The Christian Right not so ‘right’

Posted on by | 2 Comments

Ehud Would’s recent piece from Faith and Heritage was titled ‘The Christian Right Gone Left’, and I realized in looking at it again that it somewhat ties in with my recent posting about the apparent demise of social conservatism.

We know that any institution that is not self-consciously conservative or right-wing will inevitably turn to the left over time. We see that in the secular realm, in politics and sadly in the social sphere. Even worse is that the Christian ‘right’ has apparently been seduced by The World now.

Christian-Right-multiculturalism-LGBT-rights-rap-GMO-BlackLivesMatter-Civil-Rights-segregation-John-Piper-Bojidar-Marinov-Tim-Keller-Marcus-Pittman-Russell-Moore-Anthony-Bradley-Lecrae

The illustration is from the Faith and Heritage piece aforementioned.

I recommend that article as well as this one, Modern Advertising as Leftist Propaganda, by David Carlton. It’s hard to escape the influence of advertising and pop culture, no matter how hard we try to seal ourselves off from it, and some of us do try. At the very least, it exercises a second-hand influence as we (and our children) come into contact with people who live and breathe pop culture in all its potent forms. And the simple act of going out in public means that we are exposed to all the propaganda in some form or other, by means of advertising billboards, music played in retail stores and restaurants, magazine covers, even the boxes of certain products like disposable diapers (very few White children there). A large poster in my local supermarket announces that the grocery chain “values diversity”, showing a store manager with several employees of different races.

The sheer ubiquity of the memes is staggering. It takes some determination to stand up to it. I don’t have a ready solution; we can only hope and pray that the tide has to turn back to sanity sooner or later.

The seemingly all-powerful ‘System’ may be its own worst enemy as they keep pushing more and more until it reaches a point of absurdity, and it all begins to crumble of its own weight, a victim to its own contradictions.  They can’t seem to resist overplaying their hand. I hope that will eventually be their undoing.

Italy ferrying immigrants to Europe?

Posted on by | 3 Comments

According to blogger Luboš Motl at The Reference Frame, news sources say that Italy is actually sending ships to Libya, where they are picking up people from boats near the North African coast, and bringing them to Italy. ‘Rescuing’ is the word being used to describe this, and most of us would assume that meant they were picking up people from the waters after their boats or rafts sank. Not so, apparently:

Because they can’t arrive through the Balkans, the importance of the Italian route for the illegal immigrants went up. Hours ago, the media told us that

“Italy says 6,000 migrants saved, 2 drowned in 4 days”
The report – which, according to the comment sections on Czech news servers, has totally shocked the Czech public – says that Italy’s navy is picking the people from boats directly near the beaches of Libya. In a sane world, the navy would be transferring the illegal immigrants from Europe back to Africa.

But the navy under the Italian social democrats is doing exactly the opposite: they are sending Italian ships to kidnap Africans and bring them to Europe.”

I encourage you to read the rest at the link.

As jaded as I sometimes become with these stories about our ‘elites’ and their bizarre machinations, this has me stunned, though it probably shouldn’t. Apparently they can’t replace Europeans and White populations everywhere fast enough, these disciples of Coudenhove-Kalergi. They have to come up with these schemes to speed things up.

And yet that’s not all. According to a commenter ‘Fer137’ on the article

There are also several Spanish frigates “rescuing” in Libya, and probably more countries. These are EU and NATO operations. http://eeas.europa.eu/csdp/mis… https://euobserver.com/migrati…
At the height of impudence they advertised it as
“..to cut lines of international human trafficking”
When in reality have become key partners. Facilitating the work of traffickers, reducing its operating costs, providing more comfortable and safe military boats for most of the trip. I have understood that just make a phone call from the coast of Libya to an NGO to go a military boat to “rescue”.

In a way we have a kind of similar action by ‘our’ government; remember a couple of summers ago when we read of the sudden surge of ”unaccompanied minors” at our Southern border? They were children, supposedly (though some suspiciously mature-looking) who needed to be ”escorted” to safety. We couldn’t turn poor orphaned children back, could we? It was a humanitarian crisis, so the feds brought these ‘children’ stateside and provided shelters, foster homes, and all kinds of assistance.

Just helping out the human traffickers, I suppose.

But this story from Europe deserves more exposure than it has gotten; I haven’t seen mention of it anywhere, and few eyes will see it on my blog. Bloggers, if anyone is reading this, you may want to check out this story. Especially if you are fluent in a European language and read European media where this story may (or may not) be reported.

 

 

Social conservatives don’t exist

Posted on by | Leave a comment

More and more I am becoming convinced that “social conservatives” no longer exist. They are extinct, for all intents and purposes.

Maybe Free Republic is not the place to find real ”conservatives” of any type, though the FReepers style themselves ‘conservative’, and seem to truly believe they are conservative. I get the impression that for them, ”conservative” means being for ‘small government and low taxes’ primarily, and the socially conservative stuff is optional if it’s tolerated at all.

The link above is to a discussion of a piece on the presidential daughters, or one of them at least, doing what is called ‘twerking’ at some kind of ‘concert.’ The pictures tell the story. In any case, if you can stand to scroll through the comments, you’ll see that quite a few FReepers defend the exhibitionistic behavior and the no-class style of dress that is on display. ‘Kids will be kids’, ‘they wouldn’t be normal if they didn’t rebel’ or ‘we did worse in my day’, are some of the defenses offered.

Make of this what you will: many of those who see nothing wrong in ‘twerking’ wearing skimpy clothing are men. And yet elsewhere on the Internet the anti-feminist males complain that American women are sluttish — so why are men defending this behavior? More importantly why are ‘conservatives’ in general so indistinguishable from the leftists when it comes to personal morality, especially sexual behavior?

I realize that for much of the younger alt-right, the word ”conservative” is now a pejorative word, and the general decree has gone out that conservatism is dead and good riddance to it; it’s a fraud and it represents weakness and loserdom. So they say.

But if we write off conservatism as a failure and a fraud and as something without which we are better off, then who will hold the line against the continuous onslaught of ‘change’ for the sake of change, and who will try to halt, or at least slow down the cycle of depravity and loss of standards in every area of life?

There has to be a counterforce to the seemingly endless push for new extremes of rebellion — rebellion against order, against rules of any kind, and against nature itself.

To say ‘conservatism is dead; let’s bury it for good’ is to invite unopposed chaos.

Social liberalism, also known as libertinism or libertarianism, will be the end of us even if we get our political houses in order.

Erasing memory: the first step

Posted on by | 3 Comments

tumblr_o3slhbofdW1tbakk0o1_540

The above is from a Tumblr blog. So Tumblr is not all millennial SJWs and angst-ridden teens.

The quote on the graphic above is very much like a quote which I used on my very first blog post back in 2006, as I seem to recall. Unfortunately I did not keep copies of my posts from those days, though they probably can be found in archives.

But the quote is more relevant today than ever. Back in 2006 there were far fewer people thinking or writing about these kinds of ideas and themes. Now, of course, there is a profusion of blogs, collectively known as Alt-Right or Neo-reaction, but those terms did not even exist then. But our relative fewness in number, those of us on the ‘traditional’ right or ‘paleo’ right, was offset by the more collegial and mutually supportive attitude amongst us which prevailed then. I miss that.

Still, it’s good that there are more people aware of the message in the above graphic, and more writing about it and discussing it, more openly and boldly.

Those ’11 million’ must have a ‘voice’

Posted on by | 3 Comments

Antonio Villaraigosa, former L.A. Mayor and would-be governor of California, says that those fabled “11 million” illegal Latinos ‘must have a voice’ in the Democrat party and in ‘our’ nation.  “Our” nation, Tony? Do we, you and I, have a shared nation or nationality? Your ‘America’ and mine are not the same, as your words and actions amply illustrate.

Villaraigosa, as is typical of his political brethren on the Left, says that ‘we are our brothers’ keeper.’ But is everybody in the world my brother? If everybody is my brother, then the word ‘brother’ is meaningless. If everybody, all human beings including those tens of millions of Latino trespassers, are my brothers, then nobody is my brother. Our natural loyalties start with close blood kin and expand outward, and those nearest take priority.

The discussion of this article at Free Republic included the following, somewhat typical comments. For instance, the first comment is one that is frequently asserted by somebody, sooner or later, on such threads:

“A lot of Hispanics hate illegals.” – posted by Roman_War_Criminal

Sure, if you say so. The fact that I’ve never personally encountered this attitude is not necessarily proof that it isn’t so, but neither is the bald statement that it is so. Now, usually these statements — that many (or most) Hispanics object to illegal Latino immigration — are left unchallenged, but some healthy skepticism appears in the form of the following responses:

To: Roman_War_Criminal
A lot of Hispanics hate illegals.

Well they sure are mighty discreet about it.
11 posted on Thursday, July 28, 2016 4:59:45 PM by Steely Tom (Vote GOP: A

Slower Handbasket)

To: Steely Tom
kinda like those “peaceful” muslims we hear about.

37 posted on Thursday, July 28, 2016 5:18:15 PM by ealgeone

Exactly like those ”peaceful” Moslems. After all these years of witnessing Moslem atrocities (“false flags” to some) the lack of any significant counter-voice from the so-called ‘Muslim community‘ is glaringly obvious. I have less and less patience with these kinds of apologetic statements on behalf of supposed ‘moderates’, and for this “can’t we all just get along” pleading on behalf of this troublesome group or that. Unless there is a great groundswell of opposition to the ‘extremists’ who supposedly don’t represent the majority, I can only assume that the majority are either indifferent to what the ”few bad apples” [sic] are doing, or they are supportive of it. Either way, they are morally culpable, but then they illustrate the old adage that blood is thicker than water. Except, of course, for many Whites.

Where are these Hispanics who oppose illegal immigration? I know that some of the anti-open borders organizations in California would point to a Hispanic woman who spoke at various rallies 10 or so years back, as proof that ‘they are not all like that’; some are loyal  Americans just like you ‘n me. Likewise there has been a Hispanic woman who has been featured prominently at some Trump events, as a very vocal cheerleader for Trump. To me this is, sadly, much like the ‘conservative black’ fawn-fests that happened at Tea Party rallies and such: the endless quest for minorities who are ‘on our side’, and as proof that NA(X)ALT. Sorry, I remain skeptical. One swallow doth not a summer make; the exceptions and the outliers merely prove the rule. These exceptions are feted and courted and fawned over precisely because they ARE exceptions, oddities. We can’t base our actions or policies on the exceptions to the very real rule.

Certifiably insane — or?

Posted on by | 5 Comments

Jean-Claude Juncker has said that the EU will never give up on their open-borders policy, despite the growing migrant crisis and the ramped-up terrorist acts in Europe. He says the EU will not give up on the so-called ”free movement of people” within the EU.

“This is one of the four fundamental freedoms of the founding Treaty of Rome. It is an inviolable principle,” he said.

[…]Speaking after Islamic terror attacks left 130 dead in Paris last November, Mr. Juncker rejected calls to rethink the EU’s open doors policy on migration from Africa and the Middle East. Dismissing suggestions that open borders led to the attacks, Mr. Juncker said he believed “exactly the opposite” – that the attacks should be met with a stronger display of liberal values including open borders.”

Apparently this statement was before the most recent attacks, which resulted in an elderly priest in Normandy murdered in his church, his throat slit. Some reports say that he was beheaded, but as we cannot automatically assume the media is giving accurate and complete information, given the fact that their marching orders from TPTB are to lie and mislead so as to further the agenda; the days of honest and objective journalism, insofar as they ever existed, are now a distant memory.

In response to the latest outrage, Hollande the globalist stooge says that the French people are ‘at war with ISIS.’ Shades of George W. Bush saying we were at war with ‘terror’, not with Islam, the “religion of peace.” Anything to avoid naming an enemy, an enemy which is not an abstraction. And saying that the enemy is ‘Islamism’ or ‘extremism’ or just ISIS, is a copout, a politically correct way of narrowing the blame down to ‘just a few extremists, a few bad apples who don’t represent Islam.’

If Juncker and his fellow globalist lackeys are sincere believers in their evil agenda of destroying nations and peoples, they are, as I’ve said for years, either insane or evil. Some people attribute the actions of Merkel, Juncker, and all their sorry kind to incompetence or to simple power-hunger.  Even now, some people can’t seem to see that this bizarre Camp-of-the-Saints scenario is not just the result of blundering or of simple political party ambitions (for instance Americans saying “it’s all about keeping the Democrats in power, more Democrat votes,” etc.) or ‘cheap labor’ for business — although that last apparently is a motivator for big business and small business too, in some cases. No, the madness we see playing out has method to it. They are working to a purpose, and working furiously to accomplish their malevolent goals. Nobody does this kind of evil, of this magnitude, for ordinary reasons.

And for my Christian readers, yes, we are fighting against ‘principalities and powers,’ and ‘spiritual wickedness in high places.’

Oh, and I am waiting for the claims that ‘this was staged; nobody died; the survivors are crisis actors and the blood was ketchup.’

Strange and portentous times we are living in, but then we knew this was coming. It was predicted, and even some who don’t read the Bible or believe prophecy sensed that this was taking shape. Yet some still don’t see the larger significance of it.

The lying media at it again

Posted on by | 5 Comments

Are they ever not lying?

Since yesterday’s post there are more details coming to light on the Munich murders. But how much of what the media says is trustworthy or true? The BBC baldly states that there is a link between the Munich murderer and Breivik. The only link that is evident is that the shootings in Norway and this one in Munich occurred on the same calendar day, five years apart. But the media are so desperate to connect the Munich event with any White person, particularly one who is supposed to be a nationalist, so as to tar all nationalists with the same brush as a deranged Mohammedan, or the deranged Mohammedan of the day. Blame Whites wherever possible, seems to be Rule #1.

A German speaker, on a Free Republic thread discussing the BBC article linked above, checks the BBC’s account of things against a German-language account of the story in Der Spiegel. He gives his translation of relevant passages:

Der Täter habe sich intensiv mit dem Thema Amok beschäftigt, daher gehen die Ermittler davon aus, dass er sich auch mit dem Fall Breivik beschäftigt habe. Das liege auf der Hand, sagt Polizeipräsident Andrä. Freitag war der fünfte Jahrestag des Amoklaufs in Norwegen.

My translation: The culprit has interested himself in mass shootings, therefore the investigators assume that he also has interested himself in the Breivik case. That’s obvious, says Chief of Police Andrä. Yesterday was the fifth anniversary of the mass shootings in Norway.

Now, you can go back to the BBC piece, check the first page of the Daily Telegraph etc etc and see how a false story is made. “

The phrase that I bolded in the quote above tells the story: investigators assume. The politically correct police seem as much to blame here as the anti-White mendacious media.

Another way in which the media have deceived us on this story: his name was at first (after some delay) given as Ali Sonboly. Later reports gave his name as David Sonboly, David, of course, not being a Moslem name usually. So we are told he was a convert to Christianity. And his ethnicity was given as Iranian. However, Walid Shoebat says he is not Iranian but Syrian, with Turkish loyalties.

“Why then advertise him as an Iranian which would make him a Shiite Muslim? Is it possible that Germany wants to avoid the repercussion when Germans know that Turks or Syrian refugees who are entering Germany by the droves are the culprit?”

Obviously the media have been told by their puppetmasters to conceal any link to the ‘Syrian’ ‘refugees’, so as not to arouse xenophobia and ‘Islamophobia.’

There are Alt-Right bloggers who are quibbling over whether he is Iranian because, they say, Iranians do not commit terror acts. I am not sure of the veracity of that claim; I haven’t researched it, but it seems a bit of a sweeping general statement, to me. In any case it’s moot, if it’s true that Sonboly was not Iranian at all. Shoebat asserts that the surname Sonboly is a Syrian name and he seems more credible on that than most Western journalists (many of whom are Third-worlders, including Moslems; remember journalism’s ‘diversity mandate’?). I will trust what Shoebat says over what the rest of the media tells us.

Again, other bloggers are arguing that the killings in Munich were not terror or jihad because he was just a troubled individual who was a loser and felt suicidal. But why would a merely suicidal person kill others on their way out of this world? Why not just kill oneself, and not innocent strangers? Then again, I am not a believer in armchair psychoanalysis of every killer or criminal out there, nor do I put much credibility even on the opinions of professional psychologists or psychoanalysts. Those ‘sciences’ are not hard science; there is far too much subjectivity and ‘trendiness’ in the mental health field, and it is now politicized, politically correct, far too often for it to be credible.

And what about the tedious media discussion of how this unfortunate young man got ”radicalized”, as if believing in Islam was not radicalizing enough? Who radicalized the original jihadists as they came out of the Middle East slaying and conquering and converting by the sword in the 7th century or so?

The overriding fact is that Sonboly was out of place, in a country that was not his ancestral country, and he was angry and bitter towards the native people of his host country. He was an immigrant, and he, like all the other jihadists or terrorists or whatever we choose to call them, illustrate not just the folly of promiscuous immigration practices, but the fatal consequences for innocent people in the host countries.

Another attack

Posted on by | 2 Comments

Yet another attack, this time in Munich, at a shopping mall. Ten are dead, as of the writing of this, some of them children. More are injured.

And yet another shameful job by the Western establishment media in ‘reporting’ this story. As is usual in any crime or atrocity by one of the ‘protected groups’, the media deliberately obfuscated details, claiming that there was no certainty about the identity or especially the ethnicity/race of the attacker. The local authorities were also culpable, in issuing statements asking people to refrain from ‘speculating’ about the attacker.

The American media were especially brazen in trying to link the attack to German nationalists (which, in their twisted parallel universe, translates to ‘haters’ and ‘bigoted Whites’). Shep Smith, the light-in-his-loafers Fox News personality, was blatantly pushing this storyline. It may have been Shep who mentioned the Utoya shootings of several years ago, since the Munich attack occurred on the anniversaary of that incident. You will notice that the article I link above also makes a point of reminding readers that this was the anniversary of Utoya.

I am sure that many significant events have happened on this day, so why is that one alone so significant, that it must be mentioned? Is the point that ‘White men, right-wing nationalists, do this kind of thing too‘? I don’t know what else to take away from their pointedly telling us about that anniversary, which most of us would not even be aware of.

Now of course we know that the shooter (who targeted children, real children, not post-pubescent teenagers as in the aforementioned attack in 2011) was Iranian by ancestry, though apparently a German citizen. It appears he had a verbal exchange at the site of the attack with a German who referred to immigrants: the shooter said he was ‘German’ by virtue of having been born there.  Again, as Wellington said, being born in a stable doesn’t make you a horse, and this Iranian killer was not German, regardless of an accident of birth or of citizenship papers.

The shocking thing about this incident is that the killer apparently lured children to the McDonald’s at the mall where the killings took place. He posted on Facebook about ‘free food’ for children there.

Though the media portray any ethnopatriot or ethnonationalist Whites as evil people consumed with ‘hate’ for anyone different from ourselves, I personally cannot conceive of hating anyone, especially strangers, so much that I would even think of doing something like this. The real ‘hate’, the kind of burning, visceral hate that allows someone to lure and kill children because of religious/racial/ethnic grudges is just foreign to me. These attacks only confirm in me the belief that these people are of a completely different makeup and mindset to Western, European-descended people. We have dangerous people amongst our own but not on the scale of what the Islamic world produces.

The media lackeys are colossal hypocrites who point the finger of accusation and condemnation at their own kinsmen while whitewashing and covering up and apologizing for the evils of the ‘sainted’ Others in our midst. These ‘white’ collaborationists are a disgrace to us and if we could excommunicate them from our folk, banish them, make them outcasts, that would be fully justified. All lefties and multicultists should be required to relocate to the Third World country of their choice, which if they are consistent, they would happily agree to.

The dominant American ethnic group

Posted on by | 7 Comments

For once, those are not my words, but a quote from a comment at the iSteve blog:

“I’ve noticed that they talk incessantly about minority cultures: their music, their food, and so forth, and how we “appropriate” it. But they act as if there’s no such thing as culture amongst white people. Unless they’re part of specific groups, like Italians or the Irish. The dominant American ethnic group in U.S. culture were and are the English. But we so take them for granted it’s as if their influence isn’t there, even though blacks, for instance, have “appropriated” more of it than we could ever hope to appropriate of theirs should we try.

A similar fate befell German culture. I guess the Irish survived because they were oppressed, or whatever. But there’s a whimsical quality to Irish-American culture, which I find artificial. Anyway, the point is that mainstream American culture is there, while people brought up in its slain yet undying influence pretend it isn’t.”

[Emphasis mine above.]

This will be cross-posted at the other blog, as it is very much the theme of that blog.

The new Ireland

Posted on by | Leave a comment

Many Irish-Americans, provided they haven’t actually visited Ireland lately, still think of Ireland as a country which is religious and socially conservative, safe, and above all, populated by Irish (mostly Catholic).

Meanwhile, in the real Ireland of 2016, the Minister of Social Protection is surnamed Varadkar, and he is ‘out’ as a homosexual. I can just hear someone say ‘Ireland is a nation of immigrants’ — oh, wait, that’s what they say about our country. They say it also about Britain or any historically White country these days. Whatever. By their constant use of that refrain to pummel immigration skeptics into submission, they succeed in making it true, as propagandized populations begin to believe the lies over time.

Varadkar, in case you are wondering, has a father from India and an Irish-born mother.

But all the same, no doubt, he is more Irish than the Irish themselves.

However he does not seem to share the same set of ethics as most Irish people, who, despite the social changes accompanying the transition to post-Christianity, are probably still more pro-life than many other Western nations.

An Ireland with African mayors, an Ireland where a native-born mayor is driven to quit following a controversy over his remarks about African migrants — where are the ethnopatriots in Ireland? I know there are a few but it seems the Irish are in the throes of xenophilia or more properly xenomania. It seems they have so identified with the ‘immigrant’ because their folk have so often immigrated to other countries for economic reasons, and because of the famine and colonialism, they see Africans as fellow oppressed folk.

It appears that much of the nationalist fervor that led to past rebellions against the much-hated Brits was not motivated mainly by ethnopatriotism but enmity towards, and envy of, the British. The result we see in these news stories out of Ireland is what happens when nationalism is not so much based on love, or above all, on loyalty to one’s kinsmen, but on hatred of some outside group.

Several years ago I wrote a post addressing this in an American context. We are very united in dislike for ‘the elites’ or some other group — everyone has their favorite minority, it seems, and many have their favorite enemy as well. But do we love our own folk, do we have enough loyalty to our own, to attain some kind of solidarity? I believe that love for folk and family and Faith have to animate our desire to prevail; animus cannot take us that far, especially when we can’t always agree on exactly who or what is ultimately responsible for our predicament.

Time will tell. I hope Ireland wakes up, and I hope the same for the American majority.