Sensible common sense, the traditional outlook of the vast majority, is now regarded as right-wing extremism. But what has caused this dislocation of the political spectrum?
by Colin Liddell
A near Orwellian police state with bans on weapons, bans on words and thoughts, and an incessant flow of PC propaganda is no defence against the insanities created by “multicultural Britain,” as we saw yet again in London, where we were recently ‘treated’ to an iPhone clip of a Sub-Saharan Muslim lecturing us with hands crimsoned with the blood of an off-duty British soldier that he and an associate had just hit with a car and then butchered with knives and a meat cleaver on the streets of Woolwich in South East London.
The basic problem is not the nature of Sub-Saharan Africans or the nature of Islam. These have been well-known for a long time and are what they are for a variety of reasons that it is superfluous to go into here. No, the real problem is one of politics and ideology, and, in short, of the systemic dislocation of the political spectrum.In the wake of such horror, we can expect to hear the usual cries for “tolerance” and the throb-in-the-throat pleas not to let the “extremists” win. But the trouble is the extremists won long ago. What other word can you use for political parties like the Conservative and Labour Parties that have been creating cultural chaos and enacting genocide and race replacement on a massive scale?
The only extremists are those holding the reins of government, as they have been doing for the last 60 years. But they would have you believe that they are the “moderates,” the reasonable ones, and that the extremists are the “unrepresentative” Muslims who committed the Woolwich atrocity and the “Far Right” parties and organizations who have opposed mass immigration and the kind of multiracialism that has Sub-Saharan Muslims living cheek-by-slashed-jowl with troops serving the interests of America and Israel.
The Muslims who committed this atrocity are not extremists. They are following one of the broadest roads in a major world religion, a religion that grew up among a band of desert cutthroats and expanded by conquest, violence, intimidation, slavery, and mass rape; a religion that tolerates nothing but itself and drives its more logical adherents to acts of violence.
A so-called “moderate” Muslim is nothing more than a bad Muslim, someone who probably drinks alcohol and eats pork as well. A good Muslim is one who acts within the genocidal dictates of the religion’s founder. Needless to say, the rest of us should avoid good Muslims like the plague and be wary of bad Muslims in case they start taking their religion seriously.
The so-called “racists” and “fascists” who oppose multiracial Britain and wish not only to stop mass immigration but also to start the necessary process of “exigration” – the removal of the unassimilatable immigrant population – are not the extremists either. These people are common sense moderates, who, despite the lies of their higher and betters and the endless extremist propaganda of the “multicultural” state, realized at some gut level that the ruling elites were creating a madhouse.
The extremists are David Cameron, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, John Major, Margaret Thatcher, Jim Callaghan, Edward Heath, Harold Wilson, Alec Douglas-Home, Harold Macmillan, and Anthony Eden, the prime ministers who facilitated the process by which Britain has been transformed into the Bedlam it is today.
The extremists are the media, the BBC and the newspapers of the oligarchs, who have bandied about the word “racist” in an attempt to suppress any opposition to the Third World colonization of Britain, in effect creating a society whose every second thought is now race.
The extremists are the academics, who have used their intelligence to blind themselves for the pleasures of sneering at lowly common sense and basking in the glow of a false moral smugness, while furthering their lie-driven careers.
But the extremists are also the majority of the British people who have voted for these politicians, listened to these journalists, and respected these academics, all the while feeling that something was deeply wrong.
Things like the increasing imposition of multicultural totalitarianism and the Woolwich atrocity that it pathetically failed to stop are not accidents. They are the symptoms of a deep disease of the political system. This disease is extremism, but not as the mass media uses the term.
Extremism exists naturally at the extreme ends of any system. Think of it like a bell curve. The left and right sides of the curve – the ‘extremes’ – taper to nothing, while the centre bulges to the highest point and contains most of the mass.
The fact that extremes exist in any system is not a problem in itself, and, in the grand scheme of things, may even be necessary. The problem we have in the West is that “the bulge” has been dislocated so that now the weight of opinion and power has been dislocated to the extreme Left for the last 60 years.
What is ‘centric’ or moderate about the ideas on which modern Britain is based? Nothing! The viewpoint that race is a construct, that blood exerts no pull on the human heart, that loyalty to your own kind is evil, and that we are all blank slates is self-evidently an extremist Leftist one, but it is one that has become displaced towards the centre of our society.
What is “extremist” about the wish to prevent your country being colonized and your race sunk in a flood of Third World immigration, degradation, and animalistic violence? This is self evidently a centric notion, but in today’s insane world this is given the name “far-right,” “fascist,” or “racist,” all words signifying extremism and evil.
Sensible common sense, the traditional outlook of the vast majority, is now regarded as right-wing extremism. But what has caused this dislocation of the political spectrum? The causes are many, but essentially it is the switch from a society characterized by structure, ties, and values to one based on fluidity, nexus, and price. This shift requires a change in the basic concept of humanity from a static notion based on essence and being to a dynamic notion based on function and interaction: synapses instead of neurons, algebra instead of numbers.
This results in the cult of “androidism,” where anything man-shaped is considered equivalent and connected to every other thing that is man-like, with the ability to acquire money the only distinguisher. This is how multinationals, super states, and global elites see the world, and it creates the fluidity and interchangeability required by late-period global capitalism to facilitate more economic interactions, be they Keynsian or Austrian, public sector or private. To revert to a world of structure, ties, and values would cause an economic meltdown (actually much to be desired), so we are forced to live outside our mental comfort zone and fall down before the Golden Calf of multiculturalism.
The extremists who control the West see androidism as a means to facilitate short-term economic interests – their own and also that of the wider society (hence the widespread support for this stupidity) – but they also see it as a solution to the problems that it creates. Not only does androidism broaden markets, enlarge the labour pool, and create marketable stresses and problems, but it also promises the solution to the chaos it unleashes in the vast reprogramming of the human race.
Be the subjects Sub-Saharans with markedly lower IQs or Muslims with a deeply incompatible culture, the androidist extremists who control the West believe that they can use “education” and “culture” to maintain the status quo in their vast game of demographic musical chairs. Sub-Saharans can be educated to replace low-breeding Europeans and Muslims can be culturally reprogrammed by the potency and insidiousness of Western popular culture.
In this view, the great multiracial cities of West are educational laboratories doing what has never been done before, or vast cultural concentration camps exterminating the awkward culture of the incomers in a flood of porn, feminism, consumerism, individualism, and sheer godlessness.
Credit where it’s due: This is a titanic theory and astounding in its scope – if it works. But the great flaw with extreme ideas is that they are extreme for a reason, and this reason is their more tenuous connection with reality. This is how you know they are extreme. This is the case with androidism. Just because someone has two arms and two legs, and walks upright, doesn’t mean that he is equivalent to all the other two-armed and two-legged creatures walking upright. The atrocity in Woolwich is a graphic example of this much denied truism.