Monday, 14 March 2016

The problem of the Far Right with Feminism

The problem of the Far Right is that their men are perceived as repulsively unmarriageable.

The middle class women who control the media take one look at lower class racists and collectively shudder with revulsion.

They imagine having to be married to any of these lower class beta males and shudder again.

Then they resolve to save lower class women from having to marry lower class racists just to have children.

The female urban proletariat know that if they want to marry and have legitimate offspring they would have to find a Muslim husband. White proletarian women who care about being properly married and having legitimate offspring are already voting with their feet ie converting to Islam in order to increase their chances of finding a decent Muslim husband who will respect his marriage vows and be a good father.

White middle class women think they have time to play with and expect to meet their boyfriend and husband at university.

Most people are snobs or are subliminally affected by class perceptions. They hear a politician in a good suit speaking in an educated accent and are assured. They see some beta male slob who doesn't know how to dress properly speaking in a regional or plebeian accent ranting and raving about Jews, Muslims and immigrants and know they don't want to share his views on anything.

The trouble with the so-called Far Right - is that they have no leader capable of commanding respect in the political establishment because they are either plebs or charmless charisma-free zones like Eddy Butler. Nigel Farage and Nick Griffin broke that mould being public schoolboys, but that was still not enough to get things moving, because they don't have the strength of character and leadership skills necessary to do what must be done to change the political orthodoxy of the day. They are always on the defensive and dare not even say what is necessary to be said.

What is necessary to be said is that feminism is bad for the long term national interest because it makes the birth rate decline and creates the need for immigrant labour.

What is also necessary to be said is that the welfare state raises the cost of labour.

It is also necessary to say that if racist plebs don't want immigration they must be prepared to work harder for less.

Finally, what is necessary to be said is that the operation of democracy makes the continuation of the current system inevitable and predictable because all political parties chase the female vote which they must not alienate in order to remain in office or be voted into office.

No one not in the "Far Right" would trust its plebeian leaders to run the country properly, particularly if they won't admit that the only way to stop immigration is to make women have more legitimate babies and marry at a younger age or make employees give up employment protection legislation ie repeal the Equality Act 2010, as well as abolish maternity and equal pay.

Employers would know that if all immigrant workers were sent packing we would be back to the three-day week and wildcat strikes of the 1970s.

The key to the solution is to reconsecrate marriage, which would give women something to do once they are mostly kept out of the workplace. However, if most British men are obviously unmarriageable, then this understandably rouses feelings of hatred and revulsion in the female populace. Probably, many would say they would rather die than marry, obey and then bear the children of some beta male loser they had no choice but to marry.

The problem as I see it is that the sufferers of the disease of feminism have not the intellectual honesty to admit that they are suffering from it or the strength of character to propose its cure. Indeed, Eddy Butler has himself said to me that the cure I propose is worse than the disease.
If the patient refuses to admit he is sick, then he will not be disposed to take the bitter medicine necessary to cure it. If the bitter medicine is necessary to cure his life-endangering disease, then he will die if he will not take it.

The "Far Right", being mostly uneducated plebs, will not be disposed to take my advice. Not being white and male, they will say, as Eddy Butler does, that I am foreign and female and cannot possibly have the solution to their problems.

What is necessary is that some white male leader use my ideas, but no white male leader will say what needs to be said because he will be afraid not only of alienating his supporters, but also his wife, daughters and female seniors. Nick Griffin and Nigel Farage both come into this category. Indeed, all white male politicians suffer from this disability to speak what is necessary for them to say to solve the problem of immigration and national degeneracy.

Therefore NOTHING WILL BE DONE LET ALONE SAID about what is necessary to solve the problem.

If you will not admit you are in error then you will not deviate from the path of error, and most degenerate Westerners are so morally corrupted that they will not submit to the rules of truth and logic if they dislike its conclusions. I cannot correct them because they are immune to the rules of logic and reject truth and will simply reject and suppress what I say, knowing that I will be helpless to make them agree with me. After all, I am only one woman with no conquering army to help me achieve my aims, ignored by the media and politically isolated because my ideas will be perceived as anathema to Western liberalism and democracy.

No man in the "Far Right" will be prepared to say what I say, which is why they all say I am mad or refuse to endorse or even discuss my ideas, just like the liberal media.

Why do I keep putting "Far Right" in quotes? Because to call them the Far Right would be to dignify the thoughts and deeds of uneducated and unskilled manual labour by implying that their views amount to something as sophisticated as a political ideology when all they consist of is a collection of hatreds and prejudices.

My thoughts do deserve to be dignified as an ideology, but theirs don't because I have identified the cause of Western malaise and proposed practicable even if unpopular solutions, while their modus operandi is merely to turn up the hate and hope for civil disorder, violence and revolution while the white race still outnumber the Jews, Muslims and other races they hate and fear.

Being beta male victims of feminism deprived of sex and hungry for sexual release, they already know the source of their oppression: women not respecting them, not finding them desirable sex partners or husbands and indeed even preferring Muslim men whom they perceive as their mortal enemies to them. Such men will be even more less likely to say what I say because their need to have sex with sluts will be more urgent and immediate than their desire to save their race from degeneracy or save their nation from Islamic domination.

As for those of them who are no longer sexually active, they are men of no influence or ambition with no desire to acquire influence. They would be moral and intellectual mediocrities fearing to risk alienation by their fellow "nationalists" through discussing my ideas.

Unprincipled men of no faith lacking in education cannot be expected to achieve a successful counter-revolution against the matriarchy, and no man with sufficient seniority in politics is prepared to risk losing his privileges to stand up for a bunch of lower class racist losers who will be unlikely to be either grateful or loyal to him for his efforts on their behalves.

Beta males will be even more unlikely to act according to principle, because most of them don't even know what it is. Also, no beta male will accept the authority of another beta male. The best example of a beta male in politics is John Major who simply could not keep order even in his own cabinet because no other man in the cabinet respected him or saw him as an alpha male with leadership qualities worthy of leading them.

Beta males are like women who cannot be trusted to keep their promises. Indeed, they are given the same excuses as capricious women who don't know their own mind.

I already know that public schoolboys are also spineless cowards who regard having principles as giving hostages to fortune, and prefer to make up the rules as they go along, like conscienceless psychopaths who only act according to mood and opportunity.

Leaderless beta males who behave like women only whinge weakly weekly but become offended when you propose a solution. They are dimly aware of what the solution is because I have already told them my solutions ad nauseam, but believe that if they ignore me my ideas will not get the oxygen of publicity and eventually I will shut up and go away. This is exactly the same tactic of the liberal media.

I am sure that the more prominent members of the "Far Right" are already well aware of my ideas. They refuse to discuss it because they already know discussing my ideas would only upset their followers, who will already know that they are unmarriageable and despised by women of their class and the class above.

Such "leaders" only have the idea of turning up the hate, towards immigrants and towards Muslims, hoping that things will get so bad that it will provoke race riots and perhaps civil war in order that they can through violence achieve their ends as opposed to hope hopelessly for success in a system that is rigged against them from the beginning.

Turning up the hate serves the purpose of making people feel more certain of their position. Descartes said "I think therefore I am." He neglected to say also "I *feel* therefore I am." The educated reason with logic, the uneducated and women "reason" with their emotions. As Hitler once said, "The mob is feminine."

The more certain one feels about one's position, the more likely one is to fight the enemy, to the death, if need be. Those who reason with logic will be more likely to be correct in their certainty, and those who "reason" with their emotions will be more likely to be certain but in error.

The perceived low social class of the anti-immigration parties will forever earn them the hatred and contempt of the classes above them. There will always be the feeling that the poor are poor because they deserve to be: because they are lazy, stupid feckless people whom no rational employer would wish to hire as employees.

The solution would be to get a sufficiently charismatic, bold and ambitious man already in the political establishment or capable of entering it to propose my solutions in a convincing and persuasive way.

Perhaps one of the Eurosceptic Conservative politicians is up to it. The most likely candidate of these is Michael Gove, who wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth and easily the most intellectually accomplished politician in the establishment.

Beta males need to find a leader, and that leader has to be a man capable of being a part of the political establishment if he isn't already.

What have beta males to offer such a man though?

Their loyalty, of course.

But nationalists are infamous for treating each other like shit, playing dirty and ignoring their own rules when it suits them, just like members of the political establishment.

Gove would be an ambitious, brave and principled man to attempt such a thing with the odds so hugely stacked against him, but if successful he would go down in history as the man who eradicated feminism in Britain. He would and could only do it with the support of his wife, but the support of his wife is in doubt.

No comments: