Today’s reading is Parasha Mikeitz (Gen. 41:1-44.17)
Casey and I are rather lame early in this one as Luke tries to rouse us from our goyishe torpor to realize the damage to America caused by Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
15:30 John J. Mearscheimer, liberal hegemony and the Jews.
26:30 Has Trump surrendered to the Lobby?
31:15 What’s the basis of morality? Greg Johnson versus Richard Spencer.
34:40 Someone on the live chat challenges Luke’s history and gets the smack-down. Don’t fuck with the Luke.
48:50 The difference between Judaism and Christianity.
58:00 Luke on the superiority of the law over conscience.
1:05:05 Will Trump complete the system of German Idealism?
1:06:25 Yes, Trump will complete the system of German Idealism.
1:26:45 “Religious Jews are asked about the Talmud.” A viral video wherein Hasidic Jews speak frankly about the Gentiles. We are not flattered.
1:27:20 The virtues of hypocrisy in the world of ethnic warfare.
1:38:00 Wherein we reason our way to the conclusion Judaism is a proposition religion, motivated solely by our concern for the Jews and humanity.
1:42:25 Is Casey cucked on white identity?
1:45: Joseph the archetypal court Jew.
Luke’s notes on the show:
This week’s Torah portion tells the story of “Joseph’s interpretation of Pharaoh’s dreams, Joseph’s rise to power in Egypt, and Joseph’s testing of his brothers.”
* The story of Joseph illustrates why Jews have rarely been popular with non-Jews but have often been useful to gentile rulers. Joseph was the first court Jew. He became second in power to the Pharoah and he took on, to some degree, an Egyptian point of view. He accuses his brothers of being spies. An ethnocentric group is quick to view outsiders as spies. Jews have sometimes accused me of being a spy in my conversion to Judaism. Anglos, being the least ethno-centric group around, are unlikely to view outsiders as spies.
* Joseph did not learn much from his experience. In Gen. 43:34, he gives Benjamin portions five times as large as the portions given to the rest of his brothers.
* What is the basis of morality? God, the state, evolutionary biology?
Luke: “Do you believe in objective morality and objective good and evil?”
Greg: “Yes. I think that morality and good and evil and things like that are based on nature. I follow the classical Greek notion of Natural Law and Natural Right. I believe those are reasonable views, that we can come up with an ethics that is based on nature, that’s not based simply on social convention or simply on revelation and appeals to religion. Science and socio-biology gives us a lot of useful information for constructing this ethic. Larry Arnhart has written a book called Darwinian Natural Rights. He’s influenced by classical political philosophy and natural right thinking and yet he shows that socio-biology supports a lot of the naturalistic ethical ideas that you find in classical Greek and Roman political philosophy. That is the outlook that I think is most promising. By appealing to science and to classical philosophy, we can come up with a moral consensus and political consensus that is reason-based and science-based and that allows us to sidestep inherently contentious and sometimes violence-inducing things like appeals to religious revelation.”
Richard: “That’s a very deep question.”
“Morality and theology are ways of building a group consensus without using direct force so that people feel like they are… There’s an evolutionary origin of morality.”