9sublime,
To start, "Who" is a Jew is a canard used as a straw man to divert the attention or criticism away from the collectivist paradigm that Judaism creates. Using the construct "one is born a Jew"; the first thing out of a Jew's mouth is not all Jews are the same. It is only a control tactic as is the idea of a "small minority" ( 2% of the population) are always the victim is also a part of the canard.
A Jew (one that believes, defends, manifests and promotes, the criminal Jewish mentality) is an incalculable quantity.
Judaism is only a dogma that is open for examination in a free society. Every ideology that forms a group concept is open for criticism and rejection. Otherwise, as an individual, the group is forcing its belief system on to the individual.
Correct.
If one promotes an ideology, then claims bigotry when another doesn't except it, is using tyrannical tactics for manipulation of the individual.
Tyranny occurs
ONLY when one employs arbitrarily the coersive powers of the
STATE, as manifested in the law and the actions of the armed forces.
So the jews, japanese, arabs etc., may cry bigotry to high heaven and it wouldn't be considered tyranny in itself in any academic sense.
The beginning of the Abrahamic Religions started with Judaism, so if Judaism is false, all that follows is false. A fish rots from the head down. If you build a dogma on a false foundation, all dogmas that follow are false. The problem is, all of the religions of Abraham, Judaeo/Christianity/Islamic thought, with the Torah, the Bible and the Qur'an as their respective holy texts, are the source for present world religious conflict and wars between the elements of the Abrahamic Religions. The jockeying for nonexistent authority by their tribal God is the source of all this conflict, and is now affecting the entire world.
You are over-simplifying the political dynamics of the world. Religion isn't the root cause of most conflicts in the world - although demagogues would like to present them that way for their own ends.
Once you understand the collectivist paradigm, you will see that the three religions are only a technique using the dialectic process to merge point and counterpoint (thesis and antithesis) into a compromise or other state of agreement (synthesis). Christianity and Islam are only control oppositions of the same beast.
Apparently, you do not understand the process of dialectics. There is no compromise between a thesis and its
ANTI-thesis. Dialectics happens precisely to
ERADICATE INCONGRUENCE in a paradigm either by synthesis or mutual annihilation.
It is a conn-game of "god said" for world domination that has no moral justification.
You have no idea of the political forces reconstituting society as we speak. No political theory has established itself without the ethical impetus provided by religion.
In order to kill the beast, you have to cut the head off of the source of the criminality, because the control gets their legitimacy from the source "god said".
Sigh.
Religion, as a
RIGHT OF THOUGHT, is
INSEPARABLE from the human person, hence inseparable from the society that individual persons constitute. Severing the 'head', as you say, will only cause society's own demise.
Even the blatantly atheist imperatives of communism fails under
ETHICAL scrutiny. Why must the dominant class refrain from exploiting others, as is the natural right of the strong. Such an imperative is simply ridiculous
WITHOUT the self-evident and fundamental truth that exploitation is wrong, no?
........so what is their objective, then? Since you can't seem to define their goal.
