Wordpress Site is Up!

Here it is, finally. I've finally made the move over to Wordpress. Remember to change your bookmarks, and to update your blogroll. Go check it out, and be sure to comment!

To Wordpress I Go!

Well, the polls have closed, the results have been tallied, and the the bribes have all been paid out: Looks like I'm moving Johnny Dissidence headquarters to Wordpress.

I've been considering the move from Blogspot for a while now, but only recently had the desire to change really emerged, encouraged by a certain Pat Hannagan. The dark, dreary background of Blogspot was cool at first, but now its starting to look and feel stale, unprofessional and unwieldy. Time for a change.

But now, with the Will of the People (tm) backing the decision to shift blog domains, so there is no looking back now. I'll have finished setting up the new Wordpress blog in the next few days, so until then:

WW2: Why We Didn't Really Win

My latest post is featured at Inmalafide.com, why not go check it out?

"I'm sorry mummy. I don't know what I did wrong."

Trading links with a friend, I came across this rage inducing clip on Youtube:



This news story is a testament to the times we live in. In front of her pleading mother, a  Black female airport screener feels up sorry, frisks a confused six year old little White girl.  The prime demographic for a suicide bomber or a Mexican drug mule, right?


I've got a solution that will completely eliminate any of the issues associated with profiling people being screened for flying. Create two types of air travel companies; Diversity Airways and White Infidel Airways. The people who are so insistent on multiculturalism can have their fix of experiencing wonderful diversity in the form of being subjected to searches at random (maybe even by a Muslim woman, if they get lucky) because obviously, it would be racist to profile based on race. Or gender. Or age. Or any distinguishing traits that might make the process a little more efficient.


From Jared Taylor himself, here's a good refutation of the role racial profiling plays in law enforcement, in that it forms part of a larger profile based on race, age, societal status and appearance. Fools who insist on eliminating any type of profiling in the role of enforcing rules and laws in society are living in fantasy land.

Weighing in on Libya

Yes, this will be my first real post in a while! As I've said in my previous post, I've been pretty swamped with schoolwork lately, which leaves me a drained and jabbering dupe at the end of the day. So... Not different in any real sense.

As you have no doubt heard already, a UN-lead Security Coalition of forces (i.e: A US-lead embarkation of peer-pressured Western powers) began bombing Libya on the 19th of March in order to topple the Gaddafi regime. the Obama administration, with Kid Obama especially coming off as a "hip", young, Marxist wannabe-revolutionary, with ambitions of empowering "da dis'mpow'd masses" has been especially militant in communicating the necessity of US having a hand in "freeing" the Libyan people from their oppressive dictator, that they need democracy, a right to self-determination.

To give a bit of background to Libya and the conflict, Libya is a fairly sparsely populated country situated on the northern Africa coast, with a lot of unsettled desert in between. The population is six million, composed mostly of Arabs, with a large minority (1 million) of illegal Egyptians and sub-Saharan Africans. Muammar Gaddafi, long since a coup d'etat in 1969 has ruled Libya as its "Leader and Guide" in totality but recently has been facing strong opposition and civil warfare, especially emboldened by the recent Tripoli and Egyptian uprisings.  Another important factor with Libya is the fact it is houses the ninth largest oil reserves globally, and is considered a prime market for oil due to its proximity to Europe.

Two Good Mates in Simpler Times

In most cases, it is better the enemy you know. Indeed, Gaddafi may be a sociopathic, socialist blackmailing bastard, but he's familiar, and he has enough animousity directed at him in his region to act as a destabiliser of his power. An unforeseen consequence of USA's fighting tactics, to arm and equip a lesser evil to fight a bigger one or to rebel against it within the society. This diabolically backfired in the faces of the USA in the case of Osama Bin Laden, with the lesser evil triumphing over the greater evil, and becoming a great force in of itself. We should contrast this with the Mujahideen characteristics of the rebel fighters that the West are utilising in fighting Gaddafi, which lays down the framework for a potential Islamic republic to arise out of Libya in the near future. Not surprising, the liberal public distaste towards the Obama intervention in Libya is all but muted, a far-cry from the leftist reaction to Bush entering Iraq, a popularised meme.

Libya is a testament to the failure of African states. Libya, like most of Africa, a mix of different tribes and ethnicities in a continent saturated in ethnocentric tension, and to contrast with the heavy Arabic population, is served up with the added sprinkling of ideological religiosity of Islam, to add to the potential powder keg of potential tension sources.

This Libya intervention should also serve as just another example of agenda-laden America world police at work. The same state that cannot capture and kill Osama, the ever omniscient Road Runner to the US armed force's absurdly over-elaborate, technologically proficient, but ultimately incompetent and self-defeating Wile E. Coyote, felt it prudent embarked on another irrevelant conflict whom costs will be naturally be absorbed by the tax-payers of this UN coalition, true to form to the doctrine of socialising costs and privatising profit. In essence, the major Western powers all involved in this conflict, France, England and the USA all report substantial debts, have no real involvement in the region, and are setting themselves up to have another potential Arabic Islamic state on the horizon, right over the ditch.

Long Absence in Posting

My humblest apologies for not posting in recent times. University is kicking my arse and my balls presently; I'm pretty spent in regards to summoning up the effort to churn out a post, though I have a few in the works I need to work on. Also, I am a part of Inmalafide now, so I should post something there soon. In the meantime:

Mega Metal Mash Up 3

Once again...

Advocating Free Contraceptives to Beneficiaries= Nazism

Sharon Wilson-Davis, a Maori former solo mother and a member of the Welfare Working Group, has been equated to the Nazis for recommending free contraceptives for people on benefits, lifted from here.

Former Green MP Sue Bradford said the group seemed to be "looking to Nazi Germany for inspiration, with its underpinning 'work makes free' philosophy, attempted eugenic control of a portion of the population, and its potential racist implications for Maori".

As usual, leftist rhetoric requires a suspension of disbelief for it to be somewhat digestible to the public, forgetting the racial demographics of the person she is accusing of "Nazi-style" anti-Maori racial eugenic policy. Obviously, facts don't matter when you have a leftist moral agenda to promote, right?

Mrs Wilson-Davis, whose Strive Community Trust runs work transition programmes for sole parents in Mangere, said on Tuesday that she supported both proposals to encourage young women to "make wiser choices".

The problem here is not some crypto-fascist agenda. The problem is that it promotes responsibility in women, and especially in non-White women, in direct violation of the feminist principle that women could have all the choice and privilege with none of the responsibility or hardship to boot. Obviously, this cannot fly with the leftists who buddy up their ideological principles with femarxist ideology, as it'd be in contradiction of the the terms that women were sold in regards to "Female Liberation".

"What are your choices? We have a contraceptive device that is totally subsidised, so that when you are in better circumstances, if you have work or if you meet a lovely man and he's willing to support you, fine, have twins, have whatever. But not while you are in this situation."

           ...

She said the group was not racist, even though it found 31 per cent of all working-aged Maori were on welfare compared with 10 per cent of non-Maori.

This all looks oddly familiar.

Louis Theroux on the "Ultra Zionists" And the Nazis

Louis Theroux. The embarrassing epitome of what has become the English media personality; effeminate, overly-diplomatic, and unabashedly politically correct, Cam correctly pointed out the stark contrast with this wimpy she-boy and a real man, like the late Terre Blanche. He has departed on numerous journeys out in the world to see numerous extreme subcultures, from American negro inner-city gang bangers, to Black Muslim nationalists and even the Afrikaner Resistance Movement in South Africa. But I'll be contrasting the documentation and portrayal of two vibrant extremes by the BBC frontman, The Zionists and the neo-Nazis. Let's find out which one gets the least biased coverage by Theroux.

Louis Theroux, and the Ultra Zionists

Barely five minutes into the Ultra Zionists, he shows his hand of cards face up. Consider the limp-wristed, pedantic way he talks to a Zionist Jew on the illegal expansion policies of Israel into east Jerusalem:

"Don't you feel... uhh... that you're ...uh...partially...uh..  responsible for putting those kids [in east Jerusalem settlements] in harm's way?"

Upon witnessing an argument between a Zionist Israeli and a Palestinian, he apologetically injects the fact that "The international community is on his side [Palestinians] in that it doesn't recognise your rights in this region, and sees you as an interloper." An undercurrent of fear was ever present. His  reluctance to slightly critique is palpable, whether it be fear for his personage physically or the potential fallout socially (with his media buddies), remains to be seen. But the impression you're given is that, at best, he is a passive spectator into an alternative community practicing an alternative ideology. At worst, he is a protected tourist in a divided country with potentially hazardous zones. As with many things, this is not the case.

The most disturbing part of the ultra-Zionists, was the good goyim Christians working for free to help out Israel. One especially delusional puritan goy even wanted to join the IDF. Metaphorically, this personifies the deeply Judaified, heavily religious American Christians, duped into buying and fighting the Iraq war, and are now gearing up to spill blood in Iran.

Even the name "Ultra-Zionists" are not meant to elicit much fear or emotion as labeling someone a "far-right extremist" as many are in the media.

Overall, he presents an only slightly morally biased account of the Israelis usurping Palestinian territory. His narration, a sober, meek monotone portraying the events from a perspective of an impartial observer. But if you came to see a wimpy, libtarded coward moralise smugly and supremely, you haven't see anything yet.

Louis Theroux, and the Nazis

At the start of the episode, the tone is set; Theroux had set out on a moral crusade. "Do you consider other people's feelings?" He inquires an oddball WN mother taping down a Swastika onto her kitchen floor. The contrast with the Zionists is vividly presented. This formerly quivering, apologetic coward, now a big brave battler of this naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

Meeting Tom Metzger is the same deal, but even worse. He initiates his liberal moral outrage mode in relation to Metzger claiming blacks commit more violent crimes and how the justice system is geared against White racial loyalty, but they quickly recover this indiscretion and become something reminiscent of friendly. Embarrassingly, Theroux has a tendency towards trying to be the liberal, almost Calvinist in character priest; Trying to extract a confession or repudiation of their evil, sinful ways.

Upon meeting a group of skinheads, he morally castigates them for asking if he was Jewish, and cheekily declines to answer (even though they promised to kick his arse off camera if he was). This demonstrates the lack of fear in regard to his morally mandated enemy; he is the eternal invincible liberal ubermensch facing off against the ideological scourge victoriously. Of course, his colour blind antiracial shield was up!

Louis effortlessly oozes disgust over the neo-Nazi supremacists and their ideology, but forces himself to demonstrate something reminiscent of sympathy for the Israeli cause. I can hardly blame him for being afraid of the Zionists extremists in their own country, but the unequivocal lack of respect he has for the US Nazis, and the naively deluded, colour-blind way he approached the post-apartheid South Africa Boer warriors like Eugene Terre Blanche compounded by the irrational multiculti, antiracist message he is sent out to promote, makes his socio-political bias too overwhelming  take him seriously. He is an emasculated, moral coward posing as a reporter or "exposer" of extremist groups, with a thinly veiled agenda to promote. Nothing more.

Though I'd have to add, at a greater level, the people he met in this episode were symbolic of the collapse and smoldering ruin of Nazi ideals and the constantly reinforced archetype in the mainstream; they become a joke, an ideological laughing stock, the last refuge of the vulgar and hypocritical mongoloid subhuman haters. In the end, both groups hold extreme nationalist/supremacist ideologies (though I'd say definitely that the pseudo-Nazis are merely attention-seeking, street trash morons and should not resemble anything NEAR a public voice for racially conscious Whites), but which one is actively pursuing their ambitions and displacing their foes? And contrast that with whom earns the most moral contempt and smug admonition by high priest Theroux, the real star of the show. The results are indicative of a society in need of a big fix, and timely.

Whites and Prison: Harsh Realities

I find a very interesting article in the November edition of American Renaissance, a great pro-White news site and resource on racial realism and other various topics and news. This article, a personal account written by a American White prisoner named Howard Scott Lacy, currently housed in segregation for being part of a "hate gang"; read: Whites who had the gall to band together and cultivate something like a White racial consciousness to combat adversity, instead of being physically slaughtered and sexually subjugated individually, as their system would have it. It's a very eye opening account to the racial realities Whites face in prison. It's definitely worth the read. There are many disturbing parallels between mainstream Western society and how prisons are run.

Any white man in a Texas prison who joins one of the many gangs is “confirmed” as a member of a Security Threat Group (STG) and goes to seg. In many cases, a man ends up here for nothing more than having pro-white literature or showing any kind of racial pride or awareness.

 Once a man is listed as a member of an STG, he goes into a nationwide database and is even listed on government “terrorist” watch lists. He stays in that database for years after he is released. When police officers check our names, even during a routine traffic stop, they are cautioned to “treat the situation as if it were a felony takedown,” and to consider us “armed and dangerous.” This classification has nothing to do with our criminal records — most whites are in prison for non-violent crimes — and even less with any allegedly “terrorist” activities. We become STG members simply because we have shown white solidarity.  

Just like on the outside, White pride or solidarity is equated to hate-mongerer, Nazism, White supremacism; but no matter what its described as, the public know it's bad. But in this case, Whites are the exception to that rule.

The courts have ruled that no matter how much sense it would make to separate prisoners by race, that is impossible because it would be discrimination against minorities. It does not matter that whites are the ones who suffer most from integration, society must protect the “civil rights” of those who prey on us. The irony is that most of the young whites who suddenly find themselves in this hell never had a “racist” or “hateful” thought until they came to prison and learned the truth.

Indeed, the same is true for education, racially integrated classrooms can tend towards a jungle, depending on their demographics. This can help to explain the poor quality education most public school students receive now in many areas, and not only in the US.

I should point out that Hispanic gang members, like whites, are automatically classified as members of STGs. For reason not clear to me, members of black gangs are not automatically classified as members of STGs, and therefore are not automatically put in seg. Because they remain in the general population, blacks are usually required to take rehab classes, and this helps their reintegration into society — at least for those who want to go straight. Their chances of parole are also much better simply because they are not in seg and are not listed as part of an STG.

...

The policy is really the same here as it is in the rest of society. It is perfectly normal for blacks, especially, to hate whites, so no one pays special attention to it. In prison, whites learn very quickly that they need a racial consciousness in order to survive. That is just as forbidden here as it is on the outside, so we are the ones who suffer most from racial conflict. Whites who never thought in terms of race are forced to do so once they get here — and are then punished for something that was forced on them by blacks and Hispanics who had a strong racial consciousness long before they were even arrested. Don’t even get me started on how unfair this is and what we must go through on account of this malicious double standard.

...

Many people believe that since we are criminals, we have put ourselves in this situation and deserve whatever we get. I agree that we are responsible for our own actions and their consequences. I can’t tell you how sick I am of people who prey on society and then start screaming about “rights” once they get here. Blacks are notorious for this. But it is wrong to force integration on prisoners and then punish whites for doing — belatedly and less effectively — what the others have been doing all along.

Compare the White attitude to their criminals with various other ethnic groups. Incomprehensible to Whites, non-White racial unity and loyalty can tend towards their lowest common denominators.

It is always easy to tell when a female guard, nurse, clerk, etc. is walking the hall because of the tremendous noise that follows her. Blacks will stand in the doors of their cells or line the windows three or four deep, screaming and yelling sexual suggestions and abuse. All women get this treatment: old, young, attractive, homely. Even grandmotherly types who are doing something that benefits inmates, like passing out mail, get the same treatment. Blacks honestly seem to believe that all women, especially white women, are sluts. “Dem hos be want dat nigga dick!”

Sexual aggressiveness doesn’t end with yelling. Blacks expose themselves and masturbate at the sight of these women, whether it is in the infirmary, in the day room, in the chow hall, in church, in their cells with their cellies, on the sidewalk, or in a group. They ejaculate through the bars, on the floor, against the walls. They seem to have no idea how repulsive they are. Whites — at least the ones who stand up for themselves — will not put up with this kind of public perversity, and it has been the cause of plenty of riots. 

A few women seem to enjoy the attention. Some encourage the men by talking dirty or helping them masturbate. Some even have intercourse with prisoners. They may do this in exchange for stamps, which they used to be able to turn in at the post office for money, or even just for a candy bar or a soda. These are extreme cases, and they are usually black women. Most blacks at least seem to take the screaming in stride, and even pride themselves on being “down.”

 ...

 I have a story from years ago when I was in the general population. There had been tension with blacks — a very common thing — and we fully expected a riot to break out in the recreation or “rec” yard. At that time we often buried shanks in the dirt part of the rec yard so they would be available in case of trouble. It was too risky to carry a knife or keep one in your quarters, and the rec yard was where there was most likely to be fighting.

These hidden shanks were no secret to the other inmates or even the staff, and from time to time guards swept the yard with metal detectors. On that day, when we got out on the rec yard, it was only me and two other whites — only two others who were prepared to fight, anyway — facing 60 or 70 blacks. I don’t know how many it would have taken to whip the three of us, but I know they were all going to attack us!

My brothers and I immediately went for the shanks, but they were gone! The staff had swept the field. We assumed we were in for a severe beating, with or without the shanks. We decided we had nothing to lose, however, if we decided to act as if we had found them. We walked boldly up to the leaders and made our demand (one of them had stolen a brother’s radio, and we wanted it back). The whole time, we kept our hands in our pants as if we were carrying knives — and they bought it. The three of us made the whole pack of them back down. It makes a good story now, but I was scared to death.

Racial diversity: Because we're all equals, even when we're not.

Ukrainian Feminists Protest NZ Radio "Win a Wife" competition Topless

Apparently, eastern Europe is not immune from the virus of feminism. A New Zealand radio show, The Rock, was holding a competition which would send a fortunate listener to Ukraine to "Win a Wife", which sparked up a fierce response from a bunch of nubile feminists belonging to an organisation called Femen, who, understanding the power of their "assets", decided to protest topless.



Here's the NSFW images of the protest. It's clear what the major difference between Western feminists and Eastern European ones are.

Football Hooligan Culture

One thing I've been aware of for a while, but especially knocked onto me upon watching The Football Factory, is the European football hooligan culture writ large. It's a cultural phenomenon that I'm sure most of us from the extended Anglosphere are not particularly in tune with.

The film does just enough to warrant my recommendations to my readers, for any who are intrigued by hooligan violence and, essentially, the pointlessly distracting battles of a subverted-but fired up White class. Undeniably, it has a slight anti-racist message foisting itself upon the viewer remorselessly, but this all but detracts from the thoroughly entertaining piece of cinematography. It follows Tom Johnson, a man who in is own words:

"...I'm just another bored male in a dead-end job, approaching thirty, who lives for the weekend..."

The epitomy of the ideologically emptied, fleeting Western male in a crumbling civilisation, sold a dystopia packaged as a utopia, post-purchase dissonance subdued and muffled by drink and gang scuffle. A loser class with no higher calling, no responsibilities and no respect for a society than has wiped him with his own arse. The fashions, the dialects, the semi-coherent colloquialisms. One thug bashing another over sporting allegiances, pissed and coked off his tree. And these are the material demographic bulk of the generations who would have been fighting in the World Wars. One must ask himself, what the fuck happened to England?

To me, sports are a sharpening of ones' survival mechanism, sating the male desires to hunt and experience life on adrenaline edge. But for most of us, its just communal clustering over a screen, or even a solitary act, with which you utilise as conversational fodder later.

Though, European football is a different species entirely. Having transitioned from a non-violent spectator sport to organised brawling, a testament to the triumphant of proto-tribalist loyalty and inter-fighting of an ethnic group. No ideology, no thought, just fist, elbow and foot connecting with face. This is a symbolic representative of our future, whether we like it or not, because there will be much blood. Of course, this formerly Anglo Saxon tradition, like our productivity, has been outsourced further east to foreigners, less concerned with your state of welfare.

If anything, these organised gang brawls are but the last instinctual flickering of the evolutionary responses of working class Brits. It's a reaction against the highly subversively, anti-White, anti-human nature system with which they find themselves living in. It demonstrates that cultural Marxism fails, people cannot be totally stripped down, reformed into a more malleable organism. The trials and tribulations of these hooligans show one major thing, an emergence of some kind of pre-Western collapse proto-tribalism.

But despite the buzz of the sport and fighting, its ultimately a waste. A waste of the twenties and thirties , a middling or non-existent genetic legacy breeding selves out of existence, products of an aimless working class who has no resort but their sport,  their socially sponsored distraction, testosterone-burner, sating their reptile brains' desire to fight. The evolutionary extent of severely subverted White class is largely put to the test in England, a society obsessed with low-class interventionist talk shows and facing off to mediocre job prospects, and the real bulk of Anglo-Saxon breeding is done by those with no husband or father on welfare.

But if there is to be any upside to this movement, it is the EDL. The English Defence League is the epitome of this football hooligan culture, taken into a street-level political movement officially opposed against Muslim extremism, with a lot of potential for the future. Yes, at the moment it is a heavily politically correct bit of a multiracial wank-festival, but its heart is in the right place. If rumours of BNP links are true, the potential is for a further evolution good for the future of white England is ripened; Fighting in the street while the BNP does their battling in parliament, against Mohammedan masses and the LibLabCon behemoth respectively.

Althought the ranks of most football hooligan firms are filled with wasters and criminals, there is an upside. The potential for any movement such as this, filled with young men angry at their society and wanting some outlet to rebel against it, to be absorbed and directed by a right-minded political entity provides an great opportunity for utilisation in a more productive direction. Which is, after all, what is heavily bereft for a lot of White males in the West; a solid direction and sense of ethno-nationalistic pride to follow.

Banking and Currency Manipulation

A 30 minute cartoon on the history of currency, debt and banking's connection. Check it out.

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?

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.

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:

"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.

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.

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.

Mega Metal Mash up 2

 Here we go again...

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.