Tuesday, 17 July 2018

Democracy versus The People

If we're to believe our globohomo overlords it seems that the Western world faces a new and sinister threat: Populism. According to that corrupt traitor Tony Blair "the rise of the populists has already changed the social and economic policies pursued by many countries; created new tensions between nation-states within Europe; and begun to put pressure on democratic institutions in a variety of countries that had once been seen as consolidated democracies". EU nation-wreckers such as Juncker and Tusk have voiced similar concerns.

Which I find confusing. How can the expressed will of the ordinary people be anti-democratic? According to Bliar populism draws a “sharp distinction between friend and enemy, with supporters portrayed as legitimate and opponents illegitimate. Populists claim to represent the people against elites, immigrants, or some other minority – and have a fondness for referendums."

And that's bad? Hey, even (((Wiki))) has - at least for now - a positive take on it, describing it as 'a political philosophy supporting the rights and power of the people in their struggle against a privileged elite'. 

Maybe one of the world's leading experts on populism can tell us what's wrong with it. Here's Zsolt Enyedi who's a professor at the Soros-funded Central European University.  "Populism is a threat to democracy primarily because it holds the potential of providing the state with a moral status that it otherwise lacks. Once the state turns into the embodiment of the virtuous people the defense mechanisms developed against tyranny, such as freedoms, checks and balances, the rule of law, tolerance, autonomous social institutions, individual and group rights, or pluralism, are inevitably under threat. It undermines the civility of the relations among citizens. It erodes the respect for the dignity of political opponents and of minority groups and weakens the culture of reasoned debates." 

Aha! Now we're getting somewhere. Let me translate this academic sleight-of-hand for you. Populism is bad because it implements the will of the people untrammelled by anti-democratic institutions (gamed political systems, laws that criminalise unapproved speech and courts that ruthlessly enforce them against ordinary (read White) citizens, Cultural Marxist academia and the controlled media and 'entertainment' industries that endlessly parrot the Approved Narrative). As for undermining the civility of the relations among citizens, well, that 'civility' is a euphemism for Stalinist enforcement of political correctness.

The very reasons populism is attacked by our globohomo overlords and their academic and media whores are the very reasons why it's very much a Good Thing. It disintermediates the control mechanisms they've devised to dilute, divert and ultimately frustrate the will of the ordinary people, the White working-class 'losers' whom they hold in so much contempt. It gave us, inter alia, Brexit, Trump and Orban. It's growing in almost every White country. Ultimately it might lead to retributive justice against the West's traitorous leaders. No wonder they're worried.

Saturday, 14 July 2018

Conclusive proof of global warming

French soccer team 1958

French soccer team 2018

Irish women's relay team 2012

Irish women's relay team 2018

Wednesday, 11 July 2018

Ungrateful bipeds

The Congo languishes at the very bottom of just about every comparative international metric. Apart from one. You see the Congo holds the coveted prize of The Worst Country In The World For Women. Even the Guardian concedes it to be "the rape capital of the world where women are raped while going go to the fields or on their way to market to trade, or also on the road to the stream while going to fetch water". Far from protecting the women, the forces of law and order are in fact the worst offenders.

A recent Oxfam report denounced the shocking scale of domestic sexual violence. 'Women ... are treated as second-class citizens with few opportunities to enter politics and make a difference in gender relations. Forced marriages of girls under 18 remain a severe obstacle to education." Over vast areas of the country the Congolese live in mud or grass huts without sanitation, power or medical services (apart from witch doctors who'll prescribe albino body parts as a remedy for most ailments). Malnutrition and even starvation are endemic.

You'd imagine then (well actually you wouldn't if you were paying attention) that a woman who managed to escape that country and get United States citizenship would be eternally grateful to her new country and its institutions. Enter stage left Patricia Okoumou, the woman who blocked the Statue Of Liberty to protest at Trump's immigration policies.  "Trump has wrecked this country apart [sic]. I can say a lot of things about this monster, but I will stop at this: His draconian zero-tolerance policy on immigration has to go."

Can you just imagine what life would be like for us if and when primitive ingrates like her achieve numerical dominance in our countries? To get such a sense cross the Atlantic to Sheffield, one of England's largest cities. Once the centre of a proud engineering and steel manufacturing tradition, Sheffield has seen its fortunes decline as traitorous globohomo leaders outsourced the work to foreign shores. As the White working class goes into sharp decline its place is being taken by a motley mob of Third World bottom feeders. One of whom, a Somali asylum seeker with the good old English name of Majid Majid, has been elected by these citizens as the city's Mayor.

Is he grateful to his new country for such an extraordinary development? Not a bit of it. He openly despises Britain and its institutions, including the Mayoral office that he holds, dressing in ghetto gear and threatening to remove the portrait of the Queen in his office and replace it by that of his (presumably burka-clad) mother. And now on behalf of the British people he has banned President
Trump, whom he labelled a “wasteman”, from Sheffield during his forthcoming visit. Citing the “Muslim ban” and the detention of children at the border as the reason behind it he tweeted: "I Magid Magid, Lord Mayor & first citizen of this city hereby declare that not only is Donald J Trump a WASTEMAN, but he is also henceforth banned from the great city of Sheffield! I further declare July 13th to be Mexico Solidarity Day!" 

Doesn't that reek of Third World demagoguery. The kind you'd find in, well, the Congo or Somalia. Pint-sized Idi Amin in the making. But such people are infesting the corridors of power throughout Britain and it gets worse every day. When will the Saxon begin to hate?

Monday, 9 July 2018

It’s a woman’s world. Or is it?

On the face of it, feminism has been an unalloyed success for women. They enjoy freedoms inconceivable in earlier times, discriminatory preferences over men (well White men anyway) in college admissions and promotions at work, they earn more and the law is massively biased in their favour. They’re ‘empowered’ baby! And nowhere more so than in sex and mating.

Social convention (or lack of same), contraception and abortion rights mean she no longer needs to remain chaste and virginal, hoping to be chosen by Mr. Right, marrying and having children while young, consigned to a life of drudgery and housework. Now the liberated young woman plays the field, hooks up, makes out. She has countless temporary relationships that won't interfere with education or career. Then, when she comes to her early thirties she’ll look to settle down and have her 1.5 children with a suitably emasculated husband.

Boy, it’s a woman’s world.

Or is it?

Look at it this way. When it comes to mating, what does your average raging hormone young man want? Am I projecting when I say plenty of sex with plenty of girls…..with little or no commitment? Or the real dream, have chicks come up to them and ask if they want to hook up, followed by casual sex, and then on to the next conquest? This is fairly common following the triumph of feminism.

But is that what most women really want? Somehow I doubt it. Maybe I’m wrong, but, just as the male is biologically programmed to spread his seed far and wide before eventually settling down with his love mate, the female is programmed to treat her reproductive capabilities with great discretion. (The young black man is a bit different in that he likes to play the field a bit, and see which babies come out the prettiest, before he settles down with just three or four of his favourite wummins). Both genders are programmed to have children and most, especially women, are likely to feel unfulfilled in their absence. Glamorous career or not.

Now go back to the having it all young woman. Empowered by an active sex life from her late teens onwards, and having established a glittering career in HR or Marketing (only dykes are of use in any other jobs) she’s now, having moved into her thirties, ready for phase two of her plan: To choose an appropriate mate and start a family. Aha! But theirein lies the rub. Because the years of maximum sexual attractiveness and fertility are now rapidly disappearing in her slipstream. Those years, characterised by casual relationships in which she probably held the whip hand (metaphorically speaking) have not prepared her well for long-term commitment. And another big shock: She’ll find that a very very high proportion of desirable men have already made their choices and settled down.

It happens all the time. Even here in this remote corner of Ireland I know lots and lots of attractive clever young women who realised late - too late - that they really did want a normal family. But by that time they are unprepared for it. Their skills revolve around being sexy career women, and when they lose the “sexy” part they’re left with nothing but a career — usually not a particularly impressive one in a cubicle farm. Within a few short years, years that fly by with horrifying speed, they are, to use the cruel colloquialism, 'past it'. Embittered, barren, hollowed-out husks, asking themselves where it all went wrong.

Meanwhile her male counterparts, having enjoyed her body while it was at its most sexually desirable, are now settled down with someone else. Someone who’s not as liberated as our heroine. And to crown it all the reality of innate capabilities and commercial pressures have meant that he’s now overtaken her.....she who thrived initially on AA but who just couldn’t cut it as the going got tougher and tougher and as her enthusiasm dropped on realising that career was a poor substitute for a family.

But if feminism has worked to men’s advantage in this way in reality it's a Pyrrhic victory for all of us. Because feminism has still achieved its primary goal of turning our men and women against one another and thereby precipitate the inevitable social degradation we now see around us.

Friday, 6 July 2018

World Cup - some interim observations

Well the first one is that this has been an absolutely brilliant competition. Despite the anti-Russian hysteria that prevailed in the build-up and lachrymose claims by black players that their very lives were at risk in the xenophobic racist dystopia that is Putin's Russia nothing's happened. Same with terrorism. Western supporters were warned by their Governments against travelling due to the supposedly high risk of terrorism. Again, nothing. So the War Party's hopes have, at least so far, been dashed.

And as usually happens not a single one of the supposedly under-represented Third World teams emerged from the Group stages. The reality, as the results show, and reflecting the world we live in, is that such countries are drastically over-represented. Soccer powerhouses such as Italy and Holland failed to make it out of the gruelling European qualifying rounds while makeweights such as Saudi Arabia and Panama qualified and duly got their asses handed to them. This has been much lamented by the commentariat. 'As an African I'm obviously saddened that no African team has gone through' observed one affirmative action 'journalist' in Ireland while his colleagues and commentators clucked in sympathy. Can you just imagine the reaction if someone had said 'as a European I'm glad no African teams got  through in our place'?

And speaking of Italy I introduce you hear to the new 'Italian' captain, Mario Bolletelli. I'm sure he knows exactly how to rouse and motivate his subjects by appealing to their proud history and cultural traditions, the glories of Rome and all that. Actually though it seems to me that  European teams are much less cultural enriched than in earlier World Cups. Even France, which if memory serves me correctly had only one actual Frenchman on their 2014 team now have several. And the Swedish first team was made up almost entirely of, well, Swedes. Maybe it's just coincidence but just maybe it's a sign of some positive trend.

Anyway, mostly good so far. Now if only Russia were to win it and rub their enemies' faces further in the mud!

Monday, 2 July 2018

A beguiling prospect

The previous post was about how anti-white alliances in Western countries are inherently unstable and are beginning to fracture as parasite numbers grow and YT's spoils get thinner. I also predicted that, as a byproduct, Jews will come a cropper under this new dispensation as non-Whites are immune to Holocau$t™ guilt-tripping. And now another intriguing face-off is underway. I refer to the lawsuit against Harvard by Asians who uncovered data showing that if grades and standardised test scores alone determined admissions, the percentage of Asians in an incoming class would more than double, from 19% to 43%.

Now I don't give a damn whether the suit succeeds or not. My view is that huge numbers of Asians should not be in America in the first place. Let them develop their own universities in their own countries instead of forcing out the people whose ancestors conceived of and built their own institutions. But if all goes well it could shine a light on the real admissions scandal. 

Even as things stand 'Whites' are under-represented as the following enrolment figures from 2014 show:

Asian 16%
Black non-Hispanic 7%
Hispanic 8%
International 10%
Mixed 3%
Unknown 12%
Whites 43%

When SAT scores (the only neutral criterion) are taken into account both Whites and Asians are drastically under-represented. But the really significant statistic lies in the "White" breakdown. You see of that 43% Jews make up no less than 24% while gentile Whites make up a mere 19%. The respective proportions of the population are 2% and 68%. So Jews are over-represented compared to Whites - the people who founded and built the institution to its current preeminent position - by a staggering 1200%! This would be slightly reduced when corrected to reflect higher Jewish SAT scores but only slightly. I read research quoted by David Duke which shows that this margin has diminished to insignificant levels in recent years for reasons as yet unexplained.

So that's the beguiling prospect held out by this lawsuit. And being taken by a non-White minority means it'll get favourable media treatment. So will the ten-ton elephant in the room finally be dragged out, trumpeting indignantly, into the cold light of day? Well we should never underestimate Jews' staggeringly effective shape-shifting abilities whereby they can transform from White ('greeting fellow white people') to unique persecuted minority depending on circumstantial exigencies.

But for sure we'll watch this space.

Thursday, 28 June 2018

A heartening development

"Rep. Joe Crowley, one of the top Democrats in the House of Representatives, lost his New York primary in a shocking upset on Tuesday night to community organizer Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Crowley..... fell easily to a first-time candidate with a Democratic Socialists of America membership card and a proudly leftist agenda. She ran on Medicare-for-all, a federal jobs guarantee, and getting tough on Wall Street."

Why would I celebrate the victory of an open-borders female Hispanic 'community organiser' (where have we heard that before?) over a straight White Irish-American male with a platform like hers? Well let me say it's impossible to avoid a pang of sympathy seeing the stricken expression on Crowley's face when the full horror of the result became apparent. But such sympathy would be misplaced. Because he's been a strident and unrelenting critic of President Trump and especially his efforts to control immigration.

And now Crowley's brown pets have turned on him and selected one of their own despite all his efforts on their behalf. The gods of karma surely permitted themselves a grim smile. Crowley would have understood this and possibly avoided his fate had he listened to the wise words of legendary Singaporean leader Lee Kwan Yew. "In multicultural societies you don't vote according to your economic interests. You vote in accordance with race and religion". (In another interview he warned that 'multiculturalism will destroy America'.) But why is this a good thing apart? 

It's good because it accelerates White awakening to the reality of what's happening to them. Such developments - and they're occurring everywhere - will polarise politics to the point where Republicans become (implicitly, not explicitly) the White party, with Democrats, like the "British" Labour Party, an unsavoury and fissiparous rabble of browns, blacks, welfare parasites (but I repeat myself), various shades of sexual freaks and a residue of self-hating Whites. Patriotic Whites will take over the Republican party and oust the RINOs. If that happens before Whites reach minority status then Whites will recover their country.

Gratifyingly should such developments come to pass Jews are likely to feel the chill. Despite their treachery towards White Americans in the form of open borders, anti-White 'hate' and affirmative active legislation, blacks and Hispanics will still see them as White and will be utterly unmoved by the Holocau$t™ guilt-tripping which worked so well against altruistic and trusting Whites. Despite their legendary ability to flee dying hosts onto healthy ones I believe that Whites will no longer be so altruistic and trusting as the scale of  (((their))) treachery becomes more apparent every day. "Greeting fellow White people" might well be met with jeers rather than cheers.

We live in hope.