En poursuivant votre navigation sur ce site, vous acceptez l'utilisation de cookies. Ces derniers assurent le bon fonctionnement de nos services. En savoir plus.

lundi, 06 mai 2013

The Moral Hollowness of the Elites


The Moral Hollowness of the Elites

Ex: http://www.alternativeright.com/

The Establishment presents itself as moral and opposed to low things like "prejudice," "narrow-mindedness," and "bigotry." This helps create a sense of arrogance that prevents them from questioning whether they have actually created a multiracial utopia or not. They are prejudiced, but against their own people. Furthermore, their unrealistic and irrational policies have brought about the very same situation that the ideology of the last sixty years was designed to prevent.

The dominant ideology since the Second World War has been multiracialism with variants like "anti-racism," enthusiasm for open borders, and other variations which are idealistic and progressive. The zealots for immigration have justified it by lies like "the economy needs it" or blaming working people, who "won't do the dirty jobs"! 

In the 1960s the New Left took over Liberalism. They kept the name but changed the content. For example, and this is profoundly important, individual rights were changed to group rights, which introduced totalitarian thinking, as group rights gave minority ("victim") groups preferential treatment over the host population ("the oppressors"). The watchwords of The New Left were “everything is political,” which reveals their totalitarian approach, and “we must change attitudes,” which uncloaks their social engineering agenda. Liberalism was effectively changed to a form of Marxist totalitarianism.

The New Left were not working-class socialists but Bourgeois-Socialists, with middle-class students serving as the apparatchiks. They eschewed economics for identity politics, which was effectively an inverse of Hitler's racial superiority ideology, as they promoted ethnic minorities, gypsies, and homosexuals - all groups that had the inverse endorsement of Hitler's disdain. These new Left Liberals were authoritarian where Classic Liberals genuinely believed in rights. The New Left took over universities in 1968 and nearly brought the French government down with riots in Paris. The London School of Economics and Berkeley in the US suffered similar occupations. Many leaders of New Left/Trotskyist groups, like Tariq Ali, then went on to become part of the new Establishment.

Up to the 1960s Liberals had undermined Western nations with guilt, but from then on it changed to hatred of their own people. Multiracialism has the same structure as Nazism, except Whites became the target group in place of Jews. It was a reaction to Hitler's attempt to exterminate European Jews and to stop that happening again. The people the Nazis persecuted were almost deified, while Whites became the scapegoats when things went wrong, as they always do now, under the term “racism.”

The New Left project was to destroy existing communities, especially the working-class communities that supported the old moderate Socialists, while using the term "communities" for their new constituency groups, the “Black” and “gay”communities.

The individual subjects of classic Liberalism were transformed into representatives of favoured groups, like “single mothers,” “lesbians,” “gays,” and “alternative life-styles.” Traditional units of organization, like the family and community, were opposed, and in their place personal freedom and sexual emancipation were promoted with little concern for the consequent unhappiness, loneliness, and deprivation. Abstract justification was all; practical consequences nothing. Schools' curricula were feminised and young White men were denied the invigoration of competition and suitable male role models.

The Liberal capitulation

This movement would have got anywhere without the support of major popular musicians of the time, like Bob Dylan and The Beatles. John Lennon donated money to the IRA and Black Panthers.

William Rees-Mogg, editor of The Times, defended Mick Jagger and Keith Richards who were on drugs charges in an infamous and cowardly article, “Who breaks a butterfly on a wheel?”  In 1971 the state capitulated to the convicted editors of the counter cultural OZ magazine when the Lord Chief Justice of England, Lord Widgery had them brought from prison and told them that if they agreed to stop working on the magazine their appeal would be certain to succeed, which is exactly what happened, making them "martyrs who had suffered nothing" and effectively mocking the remnants of conservative power in the state.

Classical Liberals believed in rights for ethnic people and homosexuals, but Cultural Marxists instead gave them preferential treatment and started moves to to dispossess and dehumanise Whites.

This shift in the 1960s can be characterized as a change from fighting for racial equality to dehumanising Whites as haters. The term “racist” replaced “racialist.” In a book review for The Salisbury Review of Spring 2003, Sir Alfred Sherman, former speech writer for Mrs Thatcher and leader writer for the Daily Telegraph, recalled the process at work in parts of London:

I was horrified. My natural vague sympathies for the immigrants, strangers in a foreign land, was replaced by strong but hopeless sympathy for the British victims of mass immigration, whose home areas were being occupied. I was made aware of a disquieting evolution in “Establishment” attitudes towards what they called immigration or race relations and I dubbed “colonialisation.” The well-being and rights of immigrants and ethnic minorities had become paramount. The British working classes, hitherto the object of demonstrative solicitude by particularly the New Establishment on the left, but the working classes had acquired new status as the enemy, damned by the all-purpose pejorative “racists."


In education Liberals allowed free expression within Liberal parameters. The style of essay writing changed to favour cultural relativism, with students asked to consider the pros and cons of a case, rather than rights and wrongs. Cultural Marxists also proceeded to remove many subjects from the curriculum, especially conventional history, because forgetting our common roots and shared ancestry would make it easier for them to socially engineer us into a new people ready for their utopia. The process of dumbing-down and reducing vocabulary, so that people could only think what the elites want them to, was also favoured.

The Public Abasement of Dissidents

Cultural Marxism derived much from Chairman Mao's Little Red Book, a fashionable item for middle-class students from the 1960s onward. Mentors like Herbert Marcuse and Eric Hobsbawm were open admirers of Stalin. In Marxist China and the Soviet Union dissent was typically dealt with through public show trials, where the victims publicly abased themselves and confessed their crimes. In contemporary Britain this persecution role is now in the hands of the media.

In 2007, Dr. James Watson, the 79-year-old geneticist who, with Francis Crick, discovered the structure of DNA, and who is regarded as one of the great scientists of his time, was persecuted for telling the Sunday Times that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really." He also said there was a natural desire that all human beings should be equal but "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true." He claimed the genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence would be found within a decade.

The British establishment's agency of inquisition, the Equality and Human Rights Commission, responded, saying it was studying Dr Watson's remarks "in full." Politicians moved to persecute him: "It is a shame that a man with a record of scientific distinction should see his work overshadowed by his own irrational prejudices," opined David Lammy, the Skills Minister.

The loathsome mayor of London Ken Livingstone said, "Such ignorant comments...are utterly offensive and give succour to the most backward in our society." The Science Museum cancelled a sell-out meeting it had planned to hold to honour Watson on the grounds that his remarks had gone "beyond the point of acceptable debate." Several other centres scheduled to host his talks followed suit. What a scientific argument! His employers, the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in Long Island suspended him as chancellor. Scientist Richard Dawkins saw the real issue:

What is ethically wrong is the hounding, by what can only be described as an illiberal and intolerant "thought police," of one of the most distinguished scientists of our time, out of the Science Museum, and maybe out of the laboratory that he has devoted much of his life to, building up a world-class reputation.

Around the same time "celebrity" Jade Goody had the "wrong attitude" to Indian film star, Shilpa Shetty, in Celebrity Big Brother, and was accused of racist bullying. The programme is based on getting an assortment of diverse characters into a house and titillating the viewers to keep the viewing figures up, with bullying and personality clashes. This is the whole attraction.

Following the clash Goody was presented as "common" and a "chav,"  a derogatory term for White working class Britons, while Shetty was made into something of a saint. This set the scene for the inevitable public kowtowing and abasement before the gods of multiculturalism. Jade kept apologising, confessing publicly that she was disgusted with herself - the Cultural Marxist rulers version of a Soviet show trial.

She had to be broken in public, made to repent and show abject contrition. Jade had some Afro-Caribbean ancestry. An honest person would look for a cause other than racism, like class envy or bad manners, but there is an ideology at work which imposes the same explanation on different situations – anti-White racism.

The British state is now persecuting a dissident, Emma West. The incident that got West persecuted was a film of her being abusive on a tram against multiracialism in general but to no one in particular. This was 18 months ago and the case has since been delayed, with five scheduled hearings cancelled, not for practical or legal reasons, but because West has not suitably abased herself and maintains a plea of not guilty. West is a danger to the authorities because pleading not guilty raises the threat of the case becoming a public debate and the state wants to maintain the illusion that everyone agrees with mass immigration apart from a few nutters.

The problems we are facing stem from the moral code imposed by the Enlightenment and the replacement of an aristocratic class, based on blood and land, with secular elites united by ideology with membership dependent on thinking and saying the right things - an Ideological Caste - with pretensions to morality based on abstractions. The climatic moment was the French Revolution. Even then, the perceptive French philosopher Joseph De Maistre analysed the problem in Considérations sur la France in 1797:

I will simply point out the error of principle that has provided the foundation of this constitution and that has led the French astray since the first moment of their revolution.
The constitution of 1795, like its predecessors, has been drawn up for Man. Now, there is no such thing in the world as Man. In the course of my life, I have seen Frenchmen, Italians, Russians, etc. I am even aware, thanks to Montesquieu, that one can be a Persian. But, as for Man, I declare that I have never met him in my life. If he exists, I certainly have no knowledge of him.
....This constitution is capable of being applied to all human communities from China to Geneva. But a constitution which is made for all nations is made for none: it is a pure abstraction, a school exercise whose purpose is to exercise the mind in accordance with a hypothetical ideal, and which ought to be addressed to Man, in the imaginary places which he inhabits....
What is a constitution? Is it not the solution to the following problem: to find the laws that are fitting for a particular nation, given its population, its customs, its religion, its geographical situation, its political relations, its wealth, and its good and bad qualities?
Now, this problem is not addressed at all by the Constitution of 1795, which is concerned only with Man.

Restructuring  Peoples' Thinking

In accordance with such abstractions and the moral pretensions of those who enforce them, we are being socially engineered and traditional ways of thinking systematically broken down.  Another example: The television programme Gypsy Wars contrasted a local woman and travellers who had invaded her land. They showed her as a representative of us but then presented the travellers in such a way as to make her attitudes seem mistaken, intolerant, and extreme.

They edited out all the young Gypsy men, because they are aggressive and would garner support for the woman; the life of the village threatened by the travellers was not shown, because that is appealing and viewers would sympathise with the woman. Also, the woman was selected because she is not typical of rural people, but a bit eccentric and someone who could be set up as the aggressor even though she was in fact the victim. When the police had to evict the travellers from Dale Farm in accordance with British law, the media again showed no men. This program was a casebook study of how television restructures people's thoughts to fit them into an anti-British ideology.

How do we counter the dominant ideology?

People follow the dominant elites because they appear strong and successful, and many who agree with us vote for the dominant parties for that reason. A conviction based on the knowledge that they follow in the steps of great national figures would help counter that disadvantage. For this reason it is important to emphasize traditions of opposition to multiculturalism and the fact that most of the great and the good in history have been on our side in one way or another

By linking to traditions, our people link with great historical figures, like Queen Elizabeth I and Lord Palmerston, who are role-models, as are Enoch Powell, the great 5th Marquess of Salisbury, who fought against immigration, and Sir Winston Churchill, who tried to introduce a Bill to control immigration in 1955 and wanted to fight the 1955 general election under the slogan "Keep England White."

In the US they have the precedent of Eisenhower's Operation Wetback. In 1949 the Border Patrol seized nearly 280,000 illegal immigrants. By 1953, the numbers had increased to over than 865,000, and the U.S. government had to do something about it. In 1954, agents found over one million illegal immigrants. 

The ideology of multiracialism was supposedly a reaction to Hitler's attempted extermination of European Jews, and its aim was to ensure that genocide would never happen again. But it is happening again, and it is being caused by the Western elites who pledged to stamp it out. They have been using every form of manipulation, intimidation, corruption, brainwashing, and bullying at their command. But the evils they employ in pursuit of a supposed "good" have become instead evils for the sake of evil.

Les commentaires sont fermés.