Thursday, 30 May 2013

Save Western civilisation from the dementia of feminism

Another feminist whose hit and run "debating" tactics leave much to be desired. (She tweeted at me then blocked me.)

Mind you, she got one thing exactly right, it is indeed my intention to destroy feminism.  This feminist thinks destroying feminism would destroy society, but the intention is to save Western civilisation from the matriarchy.  Thankfully, the penny is now dropping with more and more people.

Everyone who has ever benefited from Western civilisation has a stake in it, regardless of race.  Let us now start a worldwide campaign to save Western civilisation from feminists!   

Sunday, 26 May 2013

We are in the Kali Yuga

Prophesied events during a Kali Yuga 

A discourse by Markandeya in the Mahabharata identifies some of the attributes of Kali Yuga.

In relation to rulers, it lists:

Rulers will become unreasonable: they will levy taxes unfairly. (Note the deliberate conflation of avoidance and evasion.)

Rulers will no longer see it as their duty to promote spirituality, or to protect their subjects: they will become a danger to the world. (US Presidents and UK Prime Ministers have been a succession of warmongers.)

People will start migrating, seeking countries where wheat and barley form the staple food source. (Mass immigration.)

"At the end of Kali-yuga, when there exist no topics on the subject of God, even at the residences of so-called saints and respectable gentlemen of the three higher varnas [guna or temperament] and when nothing is known of the techniques of sacrifice, even by word, at that time the Lord will appear as the supreme chastiser." (Srimad-Bhagavatam (2.7)  (Neither the Church of England nor the Catholic Church are fit for the purpose of protecting the morals of the people.)

With regard to human relationships, Markandeya's discourse says:

Avarice and wrath will be common. Humans will openly display animosity towards each other.

Ignorance of dharma will occur.

People will have thoughts of murder with no justification and will see nothing wrong in that.

Lust will be viewed as socially acceptable and sexual intercourse will be seen as the central requirement of life. (The civil partnership has lead to gay marriage, has it not?)

Sin will increase exponentially, whilst virtue will fade and cease to flourish.  (Virtue and principle is mocked as stupidity deserving of exploitation.)

People will take vows and break them soon after. (No-fault divorce.)

People will become addicted to intoxicating drinks and drugs.

Gurus will no longer be respected and their students will attempt to injure them.  Their teachings will be insulted, and followers of Kama will wrest control of the mind from all human beings. 

The maximum lifespan of a human in this age is 90-100 years.

Brahmans will not be learned or honored, Kshatriyas will not be brave, Vaishyas will not be just in their dealings.

Do they mean us?

Kali Yuga - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Kali Yuga (Devanāgarī: कलियुग[kəli juɡə], lit. "age of [the demon] Kali", or "age of vice") is the last of the four stages the world goes through as part of the cycle of yugas described in the Indian scriptures. The other ages are Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga and Dvapara Yuga.

“Out of the corruption of women proceeds the confusion of races; out of the confusion of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory, the loss of understanding; and out of this, all evil.”

-Bhagavad Gita, I, verse 41 et seq.
(as quoted by Savetri Devi in The Lightening and the Sun, page 139)

The corruption of women flows from feminism.

Saturday, 11 May 2013

What would you do if you found yourself in the body of a member of the opposite sex?

You suddenly find yourself in the body of a member of the opposite sex of the same age . To change back to your original body, you would have to undergo Gender Reassignment Surgery. Would you

(a) make the best of things in the body you have found yourself in?

(b) undergo GRS as soon as possible?

(c) commit suicide

This poll can also be found at

Male to female gender reassignment surgery

Female to male gender reassignment surgery
Stephanie does have a feminine voice.  I must say she convinces me just by her voice and I find her persona quite likable.  She is genuinely feminine.
Stephanie Rose Woodcock

I actually have a brilliant idea for a TV show featuring transsexuals which I know people the world over would just love.

Friday, 10 May 2013

BBC Socialist feminist Jayne Egerton displays a sound understanding of the rules of tolerance and the methodology of rational discourse

Thursday, 9 May 2013

Matriarchy proposes to make it easier to convict those who are accused of rape (ie men) by abolishing jury

What is Rape Myth Acceptance?

She asked for it: the impact of rape myths
Quiz on how you are affected by RMA

Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, (2013), pp. 1–29 doi:10.1093/ojls/gqt006
Rape Myths: Is Elite Opinion Right and Popular Opinion Wrong?1
Helen Reece*

"Once the population has been stigmatized as dripping with RMA, there are two solutions: to remove either rape-supportive people from process or rape-supportive attitudes from people. Donald Draper is unusually unapologetic about recommending the former. Making explicit the elitism that is implicit in much of the rape myth discourse, he sees rape law as representing a tension between elite opinion, which is right, and popular opinion, which is wrong. ‘Elite opinion has controlled the law-on-the-books’, he states, but ‘popular opinion has had more influence on the law-in-action.’ Accordingly, he is quite matter-of-fact about his proposal to abolish the jury in rape trials, as a ‘direct bypass of popular prejudice’. Proposals to screen criminal justice personnel for RMA, or ensure more female representatives, are less extreme points along this spectrum. It might have been assumed that the more optimistic recommendations would be those based on education. It is true that part of Draper’s reasoning for abolishing the jury is his pessimism about the prospects of attitudinal change (although this is in large part because he recognizes that educating people out of rape myths means the wholesale transformation of public attitudes towards gender roles and stereotypes). But in reality, ambivalence towards abolishing jury trial is rarely based on the importance of popular participation in the criminal justice system, and rarely because reformers are ‘bright-eyed optimist[s] [expecting] a sudden sea-change in popular attitudes’. Rather, RMA is seen as too rampant for this remedy to work. Specifically, Temkin and Krahe ´ are tentative about abolishing the jury because ‘reliance on judges and barristers effectively to challenge stereotypes seems rather like pie in the sky’."

"Nor does this problem extend only so far as judges and barristers. Before conducting their research, Stewart and others had expected rape supportive attitudes to differ across social positions, but they ‘became fascinated by the consistency with which cultural myths and stereotypes about rape were embraced at all levels of the justice system and by all parties involved’; for Temkin and Krahe ´, during discussion of the SOA 2003 adherence to rape myths extended as far up the echelons as the then Home Secretary. In sum, rape myths influence the ‘judgments and decisions made by police officers, crown prosecutors, forensic medical examiners (FMEs), juries, and judges’. According to these rape myth researchers, only super elite opinion is right. RMA having such a hold within the body politic, quarantine clearly cannot hold. Those few who are clean of RMA would not have time to process all the rape claims.

Accordingly, the more common reform proposals involve managing, not excluding, people with rape-supportive attitudes. One important strategy is to give them rules to follow, as discretion involves trusting decision-makers’ instincts. The other strategy is education. In itself, educating people is of course a good idea. But education needs to involve an educator who is better informed imparting knowledge to others who are worse informed. In relation to some small segments of rape myth education, these stipulations may be met. If jurors mistakenly believe that physical injuries must accompany rape, or that a woman’s delayed complaint means that she was not raped, then certainly information will help their decision-making. However, this is not true of the training programmes aimed at dispelling stereotypes, let alone the ‘wider educational initiatives designed to target social attitudes’. As we have seen, these involve persuading people to believe that they believe the most perverse rape myths, by labelling as myths what are actually a mixture of fact and opinion, depicting the occasionally held sex myth as rampant rape myth, and putting the worst possible interpretation on ambiguous and complex statements. The message of these initiatives—that those attitudes that are disapproved of are rape-supportive, and those views that are not shared are rape myths—functions to close down, not open up, the possibilities of a productive public conversation about these important and at times vexed questions."

Be afraid, be very very afraid as the matriarchy entrenches itself and spreads its tentacles all around you, especially in your mind.

Time to tell feminism to fuck off, methinks, if men value the quality of their lives and value being men.

Wednesday, 8 May 2013

The enemy within of nationalism - the promiscuous female nationalists fear to offend

Understand your class system. The BNP are considered lower class losers who are expected to put up with this kind of thing because they are lower class losers. It really is as simple as that. Nick Griffin doesn't want any educated middle class professional joining the BNP because he doesn't want any leadership rivals.

The problem is therefore

1. the pariah status of lower class voters who are anti-immigration

2. the fact that the leader of the lower class voters are anti-immigration doesn't want to change its image of being a party of lower class voters who are anti-immigration

UKIP doesn't want anyone who ever joined the party of lower class racist voters to join them.

What nationalists in the prohibited list of parties and organisations that cannot join UKIP could most usefully do is to debunk ethno-nationalism and become civic nationalists, but I can't see that happening because they confuse a political party with a social club and believe that their political activism is the repetition of their desire to repatriate non-white British citizens.

They will insist on their right to say they want to send every non-white home even as they know how unrealistic and deluded it is to ask for that. They are not the brightest bulbs in the box, after all.

They insist on asking for all or nothing even though knowing that asking for all means they will end up getting nothing.

It is just the mulish stupidity that gives them their pariah status ie not only are they racist, they are also STUPID. They are so stupid they have no idea how much they are despised for both their views, their social status and their dress sense.

They never want to discuss anything ideological because they know they will end up fighting each other, and they can be pretty unpleasant to each other, as we all know.

In the meantime, Nick Griffin regards them as a source of income. He is not interested in helping them, only in milking them by feeding their grievances.

If he cared about them, he would drag them kicking and screaming into civic nationalism, but he cannot be bothered with these stupid vicious people, even though the success of Front Nationale has shown quite conclusively that the way forward is civic nationalism.

Is there another rival nationalist party in France? Nope, nothing that need worry Marine Le Pen.

She tellingly said that her party is closer to UKIP than it is to the BNP.

Uneducated people tend not to get the significance of ideology and it is true that most BNP supporters will not understand why it is necessary for nationalists to embrace civic nationalism.

These uneducated and ignorant people see nationalism as asserting the right to say they want to repatriate non-white British citizens, even as they know it does them no good.

Because they are seen as so uneducated, racist, lower class and unpleasant, no one will give them the time of day apart from their leader, who only wants to squeeze money out of them.

Anyone who is leadership material in the BNP would be marginalised and expelled anyway, because Nick Griffin wants to stay top dog whether or not it is in the interests of his cause or not.

If he cared about his cause he would encourage people of talent to join and stay, but he does not. He only cares that he stays leader of the BNP.

Because he does not care about the people who supports the BNP, he sees it as more than his job's worth to tell them why the political establishment despises them and no sane British employer wants to hire a British worker who cannot compete against unskilled manual labour from abroad, probably because they are obese, or disabled or have learning difficulties as well as mental health issues with a few substance abuse, behavioural addictions and drink problems thrown in.

The fact is that the white working class are not fit for purpose.

Does Nick Griffin tell them that? Of course not. He tells them it is all the fault of the Jews and the Muslims.

There is only one person in the land prepared to tell the white indigenous working classes exactly what is wrong with them and why they are so despised, but she was expelled at the behest of an unmarried single mother with illegitimate and disabled offspring.

Single mothers with illegitimate and disabled offspring actually wield a disproportionate amount of power, because there are so many of them and they have the vote.

These women, who are members of the parasitic pornocracy who wield such power over both nationalists and the political establishment, are the result of over half a century of feminism and that other grave and continuing error - indiscriminate universal suffrage.

The reason why there are so many immigrants in this country is because British mothers do not have enough children and do not bring up or educate those that they have properly.

We all know that the teaching profession is female-dominated and have been trying to hide their failure for years.

But is any British man or even leader of a political party prepared to say that?

Of courser not. He is so afraid of them (because they have the vote) that he prefers to blame the symptoms of his malaise than point to its cause - the matriarchy that has established itself on the foundations of feminism, indiscriminate universal suffrage and no-fault divorce.

Any race of men who are known to be afraid of their women will be treated with contempt by other races whose men are not afraid of the worst of their women, the unmarried single mother with illegitimate and disabled offspring.

In fact, these days the white man is generally supposed to be a paedophile and his women considered sluts.

However, so effeminate and degraded is the white man now that he is either unaware of the contempt in which he is held by other races, or affects not to care.

In other races, there remains a visceral disgust for the promiscuous female. It probably comes from a collective memory of how degraded a society becomes when it allows the preferences of these women and their offspring to dominate their society, and is followed by invasion, conquest, exploitation and slavery.

The reason the promiscuous female is instinctively hated and despised is because when there are too many of them, standards of education and morality decline, and men become afraid of women. What can be more humiliating than to have to admit that you are afraid of people who are in most cases stupider, poorer and weaker than you?

Only men without honour and who feel no shame and who have no masculine pride would admit to this.

Yes, it is indeed the case that the enemy is within. It is in your trousers and between your legs and between your ears in the way that the default position of the average British male is that of rational cowardice and his degenerate inability to understand the purpose of abstract concepts such as honour and courage.  

Men fear the wrath of promiscuous women when they are so impoverished that the only kind of sex they can hope for is sex from a slut.

If they want sex from such a woman, he must take care not to offend her by calling a spade a spade and, of course, a slut a slut.

A slut is anyone prepared to have sex with a man not her husband. A worse kind of slut is one who gets knocked up. The worst kind is one who goes on to have her illegitimate offspring at the expense of the taxpayer.

The Catholic Church is no longer prepared to call a slut a slut because it is afraid of the predictable accusations of homosexual and paedophile celibate priests.

The worst kind of man is a man who pretends he can see nothing at all wrong in all this, especially if he calls himself a nationalist.

If you want to know when the rot started, it was when the institution of marriage was no longer respected.

It was no longer respected when no-fault divorce was introduced. When that happened the fact that your marriage certificate has now become a piece of paper not fit to wipe your arse on was only inevitable.

To desecrate marriage further, treat the unmarried mother better than married parents by allowing her to live off the taxpayer.

To desecrate marriage even further, give it to same sex couples as a sex toy to use for when they want to say they love each other, until they no longer do.

In the Land of Compulsory Fornication that is Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland the Slut Single Mum is Queen and the men drones.

Have you noticed how feminists never ever consider the long term national interest between pauses of "Gimme, gimme, gimme"?

It is an alien concept to them.  It is like asking a serial killer to consider the feelings of the loved ones of his murdered victims.

How can such a nation, based on such immoral and demented principles, ever prosper again?

Man created God to protect him from the promiscuous female.  Now, the effeminate man no longer believes in God.   Even those who acknowledge the usefulness of God do not have the conviction to use Him as an instrument of government, even as he knows that a general belief in God was an essential prop in making  people respect the institutions of marriage.

Marriage is eugenic, illegitimacy dysgenic.

Soon, the white man will be so degenerate that he will no longer be able to grasp these concepts.

Returning to barbarism means behaving like animals, and animals are not known for their ability to grasp and use abstract concepts.

Let the West then be the perfect demonstration of how condoning extramarital sex can end your civilisation.