Like sheikh spear he had gone past the greenback and dialectic, and realised the "world is a stage and we are all actors", and that there is a reality beyond, and that our reality is just a dreamworld. Which begged the sheikhs question "to be or not be"!!
I love America and would never leave. I think this is the big difference here. You can appreciate someone else loving his country but you condemn Americans who do. I would never say that America is better than Morocco for you, obviously it works. I’ve been to Russia and I loved visiting, but I would never move there because I’m American and this is home.
I also think there's a better solution to the decline in population than taking away women's sovereignty over their bodies. Most couples I know who don't have children say it's because they can't afford it. By changing the economy, in the way I describe in my book: https://www.amazon.com/How-Dismantle-Empire-2020-Vision/dp/1733347607, we could give couples who want children the choice to have and raise them securely--on one income or no corporate income--rather than taking choice away and forcing girls who don't want or can't raise children at that time or with that partner to have them. Here's that view:
And great conversation with Wyatt! I really enjoyed it. You kept mentioning one person after another that I've done episodes on and have some dialogue with, so I include this as part of my ongoing effort to convince you I'm worth subbing ;-)
Thank you for those links, Tereza! In some ways patriarchy is the front for women running things behind the scenes. I think women generally have more power than men overall because they have better social skills, and humans are social creatures and the most skillful have the most influence. For instance, under Moroccan "patriarchy" women decide who marries whom, which creates the interfamily links through which social power is exercised. (By women who meet, talk, and run rings around the guys...)
I appreciate your gratitude, Kevin, when I inundate you with links ;-)
Power is property. If a woman doesn't have a roof over her head or the means to feed her children, her 'power' all depends on coercing a man. If property rights prioritized the children, they would be matrilineal and no child would be homeless.
Our economic system turns homes into speculative investments--a trick, since your home isn't worth more, your money is worth less in terms of housing, which everyone needs. Men, as Graeber shows in anthropology, have always been gamblers. That's why the basics of life were owned in community by the women, who then gambled for trinkets.
Because mortgages are priced competitively at as much debt as possible, women won the right to work for one generation. Then the two-income mortgage became the norm and they forever lost the right to stay home and raise children. This went backwards--it should have enabled the labor of men to serve family and community too rather than having women's labor also serve investor profits.
The former is what my system does by taking back the mortgages.
Kevin….that is a great bit Of writing. I would just say, add, that the “issue” of opportunities for women and their subjurgation in some cultures is not an arguement that you can win if you embrace the idea that a woman’s optimal role is x, y,or z. Like everyone else there should be career options and equal opportunity for woman to participare in the work-a-day world, if they choose to, without the unnecessary militant critique of woman (and men) who choose to live more “traditional” roles believing that there is a more natural polarization between the sexes with the male being more dynamic outside of the home and the woman being more of a nurturing force within the home esp where children are conceived. To deny that women have had equality of opportunity is a falsehood. To promote careerism v motherhood is a different matter. They should be kept separate.
Thank you for the kind words. I think it's natural and inevitable and good that the norm for women is that their main career will be as moms/aunties/grandmothers, that is, caregivers and household managers, while men will be breadwinners and protectors. But "the norm" admits exceptions. Just as some men are called to be mystics wandering in the desert, or impecunious scholars, or what-have-you, some women are called to be saints, scholars, businesspeople, etc. The Prophet Muhammad's primary wife, Khadija, was a successful businesswoman, and he was basically her assistant.
But the main problem in today's West isn't that women are held back from male-dominated professions, but that they are pressured to become slaves and/or whores in the so-called "free market" (run by oligarchs) rather than family-based traditional caregivers and moms. The people who fall for that brainwashing will leave neither genes nor memes, while the future people of Earth will be the descendants of the (mostly religious) people who resisted secularist feminist brainwashing and had large families generation after generation.
Nothing more sacred than Motherhood. All female "careerism" is a prostitution of the sacred feminine. Female careerism has destroyed the Family Nexus. Is the desecration of the Family Temple in the Western World.
But of course this argument cannot stand up in a so called democratic rule of law, where everything would be surreptitiously equal, putting GOOD on the same level as EVIL.
For the spiritual up right Man &/or Woman, all values are internally anchored. Invisible to the Cimmerian darkness that clutters the better jugement of Mankind on the outer narcissistic world stage.
What does the Holy Qur'an say ? Is an evil doer equal in valeur to a believer, a Mu'min ? The Truth (al Haqq) for an honest Man needs no proof, is obvious to an uncluttered sincere & lucid mind.
The Root of Evil is always "La Mauvaise Foi" and the selfishness of the bad doggy, the inferior "nefs" !
I am re-reading D’ag Hammarskjold book of 1964,
Which I remembered reading in 1969—
I remembered his poetry as Secretary General United Nations—- “Never the answer “.
His sharing on Meister Eckert
On basically my interpretation that one can never be separate from one’s soul
And sometimes words take away what the soul is
His poetry always on God
I find inspiring.
His life taken by plane crash
Regarding Israel and Suez Canal
These global crimes did not just begin 9/11/01 or October 7, 2023 .
Being connected to one’s spiritual self
A daily practice .
Thanks Kevin for your wisdom and communications .
Like sheikh spear he had gone past the greenback and dialectic, and realised the "world is a stage and we are all actors", and that there is a reality beyond, and that our reality is just a dreamworld. Which begged the sheikhs question "to be or not be"!!
Sometimes I think if it were not Israel and Gaza, America and Vietnam , It would be { Peanut Butter and Jelly) fighting.
Your post is being blocked. I can not subscribe. ( something went wrong )
I am a retired 73 yo American living in Morocco. I would love to meet with you someday.
I love America and would never leave. I think this is the big difference here. You can appreciate someone else loving his country but you condemn Americans who do. I would never say that America is better than Morocco for you, obviously it works. I’ve been to Russia and I loved visiting, but I would never move there because I’m American and this is home.
In this, I offer an alternative view to patriarchy, citing David Graeber:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/when-mothers-ran-the-world
I also think there's a better solution to the decline in population than taking away women's sovereignty over their bodies. Most couples I know who don't have children say it's because they can't afford it. By changing the economy, in the way I describe in my book: https://www.amazon.com/How-Dismantle-Empire-2020-Vision/dp/1733347607, we could give couples who want children the choice to have and raise them securely--on one income or no corporate income--rather than taking choice away and forcing girls who don't want or can't raise children at that time or with that partner to have them. Here's that view:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/roe-v-redux-leak-or-squirrel?
And great conversation with Wyatt! I really enjoyed it. You kept mentioning one person after another that I've done episodes on and have some dialogue with, so I include this as part of my ongoing effort to convince you I'm worth subbing ;-)
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/noam-chomsky-is-the-problem
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/nord-streams-and-the-bagel-of-doom
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/ponerology-the-question-of-evil (on Harrison)
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/matt-ehret-and-cynthia-chung-geopuzzle pros
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/matt-ehret-and-james-corbett
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/multipolar-vs-micropolar (Matt & James)
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/having-words-peter-duke-and-jasun horsley
Thank you for those links, Tereza! In some ways patriarchy is the front for women running things behind the scenes. I think women generally have more power than men overall because they have better social skills, and humans are social creatures and the most skillful have the most influence. For instance, under Moroccan "patriarchy" women decide who marries whom, which creates the interfamily links through which social power is exercised. (By women who meet, talk, and run rings around the guys...)
I appreciate your gratitude, Kevin, when I inundate you with links ;-)
Power is property. If a woman doesn't have a roof over her head or the means to feed her children, her 'power' all depends on coercing a man. If property rights prioritized the children, they would be matrilineal and no child would be homeless.
Our economic system turns homes into speculative investments--a trick, since your home isn't worth more, your money is worth less in terms of housing, which everyone needs. Men, as Graeber shows in anthropology, have always been gamblers. That's why the basics of life were owned in community by the women, who then gambled for trinkets.
Because mortgages are priced competitively at as much debt as possible, women won the right to work for one generation. Then the two-income mortgage became the norm and they forever lost the right to stay home and raise children. This went backwards--it should have enabled the labor of men to serve family and community too rather than having women's labor also serve investor profits.
The former is what my system does by taking back the mortgages.
PS - I don't think it's a coincidence that aggressive "devils" get sweet daughters as first born, and then turn pussy!!
Kevin….that is a great bit Of writing. I would just say, add, that the “issue” of opportunities for women and their subjurgation in some cultures is not an arguement that you can win if you embrace the idea that a woman’s optimal role is x, y,or z. Like everyone else there should be career options and equal opportunity for woman to participare in the work-a-day world, if they choose to, without the unnecessary militant critique of woman (and men) who choose to live more “traditional” roles believing that there is a more natural polarization between the sexes with the male being more dynamic outside of the home and the woman being more of a nurturing force within the home esp where children are conceived. To deny that women have had equality of opportunity is a falsehood. To promote careerism v motherhood is a different matter. They should be kept separate.
Thank you for the kind words. I think it's natural and inevitable and good that the norm for women is that their main career will be as moms/aunties/grandmothers, that is, caregivers and household managers, while men will be breadwinners and protectors. But "the norm" admits exceptions. Just as some men are called to be mystics wandering in the desert, or impecunious scholars, or what-have-you, some women are called to be saints, scholars, businesspeople, etc. The Prophet Muhammad's primary wife, Khadija, was a successful businesswoman, and he was basically her assistant.
But the main problem in today's West isn't that women are held back from male-dominated professions, but that they are pressured to become slaves and/or whores in the so-called "free market" (run by oligarchs) rather than family-based traditional caregivers and moms. The people who fall for that brainwashing will leave neither genes nor memes, while the future people of Earth will be the descendants of the (mostly religious) people who resisted secularist feminist brainwashing and had large families generation after generation.
Nothing more sacred than Motherhood. All female "careerism" is a prostitution of the sacred feminine. Female careerism has destroyed the Family Nexus. Is the desecration of the Family Temple in the Western World.
But of course this argument cannot stand up in a so called democratic rule of law, where everything would be surreptitiously equal, putting GOOD on the same level as EVIL.
For the spiritual up right Man &/or Woman, all values are internally anchored. Invisible to the Cimmerian darkness that clutters the better jugement of Mankind on the outer narcissistic world stage.
What does the Holy Qur'an say ? Is an evil doer equal in valeur to a believer, a Mu'min ? The Truth (al Haqq) for an honest Man needs no proof, is obvious to an uncluttered sincere & lucid mind.
The Root of Evil is always "La Mauvaise Foi" and the selfishness of the bad doggy, the inferior "nefs" !
آمين