Sunday, 26 February 2017

Oh ma' achin' sides!!!

You know, these days it's almost possible to feel a little sorry for the legacy media, die Lugenpresse. Take the Guardian (yes, please do). Its obese shrieking lesbians and their wispy-bearded virtue-signalling "male" counterparts can feel power slipping from the oily grasp. Already reeling from Trump and Brexit, their readership and credibility plummet while financial losses soar. Reality smacks them in the face every day and watching them pull their own teeth out is such fun. Take this Gruaniad report from South Africa where that country's African population riot against illegal immigration from other parts of Africa.

South African police have used stun grenades, rubber bullets and water cannon to try to disperse anti-immigration protesters in the capital, Pretoria, and keep them from foreign nationals who had gathered to express alarm about recent attacks.
A police official said 136 people had been arrested in the past 24 hours.

Resentment against foreign nationals has sometimes turned deadly amid accusations that they take jobs from locals in a country where unemployment is more than 25%. Others are blamed for drug-dealing and other crimes.

In 2015, anti-immigrant riots in and around the city of Durban left at least six people dead. About 60 people were killed in similar violence seven years earlier.

On Friday protesters in Pretoria marched towards the foreign ministry, some carrying sticks or pipes. A petition was handed to the ministry in which they suggested the government teach immigrants to “speak properly”. The petition added: “They are arrogant and they don’t know how to talk to people, especially Nigerians.

Oh deary deary me. How can this be? Our favourite pets saying the very same things as White fascists.  It's enough to make a GoodWhite journalist choke on his/her/its tofu. Snowflakes melting in the African sun! As they stagger around, stupified, is there any chance that they'll stumble on and report the real genocide taking place in the Rainbow Nation?

Simple answer: No.

Thursday, 23 February 2017

The new leader of Ireland?

Very soon Ireland will have a new Prime Minister, the current one having been forced to quit by his own party. And like all Irish public figures he went kicking and screaming, in the process shedding whatever dignity he may once have possessed.  Given that his party's founders were also the founders of the Irish State it's understandable that it's policies have always been of the traditional, conservative, law-and-order kind while it draws its support mainly from middle class Catholics. Its name, Fine Gael, means Irish People or Irish Tribe.

Unsurprising then that all of its leaders have reflected this history, traditional policies and support demographics. Despite this a different type of candidate for the leadership has now emerged. Not just a candidate, he's the favourite. And no surprise because Leo Varadkar ticks all the boxes. He's gay, brown, foreign and a Hindu. In the Ireland of today - in fact in any White country - this represents an unbeatable combination. The fact that he's accomplished nothing politically is neither here nor there. If he's not given the job it will show that Ireland has failed to outgrow its shameful past and remains a benighted homophobic, racist and xenophobic backwater. 

So yes, all going well The Irish Tribe and the Irish Government will shortly be lead by a homosexual Hindu from Pakistan.

That's what I call progress.

Sunday, 19 February 2017

Quantifying diversity's costs

In an earlier post I computed a lifetime cost to us northern European taxpayers of €3 million for a typical family of African or Muslim parasites roosting in our countries. But the real cost is very much greater as the following examples show. 

1.   Direct cost of the equality agenda which attempts to bridge the Achievement Gap by transforming the accomplishment of low IQ immigrants from clan-based societies into the equal of their Western hosts

2.  Financing the whole enforcement industry which has grown up alongside the equality agenda, the various NGOs, quangos and "charities"....

3.  The catastrophic impact on productivity deriving from the dumbing down of qualification requirement, the promotion of vibrants into make-believe jobs, productive workers (read: Whites) becoming demotivated and less productive as opportunities get closed off to them due to their race. 

4.  The redefining of excellence and success as 'elitist' and 'Eurocentric' in the interests of 'fairness'.

5.  Waste of education resources and lowering of education standards for everyone as vibrants are shoe-horned into academic courses for which they're unsuited 

6.  Culture of corruption. Here I'm thinking mainly of Indians and Chinese who have fundamentally different attitudes towards things like elections, examinations and the law generally. If you can cheat and get away with it in any of those areas well you do it. This Asian culture and the clan-based African and Muslim societal mores are incompatible with Western systems of academic qualifications and the impartiality of judges and juries

7.  The broader lack of societal trust experienced in multicultural countries leads, inter alia, to significant additional expenditure on security, both physical and financial.

So adding these unquantifiable costs onto the €3 million direct lifetime costs leads one to ask what a real repatriation programme would be worth to a Western Government. It also leads us to ask how we ever allowed ourselves to get into this situation in the first place.

Thursday, 16 February 2017

Am I paranoid?

Help me here. Am I paranoid? To answer you first must understand something about the Irish political system. The key point being that our politicians are nonentities, without convictions, whose only interest lies in ensuring their place on the gravy train through re-election. For the longer-standing ones the ultimate prize is a Ministry. The in-fighting to win the Ministerial Mercedes and the concomitant golden pension is ferocious. 

Now with that in mind consider the case of American bull dyke Catherine Zappone who fetched up in Ireland a few years ago, complete with her "wife" and presumably a selection of her favourite dildos. She immediately jumped on the charity bandwagon and in the last general election the trendy constituents of her Dublin constituency helped her squeak into our parliament. As an Independent. Now normally Independents have little chance of being awarded a Ministry, the spoils invariably going to members of the dominant Government Party. 

While this Government relies on a certain amount of Independents the selection of this newbie was mysterious. Unless you consider that she (or he - what do you call those freaks?) is a radical feminist with a stated objective to 'get mothers out of the home and into the workplace'. Where presumably they could meet nice bull dykes like Zappone and be introduced to a whole new world of fun. 

Did the curtain twitch mysteriously as the Ministerial appointments were discussed? Just as it must have when that nation-wrecking poison dwarf Alan Shatter was appointed? The plot thickens when you consider that while Shatter was given charge of the immigration spigot Zappone has responsibility for children and the family (where she/he has become embroiled in probably the greatest scandal in the history of the State).

On reflection, no, I don't think I'm paranoid. 

Monday, 13 February 2017

It's a fine line

Here's an interesting comment to the previous post, followed by my response.

"Dilemma; as a Mishling European, Irish, German, English, Danish heritage born in Australia who doesn't act Aboriginal, what nationality should I call myself?

My response:

"The people who built Australia were of European ancestry, primarily British. They became what we know today as Australians, a distinctive people with their own particular variations on their common European heritage. (I hesitate to say that they have their own, (cough) culture!) As such everybody understands your general lineage and its particular permutations become unimportant. 

You're very unlikely as an Australian to be asked about your ancestry anyway because you look and speak like what people expect of an Australian. If you are asked you can cheerfully and proudly expound as you did above. And it's not just Australians. For example my grandson's grandparents are Irish, Scottish and English. But because we're all from the same basic race, stock and culture nobody pays any attention to it. And if they did we'd all be happy to talk about it.

The case of the black "Irish" woman is totally different. Essentially if she's to be taken as Irish then the word loses all meaning. To be Irish is no different to being any other nationality and that's self-evidently ridiculous. Which of course does not prevent the idea being relentlessly foisted on us."

This interchange raised a further important dilemma. On the one hand we Whites must constantly and fearlessly reaffirm our own unique racial, national, ethnic and cultural heritages. This is required to put ersatz 'Irish' people like that woman in their box and to prevent them appropriating what's ours. And also of course to build resistance to the broader Kalergi-derived invasion of our lands and ultimately blending us out of existence.  But on the other hand great care must be taken to not widen existing fissures within the Europe-derived ethny. And God knows, we're picking our way through a minefield here, mines of the national and religious kinds in particular, laced with high-explosive historical baggage. Primed to explode at the slightest touch.

It's a fine line. And there's no simple solution other than to suggest that at the highest level European-derived peoples should celebrate our common achievement and focus on our common enemies and their dastardly plans.

Thursday, 9 February 2017

"But where are you really from?"

As every schoolboy knows rebellion against English rule has been a regular feature of Irish history for over 500 years. Each insurrection drew substance from our ancient and unique heritage, bloodline, myths, values, language, morals, religion and traditions. Here for example are the opening lines of  the 1916 Declaration Of Independence:  "In the name of God and of the dead generations from which she receives her old tradition of nationhood, Ireland, through us, summons her children to her flag and strikes for her freedom."

I raise this not, Heaven forfend, to stoke anti-English sentiment - happily about 95% of Irish people have a positive and affectionate attitude towards our English cousins. I mention it in response to this women I saw on TV, bitterly complaining that when she tells people she's Irish they answer 'yes, but where are you really from?'. She gets baffled and frustrated by this, while the other geldings on the panel clucked in sympathy. After all she was born and reared in Ireland, spoke with a Dublin accent....

Now maybe I'm jumping to conclusions here but just maybe the fact that she's black as the ace of spades has something to do with it. Yes, you see this Irish woman's parents had left Africa and, as the saying goes, 'found themselves in Ireland'. At which point they got down to reproducing lots of Irish boys and girls, who now presumably share their sister's frustration. Assume for a minute that my parents had left Ireland and gone to Japan just after they'd been married and that I'd been born and reared there. Would anyone anywhere refer to me as 'the Japanese guy'? Had I introduced myself as such the inevitable question would have been 'but where are you originally from?'. Of course it would.

What this issue highlights is the old Proposition Nation canard, coined by (((rootless cosmopolitans))) in relation to the USA but now being extended to all White countries. In essence the canard claims that a nation is defined by its values and ideals, not by bloodline. Thus anyone can become an American or Englishman or whatever. But this assumes that such a Proposition can arise independently of ethnic heritage....our DNA.  It does not because otherwise Africa and the Arab world would be flourishing liberal democracies. 

So what happens when a large enough number of people either don’t care about or actively oppose the Proposition? (Think African and Muslim hordes now weeping across our lands). You don't have a nation anymore. You have a monstrosity whose future is deeply problematical. To sustain it you must force everybody to think the same. That of course is what the Political Correctness project is all about. They tried something similar in the Soviet Union (the ultimate Proposition Nation) with predictable results.

The late great Sam Francis wrote "We need not only to understand the role of race in creating our civilization but also to incorporate that understanding in our defense of our civilization. Until we do so, we can expect only to keep on losing the war we are in. As long as whites continue to avoid and deny their own racial identity, at a time when almost every other racial and ethnic category is rediscovering and asserting its own, whites will have no chance to resist their dispossession and their eventual possible physical destruction.

He could have added: "And that is the plan".

Sunday, 5 February 2017

Courts lose the run of themselves

What sort of a crazy situation applies in the USA when an obscure judge, whose job involves Federal cases only in the western half of Washington state can rescind a Presidential Executive Order and extend his ruling to the whole country? Seems insane to me. But it reflects a trend in all White countries whereby courts increasingly usurp the power of elected representatives, in effect making the law as well as adjudicating on it. Just say a law or Executive Order is 'unconstitutional' and everybody must go back to base.

Being largely unaccountable they seldom hesitate to intervene and make rulings that are both unpopular and illogical. The execrable European Court Of Human Rights is probably the worst with every Third World criminal due for expulsion guaranteed a right-to-remain verdict. And what about Brexit, where the (((judges))) decided to do away with all this democratic voting nonsense? There's an admiring quote ascribed to US Chief Justice Earl Warren (arguably the guy who started the rot) as he assessed potential rulings: 'Is it fair?' he asked. Might sound nice but that criterion has nothing to do with the US Supreme Court or any court for that matter. Their job lies exclusively in interpreting the law as laid down by the relevant legislature. If they start making the law, which in effect they're doing, the whole system of checks and balances collapses.

Interestingly, but not surprisingly, capture of the judicial system ranks high on the nation-wreckers' agenda with Saul Alinsky, the Frankfurt School, Grampsci and even the Protocols Of Zion all recognising its importance. Combining this power with the broader nexus of Jewish interests is capable of achieving extraordinary results, as my case study on Yonkers shows.

Incidentally I find it interesting that when a Federal court in Texas issued an injunction halting Obama’s executive amnesty order, the administration simply ignored it and continued as before. Which raises the question of what Mr. Trump should do now. In fact I think the nation-wreckers might, just might, have shot themselves in the foot. If the President conducted a media blitz, asking 'who runs the country, elected officials or judges?' it might not reverse the decision but it would highlight the extraordinary power wielded by unelected judges. 

He could also of course simply issue a new similarly-worded Executive Order and recommence enforcing the immigration law while the DoJ appeals the current Federal ruling.

In any event my bones tell me that if this gets played right the ruling could end up like the 'fake news' meme as a major own-goal.