Featured Discussions - The 4 Freedoms Library2024-03-29T00:39:52Zhttp://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topic/list?feed=yes&xn_auth=no&featured=1Feetocracy: Resolving the Vulnerabilities of the Democratic Modeltag:4freedoms.com,2023-05-08:3766518:Topic:2780292023-05-08T01:27:12.804ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>There are Protected Core Documents (PCD) in the Admin room, intended to frame and summarise the core ideas of this site. I'm linking to it from this Ideology and Dialogue Room, to make it easier to find, as it is so important. </p>
<p><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/admin/forum/topics/full-mission-statement">http://4freedoms.com/group/admin/forum/topics/full-mission-statement</a></p>
<p>There are Protected Core Documents (PCD) in the Admin room, intended to frame and summarise the core ideas of this site. I'm linking to it from this Ideology and Dialogue Room, to make it easier to find, as it is so important. </p>
<p><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/admin/forum/topics/full-mission-statement">http://4freedoms.com/group/admin/forum/topics/full-mission-statement</a></p> Socialism, Conservatism & Liberalism - some definitionstag:4freedoms.com,2019-07-19:3766518:Topic:2038982019-07-19T16:11:31.778ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<ul>
<li><span><strong>Socialism</strong>:</span><br></br> <span>A theory of government based upon the ownership and control of capital, land, and means of production by the community as a whole.</span><br></br> <span>A political theory advocating public ownership of the means of production and the sharing of political power by the whole community.</span><br></br> <span>1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively…</span></li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li><span><strong>Socialism</strong>:</span><br/> <span>A theory of government based upon the ownership and control of capital, land, and means of production by the community as a whole.</span><br/> <span>A political theory advocating public ownership of the means of production and the sharing of political power by the whole community.</span><br/> <span>1. Any of various theories or systems of social organization in which the means of producing and distributing goods is owned collectively or by a centralized government that often plans and controls the economy.</span><br/> <span>2. The stage in Marxist-Leninist theory intermediate between capitalism and communism, in which the means of production are collectively owned but a completely classless society has not yet been achieved.</span><br/> <span>1. (Economics) an economic theory or system in which the means of production, distribution, and exchange are owned by the community collectively, usually through the state. It is characterized by production for use rather than profit, by equality of individual wealth, by the absence of competitive economic activity, and, usually, by government determination of investment, prices, and production levels. Compare capitalism</span><br/> <span>2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system<br/> You could say that the present problem with socialists is that they have taken the principles of equality and sharing to an extreme.<br/> <br/></span></li>
<li><p><strong>Capitalism</strong>: <br/> An economic system in which the means of production and distribution are privately or corporately owned and development occurs through the accumulation and reinvestment of profits gained in a free market.<br/> (Economics) Also called: free enterprise or private enterprise an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, characterized by the freedom of capitalists to operate or manage their property for profit in competitive conditions.<br/> an economic system in which investment in and ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange of wealth is made and maintained chiefly by private individuals or corporations.</p>
</li>
<li><p><strong>Liberalism</strong>: <br/> A political theory founded on the natural goodness of humans and the autonomy of the individual and favoring civil and political liberties, government by law with the consent of the governed, and protection from arbitrary authority. A political and social philosophy advocating individual freedom, representational forms of government, progress and reform, and protection of civil liberties. A political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, parliamentary legislatures, governmental assurances of civil liberties and individual rights, and nonviolent modification of institutions to permit continued individual and social progress. A movement in modern Protestantism that emphasizes freedom from tradition and authority, the adjustment of religious beliefs to scientific conceptions, and the spiritual and ethical content of Christianity.</p>
</li>
</ul>
<p>In general, I'm not in favour of obsessing about the 'accepted' word definitions. As we all know, Islam is not a race, but if someone wants to say that being transphobic is racist, I'll ask them for their definition of 'racist', then I'll define 'racist 2', to partition off a separate meaning, if I need it. It doesn't matter, they get hung anyway. Their argument does not depend on the particular meaning, it depends on the EQUIVOCATION between 2 different meanings, and the attempt to get the benefits of meaning 2 while using the facts of meaning 1. </p>
<p>So, Muslims saying that Islamophobia is racist, are taking the genetic racial meaning and trying to glue it to the group affiliation meaning of Muslim. However they define their words, this trick can be exposed. At the end of the day, there are white, yellow and pink Muslims, so their attempt to blur the boundaries is exposed easily. </p>
<p>I will try remember the definitions of Socialism, Capitalism and Liberalism tho, for my own benefit, as well as for public argument. That said, he could happily reject the interviewers demand that he define those words. He could ask the interviewer to define the words and then say if he agrees. If the interviewer says that he needs to show he can define the words in use, then he should ask the interviewer to define 'cynical' or 'irony' or 'tautology' or 'expressionism' or 'mendacious'. I bet he can't. The point is, the normal population is constantly using words they can't define. That is the miracle of language, as people like Chomsky will tell you.</p>
<p>Actually, I have a strange ability to define any word you throw at me. I was on a holiday when I defined a few words for the non-English speakers, and a lady there was astonished. I think its not the norm? So nobody should expect you to trot out a definition of words you are using, unless you are a thought leader in that area, in which case you should be able to, as part of your educational mission.</p>
<p>In any case, I don't think that definition of Liberalism gets to the heart of the matter, it basically states the effects, of the thinking, it shows the leaves not the roots and trunk. So I'll give my definition.</p>
<p>Liberalism is the belief that we can construct a better system of human governance, by using principles of universal and equal human rights, equally and fairly applied justice, democratic mandate, civil institutions, and peaceful change. These principles will be applied by human intelligence and pure reason and human feeling (like conscience, compassion, sympathy and kindness), without being restricted by whatever institutions, norms, laws or cultural traditions that have arisen through historical development. </p>
<p>Liberalism begins with the Enlightenment, when ancient wisdom and ancient authority were no longer accepted without examination: from that point, everything is up for grabs; everything is potentially open to change. </p>
<p>Liberalism is fundamentally a (conceited) belief that the purity and power of the human mind in the current age, is superior to all the accumulated wisdom that has been stored through the ages in societies laws, institutions and cultural mores. It began with the bible language going from Greek and Latin scholars to being read by English speaking plebs, and is ending with words like 'marriage', 'man' and 'woman' being redefined.</p>
<p>Now that I've defined Liberalism properly, we can properly say what a conservative is. </p>
<p>A conservative believes that the purity and power of the human mind is INFERIOR to the accumulated wisdom of previous ages, and that the social knowledge that has EVOLVED and become ENCAPSULATED in the institutions, laws, traditions, cultural mores and even language, of the people over tens of thousands of years, is far more powerful, insightful, intelligent and reliable, than any 'superior', 'more enlightened', new theory or model that a single human or group of humans can concoct in their 'clever' discussions, even in a whole lifetime. </p>
<p>For example, the idea of marriage is older than the first human civilisations, identified by the cities and written records that first appeared 6000 years ago, and by spoken myths and legends that were handed down verbally before then. If marriage between man and woman is 10,000 years old, then its a concept has been tested and evolved through at least 400 generations. That's 400 times more testing than any single human perform in his life. You get the idea. </p>
<p>Thus for a conservative, everything is not open for change; and where change is accepted, it is done in small steps, and slowly, checking at each stage that the changes have not somehow wreaked havoc in the whole system. Crucially, the conservative would monitor the results, and then REACT to them, by rolling them back if necessary. Obviously, there is very little true conservatism around in the West at the moment.</p>
<p>So a conservative can have immigration, in small amounts and slowly, so that the effect of an entire generation can be seen, say, over 70 years. Once its seen that Islam, say, does not integrate and still preaches an unreformed message of fascistic supremacism and world domination - all of that immigration would be stopped. </p>
<p>A conservative would allow some reduction of the gold basis of the currency, but would wait at least 30 years to see what effect this had on the rest of the economy and the FX rates, before proceeding further. </p>
<p>A conservative could remove the death penalty, but it would be on a temporary 30 or 40 year basis. If after that time crimes rates have gone up (as they have seriously and dangerously), then the suspension would be ended and the death penalty restored. </p> Our women on the verge of tears: where does this lead?tag:4freedoms.com,2019-01-02:3766518:Topic:1997302019-01-02T00:31:37.826ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Take a look at these videos, then I will post what I see.…</p>
<p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qXVnznVa88A?rel=0&wmode=opaque" width="560"></iframe>
</p>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hzRnb63nT_g?rel=0&wmode=opaque" width="560"></iframe>
<p></p>
<p>Take a look at these videos, then I will post what I see.</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qXVnznVa88A?rel=0&wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hzRnb63nT_g?rel=0&wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iJk8qj3SIJc?rel=0&wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p> Civic Nationalism v. Ethnic Nationalismtag:4freedoms.com,2018-03-05:3766518:Topic:1942732018-03-05T11:45:06.878ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>This isn't really a 4 Freedoms issue, but since it keeps coming up, and its interesting and it interplays into questions of how to construct a non-collapsing democracy, this forum can be used to collect interesting articles and discussions in this area. </p>
<p>First off, a long discussion with Richard Spencer, Sargon of Akkad, and Styxhexenhammer666. It is very long, but you can try listen to it while travelling, washing up, etc, as it is worth the effort, and possibly, historically…</p>
<p>This isn't really a 4 Freedoms issue, but since it keeps coming up, and its interesting and it interplays into questions of how to construct a non-collapsing democracy, this forum can be used to collect interesting articles and discussions in this area. </p>
<p>First off, a long discussion with Richard Spencer, Sargon of Akkad, and Styxhexenhammer666. It is very long, but you can try listen to it while travelling, washing up, etc, as it is worth the effort, and possibly, historically significant.</p>
<p>I have to agree with the general comments that Sargon comes out looking foolish from this, and I have to upgrade my opinion of Richard Spencer: he is definitely intelligent, knows his stuff, and has good arguments and some revolutionary ideas. One of the latter is when he points out in his intro that fundamentally conservatism is collectivist and socialism is individualist. He also points out that a 'conservatism' that doesn't 'conserve' things, is, somewhat tautologically, pointless.</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UiUH-tWHbr8?rel=0&wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p> Terminal Societal Sicknesstag:4freedoms.com,2017-05-22:3766518:Topic:1869582017-05-22T05:15:25.926ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>I've been noticing more and more news stories lately that indicate a kind of terminal or pathological sickness in Western societies. It's not just the crimes as recorded, it's society's reaction to them, or the lack of it. Things unthinkable a few years ago, that would have caused mass outrage, are now accepted as the new normal. A prime example of this would be the rape and pimping of at least 100,000 English schoolgirls by Muslim grooming gangs.</p>
<p>It seems like more than just a…</p>
<p>I've been noticing more and more news stories lately that indicate a kind of terminal or pathological sickness in Western societies. It's not just the crimes as recorded, it's society's reaction to them, or the lack of it. Things unthinkable a few years ago, that would have caused mass outrage, are now accepted as the new normal. A prime example of this would be the rape and pimping of at least 100,000 English schoolgirls by Muslim grooming gangs.</p>
<p>It seems like more than just a decline. Something has gone drastically wrong in the Western mind, and its not at all clear how it can be corrected, if at all.</p> Failed Heroes of the Left: Rachel Dolezaltag:4freedoms.com,2017-03-23:3766518:Topic:1863142017-03-23T02:19:24.324ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>This entry is mis-posted in the USA room, so please add new material there, thanks.</p>
<p><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/us/forum/topics/rachel-dolezal-collected-articles">http://4freedoms.com/group/us/forum/topics/rachel-dolezal-collected-articles</a></p>
<p>This entry is mis-posted in the USA room, so please add new material there, thanks.</p>
<p><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/us/forum/topics/rachel-dolezal-collected-articles">http://4freedoms.com/group/us/forum/topics/rachel-dolezal-collected-articles</a></p> Islam = Fascismtag:4freedoms.com,2016-06-05:3766518:Topic:1794312016-06-05T01:19:34.969ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Islam is definitely totalitarian. If someone disputes that, then ask them, if an ideology answers yes to the following questions, would they rate it as totalitarian or not? If it says:</p>
<ul>
<li><em>"If you leave our ideology, we will kill you"</em>: is that totalitarian?</li>
<li><em>"All children born to our ideology must join it, or we will kill them"</em>: is that totalitarian?</li>
<li><em>"Those that don't follow our ideology must convert, or pay our gang 'protection money', or we…</em></li>
</ul>
<p>Islam is definitely totalitarian. If someone disputes that, then ask them, if an ideology answers yes to the following questions, would they rate it as totalitarian or not? If it says:</p>
<ul>
<li><em>"If you leave our ideology, we will kill you"</em>: is that totalitarian?</li>
<li><em>"All children born to our ideology must join it, or we will kill them"</em>: is that totalitarian?</li>
<li><em>"Those that don't follow our ideology must convert, or pay our gang 'protection money', or we kill them"</em>: is that totalitarian?</li>
<li><em>"Followers should journey to other, non-follower countries, to convert, extort protection money, or kill them":</em> is that totalitarian?</li>
<li><em>"If anyone outside our ideology criticise it, we will kill them"</em>: is that totalitarian?</li>
<li><em>"If one of our own followers criticises our ideology, we will kill him"</em>: is that totalitarian?</li>
</ul>
<p>Islam answers Yes to all 6 questions, so you can pretty safely say Islam is totalitarian. Unfortunately, many people are not familiar with that word, but they are familiar with the word Fascism. Here are two definitions of Fascism:</p>
<ol>
<li>Fascism: an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization</li>
<li> Fascism: a form of radical authoritarian nationalism that came to prominence in early 20th-century Europe, influenced by national syndicalism</li>
</ol>
<p>Islam definitely satisfies meaning 1, so it is better, as more easily understood by others, to say:</p>
<blockquote>Islam = Fascism</blockquote> All Ideologies are ABM (Agent Based Models)tag:4freedoms.com,2015-12-31:3766518:Topic:1731992015-12-31T00:20:00.051ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Islam is a fantastic example of an ABM. There is no central controlling agency, not even a Caliph now, but the net effect of all Muslims individually following their programming to varying degrees, is to cause Islam to propagate, replicate, then hijack its host society (if using the peaceful method).</p>
<p><span>Complex Systems Theory explains this as the result of a simple but well designed program, being repeated and executed multiple times by multiple agents. The primary example is…</span></p>
<p>Islam is a fantastic example of an ABM. There is no central controlling agency, not even a Caliph now, but the net effect of all Muslims individually following their programming to varying degrees, is to cause Islam to propagate, replicate, then hijack its host society (if using the peaceful method).</p>
<p><span>Complex Systems Theory explains this as the result of a simple but well designed program, being repeated and executed multiple times by multiple agents. The primary example is slime mould, which, though a simple colony of thousands of basic separate organisms, appears to function like one integrated single organism, and perform some complex behaviour. Another example is that of ants and termites: the programming of any individual ant is quite simple, but when thousands of them interact together, the end result is complex. It appears to be centrally organised, but it is not.</span><br/> <br/> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC128598/">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC128598/</a><br/> <span>Another example of this surprising phenomenon is given by fractals. Just a very simple graphing formula, repeated multiple times, gives rise to incredibly complex and beautiful patterns, which appear to be the result of some kind of higher level design process, but again, it is not. It is neither random, nor centrally organised.</span><br/> <br/> <span>These are called Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS), and we can simulate them using Agent Based Modelling (ABM). In fact, I suggested several years ago that ABM be used to model and predict the collapse of an Open Society as its number of Muslim members increases.</span><br/> <a href="http://aidontheedge.info/2010/02/15/slime-mould-simple-rules-and-the-politics-of-self-organisation/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">http://aidontheedge.info/2010/02/15/slime-mould-simple-rules-and-th...</a></p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/B79Z56vl02A?rel=0&wmode=opaque" frameborder="0"></iframe>
</p>
<p>The slime mould goes thru several stages but it is not a single organism with a CNS, it is a collection of single cells, all acting independently according to a common program. Yet it is still able to hunt for food and consume it, and when the food is exhausted it, it stops moving and builds spore head structures, to enable propagation.</p>
<p>We may also explain the Cathedral of the Dark Enlightenment as the operation of an ABM:</p>
<p><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topics/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land">http://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topics/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land</a></p>
<p>This is further described by Ed West in an article "Happy Families, Uncharitable Thoughts":</p>
<p><a href="http://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topics/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land?commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A173197&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A1677">http://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topics/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land?commentId=3766518%3AComment%3A173197&groupId=3766518%3AGroup%3A1677</a></p>
<p>He references 'the Cathedral', but also calls it the blob, recognising that it is an amorphous structure without a central control network, that nevertheless succeeds in a near total control of its environment. It does this by an individual programming within each person, which produces a net effect in a clear and definite direction. </p>
<p>There is a big take-away from this ABM approach. When we evaluate an ideology, we need to do it in 2 different ways. </p>
<ol>
<li>We evaluate the conceptual framework, to see how the whole thing hangs together, what are its fundamental principles, what are its resultant directives, what are its defects and inconsistencies, what are its strengths, etc. That is an intellectual process that can be pursued virtually on one's own, in a library</li>
<li>We evaluate the effect of the 'computation' of the ABM by a society that has 'absorbed' or ingested it. So in this case, the number of agents in the society is very important, but we should not jump to conclusions about the net effect of (1) on (2). For example, Chistianity may say in (1) that Homosexuals are an abomination in the face of the Lord, but when we look out at a Christianised society, we find the automata simply aren't implementing and responding to that directive. What is important for the method 2 (ABM) approach, is the number of Agents, and the degree of seriousness with which they take different parts of (1), the ideological framework.<br/> Another example would be in the operation of the fascist left and the liberal quislings. Their ideology allegedly supports Free Speech. But its clear that when it comes to implementing this directive, it gets superceded by other directives, like "especially protect all non-white people", or "make sure you yourself aren't subjected to Islamic terror". Again, it doesn't matter if one highly articulate member of that group, like Chomsky for example, espouses all kinds of fancy defences of Free Speech. For the ABM approach, the key factor is not the ideological purity and correctness of the idea, it is the simple number of agents, and the force with which they act. In fact, you could argue that dumb agents like the Hate not Hopers, are more effective and useful than the clever, nuanced ones, because the dumb ones can be manipulated and controlled far more easily, and have fewer mental obstacles or general commitments to get in the way of direct action.</li>
</ol> Tribalism: the end of Egalitarianism and Democracy?tag:4freedoms.com,2015-12-27:3766518:Topic:1734202015-12-27T15:09:25.440ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>We begin this discussion with a comment from Paul:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/muslim-prayer-hall-in-corsica-vandalised-after-attacks-on-firemen/ar-BBnVpcm?li=AA59G2?ocid=MSN_UK_RECIRC">http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/muslim-prayer-hall-in-corsica-v...</a></p>
<p>In reference to the attack in Corsica. Other news outlets are reporting it as an Islamophobic attack? Im not posting links to such garbage. </p>
<p>Its typical of certain media outlets to fail…</p>
</blockquote>
<p>We begin this discussion with a comment from Paul:</p>
<blockquote><p><a href="http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/muslim-prayer-hall-in-corsica-vandalised-after-attacks-on-firemen/ar-BBnVpcm?li=AA59G2?ocid=MSN_UK_RECIRC">http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/muslim-prayer-hall-in-corsica-v...</a></p>
<p>In reference to the attack in Corsica. Other news outlets are reporting it as an Islamophobic attack? Im not posting links to such garbage. </p>
<p>Its typical of certain media outlets to fail to report the full story. There's no mention of the attacks on the Police and fire fighters, and i bet if someone with even the slightest of interest would find there's been a long history of irritation between the two communities. Because it doesn't just happen that 600 people go on the rampage over one event. </p>
<p>I've seen photo's of the so called rampage, and it looks like a small amount of damage has been done compared to similar events involving Muslims. Normally when gangs of Muslims rampage over korans or drawing of Mo or the crusades or something, the scenes normally resemble a war zone, with dead people. </p>
</blockquote>
<p><span>I agree. I've given up capturing those shitty, Islamophilic reports. Its clear that the quislings see no disparity between the violence, frequency and depravity of Muslim attacks, and the rare, black swan instances of kuffar response.</span><br/> <br/> <span>And you always have to dig to find the underlying truth - normally some Muslim violence finally provoking the exasperated kuffar.</span><br/> <br/> <span>As has been said before, what was the untold story behind the Bradford and Bolton riots of the 1990s? We now know that Muslim grooming gangs have been trashing thousands of underage girls since that time. Was that what provoked the riots? Don't expect the 4th estate to tell you!</span></p>
<p><span>The Islamic gang is clearly defined, well organised, fully funded, and totally comitted to the promotion of the gang's interests and the protection of its members. How can a disparate scattering of individuals in a confused and aimless democracy, ever compete with that? And so it is that with a little bit of string pulling here, a little bit of threatening there, combined with a fully compliant BBC, their message will always get out in suppression of the kuffar's perfunctory attempts to set the record straight.</span><br/> <br/> <span>How is this system supposed to work? Well, after incidents like mass grooming and rape of kuffar girls, 5 times normal criminality, officially codified hate speech, extreme violence and terror attacks in this country and abroad and cutting their little girls clits, followed by mealy mouthed excuses and brazen lies from Muslim leaders, people develop a societal memory. People do not create a database to stor and codify all this information, they just develop a general impression that Muslims pose a risk to them and their society. They do this in the same way that we develop a general impression that driving at high speed poses a risk to others, and if performed by a large group of people, to society in general. We dont remember all the news reports and personally known tragedies; we just form a general impression.</span><br/> <br/> <span>So why doesnt that system work anymore? Its because that accumulated societal knowledge is now called 'prejudice'.</span><br/> <br/> <span>Muslim gangocracy will replace secular democracy, and very soon, the canaries in the coalmine like ourselves, will be shut down by the very thing they are trying to protect.</span></p>
<p><span>Which leads to the question that Anthony puts: why isn't this blatant kuffarphobic oppression leading to protests and rebellion?</span></p>
<blockquote><p><span><span>Re Corsica/Bradford etc riots, connected with this, and probably the subject of lengthy discussion, is that it is amazing just how few and far between they have been considering the awfulness of grooming gangs,fgm, heroin pushing etc - back in the day in the 70's and 80's, people used to be kicking off and rioting all the time !, why so infrequent now ? is it because the police have better detection methods, or is it because people have become so browbeaten that they don't riot anymore, or a combination of other reasons ?</span></span></p>
</blockquote>
<p><span>I believe its for 4 reasons.</span></p>
<ol>
<li><span>People are more docile now, because there are fewer toughman jobs like coal mining around.<br/></span></li>
<li><span>Also, people are nicely made soporific by endless high quality entertainment, and distractions like Facebook and Twitter.<br/></span></li>
<li><span>The state has finely honed its control techniques. By infiltrating groups like EDL, March for England, etc, with SDS, and by destroying people like Tommy using the CPS. So that in the end, you are left with a kind of confused hydra, unsure of which way to turn.<br/></span></li>
<li><span>Finally, the quisling liberals of the mainstream media, and the fascist left of the social media have finely honed their Alinsky techniques to destroy the life of anyone who stands up against their 'approved' narrative. This applies to everyone, from Nigel Farage, to people like us (if they can identify us), to a random person on a bus that cracks from the kuffarphobic oppression. Thus in the end, every tiny potential leader is squashed at the very beginning, and prevented from growing into something bigger.</span></li>
</ol>
<p>The process is fully perfected and very powerful, yet has the advantage of not being identifiable as a formal system, like Stalins secret police, or East Germany's network of informants, so it is much harder for people to rebel against it. How can you fight back against something that doesn't even have a name? Truly, Stalin would have been jealous of our modern systems of political control.</p>
<p>We don't know what Muslim gang members are active within the BBC, the CPS, the Metropolitian Police, the Guardian, Hate not Hope, etc, pulling the strings to crush all opposition. We don't even know quislings are active in these organisations, promoting their totalitarian kuffarphobic agenda for them. Truly, it is hard to see how individual political activists in an open society, can stand up against this well organised, well funded and thoroughly embedded, Islamic political juggernaut.</p> The Cathedral and Dark Enlightenment - by Nick Landtag:4freedoms.com,2015-10-30:3766518:Topic:1720662015-10-30T20:15:56.288ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>The attached doc is a copy in case his website goes down.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thedarkenlightenment.com/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land/" target="_blank">http://www.thedarkenlightenment.com/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land/</a></p>
<p>The attached doc is a copy in case his website goes down.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thedarkenlightenment.com/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land/" target="_blank">http://www.thedarkenlightenment.com/the-dark-enlightenment-by-nick-land/</a></p>