The “brain-drain” that is occurring by wholesale importing migrants from regions of low HDI, or human development indexes, (in the Middle East and Africa) to regions of high human development indexes (in Europe) will likely spell disaster for maintaining the integrity and composition of the archetypal Western nation state.
A nation state, its qualities and identity, whether good or bad, is simply a direct result of the collection of individuals that compose it.
Because of this, the development of the individuals that make up the state is crucial in defining the quality of the collective state as a whole, and a crucial factor that should be heeded.
Different groups of individuals take on various group characteristics, genetic and environmental, so when dealing with migrants from different demographic groups, we must consider this as a factor.
Questions that need to be asked: are these individuals morally sound? Are they intellectually adept? What are their general qualities and flaws? What is the provenance of a demographic, how compatible is a group of people with the values, systems, politics, and culture of another group?
Social demographics and its impact on a nation state.
Is the homogeneity of the essence of a state at every level of its definition upheld when a given group is introduced into the demographic equation?
What biology and inherent predispositions underpins the differential between populations, how much can environmental factors be attributed to these differences or similarities?
At the root of what I’m trying to say is that our excessive liberal attitudes and open-doored pathological altruism needs to be re-thought and addressed accordingly.
If we go by the evidence, a brain-drain will occur that will affect the West negatively.
Science proves this brain-drain trend to be grounded in empirical, demographic reality; as the more educated, genetically adept native Europeans’ birth rate is declining and migrant birth rate increasing, a large brain-drain will occur within a few decades as the two populations intersperse, with one rapidly replacing the other in its prominence — the devastating affects of this brain-drain has yet to be felt this early on in the process, but it will come in the end.
If seeing the rampant spike in migrant-caused crime hadn’t already convinced you that there is a demographic problem brewing — the strong, empirical correlation between national average IQ and national success will:
As you can see, the Western nations tend to be placed in higher levels of national success.The migrant crisis is importing chaos into an equation of order.The correlation, and very likely causation, is indisputable – and needs to be considered with regards to the engineered European migrant crisis.
“There is no such thing, at this date of the world’s history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it.
There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone.
The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press?
We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes.”
— John Swinton, preeminent New York journalist, at a press banquet, 1880.
Journalism is, for the most part, a dead, bastardized profession — no longer is it about holding power to account and keeping the public duly informed.
The line between journalism — traditionally, the dispassionate reporting of facts — and outright partisanship, whether knowingly or not, seems blurrier than ever.
As it has been for over a century since the dawn of Yellow Journalism — Journalists are answerable to a preset story selection process, funneled into news material that staunchly avoids controversy, instead exalting vague, generalized, and often trivial topics as “newsworthy”, over ones that could be “defamatory” or be deemed “too risky” to report on.
Today, Journalists espouse prepackaged, fence-sitting, irresolute propaganda that shuns the devil hiding in the details — with production mostly marketed towards the lowest common denominator; opting for simplified language, generalized explanations, and an inability to come to conclusions and actually analyze and inform rather than simply describe and commentate.
Journalism is branded as a “risky business” to deter maverick Journalism.
A high-stakes, red tape laden “minefield” mentality is hammered into every Journalist hopeful in an attempt to extinguish the curious spark that fuels the real investigative and analytical Journalism that we all need more of.
They would rather you play it safe and not “lose your job by getting it wrong”.
The result is tame media content that is vague, tiptoes, and is fearful of causing grief or insult, this is a known form of information suppression.
Today’s Journalism is a Journalism of mouthpieces, built on the ugly clutches of fear and dependency, today’s Journalism is intellectual prostitution.
The best Journalism has always come from dissidents, this is because the very basis of Journalism is dissent itself. The stranglehold of ‘professionalism’ has made journalists oblivious to the compromises with authority they are constantly making.
It has also ensured that many readers remain oblivious to the same compromises.
“The New York Times is the house organ of the Establishment. It is committed, both editorially and in its presentation of the news, to the interests of an Establishment: continuity, security and legitimacy. Therefore they generally support business and finance, the American version of empire, the government and the president, until, and unless, some excess is so egregious that it poses a threat to continuity, security or legitimacy.”
— Larry Beinhart, American author.
And just like ‘terrorism’, it turns out that ‘advocacy journalism’ is a sin committed only by opponents of established power, as the income dependency blind spot of mainstream Journalists taints the media pool for everyone:
This is especially so with the recent ‘fake news’ outcry slanting solely alternative “conspiracy” media outlets, while hypocritically ignoring the overwhelming globalist advocacy of the mainstream press.
“The major Western news outlets now conflate the discrete difficulties from made-up ‘fake news’ and baseless ‘conspiracy theories’ with responsible dissenting analysis,” he wrote. “All get thrown into the same pot and subjected to disdain and ridicule.”
— Robert Parry, American investigative journalist.
Mainstream Journalism education produces willing and committed establishment mouthpieces that don’t know the Emperor has no clothes.
The backgrounds of journalists who repeatedly and suspiciously repeat talking-points usually reveals a similar and extensive “resume” of mainstream indoctrination, it’s a common observable pattern, not to mention media outlets hiring left-leaning individuals over right-leaning ones; those with the liberal suitability that makes them easier to adopt, and get behind the agenda of the outlet.
Principles held by mainstream Journalists are often features of indoctrinated enslavement that have become too doctrinally familiarized to eschew.
Western media is directly and indirectly promoting Western imperialism.
Like the sons of chiefs in Britannia, foreign journalists serving Western media branches, i.e. Al Jazeera, probably have honestly convinced themselves that these features of control and manipulation are instead the “novelties of civilization.”
International Journalism acts as cultural imperialism for Western corporate interests.
Today, a “softer” version of imperialism is disseminated under the guise of journalism and academia.
This kind of imperialism was present in the elite-owned British Empire, when education and missionary programs were created to replace independent and unique local perspectives and culture with the uniform perspective and culture of Britain, serving British aspirations of global hegemony.
It sought to transform indigenous communities into imperial archetypes of civility and modernity by re-modelling the individual, the community, and the state through western, Christian philosophies that encouraged uniformity to the Empire and smoothed the aggravations of cultural and ideological acclimatization.
“We have few princes and earls today, but we surely have their modern-day equivalents in the very wealthy who seek to manage the news, make unsavoury facts disappear and elect representatives who are in service to their own economic and social agenda… The “free press” is no longer a check on power. It has instead become part of the power apparatus itself. And this is dangerous.”
— Dan Rather, American Journalist.
Today’s globalization takes these “soft” imperialist social engineering strategies to a new and unprecedented level, to push a cultural-Marxist deconstruction of foreign and domestic systems and entities that threaten globalism:
Today we have a large variety of truths: truths for feminists, truths for blacks, Muslims, Hispanics, homosexuals, trans-gendered, truths for the foreign policy community that serves the military/security complex, truths for the neocons, truths for the One Percent that control the economy and the economists who serve them, truths for “white supremacists,” itself a truth term for their opponents. You can add to the list. The “truth” in these “truths” is that they are self-serving of the group that expresses them. Their actual relation to truth is of no consequence to those espousing the “truths.”
Weaponized academia: A Journalist’s mainstream education focuses on these toxic tenets:
Be risk averse, play it safe, do what you are told: The profession of Journalism is risky, you should always have somebody’s reputation and the legal ramifications of any given story in the forefront of your mind (rather than advocacy of the truth); it is far easier to report on less controversial stories, and we encourage you to do so by providing you with safe, easy stories. Be very scared of the government being instrumental in locking up journalists for the crime of exposing the establishment, but hopefully you will be too loyal to the establishment to figure out that it is worth exposing.
Become an ideologue: Conspiracy and alternative media is “fake news”, and should be shunned and rallied against without question, do otherwise and you are a dunce that isn’t worthy of being a Journalist. Accept other traditionally held mainstream media ideas such as the Russia bogeyman scare.
Be unquestioningly loyal to us: You should unquestionably trust our establishment-owned Associated Press and other mainstream outlets as the best sources, we encourage you to work for them and use them as reference points in your research because they are “unbiased”.
Cultural indoctrination: Hatred of the West and its “privileged”, colonial native population must be at the forefront of your Journalistic philosophy and ethical advocacy, else you are an immoral Journalist.
Get used to doing it our way: Your stories and original content will be screened before its publication by a left-leaning, agenda-driven editor who will likely reject anything they and their masters disapprove of, so just save yourself the effort and produce propaganda for us otherwise you will not make it in this field. Accept the limits and compromises of corporate media that will inhibit you as a Journalist and become another “Repeater” Journalist.
Normalization of media tyranny: Everything we have taught you is how the industry has always been and always will be, it’s automatically the “best formula” because you’ve been taught by “professionals” who “know everything” about the industry — so yield, accept our compartmentalization and take up the standard of sell-out doctrinaire.
The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion describes the elite’s intentions for weaponized education:
“We must introduce into their education all those principles which have so brilliantly broken up their order.”
We shall turn them into “unthinking submissive brutes waiting for things to be presented before their eyes in order to form an idea of them…”
“We shall erase from the memory of men all facts of previous centuries which are undesirable to us…”
“Do not suppose for a moment that these statements are empty words: think carefully of the successes we arranged for Darwinism, Marxism, Nietzsche-ism…. it should be plain to see what a disintegrating importance these directives have had upon the minds of the goyim. ” (Protocol 2)
Let me remind you of a passage from a 1930’s Communist manual on brainwashing. “In the United States, we have been able to alter the works of William James, and others, …and to place the tenets of Karl Marx, Pavlov, Lamarck, and the data of Dialectic Materialism into the textbooks of psychology, to such a degree that anyone thoroughly studying psychology becomes at once a candidate to accept the reasonableness of Communism.”
We can look at the Reuters fellowship program and see news organisations like Thompson Reuters, the BBC, The Economist and The Guardian are held up as “examples” of journalism.
This is despite their active manipulation of information toward particular political objectives rather than accurately informing the public.
In particular, these news services played crucial roles in promoting wars like the US-UK led invasion of Iraq in 2003, intentionally obfuscating critical information the public and policymakers required to make an honest assessment of the decision to go to war.
The BBC in particular has been embroiled in impropriety ranging from deceptive news coverage to paid-for documentaries and even criminal conduct committed by individuals, and covered up institutionally.
What isn’t taught in mainstream Journalistic education is corporate partisanship and the dangerously ever-centralizing state of major media organisations:
The elites are buying out the competition at an alarming rate, you may see many faces of the media, but behind it all there are only a few owners.
“The American media does not serve the truth. It serves the government and the interest groups that empower the government. The function of the “mainstream media” is to sell products and to brainwash the audience for the government and interest groups.”
— Paul Craig Roberts, American economist, journalist, blogger, and former civil servant.
The US State Department has issued a fresh ultimatum on the Iran nuclear deal to Washington’s ostensible major allies in Europe, demanding that Germany, Britain and France commit themselves to altering the agreement along the lines demanded by President Donald Trump or face its unilateral abrogation by the US.
A secret State Department cable obtained by Reuters presents what are essentially the same demands made by Trump last January. At that time, he announced that he was prepared to relaunch all-out US economic warfare against Iran unless the European powers joined Washington in imposing a rewritten nuclear accord on Tehran, including provisions that the Iranian government cannot and will not accept.
The occasion for Trump’s threat was his reluctant announcement on January 12 that he had decided to waive the re-imposition of US sanctions that were lifted as part of the nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He vowed that this would be the last time he issued such a waiver, unless his conditions were met. The next deadline for waiving the sanctions is May 12.
The message from the State Department to the European powers asks for their “commitment that we should work together to seek a supplemental or follow-on agreement that addresses Iran’s development or testing long-range missiles, ensures strong IAEA inspections, and fixes the flaws of the ‘sunset clause.’”
Washington has demanded that Iran grant International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors immediate and unlimited access to any site in the country, including military bases; the elimination of “sunset clauses” in the JCPOA, making time-limited restrictions on aspects of Iran’s civil nuclear program permanent; and drastically limiting, if not outlawing, Iran’s ballistic missile program.
While presented by Reuters and other media as a softening of the position outlined by Trump in January, the cable makes it clear that the US is continuing to present its nominal allies in Europe with an ultimatum.
“In the absence of a clear commitment from your side to address these issues, the United States will not again waive sanctions in order to stay in the Iran nuclear deal. If at any time the President judges that such commitment is not within reach, the President indicated he would end US participation in the deal.”
The cable’s “talking points” for US diplomats to advance Washington’s agenda in Europe stress “the Trump administration’s strategy to counter the Iranian regime’s reckless aggression,” which “addresses the full range of Iranian threats, of which Iran’s nuclear program is only one element.”
The clear implication is that Washington is embarked on a trajectory of war with Iran, either with or without the collaboration of its NATO allies in Berlin, London and Paris. Should they join with the US in ripping up the nuclear accord, it will set them on a collision course not only with Iran, but also with Russia and China, the two other signatories to the JCPOA.
The US has spelled out its own intentions in the Trump administration’s recent National Security Strategy, lumping Iran together with North Korea under the category of “rogue states” that represent a threat to US “national interests” and are to be confronted and defeated.
None of the European powers responded directly to the US cable, which the State Department itself refused to discuss. Asked about the US demands in an online media briefing, the French Foreign Ministry declared:
“The French position on the Iran nuclear deal is known. As the President of the Republic [Emmanuel Macron] has said, we reaffirm our full attachment to the global action plan and its strict implementation.” It added that Paris would “continue to talk about the Iran nuclear program with our European and American partners.”
The European powers are pursuing their own imperialist interests in the Middle East and are increasingly at odds with US interests and strategies. The lifting of sanctions against Iran was greeted by European corporations as an opportunity to generate a fresh stream of profits through billions of dollars in new investments and trade deals. Many of these plans remain unfulfilled because of concerns that the US will target companies with unilateral sanctions, and that their investments could go up in smoke in the event of a new and catastrophic US war in the Middle East.
While hostile to Iran’s growing influence in the region, the European powers are increasingly alarmed at the prospect that Washington’s strategy of forging a regional anti-Iranian alliance with Israel and Saudi Arabia, together with the other Sunni Gulf oil sheikdoms, will produce a military confrontation that could cut off oil supplies upon which Europe depends and unleash a political and refugee crisis that will spill onto the continent.
Washington has issued its latest ultimatum in the midst of an explosive escalation of regional tensions, driven in the main by US and Israeli aggression. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spelled out Tel Aviv’s aggressive stance against Iran in a bellicose speech to the Munich Security Conference on Sunday. Holding up what he claimed was a piece of an Iranian drone shot down over Israeli-occupied Syrian territory in the Golan Heights, he denounced Iran as “the greatest threat to the world,” equating it with Nazi Germany.
“We will act without hesitation to defend ourselves, and we will act if necessary not just against Iran’s proxies that are attacking us, but against Iran itself,” said Netanyahu, in a clear threat to attack Iran, an action that his government would undertake only with US backing.
Israel responded to the alleged overflight of the drone, which Tehran insists was launched by independent Syrian militia elements in Syria, by targeting Iranian personnel in Syria with air strikes. Syrian air defense units succeeded in shooting down an Israeli F-16 fighter jet, the first such loss for the Israeli Air Force since the early 1980s.
Speaking in response to Netanyahu at the Munich conference, Mohammad Javad Zarif, the Iranian foreign minister, attributed the frenzied tone of Netanyahu’s speech to the downing of the warplane.
“The so-called invincibility of [Israel] has crumbled,” he said.
The US military and intelligence apparatus and its loyal stenographers in the US corporate media are churning out continuous war propaganda against Iran.
Speaking at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, US national security advisor Gen. H.R. McMaster declared it was necessary to “act against Iran,” which he accused of arming a “network of proxies” that is “becoming more and more capable as Iran seeds more and more…destructive weapons into these networks.”
The New York Times published a lengthy piece Monday based on interviews with Israeli military officers and government officials along with representatives of US, Israeli and Saudi-funded think tanks alleging that Iran is “creating an infrastructure [in Syria] to threaten Israel.” Needless to say, the article made no mention of Israel’s own funding and aid for Sunni Islamist militias attacking the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad.
The same issue of the Times carried an opinion piece by US ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley claiming, falsely, that a report issued by the United Nations proved that Iran has shipped missiles to the Houthi rebels in Yemen to fire at Saudi Arabia. The actual report found that “remnants” of the missiles were of Iranian origin, while providing no evidence as to how they got there.
Haley insists that the world must “act before a missile hits a school or a hospital and leads to a dangerous military escalation that provokes a Saudi military response.”
The column echoes the “big lie” methods pioneered by Nazi Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. That Saudi Arabia has been bombing Yemeni schools, hospitals, neighborhoods and infrastructure for nearly three years, killing some 13,000 Yemeni civilians and plunging the country’s population into the worst humanitarian crisis on the planet, goes unmentioned.
Haley is also silent on the fact that the US has provided the vast majority of the bombs and missiles dropped on the Yemeni people, while mounting logistical and refueling operations that make the mass slaughter possible.
Race relations is one of the biggest globalist social engineering efforts of the past fifty to sixty years, race has constantly been taken out of context and called an ‘issue of skin color’ by the race propagandists; civil rights figures fought the ‘good fight’, while the opposition; always equated to ‘racist extremists’; were the ‘baddies’.
I will open with two powerful quotes:
“We need to get rid of our liberal preconceptions. Men are not born equal, this is something which has not yet got through to the politicians, and it is by no means clear that all races are equally gifted.”
— Dr. Francis Crick, Nobel Prize winner and co-discoverer of DNA
“All the evidence to date suggests the strong and indeed overwhelming importance of genetic factors in producing the great variety of intellectual differences which we observe in our culture, and much of the differences observed between racial groups.”
— Hans Eysenck, Professor of Psychology at London University
In a survey from 1985 only 16% of biologists and 36% of educational psychologists disagreed with the statement “There are biological races in the species Homo sapiens“.[88]
The two main sides to the race argument (from Metapedia):
‘Race realists’ view race as a natural phenomenon to be observed, studied, and explained. They believe the human race is a valid biological concept, similar to sub-species or breeds or strains.
On the other side, those I term the hermeneusticists view “race” as an epiphenomenon, (like gender as opposed to “sex”) a mere social construction, with political and economic forces as the real causal agents. Rather than actually research race, hermeneuticists research those who study race.
The race-realist approach is empirical and employs a myriad of scientific methodologies, including surveys, social demography, IQ and personality tests, and behavior genetic analyses (e.g. twin studies).
The hermeneutical approach relies on textual, historical, and political analysis. The race-realist viewpoint is descriptive, explanatory, and typically avoids prescribing policy. Because the hermeneutical viewpoint sees inexorable links between theory and practice, its writings are often prescriptive and assume an advocacy position.
To their opponents, the race-realist approach comes across as cold, detached, and suspect of hiding a “racist” agenda. Hermeneuticists appear to race-realists as muddled, heated, and ideologically committed to an anti-racist activism.
Scientific race realism is not racist. Racism requires hatred. So the belief that some races are better than others is not racist: it is simply the scientific truth.
This article will put race into scientific context and expand on the deliberately suppressed and underrepresented information surrounding the topic.
Globalist migrant agenda (numerical IQ): high net movement from r-selection, low IQ regions to K-selection high IQ regions will spell disaster for the integrity of liberty-oriented Western civilization, lowering the (human development index) HDI and thus creating a more docile, controllable population.
These numbers came from a work carried out from 2002 to 2006 by Richard Lynn, a British Professor of Psychology, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish Professor of Political Science, who conducted IQ studies in more than 80 countries.
Richard Dawkins, ethologist & evolutionary biologist on the topic of racial classification:
“However small the racial partition of the total variation may be, if such racial characteristics as there are highly correlated with other racial characteristics, they are by definition informative, and therefore of taxonomic significance.”
— Richard Dawkins, The Ancestor’s Tale
"Social construct"? Forget it. Race is biologically real. But it's irrelevant to anything that matters. We're all HUMAN.
Yes, we’re all human, we must love one another, but that should not stop us accepting our biodiversity as something to be seriously taken into consideration.
The weakest of us should not be arbitrarily ‘represented’ as the best of us against all natural authority; that isn’t wise or meritocratic, it is dangerously delusional.
Research on ethnic heterogeneity has found that divided societies have numerous and severe problems.
It is sometimes argued that “race is just skin deep“. This diagram from a 2011 study shows how much three populations (from Africa, East Asia, and Europe) differ genetically from one another (according to the genetic measure used) and regarding gene groups with different functions. Red lines (additions to the original image) mark gene groups stated to be involved in pigmentation, hair development, and skeletal development (physical appearance). There are numerous other gene groups including many involved in the nervous system or potentially involved in the nervous system (including the brain). The gene group showing the largest population differences was involved in pituitary gland development. The pituitary gland is the part of the brain which controls the hormone system which has many effects on the whole body (including the brain itself).[8]Lifetime risk of incarceration for different racial groups in the United States. The lifetime risk for Black males is around 1/3. The relationship between race and crime is one example of a topic where many important aspects are not covered in mainstream sources.Past and predicted future population numbers 1950-2100. One issue relevant to White demographics with Whites quickly becoming minorities worldwide.
What we have in modern times is forced redistribution of resources to lower IQ groups, allowing them to r-selectively breed, this drags the whole of society down, benefiting only the rich Jewish oligarchs who stand to gain from the weakness of a genetically decaying population.
The human racial differential phenomenon.
On the other hand, if this natural selective process is allowed to act out on its own, certain racial groups, depending on the extent of their differences, will, on the whole, remain separated.
What is naturally effective will be represented accordingly, what is not naturally effective will not be represented, this is not racism as we’ve been told (i.e. whites being more wealthy and better represented), this is natural selection in action, without it, the human race, and civilization, would simply not survive.
This natural segregation phenomenon is being deliberately suppressed, multicultural societies are mainly living apart (with bell curve to be accounted for), this truth is being kept from you.
Groups of people with similar IQ levels are able to integrate, hence why many east Asians are able to perfectly integrate in the West, as the IQ point difference increases it drops down to just assimilation, and then finally full segregation.
The fact that there are no culturally divided societies that are even remotely like the multicultural harmonious utopia we are being sold should cause concern (but is instead ignored).
“This multicultural approach, saying that we simply live side by side and live happily with each other has failed. Utterly failed.” ― Angela Merkel
Segregation – Different cultures are kept separate from one another.
Assimilation – Minority cultures adopt the culture of the majority.
Integration – All cultures blend into a common culture. Sometimes described as a melting pot.
Multiculturalism assumes there are no important biological forces keeping different groups set apart. It envisions a world where all cultures live in peace and unity, and it is possible to experience other cultures the same as own’s own. Opponents hold this is an impossible fantasy that leads to alienation and anomie, especially when different ethnic groups are together.
Historical observances: most historical, non-socialist empires having many cultures have if anything practiced extensive self-segregation. The different cultures are usually allowed very extensive autonomy to manage their own affairs (including having separate law systems) as long as they pay taxes to the empire. The different groups to a large degree self-segregate from one another in the empire.
For example, in modern day Britain, Islamic migrants have evidently not integrated or even assimilated to the presiding Western culture. What underpins this is a combination of genetic, social, and environmental factors.
Results from various surveys in Britain on British Muslims have been described as stating that:
62% do not believe in the protection of free speech.
58% believe insulting Islam should result in criminal prosecution.
68% support the arrest and prosecution of anyone who insults Islam.
61% want homosexuality punished.
only 7% think of themselves as British first (81% say ‘Muslim’ rather than ‘Briton’).
31% identify more with Muslims in other countries than with non-Muslim Brits.
11% find violence for political ends acceptable.
up to 52% believe a Muslim man is entitled to up to four wives.
51% believe a woman cannot marry a non-Muslim. Only 51% believe a Muslim woman may marry without a guardian’s consent.
1 in 10 support killing a family member over “dishonor”.
1 in 5 young British Muslims agree that ‘honor’ violence is acceptable.
28% want Britain to be an Islamic state.
40% want sharia in the UK.
40% of British Muslim students want sharia.]
On the other hand, the native population feels as follows:
A 2017 US survey found that is asked if the United States was “losing its culture and identity,” 55% of respondents said yes, with 68% of white working class Americans feeling that way. Almost half (48%) of white working class Americans also feel that “things have changed so much that I often feel like a stranger in my own country,” while 62% believe that immigrants arriving from other countries threaten American culture.
A 2017 UK survey found that 56% believe that local culture was threatened by ethnic minorities.
Research on biological/genetic mechanisms related to racial genetic interests has found that different groups tend to feel more empathy for and favor their own group which makes group conflict very difficult to avoid. This research also implies that assimilation/integration may not work unless the different groups are genetically similar. Thus, the different immigrant European groups to the United States could be assimilated/integrated but this may not work with immigrant groups that are more genetically different.
Stefan Molyneux elaborates as to why this racial segregation phenomenon occurs:
Other leading sources on race realism:
David Duke,
Steve Sailer,
Jared Taylor of American Renaissance,
J Philippe Rushton of the Pioneer Fund,
Charles Murray of “The Bell Curve”,
HBDers, the scientific wing of race realism. If race is a fact of nature, then it can and should be studied by science.
Also see:
Al-Andalus – Lacking any good example of a current multicultural utopia, supporters of multiculturalism have instead often claimed that Al-Andalus (medieval Islamic Iberia) was one, before being destroyed by White Christians.
Globalist cultural-Marxism is a method of undermining the success of natural systems of genetic selection, et al, for personal gain.
Cultural Marxism: the gradual process of destroying all traditions, languages, religions, individuality, government, family, law and order in order to re-assemble everything under the Globalist model for world governance.
Race manipulation is just one part of this agenda, in this article I will focus on ‘race realism’ and genetic engineering as a powerful tool for population control.
Anti-meritocratic minority representation.
Anti-white minority ‘representation’ is afoot across school, media, professional, and political spheres.
ITV’s ‘Peston on Sunday Show’ was also found guilty of anti-white job advertisement.
They want to exalt desirable minorities and repress undesirable whites.
Minorities are grossly over-represented, while ‘white guilt’ and other cultural-Marxist social engineering ploys have been used to destroy the order-based western mindset and genotype, replacing it with the chaos-based third world mindset and genotype as a methodology for dysgenic population control.
Minority representation is a deliberate illusion.
The <1% remains majority white Ashkenazi Jews; nothing changes for them, yet everything changes for the population they want to control.
This graph gives a general idea for the race power index, although this is based on mainstream rich lists, not taking into account numerous Ashkenazi Jewish trillionaires, i.e. Rockefellers and Rothschilds.
By ‘representing’ minorities in high-earning and highly regarded roles as a ‘progressive’ social justice statement in a ‘post racial’ world, those in control gain more obedience, and create yet more popular acceptance for mass-migration and multiracial societies. Meanwhile, they still hold onto the real seats of power; having given away mere symbols of power, and not substantial power.
Average vs. extreme groups differences.
Another point is that only looking at average differences between groups may be misleading. Many characteristics that are influenced by many factors (like by many genes) will (due to the “central limit theorem”) have a “normal distribution” (a “bell curve” distribution). However, a characteristic of this distribution is that differences will be amplified at the extremes. Thus, group differences will be more pronounced at extreme values than they are at more average values. In practice, this means that racial differences will be more pronounced at extreme values (such as at extreme IQ values). Furthermore, in some situations these extreme groups may be particularly important. For example, it may be extreme rather than average persons that make most inventions. Thus, only looking at average group differences may in some situations be misleading.
Hiding the genetic ceiling with the glass ceiling.
Nothing changes at the very top of the hierarchy, but the general public are led to believe that the future is ‘minorities in high places’, i.e. Barack Obama, Sadiq Khan and so on, that minority groups were held back by a social glass ceiling, rather than a biological genetic one.
The Globalists have intentionally undermined natural selectivity, because they control corporate forces that are powerful and influential enough to overwrite the natural order that has ruled for so long and stood in the way of controlling populations.
Now they drive the direction of humanity’s genetic future, by rewriting the human genetic and epigenetic DNA they can pull the biological strings of the human race at their will.
Their false racial paradigm was and continues to be drilled deep into the minds of new generations to indoctrinate an irrational liberality founded in emotion rather than in scientific truth surrounding the subjects of race, colour, and creed — and the truth about biodiversity.
The stigma of being called a ‘racist’.
The fear of being labelled a ‘racist’ is one of the biggest mass-hysteric trends of our time, it is a designed social stigma that aims to suppress discussion and acknowledgement of the rational race discussion, this allows social engineering and race-mixing to take place with minimal popular resistance.
There’s a reason the migrant crisis heavily favors African and middle eastern migrants; they have the detrimental genotype and mindset they want to mass-introduce in the West, to create a worker subclass accustomed to poverty, corruption, and illiteracy. They use the welfare state and ‘open-door’ policy making as a magnet for these migrants.
This reality is consistently censored in the West as we are spoonfed the emotional narrative of the race discussion everyday; that those who challenge orthodox race and immigration ideas must, without question, be motivated by an extremist and irrational racist ‘hatred’, and whatever they have to say ought to be dismissed.
Race is not a social construct, it is biological.
“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.”
He claimed that our differences are not biological, but a result of hard graft, merit, and self-determination. He made an argument for environmental causes defining the ‘content of our characters’, but ignored the biological factors that also define who and what we are as human beings.
Environment plays a partial role in defining us, not an absolute role.
“If only environmental factors were responsible for the different IQs of different populations, we should expect to find some countries where Africans had higher IQs than Europeans. The failure to find a single country where this is the case points to the presence of a strong genetic factor.” — Richard Lynn.
“Regression would explain why Black children born to high IQ, wealthy Black parents have test scores 2 to 4 points lower than do White children born to low IQ, poor White parents.” — Arthur Jensen.
Today, to even consider race in a non-collectivist light is heavily opposed, both legally and socially. We stand to lose resources, friends, our reputation, or our ego if we stand for what seems to be an idea already beaten by what we are told is the ‘consensus’, that race is a social construct that divides us.
As an individual, it makes sense to go with the ‘politically correct’ herd, to avoid the headache; because it’s the path of least resistance. But the dire implications of doing this are overlooked. Our biodiversity shapes the qualities (or flaws) and the rise or fall of civilization itself, understanding race is understanding ourselves and what it means to be human.
Civilization is made up of human individuals, but speciation can bring on collective racial traits.
Civilization is made up of biological human individuals, our environment is an extension of ourselves; our biology precedes everything we think of, everything we produce, our inclination and reception to certain persuasions, and every trait that enables the group to flourish, or to flounder.
IQ and good genes creates success and progression, poor genetics causes regression, environmental factors play a role too, but the genetic role is understated.
This is an imperative dynamic to successful civilization, a nation of the genetically healthy is going to be a nation set for success.
Garett Jones states in the video that:
“Smarter people are more likely to see the ‘invisible hand’, having smart, informed voters is crucial to a functioning civilization; to support market competition, to support some degree of long-term thinking, looking at the unseen versus the seen.”
Natural selection is everywhere, except in social justice ideology.
If you accept evolution, you accept race realism.
In the animal kingdom, successful genes always outlive weaker genes, stronger traits are passed on while weaker traits are cast aside, this process ensures the success and continuation of a species, it is a natural safeguard that has stood the test of time.
Humans follow these fundamental laws of nature too.
For example, in choosing a mate, or in a professional setting where a company hires on positive traits; a hardworking nature, punctuality, composure, adaptability, and creativity is favored over the slacker, a better candidate will net more resources and boost ‘survival’ chances — we can all agree to this common system of meritocracy; a nation is simply that on a larger scale; it’s group awareness of what has worked for survival in the immediate environment, and a desire to preserve and embolden that.
Yet today, in the name of tolerance, we insist on immigration policies that bring in people that do not have the necessary traits, both biologically and environmentally, to both maintain and further western civilization.
Historical context: race and lineage has always been recognized.
Before the 17th-century scientific revolution, ideas about race were inchoate and unsystematic — “Folk anthropology.”
To the degree they included notions we would now consider biological, those notions came from:
Practical knowledge obtained from millennia of experience in selective breeding of crops and livestock.
From these, by the time methodical science arrived on the scene, civilized peoples had a fair, but unorganized, stock of knowledge about inheritance and genetic similarity.
In modern times, these ideas about inheritance have been proven true.
“Genetic differences between human groups (in particular, differences in average native intelligence) have been an important factor in human history.”
With the Enlightenment, systematic biological classification was attempted, most persuasively by Linnaeus. Philosophers also took an interest — Kant, for example.
In modern times, the race debate is branded as ‘low-brow’ and nonintellectual, yet these leading thinkers partook in deliberating on race.
Race in the modern sense was salient in the 18th-century Americas and the Caribbean, which had long made use of black African and (to a much smaller degree) local indigenous peoples as slave labor. It was salient, too for the small minority of Europeans who had first-hand experience of Europe’s overseas empires.
This did not lead to much scientific theorizing, but it did cause a lot of noticing. Thomas Jefferson can be taken as representative.
The “long” 19th century (i.e. to 1914) saw the end of race slavery in the civilized world, and the rise and acceptance of evolutionary biology. There was much theorizing about race, most of it not very scientific. Charles Darwin was of course an outstanding exception — a great scientist.
Darwin observed clear differences between the races.
The 20th century saw the rise of population genetics (Wright, Fisher, Haldane), the neo-Darwinian synthesis (Dobzhansky, Mayr) in evolutionary biology, the molecular structure of DNA (Watson & Crick), and rigorous psychometry (Burt, Eysenck, Jensen).
All these developments had implications for the understanding of race as a feature of the human world. Modern science has allowed us to prove many of these historical theories and observances.
Race Realism and Race Denialism.
Let’s start by defining ‘race’ itself, modern society has been taught to see race in terms of color, that we are ‘all the same underneath’. Race actually means something else altogether:
“The biological definition of race is a geographically isolated breeding population that shares certain characteristics in higher frequencies than other populations of that species, but has not become reproductively isolated from other populations of the same species.”
‘Race realism’ is the scientific point of view that:
Like any other widely-distributed species, Homo sapiens are divided into local varieties – races – that differ in their biology.
Where races show different statistical profiles on heritable traits – physiognomy, metabolism, disease susceptibility, and the BIP traits (Behavior, Intelligence, Personality) – it is reasonable to infer that biological differences are causal factors.
Biological race differences work together with adscititious factors (history, geography, epidemiology) to shape social outcomes.
The ‘Bell Curve’: the science is clear, the races have classifiable differences, we must accept this uncomfortable truth and adapt ourselves accordingly.
The opposite of race realism is race denialism, and race denialism is the social ideology and practice promoted by Zionist Globalism in order to gain popular acceptance to subversively sully the races as a part of their agenda of dysgenics; to create the lowest common denominator as the average human being by promoting deleterious alleles.
‘Race denialism’ is the hypothetical point of view that:
Observed group differences between local varieties of Homo sap. are superficial and inconsequential, like the hair color of individuals.
The different statistical profiles of races on BIP traits and social outcomes are entirely caused by historical and social factors. Biology plays no part.
Poor genetics for the many means more power to the enlightened few, by lowering the genetic (and epigenetic) ceiling for average humans you can easily assert a designed eugenicist race above a designed dysgenicist slave race. If the average person lacks the mental faculties to conceive of their own enslavement then those in control have succeeded.
This agenda is promoted through race denialist, dysgenic-promoting propaganda which is widely seen across globalist controlled mediums:
The commanding heights of Western societies – media, schools, politics – are held by race denialists, mainstream anything promotes race denialism in the most one-sided way imaginable.
Race denialism is a social dogma. All respectable people are required to affirm it.
The geographical impact on race and IQ.
Early humans settled different landmasses, these landmasses held different environmental characteristics, which, in turn, affected their occupants.
Harsh northern hemisphere climates forced its occupants to become more adaptable and resourceful, surviving in colder, harsher climates required the development of larger intelligence faculties compared to survival in sub-Saharan Africa where an abundance of regional wildlife and flora meant biological adaptation was less necessary for survival.
The five major races correspond to major geographic barriers between human groups: the Oceans, the Sahara desert in Northern Africa, and the Himalayas mountain range in Central Asia (and the deserts and the mountain ranges bordering on the Himalayas). These geographic barriers can be distinguished in the above satellite imagery of Eurasia and Northern Africa.
“Caucasoids and Mongoloids who live in their homelands and in recently colonized regions, such as North America, did not rise to their present population levels and positions of cultural dominance by accident. They achieved all this because their ancestors occupied the most favorable of the earth’s zoological regions, in which other kinds of animals also attained dominance during the Pleistocene. These regions had challenging climates and ample breeding grounds and were centrally located within continental land masses. There general adaptation was more important than special adaptation. Any other subspecies that had evolved in these regions would probably have been just as successful.”
Bureaucracy, red tape, what ever you want to call it, is dangerous; it’s thought control when in the wrong hands, I’m going to explain why that is.
Why is it dangerous to have regulations? To have rules and guidelines? The answer is simply excess. Deliberate, blinding, overwhelming excess. Let me explain.
The true definition of freedom is reality in parallel with natural law, i.e. our actions are governed by free will, and the consequences of those actions are governed by natural law, not some abstract, out-of-touch rule devised by a man.
Children look for reality in simple forms of pleasure and pain, we do this throughout our lives in making sense of the world around us.
As children we are taught by natural law not to touch a flame as it will burn us, and that hurts, so we don’t do it again.
Likewise, the state teaches us not to do things and threatens us with suffering, except the state changes its rules all the time, it uses the suffering paradigm to enforce its own reality, while natural law keeps its rules the same. I think its easy to point out which one is the fake.
When we get caught up in the state’s authorship of our ‘reality’ it’s because we think the state is worthy of our unquestioning loyalty and respect. It isn’t, and history’s great sufferings proves that to be true.
Our realities are always changing because of a thing called stimulus, we need to understand the state is the biggest man-made stimulus in our lives. Because this stimulus is man-made we must take into account every aspect of what man is and how that defines the stimulus we are exposing ourselves, and our concepts about reality, to. This includes taking into account the negative roots of a man-made stimulus, such as: corrupt, greedy, egotistical, deceptive, etcetera.
This all sounds so simple, and it is, but people do struggle in differentiating the state’s rules from natural law and common sense. They live their lives by an ever-growing, ever-changing book of rules and regulations. In essence, allowing someone to constantly program and reprogram them to behave in a certain way – that’s dangerous, and I think any sane individual would agree.
‘Right think’ and ‘wrong think’, Orwell’s 1984 seen in state’s creeping red tape.
An example of this is the US government banning the collection of rain water and smoking cannabis, (a safe, beneficial medicinal plant). Both of these cases are in direct contravention to free-will, the choice to do these things does not harm anyone but the government insists it does. I’m waiting for a ruling ‘authority’ to say breathing is banned.
“the power or right to act, speak, or think as one wants.” — the primary definition of ‘freedom‘
The mere thought of Islam producing a toxic culture in the middle-east is ‘wrong think’ and not ‘politically correct’ – but what is ever ‘correct’? And who could ever have the sheer arrogance to rule in absolutes? Someone that does that should not be followed.
Think in terms of empirical reality: natural law.
So, if you were to jump off a cliff, the law of gravity would bring you down and likely result in your death – that’s cause and effect in tandem with natural law. State imposed rules are so often on abstract, nonsensical terms that force upon us faulty, insane notions at the barrel of a gun.
Forging a false reality: Too much red tape is about thought control, about laying out a minefield where you are always ‘wrong’ unless you refer to the presiding authority first.
This is why it’s so important to not blindly accept the state’s overwhelming bureaucratic red tape and to always challenge it when common sense holds more relevance. If you succumb to letting the state guide you as an individual, you forfeit your free thought and can easily be led astray.
It’s about dominating the individual, uprooting the ‘self’ and imposing the collective, ‘bee-hive’ thought.
Mass-control is big business in the higher-ups, as it has been in ruling classes throughout history, the globalist elites know that it is crucial to consolidating their position, and holding sway over the masses.
Think of herding sheep, a hive-mind collective running away from wherever the sheep dog emerges. Now understand that the sheep dog is the ever-changing ‘regulations’ of the state – it only works when the targets are easily led-on.
Bureaucracy is about domination, it ties into a policy of herding the sheep – subtly guiding our subconscious minds towards a general school of thought with threats, the metaphorical sheep dog that chases us around is the red tape that bludgeons our freedom to think freely every day. It’s the false box that is built around us; the mold we must conform to or else.
Too much red tape is dangerous for a free-thinking society because it forces us to question ourselves within the system of preordained ‘truths’, it masks simple, empirical realities by saying “the state’s rules and regulations come first before all else, even common sense – even natural law.”
Red tape is about making authority seem like the author of ‘natural law’, the difference is natural law never changes – the laws of men change all the time.
For example, the egg ‘salmonella’ scare propagated by the mainstream media, now proven false made most of us cautious around eggs and their preparation before consumption. This was an unnecessary, unfounded mental block that changed our behavior contrary to what was true.
The journalist who released millions of documents known as ‘The Panama Papers’ was killed on Monday after an explosive detonated inside her car.
Daphne Caruana Galizia, who leaked numerous documents concerning dodgy offshore dealings with elite politicians and businessmen around the world, was killed in northern Malta in what appears to be a revenge attack by Deep State operatives.
Infowars.com reports: Local media reports that Galizia had alerted police just two weeks prior after she began receiving numerous death threats.
The car bomb, which detonated near the journalist’s home, sent the 53-year-old’s Peugeot 108 several meters into a nearby field.
The ‘one-woman Wikileaks’ posed a huge threat to a shady elite ruling class.
Galizia, recently described as a “one-woman WikiLeaks,” drew the ire of countless powerful figures in Malta with her regular blog posts detailing corruption, but also her works exposing globalist-led corruption.
The journalist’s last story accused Malta’s prime minister, Joseph Muscat, of ties to offshore companies accused of selling Maltese passports and receiving payments from the government of Azerbaijan.
“Everyone knows Ms Caruana Galizia was a harsh critic of mine both politically and personally, but nobody can justify this barbaric act in any way,” Muscat said.
But whoever planted the bomb did justify this attack; and now a leading journalist in truth-exposure is dead.
Adrian Delia, the Nationalist party leader, bluntly pointed the finger at Galizia’s political journalism for the reason behind the attack.
“A political murder took place today,” said Delia, also a target of Galizia’s reporting. “What happened today is not an ordinary killing. It is a consequence of the total collapse of the rule of law which has been going on for the past four years.”
Galizia’s family is currently petitioning the government to replace Consuelo Scerri Herrera as the incident’s head investigator. Scerri was mentioned numerous times in Galizia’s blog.
In a statement the family argued Scerri could not “conduct a magisterial inquiry through the seriousness and impartiality that is needed in the search for truth.”
No one thus far has taken responsibility for the attack. Galizia’s reporting targeted a wide range of entities including banks accused of money laundering and the Mafia.
Jordi Sanchez of the Catalan National Assembly (ANC) and Jordi Cuixart of Omnium Cultural, two organisers of the 1st October independence referendum, have been arrested on the order of the Spanish National Court on sedition charges.
They are currently in jail with no condition of bail being offered.
This comes as Madrid has expressed confusion over the nature of Catalan President Carles Puigdemont’s intentions to form an independent Catalan Republic.
Madrid continue to refuse negotiations, Puigdemont seeking the diplomatic approach.
Last week, Puigdemont officially signed a declaration of independence, but immediately thereafter delayed its ascension, thus practically making the document a statement of intent than a fully fledged declaration.
Puigdemont has called for dialogue over independence while Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy claims that Madrid will not discuss the matter in any way shape or form. Madrid has issued an ultimatum to Catalonia that unless Puigdemont rebukes any intention of independence by the 19th of October, Spain may suspend Catalonia’s parliament and invoke direct rule.
While the Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy and even the Spanish King intervened to state that the Catalan exercise in democracy had no legitimacy on constitutional grounds, one must realize that all constitutions, like all currencies not pegged to a metallic standard, are only valid if a consensus of peoples are willing to bestow them with legitimacy. The United States for example, violates its constitution on a daily basis and this is now accepted as a status quo. Just ask the detainees in Guantanamo Bay about the sanctity of the US constitution.
Spain knows a diplomatic, democratic approach will lose them Catalonia.
In this sense, the Catalonia referendum on independence was equally a referendum on the legitimacy and more specifically, the lack of legitimacy of Spain’s perennially controversial 1978 constitution.
Catalonia’s citizens take to the streets, rallying a cry for independence.
While the Catalans want a debate, Madrid answered with an anti-democratic campaign of police brutality in a country that is not anywhere near a war zone. There was no excuse for the violence and indeed, the violence was totally condemned by the Catalan President in his speech.
Thus far, Spain has rejected all offers of mediation, including one from Switzerland.
Ticking time bomb threatens to martyr grassroots nationalist movements in Europe and paint the EU as a bogeyman.
If Spain buries its head in the sand even further than it already has, whatever happens can only be blamed on Madrid. If the EU continues to exercise the same attitude as Madrid, Brussels too will share a substantial portion of the blame.
Carles Puigdemont retweeted this in an obvious reference to the EU’s silence on the crisis:
Hello Mr. @JunckerEU. Just for you to know that there are political prisoners in Catalonia again. And they are European political prisoners. https://t.co/uahrEcH7fc
While the dispute between Madrid and Barcelona cannot be compared to the Israeli occupation and ethnic cleansing of Palestine, Carles Puigdemont’s attitude to Madrid was rhetorically reminiscent of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat’s statement to the United Nations in 1974.
During his first address to the UN General Assembly, Arafat said,
“I come to you bearing an olive branch in one hand and a freedom fighter’s gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand”.
MGM Grand owns Mandalay Bay Casino Hotel in Las Vegas, from where a shooter attacked a nearby Country Music Festival, killing 59 and injuring 527. The Chief Executive Officer of MGM Grand, James Murren, suddenly began selling-off his MGM Grand Stocks in the weeks before the attack took place.
This leaves the question, why?
Did James Murren have prior knowledge that this attack was going to take place? Did he know that the value of MGM Grand stocks would plummet after the attack, and so he cashed-out before the attack happened?
MGM Resorts International (NYSE: MGM) CEO James Murren sold 294,150 shares of the stock in a transaction on Friday, September 8th. The shares were sold at an average price of $34.08, for a total transaction of $10,024,632.00. This was a significant transfer of wealth.
Following the transaction, the chief executive officer now directly owns 71,442 shares in the company, valued at $2,434,743.36, having owned 365,592 shares before the transaction.
The transaction was disclosed in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission (image provided), and can also be taken directly from the US Securities Exchange Commission website which can be accessed through this link.
On Thursday, September 7th, James Murren sold 259,760 shares of MGM Resorts International stock. The stock was sold at an average price of $34.19, for a total transaction of $8,881,194.40.
On Wednesday, August 9th, James Murren sold 57,269 shares of MGM Resorts International stock. The shares were sold at an average price of $31.54, for a total transaction of $1,806,264.26.
On Monday, July 31st, James Murren sold 57,269 shares of MGM Resorts International stock. The shares were sold at an average price of $33.05, for a total transaction of $1,892,740.45.
Why did James Murren start dumping large amounts of his own company’s stock weeks before the attack? Some are wondering if it may be because he had prior knowledge the attack was to take place.
In the meantime, folks who hold stock in MGM Grand may wish to ask themselves if continuing to hold this stock is a smart move? Now that this information is out, it is likely that many, many people may choose to distance themselves from this corporation . . . and we all know what happens when folks start “distancing themselves” from a particular stock — the value tends to PLUMMET.
Mass migration patterns have happened throughout history, and they have, for better of for worse, influenced the due course and destiny of the affected host nation or region.
Today, mass migration is being orchestrated for the same outcome, big change. Presently, this change as seen in Europe, falls under the intricately designed Globalist agenda; that is to alter and stamp-out stubborn western, Judeo-Christian cultural roots that prevent hyper-centralization.
To do this, one must prevent integration/cultural assimilation from disallowing the outcome you want to see: that is a retrograde, subservient populace, as seen in many middle-eastern nations that live under tyranny. You must introduce a new culture very rapidly to encourage enclaves, and discourage the incentive that would have come with assimilation, i.e. adaptability to gain favour in workplace and social circles. Globalists encourage Islamic figureheads in influential positions to trounce the need for assimilation, i.e. Sadiq Khan as Mayor of London, Malala Yousafzai as a Muslim cultural figurehead. The suppression of distinctively Western traditions, i.e. the denouncement of St. George’s Day for “inclusiveness” encourages Islamic migrants to disregard the host culture and set of values, they have a free pass. They are shaped to adore the big-brother state and ignore the values of liberty.
It takes an exhaustive campaign of indoctrination and propaganda to achieve this seclusion, a classic case of divide and conquer. The voices of Globalism seem louder and truer than all else, their false image of authority misguides the many, because they have money and assets (this does not mean they have any imperative), those that choose to listen to them day in, day out, those with their hearts and minds in the material world- these are the ones that willfully define their reality according to this constant reinforcement.
“Stop watching the news, because the news contrives to frighten you. To make you feel small and alone…” — Morrissey
Overriding and Undermining Western Culture.
I will stick to expanding on the topic of multiculturalism here, of course the introduction of other factors helps denigrate western values – but to stay on-topic, I will discuss multiculturalism exclusively.
The very term ‘multiculturalism’ is asking for people to live categorically apart, the term implies that multiple cultures can live under a single political and ideological roof, this is not so when the cultures at hand are radically different from one another.
Cultural differences have plagued empire-builders throughout history, Biblically God (YHWH), placed cultural differences as a barricade to a Babylonian world order.
‘Culture’ in itself is an umbrella term that incorporates political and ideological persuasions, people that forget this and look at the skin color (nothing to do with culture) and less pertinent differences between cultural definitions are missing the point; culture has political and ideological baggage in many cases, cultural Islam is one of these cases. ‘Multiculturalism’ is a misleading term in that it flaunts itself as progressive and tolerant, but in fact is hopelessly idealistic.
To override a presiding culture, you must make the target culture (western/white culture) fear the culture you intend to introduce(third world Islam), and vice versa make the introduced culture fear the target culture (i.e. playing the racism card, making everything about race and xenophobia). The result is division, by keeping the two cultures separate, you allow the qualities and attributes of one to not become assimilated with the one you want to eliminate or suppress.
Orchestrated terrorist events that point towards cultural Islam help stoke the flames of fear and hatred. Fear keeps people apart, and above all, distrustful of one another.
The pull factor to bring in the introduced culture will be free stuff, i.e. the welfare state and socialism, something as a mouth-watering incentive, and of course, open borders achieved through the EUs schengen area and porous border policies, it is so easy to take the sweet, low-hanging fruit dangled before them.
We Shouldn’t Simply Accept a Toxic Culture, but Neither Should We Hate It.
Of course, the culture that is to be introduced is an inferior, regressive culture, and the westernized host culture has every right to disdain it. However, if this disdain is expressed as blatant anger and hatred, and not moderate, patient understanding accompanying a desire to help fix the pitfalls of a toxic culture that is being imposed en masse, both cultures will simply live apart while the ‘migration crisis’ continues.
The higher birthrate of cultural Islam will mean that it will overtake and outnumber people holding Western-minded ideas very quickly within a few decades, as the family unit is the principal catalyst for passing-on values, the large Muslim families will win every-time in a western world with a falling birthrate and smaller families on average.
The situation that we are in (a designed mass-migration pattern) demands our collective to push to westernize as many third-world people as possible while seeking a skills-based limited migration program, not the cultural-replacement program (disguised as a refugee crisis) currently in effect. We must not alienate them, but instead demonstrate the perks of western civilization, we must quash the ‘slaver-white man’ and ‘imperialist-oppressor’ focused image pushed by the Globalist controlled media that serves to alienate and vilify the most progressive, uplifting culture and society the world has ever known, an embodiment of liberty worth preserving and spreading.
Will we let our cultural malleability caused by our collective fall in strong, immovable, western values permit the dominant, but inferior Islamic culture to overtake as the presiding power in the West alongside Globalism?
Take a look at what is happening in Europe. It’s inundated with “refugees”, the direct impact is that Europe’s liberty-founded culture is being radically changed for the worse.
Lawlessness is starting to thrive. Women are being systematically raped, mosques are being built, and churches destroyed, vandalism and disrespect abounds.
Europe’s entire culture is being replaced and it is being allowed out of a misguided and twisted manufactured political correctness; a product of complex social mind control.
Europe’s culturedoes not conform to ISIS’ unyielding and narrow interpretation of Islam, so it must be replaced. Realize that their intent on a global scale.
Don’t you see that our own citizens are taking away our culture piece by piece with these statue removals?
No telling what will be next, Mount Rushmore? Faceless currency? It bears resemblance to Stalin’s communist state. Well, this in itself opens the door to the one world economy agenda, remove symbols and reminders of civilization, sooner or later civilization will be lost.
These ‘racial’ monument removals are just the beginning of a domino line, it will get incredibly worse. The racial implications are simply a deception to enable it, if we fell for it this time, what will we fall for next?
If we remove our culture, we will quickly forget about what it represents, this leaves the door wide open to tyranny’s grasp.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
— George Santayana
The door is open; it’s all prepared now for radicals to replace genuine history, as flawed and ugly as it is, with their own. Soon there will no longer be an American or western history. Here’s why:
There is a Global Agenda to destroy monuments and to destroy history in the US and Western world, as well as in Syria. Why? It is a New World Order Agenda. Now more than ever the agenda to rewrite history has started. We are duped into thinking this is just a racial divide. It’s not.
The modern westerner stands for nothing, so they fall for everything. Our apathy and tolerance makes us easy targets for manipulators, our widespread reluctance to take a stance and enforce common principles weakens us all.
A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything.
— Malcolm X
The deep seriousness of the New World Order removing American history (or the history of any culture) in order to replace it with their own is being missed! The liberals do not see that they are NWO puppets, doing the dirty work for them! Once the older generation that remembers American history die or are removed from society, the NWO can insert their own perverted ideology as ‘history’ to deceive the new generations.
Tolerance and apathy are the last virtues of a dying society.
— Aristotle
This has been attempted once before, equally evil. The evil persons were Adolf Hitler and Stalin. We are being influenced by the enemy of our souls. Look around, see the violence, hatred, disrespect, intolerance. Americans have become angry, whimsical, whining, spoiled, self-indulgent and easily offended, a culture of sensitivity has been forged, the population polices itself, undesirable ‘alternative’ opinions are automatically branded as hateful.
The Spearhead Journal 
