“The blindness of the masses, their readiness to surrender to that resounding but empty eloquence that fills the public squares, make them an easy prey. … We will have no difficulty in finding as much eloquence among our people for the expression of false sentiments as Christians find in their sincerity and enthusiasm.”
‘The Rabbi’s Speech’ Hermann Goedsche, Biarritz (1868)
I’ve never really enjoyed horror movies. I don’t mind the gore, the violence, or even the bad acting. What I can’t forgive is the mind-numbing predictability that typifies the genre. While many of its fans might preach about the fun to be had with the ‘suspension of disbelief,’ I’ve often been the annoying fellow in the movie theatre asking “Why don’t they just turn on the light/leave the house/stay out of the basement?” Being frightened or shocked requires a lowered level of anticipation, and a lowered level of anticipation requires the viewer to ignore surrounding patterns, cues and clues and, above all, to ‘suspend disbelief.’ To partake in the horror experience, we need to set aside not only our tendency to perceive an unfolding formula, but also the fact that we may have seen such a formula many times previously. And although we are aware that what we are observing is a complete fiction, we must undertake efforts on a subconscious or conscious level to convince ourselves that it is, or could be, true.
As a very rational thinker with an eye for patterns, I find it difficult to partake in the horror experience. It takes a lot to shock me and, for much the same reason, I was left largely untroubled by the recent events in Orlando and Yorkshire. I certainly didn’t feel any sense of surprise at either instance of violence. Like every horror franchise that runs for too long, acts of Muslim terror on our soil started losing their shock value around a decade ago (or at least they should have). And England has been undergoing such a level of dispossession, murder and child rape that a violent response, even from the fringes of White society, was an unfortunate inevitability. Since our movement is greatly concerned with monitoring the facts and the reality of our unfolding racial horror, we anticipated these ‘scares’ with no less certainty than we anticipated the rising of the sun. We knew the likely places from which these events would emanate, and we know that more will follow.
However, while we observe with frustration and anticipation the slow and predictable unfolding of this ghastly tale, it is clear that many of our compatriots are undergoing a rather different experience. Indeed, clever dialogue by ‘the scriptwriters’ is still successfully swindling most of the audience and somehow keeping them on the edge of their seats. Surprise is apparently rampant. The Washington Post reported on “Shock, tears and grief” following the Orlando shooting. Barack Obama described shocked communities “grasping for answers with broken hearts.” Meanwhile, in an astonishing piece of emotional projection by liberals, NBC reported that Afghan-Americans (an absurd label) are “grappling with shock, shame and the taboo topics of homophobia and religious intolerance in their community.” The truth of course is that ‘Afghan-Americans’ weren’t remotely shocked, shamed, or surprised by these events or themes. While the Middle East is a rancid cesspool of long-practiced sinister sexual deviancies, a paradoxical antipathy towards homosexuality remains a common feature of Islamic life. Of the fifty-one states that constitute the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), ten of them punish homosexual activity with the death penalty, including Afghanistan. Although no mainstream Afghan or Muslim organization has stated its willingness to revisit its position on homosexuals in the wake of the Orlando shootings, shocked liberals of the NBC variety are comforting themselves with the delusion that Muslims are just as shocked and horrified as they are.
Self-deceiving liberals have achieved one of their greatest tricks of journalistic magic by ensuring the disappearance of religion and ethnicity from their commentary on Islamic violence. Struggling hard to paint the Orlando shooting as part of a ‘homophobic’ culture in which “we” are all complicit, the overwhelmingly leftist homosexual clique is apparently now redoubling its political efforts to ensure that the blameless White mainstream has its guns taken away and its nose rubbed in even more same-sex effrontery. Liberal sociologist, and self-styled expert on ‘guns and gender,’ Jennifer Carlson has written in the Washington Post that
Actor, activist and author George Takei has described the fight for gun control as “the next chapter of LGBT history.” Many LGBTQ groups cheered the Democratic-led Senate filibuster this past week in favor of gun reforms. This outcry makes sense. This hate-motivated killing in Orlando is but one example of the broad culture of violent intolerance that LGBTQ people face. Until now, the NRA — not just because of its sheer organizational strength and financial backing, but also because of its cultural ingenuity — has been able to define the terms of the gun debate and the terrain of the struggle. The LGBTQ movement might just be able to change that.
Largely forgotten is the fact that a homosexual is far more likely to die from a sexually transmitted disease or at the hands of a fellow homosexual than from the rifle barrel of a normal White American. An utterly irredeemable demographic, and in my opinion utterly irreconcilable to our ideology, homosexuals continue to reject Donald Trump while mobilizing on behalf of a host of left-liberal causes.
Although the latest exculpation of Arabs and Islam has taken on a rainbow hue, there is nothing novel about the more general nature of such poisonous delusions. The trend was in evidence as far back as 2005 when thousands of African Muslim youths went on the rampage in France. The global media was then almost unanimous in excusing the violence and destruction of these colonists as the expressions of an unemployed contingent of Arab youth experiencing a lack of economic opportunities. What the champagne-sipping socialist Left didn’t seem to realize was that this excuse is no more helpful to their cause than admitting the role of religion and race. The economic excuse for the misdeeds of their colored darlings still left unaddressed a very stark objective social problem — the presence in a given nation of a vast and cohesive body of aggrieved aliens nursing a sense of entitlement to scarce resources that they have no legitimate claim to. By offering their support for mass immigration, and thus the introduction of such a social problem into our nations, liberals have played a key role in making our societies more violent, less trusting, and economically weaker — all while under the delusion that they were making “the world” a better place.
Of course, movie theatre audiences are filled with people that never have a ‘turn-the-light-on’ moment. These are people who are comfortable and entertained by their suspension of disbelief. They have a lowered level of anticipation and are blind to the cues and clues around them, and thus every stale gimmick still possesses the power to shock and frighten. In much the same way, our modern liberals exist in a world in which they have suspended disbelief in the ideological fantasies they have been indoctrinated with. Their ideology thus becomes immune to reality. The young creatives in our movement have actually popularized a very intelligent meme ridiculing this pernicious liberal trait: “No-one could have predicted that…” One could then complete the sentence with something like “…Black African migrants would do poorly in school and be highly prone to crime,” or “…Arab migrants would rape European women” The meme highlights that these behaviors are actually very predictable while also pouring scathing sarcasm on the real or feigned shock of liberals when such events occur.
Who could have predicted that a US-born Muslim of Afghan descent would allow, in the words of Rudyard Kipling, “the Gods of his far-off land to repossess his blood”? Who could have predicted that a Muslim would target homosexuals, when homosexuals are routinely executed in the most staunchly Muslim areas of the Middle East? And who could have predicted that multiculturalism would lead to bloodshed on the streets of a once-homogenous nation that prided itself on the right of its citizens to bear arms while also maintaining a level of lawfulness and peacefulness that was the envy of the world? The sad truth, ladies and gentlemen, is that it was predicted by many of us — but ignored by many more.
Liberals have neglected to fully interrogate their own arguments because their entire ideology is built on the suspension of disbelief. They are capable of persisting in their delusion only because they ignore the patterns around them, sacrificing an understanding of ‘the plot’ for an emotionally exciting journey on the edge of their seats. The left-liberal existence is lived out on the ‘fun’ of pro-immigration rallies, the thrill of being morally righteous, and the equally emotionally heightened atmosphere of the candle-lit vigils that accompany the ‘shocks’ and ‘scares’ of the dreadful world they have helped to create. Much like that of a young child, theirs is an emotive world where adrenaline, novelty and stimulation are the most significant landmarks. It is a world where Antifa placards mingle with crocodile tears, in which ‘love’ can overcome physical realities and genetic limitations, in which pop concerts can reverse famines, and in which the only enemy is that amorphous but ever-present ideological bogeyman — ‘hate.’
The husband of Jo Cox has apparently urged everyone “to fight against the hate that killed her.” As far as soundbites go, few could be more attuned to the irrational spirit of modern liberalism. Liberalism, wallowing in the conceit that it is the last bastion of rationality, paradoxically imbues ‘hate’ with the same supernatural aura once reserved for poltergeists and demons. Mr Cox and his fellow liberals would do well to remember that ‘hate’ did not kill Jo Cox any more than it killed anyone at the Pulse nightclub. Men undertook these grim endeavors — human beings with social and ethnic connections and identities, grievances, agendas and interests. However, like a horror bogeyman, ‘hate’ is significantly less intellectually demanding and thus more appealing to ‘the scriptwriters’ who believe it is best not to have the audience think too much. Faced with ‘hate’ rather than three-dimensional individuals and ethnic groups, the childish liberal need not attempt to understand its history, its motivations, or even what it wants. It suffices to simply scream when it pops up.
For those of us more interested in the substance of the plot of the unfolding horror, we are only too aware that the Left thrives on emotional highs rather than reality. When they attended their pro-refugee rallies and campaigned on behalf of the Islamic colonization of their own nations, they weren’t thinking about the future needs, demands and behaviors of their beloved guests. Few pro-refugee demonstrations were accompanied by fiscal breakdowns informing the general public that in a few years this growing population would require new homes, that in ten years we would need to bring about a huge increase in jobs from our already struggling economies, or that during that time our criminal justice and health care systems would be placed under unbearable strain by the colonists in our midst. We certainly weren’t informed by our liberal moral superiors that our failure to provide financial benefits as well as living space to these settlers would result in destruction, violence, and murder on our streets. Instead, chattering liberals claimed ‘shock’ that the new houses didn’t build themselves, that an incoherent thug represented a poor option for employment in an industrial nation, and that their beloved refugees brought with them vice, crime, disease and more than enough of their own home-grown prejudices.
Just as viewers of horror movies can be kept on the edge of their seats, so can they also be deeply misled. Although they may still be spooked along the way, viewers can possess a smug satisfaction that they have the plot figured out entirely, ignorant of the final twist that ultimately looms on the horizon. In the same way, and in marked contrast to responses to events in Orlando, liberals have adopted a smug and self-satisfied approach to the assassination of Jo Cox in Yorkshire. Organizations and media outlets that were slow or insipid in probing the motivations of Omar Mateen were suddenly unanimous in their summation of Thomas Mair. The scriptwriters at the SPLC popped up almost immediately with a dubiously acquired document purporting to show that Mair once purchased a US Military manual from the National Alliance. The curiously foggy logic of the left appears to clear rapidly at any hint of White violence, and I await the advent of a single piece of journalism suggesting that the violence of Thomas Mair was linked to economic deprivation, social isolation, or any other excuses that would have been tenderly laid at his feet had he possessed a little more melanin. With smug satisfaction, the left comforts itself with the delusion that Mair was possessed by ‘hate’ in the same way that one might be possessed by a devil, an abstraction we need not struggle too hard to understand. The only effort that need be expended is that “we as a society” should continue with the rallies, protests and processes that constitute the modern equivalent of a social exorcism. Our liberal priests will continue to wave their rainbow flags and sprinkle the holy water of ‘tolerance’ in an effort to drive out their wholly imagined devil.
While liberals continue to insist that the rhetoric of Donald Trump is contributing to a coarsening of the democratic process and thus a more violent political atmosphere, it is clear that it is actually the deeply erratic, fanatical and irrational nature of the left that is contributing most heavily to the destabilization of our societies. Immigration and the weakening of social norms, the two biggest liberal cause célèbres, have been utterly catastrophic to the high-trust and relatively peaceful societies that prevailed in the West in earlier periods. The emotive and adrenaline-seeking Left is taking the rest of society on a violent rollercoaster that threatens to derail at any given moment. While death, rape and abuse surround us, the scriptwriters are working overtime to keep the audience guessing. Much like someone commenting on the pleasantness of the journey while clinging to the sinking Titanic, last year Michael Cohen wrote that the West was becoming “freer, more generous, more cognizant of its past and more progressive than it was before.” This was in the context of historic flags being torn down, homosexuals being allowed to marry, and Islamist shootings across Europe and America. Cohen’s lies, and his barely concealed joy at our unfolding catastrophe, will of course go unnoticed by the majority in ‘the audience.’
As the audience gets played by those controlling the narrative, the rest of us, those aware of the simplicity of the plot, are reduced to offering ‘spoilers.’ We know that the West has a problem with the bogeyman of Islamic terror for two main reasons. The first is that we pursued disastrous foreign policy goals in Muslim lands. These interventions benefitted no-one but a self-interested international clique that has successfully confused our aspirations with its own. The second reason is that we have actively or passively permitted the influx of millions of Muslims into our homelands, and not without the involvement of the aforementioned clique. The first reason reignited ancient hatreds that had been cooled for centuries. The second brought these hatreds within our gates. Such is the origin of our Islamic horror story.
Just as the plot is simple, our ‘turn the light on’ moment is also very straightforward. There are really only two steps which must be taken if we are to solve the immediate Islamic problem. The first is to cease involvement in lands that are not ours, and never have been. We would do much better as a people to focus instead on addressing our own internal civilizational crisis, and leave those in more primitive stages of social development to wallow in the mire of their own creation. The second is to rapidly and conclusively reverse the Islamic colonization of our ancient, rightful, and hard-won homes. In order to achieve this, multiculturalism — the engine-room of the Islamic colonization, the camouflage for Islamic terror, and the progenitor of a multitude of societal dysfunctions — must be dismantled, disgraced and discarded forever. Its theorists, facilitators, and supporters should be permanently exiled.
Only when this is accomplished will the horrors enveloping our nations come to an end.