Why Eugenics, anti-feminism and nationalism go hand in hand

What is moral is necessary, and what is necessary for the long term national interest must be moral.

Any self-respecting nationalist should be prepared to have a rational and civil discussion on the subject of eugenics. What is nationalism but the promotion of the LONG-TERM national interest? Eugenics are merely policies designed to prevent degeneracy. It is in the long-term national interest to prevent degeneracy.

Is it not necessary in the long term national interest to prevent degeneracy?

If it is necessary, is it not moral?

Feminists hate the idea of eugenics, but feminists are immoral women, are they not?  Immoral women are promiscuous women, and promiscuous women are the cause of widespread illegitimacy.

Widespread illegitimacy is of course the cause of degeneracy.

What is degeneracy?

Being physically, morally and intellectually inferior to your parents.

Eugenics is necessary and moral in the long-term national interest.

A prosperous farmer is one who practices good husbandry.  A prosperous and strong nation is not afraid to tell the most evil and immoral of its women that they are evil and immoral.  A strong nation is not afraid of questioning its pornocracy and those who serve it.

The men who are nominally in charge, like Cameron and others, are really only the Head Gardener or the butler if not the coachman of the pornocracy.

Who are the pornocracy?  The slut single mums who have the vote.

They can be defeated.  Indeed, they must be defeated, or the next generation will be even more degenerate and beyond redemption than this one.

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

The Bhagavad Gita

On being often compared to Adolf Hitler

Someone said to me today: "Some people have compared you to Adolf Hitler. I bet you did Nazi that one coming."

"But how am I like Adolf Hitler?" I asked in dismay.

"Probably because of your views on euthanasia of the disabled."

It should be noted that I at no time advocated a policy of systematic extermination of all who are disabled though many of enemies like to pretend that I did. My brand of Libertarian Eugenics consists only of legalising the practice of infanticide by the parents of the victim.  This means that up to the age of 12 months, parents of unwanted babies may dispose of them without getting into trouble with the law in rather the same way that the Ancient Greeks exposed their unwanted young.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infanticide#Greece_and_Rome

This would considerably speed up the adoption process too, and obviate the need for social workers, adoption agencies and the like saving the taxpayer billions of pounds.

I really don't mind discussing the subject of EUGENICS.

Infanticide was not exactly unknown way, way, way before Hitler was even a twinkle in his father's eye.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midwifery#Early_historical_perspective

"After the delivery, the midwife made the initial call on whether or not an infant was healthy and fit to rear. She inspected the newborn for congenital deformities and testing its cry to hear whether or not it was robust and hearty. Ultimately, midwives made a determination about the chances for an infant’s survival and likely recommended that a newborn with any severe deformities be exposed."

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

"Eugenics is the "applied science or the bio-social movement which advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a population", usually referring to the manipulation of human populations."

"Eugenics was widely popular in the early decades of the 20th century. The First International Congress of Eugenics in 1912 was supported by many prominent persons, including: its president Leonard Darwin, the son of Charles Darwin; honorary vice-president Winston Churchill, then First Lord of the Admiralty and future Prime Minister of the United Kingdom; Auguste Forel, famous Swiss pathologist; Alexander Graham Bell, the inventor of the telephone; among other prominent people."

http://www.prometheism.net/articles/ancient.htm is where you will find Allen Roper's essay on ANCIENT EUGENICS argues the MORAL case for Eugenics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pater_familias#Children

"The laws of the Twelve Tables required the pater familias to ensure that "obviously deformed" infants were put to death. The survival of congenitally disabled adults—conspicuously evidenced among the elite by the partially lame Emperor Claudius—demonstrates that personal choice was exercised in the matter."

I don't mind undertaking the task of explaining again and again these agreed facts of Western history to ignorant Westerners who have not been taught their own history in their morbidly feminised curriculum after they abandoned the Classics.

I don't mind explaining again and again that the institution of Marriage is Eugenic in intention, just like laws prohibiting incest.

Feminism is of course anti-eugenic because it promotes gender equality which encourages female promiscuity.

A matriarchy is a society which condones female promiscuity while a patriarchy is a society which condones male promiscuity.

What is wrong with female promiscuity?  Because it tolerates widespread illegitimacy.

Why is widespread illegitimacy a Bad Thing?  Because it tolerates and makes excuses for ever-lowering standards of behaviour, morality and educational standards, leading to the decline and fall of your society, race, nation and civilisation.

In a degenerate society, women find good men dull and bad men attractive, and are not punished for this preference.

Women, because of their weak, conformist and masochistic nature, will tolerate most evils while their strong maternal instincts seek outlet through the care of the helpless and the pathetic.  In those whose instincts are mainly masochistic, the more pathetic their offspring, the greater their status.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnchausen_syndrome_by_proxy

It has been noted that the most notorious cases of Munchausen by Proxy cases are women.

If only people would concentrate on what I am saying rather than wondering whether I am like Hitler in their infantile way.

I have no intention of having a union with Austria, or of invading Czechoslovakia or Poland.  In fact, if truth be told, I am really a bit of a peace-nik who believes in good old fashioned family values and the virtues of good government by a wise, courageous and rational political class capable of directing their minds to the principles of good husbandry in the long-term national interest and never again towards bribing the voters with their own money to their own long-term detriment for the sake of  a miserable term in office in which they will do very little good.

http://www.bing.com/Dictionary/search?q=define+husbandry&qpvt=husbandry&FORM=DTPDIA

I am really not at all like Hitler.