Tag Archives: slavery

The Left’s Exploitation of Race

The Left’s Exploitation of Race

By Duncan Whitmore

Nearly two years ago, the present writer published on this blog an essay concerning how gullible leftists are whipped up into frenzies of hysteria for the purposes of fulfilling a political agenda often only loosely connected to the problems of which they complain. An example we gave was the leftist outrage at Donald Trump’s supposed racism and misogyny, allegations which are raised solely because of the wider threat that Trump poses to the mantra of globalisation and a US hegemonic world. Absent that threat, none of the 45th President’s alleged affronts against women and other races would have seen the light of day. Fast forward to today and the protests, riots, and looting following the killing, by a Minnesota policeman, of a black man whom he was apprehending, have demonstrated this useful idiocy – fuelled also, no doubt, by the economic frustrations of younger, university educated middle classes whom the COVID lockdowns may have driven over the edge – to an even wider extent.

Regardless of the specific images of rioting and violence with which we were greeted last weekend, it is probably the case that the vast majority of those who took part in the protesting feel that they care, quite genuinely, for what they perceive to be the plight of African-Americans. It is typical for libertarians, and the right genuinely, to paint all leftists as dyed-in-the wool Marxists hell-bent on destroying Western civilisation, but we should remember that many of them are themselves victims of years of indoctrination by their schools, universities and mainstream media which presented them with a wall of unbridled, hegemonic leftism. Indeed, we have to hope that they are not all committed fanatics immune to reasoned rebuttals of the leftist monologue, for if they are then our cause may well be lost. A handful of personal acquaintances of mine who drift around the left but who have, other than minor mutterings about Brexit and Boris, scarcely uttered a political statement in their lives, have, within the last few weeks, unloaded a deluge of social media condemnation of police brutality and decrying “institutional racism”, all with the “#blacklivesmatter” hashtag. A few even donned placards and took part in the protesting. True enough, most will be content to merely virtue signal rather than do anything that actually makes a real difference, and most have already reverted to posting “selfies” and worrying about the fact they cannot get a haircut during the COVID-19 lockdown. But they are not fundamentally bad people. Read more

The Useful Idiocy of the Left

The Useful Idiocy of the Left

By Duncan Whitmore

The typical libertarian is unlikely to open his YouTube account or Twitter feed without encountering a cascade of material in which a) the left is drawing attention to itself in a loud and obnoxious manner; and b) libertarians, conservatives and their fellow travellers are castigating the left for whatever it is doing. Given all of this attention paid to the left one would have thought that they must have something important to say. Let us look at a few recent examples to see if this is true.

On August 11th it was reported in the news that around a hundred or so protestors had appeared in the constituency of Conservative MP Andrew Griffiths to demand his resignation. No doubt the motivation of a small crowd of Mr Griffiths’ constituents to give up their afternoon and don placards calling for his head owed itself to something extremely serious. After all, surely we would only bother to march through the streets to protest if the matter was as grave as an illegal war, right?

Actually, the flames of fury were ignited by something altogether less serious. Mr Griffiths, who is married, had been sending a considerable volume of lewd text messages to two barmaids, the contents of which were published by the Sunday Mirror. The high crime which had fuelled the protestors’ rage was that Mr Griffiths is a “misogynist”, the protest calling for nothing more than a rejection of his “behaviour and attitudes”. Read more

Lord Tebbit should address the Enemy-Class-history-erasers directly (British-State-GCSE History papers to be added sequentially – keep looking…)

David Davis

The British-State “history” “syllabus” is a current and festering disgrace, has been designed on purpose with a civilisation-erasing(ours) -intent, and will have to go.

“The English were responsible for slavery” (discuss the sources given to you. Do not refer to other sources.)

“The Tudors brought war, smoking and piracy” (discuss the given account by a Spanish monk.)

“The capitalists of the Industrial Revolution exploited workers deliberately, especially children” (discuss the sources given including the extract from a novel by a writer called Charles Dickens.)

“Haig was the Butcher of the Somme” (discuss the sources given.)

“The salt tax in India was the cause of Ghandi’s rebellion and was unfair to poor Indian people” (discuss the role of modern Quangos in forced dietary-choice-editing by New Labour…(I wish))

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (a paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3047-3-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (its “mark scheme”)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3047-1-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (another paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3047-1-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (this paper’s “mark scheme”)

Here’s some serious papers for British 16-year-olds, concerning what “educationists” think that these people ought to think about “The American West 1840-1895”:-

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3041-3046-2A-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (the paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3041-3046-2A-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (its mark scheme)

“British social and economic history” … the assumption that Trades Unions are innately a good thing, and that opposing them as infringements of property rights is bad, is taken as read:-

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3043-1-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (a paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3043-1-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (its mark scheme)

More to come…..

Under the skin of Christianised anglo-socialism, a skull

David Davis

The Devil, always prescient and let Peace Be Upon Him, uncovers (sorry) the real face of GramscoFabiaNazism.

At last, I get it now. I get it.

“Slavery” was as we know, always practised by European non-capitalist-but-gold-consuming-tyrannies such as Spain and Portugal, with the connivance and active participation of precapitalist-barbarian-survival-guides-acting-in-concert-with-precapitalist-tribalist-racist-chiefs-in-Africa (so they could “get the staff”.) But, with a subtle change in the content of education, it was what the liberal Anglosphere was to be made to “apologise for”. It had to be made to look like WE did “slavery” (even though WE abolished it.) This would be needed so that when the British State re-introduced slavery for its own children, as it proposes to do now, the epistemological link between the two sorts would be erased.

Let’s call for “an army ov volunteers” to “help the UK out of recession”. Personally, I’d gunpoint the members of the Fabian Society into unpaid labour, if need be, for eve(own privilieged) children, and their children’s children and so on, can work until Labour’s PSBR is repaid.That’ll concentrate their minds, for even lefties think (sorry, pretend) children are innocent.

We can then all watch.

Apologising for slavery

David Davis

This caught my eye quite accidentally: I was not intending to write anything about slavery today, with the possible exception of a suitable comment about true things that White People are not allowed to say.

It occurs to me that _if_ West African Tribal Bigmen had refused to trade their (own slaves) people for Spanish and Portuguese money and beads, then history might have been different. Absolutely all the helots would have got carted off by their ears either way (The HispanoPortuguesi had guns by then) and ther tribal Big-guys would have been slaughtered, but then at least “antislavery campaigners” would have been able to absolutely claim the moral high-ground from the very beginning. WE’d not have fallen, through being asleep on the ideological job, into the trap of being _blamed for slavery_ through being the dominant Atlantic-Maritime power in the times when we were trying actually to abolish this pre-capitalist, pre-liberal, Euro-Imperium-friendly barbarism.

It riles me, that _we_ have had to “apologise” for slavery, when _we_ were the first nation to unilaterally outlaw it everywhere and for all time, planetwide. Naturally, there is no mention whatever of the role played either by tribal chiefs, or by the Arabs, who as is well known, still “do” slavery bigtime, and who were not bit-players in the atlantic slavetrade either, with their trans-African communications.

Libertarians of course don’t agree with slavery. You own yourself and your justly-acquired goods, and can dispose of either as you will. But I think an exception could be made for major GramscoFabiocrats and their children (the Koran says that it says so) in the event of a libertarian revolution that’s far-reaching enough and rapid enough. There are after all things posing as “religions” which allow slavery and regulate it as a means of social intercourse. Either, these are religions and can therefore enforce behaviour-codes on willing submitters, or else they are not relgions and their strictures and codes can be disregarded. If the Libertarian “Minsiter of Human Skills Co-ordination” (a tautology) was to convert to Islam, then he could indent all ex-“Hospital Trust Managers” (for example) as (his) slaves, and they’d have to do his bidding at all times. if he can’t do that, then Islam is not a religion, but something else, and we have to start that deiscussion.

Milibanana is actually right, but now, nobody will believe him: his party has done too much damage to what he purports to support, also favours “disarmament”, and won’t buy his soldiers any kit (so that they can die.)

David Davis

Here’s the milibanana on Afghanistan. there will be more about this later after I have done chores.

More later, here it is:-

I have concluded my household wife-imposed duties, for the present.

Now then: most British  libertarians are against our being involved in wars in Asia – or anywhere for that matter. They say that the UK has no “vital interest” in that region. I disagree absolutely, and the principal proponents of the “no involvement” school of thought know this quite well.

I expect to be aggressively excoriated in the next week, as a result of this opinion, mainly by friendly libertarians, some of whom even know me. Comments from all sides will be welcome, it makes life exciting.

Although “fundamentalist Islamists”, the “Taliban”, (whatever he is – I think he publicly hung a Wireless Tele Vision Set a few years ago for capital crimes – good bloke then) and “Al Quaeda” (whatever she is – I think she has a David Frost type TV channel like Big Brother?) do represent a threat to liberal Western civilisation, and certainly a threat to its spread (which is a Crusading-Duty and an obligation laid upon us) they do not represent such an immediate short-term threat as home-grown GreeNazis.

I have spoken about these latter kinds of Green-trons before, but they will have in the end to be sorted out separately: it is a different sort of war, and more tragic, for we will have to assault or restrain our own people, who grew up with us and whom we trusted, and whom we even shagged, sometimes, because we thought they loved us for ourselves. Sex makes war and conflict harder later – ask any divorcee.

[Don’t even get tempted, while drunk, to shag willing pretty hippie Green women who invite you back after a political argument which they say they enjoyed – you will live to regret it.]

However, if we leave this Taliban bloke untouched and unexterminated, then owing to the nature of state structure currently in Pakistan – and probably in other neighbouring outfits too in the medium term –  he will get his hands on far more powerful WMDs than he has at the moment, and our task of doing what the Milibanana says will be 1,000% more difficult. I believe that Baluchistan, a large tribal gathering of some 120 million people, struggling right now to keep some kind of writ running in parts of itself, has missiles called something like “Shitbag-3” , or some such resonant acronym. We will, later, face the possibility of actual anihilation, as opposed to daily humiliation.

If we do nothing in Afghanistan in these next two decades, then the kind of spectacle that the BBC is pleased to send you, underlining its policy-position that you should “get out” (and join places like the USSR – a failed state –  in ignominy) will be amplified a hundredfold: in Baluchistan, Kashmir, Persia and places to the North and West. Probably in Burma and Malaya too if you are not careful. India will probably hold out, and the Chinese, properly unscrupulous in the /correct sense/ of the word, will stand no nonsense in Tibet and other near places.

Milibanana’s problem as Foreign Secretary (is he still?) is that he knows what is being fought for as he in an intelligent man. He’s even a Jew, for f***’s sake – so he ought to know what I and he and our enemies are talking about. However, his entire policical historiography, and his whole educational upbringing,  is based in the belief about the iniquitousness of Western liberal Classical civilisation, and how it must be aborted and attenuated at all costs, as he is a paid-up GramscoFabiaNazi.

It’s not what he can’t say, that I compain about – it’s the way he can’t say it.

He can’t say, in front of his masters, that this war is a small, tragic and necessary part of the defence of Western Civilisation, for his masters in the GramscoFabian movement won’t allow it to be said on the Wireless Tele Vision.

Because he can’t now, any more, fall back on the simple truth – which is outlined above – he has to appear to panic at the severe (by our standards today…!…think of the Somme – 19, 247 killed on 1st July 1916 alone…) loss of life among British Soldiers – some of whom might even have been his constituents. He has to put, hastily and desperately, some sort of manichaean gloss on what is by our standards really bad news. He can’t, in fact, bury it, much as he’d love to: he has to say something approximating to the truth, but he can’t put it the way it ought to be. (He’s also terrified of what he thinks “Muslim voters” will do to his party at home here…but he need not be, for as I said, the British GreeNazis are far, far more potentially lethal to him and to us than anything Islam could even dream of.)

As regards, too, the sad fate of the eight British soldiers who died in one day just now, there could be a remedy.

British modern people are not accustomed to these kinds of Wireless Tele Vision reports. Every death is an individual sorrow for the man’s family. From this there is no escape.

We are not like Stalin, the archetypal Mark-III-GramscoFabiaNazi personified, who said famously “one death is insignificant”, but being ideologues like him we knew what he meant – that did not make him right however. We deplore both the deaths and also the effects of these deaths on the political morale of the UK. (OK some of us are at leats minimal-Statists and we think the British got it least wrong in terms of defining stateness…) Charges could be laid of course at the door of the present UK government, for both hating the Armed Forces for what they represent and for their ethos of loyalty to what they undertook to do.

But in the end, this Taliban bloke is getting his munitions form somebody. That somebody can’t be far away or we might have noticed. Perhaps it’s Russia. I would not evince surprise, as their governments always cheat and lie (more fool the Russian people for failing in the last 30 years to resist more, when they could.)

But perhaps it’s not Russia. I also don’t think it’s China or Japan or India or Iran or Korea or South Africa, or Israel, or Pan-Arabia, and the like.

The point of having Nuclear weapons is to be able to point them, in public of course, at someone that is upsetting your foreign policy objectives – providing he does not have either any, or as many as you do. Therefore, whoever is supplying this Taliban man with his IEDs, and thingies that blow up Land-Rovers, ought to be able to be threatened. Otherwise, there is no point in having sumbarines that can deliver such a weapon to anywhere in the world, form anywhere unknown.

I can’t really see whay we could have any problem in stopping these unpleasant deaths among our soldiers, whose only mission is to peacefully protect the longer-term-future-survival of Western liberal Civilisation.

Like we did over eradicating slavery, for about 200 years [ – AND we had to apoligise –  we WILL get you GramscoFabiaNazi bastards…one day…and you WILL pray to be sorry, and we will not let you.]

Liberals like us want to be merciful people, but the quantity of mercy (strained or unstrained) that you will now require, when we find you finally, has become too great for the market to provide – so you will have to make do with what will be available.

You yourselves, GramscoFabiaNazis, keep on trumpeting – especially in your text books for students – that “the market” “distributes goods and resources imperfectly”…so now you can eat your own words at last.

« Older Entries