Broken record alert!
Yep... AGAIN with the "You Should Be Reading Taki'sMagazine" exhortation!
* * *
I’ll believe we have an unbiased media the moment they start using the term “far left” as frequently as they use “far right.” But don’t hold your breath, because you will surely die waiting.
The blood hadn’t even dried from the carnage in Paris before the major media’s lackeys and lickspittles were issuing dire warnings about a disturbing political trend in Europe. Despite the fact that Islamic extremists spilled gallons of blood Friday night, the media’s respectable class — those craven lackeys and lickspittles — did not seem in the least bit terrified about Islamic terrorism, but rather about the “far right” gaining traction in Europe.
“The Paris attacks will strengthen right-wing European groups,” belched Market Watch.
“Far-right protests break out across France,” howled the Express.
The Daily Mail equated “right-wing protesters” with “anti-Muslim bigots.”
One shouldn’t expect any more or less from a media class of paid prostitutes who for generations have sculpted a narrative that blood-and-soil nationalist movements among non-whites are noble “indigenous struggles,” whereas precisely the same sort of instincts constitute a toxic burblin’ stew of “far-right extremism” when expressed among whites.
They follow a script where the primal urge for ethnic survival among non-whites is righteous and empowering, whereas it’s the heart of human darkness for whites — either individually or collectively — to exist in any other state besides one of constant apology and retreat.
And then some hairy, holy-rolling Turds of Allah came along and slaughtered 130-plus people, many of whom likely had been brainwashed and peer-pressured into believing that “xenophobia” was a character defect rather than a survival instinct.
France is the birthplace of the very concepts of “left” and “right” as political terms. This false and pitifully reductive dichotomy has had so much staying power that even those who deny the very existence of race and gender seem convinced that the meanings of “left” and “right” are etched in stone.
It doesn’t matter that these political nametags are the very essence of “social constructs.” It matters not that what was called “progressive” 100 years ago would be deemed far-right eugenic quackery these days. It doesn’t matter that “liberal” used to mean the same as what “libertarian” now does, even though the two terms are almost polar opposites nowadays.
Simple minds suffer from a hyper-simplistic classification mania, and no amount of persuasion can convince them that there are more than two ways of looking at any given subject.
* YEP... HITS THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. MOST PEOPLE ARE... STUPID.
* SERIOUSLY, FOLKS... "RIGHT" vs. "LEFT" MAY BE CONVENIENT SHORTHAND...
* AND SURELY "LEFT" HAS REAL MEANING...
* BUT AS FOR "RIGHT"... THAT'S AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT KETTLE OF FISH. MANY WHO CLAIM TO BE "RIGHT" ARE ONLY "RIGHT" IN THE EUROPEAN SENSE... IN THE GOP ESTABLISHMENT SENSE... IN THE SENSE OF WANTING TO BE "IN" WITH THE OLIGARCHY. MY FRIENDS... THIS ISN'T "RIGHT."
* THERE'S A HUGE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN "CONSERVATIVE" AND "RIGHT." THE NEOCONS ARE "RIGHT." (AND IN A SENSE THEY'RE ALSO "LEFT.") THE TRANSNATIONALISTS ARE "LEFT"... BUT ALSO NOTE... MANY FOLKS WHO CALL THEMSELVES "CONSERVATIVES" - WHO RAIL AGAINST SUPPOSED "ISOLATIONALISTS" (WHO REALLY DON'T EXIST AS SUCH) AND "LIBERTARIANS" AND "FAIR TRADERS/ECONOMIC NATIONALISTS" COUNT THEMSELVES AS "CONSERVATIVES." THEY'RE NOT.
* ANYWAY... BACK TO THE COLUMN...
The way many — if not most — people speak, one would think it’s impossible for anyone to lean left economically and right culturally, or vice versa, or any other possible combination that transcends the rigid two-dimensional model.
Divvying the entire world up into two neatly sliced watermelon halves — one marked “left” and the other “right” — ignores that we’re not dealing with a simple two-dimensional line segment but rather a 3-D constellation of intersecting line segments that run across an array of spectrums including economics, culture, race, borders, and everything else under the sun.
What has been repeated a gazillion times but has yet to sink into the modern leftist’s soft skull is that at least in cultural terms, Islam is about as “right wing” as it gets. It is intensely “patriarchal” and “homophobic” and “sexist.” The average Muslim manifests far more of the behaviors and attitudes that are routinely condemned as hateful and vile and retrograde when they’re expressed by the purported bigots and xenophobes of the Caucasian right wing.
And yet the average leftist coddles and defends Islam because leftism’s hatred of patriarchy and homophobia and sexism is not nearly as intense as its hatred of all things Western. No matter how right-wing it is at heart, Islam is, at least for the time being, extraordinarily useful to the left.
* I DON'T PAINT ISLAM WITH A BROAD BRUSH. NOR DO I FEEL CONTEMPT FOR CULTURAL NORMS THAT IN MANY WAYS ARE QUITE IN KEEPING WITH MY MORAL AND ETHICAL GROUNDING. WHETHER WE'RE TALKING MUSLIMS... OR CHRISTIANS OR JEWS OR HINDUS OR ANIMISTS OR...
A TERRORIST IS A TERRORIST. A PIECE OF GARBAGE IS A PIECE OF GARBAGE. AND A GOOD PERSON IS A GOOD PERSON.
So when the chattering classes chirp about an ominously looming wave of “right-wing extremism” in Europe, it’s understood that they are not talking about rampant gay-bashing or clit-snipping or slut-shaming in Europe’s Islamic no-go zones.
* I'M KINDA ON BOARD WITH THE SLUT-SHAMING.
* AS TO THE GAY BASHING... I'M AGAINST IT... BUT I'M ALSO AGAINST "GAY NORMING" AND ABSOLUTELY AGAINST CREATING A "GAY HERO" MEME. (SEE: MODERN AMERICAN TV.)
Rather, they are referencing the simple desire for indigenous Europeans to keep Europe culturally and ethnically European.
* I'M FOR THAT! KEEP ASIA ASIAN! KEEP AFRICA AFRICAN! KEEP ARABIA ARAB! (AND SO ON AND SO FORTH...)
In this context, the left-right continuum involves national borders — if you want them erased, you’re left wing, and if you want walls and fences built, you’re not only “right wing,” you’re a “right wing extremist” and a member of the “far right fringes.”
But this begs the question: Why do leftists consider it outright sinister when Europeans wish for Europe to remain European both culturally and ethnically? Isn’t in-group altruism the only way that groups survive, especially when pitted against groups who don’t suffer from self-hatred and who seek to eliminate all competitors?
Of course it is!
In this context, a “right-wing extremist” is a European who simply wishes for Europe to remain European. It’s someone who rightly discerns that the scabby hordes of so-called “refugees” flooding into Europe from the Middle East do not come in peace or with the desire to assimilate; they come instead to conquer and destroy. They come with a chip on their shoulder and a score to settle. And they are being used as tools by Europe’s elites to terrify and silence the masses.
In other words, a “right-wing extremist” is someone who feels no need to die and be blotted from history’s pages simply because some sheltered and pampered pansy tells them it’s the right thing to do. It is someone who doesn’t feel compelled to sacrifice their continued cultural and genetic existence on this planet merely to appease some sheltered elitist’s tangled guilt complexes. It’s someone of European descent who sees it as a character defect rather than a virtue to hate oneself.