Godzilla: Final Wars Combat I

Now this is a Godzilla flick worthy of praise!!

We all know that the American remake of Godzilla was the WORST damn film in the history of the franchise... but this movie is where it's at.

Slick, stylish, filled with hot Japanese babes with hot leggs (vs. the American movie with a CG Godzilla and gay ass human love scenes), and no holds barred combat, this is the Godzilla flick to end them all!

Make sure you check it out.

Battles Without Honor and Humanity Trailer

Kumogakure here... hitting you with that funk!

The Yakuza Papers are classic Japanese gangster films with violence, guns, respect... all of those things that Red Blooded men thrive on!

Check it out!

Endgame! Prequel to Book V.

Good morning and welcome back to Kumogakure School!!

Before we move to an overview of the all important Book V of Plato's Republic, I would like to comment on some additional ideas that are found in the pages of that famous discourse.

Newcomers, by the way, are urged to read all of the Endgame! series of posts, from the beginning. In this way, the reader will be able to read the various interpretations that scholars and philosophers have gleaned from Book V's subject matter, making it more comprehensible. Reading the older posts will also aid in understanding that Book V is a very big part of Plato's scheme for his ideal state, a system that I believe we are being driven towards at breakneck speed.

I would like to let it be known that Plato, while advocating a philosophical system that, on the main, I reject, is indisputably one of the most brilliant men to have ever walked the Earth. His contributions are legion. Disciplines such as Religion, Music, Law, and Politics, among others, have been impacted by the Masterful thinker, and only systems of immense antiquity, that have actively sought to keep themselves pure from any foreign influence, remain largely free of Platonic doctrine.

For example, one only need to compare the Biblical Old Testament (Tanach) to the New Testament to see the difference that a little Plato makes.

Deuteronomy 28:63 from the Tanach:

Just as it pleased the LORD to make you prosper and increase in number, so it will please him to ruin and destroy you. You will be uprooted from the land you are entering to possess.

1 John 1:5 from the New Testament:

This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.

The Republic, Book II 380 b-c:

"What the poet must not be allowed to say is that those who were punished were made wretched through god's action... but if a state is to be run on the right lines, every possible step must be taken to prevent anyone, young or old, either saying or being told, whether in poetry or prose, that god, being good, can cause harm or evil to any man...

... God is the cause, not of all things, but only of good."

(Maricon, author of the first complete Christian Gospel)



This is a profound theological difference, and it serves as a good example of the influence of Platonic thought on religion, and on Christianity in particular. So much so that the first complete New Testament Gospel, Maricon's Gospel of the Lord, rejected the Hebrew Bible completely, because of the great discord between the earlier Hebraic outlook and Platonic/Non-Hebrew ideals. And it should be noted that significant Fathers of the Church were also followers of Neo-Platonism.

So in essence, while the Thinker, in my view, is fatally misguided in matters of statecraft, he is an intellectual giant whose words are worth reading with careful consideration and respect.

With this in mind, according to the Republic:

“... the prevalence of indiscipline and disease in a community leads, does it not, to the opening of law courts and surgeries in large numbers, and law and medicine begin to give themselves airs, especially when they are taken with great seriousness even by free men… And when not only the lower classes and manual workers, but also those who have some pretensions to a liberal education, need skilled doctors and lawyers, that is a pretty conclusive proof that the education in a state is disgracefully bad. For is it not a strikingly disgraceful sign of a bad education if one has to seek justice at the hands of others as one’s masters and judges because it lacks it in oneself (p. 103)?”

A damning indictment, and one that is especially true of our society. My regular readers know how the law courts have been twisted and perverted in the ironic pursuit of Platonic ideas.

History has shown us that on the main, Platonic solutions to issues of human governance often lead to the conditions that our author bemoans above. The Philosopher's greatest and most radical ideas only backfire against him, as is fitting for proposals that go against the Law of Heaven. We see this occur time and time again, and is something we should keep in mind as we explore Book V in future posts.

As an example, pre-Communist China believed that adherance to the Law was the lowest level of moral virtue, and that mankind could acheive much higher heights of morality. However with the coming of Communism, this ancient way of thinking was swept away.

With the benefit of hindsight, we can see that, in its quest to brainwash the people into surrendering their God given needs for family, property, and morality, the Leftist state created more poverty, ignorance, instability, and fear than it resolved.

The former Soviet Union is a prime example of this.

Looking at the West, which is rapidly embracing Third Wave and other similar political philosophies...

...Anyone with Google can read all about how the educational system of the West is crumbling, how our economies are rapidly reaching crisis mode, how the courts of law are being abused and misused [1][2], how unhealthy and bloated, conceited and vain the people (especially the women) are becoming, and how great the neglect of the ancient and noble ideas of justice, loyalty, compassion, and honor.

The author continues:

“And it’s disgraceful too to need a doctor not only for injury or regular disease, but because by leading the kind of idle life we have described we have filled our bodies with gases and fluids, like a stagnant pool, and driven the medical profession to invent names for our diseases (p. 103)…”

Disgraceful indeed.

Consider that the government has spent billions in its efforts to help children lose weight, and that the program has been a colossal failure.

According to the Detroit Free Press:

Experts agree that although most funding targets schools, parents have the greatest influence, even a biological influence, over what their children eat. Zeitler said when children slim down, it's because "their families get religion about this and figure out what needs to happen."

But often, they don't.

"If the mother is eating Cheetos and white bread, the fetus will be born with those taste buds. If the mother is eating carrots and oatmeal, the child will be born with those taste buds," said Dr. Robert Trevino of the Social and Health Research Center in San Antonio.

"If we don't reach a child before they get to puberty, it's going to be very tough, very difficult, to change their eating behavior."

Also, poorer kids are especially at risk, because unhealthy food is cheaper and more easily available than healthy food. Parents are often working, leaving children unsupervised to get snacks. Low-income neighborhoods have fewer supermarkets with fresh produce.

Please note, dear reader, that in the case of the inner city community, of which I am a member, the word parent means SINGLE MOTHER. This is a world where the words "married" and "father" are seldom heard of.

Working too many hours, with too little help, she is in no position to feed her children with the very expensive "health food" that most of us can afford.

Or maybe she doesn't care what the "little bastards" eat, so long as they leave her "the hell alone."

Or possibly she doesn't want to, doesn't know how to, or is too tired to cook. She will send her young children to the local burger joint... maybe five nights a week.

Once again, it is ironic that, thanks to the Platonically inspired feminist movement, the very conditions that our favorite philosopher laments have come to pass.

While I hate to point fingers, in this case, the blame for this sad state of affairs rests with:

1) Government for their role in advancing the feminist agenda

2) Big Business for selling us poisonous foods that we don't really need, or contain ingredients that are oh so harmful to our health (supersized fries, anyone)?

3) Women.

Why are women responsible?

By the force of law and custom, women have 100% of all responsibility for the care and feeding of children, thanks to feminism. In this country, and many countries around the world, a man has no ultimate say in the lives of his children.

WITH ALL THE RIGHTS, COMES ALL THE RESPONSIBILITY.

To be fair, women aren't getting off scott free either. They too are suffering under Leftist rule.

You know, dear reader, the present state of affairs reminds me of a passage in Harvey Mansfield's Outstanding work, Manliness.

Explaining to his readers the philosophy of Nietzsche with respect to women and the "gender-neutral society," Mansfield notes that:

"...he anticipates the gender neutral society... "women can though a few centuries of education be made into anything, even into men." It can be done, but it isn't appropriate to do. In the transition lies the real trouble, Nietzsche says... Furthermore, men will be angry because the arts and sciences will be choked up by "unheard-of dilettantism," politics will be more fantastic and partisan than ever, society will be in dissolution -- all because women, "the custodians of ancient morality and custom," have become ridiculous to themselves. Once they let go of being guardians of morality and custom, where else will they find a comparable power (Mansfield, Manliness, p. 118)?"

Ladies and gentlemen, I submit to you that women (and men who are controlled by women) are indeed ridiculous to themselves today. And the primary catalyist to the formation of the "Lace Curtain" is none other than impressionable revolutionaries who studied Book V of the Republic.

The societal ills that affect us today are numerous and complicated. Feminism alone is not the cause of all of our troubles. However, Leftist feminism has done much to bring us to this unfortunate state of affairs; and in many instances, it is the driving force behind unwelcome change.

By the way dear reader, this is Plato's "managed health care" approach:

“ This then is the kind of medical and judicial provision for which you will legislate in your state. It will provide treatment for those of your citizens whose physical and psychological constitution is good; as for the others, it will leave the unhealthy to die, and those whose psychological constitution is incurably corrupt it will put to death (The Republic p. 108).”

Is this the kind of socialized medicine that Mr. Michael Moore promotes in his latest movie?

Lets hope not!!

Thank you dear visitor, for your patience. I know that today's post was long, but it is essential to the rest of my argument. All of this leads us to a critical examination of Book V of the Republic. In this section, our favorite philosopher will lay out his grand scheme for the female Guardian; one that certain groups of yesterday and today seek to impose upon our societies, leaving a trail of carnage, devastation, and corpses in its wake.

See you next crime!

Kumo.

Baskerville: The Road to Serfdom.

Welcome back!

Hope you are enjoying your holiday!

Here's an interesting article by Baskerville entitled, "Welfare and the Road to Serfdom," courtesy of the Fine ANCPR blog:

As conservatives congratulate themselves on ten years of welfare reform, they need to start looking at the larger picture and all that was left undone. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) addressed only one program in the welfare behemoth, Aid to Families with Dependent Children. The myriad other programs that constitute the welfare state remain untouched. Figures recently reported by the National Center for Health Statistics showing out-of-wedlock births at a record high confirm that, in social terms, we have barely scratched the surface.

Moreover, it is not called the welfare “state” for nothing. For unnoticed by reformers has been a startling development that is far more serious than even the devastating economic effects. This is the quiet metamorphosis of welfare from a simple system of public assistance into nothing less than a miniature penal apparatus, replete with its own system of courts, prosecutors, police, and jails: juvenile and “family” courts, “matrimonial” lawyers, child protective services, domestic violence units, child support enforcement agents, and more. This kafkaesque machinery operates by its own rules, largely outside the constitutional order, and represents the fulfillment of Friedrich von Hayek’s prophecy that socialism would eventually take us down a “road to serfdom.”

The first step in the mission creep transforming public assistance into bureaucratic tyranny was the extension of welfare operations beyond the needy. Having shut the front door to welfare abuse among low-income recipients, reformers have left the back door wide open, with welfare-originated programs quietly expanded to serve the middle class.

The prime example is child support enforcement, which grew directly out of welfare. Despite sanctimonious rhetoric about being “for the children,” the original aim was not to provide for children but to recover welfare costs; no other constitutional justification exists for this federal plainclothes police force. The program was begun exclusively for families on welfare and was to be applied to willfully absent parents who had abandoned their parental responsibilities to their children, leaving them dependent on public assistance to satisfy basic needs.

During the 1980s and 1990s – with no public debate, justification, or explanation – federal enforcement machinery conceived and created to address the minority of children in poverty was expanded (under bureaucratic and feminist pressure) to cover During the 1980s and 1990s – with no public debate, justification, or explanation – federal enforcement machinery conceived and created to address the minority of children in poverty was expanded (under bureaucratic and feminist pressure) to cover all child support cases, including the vast majority not receiving welfare. Unlike Temporary Assistance to Needy Families and virtually every other welfare program, child support enforcement is not means tested; indeed, there are no limitations or eligibility requirements at all.

This vastly expanded the size of the program and continues to do so by bringing in millions of middle-class divorce cases, for which the system was never intended. Unlike the welfare-related cases, where it is almost impossible to collect from impecunious young inner-city fathers, the divorced fathers have deeper pockets to mine...

Read the rest of it.

The piece ties in beautifully with what I have written concerning the very shabby condition of this country's financial system, in the long term.

For example, the Baskerville paper cites the following chart:

Cost to the Taxpayer of the Child Support Enforcement Program

As of 2002, the expense of both the state and federal child support programs has climbed into the BILLIONS of dollars!

And forgive me, dear reader, if I assume that the costs of administering these morally bankrupt programs have only increased since then. I say morally bankrupt because programs that undermine the family unit, such as child support, not only defy the laws of morality and logic, but they also create moral hazards that greatly discourage marriage, the familial arrangement that is the most conducive to wealth creation [a][b].

We are robbing Peter to pay Paul, and losing money in the process. In financial speak, our child support regime has a negative "net present value," and should be dismantled with excessive amounts of speed and fury.

No Cost Accountant in his right mind would continue such a program, but the Child Support Regime, as Mr. Baskerville points out, is very profitable for certain government agencies and private businesses that make a living off of the wages of sin:

Deuteronomy 10:18:

He defends the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and loves the alien (or the stranger, Strongs# 1616), giving him food and clothing.

In closing, feminism, along with other Platonic movements, is doomed to failure. It is inefficient, and unsustainable.

In a perfect world, our political leadership would catch on, see the iceburgs, and reverse the unsinkable U.S.S. Government before it's too late. However in the real world that you and I inhabit, this outcome looks increasingly unlikely.

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best... and save that last rack of BBQ ribs for me!!

Kumo.

Has the Eternal Bachelor Returned??

Gents,

Give it a look.

Could it be that Duncan has returned??

Let's hope!

Rageh inside Iran.

Hey Sportsfans!!

Check out this interesting film, Rageh Inside Iran.

An interesting look inside of the current American Public Enemy Number One.

Also, a very good example of Leftist Mangina BBC reporters at work. MRAs will note all the damn questions he asks about women, and young women, and how women should be allowed to speak independently from her husbands, what the women are wearing, how "Male Dominiated" Iranian society is, etc etc etc.

Mr. Omaar, if you are reading this, please shut the hell up, leave people and their culture alone, and JUST DO THE DAMN STORY WITHOUT YOUR LEFTIST FEMINIST BULLCRAP!

Other than that, nice job buddy!

Check it out.

Truth or Falsehood??

Greetings!

The UK is not a merry place at the moment.

According to fav Anti-Jihadi site Jihad Watch, my second favorite foreign nation (Japan being number one naturally) is ground zero in the War on Terror.

Or is it?

Infowars.com has a different take. They say that the attacks in England have been staged, as a pretext for expanded government power.

Who to believe?

During my time as an MRA, I have learned that in order to see the complete picture, two or more points of view are needed.

For example, we know that a graduating class of jihadi fighters recently came out of Pakistan. It would make sense then, that we are now witnessing terrorist attacks in "Londinstan."

Although it is interesting that these attacks are so unsophisticated. Most professional jihadi strikes usually have much better planning and execution.

So, maybe these are bonified terrorist attacks.

However...

Government does have a long history of staging violent events in order to justify some form of intervention or policy. Alex Jones, in his video Terrorstorm, provides some very interesting historical examples of government backed terrorism.

And both Jihad Watch and Infowars.com agree that the logical course of action is to crack down on Muslims, shut down terror cells, and empower the (British) people in order to help combat the menace.

As the Infowars article states:

If we were really at war with Islamic terrorists then the British government would impose stringent controls on letting Muslims into the country in the first place and would deport others en masse - but instead the opposite has happened, while everybody's rights are violated and abused in the name of security.

So... do I think these UK attacks were staged?

Possibly.




(Prime Minister Gordon Brown)


But I, along with millions around the world, will wait and see how the British government, under the leadership of Gordon Brown, responds. Will they work with the British people, while respecting their rights and freedoms, in order to bring peace and order?

Or will Mr. Brown seek to implement an even stricter police state?

Only time will tell.

Kumo.