Darren Osborne and the Finsbury Mosque Incident: A Rebellion against the Idea that Revenge Couldn’t Even Be Contemplated

Andrew Joyce, Ph.D.


At time of this writing, the Left and the British state are busily engaged in portraying a solitary, frustrated, drunken son of Albion as that great figure of myth — the ‘right wing extremist.’ By most accounts Darren Osborne is an everyman figure, a married father of four who enjoys his beer and the quiet life of the suburban lower middle class. In images displayed by the media, green weeds split the ground just outside his otherwise tidy home, while a police officer stands at the gate of a small, neat, garden fence. It’s the kind of home you’d walk past and not look at twice; a home like your own. Like a lot of men his age, Osborne appears to have grumbled occasionally at ‘the Muslims,’ and bristled at the growing number of Islamic terrorist attacks occurring in his nation. But there was nothing to suggest he might be a ‘man of action.’ He was not a member of any nationalist organization. He had no blog, no history of activism. The leader of the South Wales National Front, Adam Lloyd, told the press that Osborne “is not known to any of us here in South Wales National Front, and to our knowledge is not and never has been a member.” Darren Osborne surprised ‘the movement’ with his actions in Finsbury, though I suspect he surprised himself even more.

Modern ‘society’ is expert at controlling the behavior of men — in particular, the expectations, responsibilities, and burdens of the consumer society, propped up by mortgage and credit card usury. Shackled from cradle to grave. For many people, leaving education is merely the start of a succession of races to pay the bills each month. No grander purpose or vision lies beyond this bottom line. A wife may come and go, homes are bought and debts incurred, children are born in order that they too might one day begin the same race.

Some might say that this has always been the case, and in some respects they are correct. However, the last five decades have witnessed the steady politicization of the working environment, and this is unique. Being socially and politically compliant became a more important part of life than at any time in history. In the past, there always existed ‘the frontier’ or beyond. There was thus always a place to go for ‘the man with a cause,’ the noble outlaw. The Icelandic Sagas, which in many respects exalt this type of man, are replete with individuals and individualism — tales of people who wanted more from life than existing social systems offered, and so set forth into new lands or waged war on the status quo in old ones.

The globalized world of the 21st century offers no frontier. Nowhere is free of the airport, the convenience store, the security camera, the detective, or the State. The world, as they say, is getting smaller, not bigger. Only the born slave could see this as a good thing. Today, there is no place for rebellion to be displaced to, and the State maintains a greater monopoly on the use of force than at any time in history. In this context, conformity has become endemic. Rebellion of even the most mediocre kind now results in ejection from employment and disaster in the race to pay those all-important bills. Loss of job can result in loss of home, and in many cases family. At some point in recent times, a man’s ability to conform and remain silent became the fulcrum upon which his entire personal fate would rest. And because of this, the vast majority of men remain silent and still when it comes to anything meaningful. Robinson Jeffers, the great ‘inhumanist’ poet of the early 20th century wrote of this malaise in ‘Decaying Lambskins’:

Because we are not proud but wearily ashamed of this peak of
time. What is noble in us, to kindle
The imagination of a future age? We shall seem a race of cheap
Fausts, vulgar magicians.
What men have we to show them? but inventions and appliances.
Not men but populations, mass-men; not life
But amusements; not health but medicines.

Never in history has European man been more compliant to the wishes of his overseers, or even his peers. Life expectancy has increased, but is life being truly lived? Years slip by with no truly special achievement. The hair becomes more gray, and the waistline expands. Despondency sets in. Some join the ranks of the silent epidemic of White middle aged males taking their own lives. Mass immigration, Islamic terror, and the rape of White children occurs amidst this bewildering, infuriating inertia. All of this occurred to me as I watched phone-recorded images of Darren Osborne prior to being bundled into the back of a police van. In one clip he shouts ‘Kill Me’ to the Muslims surrounding him. Semi-drunk, he appears possessed of both physical and mental pain. I believe that Osborne’s actions were indeed an act of revenge, but they were perhaps foremost an act of rebellion — a rebellion against the idea that revenge couldn’t even be contemplated; a rebellion against inertia and the silent suffering of inaction.

I’ve written previously that the figure of the ‘right wing extremist’ is largely mythical. Not only is this true in terms of the vulgar exaggeration of the threat of violence from the Right, but also because ’extremism’ is itself merely an invention of the late 20th-century Liberal state, which hubristically lays claim to define what is normal and natural. The Liberal state sees itself as devoid of ideology, and the ultimate in benevolent neutrality. Just as the Liberal state is founded on this lie, so the concept of ‘extremism’ is a lie. There isn’t even anything ‘extreme’ about Islamism — it simply is, and is true to its own primitive nature. It would be more honest for us to simply call Islamists ‘Muslims’ than to call them ‘extremists.’

I could probably argue that the Liberal state is itself ‘extremist’ because it locks people in jail for years for leaving sandwiches outside mosques, but that would be playing their game. A more Social Darwinist view of modern politics and the devices of violence and coercion would be to suggest that the field is wide open and all players will play to their strengths. The only oddity about it all is that Liberalism has forgotten that it rests on ‘the shoulders of giants’ who jailed, were jailed, killed, or were killed to in order to pave its way into government and statehood. Without ‘extremists’ Liberalism wouldn’t exist today.

Peace and tolerance are the trump cards of the status quo. The man with pockets full of poker chips is the man most likely to want to call an end to the evening’s game. Liberalism has what it wants, and it has a population too terrified and distracted by the banalities of modern life to ‘look back in anger.’ When you hear a politician or public figure utter the refrain that this or that attack was “an attack on all of us,” what they mean is that someone has dared to suggest that the poker game isn’t over yet; that the chips are still in play. Liberalism is facilitating multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is facilitating the demographic decline of our people. We cannot long endure the status quo. As things worsen, we will very probably see more examples of the frustration of the everyman boiling over.

However, Liberalism cannot accept that it is pushing ordinary people to the edge. Thus, Osborne the frustrated everyman is being reconstructed as Osborne the right-wing terrorist. It’s a narrative resting on very poor foundations, but the status quo is milking the incident in Finsbury for every drop of ideological value. Owen Jones, a repugnant homosexual journalist at The Guardian has written: “Britain’s far right is desperate, angry, cornered, and dangerous, as the Finsbury Park atrocity may well show. In just a year, the number of far-right extremists referred to the government has jumped by nearly a third. Social media abounds with frothing far-right fanatics, screaming about betrayal and vengeance. Both Muslims and the left are firmly in their sights — and we urgently need a strategy to deal with it.”

Jones, like many pathological liars on the Left, is being disingenuous to say the least. The ‘government referrals’ Jones refers to are in relation to the UK’s ‘Prevent’ program, which is supposed to catch and ‘re-educate’ youngsters at risk of developing ‘extremist’ attitudes. In a move intended to make the program look less ‘racist,’ vast efforts were expended to declare the non-violent nationalist group ‘National Action’ a terrorist group, and therefore pave the way to sweep up its young members in an effort to massage Prevent’s ethnicity figures. In truth, so-called ‘right wing extremists’ comprised just 8% of terror arrests last year, and were almost non-existent at the charging and conviction stages — suggesting that the legal system is deliberately targeting innocent Whites for arrest on very weak suspicions in an effort to massage its figures and make Muslims look slightly better.

Jones may truly believe the lies he tells, though he has a history of bending narratives in accordance with his own ideological preferences. In one of the funniest incidents ever recorded on a live news broadcast, Jones once got into an argument with another journalist who uttered the familiar refrain that “it was an attack on us all.” Jones is normally full of such banalities, but in this particular case the incident in question was the Orlando massacre. Because, in this instance, Jones felt that there was a more personal sense of victimhood to be gained from claiming Orlando as a specifically ‘homophobic’ attack, he began arguing against the ‘attack on us all’ narrative on the grounds that it was clearly an attack on gays — only to be rebutted by the increasingly zealous virtue-signaling of the host. Jones eventually lost his composure completely, walking off set because of the host’s insistence that the attack in Orlando was an “attack on us all” and not just an attack on homosexuals. It really has to be seen to be believed, but this is Left-Liberalism in a nutshell. It constantly shapes its own narratives according to its own perceived needs or preferences.

Amber Rudd, the British Home Secretary, is another shaper of narratives and a quintessential member of the hostile elite. Although it appears to be open season on native Britons, Rudd has repeatedly made strenuous efforts to grant special privileges and protections to both Jews and Muslims. In March, Rudd pledged £13.4 million in taxpayer’s money to fund security measures at Jewish schools and community establishments, promising to protect the Jewish community against anti-Semitism. Rudd apparently said to a meeting of Jews: “We are doing what we can to confine anti-Semitism to the history books. If you feel threatened we will listen to you, and if you are victimized we will defend you,”

In the aftermath of Darren Osborne’s act of desperation, Rudd wrote an op-ed in The Guardian in which she declared: British Muslims Deserve Full Protection, and They Will Get It. Rudd stated: “Muslims must feel safe and we are working together to tackle hate crime as well as all forms of extremism. … Sadly, indicative figures suggest that over half of those who experience hate because of their religion are Muslim.” As well as promising at least £2.4 million for the protection of mosques, Rudd boasted that she had proscribed National Action, “the first extreme rightwing group to be banned as a terrorist organization.”

Of course, the offering of special protections to Jews by elites and the State has long historical precedent. The yellow badge identifying the Jew originated in medieval times as a way of making it easier for the King’s men to spot and protect Jews — the King’s usurers and tax collectors. Along with disarming the populace, special protection is one of the main reasons why Jews are strongly attracted to, and supportive of, the idea of strong central government. The offering of similar privileges and protections to Muslims is relatively new, but should be seen as indicating the increasing alienation of native government/State elites from their own populations. Our elites (government, media, business) have sold their souls to the Devil of globalization, and Whites are now regarded as mere interchangeable chattel, or worse. To be sure, you will be tolerated and allowed to go slowly extinct if you carry on the kind of dull, soulless existence described at the outset of this article. But the problem with Whites, as many globalists know, is that they still have, on occasion, the tendency to behave as they did in the Icelandic Sagas — to seek freedom and a new path; to reject tyranny and injustice; to seek their own piece of land and refuse to be bought off with anything less. Strong central government is anathema to the European, especially when there is no frontier, or ‘New World,’ that he might escape to if he is unsatisfied.

At time of writing, Darren Osborne has been charged with terrorism offenses, a move that has been justified on the dubious reasoning that his actions were in aid of a political cause. This is tenuous indeed. Based on the evidence that has emerged thus far, Osborne does not appear to have adhered to any kind of systematic ideology, let alone advocated any coherent social or political program. The only charge that could conceivably match his crime is that of religiously aggravated attempted murder — a serious charge, but not the terrorism charge that would in all probability ensure he never sees another day beyond prison walls. The real, deeper, reason why Osborne has been charged with a political offense is because his actions were a political affront to the multicultural agenda and the Left-Liberal, globalist state, and must necessarily be reconstructed as systematically ‘racist,’ ‘neo-Nazi’ or ‘far right.’ As time progresses and things worsen, we should expect more and more relatively ordinary, unaffiliated, and frustrated people to act against this system, and to undergo similar reconstructions. There were will more arrests of innocent Whites. More figures will be massaged. More lies will be told, and more money will be spent on protecting everyone but the rightful heirs to these lands.

But things are beginning to change. Across the West storm clouds are gathering. I believe that the time will soon be at hand when we can prove the poet Jeffers wrong — that we are more than cheap Fausts and vulgar magicians; that we are men and not just populations; that we desire life and not just amusements.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks

61 Comments to "Darren Osborne and the Finsbury Mosque Incident: A Rebellion against the Idea that Revenge Couldn’t Even Be Contemplated"

  1. June 21, 2017 - 8:35 am | Permalink

    I feel like crying when I read this article. As a 70 yo woman losing her home it’s truth is shattering. It is a crime now to protect our selves and our home from the tribe. The Jewish criminals against the whole Earth. Who have destroyed Muslim countries to drive them into Europe to destroy our future, our children’s and grandchildren’s future. And our “governments” that have made it a crime to defend ourselves!

  2. Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
    June 21, 2017 - 9:46 am | Permalink

    There were more arrests of innocent Whites. [sic]

    They could not arrest the greatest of them all, Dominique Venner.

  3. Ironsides's Gravatar Ironsides
    June 21, 2017 - 11:04 am | Permalink

    A rousing conclusion. Bravo!

  4. R. Smith's Gravatar R. Smith
    June 21, 2017 - 12:18 pm | Permalink

    I cannot remember a time when I said I approved of every word in an article but this is the once. War is coming to Europe, the knights of multiracialism like Tommy Robinson and Paul Joseph Watson will fight the Muslims on behalf of the Jews, the minorities and the homosexuals while we the ethno-nationalists will save our swords to drive out the Jews and their 3rd world imports the Hindus, Sikhs and blacks. The final battle of that war will be against the civic nationalist cucks like Robinson and their dream of a brown Europe.

    • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
      June 21, 2017 - 4:05 pm | Permalink

      @ R. Smith

      This is your fantasy dream, not a rational analysis of the predicament. The only practical effect of its publication is to give the proponents of “a brown Europe” a further excuse to scour the internet and impose precautionary police-state controls.

      In the UK the sole effect of the murders of Stephen Lawrence and Jo Cox, and the recent mosque attack, in the UK has been to strengthen the opponents of “white nationalism” by astute propaganda, massive funds and increased repressive legislation.

      Such actions, including attacks on people like “Robinson”, will not dislodge the actual masters of the system any more than left-wing anarchists smashing shop windows made any difference to Wall Street, the City, or Frankfurt. Like some computer war game or a Nazi Zombie Horror Movie, such ideas in modern circumstances may satisfy a subjective emotion, and a lurid imagination about “swords” driving out all the Jews, Hindus, Sikhs and blacks, but do nothing effective to buck the system.

      • Franks&Beans's Gravatar Franks&Beans
        June 25, 2017 - 2:39 am | Permalink

        @ David Ashton,

        I do not really get why you are so upset by R. Smith’s comment about driving out Hindus and sikhs by the sword. It may come to that. Many people may think that the Hindus and Sikhs and also asians are all peaceful, but they are against western civilization in the sense that they fail to assimilate, have their own ghettos and also vote for parties that are against the interests of whites. Greville Janner was one politician the Hindus in Leicester kept on voting for and he was very anti British. I got all this from this website. Greville even imported many of these Hindus to the UK to be his voters. A few may stay, but depending on if they are 100% with the west and its interests, but 99% of them have to leave. So the mods here need to stop getting their knickers in a twist when someone states the obvious.

        • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
          June 28, 2017 - 2:54 am | Permalink

          R.Smith – First of all just to mention that Tommy Robinson’s Twitter really is a fantastic site for news and opinion about the enemy of globalists and extremist muslims. (All my phrases are careful ones) This man Robinson is doing more than anyone else to waken the patriotic side of the British people. But because he does not tick all your boxes, you are hostile to him. He does not tick your Jew box the right way so you regard him as cuck or enemy. Give the man a break – he has no academic education and his specialism is the threat from Islam. Yet whilst being ‘ignorant and uneducated’ he has educated himself in his specialist field so well that he wiped the floor last week in his live TV debate with the MSM man Piers-show-some-damn-respect-for-Islam-Morgan. The MSM threw everything at him and he won – one uneducated man against the best the educated left could muster against him. The Piers Morgan interview is big news in Britain and despite all the newspapers rubbishing him, Robinson’s Twitter followers continue to increase. His book ‘Enemy of the State’ whilst showing he is no master of prose, is nevertheless number 1 best seller now in Britain on Amazon.

          The muslim extremists (carefully chosen phrasing) are being helped by the left/globalists – and so are lefty Jews also helping the gloablists. So we have three enemies: 1) muslim extremists 2) lefty Jews 3) gloablists/lefties.

          We all have different opinions about which is the number one enemy. I tend to 3), and also I think that 1) starting to kick off in the West is making people take sides and see that 3) are the enemy within, whereas I know others who read this site tend to 2). I like this site not because of 2) so much (although this is important and also explains so much) but rather because Kevin MacDonald is the only important and influential academic who is able to explain everything that is happening to the West. I refer to his theories of individualism and ethno-centrism and their basis in the genes. His approach views humans as having animal behaviour that is controlled by our wiring/genes, and he looks for the origin of behaviour patterns in the past migration and spread of humans around the globe, with a strong emphasis on how natural selection and environment shape the differences between races. This explains far more than theories about bankers taking over the world, and is a far better theory to explain events than just saying global elites just want power and control and money (if this was the motive, the lefty Jews would not seek to bring down the countries that are the source of their wealth and security). It explains more if you consider these globalists as being controlled by their wiring/genes that were laid down over thousands of years. (If globalists just want power and money, why do they remain committed even when their lives are coming to a close due to old age and there is no power or money in prospect?)

          Just because someone like Robinson only takes on one enemy (ie 1) or perhaps 1 and 3, this is no reason to condemn him to your category of cucks, just because you see 2) as the no 1 enemy.

          (And just because 1 and 2 also have conflict with each other that is no reason to suddenly embrace 1 and consider them allies. If two of your enemies have an argument, do not try and make one of them your friend).

          You attitude to Tommy Robinson is like your house is on fire and Tommy Robinson your neighbour rushes round with a hose pipe to put it out. You say ‘Hang on, stop it, I have an argument with you over painting the fence between our properties – I want to paint it green and you want to paint it yellow, so go away you are not my friend due to our fence-painting dispute and I will not let you help me put out the fire”

    • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
      June 22, 2017 - 2:30 am | Permalink

      @ R. Smith

      This sounds like the sort of bloodcurdling mass-murder fantasy that can be quoted, or planted, by opponents to make white nationalists sound like mad sadists.

      • June 23, 2017 - 10:39 am | Permalink

        I don’t think so. If everybody likes you, then you haven’t been yourself. If you like everybody you haven’t learned anything of the world.

  5. silviosilver's Gravatar silviosilver
    June 21, 2017 - 3:41 pm | Permalink

    For many people, leaving education is merely the start of a succession of races to pay the bills each month. No grander purpose or vision lies beyond this bottom line.

    This a very common attitude among racialist writers. In a nutshell, the logic is: race is wrong, therefore pretty much everything else about the contemporary western world is wrong too – and needs to be shown the door.

    I rather doubt this attitude is winning very many converts to white nationalism. For or better or worse, the great majority of whites today are wedded to baseline liberal values and lifestyles. To therefore insist that white racial salvation cannot come but at the price of abandoning those values and lifestyles is not only wrong and not only wrongheaded, but supremely self-defeating. (And it’s ironic that the author quotes a poem from the early 20th century to emphasize his point, considering that most white nationalists today would move heaven and earth to return to that halcyon epoch when whites, both at home and abroad, were demographically thriving and racially dominant – and yet remained overwhelmingly politically liberal.)

    To get to the nub of the author’s argument, bills and debts aren’t incurred merely for the procedural sake of it; they are instead a conduit to the fulfillment of countless and multifarious hopes and dreams. If the author finds these hopes and dreams severely underwhelming – or perhaps the handiwork of malevolent (((mind-benders))) – that is his business, but it is surely telling that peoples who lack the sort of creature-comforts which dot the landscape of first world countries will go to often incredible lengths to acquire access to them. Evidently, such peoples are not content to simply luxuriate in their abundant racial and cultural identity – a social objective that the author at least strongly hints (“we desire life and not just amusements”) ought to replace ‘mindless’ consumerism.

    What this author, like so many indignant racialists before him, misses is that, far from suffocating individual uniqueness (the “mass-men” accusation), the liberal state does as good a job as is humanly possible of enabling each man to follow his own bliss – provided, of course, that his doing so does not unfairly prevent other men from following theirs. If the resulting liberal compliance is too staid for the author’s liking, then he could always throw out that last proviso about unfair prevention. That might seem a straight ticket to a Hobbesian war of all against all, but if that’s what it takes to achieve life over mere amusement, then I guess it’s all worth it. (Check out thrill-a-minute Libya or Syria for a preview of the coming attractions!)

    If the author’s attitude toward the liberal world is erroneous, then the author grievously compounds the error by claiming that, (a) “Liberalism cannot accept that it is pushing ordinary people to the edge,” and presumably doing so because, (b) the “Liberal state sees itself as devoid of ideology.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Liberal political theorists are profoundly aware that they are proponents of an ideological stance. And such criticisms as that politically correct prohibitions on free speech push people towards extremes abound among liberals. There is nothing whatsoever in the criticism of Islam or multiculturalism or equalitarian pseudoscience that requires a liberal (as opposed to a cultural Marxist) to abandon his commitment to liberal principles. In this piece the author accuses liberals of hubris; well I really must say, the author comes perilously close to hubristically dismissing men the stature of an Acton or a Macaulay as simpleminded liberal fools who are yet to realize the world is a dangerous place!

    • Karen T's Gravatar Karen T
      June 22, 2017 - 10:39 am | Permalink

      I know you won’t post this, but all the same….blahablah
      blahbalhablahblah

      • Charles's Gravatar Charles
        June 28, 2017 - 8:41 pm | Permalink

        No violence from anyone anywhere, there are no intellectual loop holes to jump through that say what and what is not legitimatized revenge, peace will rule, until the battle cry is sounded. Remember to wait for the battle cry, it will be Godspeed!

    • Andrew Joyce's Gravatar Andrew Joyce
      June 22, 2017 - 12:24 pm | Permalink

      What a beautifully crafted, if geriatrically naive, love letter to the American Dream.

      Liberalism is a rotten old house that younger generations have grown sick of. We will enjoy burning it to the ground.

      You’re correct that I’m a racialist. I’m also a revolutionary. You will have much more to fear as this world begins to crumble, and your feeble attachment to your creature comforts and the Liberalism that facilitates them won’t do anything to save you.

      I should frame your comment. One day it might sit in a museum as the perfect representation of all that was wrong with the Boomer mindset.

      • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
        June 22, 2017 - 2:44 pm | Permalink

        I protest, Dr. Joyce! There is nothing inherently “geriatric” in the factually unsound, morally distasteful, and otherwise blathering comment you rightly scorn. I myself, a pre-boomer, fully share your scorn for it—and lest we allow its closing obiter dictum to pass unchallenged, Macaulay was a simpleminded fool, not to mention an indifferent and grossly overesteemed historian, and that’s probably the kindest thing to be said for him!

        On the basis of my own acquaintance, I assert confidently that more white men and women under the age of fifty than over it can be counted upon to grow teary-eyed as, Starbucks latte in trembling hand, they second the deplorable comment above.

        I think that the one legitimate gripe that may be made anent your terminology was made in another context by the commenter Curmudgeon:

        We haven’t been in a [genuine] left/right paradigm for decades. We are, and have been, in an obvious globalist/nationalist paradigm. [addition in brackets mine]

        Whether because I am as far to the right (properly understood) as Joseph de Maistre or despite it, I think that there are solid grounds for considering the continuing use of these deliberately misapplied terms more trouble than they are worth. We are now almost an entire century past the age when Chesterton and Shaw could disagree profoundly on matters of critical import yet debate those matters without rancor precisely because each recognized the other’s integrity and patriotism. I recognize no such virtues among our opponents. Perhaps today there are more self-anointed “leftists” than “rightists” who hate and despise patriots and patriotism, but I consider the actual counting of heads too pointlessly dirty a job to do. And wouldn’t you agree that both sides have been thoroughly subverted, Gramsci’d, hasbara’d—call it what you will?

        • Barkingmad's Gravatar Barkingmad
          June 22, 2017 - 8:12 pm | Permalink

          There is nothing inherently “geriatric” in the factually unsound, morally distasteful…

          I couldn’t figure out what Dr. Joyce meant, either, when he referred to “geriatrically” naive love letter.

          While I’m here, though, I don’t think that every single thought, idea and statement of Silviosilver is incorrect.

          “Liberal political theorists are profoundly aware that they are proponents of an ideological stance.” Maybe I’m not the sharpest knife in the drawer, but it looks that way to me, too.

          • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
            June 23, 2017 - 12:40 pm | Permalink

            Oh, you’re quite sharp enough for present purposes, dear B.

            On a not unrelated matter, a hat tip to Dr. Joyce, whose last riposte to SS upgraded “geriatric” to “senile.” The latter being a station stop my train hasn’t quite reached, my nose is no longer out of joint. Indeed, I haven’t even begun working on a Grievance Rationale to counter real or perceived denigrations of its scenic delights.

            Besides, as silvio has cut me to the quick with his insinuation that my insufficiency of conformism has rendered me a figure of fun, the next few days have been set aside for study of his latest best seller, What, Me Glum? Using Perpetual Adolescent Memes for Fun and Profit.

      • silviosilver's Gravatar silviosilver
        June 22, 2017 - 11:07 pm | Permalink

        If I’m growing geriatric at forty then I can only conclude I’m wise beyond my years.

        You’re correct that liberalism is losing its appeal among the youngest generations; unfortunately, it’s not for the reasons you imagine. Among this set, your racial revolutionary inclinations typically carry as much sociopolitical heft as a bag of fart. Being baby-faced, I routinely socially mix it with folks in their twenties. It’s encouraging to occasionally run into a young man ‘in real life’ who is down with the Alt Right to the point of being familiar with Pepe and Kek memes, but for the time being his sort are handsomely outnumbered by BLM/Refugees Welcome sympathizers.

        Given all that, then, I think you can take some comfort knowing that even if your predicted and hoped for revolution fails to materialize, there will remain certain liberal stalwarts to keep making ‘the case for race.’

        and your feeble attachment to your creature comforts and the Liberalism that facilitates them won’t do anything to save you.

        On the other hand, let’s assume your revolution not only materializes but succeeds. What then? When the dust settles, as it eventually must, what do people set about doing in your non-liberal new world? Seeking creature comforts is out, so what is it?

        It may surprise you to learn that I had a spell as fascist, some eight or nine years ago. Fascism, as I saw it then, was the gift, the hope, the dream; and when it was vanquished, all meaning and purpose were vanquished from the earth. And soon all beauty too, as the best of mankind would become submerged beneath a figurative (ma non troppo) mudslide of ‘humanity.’ Needless to say, such thoughts left me as glum as could be.

        So I’d stroll past the grand Victorian buildings in my city on a weekend evening – for as glum as I was, it wouldn’t do to completely seclude myself – and gaze almost uncomprehendingly at the beer-swilling patrons of bars and bistros for whom mere cognizance, let alone appreciation, of their peerless racial and cultural inheritance was the furthest thing from their minds. What poor, poor fools they are, I’d tell myself, wasting their lives away in idle chit-chat and puerile laughter, staggering about in drunken stupor or gyrating spasmodically to the beats of jungle music.

        At some point it dawned on that I was the fool. If we toss out idle socializing, the pursuit of casual romances, the harmless indulgences of the flesh, the fascinations with gadgetry, the stimulating flights of fancy, the…I’m sure you can round out the list…well, that austere arithmetic really doesn’t leave us with much else. Surely nobody besides larping sedevacantists imagines we’re going to return to Christianity as the salve for the problem of existence. If, as 20th century philosophers came to believe, nobody has (or can have) any definitive answers, then what’s so bad about amusing ourselves to death? (Really, I want to know!) If the answer turns out to be “nothing,” then surely what matters politically is creating the environment most conducive to each of us deciding upon and living out our own particular answers as to how best to live – and for a racialist liberal like me, that necessarily includes considerations regarding the racial environment.

        Pierre,

        Macaulay may be overesteemed, but de Maistre’s fun park equivalent is a ‘house of horrors’: terrifying if true, but we know it’s not so we can simply laugh.

        • Andrew Joyce's Gravatar Andrew Joyce
          June 23, 2017 - 9:30 am | Permalink

          Your ideas are senile. Your writing style is sickeningly feminine/queer. You’ve offered nothing of value here, just a lazy panegyric to a discredited social system. Racialism cannot co-exist with liberalism. Our entire current environment is proof of that. Your claim to be a racialist liberal is laughable. Your consistent “effort posting” on this is itself ridiculous.

          • K Riches's Gravatar K Riches
            June 23, 2017 - 5:08 pm | Permalink

            Perhaps he’s a bit insecure deep down and just wants to be liked – hence his volte-face over the babbling bars. I kept thinking of the character of Candide. Had to laugh when he really couldn’t think of any motivating existential force outside of gadgetry, idleness, incipient and lingering kidultry, doorway rutting and mindless amusement, just because some silly philosophers tell him there isn’t. He really is a bit of a jellyfish.

          • PUNISHMENT's Gravatar PUNISHMENT
            June 25, 2017 - 12:40 am | Permalink

            Comfort, convenience, and security have certainly made many white ‘men’ into effete faggots. It is time to be reborn. Blood, fire, and death will cull the weak. We have a long grim road ahead, and it is good. Joyce and his musings are excellent.

        • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
          June 23, 2017 - 12:13 pm | Permalink

          … larping sedevacantists …

          What price hipness?

    • Lycurgus's Gravatar Lycurgus
      June 22, 2017 - 3:29 pm | Permalink

      Your analysis is logically consistent, but incomplete and so misses the point. Some liberalism (not the traditional political label) is and can be seen as an investment in group strength and cohesion, but when it is the case in an open, globalised, world the the result is an addiction to an emotional response that leads the country to a cultural overdose.

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 28, 2017 - 3:10 am | Permalink

      silviosiilver: “the liberal state does as good a job as is humanly possible of enabling each man to follow his own bliss ”
      The wealth and infrastructure and rule of law ie our safety and freedom and security – all the bliss that you refer to – none of this was provided by the current establishment types – the left and globalists. They are trying to bring it all down and end the bliss. The wealth and security and comforts was made for us by types who had the opposite views to the globalists. Those who founded the USA did not arrive and then immediately demand that their leaders start monitoring them for racism or Thought Crime. ie the opposite of our current elite.

      It is true that currently we live in peaceful times where you can follow your dreams and we have abundant wealth and safety.

      If we could freeze things exactly as they are then there would be no problem, or rather a small problem. What the people who come to this site are worried about is not the present, it is the future, as we can see clearly that the West, by committing national suicide, is going to leave this period of bliss and plenty and instead is going to join the third world. The globalists will only be happy when they have done to their own countries that which they are doing to white S.Africans at present – ie take them down.

  6. Berry's Gravatar Berry
    June 21, 2017 - 3:48 pm | Permalink

    Does anybody know where I can donate money to darren osborne? Where is he being jailed, who is his attorney, etc. I’d like to help if I could find the information.

    • DAI CAERPHILLY's Gravatar DAI CAERPHILLY
      June 23, 2017 - 8:40 am | Permalink

      He has legal defence and no money is needed. Besides,he`s not what we want as a martyr or voice for us. I sympathise but stay away.

  7. Harvey's Gravatar Harvey
    June 21, 2017 - 6:45 pm | Permalink

    Over the years, despite high measures in IQ, I have learned that I am actually quite thick. One of the benefits of TOO membership are articles like this, which help one identify as slightly less improbable. It may be that this dynamic tension of intellect and pragmatism is capable of manifesting yet more backwardly in noisy, obviously hollow courtiers such as Owen Jones. Where one is utterly wrong, thick and barbarically impractical, while insisting on being perceived as smart, correct and contemporary.

    In contrast, Darren Osborne, a normal man endeavoring to lead a normal life with traditional skills, leaves us with a fully pronounced issuance from our ethnic collective unconscious mind.

  8. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    June 21, 2017 - 8:15 pm | Permalink

    There’s good reason to suppose that narrative shaping goes well beyond mere commentary of a factual occurrence. Orlando, a case in point.

  9. George Tirebiter's Gravatar George Tirebiter
    June 21, 2017 - 8:16 pm | Permalink

    The abysmal ignorance of whites in the US will definitely be their downfall here.
    I was recently discussing the death cult that is Islam with a neighbor when he asked me how I became interested in Islam.
    When I said that I became aware of what was happening in Europe, he looked puzzled.
    I asked him if he was aware of the problems that Islam was creating in Europe, he said no.
    And he’s not unusual here.
    Most people are clueless about anything outside their local reality or whatever is served up to them from the MSM.
    Doom!

    • Junghans's Gravatar Junghans
      June 22, 2017 - 9:51 am | Permalink

      ‘Normies’, or the average White conformist discussed here, is indeed basically clueless about many things, especially vital issues.

    • T. J.'s Gravatar T. J.
      June 22, 2017 - 8:40 pm | Permalink

      George-

      Do you ever get tired of biting tires?

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 28, 2017 - 3:27 am | Permalink

      George Tirebiter – one documentary of one hour on mainstream TV will completely awaken this man and set him straight on what is happening. (I am not saying such a documentary will appear in the near future on TV, but they are on youtube). His natural state is to defend his country against enemies – but he cannot enter this state when he is completely ignorant about his enemies. The TV media are the enemy within and are keeping him ignorant on purpose. The left can only win whilst they control the media and keep people like him ignorant.

      What is happening now is that Islam is kicking off in the West too soon – the left are desperately telling them to calm down and wait until there are more of them in the West, but the extreme muslims cannot hold back and are kicking off too soon as far as the left are concerned.

      The effect of this early kicking off by Islam before planned is that the MSM can no longer control the narrative so tightly, as now we have the internet. It is becoming increasingly hard for them to keep persuading the people that Islam is a religion of peace, and as soon as your neighbour strays away from fake-news MSM and sees a few youtube videos of the real news, his views will QUICKLY CHANGE.

      The narrative of the left is completely contrary to human nature and as soon as the enemy within MSM lose their grip on the minds of the people, the people will think in their natural way, not in the self-hating perverted way they do at present. The left have been winning over the decades only because they controlled the narrative very tightly, and now the internet is weakening their control of the narrative.

  10. Armor's Gravatar Armor
    June 21, 2017 - 8:51 pm | Permalink

    Our elites have been displaced and silenced. They are now in the same boat as we are. ZOG keeps recruiting smart traitors as substitutes for them. The traitors are smart and stupid at the same time. In the case of Amber Rudd, for example, if she is not Jewish, is there anything else than self-serving stupidity to explain her behavior? Her work as a policewoman for the Jews is contemptible. I doubt she understands what she is doing. What would she make of an essay like this one if she came across it? Would she understand that normal people hate being interchangeable chattel? She would probably think that this whole essay is a bunch of nonsense.

    The Jews have a racial agenda, but I think people like Amber Rudd are simply led by stupidity, conformism, and their individual interest, not by liberalism or any other political philosophy. Andrew Joyce mentions the Left and the “Liberal state” in the article, but I think the real problem is that Western countries have been turning into dictatorships. I don’t think Western dictatorships have any deep roots in liberalism. And I don’t see any popular left-wing or right-wing movement supporting Rudd’s policies. The Guardian is only the voice of a small minority.

    People like Rudd, both in the government and the media, keep enforcing the replacement program, but they have no real justification for it. When challenged, they can only come up with nonsensical arguments: It’s about saving the desperate Nigerians who flee the brutal war in Syria. The migrants must be saved from drowning. We need them to pay for our retirement pensions, and so on. The reason Rudd supports race replacement is not because it fits well with her world view. She doesn’t have a world view –at least, not a coherent one. She’s simply following the Jewish agenda.

    The other day, Kevin MacDonald wrote an article about the Jewish geneticist Eric Turkheimer: “Jewish Ethnic Interests Masquerading as Ethical Concerns”. The same thing can be said of Amber Rudd. What she defends under the guise of ethical concerns is her own political career, and the collective ethnic interests of the Jews.

    Her attitude cannot be explained by liberalism, or by a conservative or progressive outlook. What’s ethical in her eyes is everything that favors Jewish interests or hurts White interests. I would expect such an attitude to come from the so-called Left. We know the role of the Jewish media, universities, and activists, in setting the political orientations of the institutional Left. But they have clearly been at work in the institutional Right too.


    Without the Jews, I understand there might still be a malaise caused by modernity, enforced conformism, life under the rule of a dull centralized bureaucracy, and so on. But Amber Rudd would not be in the government trying to destroy her own people.

  11. Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
    June 21, 2017 - 11:11 pm | Permalink

    This might be just another government-MSM joint venture, a squalid mise-en-scène, phony as that faux hero, Roy Larner.

    • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
      June 22, 2017 - 8:46 am | Permalink

      @ Trenchant & Armor

      Probably not a government venture, but on any interpretation it doesn’t help – for similar reasons. Vengeance should be directed at the consciously guilty, not children gathered peacefully in the street.

      As for “The Guardian” it is the voice of a small minority and its content has reached self-parody as a sort of BAME/LGBT/
      Marxist broadsheet, but it is unfortunately quite influential, especially in the BBC, among Labour/Liberal Democrats, and the Red Bohemia of the “music” & “arts” scene. It has been the main public “intellectual” tool of the New Left “race-gender-class” agenda-networking, which has incrementally subverted our institutions, from education curricula to parliamentary legislation, and is now poised for “insurrection” (John McDonnell MP) as a final push on the “class” front – targeted vilification of opponents, grievance demos, student safe-spaces & sit-downs, wildcat strikes, race riots, direct action, social media manipulation, paralysis of government, &c.

      “The time to mobilise is now,” writes the obnoxious little toad Owen Jones in “The Guardian”, June 22. “Britain’s old order is crumbling…younger working-class voters are decisively plumping for Corbyn’s new Labour Party [whose] leadership has an extra-parliamentary theory of social change…people in their communities and workplaces should feel collectively empowered and politically engaged…. A new society intolerant of injustice and inequality can be created. But only the biggest mass movement in Britain’s history can make it so.”

      Brexit breakdown, continued inward migration, austerity cuts, police neglect, and eventually a major international financial crisis, are what the heirs of Lenin, Gramsci & Marcuse are preparing for.

      The techniques were fully explained to “conservative” dumbos by e.g. Eugene Methvin’s “Riot Makers” and “Rise of Radicalism” in the 1970s – hard to obtain today but still instructive.

      • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
        June 22, 2017 - 5:40 pm | Permalink

        Sorry, you’ll have to excuse me. I’m not going to be mourning any “children gathered in the street” without corroborating evidence for that tale. I’m all cried out over those poor Kuwaiti babies torn from their incubators and left to die on the cold floor. And much, much more.

  12. Michael Adkins's Gravatar Michael Adkins
    June 22, 2017 - 7:41 am | Permalink

    It’s interesting how quickly ‘liberals’ attack the least attempt at resistance by European men and women, while at the same time forgetting those individuals imprisoned for decades just for misspeaking (as has happened in the U.S.).

    • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
      June 22, 2017 - 8:50 am | Permalink

      @ Michael Adkins

      They also hush up or forget unprovoked “ethnic” murders of white people, quite separate from Islamist terrorism at home and abroad.

  13. Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
    June 22, 2017 - 8:48 am | Permalink

    I was watching RT news when the story was breaking. Everyone was calling it a “terror” attack until Michael Maloof, formerly of the Pentagon was interviewed. He calmly stated that no one knows what happened, as there isn’t enough information. He gave a number of scenarios of what it could be, and stated something to the effect that ‘for all we know, it could be a drunk driver’. He based that on the reports that only one person had been killed and 9 injured. Yet, the narrative was already being shaped, even on the supposedly Russian propaganda channel.
    If Osborne was/is a “terrorist”, or even if he was seeking revenge as suggested by Andrew Joyce, Osborne was clearly very inefficient in his effort. He ought to have been able to have created much greater carnage than one dead, in a “crowd of people”, as 10 people do not constitute a crowd. I’ve been in bigger groups at a restaurant, and more people have been killed by food poisoning at restaurants in a single event.
    I have no doubt that Osborne will be convicted of terrorism as a diversionary tactic. Interesting that the rent-a-mobs are out with another anti-White protest about the Muslim filled Grenfell Tower fire. Bad press for Muslims – London Bridge and Manchester – are out of the news and good press is in!

    • Gbon's Gravatar Gbon
      June 27, 2017 - 10:06 pm | Permalink

      Curmudgeon

      Supposedly the person killed had a heart attack before the van arrived. Who knows the truth? Given the pro Muslim bias of the police, I wouldn’t believe even a police report about the incident

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 29, 2017 - 2:10 am | Permalink

      Curmudgen – it is no bad thing in the long run for it to be called a terror attack – as it is better to escalate the tensions now while they are only 5% rather than holding the lid down tightly and then it blows off instead when they are 20%. It is better that it kicks off now while they can be dealt with relatively easily.

      The left are clearly trying to exaggerate any ‘right-wing attacks’ in order to dream up an imaginary group that needs to then be dealt with by clamping down on free speech. But the left are not perfect in their scheming to bring us down and do not always use the best tactics, and what I observe now is people beginning to take sides, people who in the past have never had political thoughts. (Just as many who had not voted for 40 years voted Trump – an awakening of the non-political).

      It is also making the ‘right’ seem more attractive, and also making the left less attractive, as people who are ignorant of politics are having their eyes opened to see that the left and islam are allies. The islam issue is actually making the indigenous feel under threat for the first time in generations, and this is beginning to awaken their own group instincts. Every time the so-called ‘far-right’ are in the news these days it is in the context of reasonable people (like Tommy Robinson) standing up to terrorists and bad people, and this is despite the best efforts of the MSM to portray the Right as the extremist ones, so it is in fact giving the ‘far-right’ a good name and making them seem reasonable and attractive. The left are capable of many own goals. The ploy of the DM (Daily Mail) to call the two sides in any right-wing march ‘far-right’ versus ‘anti-fascist’ is no longer having any impact on the readers of the DM for example, as under their biased articles the support for the Right in the comments is overwhelming.

  14. Kyle McKenna's Gravatar Kyle McKenna
    June 22, 2017 - 2:08 pm | Permalink

    How many people is Mr Osborne alleged to have killed, anyway? From the frenzy in the British media I assume it was dozens, if not hundreds.

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 29, 2017 - 1:53 am | Permalink

      About a month previously there was a report in the DM about an enraged muslim man in a van who ran over 5 white men after a traffic argument. There were no attempted murder charges, no terrorism charges – he got five years prison. He literally scattered them like skittles (see video) by driving into them on the pavement.
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4606844/Van-driver-mounted-pavement-drove-five-men.html
      His excuse was that fasting during ramadan made him angry.

  15. Gotcha's Gravatar Gotcha
    June 23, 2017 - 4:16 am | Permalink

    The Establishment is well aware native Britons are less of a danger compared to the imported underclass that keeps churning our extremists.

    It is all a ploy to deflect attention onto Tommy et al. The fact is they now realise the ethnics are a problem and could riot anytime overwhelming the police forcing the ruling class to call the armed forces. This will trigger civil war. We had riots by pakis in 2001 in Oldham and Bradford. Add the 2011 editions. The Establishment is highly fearful of a repeat hence it keep up appearances. In tandem pakis keep making more demands knowing its a numbers game.

    Jews, Blair and previous governments are responsible for opening the doors.

    • DAI CAERPHILLY's Gravatar DAI CAERPHILLY
      June 23, 2017 - 8:49 am | Permalink

      And what shall we do about it when we eventually rise up. I want the hangmans job.

    • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
      June 23, 2017 - 8:51 am | Permalink

      “The fact is they now realise the ethnics are a problem and could riot anytime…”
      The reality is that they have known, for almost 60 years (1958 Notting Hill), that the ethnics are a problem. They just don’t and won’t care, until they themselves are attacked by the ethnics.

    • Trenchant's Gravatar Trenchant
      June 23, 2017 - 9:59 pm | Permalink

      @ Gotcha:
      With respect, I think you’re quite mistaken. The PTB are not at all worried by minorities acting up, nor should they be. Low intelligence, internally-fractious tribal coalitions are no match for high-intelligence, united groups, enjoying the power of the State apparatus, such as the Jews and their white enablers. Non-Europeans and Muslims are a threat only to lower and middle-class Britons, and it is the wrath of these subjects that the PTB fear. Especially as the safety-valve of free speech has long been plugged.

      If it weren’t for the showy “Muslim” terror events, legislating against Thought-crime and circumscribing self-defense would be that much harder. To me it’s clear that said legislation is written for, to be enforced against, whites, and whites alone.

  16. Mr Curious's Gravatar Mr Curious
    June 23, 2017 - 4:40 am | Permalink

    MScuM Churzpah is astonishing. Wave acter wave of Third World darkies commit attack after after attack against the people of Pepe & ‘don’t jude… Donn’t be hasty… Nothing to do with race yadda yadda…’

    Finally a White Man gives the rabbits a taste of their own medicine & MSM (((journosluts))) say a ‘White man’ literally hours after the attack. Race is suddenly all important. Next time a darky commits a spectacular see if the sluts call the rabbits ‘a black, a brown, a mystery meat’.

    YOU’LL BE WAITING A WHILE!!!

  17. Sam's Gravatar Sam
    June 23, 2017 - 5:43 pm | Permalink

    Osborne followed the Zionist Britain First on Twitter.

  18. Rosa's Gravatar Rosa
    June 24, 2017 - 11:27 am | Permalink

    Luckily, in a way, Muslims to the rescue. Just after Osborne’s act we have seen a failed attack in Paris, in Bruxelles, in Flint, Michigan. And no one hears of Osborne anymore.
    By the way what happened to the last “right wind extremist”, that who murdered the female MP jut before Brexit ?

  19. Matt_Grey's Gravatar Matt_Grey
    June 24, 2017 - 8:39 pm | Permalink

    “Strong central government is anathema to the European, especially when there is no frontier, or ‘New World,’ that he might escape to if he is unsatisfied.”

    Oh that space exploration had advanced at a faster rate!

    BTW Brilliant and very moving article!

  20. June 25, 2017 - 1:39 pm | Permalink

    Andrew Joyce tries to make some kind of hero out of Darren Osborne yet the man had a history of erratic, verbally aggressive behavior and if his goal was to kill Muslim men his method was ineffectual. His yelling “Kill me!” to his would be victims shows what a nutcase he is.

    Setting aside the craziness this was the sort of tit-for-tat violence that Paul Weston warned about back in 2007. He quotes himself in this recent video
    Civil War in Europe: Which Side Are You on?.

    • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
      June 26, 2017 - 5:55 am | Permalink

      I see no effort to make a hero out of Osborne. I suspect what we are not being told is that Osborne was DUI. Being verbally aggressive does not translate into being physically aggressive. For all we know “Kill me” if he really did say that, may well have been out of guilt. What of the other two that were reported to be in the van? Who are they and what is their version?

  21. June 25, 2017 - 5:30 pm | Permalink

    Fantastic article. Thank you.

    This X 10:

    “Our elites (government, media, business) have sold their souls to the Devil of globalization, and Whites are now regarded as mere interchangeable chattel, or worse. To be sure, you will be tolerated and allowed to go slowly extinct if you carry on the kind of dull, soulless existence described at the outset of this article. But the problem with Whites, as many globalists know, is that they still have, on occasion, the tendency to behave as they did in the Icelandic Sagas — to seek freedom and a new path; to reject tyranny and injustice; to seek their own piece of land and refuse to be bought off with anything less. Strong central government is anathema to the European, especially when there is no frontier, or ‘New World,’ that he might escape to if he is unsatisfied.”

  22. David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
    June 26, 2017 - 5:00 am | Permalink

    For a useful insight into how opponents handle such events in the US “hate speech” context, see the contribution by Barry Mauer, Central Florida University, at http://www.academic.edu/3317452/Pulse_A_Consultation.pdf

    • Pierre de Craon's Gravatar Pierre de Craon
      June 26, 2017 - 4:59 pm | Permalink

      The link appears to be dead. Try this instead. The good stuff is in the pdf file at the bottom of the linked page.

      There is also this from the same pestilent source.

      Ultimately, there’s nothing new here. It’s just the usual supersized serving of Jewish victimization mongering and primitive vengefulness, some of which has been permitted to adorn the brow of their homosexual stand-ins, inter alia.

  23. joe six pack's Gravatar joe six pack
    June 27, 2017 - 3:13 am | Permalink

    Great essay! The paragraph that jumped out and smacked me on the forehead was this one:

    “Modern ‘society’ is expert at controlling the behavior of men — in particular, the expectations, responsibilities, and burdens of the consumer society, propped up by mortgage and credit card usury. Shackled from cradle to grave. For many people, leaving education is merely the start of a succession of races to pay the bills each month. No grander purpose or vision lies beyond this bottom line. A wife may come and go, homes are bought and debts incurred, children are born in order that they too might one day begin the same race.”

    We in America pride ourselves on being individualists but that is a load of lies. Back in 1820 90% of us worked on our 100 acres and grubbed a living out of the land on our own without regard to anyone else’s opinion. We were genuine individualists back then and made up our own minds.
    Now the situation is reversed, 90% of us work in bureaucracies with Human Resources departments run by large African-American women with big chips on their shoulders. ‘Watch what you say and watch what you do and therefore watch what you think.’
    Orwell called it Crimethink.
    The ex west Pointer, military critic, John Reed has an essay devoted to analyzing the US Military’s bureaucratic path to promotion. He calls it a marathon 30 year single elimination suck-up tournament.
    https://johntreed.com/blogs/john-t-reed-s-blog-about-military-matters/60879683-the-u-s-military-s-marathon-30-year-single-elimination-suck-up-tournament-or-how-america-selects-its-generals

    The points he makes elucidate the modern humans dilemma, we are not free at all. We are prisoners of bureaucracy where we must measure our words and even worse as he says, get 30 different bosses to like us. No freedom there that is for sure.

    Bureaucracy makes material life easier because you spread the risk around, but at what price? Your free speech is sacrificed and little by little you redact what you say and then what you think, it is just easier for your family that way. Once we all come to the realization we are muzzled like obedient dogs by our bureaucratic masters then perhaps our barks might become a little more articulate and penetrating, like this essay. Thanks

    • pterodactyl's Gravatar pterodactyl
      June 29, 2017 - 2:18 am | Permalink

      joe six pack – correct. Bureaucracy favours the left as it is a system that AVOIDS the best/effective/competent getting to the top, as instead of genuine ability being the criteria for promotion, there is a shift away from this to other criterea – your opinions.

      • David Ashton's Gravatar David Ashton
        June 29, 2017 - 5:54 am | Permalink

        @ pterodactyl

        A current PC theme is that politics should “represent” the demos, with a sufficient %age of the disabled, young, recent alien immigrants, welfare dependents, prison inmates and “wyomin”. If governance is drawn from this pool, which represents a majority of lower IQ and poorly educated people, all other factors being equal, it will not be an aristocracy of competent talent. It magnifies “wants” at the expense of “capacities” to satisfy them. It hardly needed e.g. Plato, Disraeli, Le Bon or Mencken to point out the obvious.

        The “social democrat” deception consists of transferring wealth from a minority of “have mores” to a majority of “want mores”, with its political exponents and facilitating bureaucracy claiming their own parasitic high income from management of this “legalized theft”.

        There is a downgrading of election arguments, aggravated by cheap advertisements and media manipulation. Those who know better and also care for the future of civilization are obliged themselves to use deception to gain some “power”, while extra-parliamentary “elites” from big bankers to college lecturers carry on, effectively unmolested.

        The campaign progress and current capture of Donald J. Trump illustrate the problem in the USA, and the collapse of Theresa May’s majority and the victory of Emmanuel Macron
        illustrate it in Europe.

        I am interested to know what able critics of “democracy” like Tomislav Sunic think we can DO about it.

        • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
          June 29, 2017 - 10:15 am | Permalink

          @ David
          The modern day promoters of “social democracy” are more akin to the US’s RINOs, i.e. they are social democrats in name only.
          The older view of social democrats did not include flooding their nations with foreigners, irrespective of colour, and certainly not promoting widespread endless welfare. Wages between the top earners and bottom earners was not hundreds or thousands of times more than the lowest earners in the same company, rather a factor of less than 10. Providing conditions for meaningful full time employment, whether private or public sector, was seen as positive, not negative. Welfare was for those unable to work. The most efficient economy is one where all can participate relatively equally.
          I read an article in the late 70s to early 80s predicting the decline of the US. The Wall Street “greed is good” mentality was already established. The article pointed out that mediocre mid managers in US Corporations earned more per year than the CEO of Honda, which was already starting to kick the crap out of US automakers. Further, the CEO of Honda was earning about eight times as much as the lowest paid worker on the shop floor. The article correctly predicted that the American model (which has been exported everywhere in the West) was unsustainable for industry and that there would be serious social consequences.
          Add to that, Lee Iacocca stating that US industry, and the auto sector specifically, was becoming uncompetitive, not because of wages or pensions, but because of health care costs. All of the US competitors had universal health care coverage to varying degrees.
          Never reported is that Japan and Germany had the world’s highest average industrial wage, not the US, UK, or Canada. Also never reported was that non-aligned social democratic Sweden, prior to Olaf Palme, had almost no immigration, near full employment, the world’s highest standard of living, generous welfare for those unable to work, universal healthcare, the world’s 3rd highest military spending, budget surpluses, and a taxation rate comparable to the US.
          Social democrats are not free traders, they are fair traders and believe in taking care of their own. Social democracy works just fine in a homogeneous society, the problem these days is finding a homogeneous society.

      • Curmudgeon's Gravatar Curmudgeon
        June 29, 2017 - 6:41 am | Permalink

        “Bureaucracy favours the left as it is a system that AVOIDS the best/effective/competent getting to the top,…”
        That is too simplistic. Bureaucracy has existed for thousands of years in societies throughout history, whether governmental or in privately owned companies. Bureaucracy favours the in-group, irrespective of political inclination. At one time in our not too distant past, there was long term thinking called succession planning. Virtually everyone in a bureaucracy was capable of doing the job of the person(s) one step ahead, and it was all learned in the workplace, and transition when people left was smooth. Today, in the interest of cost cutting, many government bureaucracies are incapable of functioning, because the long term politicization of bureaucracy has led to people, with nothing other than political connections, being floated in at higher levels, and hiring what they see in the mirror into positions that do nothing. If there is a bloat, it is caused by the in-group politicization of the bureaucracy, not the apolitical people (who are the capable ones) in the bureaucracy. The number of bureaucracies within government and their usefulness are different issues.

        On the private sector side, “shareholder value” means bringing in “expert consultants” who know diddly squat about the workplace, which leads to cutting jobs to the point where people are overloaded to the point where they simply cannot function. The dysfunctional workplace then requires more consultants to make more dysfunctional changes. It’s a different type of bureaucracy, but a bureaucracy non-the-less.

  24. June 29, 2017 - 8:18 pm | Permalink

    As you have correctly surmised “extremism” and “moderation” are subjective measures, usually determined by each individual’s environs or the cognitive programming (brain-washing) an individual, a group of individuals, or even a whole nation is subjected to. Hence, most non-Muslims would naturally find many of the tenets of Islam, as represented by the 1400 year old ancient Shariah, to be extreme – at least at face value without having had the opportunity to examine such tenets at length with objectivity.

    However, I would like to request you to try not to confuse true orthodox, conservative Islam (yes, those long-bearded fanatics) with the ideology of these “muslim” mass-murderers of civilians, who are ALL, without exception, inspired by Zionist-created Wahhabism which is an ideology completely foreign to Islam. Furthermore, many of these incidents are orchestrated and puppeteered by the very same Zionists who have mastered the art of manipulating the puppets that they themselves engineer into existence.

    In fact, extreme as it will seem to many today, the ancient, medieval Shariah (Islamic Law) would demand the death sentence for such “muslim” mass-murderers, as it would do to the likes of the Rochdale “muslim” grooming gangs also. The 1400-year old Shariah, which is immutable and immune to “modernisation” or “improvement”, is extremely clear and extremely unambiguous on such matters.

    A good reference point for those unacquainted with orthodox Islam is Salahuddin Ayyubi – known as Saladin in Christendom – who, despite his Islamic generosity and magnanimity, would not hesitate to execute war-criminals amongst his midst.

    So, by all means, regard Islam, in itself, to be “extreme”, but please do bear in mind that acts for which the Islamic Shariah demands the death sentence can hardly be called Islamic.

Comments are closed.