Eugenics disguised as Anti-Racism

In an article in last Friday's Guardian (LINK), Jonathan Freedland writes about EUGENICS as the “skeleton in the Left's closet,” pointing out how many prominent and still revered members of the Left were, before the Nazis gave it a bad name, very enthusiastic about it and its application to society.

There are two points I want to make. One in defence of EUGENICS, as a responsibility that human populations (societies) must sooner or later face up if they don't want to degenerate over time, as they most certainly will without natural selection (which one might equally well call “natural eugenics”) to do the job for us. It is a difficult, dilemmacal, call, which was rushed into and made a mess of, before the Nazis spoiled things entirely, but not one that society can carry on ignoring (or demonising and suppressing) indefinitely – at least, not without dire consequences.

The other point I want to make is that the Left has in fact succeeded in getting the state to adopt an ideology (not coincidentally, the exact but equally extreme opposite of Nazi racial ideology) and policies (especially in respect to immigration) which follow from it, which effectively amounts to a program of EUGENICS: when you bring children of different race together in the same school, many will inevitably go on to intermarry and create a different race. From two or more different races a single mixed race will emerge.

Thus far, this has not been recognised as a form of EUGENICS, but it is high time it was.

The present day Left (including so-called “progressives”, liberals and Jonathan Freedland himself, I imagine), will vigorously deny that mixed-race schools are a form eugenics, but I don't really see how they can be seen as anything else. We should at least be having a debate about it, which currently we are not. It's a taboo issue. Not having mix-race schools is seen (by the Left) as a form of Apartheid and thus “racist”.

Thus the Left have succeeded in implementing their program of EUGENICS, designed to create another, presumably better (non-white), breed of Briton (European and American) by disguising it in the garb (and ideology) of anti-Apartheid and ANTI-RACISM.

What are the Left's motivations for this clandestine program of EUGENICS?

I have no direct evidence of what they are, but it is pretty safe to say, I think, that they are mixed and largely subconscious. When they refute my suggestion of eugenics, most, I am sure, are being quite sincere. Ideologically, eugenics is as abhorrent to them as Apartheid and racism, which thus blinds them to the reality of the eugenics being implicit in their racial (extreme anti-Nazi) ideology of “colour-blindness” and “One-Human-Racism”.

Their underlying motivation, I suggest, is the desire to be morally upright (nothing wrong with that), which, however, all too easily becomes a desire to be “morally superior”, especially when there are huge rewards to be had in terms of social status and political power, which is why, of course, the state itself has embraced the same ideology, just as it did Church ideology in medieval times.

There are 3 principal forms of state POWER: moral authority, money and military might, all of which are necessary, but also subject to much abuse. The more aware we are of such abuse and the better we understand it (necessarily from a human-evolutionary, i.e. Darwinian, perspective), the better we will be able to limit, if not eliminate it entirely.

Multiculturalism's Toxic Legacy

This post is in response to the following article in yesterday's Telegraph, Multiculturalism has left Britain with a toxic legacy:

"Labour ministers . . . thought the only issue would be racism from the local population."

Which they could then exploit to massive power-political advantage by claiming "colour-blindness" and the authority of the moral high ground for themselves, with Conservative politicians, if they didn't want to be branded "racist " themselves, having no choice but to follow suit.

It is exactly the same power-political strategy used by the medieval church to claim moral authority for itself, which it was able to use to exert control not just over the peasantry, but over the aristocracy as well.

Back then it was belief in church ideology that was demanded, now it is belief in the ideology of "colour-blindness" or "One-Human-Racism", which, not coincidentally, is the exact but equally extreme opposite

Anders Breivik's (In)sanity?

My response to an article, Anders Behring Breivik is not insane, in today’s Telegraph:

No one in their right mind could have any sympathy for what Breivik did (killing so many innocent people), which was psychopathic, but many of us have a lot of sympathy for what motivated him, which, if I’ve understood him correctly, is the betrayal of western Europe’s indigenous peoples by their own governments, by allowing mass immigration into our already, natively and unsustainably, overpopulated subcontinent, and destroying the long-standing and natural ethnic basis of our national identities.

All these people won’t have died in vain if, instead of scapegoating it onto a madman, we face up to this self-betrayal and develop and understanding of it, before it leads to far greater damage and death tolls.

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.

Immigration & Parliamentary Betrayal

My response to David Cameron’s latest speech on immigration, in which he is reported as saying:

“. . mass immigration has led to ‘discomfort and disjointedness’ in neighbourhoods because some migrants have been unwilling to integrate or learn English.”

And so the LIE is perpetuated: if only immigrants would “integrate” and learn English, everything would be honky dory. No mention of the fact that mass immigration has destroyed the natural ethnic basis of our national identity, or that Britain’s indigenous population is predicted to become an “ethnic minority” in its ancestral homeland within the next 50 years!

Not that I’m surprised. To admit that would be to admit that the STATE and Parliament themselves have betrayed the very people they were supposed to serve.

How could they – how do they still – get away with such a betrayal? Because it’s a form of self-betrayal, in which we are ALL implicated, and thus rationalise and hide from ourselves, subconsciously, as a form of collective, self-induced, posthypnotic suggestion.

Thus, there is no point in pointing the finger of blame – least of all, at immigrants. Instead, we need to wake up from the trance we are under, recognise what has happened and develop an understanding of it.

In the meantime, there’s very little any mainstream politician can do. Like the economy – whether socialist or capitalist – mass immigration is based on an ideology, which currently we don’t even recognise as such.

Nothing will change until we change the ideology, which, not coincidentally, is the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology, which initially it was an understandable overreaction to (as well as to the injustice and inhumanity of Jim Crow and Apartheid) - and would have us believe, it is the ONLY alternative to -, before being consolidated in its present extreme form by economic and political opportunism, especially by the Left, who used it to claim a spurious “moral high ground” for themselves, along with the massive power-political advantages that go with it (much as, in its own way, the medieval Church did).

Paradigm Lost, Paradigm Gained

We are trapped in a paradigm which prevents us recognising and facing up to the two principal existential problems now threatening to put a premature end to our civilisation: 1) the inherent non-sustainability of rapacious, consumer-capitalism, and 2) the liberal-fascist/statist ideology (not coincidentally, the exact, but equally extreme, opposite of Nazi racial ideology) used to impose the madness of mass immigration and multi-ethnic society on us, by equating the natural ethnic basis of national identity with “racism”.

This paradigm (which we urgently need to “lose”, i.e. replace with a more realistic, rational, humane and sustainable paradigm) equates STATE and NATION, so that however the former chooses to define itself (whether racially “pure”, like the Nazi state, or “multi-ethnic” like the liberal-fascist state) it remains a NATION, with a legitimate claim to its citizens’ loyalty.

The truth, however, is that the STATE is not our NATION, and never was, but only poses as such, in order to fulfil its perverted Darwinian purpose of facilitating “society’s” self-exploitation as a human environment, to the advantage of power, wealth, privilege and now, of course, “talent”.

The STATE and consumer-capitalism are mutually dependent on each other, and on the madness of perpetual economic growth, to provide ever-increasing material wealth for individuals and revenue stream for the state, without which the mercenary democratic STATE cannot survive, because of its vassals (voters and party donors) insatiable demands. The obvious fact that such a system is inherently unsustainable (as well as unjust and inhumane), on our finite, vulnerable and overpopulated planet, is simply ignored, as if under some form of collective post-hypnotic suggestion, because trapped in the existing socio-economic paradigm.

The STATE, has always demonised and suppressed its subjects inherent tribal nature and its free and spontaneous expression, in order to co-opt, manipulate and exploit it for its own ends. This is what the Nazi state did in one particularly extreme and unpleasant form; it is also what our own liberal-fascist state is currently doing in an oppositely extreme and (not so obviously) unpleasant form. It brings different races and ethnicities together in the name of DIVERSITY, which it then destroys, i.e. homogenises, in the melting pot of the multi-ethnic state.

The alternative paradigm is a new, grass-roots-democratic, Nationalism of Good Nationalists, as opposed to the state nationalism we have only known up until now. A nationalism based on “love of ones own (nation) and respect for others”. It’s a paradigm in harmony with our healthy (as opposed to perverted) Darwinian and tribal nature.

Being grass-roots-democratic, it is up to US work out the details. So what are we waiting for?

It goes without saying, I hope, that this revolution, i.e. change of paradigm, must, if it is to succeed, proceed peacefully. It’s a revolution which will take place in our heads and hearts, rather than on the streets.