On Miscegenation: A Theory of Everything

In the EU, Australia, and North America, all aspects of our lives have now become politicized. Such a demonstrable fact admits that our societies are not only radically shifting to an augmented Marxist paradigm; but that the entire range of our human experience is also under this subversive filter. Perhaps the most significant target of this politicization process is our biology, specifically reproduction. Whether it be planned parenthood, feminism, the LGBT front, or the effects of sterilizing chemical inputs, the attack on Western reproductive behaviour has been relentless for almost a century now. And at present, the coup de grace is taking place: miscegenation. In just a few short years, a massive mainstream push has completely inundated Western society with sexualized white/non-white pairing arrangements in both institutional and commercial settings, earmarking in particular the younger generation for such programming. It is, simply put, a logical, evolutionary component to the European Replacement model which, for several generations, has subtly, but continuously been pacifying our group’s sexual acceptance of outside races. Once normalized however, there would be no going back, and the entire history of the parent haplogroup will forever cease to exist.

Typology / Design / Promotion

(1) Typology

The difficulty in achieving a complete revaluation of beliefs within a culture over two generations is impossible to comprehend but for the fact that it has simply not happened before. Some examples could be made, such as the Bolshevik assault against Russian Orthodox culture during the 1920s and 30s, the Anglo-French subjugation of the North American Indians, and the Moorish occupation of Visigothic Spain, to name a few. Although these episodes had drastically different elements at play, each operating culture under attack eventually overcame this struggle to retain much of its cultural and racial identity after a period of time. In all three cases, language, religion, art, and social infrastructures were suppressed to varying degrees by the conquering culture in its attempt to maintain dominance. But in none of these instances did the perpetrators use the forethought or subtlety that the replacement of an entire race in its own indigenous lands requires; only within the architecture of a liberal, surrogate culture, similar to that subsuming ours, may one observe such a deceptively laid design.

The inversion of values and morals occurs at a certain point in the life-arc of any particular culture. When the Roman Republic was transformed into an Imperium, its entire ethos also shifted; and the days of honorum publicus and racial sacrifice became numbered. Likewise, when Sparta could no longer resist the flow of Eastern money systems into the Greek city states with which it competed, forcing it into a titanic struggle with the Delian League, it lost its soul forever in a compulsory alliance with its spiritual nemesis, Persia. But these were only players in the early history of Western Civilization—our most cherished and finest, to be sure—whose moral ruin did not change the inherent character of the European race. As societies they had fallen to an oriental, halachic poison; but the interior lives of their peoples were still instructed by the fundamental cultural tenets of Classical Philosophy and Ethikos. In the two millennia since, the core civilization grew in size, power, and reach, before its extent and dominance began to decline on the world stage. This recent collapse, however, differs from the others that preceded it; as the impetus has come from within the general population itself, and not by some aristocratic elite or outside force, prompting a “moral ruin” that is far more expansive and deep than those previously experienced. One which has come to effectively pollute the inmost soul of every human being who can claim European ancestry: racial self-hatred.

(2) Design

So, how do you compromise a racial group’s integrity and compel it to virtual suicide? Answer: You must first establish a psychological complex that is self-critical, motivated by an abstract sense of guilt. But to develop this you will need three components which must be broadly controlled: psychology, mainstream media, and institutional support.

In Western society, psychology became prevalent towards the late 19th century. By the Great War, it had become academically and socially accepted. Its main proponents were almost exclusively Jewish, most of whom held antipathies towards classic European thought; in fact, many of these men considered stock European religious attitudes and establishment philosophy as predominantly neurotic, rather than metaphysical. Furthermore, Sigmund Freud’s examination of culture in his “Civilization and its Discontents” (1929) was a thinly veiled attack on Western society where he began undermining the significance of the individual by redefining what culture and civilization were in relation to that person. For Freud, the individual was just some libido-controlled automaton—a highly sexualized being—that fluctuated between pathological and healthy states. This rendering of humanity was absurdly reductionist, diminishing the common man to some kind of passive animal with communal instincts when he was good, maladjusted and hyper-sexual when he was not. The Jewish mentality when comparing these contrasting values is immediately apparent. But the road had been paved. And the next generation of academics, one group of German-born intellectuals in particular, took these subversive, anti-classical ideas, and rewrote them into the greatest cognitive threat ever imposed on a civilization: Cultural Marxism.

With the Frankfurt School, we have the emergence of an avant-garde group of thinkers who passionately desired a despondent, pathologically motivated, self-inimical culture to replace the burgeoning, nationalistic, optimistic European culture that was quickly eyeing the world as its dominion. They were, to a man, Marxist Jews, and their vision of a socially bankrupted Western Culture, devoid of classic European values, became the revolutionary force behind the post-1945 world. Their intellectual creation, Critical Theory, was a toxic mixture of Marx’s critical methodology, and Sigmund Freud’s subtractive view of humanity and culture. In a word, it was designed to establish a highly politcized social contract where the principle players in society were no longer people, but issues. This they realized would bring about a catastrophe in Western Civilization, a sort of collective schizophrenia. Their belief was that after this massive breakdown, in the throes of nervous exhaustion, European culture would then be powerless against the social programming necessary to make it permissive, liberal, and creatively impotent from within, entirely malleable to a Marxist intellectual elite for millennia.

(3) Promotion

The approach to promulgating such an anti-cultural model within a society is a delicate business, as the tendency of a healthy, homogeneous population is to identify then thwart alien ideas that run counter to its sense of well-being. In the case of the Frankfurt School, its principals had the fortune of deportation from Germany, only to land influential positions at a number of academic institutions in America. One can make the observation that these situations, at the most prestigious Universities, were given to these intellectuals without any competition: they were just handed placements, directing the faculties of Sociology, Philosophy, Psychology, and Law at the most distinguished institutions in the United States. They then began teaching the next generation of educated Americans how to despise their own country, its people, its traditions, its laws. Their books were published, without censorship, straight from the desk to the presses en masse, so millions of Americans became saturated with their anti-cultural invective. In fact, the entire 1960s social revolution was a synthetic psychological operation which the Frankfurt School spearheaded. It was a death-knell to all the potential that America had fostered. Since then, the United States has been a graveyard of ideas…

So how does miscegenation fit in?

Modern feminism.

Feminism did not begin as a unique, broadly defined social movement. It was a sub-category of revolutionary Marxist strategy that sought to undermine the family unit in the West. After the subsumption of feminism into modern Liberal social dynamics, which the Frankfurt School aggressively endorsed, the generally understood concept of the Family, a foundation stone of all races or cultures for millennia and a barrier to authoritative rule, was deliberately fragmented through law codes and negative socialization. By wedding them to the Liberal welfare state through social and economic sponsorship, European women were given carte blanche in their sexual and relational behaviours. After two generations, Western reproductive rates plummeted, the roles of men and women were blurred, and the sexual binary that sustained European civilization (like every culture that has ever existed) was broken. As the impaired social paradigm continued to manifest, Western women began levering their new-found “power” to optimize the benefits granted by Liberal governments. The single mother became normalized, the ostracized male was generalized. This then created the sexual vacuum that we now have.

Enter the African “refugee.”

With the advocacy of sexual options for the “liberated” Western woman, mainstream commercial institutions have initiated a major disarming campaign that has standardized mixed race coupling—but only in Western countries. The primary platforms for this hyper-sexual propaganda have been pornography, mainstream fashion advertising, talk shows, and news media: all targeting Western women. The pacified European male, choosing to become a beta surrogate rather than lose his connection to female company, has taken on a feminine, secondary role in his intimate interactions for fear of losing any sexual contact altogether. This has allowed for a higher testosteroned, culturally deficient male type to enter the sexual vacuum for reproductive dominance. And who is this new male type that our elite is marketing? Any male who is not White.

Normalizing an historically-incorrect social devolution is a typically liberal prerogative, and an essential tactic of neo-Marxism. It is a design flaw deliberately placed within the architecture of Western Civilization. The proponents of critical theory have only one supreme goal: the end of European culture; and they have made us distrust this cultural heritage. But their greatest imposition against us was the socially accepted division of the family; for prior to this, we considered the intact Family unit as natural and necessary. If we Europeans can somehow re-normalize these familial roles between each other, and find a lasting accord, the Marxist mirror can finally be smashed.

Wouldn’t it be staggering to see ourselves again?


The Tactics of Immigration


     an action or strategy carefully planned to achieve a specific end…
Immigration is a form of demographic genocide which, either by design or consequence, results in ethnic cleansing. In addition to this, Western governments are effacing their European populations by promoting a variety of other schemes such as miscegenation, abortion, homosexuality, gender dysphoria, and White guilt. But immigration has been by far the most successful approach towards complete replacement; and if this does not drastically change within the next decade or so, Europeans will be the first race to become extinct.
So who within the political class is behind immigration policy? And how have they been able to coercively open the flood gates?
Whether the discussion begins with the diaspora after the Bar Kokhba revolt, or seeks to understand the role played by fifth columns during the fall of the Visigothic Kingdom to Moslem forces in 711 AD, there has been a continuous thread, over some 2000 years, of a Jewish influence within the lands inhabited by Europeans that has sought to undermine the integrity of cultural boundaries, and more crucially, the conception of borders. Through traitorous invitation, political realignments, or financial legerdemain, these alien forces have often contrived the social conditions and historical circumstances where kingdoms and nations went to war, peoples fled their homelands, and for those caught in between, a life of brutal misery. In such a frustrating and vicious cycle, a continual pressure has been placed upon the European race. Never has a group of people been so crushed over such a length of time. Even the Asian and African Kingdoms had centuries of relative peace here and there; but for simple Europeans, a steadfast, farming culture, which had natural ties to the land and each other—the past 2000 years has been a nightmare.
And it continues.
In the gristmill of the present era, we have observable evidence of a Judeo-Globalist conspiracy to open Western countries to the importation of countless non-White peoples whose sheer numbers will out-produce the native European populations. This current state of affairs can be traced back to the mid 1960s when, in just a few short years, every Western state changed—without any popular consent—the laws governing immigration policy. In every case, Jewish leadership was responsible for these changes. The resultant break up of the dominant, homogeneous, traditional European culture ensured that a small rank and file coterie maintained its grip over Western nations by excluding any possibility of a larger, racially European competitive group from rising to positions of influence. Moreover, the social stability within many European nations gradually became compromised as the original ethno-fabric unwound, creating greater mechanisms of control against the native populations, which further reinforced the absolute dominance by this coterie over state and culture.
The following is a shortlist of Western nations who adopted these democidal immigration policies after 1960 and the Jewish ringleaders behind these efforts:
The Hart-Celler Act (United States, 1965)

Senator Jacob Javits played a prominent role in the Senate hearings for the 1965 bill. Javits authored an article entitled “Let’s Open the Gates” in which a proposed immigration level of 500,000 people per year, for 20 years, was requested, with no restrictions on national origin.

Congressman Emanuel Celler, who had fought for unrestricted immigration since the 1920s in the House of Representatives, was the main writer of the legislation.

Leo Pfeffer, who wrote many treatises and books that acted as softening propaganda for open immigration, also co-conceived the legislated material.

Norman Podhoretz was a former Comintern sympathizer turned “Neo-Con” who became a close associate of the aforementioned men; he wrote numerous articles promoting open immigration.

And Jewish organizations such as the American Jewish Congress, The Jewish Federation, the ACLU, and B’nai B’rith, all filed briefs in support of open immigration before the Senate Subcommittee during the hearings prior to the Hart-Celler Act.

The Migration Act (Australia, 1966)

Walter Lippmann played a crucial role in pressuring the Holt government to do away with racial profiling against non-White immigration; he was president of the Australian Jewish Welfare Society which, among other services, offered financial support and housing to non-White immigrants to Australia.

John Malcolm Fraser was a cabinet member during the Holt government who went on to become Prime Minister of Australia (1975-83). His mother’s maiden name was Woolf, born of a South African Jew who emigrated to Australia. Despite being minister of the War Cabinet, his Liberal Party values did not stop him from advising on an “easing” of immigration restrictions. This sympathy no doubt gave him a leg up on his competitors when he campaigned for Prime Minister a decade later.

The British Nationality Act (The United Kingdom, 1981)

The Labour Party, true to its Marxist roots, began a series of Nationality Acts from 1948 onward that established the rule of jus soli, whereby citizens of the British Commonwealth could now migrate to Britain.

Ralph Miliband was born in the Jewish Quarter of Warsaw. He emigrated to England in 1940. After the war, he joined the Labour Party, despite his hatred for English culture, and proceeded to become an intellectual proponent of the New Left. His writings and lectures proved influential in the reworking of several British Nationality Acts over the decades, as they became increasingly more open to non-White immigration.

Maurice Edelman was a lifelong Member of  British Parliament. He was a francophile and admirer of David Ben Gurion. His efforts over the years as a Labour Party MP included a number of published works, several of which sought to influence how Britons saw themselves. Like many of his ilk, he considered the peoples of Britain to be the ancestors of migrants.

Canada, Germany, Sweden, France, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, and so many others, also had major overhauls to their National Immigration policies during the same period. The mainstream narrative explained this phenomenon as a development of lower birthrates among natural Europeans; then there was a financial reasoning behind the influx, one which argued the fallacy that Western countries had a desperate shortage of low-skilled workers; and now the latest explanation for mass immigration has been given: that Europeans need to become more diverse—despite the demonstrable fact that about 97% of all hair colours, and 96% of all eye colours attributed to human beings belong exclusively to the European haplogroup.

The explanation that we are never given is simply this: that an internationalist cartel, operating within Western nations, has designs on governing the planet at some point in the future. They have shared this common goal since the Age of Revolution; and this, in part, helps explain why their long term plans always go unnoticed—because they think in terms of centuries, while Europeans can only see from one generation to the next. And it matters not what one calls them: Liberal, Globalist, Socialist, Communist, Cultural Marxist, or Jewry—in toto they are one and the same. They desire a one world cultural order, ruled by a centrally controlled government, with all of humanity under its thumb. And for them, European nationalism, since 1848, has been a barrier to that goal…

Therefore, Europeans must be replaced.

This philosophical point is essential to understanding their religion, or Globalism. Much of the world already operates in some manner like it, but conditionally, on a micro level—a subsistence version of it, a pseudo-communism if you will—due to poverty (Africa), culture (China), or caste (India). However, the individuality and free-spirited nature of Europeans and their ability to organize and express these traits through cultural celebration (nationalism) is a roadblock to world government. Even when given various forms of socialism to live by, many European cultures could just not adapt collectively or metaphysically to it. And once it becomes understood that the purest form of this doctrine, Communism, was simply a Jewish-designed belief system to persuade Gentiles to abandon the notion of property rights, relinquish their free will to an authority that ruled over them, and divorce themselves from the values of their culture and kindred inasmuch as they related to the state, then it makes perfect sense why the Europeans have stubbornly held their ground through dozens of the world’s greatest social cataclysms, of which the Bolshevik Revolution and World Wars were only a part.

And now the final push looms large. An army of culturally alien, hostile peoples have been brought into our midst. Many are males of military age. They want to pair up and breed with native European women, which our elected governments offer up to them; they want their own laws and cultural norms to be dominant; they defile our religious and historical spaces while waiting for the day when Western governments finally say to them: now go, kill the White menace. And to think that it all began with just a few modest initiatives, some cosmetic changes to our immigration policies only a few short decades ago, when a man like Enoch Powell could deliver a speech that still meant something…

Yes, there will be rivers of blood…

Who Builds Civilization? Or: Who is Destroying the West?

A culture is the sole prerequisite for the development of a civilization—better put: a cohesive, homogeneous, self-comprehending group is the fundamental bedrock to the idea. There cannot be civilization without this. Period. But to attain these elemental safeguards such as compatibility, unique identity, and collective awareness, there must be a driving will that governs the group consciousness. And in every case where a successful, enduring civilization was created, a racially motivated, conservative, patriarchal system can be distinguished as its constructing force. In Europe, this was the template for 3000 years; and now this is changing.

Group morality is the central structure of an articulated culture. It almost always begins when a racially developed core group has obtained its beliefs through evolutionary bias and group-based self-examination. Its opinions, belief systems, and comprehension of “right and wrong” are inherently bound to the developing, racial socialization of the group. Put more simply: there is a necessary bond between the members of a race that links them together far beyond the mundane forms of society and its infrastructures; and this familia supra omnia is deeply sublimated in a transcendental way. Many philosophers from antiquity were strangely correct when they claimed that each race had its own spiritual genus, or soul. And in Western Civilization for the past 60 years, this soul has been under attack.

So. Who are the Assailants? What are their methods? And what is their motive?

In his landmark book, The Culture of Critique, Dr. Kevin MacDonald effectively argued that through an uncanny form of group evolutionary strategy, the Jewish people of Europe (primarily the Ashkenazim) developed forms of alternative control within the political, economic, and social landscape of the European West. By usurping lines of communication, monopolizing the movement of goods, creating media empires and fiat currency, swapping out financial securities from government debts (then lending back into these), establishing think tanks and NGOs to subvert society at every point, bankrupting working classes, and then, when all else failed, manufacturing both European and Colonial wars—this group was able to out-maneuver the ruling elite of the West and, perforce, its peoples. In fact, one can assert that this foreign group now acts as the hand which guides the entirety of Western Civilization.

In other words, sovereignty has been a false idol here for a very long time.

To cover the myriad details in the methodology requires a book. And it must be encouraged that you read Dr. MacDonald’s work so as to comprehend the sheer scope of this group’s endevours against European culture. But from our perspective, after researching the primary reasons for these in-group strategies, the motives have always loomed hazily in the distance; and although they were not so easily understood at first, a grim conclusion persisted: That there is an Elite within the upper strata of the Ashkenazim whose sole purpose is the utter annihilation of the European racial core. And yes, this concept is alien to us. It is the most difficult idea to rationalize, especially for those coming from a European cultural milieu, wherein the humanities are integral to its scholastic sensibility. We recoil from these prospects, for they do not bode well for any other rationalizations that follow them. And yet it must be stated. This is the key to understanding the European predicament in the year of our Lord, 2016. And it is a predicament that will not change for several centuries…

But why? Why remove an entire racial group from the human historical process, especially one that has contributed far more than all the other racial groups combined? What benefit does it serve?

Well, if your in-group strategy is global hegemony, then your first priority would be to remove the primary competitor against you—even when this very same adversary was inclined to collaborate with you. Moses versus Pharaoh. This is the template—inverted to be sure; and the Hiburu have always defined themselves through conflict. But when you can persuade your enemy to fight himself, then you have learned a quintessential tool that can be passed down for generations. This is their wisdom.

Furthermore, following an implicit tenet guiding this system, they have understood that a virile, masculine, patriarchy—which has dictated European civilization for three millennia—is the most concrete impediment to their progress. To neutralize this cultural strength, they have instilled a sexually ambiguous, highly feminized set of social platforms within the society at large, encouraging unnatural and hyper-sexual behaviours in order to check the healthy, normalizing sexual interests within European communities. This lowers birth rates and depresses the racial sense of self-preservation. These vector points are usually softened following periods of academic agitprop and media boosting, policies that were best developed by the think tank groups that were allowed to escape Germany in the mid 1930s under the Frankfurt School umbrella. This nihilistic, post-communist philosophy of Critical Theory which these aliens created became what is now known as Cultural Marxism: the defining religion of European Exterminism.

But the greatest piece of black magic that these psychologists ever produced was that an entire race of people, through a strange form of legerdemain, was forced to see the entire cosmos through Ashkenazi eyes. Remember this statement for the rest of your life: we see the entire universe as they would have us see it. When Europeans peer into their own souls, when they consider their own values, estimate their self-worth, or their perspective on all things the mind perceives—all of it is muddied with an Halachic narrative filled with false morals and self-deception. They removed our classical Mythos by stealth, in which the older archetypes had been developed, where unambivalent morality coexisted with sexual division, while being set around family structures in order to maintain greater opportunity for the racial reproduction and social integrity of the group. This was normal. And this should still be the norm.

So as the West is quickly becoming infested with non-partisan, male youth from the third world, and while women of European descent are indoctrinated to miscegenate with alien groups outside of ours, we must begin to question the merit of the dupes who rule over us—our elected officials, bureaucratic legislators, and local authorities. They have not fulfilled their primary function, which is to secure and protect our native population, for they now serve Mammon. And besides, when did we ever ask to be replaced? Does our political class believe it has the right to replace us in this fashion? And if ballots no longer mean something, then is it not our godly right to take their authority away by any means possible? I should hope so.

The “White” Versus “European” Identity Crisis

The Mainstream narrative has narrowed its scope over the past ten years in what it defines as European culture. And this has been by design, as there is no evidence that it occurred organically. In fact, there is ample proof that the characterization of “Whiteness” and the deliberate dislocation of this modern concept from its cultural and racial core—that of a European realization and identity—has been a massive victory by the Liberal Elite over the collective consciousness of European peoples. Furthermore, this continued effort to abstract our self-identity into the synthetic abstraction which has come to be known as “White” will assuredly annihilate whatever sense of distinctiveness we still have left while leaving our entire group vulnerable to the racialist, marginalizing policies of the Cultural Marxist establishment. The whole point of this endevour has been to pacify the instinctive urge to defend one’s family, nation, and birthrights. It is that simple. The result has been the manufactured migration of 150 million non-Europeans into Australia, Europe, and North America over the past 50 years without a single significant incident of pushback. This could never have occurred with a group of people who were self-aware.

So, if race is a social construct, then why promote such an antithetical label as “White” into the mainstream dialogue so often? And why promote this label only in negative terms? Won’t people see through this at some point?

Well, the answer is twofold: The label is being sold to non-Europeans who will either justify further their victim status, or use it as invective against a competitive group; conversely, it is simultaneously being sold to Europeans who will begin to identify as “White”. The former transfers greater cultural power to an under-class of potential enemies to European culture; the latter arrests the development of European identity by making us ashamed of our selves while identifying with a negative, completely false concept that is empty of any content—in other words, we are now identifying with nothingness.  This must be repeated here: the MSM and the Cultural Marxist academic elite have essentially emptied Western society of its cultural content. And when you cannot identify with anything having such content, you have nothing left to defend. The nightmare of this scenario, and the black magic of those behind it should tell you how deep this group’s hatred of our people and culture runs.

This goes beyond simple genocide.

And while we are on the topic of genocide. If we were to use the standard definitions and legal criteria when using the term “White” to represent the native European peoples, then at least two of the five conditions have been met for establishing that genocide has been conducted by our political elites—with international entities in support—against the populations of Australia, Canada, the United States, and the EU. In the United Nations Convention on Genocide (see link above), both actions (c) and (d) were and are still being orchestrated against European peoples in the West, while the charge can be made that the latter portion of (b) has also been applied. But because race is a social construct, none of the claims above have any value since race only matters when it can be used to violate or dishonour native Europeans, or to entitle non-Europeans; just as race can be used to support the socio-political development of ethnic minorities, but must never be used to isolate the behavioural patterns of these very same groups for gathering statistical data.

The hypocrisy between these comparisons is obvious to most Europeans living in the West, but without a core identity operating, and the social consequences for those who speak against these discrepancies, only a few faint voices can be heard from the dark. And if you listen closely enough, you just might make out the last dying echo of an entire race of people…

Soft Borders and Globalisation

“Macbeth’s self-justifications were feeble—and his conscience devoured him. Yes, even Iago was a little lamb too. The imagination and the spiritual strength of Shakespeare’s evildoers stopped short at a dozen corpses. Because they had no ideology…”

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

The Globalisation platform requires a myriad of transformations economically, politically, and socially before it can fully consolidate. Most importantly however, none of these matter if sovereign borders are not redefined or eliminated altogether; in fact, this has been the sole stumbling block over the past two decades since the breakdown of the Soviet Union. One of the keys as to why the Internationalists have failed to make greater strides recently is European nationalism. It will just not go away. And why should it? Generations have fought and died for ideas that were intricately linked to home and country. It runs as deep as instinct. Sublimate it a bit, and it is essentially spiritual. So then, in spite of this, how are the Political Elites dealing with it? Well, they have just decided to forget that borders even exist.

When Angela Merkel, against all logic or principle, invited the entire Third World—and by default, the whole of Islam—to safely enter the European continent, the first phase of a borderless system of governance was ushered in. By telling European member states to “stand down” before the massive inflow of millions, using threats of economic sanctions and blackmail to enforce compliance, the EU bureaucratic elite were able to give up an entire continent of nations and peoples without a single shot being fired. Even more stunning than this was the complacence with which it was met; and in some cases, was cheered on by the multitude of naive, Liberal Left youth of Europe. To make things more complex, the vast set of loans required for this operation which interlinked so many of the larger member states now created an economic pact of mutual self-destruction, thereby getting the European tax payer to finance his own doom.

A few leaders were not fooled by all of this. They knew that the cover story of so-called “Syrian Refugees” was a fraud; that it was vote swapping in the short run, and nation-breaking in the long run. But severe limits on sovereign decision-making since the Lisbon Treaty was signed handcuffed them. In Viktor Orban’s case (Hungary), despite a 98% vote against refugee quotas in the referendum this week, all of his work towards ending the migrant problem backfired as the turnout was too low. This was, in part, engineered by NGOs who told Left-leaning partisans not to vote at all, subsequently sabotaging the entire referendum. The Liberal youth were only too happy to listen, while they smugly laughed away their inheritance and future. So how is it possible that so many Europeans just don’t seem to care?

Well, the short answer is: they have been modeled to think in global paradigms. With the exception of Eastern Europe, where five decades of brutal Communism gave the nations who lived through it a healthy dislike for leftist macro-politics, the majority of Europeans have been pummeled with cultural indoctrination. A liberal, socialist worldview is the only intellectual, popular, and scientific narrative they have ever known. Since 1945, most European countries, and especially Germany, have been collectively ambushed by a coercive brand of thought reform, whereby a general sense of guilt is placed into a part of one’s personality core, which then acts as a regulator for filtering ideas and influencing modes of thinking. These “liberal” values are disseminated in school curricula, advertising, and entertainment. All of these “hubs” are operated and controlled by a Liberal Elite which is constantly vetting itself. No different than any run-of-the-mill Communist system—excepting of course the prisons and torture—just with the added touch of public porn and Hollywood glamour. So by entrenching a sustained guilt complex beneath all of this, the notion of a borderless world community begins to sound rather pleasant, perhaps even ideal. The ruling establishment then uses the fuzzy feelings this produces while committing genocide upon the European people—who even foot the bill for it!

 The tragedy of soft, open borders is a process that will play out over several generations. The cultural tensions on the streets of Canada, America, and Europe will seethe and boil, sometimes erupting into mob violence. And, as in the previous, most notorious attempt at mass culture-mixing in Russia, where the Bolsheviks murdered well over 50 million gentiles by moving great swathes of people across ethnic and religious boundaries like so many cattle, the popular unrest will need to be quickly and savagely put down. But the Russian Man still had his cultural memory, and resisted until the very end. In contrast, the domesticated, almost effete, Western male will not be up to the task; while his female counterpart will willingly go over to the other side as they are wont to do. Demographics will ensure that this cannot be solved in the democratic political sphere, and our very own socialist governments will not allow their immigrant voting machine come to any harm; so do not be surprised when the cross hairs of their ire are fixed on you when you speak up for your so-called rights…

 Welcome to the borderless state!


Gender Dysphoria and the Modern State

What do you get when you combine wanton narcissism, widespread nutritional deficiency, and spiritual melancholia? Answer: the contemporary genderless youth. And if that isn’t enough, the countless hours hovering over electronic devices, lack of outdoor activity, and a general disdain for healthy social diversions has brought the latest generation of Western youth to a point that now imperils the continued existence of our civilization. Even the usual disengagement of your typical youth, a malaise that has been ruthlessly fostered by the media elite ever since its victory over McCarthy in the 1950s, has an uncanny edge to it: this is an utterly nihilistic group of young people; and many of them literally do not care about anything but themselves. Sociologists will say this is predictable teenage behaviour going back to the stone age. Meteorologists will assert that this is evidence of Climate Change—but none of it deals with the root cause. For all of this is fostered by the individual postmodern personality. And in the following I will attempt to explain how, during its formative stages, the current generation is being modified to suit the Establishment’s desire for a homogeneous, sexually sterile, western human type.

From the very beginning, when the first communities began organizing themselves through governments, the issue of sexuality and the legislation of laws pertaining to it were central in their governance. This can be seen codified in so many religious books and clay tablets that, for economy’s sake, I need not develop this notion any further. For the most part, the intended effect was to introduce commonly understood standards of practice, or forms of engagement when it came to marriage, procreation, and healthy sexual practices. As communities evolved into ever more complex polities, institutions were required to handle the various branches of society where oversight was needed, such as policing, courts of law, or currency creation. These were originally intended to serve a social purpose, that is, for the greater good of the people the laws were supposed to represent. As time went by, however, the idea of government began to change.

Special interests always had a hand in ruling society; no kingdom could have governed without them. But with the slow decay of monarchical absolutism and the rise of the elitist schools of governance, these special interest groups now had greater sway in politics. They became sponsors of new social theories, which included a belief that the rule of law must be expanded to all facets of the civilization—and this meant bigger government. The last three centuries of Western political history, it can be argued, has been the struggle between the two ideologies of pervasive versus minimal governance. However that may be, the rise of Marxism and the twentieth century idea of total government ensured that the Statist philosophy of rule would be the contemporary method of choice, as so many predicted not too long ago.

So, what does this have to do with pan-sexual delusions?

In a word: everything. Despite some attempts by a few good politicians to impede the process, the increasing centralization of government and bureaucratic overreach, particularly in the EU, Canada, and the USA, means that a massive expansion of law codes and legislation has been made possible. In addition to this, all of the entities above have a ruling class that is infatuated with cultural Marxist social theory, a model that offers complete control over society and the individual. Furthermore, considering that cultural Marxist philosophy is, practicably speaking, a social engineering model, there is now the potential to create a completely new human type. And if absolute power is their goal, the last thing they would want is a confident, heterosexually virile, independently minded population that, by its very nature, poses as an existential threat to their political monopoly. Rather, over a generation or two, permit the introduction of phthalate esters into the food chain, allow t he unimpeded rise of estrogens to build up in boys, and testosterone in girls. Forcefully legislate sex education curricula into primary schools, with particular consideration given to LGBT attitudes, and sexual confusion will become the engine of society.

Hence, a gender-confused sexual dysphoria becomes a key opening, or vector point, into the very heart of a people. Moreover, I contend that sexual confusion is the weapon of choice that the establishment has chosen to use against Western populations, whose organic and cultural integrity will become so splintered so as to seem like the entire social order has collective schizophrenia. There is ample evidence to suggest that Western governments have had a preoccupation with scientific research pertaining to the control of human populations over the past 100 years, particularly in the fields of eugenics and psychiatry. Other tactics such as the creation of divisional social issues, cultural Marxist regimentation, and the institutionalization of state dependents have done endless harm. But nothing offers more power to a ruling class than the absolute control over the reproductive ability of a population, period.

Furthermore, new lifestyles and, more crucially, the ideology that guides them, wrecked the nuclear family model within two generations. Children were now being raised by single mothers, next door neighbours, and television sets. The transmission of core family values has ended. Traditional archetypes and the philosophical relationship between family members has been dismantled. To make things worse, agricorporations and synthetic foods companies insist on unhealthy marketing schemes which has drastically altered Western eating habits. Untested industrial materials, plastics, biotoxins, chemically-caused allergies, vaccinations, and rampant depression are all coalescing to target entire populations in a very short span of time. So it is no coincidence, in my opinion, that the sudden rise of autism and gender dysphoria both occurred nearly at the same time. The difference being that Autism is not a mental illness, nor is it state sponsored.

Included with the above, the least considered cause of the gender-confused generation (and this is statistically borne out) is the fatherless household. In the US alone, about 30% of all teenagers suffering from gender dysphoria come from single mother homes. Realistically, however, the rate is probably much higher. The father archetype influences personality and sexual awareness far more profoundly than the mother; for it is the primordial function of the father archetype to promote the fundamental distinguishing of opposites and, consequently, differentiation of various unconscious contents. Carl Jung wrote: “There is no consciousness without discrimination of opposites”. For so many now, it is also the lack of a father that has brought them to this unhappy place. When the consciousness centers are not being lit up, the ability to discriminate between opposites (ie. sexes) is handicapped. It is that simple.

The long term consequences of the Western Elite’s tinkering in social engineering could not have been known to them, but they struck gold nevertheless. And what are the odds they will let a patriarchal model flourish once again in the West? I should think they would rather it burn like a funeral pyre than let go of this halachic power. Let them just try…



The Attack on the Traditional German Family

Germany, which has become the model upon which the entire West will be refashioned, amidst its own self-abolishment, has yet again made it very clear that the traditional notions of what it is to be “German” are no longer reconcilable. In a strange, horrifyingly obvious attempt to impose the new social narrative last February, the widely-circulated parenting magazine, Baby und Familie, published an article that embodied wholly the decline of European civilization.

The title of the piece was Gefahr von Rechts, or Danger from the Right. In it was depicted an artist’s renderings of solely blonde mothers with their blonde children in various settings such as playgrounds or day care centers. However, the accompanying text was thinly veiled, deliberately anti-German doublespeak. The writer warned of a rise in “right-wing” extremism amongst middle class native Germans, especially in the eastern rural areas. Parents, the writer cautioned, should be vigilant at all times, but that the warning signs were easily detected if one knew what to look for. And what are these indicators, she asked?

1. If the children are “inconspicuous, cute, and engaged.”

2. The family is generally nice and dedicated to one another.

3. If the children are cleanly clothed, obedient, and not overly loud.

4. The parents and children do not have American logos on their clothing.

5. If the children exhibit attentiveness beyond their years.

6. Young girls who often exhibit “accurately braided hair and wear long skirts.”

7. If the parents try to build personal relationships with other parents.

8. Parents who want to build a “better community.”

9. If the family seems “too normal.”

So basically, if the parents and children are modeled on traditional German values and principles, then they are likely to be some kind of neo-Nazi kinsfolk. This underhanded betrayal of German culture is stomach-churning to say the least, but it has an ulterior objective that is less obvious: it intends to make a corrupted vision of an ideal family. This is not just an attack on Classical European values, it is an assault on the very fabric of society. The end result can only be a degenerate form of the Family paradigm. And for a magazine that receives government support, this is completely outrageous. One must come to the rational conclusion, then, that the German government is intentionally breaking down the moral standards of its own people, where things such as dedication towards others, sense of community, mindfulness, high self-esteem, and happiness within the family unit are held in contempt and no longer valued.

The NGO think tank that was consulted for this article, the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, is partly run by former Stasi agents whose mission has not changed in the 25 years since the Berlin Wall fell: Global Marxism and the annihilation of the nation state. If this means wiping out the cultural value systems of entire peoples, then so be it. The thin veneer of their operation uses the typical rhetoric of a pro-democratic, one-world-community organization: but the reality is quite the opposite. And the danger this group poses to Germans is far reaching. The fact that thousands of young, progressive liberals and socialists make up the bulk of its volunteer army gives it an impetus that will last for decades. The harm this will do shall continue for several generations, or at least until German identity is utterly put to death.

Anetta Kahane, the founder of the Amadeu Antonio Foundation, has for years pushed the notion that Germany will fail as a state unless unmitigated millions of third world migrants enter the country as saviours. One of her closest associates, and foundation member, Julia Schramm, has even gone so far as to state that “Germans are not human,” and “Let the bombs fall, let it burn, betray Germany.” Heike Radvan, the well known third wave feminist and gender specialist, is also a contributor to this organization’s philosophical system. With such a nihilistic, self serving intelligentsia at its core, this group will effectively rush the German nation headlong into a nightmarish and brutal end…


*Originally published by the author on the Black Pigeon Speaks website, October 4, 2016