Modern Politics and the Manufacture of the Unrightful Pre-Eminent Right to be Offended and Display Intolerant Tolerance (Updated)

By on

 The question of the hour, in the modern immoral mundial meltdown, appears to be this:

Who has the greater right to be offended? 

That is an unavoidable question that everyone seems to avoid; which is hypocritical and oxymoronic (two clear hallmarks of the present age of irresponsibility and lunacy). 

If all are equal then all have the equal right to be offended, but how can one have the right be offended when his offense offends another in his right not to be offended?

The solution: Don't think.  Just do what we tell you.

What makes "elected servants" think that they have the right to be overlords and make decrees rather than govern honestly as they swore they would according to the laws that were established at the time that they were elected...? in a generational continuum from the foundation of our government established by our Founders and their posterity. 

Do outsiders have a right to subvert?  If so, is their right to subvert a greater right than the right of the legitimate persons to prevent subversion?

How can unlawful dishonesty of invaders have greater right than lawful honesty of rightful heirs? 

If compared to another clear-cut area, this would be called bank robbery!  That is what modern politics is.  Yet, for some reason, it is given an aire of legitimacy and respectability, even though the majority of the populace knows that the majority (if not all) of the politicians are corrupt, lying treasonous, immoral, criminal bastards. 

Modern politics is a game of "capture the flag".  No rules.  Whoever captures the flag wins.  The problem is, moral people thinking that it is a game play by what they are told are the rules, and so, they will always lose if they are too stupid to realize that it is not a game (the other side does not follow any rules)—it is a war.

Clearly someone must have that pre-eminent pole position of having the exclusive right to be offended (and if someone has the exclusive right, to where did equality disappear and who "disappeared it" and by what right?).  Is might or subterfuge legitimate means to secure right over what had not been your right, but which had been someone elses? 

Now, understand clearly, the difference between inherent right versus pseudo-right. 

In the former, you build your own house and have exclusive right to it. 

In the latter, you build your own house and others attempt to steal it from you by any means: whether slowly taxing you to death to give benefits to everyone other than the one to whom they are supposed to go (the taxpayer: for that is the only legitimate, moral, legal use of taxpayer money, for actual needed, desired services of the taxpayers themselves, for services that they cannot individually procure, such as the nation's roads, REASONABLE national defense, etc.) or whether they try to kill him outright and take it immediately.

If someone has a right (or at least, for argument sake, something that is recognized as a "right", even if in truth it is not a right), what has established that right, by whom, and, ironically, by what authority?

Furthermore, has it always been that way? that is: has someone always had the exclusive right over someone else?

The common law says that your right to swing your fist ends where someone else's nose begins (unless it is a matter of self defense, and you are protecting your own nose).  The Common Law established that you have the right to do whatever you want based upon the Morality established by the Bible, except to the point that it actually (not imaginarily) injured someone else or sinned against God.  This is what Christendom was founded upon.  Those that don't like that should stay in and / or return to their own countries where they have the right to whatever perverse laws their worthless, perverse ancestors established.

“That which is against Divine Law [Bible] is repugnant to society and is void.” (Common Law Maxim)

If it has not always been that way, that people indeed have exclusive right in their own home (which is their castle) and in their own neighborhoods and homes—which are extensions of their own family*— again what changed it and by what authority?

[* and here we see the revelation why destruction of the family is the first step toward the subversion of a nation.  Alexeksandr Solzhenitsyn expressed, "To destroy a people you must first sever their roots."   The Jewish subversive and early leader of communism, Lenin, put it more bluntly: "Destroy the family, you destroy the country."  The Jewish subversive and founder of one type of Communism, Marx, wrote: “Whatever is, is worth destroying.”  That is the mindset of antichrists who cannot develop civilization on their own, they claim to want to "liberate the masses" but that is only like freeing all the animals in the zoo—to create chaos so the zoo itself can be subverted.  For more details, see my quadrilogy: Bolshevik Primer, Communist Manifesto, Fearless and Godly Pioneers for the Truth, and the Talmud Unmasked.]

Can rights be invented and legislated?  No.  That is a humanistic psychosis.  Rights are not derived from the State.  One cannot confer rights upon someone else greater than he himself has.  You cannot sell the Brooklyn Bridge to someone if you don't actually own it.  That is called Fraud.  That defines 99.9% of modern government.  Government itself exists because of the people (not vice versa) and Government itself has no rights, but privileges granted to the public servants by the true sovereigns, the individuals who lawfully elected the public servants to serve them and defend their rights.  Rights are derived from God alone, and to secure those rights, governments are instituted among men.  Corrupt, treasonous politicians purposely ignore those facts and turn the tables and pretend they have always been that way: the Goverment being supreme and the people its pawns.  This is High Treason! 

John Adams expressed “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious [Christian] people. It is wholly inad-
equate for the government of any other.”  The violation of this altruism is why our Constitutions and nations have been subverted.

[* When our Founders and the Puritans and Reforms used the word religion, the referred to Christianity and Christianity alone, for in their minds and in reality, there is no other.  Those that don't like that comment, stay in your own psychosis / nation.  See also my brief, humorous booklet (also here as a Rumination), "Department of Farmland Security".]

If rights can be invented and legislated, what is to prevent someone else from inventing and legislating something different—diametrically opposed to the former "rights", if such invention and legislation of rights is itself a right?  And if such creative invention and legislation is a right itself, then how can there be any such thing as rights?

True rights are about protecting what is ones own property (life, liberty, possessions, pursuit of happiness, freedom). 

Pseudo-rights—which are being slung around today like greasy hash at a Bowry soup kitchen—are about limiting someone elses right to have natural rights based upon imaginary supremacy of someone who has no natural rights over that person.  It is connected to the mental psychosis of imaginary "equality".  All things are not equal.  If you believe so, go ahead and try to use an anvil as a parachute, a jack-hammer as a pole vault, and a trampoline as a soup spoon.  Let me know how it works out.  Draft horses will not win the Kentucky derby and chihuahuas won't prevail over home invaders.  Ditch-diggers don't make good dentists.  If you think otherwise, good luck with that, but don't expect anyone to enter your delusion with you.  Hint: If equality has to be declared by fiat, there is no equality.  Those that are equal will demonstrate themselves to be equal, regardless of the situation or environment.  Mango trees are not equal with lingonberries.  If they were, Mango trees would grow wild in Sweden and lingonberries would grow wild in Afria.

If it has not always been the psychosis of society that all peoples are equal and that all have equal rights.  If all have equal rights then no one has rights.  Like a 5-year old who says, "it is my favorite" to everything.  Young children don't understand the true essence of "favorite".  If all things are special, then nothing is special, but common and ordinary.  Similarly, if you have the right to believe the way you do and I have the right to believe the way I do, but I am no longer allowed to express the way that I believe (although it used to be the norm) but you are allowed to express the way that you believe (which used to be outlawed)—where then is your deluded notion of equality?  Such deluded notions are merely Marxist opiates to fool the rightful heirs into surrendering their necks to the chopping blocks and giving everything that they own to their enemies.  How many movies have such deluded people seen in which the vile enemy feigns a change of heart, and with an evil smile attempts to sweet talk the victim or hero into both of them putting down their weapons and being friends?  The evil enemy has another gun sticking out of the waistline of his pants behind him, and the audience can see it, but the to-be victim or hero cannot.  The audience is sometimes even shouting (being caught up in the fantasy/movie) to the innocent victim / hero: "Dont' do it!  He's lying!  He's going to kill you!"  IF ONLY the same audience would be caught up in reality!  The very same thing that people in the audience have seen in dozens of movies, is happening in real life, but they are too stupid to realize it.

The turning of the tables to "minority rights" (who had no rights; if they thought that rights were so important, why did they leave their own nations where they had the right to demand rights?) has only been an evil ploy.  Once the outside minority becomes the majority, the laws will be changed again to favor the majority and the new minority (who used to be the majority) will be told that they have the right to be silent or they will be punished. 

This is the result of a subversive, alien upheaval of society that declares that those who have no natural rights (outside of their own natural habitat), now have the greatest rights.  However, in odius contradiction, white Christians have no rights in nonwhite, nonchristian lands: those nonwhites nonchristian peoples claim the exlusive rights and sovereignty to their own nations, while telling us that we do not have exclusive rights to ours, but all are "equal" and have "equal rights".  Of course, this is merely the real-life version of the old adage, "what's mine is mine, and what's yours is mine" —and therefore, in reality, nothing is yours and everything is mine.  Isn't that fair?  Isn't equality wonderful?  Oh if only we have practiced such equality hundreds of years ago!

Then what are modernly called "rights" are not rights, but merely a trend, the blowing in of the winds of change creating the Dust Bowl, not Paradise (though in the modern psychosis, black is called white and Hell is called Paradise—again, in violation of God's command to not call evil, 'good' or good 'evil'—and God pronounced a curse on those who do so: It is the Law of the Harvest—you reap what you sow).  The winds of change are most often for the worse, because the primary law of the natural world is entropy (especially when there enemies involved called "saboteurs", or more modernly, they are known as "politicians").

If the very nature of "rights" has changed in the past by those who had no rights what is to prevent it from changing again and again in the future?  If it can change and be taken from you and given to another is it truly a right by those who now possess it unrightfully?

Is might right?  Is deception right? 

If those who are jealous of what others have agree that it is "unfair" that those others have those things while those jealous do not, does that make it right for them to take by hook or crook what others have?  Is stealing a right?  Where does "equality" fit in?

This is modern politics boiled down and stripped of its false marketing and glitzy makeup. 

When the legitimate voters have been supplanted by spurious voters and the vote of illegitimates changes the law, does that make it right?

In reality, trends are delusion forced by schemers onto the less-thinking element of the population.

Thus, delusion in this case is the result of carefully planned deception.

Do those doing the deceiving and subverting have greater right than others not to be deceived and subverted?  If so, based upon what?  Again, to where does the mythical chimera of "equality" disappear when reality is discussed?

Modern corrupt politics is thus governed and perpetuated and protected by these factors:

1. government controls education and all forms of indoctrination (schools to universities, religion, media, book publishers, tv and movies).  [These are several of the 10 Planks of the Communist Manifesto.]

2. government controls immigration and the importation of aliens without rights and putting them on a tax-payer funded breeding program to breed and raise voters to vote their way to take the rights from the rightful rightholders and give them to the unrightful invaders and overbreeders.  As George Bernard Shaw expressed, those who rob Peter to pay Paul can always count on the support of Paul.  Free cell phones for everyone (well, free cell-phones if your skin is the right color; those with the wrong color skin don't get a free cell phone, they have the "right" to pay for the cell phones for all the others in this Alice-in-Wonderland Utopia of "equality")... or as an African political candidate once promised "a chicken in every pot!"  Cockadoodledoo! —now there's civilization and equality materializing out of nowhere!  Let's turn the entire world over to such geniuses and benevolent souls!

3. government controls regulation and taxation of every aspect of life [more Planks of the Communist Manifesto], and taxes those who had the rights to pay for the transference of those rights to those who did not have the rights, and government brainwashes the greater masses who had rights into breeding with those who did not have rights, and into adopting those who had no rights so those who had no rights will inherit all from those who do have rights; and government brainwashes those who had rights into stopping reproducing and allowing the imported, adopted, and spuriously bred nonright holders into completely supplanting them—because it is the right of those who have no rights to steal all the rights from those who rightfully had them, and if you try to stop those who are stealing your rights that is a violation of the rights of the right stealers.  Isn't equality a wonderful thing.  You have the right to corral up your cattle, and the Bhantu and Khoi-san have the right to steal and eat them.  Everyone has what he wants.  Isn't equality grand!  Everyone should be deliriously happy!  More fluoride in the water for everyone!

Those who had the natural rights must be infinitely tolerant of those who have no natural rights,* but those who have no natural rights (who now have the illusion of being given all the rights) are allowed to be violently intolerant of those who legitimately had the natural rights.

[* In the make-believe land of "Equalitonia" those who have no natural rights are equal to those who do, and therefore, legitimacy and illegitimacy are equal realities and reality and nonreality are themselves equal realities.  Just don't think about it.  That is what ruins the Utopia.  Check your brain at the door and just believe what you are told,* and if it doesn't make any sense to you just keep drinking the fluoride until it does!

* Also, ignore the seeming contradiction that if all are equal that someone else has the right to tell you what you are allowed to think.]

Just like George Orwell's 1946 allegorical novel Animal Farm* depicted: in to subvert the barnyard to place it under their totalitarian control, the pigs told all the animals that all animals are equal... then once the pigs gained power, the rules changed to create the elite class among pigs.  Those who noticed the seeming descrepancy were told that  All animals are equal, but pigs are "just a little more equal" than nonpigs.  Then individual animals who disagreed "disappeared" in the middle of the night and were never seen or heard from again... and those who voiced their curiosity concerning what happened to them and who noticed that those individual animals were missing, themselves went missing.  Those who did not want to go missing themselves wised up and stopped noticing.  Another shotglass of fluoride please! maybe a continuous I-V drip for the more "confused" individuals.

[* 141pp., pb., 10.00 + P&H.  DVD cartoon, 24.00; DVD 2-in-1, Animal Farm movie & Moby Dick 13.00 + P&H.]

Those who had no rights whose spokespersons championed tolerance, now declare that you must without boundaries or degree fully and forever tolerate us—now demand not merely tolerance, but preferential treatment and being put on a pedestal to be worshipped.  However, they also demand that they can be infinitely intolerant of you.  But isn't it wonderful that we are all so equal!  You natural right holders can do all the work, and we nonholders of natural rights will reap all the rewards of your hard labor.  Isn't it so wonderful that we work so well together?  Equality is such a wonderful dream, let's all pray that we never wake up from such sweet slumber!

Makes perfect sense.  Doesn't it?  Let's all jump off Niagara Falls.  It's our right! (some even would say that it is our duty!) —just as long as we leave all our possessions and wealth, all that our ancestors have sacrificed and built here in the US for 400 or so years and for millennia in Europe.  It's the right of those who have built nothing in their nations, to take from us everything that we have sacrificed to build in ours.

Someone once emailed me after reading my book, Uncovering the Mysteries of Your Hidden Inheritance:

“In 2005 I read your monumental book, Uncovering... It was like the movie The Matrix for me.  Do
I take the green pill and stay asleep or the red one and see the truth knowing things can never be the same again?”

Christendom.  Listen to me.  Shake yourself from your delusion, you apathy, your slumber of the dead.  Stop taking the pills.... the opium of the masses is not Christianity—it is corrupt government and their force-fed delusions of equality and the "government's" supreme right (which trumps your right) to equally dispense rights as they see fit, unequally.

Christ Jesus said, "I am the Truth" and "ye shall know the truth and the Truth shall make you free".

Our existence follows God's Natural Law of the Harvest: You Reap What You Sow.

It's up to you.

Which would you prefer? —the toxic fall out and return to barbarism and inhumanity of the "Mad Max" movie series or Planet of the Apes series... or the tv series of Mabury RFD and the Andy Griffith Show, Leave it to Beaver, and Petticoat Junction? 

Admittedly those nice, older tv shows were devoid of God—but in reality, the pleasantness and wholesomeness of those shows depicted what Christendom used to be like. Furthermore, Christedom was like that and was named Christendom because we were not godless, but ordered our lives as the Creator of the universe commanded us. 

Now the modern subverters even try to tell us we were not founded as a Christian nation—next, they will tell us that Christendom was a term invented in 1980 by a group of religious nuts. 

Their lies only work for those who are too lazy and dull minded and godless to do one fart of research.  You reap what you sow. But even if you are too worthless to care about sowing for yourself, you need to realize that you destroy not only your own garden, but the gardens of everyone around you.  The toxic weeds or GMO life-destroying plants that you casually allow to overtake your garden, will limitlessly spread and infest every other garden bordering yours; and then theirs too will spread outward like an aggressive cancer unless drastic measures are taken.  Therefore, such "worry-free", "eat-drink-and be merry" persons are not merely guilty of suicide—but they are guilty of the mass murder of their entire family and all their kinsmen-neighbors.  God will not hold such persons guiltless.

You have two choices: get on your knees and truly seek the only God Who exists and ask Him to forgive you and show you in His Word* what to do... or go back to watching the ballgame or movie.  But remember, on the day of Judgment, He will ask you why you didn't choose to humble yourself, fall on your knees, and seek Him this very moment.

[* Understand, the Bible, like the U.S. Constitution, is not to be interpreted in light of modern notions and feelings, but in light of the day and time and environment and meaning and intent when it was written.  Truth never changes.  Morality never changes.  "My people are destroyed because they lack knowledge."  The Bible is not illogical.  It is perfectly logical.  Those who hate it and the Truth say otherwise to subvert your mind.  God is Immutable.  He is Holy.  His Holiness never changes.  He commanded "Be holy as I am Holy" and that Standard of Holiness for us (His Law) cannot change.  That which God declared to be immoral and abominations 4,000 still are today and always will be.  Stop drinking the fluoride.  Unplug from the narcotic machine that keeps you doped up, detox with the Word of God and prayer.  Read my books.  Does God Repent? would also be a good book to start with; then Uncovering the Mysteries of Your Hidden Inheritance; then Ten Commandments for You(th).  You are either part of the problem or part of the solution.  There is no neutrality.  Those who are neutral are God's enemies when He commanded us, "Choose you this day!"]

So either articulate your heart and mind to God and learn and do what He commanded... or just Babylon (babble on).  Enjoy the delusion while it lasts.  Party on until the tsunami hits.  But that will not be the end, but the eternal beginning... and it won't be a happy eternity for those who rejected what God commanded: for to reject what He commanded it to reject Him.

[If you find importance in these postings please consider supporting this ministry, and pass on and post the links to these Ruminations to others of like mind and ask them to do the same.  Thank you.  R.A.B.]



Someone on my email list responded to my posting —


On 6/3/2017 11:34 AM, ____________wrote:


Thanks. Excellent! Please give your understand of the difference between natural law - common law - biblical law.




here is my reply.




In my mind, Natural Law and Biblical Law are nearly the same thing, Natural Law (in my mind, but not in the minds of secularists) being the Christian and / or secular expression of inferences and conclusions derived from principles declared in the Word of God and even the Law which God partially wrote on our hearts (but not to be confused with the heresy of the basic goodness of man—just because someone knows right from wrong does not mean that he will do what is right; and sinful man of his own ability is not able to be good).  Common Law was that Divine Natural Law and Biblical Law that was practiced by European, British, and American civilizations from time immemorial, which was eventually codefied by Alfred the Great, and by the Salian Franks, Gothic Lombards in Italy, and Justinian in Byzantia.  Common Law within the nations of Christendom is that which was commonly practiced, whether spoken or not, and considered the standard of morality.  ["Common law" practiced outside of Christendom we would more properly define as "chaotic immorality"—another nail in the coffin of the myth of equality and another evidence of the stupidity of believing the myth and allowing aliens to settle among us for any reason.]  Since man is sinful and not perfect, this does not mean that every single practice or maxim of Common Law was perfectly tuned with Scripture, but as a whole, the latter derived from the former—especially those in blindness, not realizing that they are God's people and always have been.  However, it needs to also be remembered that when the righteous rule the people rejoice; but when the wicked rule the people mourn.  When ungodly kings ruled over Judah, they introduced their own abominations as standard practice.  Likewise, when evil lords under feudalism ruled, the common law in their jurisdictions was probably that which was noted in the book of the Judges, in which each man did that which was right in his own eyes (when he could get away with it) or "the law of the jungle" (either be a predator or be predated upon: do unto others before they get a chance to do unto you).  However, these are the vile aberrations, not the norm, that eventually developed into the Common Law of civilization known as Christendom.  It was not named Christendom because of godless laws and practices.  When men were still fallen and sinful and imperfect, the standard was recognized.  Aliens do not have this God-consciousness; to them, often stealing, lying, betraying, and murdering are considered virtues.  Even the Vandals, those uncouth "barbarians" when they en-mass migrated down across the Straits of Gibraltar to North Africa (having been crowded out of the Iberia peninsula by their larger and stronger Gothic kinsmen, the Visigoths and Suevians) where they set up a kingdom, challenging the Roman Empire’s province there. Rome’s colonies were the most debauched and immoral of the day, but the Vandals were known for the chastity of their manners. Instead of the Vandals becoming corrupt, living among such depravity as found in Carthage and other towns of northern Africa, they became its moral reformers. They encouraged prostitutes to marry, made adultery a capital offense, and punished immorality so severely that great moral change transpired in all the provinces they conquered. Where did barbarians acquire such morals?  The same thing occurred when the Heruli, Ostrogoths, and Langobards descended into Italy and Conquered it, and later also the Normans into Southern Italy and Sicily.


[To see the direct correlation of British Common Law (and American Common Law derived from British Common Law), see: The Dooms of King Alfred (laws of England established c.890 A.D. based upon Bible/God’s Law) 58pp., 6.00 + P&H; bilinear Anglo-Saxon (Old English) & English translation.  Also see Origins of the Common Law (1966), Hoague, 272pp., Hb., 22.00 + P&H; pb., 14.00 + P&H.]


When secular scholars attempt to amputate God and Divine Law from Natural Law, then what actually is the result should be called "unnatural law" or "artificial law"—which now comprises about 95% of all laws in the former nations of Christendom, which have been subverted through Talmudism, the peoples of Christendom not even realizing it (because they don't know their own history or the Word of God, but have been slowly weaned off both and then fed poison). 


Even as the Glory departed from Israel in the Old Testament, due to the people's flagrant, unrepentant sin, and seeking after their own gods and their own pleasures, so also has God's Spirit departed from Christendom, like the eerie phenomena in which the tide slowly and dramatically withdraws from shore.  Simple-minded persons, drunk on the wine of Babylon and the narcotic effect of hedonism, think that a queer quirk of nature has provided the perfect opportunity, in the withdrawal of the water far from the shoreline, to go exploring and look for treasures.  However, of course, the tide has merely retreated temporarily, to meet the oncoming tsunami, turn around and escort it back to shore and unleash a dynamo of cataclysmic destruction on everything in its path.  This ironically follows the same historical pattern that has been and is being carried out against Christendom before our very eyes in that the "barbarians inside the gate" who were allowed in, who settled in among us and pretended to blend in, even "convert", and live like "good Christians" and pretend to appreciate our civilization—when the political climate change transpired, they turned and joined with the invading forces of their kinsmen to destroy us (this is one of the reasons the Crusades in the Holy Lands were not able to maintain those areas they conquered; they eventually allowed the aliens in among them and even allowed them to be part of the garrison guarding the fortress; but invariably, when the Muslims attacked, the majority of the Muslims who had "converted" to Christianity, threw off their masque and joined with the Muslims to murder the Christians). 


However, God shall have the last laugh (Psalm 2) for Christ, likewise shall return—He shall not rapture and spirit away his saints whom He commanded "Occupy till I come", the very "meek who shall inherit the earth", but those who are alive and remain shall be caught up together to meet Christ in the clouds—and then turn around and either escort Him or follow Him to earth where He will command the holy angels to unleash a Divine tsunami on all those who hate God, from which none shall escape.


[* —meek not to the enemy of God, but meek toward God: submissive toward God, not sinful antichrists.  Sadly, having swallowed the poison of false theology, and giving full reign and rein to a carnal nature, most "Christians", husbands, wives, children, pastors, members of the congregation are weak (submissive to the wrong people, not resisting evil) when they should be strong and strong (self-willed and rebellious, resisting righteousness) when they should be weak.]