"Is President Obama doomed to failure?" asks the Today Programme on Facebook

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_8975000/8975039.stm

0853
President Obama has largely achieved what he said he would, yet some observers regard him as a failure and he is facing the prospect of significant electoral losses in the forthcoming mid-term elections. Former editor of the Economist, Bill Emmott and Bill Barnard of Democrats Abroad discuss the achievements and failures of the US president.

Obama embodies

1. the loss of confidence of the white race
2. the end of liberal hegemony
3. the decline of the USA

as surely as the assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand came to embody the beginning of WW1.

The Obama Administration is really a signal that America is about to make way for another superpower, and the beginning of the end for liberalism as a respectable political orthodoxy. Shallower historians will see it in racial terms, unfortunately.

Obama got in because, in the whole of America, there was no clearly better candidate that the rotten US political system was capable of producing.

Obama, with his way with words and his ability to cry on cue, touched every liberal heart-string drinking in the last chance saloon.

Liberalism AKA feminism AKA the desecration of family values is an aberration that has delighted us for quite long enough. 

Islam and Liberalism distorted into fascism, people too afraid to admit this.

The trouble with Islam is that Muslims have distorted Islam, rather in the same way that liberals have perverted liberalism into fascism

Machiavelli spoke out against Liberalism and gave reasons

" ... a prince, so long as he keeps his subjects united and loyal, ought not to mind the reproach of cruelty; because with a few examples he will be more merciful than those who, *through too much mercy*, *allow disorders to arise*, *from which follow murders and robberies*; for these are wont to injure *the whole people*, whilst those executions which originate with a prince offend the individual only."

From the 17th Chapter of The Prince, concerning cruelty and clemency and whether it is better to be loved than feared

"... liberalism itself may be running out of time" NY Times journalist says so too

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/opinion/21douthat-1.html

"It’s not that [Obama] hasn’t done a great deal for liberals during his 18 months in office. It’s that liberalism itself may be running out of time."

 So good to hear it from someone else. 

Liberal Orthodoxy v The National Interest; How to vote in General Election 2010

If you are going to vote LibLabCon, you are too stupid to vote.

If you vote for policies supported by parties that amount to a systematic cultivation of failure, you are too stupid to vote.

If you think Cameron is going to be better than Brown, after the hash he has made out of policy-making in the last five years since he became leader, you are too stupid to vote.

The Liberal Democrats are a party of porn stars and coprophiliacs, and are so out of touch that they think it is OK to be seen to be a party that tolerates this filth.

If you think the LibDems are a protest vote, you are too stupid to vote.

If you think "racism" is worse than loss of liberty, you are too stupid to vote.

If you are afraid to vote for a party because of its reputation of racism, though it has many policies that you actually support, you are too stupid to vote.

UKIP would appear to be the happy medium, though it has hedged its bets on the war and on the EU. If you think hedging its bets was a good idea then vote UKIP.

UKIP will not explicitly denounce the war and only offers us a referendum on the EU.

The BNP however states it would withdraw British troops now if it could, and intends to withdraw from the EU without holding a referendum.

If you prefer a party that was the most consistently against the invasion of Muslim lands from the beginning, then you know what to do. If there were any justice in the world, they should mop up the Muslim vote since many of their policies, such as government by referenda as well as corporal and capital punishment, are supported by the Koran.

But there is very little justice in the world and very little reason in Man.

The party that was right all along is unfortunately also unpopular and has been consistently demonised by the liberal media for many decades.

It remains to be seen if that party has the ability to attract enough votes to revolutionise the debate between Liberal Orthodoxy and the National Interest.

The longer the war carries on the more paranoid the government will get, the more paranoid it gets the more paranoid it will make us. It will then rob us of even more of our liberties and property.

Liberalism is rotten to the core because it has perverted its own ideals. Its supports are the unholy Quartet of Denial, Denunciation, Ostracisation and Censorship.

Let us hope it will have the decency to die before it does any more damage.

The subtext of liberalism

Indiscriminate compassion and endless tolerance of all that is toxic to society is the part and parcel of liberal ideology is an expression of contempt by liberals to those to those less fortunate than they. They can afford to be compassionate, civilised, humane, and tolerant, in their nice houses, leafy surburbs, good schools and low-crime neighbourhoods.

This is the subtext of what a liberal is saying when he or she prates on about tolerance and compassion:

"People like us can afford to prate on about compassion and tolerance! Screw you, you stupid poor f*ckers who have to live cheek by jowl with foreigners you resent for coming here to take the bread out of your mouths, who get mugged, raped, burgled and murdered by vermin, while we liberals say we feel sorry for the PERPETRATORS just to push your face further into the poo!

Yeah, screw you, you POOR sad stupid f*ckers. Eat shit for being stupid and poor.

Eat shit Jamie Bulger's mum while we drink our Champagne of Socialism because we don't live in f*cking Liverpool like so many poor stupid people in the North. What happened to you could never happen to us so we don't care about you.

You vote BNP because you are poor, stupid and working class whom state education has failed and who can't compete with the foreigners. We liberals have kicked away your ladder by destroying grammar schools so poor children do not have access to the chance of a good education but have to go to a the local sink comp where they can be the NEETs, criminals and the single mothers mums of the future.

We do not effectively discourage teenage girls from becoming single mums because we can't be bothered and don't want to seem intolerant and judgemental. We are cowards and hypocrites too in case you hadn't noticed.

We spit and stamp on the heads people like you, Evil Racist Nazi Extremist Fascist Scum who are sad and stupid and scummy enough to be born poor!"

It is the modern version of saying "Let them eat cake."

The Advantages of a Patriarchy against the Barbarism of the Matriarchy

Are men naturally non-interventionists and women naturally censorious and interfering?

Is our nanny state the result of feminine values predominating and a national manifestation of feminine neurosis and irrationality?

Is Western civilisation doomed if it does not address this problem? Surely it must pull itself back into masculine preoccupations of analysis and rational problem-solving as opposed to feminine displacement activity?

History is replete with patriarchies while matriarchies are unheard of. Is it because matriarchies are by definition incapable of practising anything as civilised as reading and writing, because its natural state is simply breeding, emotionalism and barbarism?

The refusal to address the problem of single mummery is the chief reason why we have ever-declining educational standards which successive governments are too frightened to address for fear of giving offence to the illegitimate and the mothers of the illegitimate, and of course the female-dominated teaching profession.

Those who are illegitimate will have fewer inhibitions about having illegitimate children and so the rot slides down its slippery slope, and we with it.

46% of babies are now born out of wedlock.

70% of our prison population were singly-parented.

And still the liberal establishment will not speak out against single mummery.

Do such incompetents, cowards and hypocrites deserve to rule over those they regularly denounce as extremist, such as the BNP and the Muslims?

Feminine neurosis does not affect women alone. There are many emasculated liberal men who subscribe to all the irrational values of feminism and are permanently frightened of giving offence. Many of them are prominent male politicians. Some of them even support the paedophile tax (of paying £64 to the government to "prove" you are not a paedophile), even as they know that it would do nothing to protect children. These men are either eunuchs or drones.

Is it not time they were sent on their way, in favour of courageous, principled rational and masculine leadership or at least by women capable of thinking in these terms?

Good husbandry is a after all male concept. It means delegating that which needs delegating while you get on with more important matters. Women need to be kept properly occupied or they will simply interfere and impose their irrational emotionalism on everything and everyone else, to the detriment of society and the civilisation that that society is part of.

Extremist liberalism ends Western civilisation

Liberalism, originally benign, made tolerance of differences and individual liberty totemic.

Extremist liberalism tolerates behaviour that is societally destructive (examples are female promiscuity, single parenthood, widespread illegitimacy, fatherlessness, family breakdown, rising crime, uncontrolled immigration, the welfare state, the morbid over-feminisation of society also known as the matriarchy and ever lowering standards of education) while denouncing whistle blowers as evil, racists, bigots and fascists.

Extremist liberalism will be the downfall of Western civilisation, and now is the best time to challenge it, for the chickens are coming home to roost ...

The Whig Interpretation of History

The new divisions in society now exists between those who can afford to be "compassionate" and those who cannot.

When absolute poverty disappears, society is then divided between those who can afford their champagne socialism and those who cannot.

Champagne socialists are those who willingly pay higher taxes to feel good about themselves and ask everyone to follow their virtuous example. These people think the carrot is the only thing a good liberal need to use even as they know that the majority are stupid, stubborn and vicious, liable to become worse if the stick is not used. Some of them do not even know this, because they are out of touch with the rest of society in their leafy suburbs and privileged lives. The stick, to a liberal, is "fascist". Carrot is "liberal".

This issue is totemic.

Liberalism is the classic example of sparing the rod and spoiling the child.

Liberals are Nice People who do not complain about single mothers like the Nasty People known as Conservatives. Theresa May and her Compassionate and Progressive Conservatives have surrendered their principles and submitted to champagne socialism because they were tired of the Ugly Truth and wanted to be thought of as nice people too, so people would vote for them.

This is after all what passes for ideological debate in Britain these days.

The Whig historian peddles a fantasy that things will keep getting better and better as long as liberals and liberal orthodoxies prevail.

Now is the time to challenge this fairy tale.

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

An up-to-date analysis of the British class system: Champagne Socialism and British Nationalism

In every age and in every nation, there are groups which are privileged and those who are not.

In the old days poor people would be obvious by their under-nourished appearance and servile manner.

In an affluent and egalitarian age when no one starves and even the poor can afford DVD players to play their porn and eat themselves obese, there would necessarily be a realignment and reclassification.

The ones who do not mind being endlessly compassionate and tolerant of all things societally destructive (such as female promiscuity leading to family breakdown, single mummery bringing about rising crime and ever-lower standards of education and uncontrolled immigration) can afford to do so because they reside in leafy low-crime neighbourhoods and aren't really bothered about things that affect those living less gilded lives.

They think, perhaps, that the white urban proletariat deserve what they get for being born on the wrong side of the tracks, for being poor, for not knowing any better and for not having access to a decent education.

There is just a hint of the caste system here you see, for it is much easier to think that the poor deserve what they get. It is much easier to brand them as CHAVs, racists, fascists and of being guilty of especial evil and depravity, than to put oneself out through suggesting that things could be made better for them (and by extension all of us) by simply doing this and that.

The issue of immigration is very telling.

Businesses and employers cannot get enough of cheap foreign labour because they know that the white urban proletariat make poor employees.

They make poor employees because they have had a sham of an education and are more often than not illegitimate and unmarried parents, with all the attendant social and educational disadvantages this entails.

Therefore the white urban lower classes are dismissed as useless and their grievances ignored in favour of the more productive foreign worker who come here and do the jobs the white urban proletariat shun. The white urban proletariat are discouraged from seeking employment because are fobbed off with beggarly sums of benefit, just enough to keep them quiescent while unemployed. It is little surprise then that they spend most of their time drinking, taking drugs, procreating while viewing porn and snuff films on their DVD players in the presence of their illegitimate children.

It is well known that Liberals have a phobia of seeming uncompassionate and intolerant. Because of this, they have for generations ignored the problem of schools that do not teach because there is no discipline, and the criminal justice system that neither punishes nor deters.

Talking about spending cuts is now so beyond the pale that not even the Conservative leader dares talk about that, and this demonstrates how utterly cowed and crushed by liberal ideology our political classes have been.

Those who call for traditional teaching methods and condign punishment for criminals are invariably condemned as illiberal intolerant bigots, if not actually called Fascists and Nazis.

You see, the underclasses serve their purpose as the receptacles of liberal compassion and tolerance, which only liberals can afford. It pleases them to wear permissiveness as an ostentatious badge of moral superiority, along with the free trade, environmentally-friendly, free-range, organic products which they instinctively favour as a means of reinforcing the message that the rich are good charitable souls who care about other people in other lands and other species, but not their own poor in their own land.

It is perhaps now time to question the viability of our political classes if they continue to drag us down this dead end, who ignore the questions they cannot answer, while smearing and censoring those who dare question their insufferable cant of compassionate tolerance and free love.

The End of Rationalism: the End of Western Civilisation

An 1800s Russian engraving depicting the Whore of Babylon riding the seven-headed Beast (a Sirrush)

Orwell does not need to be around for us to acknowledge that China and the Far East is on the way up and the West who has embraced socialism is on the way down.

We are now meeting them as we are on our way down and they are on their way up.

A senator recently complained that American economic policy is "financial socialism". The writing is on the wall, but we choose not to read it. Or if we read it, pretend we don't understand it.

Fact: the most rational form of government is the vehicle by which a civilisation secures hegemony.

The West used to be the most rational civilisation.

This is no longer the case as we now live in a new dark age of extremist liberalism.

Extremist liberals are incoherent, irrational, censorious, freedom-hating, thoughtcrime-loving and would deny the truth if it goes against their long-held beliefs. They are the Aztecs of the 21st century. They are already worshiping as their gods the very things that would destroy them.

The Sacred Cow they worship is the Single Mum Who is a Burden on the State.

Male Prime Ministers and Presidents dare not say anything about the Sacred Cow that is eating them out of house and home and defecating all over their carpet because there are too many of them now and they all have the vote. 

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

"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication"

We now at last know where our free for all fuck fest has brought us to, do we not?  

Bye bye, Western Civilisation.  Nice knowing you.