Gutters Foaming With Blood – Denial and Inversion

250534_471212172955173_1275280004_n

Observers of the news will have, of late, been made aware of several of those delightful little vignettes we are periodically treated to as a result of Western Europe’s policy of colonising their own countries with hostile 3rd world populations.

I refer, of course, primarily to the murder of British Soldier Lee Rigby in Woolwich, South London and the attempts by immigrants in Sweden to beat the world record attempt for ‘most cars set on fire’ currently held by Africans in France.

By now the reaction of the ruling class to these types of events is completely predictable.
David Cameron typified it saying:

“This was not just an attack on Britain and on the British way of life, it was also a betrayal of Islam and of the Muslim communities who give so much to our country. [exactly what they give he didn’t specify – he probably didn’t mean child grooming gangs and 12.5% of the prison population]…this country will be absolutely resolute in its stand against violent extremism and terror. We will never give in to terror or terrorism in any of its forms [yet we have IRA terrorists sitting as members of parliament].
Second, this view is shared by every community in our country

– not every member of every community though, clearly.

The general consensus of the political class was that this attack, just like the 7/7 bombings, had absolutely nothing to do with them whatsoever. Before Rigby’s body was cold, London Mayor Boris Johnson said it was wrong to link the murder of a soldier with British foreign policy and that “The fault lies wholly and exclusively in the warped and deluded mindset of the people who did it” before proceeding to go off grovelling to Muslims.

Foreign Secretary William Hague took the time to express his horror and disgust that fanatics would kill someone in the streets and attempt to mutilate the victim’s corpse just before he headed off to an EU meeting to (successfully) argue for the lifting on an arms embargo on the Syrian rebels in order to supply weapons to fanatics who kill people in their streets and then mutilate their corpses.

Meanwhile in Sweden (and all-but ignored by the likes of the BBC for several days), rioting broke out, perpetrated by ‘Swedish youths’ following the shooting by police of a deranged, machete wielding immigrant, an act of oppression to which obviously the only reasonable response was to set fire to cars and schools.

The powers-that-be were at a loss as to the causes of the conflagration:
“There is no answer” being the considered opinion of one Stockholm police spokesman, the sight of Somalis enriching Stockholm by trying to turn it into Mogadishu seemingly never prompting the questions as to why inviting the people who turned Mogadishu into Mogadishu in the first place into the country was a good idea or why anyone should be surprised when they try to do the same thing in their new land.

The responses to these and other acts of ‘cultural enrichment’ serve to illuminate the nature of the liberal capitalist, ‘multicultural’ state and the mentality of its ruling elites:

Following the Woolwich murder the forces of the state leapt into action to protect the public by arresting English people for making non-PC comments on the internet
and sending counter-terrorist police to raid the homes of nationalists.

Swedish authorities, instead of suppressing the disorder, decided not to use the police to confront rioters. It was seen as much more important for the state to exert its power to enforce order by issuing parking fines to people who had had their cars torched by ‘youths’. In a repeat of what happened in areas like Eltham in London during the riots of 2011, it was only when indigenous, working class men began patrols to prevent the rioters destroying their neighbourhoods that Swedish police were ordered to confront anybody, eager to prevent these Nazis from perpetrating such atrocities as defending their property and preventing crime.

Multiculturalism is striking for the sheer amount of cognitive dissonance and lying its defence demands:

After days of exaggerating a backlash against Muslims, the British media were beside themselves with excitement when a ‘Somali Cultural Centre’ and then an ‘Islamic College’ were set ablaze under suspicious circumstances, news presenters almost soiling themselves with glee when it was reported by police that witnesses had seen the letters ‘EDL’ painted on the side of the ‘cultural centre’ (why anyone would spray graffiti on a building they are about to burn down is anyone’s guess).

In reaction to the apparent arson attack on the ‘cultural centre’, the local MP repeated the standard line that this was an ‘attack on the whole community’, just as we had been told that the Woolwich murder and previous outrages had been an ‘attack on the whole community’.

This is clearly absurd – as is the constant refrain of the clerisy that the ‘far-right’ is a threat to life and liberty of just as serious a nature, or worse, than Islamic terrorism or other immigrant crime.

But life in the post-modern liberal state provides no shortage of absurdities:

Muslim terrorists explicitly cite the West’s aggressive, neo-jacobin foreign policy and wars as the reason for their action – this, we are supposed to believe, is totally untrue and that these people are simply deranged.

British authorities, following the vandalism of war memorials in London, hastily covered over the spray painted word ‘Islam’ presumably so no one would know what the motivation of the vandals was.

7500 people are murdered in Germany by aliens (mainly Muslim or nominally Muslim Turks) but Germans are told that it is they who are the problem since they are yet to rid themselves of Nazism.

When indigenous Britons are attacked by Asians, the media cannot even bring itself to describe the victims as “white girls” without using scare quotes.

When immigrants from the 3rd world, most of them in Sweden as a result of that nation’s asylum policy, go on the rampage it is because the Swedes and their “discrimination and racism“ are at fault, despite providing these ingrates with a standard of living far higher than what they could expect in their motherlands.

When a mentally ill woman shouts abuse directed toward other ethnic groups nothing ever happens…

…so long as the person doing the abusing is black (as any frequent user of London’s public transportation system can attest to). If they are white then they will be remorselessly hounded and bullied by the forces of the state until they admit their guilt and recant their heresy all the while smug middle class leftists and ethnic hypocrites prove their moral righteousness by howling on social media for the witch to be burned because the incident was filmed and put into the public domain.

The reflexive response to any bug in the multicultural program is, first, to deny the reasons for their occurrence and, second, to invert both the causes and the importance of the actors. The primary agents of disorder are demoted to freakish perpetrators of disconnected phenomena while the group who must bear the brunt and pay the largest part of the (butcher’s) bill of the socialisation of the costs of diversity become the actual problem in the eyes of ruling elites and their media and far-left collaborators.

Favoured minority groups must always be portrayed as victims. The ideological underpinning of political policy is never at fault. Policies that, by any logic-based evaluation, cause the conditions for social strife are never to blame.

Inter-ethnic tensions and concomitant disorder are used by the ruling class to crack down on native dissent.

Whatever problems are caused by extreme social heterogeneity the only option offered is more of it, creating a state of affairs akin to deliberately turning up the heat on a pressure cooker and then blaming it on a victim of the resulting explosion.

Anyone who has paying attention to recent history will have noticed that our humanitarian interventions/wars of aggression in the more benighted parts of the planet always result in large numbers of immigrants (presumably seeking refuge from our humanitarianism) entering the West to become permanent residents. That they often bring with them the kind of violence and barbarism they are ostensibly escaping is apparently not a problem anyone should be exercised about – even if their lives are negatively impacted by such things.

The more we interfere in foreign concerns and with the historic configuration of our own societies the worse the impact is on our nations, an impact which is easily measurable though routinely denied. Anyone protesting about their ethno-cultural dispossession will be ostracised, financially ruined, prosecuted, imprisoned or physically attacked by state supported ‘anti-fascists’. The architects of this dystopian world order are protected under the aegis of the state security apparatus; typical of how these people insulate themselves from the consequences of their actions, as their media cheerleaders and other bien pensant left-liberals do when they typically choose to live far away from the ‘enriching’ ‘diversity’ they have helped inflict on others.

We are told that what we see happening is, in fact not what is happening and that it is more than likely that the opposite is happening. Causes are denied and /or inverted.

Every incident, every problem caused by ruling class policy justifies increasing the power of that class and its state. Power which it then uses against its own people. In this and a myriad of other ways, the consequences of present liberal policy present opportunities for various sectional interests at the expense of the majority.

It may be worth noting that, according to every single one of the major philosophies of government, including those which underpin the liberal democratic state, we have reached the stage where the destruction of the political system and the class it sustains is completely legitimate – due to the undermining of the well-being of the demos from whom it supposedly derives legitimacy.

Whether that has any bearing on anything or not, this is imperative if the West is to survive:

The liberal order must be destroyed.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s