When will the idealistic morons in the West accept reality?

Description of video in case it gets taken down at some point

GEEN STIJL TV Channel. The interview of three Muslim teenagers (probably of Moroccan origin) shows above all how integration had totally failed in the Netherlands. There is no reason not to believe the boys belong already to the third generation non western immigrants that are living in the Netherlands. They are born and raised here. Still their knowledge of the Dutch language is very poor. It is hard to believe, if we think they are attending a Dutch school from the beginning and are now visiting high school. Billions of Guldens and later on Euro’s were invested (still) in extremely expensive integration programs.

Very alarming are their idea’s about the host country that had done so much to give them good life, health care, education etc. How many of them could have reached the age of 5 years old, if they were still living in their country of origin? Now they are spitting on the “Kuffar”. They want to rough up their women and girls for not dressing properly etc. They want to live in the wonderful country IS “where a Muslim can live according to the laws of his faith. It is very obvious that the boys get all their idea’s from their parents and the mosques; it is especially clear by the youngest.

Few day’s after the terror assault in Copenhagen interviewed the Dutch TV the famous Danish cartoon drawer Kurt Westergaard. This is what he had said: Now after the attack. I am afraid that the Danes will take it very hard and hostility among the two groups will grow. By that all integration efforts made for so many years and the milliards of Kronen it had cost, will go down the drain. Alas for mister Hedegaard, integration had TOTALLY FAILED. We have to look at it as a bad investment that had totally failed.

I don’t really have much that I need to add. The description says it all. These people aren’t integrating at all. If anything, each generation becomes more and more distant from the host society. The first generation recognise the value of our societies and come here for a better life. The following generations however end up taking for granted, the benefits they get living in our societies, and develop an idealised view of the societies that their parents left behind. Some of them get to the point that they actually leave their host society to wage Jihad against it. Others, remain as worthless parasites and try to drag down the host society from within.

Can anyone seriously explain to me, why these people are here? How do they benefit our societies? What do they contribute? If they don’t contribute, then what obligation do we have to them? If they aren’t willing to integrate and feel that Shariah states are superior, why aren’t they deported instantly?

All I want, is to understand why. I mean surely if there is a good reason for them to be here, it would make sense to tell us what this reason is, in order to reassure us that they’re worth having here. It’s like how if a child is sick and they need to take horrible tasting medicine to feel better. They’re not going to like the unpleasantness of it, but if you explain to them why it’s necessary, they’ll endure it for the greater good. If someone can explain to me why we need to deal with the unpleasantness of having people who want to destroy our way of life, and do so in a way that makes sense, I’d be willing to listen.

Once again, Whitey is being demonised unfairly.

So apparently, a California school is distributing leaflets about something called a “White Space”. Essentially, white students are to be taken aside and separated from their oppressed non-white classmates and made to feel guilty about all that oppression they are doing.

California Public School Promotes “White Space” to “Unlearn Racism” (Please click on link and read the whole thing. It summarises my thoughts better than I could)

Why A White Space?

For many, it sounds contradictory: Isn’t it racist if just white people get together? Isn’t that segregation? The following are our reasons for meeting as a white anti-racist affinity group:

1. People of color shouldn’t always have to be the ones to educate white people about racism and oppression. We are taking responsibility for learnipractice as a white person can sometimes mean increased alienation and conflict in our lives, especially with other white friends and family who disagree with us. …
4. It’s a space for white people to figure out what it means to be anti-racist white person and challenge racism in all areas of our lives. …
5. It’s a place where white people can begin to build a new culture of white anti-racism, and learn the skills needed to transform the larger white community.
6. White affinity groups are a supplement to, not a replacement for, multi-racial dialogues and activism between white people and people of color. …
7. A white space serves as a resource to people of color who want to work with white people but don’t want to spend all their energy dealing with the racism of white people.ng about our own white privilege and how to challenge it as white people.
2. In order to challenge racism and dismantle white supremacy, white people need to unlearn racism and discover the ways we enact white privilege. …
3. A commitment to anti-racist identity and

Despite the fact that slavery in the West was ended about 150 years ago (by white people) and Jim Crow laws were ended about 50 years ago (by white people, though admittedly due to pressure by black civil rights activists) and despite the fact that every race, including white people have been the victims of slavery at some point, we still need to realise that every single thing that goes wrong in the non-white communities is because of some vague unspecified form of racism committed by white people against them.

All racists, every single one of them.

If black and Hispanic students fail miserably in school, drop out, end up dealing drugs and get shot in the street, it’s all the white students fault for oppressing them. It doesn’t have anything to do with their cultural values, as all people are equal in every way, and the only thing that can possibly account for demographic differences is how much oppression that demographic suffers at the hands of white people. You see, all white people are automatically born as racists and so, need to unlearn racism. We just can’t help ourselves, we’re genetically predisposed to be oppressors (even though we’re led to believe that genetically speaking, we aren’t all that different from the other races).

If only those white students hadn’t oppressed them so much. They could have been doctors or supreme court judges.

It remains a mystery of course why Asian students (another non-white minority in America) don’t fail at education as much as other minorities. In fact, they often do better on average than white people. Why is it that white people oppress blacks, Hispanics, Arabs etc so much, but they don’t oppress Asians? Perhaps Asians are also born with some form of white privilege.

White Privilege

Jokes aside, this is just getting ridiculous. When will people realise that it’s all gone full circle now? The reality is, that White people are now the most discriminated against of the major races in the world? White people are the only race who aren’t allowed to have an exclusive homeland(s) (blacks, Asians, Hispanic, Arabs and Indians all do). White people MUST live in diverse countries. White people are the only race that have to change the laws and traditions of their countries to accommodate outsiders. White people are the only racial group that can be grouped together in negative terms, as the document I’m linked to is doing. It’s perfectly ok to act as if all white people are racist, but it wouldn’t be ok to say the same thing about all black or Hispanic people of course. After all, it would be racist to act as if all members of a racial group are the same, unless that group is white people.


The worry I have, is this. If people of other races are being conditioned to think that white people are evil, and that it’s ok to discriminate against us like this, what’s going to happen in a few decades if (as present trends suggest), our numbers are significantly lower, and their’s are much higher in what were once our countries? Will it spur on racial hatred towards us, and justify acts of genocide? After all, it has often been suggested that genocide begins with demonising the target group with words. That’s already happening to us. What happens next?

This man then proceeded to oppress Will Smith, Al Sharpton and Oprah Winfrey in some vague way for absolutely no reason.

AntiRacist Hitler Cartoon

This cartoon is worth watching as it perfectly symbolises what is going on in (what were once) predominately white countries.

Just to summarise the video:

-Hitler (who apparently survived WW2) comes back and claims that he was wrong for being a racist.

-He decides that now he will dedicate his life to being an anti-racist and spreading diversity.

-He visits Israel and decides that it “isn’t diverse enough”. There are too many Jews and not enough non-Jews

-He opens the borders to Israel and floods it with non-Jewish immigrants.

-He uses propaganda to encourage Jews to intermarry with non-Jews, rather than other Jews, thus producing non-Jewish children.

-Any Jews who complain about any of this are verbally attacked as being racists or Jewish supremacists. Their legitimate fears of becoming a minority in their own homeland is scoffed at.

-15 years later, the Jews are all but extinct (only one remains).

-Thus, Hitler finally succeeds in doing what the holocaust failed to do, the genocide of the Jews.

Now, replace the Jews with white people, Israel with white countries, and Hitler with anyone who pushes multiculturalism in those countries, and you’ve got the current situation facing the Western world.

The way I see it, I completely agree with the Jews in the video. It isn’t racist to want to preserve yourself and your race. It’s perfectly natural and something that should be encouraged. Caring about our own race and its future doesn’t mean that we hate people of other races. There’s no reason why small and reasonable amounts of outsiders (who are willing to integrate) can’t be brought in. It just means that we believe that our race has as much right to exist, and to do so in the countries that our ancestors built, as any other race has to exist in their own.

What’s the problem there? What is so evil about wanting to leave for our descendants, what our ancestors left for us. What is so evil about wanting our descendants to look like us? What is so evil about taking pride in what makes us unique as a people? I honestly can’t see it.

The best part of the video was when Hitler parodied this very real quote from Barbara Spectre. This is genocide, plain and simple.

“You might be Mike Brown if…”

It seems that the anger over the death of black teenager Michael Brown at the hands of white cop Darren Wilson still hasn’t cooled. A stand up comedian did a bit mocking the incident and managed to troll the fuck out of audience big time.

Personally, I found it pretty amusing to watch. Not so much because of the jokes (which were lame) but because of how annoyed the audience were getting. It was also pretty obvious that the comedian took a lot of pleasure in trolling the fuck out of the audience, just from looking at his mannerisms and listening to his tone of voice.

What’s particularly amusing is the fact that what he was saying is all true. I discussed the Ferguson riots a few months ago here, and all his jokes are about the things I discussed back then.

Unfortunately, in the world we live in now, facts are irrelevant. As far as the idiots in the crowd are concerned, Darren Wilson should have allowed Michael Brown to take his gun from him and possibly even use it against him, rather than using it to defend himself. All that matters is that Michael Brown was black (and therefore the innocent victim) and Darren Wilson was white (and therefore the evil oppressor). Anything that goes against that narrative, they don’t want to hear.

Left-Wing French street artist, experiences the joy of diversity first hand.

I always get a giddy thrill when something like this happens. Apparently, a famous street artist who goes by the name of COMBO, decided to paint a mural in a Parisian Muslim ghetto of the word “Coexist” with the letters C, X, and T, replaced with a Muslim half moon, Jewish star of David, and a Christian Cross respectively. Obviously, the point was to promote tolerance and peace between the different religious groups in France currently.

The mural in question.

As noble a goal as that may be, he didn’t take into consideration the fact that not everyone is as tolerant as he would like. For his efforts, he was severely beaten by four Muslim men.

From Conservative Headlines

A French street artist was severely beaten by four Muslim men for refusing to remove a “Coexist” painting. The artist, who goes by Combo, was left with bruises and a dislocated shoulder,

The painting includes a self-portrait of Combo dressed in Arab garb and the word Coexist spelled with a cross, half moon, and six pointed star. Combo had painted the image on the east side of Paris near an immigrant Ghetto.

Combo was adamant that the beating has not swayed his left-wing ideology.

On Facebook he wrote “I am deliberately being vague about the description of these cowards and where it all happened. To me, it doesn’t matter where they come from, what color their skin is, what their religion or their political ideas are. In this context, all they represent is stupidity and ignorance.”

Combo has received international media coverage in the past for street art in Paris, Hong Kong and at the former site of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster,

Reading the bolded part reveals a sad but obvious reality to me. In my last post I discussed how people are very attached to the beliefs they already hold and will do whatever it takes to justify those beliefs and discredit ideas that are counter to them. Reading this however, makes it clear to me that for some of these people, it is far worse than I ever suspected. This man was beaten severely by a group he was trying to promote tolerance towards simply for preaching his messages of tolerance. Yet it seems that no amount of reality can make lunatics like this reconsider their stupidity. There’s literally no hope of ever convincing people like this to think differently. His own daughter could go through a Rotherham like experience and he himself could be beheaded by ISIS, and in the last few seconds before his death, he’d still be preaching the joys of diversity.

Consider yourself “Culturally enriched”, COMBO.

Let this man serve as an example. Do you really want to be so brainwashed by your sense of smug superiority of being tolerant and understanding, that you’d be willing to go through this yourself? Personally, I’d think you were a fucking moron if you did.

“It doesn’t back up my biased preconceptions. Therefore it must be false”

I know what you mean :(
I know what you mean 😦

One thing I’ve noticed while writing this blog, both from discussing its content with people, and from reading comments on stories that I link to, is that people are very set in their way of thinking. It seems that no matter how much evidence there is to support something being true, people will automatically find a way to discredit it, in order to stick to their preconceived way of thinking. Usually the way they discredit it, doesn’t really discredit it at all. Rather, it just makes them feel in their own head that they have discredited it. This can be done through a number of techniques.

The process in a nutshell.
The process in a nutshell.

One technique that comes to mind is attacking the source of the information, rather than the content itself. Lets just say that Fox News was to endorse a Republican candidate for the US presidential election and gave a bunch of reasons as to why they felt he was a better candidate than the Democrat candidate. To a typical democratic voter, these reasons (no matter how true they may be) would be dismissed off hand because Fox has a reputation of being biased towards the Republicans. The fact that they all could be completely true  and verifiable is irrelevant. Conversely, if CNN (a network which has a reputation of being biased towards the Democrats) gave a bunch of reasons why the Democrat candidate was better, the Democrat voter would likely believe them, as they would back up the feelings they already had. If a Republican voter was in the same situation, their reaction would be reversed. People don’t go to the news to get new perspectives. They go to get confirmation of what they already believe.

Fox News as seen by the average Democrat voter.
CNN as seen by the average Republican voter.

Another example is the use of Strawman arguments. Lets just say for example, I was to discuss my fears about mass immigration and its effects on the future of Europe. I might suggest that we should bring in stricter immigration controls so that we only take in people that are in some way useful to us (for example, bringing in Indian IT specialists due to the high amount of IT jobs, and small amount of skilled IT professionals in Ireland). I would suggest that we shouldn’t be bringing in unskilled immigrants when we already have so many of our own unskilled workers who are unemployed. As far as I’m concerned, they are of no benefit to us, and we have no responsibility to them. I would suggest background checks and interviews with prospective immigrants to make sure they are compatible with our culture.

These people are great and are actually worth importing.

I would also suggest that we should be stricter with asylum seekers. People who come from a genuinely dangerous part of the world, and who (somehow) make it to Ireland before any other safe country? No problem, we’ll do our duty and take care of you. It would be inhumane not to. Economic migrants who come here for free everything and who bypass other EU countries in the process? They can go fuck themselves and should be on the first plane back to wherever the hell they came from. The strawman argument that people might make in that case is that I’m just an “Ignorant racist who hates those people just because they have a different skin colour”. Yet, if people actually really paid attention to what I’m saying, they would see that isn’t the case. I have absolutely no problem at all letting in people who have something to contribute and who are willing to integrate with us. I just think its utter insanity to have this overly tolerant attitude of letting anyone in regardless of how little they benefit the European people. I truly believe that doing so is suicidal. Just because other people would rather risk getting themselves or their descendants raped/killed/enslaved, or their culture destroyed just for the sake of feeling good about how tolerant and enlightened they are, doesn’t mean everyone else should. As far as I’m concerned, our way of life is something worth preserving and its more important to me than the feelings of a Muslim jihadist, a Somalian pirate, a gypsy beggar/thief, or any other person with compatibility issues.

“Boy, we sure need more of these vibrant and colourful geniuses, to enrich our boring culture” said nobody ever.

Logical fallacies are another thing that I’ve seen used in many an argument. I don’t feel like going in to too much detail, so here’s a list of what I’m talking about.


I will however highlight one that instantly comes to mind. The fallacy of the middle ground always being right. Some people have this idea that when there are two extreme views on the opposite sides of a discussion, that both are automatically wrong. Therefore, compromising is the right choice. Now imagine this scenario.

I’m sure we’re all familiar with the Rotherham scandal. 1400 young white English girls who were raped and trafficked by Pakistani men. Extreme view one would be “It was perfectly justified to rape those girls and they shouldn’t be punished”. Extreme view two would be “It was a horrific crime and those rapists and anyone who helped cover up their crimes should be severely punished”. The middle ground in that situation would be “It was ok to rape 700 girls but after that, it got a bit excessive. They should receive some punishment (not too harsh) for the extra 700”. Anyone with common sense would see that as being completely insane. Obviously extreme view two is the correct view in that situation. Thankfully enough, I’ve never seen anyone stupid enough to take a middle ground argument like that, but I’m just using it as a point to show that sometimes an extreme view can be the right one. Imagine if someone in politics was to claim “The far right calls me a communist and the far left calls me a fascist. I guess that means I’m in the middle, and doing something right then”. No, it doesn’t necessarily mean that at all. It could just mean that you are an idiot who gets everything wrong.

Seems fair.

Now to be honest, I can understand why it can be difficult to break away from our biased ways of thinking.  As I’ve said before (I think), I too used to think in more or less the same ways that I’m complaining about now. I used to read alternative views with scorn. It was only when I really took the time to think, analyse what I was reading without any biases and compare it to what I was actually experiencing and what my instincts were telling me, that I started to realise that the alternative views made sense. That’s why I would ask others to think critically about things in future and to not just fall back on what they were already engineered to believe. You might be shocked by what you realise.

Bonus post: Parade in Germany halted over terrorist threat.

So just a few minutes ago, I discussed the Islamic Extremist terrorist attack in Denmark that occurred on the 14th of February. Well, it seems I didn’t have to wait long to find another example of something worth talking about, so I had to follow up immediately just to reiterate the point I already made.

From The BBC

A carnival parade has been called off at short notice in Braunschweig, northern Germany, due to the threat of an Islamist attack, police said.

A “specific threat of an Islamist attack” was identified by state security sources, they said in a statement.

Police urged people planning to attend to stay at home.

The parade – a well-known regional attraction – was cancelled only 90 minutes before it was due to start.

“Many people arriving at the train station were already dressed up and very disappointed – but we didn’t want to take any risks,” police spokesman Thomas Geese was quoted as saying.

Braunschweig’s Carnival parade reportedly draws around 250,000 visitors each year. More than 4,000 participants in fancy dress march down a 6km (four-mile) route through the city.

The decision to call it off was taken by Mayor Ulrich Markurth and the parade’s marshal, Gerhard Baller.

“This is a sad day for our city,” Mayor Markurth told public broadcaster NDR.

“The assessment of the police however left us with no other choice.”

Large carnival parades and street parties are held every year in the week before Lent in Catholic regions of Germany.

The cancellation comes hours after Danish police shot dead a man they believe was behind two deadly attacks earlier in Copenhagen, though one German police chief was quoted as saying there was no link.

I already said everything that needed to be said in the previous post, so I have nothing really to add. I just had to post this because it proves just how serious the threat is getting. Only 24 hours after a terrorist attack in one European country, we see the threat of another attack occurring in another European country. A threat based on the same ideology, an ideology that simply isn’t compatible with Europe, yet continues to have the red carpet rolled out in welcome for. Yep, we live in the Twilight Zone

Actually, I think most Twilight Zone episodes were more plausible than the insanity we live in now.

but we didn’t want to take any risks,” police spokesman Thomas Geese was quoted as saying.