Saturday, 28 November 2009
The legendary British comedian John Cleese is returning to work after a grossly unfair Divorce settlement orchestrated by the matriarchy's legal lackeys. At 70, he is on tour again. It is said that the Samurai were encouraged to think of death in battle every morning, to prepare them for the day ahead. Anglo-American men need to contemplate Divorce settlements like this every morning, for the same reason...
The Oscar nominated comedy actor is giving his former wife £8 million in cash and assets which include an apartment in New York, a £2 million mews house in fashionable Holland Park in west London, and half a beach house in Santa Barbara in California which is yet to be sold.
Ms Faye Eichelberger, an American psychotherapist, will also receive £600,000 a year for seven years. The papers to finalise the financial settlement were lodged in the courts in California last week.
Cleese, 70, who is in the New Forest writing a barbed one man show to be called Alimony Tour Year One, has revealed his anger at the size of the divorce settlement which will make his former wife, who he was married to for 16 years, richer than him.
He said: “What I find so unfair is that if we both died today, her children would get much more than mine.” He added: “At least I will know in future if a I go out with a lady they will not be after me for my money.” When he met her in 1990 she was living in a third floor council flat in London with two sons from a previous marriage.
His former wife, who is 64, was represented in the legal negotiations by Fiona Shackleton, who is known as the Steel Magnolia because of her sharp negotiating skills. She also acted for the Prince of Wales and Sir Paul McCartney in their respective divorces.
In her divorce testimony, she claimed Cleese was a “world-renowned celebrity” and she was used to “being entertained by royalty and dignitaries in castles”. She claimed half the Monty Python star’s earnings since their 1992 wedding, half his nine properties, and £900,000 a year to live on.
In March a judge in America declared her claim was “excessive” and reduced the interim payments he had been paying from £106,000 a month to £57,000.
Michael Winner, the former film director and acerbic restaurant critic who has been Cleese’s closest friend for 30 years, said: “It is an extraordinary world which means John is left with much less than his former wife even though he is the star who did all the work. The settlement defies human belief. John is extremely cross about it and I don’t blame him. The settlement comes after two years of harrowing legal argument.”
Mr Winner, who accompanied the couple on their honeymoon to St Lucia in 1992, said: “John has worked all his life and will now have to continue working because he has seen a huge chunk of what he has worked for going to his former wife who he rescued from a council flat (Housing Project).”
Cleese, who is also working on a film script, added: “I got off lightly. Think what I’d have had to pay Alyce if she had contributed anything to the relationship.”
In a recent interview the actor said: “In my 70th year I will still be spending two months a year doing work that is of no interest to me and which is probably slightly spiritually depleting in order to feed the beast.”
He has remained friends with his first wife, Connie Booth, who co-wrote and starred in Fawlty Towers and the American actress Barbara Trentham. He has two grown-up daughters with his first two wives. Last year he sold his ranch in California to help pay for the divorce.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Murder someone with a cricket bat, get your sentence reduced for no reason, fake a drugs overdose to get into a cushy 'open prison' that resembles a stately home, escape over the wall - and no one bats an eyelid! Why couldn't I have been born an Anglobitch? Hey, only in England...
Former Royal aide Jane Andrews escaped from prison just four days after parole chiefs caved in to her demands to switch to an open jail. Murderer Andrews, 40 - the Duchess of York's ex-pal and dresser - is believed to have "bunked over a wall" after a therapy session.
Panic-stricken bosses at HMP East Sutton Park in Maidstone, Kent, locked down the prison and called in support from police search teams and helicopters. But they were later forced to admit she could have vanished at any point during an EIGHT-HOUR window.
Andrews, who escaped on Sunday, was still at large last night despite a huge search.
Andrews - who was moved to East Sutton Park after convincing a parole board of her "remorse" - had just come off suicide watch. She swallowed a handful of paracetamol tablets last Wednesday three hours after arriving at her new jail and had to be rushed to hospital.
A prison insider said: "Jane Andrews has only just arrived and she's already managed to escape. Maybe that tells you something about the state of prison security. She is easily the most high-profile prisoner here and so she should have been monitored. It's embarrassing that no one noticed she was missing until nearly 9pm, and she couldn't be accounted for after around 1pm."
Prison insiders said last night the alarm was raised over Andrews being missing at 8.45pm on Sunday, when a roll-call showed she was not in her cell. After a full search of the grounds, she was deemed a fugitive and the police were called. A helicopter arrived at about 11.45pm.
The former flunky was jailed for life for the murder of her lover Tom Cressman, 39, in 2000. She clubbed him unconscious with a cricket bat and then stabbed him to death with a kitchen knife because he refused to marry her. Victim Tom's brother Rick, 58, said last night: "She has moved to an open prison and what has she done? It was too early to be doing it. I suspect she will try and leave the country."
Meanwhile Tom's mother told today of how police have increased security around her house after the killer escaped. Barbara Cressman, 81, said she thought that "a life sentence should be for life" and that Andrews should never have been moved to a low security prison to begin with.
She said: "I think it's public knowledge how I feel about Jane Andrews. She should never have been moved to a low risk prison after the horrific crimes she committed. It was especially surprising to hear she's escaped after she tried to kill herself during the week by taking an overdose. I found out from my victim liaison officer - there is increased security around me but I feel quite safe. She shouldn't even have the chance for parole, she deserves to serve a proper life sentence. Look at how many people are released too soon. Her 12 years are not enough to pay for what she did."
Andrews was eligible for release in 2012, despite being jailed for life in 2001. She was sentenced to a minimum of 15 years, which was reduced to 12.
Source: The Sun
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
The following case sharply reveals how males have no status in Anglo-American culture. While Anglo-Saxon society places enormous value on young girls, it considers males of the same age to be of no value whatsoever. While armies of police are mobilized when any young white girl goes missing for two minutes, no one paid any concern to this missing 13 year old male. The kid observed, 'Nobody really cares about the world and about people' - true enough, but especially if you are male and poor in the pan-Anglosphere matriarchy. It is interesting that his Mexican parents failed to grasp the crucial gender-factor of the case, missing the casual misandry at the root of Anglo-Saxon civilization. Some would ask: 'If the Anglosphere hates and denigrates men, why does it continue to take our taxes?' An interesting question, with no easy answers:
A 13-year-old boy with Asperger's syndrome spent 11 days in the New York subway system after going missing following a school telling off, his mother has claimed. Police found Francisco Hernandez Jr hiding out in a Coney Island station late last month having survived for almost two weeks on a diet of news stand confectionery and snacks. His parents claim authorities were reluctant to make his case a priority because they are Mexican immigrants, but New York Police Department denied the claims.
Francisco is believed to have taken off on October 15 after he failed to complete a homework assignment and was told off for not concentrating in class. According to a report in the New York Times, the youngster walked eight blocks to the Bay Parkway station and boarded a train because it seemed like the best place to hide.
The 13-year-old suffers from Asperger's syndrome - a form of autism which makes it difficult for sufferers to communicate or interact with others. Fearing a scolding from his parents, Francisco removed the battery from his mobile phone. When he failed to return home from school, his mother Marisela Garcia scoured the nearby subway station - a previous incident had seen Francisco go missing for five hours on the network. After hours of searching, the police were called.
Over the next few days, officers interviewed teachers, classmates and distributed leaflets across the city showing the missing youngster's photograph. But despite their efforts he remained unnoticed on the busy subway system.
Francisco told the New York Times that he spent his days riding trains to the end destination before switching tracks and heading in the other direction. He lived on crisps, croissants and other snacks brought from the kiosks that litter the subway's stations. And despite thousands of flyers being distributed, no-one recognised or even talked to him, he claimed.
"Nobody really cares about the world and about people," he said.
He was eventually found on October 26. A transit officer was studying a sign with Francisco's photo on when he turned to see the boy sitting in a stationary carriage, it was reported. Apart from leg cramps, Francisco reported no physically ailments from his ordeal and is now back at school.
But his parents are now questioning why it took authorities so long to find the runaway on one of the world's busiest transport system.
Source: New York Times
Monday, 23 November 2009
When Anglo-American women hit thirty, they instantly transform into human beings. Prior to that age, they're essentially insane, evil, remorseless, poisonous, rapacious and entitled reptiles. They are indulged in this behavior by Anglo-American culture itself, which bends laws and traditions like paper-clips to accommodate their whims. This unlovely attitude plainly relates to their 'ownership' of sex in a repressive, 'Disneyfied' culture: since they control a scarce and valuable recourse, they have carte blanche to do whatever they want.
By their late twenties, though, their reproductive and sexual 'value' is waning rapidly. Their flesh thickens, grey scars their hair and the first wrinkles are starting to show. Unable to call on sexual allure to legitimize her atrocious attitudes and behavior, a new phase opens in her life: 'I'm everybody's friend'. Overnight, the cold-hearted Anglobitch becomes the convivial matriarch, praying the world will forget her past transgressions.
Most of the world forgets, alright: most, but not all. Many Anglo-American men cannot forget years of sexual disenfranchisement and emotional abuse. And now the pudgy, butter-faced sow is weak and vulnerable, a victim ripe for vengeance. She will typically have a gaggle of psychotic, low-IQ kids on her hands, born to some bullying psycho in her early twenties. All washed up, her ass spreading like a bush fire, she needs a good man's help. Unfortunately, Mr Psycho is usually laid up in jail - or at least, long departed.
This where you come in: guys, it's payback time!
The whip has changed hands. You hold all the cards, now - the money, the job, the nice home, the high performance car - while she's just a turkey-necked loser skulking home from life's poker table. Her life is in ruins, and you are her only hope. She has absolutely nothing you want, you are her potential salvation.
Now, remember one thing, guys, before you embark on your ruthless campaign of sport-fucking and misogynistic abuse: they want your prosperity. Remember that, and harden your hearts. It's payback time!
One way in which feminists have secured a chokehold on western civilization in general (and the Anglosphere in particular) is through language. It is a 'given' among modern sociologists and socially-engaged philosophers that language is an integral aspect of social control. Both in the Continental and Anglo-Saxon academic spheres, language is seen as the key to hegemonic dominance: as George Orwell showed us in '1984', twisting or suppressing language necessarily restricts the individual's capacity to actively resist coercive authority.
Given that we are now living in a matriarchy where men in general have few (or no) rights, we would expect language to have been carefully subverted to achieve this ignoble end. A cursory examination will prove this to be just the case. The present author encourages his readers to find many more examples than are given here, for they abound in the hollow rhetoric expounded by Anglo feminists. Indeed, they have filtered beyond the confines of feminist discourse into the culture at large.
The Feminist 'We'
Nowadays, we are always told that World War One affected 'a generation', implying that women endured the same experiences as men in that war. The same is often said of the Second World War, Vietnam, the American Civil War and wars in general. However, a cursory examination of the historical evidence shows that 'a generation' was not punished, at all: it was men, exclusively. Female contributions and sacrifices in any of those wars amounted to a big, fat, zero. For example, the South in the Civil War lost over 20% of its males of military age (16-45). No women were lost in combat. In 1916, the British lost 60 000 men in a single day on the Somme. Not one of these casualties was a woman.
However, the mainstream culture continually assails us with phrases like the 'Vietnam Generation' or the 'Lost Generation', trying to subvert war into a communal arena where men and women suffered equally. It wasn't, though, and let us not forget it.
The 'Child' Soldier
By the same token, we are always told about 'child soldiers', as though female children were represented in equal numbers within that vile practice. They are not. What they really mean is 'boy soldier', so why don't they just say it? Simple: they will not say it because 'boy soldier' confounds the 'victim status' that Anglo feminists have sought to monopolize in order to wrest power from men without demur. So, by pretending that children coerced into fighting are not just boys, by using weasel words to mask this ugly truth, feminists can deny the male-specific nature of under-age military service across the world, retaining their grasp on victim-hood.
'Gendercide' is another good example of how the liberal-feminist establishment have subverted language in order to distort reality. In fact, Gendercide should be replaced by a new word, Androcide, since men are almost exclusively its victims. In Bosnia, for example, systematic gendercide always involved the liquidation of males - women were typically evacuated from the extermination zones (though of course a number were also raped). Moreover, the fact that matrilinear cultures like the Jews or Ba'Hais are weak minorities gives powerful testament to the fact that Gendercide is overwhelmingly directed against males. After all, while women might be raped and coerced they are still far more likely to survive pogroms and race-massacres than men, which is where the matrilinear custom developed.
From the above, we can see that feminists have cleverly twisted language to give the false impression that specifically anti-male oppressions are burdens equally shared between men and women. Of course, this is so women can monopolize 'victim status' and so pursue their misandrist program of social disruption without interference. However, feminist-leaning liberals are always quick to make certain forms of oppression female-specific. 'Rapist' or 'child abuser' have become synonymous with males, while victims of these crimes are invariably assumed to be female (two false assumptions, both sustained by ongoing linguistic manipulation). Moreover, the Anglo-American media invariably show females preferential treatment in every case ('Pretty White Girl Syndrome'), demonstrating their pliancy to feminist agendas. Of course, given the puritanical, misandrist nature of Anglo culture, we would expect nothing less.
Sunday, 15 November 2009
Now I've heard everything: a female child killer serves a two year sentence for cold blooded murder of a male baby by dashing his brains out against a wall. On release, she is then given public funding to build a new life. Now, can you imagine the male killer of a female baby being treated so leniently? How can those suckers on sites like Feministing.com and EqualWrites seriously persist in arguing that males are 'advantaged' citizens in the contemporary Anglosphere? Note the outrage at this deranged decision in China, a non-Anglosphere country where male life has value.
Warning - content disturbing:
An immigrant convicted of the horrific killing of a 17-month-old baby has been given £4,500 by the Government as a 'bribe' to leave the country. Malaysian Agnes Wong, 29, was jailed for five years in 2008 for the brutal manslaughter of a toddler she was supposed to be child-minding.She was let out of prison in July this year, and two weeks ago was put on a plane at Heathrow and sent to Malaysia with a 'voucher' worth £4,500 to spend when she got there.
Wong was jailed after a court heard how she had swung the boy, Hugo Wang, by his ankles and smashed his head. He died of brain injuries. Wong's payment has sparked disbelief and outrage, coming just days after the Prime Minister said he understood the public's mounting concerns over immigration. Tory immigration spokesman Damian Green said: 'Only last week, Gordon Brown said he "gets it" on immigration but this is proof he doesn't get it. For an immigrant who killed a child to get taxpayers' money to help with her future life is nothing short of appalling.'
Mr Green demanded to know why Wong had not been automatically deported without a penny of public money. 'Even while Labour repeatedly boasted about introducing automatic deportation for people like this, it now appears they have been using public money to help people get round that very system,' he said. The horrific story of Hugo's last hours caused national revulsion when Wong's sadistic behaviour was exposed in court.
The unregistered childminder, who came to the UK in 2003, was paid £120 (c. US $200) a week to look after Hugo in her home in Salford, Greater Manchester, while the boy's parents worked 16 to 20 hours a day to make ends meet. She was accused of waging a 'regime of terror' against him, torturing him with a hairdryer and hitting him so hard with a ruler that it snapped.
Hugo died in January 2007, a day after he was taken, unconscious, to hospital where he underwent emergency surgery. He had been struck with such force that his brain had shifted in his skull and caused internal bleeding. Doctors also found bite and burn marks on his body. Wong, who denied murder, was found guilty of manslaughter but was sentenced in May 2008 to just five years in prison. The Mail on Sunday has now learned that Wong served only the minimum jail term of two-and-half years, including her time in custody before and during the trial.
Just two weeks ago, she was deported to Malaysia under a controversial 'Facilitated Returns Scheme' under which foreign prisoners are paid up to £5,000 if they agree to leave the UK as early as possible without fighting their deportation using human-rights laws or by claiming asylum. So far, around 1,000 have left the UK and been given the money.
It is not known for certain whether Wong - who used the anglicised name Agnes, although her Malaysian name is Siew Teng - entered Britain legally or illegally. However, any immigrant who commits a serious crime can forfeit their right to remain in Britain and can be deported.
As Wong boarded a plane at Heathrow on November 2 bound for Kuala Lumpur, immigration officials handed her a letter confirming that she was entitled to a 'reintegration fund' payout of up to £4,500. The letter informed her that the money, provided by UK taxpayers but administered by an international migration organisation, could be 'invested' in training for a new job, housing, education, medical treatment or to help set up a small business.
Friends have now spoken of how Hugo's father, Jian Lin Situ, never got over the death of his son and how he had taken the baby's ashes back to China. They also voiced their anger that the boy's killer would get thousands of pounds of public money to build a new life. One said: 'It is an absolute disgrace that she has got this money. That sort of money will go a long way in Malaysia.'
The friend recalled how Hugo's father had been distraught to learn that some of his son's body parts were initially retained by the coroner in case Wong appealed against her conviction. 'When Hugo died it was big in all the newspapers in China. We followed the proceedings and were all horrified by what happened to that poor boy,' said the friend. 'Jian and Hugo's mother Zhen split up soon after. I think they both blamed each other for their son's death.
'I think Zhen went back to China. Jian never got over Hugo's death. He was absolutely devastated. He took Hugo's ashes back to China, to the Canton district, the family's ancestral home. After that, Jian moved on to a restaurant in Liverpool. From there he went to another restaurant in Blackburn and we lost touch.'
The friend added that Mr Situ would be 'horrified' to learn that Wong had already been returned home, especially as he protested that she should originally have been given a 15-year jail sentence.
'Jian thought five years was too lenient. This is just an insult to Hugo's memory. What are they playing at, letting her out so early? They should have thrown away the key.'
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
It occurs to the present author that female sex-offenders have not recently increased in number, rather that Anglo-American MRAs (by their ceaseless work in exposing the preferential treatment granted to females in the Anglosphere) have created a new cultural climate where rational criticism of women is now relatively acceptable. Hence, the figures SEEM to change, while in fact it is Anglo-American CULTURE that is changing, slowly but slowly:
The number of children reporting sexual abuse by women to ChildLine has soared over the past five years.
New research reveals the helpline experienced a 132% rise in complaints of female sexual assaults over the period, compared with a 27% increase in reports of abuse by men. The statistics follow the case of nursery worker Vanessa George, who is awaiting sentencing for sexually abusing children in her care and taking and distributing pornographic photographs of them.
In the past year, more than 2,100 children told ChildLine they had been sexually abused by a woman. That is nearly a quarter of all calls where the offender's gender could be identified. More than half of those (1,311) claimed their own mother was responsible for the assault. The research found boys were more likely to say they had been abused a woman than a man. However, girls were more than 10 times likelier to report being abused by a male than a female.
Esther Rantzen, president of the helpline, said: "This report reveals that ChildLine, by listening to the direct and authentic voices of abused children, has shattered common myths about sexual abuse.
"It does not only happen to girls, as many people believe. It happens to boys too. Mothers can sometimes sexually abuse their sons. And the report found that when girls are sexually abused, by far the most common perpetrator is not a stepfather, as many believe, but the biological father."
Previous research by the NSPCC suggested women may be responsible for about one in 20 sex offences committed against children.
Sourse: Sky News
Sunday, 1 November 2009
In military parlance, a demonstration is a feint with fire. It was often used during the American Civil War to shift defensive firepower in a lateral line away from a concealed attack. Essentially, the manoeuvre was used to distract the enemy's attention from an impending danger.
A new theme in Anglo-American feminism is the Third World, or the sufferings of women in Third World countries such as India or the African continent. Of course, this is partly related to the bourgeois, hypocritical nature of Anglo-American feminism and its idiomatic preoccupations. This explanation, however, is only half the story, for by redirecting public attention to insoluble situations abroad, Anglo feminism is cleverly working a demonstration. What is the ulterior purpose of this feint? The answer is simple: to delude us about contemporary reality in the Anglosphere. The core themes of the feminists' strategy are outlined below:
* To distract attention from the fact that Anglo-American women are now clearly advantaged, having squared rights with privileges.
* To distract attention from the fact that Anglo-American men are now third class citizens in divorce, education and the media.
* To pretend that women are still (or ever were) victimized in Anglo-Saxon countries.
* To distract attention from the negative social fallout from feminism - divorce, family disruption, unemployment and the emergence of a vast, criminal underclass.
* To distract attention from the fact that for working class women (the vast majority), feminism has been an unmitigated catastrophe.
If we consider most feminist websites, for example Feministing and EqualWrites, all are now characterized by studied disinterest in affairs at home in America, Britain, Australia or Canada and an intense preoccupation with issues of no immediate relevance in remote, lawless countries. Here are a few examples from EqualWrites, the Princeton University pro-feminist blog:
* Kuwaiti Women May Obtain Passports without Husband...
* Egyptian University Bans Niqab in All-Female Areas...
* Guinea citizens raped violently during political protest...
* Women in the Military: Changing Standards in Australia...
* Roman Polanski arrested Saturday in Switzerland
* Quick hit: Polish newspaper fined for abortion-related slur...
* Quick links: dating for dogs and anti-burqa talk in Denmark...
* Anti-women's rights campaign triumphs in Mali
What next? Lively, fresh and relevant news items about women's rights on other planets? How about parallel universes? My whole point is, contemporary feminism needs to distract public attention from the catastrophic impact of feminism on the west in general, and the Anglosphere in particular. By these 'demonstrations', academic feminism tries desperately to disguise its own failings.
On May 11th 2009 the New York Times reported that the newspapers (big and small) have lost 16% of their readers since 2000, but the major broadcast networks had lost 28% of their viewers in the same time. In short, the MSM looks to be in terminal decline.
The Main Stream Media is now directed at leftist Baby-Boomers, the elderly and the working class. It survives only because these groups lack the technical facility to contribute to the Blogosphere. Leftists, the elderly and the working class are a useless audience because they are timid, dying or stupid. A cursory glance at any British newsstand shows the same story; publications aimed at out-of-touch pensioners (Daily Express, the Daily Mail, the provincial press in general), neo-Christian liberal eccentrics (the Guardian) or uneducated no-marks glued to their TV sets (Sun, Mirror, Daily Star). None of these publications has any appeal to a genuinely intelligent, self-aware person of any social background. The same can be said of TV. Aside from a few decent wildlife shows, the programmes are banal prolefeed (X Factor, American Idol) aimed at the human LCD. Political programmes are utterly juvenile, still trapped within post-War paternalism, refusing to accept that Britain now dances to the tunes of America’s Power Elite (without understanding this, no genuine understanding of Anglosphere politics can begin).
In the modern Anglosphere, MRAs are heavily outnumbered. In itself, this is not insurmountable: as Stonewall Jackson opined, a small nation can hold its own against a larger nation by concentrating its forces, destroying the enemy in detail, compensating for small numbers with greater activity. Indeed, during the early days of Anglo feminism in the late Sixties, they did exactly this. Feminists were active everywhere across the Anglosphere and were able to drive patriarchy before them, destroyed in detail or trapped in intellectual redoubts. Today, the liberal feminists hold the ground that matters: the mainstream media, the law, politics and academia. We hold nothing. However, the fall of the MSM removes a vital part of their fortress, giving us the initiative for the first time in decades.
To understand this situation better, we must return to Antonio Gramsci's concept of hegemony. Gramsci thought deeply about why revolutions happened in some countries, not others. Why did Russians rebel during World War One, and not the English? After all, on the morning of the battle of the Somme, some 60, 000 British troops died; whole villages lost all their men in a few hours. The same could be said of the American Southerners during the Civil War. Why did they keep fighting, even after Gettysburg, when all hope of victory was gone? According to Gramsci, hegemony explains this difference. Russia had no elaborate mass media comprising radio stations or newspapers, which weakened the masses' social conviction and made revolt more likely. By contrast, the English fought on because they were enmeshed in a complex hegemony comprising schools, newspapers, radio broadcasts, street names and customs, binding them to the existing social order and making them more pliant to state manipulation. We are all trapped in hegemony, to a greater or lesser extent. And it is fair to say that we are now trapped in a matriarchal hegemony, which has normalized the denigration and marginalization of men across the Anglosphere.
However, since the MSM is the major tool for transmitting the NAMWO agenda, its decline represents a golden opportunity to create a counter-hegemonic movement. The Internet is supplanting the MSM and we must colonize it NOW to realize our aims and ambitions. If we look at the media world, the most potent initiatives inhering to men's issues are occurring online. However, removal of the MSM's ability to control popular discourse is beginning to have far reaching effects in the real world, too. We are witnessing what Gramsci called a 'crisis of hegemony' where many of the old pan-Anglosphere sureties are no longer viable. All the old assumptions are disintegrating, where they remain in place at all.
The hegemonic breakdown is much more precipitous in Britain than elsewhere, simply because British hegemony is more developed than that of the younger Anglosphere countries. It is implied that, being more socially integrated, the British quickly lapse into anarchy when sundered from hegemonic tradition. Hence Britain’s hegemonic collapse is having political effects transcending mere lifestyle issues. A case in point: declining support for the ‘mainstream’ parties is matched by rising support for the BNP. Of course, Nick Griffin’s nationalists have fully exploited the Internet to get their message across - as we might expect from a counter-hegemonic perspective.
Canadian criminologist Elliott Leyton discusses British hegemonic exceptionalism in Men of Blood, his study of crime in Britain. He argues that Britain has traditionally enjoyed low crime rates because of high hegemonic integration. For example, British murderers have much higher suicide rates than incarcerated murderers elsewhere in the world – obviously, the ‘shame’ of such a crime is greater for highly integrated individuals. Interestingly, the excellence of the British armed forces may also relate to this hegemonic factor – during World War Two, 120 British troops were worth 150 Americans in western theatres. Even today, the excellence of Britain’s forces give it a disproportionate influence on world affairs. And British football hooliganism mimics traditional imperialist themes of international expansion. But I digress...
In short, the MSM can no longer regulate public opinion as they did in the post-war era. Men’s rights, populist politics and other anti-Boomer agendas are just a few of the online results. In the longer term, the MSM looks doomed to extinction. It cannot compete with the Internet for a number of reasons:
Expenses and overheads. To get any publication to the newsstands, costs are astronomical. It costs little or nothing to post opinion or information on a website. Ultimately, costs alone will force the MSM onto the Internet, where their advantages are nullified.
Speed. The Internet is quicker. Newspapers chew over old stories because they are followers, now. Today, hot news breaks online, not via the MSM.
Technical proliferation. As more and more people get online access, the old media channels wither. As handheld devices like iphones and Blackberries become ubiquitous, those old channels will run completely dry.
Death/marginalisation of current MSM audiences. The old die off. The working class has no spending power. Boomer leftists are dying off, too. The MSM presently survives on these audiences. This is why their offerings are so weird, low-brow and out of touch. Newspapers seem to think we are still living in 1958: party politics, organized religion, feminism and post-war collectivism all express this archaic fixation. Smart younger people have decamped online, disgusted with these offerings. The MSM have adapted skilfully to lower class/Boomer/pensioner tastes - but dealt themselves out of the game.
Given that the MSM are doomed, what does the future hold? Many things, not all of them good.
Firstly, the blogs of today will become tomorrow’s online institutions. Roissy in DC or Whisky (or whoever runs their blogs, then) will become household names. Baby Boomer left-feminism will be forced back, as its spokespeople die off. Already, Greer and MacKinnon convey an archaic ethos bizarre even to most women. We can expect Internet-based, pan-Anglosphere post-modern communities of interest to burgeon. Such communities will widen into pressure groups, maybe even new political blocs. Emboldened and renewed by these new communal links, Britain will sever links with Continental Europe and look more towards the States and the commonwealth as its natural cultural allies. As pan-Anglosphere hegemony erodes, supplanted by these new online communities of interest, the constituent nations will start to politically disentegrate. Britain in particular may lapse into civil war, torn between a paternalist MSM ‘Court’ and a populist Internet ‘Country’.
Truly, we live in interesting times.
We all know teenage girls are horrible people. Moreover, they have ALWAYS been horrible people. A cursory glance at the New Testament will demonstrate this eternal truth:
Peter Disowns Jesus (Matthew, 69: 74)
69 Now Peter was sitting out in the courtyard, and a servant girl came to him. "You also were with Jesus of Galilee," she said.
70 But he denied it before them all. "I don't know what you're talking about," he said.
71 Then he went out to the gateway, where another girl saw him and said to the people there, "This fellow was with Jesus of Nazareth."
72 He denied it again, with an oath: "I don't know the man!"
73 After a little while, those standing there went up to Peter and said, "Surely you are one of them, for your accent gives you away."
74 Then he began to call down curses on himself and he swore to them, "I don't know the man!"
Immediately a rooster crowed.
75 Then Peter remembered the word Jesus had spoken: "Before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times." And he went outside and wept bitterly.
Of the three people trying to make trouble for Peter, two are teenage girls! This is quite remarkable, when considered objectively. However, if we cast about us, we can see quite readily that contemporary teenage girls are equally obnoxious. Though millennia pass by, they are scum eternal, forever poking their noses into other people's business and stirring up trouble.
This is demonstrated by the fact that the second girl ‘said to the people there’ that Peter was a follower of Jesus. Not content with this knowledge, she had to disperse it in order to raise problems for Peter. Teenaged girls act this way because no one can touch them: at their peak of sexual appeal, they perch on pedestals above all reproof or criticism.
Of course, the true Pedestal Syndrome never arose in ancient Palestine: misogynist theology and Hebrew patriarchy saw to that. However, in modern Anglo-American civilization, with its repressive Calvinism and Disneyland ideals, conditions have been uniquely created to shape the most obnoxious teenage girls in history. Indeed, by sheer dint of owning a vagina in this stilted culture, any teenage Anglobitch can expect to get away with literally anything. Whatever she attempts, the NAMWO (New Anglo Matriarchal World Order) authorities clap like performing seals; even assault, child abuse and murder are regarded with complete indifference and met with perfunctory sentences. Had Louise Woodward (the English nanny released by the American authorities after killing baby Matthew Eappen) been male, the NAMWO media would have been calling for his blood.
In short, the teenage Anglobitch is like James Bond: she has a license to kill. The specific context of Anglo-Disneyland repression has amplified the sense of entitlement inherent in teenage girls to hideous dimensions. Painted princesses treading on flowers, expecting the world to dance to their neurotic whims, these narcissistic harridans have ruined the whole Anglosphere.