Tuesday 21 April 2015

Why white people have such a problem with Jews, Muslims and immigration and what they could do about it





http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2013-05-23/anti-immigrant-and-anti-euro-germanys-thilo-sarrazin-is-not-sorry

“Our guilt from the war is abused in political arguments,” he says. “It’s used to suggest how we should we treat migrants, and that our asylum policies should be as liberal as possible, and that we should bail out other countries using the euro.” He pauses to take a drink. “But none of that has anything to do with the objective facts of our past.”




Immigration Infatuation - Who is responsible for this? The answer by Dr E Michael Jones is at 15:40 WAIT FOR IT!

At the end of the day it is the SYSTEM that it is fault, and by this I mean the system with which you chose your government.

This unfortunately means REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY in an environment of indiscriminate universal suffrage has been a recipe for failure and is unlikely to be self-correcting.

Most countries in the world operate under this system and therefore most countries in the world suffer from the same problem.

What are the alternatives?

Well, there is the one-party state which China has, which is to all intents and purposes NATIONAL SOCIALIST. Strange that it has turned out that the Chinese have turned out to be better at National Socialism under a one party state than the Germans.

The other option is what the Islamists propose.

I can't think of third option, can you?

What no one seems to see is that the West is now a matriarchy, and this means a society that does not practise or respect marriage.

There is of course a reason why marriage is considered an institution, and an institution is basically a naturally-occurring practice that exists in all human societies eg slavery, prostitution, warfare.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institution

The matriarchy establishes itself in the absence of marriage.

How do I know why the West is now a matriarchy?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2285670/Most-children-of-British-mothers-born-out-of-wedlock.html

All religions promote and practise marriage for the very good reason that marriage is eugenic.

To respect marriage, you have to forbid extramarital sex, which is what the Abrahamic faiths do.

All matriarchies are primitive and declining societies, all patriarchies are advanced civilisations, without exception.

The religion of the West is not Christianity but PC Liberalism, which is all about promoting and practising sexual liberation and extramarital sex.

When general standards of sexual morality fall noticeably short of the ideal of marriage ie NO EXTRAMARITAL SEX, then general moral and educational standards deteriorate.

What is the purpose of having moral standards?

If all members of the group have the same moral standards and obey the same rules then they are more likely to be socially cohesive and be able to defend themselves better against their enemies.

All societies have two kinds of enemies: internal enemies and external enemies.

The internal enemies of all societies are always sluts and socialists.

After May 7, Britain will become even more of a society ruled by sluts and socialists. Today Sir David Steel was talking on the Today Programme about a minority Labour government. This will of course make you weaker against your external enemies.

At heart this is all about Western man having lost control over his women.

When you think about it, all Western men are lower than sluts, even the US President.

Even the US President, and anyone aspiring to be US President, must be conscious of how the female vote could swing things for him

http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2012-07-18.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8555358.stm?hc_location=ufi

If men say it is OK for women to have extramarital sex because they want to have extramarital sex with them, then they will end up being lower than unmarried mothers with illegitimate offspring.

This has already happened in all parts of the West, and you know it, really.

The reason why consecutive governments conspire to facilitate immigration is because their business voters need labour now, not in 18 years time when British mothers deign to have legitimate children, bring them up properly while living with their father and see to it that when they leave school they are fit to be employed.

None of the anti-immigration parties ever talk about this because they know doing so would alienate the female vote.

Plebs don't care about education, certainly not selective education and certainly not grammar schools, even if they know what they are in the first place.

Even the Tories won't talk about grammar schools now, but they were the schools that allowed bright working class children to get on in life.

All the problems of the West would actually be miraculously solved if men could bring themselves to support traditional marriage, but I know this is too much to expect, even amongst the men who are complaining about being victims of feminism.

Victims of feminism are beta males and beta males are by definition not sexy, and definitely not marriageable.

If you are not marriageable but still want to have sex with women you are not going to forbid extramarital sex, are you?

Of course not.

So you just stick to complaining about Jews and Muslims who - whatever you think of them - take marriage more seriously than people who call themselves Christians. This probably explains why Jews control Christians and why Christians fear Muslims.

Secretly or perhaps not so secretly, they would probably rather be impregnated by a warrior than a beta male they despise for lacking in masculinity.

Perhaps disdain for men is why women are increasingly becoming lesbians and perhaps why men who must have sex at any cost are becoming gay in increasing numbers.

Because of divorce laws that favour the poorer party, and the availability of the option of extramarital sex, fewer and fewer marriageable men are choosing to get married so this means illegitimacy will also spread far and wide amongst the upper and middle classes.

This will make Muslims in the West even more determined NOT to integrate into this degenerate culture and drive more and more of them to join ISIS rather than live under a government whose alpha male is afraid of omega females.

(Omega females - unmarried single mothers - are the least desirable sex partner for a rational man seeking a wife and a mother for his legitimate children.)

So, the enemies of society are not really Jews and Muslims, but feminazi promiscuous Western women that Western men have now completely lost control of.

If we have the rule that extramarital sex is forbidden - as the Muslims do - it would force women to choose their sex partners more carefully.

Men can of course cheat more easily since they are not the ones who are always left holding the baby and they can always skip town if they don't want to be forced into a shotgun marriage.

It will mean that some men are not going to be get reproductive rights at all and will have to make do with prostitutes, but doing this will ensure that the next generation will be better quality people and citizens than our generation.

Women just follow the money. Most women are really prostitutes and this makes most men punters. This is not edifying, and only marriage can make it better because marriage is held as an ideal of love and trust between a man and a woman.

I thought it was very interesting that the Koran tolerates brothels, while feminazis want to criminalise them.

Therefore in practice in an Islamic state brothels would be legal.

In a patriarchy, most of the sex that takes place would be married sex and prostitute sex.

In a matriarchy, most of the sex that takes place would be fornication and LGBT sex.

It is probably not hard to predict that the quality of the next generation in a patriarchy is bound to be better than a matriarchy's, is it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matriarchy#Native_Americans

Native Americans were matriarchal. The white man who took their land so easily was patriarchal.

Eugenics was really reinventing the wheel. Marriage was always always eugenic if you allow both parties to choose freely.

If marriage was respected again, the effect of that would be eugenic and social cohesion again.

I suspect however that people who identify with Christianity in the West would rather blame Jews and Muslims than accept the necessity of having to respect marriage again, even as I tell them again and again that they cannot expect Jews and Muslims to hold themselves back and not follow their religion so white people who identify themselves with Christianity can catch up with them.

I know how much they hate my message: they hate my message so much that I was excluded from London Forum Meetings after having initially accepted me to the extent that I was invited to give a talk. The talk I would have given before the invitation was withdrawn can be read at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/my-proposed-talk-on-nakba-day-15-may_29.html and http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/my-nakba-dayisrael-independence-day.html
They hate  me because I have blasphemed against their deity, and their deity is the slut.

What is the solution I offer and the bitter medicine that they refuse to take? It is of course Secular Koranism. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/secular-koranism.html Secular Koranism would defenestrate the matriarchy, curb Jewish power by abolishing representative democracy and usury as well as end Muslim terrorism. 
at

No comments:

Post a Comment