Why the Left Betrayed Us

It will surprise many to learn that it was in response to our betrayal by the Right.

The rich and powerful have always exploited the rest of society, which they created the STATE to facilitate and legitimise, by deceitfully and self-deceivingly equating it with our NATION.

They, and those who identified with them for the rewards to be had, were the original Right. While the original Left were those who pressed them to show more humanity towards the people they exploited.

As the “nation state” took more definite form, there were calls for the rich and powerful to treat their compatriots as members of the same nation, to share with them, instead of exploiting them as a human resource.

This was the original idea behind “socialism”: that members of the same nation should share with each other, rather than exploit each other. Only the rich and powerful weren’t interested. All they wanted to do was preserve their power, wealth and privileges, and go on exploiting their fellow countrymen.

Many on the Left were well-intentioned in wanting to create a more equal society, but some (now the majority) misused the moral high ground they claimed for their own personal advantage, serving the STATE for the rewards to be had, rather than their PEOPLE, thus making them no better than the rich and powerful (and more despised because of their hypocrisy).

Others on the Left, reacted to the indifference of the Right to national identity and solidarity (except when they needed loyal soldiers to fight their wars), with a form of collective self-harming, promoting the destruction of their own nation through mass immigration of unrelated peoples and the creation of a multi-ethnic, as opposed to national society.

Thus, we are being betrayed by the Left and the Right, because both fail to recognise and show solidarity with their NATION. But since most people make the mistake of identifying with the STATE as their NATION, and politically with either the Left or the Right, it is a form of national self-denial and self-betrayal.

Only united can we stand and survive, as a PEOPLE and a NATION, but we are utterly divided (not even knowing who our people or nation are) and in free fall. It’s just that on a historical scale, things take time, and blinded by our own individual, narrow and short-sighted self-interests, we don’t even notice it.

It seems it will be left to those who replace us (another, hopefully, better breed of Briton) to recognise and study our fall and demise, and hopefully learn from our mistakes.

The State That's Betraying Us

The State, which poses as our nation, is betraying us – in 1001 ways, but primarily by giving citizenship to millions of 3^rd world immigrants and allowing them to settle in our already natively and unsustainably overpopulated country and subcontinent, and whose high birth rate means that within 50 years or so, they and their descendent will replace us, the indigenous population, as Britain’s ethnic majority. Britain’s ethnic identity will change from being European (with all the history that goes with it) to being “global”, post-racial and post-European, this being the unspoken ideological goal of liberal-fascism.

If that is not betrayal, I don’t know what is.

How is the STATE able to get away with betraying us like this?

Firstly, by having all who oppose it, or the ideology of “colourblindness” it is based on, condemned and dismissed as “racists”.

Not coincidentally, it is the exact but equally extreme opposite of Nazi racial ideology, which initially it was an understandable overreaction to (also to the injustice and inhumanity of Jim Crow and Apartheid), only to be consolidated is this extreme form for the sake of economic and power-political advantage, gained from claiming an absolute but spurious “moral high ground” for it.

Secondly, by deceiving us into believing that it represents our NATION, and thus into identifying with it, thereby making it a form of “self-betrayal”, which, of course, is particularly difficult to recognise and face up to.

Scottish Nationalists or Statists?

The following quote is from an article, “The United Kingdom: Disunited, we will all fall“, in today’s Telegraph:

“Scotland, . . perhaps the most mono-cultural country in Europe . . , whose population has only recently shown a slight increase after years of stagnation, wants more incomers.”

Such MADNESS suggests to me that Scotland’s so-called “nationalist” politicians are not nationalists at all, but statists, i.e. typical power-hungry politicians, merely posing as nationalists.

Genuine (rational) nationalists identify with their own PEOPLE and NATION, which are naturally rooted in shared ethnicity, culture and history (and thus a shared sense of identity and solidarity), and would thus not want immigrants (certainly not many) of quite different ethnicity, culture and history undermining their national identity, as has happened (is happening) in England.

Statists, on the other hand, identify with POWER, which they pursue even at their own people’s and nation’s expense (and ultimate destruction). They don’t care about the “colour of people’s skin”, i.e. ethnic origins, but about “the colour of MONEY” and POWER, which now necessitates embracing core liberal-fascist/statist ideology of “colourblindness”, as a spurious “moral high ground”, which denies and demonises as “racist” the natural ethnic basis of national identity.

Who or What Governs Britain?

In Tuesday’s Telegraph, Daniel Hannan asks “Who governs Britain?“, but the question should really be, WHAT governs Britain?

Modern brain science has shown that decisions are made prior to the individual becoming aware of them. We then rationalise these decisions and our behaviour in order to delude ourselves into a false sense conscious and rational control.

When it comes to our collective behaviour and decisions of the state and corporations (capital), the situation is no different – as history and our current situation bear witness to, although we rationalise them too, of course, either not recognising just how bad things are, or blaming the undeniably bad on others.

Far from being cynical and fatalistic about it, developing an understanding this, I believe, offers a means of raising our awareness and directing our behaviour along more rational, humane and enlightened lines. Currently, our collective behaviour is light years away from being any of these things, although we rationalise and deceive ourselves into believing that this is not the case.

So WHAT is it that rules us?

It is our our primordial Darwinian nature (what else?), which drives the struggle for survival and reproductive success, only now misplaced, perverted and, of course, rationalised (reduced largely to the pursuit and exercise of POWER: social, professional, political economic/financial etc.) in the artificial environment of human civilisation itself, where the STATE conflates and confounds our original intra-tribal and extra-tribal environments, which we evolved to response to very differently, posing as our tribe (or nation) on the one hand, representing the intra-tribal environment, while at the same time facilitating society's self-exploitation as an extra-tribal environment.

The British Sheeple say NO!

NO to AV (and PR)

NO to more democracy.

NO to more representative government.

NO to changing the status quo that got us into the mess we are in.

Well done! Your political masters are pleased with you.

African Archbishop of York Urges English to be More Patriotic!

and to celebrate St George’s Day.

“I have long campaigned for us to have a special holiday where we can celebrate our patron saint and all that is great about our wonderful nation.”

he is quoted as saying (Link to article).

I’m amused and very cynical about the archbishop, an African by birth and descent, presuming to identify with me, my fellow “Englishmen” (all ethnic Europeans by descent) and our “wonderful nation”.

My gut response is as if he (or anyone else I’m not comfortable with) wanted to embrace me physically: Back off! I say, and put my hands up to keep him at a distance. Which he’d better do. Otherwise – if he persists in trying to embrace me – I’m likely to hit him. Then he’ll get the message: I don’t want to be embraced, not by you – thank you very much.

Only, in this political context, if I did hit out at him, or in anyway resist his advances to embrace me, I’d be branded a “racist”.

“Patriotism is only wrong if you are not doing it in the name of the Crown . . .”

archbishop John Sentamu is further quoted as saying, which throws some light on his (I’m sure subliminal) motivations.

“In the name of the Crown”, i.e. the STATE, he is exercising his legal right as a British citizen to embrace all other British citizens as members of his own PEOPLE and NATION.

Why would he want to do that when it is obvious that we do not belong to the same PEOPLE or NATION . . ? Because identifying with the British STATE, just as identifying with the Anglican church, gives him massive personal, social and economic advantages, way and above anything he could hope to enjoy in his native Africa.

I did say that I was cynical about the archbishop’s motivations, and with good reason, I think.

Although it wasn’t my intention, this post follows on nicely from by previous post about the Darwinian nature of the Catholic church.

The Catholic Church – A Darwinian Perspective

My response to an article in today’s Telegraph on the beatification of Pope John Paul II:

“[the] sexual abuse of children by priests . . [which] he swept . . under the carpet, [was] hardly the conduct of a saint.”

Of course not. It was the conduct of someone more interested in the authority and POWER of the church he headed and so strongly and self-interestedly  identified with.

“This was the miracle that Vatican rules require for the beatification to take place at all (a second is now needed for canonisation).”

This, I think, illustrates the gullibility on which the POWER of the Catholic church depends.

“. . he did not win over the dissenters in his flock, but that didn’t stop him commanding attention and respect.”

“Flock” is an appropriate way of describing the “sheeple” whose belief in and identification with the Catholic church give it so much POWER. Although, if it works to your material advantage (as in the case of Catholic clergy and academics), you are more a shepherd than a sheep, with a vested interest in being gullible.

“ . . the enduring place in our national life of tradition and authority, [which for Catholics] the papacy continues to [serve].”

This, I suggest, reflects man’s deep and inherent tribal nature, which civilisation teaches us to suppress, deny, ridicule, trivialise or demonise (e.g. as “racist”), while at the same time manipulating and exploiting it subliminally for its own (perverted Darwinian) purposes.

Our original tribe having been usurped by the state and a money economy (civilisation), has left us with a profound emotional need for a substitute, be it the STATE itself (posing as our NATION), our religion, company, political party or ideology, football team, or whatever, all of which manipulate and exploit, but rarely truly satisfy, our need for tribal identity and loyalty.

The Problem is Our Low Birth Rate?

My response to the claim, made in a comment on my Telegraph blog (The Union Flag) that “the white man’s problem is his low birthrate.”

I couldn’t disagree more. Our low birth rate is a BLESSING. It is a tragedy that we fail to recognise that. What we need is quality, not quantity.

Our planet is already unsustainably overpopulated, certainly given the kind of lifestyles and lifestyle aspirations most people are currently pursuing or aspiring to. But never mind exceeding Earth’s carrying capacity, as we are currently doing; as a species, we need to live WELL within its limits, leaving ourselves plenty of room for manoeuvre when environmental conditions change, as they surely will.

We urgently need to stabilise and start reducing the global population – something our own, white race, is already doing. Instead of worrying about our decreasing numbers and bringing in immigrants to make up for them (which is utter madness!), we should be rejoicing at the fact, and adapting ourselves, i.e. society, to the changing demographics.

What’s happening at the moment is that Europeans are being displaced and replaced by migrating and faster breeding non-European races, which is very Darwinian, of course: survival of the fittest and all that. From a primitive Darwinian perspective, Europeans seem to be flawed, thus accounting for our absolute and relative decline in numbers, to the advantage of less flawed (dare I say, “superior”) races.

However, what from a primitive Darwinian perspective seems to be a flaw, isn’t, if we want to avoid a primitive and brutal Darwinian struggle for resources and survival with our fellow humans, which a ruthless Mother Nature would, as a matter of course, subject other, less intelligent, species to; this being the way that evolution works!

We have the knowledge and intelligence to transcend our primitive Darwinian nature and avoid this brutal struggle within our own species, but at the moment it doesn’t look as though we are going to use them, because of our blindness to the way in which our Darwinian drive for survival and reproductive success, misplaced in the artificial environment of human civilisation itself, has been perverted to a struggle for individual advantage, POWER and riches.

The Union Flag

A Union flag’s for life, not just for the wedding, writes Melissa Kite in her blog. “If only we could bottle that sense of [national] unity and keep it going a bit longer”, she goes on to say. This is my response:

There was a time when the Union Flag for me too was a symbol of the NATION I identified with as my own, but not any more – not since realising, in a painful and draw-out process of disillusionment, that the MADNESS of mass immigration, into our already, natively and unsustainably, overpopulated country, and the multi-ethnic society it has given rise to (with the indigenous population predicted to become a minority within 50 years!), has destroyed the sense of shared identity I once had with my fellow Britons.

National identity used to have substance to it, despite its abuse and exploitation by our ruling elites, but not any more. It’s just a self-deception that we are obliged, or reasons to STATE and power politics, to persist in for lack of an alternative. As in America, everyone has their own understanding of what the NATION means, without any genuine consensus. There is nothing that binds us all together as a nation other than our dependency (material and emotional) on the mercenary British STATE. What we have is a feigned nation and feigned unity, as will become apparent when put to the test.

For me, the Union flag has become a symbol of a proprietary, mercenary and multi-ethnic British STATE (deceitfully posing as our nation) whose primary purpose is to facilitate “society’s” self-exploitation to the advantage of power, wealth, privilege, “talent” and now, paradoxically, the “disadvantaged” (including millions of 3rd world immigrants).

At the moment we lack an alternative to this pseudo-nation state of ours, but we urgently need to create one, before the lie we are living turns into a nightmare. The way to go about it is peacefully and grass-roots-democratically. We also need to recognise and develop an understanding of the perverted Darwinian nature of our situation, which also explains the madness and self-deception that prevents us from recognising it.