Ulster’s economic migrants

For some time, many of us who keep an eye on these issues thought that Northern Ireland, that is, Ulster, was spared from the mass immigration which has swamped the UK and many other Western countries. We thought wrong, as this article from the ethnonationalist blog Ulster Awake shows us. Ulster, it appears, is in the crosshairs too, and is being ‘enriched’ with diversity, mostly in the form of economic migrants.

Naturally this is hurting the native people of Ulster.

Why employ Brendan or Billy at £9 p/h when we can have Pablo or Gregori doing the same job for £6.95-£7.20 without moaning about overtime/nights or weekends as those much needed funds are needed back home, and with nine to a two up/two down terrace house their living expenses are to a bare minimum!”

It appears that some of the immigration is coming from Eastern Europe and Portugal. For those who are pan-Europeanists or WNs, the thinking is: “what’s the problem as long as they are White?”, after all Eastern Europeans and Portuguese are White (in the latter case, to varying degrees).

But would the people of Ulster agree with that viewpoint? I would say the real ethnonationalist favors his own people over others, and no ethnonationalist would agree with those who imply that all European peoples are basically interchangeable.

Given the false choice of deciding which immigrant group replaces you in your own homeland, how can it be less disastrous to be replaced by those of roughly similar complexion, as opposed to people of another race? Absurd. The real question should be not about who is the least objectionable replacement for your folk, but why that replacement and ethnic cleansing process is accepted at all?

Nor, as some say, is mass immigration acceptable as long as it’s not Moslems who are replacing the native people. It’s pretty cold comfort to be told ‘at least they aren’t Moslems‘, as you watch your neighborhood and country being transformed.

Each people is unique; cultures are not equal, because people — individual people and the various ethnic groups — are not equal.

We can only wish the Ulster folk the best; I believe and hope they have a strong enough sense of their identity and their roots to resist this forced change to their country.

 

 

Worth it?

The Anti-Gnostic posted a piece on the recent disturbing story about a teen-aged Hispanic girl who, having recently fallen into the company of MS-13 gang members, was murdered. No less than six juveniles and four adults appear to have been involved in the killing. All the names of the suspects are Hispanic, and it seems probable most were foreign-born. Whether they were illegal is irrelevant; they could just as easily be here legally, or some might be ‘anchor babies’, considered legal by some.

This story, though it’s the latest, is one of many, as MS-13 and its equivalents put down stakes all over this country — even in the small community where I live, which is not all that ”diverse and enriched” as yet. It’s sad for the families and sad for our country as we risk becoming inured to this process of assimilation towards Third World norms.

I just began wondering, though, suppose the liberals’ hoped-for scenario comes into being, and that we gradually become used to all this diversity, and we become a rainbow nation wherein we all ‘accept and celebrate our mutual differences.’ Granted, Whites will be a small minority amongst the rest, but what of it? Race is a social construct; we all bleed red, and this is a proposition nation, after all. The Salvadorean and other gang-bangers’ progeny will be just one more variety of Americans amongst the colorful mosaic. And on and on.

But a hundred years from now, will people shrug their shoulders and accept the presence of these violent gangs and their ways as just one small price to be paid for the rich pageant of ‘diversity’ — much as most Americans now think that the Mafia isn’t so bad; we’ve enjoyed lots of good movies, novels, and TV series about the Mafiosi (the Sopranos, the Godfather, etc.), and then there’s all the wonderful food and cultural enrichment. So the introduction into our country of the Black Hand Society, the Mafia, and in our day, the (((‘Russian mafia‘))) and so on are just part of the package. Really not so bad, if we keep a sense of perspective, right?

One appalling story after another of gang murders and various atrocities and it’s all old hat, yesterday’s news. We have a way of growing jaded and accepting of things which should never be thought of as acceptable. That’s probably what the powers-that-be are counting on.

 

Popular music and race

In a recent post I linked to Steve Sailer’s piece about the race card being played at the Grammy awards. The question was raised whether Whites should apologies for winning awards, with the implicit assumption being that the awards are ‘stolen’ from blacks, who are of course the rightful winners, or would be in a ‘colorblind’ society.

I’ve often pondered how it is that our popular music (and popular culture in general) is so dominated by blacks. Most people — even those who are somewhat racially aware — would defer to blacks by saying that blacks are just more talented at music, as they are supposedly in athletics. But the black ascendancy has black people accusing Whites of “cultural appropriation” when they emulate, even unconsciously, black styles.

Could we not say rightly that blacks have a kind of cultural hegemony in our society, in all Western societies, given their disproportionate numbers in entertainment and their pervasive influence on White performers and composers of music?

This is not a new thing. I came across an article in an old (dated 1927) article in an Argentine magazine, Cine-Mundial. The article was titled ‘Melanomania‘, a term that the writer, R. De Zayas Enriquez, apparently coined himself to describe the craze among White people for black entertainment. Maybe we should use that word; the ‘-mania’ suffix is apt, and it has become a more pronounced trend since the time that the article was written.

As we are in black history month, wherein many claims are made about blacks having invented just about everything, we are bound to hear that blacks invented, among other things, rock ‘n roll, a claim which is usually conceded by most Whites. Yet it could just as convincingly be argued that rock ‘n roll derives more from country music in the form of old-time string-band music, via what was called ‘rockabilly.’ Chuck Berry’s music shows more influence from White country/rockabilly than vice-versa. Does it matter who invented it? Rock ‘n roll is something I grew up with, as did most of us today, and I enjoy a lot of it, but it isn’t exactly our crowning cultural achievement. Still, the truth matters, and it does serve the cultural Marxist, anti-White agenda to claim that blacks are the source of all our popular musical genres, as does the writer of this following excerpt. The writer is Isaac Goldberg (are triple parentheses even necessary there?) in a book called Tin Pan Alley, from 1930. [NB: the language in the following is the author’s;  everyone was politically incorrect in 1930].

“Before the various types of jazz was the modern coon song; before the coon song was the minstrel show; before the minstrel show was the plantation melody and the spiritual. It is safe to say that without the Negro we should have had no Tin Pan Alley; or, if this sounds like exaggeration, certainly Tin Pan alley would have been a far less picturesque Melody Land than it is to-day.

Why has the coon song become so representative of our popular music? Why is it impossible to think of our street songs for long without encountering the influence — whether pseudo or real — of the black? Why, whether in the early days of the southland, or in the contemporary life of Gotham, is the rhythm, the lingo, the accent of the Negro so persistent?

The Negro is the symbol of our uninhibited expression, of our uninhibited action. He is our catharsis. He is the disguise behind which we may, for a releasing moment, rejoin that part of ourselves which we have sacrificed to civilization. He helps us to a double deliverance. What we dare not say, often we freely sing. Music, too, is an absolution. And what we would not dare to sing in our own plain speech we freely sing in the Negro dialect, or in terms of the black. The popular son, like an unseen Cyrano, provides love phrases for that speechless Christian, the Public. And the Negro, a black Cyrano, adds lust to passion.

Can this be one of the reasons why the American Anglo-Saxon has held aloof from the exploitation and particularly the creation of songs in the musical vernacular? Can it be only a coincidence that the three races who have contributed most to our popular song — the Negro, the Irish and the Jew — should be the familiar example of oppressed nationalities, credited with a fine intensity of inner life and with passions less bridled than those of the more conventional — not necessarily the more frigid — American Anglo-Saxon?”

We can see the politics showing through the writer’s statements involving ‘oppressed’ races, and his biases towards Anglo-Saxons.

I will explore this further in future posts, because it seems that the cultural revolution has been more insidious and more important than the gradualist political revolution.

 

 

Sudden jihad or ‘workplace violence?’

We already saw how the powers-that-be and their media arm spun the Fort Hood massacre by a Mohammedan as ‘workplace violence.’ Now they are already calling the latest incident, in Amarillo, Texas of all places, as more ‘workplace violence’ because the Somali Moslem shooter was an ex-employee of the Walmart where the incident happened.

Within a 76-minute period, shots rang out inside an Amarillo Walmart, a disgruntled employee took two hostages, panicked customers fled, an army of area law enforcement descended, the national news media covered and, ultimately, a gunman was left dead.

Amarillo police shot and killed 54-year-old Mohammad Moghaddam and rescued two hostages in just a little more than an hour. The incident paralyzed blocks along South Georgia Street and the Canyon E-Way for hours and had many in the city following the tense period through social media and other channels.”

And this same newspaper reporting this incident, about six months ago, was bemoaning the fact that blogs were stirring ‘controversy’ over the big surge in refugees being settled in Amarillo. The Mayor of Amarillo was insisting that the problem was the sheer number of refugees, not the fact that they were Moslem.

“It’s sad these groups are blaming (refugees for) some threat of an ISIS terrorist. That doesn’t translate at all to the situation in Amarillo. I would go anywhere with the refugees here,” Harpole said. “(The blogs) misquoted me about five times.”

Well, Mayor Harpole, I am not misquoting you, unless the quote I pasted above from the Amarillo Globe-News misquoted you. I doubt that they would do that, given that most public officials are liberal as are 99.9999 percent of the ‘newspapers’ in America. I am sure the Globe-News will faithfully report the party line carried by most politicians, namely: “Islam is a religion of peace. These are hardworking people looking for a better life. And this is a nation of immigrants.” Etc., etc., repeat as needed.

Leaving aside that risible cliche that ‘Islam is a religion of peace,’ it’s just a fact that Somalia is a violent place — one of the most violent on this planet. No, it is not America with its ”gun culture” that is the worst, as leftists ignorantly say. According to most reliable statistics, Somalia up there near the top.

According to this website Somalia is number one. This site lists Mogadishu, the Somali capital, as the third most dangerous city in the world.  There are plenty of other stats out there which verify this fact; I needn’t go on providing more of the same. Liberals and assorted ”conservative” pollyannas may make excuses such as ”but the violence is done by extremist groups, warlords, etc.; the Somalis are mostly innocent victims not perpetrators. We need to rescue them from their violent cultures.” But where does their violent culture come from? The people make the place. The culture is a product of the people, not the other way around, no matter what the ‘nurture over nature’ cult says.

And in this article we can read how America’s ‘magic dirt’ has transformed the Somalis once they are breathing America’s ‘magic free air.’ :

The decision taken in the early 1990s by the US’s former president, Bill Clinton, to import tens of thousands of backward Somalis into the American heartland of Minnesota has turned into an entirely predictable tale of crime, violence—and now, as demonstrated in the Nairobi, Kenya, shopping mall atrocity, terrorism.”

Since the above was written in 2013, I am sure that other examples could be added to the above list.

So Mayor Harpole and the many other elected officials like him are simply in massive denial about the habits and behaviors of Somalis, and about the nature of the so-called ‘religion of peace.’

Part of my upbringing was in a West Texas town not far from Amarillo. At that time, most of the panhandle and West Texas was populated by old-stock Texans, mostly ‘Anglos’, to use the Hispanic term, though there were Mexican migrant workers who actually did migrate back to Mexico when the crops were in. There was little ‘diversity’ in today’s sense, just the natural diversity of the various kinds of Anglo Texans.

Since I spoke of the Fort Hood shootings at the beginning of this piece, I remember one of the more shocking statements made afterward by one of the public figures, General Casey. He warned (as usual) of a possible ”backlash” by Americans:

General George Casey Jr., the Army chief of staff, said on Sunday that he was concerned that speculation about the religious beliefs of Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, accused of killing 12 fellow soldiers and one civilian and wounding dozens of others in a shooting rampage at Fort Hood, could “cause a backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers.”

“I’ve asked our Army leaders to be on the lookout for that,” General Casey said in an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union. “It would be a shame—as great a tragedy as this was—it would be a shame if our diversity became a casualty as well.

So General Casey, a military man whose job is allegedly to defend American citizens against foreign enemies (what else is a military for?) is being more protective of ‘Muslim  [sic] soldiers.’ What about American soldiers? American civilians, too, some of whom were murdered at Fort Hood? All Casey seemed to care about was his precious ‘diversity’. The potential damage to ‘diversity’ was more of a concern to him than the loss of American human beings, men, women, children, old, young — diversity is all that matters, right, General Casey? Mayor Harpole?

Heaven forbid ”Holy diversity” be damaged.

At least, thank the Lord, none of our folk were killed in this incident. But that was only by the grace of God, not through any efforts by American officials to protect their citizens and constituents. However, credit to the police who did what was necessary, and perhaps Texas is not yet as PC-paralyzed as many American states are. But the best cure is prevention. This situation was one of human making. Import large numbers of people from a violent country and you get — surprise, surprise — violence.

Elected officials? They are too busy protecting The Narrative, and Holy Diversity.

“It was workplace violence, Islam is a religion of peace, and diversity is our strength.”

Once again: diversity is not our strength. It is our greatest weakness, our greatest vulnerability in this day and time. It will be the end of us, either by slow demographic ‘swamping’, as we are blended beyond recognition, as our country becomes another Third World panmixia country like Brazil, or as we are slowly picked off by people like the Orlando shooter, the San Bernadino ‘Mr. and Mrs. Terrorists’, and all the rest of the vibrant enrichers, whose presence must be protected and defended at all costs. even at the cost of American lives. Diversity is all.

‘Suspects’ arrested in San Jose

Police in San Jose, California got around to doing their job of arresting some of the attackers who assaulted attendees at a Donald Trump rally. Better late than never, but better still if they had done their job as the attacks were in progress, rather than standing by as people were being brutalized by the riff-raff. Had they done so, then maybe there would not have been any crimes committed against innocent people.

Speaking of riff-raff, was there any doubt about the demographics of the ‘anti’s?

The suspects have been identified as Ahmed Abdirahman, 19 of Santa Clara; Robert Trillo, 18 of San Jose; Antonio Fernandez, 19 of San Jose; and Michael Kitaigorodsky, 19 of San Jose.[…]Abdirahman, Trillo, and Fernandez were arrested on felony charges of assault with a deadly weapon. Kitaigorodsky was arrested on a misdemeanor charge of failure to disperse.”

So, two of the attackers were Hispanic, probably Mexican, one a Somali (refugee? likely) and the last, Kitaigorodsky, (presumably the grinning idiot with blue-green hair) could be Russian? Ukrainian? Jewish? Another likely immigrant or son of immigrants. Emma Lazarus’s kind of people.

Really, this makes Trump’s point about immigration for him.

 

 

Anti-whites ‘fuel nationalism’

…Specifically White nationalism, which someone named David Marcus thinks is a bad thing, a uniquely undesirable form of nationalism. David Marcus says Whites must not tribalize, like every other group of people on the planet do; we must look at others only as individuals, not as members of a group.

I guess that is to be expected coming from someone named David Marcus; there is a definite pattern of Jews discouraging ethnocentrism or ethnopatriotism on the part of White ‘gentiles’, especially Christians, while claiming the right for their own people to be the most ethnocentric and nepotistic people on planet Earth.

As some of you reading this know to be true, I was a latecomer to acknowledging the Jewish role in what is happening to White countries. Maybe I was just unwilling to touch such a radioactive subject, seeing how anyone who criticizes or even notices patterns among Jews is slapped down as an ”anti-Semite” who is thereby discredited.

But at a certain point I could not avoid noticing the part played by Jews in promoting multiculturalism, and cultural Marxism in all its forms, as well as opposing the influence of Christianity in our society. And it is obvious that Jews have, because of the victim culture, been placed above scrutiny heretofore — which is the ultimate form of political correctness.

The Jewish question aside, it is indefensible to deny Whites the simple right to secure and promote their own ethnic/genetic interests, especially in a world in which everyone else asserts their own tribal/ethnic/racial/religious identities, often in the most militant and aggressive ways. And yet we, and we alone, are carefully monitored and censured if we dare to think of ourselves as a discrete group with ethnic interests of our own, or heaven forbid, to assert our identity.

And it is hardly possible for anyone to deny that the percentage of Whites is fast diminishing in this upside-down world in which the most backward countries are seeing their populations explode, hence the spillover into Europe and North America as well as Australia and New Zealand. Wherever White people live, their relative numbers are shrinking in proportion to the population of the undeveloped nations. White people are a small minority of the total world population, and getting smaller. Yet paradoxically only Whites have been hectored about limiting family size or foregoing having children at all. Mother Earth can’t support more people — at least White people, apparently.

We are under an existential threat. And yet we are being told to think of ourselves only as isolated individuals with no kinship ties, cultural heritage, or history. We are just two-legged, tool-using mammals and that’s all the identity we need.

I would love to see this Marcus write the same piece addressed to the people of Israel and see how well it sells there. Or the diaspora Jewish community; are they willing to give up their group identity in favor of being ‘just individuals’?

And let’s not single out Jews; blacks are extremely ethnocentric. Think of the O.J. Simpson verdict; blacks cheered the verdict because one of their ‘own’ was getting off Scot-free, and they thought that was ‘justice.’ Blacks see everything through the prism of their race. Mexicans are nationalistic/ethnocentric to an extreme degree also; let’s see Mr. Marcus preach ‘individualism’ to Latinos, and warn against the extremists in La Raza or MeCha or any other nationalistic extremist organization.

This passe libertarian idea of ‘just individuals’ is inimical to our survival in today’s tribalistic world. Why should we alone be expected to give up our identity (which we have always had; it is not artificially created) and make ourselves vulnerable to the multitude of aggressive ethnic groups who have been introduced without our consent into our national home, our living space?

Mr. Marcus, like many of the deracinated ”right”, tries to make ”nationalism” a dirty word. “White” nationalism is a doubly-dirty term in the minds of such people because to them Whites are congenitally guilty of something. These same people use terms like ‘White nationalism’ promiscuously and inaccurately. They also conflate WNism with ‘Supremacy’, and that is dishonest or ignorant. Scarcely anyone wants ‘supremacy’ in the sense of ruling over other races. We simply want what all peoples have wanted: a place to be ourselves, amongst our own, in a land that is our homeland, our secure place. And the evil ”14 words” are about nothing more than the right to live unmolested amongst our own ethnic kin, the right to live and to ensure a future for our children, our progeny.

That is, after all, what brought our forefathers to this country. And when they established an independent nation here, they said explicitly that it was for themselves and their progeny. Not for the whole world, and most certainly not for those who were openly hostile or incompatible with this nation’s people, or for anyone who openly worked against the interests of the people of this nation.

Below the title of this blog, you will see the words ‘Ourselves and our posterity.’

From the beginning, this country was about securing the existence of our people and a future for their/our children.

Where is the evil in that? And why should we willingly renounce that?

1990 and today

1990 seems like ages ago, mostly because this country and the world have changed so drastically — ‘thanks’ to the progressive juggernaut and the third-world invasion.

But one thing that has not changed as much as some would like us to believe is the worldview of Donald Trump. Matt Bailey, via The Ex-Army – Libertarian Nationalist blog offers excerpts from an interview with Trump in that long-ago year.

‘We Americans are laughed at around the world for losing a hundred and
fifty billion dollars year after year, for defending wealthy nations
for nothing, nations that would be wiped off the face of the earth in
about fifteen minutes if it weren’t for us. Our “allies” are making
billions screwing us.”

Read the whole thing at the link.

Those opposed to Trump constantly repeat that he is ‘a phony’ or that he has reversed himself on most things over the years and is therefore not to be trusted. Or they say he is a ‘liberal’ — as if any liberal these days would propose a border wall, or curtailing Moslem immigration specifically.  As if any liberal (or even most “conservatives” in the 21st century) would speak of questioning globalism.

His enemies say Trump used to be a Democrat, therefore he must be, at core, a liberal or an impostor, because as we know nobody has ever changed their views during their adult lives, or ever changed parties or ‘sides.’

As the blog post points out, that great hero of the respectable Republicans, Ronald Reagan, was a Democrat in his younger days — he famously said that he did not leave the Democrats as much as the Democrats left him. And the Democrats have actually left quite a few people behind as they have moved more and more leftward over the last several decades. Imagine: there once were patriotic Democrats, ‘race-realist’ Democrats, ‘hawkish’ Democrats, populist Democrats.

Now we are in the process of seeing the Republicans ‘leave’ many of us behind as they trail after the Democrat-progressives, like the pale shadows of the Democrats that they are.  Hunter Wallace writes about the Democrats ‘reaching out’ to their potential soul-mates on the GOP side.

But given the social and political upheavals of the last few decades it would not be surprising if the political scene is re-aligned, along the lines of globalist vs. nationalist as some have been saying for a while now. Or elitist vs. populist.

Trump’s supposed inconsistencies over the years have been exaggerated by his enemies. And it would seem that any thinking person should be able to have a change of heart and mind in response to the rapidly-changing conditions in the world. What was good for this country 50 years ago is no longer so; only the most foolish people refuse to learn and refuse to change course, especially when about to careen over a cliff.

Another mention of our English origins

I can hardly believe it: there’s yet another blog post which mentions the English origins of America. There have been a few such blog pieces in recent weeks from alt-right bloggers.

That’s the good news: there is renewed discussion of American identity and the loss of cohesion, but the bad news is: the comments. The comments are a depressing lot: please go over and read the piece and the accompanying comments. They are a mix of the usual canards and outright falsehoods mixed with some backhanded quasi-slurs against Anglo-Americans. Examples: the descendants of the English founding stock are ‘elites’ who subverted America, in collusion with you-know-who. This canard is repeated often on alt-right blogs and rarely, if ever, challenged. Another frequently heard comment: ‘there are no [pure] English people’ or ‘the English people are a mixture of peoples anyway, so, what’s the big deal if they are lost in the genetic blender?‘ Just for some perspective, the native indigenous English people in England are being brainwashed with the same falsehoods, and are told that ‘Britain has always been a multicultural multiracial nation’, because The Angles, and The Saxons, and the Danes, and the Vikings and The Normans — never mind that all these people are kindred peoples. Why does most of the world seem not to comprehend that basic fact?

I don’t have time to write a full response but I will do so later — though it seems futile to even try; as I’m just one person writing in obscurity here.

 

 

Is this the future?

I was speculating to myself the other day that this practice might one day be mandatory, or at least natural reproduction with someone like ourselves will be a “hate crime.”

I’m actually surprised that this is the first such story, at least in my experience, of this kind of politically correct self-immolation.

Somebody will no doubt think I am being heartless or unkind with this opinion, but the fact is, for all these centuries, millennia, of human history, this kind of thing is something new under the sun, and would have been viewed with shock by most human beings up until our present enlightened age.

Kind after kind. Like calls to like. It’s a law of nature. I didn’t declare it so; nature did, or God, if, like me, you believe in God. So if someone thinks me unkind for criticizing this, their quarrel is with God, ultimately. So it makes it a bit problematic for these people who profess Christianity. They are young; they probably grew up sitting under the teaching of the modern-day wolves-in-sheep’s-clothing “ministers”, thus getting second-hand cultural Marxism from their supposed shepherds. Or maybe they get their cultural Marxism first-hand via the media, and the schools.

This kind of thing is not yet known in my little town, but we have droves of people having garage sales to raise funds for their ‘adoption trip’ to Africa or Haiti. It’s not an uncommon sight to see people (most of them nominally Christian) in our town, parents with obvious children of their own, who look like them, also pushing sn obviously adopted baby in a carriage.

One day, it’s almost certain, given the state of racial tension and animus in our society, that these children will be alienated, angry adolescents and adults with identity conflicts, people who may well turn against their parents and ‘siblings.’ To believe otherwise is to believe in fairy-tales. Exceptions may exist but exceptions by definition are rare.

The fact that these two people (like other such indoctrinated people) chose not only to adopt but to conceive a child not of their own genetic kin shows that far from being “colorblind”, which would imply willingness to accept a child of their own kind as well as others, they deliberately excluded the possibility of having a White child.

As I write this, there are also ‘gay’ couples paying women in India or elsewhere in Asia to bear children for them. In some cases these children are fathered by the usually White gay males but even then, the child is in the “Other” category. And there is something much more personal about conceiving, carrying, and giving birth to a child with little or no genetic kinship to yourself. And that is the case with a partner of another race; one need only to look at a genetic map to see how distant Europeans are from other races. The differences mean something; it is far more than skin color or pigment cells. Far more.

And then there is that thing known as telegony. The followers of scientism, or the hard-nosed skeptics, deny the validity of the idea but it’s looking more possible, with new research. Those who are familar with livestock breeding know the idea, though even some of them deny it. But I’m inclined to believe it. It’s certainly something to think about in connection with promiscuous reproduction, both intra-racially and inter-racially. Maybe there are reasons why our Creator condemns promiscuity and adultery; one becomes ‘one’, DNA-wise, with those one mates or reproduces with.

Adultery, thus, takes on a new meaning.

And from a Christian point of view, artificial insemination is a kind of adultery, isn’t it? Doubly so in this case, as it violates the ‘kind after kind’ precept.

But that doesn’t bother most of today’s Christians or Churchians, for whom Thou Shalt Be Politically Correct is the first and only commandment.

Meantime I am expecting that this kind of thing may one day be compulsory, if today’s rush to madness continues.

The upside-down world

Bruce Charlton is right, here, when he says we are “living in the most bizarre and insane world  — ever.

It’s not news to most of us; for some years I’ve called our present world upside-down, as all the old verities and simple common-sense wisdom have been thrown out the window in exchange for the previously-unthinkable ideas such as ”transsexualism”, females in combat, ”males” giving birth, and of course the attempted obliteration of ethnic and racial categories.

Have any of you ever heard of ”otherkins“? Did you know there is an “otherkin community”? I didn’t know until very recently. As insane as it sounds, someone claiming to be ‘really’ nonhuman or even an inanimate object, is not much weirder than a man claiming he is really a woman in a man’s body. Or vice-versa.

Then there are the trans-racialists who claim to have been born as the wrong race. But I thought race didn’t exist. I suppose eventually some helpful ‘doctor’ like those who claim to transmute men into women or women to men will come up with a procedure to make people another race or ethnicity — just by changing their external appearance. Just as with ‘sex change’ surgery. It’s all make-believe but most of the world now accepts it or at least  tolerates all this pretense and lying.

Bruce Charlton notes that for those of the younger generations, it’s hard to grasp just how insane and bizarre our world has become because they’ve never known any other kind of world. They’ve been taught that the images of a more sane and wholesome past are just lies and propaganda. Look at pictures of mid-20th century ‘happy housewives’; the young have been conditioned to believe that it was all a sinister false front. And as Charlton says, unless one reads old books, or even watches old movies, there is no conception that life was much different and much more coherent and benign in days before this Age of Lies.

It may be near impossible to un-condition the young. Even their parents, who in most cases are old enough to remember a much better and less turbulent world, have been affected by the propaganda and have come to believe that the old, normal world, in which some kind  of time-honored standards still existed, was very flawed and needed to be replaced. But how can anyone with a memory believe that the ‘revised and improved’ reality is preferable?

“The casual assumption , possible because of such gross ignorance and disdain for the past and other societies, is that we, here, now have got things right and at last understand what it is to be human (neither a man nor a woman, for starters!)  – while everybody at every other time and place were being crudely hoodwinked.”

Most egregious are the Christians who, having adopted political correctness in preference to Biblical ethics, obviously believe that every previous generation of Christians got it wrong; we, in our chaotic age, are the epitome of enlightenment; we are the first and only generation of Christians to rightly understand the Bible. What arrogance! By thinking this way, they are in effect condemning their parents, grandparents, and virtually all past Christians because those Christians were not Zionists, Babelists or universalists. How do these Christians reconcile their disrespect for their forefathers with the commandment to ”honor thy father and thy mother?”

Sadly, many people on the ”right” believe, along with the Left, that the past generations got it wrong and that if we had been alive then, we’d have created a far superior world. These people on both ends of the spectrum would prefer that the past be completely obliterated and its memory banished so that we can start from scratch and re-invent the proverbial wheel. This is foolishness regardless of whether it comes from the Left or the ”right.”

Ethnopatriotism or ethnonationalism should mean keeping faith with all our folk, including the generations who went before us, those to whom we owe our very existence. It should mean keeping faith with the past, and preserving what is and was best about it. The present, and all its associations, have the odor of leftist nihilism, and I always hope that one day “this present darkness” will be gone, and will  seem to us like a bad dream.