All Discussions Tagged '-' - The 4 Freedoms Library2024-03-29T12:45:53Zhttp://4freedoms.com/group/argumentation/forum/topic/listForTag?tag=-&feed=yes&xn_auth=noLauren Southern - leaving politicstag:4freedoms.com,2022-07-30:3766518:Topic:2756482022-07-30T22:26:56.661ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Lauren Southern does a 'big reveal' on the alt right in this video. I've made some comments on it to save everyone the time of listening to it all.…</p>
<p><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dqzJmdlJx0k?wmode=opaque" width="560"></iframe>
</p>
<p>Lauren Southern does a 'big reveal' on the alt right in this video. I've made some comments on it to save everyone the time of listening to it all.</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dqzJmdlJx0k?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p>
<a href="https://thebridgehead.ca/2022/07/21/lauren-southern-reveals-the-whole-truth-about-the-alt-right/">https://thebridgehead.ca/2022/07/21/lauren-southern-reveals-the-whole-truth-about-the-alt-right/</a> 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> Failed Heroes of the Left: ILHAN Omartag:4freedoms.com,2019-02-03:3766518:Topic:2002152019-02-03T22:10:59.774ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>This woman committed the following 4 clearly verifiable crimes, yet still got elected to the US congress.</p>
<ul>
<li>Incest</li>
<li>Bigamy</li>
<li>Immigration fraud</li>
<li>Perjury</li>
</ul>
<p>Why? Wll because she ticks all the boxes of course - Muslim, black, woman - what's not to like for a Leftist? </p>
<p>So, will she be prosecuted? Even if she wasn't protected by the closed ranks of the indoctrinated left, there's one more obstacle: the Minnesota Attorney General is now well…</p>
<p>This woman committed the following 4 clearly verifiable crimes, yet still got elected to the US congress.</p>
<ul>
<li>Incest</li>
<li>Bigamy</li>
<li>Immigration fraud</li>
<li>Perjury</li>
</ul>
<p>Why? Wll because she ticks all the boxes of course - Muslim, black, woman - what's not to like for a Leftist? </p>
<p>So, will she be prosecuted? Even if she wasn't protected by the closed ranks of the indoctrinated left, there's one more obstacle: the Minnesota Attorney General is now well known Muslim activist and senator Keith Ellison. Islam protects its own and crushes the kuffar irrespective of what the corrrect legal process is - a point the civic nationalists still haven't grasped. </p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LlbHRFWt1Z4?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p> Failed Heroes of the Left: Nathan Philips - Racist Liartag:4freedoms.com,2019-01-27:3766518:Topic:2000052019-01-27T16:41:47.496ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1Od_SSpVaiM?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1Od_SSpVaiM?wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe> Disavowal: Don't bother - there's no quid pro quotag:4freedoms.com,2018-04-22:3766518:Topic:1954042018-04-22T12:03:11.330ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>There is no point in conceding any point to the Left, or attempting to make any compromise with them, because they will just take what they can and give nothing back in return. By disavowing any other speaker, you merely show that your are weakened by the attack and feeling vulnerable, so have gone on the defence. You also help them to separate you from possible allies, now or in the future (when things are more serious, and people have to be less picky about who they work…</p>
<p>There is no point in conceding any point to the Left, or attempting to make any compromise with them, because they will just take what they can and give nothing back in return. By disavowing any other speaker, you merely show that your are weakened by the attack and feeling vulnerable, so have gone on the defence. You also help them to separate you from possible allies, now or in the future (when things are more serious, and people have to be less picky about who they work with).</p>
<p><iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pi9c5YCYJkI?rel=0&wmode=opaque" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</p> How to Live as a Dissidenttag:4freedoms.com,2017-10-14:3766518:Topic:1907072017-10-14T01:10:36.021ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<h1 class="entry-title">How to Live as a Dissident</h1>
<div class="entry-meta"><span class="author vcard"><span class="author vcard"><a class="url fn n" href="https://www.counter-currents.com/author/jcostello/" title="View all posts by Jef Costello">Jef Costello</a> </span></span>4,152 words…</div>
<div class="entry-meta"></div>
<div class="entry-meta"></div>
<h1 class="entry-title">How to Live as a Dissident</h1>
<div class="entry-meta"><span class="author vcard"><span class="author vcard"><a class="url fn n" href="https://www.counter-currents.com/author/jcostello/" title="View all posts by Jef Costello">Jef Costello</a> </span></span>4,152 words</div>
<div class="entry-meta"></div>
<div class="entry-meta"><span class="author vcard"><a href="https://www.counter-currents.com/2017/10/how-to-live-as-a-dissident/">https://www.counter-currents.com/2017/10/how-to-live-as-a-dissident</a></span></div>
<div class="entry-meta"></div>
<div class="entry-content"><div id="attachment_56271" class="wp-caption alignright"><p class="wp-caption-text">A friend of mine got doxed recently. I have other friends who live in fear of being exposed, vilified, and fired from their jobs. I’ve accepted the danger for over a decade now. But the danger is greater now than it has ever been before. The danger of physical violence is also now very real. Our people are being recognized and attacked on the street, and Antifa and others have called for violence — claiming that it’s okay if you’re attacking a “Nazi” (which now basically means any white person at all, especially one who isn’t racked with guilt over being white).</p>
</div>
<p><span id="more-75665"></span></p>
<p>The dangers we now face — doxing, firing, de-platforming, physical violence, and so on — exist because Leftists are no longer laughing at us: they genuinely feel threatened. And so they’re lashing out with every weapon at their disposal — in ways that are frequently insane and irrational, to say nothing of dishonorable. A mere three years ago or so things were very different. I had essentially resigned myself to the fact that I would continue writing heretical essays under various pseudonyms until the day I died or went gaga (whichever came first), and that if there were any concrete results from these efforts they would come after my death.</p>
<p>But things have changed very fast. Our message is getting around in a big way, and more and more people are hopping on board – including young, attractive, smart people. (As opposed to the grizzled, old jack o’lantern-faced misfits you used to meet at right wing dinners, forever trying to link the Jews and the Masons to fluoridation.) And I never expected to see Counter-Currents and Greg Johnson denounced (repeatedly) in the pages of <span>The New York Times</span>. My friends are doing plenty of gloating, but they are also plenty nervous. I know some folks who are going around in hats and sunglasses, like Hollywood celebrities avoiding paparazzi, and other friends who are getting out of town and going places where there are fewer white Leftists (there’s lots of affordable real estate in Detroit, I hear).</p>
<p>“I feel like the walls are closing in,” one friend said to me the other day. He’s afraid of being doxed — but the general cultural insanity really gets to him (and me): the hysterical reactions to Trump, the violence of Berkeley and Charlottesville, the Las Vegas shootings, and so on. (Every night when I go to sleep I pray I won’t wake up in France or England or Sweden — that’s the best thing I can say about this situation.) Another friend is now on prescription tranquilizers and downing them with vodka (“It makes ’em work faster,” quoth Patty Duke in <span>Valley of the Dolls</span>). And, yes, a couple of friends have decided that they want “out” of our movement — that this is more than they bargained for.</p>
<p>The purpose of this essay is to establish some practical guidelines for dealing with, and surviving, these tumultuous times. I can’t guarantee that you are going to <span>physically</span>survive — your life could be taken at any moment by a crazed Hillary supporter, a gun-toting anti-gun pussy-hat-wearing Leftist, or an exploding kebab. But I think I can guarantee that if you follow my recommendations, you can survive with your <span>soul</span> intact. So let us begin.</p>
<p>First of all, if any of the above describes how you feel you need to <span>wake the hell up and stop your whining!</span> What did you think this was going to be, a tea party? Did you maybe think this was just yet another subculture you could join and participate in after work, online and from the safety of your Ikea-furnished high-rise apartment with the solid concrete walls? Were you just LARPing? As Lenin memorably remarked, “A revolution is not a girl’s dormitory.” And this is a revolution, folks, and we are revolutionaries. Act like it. Become it.</p>
<p>So, the first step in dealing with the present madness is to accept the reality of the fact that <span>everything you’ve been saying and thinking for years is right</span> (yes, you were right!), that everything <span>really is</span> falling apart – much quicker than you thought it would – and that you are among the vanguard. You are making world history. And like most other historical figures, you are going to lead a life – probably a relatively short life – in which you will be attacked and vilified. You may lose things important to you. Indeed, you may lose <span>everything</span>. Folks are going to abandon you. This could mean your friends, your parents, your children, and your spouse or significant other (that at least <span>some</span> of these will abandon you is as certain as the sun rising tomorrow). You’re probably never going to be able to settle down in one place and be “happy.” You may be on the run. If things get <span>really</span> bad, you may have to become an outlaw and you may die in a convenient prison accident, or in a hail of bullets.</p>
<p>Accept your fate. Accept, right now, that you are going to lead a life filled with conflict and discord and loneliness and violence. But you must also <span>love</span> your fate. Yes, this is going to be hell. But it’s also going to be glorious. You are going to lead an extraordinary life — the kind of life people read about. (Don’t worry: in the future we are building, people are going to read again.) If the term “revolutionary” conjures up distasteful images of Bolsheviks, then think of yourself as a warrior.</p>
<p>It’s a universal warrior practice — the samurai are a familiar example of this — to wake up each morning and to accept that you will die that very day. Not just that, but to affirm “Today is a <span>good day</span> to die.” I recommend you start your day like this. Rise from your memory foam (which you must do without when you’re on the lam) and say, “Today is a good day to be doxed.” (This should preferably be said in front of a statue of Odin.) Today is a good day to be exposed, ostracized, de-platformed, de-monetized, abandoned by your family, and fired from your job. But hell, you might as well say “Today is a good day to die,” because at the rate things are going they’ll start trying to kill us pretty soon.</p>
<p>And when the day comes that they go after you — in whatever form, whether it’s your boss confronting you, or Antifa attacking you with crowbars and bear mace — you need, above all else, to avoid falling into one major trap. You must never for a moment allow yourself to waiver in your convictions. You must never for a moment feel that you might <span>deserve</span> whatever punishment is visited upon you. I know that you will feel surprised by this suggestion, and think that perhaps it does not apply to you: “I would never feel that way.” But think again. Like every human being in every society throughout time, we have been raised since infancy to respect authority: the authority of institutions, the authority of laws, and the authority of individuals in certain positions, whether it’s the police, or the mayor, or the dean of your college, or “the boss.” And when all the weight of that authority comes crashing down on our heads it’s perfectly natural that many of us will emotionally revert, if only very, very briefly, to childhood. We may get that ominous “I’ve been a bad boy” feeling and then steel ourselves for the punishment we think we’ve probably been deserving all along.</p>
<p>Needless to say, we have to <span>see</span> that we are programmed for these kinds of feelings, and see that they are illegitimate. If we do not, if we are taken by these feelings then we will wind up like those pathetic, cringe-inducing cases we’ve all seen (too many to mention) where the poor S.O.B. who’s caught saying something un-p.c. begs for forgiveness (and gets fired anyway). Vox Day in his very useful book <a href="https://www.amazon.com/SJWs-Always-Lie-Taking-Thought/dp/9527065682/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1507485896&sr=8-3&keywords=vox+day"><span>SJWs Always Lie</span></a> advises us not to apologize if exposed, because it will only be used against us. But surely the primary reason not to apologize is to preserve your self-respect. And that’s a lot more important than your job. They can take your job, and your friends and your family, and even your freedom and your life, but they cannot take your self-worth, not unless you give it to them yourself by melting down.</p>
<p>We must learn to see the <span>entire system</span> of authority as illegitimate — from the President, who must still parrot the language of diversity even as he promises (again and again) to build a wall to keep out diversity, down to your boss, who must fire you if you refuse to use the correct pronouns with the transgender receptionist, lest he himself be fired. Now, yes, I know: most of us are working on seeing things this way, and some are already there. But the illegitimacy of the system needs, in most of us, to become even more vividly and constantly perceived. And we must keep always in mind one basic, unshakeable conviction: that the system is <span>genuinely evil</span>, that it is set against life and against our people and our culture. We, on the other hand, are fighting for . . . how do I sum it up? I might as well just say <span>everything that is good and holy</span>, because that’s what it amounts to. We must keep this in mind <span>perpetually</span>: when we rise from the bed each morning to face the day, when we look at the news, when we attend events and find ourselves attacked, when they try to go after our jobs, and when we are faced with the relentless lies at work, at school, or wherever.</p>
<p>Earlier I used the terms “revolutionary” and “warrior,” but I find that “dissident” is also extremely helpful. This term immediately conjures up memories of the U.S.S.R. and the “Soviet dissidents.” Perhaps the most famous of these was Andrei Sakharov, who once said, “Everyone wants to have a job, be married, have children, be happy, but dissidents must be prepared to see their lives destroyed and those dear to them hurt.” When we look at the situation of the Soviet dissidents we see them (correctly) as heroic rebels protesting against a system that was monolithically evil. But that’s easy, not just because the evil was often more blatant than it is here (torture chambers, gulags, forced commitment to mental asylums, etc.), but because it was <span>over there</span>. We, on the other hand, have to see it in the place we call home, in the place we have been taught to regard as the land of the free and home of the brave, and the “greatest country in the world” (obviously, I am writing mainly for my American readers).</p>
<p>Whatever you may <span>consciously</span> think, you are still deeply invested in this system. For instance, most of us on the Right want to defend the police against the madness of Black Lives Matter — but after Charlottesville there can be no illusions about the police defending <span>us</span>. So, we just have to say goodbye to all such noble sentiments. I was raised in a military family and despised the protestors of the ’60s and ’70s who threw eggs at the ROTC. But, aside from this juvenile behavior, those protestors were kind of right: the military is a force for evil, because it serves the globalist, multicultural state — and simultaneously the ethnonationalist state of Israel. The support many of us showed for Trump (and still show) is an indication of how deeply invested we are in the system, or at least in the idea that it can be “fixed.”</p>
<p>All this needs to go — we need to disengage from all this, deep down in our souls. The system as a whole is evil, and we are the dissidents who oppose it. Etymologically, a dissident is someone who “sits apart.” We must sit apart from the system, while remaining within it: as much as possible, our words and our deeds must express our apartness. What is eminently possible, 100% of the time, is to at least <span>feel and know</span>our apartness in our hearts and minds, whether we are confronting political happenings, popular culture, or anything else.</p>
<p>The language of “dissidence” claims the moral high ground. To be a dissident is to (usually) be a peaceful protestor against a tyrannical system. When we are confronted, when we are called out on our beliefs or called into that fateful meeting with the boss, we need to identify ourselves not as “conservative” (whatever that means) or “Alt Right” (which is too heavily associated with Richard Spencer) or “revolutionaries” (which is far too Red) but as “dissidents.” To identify yourself as such, when faced, for example, with a representative of authority, communicates “You represent a corrupt and oppressive system. I am protesting against that system. To penalize me is to crush dissent.” To call ourselves dissidents in the face of, to take another example, Antifa thugs, is to say “You are frauds and fools. You think you are rebels, but in fact you represent the worst, most nakedly evil element within a corrupt and tyrannical system. <span>We</span> are the true dissidents.”</p>
<p>To position ourselves as dissidents is good for the soul — it trains us to overcome our attachments to the system, and to clearly see ourselves as agents of the good. And it changes the conversations we have with others. To say you are a dissident is to say that you are the conscientious voice of dissent, and have a <span>right</span> to stand apart. Soviet dissident Lyudmila Alexeyeva once said, “What would happen if citizens acted on the assumption that they have rights? If one person did it, he would become a martyr; if two people did it, they would be labeled an enemy organization; if thousands of people did it, the state would have to become less oppressive.” As more and more of us position ourselves as dissidents and stand firm on the legitimacy of our cause and our speech, then what the Left fears most will come to pass: the Right will become “normalized.” In other words, we will become an accepted, and, to a greater and greater extent, tolerated part of the political landscape. Our influence will grow, and the system will become more and more unstable. Once again, the case of the Soviet Union is a useful example to study.</p>
<p>In sum, the first and most important lessons in dealing with the madness of our times is to see yourself as a dissident fighting a truly decadent and oppressive system, to never waiver in your conviction that your cause is right (no matter what they do to you), and to accept that you are going to suffer for your cause. If you are able truly to adopt these attitudes, you will be armored against all that the forces of evil can sling at you. You will be an effective fighter for our cause, and you will spiritually <span>invulnerable</span>.</p>
<p>I now turn to some lesser, but not unimportant considerations.</p>
<ul>
<li>You must free yourself from dependence on people and things. Learn to become a stoic. Remember that nothing lasts forever and that the fate of most people, things, and situations is almost entirely beyond your control. Know — really know — that many, if not all of your human relationships may wither and die. And this may be due, as discussed already, to others being unable to reconcile themselves not just to the radicalness of your views but to their <span>truth</span>. In particular, you must not be a slave to possessions. Remember Tyler Durden’s immortal words “<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CWRTqMGvdpc">The things you own end up owning you</a>.” And read D. H. Lawrence’s story “<a href="https://www.counter-currents.com/2014/04/things/">Things</a>” (which illustrates Tyler’s point beautifully). You must ruthlessly expunge every trace in your character of the bourgeois ideal of “gracious living.” Have as little as possible. And if you already have a lot or must have a lot, then learn to stop caring about it. If it could all burn down tomorrow and you wouldn’t shed a tear, then you’re doing something right.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Adopt a Romantic view of yourself and your life and your destiny. Yes, it is perfectly fine to think of yourself as a “warrior,” as I suggested earlier. Because that is, in fact, what you are. See your life as a saga that you are creating through your words and deeds. Do not take any action that you would not want to be part of the story. See yourself as a <a href="https://www.counter-currents.com/2015/08/i-am-a-world-historical-individual/">world-historical individual</a> who has a mission to accomplish in the cosmic scheme of things, and whose life will not end until he’s done it. (Though you may never know exactly what it is and when it’s done; don’t worry, the bards who sing about you will see the thread that you may miss.) Again, don’t be embarrassed: you can do this. Indeed, you need to do it for the Cause: on the sensible pragmatic principle that those who believe themselves capable of great deeds are much more likely to actually perform them, when given the chance, than those who do not think themselves capable.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Do not entertain negative, defeatist thoughts. You have a moral obligation to the Cause not to do this. The reason is that defeatism breeds defeat. Those who allow themselves to wallow in negativism, defeatism, and (God help us) self-pity regularly fail to seize opportunities for victory or advancement when such opportunities present themselves. Thus, you have an obligation to your race to be positive. “Easier said than done,” I hear you saying. I understand that, but I will give you an ancient Tibetan exercise for loosening the hold that negative thoughts have on you. Since you do not want them, begin to think of them as <span>not you</span>, or not yours. The really negative thing about negative thoughts is that we <span>identify</span> with them: we believe them, we think that in them we glimpse the <span>truth</span>. Come to see these thoughts like bad weather: something that happens to you, but that is not you. Learn to recognize your undesirable thought patterns (which, as you well know, are often not fully rational). “Oh, there they are again,” you should say. “The thoughts are back.” Objectify them as The Other (don’t worry, they won’t get offended). Better yet, see them as demons continually bedeviling you, and see yourself as the warrior saint who must fight them, often on a daily basis, in order to carry out his great work. Our struggle is both an external one, in the world, and an internal one.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Set aside times in the day where you give yourself permission to completely disengage from all thought about the problems of the world, and your personal problems. For me there are two such times. One is when I meditate in the morning, usually for 30 or 35 minutes. Part of the beauty of meditation, for me at least, is that it is a time when I give myself permission not to think about anything — which means it is a time when I am totally <span>free</span>. Indeed, to meditate I must <span>not</span> think about anything, for the meditation practice I follow consists of gently batting away all stray thoughts and attempting to make my mind a total blank, while following my breath. The other time when I completely disengage is the very end of the day. Every night, I make myself a relatively strong drink and lie down on the sofa and watch a movie, or YouTube videos (on non-political subjects). I sometimes drift off to sleep that way. In all honesty, given how dicey things have become as of late, I sometimes look forward to this time more than anything else in the day.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>As just noted, drink alcohol. But in moderation. We’ve earned this. And it is extremely useful for relaxation. I never get drunk, but just a moderate amount is enough to relax me and help me put all the madness in perspective. I often wind up laughing about it. Maniacally.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Lift weights, take martial arts, do CrossFit, or something else. Just do something. It will relieve some of your tension and anger, relax you, and make you healthier (thus you will be stronger and live longer and be a better servant of our Cause).</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Have long term plans, but (sorry about the cliché) live one day at a time. Plan every day, each morning, and have a system for doing it. The first step is to remind yourself of your life priorities. #1 on this list should be the Cause. Plan what you are going to do that day as a warrior, revolutionary, or dissident. It could be reading an article on this website, writing an article, listening to a podcast, red-pilling a friend, whatever. Also, list all your mundane tasks and try to get these out of the way as swiftly and efficiently as possible. Finally – and this is important – every morning list all the things that are good in your life, and that you are grateful for. Obviously, this is to combat that “walls are closing in” feeling. The list can be as long and as personal as you like. Items could include the people in your life that you love, the things you enjoy doing, the book you are enjoying reading right now – or even just facts about the world that you take joy in. The sun, the coming cold weather, hot showers, cats that look like Hitler, whatever. Give special attention to things you are <span>looking forward</span> to doing, participating in, etc. (And, by the way, just in case you think this “list the stuff you’re grateful for” business seems too touchy-feely, <a href="https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1621451097/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1">I got this idea from a Navy Seal</a>.)</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Practice <a href="http://www.artofmanliness.com/2014/10/10/art-of-manliness-podcast-85-situational-awareness-with-patrick-van-horne/">situational awareness</a>. Earlier I mentioned the growing danger of physical violence against folks on the Right. Be vigilant. Know your surroundings. Find the exits. Identify possible threats. Never go around daydreaming — always be awake. And get the damned ear buds out of your ears, and NEVER look at your phone when walking or in a crowd. Investigate the laws in your area regarding carrying concealed weapons. If it’s lawful, carry one or more. But never, ever use them unless you are really being attacked. And if you must fight back and must injure someone (or worse) here is one of the best pieces of advice I ever got (from an ex-Army Ranger): always tell the police “I was in fear for my life” (which is true), <span>and then say absolutely nothing else</span>.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Have a plan for what you are going to do if you get doxed — at work, for example. Vox Day’s aforementioned <span>SJWs Always Lie</span> has lots of good advice about this. Here’s my plan (which might not fly at everybody’s place of employment): (1) Say that you will not discuss whatever charges are being made against you until they are put in writing; (2) State that the letter must contain the following pieces of information, and put them in explicit terms, without generalities: the names of those making these accusations (“I will not respond to anonymous accusers”), exactly what the accusations are, the specific reasons why the company/place of work thinks this is their business, and what’s at stake (are you threatening my job, or what?); (3) Say that you will be happy to have a discussion once you have received such a letter, but that getting the letter is non-negotiable; (4) Say that you will require plenty of notice about a subsequent meeting, as it will need to be at a time when your attorney is free; (5) Finally, if necessary, assert your First Amendment rights (sorry, Europeans) as a dissident. Many employers will back down when faced with this sort of strategy. As Vox Day points out, they want you to voluntarily resign — because they really don’t want the hassle of having to fire you, and the potential legal repercussions.</li>
</ul>
<ul>
<li>Lastly, going back to creating that to do list where you are going to list all the things you will do for the Cause: do, do, do, do, and do! Life is short, and I’ve repeatedly warned you that the lives of dissidents tend to be very short. Make your time on this earth count by doing as much as you possibly can for the one cause that, for us, dwarfs all others: saving our people and our culture.</li>
</ul>
<p>So, there you have it. The foregoing is the philosophy I have adopted, and the practical measures I have undertaken, to help me live as a dissident in these rapidly-changing circumstances. I know some of this can work for you. We live in dangerous times, and sometimes it’s pretty scary. But we must also admit that we live in <span>exciting</span> times. The very reason why the danger has amped up is because we have been so successful. I wish you the best, comrades.</p>
</div> Leftism is a mental illness - Anne Marie Waterstag:4freedoms.com,2016-07-11:3766518:Topic:1803622016-07-11T23:58:46.847ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<div class="flex_vbox" id="ppPrt7-4aw_SinglePostMediaTop_MediaPost__0_0__type_MediaPost"><div class="s12" id="ppPrt7-4aw_SinglePostMediaTop_MediaPost__0_0_mediaText"><div class="s12_richTextContainer s12richTextContainer" id="ppPrt7-4aw_SinglePostMediaTop_MediaPost__0_0_mediaTextrichTextContainer"><div id="innerContainer_txtMedia1o73"><div class="s15" id="innercomp_txtMedia1o73" title=""><div class="s15link" id="innercomp_txtMedia1o73link"><div class="s15img" id="innercomp_txtMedia1o73img"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ppPrt7-4aw_SinglePostMediaTop_MediaPost__0_0__type_MediaPost" class="flex_vbox"><div class="s12" id="ppPrt7-4aw_SinglePostMediaTop_MediaPost__0_0_mediaText"><div id="ppPrt7-4aw_SinglePostMediaTop_MediaPost__0_0_mediaTextrichTextContainer" class="s12_richTextContainer s12richTextContainer"><div id="innerContainer_txtMedia1o73"><div title="" class="s15" id="innercomp_txtMedia1o73"><div id="innercomp_txtMedia1o73link" class="s15link"><div id="innercomp_txtMedia1o73img" class="s15img"><a href="https://static.wixstatic.com/media/d642b0_003397bfe1ea4b46aaf6adf842647a4b~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_569,h_320,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/d642b0_003397bfe1ea4b46aaf6adf842647a4b~mv2.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://static.wixstatic.com/media/d642b0_003397bfe1ea4b46aaf6adf842647a4b~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_569,h_320,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/d642b0_003397bfe1ea4b46aaf6adf842647a4b~mv2.jpg?width=350" width="350" class="align-right"/></a>I recently posted a tweet stating: “I’m beginning to think it’s true. Leftism is a mental illness”. It appears to have riled a few people, so might be worth some further exploration.</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="font_8"><br/> I’ll begin with what I mean by ‘Leftism’. Life occurs on both a macro and micro level. In general, the latter applies to a small or single unit (e.g. the individual) and macro to ‘the bigger picture’ or a broad overview – in this instance, the Left-wing movement as a whole. It is my firm belief, as a former moderate left-winger, that the Left-wing movement has morphed in to something truly alarming and which exhibits traits recognisable as forms of mental illness.</p>
<p class="font_8"><strong>Self-Loathing</strong></p>
<p class="font_8">Attached to the controversial tweet, I added a <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3675154/Left-wing-German-politician-raped-migrants-admits-LIED-police-attackers-nationality-did-not-want-encourage-racism.html" target="_blank">news story</a> regarding a German political activist (Left-wing) who had been sexually assaulted by a group of Germany’s newest residents – migrants from the Middle East/North Africa. Described as a “national spokeswoman of the left-wing youth movement Solid”, Selin Goren was attacked by 3 men in Mannheim and “forced to perform a sex act”. When she went to the police, she lied about the identity of her attackers, claiming they spoke German when in fact they had been speaking “Arabic or Farsi”. She did this because she didn’t want to encourage racism. Putting aside how irresponsible it is to deliberately give false information to the police, this is a woman who believes she is worth so little that she will tolerate sexual assault so as to present a false picture of reality in the name of protecting a political ideology. Her own humanity and right to justice were secondary to her political narrative.</p>
<p class="font_8"><span>She is not alone</span></p>
<p class="font_8">A male Norwegian politician, who was <span><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3528236/Male-Norwegian-politician-raped-asylum-seeker-says-feels-GUILTY-attacker-deported-man-suffer-Somalia.html" target="_blank"><span>raped by a migrant</span></a></span> in his home, revealed how he felt guilty that his rapist was to be deported back to his native Somalia because he may face hardship there. His concern for a convicted rapist was therefore greater than his concern for himself or his fellow Norwegians. This brings me to another recognisable and recognised personality disorder trait: hatred of one’s own ethnic group. This one is particularly widespread within the Left-wing movement.</p>
<p class="font_8">Anti-white sentiment is common among Left-wingers, including among white activists; something I witnessed many times during my years around politics. This is perfectly illustrated in the UK in an English anti-Englishness that <span><a href="http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/bristol-multicultural-st-george-s-day/story-29167059-detail/story.html" target="_blank"><span>won’t, for example, celebrate the country’s national day because a city is too “multicultural”</span></a></span> and it wouldn’t be feasible for them to celebrate all cultures. The idea that English culture should have a special place in England doesn’t appear to have been entertained. The city of Bristol is an English city (with a council dominated by Labour) that refused to celebrate England.</p>
<p class="font_8">In 2007, Leo McKinstrey wrote in the <span><a href="http://www.express.co.uk/comment/columnists/leo-mckinstry/15991/How-the-Government-has-declared-war-on-white-English-people" target="_blank"><span>Express</span></a></span> that “for the first time in a mature democracy, a Government [Labour] is waging a campaign of aggressive discrimination against its indigenous population”. Examples included a teenager who had been refused a position with the Environment Agency because she was white and English. Competition for the post was only open to “ethnic minorities” - interestingly including Scots, Irish and Welsh, but not English.</p>
<p class="font_8">McKinstrey also points out how Ken Livingstone, former Labour Mayor of London, had refused to endorse nominations for the London Fire Authority because too many candidates were white. “Too many whites” is a phrase one will hear used quite a lot if one spends time around (often white) Left-wing ideologues determined to implement Left-wing policy. “Ethnic diversity” appears to be the aim just about everywhere and for everything - something that is most often expressed through lament of a white or an English majority. A small nursery in Lincolnshire was <span><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3561380/Nursery-downgraded-Ofsted-failing-teach-ethnic-diversity.html" target="_blank"><span>censured by Ofsted</span></a></span> (schools inspectorate) this year for failing to teach about other cultures or not having enough black or Asian people featured in pictures on the wall. We can try to dress this up as we like, but the message is very clear – there is too much white and English going on.</p>
<p class="font_8">The poor old Swedes have taken hatred of their ethnicity to an extraordinary place. Migrant rape and abuse of Swedes is at an alarming level and yet they keep their borders open for more. Not only do its leaders do nothing to prevent or punish serious assaults committed against their own people, but they add insult to injury by insisting that Sweden itself is essentially worthless. Mona Sahlin, former leader of the Swedish Social Democrats told the Swedes that they have <span><a href="http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5161/mona-sahlin" target="_blank"><span>no culture worth defending</span></a></span>. She said "I've often had that question but I cannot figure out what Swedish culture is. I think that is what makes many Swedes so envious of immigrant groups. You have a culture, an identity, a history, something that binds you together. What do we have? We have Midsummer's Eve and such corny things." Sweden has even had a Prime Minister who told them the country was <span><a href="http://speisa.com/modules/articles/index.php/item.576/former-swedish-pm-sweden-belongs-to-the-immigrants-not-the-swedes.html" target="_blank"><span>no longer theirs: Sweden now belongs to immigrants</span></a></span>.</p>
<p class="font_8">I have not even scratched the surface here, there are simply too many similar examples.</p>
<p class="font_8">Across the board, left-leaning politicians and journalists can also offer inexplicable sympathies to those who attack Western countries: it’s our fault, our foreign policy, our past. Rarely, if ever, do Left-wing activists see Westerners, certainly whites, as the innocent party. It is always somehow our fault. This brings me to the next personality disorder trait frequently exhibited across the Left-wing movement. It is an interesting twist on the Left’s self-hate. It hates itself because it presumes itself superior.</p>
<p class="font_8"><strong>Narcissism</strong></p>
<p class="font_8">Narcissistic personality disorder is, at its name suggests, a known and recognised condition. Basically, a narcissist is endowed with a bloated and entirely irrational sense of their own self-importance, despises those who disagree, and presents themselves as the all-knowing expert on all things. The Left-wing is infected with a weird form of narcissism that causes many to believe that they know what is best for all – regardless of democratic consensus. This can no better be demonstrated than with the reaction of the Left to the recent decision of the British electorate to leave the European Union. <span><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36692990" target="_blank"><span>Thousands of people turned in London</span></a></span> demanding that the majority of the electorate be ignored and the UK remain an EU member. Labour MP David Lammy personified this attitude by stating <span><a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-result-latest-david-lammy-mp-eu-referendum-result-parliament-twitter-statement-stop-this-a7102931.html" target="_blank"><span>“we can stop this madness”</span></a></span>. Madness? The madness of wanting to leave the EU? The madness of disagreeing with a Left-wing elite? What staggering arrogance it requires to believe that those who disagree with you on a political point do so because they are “mad”.<br/> These are people who genuinely believe that their viewpoint ought to override others and that all who disagree with them are either mad, fascists or bigots, or simply uneducated fools who know not what they do.</p>
<p class="font_8">Add in to this toxic mix a crippling guilt complex that causes people on the Left to feel such extreme guilt about European colonialism for example that they feel they deserve to be punished for it – even though they had nothing to do with it and were not responsible. This again reveals the mixture of narcissism and self-hate: we are so important that we are responsible for everything, we are so awful we should be punished for everything.</p>
<p class="font_8">Finally, add a complete and total detachment from reality. When I was a Parliamentary candidate, I took part in several hustings events and was the only candidate to raise common sense objections to open border migration. I was roundly vilified of course. No other candidate, at any event, had the courage to agree with me. This is because they were either Leftists themselves or afraid of the inevitable bullying that accompanies disagreeing with the Left.</p>
<p class="font_8">Leftists refuse to put a limit on migration figures, regardless of impact. Simple economics (supply and demand affecting the jobs or housing markets for example) do not apply. Basic numeracy doesn’t seem to apply either – 100,000 people is no different to 1,000,000 people, so what the hell? Let’s have many millions. The same can be said about the Leftist view of Islam. Anyone who dares to even point out the reality of the horror faced in Islamic states, or what Islamic scripture plainly states about non-believers, will instantly become a bigot or a racist regardless of the fact that what they are saying is demonstrably and provably true.</p>
<p class="font_8">There’s a common saying: ‘the lunatics have taken over the asylum’. I think if we look at Western politics, this is becoming quite apt. Although losing power at present, the Left has dominated political discourse for such a long time that contempt for ourselves, and contempt for those who don’t agree that we ought to feel contempt for ourselves, is now essentially mainstream. That all who oppose internationalism or socialism do so because they are morally inferior (or “far-Right” to use the latest slur) is now mainstream political thought, even disseminated in schools.</p>
<p class="font_8">The pursuit of Left-wing utopian ideals now out-ranks objective truths, rationality, and common sense. All of this occurs because the Left has the power and has decided that it deserves to keep it, forever. Everyone else is just mad.</p>
<p class="font_8"><a href="http://www.weneedtotalkaboutislam.com/#">http://www.weneedtotalkaboutislam.com/#</a>!Leftism-is-a-mental-illness/c193z/57822a400cf250831da2593d July 10, 2016</p>
</div>
</div>
</div> 1984 - Tracking Our Descent into Madnesstag:4freedoms.com,2016-05-19:3766518:Topic:1786502016-05-19T18:22:51.076ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<div class="title"><h3 class="optimizely-1-33181">European Muslims Debate: Should Gays Be Executed?</h3>
</div>
<div class="byline"><a href="https://pajamasmed.hs.llnwd.net/e1/static-content/images/author-photos/brucebawer-537333653.jpg" target="_blank"><img class="align-left" src="https://pajamasmed.hs.llnwd.net/e1/static-content/images/author-photos/brucebawer-537333653.jpg"></img></a> BY BRUCE BAWER <span class="date date-formatted">AUGUST 7, 2008…</span><div class="comment-link"><a href="https://pjmedia.com/blog/european-muslims-debate-should-gays-be-executed/?singlepage=true#comments"></a></div>
</div>
<div class="title"><h3 class="optimizely-1-33181">European Muslims Debate: Should Gays Be Executed?</h3>
</div>
<div class="byline"><a href="https://pajamasmed.hs.llnwd.net/e1/static-content/images/author-photos/brucebawer-537333653.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://pajamasmed.hs.llnwd.net/e1/static-content/images/author-photos/brucebawer-537333653.jpg" class="align-left"/></a>BY BRUCE BAWER <span class="date date-formatted">AUGUST 7, 2008</span><div class="comment-link"><a href="https://pjmedia.com/blog/european-muslims-debate-should-gays-be-executed/?singlepage=true#comments"><span class="ss-icon ss-standard"> </span></a></div>
</div>
<div class="content"><p>One of the pillars of the future totalitarian state in <em>1984</em> is the practice of doublethink, which Orwell defined as “the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. ... To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just so long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies -- all this is indispensably necessary.”</p>
<p>As it happens, this is a precise description of exactly what’s been going on in many parts of Europe in recent years, as multicultural ideology has been confronted by realities about Islam that, in a doublethink-free world, would send that ideology crashing to the ground in flames.</p>
<p>For a case in point, I will refer the reader to an episode I’ve <a href="http://pjmedia.com/blog/first_they_came_for_the_gays/">mentioned</a> previously in this space -- an Oslo debate last November at which the deputy chairman of Norway’s Islamic Council, Asghar Ali, refused to reject the death penalty for gays. When Senaid Kobilica, the head of the Islamic Council (which represents 60,000 Muslims), was asked where <em>he</em> stood on the question, he replied that he couldn’t give a definitive answer until he got a ruling from the European Fatwa Council. This week it was <a href="http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article2573841.ece">reported</a> that he’s still waiting.</p>
<p>But not to worry! Kobilica added that he’s “100 percent certain that the fatwa council will not come out in favor of something which conflicts with European law.” Meaning that while the death penalty for homosexuals is, indeed, an orthodox Islamic position -- one about which the Fatwa Council’s head, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has himself written sympathetically -- Western Muslim leaders, in accordance with the Koran (and with good strategy), prefer in such controversial cases not to challenge infidel law. (There will, after all, be time enough to execute gays in the coming decades, as the Muslim population attains critical balance in one country after another -- first, most likely, in France and Sweden and the Netherlands, and in Norway some time after that.)</p>
<div class="inline-ad-wrapper"><div class="inline-ad-label">SPONSORED</div>
<ins class="adsbygoogle"><ins id="aswift_0_expand"><ins id="aswift_0_anchor"></ins></ins></ins></div>
<p>What’s most chilling about all this, however, is not the positions of these Muslim leaders but the reactions of the Norwegian establishment. Or, one should say, the<em>lack </em>of reaction.</p>
<p>Consider this. After last November’s debate, it emerged that Asghar Ali not only was deputy chairman of the Islamic Council but was also on the board of the Oslo Arbeidersamfunn, the largest and most influential association within Norway’s ruling Labor Party. Asked about Ali’s views, the head of the Oslo Arbeidersamfunn, Anne Cathrine Berger, <a href="http://www.ostkantavisa.no/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071108/NYHETER/71108005/1002">lamented</a> that some people “can’t see the difference between a board member’s views and the organization’s views.” Despite scattered calls for his dismissal, Ali remained on the board. (When a new board election was held in February, Ali chose not to run again.)</p>
<p>That’s not all: Ali is, in addition, secretary of the 37,000-member Electricians’ and IT Workers’ Union. After the November debate, the union’s website posted a “<a href="http://www.elogit.no/asset/9214/1/9214_1.doc">clarification</a>” by Ali saying that “as a Norwegian Muslim” he in fact rejected the death penalty for gays. The words "as a Norwegian Muslim" amount to a disingenuous dodge -- they're the rhetorical equivalent of keeping your fingers crossed behind your back. To state that one rejects the death penalty for gays "as a Norwegian Muslim” isn’t the same as saying that one rejects it, period. Like what Kobilica said about European law, it’s simply an Islamist’s way of affirming that he accepts infidel law as it now stands; such a statement reveals absolutely nothing about his real position on the question, or about whether he is, in fact, dedicated to the goal of ultimately changing this and the rest of Norwegian law to conform with sharia. At this point in the ongoing Islamization of Europe, the slipperiness of Ali’s “clarification” should be manifest to any infidel who’s made an effort to understand how Muslims think about these matters. Yet the head of the Electricians’ and IT Workers’ Union , Hans Olav Felix, pronounced himself <a href="http://www.elogit.no/index.gan?id=9174&subid=0&serchDone=1">satisfied</a>with Ali’s ”clarification,” and Ali remains in the #2 spot at the union.</p>
<p>As for the Norwegian government, there has been no serious effort, as far as I know, to rescind from the Islamic Council its half million kroner a year in state support.</p>
<div class="article-inline-ad-container"><div id="div-gpt-ad-1440702215287-4" class="article-inline-ad"><div id="google_ads_iframe_/1011927/PJM_300_by_250_middle_0__container__"></div>
</div>
</div>
<p>And the media? After a news cycle or two had passed, the Norwegian media dropped the whole pesky little business of Muslims executing gays down the memory hole and resumed treating the members of the Islamic Council as if they were congenial folks who are model immigrants, lovers of Norway, and (that magic word) <em>moderates</em>. When Norwegian security services expressed concern in February about the possible role in terrorist funding of money sent abroad by Norwegian Muslims, <em><a href="http://www.dagsavisen.no/innenriks/article336321.ece">Dagsavisen</a> </em>went straight to Asghar Ali for a quote pooh-poohing the idea. <em>Dagsavisen</em>’s article ended as follows: “Ali emphasizes that the Norwegian Muslim community has definitively rejected extremism.” The fact that Ali himself had refused only weeks earlier to reject the death penalty for gay people had already been deep-sixed.</p>
<p>In the same month, Muslims rioted in Denmark, and <em>Aftenbladet</em> ran a <a href="http://aftenbladet.no/utenriks/article598180.ece">piece</a>portraying Kobilinka as an embodiment of moderation and reason. He was quoted as calling on Muslim youth in Norway to control themselves and blaming the riots in Denmark on “inequality and discrimination.” His argument that Muslims are the victims of bigotry, and that this bigotry is the cause of any unrest by Muslim youth, was treated as self-evident; meanwhile, the fact that this self-proclaimed opponent of discrimination had recently refused to reject the death penalty for gays went unmentioned.</p>
<p>As if all this weren’t enough, in April <em>Aftenposten</em> ran a <a href="http://www.aftenposten.no/reise/article2360369.ece">profile</a> of Kobilica by Kristin Høiland. Her headline: “Travel-Happy Imam.” The subhead: “He loves the mountains, enjoys skiing -- and considers his journey to Norway among the most important of his life.” Høiland’s text glowed with enthusiasm for this exemplary “new Norwegian”: “We have seldom met anyone so happy to be living in this country. ... Kobilica could be mistaken for an unusually well-dressed Norwegian ... [he’s] a young, modern imam, dressed in suit and tie, and available by cell phone and e-mail.” Also, he’s “hospitable,” he’s a “bridge-builder,” the atmosphere in his office is “informal and friendly.” When he tells Høiland that he wants “to show that Islam is an inclusive religion” that “adapts to the society we live in,” you might expect her to reply with a query about executing gays, but no: her next question is “Do you have any dream destinations?”</p>
<p>A search through all the major Norwegian papers and several lesser ones shows that none has been moved in recent days to editorialize about the Islamic Council’s continued on-the-fence posture about executing homosexuals. On the contrary, instead of acknowledging that more than a few Muslim leaders in Europe are well on their way to being the continent’s new Nazis, the Norwegian media have continued, in the face of all evidence, to cling to the mantra that Muslims are Europe ’s new Jews. To read the Norwegian media, you’d think European Muslims are huddling together in their homes, trembling in terror that an Islamophobic mob will break down the door any second and drag them out to be lynched. The media make no effort to reconcile such fantasies with the reality that Muslim leaders are out there every day, throwing their weight around with increasing self-assurance and being increasingly open about their devotion to even the most brutal parts of sharia law.</p>
<div class="inline-ad-wrapper"><div class="inline-ad-label">SPONSORED</div>
<ins class="adsbygoogle"><ins id="aswift_1_expand"><ins id="aswift_1_anchor"></ins></ins></ins></div>
<p>As it happens, the news that the Islamic Council was still awaiting the Fatwa Council’s verdict on gays came a day before a report that Mullah Krekar, Norway’s #1 resident terrorist, was suing Norway in the European Court of Human Rights because he wanted “to see that I’m getting everything I have a right to.” What both of these stories underscore is that on every front, and with every weapon they can find -- lawsuits, veiled threats, guilt-tripping, and puff pieces masquerading as journalism -- Islamists are poking and prodding at the edifice of European democracy in a tireless effort to weaken the system and bend it ever more surely toward sharia. They’ve realized that the work of jihad -- of restoring the caliphate, of making Europe a part of the <em>umma</em> -- doesn’t require suicide bombs and airplane missiles; for the prevalence in the West of useful idiots who’ve been brainwashed by multiculturalism makes such weapons superfluous.</p>
<p><a href="https://pjmedia.com/blog/european-muslims-debate-should-gays-be-executed/?singlepage=true">https://pjmedia.com/blog/european-muslims-debate-should-gays-be-executed/?singlepage=true</a></p>
</div> Stopping Kuffarphobia - Suggested Solutionstag:4freedoms.com,2016-02-25:3766518:Topic:1762172016-02-25T06:34:49.831ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>This forum is to capture suggested solutions to the problems of encroaching kuffarphobia and Islamic hate. It includes corrections to the Democratic Model, where its vulnerabilities are being exploited. </p>
<p>Of course, solutions are scattered throughout the site in various categories and various forms. But it would be nice to have pointers to all the solutions in this central place. After all, interviewers often say "Now that you've described the problem as you see it, what do you…</p>
<p>This forum is to capture suggested solutions to the problems of encroaching kuffarphobia and Islamic hate. It includes corrections to the Democratic Model, where its vulnerabilities are being exploited. </p>
<p>Of course, solutions are scattered throughout the site in various categories and various forms. But it would be nice to have pointers to all the solutions in this central place. After all, interviewers often say "Now that you've described the problem as you see it, what do you suggest as the solution?". Well, hopefully this forum can offer a nice selection for that purpose.</p> Social Justice Warriors - the lepers of the 21st centurytag:4freedoms.com,2016-01-03:3766518:Topic:1734752016-01-03T05:56:27.352ZAlan Lakehttp://4freedoms.com/profile/AlanLake
<p>Social Justice Warriors (SJW) are the people that hunt on the Internet / Facebook / Twitter etc, for someone who has stepped slightly out of line, now or maybe 10 years ago, then proceed to try destroy them. In doing this they hope to show other people how pure and morally superior they are - Virtue Signaling, to use another modern meme.</p>
<p>But this concept goes far deeper. I'm sure leaders of Hate not Hope would be flattered to be called an SJW. I don't think I need to say anything…</p>
<p>Social Justice Warriors (SJW) are the people that hunt on the Internet / Facebook / Twitter etc, for someone who has stepped slightly out of line, now or maybe 10 years ago, then proceed to try destroy them. In doing this they hope to show other people how pure and morally superior they are - Virtue Signaling, to use another modern meme.</p>
<p>But this concept goes far deeper. I'm sure leaders of Hate not Hope would be flattered to be called an SJW. I don't think I need to say anything more about the testimony that gives.</p>
<p><a href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495053?profile=original" target="_self"><img width="400" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/110495053?profile=RESIZE_480x480" width="400" class="align-right"/></a></p>
<p>But what about Michelle Obama? After writing on a piece of card and holding it up for a few seconds, she was being feted by the Guardian. I guess it's to be expected when her husband gets a Nobel Peace prize just for winning a democratic election.</p>
<p></p>
<p><strong>Michelle Obama raises pressure over kidnapped schoolgirls </strong></p>
<p><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/10/michelle-obama-nigeria-presidential-address">http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/10/michelle-obama-nigeria-presidential-address</a></p>
<p>Following this forum header is a post giving a far better criticism of the SJW than I can muster, so please read that next.</p>
<p>But there is another aspect of this phenomenon, what I'll call the Poisoned Re-Tweet Trap (PRTT). In this someone sends to a celebrity, a photoshopped image in which a mass murder appears to be their father, and asks for a re-tweet. This is apparently one of the high moral questions of our times: is the guilty person the one setting the PRTT trap, or the celebrity that re-tweets without due consideration? Vote in the survey!</p>
<p><a href="http://metro.co.uk/2016/01/02/lord-alan-sugar-is-the-latest-celeb-to-be-duped-into-tweeting-picture-of-serial-killer-5596330/">http://metro.co.uk/2016/01/02/lord-alan-sugar-is-the-latest-celeb-to-be-duped-into-tweeting-picture-of-serial-killer-5596330/</a></p>
<p>I think the latter question misses the point. Re-tweeting, like Michelle Obama's #bringbackourgirls (or as it should be, #bringbacktheircorpses), is a cheap and lazy attempt at virtue signalling. The PRTT problem is just a symptom of a far deeper moral vacuity and spineless, one that is constantly seeking to don a halo, while doing nothing for it, taking no risks, and devoting no effort. </p>
<p>Truly, the SJWs are the sick lepers of the 21st century.</p>