The Lost Art of Discipline, Part IV.

What's good Pimpin'?

Toku "Pretty Boy" Gakure in here, getting ready to open up Tha Hall of Game on that azz!!


According to the Urban Dictionary:

2. game

1. pick up lines
2. skill
3. mojo/sexdrive

1. I'm feelin' ya game, I holla at you later.
2. Babyboy's got game, I don't think I can handle him.
3. Shit, baby, ya game is off...



3. game

ability; skillz; will to do something.

1. cuz you got no game son!
2. I've gots the mad game yo'!
3. quittin' on me? that's a sign of no game!



The Art of Discipline (and of love affairs in general), is indeed an art, and not a science. It's not something that is bound by hard and fast rules. It dwells in a shady grey area of timing, situation, and appropriateness.

Attempts to legislate The Art out of existence via Domestic Violence laws has resulted in countless numbers of ruined marriages and relationships. It has also led to massive discontent between men and women, for reasons we shall explore.

Please be sure to check out previous installments [1][2][3] of the series, as they lay the groundwork for what I am going to be speaking on today.

Also, this is going to be a long post. So if you need to, read some of it, chill, do something else, and come back for more. I won't be posting anything else until next weekend, so feel free to take your time.

Aiight!?

Let's get to it.



Why Domestic Violence Laws Suck.



Here's the lie that has been drilled into our heads relentlessly by our modern Matriarchal society:

The typical woman wants, needs, and expects a man to always be nice, always be kind, never get angry or upset no matter what she does to him, to love her "unconditionally" and without judging, and to accept her no matter how she looks, acts, or behaves toward him or towards other people. And never, under any circumstances, is he to show strong emotions, to argue with her and win, or dispute the modern gospel that there is "no excuse for domestic violence."

This agreed upon code of male conduct has the force of law, thanks to the myriad of domestic violence laws passed by State legislatures.


From Texas:

71.004. Family Violence

"Family violence" means:(1) an act by a member of a family or household against another member of the family or household that is intended to result in physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or sexual assault or that is a threat that reasonably places the member in fear of imminent physical harm, bodily injury, assault, or sexual assault, but does not include defensive measures to protect oneself;(2) abuse, as that term is defined by Sections 261.001(1)(C), (E), and (G), by a member of a family or household toward a child of the family or household; or(3) dating violence, as that term is defined by Section 71.0021.

From Indiana:

IC 35-42-2-1.3

Domestic battery

Sec. 1.3.
(a) A person who knowingly or intentionally touches an individual who:
(1) is or was a spouse of the other person;
(2) is or was living as if a spouse of the other person as provided in subsection (c); or
(3) has a child in common with the other person;

in a rude, insolent, or angry manner that results in bodily injury to the person described in subdivision (1), (2), or (3) commits domestic battery, a Class A misdemeanor...

From Oregon:

Family Abuse Act

back to top107.705 Definitions

As used in ORS 107.700 to 107.735:

(1) “Abuse” means the occurrence of one or more of the following acts between family or household members:

(a) Attempting to cause or intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causing bodily injury.

(b) Intentionally, knowingly or recklessly placing another in fear of imminent bodily injury.

(c) Causing another to engage in involuntary sexual relations by force or threat of force.

(2) “Child” means an unmarried person who is under 18 years of age.

(3) “Family or household members” means any of the following:

(a) Spouses.

(b) Former spouses.

(c) Adult persons related by blood, marriage or adoption.

(d) Persons who are cohabiting or who have cohabited with each other.

(e) Persons who have been involved in a sexually intimate relationship with each otherwithin two years immediately preceding the filing by one of them of a petition under ORS 107.710.

(f) Unmarried parents of a child.

(4) “Interfere” means to interpose in a manner that would reasonably be expected to hinder or impede a person in the petitioner's situation.

(5) “Intimidate” means to act in a manner that would reasonably be expected to threaten a person in the petitioner's situation, thereby compelling or deterring conduct on the part of the person.

(6) “Menace” means to act in a manner that would reasonably be expected to threaten a person in the petitioner's situation.

(7) “Molest” means to act, with hostile intent or injurious effect, in a manner that would reasonably be expected to annoy, disturb or persecute a person in the petitioner's position.

As we can see, Domestic Violence laws vary from state to state, but they generally prohibit individuals in relationships from committing certain actions towards their partner.

Since our modern day laws are written as public policy, society has decreed that we should modify our conduct in such a way as to not violate these laws.

If we ignore the well documented fact [4][5][6] that these various statutes are written and enforced in such a way as to violate the Natural Rights of men, there is still the question of the unintended consequences of such legislation, and if this is a policy that the public truly wishes to live by.

Does the typical woman really want a man who complies with the letter and the spirit of these laws? If men strictly adhere to these rules and guide their conduct accordingly, is this what society really needs and wants in order to survive and thrive? Will this code of conduct contribute to the ultimate stability of long term relationships?

If we accept that the letter of the Domestic Violence law is the lowest level of human development, does the public at large want the "virtues" that these laws help to shape?

My answer to this question is: No, the typical woman would never tolerate the existence of these laws for any period of time if the average couple on the street followed the law to the letter.

Note that I said, If, not when. The fact of the matter is that normal everyday people violate these codes day in and day out. Couples choose to keep their private infractions private instead of picking up the phone and requesting police assistance. Indeed, most couples involve police action either when things are obviously out of control and outside intervention is needed, or when the requester desires to “punish” a wayward lover via the Domestic Violence industry.

Furthermore, Joe and Jane Sixpack, more often than not, mutually agree to violate Domestic Violence laws. Usually, this comes as a result of drinking, staying out too late the night before, hitting on Jane's sister or staring too long at Joe's brother, or some other long suppressed grudge.

Next thing you know, Jane is trying to cut Joe, Joe is pimp-smacking the crap out of Jane, the happy couple ends up in the middle of the street, the police show up, for the tenth time, to restore order, and somebody, probably Joe, ends up taking a ride to the County Jail.

Some time later, the State dismisses the case, or cuts a deal with Joe because Jane refuses to co-operate. The Prosecutor tries her best to proceed with the hearing, but without Jane's testimony, there isn't much to go on. The Judge has 18 additional hearings today, and the facts of these cases are very similar to Joe's. No witness, minimal co-operation from the "victim", a limited number of funds, Prosecutors, and Public Defenders, and no end in sight to the case load.

Joe's Public Defender offers him a plea-bargain that results in some time at the County Jail. Credit is given for time already served. The Court Officers accept the deal, since they have 18 other cases to try, and the evidence against Joe is shaky at best.

The Judge sentences Joe to some jail time, and fines him some dollars. Case closed.

While Joe is in jail, Jane stops by to put some Commissary money on his books. They laugh, cry, and argue during visitation and collect phone calls. He threatens to "Kick yo' ass once I get outta here." Jane's response is, "bring it on Muthafucka!"

It must be true love.

At the end of the day, Joe gets out of jail. Maybe Jane will leave him for some other guy, or maybe they will kiss and make up, only to fight again once they start sippin' that Old Skool Malt Liquor.

Some might ask me to prove this little passion play. The only thing I can advise you is to go downtown and observe your Domestic Violence courts in action. Talk to Judges, Prosecutors, Public Defenders, and Defendants. Read Police Reports by the stack.

Do all of these things, like I do, day in and day out, and you will get a better picture as to how inefficient, wasteful, and futile our Domestic Violence laws really are. You will see the abuses of Constitutional rights on a daily basis. You will note that the vast majority of cases DO NOT involve serious or life-threatening injury. You will note how many cases involved a woman scorned who pulls out all the stops in an attempt to get her current or former lover fucked up.

How soon we forget that Hell Hath no Fury...


So what are you saying Pretty Boy? you wonder. That battery, assault, and violent crimes against intimate partners should be abolished?

Absolutely not.

As I wrote previously:

... some people unilaterally impose their will upon their partners. They do not obtain consent to do what they do. They are angry, reckless, and out of control. They inflict pain and injury indiscriminately. These people may escalate their violence in order to keep the unwilling victim in line.

Now these are the folks that, when they violate perfectly good laws such as battery, assault, breaking and entering, stalking, murder and attempted murder, and the like, should be arrested if probable cause is present, they should receive a fair trial with equal protection and due process of law, and if found guilty by a jury of their peers, suffer the consequences thereof.

These people are the ones who need treatment and counseling, and their victims need the same, as some people become addicted to the pain and the torment they receive...

My issues with Domestic Violence legislation are that they are unconstitutional (VAWA), poorly written, and provide all kinds of loopholes that tempt people into abusing them. In addition, if someone files a false DV complaint, there is no consequence for doing so to my knowledge. This lack of accountability encourages feuding couples to use these laws as weapons.

Another aspect of DV laws, which has been largely neglected, is that the ideological basis of these codes, and the way in which they are enforced, is yet another reason why they are completely intolerable and need to be either reformed significantly or abolished altogether.

People are not stupid. The vast majority has a common sense understanding of right and wrong; irrespective of what the law says. As we said at the beginning of this series, Virtue is more important than the Law.

It is my firm opinion that we really don't need most of the laws we have on the books now. If humanity obeyed the Universal Law, such as the Ten Commandments, the 42 Negative Confessions, or a similar moral code that compels humanity to ever increasing levels of goodness and morality, then the vast portion of the Law would only need concern itself with technical matters that would not apply except in specialized circumstances.

I say again, the vast majority of laws are irrelevant, so it doesn't matter if they are on the books or not. In essence, these irrelevant laws, more often than not, become tools of Tyranny, i.e. the War on Drugs, Feminist Jurisprudence, etc. If we compare our volumes of legal statutes against what the law should be, we will find that we have encumbered ourselves with a great manner of useless laws that only serve to make matters worse.

So getting back to the subject matter at hand, most individuals who are objective, rational, in possession of true and correct facts, and know how to discern real life from tiresome feminist rantings are able to judge what is reasonable and what is excessive.

Police Officers, once upon a time, had the discretion as to whether or not he would arrest someone for a domestic disturbance. If he determined that there was no probable cause to make the arrest, he would sternly warn the happy couple to chill out or get locked up.

If it was obvious to him, based on his training and experience, that bodily harm was imminent if he did not take action, he could make the arrest in order to diffuse the situation. If it was clear that he was called to a residence at the insistence of a woman who wanted to simply "get even" with her "bastard of a husband", he could let her know that calling 911 for a non emergency situation was against the law, or arrest her for making a false report.

Case closed.

However, modern Domestic Violence statutes are based upon flawed, biased, and malicious feminist ideology. The totalitarian and anti-male philosophy of feminism is the "spirit" of today's domestic violence policies.

The criminal justice system, from the Officer on the street to the sentencing Judge, has been taught, incorrectly, that women are the majority of the victims, that men are the majority of the perpetrators; and that men abuse women in order to gain or uphold some form of male patriarchal dominant state, an idea that has been discredited by hundreds of irrefutable studies [7][8] .

As a result, these laws are enforced in a spirit of persecution and vengeance, and not in a spirit of justice, fairness, and appropriateness. Throwing the book at someone because in a fit of anger they said something rude or insolent to their spouse is not appropriate, or in society's best interest, at times and in all cases.

This is why we have a jury system, so that the citizens themselves can judge the laws and the facts of any given case. We know, as human beings, that there are behaviors which cannot be justified. I cannot write on this blog that we should turn a blind eye to a woman who, without any provocation, stabs a man repeatedly, throws him down a flight of stairs, and sets fire to his house, all in front of his children. Even if I could marshal arguments as to why such a woman is morally justified to commit such heinous acts of violence, it would be rightfully dismissed by society at large.

In the same spirit, individuals (not academics, feminists, or politicians) can discern the difference between scolding one's wife for her abusive and destructive behaviors versus destroying an innocent wife's self esteem and self image in a twisted attempt to inflict psychological abuse upon her. This intelligent discernment has long been recognized in the spiritual and legal spheres. Cruelty, in various times and places, is grounds for divorce, and is recognized as a specific and punishable offense.

The issue here is that feminist propaganda has caused normally rational individuals to avoid using their faculties of intelligent discernment when it comes to DV issues. The man who dares to chastise his wife for her ruinous shopaholic syndrome is automatically labeled an “abuser”, and suffers the penalties thereof. Nevermind that his actions would be clearly justified by the situation he found himself in.

As another example, breaking someone's arm because they came home at 3 A.M. with strange phone numbers in their cell phone is clearly unacceptable conduct. On the other hand, most people would agree that grabbing someone's arms and holding them in your lap to stop a violent attack on your person is not unacceptable conduct. However, the attacker, if she is female and an intimate partner, might very well succeed in prosecuting you under Domestic Violence legislation for your justified act of self defense.

In summary, although Domestic Violence laws have been enacted to suppress certain behaviors, they ultimately fail because they stifle actions that human beings need to do in order to sustain a healthy long term relationship. In their zeal to transform human beings into angels who are without blemish and conflict, they contain no real understanding of how men and women interact with one another. And because these laws have been created in a climate that allows for no compassion, understanding, rationality, or discernment, most people either ignore these statutes (to their legal peril), or go to great lengths to keep their "illegal" interactions secret and out of public view. None of this is good for society in the long term.

Conflicts, which are an inevitable part of any relationship, are avoided at all costs (to avoid the legal liabilities). This leads to the premature termination of the pairing as frustration, anger, and unexpressed negative feelings stay bottled up inside in order to adhere to the new Matriarchal social standard.

What’s worse, these laws classify genuine discipline with unacceptable violent behavior as criminal acts. The man who attempts to correct his wife’s drinking problem is lumped in with the woman who belittles her husband’s manhood and honor day after day for no reason at all. The man who unlawfully stalks and threatens to murder an ex-lover is legally equivalent to the man who visits a separated spouse to plead for her to come home and resume their married life.

This is the great failure of feminist public policy. There is no intelligence, there is no forgiveness, there is no room for appropriate discipline, and there is no understanding of the love that exists between the typical man and the typical woman.

Unfortunately for social engineers, feminists, metro-sexuals and nice guys, the typical woman isn't looking for a "New Man." She very much prefers, in knowledge or in ignorance, a man that is going to give her the feedback, leadership, and discipline that she craves. And no amount of feminist legislation can alter this fact.




Bitches, and why women don’t want them.




According to the Urban Dictionary:

Bitch

(1) Word used to describe the act of whining excessively.

(2) Person who rides specifically in the middle of a front-seatting only car meant for 2 passengers or less.

(3) Modern-day servant; A person who performs tasks for another, usually degrading in status.

(4) Term used to exclaim hardship.

(1) "Stop bitching Todd!"
(2) "Can I ride bitch?"
(3) "Bring my friend and I some vodka bitch"
(4) *Peron tells story to other cellmate, depicting how they came to be there, cellmate says* "Ain't that a Bitch!"

bitch

• An exceedingly whipped guy who does/wears/thinks/says whatever his girlfriend tells him to.

Now that we've defined what a Bitch is, we will attempt to explain why the typical woman absolutely despises such a man. With a tip of the hat to the guys at Don't Get Married, I wanted to share this interesting paper entitled, About Domestic Violence Against Men:

What Are The Characteristics Of Women Who Are Abusive And Violent?

The characteristics of men or women who are abusive fall into three categories.

* Alcohol Abuse. Alcohol abuse is a major cause and trigger in domestic violence. People who are intoxicated have less impulse control, are easily frustrated, have greater misunderstandings and are generally prone to resort to violence as a solution to problems. Women who abuse men are frequently alcoholics.

* Psychological Disorders. There are certain psychological problems, primarily personality disorders, in which women are characteristically abusive and violent toward men. Borderline personality disorder is a diagnosis that is found almost exclusively with women. Approximately 1 to 2 percent of all women have a Borderline Personality disorder. At least 50% of all domestic abuse and violence against men is associated with woman who have a Borderline Personality disorder. The disorder is also associated with suicidal behavior, severe mood swings, lying, sexual problems and alcohol abuse.

* Unrealistic expectations, assumptions and conclusions. Women who are abusive toward men usually have unrealistic expectations and make unrealistic demands of men. These women will typically experience repeated episodes of depression, anxiety, frustration and irritability which they attribute to a man's behavior. In fact, their mental and emotional state is the result of their own insecurities, emotional problems, trauma during childhood or even withdrawal from alcohol.

They blame men rather than admit their problems, take responsibility for how they live their lives or do something about how they make themselves miserable. They refuse to enter treatment and may even insist the man needs treatment. Instead of helping themselves, they blame a man for how they feel and believe that a man should do something to make them feel better. They will often medicate their emotions with alcohol. When men can't make them feel better, these women become frustrated and assume that men are doing this on purpose...

Right on the money!

The paper continues:

A Common Dynamic: How Violence ERUPTS

There are a number of commonly reported interactions in which violence against men erupts. Here is one example that illustrates a common dynamic.

The woman is mildly distressed and upset. The man notices her distress and then worries she may become angry. The woman attempts to communicate and discuss her feelings. She wants to talk, feel supported and feel less alone. She initially attributes some of her distress or problems to him. The man begins to feel defensive, shuts down emotionally and attempts to deal with the problems rationally. He feels a fight is coming on.The woman feels uncared for, ignored and then gets angry. She wants him to share the problem and he doesn't feel he has a problem.

The man will attempt to remain unemotional and stay in control of himself. He avoids accepting any blame for how she feels. He is also worried that she may explode at any moment and that she will certainly do so if he talks about his feelings. The man will start talking about her problem as if she could feel better if she would only listen to him and stop acting so upset. He fails to understand how she feels and tries to remain calm. He tells her to calm down and ends up looking insensitive. She begins to wonder if he has any feelings at all. She tells him that he thinks he's perfect. He says he is not perfect. She calls him insensitive. He stares at her and says nothing but looks irritated.

The woman is frustrated that he won't reveal his feelings and that he acts like he is in control. On the other hand, the man feels out of control and like there is no room for anybody's feelings in the conversation but hers. Communication breaks down and the woman begins to insult the man. When the man finally expresses his disapproval and attempts to end the fight. The woman becomes enraged and may throw something. The man will usually endure insults and interactions like this for weeks or months.

This whole pattern becomes a recurrent and all too familiar experience. The man becomes increasingly sensitive to how the woman acts and becomes avoidant and unsupportive. The man begins to believe that there is nothing he can do and that it may be all his fault. His frustration and anger can build for months like this.

This risk of violence increases when the woman insults the man in front of their children, threatens the man's relationship with his children, or she refuses to control her abusive behavior when the children are present. She may call him a terrible father or an awful husband in front of the children. Eventually he feels enraged not only because of how she treats him, but how her behavior is harming the children.

At some point the man may throw something, punch a wall, or slam his fist down loudly to vent his anger and to communicate that he has reached his limits. Up till now she has never listened to what he had to say. He decides that maybe she will stop if she can see just how angry he has become. Rather than recognizing that he has reached his limits, expressing his anger physically has the opposite effect. For a long time the man has tried to hide his anger.

Why should the woman believe he really means it? After all, he has put up with her abuse for a long time and done nothing. Instead of realizing that things have gotten out of control, the woman may approach him and say something like, "What are you gonna do. Hit me? Go ahead. I'll call the police and you'll never see your children again." Once he expressed his anger physically, the situation became dangerous for him and for her. The door to violence has opened wide. He should walk away. When he does walk away, she ends up more angry than ever, will scream obscenities at him and strike him repeatedly. She may even strike him with an object...

Let's take a moment to examine why this dynamic occurs, and how the man could have handled things differently.


Women who abuse men are frequently alcoholics.


Alcohol is a dangerous, yet legal drug that has killed countless numbers of people throughout history. On the other hand Cannabis, an illegal drug, is so friendly to mankind that there are no confirmed cases of human beings dying from its use [9][10].

In addition, the Cannabis plant helps men and women "get a little closer," and it is a powerful stress reliever [11][12]. Methinks that if womankind switched over from Brew to Bud, maybe there would be less incidents of this kind.

In addition, if a man sees that his woman has a drinking problem, he needs to get on her immediately, and recommend that she obtain counseling to deal with it. If her condition worsens, more drastic action, including terminating the relationship, needs to be considered.

What I would like to stress above all is when one deals with women, one has to nip any and all negative developments in the bud as soon as possible before things spiral out of control.

Under no circumstances can you allow problems to fester. You have to find out what the problem is, determine the best course of action, and deal with it. And curiously, one will find that the typical woman is expecting you to clue in and pay attention to her issues without being told to do so. The solution might be nothing more than listening to her and saying "yeah" or "ok" when she needs to get something off her chest. But allowing problems to sit on the back burner is a recipe for Mission Failure, if you know what I mean.


Borderline personality disorder is a diagnosis that is found almost exclusively with women.


Again, the man has to solve this problem sooner rather than later. If an adjustment is needed, then the Art of Discipline becomes swift and decisive corrective action. If his woman needs counseling to deal with her personality issues, then get out there and Git Er Done! If she doesn't want to act right and things continually get worse, then separating the chick from your squad and leaving her the hell alone is the wisest course of action.


Unrealistic expectations, assumptions and conclusions. Women who are abusive toward men usually have unrealistic expectations and make unrealistic demands of men... They blame men rather than admit their problems, take responsibility for how they live their lives or do something about how they make themselves miserable...


As the Mighty Marc Rudov often notes, today's woman has been raised with a severe Princess complex. Their mothers and their fathers have withheld the rod of discipline, and have utterly spoiled the child. This kind of woman has probably been beating up boys since she was a child, and she's not going to treat you any differently!

As an example of our toxic society at work, films of women beating up hordes of muscular men are commonplace. Commercials portray women as know it alls who have to solve every problem, be up on every trend, balance work, family, and social obligations, and supervise husband and kids... all without breaking a sweat.

If I were a woman, I would probably be sick and tired of trying to do all of the things we expect women to do in our modern culture. No wonder that the most common drugs prescribed to women are Anti-depressants!

Something else I should point out... the female brain is heavily influenced and dependent upon the quality of her relationships with others. So to say that women should just "Man-Up" and sort out her issues entirely on her own isn't that realistic to me. Considering the volume of responsibilities (Career, family, education, housekeeping, etc) that society places on them, it seems logical that a woman is going to need the assistance of parents, family, friends, and her husband in order to help her to reorient her negative attitudes, beliefs, and expectations, and keep them centered on the positive.

After all, no woman is an island.

This is where her husband, the man who has pledged before God and man to be there for her, comes into the picture. It seems counter intuitive to say this, but a wife needs her husband to provide meaningful feedback, advice, and yes, even correction when she needs it (after all, wives correct their husbands all the time). And what's more, she expects his feedback to be different from what her girlfriends would advise her to do or to feel. If she wanted her husband to be womanly in thought, word, and deed, she would have chosen to be with a woman. She is looking to you, my good man, to supply her with that Manliness she needs to be complete.

Unfortunately, due to the unholy combination of feminist jurisprudence and widespread social brainwashing, the typical gal cannot receive the authentic Manliness she desires. Many a man, in order to conform to what is expected of him, has suppressed his manliness and has morphed into a "Nice Guy" who is unwilling to rock the boat and express his opinion, especially if it contradicts what his woman wants to do.

Consequently, many young women have resorted to hook-ups and bad boys in a futile quest to experience genuine manliness. So the Good Girls go with Bad Boys, and the Nice Guy, who would do anything for her, winds up out in the cold.

So what do these Bad Boys do that the Nice Guys don't?

More on that in part V!

Toku "Pretty Boy" Gakure.

More Men Behaving Badly.

A Foreclosure victim...

A buyer for Citigroup...

And the most nefarious man to walk the earth...


Toku out.

The Lost Art of Discipline, Part III.

What's good peoples...

As we continue on with our examination of discipline and the vital role it plays in smooth and harmonious family functioning, I wanted to go on a (somewhat) brief digression.






No Gold Standard, no monetary morality.





Longtime readers know that I like to write about precious metals and the role they play in our monetary system. I am also in favor of a return to the traditional American hard currency standard [a][b].

Fittingly, I would like to present this interview with Mr. Ferdinand Lips, formerly of the Rothschild banking empire, as he discusses his book Gold Wars: The Battle Against Sound Money as Seen From a Swiss Perspective with Mr. Jim Puplava of Financial Sense.

What really struck me as I listened to this podcast was that Mr Lips stated, on more than one occasion, that justice and fiat money cannot co-exist. He also stated that without a gold standard, there can be no trust, and the financial system itself cannot function properly without it.

More importantly, the writer indirectly notes that Gold is more than money.

Gold is discipline.

Pretty strong words, but this elderly gentleman's credentials speak for themselves. He confirms an idea that I have held for a long time, namely that fiat money is the root of all evil in general, and of feminism in particular.

Ideas are fine and good, but it takes committed action and massive sums of money and credit for an idea to manifest in the real world. And clearly, billions of federal dollars have been stolen (from taxpayers), and counterfeited in order to sustain the current Matriarchal regime [c][d].

None of this would have been possible if government spending were restrained by a gold standard. No government would squander their precious and limited resources on a series of programs that offers a negative return on investment and has proven to be largely ineffective [1][2]. If a government was foolish enough to try, the standard would automatically impose a sharp penalty for monetary mismanagement.

Or to put it another way, if "social activists" wanted to impose a government funded feminist superstate upon the American people under the discipline of a gold standard, the government would have to raise taxes or sell bonds in order to finance such a program, which would have raised the ire of the people without fail. No one in their right mind would long tolerate programs such as VAWA if their taxes increased dramatically as a result. At the very least, there would be a much larger outcry, and a more critical examination of the program, the ideology on which it is based, and the return on investment of the enterprise.

And so, in order to avoid all of this unseemly opposition, governments prefer to fund feminist pork, overseas entanglements, bridges to nowhere, and all manner of nonsensical projects by resorting to inflation, or creating money out of thin air [11][22][33].

In this way, harmful and unnatural programs such as feminism and the Drug War are funded into fruition, justice is perverted beyond recognition, a host of other unintended and disastrous events occur throughout the society, and various individuals, such as the poor, people who save money, retired folks on a fixed income, and others suffer most terribly in the end.





The Immorality of Fiat Currency.



It should be pointed out, by the way, that debasement of currencies is a violation of the Universal Law. We find injunctions against this practice dating back to the dawn of civilization.

In the Kemetic Pert M Heru, known to most in the West as the Egyptian Book of the Dead, is the oldest collection of spiritual wisdom known to mankind.

Tucked within a series of injunctions known as the 42 Negative Confessions, we find:

(6) "I have not defrauded offerings." Variant: I have not destroyed food supplies or increased or decreased the measures to profit (Pert M Heru, p. 304).

The peoples of Kemet were well aware of the role of precious metals as a store of wealth. Silver, being rarer than gold, was the premiere store of value at various points of the Kingdom's long history. Also, we know that gold and silver were used as units of account and as a medium of exchange... in other words, as money.


Moving to the later Hebrew writings, the Torah and Tanach, we find:

Ye shall do no unrighteousness in judgment, in meteyard, in
weight, or in measure. Just balances, just weights, a just
ephah, and a just hin, shall ye have. (Lev. 19:35-36)

Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights, a great and a small. Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small. But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have…. For all that do such things, and all that do unrighteously, are an abomination unto the Lord thy God. (Deut. 25:13-16)

Please note that currency is expressed in weights of gold, silver, or some other commodity accepted by a nation as money. Even our present day fiat currencies, as Rothbard explains in the link above, such as American Dollars or British Pounds Sterling, ultimately derive their "value" from their origins as gold and silver backed currencies, which were defined by the weight of the gold or silver content they represented.

Consequently, having just weights becomes a very important issue. So much so, that the Holy One Himself is very much against debasement in any form, be it tampering with coinage or printing paper money out of thin air.

And still later, we find injunctions in the Koran against fiat paper dollars.

When you have time, please watch this series of videos entitled Islam and the Future of Money. It explains much about Islamic attitudes towards money, and it also reveals some little known facts about the IMF, the World Bank, and the Bretton Woods accord. Definitely worth watching.




And finally, most of the economists, such as the Austrian school, recognize the harmful effects of fiat monetary inflation.

The point of all this is that without the discipline of gold, silver, and honest weights and measures, injustice, criminality, and poverty reign throughout the land. The masses suffer, and the well connected few benefit.


And the bulk of these well connected individuals who benefit are men.



Men behaving badly.




We need to understand that the Money Masters, the politicians, the policymakers and the media moguls are overwhelmingly male [aa][bb][cc][dd]. And this small group of "elite" men are condemning their brothers to ignorance, misery, imprisonment and death without apology.

In addition, as the Mighty Marc Rudov often notes [e][f], the average man on the street does not have the discipline of standing up for himself and his rights. He is more than willing to accept widespread misandry in order to curry female favor. Nor is he willing to impose discipline upon his elected officials, community and business leaders, or newsmedia outlets. Bailouts and corruption continue unchecked, and the future of the nation looks increasingly bleak.

From the dregs of society to the top of the heap, men are behaving very badly indeed. The Virtues, such as discipline, seem to be diminishing and disappearing with every passing moment.



Conclusion




Before I write in more detail about why men need to be in a position to administer discipline within their family circles, I felt it was important to point out that discipline is needed on all levels of society.

Business, government, religious institutions, and social groups are in a state of disarray. And at the helm of most of these bodies, we find men who have betrayed their oaths and their positions of trust. Male judges, male police officers, male prosecutors, male mayors, male governors, male Congressmen, male auto executives...

Men have the power and the intellect to fight for justice, repudiate flawed and harmful ideologies such as feminism, and govern in such a way as to benefit all citizens of the nation.

But they can do none of these things so long as they refuse to apply discipline where and when it is needed, and cannot do the right things if they refuse to exercise the self-discipline it takes to fight for justice, morality and order. If they refuse to refute the elements that always seek to lead men and nations down the path of tyranny and destruction, then they have no right to accept the mantle of Kingship that is the birthright and the responsibility of most every man.

A man's home cannot be his castle if he refuses to fight for it!

It is no secret that Men are not angels. I don't want readers to believe that men have some sort of Divine Right that is completely divorced from Divine Responsibility. We must remember that while we seek to bring discipline into our family, community, and nation, we are not above the Universal Law, and that the price of leadership and authority comes with a high price. To whom great authority is given, much is expected.

Discipline, after all, is the duty of men and women alike.

Toku.

The Drug War: An All American Failure.

Fellow Truthseekers,

When an open-minded individual frees himself from societal and government sponsored propaganda, and critically examines all of the major controversies in America today, one quickly discovers that his government is lying to him, wasting a crap-ton of money in the pursuit of Ass-Backwards policies, and declares good things to be evil, while religiously promoting evil as good.


Case in point: America's failed War on Drugs.


When you have a minute, please watch the following clips:

The Union: the business behind getting high







American Drug War






If you can find these movies (hint: Google is your friend), be sure to take some time and check 'em out.

Even if you don't use drugs per se, please understand that the War on Drugs is nothing more than another manifestation of the overall trend of government denying the Natural Rights of the People in order to carry out a tragically flawed public policy in their name.

The People have every right to choose for themselves what substances they will or will not ingest, so long as they do not violate the rights of others in the process.

Drugs, and especially Marijuana, should be legalized immediately. And by carrying on this War, the government, as usual, creates more problems than it solves. All of this chaos in their misguided attempts to "protect" the populace.

When the nation decides to decriminalize and regulate drugs, society as a whole will be a lot better off.

But don't take my word for it... watch these films and make up your own mind.

Sincerely yours,

Toke Dogg.

Perfect Storm: The Beginning of the End.

Gang,

I would like to begin this post with a press release issued by Mr. Roy Den Hollander, Attorney and Men's Right's Crusader:

"Men just don't count in the Federal District Court of New York.


In a December 3, 2008 decision, Federal Judge William Pauley III approved the U.S. Government's use of secret proceedings to find U.S. citizen husbands of alien wives guilty of battery. The proceedings are kept secret from only the husband, not the alien wives, various government officials or various Feminist groups.

In a slip-shod opinion that reflects Judge Pauley III's effort to give men's rights the bums rush out of his court, he ignored the law and invented facts because of the ever present bureaucratic zeal to curry favor with the Feminists.

The case challenged the constitutionality of certain provisions of the Violence Against Women Act ("VAWA") that allow alien females to fraudulently gain U.S. citizenship by falsely accusing their U.S. husbands of battery. Under VAWA, the husband has no notice nor opportunity to refute the charges against him, the so-called evidence used for finding him guilty comes from his ex-wife, her immigration lawyer and feminist counselors. If by chance, the American man somehow gets evidence to the Government that shows his alien wife is lying, the evidence ends up in the garbage.

Judge Pauley III disdainfully brushed aside any concern for the rights of the husbands, which is common in the misandrist court of the Southern District of New York, to rule that such Nazi-like proceedings don't injure the husband. Think a minute—would you want the U.S. Government, listening only to your ex-wife, her lawyer and various feminists, to decide whether you committed felonies and misdemeanors against her. You know they are going to find you guilty because you're not there.

The Government then promises that no harm will come to you because all its findings will be kept secret, except from your ex-wife, her lawyer, various feminists, and local, state and federal law enforcement agencies. Oh, and by the way, if any of the Government's decisions about you committing crimes leaks to the general public, there is not a damn thing you can do—legally. There are no lawsuits or administrative proceedings you can bring to correct the false record or keep it from being published. To judges like William Pauley III, such are not injuries because they are injuries to males not females.

But there's something more important than Judge Pauley III's spinning of the law to favor feminists—ask yourself, does this Government process seem fair to you. "The heart of the matter is that democracy implies respect for the elementary rights of men, however suspect or unworthy those men may be; a democratic government must therefore practice fairness; and fairness can rarely be obtained by secret, one-sided determination of facts decisive of rights." Joint Anti-Fascist Refugee Committee v. McGrath, 341 U.S. 123, 170 (Frankfurter J., concurring)(1951).

Where's Felix Frankfurter when justice needs him?

Please visit Mr. Hollander's website for more information and documents concerning his VAWA challenge.

This blogger has to give madd RESPECT to the good counselor for making the high profile effort to challenge this discriminatory legislation through the American feminist legal system. Thank you sir, for your efforts.






Feminism: the highest law of the land.






Unfortunately, as I stated in my previous post on The Law, the issue of whether men have constitutional rights that should be upheld even in the face of bigoted, misguided, and ill-informed opposition has long been settled.

Allow me to state my position once more: MEN IN THE FEMINIZED WEST HAVE NO NATURAL RIGHTS. PERIOD.

Men are allowed to have rights so long as they do not go against what the Mob declares they should have. Our Democratic system, on many occasions has stated this to be so.

Indeed, feminism and anti-male hatred is a matter of public policy, to be upheld at all times and in all circumstances.

So what is public policy?

>A principle that no person or government official can legally perform an act that tends to injure the public.

Public policy manifests the common sense and common conscience of the citizens as a whole that extends throughout the state and is applied to matters of public health, safety, and welfare. It is general, well-settled public opinion relating to the duties of citizens to their fellow citizens. It imports something that fluctuates with the changing economic needs, social customs, and moral aspirations of the people. Public policy enters into, and influences, the enactment, execution, and interpretation of legislation.

Notice how the ideal of public policy directly contrasts with the Republican idea that men are entitled to fundamental, inalienable, natural rights which cannot be set aside or violated in any cases whatever.

Understand that we live in the Mob Rule of Feminized Democracy, and not in a Constitutional Republic as many of us have been led to believe.

Now some may ask, is feminism a "third pillar" of American public policy?

I would say that it is. Firstly, one must consider how whenever feminist family values and claims of equal protection and due process come into conflict in American courts of law, feminism almost always trumps any and all of its challengers.

Even if feminist policies violate the most sacred and time honored concepts of right and justice, it doesn't matter. Feminism, By Thunder, must not be harmed! The privileges of women must be upheld, no matter how great the injustice!

Secondly, consider the volumes of books devoted to this very idea, that feminist jurisprudence must overpower all opposition in order to secure the "liberation" of women.

So then, lets face facts. Feminism, domestic violence, restraining orders, the wage gap, the glass ceiling... everything about feminism that is largely based on lies, damned lies, and bullshit, is the highest and most important public policy objective in the United States, and the modern Western World. Men are second class citizens in all the ways that truly matter. Also, recognize that the legal subjection of men has been going on for a very long time. Nothing new to see here folks!

And finally, the solutions to our problems will not come from the White House, the Supreme Court, the Media, or Congress. Nor will they come from the Republican or the Democratic parties. The government and the mainstream political establishment has abandoned us. The halls of justice are closed; the spirit of the law having fled from the American courts long ago.

We are on our own gentlemen. The sooner we accept this, the better off we will be.

Now with all that said, I must confess that, as I type these words, I feel more and more irrelevant.

Why?

Because events are in motion, right now at this very moment, that will insure the complete obliteration of our corrupt and hypocritical feminist/fascist/socialist/globalist/platonic regime.

The people, holders of true power, are getting ready to experience a rude awakening.

Public policy, which has been a great enemy of men, is getting ready to morph into our best friend and ally.





When the power of Political Feminism will be broken.







(Niccolo Machiavelli)





Machiavelli, in his The Discourses, number 58, The Masses are more Knowing and more Constant than is a Price, speaking about the power of the Roman masses, notes that:

"But when it was necessary to take action against some powerful person, it did so... in the case of others who sought to oppress it. Also, when it had to obey dictators or consuls in the public interest, it did so (p. 252)."

The writer concludes:

"When the populace has thrown off all restraint, it is not the mad things it does that are terrifying, nor is of present evils that one is afraid, but what may come of them... ...The brutalities of the masses are directed against those they suspect of conspiring against the public good (p. 257)."

What I take from these passages are that the masses have the power to move heaven and earth for their own benefit whenever they please. Did not the Founding Fathers say that all political power is inherent in the People?

What is going on today is a function of ignorance. The masses have allowed themselves to be dumbed down into the Sheeple that they are today. Intentionally and unintentionally, the people find themselves wholly ignorant of how wicked their cultural, legal, religious and economic institutions have become. Much of the blame can be laid directly at the feet of America's public school system. When one learns who was behind the creation of our modern government schools, and who benefits from their existence, one will find that the ignorance of our People is far from accidental.

And, in spite of all the injustice that has been carried out in their name, the great mass of people in this country have managed to carve out decent lives for themselves. In spite of massive government and banking interventions into their lives, as well as the unchecked growth of feminist courts of plunder, they are more or less the captains of their destiny. Life, up until this point, has been fairly good.

However, the illusion of prosperity, plenty, and power is about to be shattered. Peak Credit, and all of the luxuries that will soon be out of reach, has arrived. When the full ramifications of this event are felt by the masses, unpredictable social change will manifest, seemingly overnight.

Using the dismemberment of the rights of men as an example, change on this front will come only when the people decide that feminist public policy is not in their best interests. When this shift occurs, the power of Political Feminism will be broken. On that happy day, feminist lobbyists will receive cordial handshakes, warm smiles, and promises to act on feminist public policies, but nothing will come of it. Throughout all of the corridors of power, the doors will be slammed shut on feminists like the tombs of the ancient Egyptian Pharaohs closed shut upon their mummies, not to be opened again for thousands of years.

It will take a moment of mass revelation for this to occur, and before such a paradigm shift happens, an event of biblical proportions; a Category 11 hurricane will need to descend upon the populace. Only an excruciating amount of misery will serve as the catalyst... Western Man, at this point, is too far gone for him to fix the error of his ways before calamity strikes.

Speaking of the mysterious power of Habitforce, writer and success pioneer Napoleon Hill explains:

" ... one may control one's earthly destiny to an astounding degree, simply by exercising the privilege of shaping one's thoughts. But once these thoughts have been shaped into definite patterns, they are taken over by the law of Cosmic Habitforce and are made into permanent habits, and they remain as such unless and until they have been supplanted by different and stronger thought patterns.

Now we come to the consideration of one of the most profound of all truths: the fact that most people who obtain the higher brackets of success seldom do so until they have undergone some tragedy or emergency which reached deeply into their souls and reduced them to that circumstance of life called "failure."

The reason for this strange phenomenon is readily recognized by those who understand the law of Cosmic Habitforce, for it consists in the fact that these disasters and tragedies of life serve to break up established habits--habits which have led eventually to the inevitable results of failure-- and thus break the grip of Cosmic Habitforce and allow these failures to formulate new and better habits.

We see the same phenomenon in the results of warfare. When nations or large groups of people so relate themselves that their efforts do not harmonize with the Divine Plan of nature, they are forced to break up their habits, by warfare or some other equally disturbing circumstances, such as business depressions or epidemics of disease, so that a new start may be made which conforms more nearly to Nature's ultimate and overall scheme (The Master Key to Riches, p. 438)."

And, in our modern times, Mr. Hill's theory of Habitforce is about to be put to the ultimate test.




All Hail the coming Depression!




As Americans look around them, they cannot help but notice that their religious, social, economic, and political institutions are falling apart before their very eyes.


Once mighty manufacturers beg for their financial lives on national television.

Record numbers of Americans are unemployed, and living on government aid.

Tent cities are the new housing boom as millions of properties are entering foreclosure.

The Federal Reserve is inflating the money supply like there's no tomorrow, setting the stage for hyperinflation if they screw up... which they probably will.

The total cost of massive multi-trillion dollar bailouts outstrips every major American spending initiative except World War II.

Financial writer Ty Andros, in his latest piece entitled The Crack Up Boom, Part XIII notes:

... let’s examine a recent missive from James Bianco at Bianco Research in Chicago:

“Jim Bianco of Bianco Research crunched the inflation adjusted numbers. The bailout has cost more than all of these big budget government expenditures – combined:

* Marshall Plan: Cost: $12.7 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $115.3 billion
* Louisiana Purchase: Cost: $15 million, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $217 billion
* Race to the Moon: Cost: $36.4 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $237 billion
* S&L Crisis: Cost: $153 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $256 billion
* Korean War: Cost: $54 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $454 billion
* The New Deal: Cost: $32 billion (Est), Inflation Adjusted Cost: $500 billion (Est)
* Invasion of Iraq: Cost: $551b, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $597 billion
* Vietnam War: Cost: $111 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $698 billion
* NASA: Cost: $416.7 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $851.2 billion

TOTAL: $3.92 trillion (data courtesy of Bianco Research)

That is $686 billion less than the cost of the credit crisis thus far.

The only single American event in history that even comes close to matching the cost of the credit crisis is World War II: Original Cost: $288 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $3.6 trillion

The $4.6165 trillion dollars committed so far is about a trillion dollars ($979 billion dollars) greater than the entire cost of World War II borne by the United States: $3.6 trillion, adjusted for inflation (original cost was $288 billion).”

Thank you, James.

So the cost of the current crisis is greater than all of the above, including World War II, and can be expected to at least DOUBLE from here. And of course Bianco uses the OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT measures of inflation, not the true numbers like we find at www.shadowstats.com . Now here’s the BAD news:

THESE NUMBERS DO NOT INCLUDE THE REST OF THE G7 and they are in as much or more trouble than the United States. The reality of this has just BEGUN to be felt. It has happened so fast that the ALTERED REALITY we will endure is only in its infancy!!!

As Mr. Andros stated above, the economic crisis isn't limited to the United States. And international troubles will only reinforce America's financial tsunami. After all, wasn't a One World Order the goal of all this anyway??

My wife (who holds a bachelor's degree in political science) and I often have conversations about whether or not the European Union will survive. My position is that the EU is headed for splitsville, and that the driving reason will be the upcoming economic collapse that will decimate European institutions and force some nations to quit the Euro [1][2] in the long run.

In his article entitled, European Banks to be Hit by Collapsing Emerging Markets, Mr. Jack Crooks writes:

"The news that gets lost in the cacophony of reports about the U.S. economy is this: Two major crises now hammering emerging nations:

First, sinking exports. Over the last few years, the historic economic growth in emerging markets like Ukraine, South Korea, the Czech Republic, Poland, and others was driven almost entirely by demand for their exports from the U.S. and Europe.

Now, with the U.S. and Eurozone economies sliding, that demand has started to evaporate. And because these countries have little domestic demand to drive their economies, they've suddenly been thrown into a struggle for their very survival.

Second, plunging oil. As the economic crisis has slashed oil prices by nearly two-thirds, oil-producing emerging nations — Russia, Venezuela, Ecudor and others — are suddenly starving for cash to pay their bills.

Combined, these two events are now conspiring to set off a chain reaction that will bring the biggest creditors to these emerging markets — such as Europe and the UK — to their knees. When the history books are written, two key dates will be cited as moments when critical warnings were clearly telegraphed, duly recorded and promptly ignored until it was too late:

Key Date #1: Thursday, November 13. Seventeen days ago, the government of Ecuador failed to pay interest on bonds it had sold to investors. Citing plunging oil revenues, the government postponed its interest payments for a full month.

Key Date #2: Monday, December 15. Fifteen days from today, Ecuador must make those interest payments plus interest for the month of November. If it fails — if Ecuador defaults on its government bonds — it's could be first the domino in a chain reaction of government debt defaults that will sweep the globe...

... A few days ago, leaders from 21 nations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and three other international organizations attended an emergency, two-day summit to address the catastrophe among emerging nations. Japan pledged $100 billion for emergency loans to the governments of South Korea, India, Indonesia and other economies and urged other potential donor nations to do the same.

Similar stories can be told about dozens of emerging economies throughout Asia, Eastern Europe and Latin America: They're drowning in debt they built up during the good times … and now, with their exports vanishing before their very eyes, their economies are cratering.

Why should we care that these emergency economies are on the verge of collapse?

Because …

European Banks Loaned These Countries A Staggering $3.5 Trillion. When They Go Down, So Will Europe's Largest Banks!

Fortunately for us, U.S. banks loaned only $500 billion to these emerging markets and Japanese banks loaned them only $200 billion. But European banks loaned them a whopping $3.5 trillion — five times more than the U.S. and Japan combined.

Amazingly, European banks loaned these countries amounts so large they're the equivalent of a whopping 21% of their Eurozone's total GDP, according to Bank for International Settlements. And when you look at individual countries, the numbers are even larger:

In Sweden, banks loaned an amount equal to 25% of that country's GDP …

Swiss banks loaned the equivalent of 50% — fully HALF — of Switzerland's total GDP …

And Austrian banks loaned an amount equal to 85% that nation's GDP — with 80% going to the countries in Eastern Europe that are now suffering the greatest economic pain of all! ..."

Now add into the mix a Quadrillion dollars worth of derivatives, Credit Default Swaps, and other financial insanity hidden deep within the massive amounts of liabilities that banks and other economic players owe other institutions, and we could easily be on the verge of a worldwide financial meltdown that, quite frankly, scares the crap out of me!

All it takes is just one failed bank, or one bankrupt hedge fund, and economic Armageddon would be all but assured. And please keep in mind that, even if the Fed and other central banks decide to print trillions of dollars to save vulnerable institutions, it is the fundamental law of accounting that every debit entry have a corresponding credit entry. In other words, all of these trillions of dollars will eventually end up on somebody's balance sheet... most likely the taxpayers.

Which of course will lead to the endgame: A U.S. Bond Market/U.S. Dollar crisis. But that happens later.

Speaking of the U.S., we should also remember that the government bodies must responsible for upholding and enforcing feminist tyranny, i.e. State and Local governments, are also feeling the squeeze in a major way.

From Mish's post entited, Avalanche Of Fiscal Irresponsibility Hits California:

The California budget deficit is now $11 billion, on a path to $28 billion. Given that it's no longer possible to put this crisis off, Schwarzenegger declares fiscal emergency.

With time and money running out for California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger declared a fiscal emergency today and called legislators into a new special session that won't end until they agree on a way to trim the state's $11.2 billion budget deficit.

"Without immediate action, our state is headed for a fiscal disaster" in which California could run out of money to pay its bills by late February, the governor said in a news conference in Los Angeles.

He compared the growing deficit, which could reach $28 billion by 2010, to an avalanche gaining momentum, and he slammed the Legislature, Democrats and Republicans both, for not coming up with any solutions during a special session that ended Nov. 25...

Feminists rely on State and Local governments to pass and enforce a host of feminist friendly legislation including restraining order and domestic violence laws. However, these governmental units are falling upon hard times themselves, and their budget constraints are only going to increase in the coming years.

And, seeing as how feminist public policy wastes billions of dollars, methinks that, when the pain and anguish of maintaining our present system becomes unbearable, the politicians will be forced to do the right thing and chart a more pro-male and family friendly course of action. They won't do it because they have seen the light and are now ready to do the right thing, but they will do it because if they don't have their best and brightest men actively engaged in marriage, family life, child-rearing, and industry, then the nation will simply not survive. Already we see the impact this crisis is having on divorce rates, and other widespread changes will occur in the fullness of time.

I expect to see laws that currently discriminate against men, families and marriage be amended or repealed, quietly, over the coming decades. And, one fine day, the masses and the elite will join forces to toss feminist family values to the scrap heap, to rot in the afternoon sun.



I for one, can't wait.






Conclusions.






We have examined feminism, public policy, and the law and found each of them wanting.

In every respect, none of these upholds the true spirit of Justice as defined by Mr. Frederic Bastiat's essay, The Law.

At the present time, Mens Rights Activists should educate, debate, expose, and attack at every opportunity. At this stage of the game, raising awareness of the issues, with a vigorous counterattack against feminist ideology, is the best way to take the fight to our enemy. It goes without saying that high profile lawsuits, public protests, and well researched books and publications are also highly effective.

Now is the time to get our message out, to offer a positive alternative to the ruling party line, and now is the time to base our theory upon solid and irrefutable ground.

In the meantime, those who promote feminist jihad, as well as those who buy feminist bullshit hook, line and sinker, will only be convinced of the wrongness of their ways by the disaster they bring upon themselves. As was said previously, feminism is against nature, and violates the Universal Law. Therefore, it has already sown the seeds of its own destruction, and the best thing we as enlightened men can do is to simply get the hell out of the way, and whenever and however we can, help push the feminist/globalist/socialist/fascist Superexpress right over the edge of the Grand Canyon.

Little by little, this blog is becoming dated and irrelevant. Human beings are ever so slowly beginning to find their way home. Most people are already relearning the ancient lessons; that men and women need each other, that strong families are the basis for a strong nation, and no one loves you or cares about you more than your kith and kin. It's just a matter of time before public policy, and the laws that uphold it, catch up to the new reality.

So breath easy. It's only a matter of time before the Universal Law is enforced, with spectacular judgment for those who have ignored it for so long.

Toku X.

What the Law Should Be.

Gentlemen,

Please listen to Mr. Frederic Bastiat's excellent discourse, The Law.

Please note how our modern day institutions of Socialism, Feminism [1][2][3], Bailouts, and government run educational systems are wholly deviant from the Classical Liberal tradition on which the American system of law is based.

In his lecture, Mr. Bastiat's main premise is that the law equals Justice, and that the legitimate function of the law is to protect the God given rights of people from other individuals and the collective mob, otherwise known as Democracy.

Democracy, I might add, has been disastrous for the Rights of Men. Once the majority of persons were convinced that all men are rapists and that Men = SCUM, all of our ancient rights to home, family and offspring were taken away shortly thereafter via Congress and the Supreme Court. Men have no rights to speak of, period. This fact is not up for discussion; it is a matter of settled law and precedent.

Now ain't ya'll just clamoring for more "Democratic Reform?"

My apologies... sorry about my digression.

If we compare Mr. Bastiat's analysis to our present day legal regime, then it becomes crystal clear why men protest so bitterly when their children are taken from them by law, and are forced to subsidize the unjust act.

It's not about the dollars and cents for most men... it is the principle. It is the injustice that is visited upon them, the inability to challenge the divorce/child support process, and the punitive and inflexible manner of the whole affair that is outrageous and morally unacceptable.

And since our feminist legal order [a][b] violates our philosopher's definition of the law on a daily basis, is it any wonder that activists such as myself bitterly criticize it?

The fact of the matter is that our present day regime, in its total disregard for the Rights of Men, is completely unjust. It is corrupt, and it is, as our thinker would certainly call it, "a perversion of the law". Indeed, he would be amazed at the tyranny that modern day men are forced to endure day in and day out, and he would be appalled to see the vast numbers of men who willingly submit to feminist slavery without a word of protest.

In any event, be sure to check it out the lecture.

Toku.

End the Fed!!!

Gang,

Yesterday was End the Fed day!!

Although I wasn't able to make any of the protests, I was definitely with them in spirit.

Here's some video:























Some quick background on why the Fed Sucks:














And finally, options that We the People have when it comes time to enact radical monetary reform:




























While this year's End the Fed rally was sparsely attended, I feel comfortable in saying that widespread protests against the banking elite will become more and more commonplace, just like in good 'ole bankrupt Iceland.








The failure of the Federal Reserve to manage the crisis that it unleashed upon the People to begin with, and the widespread realization by the public that it is the root cause of our current financial crisis, will guarantee that in the not-to-distant future, millions of Americans will gather and shout in one voice.... END THE FED!!!






Toku.