Tuesday, December 31, 2013

Mandated Sophistry: How Big Education is Misusing It's Authority

As I sit on yet another college campus' bounds, retiring into NYE lazy dreariness, I can overwhelmingly sense the pure disrepute of the government mandated texts and scholarly sophistry.  I've been thinking of planning, and I'd wager if an honest assessment was done of the language use in the secular textbook-typico one would find the type of sophistry reserved for pop culture.

Sophistry, as the pagan greek socrates proffered in his infamous dialectic, in that an average sophomoric latte sipper would likely question any reference to sovereign objective truth with a simple yet dismissive, "what is truth?"

The fact is, Truth is the business of knowledge.  Until the end of time from the beginning, there has been at very least correspondence truth-as-such.  Things correspond to our representations, etc.

Yet we are to believe there is, within public discourse, no correct interpretation - sociologically, linguistically, or otherwise.

It is an obvious bias of textbooks in this modern age, and to be done away with should they ever - god forbid - dare to publish fact based on sovereignty.

It is a dire shame to have all knowledge taught then glibly dismissed as pointless A Priori.

The fact is, purposiveness has not just a subjective place within academic thought.  Nor merely a philosophical/psychological analysis as irrelevant side note.


Teleology is simply the only way to take away the shackles of subjectivism in our literature.


Purpose has supposedly been disproven...

Does that mean that the questions of sovereign law have been relegated to the anthropological?

Does this imply that nothing has any A Priori synthesis worthy of a simple and pure creation?

Does this mean life is pointless?




Why not?  As long as what my heart and gut tell me are merely subjective phenomena then I'd suppose it follows that nothing is true.  Kant's "noumena" (or to what objects of consciousness correspond) is only accessible to Hosana on High, so in what sense should we assume our representations correspond to anything with a purpose?

Well, I'll proffer a hint -

and it ain't mythology... lol.


Facticity is facticity and ALL phenomena (or correspondence) refer to fact.  All facts are derived from the noumena or in-and-for-itself.  ALL for-the-sake-of-which primordiall facticity comports itself towards an understanding of it's own being - that is, hopefully your ahead of me, the image of god.

All representation is of a representation of what it is to comport towards an image of god, so to speak.





But unfortunately, you would be hard pressed to find this type of talk examined beyond the mere Hegel reference in some seemingly ironic sidenote.

We don't have to teach our children philosophy - but for the love of god, teach them Hegel's hermeneutics.  It's a way of understanding the Reason of Hosana on High, and can even redeem the average academic dullard entrenched in meaningless "fact"-as-such.  We need to teach the children that the reason of Hosana is more than just a metaphor - that Reason IS the structure of God's Creation.


I'd proffer the leftist Evolutionary Quantum Physics set would find this type of proclaimation untenable and intolerable!

Why is not their "Theory" of evolution and obviously error laden speculations about quantum nonsense more prone to being found intolerable for god fearing christian americans to study.I mean for christ's sake, I'm not advocating for anything other than Reason as defined by Western Tradition proper to be taught rather than this absolutely deplorable 'new-speak'.

Soon human life will be just a series of 'situations'.
Soon all divination will be brought to 'superstition'.
Eventually, all conscience and ethic-as-such will be considered 'sickly'.

What will happen to those who know? Those who know about the Truth?

What will become of those who don;'t want to believe in redistributionism and evolutionary eugenics theory?

What will happen to our children in schools, not having yet bitten the apple from the tree?





















And why do the liberals ALWAYS get to write the most prominent TEXTBOOKS?

















I say, if DDU has to back any one initiative in 2014 before all others - it is to bring back textbook authorship to it's roots in 17th Century Enlightenment-style Teleology.


RT Stillwell DDU 1/1/2014

Tuesday, December 17, 2013

A Compendium of Selections from Ann Coulter's "Treason"

In the spirit of having a little fun (as morbid as it may seem) here are some more or less random selections from a book authored by Ann Coulter entitled "Treason".

"Frustrated in their attempt to enslave the world, liberals' only fun anymore is destroying individuals."

"Democrats do the most outrageous things imaginable-collaborate with totalitarian regimes, commit felonies in the Oval Office, gay-bait senate staffers-and if anyone complains, they scream about fascist oppression."

The reporters, the Democrats...were all having a rip-roaring good laugh at the notion of Communists in government.  Stalin's show trials must have had them in stitches."

"Confident that the media would portray them as eloquent and reasonable no matter what they did, the Democrats behaved like animals..."

"This is treated as comparable to Henry V's speech at Agincourt, only more inspiring."

"Another act of mind-boggling courage was lyndon johnson's single flight through-out world war 2-as an observer-for which he was awarded the Silver Star, the third highest combat award.  For the rest of his life, Johnson wore what historian David Halberstam called 'the least deserved and most proudly displayed Silver Star in military history.'"

"Stalinist spies were passing secret government document files to Soviet agents, and the Treason Party sprang to action by vigorously investigating the precise words McCarthy had used in a speech to a women's Republican club in West Virginia.  This from the 'legally accurate' crowd.  Bill Clinton denied under oath that he had engaged in sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky, that  Monica Lewinsky had engaged in sexual relations with him, or even that he was ever alone with Monica Lewinsky.  This is hailed as Clinton's courageous effort to 'save the Constitution.'"

"People who assure us McCarthy presided over a reign of terror also describe Ken Starr's plodding, meticulous investigation as a reign of terror.  And they say that when we're watching.  Imagine when they'll say when the generation that knows the truth is gone."

"Right up until the Venona Project was declassified, proving the existence of a vast network of Soviet spies in America throughout the forties and fifties, the 'Red Scare' industry was still going strong.  Literally months before Venona was declassified, Griffin Fariello released an inadvertently hilarious book titled 'Red Scare: Memories of the American Inquisition'.  The book consisted of scores of 'oral histories' describing 'how it felt to live amid an ideology now labeled McCarthyism."

"Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason."

"You could be talking about scrabble and they would instantly leap to the anti-American position."

"Everyone says liberals love America too.  No they don't."

"They boast (lyingly) about their superior stance on civil rights.  But somehow their loyalty to the United States is off-limits as a subject of political debate."

"Liberals demand that the nation treat enemies like friends and friends like enemies.  We must lift sanctions, cancel embargoes, pull out our troops, reason with our adversaries, and absolutely never wage war-unless the french say it's okay."

"Is it more patriotic to love your country or to ridicule those who do as "naive" and "angry"?  These are not questions impenetrable to human logic."

"Free speech is a one-way ratchet for traitors.  While journalists assailed Bush for creating an atmosphere of intolerance for those who 'object to patriotic oathes,' they didn't mind creating an atmosphere of intolerance toward those who support patriotic oaths."

"Liberals unreservedly call all conservatives fascists, rascists, and enemies of civil liberties with no facts whatsoever."

"Liberals malign the flag, ban the Pledge, and hold cocktail parties for America's enemies, but no one is ever allowed to cast the slightest aspersion on their patriotism."

-

Zing!

Merry X-mas,

DDU RT 2013

Sunday, December 15, 2013

In Defense of Eddie Bernays: Why Liberals Hate The Pinnacles of Genius

The fact is, liberals - i.e. democrats or 'the left' - hate genius.  Their idea of profundity is constituted by either physicists with their heads up their asses, humanist oxen reciting what they'd gleaned from the back covers of various books, or their favorite pop icon who makes millions off liberals' penchant for being entertained by the nooks and crannies of their own mirror image.

This wouldn't be the least bit bothersome were it not for the fact that when conservatives attain the greatness of authentic genius they respond - as per Coulter's "Demonic" thesis - as a pitchfork/torch clad hoarde of townspeople, barraging down the street to a mansion's doorstep in the grim hope of running some monster out of it's mansion and "our town".  It's a rather blithe metaphore, however - when most of these hayseed townsfolk have degrees at secular institutes for profanity (i.e. what were onced cutely coined 'schools'), the blitheness becomes very serious indeed.

I'll merely say, that this would be hard to prove - were it not for the fact that almost every conservative intellectual who's achieved anything of import is ritually character assassinated by worthless authors of the anti-exceptionalist bent.  You can even find such books, easily.  They combine, in short reviewe, the difficulty and budget of documentary filmmaking with the impartiality of lamestream media.  Take for example the most prominent conservative of the last century.  His name was Eddie Bernays - author of among other books the light read "Propaganda".  Decades after it's publishing liberal activists did a spit take over the gall that someone responsible for creating advertising as we now know it would be so transparent as to title a work of authorship such an obviously sinister nome.  Propaganda.  They have held up Mr. Bernays, Sigmund Freud's nephew, as an archetype of the evil unscrupulous person responsible for 'brainwashing' the poor unclean masses in flyover country into believing things like:

1) It's nice to own property.
2) Fast cars are desirable.
3) Coffee and cigarettes make an enjoyable couplet.
4) Attractive women are good wives and mothers.
5) Steak and other meats taste delicious.
6) Suburbs are appropriate places to live.

etc.

Obviously, these kinds of flagrant violations of justice and ethics are to be combatted.


Edward Bernays was, to put it mildly, keen to some of the discoveries in classical psychology that were - at the time - truly groundbreaking new ways of understanding why humans do what they do, want what they want, and live the way they live.  He merely applied this insider understanding - as per Freud - to conventional advertising and, as with most genius, everyone followed suit.
Think of that popular cable television show "Madmen".  Take the most prestigious character from that fictional account of the ad world during the time.  Now multiply the wit by 100, multiply the power by 1000, and multiply the status by 1 million and you would have a pretty fair idea of who Mr. Bernays was.

Yet he is characterized in collective zeitgeist and near fictional accounts of his person as a dreary, almost profanely middle class meddler, a 2 bit chiseler - if you will.  He is painted to be a sort of mustachio'd "manipulator" - a term virtually invented by modern propagandists without the flair for style of Bernays.  He is, almost assuredly, implied by almost any liberal who conjures his name to be an all American idiot of kin to Goebbels himself.

Why?

Because liberals feel compelled to rewrite history to suit their hatred of American Exceptionalism.

How?

Mostly through 2 bit montages of womanly fretting in documentary film and laughably "intellectual" passages in books made for, by, and sold TO academic oxen.

When?

I'll give you a guess when it all started and it starts with 'sick' and ends with 'ickies'.



The only reason this is more than a sidenote on something marginally important from the past is because the Left's misrepresentation of Bernays' substantial contribution to the character of the former U.S.A. is what, guaranteed, the activist caste's god, Mr. Hussein himself, actually believes!
His boomer-esque affinity for qualifying 1950's morality as inherently un-american (I never thought I'd see the day) is part and parcel with this type of rewriting history.  Mr. Bernays is no longer the most prominently influential intellectual of last century.  McCarthy is no longer the most principled American of last century who fought against soviet spy's.  Buckley Jr. is no longer the man who single handedly fought back the most significant coup attempt of the last century.


No, these hyperboles and others can't be allowed.

Now, more realistic characterizations are apt.

Bernays was a traitor who turned people into zombies.
McCarthy was a monster who burned witches at the stake!
Buckley Jr. was a...


















well, I shouldn't even start -



















All I mean to say is that WHEN conservative men DO achieve the heights of true genius they are defamed, redacted, remembered inaccurately and unscrupulously - almost across the board - character assassinated.  Why?


Because they fear us.  They fear what we stand for.






RT DDU 2013








Thursday, December 12, 2013

The Most Important Thing About Christmas is Christianity: Free Speech Under Assault

My Fiance: "Merry Christmas!"
Her Co-Worker: "You're not supposed to say merry christmas, it's happy holidays."

The assault on freedom of speech may have culminated in saying happy holidays as opposed to merry christmas and other such politically correct nonsense, but recently, it has had some startling ramifications:

Lars Hedegaard, head of the Danish Free Press Society, found himself convicted of - out of all crimes possible - 'racism' for remarks about islam's treatment of women.  He believed these remarks to be made in private, but they were, in fact, tape recorded and broadcast to the world - used as evidence in his trial.  What was he guilty of?  Obviously a crime: racism.

Rev. Stephen Boissoin was convicted of, close to the worst crime possible, homophobia.
The evidence against him?  Provided by one Lori Andreachuk, a self described 'social engineer' taking part in Alberta's lifetime prohibition of any "disparaging" remarks against homosexuals.  He was banned from ever saying anything contrary to a lifestyle described in Leviticus as an "abomination".  One key to note.  This was not a prohibition against anything 'hatefull' - but merely 'disparaging'.

Dale McAlpine was arrested for handing out leaflets in England - a lifelong Christian himself.  A self described member of the gay lesbian and altogether freakoid society arrested him and sentenced him for causing 'distress to the public'.  He was accused of "talking in a loud voice" that might have been overheard.  he was fingerprinted, DNA-Sampled, and tossed in prison for 7 hours - merely for stating his opinion that gays were, as per :Leviticus, an abomination.

14 year old Codie Stott was arrested and jailed for 3 1/2 hours for merely asking to be in a different group, in school, from her Urdu "playmates".  her shoelaces were stripped off - they photo'd and fingerprinted her, a dehumanizing affair: her crime?  She complained she couldn't understand the ethnic immigrants language.
Section 5: "Racial Public Offense".

A young man much like yourself, Mr. Kinsella of Ottawa, was forced by the court to apologize to a chink simply for making a joke in public about ordering a cat at his favorite Chinese restaraunt.

Neo-Nazi's in Canada were brought to human right's tribunals simply for handing out Xeroxed pamphlets at pay phones, which was used to bring about "Speech Codes" etc.

Guy Earle, a comedian, was fined 15 hundred dollars simply for daring to put down two drunken hecklers during his performace.  HIS CRIME???  The drunken hecklers happened to be short haired butch lesbo's.

Sir Iqbal, knighted by the U.K., was investigated by Scotland Yard for "Homophobia".
The GALHA, a gayer group, was concurrently investigated by Scotland Yard for "islamaphobia".

I heard that even one Mr. Ledger was arrested for 'racism' merely for performing the hit song "Kung Fu Fighting"!!!!


The fact is, if simply saying "Merry Christmas" isn't outlawed NOW, it WILL BE in the future unless we fight for freedom of speech.  we'll find ourselves, in 20 or 30 years, in a dystopian wonderland where even acknowledging what atheists have termed 'the disease of christianity' will be a criminal offense.

And if these ponderous quantum-physics nutbags have their way, it will be.

We need to all, for the sake of the fact that CHRIST reigns supreme over all heathens and atheists, proclaim the sovereignty of Christ this christmas season with a little bit of malice and hatred in our hearts: for the multiculturalist cabal seeks to strip us of that right.  We should show them, this is a CHRISTIAN time of year.  It's not the birth of Richard 'FAGGOT' Dawkins we are celebrating.  It is the birth of the ONLY way to god's person.  It is a celebration of THE ONLY WAY TO GOD -


































That is,



























Christ.




























So say Merry Christmas with a little disdain,
Thanks.


Brendan O'Connell
Founder and Member of Domestic Democracy United

Monday, December 2, 2013

video

I've recently viewed a video of William F. Buckley Jr. interviewing one mr. Saul Alinsky.
In light of this and my previous attempts to indict the Regime on counts of alinskyan criminality, I've decided to rebroadcast this episode of DDU Dialup in order to put some perspective into the subject-as-such.

The horrifying thing about mr. Saul Alinsky is that he seems so cool and convincing in such a way as to lead normal godfearing patriots into essential conceding territory.

This is unfunctional.

The fact is, the ideology of Alinsky and neo-Alinskyan socialists has no place in the U.S.

It is a dangerous strain of political nihilism, and the mere fact of it's existence within our borders undercuts, by it's basic nature, democracy, republicanism and sovereignty.

I hope you enjoy this short video, derived from the NR.

RT