We Don’t Need an Open Racist on the SCOTUS

One Reply to “We Don’t Need an Open Racist on the SCOTUS”

1. True that, on all counts. The political correctness that has run amok here in North America (it’s even worse in Canada) is out of control and hard to believe– any white nominee saying the things that Sotomayor did, would have been run out of town by our indoctrinated media. Yet when Sotomayor says them? No problem, apparently. Total hypocrisy and double standards. The scary thing is, this PC isn’t just a mild leftward drift, it’s a well-planned ideological formula geared to bring down the West, as you’ve correctly pointed out on your site. Its roots lie in an ideology of “Gramscianism” first formulated after that disastrous Western self-evisceration called World War I.

   There was a fascinating discussion that AFAIK came up originally on the Freep site in a thread talking about the BNP in Britain in the upcoming elections, and their own efforts to fight the PC British police state, and then got mirrored to other sites- but then some spineless Freep moderator pulled it. (Apparently, the Freep mods get anxious and cowardly about any thread that delves into immigration and multiculturalism, or supports a party like the BNP- even though it’s British- since they fret this might hurt “big-tent” RINO and neoconservative Republicans. Which is the reason of course, that both the Republican Party and the Free Republic site are steadily, deservedly going the way of the Whigs as they ignore the reality right in front of their faces- since immigration, PC and multiculturalism are *exactly* what’s killing the GOP and the conservative values they used to pretend to stand for. Sites like Vdare.com, at least, have the stones to tackle the issue more head-on than useless Freerepublic, which itself seems to be under the thumb of the PC censors- preventing frank and apparently gratefully-received discussion about the most serious issue facing the West.)

   Fortunately, it did get mirrored before the thread was removed, and that’s good, b/c this background is essential to know *who* are opponents are (they’re subtle and operate in the background, especially from their base in academia), where they came from, and the absolute necessity of fighting and removing them from authority wherever they are. I’ll xpost it here, a few excerpts from the posts (major snippage):
   —

   ‘Antonio Gramsci has defeated Britain, Antonio Gramsci has destroyed Britain’ (thread title)

   Major elections for the Strasbourg Parliament are coming up soon across the Pond, and the British are so enraged by the Cultural Marxism, PC-fueled ruin of Britain by the 3 major parties (Lib-Lab-Con as they call them), they’re increasingly turning to the British National Party (BNP), as well as others like the EDP (which I know a lot less about). Their focus is protecting Britain and other Western countries from the increasingly lethal effects of Political Correctness– which, as we’re increasingly finding out, is not a mere “leftward drift,” but a specific ideology forged in the 1920’s after WWI by Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Marxist, with the express purpose of “breaking the back” of the West (leaving them open to Bolshevik dictatorship and plundering of the “kulaks” as happened in Russia).

   Didn’t realize before how specific and DANGEROUS the ideology underlying PC is– it’s not a mere “inevitable historical drift” of leftist parties, it’s a precise ideology that uses infiltration, shame, thought control and the media to generate an Orwellian “super-virus” to ruin Western societies. Leftist parties, liberals and Democrats of previous decades, bad as they may have been, did not automatically embrace Cultural Marxism. And as misguided as their own *economic Marxist* ideas and Socialism may have been, many at least cared for their countries’ citizens– with exceptions (like Ted Kennedy and Emanuel Celler with the 1965 US immigration law), they by and large didn’t set out to deliberately undermine the national fiber and cohesion of their societies. In the UK, Old-style Socialists (like Neil Kinnock, the Old Labour leader who lost to John Major in 1991) were confused in their policies, but they did care about workers and weren’t intentionally bent on undermining their societies– Tony Blair and the New Labour party, while not economically Marxist, have pursued the far more dangerous Cultural Marxist plan, and it’s already spreading in the USA and Australia also!

   ((Excerpt from a British voter considering BNP)):

   “What we often refer to as ‘PC’ political correctness is something altogether far more pernicious– a push toward Cultural Hegemony, the so-called ‘Long March Through the Institutions’ advocated by the Cultural Marxist Antonio Gramsci in the 1920’s and then further advanced by the Frankfurt School, with the deliberate aim of undermining our societies. Australia and the USA are both afflicted with this, but Canada and Great Britain especially so… Antonio Gramsci has not only defeated Britain, Antonio Gramsci has destroyed Britain. And, considering the break-up of the British Isles which is likely imminent within the next decade, in practice Gramsci has destroyed England, defeated England in every possible facet, with particular ferocity.

   Not only Nu-Labour but the entire Liberal-Labour-Conservative and UKIP band of corrupt officials have helped implement Gramsci’s plan to ruin the UK, either by direct effort or acquiescence, to import voters and net themselves cheap votes, favours and a pliable, enervated mass electorate.

   Another link, with an equally clear-sighted and sober analysis by George MacDonald Fraser, in the Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-506219/The-testament-Flashmans-creator-How-Britain-destroyed-itself.html

   ((One of the site comments– historical background on Gramscianism))

   Gramsci, with help of the Hungarian György Lukács and other founders of Cultural Marxism, started the tradition of PC in the 1920’s, after frustration that the fall of Russia into Bolshevism from their World War I military disasters, had not spread to other countries in the West. Little did Great Britain know that it was slitting its own throat by entering WWI against its cultural cousins in Middle Europe, rather than staying out and mediating as it had done before. Britain not only ruined its finances and depleted its imperial manpower in that stupid war (while also, of course, losing to Ireland from the Easter Rebellion and getting covered in the tentacles of Iraq in the 1920’s)– it also paved the way for Gramscian Cultural Marxism itself, which indeed has returned to kill Britain today. London is a cross between Calcutta and Abuja. Sadly enough, the USA and Canada soon joined in too, and they too are paying the horrible price for it. Even though the Irish fighters defeated the British in their own fight from 1916, even Ireland today seems to have been infected by the Gramscian virus that the British helped to unleash with their stupid WWI push– ironically, only the economic collapse has saved Ireland from being swamped by mass, Gramscian-advocated immigration!

   Gramsci’s and Lukacs’s dangerous innovation: they realized the value of infiltration within the “standard-setters” and “culture-bearers” of the West– educational institutions, media, government, even churches and businesses– as key to gutting Western institutions and bringing them down, as the tsars themselves had fallen in Russia in 1917. This is the “Long March through the institutions”. In seizing control of these “culture-providers”, the Cultural Marxists were gradually able to establish the stifling “thought-crime” culture, based on personal attacks and professional ruin for “hate speech” on the part of anyone raising even obvious concerns about uncontrolled immigration or multiculturalism. (The Cultural Marxists ironically, were often opposed by economic Marxists who were sometimes more nationalist and patriotic, even as they were deluded on economics.)

   Gramsci didn’t accomplish much at first– he was a lousy writer, and Mussolini reviled him so much that he had Gramsci regularly jailed and beaten up for an ideology he knew was a menace. He was certainly right in that conclusion, one of the few things Il Duce got right whatever the sense in his methods.

   But in 1930’s, members of the Frankfurt School (led by Herbert Marcuse, his wife Sophie Marcuse, Max Horkheimer and others) took Gramsci and Lukacs’ basic ideas, and turned them into the dangerous ideology we recognize today as political correctness– along with a plan to accomplish the infiltration. They began the “Institute for Social Research” there and used Freudian ideas to further develop a powerful, psychologically-informed ideology to weaken Western countries. During the 1930’s, they left for the USA and Britain, at which point they set out to implement the Cultural Marxist agenda. As Gramsci had proposed, the Cultural Marxists started with their university base– thus explaining the Orwellian thought-suppression and tenure-denial still powerful there today– then infiltrated the rest of US and British (and eventually Canadian and Australian) society, including the media.

   Things went slowly for awhile– even as WWII provided a boon to Cultural Marxist rhetoric, giving them the rhetorical cudgel to label even moderate objections with charges of “Racism” or “being Nazis”– until the Vietnam War. The cultural rifts and divisions of that period enabled the New Left and their associated radicals to take complete control of United States and British universities, and bring the Long March through the Institutions into its own.

   It’s true, there isn’t anything historically inevitable about what we today call “Leftism,” which is a far more dangerous, insidious and catastrophic form of liberalism than it’s predecessors (not to mention very different from liberal-leaning parties in Asia or Africa, which are more nationalist and would never dream of the PC idiocy overrunning the West). It’s a product of Gramsci’s specific ideology, and the unfolding of his plan in the background.

   Fast-forward to 2009, and the Gramscians are on the verge of dismantling many Western nations. Their plan has advanced to wound and weaken society, give them a permanent foothold, and resist nationalists, Paleocons, cultural conservatives and others who most directly fight them.

   ((Another post with specifics on the Gramscian ideology- amazing, b/c this is *exactly* the “media-decreed” politically-correct ideology that Republicans and Democrats, and Britain’s major parties, are supposed to toe the line on))

   – Mass immigration, especially of the unskilled, Muslims, criminals, more Marxists, and others with neither the ability nor the interest in fitting in or contributing to Western societies, but every intention of ruining them. This is a favorite of the Gramscians, since uncontrolled immigration has effects that are tough to reverse, aren’t necessarily obvious initially (and so tough to argue in the political arena with it’s immediate concerns), provide cheap “vote importation” to keep Cultural Marxists in power, and also displace and frustrate the native-born Western peoples– economically, socially, culturally. Massive immigration of this sort is bad enough in the USA, Canada and Australia, White settler societies where arguments to limit immigration meet the strongest resistance from the PC-pushers.

   But mass immigration is nothing less than an act of war, of cultural total war, for a country like Britain– where the native Western European population is indigenous, organically grew and formed a culture there, and literally being displaced. Forget talk about England and the UK as a “mongrel nation”– the Germanic and Celtic peoples have always been closely related, not just physically but culturally, and there’s an obvious difference between an Irish newcomer and a Somali or a South Asian with a hatred for the new society (even if it skips a generation which– among the London Bombers– it certainly did)!

   Britain’s imperial past has if anything helped the Cultural Marxists to argue that Britain should be open-borders to the former Commonwealth (as though other nations had squeaky-clean histories of their own), but supporting mass immigration has never been about fairness or a sensible policy to help the receiving nation– it’s designed to damage the Western country as much as possible. Economists join in the sophistry by declaring that “immigrants are needed to support social-safety nets”– failing to distinguish high- from low-quality immigrants, pretending as though immigrants themselves don’t age (and so draw on the safety net). And conveniently forgetting, of course, that criminal and non-working immigrants and their kids (especially those who hate their adopted countries) cost far more than they contribute. In addition, since many of the most anti-Western groups (especially the Muslim subgroups) also tend to have larger families than the native-born population (especially among the Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in Britain), this further changes the very identity of a society.

   Notice that other so-called “Leftist” causes are actually damaged by mass immigration– the environment is strained, pollution increases, the Muslims in particular would be the first to strike out at the Marxists if they were to take over (which is why other liberal factions sometimes hate the Cultural Marxists).

   Also, it doesn’t matter that virtually every respected study on the subject has shown that immigrants contribute best, when they’re not only culturally similar but able to contribute economically, and arriving in small numbers!

   The Gramscians don’t care about the hypocrisy– their aim is social tension and friction as a way to injure the basis of a nation, so mass immigration of the worst kind is what they back. Also, the Cultural Marxists have even made common cause with the most corrupt of the crony capitalists, who sell out their countries’ viability for a little more quick profit (from cheap labor immigration) up front. Such mass immigration also has the benefit (from the Gramscians’ point of view) of being awfully tough to undo in its effects. Nations with intact demographics can overcome even the most awful wars or other setbacks (as immigration-restricting, robot-building and innovating Japan did after WWII). But if mass immigration and multiculturalism heavily change the demographics, it’s much tougher to overcome the damage, and the Gramscians have a more solid foothold.

   Much of our current economic crisis in the USA and United Kingdom is also a direct consequence of this policy since, after all, political pressure to extend easy loans to new immigrants (who often have not acquired the skills to pay the mortgages) led directly to the debt disaster. The Gramscians know this, and they’ve been pushing for this all along, since economic insolvency for Western nations weakens us, and furthers their aims.

   – Demonizing anyone who raises legitimate concerns about the policies via the courts and the media, both their immediate effects and ones long down the road (which are difficult to argue against, since the detriments of Gramscian policy aren’t always immediately apparent). This is where screams of “racism,” “sexism” and “Nazism,” “historical guilt” (in various forms) and “patriarchy arrogance”– Orwellian weasel-words with the capacity to ruin careers, when further fanned by Gramscian journalists in the media– come in especially handy. As we all know too well here in the States, Whites can be vitriolically assaulted, but even mild questions about policies involving other groups (especially involving mass immigration, the Gramscians’ key tool to ruin us) are quite strictly prohibited, and even an unintentional slip is enough to wreck careers and livelihoods.

   Many of the most ridiculous policy abuses in place today are specific policies from Gramscian ideology, designed to divide society into competing and angry groups and explicitly favor those who want to challenge and attack the very traditions that have enabled Western society to thrive and maintain itself. Whites and men (especially those in value-added lines of work) are hit very hard, their earning power and sense of worth, as wage-earners and family heads, specifically targeted.

   Our outrageous legal system has been easy to manipulate. Some of these are overall small-scale– like the ridiculous “proportionality prong” of Title IX, which allows the laudable goal of increasing women’s sports participation, to be achieved in practice only by assuming a false “equality of interest” standard for majority-women universities, and thereby demolishing men’s sports. Others are more damaging– divorce laws that financially devastate and ruin even caring husbands and fathers, utterly overlooking their years of education (or efforts to build a business) and thus making it impossible to care for their own kids, let alone to start a new family. Sexual harassment laws have the same effect (in companies as much as government) by presuming guilt– cheapening actual abuses by officials in power (which do deserve punishment) and instead targeting the economic viability of less-powerful employees, for even things like looks or offhand comments with no intention of offending. (Just like the racism charge, which can’t be effectively defended.) Other policies are crippling to a society– like ridiculous crime and welfare laws that encourage and even reward lawbreakers (including those from abroad), who come here explicitly to damage our societies, start families they can’t support on their own, and target the pillars of society, with victims blamed for even modest self-defense (especially if committed against native-born Europeans, something the poor Britons, in PC-overrun British society, suffer with severity).

   Most ruinous of all, though, has been the Gramscians’ stranglehold on our educational system and media– which makes it horribly difficult to even argue our case to rational listeners. Our kids are indoctrinated starting in grade school with arguments that Western civilization is inherently evil (again, ignoring the black marks and difficult histories of other countries outside the West), and it gets worse at the university level. But regrettably, private schools or charter schools provide no escape– the old carrot and stick of “federal funds” and certification (just like Title IX proportionality) is similarly applied. Even home-schoolers face the “certification” attack. The media, of course, ensures that PC madness is accepted as “mainstream” by the general public, and despite the help of the Internet in counteracting it, the sheer breadth of the Gramscian assault makes it difficult to fight.

   – The “diversity” industry, which provides a self-sustaining financial base for the Gramscians, funded by the tax dollars supplied by Americans, Britons and Australians! So-called “diversity” and “multiculturalism” (code words for effective demographic warfare and cultural attacks that bring down a social structure) are of course key tools to the Gramscians’ arsenal, splitting and weakening us.

   ((Another post, on the crucial electoral decisions looming for the West))

   Gramscian political correctness is literally killing the West, killing our countries and our people. Even worse, it’s tough to get rid of short of a revolution since the Gramscians control so many institutions. They infiltrate so-called “conservative” parties (the RINOs) as well as the media, and so neuter any political opposition. Only more nationalist parties like the BNP stand up to them, but in two-party or winner-take-all systems like our own, it’s tough to get such parties in power. The BNP is gaining but they have a mountain to climb in the British police state, and the Tories are too timid to seriously try and reverse the damage of New Labour’s Blairites, on immigration or other policies– preferring instead to indulge in the corruption (the recent Parliamentary expenses scandal) and the bread and circuses that distract people from the iceberg about to hit the Titanic. The ridiculous Gramscian “human rights law” they have there is also a big part of the problem– a sensible, basic law would be fine, but the one they have there acts as though prosperity for immigrants (at the expense of hard-working European taxpayers) was a basic right. The law, with no corresponding “human responsibilities law,” demands ridiculous and financially costly refugee intakes, while blaming European Whites for all the miseries of history and the present in the Third World– rather than the real causes, i.e. corruption and mismanagement in non-Western countries, overpopulation, or just lack of good enough economies on other continents that have nothing to do with Europeans being at fault, for any of it.

   Obviously, the least capable immigrants (from the most failed societies) will most often stay in their new homes, while the better-off ones are more mobile and often return home– thus saddling Western countries with costs which are crippling in an economy like the current one. The BNP is the only party making these obvious points.

   The USA has it little better than Britain does. The Republicans, pressured by Gramscians in the media (and deeply afraid of the “racist” smears, which will hit them whatever their policies), feel pressured to institute RINOs and neocons like Michael Steele– even though pandering has never, ever worked to increase their minority vote share, since Democrats can always outpander them with free handouts. And the demographics aren’t on our side.

   I don’t know what the 2010 census in the USA will show, but I’m not sanguine– Latinos and African-Americans have been indoctrinated with the Gramscian anti-Western rhetoric, and they’re the most youthful and fastest-growing cohort of the electorate. I wonder if we could ever get a true conservative (i.e., non-RINO) elected to lead the country again. Sweden and Norway have been so targeted for Gramscian indoctrination, that the Cultural Marxists there even have their own Brownshirt thugs to enforce their ideology and punish “thought crimes”– the only bright spot, being that they have their own increasingly powerful Nationalist parties, gaining power as people in those countries (which never had overseas empires, let alone a history as “nations of immigrants”) become angry.

   Canada is in a similar miserable situation, with ridiculous affirmative action and hate-speech laws that make it practically a crime to be white and European there. Australia now has its own “Tony Blair” in power, and a Gramscian squad to back him. For example, Kevin Andrews, a minister in charge of immigration and refugees in 2007, raised generally modest and tempered (non-racist) concerns about the sheer number of unassimilated, crime-prone refugees from Sudan and similar countries in Australia, suggesting that the country moderate its intake (per capita, the highest refugee intake in the world, along with the USA and Canada) and slow things down enough to provide job support and education for the Sudanese already there. He was mercilessly pilloried, viciously attacked by the press (even by his own “conservative” party colleagues) and soon lost his job– effectively ruined since then. http://tinyurl.com/pvdgvo

   The only silver lining here is that the Gramscians haven’t had so much success in other countries. The more central, mountainous countries of Europe, for example– despite moronic Brussels bureaucratic stupidities, like the human rights law– have a more effective resistance, and cultural solidarity and nationalism. That’s because they don’t have much of a history of mass immigration or of major overseas empires, and so less of a historical association to drink the Gramscians’ mass immigration and multiculturalism Kool-Aid. In fact, some of them– like the Italians (despite Gramsci’s own background), the Austrians, Germans and Poles– have a history of facing down deadly invasion threats by the Turks against Vienna, which is also why they’re at the forefront of thwarting Turkey’s EU membership, which is now essentially dead and out. They’re also more nationalist for same reason, especially the smaller countries.

   My nephew lives in eastern Austria outside Vienna, and the Nationalist parties there and in culturally similar regions (like Bavaria in south Germany) are so strong– and the policies are so stringent– that even the decreasing numbers of Turks and other Muslims are either being deported for crimes, pushed out for lack of contributions to the economy, or intensely forced to assimilate, such that many have even changed their names to better fit in. It’s difficult to translate many of the tracts that the Nationalist parties there use (unless you know some German as used in that context), but they’re effective, and with proportional voting, they have real power. Oddly enough, even Dhimmi-addled countries like the Netherlands, Belgium and even France– which have deservedly received our scorn– are fighting back with increasing success, helped by their own electoral systems and history (Charles Martel, after all, was Frankish and still considered a French hero). The Dutch and Belgium have powerful Nationalist Parties (Geert Wilders in Holland and Vlaams Belang in Belgium are among the most powerful and popular parties in Europe), and strict immigration laws that encourage deportations, while kicking out any immigrants who can’t contribute economically or fail various exams. Sarkozy in France is corrupt, as is Berlusconi in Italy, but they’re hard-nosed types who bitterly oppose the immigration influxes and have caused the highest deportation rates of Muslims, anywhere in the world, with the lowest Muslim percentages they’ve had in a while (though they still have a long way to go).

   Oddly, some countries in South America (such as Uruguay and Paraguay) also have similar stringency on immigration and no foothold for the Gramscians, for reasons less obvious.

   The downside, of course, is that these are generally smaller countries in a culturally different region of the West, and it’s difficult to transplant their lessons here to North America, where our history’s far different and the Gramscians much more powerful.

   This is what we’re facing: The Gramscians pose a mortal threat to our societies, and sadly they’re in power right now, having infiltrated our institutions and controlling the levers of power. They’ve mostly neutered our conservative opposition, with Paleocons and true defenders of conservative culture largely powerless.

   We can only fight the Gramscians when we specifically identify them and their poisonous ideology for what it is– not just a vague and drifting “PC,” but a deliberate, well-assembled attempt to demolish the West– and force them out of their power bases, root and branch, within the media, government, business, the courts and especially the universities, their chief power base. We need to be willing to take the streets in anger if necessary. We can afford no less.

   ((One more sample post, one of the best in the group on the PC threat))

   Hubris and arrogance seem to be another part of the Gramscian PC-lunacy– they’d be cutting their own throats if the Cultural Marxists kill the goose that lays the golden egg (ie liberal, tolerant Western Civilization– sometimes too tolerant for its own good). They’re indeed the useful idiots– Gramscians would be the first to be stoned by the Islamofascists if their immigration plans came to pass.

   They don’t seem to care, like other elites who work to undermine their own societies, they seem to think that it won’t affect them in particular. Especially the ones who draw bloated university salaries– often at taxpayer expense– and live in gated complexes, insulated from the ruin they’re wreaking in the societies around them.

   It’s truly amazing to me how the most elementary considerations about a society’s overall unity and health, and the careful balance of tradition with cultural change, seems to have escaped the Gramscian mind. Are they (as well as their crony capitalist parasites) capable of thinking a mere 10 years down the road? It’s true, the 7/7 bombers in Britain in 2005 weren’t even recent immigrants, but second-generationers steeped in a hateful ideology that explicitly wants to take over the West, and has been trying since the 7th century. There are some decent, professional Muslim immigrants who contribute in low numbers, but Britain and Australia seem intent on taking the least-skilled, least capable, angriest and most criminally-prone elements from Pakistan, Bangladesh and other basketcase countries (whereas places like Egypt, Turkey and Algeria at least have some remnants of an intellectual tradition, even if in a clear minority of would-be immigrants). These immigrants then import their multiple wives, and get British benefits for them (or engage in crime in Australian cities like Melbourne, where many neighborhoods are practically a dump).

   As dumb as the EU bureaucracy is, it seems like Britain and Australia– not to mention PC-stifled Canada (or Sweden and Norway), where affirmative action for “visible minorities” and criminalized hate speech rule the roost– are also capable of introducing thoroughly idiotic policies in their own right. Ironically, the most damaging immigration waves in Western Europe– the Moroccans and Turks mass-imported to the Netherlands, the Somalians and Ethiopians imported to Sweden and Norway, the North Africans to France– largely occurred in the 1970’s and 1980’s, before the European Union itself became a force. (If anything, EU-based immigration thus far has luckily been mainly from ex-Communist Eastern Europe, though of course this would change if the some of the Gramscian EU-expansion radicals had their way– which for now, is blocked at Turkey.)

   In Britain’s case, the idiots in the Labour government (with the assent and support of many Conservatives) decided to use British taxpayer money, to underwrite chain migration of South Asians to Britain. This of course also underwrites and support their housing and presence in Britain, and their multiple wives and benefit-supported families, who too often embrace an especially virulent, radical form of Islam, leading to things like 7/7. It’s a weird, modern send-up of Lenin’s boasts about useful idiots and Western capitalists producing the rope with which they hang themselves– except in this case, it’s the Gramscian Cultural Marxists (in league with crony capitalist traitors) who not even a radical like Lenin himself had dreamed up, fooling countries like Britain into using hard-working British tax dollars to fund their own demographic displacement, in an island country that was a Roman province and has had a very Western history for thousands of years.

   My friend showed me some excerpts of the human rights law and I couldn’t believe how idiotic and short-sighted it was. It’s the sort of self-delusion that seeks to blame everything unpleasant in society on a group that’s out of favor (like Western whites, in this case)– rather than acknowledging that there’s badness and stupidity in every society, and that the West has made such freedom possible. Totally childlike. Also, things like that law make a ridiculous presupposition of a “natural right” to prosperity and having it easy– as though that were a natural state of things, rather than a product of generations working hard to make things better for their children.

   If some parts of the Third World right now are less prosperous than the West, that’s not necessarily a consequence of some vaguely-defined “Western imperialism” (which most of Europe didn’t participate in and many, such as Sweden and Greece, never bothered with at all)– it’s because some societies more effectively deal with their challenges than others. If we import the 3rd World to the West, then the West becomes Third World, and given the locations with the most rapid and uncontrolled population growth (the poorest and most corrupt countries in especially South Asia, Africa and Latin America), open borders would mean just that. Far better to help provide development and combat corruption at the source, in these societies themselves, and introduce policies that can help them meet the needs of their population, rather than giving them the “safety valve” of exporting so many among their criminal classes to the West (as corrupt Mexican governments, of course, have done with the criminal population in Mexico, increasingly pouring into the United States). This merely makes things miserable for everyone.

   If there is one silver-lining here, it’s that idiot-bureaucracies like the one in Brussels haven’t completely taken out the nationalistic spirit yet in many countries. Along with the Nationalist parties like the ones in Italy, Austria and Holland gaining power (in the Strasbourg Parliament as well as in their own countries) and more effective paths to block Turkey from the EU, I’ve been surprised at how some countries and regions– such as Austria and south German states like Bavaria– have protections to allow law-abiding private citizens to obtain and carry guns. They have some dumb restrictions in places but not as bad as I’d thought, and certainly much better than Britain where they’re banned altogether. (Although, of course, non-EU Switzerland is the best example here.)

   Still, it seems like Alpen Euro countries at least have managed to maintain a measure of more reliably conservative, cultural autonomy from Brussels, and they’re not giving it up. Heck, if they can maintain this autonomy even if they stay in the EU framework, given their history and geography, they might even benefit eventually from the Baltic states and E Europe being opened up and forging a common identity, and some old-fashioned Christendom-style European solidarity with their neighbors– even to the point of bringing in hard-working, Christian (usually old-fashioned Catholic or Orthodox) workers into the continent’s core. Although IMHO Britain, as an island, doesn’t have much to gain from the arrangement and would be best going its own way, as the distinct island nation it’s been ever since the Roman legions took off.

   One can only look with some encouragement at the respect and support that the BNP is gaining throughout Britain. As Fraser wrote in the other linked article, Gramscian political correctness is essentially denial of basic societal, economic realities, and the BNP is now in the Orwellian position of being radical, simply by telling the truth–looking it in the eye and talking about it frankly, without shame. The BNP address topics that the Gramscian PC Brigade instantly shout “racism” about, and they do so without flinching– in fact, the BNP has apparently gained tens of thousands of votes, simply by pointing out the obvious idiocy of even considering Turkish admission into the EU, opening up Britain to a flood of millions of angry, unskilled Muslims. Telling the truth may now be a radical act in Britain, and the Gramscians have stopped at nothing to defame them– attacks in even “conservative” newspapers, attempted vote fraud, DOS attacks on the BNP Website, hitting out at BNP campaigners, even postal workers throwing out BNP leaflets. It just shows that the BNP are being listened to, and the Gramscian elites and crony capitalists are afraid with good reason– the British people are finally standing up for themselves.

   Reply