Well done German identitiarians!

German identitiarians have created another iconic moment in the struggle against open borders in Europe. Fifteen members of the group scaled the famous Brandenburg Gate landmark in Berlin and unveiled a banner reading "Secure borders - secure future".

From Breitbart:

According to their Facebook page the Identitarians say that the protest was to make the average German aware that Merkel and her government were clearly breaking German laws and that the migration crisis policies were an utter failure. The group spoke of the many migrants the German government was forced to admit they had no idea where they were and highlighted the recent terror attacks in Bavaria saying that the policies of a “multicultural utopia” were leading to a rapidly fragmented society.

And the reaction of the authorities? They are ramping up their liberalism to an absurd degree:

Berlin Mayor Michael Muller described the Brandenburg Gate protest as a “disgusting” act carried out by enemies of democracy, according to Germany’s RBB 24.

“Berliners will not allow the Brandenburg Gate [to be] misused as a symbol of exclusion,” he added.

That's what it has come to. If you don't accept open borders you are guilty of "exclusion" and are therefore "disgusting" and an "enemy of democracy". The German authorities sound like members of a strange political cult.

A bit of magazine advice

Not sure if there is a logical end point to this kind of thing. Look at the magazine cover below (a lifestyle magazine for the Melbourne Herald Sun):

Notice anything odd? Maybe a close up will help:

The cover is advertising a story about "Women who are single, sexy and over 60." It's Carrie Bradshaw and the Sex in the City lifestyle being promoted now to women of grandmotherly age.

The magazine story itself is what the internet writer Dalrock calls "divorce porn," i.e. it is trying to sell divorce to women as a great lifestyle move.

The story was first published in the British newspaper, The Telegraph, back in January. The Melbourne version has the heading "Meet the freemales. Deprived? No. Lonely? Definitely not. These women are happily single, sexy and 60 - and their numbers are on the rise."

The gist of the story is that women who grew up as part of the sexual revolution want to pursue the same ideals into their 60s, leaving their husbands and marriages in order to live a life that "has infinitely more possibilities" than anything experienced by previous generations of women, choosing instead of marriage a great "adventure" and doing so alone.

In a way, these women really are acting out the values of liberal modernity. In liberal modernity there are no goods that exist as part of an objective reality. Instead, value is created by the act of choosing our own subjective goods. So what matters is being free to self-determine what we do. Marriage restricts our ability to act however we want at any given time. Therefore, a liberal modern might think it "liberating" to reject marriage in favour of the "infinite possibilities" of life as a single 60-something woman.

Our commitments to others are easily dissolved in the liberal schema. It is noticeable that no thought at all is given to the husbands that these women have left. Nor to the damage done to the institution of marriage itself. There is no mention of the duties we might carry to others, instead one woman is thought of as liberated because she rejects the idea of "caring for others" - she readily admits that she is "more selfish" than those who choose to marry.

The tension here between marriage/family and liberal values is resolved in favour of liberal values. And so you have the spectacle of a major newspaper publishing "divorce porn" for women in their 60s.

You don't know what you've got until....

I have met several white South African migrants to Australia in recent months. Quite a few seem to be choosing my region of Melbourne to resettle in. I can't help but ask them, out of curiosity, why they left South Africa to come to Australia. So far they have all listed just two things: crime and quotas.

The crime issue hit home to me with the last South African I spoke to. She said a decisive moment for her was when she was forced to the ground during a robbery and had an AK47 pointed at her head. I said to her that I had heard of some terrible things done to white farmers in South Africa, and she told me that it wasn't just a farm issue but was happening in the cities as well. She thought that it was now foolish for white people to remain in South Africa if they had the opportunity to leave (her family had to give up a lot of money to get here). She expressed some sadness at witnessing Australia heading down the same path as South Africa (I think she was referring to the carjackings and home invasions being carried out by the Apex gang). She said it was difficult as someone who had seen her own country become unliveable to observe another country heading down the same path.

I think that we as Australians take a lot for granted. It is a very basic freedom to be able to live without fear of violent attack in your daily life. Another white South African who moved to Australia wrote of his decision that:

I am grateful to my Father in heaven for the chance to leave. I will not throw stones when asked by people about my former country, but I will be candid about the facts.

It is indeed, Cry The Beloved Country. I sleep now with open windows; don’t worry about the guy selling a paper at the traffic light (robot) or the lights behind me on the way home. SA citizens, you are going to have to stand up and demand accountability. Call me what you wish, but I am happier now than I have been in 20 years.

My children have a genuine shot at goals. To those who choose to remain and those who cannot leave, I salute you.

For this (former) South African it is a great blessing simply to be able to sleep with open windows. Or not to worry when the traffic lights turn red.

Liberals do not seem to realise that in holding to an ideal of "equal freedom" by which everyone is supposed to have the right to migrate to the West regardless of the likelihood of assimilating or upholding a law-abiding culture, important personal freedoms are likely to be lost, as has happened in South Africa. To live in a more traditional society in which you can move freely and with security is a greater freedom than to have open borders and to have to barricade yourself in your home or your car.

The second reality of life for white South Africans is quotas. One of the South Africans I spoke to said that the decisive moment for him in choosing to leave his country was getting a job and observing the older and experienced white males being passed over for promotion because of the quota system in South Africa in which white males get put last. He realised that he had little chance for career advancement in South Africa, and that his children would also face the same penalties (he also explained something about white business operators having to accept majority black ownership of the company in order to receive government contracts, but I'm not sure about the details of this).

The point to be made is that it is possible to lose your country in the sense that it is no longer a place that is safe for you or that offers you normal opportunities for work or education. This is the reality for white South Africans. Some are choosing to tough it out, some are leaving and coming to places like Australia. We do need to try to preserve, for our own populations, what we have and not take it for granted.

"Who are we to say you shouldn't feel insecure?"

The head of Australia Post, Ahmed Fahour, is a Muslim. He has defended the right of Sonia Kruger to express her concerns about Muslim immigration:

"Who are we to say, 'you shouldn't feel insecure, you just suck it up'. That's not right. They have a right.

"I feel insecure. I am a Muslim and I feel insecure about what Daesh is doing.

His comment came as news arrived of a bombing, most likely carried out by the Taliban, in the Pakistani city of Quetta, which killed the senior lawyers of that city:

About 60 of them were killed in one attack on Monday in Baluchistan's capital, Quetta. They were packed into an emergency room where the body of a slain colleague lay, riddled with gunshot wounds. A widely circulated video showed lawyers milling about the hospital before an enormous explosion. A Pakistani Taliban offshoot claimed the attack, as did the Islamic State, though analysts say the latter's claim is dubious.

A generation of lawyers has been wiped out in Quetta, and it will leave Baluchistan, in more ways than one, lawless.

Barkhurdar Khan, a member of the Baluchistan Bar Council, was one of the few lawyers who survived the attack...After the attack, Khan offered his singular perspective in a heartrending stream of posts on social media.

"All, I repeat ALL senior practicing lawyers and barristers died today," he wrote. "Most of those who died were first-gen educated. The scenes of misery and loss cannot be put into words. The bent shoulders of their fathers, the broken backs of their brothers. Their kids, still oblivious to their own loss, playing and hoping," Khan continued.

"Heartwrenching is an understatement."

And, finally, something that we traditionalists have predicted. In Italy, homosexuals have been granted the right to civil unions. Unsurprisingly, the leading Muslim organisation in that country has argued that if two men can marry, then a man should be able to have more than one wife and have it recognised by the state:

Following the introduction of civil partnerships, Muslim representatives in Italy are now demanding the legalisation of polygamy.

Responding to a new law allowing same sex couples to enter civil unions, Hamza Piccardo argued that if gay relationships, which Muslims disagree with, are a civil right then Italians must accept polygamy as a civil right too.

The founder of the Union of Islamic Communities and Organisations (UCOII) in Italy took to Facebook to claim polygamy is a “civil right” and that Italy would benefit from the large number of Muslim births it would promote.

It's only a matter of time, isn't it? If, as liberals claim, family is whatever we define it to be and marriage is a celebration of love between people, then on what logical grounds can you say that men shouldn't have more than one wife?

We have a combination of a watered down liberal definition of marriage and mass Muslim immigration into the West. The result will inevitably be the legalisation of polygamy. Liberalism and Islam are working together, in this instance, to radically change the Western tradition.

My suburb to become more "vibrant" - and who is responsible?

We have seen how Muslim refugees have been brought en masse into Sweden and Germany and then put into various kinds of social housing in local communities.

Well, it's happening now in my own suburb here in Melbourne, though on a smaller scale.

I live in the suburb of Eltham on the fringes of Melbourne. It's a pleasantly green, family-oriented place to live and the demographics haven't changed much over the years - according to the 2011 census those from Italy (5%) are the only major non-Anglo ethnic group.

But that is soon to change with an influx of Muslims from Syria and Iraq. How has this come about?

Well, the first person responsible is the supposedly "conservative" politician Tony Abbott, who decided as PM to resettle 12,000 refugees from the Middle-East in Australia (admittedly smaller numbers than Germany and Sweden).

The second institution responsible is, predictably, the Catholic Church, which has decided that "social justice" means helping to Islamify Australia.

There is a large aged care facility in Eltham which was run until recently by a group called Melbourne City Mission. Last year it was taken over by St Vincent's Care Services:

Melbourne City Mission Chief Executive, Rev Ric Holland, said the sale announcement was a fantastic outcome for Eltham’s residents and their families, as well as the centre’s staff and volunteers, and it will be business as usual for operations.

That wasn't true. St Vincent's Care Services is committed to a vision of social justice which is no longer focused on helping the local elderly:

Our focus is on addressing the health care needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, people experiencing chronic homelessness and people living in the community seeking asylum.

So the mission is to help asylum seekers. What this means is that St Vincent's is going to start leasing places at the facility to young Iraqis and Syrians, then allow them to buy them cheaply, alongside the elderly residents still living there.

The local paper ran a story on this highlighting the worry for the elderly residents:

Retirement village residents fear being victimised if they speak out against plans allowing Syrian and Iraqi refugees to lease units in the same centre they call home.

...a person living inside the village...said that residents were not consulted about the proposal. "It was either like it or lump it," the resident said.

"We were told it was going to enliven the community and become a more vibrant and dynamic place, but this is a retirement centre."

...The relative of another village resident, who also did not want to be named, pleaded...for the application to be refused. "The residents are feeling very scared and unsafe," the letter read.

So elderly people in a retirement village are being told that they are going to live in a more "vibrant" place with the arrival of young Muslim refugees.

What is to be said about all this? I can only point again to the fact that the Liberal Party is more correctly described as a right-liberal party rather than a genuinely conservative one. Tony Abbott, who is often portrayed in the media as a right-wing politician, implemented policies that are radically liberal in nature rather than conservative. And the Catholic Church seems to have joined in the great liberal death wish - it is hell-bent on a future Islamic Australia rather than a Christian one.

As for those who wish to help asylum seekers, it is a very odd thing to take people from Iraq and drop them half-way around the world into an aged care facility in an outer suburb of Melbourne. If they really do need help, rather than wanting welfare and Western women, then they should be supported to resettle somewhere in their own region, where living standards and culture are similar to their own country.

Another feminist falls

Sandra Hochman was a second-wave American feminist, perhaps best known for a documentary film Year of the Woman.

Her daughter, Ariele Leve, has published a book, An Abbreviated Life, giving an account of her childhood. If it is an accurate portrayal, then it is clear that her feminist mother was psychologically disordered, possibly borderline or narcissist.

It's another case of modern society being influenced by people unfit for the role.

You can read reviews of Ariele Leve's book, including descriptions of her mother's unusual behaviour, here and here.

Melbourne Traditionalists meeting a success

Have just got back from tonight's meeting of the Melbourne Traditionalists. It was a very enjoyable get together, with some great discussion of recent events and future directions. I'd like to give some credit to Mark Moncrieff of Upon Hope who organised the event. My wish would be that such meetings could be reproduced in suburbs and towns across Australia - when you participate you get the feeling that traditionalists should not be isolated, or connected only electronically, but should form the kind of connections that arise from meeting together. Thank you to all who participated!