90 second video. The full madness of the new imperialism. National leader mandates the end of national identity; sees no contradiction in mandating a society based on both shared values and diversity of views (surely, this must include about what is valuable?); patriots must be re-educated:
On the left, it is quite well understood that America and its western lieutenants have used fanatical Islam to destroy socialist or independent states - Afghanistan in the 70s & 80s, Yugoslavia in the 90s, Libya, and now Syria. No serious consideration is given to the idea that western governments are now using Islamic immigration to destroy, meaning demoralize, undermine the unity and identity and self confidence and sense of agency of, their own citizens.
Trudeau, 2015. “Canada figured out a long time ago that differences should be a source of strength, not a source of weakness and the more we can do to bring in diverse perspectives, diverse points of view, and indeed to define a country not based on a national identity or ethnicity or language or background, but on values shared by all people in our country, values of openness, respect, compassion, a willingness to work hard, the desire to be there for each other.
“It is truly how countries in this globalized world where migration and immigration is going to be the norm rather than the exception. This is a lesson that we all need to learn.”
“It is truly how countries in this globalized world where migration and immigration is going to be the norm rather than the exception. This is a lesson that we all need to learn.”
Milosevic, 1989.
"Serbia has never had only Serbs living in it. Today, more than in the past, members of other peoples and nationalities also live in it. This is not a disadvantage for Serbia. I am truly convinced that it is its advantage. National composition of almost all countries in the world today, particularly developed ones, has also been changing in this direction. Citizens of different nationalities, religions, and races have been living together more and more frequently and more and more successfully."
Out of a mish mash of propaganda and selective moral attention in the service of geopolitical interests, what is the last 25 years of American led European political culture, described time and again in the plainest terms by American and western European leaders and elites, and promoted by every mainstream western media, with not only opponents but polite doubters demonized and dehumanized?
That all European nation states must be 'multicultural' (actually meaning, have very large Islamic - not Chinese, Hindu, Arabic Christian, other Christian European - populations); that native Europeans must at once regard this change as inevitable and assent to and agitate for government engineering to secure it; that native Europeans must self censor any preference for their own culture and people, identify this preference as retrograde and wicked, celebrate 'diversity is strength' while denying the existence of human differences, and embrace specific types of inter-racial marriage. The national borders of eastern Europe (drawn up by Hitler in Yugoslavia, and by Stalin everywhere else), and the national borders of the middle east (drawn up by the European powers in their classical imperial period), must remain intact at the cost of war and hundreds of thousands of lives, and not be peacefully changed or populations exchanged to prioritize ethnic self determination; the hidden outcome, in formerly multi ethnic states kept more or less stable by rule of law, is the domination of western favoured ethnic groups and the butchering of others.
This new morality, from the same leaders and elites who have promoted imperial war and destruction against every independent regional state which declined to become an outright slave of western interests, is promoted as a self evident good which no decent person could question, and is therefore a top down denial of human liberty in feeling and thought. What will happen when leaders and elites become more and more, like activists and journalists* and university graduates, mental products of this ideology rather than conscious exploiters of it? Perhaps this has already happened:
https://www.therebel.media/did_merkel_just_read_out_germany_s_suicide_note
A short video and a glimpse into the insane mind of a lieutenant for American led globalism. German woman asks Merkel what is she doing to protect the German people and identity against domestic Islamic domination, Merkel's response is bizarre: it's Germany's fault there are terrorists; don't be afraid; Islam is part of German culture; go to church and then explain Christianity to Muslims; remember you are guilty and arrogant and must redeem yourself.
Ordinary Europeans react to state mandated national dispossession with anger and confusion:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YXVycEbJn60
No establishment figure admits their domestic concerns; in international relations, leftover elites - leftover because of their attachment to the nation state and ethnic European culture - especially in Germany, like ex-Chancellor Helmut Schmidt, critique the present slow war against an independent Russia, but they may not understand that the question of national integrity and interest has been made obsolete by deference to integration with an American led global agenda.
In Hungary, the present elite does protest African and Islamic immigration, but the protest is still feeble and deferential, because it criticises dispossession without naming its state promoters, and does not clearly critique the basic pro-immigration premise - that all human cultures and races and the same and interchangeable. A critique which doesn't strongly affirm a contrary premise is more easily dismissed as reactionary and bigoted. The rest of eastern Europe, not wanting to displease the United States and Germany, needed to wait for the excuse of the Paris terror attack before suggesting it will decline to take in migrants.
To sum up,
"we're not the ones who bombed Libya", says Slovakian PM. Indeed. By means of war, Obama, the Democratic Party, and most of the real power in the Republican Party, extend something of their agenda for a globalist and minority white future America to their European vassal states; and the 'left', opposed to 'racist' ideas of nationhood and nationality and national unity and national culture, understands nothing about this novel imperialism, and only concerns itself about the 'rights of refugees'.
Personally, I prefer Assad, because sometimes, dictatorship is a better protector of liberty than democracy, and as for our British media, well - we can fairly say that maybe half, or more, the Syrian population expresses a pro Assad view that it simply ignores. Where are the interviews asking Syrian refugees, under protection of anonymity, who they blame for war or what they think about Assad?
No comments:
Post a Comment