Translate

Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts

Thursday, 6 September 2018

The purpose of life for rational and moral men and women (feminists not included)

God created a logical universe. A morally perfect and omnipotent Abrahamic God would not do otherwise than  create a logical universe. If the world seems illogical to us, it may be because we lack the truth or morality necessary to understand ourselves, our own history as well as the defects of our religion and political system.

If speech is further censored and the exchange of ideas obstructed because our politicians do not wish us to discuss our history, religion and politics to understand and solve our problems, we would become increasingly dishonest, immoral and illogical.

To be human is to be put on earth to ponder matters of fact, solve problems rationally and solve them without transgressing our moral principles.

Wednesday, 23 August 2017

Our crazy culture

Politics is downstream from culture.

Culture is downstream from law.

Law is downstream from morality.

Morality is downstream from religion.

Religion is downstream from politics.

Religion is basically whatever is the political orthodoxy of your time whether or not you yourself believe in God whose principles become the law.

Our laws are PC Libtard.

The culture of patriarchy is marriage and family values, the culture of matriarchy is single parenthood and child sexual abuse.

Guess what our culture is now?

If people deserve the government they get, what kind of government do we deserve?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/in-politics-fight-breitbart-knew-culture-is-key/article/1154466

Friday, 13 May 2016

Are philosophers unethical when they refuse to discuss controversial matters?


Dr Walsh has since blocked me without responding to a single point I raised. How ethical is he as a philosopher? Can cowards be ethical?

Friday, 29 May 2015

Is Rabbi Sacks tough on terrorism and the causes of terrorism?



ISIS and homosexuality are God's punishment on Europe, claims Free Presbyterian minister Ian Brown

  1. The distinction between religion and politics is a distinction without a difference.
  2. War is a continuation of politics by other means.
  3. If there are just wars then there must necessarily and logically be just acts of terrorism.
  4. Terrorism is just a poor man's war.
  5. One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.
  6. All acts of terrorism are without exception caused by bad government policy eg feminism (bad domestic policy) and the Wolfowitz Doctrine (bad foreign policy). http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/which-rules-would-make-world-safer.html
  7. It is not what happens to you, it  is how you deal with it. (Did the Austrian Empire deal with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand wisely, considering it was its hysteria that ended up in the destruction of the Austrian Empire?)
  8. Condemning terrorism is a distraction from condemning the criminal enterprise that is Western foreign policy.
  9. While non-combatants are killed by acts of terrorism, even more of them are killed in war.
  10. Imperial nations understandably condemn terrorism because it is their imperialism that causes the terrorism they complain of. 
  11. Religion is just another word for state ideology.
  12. Any state ideology that causes its members to willingly join the armed forces to kill whom they are told is the enemy without the ability or inclination to understand foreign policy serves the same purpose as religion. 
  13. Religion comes from the word "religare" which is Latin for "to bind". To bind what? To bind society. The purpose of religion is to bring about social cohesion to better allow a society to fight its enemies.
  14. The purpose of religion is to impose morality.
  15. Morality tells us what to do and what not to do for the purpose of making us more likely to co-operate with each other and to discourage certain behaviours likely to cause degeneracy and social problems eg widespread bastardy. 
  16. A system of morality obviously fails when, instead of bringing about social cohesion, it causes anomie and social fragmentation, which feminism clearly does. 
  17. Feminism causes immigration but men are still too busy accepting what feminism bribes them with - premarital and gay sex - to work this out.
  18. Man created God to protect him from woman.
  19. The enemies of society are always sluts and socialists and most voters are sluts and socialists in the West. 
  20. Democracy is about not asking people who don't know and don't care about foreign policy what to do for world peace.
  21. God if He exists is Darwinian.  His purpose is to allow those who best obey His laws to triumph overs those who are less good at obeying His laws. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/god-is-darwinian.html
  22. If God exists and assists those who obey His laws, then it follows that He will thwart the plans of those who deny His existence, deny His prophets and flout His laws. (This must include American and her allies, must it not?)
  23. The problems of the West originate in the failure of Christianity and democracy.
  24. Antisemitism is endemic in the Christian West and is entirely a Christian phenomenon.
  25. Both Jews and Muslims are Semitic peoples but the reason why Christians hated Jews and Muslims was not racial, it was because they both denied their precious Trinity. 
  26. If Muslims are now antiseimitic it is caused by Christian nations of the West being vassal states of America while America is under the control of the Israel lobby.
  27. The reason why Western governments are so easily manipulated by the Israel lobby is because representative democracy makes Western nations uniquely vulnerable to its threats and bribes. 
  28. Jews and Muslims have for so many centuries ignored the Bible that they are aghast that Muslims - whom they denounce as fanatics and extremists - should take their own Holy Book seriously.
  29. All the Abrahamic faiths promote patriarchal values and support the institutions of marriage and the family.
  30. All advanced civilisations are patriarchies and all declining and primitive civilisations matriarchies.
  31. A matriarchy establishes itself in the absence of traditional marriage on the foundations of extramarital sex, sodomy and bastardy.
  32. In a matriarchy, all men are lower than sluts, even the Prime Minister and the US President. (This is because most voters will be sluts and their bastards.)
  33. The Trinity is the Achilles heel of Christianity because it is totalitarian. It is totalitarian because it  requires Christians to believe in the absurdity of the Trinity. (If you do not believe in Christ is also God, you are not Christian and only Christians go to heaven.) 
  34. The Church and State had to be separated because the laws of God as contained in the Bible were so vaguely and badly stated that the act of Christians attempting to interpret and apply God's laws would result in Christians killing each other in the European Wars of Religion or burning each other as heretics at the drop of a hat.
  35. Because of the Christian requirement to proclaim the absurdity and lie of the Trinity as if it were the truth, the character of Christians has long since been corrupted and it is for this reason that Christianity and Hypocrisy so often go hand in hand.
  36. The gloating triumph of gay marriage in Catholic Ireland has demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that Christianity is kaput and democracy demented.
  37. The reason why Muslims are killing Christians in sub-Saharan Africa is because Christianity is now associated with the religion of the people who want to spread the disease of gay marriage all over the world. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/04/african-christians-church-of-england-gay-marriage-justin-welby
  38. The West is as Christian as a skeleton used to be human.
  39. The reason why the Catholic Church fell so easily to gay marriage is because a significant number of Catholic clergy is gay.
  40. If you were gay, ambitious, clever, malicious and want to be respected by heterosexual people, what better joke to play on them than to become the Pope or at least a Cardinal or bishop?
  41. The Catholic Church trod the same road of perdition as the Episcopalian Church - it liberalised to get bums on pews. 
  42. If the world's most powerful churches have fallen to gay marriage, why would any sane and decent person want to join the religion of people who support gay marriage thereby risking being killed by Muslims if they live in sub-Saharan Africa?
  43. The nicer Western Christians are to LGBTs, the nastier non-Western governments in Africa will be to theirs eg Uganda, Zimbabwe.
  44. Christianity is now so morally rotten that not only do its clergy not forbid sin or propagate Catholic teaching, they now encourage it in order to retain their status and income.
  45. Much of the Christian deference to Jews now is result of guilt over how badly Jews have been treated by Christians for so many centuries.
  46. Much of the Christian fear and hatred of Muslims is the fear that Islam will supersede Christianity. 
  47. Most people who call themselves Christians do not really believe in the Trinity. They are just pretending to be Christian and going to church to get their children into a decent church school because they can't afford school fees.
  48. It is perfectly possible for the Pope not to believe in the Trinity, though it entirely understandable that he would claim to believe Christ is also God just to keep his job. 
  49. The Archbishop of Canterbury is so theologically ignorant he does not even know he is supposed to believe in the Trinity. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/18/archbishop-canterbury-doubt-god-existence-welby
  50. Christianity is no longer fit for the purpose of maintaining morality and is in fact a moral vacuum. 
  51. Nature abhors a vacuum and it is inevitable that Islam will fill the moral vacuum that is Christianity.
  52. Christianity is now infested by feminists and LGBTs as well as men with third rate minds afraid of women with second rate minds. 
  53. The Church of England was created in order to be a Creature of the State and the state is now PC Liberal - not only condoning but promoting extramarital sex. 
  54. The Catholic Church is under the thumb of the international matriarchy because it knows that if it does not toe the PC Libtard line the international matriarchy will accuse and convict its clergy of historic sexual offences.
  55. When the Catholic Church had power it abused it by imposing the Inquisition probably as a reaction and revenge against having the absurdity of the Trinity mocked by Jews and Muslims.
  56. Islam is the only reliable source of social conservatism left in the West.
  57. If Islam is Judaism Lite, then Secular Koranism is Islam Lite. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/secular-koranism.html
  58. Secular Koranism is not religion, but a legal system, like EU law. (It is possible for EU lawyers to be Eurosceptic.)
  59. Secular Koranism is for socially conservative Jews, Christians, Hindus and Buddhists as well as socially conservative atheists and agnostics.
  60. No law in the Koran is inconsistent with Jewish and Christian principles.
  61. The Koran is more liberal than the Bible, has a whole chapter on divorce, gives women more rights and tolerates brothel-keeping.
  62. ISIS is the patriarchy rebelling against the dead hand of matriarchal Western imperialism.
  63. The only way to solve the problem of Israel is for it to become a one-party theocracy under the principles of Secular Koranism. http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/how-to-solve-problem-of-israel.html

Wednesday, 8 April 2015

What brought on Rvd David Robertson's fit of the vapours against Islam

Reverend David Robertson incensed at being called Islamophobic

https://theweeflea.wordpress.com/2015/04/08/islamaphobia-phobia-why-church-media-and-politicians-are-spineless/?fb_action_ids=10153238450250948&fb_action_types=news.publishes&fb_ref=pub-standard

"Every time we board a flight, go to a major public event, we are inconvenienced because of Islamic terrorism."

Muslim terrorism is undeniably caused by Western foreign policy.
http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/who-is-more-responsible-for-muslim.html

"But I despair that the spinelessness of our politicians, the hatred of militant atheists for all religions (and therefore lumping Christianity together with Islam), and the ignorance of Islam being a political theology – means that Islamaphobia and the political power of Islam will feed off one another, and both will grow together."

The distinction between politics and religion is a distinction without a difference.

Religion is only the ancient word for state ideology and state ideology is about imposing your idea of morality on others.

All morality is of course controversial simply because people don't agree on what is necessary or moral and how to go about deciding what is moral and how to go about imposing which morality on whom.

If you think about it, Islam is a state ideology no different from Nazism, Communism, Liberalism etc since all are capable of starting wars which kill people.

"Do you deny that Islam is a political as well as a religious ideology?"

It was once a guide to etiquette to avoid discussing politics and religion with strangers, but to stick to one's health and the weather.

There is no real distinction between the two because both are equally controversial and potentially upsetting.

"Do you want Islamic law to be enforced in a Muslim Britain?"

Some Muslims probably like things the way they are, I imagine, but the ones who take their religion seriously would unsurprisingly want Sharia law, but do bear in mind there are four schools of sharia and not all Muslims are agreed on the kind of sharia law they want.

Making such generalisations would be like assuming that all Christians in the world take their religion as seriously as the Christians in Bible Belt America who open museums devoted to demonstrating the workings of intelligent design, rather than evolution.

"Can you name one Islamic country where there is religious freedom – in particular the freedom to change your religion?"

http://quran.com/2/256 has the Koran stating that there is no compulsion in belief, but it cannot be denied that many Muslims ignore the Koran in just the same way people who call themselves Christian ignore Biblical teachings and claim gay marriage is good and fornication is fine.

"Will you allow Muslims in the UK to change their religion if they wish?"

You may have heard of a very active group called http://ex-muslim.org.uk/

As far as I know, no harm has come to them.

4) To the Church – Are you prophets and proclaimers of the Gospel of Christ or just compromisers with the spirit of this world? Will you love, serve , welcome and help Muslims – most of all by living, loving and telling the Good News of Jesus. Are you prepared to take time to engage, dialogue and pray with and for Muslims? And can I plead with my fellow Christians – please don’t be Islamaphobic! We have nothing to be phobic about! And if you agree with my view of the threat of Islam please don’t give any credence to right (or left) wing political groups (like the EDL or BNP) who will seek to exploit your frustration. They are evil and must be avoided like the plague.

Are all Christan clergy prophets and proclaimers of the Gospel of Christ?

What in particular about the Gospel of Christ you are referring to?

I am not sure if Muslims, who in any case acknowledge Jesus as a prophet of God as well as the Virgin Birth (though they deny the Trinity) need to be told about the "Good News of Jesus". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_in_Islam

Muslims are always often the ones who are challenging liberals to debates and liberals are the ones declining this.


It is a curious, inconsistent, hypocritical or cowardly that Reverend Robertson tells other Christians not be Islamophobic when he is constantly referring to "the threat of Islam" and bigging it up, so to speak.

 5) To the Media and the ‘Gatekeepers’ of our Culture. Are any of you prepared to have this discussion and dialogue? Or are you just going to hand over the whole debate to the real bigots, by pretending the issue does not exist and labelling those of us who dare raise it, as bigots.

There is plenty of discussion about Islamophobia in the media, but it is rarely revealing or constructive, probably because the media is stubbornly not acknowledging the existence and genius of Claire Khaw who conceived of Secular Koranism http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/secular-koranism.html and is anxiously and impatiently awaiting to oversee its imposition on the rest of the world, especially after it has been piloted successfully in Britain and Israel.

"I’m off to prepare a sermon on Isaiah….amazing how relevant this prophet is to our current situation!"

In what way is Isaiah relevant to "our current situation"? Are you likening  Muslims to the Assyrians and Israel to Christians, who were at war with each other? If so, why do you deny your Islamophobia?

http://www.premier.org.uk/News/UK/Islam-is-election-elephant-in-the-room-says-Church-leader

"Christianity is tolerant."

Are you sure, Reverend Robertson? Many examples of Christian intolerance come to mind:



Sharia courts are a species of arbitration, a method of dispute resolution, which can only be conducted if both parties agree. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/lawreports/joshuarozenberg/2957692/What-can-sharia-courts-do-in-Britain.html

"Every secular society has stemmed out of a Christian world view."

What does Reverend Robertson mean by this exactly? I suspect he conflates a liberal society with a secular society but a secular society need not necessarily be liberal or sexually liberated. Are Christian values really liberal values and have they merged only because generations of corrupt clergymen have elided away all traces of Christian morality and got away with it because people who go to church will accept anything they are told rather than read the Bible for themselves? It seems Reverend Robertson is also one of those rabid Islamophobes who says it never irrational to hate and fear Islam and denies the validity of the term Islamohobia.

" ... as long as Muslims  are going to allow their faith to be privatised ... "

What do you mean by this, Reverend Robertson? Is it like a Christian saying "As long as I go to church and obey the law, my beliefs are no one's business"? But what if the law that you obey is contrary to scripture such as gay marriage? What if you are a Muslim who has notice that the UK government goes around invading Muslim countries, bombing, killing and maiming Muslims while Islamophobic voters with corrupt and pig ignorant morals frankly don't give a damn about this and never will as long as they are all right, Jack? They actually want to kill Muslims because they hate Muslims and they hate Muslims because Muslims are numerous, visible, frightening and very noticeable because of uncontrolled immigration and PC laws. What then? Put up and shut up?

"I want the government to stop pandering to the Islamic vote and stop accusing people like me of Islamophobia ... Islamic values are not British values." 

What are Islamic values and what are British values, Reverend Robertson?

"In another decade 11% of the population are going to be Muslim."

I think Reverend Robertson read The Future of World Religions report: One in ten Europeans will be Muslim by 2050 and There May Be More Muslims Than Christians In The World By 2070, Pew Study Suggests and that was what brought about this attack of the vapours.




Saturday, 21 March 2015

Is Politics Based on Morality?

http://www.lse.ac.uk/publicEvents/events/2015/04/20150427t1830vNT.aspx

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/philosophy/people/faculty/peter/

https://eastanglia.academia.edu/CatherineOsborne

http://personalpages.manchester.ac.uk/staff/stephen.a.de-wijze/


Friday, 20 September 2013

The purpose of politics


  1. Politics is the art of imposing on others your idea of what is right.  
  2. Politics is about changing laws.
  3. Politics is about passing and repealing laws.
  4. When you have passed or repealed enough laws you will have in fact changed the ideology that governs your nation and its moral environment.  
  5. This state ideology referred to is in fact religion.  
  6. It is perfectly possible to have a state ideology that does not refer or involve a supernatural deity eg Liberalism, Communism, Nazism, Fascism, Socialism, Feminism.
  7. Judaism (originally the ideology of a tribe), Christianity, Islam, Fascism, Nazism, Apartheid, Communism, Liberalism, Socialism etc are all state ideologies if they have been adopted by a nation state. 
  8. It is a mistake to think that Communism, Liberalism, Fascism etc is not a religion.
  9. The word religion comes from the Latin "religare", which means "to bind".
  10. The thing that religion is meant to bind is society, hence the term "social cohesion". 
  11. The purpose of social cohesion is to make the members of a society behave well towards each other, feel a sense of comradeship so as to better be able to defend that society against potential enemies who may invade, exploit and abuse them as well as its internal enemies whose ideas and practices would dilute whatever social cohesion that currently remains.  
  12. Religion, through instilling morality, brings about social cohesion through making members of a society behave better towards each other than they otherwise might.  
  13. Religion is a restraining influence on the natural inclinations of people.  
  14. Liberalism liberates people from their natural inclinations.  
  15. Liberalism has created the social problems that is the result of liberating people from their natural inclinations.  
  16. Liberalism cannot solve the problems that it has created without drawing attention to its flaws and fundamental errors the most grave of which is the idea that sex between consenting adults does society no harm.  
  17. Responsible and moral politicians must have the courage to acknowledge that liberalism is fundamentally flawed.
  18. Any state ideology that fails to bring about social cohesion through imposing morality will die a natural death.  
  19. Feminism has destroyed social cohesion by desecrating the institution of marriage, practised universally in advanced civilisations.  
  20. The purpose of marriage is to regulate sexual relations.  
  21. The most urgent debate that we are not having is whether sexual relations should be regulated and the long term consequences for our society if this is not done.
  22. The purpose of responsible and moral politicians in Britain can only be to make the British respect marriage again, but it does not appear that any of the leaders of the political parties of Britain are responsible and moral or recognise or wish to discuss this question.  
  23. The are four ways of respecting the institution of marriage: (i) The prohibition of extramarital and premarital sex. (ii) The exclusion of same-sex couples from the privilege of marriage.  (iii)  The stigmatisation of never married mothers. (iv)  The reintroduction of fault in any divorce settlement.   

Tuesday, 8 January 2013

Politics is *not* an indulgence that we forego if we have children and wish to protect them

I must say I am getting tired of people saying to me that they are taking a back seat or being quiet about their views because they have children at school.

Your political beliefs are not an indulgence, I hope.  You have reached your conclusions because you have thought long and hard about why things are wrong and what needs to be done.

If you have concluded that the government is wrong about almost everything you can think of, then it cannot bode well for the future of the nation and your offspring, if you do not speak out against government policies at every opportunity using your real name, can it?

If you care about the future of the nation and the well-being of your children and your descendants, then it is your duty to force a debate on the issues, and not allow yourself to be intimidated into silence, is it not?

If you do not think you are competent to debate successfully with those who would wish to intimidate or silence you, then should you not nominate and then openly declare your support for a person who will not be intimidated and is prepared to take risks on your behalf?

Don't look to any of your MPs.  They just want to hang on to their jobs and get promoted to the cabinet by gaining the favour of whoever is currently the leader.

Don't look to any of the current party leaders of the smaller parties, they just want to be big fish in their small puddle.

Do you think Nigel Farage or Nick Griffin might just co-operate to merge their parties, as I have suggested, so they could more effectively oppose the LibLabCon?  Of course not.

Whom do you think can do the job of making the political classes listen to your grievances and the issues you  wish to have discussed?

If you don't think I am the one, then imagine me to be male and white.  Would you want me to be leader then?

Is my energy, imagination, commitment and integrity in doubt?

If you think I can do it then it is your duty to say so here, using your real name.  

Otherwise, the political establishment and media will think only I think and say the things I do and call me a crank whose views should be ignored.

If they ignore me, then they ignore you.

If they marginalise me, then they marginalise you.

If they end up calling social conservatism "extremism", then it is your fault if you have been too cowardly to do or say anything.

It is also your duty, if you indeed care about the future of the nation and the well-being of your children and your descendants, to invite others to put their names down here too.

Tuesday, 20 November 2012

Claire Khaw's aphorisms on Politics


POLITICS

  1. "Religion is for sheep, Politics is for shepherds, and wolves."
  2. "Politics is about imposing your view of what is right on those who disagree with you."
  3. "To be a social conservative in the 21st century is to be called a Far Right Extremist."  
  4. "In 21st century Britain, to be a moderate means to be the euphemism for being a coward."
  5. "All political enterprises end in failure, exhaustion and extinction. It is all about getting into power soonest and staying in power longest."
  6. "The eternal questions ought to be (1) What is necessary (2) What is practicable (3) What is true and       (4) What is right, and not, as in Western philosophy, centuries of asking the divisive question of whether God exists, and never even expecting to receive a proper answer."
  7. "Religion is for people who can't do politics."
  8. "Politics is all about finding out what it is necessary for you to do in order to do what you need to do. What is necessary is always moral."
  9. "Forgiving your enemies serves a very practical purpose.  All those who participate successfully in politics know the utility of having a forgiving nature, for it is this that disarms our enemies."
  10. "All political enterprises end in failure, exhaustion and extinction. It is all about getting into power soonest and staying in power longest."
  11. "In politics, it is better to be abused than to be ignored."
  12. "Judaism is a club while Islam is a political party."
  13. “Politics is applied philosophy.  Unfortunately for the West, Western philosophy is not very wise.”
  14. “If you there is no principle you are prepared to die for, then you have no principles.”
  15. “A principled politician would wish to influence the powerful and gullible monster that is public opinion with honest arguments and exhortation, rather than set out to be its slave from the beginning, because he fears to incur its wrath.”
  16. "Politicians are really the sewage workers of ideas, but modern Western politicians do not like getting their hands dirty with the ugly truth or unpopular ideas.  That is why the sewage is now lapping at our feet."
  17. "Politics is atheists trying to find a religion everyone can all agree on."

Sunday, 20 March 2011

Islam the Religion of Politics, Philosophy and Economics

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00zjcx5#synopsis

My email today to the Sunday Programme:


Just heard your special edition from Cairo and wonder if SUNDAY would like to discuss how a modern state could inject Koranic principles into its legal system and constitution.

It makes me impatient when people talk about the separation of Church and State in their muddle-headed way.

Religion is for people who do not think they are interested in politics.

Anyone interested in politics is always interested in religion whether or not they believe in God.

God is a creation of Man to assist him in his politics, morality and spirituality.

The Muslim credo is "Forbid what is evil and enjoin what is good" - a universal duty for any moral and political being, I would have thought.

Secular Koranism invites you to agree that the Koran is a good enough guide to humanity.

Secular Koranism does not require any converts to Islam.

Secular Koranism only requires that all law graduates pass an exam in Koranic knowledge.

Secular Koranism would promote a one-party state that would protect the rights of its members. ("Do not divide yourselves into sects and rejoice in your own doctrines."

Secular Koranism would promote direct democracy AKA government by referendum. (Shura)

Secular Koranism would repeal all anti-discrimination legislation. ("There is no compulsion in belief, for truth stands clear from error.")

Secular Koranism would be economically libertarian for it supports the interpretation that a 20% flat rate income tax is the right rate of taxation for all times. (Khums)

Secular Koranism would promote charity and dismantle the welfare state which promotes and encourages female promiscuity, family breakdown and ever-lowering standards of education and behaviour.

Secular Koranism would challenge the demented matriarchy that is destroying Reason and Rational Government in this country and in the West.

I am happy to be challenged on all of the above because I have thought it all through and would welcome a forensic scrutiny of my ideas.

Friday, 22 October 2010

Politics is ....

Politics is the art of making a rational choice out of a range of unappetising options.

Sunday, 10 October 2010

Why I joined the BNP - Part I

I am a member of the BNP and do not regard myself as a racist. Being a member of the BNP of course attracts all the usual accusations of being a Nazi Fascist Racist Extremist. 



I also regard myself as a nationalist in the sense that I believe there should be a developed ideology of what constitutes the national interest, and that the national interest cannot be represented by just one group of people who identify themselves by race, religion or whatever.  


In my opinion, the national interest should be defined as the long-term interest of the nation.



The national interest (because the nation consists of many groups of people with competing interests on grounds of gender, class, wealth, race, religion etc) should always be a judicious balance of competing interests within that nation.  


Ethno-nationalism is therefore, in my opinion, a contradiction in terms.  It is but racial preference and therefore has a divisive effect on the nation. 


While I am aware that the BNP is a party that promotes the interests of white people, I do not see why their interests are necessarily in conflict with other races if their more racially-motivated policies are dropped. 


The policies of the BNP that I agree with are:


  1. opposition to the invasion of "Afraq"
  2. withdrawal from the EU
  3. the reintroduction of the death penalty
  4. selective education
  5. opposition to uncontrolled immigration
  6. repeal of all anti-discrimination legislation
I do not fear the party's policy of voluntary repatriation, though I am firmly of the view that it would be the better for the party if it dropped this altogether.  The wiser and more experienced activists of the party already know that the only people it is politically respectable to propose expelling are illegal immigrants. 

It is my firm belief that most people, irrespective of race and religion, if left to themselves, would support most of the policies of the BNP.  They do not because they are too hypocritical and cowardly to do the most obvious thing, which is to vote for the party that has the most policies that they agree with, and simply express this preference.

If everyone did just this, then politics in this country would be in a better place.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-384167/Most-Britons-actually-support-BNP-policies.html

Instead, they regard elections as some sort of bet, and if the party they vote for does not win, they feel they have wasted their vote.

I do not believe that any race is inherently better than any other. It is all a question of culture, which is created by religion and politics, which is of course eternally fluid because religion and politics will always be affected by external circumstances in just the same as we individuals are.

Perhaps nations, like individuals, all have a designated lifespan.

If that is so, then Western civilisation is an old woman suffering from dementia.

Tuesday, 5 October 2010

A demand for principled politicians not met by supply. Why?

Is it cos our political system is crap?

But if it is crap then why can't we change it?

Because there are no principled politicians. 

Tuesday, 14 September 2010

A three-point guide to morality in politics

Decide whether
  1. your policy would result in unnecessary suffering to another
  2. the ends justify the means
  3. your policy is practicable
Answer those questions correctly more often than not over a period of time and you will have a successful career.  It really is that simple.  

Thursday, 17 June 2010

What the BNP are for

The BNP are the unofficial, unacknowledged and often unheeded think tank of the LibLabCon. We perform the public service of telling the Ugly Truth and we do it because we have this strange inexplicable urge to do so even though we get no thanks for it.

It has been said that politics is a vocation, ie something you do because you cannot help it, even when you know there's no money in it, like teaching, soldiering, nursing and the priesthood.

Tuesday, 8 June 2010

My main occupation

I see myself in the gutter splashing its contents at passersby in order to draw their attention to the fact that our sewage disposal services are no longer working.

Saturday, 3 April 2010

On Politics (my quotes)

Politics is the courtship of the fickle by the unreliable.

Politics is such a dirty business that it mostly involves persuading or compelling different people to take turns in suffering a pre-determined and unavoidable quantity of unhappiness.

Wednesday, 10 February 2010

Politicians, Dustmen, Sewage Workers and Hamlet Explained

Being a politician is a bit like being a dustman or a sewage worker. Someone's got to do it, but you rather despise a person for doing it. A revolution is a bit like a nation having a crap or a spew after a bout of food poisoning and heavy drinking, and it is always politicians who started it and have to clear up afterwards. Politics is therefore a vocation. You do it because you can't help going on and on about those bees in your bonnet. There are many far easier ways of earning money and respect.

The reason why politics is so crap in this country is because you now have a new breed of the cowardly and contemptible who don't like to do the dirty work that comes with being in politics, such as seeking the ugly truth and telling the ugly truth and a dodging the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune when those who don't like the ugly truth want to shoot the messenger who told them the ugly truth.

Wednesday, 25 November 2009

Politics and Religion

"Religion is another way of controlling the thoughts and actions of people who think they are not interested in politics."

"Politics and religion is a distinction without a difference."

Sunday, 25 January 2009

Geert Wilders: "Islam is not a religion but an ideology"

Geert Wilders, the Dutch Islamophobe who believes Islam is evil, said:

"I view Islam not as a religion, but as a dangerous, totalitarian ideology - equal to communism and fascism. Aren't I allowed to say so?"

Since he has indeed said so, it falls to non-Islamophobes to deconstruct his statement.

The fact is that all religion is but ideology. It is a distinction without a difference, and made to appear profound by those who believe there to be a difference because they are two different words.

The Koran - a work of genius - has a verse for every situation advocating both sides of the argument, eg peace or war, forgiveness or punishment.

If Man is both good and evil, then it follows that his interpretation of God's Word will be done to suit his purpose, which may be good or evil.

As for Islam's alleged totalitarianism, this is a danger any ideology is vulnerable to. After all, all anti-discrimination legislation is in fact totalitarian, because it forbids us from acting as we would wish and infringes our freedom of association and contract. There are many who would now argue that feminism and PC-liberalism are in fact totalitarian.

Wilders is also concerned that Islam is political.

But of course it is, since every moral decision we make is in fact political, eg whether we speak up or shut up on any matter likely to upset someone, when we are with friends, family, employers, customers, and anyone at all with the power to help or hinder us.

In short, Wilders' claim that Islam has the potential to become (or is already) totalitarian should not be greeted with the shock and horror that it is now being received, but with a shrug of the shoulders.

Wilders is saying nothing new. All the things that we do and say and all ideologies have the potential to be wrong, foolish, evil and destructive.

We lose our liberty when we prefer unquestioning obedience to the cultivation of a questioning mind.

We lose our liberty when we choose not to question in order to be safe.

We keep our liberty when our political system encourages us to ask questions and receive proper answers.

We lose it when we choose not to offended and impose censorship on those who would offend us.

As I have said many times before, a one-party state or an Islamic state need not be totalitarian. In fact, it is less likely to be totalitarian if we take the teleological approach to God.

Why did Man create God?

To comfort him and to keep him safe from fear and harm.

By always asking ourselves what evil a verse of the Koran is intended to forbid, or what good it is intended to enjoin, we will be more likely to use wisely this excellent book for the guidance of humanity.

If being Muslim means attaining the peace of submitting to God, and that God is but Truth, Reality, Knowledge and Reason tempered with Mercy, then what is there not to like about Islam? I speak as an atheist believing that it is not in fact necessary to believe in God to be a good Muslim.

If the Islam we in the West see is not to our liking, then it is perhaps time for the West to seize the initiative, and appropriate the Koran in order to serve ourselves better.

Religion comes from the word "religare", the Latin of "to bind", to keep together a society that will always have a tendency to fragment and disintegrate, men (and women) being what they are and always will be.

Society will always need its adhesive, and for this reason God - the most powerful being Man could imagine - will always be used for political purposes.

It is invariably Christians who cannot accept or understand this truth, crippled by their knowledge of this meaningless statement Christ gave the Roman authorities to get himself out of trouble: "I render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and God that what is God's."

In contrast to this unconscionable separation, the Holy Trinity of Religion, Politics and Morality is implicitly acknowledged in the Koran.

It is only Christian Hypocrisy that denies this Truth.

If Muslims are perceived as primitive, dangerous and fanatical, it is only because they have distorted their religion and allowed it to be perverted to suit the purpose of their leaders, who are themselves corrupt, ignorant and mistaken.

If it were not for the fact that the West has lost its own sense of self-belief, it would seize this excellent book and use it for its own benefit, in a manner more creative, progressive and liberal (in the best sense of that word) than the ones who were born into this faith.

Mark Parker entertains doubts

26:00  Psyop is just another word for state propaganda. 35:39 @DigitalGnosis ​​I dont believe Homer was a person Homer was a pagan. There wi...