After the latest enriching diversity-violence in London, an old meme quickly reemerged from the cobweb-covered wardrobe of white pathology and UK government propaganda.
‘We are not afraid’ first appeared immediately after the 7/7 bombings in London 2005, attributed to some pleb, but was rapidly adopted as a central piece of government and media propaganda under the Blair government.
You know, sometimes it’s just not appropriate to say you’re ‘not afraid’.
That statement implies you are afraid. Afraid of dealing with the real cause of the problem. You’re afraid of having to confront reality. You’re afraid of all of the accumulated lies you’ve absorbed and consented to spilling out over the floor, and how that will make you look. How are you going to explain them ? How are you going to explain to people in your life that you’ve actually been trying to harm them with these lies ?
You’re deeply afraid of being made a social pariah, of being called a racist. And you would rather people die and get maimed than be called a racist.
You are afraid. You are pathetic.
Terrorism is easy to be brave and stoic with, it’s ‘abstract’, ‘out there somewhere’ and the actual day-to-day risks of death from terrorism are still remote, albeit significantly increased by the presence of non-white populations.
Being brave and defiant towards the idea of a kind of abstract violence that you will probably never have to confront, claiming you will ‘not let it divide us’ allows you to signal your compliance to power, to demonstrate you are a ‘good person’, bypassing the actual reason it happened at all.
It must feel great to be a useful idiot –reinforcing the narrative and taboo of diversity, thereby ensuring more people are victims of terrorism.
The right advice to Londoners, and people in the UK generally is do be afraid.
And if you’re not afraid of getting run over by some worthless hate-filled negro, with a history of racially-motivated serious assault who wants his worthless life to mean something in the eyes of other negroes, and who believed in his worthless shit-brain that Islam makes his hatred righteous, be afraid of acid being thrown in your face, of rape, of remorseless violence. Be afraid of your daughters being dragged into a Pakistani pedophile ring, and the authorities being too afraid of being called racist to do anything – my God they could really have done with the ‘We are not afraid’ meme.
Also be afraid of what your government will do to clamp down on your rights after every new terrorist act, introducing new laws about hate speech, incitement, and pushing for more internet snooping as they will always do – their real target being whites. It’s all part of the enriching effect of diversity.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
So it turns out the London ‘terrorist’, Khalid Masood – born Adrian Elms from Kent, was actually a rather typical violent, maladjusted negro with mixed parents, completely at odds with the very white environment it grew up in, and sought outlets for its own biological tendency towards extreme violence. Islam, which it picked up in prison, provided this creature with a new kind of legitimacy for its own tendencies.
This was a very typical black, who’s unwelcome presence predictably managed to harm a rural community in the UK where it was born, thanks to its race-mixing selfish stupid cunt-whore white mother:
Adrian Elms was born on Christmas Day 1964, in the Dartford area of Kent, to a white British mother and a black father, who were not married. Twenty years later they moved to Tunbridge Wells where they set up home with his stepfather and two half-brothers.
where it notched up a string of convictions for serious violent offenses, which it claims it was driven to, because of ‘muh racism’.
So we come full circle. Islam is a problem, and it has no place in European countries, but blacks are violent anyway, including blacks with white blood, and anything that gives them a further sense of purpose and legitimacy to their violence is only going to escalate their violence. The appalling savagery of this non-human entity predates its involvement in Islam, and it just happened to be, that its final piece of violence was more spectacular and lethal than its previous ones.
We also need to remind ourselves just what a monstrosity race-mixing is, how harmful it is, and how we really need to move to a world where it incurs serious penalties.
I keep reading in the media how Masood/Elms was ‘British born’, but of course all that proves is that nations based on citizenship mean absolutely nothing as the pull of ethnicity and biology is far stronger, and that European nations have to re-establish themselves as ethnically-based, as opposed to ‘values based’ to be meaningful at all, and if they actually want these appalling atrocities to end.
One thing that caught my attention recently was an article by our old friend, Tony Blair in the New York Times.
Blair has put himself –or is (((being))) put, at the forefront of a so called ‘centrist’ campaign against what he correctly describes as a popular revolt in the West, culminating in Trump’s election and Brexit, which he of course opposes.
While Blair’s new political activity should be a cause for great concern, there is an immediate silver lining to this cloud. It suggests there really aren’t that many people corrupt and debased enough who can actually take on this role. Blair, despite his absolutely soiled track record with the public, finds himself regularly reused as a frontman for the forces of globalization and anti-whiteness.
The modus operandi of this populism is not to reason but to roar. It has at times an anarchic feel. Yet it has also mobilized a powerful media behind it. Its supporters welcome the outrage their leaders provoke.
The causes of this movement are the scale, scope and speed of change. This is occurring economically as jobs are displaced and communities fractured, and culturally as the force of globalization moves the rest of the world closer and blurs old boundaries of nation, race and culture.
Not that the ‘change’ itself is a bad thing. It’s just the ‘speed’ of racial and national blurring that’s the problem. Blair’s view has always been that if you ‘mitigate’ the effects of globalization, i.e: placate whites with more worthless jobs in call centers or government, provide them with more state handouts, devalued degrees, and more CCTV cameras to try to dissuade blacks, Somalis and Muslims from raping white women, the underlying objections will just go away and whites will welcome their displacement and everything will be fine. They will simply exchange their human dignity, race, culture and values for things that will only hurt them more. Just explain to them it’s ‘modern’ and ‘progressive’. That’s basically Blair’s modus operandi.
Blair goes on:
The same dynamics are splintering the left, too. One element has aligned with the right in revolt against globalization, but with business taking the place of migrants as the chief evil. They agree with the right-wing populists about elites, though for the left the elites are the wealthy, while for the right they’re the liberals.
This leftist populism is a profound error. It has no chance of matching the populist appeal of the right, and it dangerously validates some of the right’s arguments. This only fuels a cynicism that depresses support for the more progressive parts of the left’s program.
Blair’s entire career has been as a fanatical apologist and Mr Fixit for these elites, and that means trying to nullify any arguments against things elites want, like globalization, white genocide and war. What Blair is really saying here, is that our arguments are extremely sound. They are so sound, that parts of the Left have actually found a way to agree with them. That means they are not a ‘nutty right wing conspiracy’, rather they have an observable objective basis, and that makes them extremely dangerous. One of the strategies of people like Blair is to drive a wedge between the Right and the sections of the Left who have the capacity to agree with us, so there can never be any political consensus against these elites that Blair represents.
But this left tendency has gained from the seeming paralysis of the center. The parties and politicians of the center have become the managers of the status quo in an era when people want change. So, the center — in both its center-right and center-left camps — is marginalized, even despised.
It’s despised because it’s caused immense harm. Firstly, the ‘center’ – center-left or center-right, is really just another version of the Left as far as its most zealous ideological advocates are concerned.
‘The center’ is a consolidation of the power between different vectors; extremes of global capitalism on the one hand and ‘social justice’ on the other, that were once at odds with each other, but are now merged into one toxic blob.
Particularly, the center has become ideologically dominated by the cultural goals of the Left, which rely on the cover it provides to appear less-threatening, utilizing less-obvious language to obscure its intentions.
So this ‘center’ is not really a center as it has a specific direction: towards more immigration, diversity, globalization and degeneracy. It never goes away from it. Sure the center-right will pay lip service to going the other way to get votes from whites, but it never actually does anything.
The term ‘center’ is dishonest as the objectives of its most staunch advocates are not politically neutral. The phrase provides legitimacy and cover, making it seem reasonable and moderate rather than its own kind of fanaticism.
After that, the center is really just a coalition of reality-denying white cucks, virtue-signalling to one another demonstrating how eager they are to flood their countries with hostile raping retards from the Third World, and to appease organized Jewish power.
Even when some of them don’t really want to flood their countries with the Third World, the center-right is so scared of being called racist and bigoted it can’t actually stop it anyway. This means the center is not actually in control of any of its own policies. It’s an empty political position, where many of its representatives hold no political authority of their own, where they have deferred power and choices to other groups and lobbyists, the centrists’ role simply being to appease the demands of those other groups. It’s a form of signalling and obedience.
The question is, will this be a temporary phase, perhaps linked to the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis and Sept. 11, and will politics soon revert to normal, or has a new political age begun?
There are fragments of truth even in what Blair says. I wonder if Blair too sees 9/11 as a necessary component in laying the foundation for some of things we see today?
The party structures on both sides of the Atlantic have their origins in the Industrial Revolution and the debates engendered by that epoch about socialism and capitalism, the market and the state. These parties have endured because the roots they put down were very strong. But now, there are different distinctions than those simply of traditional right and left.
When I was growing up, people like my dad were conservative; and that meant economically and socially. Today, many such voters don’t fit that old stereotype. They may be pro-private enterprise and conservative on economics in traditional terms, but they’re also socially liberal — in favor, for instance, of gay rights. And there are those who used to vote left, but who are culturally illiberal and now don’t mind voting for parties of the wealthy.
Although they sometimes go under other names like ‘Western values’, it’s race and identity that are now naturally and rightfully emerging as the critical fault lines. Old stereotypical notions of left or right, were indeed once relevant in the near mono-racial era of Tony Blair’s father when everyone was white.
Today, a distinction that often matters more than traditional right and left is open vs. closed. The open-minded see globalization as an opportunity but one with challenges that should be mitigated; the closed-minded see the outside world as a threat.
Make no mistake, black violence, Muslims blowing themselves up and raping white children are a threat. The sewage of diversity is a threat. The debasing effects of diversity on white institutions is a threat. Unteachable schools, ‘no go zones’ are a threat. Laws to facilitate and protect diversity and to facilitate white displacement are a threat. And white genocide is a very big, very real threat. The ‘open-minded’ people pushing these policies do so exactly because they are a threat, while ‘progressive’ gentile whites who support these policies, or claim to, are damaged goods, hate themselves or are simply not grown up enough to deal with the reality of the world as it is. So their views cannot be accepted as having a legitimate basis. Like it or not, they have to be denied any political say at all.
This distinction crosses traditional party lines and thus has no organizing base, no natural channel for representation in electoral politics.
Again, because it’s racial. It’s much more fundamental.
So this leaves a big space in the center. For the progressive wing of politics, the correct strategy is to make the case for building a new coalition out from the center. To do so, progressives need to acknowledge the genuine cultural anxieties of those voters who have deserted the cause of social progress: on immigration, the threat of radical Islamism and the difference between being progressive and appearing obsessive on issues like gender identity.
It’s not enough to ‘acknowledge the genuine cultural anxieties of voters’, you actually have to STOP doing things that injure them. If you refuse to stop, you will be stopped.
The politics of the progressive center has not died, but it needs reinventing and re-energizing. For liberal democracy to survive and thrive, we must build a new coalition that is popular, not populist.
‘Popular’ means it’s manufactured, spun and where a corrupt media can be relied upon to issue favorable propaganda. But no it has died. It’s died morally and ideologically. The ‘progressive center’ basically means a Jewish and oligarchical center having a disproportionate influence over the policies of white governments to suit their own interests. It means pushing immigration, diversity and selling degeneracy to whites to distract them while it’s happening. The ‘liberal democracy’ Blair espouses, which has to a large extent become an elite ‘dog-whistle’ for white genocide, doesn’t deserve to survive. It deserves to die.
But you know what ? I think it’s great Blair has put himself forward as a champion of ‘liberal democracy’ and left-centrism. It just shows how completely morally bankrupt the mainstream Left is if they will tolerate this soiled wretched perverter as their spokesperson.
This was the same problem that dogged Hillary Clinton in the election. A large swathe of liberal America just couldn’t accept that she was not actually electable. So they told themselves ‘she was the lesser of two evils’. Fuck off.
If I was Blair, I would would be genuinely concerned about this new populism. Last time, when I said the right place for Blair is hanging from a lamppost, I wasn’t being flippant. Blair’s concerns about where this new ‘roaring’ revolt may lead are quite real. If the forces that are protecting and promoting Blair are sufficiently overturned, Blair will inevitably be hanging from a lamppost.
I hate where am.
I hate diversity.
I hate multiculturalism.
I hate being swamped by the Third World.
I hate walking though them.
I hate being around brown people babbling in various Third World languages.
I hate watching an obese and hideous Somalian female in a hijab –because it’s not a woman in any conventional sense– waddle along babbling into its mobile phone as it takes advantage of a world it couldn’t hope to create itself to shit out hundreds more of itself.
I hate standards being eroded.
I hate pretending all is well.
I hate a society that means and stands for nothing but the pursuit of money.
I hate being around blacks.
I hate blacks spitting. It’s easy to see where blacks have been by the trail of spit on the street.
I hate blacks kissing their teeth.
I hate blacks flapping their arms.
I hate blacks’ primitive and ridiculous collection of walks.
I hate black music.
I hate seeing stupid, ignorant white women with blacks. They have chosen their path, and should be forced to permanently adopt it far away from the advancements of the white race.
I hate the effect of blacks on whites.
I hate watching whites speak like negroes, walk like negroes, listen to negro music.
I hate how whites talk to negroes either as privileged special entities, or to try to speak in ways appealing to the negro, proving they can be as degenerate and imitating to varying degrees, negro ebonics.
I hate watching whites bury their collective heads into the sand, smiling with that dumb cuckface to focus on ‘important issues’ like sport, iPhones, games, alcohol or a bunch of other worthless shitty pursuits as their world is taken from them.
I hate black crime, which is different in quality and nature to white crime and requires different laws, punishments and answers.
I hate the denial.
I hate reading about yet another new law in a white country designed to protect this monstrous fucking lie of ‘diversity’ and ‘racial equality’.
I hate the media and its constant stream of lies.
I hate the film industry which is mostly anti-white propaganda.
I hate advertising, and if I see another mulatto on a poster with a white woman, or an image of a white woman surrounded by negroes I’m going to scream.
I hate virtually every institution or company which talks about its ‘commitment to diversity’.
I hate initiatives which promote ‘diversity’, which is a way of promoting our genocide.
I hate seeing beautiful places starting to become stained by diversity.
I hate the way beautiful rare animals are being pushed to extinction on the planet, but ugly monstrous animals are being artificially assisted to breed like flies.
This story – which made me laugh out loud- is a clear cut example of wonderful DAYLIGHT breaking through the clouds of lies. It’s a shocking irony that China will happily warn its citizens about the dangers of blacks and other diversity in London, but the UK government will do anything to feverishly cling to its intellectually-bankrupt, post-war, Jewish-constructed delusion about ‘values’ and tolerance, and damn whoever gets hurt.
The Telegraph: China’s national carrier is embroiled in a race row after its inflight magazine carried a warning that visitors to London should avoid ethnic minority areas.
Air China’s Wings of China magazine said the British capital was generally safe, but warned “precautions are needed when entering areas mainly populated by Indians, Pakistanis and black people”.
It was carried in English and Chinese in an article about London’s attractions under the headline “Tips from Air China”.
The following sentence added: “We advise tourists not to go out alone at night, and females always to be accompanied by another person when traveling.”
Of course the media have framed it as the usual moral outrage, condemning China’s more normal and healthy attitudes about race for not being sufficiently Jewish. Indeed, the Telegraph seeks to establish a ‘pattern’ of Chinese racism:
Chinese companies have previously been criticised for their depictions of other races.
In May, a Chinese laundry detergent commercial sparked outrage with its depiction of a black man being ‘cleaned’ in a washing machine before he came out as a Han Chinese man.
And over the New Year, Chinese promotional posters for the latest Star Wars film saw black British actor John Boyega being shrunk.
The Telegraph even managed to find a Chinese academic, Hu Xingdou, ‘an expert in political science at the Beijing Institute of Technology’ who would confirm their deepest fears. Yet it’s interesting that the Telegraph summarized his comments as “Racism is common in China”, when that’s not actually what he appeared to say. What he said was:
“In Western countries, there are clear boundaries when it concerns minorities and religion, but Chinese society doesn’t take ethnic minority issues seriously, which is clearly expressed in this magazine,” he told The Daily Telegraph.
“Ordinary Chinese people usually have racially discriminatory views,” Prof Hu added.
“Such as Chinese people don’t like black people, who are regarded as dirty and dangerous.”
Younger Chinese are generally less likely to have racist views, but many in China see those from the country’s rural areas who have darker skin as inferior.”
Guess what ? It’s not just a Chinese cultural trait. So do we! Black people are dirty and dangerous, and discrimination against them is fully warranted.
The terrible word racism, and the guilt and penalties associated with it, are entirely Jewish fabrications imposed on the West, exploiting the moral nature of white people. Being afraid of being perceived as racist, looking for ways to be less racist are abnormal unnatural conditions. The propaganda about race has nothing to do with how people feel or live or wish to interact.
Because Jewish influence is far weaker in China, the Chinese still have a completely normal and healthy attitude to race and ethnicity. Moreover, when young Chinese are presented with unbiased facts about European history, Europe’s wars and leaders, and the problems now facing white people, they are quite candid in their views that white countries are on a path to self-destruction, and in large part this is due to Jewish influence.
The police and media across Europe have introduced a new bureaucratic obfuscation: that some non-European Muslim attacks on Europeans are due to ‘mental illness’, that such attacks are ‘isolated’ and not related to terrorism.
“So far we have found no evidence of radicalization or anything that would suggest the man in our custody was motivated by terrorism”…
“Whilst the investigation is not yet complete, all of the work that we have done so far increasingly points to this tragic incident as having been triggered by mental health issues”
Mental illness or not, the attacker wasn’t attacking other Somalis.
The problem with this presentation of ‘mental illness’, is it willfully omits the fact these attacks derive from the same collection of non-European populations that are committing and spreading terrorist violence, where that violence is often completely normal in their own countries, and who have been inappropriately injected into European countries where their violence is aimed at people of European origin.
It willfully omits the fact that these groups, particularly of African origin, are anthropologically primitive, have biological tendencies towards unprovoked and savage violence, have dramatically low IQs, and are morally retarded.
It willfully omits the fact that all groups in general have in-group preferences and out-group hostilities, and mixing different groups is a recipe for conflict.
So who gives a fuck if it was terrorism anyway ?
To pretend the problem is just ‘terrorism’, and that everyone can ‘be relieved and go back to sleep’ if it isn’t, is a gross misrepresentation of the wider consequences of immigration.
The snowballing catastrophe for the West is not just about ‘radical Islam’, although that is a trend and now a serious problem. The fundamental issue lies in this deluded notion of introducing backwards groups from the Third World, separated by tens of thousands of years of evolution, as well as more ‘developed’ Muslim countries into white societies, and hoping these groups will act like liberal white hipsters.
Unfortunately, in their efforts to deny the racial significance of the attackers and victims, to frame Third World murders of Europeans as ‘isolated’, and especially to exonerate diversity (aka white genocide), the establishment have tripped over themselves. This latest attack comes on the back of another attack in London by a ‘mentally ill’ Somali. During the trial the Telegraph reported:
Isil fanatics are deliberately targeting people with mental health problems to inspire them to carry out terror attacks, a police chief has warned after a man suffering from psychosis was convicted of trying to behead a tube passenger.
So in an effort to protect diversity the narrative has become a mess. It’s gone from ‘terrorists recruit mentally ill Somalis to conduct terror’ to ‘mentally ill Somalis just go out and kill people randomly’. It’s gone from one story where the ‘mentally ill’ are used as mere pawns because they are vulnerable, to another where their mental illness was the cause.
Both claims are only consistent insomuch as they lead people away from the truth:– that Somalis are not fit to be among Europeans, and a very significant section the population of Somalia –for whom it is simply a normal racial trait, would fall under the definition of ‘mentally ill’ or psychopathic by European standards,
It should therefore come as little surprise that Somalia itself is an unrelenting fetid shit hole of a region. It doesn’t even have a government to speak of, the closest it has is Sharia Law. It’s a region of incessant violence, poverty and intense retardation, and is virtually at the very bottom of the Global Peace Index. “Mired in political instability and famine”, “Somalia remains a failed state“. Corruption is “rampant…tied with North Korea for last place among the 175 countries surveyed in Transparency International’s 2014 Corruption Perceptions Index”.
A small irony about these attacks is that because of diversity, some of these attacks do happen to include non-Europeans, in this case an Israeli and in other cases Hong Kong Chinese.
CNN: French President François Hollande said Tuesday that Donald Trump’s “excesses” give those watching a “retching feeling,” adding his voice to the onslaught of criticism directed at the Republican candidate.
You really have to wonder about Hollande. This monstrous sack of shit, this liberal ghoul is just pigheadedly oblivious to the “retching feeling” he evokes.
Look at the priorities of these people:
Trump makes a few off-the-cuff comments and the whole world is falling to pieces. It’s a ‘principle’ and matter of ‘respect’.
But when confronted by the Muslim slaughter campaign of French including children and the elderly by running them over, shooting them, slitting their throats, and torturing them, Hollande’s response is to actually deny why that is happening, paint a grotesquely false picture of ‘French unity’ and complain about the rise of right-wing parties. Hollande is truly someone no longer fit to be president.