Now the circle has been squared. We’re going to receive a little “guidance” about how things should be done.
From the Telegraph:
The Government should give parents lessons on how to raise their children, Britain’s leading public health expert has urged.
Professor John Ashton, the outgoing president of the Faculty of Public Health, said today’s children are being neglected by “sweatshop” schools and bad parents.
He said the state must step in to help prevent the next generation being crippled by conditions such as anxiety, anorexia and obesity.
…not to mention, disobedience.
(“Putin’s Russia has thrown down a real political gauntlet to the Western world of feminism and political correctness. More than the conflict over Ukraine or Syria, his ability to woo those disaffected by the pc/feminist world is providing a political leverage no mere battlefield victory could ever impose on the vanquished.”)
“When your opponent is suicidal, one need not ever fire a shot.” – anon
Feminism sustains itself on the presentation of the female gender as a victim of male oppression. Without that narrative, it cannot exist. But sustaining that oppressor/oppressed dynamic also forbids feminism from acting with responsible authority, because its (necessary) victimology ultimately rewards powerlessness. Feminism, when dissected, is not a vehicle for empowerment (except for the elite few at the top of its super-structure or in government) but is, instead, an idea which teaches women to embrace their inner victim.
Victimhood provides a moral license for feminism to operate, so it can’t just be let go. These days, if you haven’t suffered enough, or haven’t suffered for the right reasons… then you just ain’t suffered at all. Without the right skin and gender mix, you cannot quality for any suffering whatsoever. That is for the privileged members of the victimhood only.(*please note: some SWM-fellow travellers will be allowed, as long as terms and conditions are strictly adhered to: Apologies and self-deprecation will be demanded at regular intervals.)
Extending the status of oppressed victim to the white female (especially the white university educated female),however, is a difficult task. Whiteness implies guilt, so racial disqualification must be avoided by asserting victimhood on grounds of gender. Axiomatically, the white western university educated (f.) feminist, has identified the political means to hide her whiteness: the historic ‘culpability’ of the white western heterosexual male. In that historic configuration, the white world of terror and shame is one in which non-male/non-whites have no substantial role other than that of the ‘oppressed’, or the heroic resister to – the ‘patriarchy’. On the other side, if you are white and male, you are part of the ‘oppressor’ class. Of course, one of the benefits of this is that it enables the privileged, white, university educated female to talk down to the white male minimum wage slob. Privilege indeed.
This oppressor/oppressed narrative dismisses and exonerates the white woman as part of the culture of western imperial/colonial oppression. Western culture, after all, is to be deplored, except for its ultimate expression in the trappings narcissistic consumerism: the world of handbags, shoes and expensive clothes – (ironically, often times made by female child labour remunerated at a pittance.)
But feminism does not really have global reach, because history (shock horror) doesn’t contain a continuous dynamic everywhere at once. The oppressor/oppressed dynamic which casts the white male in the lead role does not penetrate the slavic world in anything like the same manner it does in the west.
For feminism, fitting the white Russian slav into the anti-white male oppressed/oppressor dynamic is not an easy task.
The North American/Germanic/Scandinavian idea that men exist merely to oppress women fails in the Russo-Slavic world with the indelible cultural stamp of past warfare: namely, Stalingrad. It is not a dynamic that North American or even Scandinavian women know. It is the cement that holds the concept of male sacrifice in place in the Russian mind. Russian women know this. American women, having never had their lives and their culture on the line in the same way, simply don’t. The white western feminist morality is one of convenience. Indeed, the white western feminists, taking their battle as an a priori liberation from an assumed all-powerful ‘patriarchy’ are having a tough time crossing the Russian ‘frontier’, and that is promoting a backlash. Feminism has gone beyond revealing its civic impotence, as it did in Rotherham, Cologne … and as it continues to do all over Europe and Scandinavia. It has now having broad international effects.
One of the unforeseen consequences of Rotherham and Cologne has been the elevation of the slavic world, not only as the potential saviour of the white hetero-male and the growing anti-feminist movement, but as the social force that will act as a future repository for the remains of western culture, when it succumbs to the self-destructive disaster that political correctness and feminism have created. That wasn’t supposed to happen. Vilification of the white male was supposed to be universal and easy to establish. The political and moral ‘surrender’ of the white male that the white western feminist was supposed to relish in appears to have backfired.
Already feminism is causing a noteworthy cultural and intellectual defection of western men into the orbit of a Russian/Slavic social order. Vilification of Putin is failing while ‘Putin admiration’ in the west is hitting highs. Western political failure is causing a rupture of the Republican party, while seeing a concomitant surge in anti-establishment western parties. Compared to Trump, Geert Wilders, UKIP, Marie Le Pen and Alternative for Deutschland, Russia looks like a bastion of political calm and stability. Western culture asks itself, why do ‘we’ get the preening White House narcissists, while the evil Russians get the chess-master Putin? Why do we have to hate ourselves for being white when the Slavic world doesn’t? This is dangerous territory for the west. It raises the spectre of an internal political defection brought about by feminism.
Putin himself seems aware of this and is already moving to capitalise on it. After all, feminism has provided him with a perfect opening.
In a December 2015 speech, Putin laid out his vision of Russia as a haven for those disaffected with political correctness and tired of feeling guilty for merely being white. In it, he implied that the western world’s penchant for openness and tolerance was but a mask for what is really a slide into immorality.
“Too may nations are revising their moral values and ethical norms. … Society is now required not only to recognise everyone’s right to the freedom of consciousness… but also to accept without question, the equality of good and evil, strange as it seems, concepts that are opposite in meaning. There are more and more people in the world who support our position on defending traditional values,” Putin said.
Putin’s Russia has thrown down a real political gauntlet to the Western world of feminism and political correctness. More than the conflict over Ukraine or Syria, his ability to woo those disaffected by the pc/feminist world is providing a political leverage no mere battlefield victory could ever impose on the vanquished. Feminism’s maintenance of the oppressor/oppressed narrative is beginning to produce societal and security ramifications in the west far beyond those that the world of their righteous indignation have ever envisioned. In addition to creating the political bandwidth for the unrestrained foreign immigration which is destabilizing western Europe, feminism, in its insistence on female ‘victimhood’, is also beginning to destroy western society from within.
There was a big hue and cry from people over a previous article here that suggested that Germany was using the EU as a vehicle to promote Germany hegemony, and that Brussels itself is merely a fig-leaf masking the unilateral nature of German control within europe. It seems like it hit a nerve because this blog was promptly attacked and the article deleted from within the content management system. So…
To those who are having a little trouble coping with reality, today we present a strong dose from the little island that told its banking system it wouldn’t sacrifice its own nation for its financial sector: Iceland.
Iceland’s Prime Minister, Sigmindur Gunnlaugsson, has come out and told a truth which everyone else seems to have a little trouble digesting, by saying that Germany is beginning to rule the EU unilaterally.
“When it comes to the big stuff, the decisions are made by two, and increasingly one, country,” he said.
This , of course, has some rather serious repercussions for the U.K. electorate voting on a British exit from the EU in about 100 days: an understanding that remaining in the EU is really the final surrender of sovereignty to Berlin… and not devolvement to a ‘voice’ in the shadow puppet-theatre called, Brussels.
“Others are called to meetings to approve of what has been decided… this seems to have become the standard way of doing things in Brussels.” Gunnlaugsson said. It should come as little surprise that Iceland has now completely withdrawn its application for membership in the EU. Gunnlaugsson says that it would be pointless for Iceland to join, as it would have no power at all. Outside the EU, some decision making can still be retained. The conclusion is pretty clear: If you want to retain an influence in your own future, stay out of the EU.
So, for those who believe that the UK staying in the EU means the British voice will be heard, and influence can be exacted, we present you with the new reality of German hegemony: total control. If you think Britain has a limited influence in Brussels now, just wait until after any so-called referendum. Britain will soon have none, and orders will be issued from Berlin; orders which serve Germany, and, as the situation in Greece shows, have no consideration for other ‘member’ (vassal) states.
One of the foundational points of the article, was that Germany is actually creating the new Reich. This was taken as fantasy. But it shouldn’t be. Such down to earth commentators as Jim Rickards himself have noticed the same thing, and called it the same thing. Historical precedent is scaring the politically correct into silence about speaking re: ‘certain’ things… uncomfortable things… things that demand ‘safe spaces’ to be protected from. Honestly, if you can’t see why political correctness is being pushed and what it was supposed to do by now, well, frankly, you are blind.
The truth is that Berlin is calling all the important shots in the EU. With Berlin controlling Brussels, the Reich is established. But that doesn’t imply ultimate success. In fact, the EU has done very little on the ground to create ‘ever closer union’ with member states in the past year. Schengen’s implosion is proof that there appears to be limits. The attempt by Germany to dictate who will take how many refugees shows how out of step Germany is with the rest of the EU, and how they think they can dictate all terms without political repercussion.
If collapse within the EU does come, the collapse will come from the inside, and not from outside attack. Germany has cornered its own political landscape into a series of impossible choices. The coming dust-up over the expense of a German-inspired refugee crisis is going to set up a battle royale for the distribution of public monies at a time of extreme financial stress. No lowering of interest rates into negative territory for an indeterminate period of time is going to stop this collapse either.The central banks are out of monetary ammo. Increasingly, German political hegemony is running out of ammo too. The continuing rebellion against that hegemony will persist, regardless of any referendum result.
“Why does it always have to be so grand, so Wagnerian?” – Gunter Grass
There has been confusion, consternation and bewilderment over the mass importation of north African refugees into Europe at the demand of a resurgent and unified Germany. There has also been, especially in the past two years, a growing discontent over the manner in which EU policy seems to be constructed in Berlin, genuflected to by France, and then systematically rammed down the throats of all other EU members. These two aspects are intrinsically related.
Germany, once again, is revealing its desire for European-wide hegemony. As its economy is large, and relatively functioning when compared to the rest of the EU (sauf the UK), it believes it can translate economic power into an EU-wide political domination that will result in its finally realised dream of a (now fourth) Reich. As many Germans privately reveal, what two World Wars didn’t achieve, the EU and the Euro will.
There’s just one problem. A century of history has made huge parts of Europe ill at ease over such a plan. How can Germany overcome both foreign and domestic suspicion that its vision of a new Reich is morally palatable to the rest of Europe? Simple. Atone for Auschwitz by presenting Germany as an open, free, non-racist European power who has purged its demons and is ready to assume the mantle of leadership which it feels it both deserves and is ready for. Allow millions of non-white north Africans and Albanians to flood the country in a demonstration of Germany’s new-found spirit of toleration and understanding.
In its quest to appear politically ‘reformed’, the necessary pre-requisite for its european domination, Germany has laid the foundation of its own, and the EU’s destruction. They have failed. Merkel’s policy on refugees is tearing Europe (and Scandinavia) apart. A multi-front eruption into civil war is no longer dismissed as alarmist lunacy, but tangible possibility.
Just six months ago the popular magazine Der Spiegel (German version of Time) was tipping Merkel as a potential Nobel Peace Prize winner. No more. Recently depicted on its cover wearing the saintly robes of (the mean, vicious and self-serving psycho-fascist) Mother Theresa, Mutter (Mother) Angela now appears, like her Albanian saint-mirror, as a ‘humanitarian’ fraud; or at the very least, stupid beyond comprehension. Maybe Der Spiegel never read Christopher Hitchens’ scathing indictment of that charming Albanian woman.
Merkel’s open-door refugee policy was concocted to give a false image of moral atonement for Germany’s past, that would clear the way for its domination of Europe. But, ever true to historical precedent, Germany is destroying the Europe it hopes to control. This time, the destruction could be for good.
Gunter Grass, the Nobel Prize winning writer, was fearful of the re-emergent German colossus, and stood firmly against re-unification. So did Margaret Thatcher, and so did French President Mitterand. After the drive to re-unification began, in 1990, Grass commented that he had “a powerful premonition of disaster.” That disaster is now in full flow.
At its most innocent analysis, Germany has made a cardinal error in thinking that Turkey, with its post-Ataturk Islam-lite, was a template for the entire muslim world; including the north African and Pakistani world. After all, mass-Turkish immigration into Germany seemed to be fairly innocuous. That has turned out to be a significant, perhaps fatal, mistake. Firstly, the Turkey of the 1980s is not the Turkey of the 2010s. Like all political entities it is a dynamic, and it is one which is turning sharply towards conservative Islam. Secondly, north Africa is no 1980s Turkey. Mass north African immigration, which brings with it the necessity to feed, clothe and house several million unemployable people for decades – perhaps until death, will bankrupt a German government already in debt up to its eyeballs. Massive tax increases will then be needed, as far as the eye can see, which will implode the German economy, as well as the rest of Europe.
Gunter Grass was right… and so was Margaret Thatcher and so was Francois Mitterand. It was insanity to ever let Germany unify. Their attempts to restore Germany’s post-Holocaust moral authority as a prelude to total EU domination (with, of course, France hanging on to German coattails, hoping for newfound glory) through mass north African immigration, has set Europe on a self-destruct course. The dreams of the ever re-born Reich may lay fallow for decades, even hundreds of years, within the German political psyche, but they never seem to actually die. The German political leadership seems pre-disposed towards re-creation of that Reich as its unshakable dream turned nightmare.
They are at it, yet again.
There can be little surprise that the first country to reach the stage of modern societal collapse is the one where feminism has become most entrenched: Sweden.
Sweden has always prided itself on being the most open nation in the world. It is. And now it is reaping the whirlwind of that openness: a wholesale, irreversible implosion – just short of civil war. In fact, the destruction has commenced. Asylum centres are being burned, gang battles within the competing muslim communities are regular occurrences, native women are being assaulted for daring to flaunt their political power, sexual openness and financial wherewithal, by immigrants infuriated by their second class status. In Islam, men do not take orders from women. Somehow the feminists missed that simple fact.
Feminism, in its openness, has allowed the wholesale immigration of a massive body of people who simply cannot stand the culture they have been invited into, and want it changed to resemble the one they are comfortable with, and which respects their social and religious dictates. Many Swedish women, and feminists, believe that reason and persuasive argument can change that fundamental contradiction which is tearing their society apart. They have failed to see that separation of church (mosque) and state is not something conservative Islam is ready to countenance. They see the world only through their own egocentric lenses.
In reaction, some neighbouring countries, having seen the experiment that the politically ‘correct’ ideology feminism has fostered with its multi-cultural ‘enlightenment’ and are now distancing themselves from it faster than Husain Bolt can run a 200 metre. They see, now, at this late stage, what the feminist imperative in political terms means: total self-destruction under the guise of “equality.”
Feminism steered us here and is now presented with a choice: either abandon the belief that western gynocentric liberal ‘theology’ can persuade Islam to change its social foundations, or face annihilation. There is no third option.
Norway is starting to move in that direction already, and is laying out its initial plans to roll up the drawbridge and prepare for border controls with Sweden. Perhaps of even more significant note, Norwegian Prime Minister Erna Solberg is drafting a legal mechanism which will allow the country to reject not only immigrants, but to jettison the Geneva Convention as well. The Danish Prime Minister Lars Rasmussen, appears prepared to do the same. Hungary is actually suing the EU over its immigrant ‘distribution’ policy. Austria has imposed a cap on the amount of refugees it will take. This is all to the consternation of a Germany who has run roughshod over all EU policy, believing (yet again) that it can dictate what the rest of Europe should do. Merkel has become the enemy.
There are tactical reasons for the Norwegian and Danish moves. Scrapping the Geneva Convention will give these nations the right to refuse people asylum because they are “fleeing danger”. It will also allow them to return refugees to transit countries, which in effect means returning them to Turkey. The UN is predictably up in arms over this because it means their trans-national authority is being sidelined in favour of individual nation states. That is the EU’s nightmare made real, as it undermines their authority, and reveals that they are a completely self-serving, elitist institution with no concept of what goes on outside of their privileged sphere. They are beyond out of touch. They are wholesale ignorant, reckless, and continue to believe that their dictates and micro-management can solve every unsolvable catastrophy.
Schengen, which enshrined the free movement of people in Europe, is dead. It is a prelude to a coming European collapse which will likely see the total collapse of the Euro currency and demand a near totalitarian political order to keep the EU together. The dream of a United States of Europe is fading fast and the feminist belief that opening borders to the Islamic world would create within that community a recognition of western liberal ideology as superior to Islam was a horrendously naïve, not to mention self-centred and racist, mistake.
Feminism and political correctness have wrought the destruction of the west. It is unlikely that it can be saved at this late juncture, without the resort to civil war.
It should be clear now that Feminism created the political ‘bandwidth’ that fostered mass North African Immigration into mainland Europe. No one will easily be able to shake themselves free from the sight of groups of the politically correct along with assorted feminists and SJWs standing waving placards screaming “WELCOME”, only to be sexually assaulted by the same people just a few short weeks later. It is a defining image of our time. People, are rightfully outraged. But who are they outraged at?
For one thing, there seems to be very little mainstream press backlash against the feminist movement, which is now teetering on extinction in the mass mind (but not on the government ledger, heaven forbid!). Feminists, being the upstanding, take responsibility, own your shit type of people, have stood up and admitted they were wrong… right? Ummmm, no. Not right. Like a 13 year old in a huff, they have disappeared into the bathroom, and won’t come out, until everyone promises them that they won’t be mean to them, and that they are still the special little angel they’ve always been. They’ve hurt their own feelings by fucking up on the immigration issue… and that, of course, has to be someone else’s fault. They’re stewing… desperately trying to figure out how men, and specifically, white heterosexual men, are to blame for their fuck up.
That could be a long wait. Make no mistake, feminism got stomped in Cologne. Stomped by its own juvenile naivete. Cologne could even turn out to be fatal for feminism. But what everyone seems to be missing, is that while feminism has done what it does best and messed things up, it has also done exactly what it was supposed to do at this point and time.
First, feminism has been at the forefront of helping corporates to lower wages in the western world, through its support for mass, cheap labor importation. And with that task done, its unrestrained imbecility has now been used to perform a stunning volte face and help stir the public against that self-same multicultural world. Only in feminism, eh? But, that’s why its such a perfect, all purpose tool. Exactly because its such an ephemeral phenomenon…laced with terms like “equality” and “empowerment”, it does not matter how many self-contradictory gyrations it turns itself in… women will follow its whimsy as directed. Feminism is a fantastic political vehicle precisely because it defies all laws of nature, spinning one way and then another, and all the while claiming coherence.
It may be worth noting that during these recent years of mass immigration, the one that is threatening civil war within Europe, women have held several positions of high authority in matters concerning immigration. So when the standard feminist diatribe screams out, “Name one war! ONE WAR! That a woman has started,” you can safely reply, ‘the current war that we are in’; the burgeoning european civil war… and the name of the person who started it is Merkel. It might also be noticed that our present era of mass immigration has seen the top State Department (people who issue passports, and set immigration policy, ya know) job held by a woman (Clinton), and the similar role in the UK also held by a woman (Theresa May, Home Office). (please note: the UK foreign office doesn’t handle immigration, its the home office.) If this is the “patriarchy” making all these important decisions on mass immigration… it has sure got a lot of women in it.
Feminism, and its twisted sibling political correctness have exhibited a wild and open naivete. That was both the driving force behind the Cologne attacks, and also the critical component now rousing the mass mind in virile hatred against the entire Arab/Islamic world. Nobody in the west is going to parse the Arab world with any seriousness. Nobody is going to bother to discriminate a Syrian for a North African. The press tells us, regularly, that it is Syrian immigrants rampaging. People on the ground know its largely north Africans. But that crude fluidity should serve us well in the near future. WW III is about to kick off in the Middle East. Hezbollah is well established in Syria, and now Saudi Arabia, reeling from 30 dollar a barrel oil, has plans to send 150,000 troops. Riyadh, truly, needs a war. So, the geo-political road for that war is being paved, and feminism and Cologne are just doing their part. People are raging against Islam. They are seething with contempt for the entire muslim world. They are ready for blood. Maybe, just maybe, they are ready for war. Perhaps that was the plan all along.
By now, many have seen the Iben Thranholm interview on Cologne posted on RT. It is a classic, in that it asks the question that has been on most lips: Where were the men?
Of course, ‘the men’, as we all know, were, as she says, too feminized to intervene. But isn’t this just the point of feminism? Empowerment? To let women have the power of men? Seems like men have acquired the attributes of women fairly well. Like helplessness. And skills like how to stand around in shock and stare while you dial the police who are standing a few yards away. So why haven’t the feminists taken on the mantle of power and the responsibility that comes with it? Certainly, this should have been their finest hour. A chance to show their effectiveness. What we got from the SJWs and Feminists in Cologne was failure. Has anyone asked why?
Another question to the feminists (male and female alike) and politically correct would be, “Are you seriously going to tell me you never thought something like this would happen?” To both questions, what you get is a sense that actually securing the society against enemies, and people who mean harm, is a skill the feminists haven’t practiced much. So quick to disarm cis gendered white hetero men, will they now take on the responsibility of defense and defend themselves… and how about defend us men?After all, we hear, women are fully capable of taking charge. So why didn’t they? In their delusion they got into bed with another delusional character, the state, who they not only thought they could control, but who they (get this) thought gave a damn about them. You couldn’t make it up.
They have no expertise in it… after all of the decades of feminism, they have no plan. Where is the sisterhood shouting “We’ll take care of this.”? It doesn’t exist. All those years of feminism, and in the heart of its operational theatre, left/liberal Cologne, they have nothing to defend themselves with. No plan for safety, resistance, anything. I guess they just thought they could always count on men.
Maybe the real question should be: Where were the women?