Editors Note: Some of the practices described in this article are so disgusting that my stomach gets queezy even posting them here. I therefore offer this “trigger warning” (in reverse-SJW fasion), and also the addendum that I may take it down off the site in the future, lest its description of such practices- even in condemnation- befoul the noble work we are all doing as European-Preservationists, and defenders of the holy and virtuous history of our people. -JL
Editors Note 2: This does not strictly have to do with Europe, but after seeing so many similar stories I was ‘compelled’ to write it. Horrifying stuff.
Challenge To Progressives: Your “Cutting Edge” Is Your Future Is Your Identity
We talk all the time on this site and within our movement about the evils of Progressive “Negationism” (also called Cultural-Marxism).
At the same time many Progressives truly do not understand the scope of what their ideology represents, and just what they are fighting for.
The reason this is the case is because they have accepted the basic premise of Progressivism, which is that history is one long tale of the oppressed taking back power from their oppressors (hence the word “progress”).
If this is the case, it follows logically that any progress is good. Indeed this is the core belief of the Progressive ‘religion’. Because this process is linear, it means that to examine the future of Progressive ideology- and to determine what will eventually be “good” to Progressives- all one needs to do is to look to the cutting edge of Progressive belief at any point in history.
Progressives would have us believe that this is a natural and organic process- that as human beings become more evolved, and more sophisticated, we naturally leave things behind that are better off forgotten. Examples they would point to include slavery, racism, the illegality of abortion, the criminalization of homosexuality, etc. In this narrative (which I myself long espoused during a youthful Liberal phase), Progressivism is the merely the political application of normal human societal and moral development. The idea is that Progressives bring the future into being, a future that will come no matter how hard anyone resists, while Conservatives fight against that future in vain, and only because of repressed, reactionary, dogmatic, and hateful thinking. Therefore anyone who truly “understands” the world is a Progressive, in this worldview.
The truth is a little more complicated however, and if one delves into it one can see exactly how certain “Progressive” beliefs become accepted within society, and how completely in-organic this phenomenon is.
As an example we can point to homosexuality, and we will use as Exhibit A the 1989 book After the Ball – How America will conquer its fear and hatred of Gays in the 90s (Penguin Books).
After the Ball was a political manifesto outlining the strategy by which homosexuality- long reviled in American culture- would become accepted, commonplace, and as “American as apple pie”.
I don’t have any problem with homosexuality in and of itself- Alexander the Great was homosexual (or bisexual) for goodness sake. However looking at this book is still extremely informative vis a vis how this phenomenon plays out. It also- appropriately- does not deal with normal ‘homosexuality’, but instead modern degenerate Progressive pornography (many partners, ostentatious effeminate behavior, drug use, middle-finger to the world homosexuality, as Camille Paglia would describe it).
The book argued for a three-pronged assault based on the techniques of: (1) Desensitization, (2) Jamming, and (3) Conversion.
The following explanations of each technique are from the book, where they are brief parts of much longer passages. To read a well-written analysis of the book, click on the following link: http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/after_the_ball.html
“If, however, gays can live alongside straights, visibly but as inoffensively as possible, they will arouse a low-grade alert only, which, though annoying to straights, will eventually diminish for purely physiological reasons. Straights will be desensitized…
We can extract the following principle for our campaign to desensitize straights to gays and gayness, inundate them in a continuous flood of gay-related advertising, presented in the least offensive fashion possible. If straights can’t shut off the shower, they may at least eventually get used to being wet.”
“The trick is to get the bigot into the position of feeling a conflicting twinge of shame, along with his reward, whenever his homohatred surfaces, so that his reward will be diluted or spoiled. This can be accomplished in a variety of ways, all making use of repeated exposure to pictorial images or verbal statements that are incompatible with his self-image as a well-liked person, one who fits in with the rest of the crowd. Thus, propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths and assholes–people who say not only ‘faggot’ but ‘nigger,’ ‘kike,’ and other shameful epithets–who are ‘not Christian.’”
“We mean conversion of the average American’s emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the nation via the media.
In Conversion, the bigot, who holds a very negative stereotypic picture, is repeatedly exposed to literal picture/label pairs, in magazines, and on billboards and TV, of gay- explicitly labeled as such!–who not only don’t look like his picture of a homosexual, but are carefully selected to look either like the bigot and his friends, or like any one of his other stereotypes of all-right guys– the kind of people he already likes and ` admires. This image must, of necessity, be carefully tailored to be free of absolutely every element of the widely held stereotypes of how ‘faggots’ look, dress, and sound. He–or she–must not be too well or fashionably dressed; must not be too handsome–that is, mustn’t look like a model–or well groomed. The image must be that of an icon of normality…”
Surely these strategies bring to mind various memories and examples (notably in entertainment) we have each been exposed to since homosexuality and gay marriage first became “cutting edge” Progressive issues. This brings us to the next step we must undertake in our understanding of Progressivism, which is examining what the issues of today are that are on this same “cutting edge”.
Those are the following:
One- Transgender Ideology
While less than one percent of the population of the United States consider themselves to be “transgendered”, our government- under Barack Obama and the Democrat Party- have now officially embraced a platform of being pro “transgender-rights”, and putting new laws into effect enshrining these rights, which impact not only individuals identifying as such, but society as a whole and every one of us within it. Examples of these rights and the details of this phenomenon include the following:
-The right of any individual to use any public bathroom they choose. This means that adult men, with tattoos all over their bodies and beards on their faces, have the right to go into women’s bathrooms in Walmart and Target and Sea World and Disneyland, and sit down in the stall next to your 8 year old daughter. They don’t need to be dressed as a woman to do this mind you, although some will, and others will be dressed as men but with medically created breasts. This also extends to high school changing rooms and showers. So if your 14 year old freshman daughter doesn’t want to change after P.E. with an 18 year old male “transgendered” student, she is now plum out of luck.
-The right of pre-pubescent children and their parents to have the child undergo medical hormone treatment to correct their “wrong” (natural-born) gender. This is going on across the country, and has been spotlighted in numerous media stories. In these situations ten year old boys who believe they are actually girls (its almost never the opposite scenario) will be brought by their (radical progressive) parents to doctors who will give them injections to prevent the onset of puberty, so they don’t “become men”. These doctors will then also give the children estrogen and other hormones to make them develop into women, which is what they purportedly believe their “real gender” to be. Progressives across the land, such as Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton, are now telling Americans that if they oppose the idea of ten year olds getting gender reassignment treatment they are bigots, and no better than homophobes, sexists, and racists (exactly as outlined in After the Ball). Update: The Canadian province of Ontario has actually made it illegal for parents to deny their child the right to undergo gender reassignment surgery, and ruled that parents can have their children taken away by the state if they don’t allow them the freedom to be their ‘real’ (as in not real) gender.
-The idea, even enshrined in law in Massachusetts recently, that gender is a “societal construct”. And the application of this, such as in Sweden , where many schools now mandate “gender neutral” pronouns instead of “he” and “she”.
We saw this recently in a story out of the UK that can be read here. A gentleman named Ben Ford was put up for adoption by his mother, Kim West, who he met 32 years later when she was 51. They “fell in love’ and proceeded to have a sexual relationship and decided to get married.
When this story was broke, the public was greeted by a number of university professors and researchers who claimed that this attraction is actually a semi “normal” occurrence when adult family members meet each other for the first time, and a chorus of Progressives arguing that it was “wrong” to “judge” the pair for their feelings and their decision to act on them. These Progressives celebrated the love between Mr. Ford and his mother, and shouted critics down as “repressed prudes” and “bigots”. Update: The Swedish Liberal Party’s Youth Wing recently enshrined incest as a key campaign plank, and stated that “Anyone who opposes incest is not a liberal”.
Three- Sex with animals
In super-Progressive Canada, the Canadian Supreme Court just ruled that some forms of sex with animals are legal. This mirrors Germany, which has in recent years seen the rise of “animal brothels”. Again, this practice is defended by many left-wing groups. Indeed, when the right-wing government in Denmark made such practices illegal, there was significant Progressive opposition:
Liberal Alliance members were opposed to the new law, with party member Joachim Olsen describing it in February as at best “superficial” and at worst “political populism and moralism”.
To see the article from which the quote was taken and read more about this issue, click here.
Update: This was also a key campaign plank of the Swedish Liberal Party’s Youth Wing, along with necrophilia (seriously)
Four- Muslim rape of native European children
Readers of this site will have in deep understanding of this issue already, but for anyone reading this who needs confirmation of the massive nature of this problem, and just how deep Progressive complicity lies, here is a link to the official government inquiry into Rotherham http://www.rotherham.gov.uk/downloads/file/1407/independent_inquiry_cse_in_rotherham
And a review on Counter-Currents of a book on the subject: http://www.counter-currents.com/2016/05/the-battle-of-britain/
I include this here not just because it is an example close to our hearts, but because it is quite clearly the most damning indictment against Progressives one can make. The idea that people would shrug off sex with animals and incest in favor of ideology is one thing, the idea of shrugging off the enslavement, gang-rape, and torture of hundreds of thousands of young girls, just because they are White and their rapists are Muslims (the most celebrated Progressive victim group) is of a far more horrific and depraved nature.
I used to hate reading articles that tried to link Pedophilia and Progressivism, as it seemed like such a reach, but as time has gone on I have found it increasingly difficult to dismiss such connections.
Indeed, that most representative of Progressive voices- Salon- recently published an article titled “I’m a pedophile not a monster” (click here to read it) which almost perfectly replicates two of the strategies explained in After the Ball– “desensitization” and “jamming”.
Beyond this, if one digs down, the number of examples of far-left thinkers, organizers, and politicians defending pedophilia is quite amazing. There are far too many examples to cite here, but anyone who is skeptical owes it to themselves to research the subject. For one brief primer, click on this link: http://www.wnd.com/2014/01/pedophilia-the-next-sexual-rights-revolution/
Note: when I speak of Progressive acceptance and promotion of pedophilia, I am not talking about the actual rape of children per se, but instead the legitimacy of sexual attraction to children by adults, and-in some cases- sexual interaction between the two. Indeed, we already have seen high profile examples of left-wing icons whose documented pedophilia (or similarly depraved behavior) has earned them zero condemnation from Progressives: Woody Allen, Bryan Singer, Roman Polanski, etc, each of whom has been defended by critics who point to detractors/accusers as being “squares”, “bigots”, “rednecks”, and “anti-Semites” (the exact accusations After the Fall urges Progressives to use).
The above practices laid out in this article are not “new” to the world, and have been accepted at other points in the past in various cultures- most notably in ancient Rome during its period of mass decadence leading up to the fall of the empire, as well as in other “decadent” societies near the end of their natural lifetimes. Our own societies mirror those, the only difference being such practices are now being pushed through the religion of Progressivism and given moral legitimacy within its framework, rather than just being tolerated as sick and immoral by disinterested parties unwilling to take a stand against them.
The fact that it is as an aspect of religious radicalism (the religion of Progressive Negationism) that such practices are accepted is interesting as well, as it mirrors Islam in some ways. In Islam 7th Century Arabia is considered as close to “perfection” as humanity ever achieved, since that is when Allah appeared to the Prophet Mohammed, and therefore what are today considered dubious practices which happened to be accepted then (such as slavery and crucifixion) are hailed as “good” or at least “legitimate” things today by orthodox Muslims. This simple belief-causation, “if this then that” mechanism is therefore identical to Progressivism, where anything that represents “progress” (negation of established social mores) is considered “good”, no matter what that progress might be.
To render the simple parallel between the two (orthodox Islamism and Progressive negationism)…
Muslims – God appeared in 7th Century Arabia…therefore…practices from 7th Century=good/best/perfection
Progressives – White-male-Christian led European colonialist empires were evil…therefore…anything they opposed or outlawed or disliked=good/best/perfection
Therefore since the “bourgeois”, “repressed”, “racist”, and “patriarchal” societies of the West long banned and “demonized” practices such as incest, animal-sex, and pedophilia, those must also be “good” things within the Progressive narrative. This was the case with sex between two men or between different ethnic groups, so why not the same when it comes to humans and animals, adults and children, and adults who are family members? Surely these are all just ways of “exploring one’s sexuality”, that most beloved phrase of the left these last 50 years.
My hope is that as these practices are increasingly painted as normal and non-threatening by Progressives, the remaining well-intentioned, good-hearted people within the Left realize just how radical and horrific a course their ideology is on, and make the decision to reject it.