Jump to content

Is there an agenda to reduce the White European population?


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, EnigmaticWorld said:

 

"Let's be clear about something, there was nothing white supremacist about what Jody had said. She didn't say that her people were superior to anybody else. She didn't call for violence or hatred towards anybody else. She just stated a fact."

 

 

Lol  .. I was only talking about the toadfish yesterday!

 

 

 

 

Oyster%2BToadfish.jpg&f=1&nofb=1

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/13/2020 at 11:39 AM, rideforever said:

Today we have no caste system.  And so globalism and satanism is on the rise.

Because it is chaos.

 

Order means a "caste" system, meaning everyone knows their level and they work upwards.  The entire society is a chain leading upwards to the Light.  Someone who has ability a knowledge goes up.  Same principle as on a ship, 1 captain, 1 first mate, 1 quartermaster, 1 sailmaker, 50 'hands'.

 

This is the correct order of things.

 

A pirate ship was actually very democratic. Everyone on board was entitled to speak and give their opinion. Decisions were made in council of the entire crew where people could give their views on things and cast their vote

 

The captains orders were followed during moments of crisis such as in a battle or a storm because at those times people needed to be pulling together in the same direction and decisiveness was required. Napoleon once said he'd rather have one bad general than two good ones because with two they would countermand each other and inject confusion and division into the fraught situation when what was needed was clarity and unity of purpose

 

But outside of those times the captain could be questioned. Also the crew themselves voted a quartermaster to be their representative to act as a check on the power of the captain. The quartermaster was able to veto the captain and act as a spokesman for the crew

 

The reality was in those days that most people lacked a decent education and not all could read the stars, operate a sextant or plot a course on a map so oftentimes the person with that esoteric knowledge was in a position of respect. They might be the 'navigator' but if they had other attributes of leadership they would likely become a captain

 

But the point is that the captain did not rule out of coercion. They were in a position of trust due to their knowledge and experience and their position was revocable if they overstepped the bounds of the crew.

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Macnamara said:

But the point is that the captain did not rule out of coercion. They were in a position of trust due to their knowledge and experience and their position was revocable if they overstepped the bounds of the crew.

 

I think you imagine too much, sounds like communism.

Pirates lived by the sword, by murder and theft and plunder.  It was probably the gold that kept people in line.  But if not throwing people overboard is no big deal as you are defacto without law and there are no authorities except greed.

No captain anywhere rules without coercion, whichever brand of coercion it is.  


Pirates are a kind of underworld, like Soho of the sea.  There is always something like that on the fringe of the straight and narrow.  Because it counterbalances and relieves the main line of the ships of the line.  That is normal. 

 

What happens in Soho?  Is it democracy?  Well when you are debauching yourself you can be as democratic as you like, pass the bottle around.  When you are robbing you can share around the loot.

And indeed the Leftwing fantasies of steal from the rich and taking some plunder are a lot like that.  They are the pirates of politics.

 

Anyway, if the UK as a whole becomes like Soho, or the Navy like the pirates then it is not in balance.

You earn the right to break the rules, you earn the right to a little friday night darkness

Let's say pirates represent a part of our darkness that is always there but we can't talk too much about.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Macnamara said:

sure if you want to discourage people from breeding one of the most effective things you could do would be to destroy their economic wealth so that they don't feel secure enough to have children. Meanwhile you could make sure that everyone you are trying to replace them with are given everything they need to feel secure enough to breed


An agenda is only successful through a willing population.  
The devil can tempt us with an apple but it is ultimately our choice to bite. 

The truth of why Westerners are being out bred is that they grow up slower than before.  They have extended childhoods, spend several years of their lives in college getting degrees that they can’t use, and stay under their parents roofs because it is uncomfortable to pack into cities and live like the immigrants.  

 

By the time a man or woman get over their ambiguity of whether or not they want to have a family the woman’s peak breeding years have already passed her by.  

This is as true in the US as in the UK. 

The numbers are here: 

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/work-pay-and-benefits/benefits/state-support/latest

 

In looking at the figures, in respect to blacks as they are called, their numbers are only higher than whites in terms of council tax reduction and housing benefit.  This is because they are foreign and don’t have a home already.  And they’re willing to pack in to apartments in cities so they can work for menial incomes because it is a better life than back home.  More of them are receiving child benefits because they are having more children.  


Whites still hold the majority of high paying jobs.

Whites on state benefits are living their parents’ homes. 
 

Why don’t the immigrants stay in their own countries?  Now that’s a social engineering issue that’s been going on for a long time within individual countries and now on a global scale:  creating conditions in which rural agrarian people can no longer survive so they will migrate into cities.  
 

For what reason? 
To become consumers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, rideforever said:

I think you imagine too much, sounds like communism.

 

I'm not imaging anything. I'm telling you what was going on because i know more than you

 

The ship would decide on 'articles' that they would abide by and anyone who wanted to be on that ship had to sign the articles to agree to it

 

Oftentimes in battle if it looked like the pirates were going to lose they would destroy the articles because it was evidence of the names of the people and their agreement to piracy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michi713 said:

An agenda is only successful through a willing population. 

 

WRONG!

 

An agenda that is harmful to the population is only successful through a COWED and/or brainwashed population

 

the british public were lied to about immigration at every step of the way

Edited by Macnamara
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Michi713 said:


An agenda is only successful through a willing population.  
The devil can tempt us with an apple but it is ultimately our choice to bite. 

The truth of why Westerners are being out bred is that they grow up slower than before.  They have extended childhoods, spend several years of their lives in college getting degrees that they can’t use, and stay under their parents roofs because it is uncomfortable to pack into cities and live like the immigrants.  

 

By the time a man or woman get over their ambiguity of whether or not they want to have a family the woman’s peak breeding years have already passed her by.  

This is as true in the US as in the UK. 

The numbers are here: 

https://www.ethnicity-facts-figures.service.gov.uk/work-pay-and-benefits/benefits/state-support/latest

 

In looking at the figures, in respect to blacks as they are called, their numbers are only higher than whites in terms of council tax reduction and housing benefit.  This is because they are foreign and don’t have a home already.  And they’re willing to pack in to apartments in cities so they can work for menial incomes because it is a better life than back home.  More of them are receiving child benefits because they are having more children.  


Whites still hold the majority of high paying jobs.

Whites on state benefits are living their parents’ homes. 
 

Why don’t the immigrants stay in their own countries?  Now that’s a social engineering issue that’s been going on for a long time within individual countries and now on a global scale:  creating conditions in which rural agrarian people can no longer survive so they will migrate into cities.  
 

For what reason? 
To become consumers. 

 

The western world is subjected to constant programming that encourages people not to settle down so you could argue that people are willingly bringing this on themselves, but they're also having their altruism exploited. I don't think people in Europe should have to enter a breeding contest either. I understand that the USA, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia are different though because they're not our homelands.

 

If the government and media didn't paint white people as devils all the time then things wouldn't be so bad. Even if someone is the most tolerant person going, they're still going to have the media paint a target on them. It's a situation where white people and people of colour will both eventually lose out because the government uses the conflict in society as an excuse to strip us of more rights, and the conflict in society will keep getting worse with less cohesion.

Edited by EnigmaticWorld
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

''We'' will die out but it's of our own doing. If you think about it... the elites prefer black and brown working class over white working class people. They see the white working class and their values and beliefs as relics of the past, of a ''white past''. It is about those white people that ''cling to the past'' and the white elites feel embarrassed to be associated with other less affluent white people. Meanwhile, those same affluent whites have lower birth rates. Also, a large chunk of the white populations are older people.

 

So, long term you're looking at extinction, as far as it can/should be applicable to human 'races'.

 

The affluent Romans were invaded as well and their gene pool got absorbed into other groups. It has probably happened in other civilizations too, like ancient Egypt.

 

Invaders usually have more to live for, they got that drive to make something new. Meanwhile, the established group, the older it is and the more developed it is, the more likely it seems to have reached its own end. Many advanced civilizations of the past may have simply been replaced in such a fashion.

Edited by Firebird
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Firebird said:

 They see the white working class and what they value and believe in as relics of the past, of a ''white past''.

 

the elites are social darwinnists who believe that they have a right to rule over everyone else like gods; that is the mentality we are seeing exhibited in the covid lockdowns and in the 'great reset'

 

White people traditionally have a culture of pursuing INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and are therefore seen as an obstacle to the elites pursuit of TOTALITARIAN top down control over everyone

 

They see us as an obstacle to be removed just like the irreplaceable ancient woodlands they are bulldozing to make way for their hunger games society high speed railways (to link up the overcrowded 'urban zones' of UN Agenda 2030)

Edited by Macnamara
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Macnamara said:

 

the elites are social darwinnists who believe that they have a right to rule over everyone else like gods; that is the mentality we are seeing exhibited in the covid lockdowns and in the 'great reset'

 

White people traditionally have a culture of pursuing INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS and are therefore seen as an obstacle to the elites pursuit of TOTALITARIAN top down control over everyone

 

They see us as an obstacle to be removed just like the irreplaceable ancient woodlands they are bulldozing to make way for their hunger games society high speed railways (to link up the overcrowded 'urban zones' of UN Agenda 2030)

 

I agree, but I would argue that protecting the rights of the individual was a group effort.


By nature, most people are collectivists. Most people prefer to be around people who are most like them: racially, philosophically, politically, spiritually. Including individualists.


Collectivism doesn't have to be in conflict with the individual personality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, EnigmaticWorld said:

I agree, but I would argue that protecting the rights of the individual was a group effort.


By nature, most people are collectivists. Most people prefer to be around people who are most like them: racially, philosophically, politically, spiritually. Including individualists.


Collectivism doesn't have to be in conflict with the individual personality.

 

If enough individuals are asserting their sovereignty then in the aggregate you get wider, societal freedom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Julia Hartley-brewer asks the vaccine tzar Nadhim Zahawi about unconscious racial bias at 10 mins 50 seconds in the clip below.

 

She then asks him at 11 minutes if he is unconsciously bias but of course he doesn't give a direct answer because the woke brigade refuse to admit that non white people can ever be racist towards white people

 

The whole false narrative is that only white people are at fault and that they are all unconsciously racist towards non whites. This is basically a way to abuse white people whilst at the same time flooding non white people into the country with the aim of making white people into a despised minority in their own native lands

 

It would be like the settlers in north america accusing the native americans of being 'unconsciously racist' if they ever complained about the endless boatloads of new comers...i can only describe it as a form of psychological ABUSE

 

He says that we are all unconsciously bias and goes on to speak about an initiative to make the british civil service more diverse but surely if he is complaining that when there is a majority they then give unfair advantage to people they have an unconscious bias towards, then if we follow that logic through we could say that anyone is going to have an unconscious bias so if you then flood the civil service with non whites they will then have an unconscious bias against white people and elbow them out, but maybe that's the whole plan.

 

So flood people in, guilt white people by calling them 'racist' so that they don't mount any objection as they are steadily elbowed out of all positions of any influence so that they end up with nothing but the shirts on their back whilst the people elbowing them out rationalise their actions as a crusade against 'racism' (when they are themselves pursuing their own aggressive agenda of conscious bias against white people)

 

She asks him again at 12 minutes 30 seconds can non whites have an unconscious bias [towards whites] but he doesn't answer her directly

 

This is, i suggest, because wokesters are VERY CONSCIOUS about race and think about little else and for them it is one of their driving motivations in their politics so we can only assume that they will then exercise their conscious bias against white people more as they develop more influence creating a feedback loop that will cause a nosedive for any white people with the misfortune to share space with them as they are increasingly psychologically abused whilst simultaneously pushed to the fringes in the name of 'diversity'

 

And this guy, who admits to having a race consciousness, is the guy the government has been put in charge of vaccinating the british public with an experimental vaccine that some scientists are saying could render the population infertile and turn their immune systems against themselves...

 

 

 

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

talk "we're not big on censorship here" RADIO

 

These guys are stirring up shit while lying through their teeth. They all are. There's no more media. It's gone. Actor's bullshitting the public to lead their audience up the garden path by psycho-social programs. Turn it off, tune in to the auranos - the very thing they have crudely mimicked then tried to delete. The auranos isnt full of actors, its not even full of fairly honest people either, its filled with the very hearts of peple. No lies, wise teachings, a world that the baby eating cannibals of electronic radio broadcasts have brought you from the cradle to believe is just a myth or a mental illness if you experience it first hand. It plays to your emotions and sucks you in filling your soul with greed and pride and vanity telling you these are strengths. They are weaknesses by which they buy and sell you everyday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Christian Purge Envisioned During Biden/Harris Administration

Posted By: Leo Hohmann December 17, 2020

Anti-Christian vitriol is rising out of the radical Democrat left and is more clearly framing a coming religious war in America that blames Christians for impeding the “progress” of a dark agenda. The Scientism that underpins Technocracy and Transhumanism only recognizes scientific truth while specifically excluding Biblical truth as mythical, unfounded and dangerous.

 

There is no lack of anti-Christian church activity during the Great Panic of 2020 pandemic. Churches are ordered closed or greatly restricted while casinos, Walmarts and Costcos stay open. Those churches that defied such orders have been blamed for being “super-spreaders” and charged as “unloving”, uncaring, callous and even murderous. ⁃ TN Editor

A group backed by congressional Democrats touting a “Secular America” has sent a 28-page document to the Biden transition team advising him to strip First Amendment rights from Christians who advocate traditional biblical positions on the sanctity of life, marriage, education and the nuclear family.

The group, calling themselves the Secular Democrats of America, sent the letter to Biden’s team under the title “Restoring Constitutional Secularism and Patriotic Pluralism in the White House: Prepared exclusively by Secular Democrats of America PAC for President-elect Joe Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris Transition Team.”

The document, presented by Reps Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Jared Huffman, D-Calif., and endorsed by Rep. Jerry McNerney, D-Calif., states that an incoming Biden administration must “educate the American public,” particularly those identified as the “religious right,” on the need to keep their “religious dogma” to themselves. The document calls for a purge of social conservatives from all levels of government, labeling them as “white nationalist” and “conspiracy theorists.”

“They don’t have a problem with churches, they have a problem with conservative churches that voted for Donald Trump,” Brannon Howse, a conservative radio host who aired a program on the document Monday night, told LeoHohmann.com. “And some of the people promoting this are members of the leftist neo-evangelical community.”

He said vengeful Democrats are making enemy lists and have their sights set on the traditional Catholic community as well as the conservative evangelical Protestant community – two groups that voted for Donald Trump in droves.

“As long as you’re teaching a leftist progressive socialist religiosity you’ll be just fine, but if you preach anything that is wrapped around a Judeo-Christian value system they’re coming after you,” Howse said. “They’re telling Biden don’t use the term Judeo-Christian. They don’t like that term.”

https://www.technocracy.news/christian-purge-envisioned-during-biden-harris-administration/

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Steph said:

"The Nuclear Family" is not traditional christian but a 20th century invention.

 

christianity has always valued marriage which is the pairing of a heterosexual couple who will then cohabit and raise children together

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Steph said:

The Nuclear Family is a two child policy

 

families were famously 2.4 children for a while

 

The reality is very simple: 

 

Christians value family and God and wish to instil those values in their children while State-Socialists want to destroy family and see the state as god. They believe that all children are the property of the state and that the state should be the parents and should give the children their values. State socialists feel ENTITLED to do what they want with your children including injecting experimental genome altering drugs into them. Christians believe that is evil

 

Contrary to what grassroots level state-socialists believe state-socialism is not actually materialistic in the sense that the people who are guiding it at the top are actually lurianic kabbalists. They just want everyone else to let go of their own religion and worship the state because it is the lurianic kabbalists who control the state

Edited by Macnamara
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...