Sunday, 8 May 2011
Saturday, 7 May 2011
POSTCRIPT TO THE ELECTION
First of all congratulations to all BNP members who put their head above the parapet and stood in what was obviously going to be a diffcult contest with little hope of wiinning.
These patriots kept the flame alive and showed that in spite of all the odds we are still here and will be a force to be reckoned with in the future when the enormity of our country's problems hits home.
BUT We could and should have done better and the reason we did not was purely down to the leadership of the Party.
The best and most eloquent have either been expelled or given up hope and defected to other parties or given up activity in politcs altogether.
The ones remaining running the party are the sychophants, those deluded enough to believe they will ever gain power, the ones in it for the money, people who give our party a bad name and those who are appointed through nepotism. We have become the Nick Griffin PLC.
We are told the cause of our poor results is "infiltrators" and "Searchlight" moles.
If that were the cause then these moles from MI5 must still be in the party and not those who have left the party or been sidelined.
If you think about it if MI5 wanted to infiltrate they would attempt to reach the higher echelons of power and not be ordinary members.They would continue to "support" a dying party while betraying the good activists working hard on the streets and undoing all their hard work.
I have refrained from making these comments until after the elections lest I be regarded as a destroyer although I have already been accused of consorting with "malcontents"
I have not. I AM A MALCONTENT, as any rational person with the interests of the party and nationalism must surely be. How can I be content seeing the party I love being destroyed?
I was "summoned" to a disciplinary meeting for attending a "reform" meeting which was proscribed. I did not know it was a reform meeting but even if it was what is wrong with the concept of "reform", and why does the Party believe it has the right to forbid me from attending any meeting I like?
How can we be content when our area has been almost destroyed by arbitrary suspensions, disciplinary actions and disruptive appointments and a general lack of leadership.
In a nutshell I believe we need a new leader.
Nick Griffin is a superb speaker but as the proverb says "actions speak louder than words", and his actions in the last 18 months have shown he is unfit to lead a party which seeks national government and he did not exactly crown himself in glory at Question time or the Queen's Garden Party incident.
So the question is asked "who else could be leader"?
That is a difficult one and one which has stopped me from pushing for a new one, BUT the reason for this is that anybody who is suitable has either been suspended or expelled, thus rendering them unable to mount a challenge.
Think of this.
Since 2000 the Tories have had three leaders as have Labour and the Lib Dems.
Only Nick Griffin has been leader all this time.
Lib Dem politicians are now speaking about replacing Clegg. That would probably result in expulsion in our party.
Do you think that among all the BNP members there is nobody capable of leading our party? If so God help us and we are not fit for power.
I do not believe that. I believe those who posed a threat to the present leadership have been sidelined or driven out, but we have many intelligent and eloquent members who could take up the reins and further our progress.
I believe 100% in the principles of the British National Party as do a large proportion of the British people but we are not getting our message across.
We have no stable party structure nor audited financial accounts which I have been asking for for several months. If mistakes have been made in the latter, admit them and go forward but do not suspend people for asking.
Our country deserves a better nationalist movement as they have in Europe.
Nick Griffin brought us forward in the early years of this century and indeed was the reason I joined but I can feel the disillusionment among local people with the way our cause is going.
I am sorry to say this but he is a drag on our fortunes now and should do the decent thing and resign. I will not hold my breath that he will do so but if he really is a true patriot he should realise that his time is past and do so,---and then WE CAN UNITE AND RISE PHOENIX LIKE AND TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK
These patriots kept the flame alive and showed that in spite of all the odds we are still here and will be a force to be reckoned with in the future when the enormity of our country's problems hits home.
BUT We could and should have done better and the reason we did not was purely down to the leadership of the Party.
The best and most eloquent have either been expelled or given up hope and defected to other parties or given up activity in politcs altogether.
The ones remaining running the party are the sychophants, those deluded enough to believe they will ever gain power, the ones in it for the money, people who give our party a bad name and those who are appointed through nepotism. We have become the Nick Griffin PLC.
We are told the cause of our poor results is "infiltrators" and "Searchlight" moles.
If that were the cause then these moles from MI5 must still be in the party and not those who have left the party or been sidelined.
If you think about it if MI5 wanted to infiltrate they would attempt to reach the higher echelons of power and not be ordinary members.They would continue to "support" a dying party while betraying the good activists working hard on the streets and undoing all their hard work.
I have refrained from making these comments until after the elections lest I be regarded as a destroyer although I have already been accused of consorting with "malcontents"
I have not. I AM A MALCONTENT, as any rational person with the interests of the party and nationalism must surely be. How can I be content seeing the party I love being destroyed?
I was "summoned" to a disciplinary meeting for attending a "reform" meeting which was proscribed. I did not know it was a reform meeting but even if it was what is wrong with the concept of "reform", and why does the Party believe it has the right to forbid me from attending any meeting I like?
How can we be content when our area has been almost destroyed by arbitrary suspensions, disciplinary actions and disruptive appointments and a general lack of leadership.
In a nutshell I believe we need a new leader.
Nick Griffin is a superb speaker but as the proverb says "actions speak louder than words", and his actions in the last 18 months have shown he is unfit to lead a party which seeks national government and he did not exactly crown himself in glory at Question time or the Queen's Garden Party incident.
So the question is asked "who else could be leader"?
That is a difficult one and one which has stopped me from pushing for a new one, BUT the reason for this is that anybody who is suitable has either been suspended or expelled, thus rendering them unable to mount a challenge.
Think of this.
Since 2000 the Tories have had three leaders as have Labour and the Lib Dems.
Only Nick Griffin has been leader all this time.
Lib Dem politicians are now speaking about replacing Clegg. That would probably result in expulsion in our party.
Do you think that among all the BNP members there is nobody capable of leading our party? If so God help us and we are not fit for power.
I do not believe that. I believe those who posed a threat to the present leadership have been sidelined or driven out, but we have many intelligent and eloquent members who could take up the reins and further our progress.
I believe 100% in the principles of the British National Party as do a large proportion of the British people but we are not getting our message across.
We have no stable party structure nor audited financial accounts which I have been asking for for several months. If mistakes have been made in the latter, admit them and go forward but do not suspend people for asking.
Our country deserves a better nationalist movement as they have in Europe.
Nick Griffin brought us forward in the early years of this century and indeed was the reason I joined but I can feel the disillusionment among local people with the way our cause is going.
I am sorry to say this but he is a drag on our fortunes now and should do the decent thing and resign. I will not hold my breath that he will do so but if he really is a true patriot he should realise that his time is past and do so,---and then WE CAN UNITE AND RISE PHOENIX LIKE AND TAKE OUR COUNTRY BACK
MOUSTACHES YOU CAN TRUST
I switched on the radio today for the first time in over 4 months. Turned out that there’d been some local elections and a referendum on whether to replace something called FPTP with something called AV. I’m not registered to vote, so I didn’t vote.
If I’d had a vote, I’d have used it to vote for FPTP and against all the main parties. My reasoning is simple: I’m sick of people fucking around with our political system. I don’t have any trust in the political class, and if they want to change something as fundamental as how votes are counted, it can only be because they see some thieving advantage to themselves. Because they sure as heck don’t want to represent the people of this country.
How do I know? Because I’m a smoker, and no politician pays any attention to us, even though we make up a quarter of the population. Nor does the media. They ignore us too. We may as well not exist. In fact, as far as they’re concerned, we don’t exist. If they can do that to a quarter of the population, then it can’t be too difficult to ignore everybody else as well.
I thought I was getting pretty disenchanted with politics a year or so ago, but I seem to have become even more disenchanted since then. I don’t want to know what these politicians think, or what they say, or what they do. Because there’s nothing I can do about it, except vote against them whenever I get a chance. I would’ve turned off the radio shortly after I’d turned it on, but it was on the other side of the room, and I couldn’t be bothered to get up and walk over to it. And I’d stopped listening anyway.
It must’ve been like this in East Germany back before German re-unification. Did anyone in East Germany actually listen to Ulbricht and co., or watch him on their Trabant TVs? Probably not. What was the point? There was nothing they could do about him. The Communists would always be re-elected. Well, it’s the same with us now. The professional politicians just keep on being re-elected, and then just go and do whatever the hell they want.
Nobody wanted a smoking ban, and there was no need for it, but we got one anyway. Nobody believes in global warming, but we’re going to get the stupid windmills anyway. Nobody wants to be a member of the EU, but we’re signed up to it anyway.
On days like this, I seriously wonder why anyone votes for any of the three main parties. I heard today that the Lib Dems had done very badly, and that it was punishment for going into a coalition with the Conservatives, and tearing up their manifesto in order to do so. Really? What did their voters expect? The main parties just promise whatever they think will win them votes, and then do something completely different. Labour did it with their manifesto promise to permit smoking in wet-led pubs. The Conservatives did it when Cameron made a ‘cast-iron’ guarantee for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and then reneged on it (naturally). The Lib-Dems tore up many of their manifesto pledges within minutes of the election last year. They’re all doing it. Why is anyone surprised or angry? If you vote for any of the main parties, you’re more or less telling them to do whatever the hell they like, regardless of what they may have promised before an election. And since they’re going to do that, why vote for one lying party rather than another?
Maybe that’s why the Scots voted for the Scots Nationalists. Because they at least sound like they might really mean what they say, whether people like their policies or not. Same with UKIP. And the BNP. As trust in the main parties collapses, voters will start taking pot luck with Anybody Else.
And this may be why all the politicians seem quite sure that the Lib-Con coalition government will last the full 5 years. It’s because politicians are getting more and more terrified of an increasingly disenchanted and volatile electorate. So they want to minimize the frequency of elections. They’d really prefer that there only be elections at 10 or 20 year intervals. Or, better still, none at all.
The way things are going, all I can see up ahead is increasing voter volatility, as they switch from party to party looking for somebody – anybody – who’ll actually, y’know, represent them. Someone they can trust. They’ll be looking for deeds, not words. Substance rather than spin. Truth rather than lies. They’ll be looking for men of principle. Any principle at all.
There’ll likely be sudden changes in the political landscape, as minor parties attract the huge wandering herds of disenchanted voters. The old parties – the lying parties – will dwindle away. You’ll find surprising new faces elected to power. They’ll be people who mean to do exactly what they say, and not something else. They’ll be people who aren’t prepared to compromise their convictions an iota. They’ll probably have stern faces and jutting jaws.
And, who knows, some of them may even have those trim little moustaches which were quite fashionable 70 or 80 years ago. Not extravagant moustaches that curl up at the ends. Nor soup-strainer moustaches. But moustaches you can trust.
http://cfrankdavis.wordpress.com/2011/05/07/moustaches-you-can-trust/
I am registered to vote, and I voted NO to AV. I'm no supporter of FPTP, but I've wanted REAL PR for about 30 years now. AV is not real PR. WE either change the voting system properly, or there's no point bothering at all.
Morg
.
If I’d had a vote, I’d have used it to vote for FPTP and against all the main parties. My reasoning is simple: I’m sick of people fucking around with our political system. I don’t have any trust in the political class, and if they want to change something as fundamental as how votes are counted, it can only be because they see some thieving advantage to themselves. Because they sure as heck don’t want to represent the people of this country.
How do I know? Because I’m a smoker, and no politician pays any attention to us, even though we make up a quarter of the population. Nor does the media. They ignore us too. We may as well not exist. In fact, as far as they’re concerned, we don’t exist. If they can do that to a quarter of the population, then it can’t be too difficult to ignore everybody else as well.
I thought I was getting pretty disenchanted with politics a year or so ago, but I seem to have become even more disenchanted since then. I don’t want to know what these politicians think, or what they say, or what they do. Because there’s nothing I can do about it, except vote against them whenever I get a chance. I would’ve turned off the radio shortly after I’d turned it on, but it was on the other side of the room, and I couldn’t be bothered to get up and walk over to it. And I’d stopped listening anyway.
It must’ve been like this in East Germany back before German re-unification. Did anyone in East Germany actually listen to Ulbricht and co., or watch him on their Trabant TVs? Probably not. What was the point? There was nothing they could do about him. The Communists would always be re-elected. Well, it’s the same with us now. The professional politicians just keep on being re-elected, and then just go and do whatever the hell they want.
Nobody wanted a smoking ban, and there was no need for it, but we got one anyway. Nobody believes in global warming, but we’re going to get the stupid windmills anyway. Nobody wants to be a member of the EU, but we’re signed up to it anyway.
On days like this, I seriously wonder why anyone votes for any of the three main parties. I heard today that the Lib Dems had done very badly, and that it was punishment for going into a coalition with the Conservatives, and tearing up their manifesto in order to do so. Really? What did their voters expect? The main parties just promise whatever they think will win them votes, and then do something completely different. Labour did it with their manifesto promise to permit smoking in wet-led pubs. The Conservatives did it when Cameron made a ‘cast-iron’ guarantee for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and then reneged on it (naturally). The Lib-Dems tore up many of their manifesto pledges within minutes of the election last year. They’re all doing it. Why is anyone surprised or angry? If you vote for any of the main parties, you’re more or less telling them to do whatever the hell they like, regardless of what they may have promised before an election. And since they’re going to do that, why vote for one lying party rather than another?
Maybe that’s why the Scots voted for the Scots Nationalists. Because they at least sound like they might really mean what they say, whether people like their policies or not. Same with UKIP. And the BNP. As trust in the main parties collapses, voters will start taking pot luck with Anybody Else.
And this may be why all the politicians seem quite sure that the Lib-Con coalition government will last the full 5 years. It’s because politicians are getting more and more terrified of an increasingly disenchanted and volatile electorate. So they want to minimize the frequency of elections. They’d really prefer that there only be elections at 10 or 20 year intervals. Or, better still, none at all.
The way things are going, all I can see up ahead is increasing voter volatility, as they switch from party to party looking for somebody – anybody – who’ll actually, y’know, represent them. Someone they can trust. They’ll be looking for deeds, not words. Substance rather than spin. Truth rather than lies. They’ll be looking for men of principle. Any principle at all.
There’ll likely be sudden changes in the political landscape, as minor parties attract the huge wandering herds of disenchanted voters. The old parties – the lying parties – will dwindle away. You’ll find surprising new faces elected to power. They’ll be people who mean to do exactly what they say, and not something else. They’ll be people who aren’t prepared to compromise their convictions an iota. They’ll probably have stern faces and jutting jaws.
And, who knows, some of them may even have those trim little moustaches which were quite fashionable 70 or 80 years ago. Not extravagant moustaches that curl up at the ends. Nor soup-strainer moustaches. But moustaches you can trust.
http://cfrankdavis.wordpress.com/2011/05/07/moustaches-you-can-trust/
I am registered to vote, and I voted NO to AV. I'm no supporter of FPTP, but I've wanted REAL PR for about 30 years now. AV is not real PR. WE either change the voting system properly, or there's no point bothering at all.
Morg
.
Thursday, 5 May 2011
Tuesday, 3 May 2011
Future History ... or scence fiction?
Predicting the future is a difficult exercise.
The City of God was written by Augustine of Hippo soon after the city of Rome was sacked by the Visigoths in AD 410. This shocked him and his contemporaries, yet he apparently did not understand that he was watching the death of an entire civilization. Augustine himself died while the Vandals were about to sack his city.
The Scottish economist Adam Smith published his The Wealth of Nations in 1776 during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, yet he did not see this world-historical transformation coming. Augustine and Smith were both very smart men, but even they could not foresee the near future or understand the full force of changes that was underway in their own lifetimes. Individuals who were much cleverer than I have been spectacularly wrong about the future. There is a very substantial risk that I will make the same mistake now, but I’ll try.
Augustine of Hippo: The City of God
I have increasingly come to suspect that Western civilization is not merely under threat, but that it is in fact already dead. It probably died many years ago; we just didn’t notice at the time. The West is currently in such an advanced state of decline that a collapse of sorts can no longer be avoided. The established momentum is too great, and the ruling oligarchs are not even trying to hit the brakes. A collapse will happen. It is only a question of how we deal with this, and whether we manage to carve out a good-sized homeland for our people afterwards.
I believe that the European Union will disintegrate within the coming generation, that the USA in its present form will not survive his century and that we will be facing a full structural, political, ideological and economic crisis within the coming generation followed by serious social and ethnic strife. While the twentieth century was the bloodiest century in human history so far, I fear that the twenty-first century will eventually surpass it, if for no other reason than the world is much more populous than it was in 1914 or 1939.
EU Skull Dragon
As Jacques Barzun, the French-born American teacher, author and historian of ideas, puts it in From Dawn to Decadence, “How a revolution erupts from a commonplace event — tidal wave from a ripple — is cause for endless astonishment. Neither Luther in 1517 nor the men who gathered at Versailles in 1789 intended at first what they produced at last. Even less did the Russian Liberals who made the revolution of 1917 foresee what followed. All were as ignorant as everybody else of how much was about to be destroyed. Nor could they guess what feverish feelings, what strange behavior ensue when revolution, great or short-lived, is in the air.” Mr. Barzun also reminds us that “When people accept futility and the absurd as normal, the culture is decadent. The term is not a slur; it is a technical label. A decadent culture offers opportunities chiefly to the satirist.” The West today is clearly decadent.
The Russian-born author Alexander Boot was a philology graduate of Moscow University under the Communist system during the Cold War and lectured on English and American literature before getting into trouble with the KGB, the secret police of the Soviet Union. He emigrated to the West in 1973, only to discover that the West he admired and was seeking no longer existed. This inspired a life-long quest for an explanation, some of it detailed in his book How the West Was Lost. He sees Western history as a prolonged internal struggle between two different beings which he calls Modman and Westman. Saint Paul was a Greco-Roman Christian and the first Westman. Modman saw himself as close to divine; Jesus Christ, God as man, had been replaced by Modman as God, but the old God had to die first.
'How the West Was Lost' by Alexander BootHe believes that non-European immigrants serve as a protected class used as a battering ram by the ruling elites to systematically smash and demolish the nation-states of the white West. Laws against “racism” are therefore not meant to punish criminal acts, but rather to intimidate any opposition among Europeans by always keeping whites fearful and mentally on the defensive. “They are on the books to reassert the power of the state to control not just the citizens’ actions but, more important, their thoughts.” Boot warns that “A state capable of prosecuting one person for his thoughts is equally capable of prosecuting thousands, and will predictably do so when it has consolidated its power enough to get away with any outrage.” For this reason, the author predicts that “more and more people in Western Europe and North America will be sent to prison not for something they have done, but for something they have said.”
Alexander Boot’s basic conclusion is that the West is dead, but as a Christian man he believes in resurrection and in the possibility of a life after death. Perhaps that is not a bad summary.
According to the French writer Guillaume Faye, for the first time humanity as a whole is threatened by a cataclysmic crisis that is likely to begin in the decade before 2020 — a crisis provoked by degradation of the ecosystems and geopolitical contests for scarce resources like agricultural land, oil, and above all water; by the fragility of an international economic order based on speculation and the massive indebtedness of democratic states; by the return of epidemics; by the rise of terrorism and nuclear proliferation; by the growing aggressiveness of Islam’s world offensive; and by the dramatic ageing of European populations, whose below replacement-level birth rates are confronted with rapidly growing masses of young people in the dysfunctional countries of the global South, coupled with mass migrations to the North.
This convergence of catastrophes will mark the transition from one era to another. The USA will most likely cease to be the leading world power by mid-century, perhaps cease to exist at all in its present form. The global center of power will then move back to Eurasia, where it has almost always been previously. The strongest power will probably be China or what Faye calls “Euro-Siberia” — a federated alliance between the peoples of Europe plus Russia. He doesn’t think this is literally the end of the world, merely the end of the world as we know it. Something new may arise from these events, since Europe is a civilization of metamorphosis.
Euro-Siberia
Faye predicts two possibilities for European civilization over the coming century: regeneration based on a resurgence of ancestral values, or else disappearance. Europe, especially the western half of the Continent, is currently being invaded. This is coupled with an incredible masochism on the part of Europeans themselves. Only a terrifying crisis can awaken them, and war is the most merciless of selective forces; a people that abandons its will to power inevitably perishes. A “mental AIDS,” a virus of nihilism, has severely weakened their natural defenses. Consequently, Europeans have succumbed to self-extinction. The primary symptom of this is “xenophilia,” a systematic preference for the Other over the Self.
The current advanced state of decadence owes much to the secularization of Christian charity and its modern egalitarian offshoot, human rights. In the widest possible sense it was the same civilizational genius that gave the world the concepts of universal gravitation and universal human rights. After the unprecedented successes of the Scientific Revolution, post-Enlightenment Europeans fell so much in love with the power of their own ideas that they ultimately came to define their very existence as one big idea, hence the concept of an “idea nation” or “proposition nation” was born. The leaders of this were the Americans and the French, whose Revolutions in the late 1700s came to view their countries as universal republics. This ideal was not and could not be implemented at that time, but two centuries later, coupled with the rise of global communications, it won out over ethnic identification.
Faye believes that Europe now faces a danger unparalleled in its history and refuses to see it. It has been colonized by peoples from the South. This non-European invasion began in the 1960s and was largely self-engendered, by politicians contaminated with Marxist ideas, by an employer class greedy for cheap labor, and by Utopian humanitarian ideals or misplaced post-colonial guilt. Illegal immigrants/foreign colonizers are very rarely repatriated, but receive lavish social welfare benefits handed out to them by anti-white forces in control of the state:
A race war is foreseeable now in several European countries, a subterranean war that will be far more destructive than ‘terrorism.’ The White population is being displaced, a sort of genocide is being carried out against it with the complicity or the abstention of the ruling class, the media, and the politicians, for the ideology these collaborating elites uphold is infused with a pathological hatred of their own people and a morbid passion for miscegenation. The state’s utopian plan for ‘republican integration’ has nevertheless failed because it assumed peaceful coexistence between foreigners and natives, non-Whites and Whites, was possible in a single territory. Our rulers haven’t read Aristotle, who taught that no city can possibly be democratic and orderly if it isn’t ethnically homogeneous… European societies today are devolving into an unmanageable ethnic chaos.
He believes that a rebirth of European civilization in a different form is possible, but not inevitable. Whether or not this transformation takes place depends upon to what extent Europeans manage to restore healthy societies while drawing upon their historical memory, rather than having Islamic values imposed upon them. He thinks they should adopt a policy of Europe First. Others take care of their own problems, first and foremost. Whites must learn to do the same. It is their future existence that is under threat, not that of Africans or Pakistanis:
The twenty-first century will be a century of iron and storms. It will not resemble those harmonious futures predicted up to the 1970s. It will not be the global village prophesied by Marshall MacLuhan in 1966, or Bill Gates’ planetary network, or Francis Fukuyama’s end of history: a liberal global civilization directed by a universal state. It will be a century of competing peoples and ethnic identities. And paradoxically, the victorious peoples will be those that remain faithful to, or return to, ancestral values and realities — which are biological, cultural, ethical, social, and spiritual — and that at the same time will master technoscience. The twenty-first century will be the one in which European civilization, Promethean and tragic but eminently fragile, will undergo a metamorphosis or enter its irremediable twilight.
American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations thesis from the 1990s has been accused of simplification, but he should be credited with placing the significance of ethno-cultural blocs on the radar of global politics. He is also right in pointing out that this era is characterized by a West with declining influence. The tectonic plates of global power are shifting. Future historians may label this age “the retreat of the Western world order.” The West is no longer strong enough to carry the rest of the world on its shoulders. We will face generations of turmoil until a new equilibrium is found. These massive changes and the perceived weakness of a civilization that has been dominant globally for centuries could very well ignite a new world war. Multiculturalism and the inability or unwillingness of Western nations to uphold their borders from foreign infiltration is viewed by others as an invitation for attack and a signal that the West is weak and ripe for conquest.
This century may well be dominated by a resurgence of ethno-cultural blocs. Europeans need to break with the “presentism” in which they are currently sunk and learn to see themselves again (as do many others) as a “long-living people,” bearers of a great past and hopefully a great future, too. The mental revolution needed to bring about this change in European attitudes is only possible through a gigantic crisis, a violent shock, which is already on its way. The present system is founded on a belief in miracles and a myth of indefinite progress. It is bound to collapse, but we should remember that history is open-ended and presents many unexpected twists and turns. Opportunities will arise. We need to be able to grasp them.
I’ve been trying to think centuries ahead about what is needed for European survival. The bottom line is: We need our own territories again, our own countries. History has shown us, for instance in Latin America or in parts of Central Asia, that once the European genetic percentage drops below a certain threshold, the resulting population neither looks nor acts like Europeans. Experience also tells us that if two or more different populations inhabit the same land, they will eventually mix. In combination, this means that the only way European civilization can flourish in the long run is if we have large territories specifically dedicated for people who are overwhelmingly of demographic European stock. In those cases where this has been lost it needs to be reestablished. Ideas matter, but culture primarily follows genes.
Tzotzil children
All nations around the world try to maintain their ethnicity. Only in white majority Western countries do the authorities wage a deliberate demographic and cultural war against the majority population. This is evil, and Europeans have every right to defend themselves against evil policies. Whites have shown the ability to create societies and social systems that transcend the narrow confines of clan, tribe and ethnic nepotism. This is in many ways a great character trait, but it can also be our Achilles’ heel if it is weaponized and turned against us. We must recognize that we are unusual, and that our values are far from universally shared.
White Westerners have given other peoples, including actively hostile tribes, the tools needed to multiply beyond their native capacity, the transportation needed to travel to our countries, the human rights legislation needed to settle here and the welfare states needed to exploit us.
This situation is intensified by the fact that globalization of communications and transportation, ironically to a large extent created by Western inventions, puts severe pressure on our nations in ways which were unthinkable a few generations ago. When the Christian Gospels were written down at the end of the first century AD, the population of the Roman Empire was perhaps 60 million people. This is less than the annual population growth in the early twenty-first century. In other words: The global population grows by more than another Roman Empire every single year. Our system wasn’t designed to cope with such numbers.
The various cultures and religions of the world have experienced time in different ways. We are most accustomed to a linear system deriving from the Judeo-Christian tradition, which sees a clear progression from the creation of the world through a long series of events to a last time, a Day of Judgment and an end to all history. Modern science also tends to start with a universe created at a specific point in time, the “Big Bang,” although its end is yet uncertain.
As Parkes states in Gods and Men — The Origins of Western Culture, “The most significant feature of the Jewish heritage, however, was its view of history. Other ancient peoples had believed in a golden age, but had always located it in the past at the beginning of time. Israel alone looked forward to a golden age in the future and interpreted history as a meaningful and progressive movement toward this Messianic consummation. Originating in tribalistic loyalty, and reflecting the determination of a weak people to retain its identity in spite of conquest and enslavement, the Messianic hope was given universal scope by the prophets and became the end toward which all earthly events were moving. In various manifestations, religious and secular, spiritual and materialistic, it became one of those dynamic social myths which give meaning and direction to human life and which have more influence on human action than any rational philosophy. Unless its importance is understood, the development not merely of the Jewish people but also of the whole Western world becomes unintelligible.”
Ragnarök (“Doom of the Gods” or “Judgment of the Powers”), the end of the world as we know it, will mean the death of the main god Odin and his son Thor. This is described in the Icelandic Völuspá (“Prophecy of the Seeress [Völva]”), the first poem of the Poetic Edda and one of our most important sources to Norse mythology, although it was written down in the Christian era. Odin will meet his end against the giant wolf Fenrir. Thor will fight against Jörmungandr (Mighty-snake), a giant sea creature known as the Midgard Serpent that bites itself on its own tail and surrounds the human world, called Midgard or the Middle Earth. Thor will fight heroically and vanquish the beast, but after walking nine steps he will fall dead from its venom. Yet after all this destruction and moral chaos has ended, a new world will arise from the sea. Some of the gods will survive, as will two humans who will then repeople the Earth.
Jörmungandr
While Ragnarök is the end of the world as we know it, it is not “the end of history” in the Judeo-Christian sense. A new world will arise from its ashes. Our goal should be to sow seeds that can grow into strong trees bearing fine fruits in the future. Whether this post-catastrophic culture — which will most likely have a different mythology and maybe a different concept of morality to go with it compared to what we have now — will be a revived version of Western civilization or an entirely new version of European civilization I do not know, but I tend to suspect the latter. It is hard to predict such things, but a crucial challenge will no doubt be to break with the mentality of “progress” towards “equality,” since a toxic combination of these two concepts is burying us under dangerous and biologically unsustainable egalitarian ideals.
The coming crash will at the very least lead to an ideological-political paradigm shift and the rise of a new mythology to replace the post-WWII “suicide paradigm” of misunderstood anti-Nazism and deranged altruism. At worst, the discontinuity will be so long and severe that what emerges on the other side will be a completely new civilization, another generation of European civilization, just like what emerged during the Middle Ages was a different civilization from that of Greco-Roman Antiquity. The transition between the first and second generations of European civilization took centuries. History generally moves faster now than it did back then, but I suspect such a transition will nevertheless take several generations.
How a new civilization would look like I do not know. Medieval Europeans used different elements of the Greco-Roman legacy creatively and added innovations on top of this. Generation Two of European civilization contained within itself aspects of Generation One, but also had elements of sharp discontinuity. This will probably be the case next time, too.
As Geoffrey Parker reminds us in The Cambridge History of Warfare, the overall aim of Western strategy “almost always remained the total defeat and destruction of the enemy, and this contrasted starkly with the military practice of many other societies.” He highlights the combination of technological innovation and discipline as key traits of the Western military tradition. It is not true that Europeans are particularly ethnocentric; if anything, it is the total lack of ethnocentrism that constitutes our greatest problem today. However, it is true that in addition to being great explorers, artists and scientists we have also been great warriors when circumstances have called for this. This particular cultural trait is, admittedly, very well hidden in our age of decadence, betrayal and suicidal tolerance, but it can be brought back.
Charles Martel
We will most likely enter a prolonged period of great turbulence and upheaval; the bubble of welfare state “cradle-to grave security” is about to burst. This process will be painful, but necessary, and is in any case more or less inevitable by now. In 1911 Western Europeans still ruled much of the world. In 2011 we don’t even rule the suburbs in our own major cities, and some learned observers seriously predict the end of European civilization altogether.
This also implies that for the first time in centuries we are the underdogs. There are many historical examples, from the Persian invasions of ancient times to the Muslim invasions later, where Europeans have performed at our best when we have been the underdogs. Perhaps we can do the same once the Multicultural madness retreats. We need to make sure, though, that those who have championed the toxic ideas of Multiculturalism and mass immigration of alien tribes disappear with it. If that happens, we can give our descendants a fresh start and lay the foundations for a new Renaissance, where European civilization can flourish once more.
.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/05/preparing-for-ragnarok.html#more
Fjordman is a Norwegian
Morg
The City of God was written by Augustine of Hippo soon after the city of Rome was sacked by the Visigoths in AD 410. This shocked him and his contemporaries, yet he apparently did not understand that he was watching the death of an entire civilization. Augustine himself died while the Vandals were about to sack his city.
The Scottish economist Adam Smith published his The Wealth of Nations in 1776 during the early stages of the Industrial Revolution in Britain, yet he did not see this world-historical transformation coming. Augustine and Smith were both very smart men, but even they could not foresee the near future or understand the full force of changes that was underway in their own lifetimes. Individuals who were much cleverer than I have been spectacularly wrong about the future. There is a very substantial risk that I will make the same mistake now, but I’ll try.
Augustine of Hippo: The City of God
I have increasingly come to suspect that Western civilization is not merely under threat, but that it is in fact already dead. It probably died many years ago; we just didn’t notice at the time. The West is currently in such an advanced state of decline that a collapse of sorts can no longer be avoided. The established momentum is too great, and the ruling oligarchs are not even trying to hit the brakes. A collapse will happen. It is only a question of how we deal with this, and whether we manage to carve out a good-sized homeland for our people afterwards.
I believe that the European Union will disintegrate within the coming generation, that the USA in its present form will not survive his century and that we will be facing a full structural, political, ideological and economic crisis within the coming generation followed by serious social and ethnic strife. While the twentieth century was the bloodiest century in human history so far, I fear that the twenty-first century will eventually surpass it, if for no other reason than the world is much more populous than it was in 1914 or 1939.
EU Skull Dragon
As Jacques Barzun, the French-born American teacher, author and historian of ideas, puts it in From Dawn to Decadence, “How a revolution erupts from a commonplace event — tidal wave from a ripple — is cause for endless astonishment. Neither Luther in 1517 nor the men who gathered at Versailles in 1789 intended at first what they produced at last. Even less did the Russian Liberals who made the revolution of 1917 foresee what followed. All were as ignorant as everybody else of how much was about to be destroyed. Nor could they guess what feverish feelings, what strange behavior ensue when revolution, great or short-lived, is in the air.” Mr. Barzun also reminds us that “When people accept futility and the absurd as normal, the culture is decadent. The term is not a slur; it is a technical label. A decadent culture offers opportunities chiefly to the satirist.” The West today is clearly decadent.
The Russian-born author Alexander Boot was a philology graduate of Moscow University under the Communist system during the Cold War and lectured on English and American literature before getting into trouble with the KGB, the secret police of the Soviet Union. He emigrated to the West in 1973, only to discover that the West he admired and was seeking no longer existed. This inspired a life-long quest for an explanation, some of it detailed in his book How the West Was Lost. He sees Western history as a prolonged internal struggle between two different beings which he calls Modman and Westman. Saint Paul was a Greco-Roman Christian and the first Westman. Modman saw himself as close to divine; Jesus Christ, God as man, had been replaced by Modman as God, but the old God had to die first.
'How the West Was Lost' by Alexander BootHe believes that non-European immigrants serve as a protected class used as a battering ram by the ruling elites to systematically smash and demolish the nation-states of the white West. Laws against “racism” are therefore not meant to punish criminal acts, but rather to intimidate any opposition among Europeans by always keeping whites fearful and mentally on the defensive. “They are on the books to reassert the power of the state to control not just the citizens’ actions but, more important, their thoughts.” Boot warns that “A state capable of prosecuting one person for his thoughts is equally capable of prosecuting thousands, and will predictably do so when it has consolidated its power enough to get away with any outrage.” For this reason, the author predicts that “more and more people in Western Europe and North America will be sent to prison not for something they have done, but for something they have said.”
Alexander Boot’s basic conclusion is that the West is dead, but as a Christian man he believes in resurrection and in the possibility of a life after death. Perhaps that is not a bad summary.
According to the French writer Guillaume Faye, for the first time humanity as a whole is threatened by a cataclysmic crisis that is likely to begin in the decade before 2020 — a crisis provoked by degradation of the ecosystems and geopolitical contests for scarce resources like agricultural land, oil, and above all water; by the fragility of an international economic order based on speculation and the massive indebtedness of democratic states; by the return of epidemics; by the rise of terrorism and nuclear proliferation; by the growing aggressiveness of Islam’s world offensive; and by the dramatic ageing of European populations, whose below replacement-level birth rates are confronted with rapidly growing masses of young people in the dysfunctional countries of the global South, coupled with mass migrations to the North.
This convergence of catastrophes will mark the transition from one era to another. The USA will most likely cease to be the leading world power by mid-century, perhaps cease to exist at all in its present form. The global center of power will then move back to Eurasia, where it has almost always been previously. The strongest power will probably be China or what Faye calls “Euro-Siberia” — a federated alliance between the peoples of Europe plus Russia. He doesn’t think this is literally the end of the world, merely the end of the world as we know it. Something new may arise from these events, since Europe is a civilization of metamorphosis.
Euro-Siberia
Faye predicts two possibilities for European civilization over the coming century: regeneration based on a resurgence of ancestral values, or else disappearance. Europe, especially the western half of the Continent, is currently being invaded. This is coupled with an incredible masochism on the part of Europeans themselves. Only a terrifying crisis can awaken them, and war is the most merciless of selective forces; a people that abandons its will to power inevitably perishes. A “mental AIDS,” a virus of nihilism, has severely weakened their natural defenses. Consequently, Europeans have succumbed to self-extinction. The primary symptom of this is “xenophilia,” a systematic preference for the Other over the Self.
The current advanced state of decadence owes much to the secularization of Christian charity and its modern egalitarian offshoot, human rights. In the widest possible sense it was the same civilizational genius that gave the world the concepts of universal gravitation and universal human rights. After the unprecedented successes of the Scientific Revolution, post-Enlightenment Europeans fell so much in love with the power of their own ideas that they ultimately came to define their very existence as one big idea, hence the concept of an “idea nation” or “proposition nation” was born. The leaders of this were the Americans and the French, whose Revolutions in the late 1700s came to view their countries as universal republics. This ideal was not and could not be implemented at that time, but two centuries later, coupled with the rise of global communications, it won out over ethnic identification.
Faye believes that Europe now faces a danger unparalleled in its history and refuses to see it. It has been colonized by peoples from the South. This non-European invasion began in the 1960s and was largely self-engendered, by politicians contaminated with Marxist ideas, by an employer class greedy for cheap labor, and by Utopian humanitarian ideals or misplaced post-colonial guilt. Illegal immigrants/foreign colonizers are very rarely repatriated, but receive lavish social welfare benefits handed out to them by anti-white forces in control of the state:
A race war is foreseeable now in several European countries, a subterranean war that will be far more destructive than ‘terrorism.’ The White population is being displaced, a sort of genocide is being carried out against it with the complicity or the abstention of the ruling class, the media, and the politicians, for the ideology these collaborating elites uphold is infused with a pathological hatred of their own people and a morbid passion for miscegenation. The state’s utopian plan for ‘republican integration’ has nevertheless failed because it assumed peaceful coexistence between foreigners and natives, non-Whites and Whites, was possible in a single territory. Our rulers haven’t read Aristotle, who taught that no city can possibly be democratic and orderly if it isn’t ethnically homogeneous… European societies today are devolving into an unmanageable ethnic chaos.
He believes that a rebirth of European civilization in a different form is possible, but not inevitable. Whether or not this transformation takes place depends upon to what extent Europeans manage to restore healthy societies while drawing upon their historical memory, rather than having Islamic values imposed upon them. He thinks they should adopt a policy of Europe First. Others take care of their own problems, first and foremost. Whites must learn to do the same. It is their future existence that is under threat, not that of Africans or Pakistanis:
The twenty-first century will be a century of iron and storms. It will not resemble those harmonious futures predicted up to the 1970s. It will not be the global village prophesied by Marshall MacLuhan in 1966, or Bill Gates’ planetary network, or Francis Fukuyama’s end of history: a liberal global civilization directed by a universal state. It will be a century of competing peoples and ethnic identities. And paradoxically, the victorious peoples will be those that remain faithful to, or return to, ancestral values and realities — which are biological, cultural, ethical, social, and spiritual — and that at the same time will master technoscience. The twenty-first century will be the one in which European civilization, Promethean and tragic but eminently fragile, will undergo a metamorphosis or enter its irremediable twilight.
American political scientist Samuel P. Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations thesis from the 1990s has been accused of simplification, but he should be credited with placing the significance of ethno-cultural blocs on the radar of global politics. He is also right in pointing out that this era is characterized by a West with declining influence. The tectonic plates of global power are shifting. Future historians may label this age “the retreat of the Western world order.” The West is no longer strong enough to carry the rest of the world on its shoulders. We will face generations of turmoil until a new equilibrium is found. These massive changes and the perceived weakness of a civilization that has been dominant globally for centuries could very well ignite a new world war. Multiculturalism and the inability or unwillingness of Western nations to uphold their borders from foreign infiltration is viewed by others as an invitation for attack and a signal that the West is weak and ripe for conquest.
This century may well be dominated by a resurgence of ethno-cultural blocs. Europeans need to break with the “presentism” in which they are currently sunk and learn to see themselves again (as do many others) as a “long-living people,” bearers of a great past and hopefully a great future, too. The mental revolution needed to bring about this change in European attitudes is only possible through a gigantic crisis, a violent shock, which is already on its way. The present system is founded on a belief in miracles and a myth of indefinite progress. It is bound to collapse, but we should remember that history is open-ended and presents many unexpected twists and turns. Opportunities will arise. We need to be able to grasp them.
I’ve been trying to think centuries ahead about what is needed for European survival. The bottom line is: We need our own territories again, our own countries. History has shown us, for instance in Latin America or in parts of Central Asia, that once the European genetic percentage drops below a certain threshold, the resulting population neither looks nor acts like Europeans. Experience also tells us that if two or more different populations inhabit the same land, they will eventually mix. In combination, this means that the only way European civilization can flourish in the long run is if we have large territories specifically dedicated for people who are overwhelmingly of demographic European stock. In those cases where this has been lost it needs to be reestablished. Ideas matter, but culture primarily follows genes.
Tzotzil children
All nations around the world try to maintain their ethnicity. Only in white majority Western countries do the authorities wage a deliberate demographic and cultural war against the majority population. This is evil, and Europeans have every right to defend themselves against evil policies. Whites have shown the ability to create societies and social systems that transcend the narrow confines of clan, tribe and ethnic nepotism. This is in many ways a great character trait, but it can also be our Achilles’ heel if it is weaponized and turned against us. We must recognize that we are unusual, and that our values are far from universally shared.
White Westerners have given other peoples, including actively hostile tribes, the tools needed to multiply beyond their native capacity, the transportation needed to travel to our countries, the human rights legislation needed to settle here and the welfare states needed to exploit us.
This situation is intensified by the fact that globalization of communications and transportation, ironically to a large extent created by Western inventions, puts severe pressure on our nations in ways which were unthinkable a few generations ago. When the Christian Gospels were written down at the end of the first century AD, the population of the Roman Empire was perhaps 60 million people. This is less than the annual population growth in the early twenty-first century. In other words: The global population grows by more than another Roman Empire every single year. Our system wasn’t designed to cope with such numbers.
The various cultures and religions of the world have experienced time in different ways. We are most accustomed to a linear system deriving from the Judeo-Christian tradition, which sees a clear progression from the creation of the world through a long series of events to a last time, a Day of Judgment and an end to all history. Modern science also tends to start with a universe created at a specific point in time, the “Big Bang,” although its end is yet uncertain.
As Parkes states in Gods and Men — The Origins of Western Culture, “The most significant feature of the Jewish heritage, however, was its view of history. Other ancient peoples had believed in a golden age, but had always located it in the past at the beginning of time. Israel alone looked forward to a golden age in the future and interpreted history as a meaningful and progressive movement toward this Messianic consummation. Originating in tribalistic loyalty, and reflecting the determination of a weak people to retain its identity in spite of conquest and enslavement, the Messianic hope was given universal scope by the prophets and became the end toward which all earthly events were moving. In various manifestations, religious and secular, spiritual and materialistic, it became one of those dynamic social myths which give meaning and direction to human life and which have more influence on human action than any rational philosophy. Unless its importance is understood, the development not merely of the Jewish people but also of the whole Western world becomes unintelligible.”
Ragnarök (“Doom of the Gods” or “Judgment of the Powers”), the end of the world as we know it, will mean the death of the main god Odin and his son Thor. This is described in the Icelandic Völuspá (“Prophecy of the Seeress [Völva]”), the first poem of the Poetic Edda and one of our most important sources to Norse mythology, although it was written down in the Christian era. Odin will meet his end against the giant wolf Fenrir. Thor will fight against Jörmungandr (Mighty-snake), a giant sea creature known as the Midgard Serpent that bites itself on its own tail and surrounds the human world, called Midgard or the Middle Earth. Thor will fight heroically and vanquish the beast, but after walking nine steps he will fall dead from its venom. Yet after all this destruction and moral chaos has ended, a new world will arise from the sea. Some of the gods will survive, as will two humans who will then repeople the Earth.
Jörmungandr
While Ragnarök is the end of the world as we know it, it is not “the end of history” in the Judeo-Christian sense. A new world will arise from its ashes. Our goal should be to sow seeds that can grow into strong trees bearing fine fruits in the future. Whether this post-catastrophic culture — which will most likely have a different mythology and maybe a different concept of morality to go with it compared to what we have now — will be a revived version of Western civilization or an entirely new version of European civilization I do not know, but I tend to suspect the latter. It is hard to predict such things, but a crucial challenge will no doubt be to break with the mentality of “progress” towards “equality,” since a toxic combination of these two concepts is burying us under dangerous and biologically unsustainable egalitarian ideals.
The coming crash will at the very least lead to an ideological-political paradigm shift and the rise of a new mythology to replace the post-WWII “suicide paradigm” of misunderstood anti-Nazism and deranged altruism. At worst, the discontinuity will be so long and severe that what emerges on the other side will be a completely new civilization, another generation of European civilization, just like what emerged during the Middle Ages was a different civilization from that of Greco-Roman Antiquity. The transition between the first and second generations of European civilization took centuries. History generally moves faster now than it did back then, but I suspect such a transition will nevertheless take several generations.
How a new civilization would look like I do not know. Medieval Europeans used different elements of the Greco-Roman legacy creatively and added innovations on top of this. Generation Two of European civilization contained within itself aspects of Generation One, but also had elements of sharp discontinuity. This will probably be the case next time, too.
As Geoffrey Parker reminds us in The Cambridge History of Warfare, the overall aim of Western strategy “almost always remained the total defeat and destruction of the enemy, and this contrasted starkly with the military practice of many other societies.” He highlights the combination of technological innovation and discipline as key traits of the Western military tradition. It is not true that Europeans are particularly ethnocentric; if anything, it is the total lack of ethnocentrism that constitutes our greatest problem today. However, it is true that in addition to being great explorers, artists and scientists we have also been great warriors when circumstances have called for this. This particular cultural trait is, admittedly, very well hidden in our age of decadence, betrayal and suicidal tolerance, but it can be brought back.
Charles Martel
We will most likely enter a prolonged period of great turbulence and upheaval; the bubble of welfare state “cradle-to grave security” is about to burst. This process will be painful, but necessary, and is in any case more or less inevitable by now. In 1911 Western Europeans still ruled much of the world. In 2011 we don’t even rule the suburbs in our own major cities, and some learned observers seriously predict the end of European civilization altogether.
This also implies that for the first time in centuries we are the underdogs. There are many historical examples, from the Persian invasions of ancient times to the Muslim invasions later, where Europeans have performed at our best when we have been the underdogs. Perhaps we can do the same once the Multicultural madness retreats. We need to make sure, though, that those who have championed the toxic ideas of Multiculturalism and mass immigration of alien tribes disappear with it. If that happens, we can give our descendants a fresh start and lay the foundations for a new Renaissance, where European civilization can flourish once more.
.
http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2011/05/preparing-for-ragnarok.html#more
Fjordman is a Norwegian
Morg
THEY SHOULD HAVE FED HIM TO THE PIGS
I am sure that all normal human beings in the world will delight at the killing of Osama Bin Laden a man who has been responsible for thousands of deaths.
Of course he has many followers who will be bent on revenge but they were attempting to kill us before and hence the need to cut the head off this snake.
I wonder if our government will make contact wwith "communities" of muslims in Britain to reassure them. I expect they will.
The burial at sea was in my opinion an opportunity thrown away to show our contempt for this animal and his faith just as he has shown his contempt for our civilised values by beheading captives and putting the films on line.
He should have been fed to pigs or at least smeared with pig fat before disposal and the process videoed.
Would there be reprisals? Yes probably but these could be dealt with sternly and with the maximum use of pigs
That they wouldn't like it is the point and it is time our leaders realised that WE ARE AT WAR WITH THIS EVIL CULT AND WE MUST FIGHT TO WIN,as any sign of compromise on our part will be taken as a sign of weakness by them.
Bin Laden bragged that he loved death as we love life although his actions at the end contradict this. In other words he was a hypocrite as well.
GOOD RIDDANCE
Of course he has many followers who will be bent on revenge but they were attempting to kill us before and hence the need to cut the head off this snake.
I wonder if our government will make contact wwith "communities" of muslims in Britain to reassure them. I expect they will.
The burial at sea was in my opinion an opportunity thrown away to show our contempt for this animal and his faith just as he has shown his contempt for our civilised values by beheading captives and putting the films on line.
He should have been fed to pigs or at least smeared with pig fat before disposal and the process videoed.
Would there be reprisals? Yes probably but these could be dealt with sternly and with the maximum use of pigs
That they wouldn't like it is the point and it is time our leaders realised that WE ARE AT WAR WITH THIS EVIL CULT AND WE MUST FIGHT TO WIN,as any sign of compromise on our part will be taken as a sign of weakness by them.
Bin Laden bragged that he loved death as we love life although his actions at the end contradict this. In other words he was a hypocrite as well.
GOOD RIDDANCE
Saturday, 30 April 2011
COMPARE...
...to the British press non-treatment of the same question/issue:
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110429/local/eu-absent.362821
Morg
.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20110429/local/eu-absent.362821
Morg
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)