The Analytic Impossibility of Globalism Until Value Ontology Is Implemented as All-Law (2)

Yes, Rutte has merely captured Wilders' momentum, which would be sad, if he was a Socialist and not a nearly inbred ultra Dutch partisan who will more naturally play against than for dictators from the Middle East, if his bigger ally allows it.


and as we can see,

Lookin snappy...



hahah, see how girlish she becomes.
Ive never before seen the woman in Merkel.

This is great really great.

The mongoloid Erdogan is playing his last two cards. He threatens to send in tens of thousands refugees every day, 'to make us think', and recommends Dutch turks all get 5 children, to increase Turkish influence.

As Walter would say: "He's cracking, dude."

But he'll be cracking for a while, cracker, crackhead, crock of shit.
Let him bring his whole nation to the ground. He had a chance, wasted it. Maybe Putin played him, gave him some bad advice.

The way Erdogan plays with muslim lives, how he uses them as currency, shows you what kind of guttertrash he is.

While US and Dutch fake news are trying to claim Trump refused Merkels hand and engineered a little clip for this, several pictures in German media show Trump offering Merkel the bottom-hand, the most gracious and respectful offering.



http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/trump-bekennt-sich-zur-nato-mit-einschraenkung-14930176.html
headline:
"Better to talk with, than over one another"

It is completely evident that Merkel already is taken with Trump.
All this is going really well since the Dutch Elections.

Correction, Erdieberdie only has 15000 muslims a month to spare to use and sacrifice for his personal ambitions. Sad.

Fixed Cross wrote:

Correction, Erdieberdie only has 15000 muslims a month to spare to use and sacrifice for his personal ambitions. Sad.

There are 5 million Turks living in Western Europe, apparently. No small amount. That basically represents its own small country's worth of people. And more will keep coming.

Borders are the only way to solve this. It really is that easy.

No borders = no country.

Thrasymachus wrote:

Some corrections.
He says Wilders' party came uop from beinga third tier party to the second largest.

In 2010 Wilders won 24 seats. More than he has now. He then was included in the coalition. As I keep saying he fucked it up by breaking promises. The cabinet fell. Re-elections: resulted in a loss of 9 seats, to 15 for Wilders. Both VVD and PvdA grew. VVD had never been this large, with 41 seats.

So no, Wilders has never been a third tier party. Ever since he started, he was the top story.

But he is too incompetent as a politician to win. Or not serious enough about governing.
His course of action after gaining such ground in 2010 was a true disappointment.

https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweede_Kamerverkiezingen_2012

Thrasymachus wrote:

Fixed Cross wrote:

Correction, Erdieberdie only has 15000 muslims a month to spare to use and sacrifice for his personal ambitions. Sad.

There are 5 million Turks living in Western Europe, apparently. No small amount. That basically represents its own small country's worth of people. And more will keep coming.

Borders are the only way to solve this. It really is that easy.

No borders = no country.

it's seven times that number in Europe as a whole, Germany alone holds 4 million.
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turken_in_Europa

They're already in the EU and largely with EU passports. As I've written about here before, the Turks practically own Germany by their powerful grasp on ground level commerce.

They're the most powerfully vocal ethnic group in Amsterdam, have many people in government and other high places.
But in Germany, they quite simply are the first rate citizens.

None of them are going to leave. But all of them are going to suffer from Erdogans affliction and the subsequent demise of their nation. They're going to be losing power by the day now.

Other than that I can't say what'll happen - if we're lucky, most of them turn to secular European law abiding citizens, like they were doing in the beginning, when immigration was strictly an economic matter and religion was kept private and modest.

The Socialists criminalized criticizing Islam, thereby causing an Islamic radicalism, thereby causing hatred of islam, thereby causing more internal radicalization - Socialists are too stupid to discuss values.

Correction noted. Perhaps Styxhexenhammer either has a different view of what a "third tier party" means, or was unaware of the broader history of the party.


Wiki:

"His travels to Israel and neighbouring Arab countries as a young adult helped form his political views. Wilders worked as a speechwriter for the conservative-liberal People's Party for Freedom and Democracy (Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie – VVD), and later served as parliamentary assistant to party leader Frits Bolkestein from 1990 to 1998. He was elected to the Utrecht city council in 1996, and later to the House of Representatives. Citing irreconcilable differences over the party's position on the accession of Turkey to the European Union, he left the VVD in 2004 to form his own party, the Party for Freedom.

Wilders has campaigned to stop what he views as the "Islamisation of the Netherlands". He has compared the Quran to Mein Kampf and has campaigned to have the book banned in the Netherlands.[6][7][8] He advocates ending immigration from Muslim countries,[6][9] and supports banning the construction of new mosques.[10] Wilders was a speaker at the Facing Jihad Conference held in Jerusalem in 2008, which discussed the dangers of jihad, and has called for a hard line against what he called the "street terror" exerted by minorities in Dutch cities.[11] His controversial 2008 film featuring his views on Islam, Fitna, received international attention. He has been described in the media as populist[12][13][14] and labeled far-right,[15][16][17][18] although this is disputed by other observers.[12][19][20] Wilders, who long refused to align himself with European far-right leaders such as Jean-Marie Le Pen and Jörg Haider and expressed concern about being "linked with the wrong rightist fascist groups",[21] views himself as a right-wing liberal. More recently, however, Wilders worked together with the French National Front's Marine Le Pen in an initially ill-fated, but eventually successful attempt to form a parliamentary group in the European Parliament which now includes parties from nine countries, among them Austria's Freedom Party, Italy's Northern League, and Belgium's Flemish Interest.[22][23][24][25]

...

Wilders strongly opposes the Dutch political system in general. He believes that there is a ruling elite of parliamentarians who only care about their own personal careers and disregard the will of the people. He also blames the Dutch system of multiparty coalition governments for a lack of clear and effective policies.[36] In his view, Dutch society advocates rule by consensus and cultural relativism, while he believes that this should change so as "not [to] tolerate the intolerant".[109]

On foreign relations, Wilders has largely supported Israel and has criticized countries he perceives as enemies of Israel.[34] Further, he has made some proposals in the Dutch Parliament inspired by Israeli policies: for example, he supports implementing Israeli-style administrative detention in the Netherlands, a practice heavily criticized by human rights groups but which Wilders calls "common sense".[109]


Wilders published the version of his political manifesto called Klare Wijn ("Clear Wine") in March 2006. The program proposed the implementation of ten key points:

-Considerable reduction of taxes and state regulations;
-Replacement of the present Article 1 of the Dutch constitution, guaranteeing equality under the law, by a clause stating the cultural dominance of the Christian, Jewish and humanist traditions;
-Reduction of the influence of the European Union, which may no longer be expanded with new member states, especially Turkey; the European Parliament would be abolished; Dutch financial contributions to the European Union would be reduced by billions of euros;
-A five-year moratorium on the immigration of non-Western foreigners who intend to stay in the Netherlands; foreign residents no longer would have the right to vote in municipal elections;
-A five-year moratorium on the founding of new mosques and Islamic schools and a permanent ban on preaching in any language other than Dutch; foreign imams would not be allowed to preach; radical mosques would be closed, and radical Muslims would be expelled;
-Restoration of educational standards, with an emphasis on the educational value of the family;
-Introduction of binding referenda and elected mayors, chiefs of police, and prime ministers;
-Introduction of minimum criminal penalties and higher maximum penalties; introduction of administrative detention for terror suspects; street terrorism would be punished by boot camps and denaturalisation and deportation of immigrant offenders;
-Restoration of respect and better compensation for teachers, policemen, health care workers, and military personnel;
-Instead of complicated reorganisation, a more accessible and humane health care system, especially for elderly citizens.[115][116]



While I find a few things to disagree with him in all this, but on the vast majority of issues I agree with what he is saying. And he seems to be proposing quite a bit of policies and ideas, beyond simply disliking Islam.

Also from what I can see, the other parties are refusing to work with him, and stated they would refuse to do so even if he and his Freedom Party won the election. That is fucking horseshit. I cannot respect any of these other parties for that stated refusal. Perhaps his earlier failures were due to this refusal of the others to even consider him.

You mentioned he broke promises; what promises did he break?

This, specifically, is highly cogent: "He also blames the Dutch system of multiparty coalition governments for a lack of clear and effective policies.[36] In his view, Dutch society advocates rule by consensus and cultural relativism, while he believes that this should change so as "not [to] tolerate the intolerant".[109]"

^ yes.

But as I keep saying they did work with him, in 2010, which is when he broke his promise. He had campaigned largely on keeping the pension-entitled age steady. Week 1 he dropped that promise, which lost him a third of his electorate.

If he would have been the biggest, say with 35 seats, he would still represent less than 25 percent of the population. To be the biggest party in this system does not mean to hold a majority. It is rational that the majority is formed by value-negotiations.

It would be insane to give a man with less than a quarter of the votes an absolutist mandate.

But yes, that 2006 program contains some valid ideas, as well as ideas that are absolute horseshit, like including ideology into the constitution. Thats just insane.

Imagine the US constitution would prescribe religion.

This alone points to the hard fact that he is not fit for rulership. That is namely literally fascistic.

Fixed Cross wrote:

But as I keep saying they did work with him, in 2010, which is when he broke his promise. He had campaigned largely on keeping the pension-entitled age steady. Week 1 he dropped that promise, which lost him a third of his electorate.

Perhaps he was trying to avoid austerity or other problems? If he indeed broke that promise and so quickly then of course he deserves the loss of support that he apparently got in response. But I am sure there were larger issues to consider as well.

Quote :

If he would have been the biggest, say with 35 seats, he would still represent less than 25 percent of the population. To be the biggest party in this system does not mean to hold a majority. It is rational that the majority is formed by value-negotiations.

I prefer the US system. I think coalition government is a terrible idea.

Quote :

It would be insane to give a man with less than a quarter of the votes an absolutist mandate.

Yes, which is why I prefer the US system.

Fixed Cross wrote:

But yes, that 2006 program contains some valid ideas, as well as ideas that are absolute horseshit, like including ideology into the constitution. Thats just insane.

Imagine the US constitution would prescribe religion.

This alone points to the hard fact that he is not fit for rulership. That is namely literally fascistic.

The US Constitution is implicitly based in Christian religion/ideology. "In God we Trust", for example, it is written all over the old documents and speeches. The idea is firmly embedded at the deep conscious level, at the cultural level. Which is why at the same time the Constitution can also prohibit government from respecting the establishment of a religion or the prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

I agree that an explicit "religious government" is a very stupid idea. But I also agree that inscribing something about cultural western values-sets is also needed. The hard part is how precisely to do that without immediately devolving into fascist irrational banality.

In other words, I think that the western philosophical project is already implicitly "Christian", and that Christianity forms the backbone of the west. But this doesn't mean that western society and governance ought to be religious, no way -- society and governance ought to be secular, of course. Because this secularism is also a rational consequence of the development of the "Christian" philosophical project.

Remember too that capitalism is also very "Christian", or at least it was until it became Global Capital.

Rational secularism is the prerogative of a strong philosophico-religous substructure, of having a backbone. For us that is philosophy itself; for everyone else it is what they call "religion", which is basically just unconscious philosophizing.

This is why I think Islam and the west cannot fundamentally coexist. Islam may be part of the Abrahamic triad, but Islam needs some serious modernizing and reform if it is to leave medievalism and nonsense irrationalities behind, become philosophical, self-valuing, 'capitalistic'.

The west is now a "secular Christianity".

Wilders aims for legislation, he wants to alter article 1 which prescribes religious freedom. That is fascism.
We are drenched in Christian symbols too, we have Christian churches everywhere and every Sunday the bells sound.
Our currency said "God be with us".

I do not see our system as essentially Christian though, but Greek. Christianity had no democracies, only royal houses, only when Europe broke with the Church did it begin to form democracies.

Rather than Wilders, it is Mark Rutte who has represented the rationalist calm that allows for inferior cultures to be driving the lower layers of our own.
It was the Socialists who figured islam is superior to everything in Europe and tried to have them take over.
But these scumbags are on their way out.

::

Note also that nothing of Wilders or Dutch islam-related politics can be understood without a somewhat nuanced knowledge of Pim Fortuyn, would be PM of 2002, shot dead right before he was about the sweepingly take the elections.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pim_Fortuyn

This man is far more important than Wilders.
He had very valid criticism of the EU and wrote books in which he explained the problem of Academia and political correctness.

If we can bring his legacy back into the light, we're making progress. He trumps both Wilders and Le Pen in philosophical weight. So what that he's dead.

What happened before and after that murder was studied and exhibited by Theo Van Gogh... who was then also killed.

Yes, I'm loosely familiar with them. Very tragic losses.

Islam defeats itself-- "oh you say bad things about Islam, I will kill you!" --lol

Yes socialism is on the way out. Fuck all socialistas everywhere. Now the struggle is between real capital and fake ("global") capital. And knowledge, ideation, is also "capital". The real war lies in the firmament.

Thrasymachus wrote:

Yes, I'm loosely familiar with them. Very tragic losses.

Islam defeats itself-- "oh you say bad things about Islam, I will kill you!" --lol

Exactly, That's how theyre gonna be losing the next 20 years until they are back at being a west Asian, predominantly Arab religion.
They will lose totalitarian grasp of Persia as well as Turkey. They will be in decline until/unless a dramatic revival of the Alexandrine sciences occurs, which is what brought them to power originally, which constitutes still their art, which is all geometry. And it is really all they have standing - architecture. They do possess the power to erect magnetic holy places, and thats about as important a skill as power can acquire.

Indonesia is beyond my scope. I haven't been there or near it. I just know they have the richest kitchen in the world, so theyll be fine, eventually. Maybe when they decide to let their forests grow and that soy is less important than breath.

Quote :

Yes socialism is on the way out. Fuck all socialistas everywhere. Now the struggle is between real capital and fake ("global") capital. And knowledge, ideation, is also "capital". The real war lies in the firmament.

I'm thankful we agree! Clouds pull away and reveal the golden horizon.
Interestingly Fortuyn means fortune, very much in the sense of wealth.

Value.

Ok this is real.

"The PvdA weeps: How do we become sexy again?"



https://www.nrc.nl/nieuws/2017/03/18/de-pvda-huilt-hoe-worden-we-weer-sexy-7446335-a1550947#photo

That rose-logo is by my uncle, by the way.

I dont know whats going on with the healthcare bill, but it would be a miracle of Trump can bring that even under control, let alone to a satisfactory resolution.

The US budget is divided for two thirds into welfare and healthcare, almost a third military, and some minute spending for education and other things.

Given that both welfare and military are tied into healthcare, the healthcare bill thus potentially involves well over half of the entire tax-investment strategy, and is thus a rather slow process, or should be. If it is not, if it is rushed, it can only fail enormously.

Essentially there are two viable types of healthcare insurance.
The European socialist-capitalist model where the state controls the prices of the products and services and private firms insure to provide them at the lowest cost. This results in monthly payments of about 150 euros with full dental and insurance abroad included. It used to be a lot less, maybe a quarter or even a tenth.

The other option is what American purists ideally would want to do, namely an open market, where everyone with a degree can produce medicines and services, so there is maximal competition and choice. As styxhammer says, insurance companies wouldn't even be universally needed in this equation, as most people could just pay whatever they need out of pocket. Only poor people would need insurance, which would have to be a kind of savings plan.

What we have now is that the government has selected or granted a few monopoly positions on whatever services and products are legal, the companies that hold these monopolies maximized their prices, so insurance coverage is maximally expensive as well. That's a lot of money being generated for some ruthless people that have lobbyists and who knows what kind of agents of power everywhere where it matters.

Yes as I said after the election, Trump needs to get rid of insurance in healthcare, it is a terrible idea. There can be self-pay and competition as you say, a basic insurance pool for middle-low class people as health care savings as you said, and then Medicaid and Medicare for the totally poor and elderly. The real problems are there are too many poor people, and healthcare is too expensive. Middle class such as myself pay up to $10k a year just for insurance (per person) and then if we actually use health care we get large bills on top of that. It's a pure scam, just like are higher education loans; these schemes allow some few super rich to keep getting richer while creating a bubble out of these sectors (healthcare and university education). So the problem just gets naturally worse over time.

He gives a good analysis up to a point.

In terms of what's going to happen qua violence itself, I see it differently, but I'll be careful in pronouncing it.
Governments and Justice in Europe are lenient, until they decide they don't tolerate it, then it's suddenly entirely mechanical, utterly cold, indifferent to whatever type of humanity. There is no difference if you're in Italy, France, Switzerland, Germany or the Netherlands - once governemnt decides that a certain group doesn't belong inside the fabruic, they'll assassinate and terrorize them into submission.
The pure might of the US is more intimidating, but no matter the malice in their policing intentions, they are never as empty hearted and empty minded as European government retribution.
Meaning the violence is not likely first coming from nationalists - the same force that represses nationalism will also repress islam, now that Erdogan has given a political face to it that a European leader can spit it with impunity.

I'ts on. Everyone in Europe will play it cool, but most of these politicians are standing coked up with a dagger between their teeth staring in the mirror, finally having a legitimate purpose that can make them popular.
Erdogan has in a single week turned the entire European population against him. Pro Trump, anti-Trump, too confused to talk about Trump, all of them now come and tell how much they loathe this idiot.
Two weeks ago no one was thinking about Erdogan as a fool. Now everyone sees Trump isnt the actual dictator.

The Kurds are the noblest and most cultivated people in that northern ME region, of Gilgamesh, a myth so weird and old it doesn't even belong to this world. The Turks are constantly trying to do to them what they did the Armenians, but the Kurds survived Genghis Khan and the Soviet Union and a lot more and older and meaner people, and they're the only ones still standing in Mesopotamia, free to ally with whomever desires their bravery. They are the Spartans of this day. Trump should give them his full support and carve out a nation for them.
Fuck the Palestinians. What have they ever done that's so great? They can all go live in Jordania and Syria for all Im concerned. Ive had it, the Jews were there first, Arabs kicked them out, now they are being kicked out by the Jews.
that Mosque stands on fucking top of the Jewish temple. It's pretty overwhelming evidence not only of who was there first but also what kind of intentions the newcomers took over. Assyrians, Babylonians, whatever kind of bloodthirsty tribe ... their savagery continues in muslim barbaries, and now the Jews have developed the means the defeat them.

But the Kurds - let's take a look at that peace process.

(It's not the case that we support Israel. Yes we send them money, but still as compensation. If it wasn't for us, they'd have annexed all of the old territories and would be fishing the Euphrates. Which would actually have fish, and green lands around it. But we are allied with the Saudis and the Turks, and piss in our pants before the Iranians. )