Tuesday, 31 March 2015

Catholics reject Secular Koranism but won't really say why
20th minute. Fornicators were whipped in a public place "in the usual way".

The balance of our population, our human stock is threatened. A recent article in Poverty, published by the Child Poverty Action Group, showed that a high and rising proportion of children are being born to mothers least fitted to bring children into the world and bring them up. They are born to mother who were first pregnant in adolescence in social classes 4 and 5. Many of these girls are unmarried, many are deserted or divorced or soon will be. Some are of low intelligence, most of low educational attainment. They are unlikely to be able to give children the stable emotional background, the consistent combination of love and firmness which are more important than riches. They are producing problem children, the future unmarried mothers, delinquents, denizens of our borstals, sub-normal educational establishments, prisons, hostels for drifters. Yet these mothers, the under-twenties in many cases, single parents, from classes 4 and 5, are now producing a third of all births. A high proportion of these births are a tragedy for the mother, the child and for us.
Yet what shall we do? If we do nothing, the nation moves towards degeneration, however much resources we pour into preventative work and the over-burdened educational system. It is all the more serious when we think of the loss of people with talent and initiative through emigration as our semi-socialism deprives them of adequate opportunities, rewards and satisfactions.

Yet proposals to extend birth-control facilities to these classes of people, particularly the young unmarried girls, the potential young unmarried mothers, evokes entirely understandable moral opposition. Is it not condoning immorality? I suppose it is. But which is the lesser evil, until we are able to remoralise whole groups and classes of people, undoing the harm done when already weak restraints on strong instincts are further weakened by permissiveness in television, in films, on bookstalls?

On Papal Infallibility:

Sunday, 29 March 2015

God, marriage, division of labour, specialisation and social cohesion

I am perfectly ready to accept that what are said to be God's laws are merely the accumulated wisdom of Man attributed to God because saying these laws came from an omnipotent and perfectly moral God is the only way of making the stupid, venal and unprincipled - who would only do good if rewarded and refrain from evil only if punished, in this life and the next - obey these rules generation after generation. The strictures of Communism, Nazism, Liberalism etc are only obeyed for as long as the government promoting Communism, Nazism, Liberalism etc does not fall. There are some laws that are eternal and universal, and the rules of marriage comes to mind. For as long as there are men and women on earth, they will need to make bargains with each other based on the buying and selling of sexual services as well as services men are specially good at providing eg soldiering and labouring, and of course services that women are specially good at providing eg childcare, housekeeping and sexual services.

Sex and marriage is clearly pivotal to this bargain and traditional marriage is the pivot upon which true gender balance rests.

Feminists, in their spite and eagerness to destroy the patriarchy which runs on marriage, have been demolishing this institution. All patriarchies are established on the principle of marriage and all matriarchies are established in the absence of traditional marriage. All patriarchies are advanced societies and all matriarchies are declining and primitive societies. To discover that you live in a matriarchy is the equivalent of discovering that your society has cancer. Once you have accepted this diagnosis and prognosis, you will know what the cure must logically and necessarily be: to surgically remove feminism from every major organ of the state.

Alison Saunders the Directrix of Public Prosecutions who presides over the English court system presides over a major organ of the state purporting to dispense criminal justice for victims (genuine and alleged) and perpetrators (genuine and alleged). Her campaign to increase the number of convictions against men accused of rape suggests that she does not much care whether they are in fact guilty or not. In a patriarchy every woman is potentially a slut to be shamed if she has extramarital sex. In a matriarchy every man is a potential rapist if he has sex with a slut who regrets giving him the impression that she consented to sex. A woman is most likely to regret having had sex with a beta male.

All men are lower than sluts in a matriarchy. In a patriarchy, however, beta males choose an alpha male to protect their interests. An alpha male would not hesitate to denounce a slut in the same way that the lower orders these days happily denounce each other as racists and paedophiles.  In a matriarchy all men including the putative alpha male such as the British Prime Minister and US President are afraid to offend sluts because they all have the vote.

Even if you were female, do you not finding it deeply shaming that all the men in your society are in fact lower than sluts and indeed the slaves of sluts?

Beta males are the ones whose interests are most damaged by feminism in a matriarchy. Why should we protect the beta male? Because they do all the work of labouring and soldiering, protecting and providing. What happens if they are so demoralised they withdraw their labour? Then your society will decline and fall, to be invaded and conquered by those who run their society along rational and patriarchal lines. When the enemy invades, men will be killed, captured, enslaved and sold together with the women. If you wish to avoid this, then you must support the patriarchy by supporting the principle of traditional marriage which implicitly excludes gay marriage. This would mean forbidding extramarital sex in all its heterosexual and homosexual varieties.

"Is all this really necessary?" I hear you all ask yourselves. Yes, it  is. If the problem is not addressed it will only get worse, and if it is bad enough then the sluts and socialists - the internal enemies of every society - will eventually take over, and, when they have finally exhausted all the resources of society, our external enemies will invade.

Is this really so hard to see and imagine?

Remember: WW3 was declared on 9/11. 

Saturday, 28 March 2015

Mike Buchanan describes how feminazis have taken over the state

Mike Buchanan explains how he was sent by his employment agency to be interviewed for a job he was never going to get so the feminazi who interviewed him could say she had interviewed an equal number of male candidates, even though it would only be a female candidate she would inevitably hire. She would always point to a quality the male candidate did not possess which the female candidate did to protect herself from accusations of sex discrimination by unsuccessful male candidates.

David Cameron is so unprincipled that he makes Mike Buchanan nostalgic for Tony Blair.

Angry ex-Tories now so angry they are now prepared to cut off their noses to spite their faces. That is why "Vote UKIP get Labour" no longer puts them off from voting UKIP.

Telegraph taken over by the feminazis, Times taken over by Caitlin Moran.

Why Andreas Lubitz did what he did

Andreas Gunter Lubitz in happier times.

The Germanwings co-pilot thought to have deliberately crashed his Airbus in the French Alps, killing 150 people, predicted "one day everyone will know my name", his ex-girlfriend says.

In an interview with Germany's Bild newspaper, she recalled a comment Andreas Lubitz made last year.

"One day I'm going to do something that will change the whole system, and everyone will know my name and remember," he told her.

Essence of the spree killer
In contrast, the essence of the spree killer is rebellion against his devaluation. His protest at his derogation is expressed by the number of victims; his tally is a demonstration of his worth. In most cases the spree killer has already decided to end his life, either because of events immediately beforehand or as part of a long-standing plan. Circumstances have ceased to make his life worthwhile, and he raises the cost of his demise with a final statement of his value.

We can now consider his choice of targets in light of this, particularly his emergence in modern, feminized, Western societies. In the male-female ‘game of opposites’ I have referred to before, males value the old while females value the young. Thus in the feminine mindset, children are valued more than men. This has become especially manifest since the State has supplanted the husband as the female’s protector and ultimate provider.

Female largesse extends to the many groups with which she feels affinity or sympathy. Yet practically everything that has ever been discovered or invented has arisen from white male ingenuity. Although virtually all our modern amenities derive from the efforts of exceptional males, our society could not function without ordinary men performing mundane jobs. Nevertheless in contemporary society he is constantly devalued and insulted; his concerns are routinely dismissed. What more profound insult can be delivered to a man than for a woman to advertise that she prefers a male of an alien race, even one who a century or so ago was called a savage, to seed future generations of her line? These are the provocations which can transform a normal, law-abiding and otherwise unexceptional man into a kind of Vulcan murder-machine.

Thus in raising the cost of his demise, the spree killer can target the young, raising the cost according to the values of his opponent. Breivik’s choice of target was coldly logical – since the State, as in this country, has defined “the invaders” as a protected group, any action against them will only increase their guardianship and exacerbate the situation he is rebelling against. Plus of course, information about where the blame really belongs is hard to come by. Pointing the finger can land you a jail sentence.

Intolerance of criticism
Even moderate critics of the Establishment’s suicidal immigration policies are marginalised and vehemently traduced as “racists,” “xenophobes” and the like. The fate of Matt Hale is a case in point. Nationalists’ concerns are ignored, or they are the theme of phony, stage-managed debates by a closed group of ‘media darlings’ who only repeat their stock agenda. The spree killer arises out of repressed fury at the despoliation of everything he is, has or holds dear; indeed spree killing might be regarded as the ultimate displacement activity.

Under this analysis it becomes apparent that fathers who destroy their children and then themselves, usually after the mother has spurned the marriage, are another form of spree killing. Including these personal tragedies adds significantly to the total number of spree killings already recorded.

This is only a provisional analysis of the spree killer phenomenon – H&D is an invaluable forum for intelligent nationalist thought but it is not an academic journal – and there may be some loose ends. At the forefront it is easy to lose your way. However evolutionary psychology provides us with a reliable guide, and the tribal scenario above is consistent with phylogenetic (i.e. natural) principles and the gut instinct of many individual males. It has always been, and will ever be, the male who fights to preserve the integrity of the tribe.

The spree killer may be at the outer boundary in the range of normal human behaviour, but nonetheless his is the natural response of the social animal provoked beyond endurance. He is merely the forerunner, and until he is given legitimate expression of his valid and justified anger, and allowed to respond to the daily injustices and affronts he must presently endure, each new atrocity will only herald more to come.

A widely accepted explanation links amok with male honor (amok by women is virtually unknown). Running amok would thus be both a way of escaping the world (since perpetrators were normally killed) and re-establishing one's reputation as a man to be feared and respected. Some observers have related this explanation to Islam's ban on suicide, which, it is suggested, drove Malay/Indonesian men to create circumstances in which others would kill them.

John Dyrden: "Beware the fury of a patient man."

Male Suicide Pilots - MGTOW

Thursday, 26 March 2015

Beta male antifeminist Mike Buchanan continues with his tactic of not engaging with Claire Khaw

Q.   Are you sure you are going about getting Mike Buchanan of J4MB to engage with you in the right way by insulting him daily?

A.  It would make no difference because that charmless petty little man with no imagination was never going to engage with me or anyone else.

Q.   Are you sure Mike Buchanan would have been just as dismissive of anyone else as he was of you?

A. is an example of how dismissive he is of anyone whose views he disagrees with. I actually don't know what he is on about because he hasn't bothered to explain his arguments but this kind of behaviour is typical in an arrogant petty little man with no leadership skills and no imagination.

Q.  How constructive do you think you are being by insulting Mike Buchanan and his beta male followers as often as you do?

A.  It is more constructive reminding them of their folly than giving up on antifeminism altogether. Even if these pathetic gutless beta male fuckers never listen to me it will at least be on record that I said loud and clear and lots of times that they are going about challenging feminism the wrong way.

Q.  How are you going about challenging feminism in the right way if no one listens to you either?

A.  I am saying that I will become unignorable if Mike Buchanan accepts my assistance ie to tweet on behalf of J4MB.

Q.  How will Mike Buchanan announcing that Claire Khaw is tweeting on behalf of J4MB help the cause of antifeminism?

A.  Because it is an interesting story that the media would be curious about in spite of themselves.

Q.  If Mike Buchanan were to announce that Claire Khaw is tweeting on behalf of J4MB, what do you hope the media will do?

A.  They would want to know why Mike Buchanan has chosen to accept my help, of course.

Q.  What do you hope Mike Buchanan would say if asked by the media why he has chosen to accept your help?

A.  He would be saying that I was right after all, however detestable my ideas and diagnosis.

Q.  What's in it for Mike Buchanan to say that you were right after the way you have been insulting him for so long?

A.   If he really wanted to defeat antifeminism, he would do whatever is necessary including acknowledge that my ideas that he finds so detestable are in fact correct and necessary to defeat feminism.

Q.   Have you drafted a press release for Mike Buchanan if and when he announces that he is letting you tweet on behalf of J4MB?

A.   He could just tweet "I have finally decided to let Claire Khaw tweet on behalf of J4MB. Please direct any questions you have on the matter to her." It really is that simple.

Q.   What would be the qualities necessary for Mike Buchanan to possess to do as you hope and accept your offer of assistance? Honour and humility.

A.   It would be honourable for him to stand aside for someone better able to fight feminism if he acknowledges the truth that I am in a position to do it.
He would have to have the virtue of humility to acknowledge that I am the better leader for all sorts of reasons ie my personal qualities and the current political environment. It is because of who I am that would make me a more striking figure for antifeminism than he ever will be.

Q.   What is the "current political environment" you mention that puts you in a better position than Mike Buchanan to challenge feminism?

A.   The fact that I am not male and white, of course. All men are lower than sluts in the West and Mike Buchanan is definitely a beta male. As a female and a foreigner, my position and people's perception of me would make me a more effective campaigner against antifeminism than any or even all of the beta males of Britain.

Q.   What would you say are your personal qualities that make you better able to lead in antifeminism than Mike Buchanan?

A.  The fact that I am female with alpha male leadership qualities and non-white. The cognitive dissonance the fact that I am not white and not male induces would make the media take an interest in me and the cause I promote, in spite of themselves. It is entirely understandable that despised beta males like Mike Buchanan would be complaining about feminism, but they cannot get round their heads why someone in my position - not male and not white - would wish to do so.

Q.   Mike Buchanan's position would be diminished if he allowed you to tweet on behalf of J4MB and yours would be enhanced. Can you think of anything that might induce him to suffer such a loss of status only to enhance yours other than for the good of the cause?

A.   If I am successful in challenging and defeating feminism, Mike Buchanan would of course be credited with having the wisdom, honour and humility to allow the cause of antifeminism to be led by me.

Q.   Why don't you give Mike Buchanan a call?

A.   I know the petty little man would only delight in putting the phone down so it would be a waste of time. I have however emailed him to show willingness to enter into negotiations.

Q.   What did you say in your email to Mike Buchanan?

To: Mike Buchanan
Sent: Thursday, 12 March 2015, 11:04
Subject: My formal offer to assist you in your General Election campaign
Hi Mike
I thought I would let you know that I am serious about this proposal and await your response.
Claire Khaw

Q.   Have you tried getting Mike Buchanan's followers to prevail upon him to stand aside for you?

A.   The trouble with being a beta male follower of Mike Buchanan is that beta males lack confidence, are risk-averse and give up easily. Even if they wanted to help they would be too weak, scared or stupid to know how to persuade him to stand aside or accept my offer of help.

Q.   Why do you think these contemptible creatures in J4MB who are women with penis extensions worth taking any trouble over?

A.   I don't do it because I respect or like these pathetic beta males who are too intellectually and morally crippled to be capable of acknowledging the truth of what I say, I just do it because I know the only way to get people to change their minds is to explain things clearly to people who don't want to hear what you say or do what you suggest. It is a test of my understanding of politics and psychology to know which buttons to press and leave his followers in no doubt as to why I am better fitted to lead antifeminism than Mike Buchanan. I have started so I will finish.

Q.   Do you think Mike Buchanan is afraid of you?
A.   Yes, but he should face his fear and at least be man enough to discuss things properly.