A 30 minute cartoon on the history of currency, debt and banking's connection. Check it out.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Charlie Sheen: Semitically Shitcanned
It's finally happened: The 9/11-inquiring Two and Half Men star Charlie Sheen has had his show dropped. The cause? Well, a major rant aimed partially at his show's Jewish co-creator, Chuck Lorre. He even referred to his uber-Judaic birth name, a *gasp* major no-no in Hollywood.
Now, I don't particularly harbour any special respect for Sheen, nor was I a follower of his show (I don't watch television) and he's coming off as indefensibly obnoxious and a haughty cock, but this allows for some elaboration on the ethno-politics of the Western media, and perhaps on the West as a whole: When leftist or neocon Jews get butt-hurt, a minor anal fissure transforms into a major fucking tectonic rupture. Highly ethnocentric personal connections in Hollywood means the goyim can't go around saying what they wish. Or point out certain truths. It's all in who you are, and who you know, and how much you prostrate yourself to your masters.
Indeed, Sheen's just another easy target for the media to sink their hooks into. This follows a trend, and it's got zero to do with Sheen's purported lifestyle degeneration and debauchery. Parallels can be easily drawn to the ongoing Mel Gibson saga, initiated with a drunken rant and arrest, and then later a segway into suspicious publicised recordings rage-filled rants against his ex-wife, and it's clear why: He wouldn't play ball with the ideological pitchers of Hollywood. Examining the list of movies he's been involved with: The Patriot, Braveheart, Apocalypto and Passions of the Christ; movies that did not preach liberalistic values of egalitarianism, dis-empowered Caucasians or ubermensch noble savages, especially the latter, which gave an unwanted revival of a Christian viewpoint on the life of Jesus, seen as "anti-Semitic". This was the final straw for Gibson.
The double standard is illuminated especially with Alec Baldwin, his much publicised abusive call to his daughter was quickly extinguished by the powers to be, losing its stopping power abruptly as he was embraced by Hollywood, given a fancy new TV show. Why? A certain ideological tendency of his.
It's the same story in Australia. Brendan O'Connell, a pro-Palestinian activist whom filmed his ideological battles and protests against Israeli Zionists and broadcasted them on Youtube, received a sentence of eighteen months in jail. If any Australians think they lived in a free state, think again. And if any New Zealanders think we're totally immune from thought crime offenses, I'd start reconsidering that viewpoint, if Australia is any example to go by.
When it comes to the media, there's special rules and regulations when it comes to commenting on minority and special interest groups, yet it's a free-for-all for those targeting Europids in mainstream medium. Naturally, it's self-evident that Whites are the oppressive, racist group. In fact, the burden of proof is on every White to prove they are not so, preferably via having no children, miscegnating, or generally being a pathetic and weak character who has an inability to defend himself, and submerges himself in distraction and decadence. Of course, what other race would allow their elites to invite so many of the third world into their lands without pause or organised opposition?! Clearly they must have a sinister agenda. No Whites really believe in all this egalitarian, blank state bollocks, do they?
Now, I don't particularly harbour any special respect for Sheen, nor was I a follower of his show (I don't watch television) and he's coming off as indefensibly obnoxious and a haughty cock, but this allows for some elaboration on the ethno-politics of the Western media, and perhaps on the West as a whole: When leftist or neocon Jews get butt-hurt, a minor anal fissure transforms into a major fucking tectonic rupture. Highly ethnocentric personal connections in Hollywood means the goyim can't go around saying what they wish. Or point out certain truths. It's all in who you are, and who you know, and how much you prostrate yourself to your masters.
Indeed, Sheen's just another easy target for the media to sink their hooks into. This follows a trend, and it's got zero to do with Sheen's purported lifestyle degeneration and debauchery. Parallels can be easily drawn to the ongoing Mel Gibson saga, initiated with a drunken rant and arrest, and then later a segway into suspicious publicised recordings rage-filled rants against his ex-wife, and it's clear why: He wouldn't play ball with the ideological pitchers of Hollywood. Examining the list of movies he's been involved with: The Patriot, Braveheart, Apocalypto and Passions of the Christ; movies that did not preach liberalistic values of egalitarianism, dis-empowered Caucasians or ubermensch noble savages, especially the latter, which gave an unwanted revival of a Christian viewpoint on the life of Jesus, seen as "anti-Semitic". This was the final straw for Gibson.
The double standard is illuminated especially with Alec Baldwin, his much publicised abusive call to his daughter was quickly extinguished by the powers to be, losing its stopping power abruptly as he was embraced by Hollywood, given a fancy new TV show. Why? A certain ideological tendency of his.
It's the same story in Australia. Brendan O'Connell, a pro-Palestinian activist whom filmed his ideological battles and protests against Israeli Zionists and broadcasted them on Youtube, received a sentence of eighteen months in jail. If any Australians think they lived in a free state, think again. And if any New Zealanders think we're totally immune from thought crime offenses, I'd start reconsidering that viewpoint, if Australia is any example to go by.
When it comes to the media, there's special rules and regulations when it comes to commenting on minority and special interest groups, yet it's a free-for-all for those targeting Europids in mainstream medium. Naturally, it's self-evident that Whites are the oppressive, racist group. In fact, the burden of proof is on every White to prove they are not so, preferably via having no children, miscegnating, or generally being a pathetic and weak character who has an inability to defend himself, and submerges himself in distraction and decadence. Of course, what other race would allow their elites to invite so many of the third world into their lands without pause or organised opposition?! Clearly they must have a sinister agenda. No Whites really believe in all this egalitarian, blank state bollocks, do they?
Labels:
charlie sheen,
fired,
hollywood liberal,
jews,
judeo-hollywood,
the media
Wednesday, February 23, 2011
On Naive Conservatism and Traditionalism
Ferdinand Bardamu, the famous populist-controversialist blogger posted up this scathing rebuke on a Jezebel Yenta, pissing into her own eyes whilst trying to piss on the socially deemed target of men, in the usual process of trying to guilt them into "Manning up", a subsect of the popular tactic for cougar days dating guru, also known as Feminist Shaming Language. One thing feminists fail to recognise is that White Men are so used to and resentfully tuned into this strategy, especially on the web, that they will take any excuse to lay into a bitch. The mind has been desensitised to the tactic, and replaced by a barely dormant hostility.
But indeed, this tactic is not limited to feminists alone. I agree with Ferd on this, the tendencies of traditionalists and conservatives towards becoming like craven sycophants towards jumping on the man-blamin' bandwagon on societal ills. While I haven't exactly touched on this issue as much as I would have liked, it is one I feel strongly about. While it is very true that these groups and pseudo-ideologies have started to degrade some of these conservative/Christian/traditionalist/WN communities, it is not true that the majority of conservative thought has been penetrated by the spiked strap-on called feminism, but the face, the presentable image in the Media, has been wholly subverted by cultural Marxism.
Like most ideologies, it seems like the majority of mainstream (read, politically correct) conservative or traditionalist movements harbor the kind of mangina-esque qualities that Ferd alludes to in his article, but just like our portion of the blogosphere (in comparison to the mainstream media) , the presented image of various movements in the public forum is in its diluted, multiculti PC-approved format, not in its true-to-life form. And with everything, you of course have a lot of hanger on groups who acquiesce to mainstream standards of self-censorship, and follow that model gratuitously. And then there's straight up subversion.
Whether men should have an implicit responsibility to society as a whole is somewhat debatable, but men do not have a responsibility to a system which seeks his marginalisation at every turn.
The conclusion posited here by Dennis Mangan is spot on, men have no incentive to be productive in this society and "man up", adhering to the traditional role. White men, that is. But if we go the Roissy route, our dark-skinned amigos, slowly growing in numbers, will play the feminists lapdogs for a while and then rip a new anus on society when they number high enough- and while we- the enlightened few, the happy few, withdrawn into our sluts, our jacuzzis, our sexbots and VR video games, representatively absent, will get a rude awakening in times to come.
But one thing I have noticed in young Gen Y intellectuals is that not uncommonly, the libertarianism that so many hold dear these days commonly crosses over to some form of conservatism, that also carries strong anti-feminist traditions, embedded as a meme. This reactionary stance to the highly individualised, egalitarian, solipsistic cultural viewpoint will, in this blogger's view, coagulate in a relative cultural regression, a reversion back to the norms of old West. In times of struggle, people resurrect and withdraw to means and modes that work, and why should our future be any deviation to that?
The real bargain in a traditionally structured culture in a society is that of social stability, common respect for each genders role, gender interdependence opposed to dissociation and conflict, and a sense of reliability within the community. Contrasted with what we have now, which is massive instability, self-absorption, gender competition and hostility, and a vapidly isolated, neglected community culture. Ultimately, individual preference matters for nil, as it cannot make a society function correctly.
But indeed, this tactic is not limited to feminists alone. I agree with Ferd on this, the tendencies of traditionalists and conservatives towards becoming like craven sycophants towards jumping on the man-blamin' bandwagon on societal ills. While I haven't exactly touched on this issue as much as I would have liked, it is one I feel strongly about. While it is very true that these groups and pseudo-ideologies have started to degrade some of these conservative/Christian/traditionalist/WN communities, it is not true that the majority of conservative thought has been penetrated by the spiked strap-on called feminism, but the face, the presentable image in the Media, has been wholly subverted by cultural Marxism.
Like most ideologies, it seems like the majority of mainstream (read, politically correct) conservative or traditionalist movements harbor the kind of mangina-esque qualities that Ferd alludes to in his article, but just like our portion of the blogosphere (in comparison to the mainstream media) , the presented image of various movements in the public forum is in its diluted, multiculti PC-approved format, not in its true-to-life form. And with everything, you of course have a lot of hanger on groups who acquiesce to mainstream standards of self-censorship, and follow that model gratuitously. And then there's straight up subversion.
Whether men should have an implicit responsibility to society as a whole is somewhat debatable, but men do not have a responsibility to a system which seeks his marginalisation at every turn.
The conclusion posited here by Dennis Mangan is spot on, men have no incentive to be productive in this society and "man up", adhering to the traditional role. White men, that is. But if we go the Roissy route, our dark-skinned amigos, slowly growing in numbers, will play the feminists lapdogs for a while and then rip a new anus on society when they number high enough- and while we- the enlightened few, the happy few, withdrawn into our sluts, our jacuzzis, our sexbots and VR video games, representatively absent, will get a rude awakening in times to come.
But one thing I have noticed in young Gen Y intellectuals is that not uncommonly, the libertarianism that so many hold dear these days commonly crosses over to some form of conservatism, that also carries strong anti-feminist traditions, embedded as a meme. This reactionary stance to the highly individualised, egalitarian, solipsistic cultural viewpoint will, in this blogger's view, coagulate in a relative cultural regression, a reversion back to the norms of old West. In times of struggle, people resurrect and withdraw to means and modes that work, and why should our future be any deviation to that?
The real bargain in a traditionally structured culture in a society is that of social stability, common respect for each genders role, gender interdependence opposed to dissociation and conflict, and a sense of reliability within the community. Contrasted with what we have now, which is massive instability, self-absorption, gender competition and hostility, and a vapidly isolated, neglected community culture. Ultimately, individual preference matters for nil, as it cannot make a society function correctly.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Chinese Immigrants Start Political Party in NZ
In Botany, a small group of Chinese immigrants have set up a political party. The following ought to speak volumes to any NZ WN or sensible Kiwis:
Nah. Just ignore the Treaty of Waitangi settlements, sacred Maori land, multicultural circle jerks, welfare payouts and endless White toleration.
My predictions are that, provided this gains momentum, this party will formulate into an ethnic voting block of Chinese immigrants using leverage to secure things such as more Chinese immigrants in New Zealand, Chinese spoken by crucial services, and more pandering to the Chinese government on economic issues and trade contracts. The latter is especially an important point to consider:
Stop me if I'm paranoid, but I see this as merely the Chinese government or its backers trying to secure a foothold in NZ politics, our fragile democracy. The First Pass the Post seems to be certainly conducive towards allowing representative power to ideologically-minded groups.
Apparently we've a few years behind the times, just enforcing the idea in my mind that New Zealand is still in the early stages of multiculturalism in relation to our Western friends, and we still have time to slink out of the loosening noose on our necks.
"One of the major reasons I'm working with them is that they are going to work with the Maori Party," Thompson ([a political veteran of the Maori Party] said.
"Maori and Asians have always been minorities and we have never, ever had the power to make decision by ourselves."
Nah. Just ignore the Treaty of Waitangi settlements, sacred Maori land, multicultural circle jerks, welfare payouts and endless White toleration.
My predictions are that, provided this gains momentum, this party will formulate into an ethnic voting block of Chinese immigrants using leverage to secure things such as more Chinese immigrants in New Zealand, Chinese spoken by crucial services, and more pandering to the Chinese government on economic issues and trade contracts. The latter is especially an important point to consider:
Party co-founder Stephen Ching, a former Labour candidate, said the party had powerful backers including the man who was behind the failed Crafar farm bid, Jack Chen.
Stop me if I'm paranoid, but I see this as merely the Chinese government or its backers trying to secure a foothold in NZ politics, our fragile democracy. The First Pass the Post seems to be certainly conducive towards allowing representative power to ideologically-minded groups.
Apparently we've a few years behind the times, just enforcing the idea in my mind that New Zealand is still in the early stages of multiculturalism in relation to our Western friends, and we still have time to slink out of the loosening noose on our necks.
Labels:
botany,
chinese political party,
crafar,
jack chen,
new zealand,
nz politics,
stephen ching
Friday, February 18, 2011
America and the Romans
A recent reading of Adrian Goldworthy's Fall of the West has brought to mind the numerous and distinct similarities between the ancient Roman empire and the United States empire. Though many would argue the US is not the Roman empire, which I am in full agreement with, my major point of interest are not in the distinguishing features, but in the eerily similiar commonalities between the two powers, especially with their relative declines. And some of the contributing or symptomatic factors of the Roman decline seem to look all too familiar.
Thus far, I can conclude that Rome's inherent political instability was the deciding factor of its demise; The nature of the Roman entity was one that was inherently and fatalistically divisive; Rome suffered, as empires so inclined, from sheer vastness, its sheer geographic magnitude served as more of a source of internal division and conflict than a strength, and paved the road for empirical rupture accodomatingly. At the conclusion of the Western empire, the emperor himself was reduced merely to that of a figurehead, a persona secured only by the allegiance of the general of the day and his stalwart regiment of troops. The same dynamic is visible in modern America, whose landscape is but an absurd caricature of thinly veiled antagonism and division. For the average man or woman, there is but two ideological spectrums, a hefty liberal bias at one end, and a conservative one at the other. Not only is America racially segregated, but severely by political affiliation. This ideological isolation, exacerbated by multiculturalism and the media that fuels it, helps to aggravate the symptoms of this very social sickness.
New York, much like the city center of imperial Rome, the preening and symbolic capital of America to the rest of the world, the teeming trade center of the US, the home of the vampires of finance, a neo-Marxist elites, profiting from usury and manipulating the securities of working Americans, exploiting nothing but human livestock to them, is the worm-infested core of the United Soviet State of America. Compounding misery, this empirical hub was symbolically sacked by the lowest and scummiest barbarians. Nine-eleven to me exemplified two parts of the worst part of the elite's American culture coming home to roost: Multiculturalist immigration policies with no integration policy, and backdoor American interference in other countries. An impressive deficiency maintains in the wake of the symbolic destruction of New York, the razing of the World Trade center, a monument to the might and audacity of North American economic muscle, an impregnable structure of awe-inspiring size looking down on the world, instead, in its obliterated state, to be overshadowed by the now unmentioned Park 51. Nine Eleven was an attack geared towards symbolic pillaging, the destruction wreaked worth more than the sum of its damage on infrastructure.
But the consequences of such an event lies remote in the mind of the average Joe. We don't see American youths taking to the street in fiery conflict over ridiculous student loans, the pension pyramid scheme, or the present and projected marginalisation of Whites. Like the rest of us and like the ancient Roman proletariat (thought they were known to riot when their food reserves were down), the bulk of American Whites have their hands tied.
The place I'd draw the boldest distinction between the USA and the Roman empire is in the usage of information, and in the way that that information is transferred to the people from the state. The media makes the difference in its control of the masses. The rapidity and sophistry with which the state and major corporate interests puts the public within their psychological reach is astounding. This medium allows for the powers to be to covertly transform the minds and hearts of their constituency at their whim and will. For instance, take the effect of television on the self-image and perspective of Indian women as outlined in the book Superfreakonomics, which, upon viewing their Western counterparts in US sitcoms, had the effect of depressing birth rates and decreasing spousal violence. Indeed, the Idiot box is a powerful tool, putting the masses' minds at the disposal of those who control it.
The blame of American psychological decadence and apathy can be laid partially at the feet of the education system. This governmental system, with a barely reputable accord, is used primarily as an indoctrination factory, churning out soft-core brainwashees, destined to elated performance of their ideological duty and have just the minimal amount of education to pass through life comfortably, without a shred of knowledge about their true purpose.
Although there are many similarities and differences between the ancient Roman empire and the present day USA, one thing that never changes is the essence of power itself. The societal masters' ability in the seizure and maintenance of the collective attentions of the masses may change, and the ability of different groups to seize it may alternate, but the will to power itself maintains, an unsubvertable human trait, eternally. This is a fundamental lesson to the modern man.
Thus far, I can conclude that Rome's inherent political instability was the deciding factor of its demise; The nature of the Roman entity was one that was inherently and fatalistically divisive; Rome suffered, as empires so inclined, from sheer vastness, its sheer geographic magnitude served as more of a source of internal division and conflict than a strength, and paved the road for empirical rupture accodomatingly. At the conclusion of the Western empire, the emperor himself was reduced merely to that of a figurehead, a persona secured only by the allegiance of the general of the day and his stalwart regiment of troops. The same dynamic is visible in modern America, whose landscape is but an absurd caricature of thinly veiled antagonism and division. For the average man or woman, there is but two ideological spectrums, a hefty liberal bias at one end, and a conservative one at the other. Not only is America racially segregated, but severely by political affiliation. This ideological isolation, exacerbated by multiculturalism and the media that fuels it, helps to aggravate the symptoms of this very social sickness.
New York, much like the city center of imperial Rome, the preening and symbolic capital of America to the rest of the world, the teeming trade center of the US, the home of the vampires of finance, a neo-Marxist elites, profiting from usury and manipulating the securities of working Americans, exploiting nothing but human livestock to them, is the worm-infested core of the United Soviet State of America. Compounding misery, this empirical hub was symbolically sacked by the lowest and scummiest barbarians. Nine-eleven to me exemplified two parts of the worst part of the elite's American culture coming home to roost: Multiculturalist immigration policies with no integration policy, and backdoor American interference in other countries. An impressive deficiency maintains in the wake of the symbolic destruction of New York, the razing of the World Trade center, a monument to the might and audacity of North American economic muscle, an impregnable structure of awe-inspiring size looking down on the world, instead, in its obliterated state, to be overshadowed by the now unmentioned Park 51. Nine Eleven was an attack geared towards symbolic pillaging, the destruction wreaked worth more than the sum of its damage on infrastructure.
But the consequences of such an event lies remote in the mind of the average Joe. We don't see American youths taking to the street in fiery conflict over ridiculous student loans, the pension pyramid scheme, or the present and projected marginalisation of Whites. Like the rest of us and like the ancient Roman proletariat (thought they were known to riot when their food reserves were down), the bulk of American Whites have their hands tied.
The place I'd draw the boldest distinction between the USA and the Roman empire is in the usage of information, and in the way that that information is transferred to the people from the state. The media makes the difference in its control of the masses. The rapidity and sophistry with which the state and major corporate interests puts the public within their psychological reach is astounding. This medium allows for the powers to be to covertly transform the minds and hearts of their constituency at their whim and will. For instance, take the effect of television on the self-image and perspective of Indian women as outlined in the book Superfreakonomics, which, upon viewing their Western counterparts in US sitcoms, had the effect of depressing birth rates and decreasing spousal violence. Indeed, the Idiot box is a powerful tool, putting the masses' minds at the disposal of those who control it.
The blame of American psychological decadence and apathy can be laid partially at the feet of the education system. This governmental system, with a barely reputable accord, is used primarily as an indoctrination factory, churning out soft-core brainwashees, destined to elated performance of their ideological duty and have just the minimal amount of education to pass through life comfortably, without a shred of knowledge about their true purpose.
Although there are many similarities and differences between the ancient Roman empire and the present day USA, one thing that never changes is the essence of power itself. The societal masters' ability in the seizure and maintenance of the collective attentions of the masses may change, and the ability of different groups to seize it may alternate, but the will to power itself maintains, an unsubvertable human trait, eternally. This is a fundamental lesson to the modern man.
Labels:
9/11,
american decline,
american education,
rome,
united states,
ussa
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Latest Kiwi Killed in Afghanistan
Yup, we have hit number six. Oddly enough, he was born in Western Samoa, which begs the question; how much of our armed forces are composed of foreign-born men and women? Paints a slightly disturbing picture for me, though at least it isn't another White Male dying heroically without a genetic legacy to leave behind.
Would someone care to remind me why we're in Afghanistan? At least we have a "good reason" for being in Iraq.
Would someone care to remind me why we're in Afghanistan? At least we have a "good reason" for being in Iraq.
Labels:
Afghanistan,
dead nz soldier,
new zealand,
nz army
Monday, February 14, 2011
Friday, February 11, 2011
Negation of Self, Desolation of Soul
Lately, I have had a lot of thoughts about what the typical family life is and was like for the average White Gen Y. The bulk of my growing up was in the faux-boom of the 1990s, the last misleading spark of a dying era and civilisation, leading into the mild delirium that was the 2000s. My family was a fairly regular demographic blip on the radar: Ranging from between lower middle, middle, then to slightly upper middle class, mostly established within suburbia, caucasian, with two children, a boy and girl.
If there's a ying and yang in a family's siblingry, I was always the more quietly introverted and perceptive to my elder sister's explosively extravagant extroversion. Of course, both of these have these strengths, but, judging from my and others' experiences, I think there's a tendency towards older sisters resenting younger brothers for the parental shift of attention, the female ego not taking kindly to a new entrant soaking up all of her deserved affection and praise. In other words, having a younger brother is prime breeding ground for a ball-busting cunt.
The strategy of parenting for my full-time working Baby boomer elders was first and foremost, appeasement and distraction. Raising kids was more of an errand to run or delay; plomp him in front of the TV, distract him with video games and action movies, send him off to play a variety of sports he's shit at (and the dad can watch them, and latter boast of how much he hated it but went anyway, so you owe him). There I was surprisingly well behaved for most of my early years, considering how marginal of a punishment I would probably get, but I took to the Western ritualised routine of self-subduction eagerly. In that sense, I embraced the treasures of the depersonalised, self-absorbed materialist world of the consumer. A want unsatiated is just a product away.
As my sister and I grew older, the inter-generational differences became more noticeable. A juxtaposition of baby boomers' detached, greedy idealism and Generation Y's whimpering, near-instinctual desolated nihilism.
I always got the impression I was some kind of obstacle to my dad, a pothole in the road to swerve around, or some street constructions to cross the street from. My old man was the epitomy of the dejected Baby Boomer who embraced a token, perverted representation of the 1960s idealism, fantasies of bohemian Hippydom and smoking weed, and then onto the crack pipe of status and greedy materialism, which in the end, consumed and destroyed him. I learnt one thing from my old man that I think we can all learn from baby boomers, do not let your own decadence or escapism control and ruin your life, because it will. It's certainly doing the same to our society.
My mother was the opposite, an absorber of retarded Oprahian ideals of "the power of love"; unpragmatic, a force unto itself, deluded self-esteem boosting, a dereliction of reason and sense, an unhinged maternality unleashed in a world where true femininity is regarded as an unrestrained raw female emotion.
My parents owned a business which propelled them to financial comfort and then compensated their and our lifestyles consequently, soaking in the consumer, status worshiping lifestyle as a part of themselves, their being.
But then, the whole facade of prosperity came crashing down. Borrowing to pay for new cars, profit diminishing, lifestyle downsizing, and eventually going bankrupt once the house of cards collapses in a new, failed venture. The status driven neo-yuppie Baby Boomer who faces this massive shock to their ego and lifestyle will do one of two things: Break down and disintegrate (father), or take the blows, slow down, and eventually learn and adapt (mother). Either way, once you have that lifestyle, more than likely you will continue to submit to that religion. Especially when you lose it.
Things got worse, I got into a serious fight with the old man, who followed suit by calling the police on me to get me arrested and nearly put in jail, kicked out of home at seventeen without any world-weariness, money and few friends to turn to. A dozen or so separations and re-unions later, my mother followed suit, and slowly rebuilt her life, getting a cushy government job. My old man is the same place he's been for the last five years; unstable, unemployed and a perennial victim.
A few miscarriages later, my sister eventually had a baby with her boyfriend, and then, following suit of my parents, split up and re-united a couple times, only to settle at shared custody in the end. If anyone is holding out any hope for Generation Z, you won't find any optimism from me, the coddling, placating and self-absorptive tendencies of our generation's single mothers leaves much to be desired.
In a sense, my family history is more or less a representation of what plenty of the Young White Male of our times has to face, largely. It may not be as up and down and unstable (or it may be plenty worse), but the trend is consistent: a family with a detached or/and weak father, and an overbearing, over-represented mother, whom society embues with the "You go grrrl" idealism of post-feminist doctrine, all contributing to create an individual disconnected from his world, but on fire inside.
If there's a ying and yang in a family's siblingry, I was always the more quietly introverted and perceptive to my elder sister's explosively extravagant extroversion. Of course, both of these have these strengths, but, judging from my and others' experiences, I think there's a tendency towards older sisters resenting younger brothers for the parental shift of attention, the female ego not taking kindly to a new entrant soaking up all of her deserved affection and praise. In other words, having a younger brother is prime breeding ground for a ball-busting cunt.
The strategy of parenting for my full-time working Baby boomer elders was first and foremost, appeasement and distraction. Raising kids was more of an errand to run or delay; plomp him in front of the TV, distract him with video games and action movies, send him off to play a variety of sports he's shit at (and the dad can watch them, and latter boast of how much he hated it but went anyway, so you owe him). There I was surprisingly well behaved for most of my early years, considering how marginal of a punishment I would probably get, but I took to the Western ritualised routine of self-subduction eagerly. In that sense, I embraced the treasures of the depersonalised, self-absorbed materialist world of the consumer. A want unsatiated is just a product away.
As my sister and I grew older, the inter-generational differences became more noticeable. A juxtaposition of baby boomers' detached, greedy idealism and Generation Y's whimpering, near-instinctual desolated nihilism.
I always got the impression I was some kind of obstacle to my dad, a pothole in the road to swerve around, or some street constructions to cross the street from. My old man was the epitomy of the dejected Baby Boomer who embraced a token, perverted representation of the 1960s idealism, fantasies of bohemian Hippydom and smoking weed, and then onto the crack pipe of status and greedy materialism, which in the end, consumed and destroyed him. I learnt one thing from my old man that I think we can all learn from baby boomers, do not let your own decadence or escapism control and ruin your life, because it will. It's certainly doing the same to our society.
My mother was the opposite, an absorber of retarded Oprahian ideals of "the power of love"; unpragmatic, a force unto itself, deluded self-esteem boosting, a dereliction of reason and sense, an unhinged maternality unleashed in a world where true femininity is regarded as an unrestrained raw female emotion.
My parents owned a business which propelled them to financial comfort and then compensated their and our lifestyles consequently, soaking in the consumer, status worshiping lifestyle as a part of themselves, their being.
But then, the whole facade of prosperity came crashing down. Borrowing to pay for new cars, profit diminishing, lifestyle downsizing, and eventually going bankrupt once the house of cards collapses in a new, failed venture. The status driven neo-yuppie Baby Boomer who faces this massive shock to their ego and lifestyle will do one of two things: Break down and disintegrate (father), or take the blows, slow down, and eventually learn and adapt (mother). Either way, once you have that lifestyle, more than likely you will continue to submit to that religion. Especially when you lose it.
Things got worse, I got into a serious fight with the old man, who followed suit by calling the police on me to get me arrested and nearly put in jail, kicked out of home at seventeen without any world-weariness, money and few friends to turn to. A dozen or so separations and re-unions later, my mother followed suit, and slowly rebuilt her life, getting a cushy government job. My old man is the same place he's been for the last five years; unstable, unemployed and a perennial victim.
A few miscarriages later, my sister eventually had a baby with her boyfriend, and then, following suit of my parents, split up and re-united a couple times, only to settle at shared custody in the end. If anyone is holding out any hope for Generation Z, you won't find any optimism from me, the coddling, placating and self-absorptive tendencies of our generation's single mothers leaves much to be desired.
In a sense, my family history is more or less a representation of what plenty of the Young White Male of our times has to face, largely. It may not be as up and down and unstable (or it may be plenty worse), but the trend is consistent: a family with a detached or/and weak father, and an overbearing, over-represented mother, whom society embues with the "You go grrrl" idealism of post-feminist doctrine, all contributing to create an individual disconnected from his world, but on fire inside.
Labels:
family,
gen y family,
generation y,
reflection
Friday, February 4, 2011
Videos for White Nationalists 2: Know Your Enemy
Here's the second rendition of the previous video post. As Youtube has time limits on uploads, most of these are multi-part videos, so I've taken the liberty to add the extra parts in links. You don't have to watch the entirety of these series', but its good to have an idea as to what they are about.
Yuri Bezmenov, former KGB agent on Soviet subversion of the West:
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Kevin Macdonald on Jewish Intellectual Influence on Western Culture:
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Subversive Marketing: The Psychoanalytic Beginnings of Mass Marketing:
Johnathan Bowden on Marxism and Fabian Socialism (Must see):
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Yuri Bezmenov, former KGB agent on Soviet subversion of the West:
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Kevin Macdonald on Jewish Intellectual Influence on Western Culture:
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Subversive Marketing: The Psychoanalytic Beginnings of Mass Marketing:
Johnathan Bowden on Marxism and Fabian Socialism (Must see):
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
The Foaming Tiber of American Mediocrity
We can observe in the non-American Western world, that there is a subtle kind of cultural client state status to the hyper power. Materialist consumerism conquered and occupies nations worldwide, initiated in a sociological blitzkrieg. Indeed, we are taken by storm... a storm of shit. Endless, unrelenting, smugly self-satisfied shit.
Even as early as the 1920s in America, the seeds of consumerism were being sowed. Jewish marketer Edward Bernays, using the psychological know-how of his uncle Sigmund Freud to combine psychology and marketing to sell cigarettes to women, aligning liberty with smoking, and subconsciously aligning it with a challenge to male power. The power to propagandise was nothing new, but the desire and ability to do so via motivation to profit, this was largely a new phenomenon.
Now, the drive towards a more consumer-centric society might have been the inevitable evolution of surging production, (especially necessitated and began by the Industrial Revolution) a need to offload all these goods to new markets, right? But the fix has become an addiction. Once the allure of cheap luxury items hit the taste buds of Mr and Mrs America, they were hooked, their palate changed permanently. It used to be more production and less consumption, now its no production and all consumption- to the benefit of certain entities.
All of this fits into a narrative- One of the latest incarnations of an endless will to provide the teeming, bursting masses with sufficient bread and circuses. We are units of labour or production in a neo-Marxist's air castle. A means to an end.
But gadget-fetishism and brand loyalty are not the only tools of subversion at hand, they are more of a vehicle for our compartmentalisation of both our lives and us as entities, a vehicle to distract and hedonize our attentions, and to cheapen and misdirect our characters.
A degenerating culture is one where complaining is a way to get things done. The victim narrative is a powerful cultural force, simply for the fact it encourages the masses to do nothing, and wallow in their socially subsidised, decadent mentality. Though, victimhood comes with a price. In adopting the right to void any responsibility for your actions, you must also resign yourself to a life of whimpering and whinging blanketed in a shallow demonstration of meek niceness (Unless you're a protected minority).
On television, the same tune is played. It is all but a indoctrinarian projector for the aforementioned victimhood narrative, watered down egalitarian ideals, the mangina archetype, models of artificial racial cohesion and miscegenation sponsorship, all ready to be soaked in by the audience's vicarious eyes. Hollywood churns out a feast of decultured profit-maximisers, with no adequately digestible or unique message, but a series of replications of what has come, each new copy slightly louder and more obvious than the latter.
And what of the personification of all these decadent values and machinations? Generation Zero, castrated and largely disarmed of any connection to their heritage, culture, or even sound discernment, are psychologically cut loose, naive in temperament, to float adrift into a barren, vacant sea of subversive elements and media controlled by a hostile foreign elite, with no solid grasp on reality, no worthwhile role models and perpetual dreams of escape. The worse trait is one that is, to some degree, internalized by most White Westerners but especially in the young Whites, in that everyone, from all cultures, ethnic groups and religions, share the same ideas and ethics and sense of fair play as you, in your naive little corner, do:
How close-minded and racist our elders were! Why can't we all be equal, without reference to something as meaningless as skin colour! Ethnic solidarity my arse, only racist white men believe in that shit!
Only a violent kick from Reality can obliterate that notion. Or can it?
Invoking the Procrustean approach, generation Y solidarity is dependent on your relative mediocrity to the group. Because even if you have to lob a few legs and arms off, it's worth the price for equality. Anything that keeps you amidst the ranks of the bumbling herd. Intellectual pursuits are frowned upon or looked on with indifference, but fortunately, boundless hedonism is in.
But it's no wonder that our Generation Y and younger are in such a shabby state in the US, especially. The public education systems present ranges from a mediocrity factory to a leftist teacher's personal experiment (aslong as it is the Party Line, that is).
What of the old American virtues; ideals of liberty, justice and freedom? By subversion, the presence they have in the mainstream has largely morphed into nanny statism, prosecution-by-ideology and political correctness, with only a minority of committed loyalists upholding their true, unraped forms.
Present day America's declining empire may be the epicenter of materialistic individual culture, that has become a synonym for its power, but in a sense, we are all Americans now. For Europeans, being engulfed by the Romans was only a matter of geographical distance or your respective force, but in this age of mass-communications, being culturally conquered by the Judeo-Hollywood complex has proven to only be a matter of time, a matter of degree.
In essence, the American Dream has become a nightmare. If you are the average white American male who works hard, you have the right to have your wealth redistributed to hostile aliens, to get married to a pig who will probably divorce you and force you to pay her until you die, to send your children to a school where they will soon be racial minorities and can be sent home for wearing an American flag t-shirt, pay for a baby-boomer pension ponzi scheme you will probably never get yourself. Americans have been sold a pipedream, and until the masses truly realise that it is a mirage, and they're really in a civilisational desert, will things change.
Even as early as the 1920s in America, the seeds of consumerism were being sowed. Jewish marketer Edward Bernays, using the psychological know-how of his uncle Sigmund Freud to combine psychology and marketing to sell cigarettes to women, aligning liberty with smoking, and subconsciously aligning it with a challenge to male power. The power to propagandise was nothing new, but the desire and ability to do so via motivation to profit, this was largely a new phenomenon.
Now, the drive towards a more consumer-centric society might have been the inevitable evolution of surging production, (especially necessitated and began by the Industrial Revolution) a need to offload all these goods to new markets, right? But the fix has become an addiction. Once the allure of cheap luxury items hit the taste buds of Mr and Mrs America, they were hooked, their palate changed permanently. It used to be more production and less consumption, now its no production and all consumption- to the benefit of certain entities.
All of this fits into a narrative- One of the latest incarnations of an endless will to provide the teeming, bursting masses with sufficient bread and circuses. We are units of labour or production in a neo-Marxist's air castle. A means to an end.
But gadget-fetishism and brand loyalty are not the only tools of subversion at hand, they are more of a vehicle for our compartmentalisation of both our lives and us as entities, a vehicle to distract and hedonize our attentions, and to cheapen and misdirect our characters.
A degenerating culture is one where complaining is a way to get things done. The victim narrative is a powerful cultural force, simply for the fact it encourages the masses to do nothing, and wallow in their socially subsidised, decadent mentality. Though, victimhood comes with a price. In adopting the right to void any responsibility for your actions, you must also resign yourself to a life of whimpering and whinging blanketed in a shallow demonstration of meek niceness (Unless you're a protected minority).
On television, the same tune is played. It is all but a indoctrinarian projector for the aforementioned victimhood narrative, watered down egalitarian ideals, the mangina archetype, models of artificial racial cohesion and miscegenation sponsorship, all ready to be soaked in by the audience's vicarious eyes. Hollywood churns out a feast of decultured profit-maximisers, with no adequately digestible or unique message, but a series of replications of what has come, each new copy slightly louder and more obvious than the latter.
And what of the personification of all these decadent values and machinations? Generation Zero, castrated and largely disarmed of any connection to their heritage, culture, or even sound discernment, are psychologically cut loose, naive in temperament, to float adrift into a barren, vacant sea of subversive elements and media controlled by a hostile foreign elite, with no solid grasp on reality, no worthwhile role models and perpetual dreams of escape. The worse trait is one that is, to some degree, internalized by most White Westerners but especially in the young Whites, in that everyone, from all cultures, ethnic groups and religions, share the same ideas and ethics and sense of fair play as you, in your naive little corner, do:
How close-minded and racist our elders were! Why can't we all be equal, without reference to something as meaningless as skin colour! Ethnic solidarity my arse, only racist white men believe in that shit!
Only a violent kick from Reality can obliterate that notion. Or can it?
Invoking the Procrustean approach, generation Y solidarity is dependent on your relative mediocrity to the group. Because even if you have to lob a few legs and arms off, it's worth the price for equality. Anything that keeps you amidst the ranks of the bumbling herd. Intellectual pursuits are frowned upon or looked on with indifference, but fortunately, boundless hedonism is in.
But it's no wonder that our Generation Y and younger are in such a shabby state in the US, especially. The public education systems present ranges from a mediocrity factory to a leftist teacher's personal experiment (aslong as it is the Party Line, that is).
What of the old American virtues; ideals of liberty, justice and freedom? By subversion, the presence they have in the mainstream has largely morphed into nanny statism, prosecution-by-ideology and political correctness, with only a minority of committed loyalists upholding their true, unraped forms.
Present day America's declining empire may be the epicenter of materialistic individual culture, that has become a synonym for its power, but in a sense, we are all Americans now. For Europeans, being engulfed by the Romans was only a matter of geographical distance or your respective force, but in this age of mass-communications, being culturally conquered by the Judeo-Hollywood complex has proven to only be a matter of time, a matter of degree.
In essence, the American Dream has become a nightmare. If you are the average white American male who works hard, you have the right to have your wealth redistributed to hostile aliens, to get married to a pig who will probably divorce you and force you to pay her until you die, to send your children to a school where they will soon be racial minorities and can be sent home for wearing an American flag t-shirt, pay for a baby-boomer pension ponzi scheme you will probably never get yourself. Americans have been sold a pipedream, and until the masses truly realise that it is a mirage, and they're really in a civilisational desert, will things change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)