Othering

Othering

The ‘Other’ was coined as a philosophical concept by GFW Hegel some two centuries ago as a counterpoint to the Self. 

In modern sociological and feminist discourse it has become a weaponised term.  It is not, as someone once suggested to me, a typo of 'Mothering'!

Society is built of in-groups who have normative values and behaviours.  This is the way that humans have evolved.  We might see it in early nomadic ice age tribes, or in the guild structures of mediaeval towns.  Ethnic groups have clustered together, just as those of similar trade or economic standing have always done, or children, women and men.

Modern feminist debate often centres around demonising what they describe as ‘Othering’.  To ‘Other’ someone is to see them as ‘Other’ to your social group.  This is considered very bad by feminists.  Since the current moral imperative is to be ‘inclusive’ and as ‘We Are All One’ we must not perceive anyone as ‘Other’ to ourselves, even if they are a stranger. 

As was recognised by Hegel, ‘Otherness’ is a logically necessary concept in describing the world if we are not to resort to solipsism, and yet modern thought seeks to collapse the distinction between Inner and Outer, whether that be psychologically Inner and Outer, or materially.

I have been somewhat incredulous at the ludicrous extent to which this is politicised and used as an attempted weapon of social control.  This amusing little website claims that ‘There are no others’.  None at all.  While it is admitted that ‘there’s a powerful evolutionary drive to identify in some way with a tribe of people who are “like you” ’ it nonetheless argues that this leads to an ‘insidious’ inclination to ‘other’ people.

https://therearenoothers.wordpress.com/2011/12/28/othering-101-what-is-othering/

Really all it is saying is that the writer doesn’t like the fact that the creation of in-groups as an evolutionary strategy exists.  This seems to be based on some kind of assumption that we have moved beyond the need for such survival strategies.  Feminism sees any group which has achieved ‘hegemonic’ stature as essentially ‘oppressive’, despite the fact that these kind of cultures provide stable milieus for complex societies.

This seems to me to be either a catastrophically naïve error or a purposefully intended attempt to undermine what must be a basic survival instinct.  Stay with those who are like yourself.  They share your genes and your culture.  If you stick together you have a better chance of survival.  Allowing strangers into your midst engages unnecessary risk.  The ‘Other’ may in time become friend, but it needs to earn that trust, that friendship.  The feminist wants you to give that trust without it having been earned, and if you don’t you are a bad person.

I imagine my reader will by now have surmised that there is a connection here with the psychology of the migrant invasion in Europe, November 2015.  The feminist sees the traditional protection of territory as ‘Othering’ the outsider, despite the fact that limited resources are a very important factor here.  Since in that ideology ‘There is no Other’ everyone is part of our own Global, Universal Tribe in the Global Village.

And yet simple game theory will inform us that unless the incomer respects the values of the group that it is accepted into, the system will collapse. 

This is a classic Cultural Marxist move in which reality is inverted and the truth turned upside down.  In the long established way of the world, life and evolution, creatures established their territories.  The dominant members of these tribes and clans would be responsible for defending them from ‘Others’;  but now, the alpha males who previously were responsible for maintaining the boundaries and protecting their people are now made to be the enemy, and the enemies who would invade are encouraged to do so and celebrated for it.

What we see taking place with various people in the aftermath of the Paris Bataclan massacre who are urging us to take more refugees to show our compassion is a pathological expression of this refusal to recognise the ‘Other’, or to see beyond the immediate situation at the larger consequences of endless mixing with it.  The Muslims all know that we are each Other to the Other, but too many Europeans delude themselves that this is not so, that ‘There is no other’.  That to ‘Other’ someone is to dehumanise them.

And so the Liberal European population has been brainwashed into laying down their arms, into refusing to stand up for themselves because we have to ‘treat others as ourselves’.  Everyone?  Does that mean we have to give them all our stuff?  House and feed them?  Let them destroy our civilisation?  One refugee, fine.  A million?  You have to think again.  Probably half the population of the world would like to get into Europe and get a Social Security cheque.  We have to defend against this.  It is not evil to seek to survive in the face of millions who would seek to exploit your civilisation. 

This is about boundaries.  One of the most important factors in human development is the establishment of personal boundaries.  To have a sense of responsibility for oneself and not to over rely or intrude on another.  Systems Theory tells us that we need cell walls, osmotic membranes that protect, select and filter what is permitted to come into the cell.  This is interface between Self and Other.  Where the Known meets the Unknown.

It is also about the poor countries who are losing their most energetic young people to a grandiose and false dream of seeking their fortune in the golden paved streets of Europe.  The Pied Piper of Mr Soros is enticing them all away form their own countries to destroy others.  Villages in West Africa have collapsing economies because all the young men are taking ‘the back way’ across the Maghreb to come to Europe and get rich.  There are downsides for others than ourselves.

We are going to see an interesting process in the coming weeks following the Friday 13^th massacre.  The politicians, liberals and general leftists are going to insist that we keep taking more migrants, insisting that we ‘shouldn’t give in to fear’ and that turning migrants away would in some way be ‘giving terrorists what they want’.  And yet we have already seen borders being closed.  Sweden had already, incredibly, closed its border before the atrocity, simply on the basis of there being too many causing a ‘threat to public order’.

A large number of State Governors in the USA have declared they will not be taking Syrian ‘refugees’ following the atrocities, and France has closed its borders.  This is clearly a chaos situation which is not going to improve unless measures are taken to prevent further deterioration of the situation.  It will doubtless continue to slide for a while as the EU leaders prevaricate.  Meanwhile the resolve of the European peoples is rising.  It is quite clear that the Videgrad 4 ~ Poland, Czech/Slovakia and Hungary are taking a firm stand and that is important for Europe as a whole.  These countries, and others in the East, still have ancestral memories of the Ottoman Empire and its depredations over hundreds of years.

They know that all civilisations periodically face the ‘Other’, and that it is in this that they are tested.  A nation, people or civilisation who are unable to distinguish what is ‘Other’ has lost its sense of Self, of Identity, and is vulnerable to being taken by the ‘Other’ as New Orleans was to being flooded by the sea when the levees broke.

Defence against the ‘Other’ is what all civilisation has ever been about, it is the ancient myth of Osiris keeping back the chaos of Set and the desert.  A civilisation or nation that opens its arms to the ‘Other’ has lost the will to live and submits to its own demise. 

The war for the soul of Europe has now begun.  We must find our Self, and repel the Other.  The alternative is for Europe, the jewel of civilisation, to sink into an endless night of oblivion, as chaos rushes in and its light is extinguished.

Equality

 Equality

Equality, a concept which has been working on the Western psyche for some two or three centuries, has now, having infiltrated itself into our very bones, become weaponised against us in our every thought, word and deed.

Who can argue against Equality?  Who can gainsay such a noble aspiration, seeking as it does to recognise the Divine Soul within all Humanity?

But how shall we apply it?  Shall all tall people be made equal with the short?  How shall it be applied between those of different abilities or accomplishments?  And of course how should it be applied between different cultures an value systems?

Equality before the law, and equality of opportunity are simple, because they can actually be observed and controlled to the degree of quality and quantity of their realisation.

But beyond here, as they say, lies nothing.

I am not the equal of Michelangelo, Proust or Elizabeth I.  In the realm of human endeavour there is infinite diversity of accomplishment.  An infinite variety of aptitudes and inclinations, unique in every individual.  And yet in many areas of life the Equality agenda is being enforced.  Achievement is not rewarded so as not to hurt the feelings of those who have not achieved.  Everyone has to feel good whether they have done anything worth feeling good about or not.  Gay ‘families’ which cannot produce children are considered equal to old fashioned heterosexual ones that serve to deliver the next generation of our people.

(I shall address the matter of male/female equality in a separate piece, but for now let me address that of cultural equality.)

This is also being applied to the populations of European countries as a whole, who are being told repeatedly that they are no different from the muslim hordes who are consolidating their position here in Europe.

The definition of Equality, has slid towards first ‘the same’ and now ‘complete interchangeability’, which removes the value of the individual and their uniqueness.  Thus true diversity is attacked and blended out.

This is a background mindset which has been used to justify the importation of a foreign demographic.

In most countries throughout the world, you only have citizenship if it is your ancestral home, so you have it by right.  Migrant workers and businessmen have visas for the length of time they need for their work and then leave.  In Syria for instance, I have just heard it said by a guest on R314, even when someone from abroad marries a Syrian, it is only the children who have full citizenship.

It is, or used to be, accepted conventional wisdom that a country’s population benefited from and inherited the fruits of their forebears, and hopefully prospered so that their posterity could build on this further and so on down the generations.  The idea of large numbers of non related population groups entering that society and staying there permanently would have seemed ludicrous and alien to that nation.  From a psychological point of view, there is a complete difference between how an indigenous people regard a country’s heritage, and incomers.

Absorbing literally millions of outsiders of an historically oppositional culture and thinking of them as ‘Equal’ is pushing the limits of my conceptual abilities.

We are bound by this notion that ‘all souls’ are equal. 

Perhaps in the sight of God, but here on Earth us mortals have to deal with inconvenient practical issues such as law and order and distinguishing between genuine cases of need and jihadist infiltrators.

And we hear ludicrous arguments such as ‘It’s only an accident of birth that you are European, we have as much right to be there as you.’  I don’t where to start with nonsense such as this.  It seems to propose a kind of universe where anyone can and is anything without any history, experience, or qualification.  There is no continuity, no thread connecting the meaning and purpose of your life.  ‘Abdullah had a dream of living in Europe’.  As if abandoning your ancestral people and claiming a place amongst another people to whom you have no connection were a perfectly normal thing to do.  The Cultural Marxists don’t recognise family, kin or tribe.  Hey, we’re all human, we all bleed, right?  What’s yours is mine, okay? 

We have met the enemy, and believe me, they are not us.

There are entirely different civilisational streams going on here.  To suggest that they could be equal is not only wrong, but dangerous.  And they are definitely not the same.  The culturally Marxist eroded values of the West imagine that their values of pathological altruism will be reciprocate by the new arrivals.  That they just need to be hugged and given a good job.  It is beyond the understanding of many that the ideology under which they have often spent their entire lives entails the premise that everyone else who is not part of islam must be subjected to it or die.  Predators and enemies exist, and are not just our own paranoid projections that we need to get over.  You cannot convert an enemy who is determined to be resistant to your compassion.  He will only despise your weakness.

It is not a happy time when the pathological altruist meets the jihadist, or even just a simple muslim women in a sack.  The liberal is unable to understand that these people are foundationally opposed to our way of life.  To them, ‘Equality’ is submission on your knees to their vile dogma.

I shall have to post a piece specifically dealing with that subject soon, but for now I shall contain myself to the opposite natures of islam and our own dying continental religion, Christianity.  Clearly they are not equal.  One forgives, and one conquers.  One is softness and charity, the other sternness and steel.  ‘Strike off the fingertips of the Unbeliever’ (Surah 8:12)

They could have been deliberately crafted as natural opposites, and there are those that believe they were.

The thing is, that in Nature, there is very little Equality.  Or at least of the sort that Leftists desire.  Although there is one type of Equality that is fundamental to the physical existence of the universe, and that is the Law of Entropy.  Heat tends to move from areas of greater intensity to those of lesser, thereby equalling its distribution.  This will one day result in the heat death of the universe it is thought.

However, there is in the world a force which, while it does not entirely negate the effects of entropy, nonetheless does work against it, and this is the force we know as life.

It is argued that since life involves drawing energy in and concentrating it in forms and structures within the organism, its existence cannot be accounted for by purely mechanical laws.

The bit I really like is that the concentration of energy through extraction and refinement is exactly what Alchemy was all about, in both the spiritual as well as the material realms.  The extraction and development of Essence.

The Prima Materia of raw matter, or the inexperienced or ignorant person must go through the refining and improvement process, as in smelting of metal from ore and working it with hammers.

Passage through rites which lead to progression on one’s soul path advances one in wisdom and in worth.  The coward who flees the battle and is hunted down after the battle like a dog is of less worth than the peasant who faces his death at the hands of the barbarian with a pitchfork in hand when the reavers come for him and his family.

There are qualities that are better, and there are those that are worse.

And so it is with peoples and their cultures.  Europe has distilled perceptions and ideas through the primacy of Reason and won a balance of freedom of expression with good manners and tolerance.  Within the parameters created by what was loosely known as Christendom.  I don’t consider myself a Christian any more, but for a thousand years or more it was the basis of a coherent civilisation.  So long as it was able to see itself as the guardian of special value not found elsewhere in the world, and protect that, it was a viable morphic field.

But over the generations during my own lifetime this has been lost.  The European civilisation which was to abolish slavery within its jurisdiction, possibly the greatest collective moral achievement of the entire history of the human race, has somehow lost its confidence to the degree where we are now incredibly blamed for all the ills of the world, rather than thanked and appreciated for all that we have done as a family of peoples and civilisation.

The weaponised use of the concept of Equality has led to the total infiltration of European civilisation, a demographic time bomb which will cause immense problems in the future.  Ecological models of introduced species to islands such as Australia or Britain demonstrate how damaging to the ecosystem these can be.  Human communities are no different.  We should remember the Red Squirrel.

There is much discussion of how this serves the global corporations with cheap labour and so forth, but the greater goal is clearly to destroy the European civilisation and its peoples for it is they who have the potential to subvert and remove the global elites.  Without their obsession with ‘standards’ and ‘ethics’ we would have Bhopals every week in the developing world.

‘Equality’ in the manner of the Cultural Marxists is nothing else than the attempted radical disempowerment of the whole of the human race.  It seeks to remove us from our roots and homogenise us into one global McDonalds culture.

Europe has become like a soft fruit, ripe and juicy to be plucked, sweet to the taste.  But I think there is a hard stone at the centre on which the teeth of the invader will break.

‘The stone which was rejected has become the foundation block’.  That stone is both the essence and the seed of a new generation which will grow again.

The Islamic Colonisation of Europe

The Islamic Colonisation of Europe

I just want to post a short blog here about something that is so obvious I am disgusted it is not being addressed by the mainstream media.

Unfortunately this seems to be running as one of those 'Secrets in Plain Sight' that the elites seem to like trying to get past us.  The thing is, when people's survival is at risk, deep alarm bells start going on inside their heads that make them question the conventional view of things that got them into that position in the first place.

I’ll just run through a few facts.

A flood of immigrants has been trying to enter Europe this year, the dominant number seeking to reach northern Europe.  These come from diverse groups, economic migrants, refugees and terrorists intermingled.

Chancellor Angela Merkel has taken the decision to open her country to 800,000 thousand of these migrants.  Estimates for the total expected number of migrants this year have been running at somewhere between around 500,000, so Chancellor Merkel is offering over and above what was even expected in numbers, for the whole of Europe.

This has led to an increase in the number of migrants setting off from Syria and Turkey and a new wave are now reported to be on their way.  Doubtless we can expect harrowing scenes of people trudging through the snow when the winter comes.

The vast majority of these migrants are clearly to be seen to be young men in all the videos I have seen.  While the media likes to pick juicy images of people with distressed expressions holding children to dangle before us on our screens, we should remember that only small numbers seem to fit this profile while the rest are young men.  Largely between the ages of 18 and 45 by the look of many of them, which happens to be the age of military service in most parts of the world. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LD2BGT26qI

And while there are apparently small numbers of Christians in the swarm, it cannot be argued but that the migration is primarily of people belonging to the Islamic belief.  Indeed tales abound of Christians being thrown overboard from the crowded and unseaworthy vessels in which they seek to cross to Europe.

The wealthy Arab oil states have taken none of these refugee/migrants and pictures have been seen of thousands of unused air conditioned tents in Saudi Arabia, on the excuse that they would be a security risk.

Then we have what, for me, is the clincher.  While the migrants are considered a ‘security risk’ in the Gulf, apparently they are to be encouraged in Europe, and the Saudis have offered to build hundreds of new mosques for the new arrivals in Germany.

But events have got ahead of me.  I have just seen the Sky News report

http://news.sky.com/story/1551853/sky-finds-handbook-for-eu-bound-migrants

that advice booklets are being produced and circulated to migrants by a group known as W2eu   

http://lesvos.w2eu.net/2015/06/10/10-06-15w2eu-announcement-concerning-the-defamation-of-the-welcome-to-europe-info-flyer/

It would appear that ‘Welcome To Europe’ is a group which exists in a murky state of apparent legality because it is ‘only giving advice’ and ‘they will travel anyway’.  And so of course doubtless what they are doing slips through the cracks as such activities are doubtless intended to do when bodies such as the UN and the EU draft their laws and regulations on how to deal with situations that occur in the world.  I have just heard that they are a Soros backed group.  Well I never.

http://investmentwatchblog.com/sky-news-finds-soros-open-society-org-handbook-for-new-euro-immigrants-being-given-to-muzzie-invaders/

But they make claims that are misleading.  ‘Freedom of movement is everybodies [sic] right!’

And so they expose themselves as part of the Open Borders, or rather ‘No Borders’ movement, which cannot be identified as other than International Communism.

This ‘Freedom of Movement’ meme is an assumption which has no limits.  Freedom to move where?  Have you the freedom to move in my house?  Do I have the same in yours?  Should enemies and criminals have the freedom to move in territories under our jurisdiction? 

And what about settlement?  Freedom of movement is one thing if it is as a tourist, a businessperson, a pilgrim.  But to settle?  Do a people from one land have the right to settle in lands where another group have had ancestral control of the territory for hundreds or even thousands of years?  Can I go and settle in an American Indian reservation please?  I like their customs and think it seems very romantic.  They may not like it, but hey, it’s my human rights to enjoy freedom of movement, right?

Oh, but they are a protected category, so they are safe.  Meanwhile, for some reason I haven’t been able to understand, Europe is the new land of opportunity for those who want to ‘build a new life’ despite it already being occupied by indigenous peoples for thousands of years.

Briefly, I dare say that this did start with a trickle of genuine refugees, but they will have found somewhere nearer to the start of their journey.  They have, since, clearly been outnumbered and replaced by the tens of thousands of young men of the age for military service.

Obviously word started getting round that Europe was not resisting, that people would be accepted if they could only get there and so the whole social movement of economic migrants got under way into which the jihadis and criminals could infiltrate themselves.  So now we have a conglomerate of some real refugees, a whole bunch of economic migrants who are mostly simply ruthless opportunists, and an unknown percentage of very dangerous muslim sleeper agents, criminals and general terrorists of unknown ilk. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lm2B7_dOPH8

I was particularly interested in the analysis that Millennial Woes did of a video of migrants arriving in Germany, from the BBC, pointing out the body language and cues from members of the throng which did not seem congruent with what one might expect from refugees.  Drop into the following video from just about 37 minutes in and hear what MW has to say about it a chap smoking a cigarette and looking at his i-phone who glances with at best disinterest at the bunch of lefties cheering his arrival.

This is an excellent in depth video analysis of the whole situation which I can thoroughly recommend if you are just getting into realising how phenomenally serious this whole issue is.

We hear how these people want to ‘build a new life in Europe’.  That they are having babies while here.  Do we ever hear about how they long to return home when the war is over? 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnE3cFEehxg

At about 4.45 in this video we hear how a young couple have been in Berlin for a year and are expecting their second child.  So they conceived their second child whilst in Germany.

This is not a temporary stop over of genuine refugees, this is a full on colonisation force.  If you haven’t seen the demographic projections for Britain and Europe for the next two or three decades, then you need to.  The mob is arriving.

Merkel’s opening of the German borders to what amounts all comers was the starting gun for a last surge before winter.  And now she has shut them after a week.  Is this a bluff and a bargaining tactic, as some are saying, to guilt trip other European nations to do as she did?  Is it now not abundantly clear that to follow would be to invite a tsunami of humanity that would not cease.  Europe would be overrun, looted and burnt while the elites retreated behind their military, abandoning the indigenous inhabitants to the mercies of Allah.

It is a moment of pause.  Europe is at the crossroads.

Hungary is holding the line in the face of abuse and hostility from those who would sacrifice us to the horde.  Predictions of a ‘tsunamigration’ of tens of millions, uncounted numbers who would overrun us like in Jean Raspail’s ‘Camp of the Saints’, the 1973 novel which predicted pretty much this, a Europe inundated with the poor of the Third World, paralysed with indecision and unable to defend itself. 

And now apparently the Archbishop of Canterbury has invited a refugee family to stay at Lambeth Palace.  Stunts of this nature only make things worse.  They signal to the world that we will not resist, that we want to be invaded, that we are submitting.

Two principle ideologies are facing off.  International Communism vs. Freedom.  Islam is the modern incarnation of Communism, both have been responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths.

What is presently taking place is a psychological subversion of our mindset.  We have been tricked into acting on empathy alone and into abandoning reason.  I know too many good people who are more worried about being seen to be illiberal than they are about the future of our country, their country.  If you ask someone what they would feel about being the last European on their street, or their child being the last European child in their class, or even, simply, ‘How many should we take?’ too many are unable to even think about what is being asked.  But just look at the birthrates and the demographic projections.  Allowing in uncounted and undocumented millions from a religion that has spent the last fourteen hundred years trying to conquer Europe cannot be a scenario that ends well for Europeans.

One can only pray to whatever gods one honours that the survival response of our peoples will arise and sweep away the cowardice of those who have submitted to the invader without even resisting. 

 Things like this give me hope

Published on 10 Sep 2015

"Traitor, traitor!" „Zdrajczyni, zdrajczyni!" The German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, was booed by the natives of the German city Heidenau, where she visited a camp for immigrants located in the city.
 

I have heard tales that in mosques they prepare for ‘when the time comes’.  And what would that ‘time’ be?  One has to  say that that time is when we must face reality, and if not yet now, is nonetheless, near, and we should soberly recognise that fact.

 

 

The Existential Crisis of Europe

The Existential Crisis of Europe

I’ve been trying to get started on this blog for some while now, but it’s been hard to know exactly how to get a purchase on it.  The main problem is that the mindset of most British people has been so corrupted that if you so much as mention the word ‘immigration’ you will instantly be branded ‘xenophobic’.  Or if you suggest that picking up Africans floating a few miles off Libya and ferrying them to the European mainland where they will be housed and fed might not be the most sensible thing to do, you are clearly a racist who wants to see them all dead.

Well I’ve got to the point now where I’m beginning not to care about what the opinion shepherds want us to believe or what other people think about such things, because their name calling has ceased to have any meaning, rather like the boy who cried ‘Wolf!’ and then got ignored.

The seed crystals of news which have caused the condensation of these thoughts in my mind have come over recently from the Grauniad and the Telegraph.  I used to be a Grauniad leftie from before the beginning of time until some vaguely unspecified date about a year or three ago when I began to realise that I didn’t actually agree with them any more.  In fact I began to realise that they were often found to be spouting dangerously biased and irrational nonsense.

Take the recent Danish election, in which the anti-immigration Danish People’s Party made significant gains and now holds the balance of power.

Beyond the facts of the election result itself, I would draw people's attention to the way the Grauniad has covered these results. To save you time I have lifted a series of quotes from their coverage and copied them below. They are clearly trying to control the narrative for their own ends rather than report in an unbiased manner. 

Words such as 'populist' 'seductive' and 'divisive' pepper the text, and you don't need a qualification in Neuro-Linguistic programming for it to be obvious that the Grauniad is doing its best to diss the Danish People's Party. I love the way they attack the vote as relying heavily on over 60s.  What should we make of the fact that 57% of their voters were under 60? Now that I am over 60 it is obvious to me that there is a repository of wisdom and stability in our older population which should be drawn on. Until the Cult of Youth took over, the wisdom of age was respected. Now it is sneered at because it could be the last bulwark against the multi-culti insanity which the elites are trying to impose on us.

Democracy is great isn't it? Except when the people make the 'wrong decision' of course, and need to be corrected. **** off Grauniad and respect a sovereign nation and its people's choices.

http://www.theguardian.com/…/denmark-kristian-thulesen-dahl…
Here are the quotes ~

'Soft-spoken and plausible' 'populist tide' ' Whatever people may say about the clean-cut, politically savvy Thulesen Dahl and his *divisive* anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-Brussels stance, he is no Nigel Farage.' [WTF is that supposed to mean?] 'Others suspect a more destructive agenda.' ' it seems clear the DPP surge fed off fears about the “enemy within” symbolised by February’s deadly attacks in Copenhagen by a *lone* Islamist extremist.' [Emphasis mine]  (When it's a muslim, it's a 'lone gunman', but when, as in Charleston, SC, it was a 'lone' white man, we see a massive psychological attack on blaming all white people and their culture.  Yeah, I noticed the inconsistency.)  'Coincidentally or not, 43% of DPP voters were older than 60.' 'It was a seductive campaign narrative that pulled rival parties, including Thorning-Schmidt’s Social Democrats, to the right while denying them a clearly separate ideological identity.' So now the DPP is controlling other people's ideological identity? I thought that's what the EU had been trying to do for several decades!  This is trash propaganda of the slimiest sort.

Firstly this is undisguised opinion in what should be a disinterested and objective news report.  Obviously the major issues and future ramifications need to be mentioned, but this is heavily slanted, fear mongering propaganda.

The Grauniad is known for its pro-immigration position, and this is what it is all about.  Those nasty racist Danish people want to put a stop to it, and the Grauniad wants it to continue.  Very much.  Very, very, very much indeed.

I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and consider the possibility that many on the Left genuinely believed that full scale multi-culturalism would be a good idea and work.  They had of course never tried such a mass experiment under controlled conditions, but they thought it would be a good idea.  For some reason or other that is now lost in the memory hole of time.

When it became clear a number of years ago that this whole thing wasn’t working (and Cameron, Merkel and others said this), not only was nothing done to reverse the trajectory, but in recent times the directives from the EU have if anything pressed to increase the numbers of immigrants.  As long ago as 2001 the UN predicted that the EU would need over 100,000,000 immigrants to replace population.  State policies and tax breaks for families could easily improve the indigenous European birth rate so one has to ask why is there this confluence with the continued political pressure for immigration?

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/migration/migration.htm

I have seen a link which mentioned a figure of 159,000,000 immigrants being needed by 2025, but can’t seem to find that precise one at the moment.

There is much discussion of aging demographics and the need to maintain tax revenues etc., but almost no mention of how to stimulate the birth rate of indigenous Europeans, which is surely the best long term solution, a simple reversal of the cause of our demographic decline. 

Clearly the cheap labour is a significant part of it.  We have a couple of million floating unemployed in Britain, and yet open door economic migration continues as normal business.  The EU Schengen Zone obviously has led to this to a great extent, and so we have to mention the Kalergi plan.   

I’ll have to refer to a link here, or you can just google for Kalergi. https://www.big-lies.org/coudenhove-kalergi/

Quote from Kalergi “The Eurasian-Negroid race tomorrow, outwardly similar to the ancient Egyptian, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of personalities.”

Or http://www.theeuroprobe.org/2013-044-couden/

A quote from Kalergi’s ‘Practical Idealism’

“The man of the future will be of mixed race. The races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals. Instead of destroying European Judaism against her will, refined and educated this people, driving them to their future status as a leading nation through this artificial evolutionary process. It’s not surprising that the people that escaped from the Ghetto-Prison, became the spiritual nobility of Europe. Thus, the compassionate care given by Europe created a new breed of aristocrats. This happened when the European feudal aristocracy crashed because of the emancipation of the Jews [due to the actions taken by the French Revolution]”

I didn’t write any of that, Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi did.

This has become well known about in truther circles over the last few years.  The mainstream is very reluctant to discuss Kalergi, and won’t talk about his plan.  I actually have a friend who is a life long Labour Party member who threatened to walk out on me if I tried to discuss it.  Really!  Why?  She wouldn't say.   

Frankly, I wouldn’t take it seriously but for one rather glaring connection that is too big to ignore.  Both Chancellor Merkel and EU President Van Rompuy have both been awarded the ‘Charlemagne Prize’ for services to the pan European ideal, of which Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi was the first recipient in 1950.

And what Kalergi suggested seems to now be taking place.  Join the dots my friends.

I would offer in supportive evidence the complete abdication of any right to rule by the current crop of EU leaders (with one or two exceptions) in the face of the current invasion of Europe currently taking place.  The first duty of our government is to defend the realm.  This is clearly not being done.  The dominant leadership from Brussels is continuing to try to force this down the throats of what is left of an indigenous European population with economic arguments on the one hand and moral on the other. 

Let’s put the cheap labour behind us and get onto the ‘universal ethics’ which require Europe to sacrifice itself on the altar of African need, shall we. 

Allowing ingress of hostiles is treason.      

‘Social Justice Warriors’ don’t reason or even argue with you, all they do is sling abuse.  It’s predictable, ‘Racist’ ‘Bigot’, 'Xenophobe', for simply wanting your own people to remain the main group in their own country.  Apparently the multi-culti Cultural Marxist agenda is now so advanced that they think they can silence anyone with a few well chosen weaponised words of abuse.  But it has reached the point where we don’t care as I suggested above.

The woman who wrote the following piece for the Telegraph is a bit more savvy about all this than the Grauniad, but she hasn’t quite got there yet. Fix their countries for them?  That would be racist colonialism, wouldn’t it?  This piece written before the Tunisian massacre of European tourists.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/familyholidays/11686010/Judith-Woods-Why-we-wont-be-holidaying-in-the-Med-this-year.html

One of the main problems with all this is that most Europeans haven’t any experience of sub-Saharan Africa, and many of those who do have only seen it through the eyes of tourism, protected in western standard hotels and shepherded around in tour buses and safari groups.  I spent a substantial part of my childhood in West Africa and saw this all through different eyes.  I have little doubt that while the cities in Africa may have some of the trappings of modern civilisation these days, the average peasant will still be living in the manner that they did in the fifties or sixties, whether that be the 1950s or the 1850s, or earlier.

But I hear you say that if the conditions are so primitive, then shouldn’t we be doing all we can to ameliorate them?  Let’s be clear about this.  There are over a billion native population in Africa, nearly twice that of Europe, and their continent is much larger, with immense natural resources, not to mention a climate more conducive to plant growth in much of its area.  Oh, and the almost limitless sunshine which could be used for electrical generation and thereby economic growth.  Firstly we should consider the simple matter of space, housing, employment and so forth.  Clearly the continuous arrival of unlimited numbers of people of foreign origin must have some impact on these.

But it is the actual people that we should consider.  I hear people from the likes of the Green Party saying ‘Give them time and they will become just like us’.  Really?  Does the growth of Islam in Europe support this supposition?  It seems rather the opposite to me.

We have to accept that the average sub-Saharan African has lived a life of what we would consider unremitting hardship, but that is from a European perspective.  Until recent times most of the European peoples toiled and sweated to survive in a similar manner, with added winters unknown in Africa, to boot.  Our advanced technical civilisation has removed us from that basic level of survival and, frankly, made us soft.

When Europeans see pictures of Africans in mud huts their altruistic hearts go out to them and want to help them.  But how should this be done?  Countless billions of pounds, euros and dollars have disappeared into black holes of corruption over the decades, fuelling on the one hand Presidential palaces, and on the other endless wars.  European guilt at the colonial era is a large part of this, but how long must we go on paying?  We hear more about colonial exploitation now than we have ever done.  I am not unaware of the massive debts with which the World Bank and their likes have entrapped the nations of the continent, but this should not be laid at the door of the common European peoples.

The so-called ‘moral’ argument for allowing endless streams of Africans into our historical homelands relies largely on the colonial past, which ended in the aftermath of the Second World War, and on altruistic feelings of wanting to help them.  Firstly I would suggest that the aid budgets and loans have done little to benefit the common African, and secondly that simply allowing them to come to Europe and find a future here is not a viable option, either for them or us, despite the assertions of bankers and eurocrats that we actually need this feral population.

Pictures of the migrant boat people I have seen do not actually look like African peasants in fact, but more like semi-westernised city dwellers.  I see leather jackets, jeans and sunglasses.  But they doubtless still have the tenacity of their peasant ancestors.

It is fairly obvious to me that word has got round amongst the urban poor of Africa that Europe has gone soft and is letting them in.  And not just in Africa, but pretty much throughout the Third World. 

The likes of Angela Merkel only encourage this.  I have just seen news coming in that Hungary, one of the few European nations to offer resistance to the no borders and unlimited migration policy, has been whipped into line by the EU commissars.  But the Hungarian people are not happy with this.

This is based on a fundamental misrepresentation of the African migrants.  They are put to us by the media as poor suffering refugees, fleeing a continent riven by war and strife.  Well, I won’t argue with the riven with war and strife, but these are wars of their own making.  You don’t see women and children on the boats coming across the Med, it’s all young men.  They are clearly economic migrants.  (A junior Tory minister dared suggest this a few days ago, and was roundly attacked ~ by immigrants.)

It brings to mind a story I read about four or five years ago when I was going through a motivational and personal development phase.  I was reading a lot of stuff about how getting ahead in life required effort and vision, and the implications of one story rather disturbed me.  It was about how a certain African man had not had the opportunities in his native Kenya that he sought for his economic advancement, so he walked, hitch hiked and smuggled himself north until he found his way to Europe and then with hard work and diligence made a life for himself and was successful.  All very well when it is one person alone, but I fear that many millions of Africans have heard such stories and are planning to do the same.  In fact, one of the main points of the story was put over that you have to go where the opportunities are, you won’t make a million in the desert.  True ~ but do these people have the right to impose themselves on us?  I would suggest that the answer is no, or at least that we have an equal right to defend our ancestral lands from invaders.  The lack of obvious firearms does not prevent them from being invaders.

The price of Globalisation is that hot spots of economic activity attract people to them.  But the downsides are many.  The indigenous populations of the hot spots, such as Europe and the United States, become marginalised in their own lands.  (And before you complain about Americans of Australians not being indigenous, ask yourself how the Native Americans or Australian Original people will do if their countries are taken over by Islam and Sharia law, or is swamped out by African or mestizo populations?  Less well than at present I would suggest.)

The incoming populations do not become like the indigenous.  At first they may have been compliant with the local culture, but as time has gone on and they have become stronger in numbers, they have become more assertive.  The demographic time bomb of what is now potentially millions of feral Africans settling in Europe, in addition to the already burgeoning Middle Eastern Islamic population, is something that the likes of Angela Merkel seem not to understand, other than to want to promote it.  Remember Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi?  This is exactly what he described, and claimed was necessary.

The incoming African boat people will not become like us.  They see this as an opportunity.  Europe, which always in the past was an unattainable Elysium, has become soft and faces an existential crisis as to its identity and future.

From an evolutionary survival adaptation perspective the African behaviour is perfectly understandable.  Organisms seek environments in which they can prosper.  This happens all the way from the amoeba to human beings.  But all organisms need to defend their territories, and the leaders of Europe have abdicated that responsibility for this.

The Social Justice Warrior crowd have now built a collective zeitgeist in which the ideas of ‘One People’ and ‘No Borders’ have become dominant memes.  But they do this with no recourse to anything other than claimed morality.  Why should you have all the benefits of European civilisation just because you were born there?  Why should the poor of the Third World not be entitled to all those benefits as well?  Your borders are artificial constructs etc etc etc

Not long ago a friend stated on social media that (he believed) it was ‘immoral’ to maintain European borders against migrants who wished to come here.  He asserted this as if it were a proven fact that brooked no disagreement.  This chap lives in a rural part of southern England where he probably doesn’t see a non-European face from one week to the next.  He, like so many of the liberal classes of the west, is not yet impacted by the social and demographic impacts of many millions of people arriving here to take perceived opportunities.  Unlike those of us in large cities.

And yet it is admitted from time to time that the Third World migrants harbour in their midst murderers, drug traffickers, rapists and all manner of undesirables.  Their identities and criminal records are uncheckable by European border authorities.  A recent incident involved some twenty five boat people being murdered by their fellow travellers because they were Christians.  Not that I imagine they were wonderful people, but if that is how a boat load of immigrants treat others of their people simply for being Christians, then how might we expect them to treat white European people?  It was recently admitted that 100% of rapes in Oslo are committed by people of non-Norwegian ancestry ~ immigrants.  Obviously some immigrants are more responsible than others, but the kind of unrestricted migration we are seeing at present across the Med from Africa is unlikely to be dominated by the kind of responsible, educated immigrant that the Labour party went to so much effort to present to us before the election.  I would venture that there are few brain surgeons or information technology experts amongst the African boat people.

The leadership of the West has abdicated responsibility.  Either they have lost the plot entirely or have been co-opted by interests who seek to destroy the West in the manner proposed by Count Kalergi.

Every nation and people have the right to control their borders and maintain dominance in their own ancestral lands.  This is a fundamental fact which has been ceaselessly attacked, undermined, argued against and sneered at increasingly over the last few decades.  And yet all other ethnic groups, all other countries and nations are permitted to maintain their borders, control the movements of immigrants into their territories and define themselves by their ethnicity.  Except those peoples of white European ancestry.

One of my favourite episodes from ancient literature is from the Bhagavad Gita.  On the night before the great Battle of Kuruksetra, Arjuna asks Krishna why it is necessary to face his relative the Kauravas in battle, and if there is any alternative.  In essence, Krishna replies ‘You would rather let them kill you and your entire family then?’

Christian morality is fine when you live in an homogeneous culture where all share the high trust values.  But allowing in millions of people from different cultures that don’t believe in these values is suicide.  They see our high trust societies as a soft touch to be exploited, taken over and turned to their values.  If you think that muslims and Africans will become like us rather than adhere to their own ancestral values, then I wish you luck with that when you are stoned to death for having views on women’s rights or freedom of speech.  I have heard recently that in mosques muslims often talk about ‘When the time comes’. 

And what time might that be I wonder?  Anyone who imagines that an aggressive belief system which has conquered some fifty or so countries by the sword and which makes no secret of the fact that it seeks to ‘convert’ (coerce) the rest of the world to its ‘peaceful’ ways is living in a fantasy land.  The body count of the jihad over the centuries stands at some 300 million or so I understand.  Lovely practices such as 'striking off the fingertips', or simple beheading, of unbelievers are recommended in the koran as methods whereby they can achieve mastery.

The leadership and peoples of the West face a severe existential challenge.  Do we continue with a universalist ethics which insists we give away all that our ancestors achieved because someone has found a vulnerable point in our ethics that they can exploit like a Trojan horse virus, or do we face up to the fact that we have to protect ourselves from being swamped out by barbarians?  It happened to Byzantium and all the remains of the Roman Empire.  Charles Martel prevented it in 732 at Poitiers.  The good people of Austria saw it face to face in 1683 when the muslim hordes besieged the gates of Vienna.

Do we let our identity and culture fold because we have had a manipulative mind game played against us to make us feel guilty of our historical success, or do we follow the suggestion of Krishna, and seek to secure a future for ourselves, our European peoples and children?

You decide.