When interacting with people over the years I have found that they often hold two opposing ideas about Liberalism at the same time. First of all they believe that Liberalism is unchanging and that it is no different or harmful then it was 50 or 100 years ago. However they also hold that Liberalism changes things and that it is always progressing. How exactly does something change while remaining unchanged?
I would of course like to point out that Liberalism is always harmful and while it may appear benign, appearances are deceptive. Liberalism believes in freedom, absolute freedom, it believes that if human nature exists then it is changeable. That people, their society, their humanity is perfectible. And that within that perfectibility people will be absolutely free to design or redesign themselves into autonomous individuals, free to choose every aspect of their life.
Exactly when Liberalism came to believe all of these things is hard to pinpoint. One reason for this is that Liberalism does not stay static, it is in constant motion. It has no "holy" book as such, instead it uses slogans to advance it's cause, freedom, equality, things that are easy to understand, sweet to the ear and most importantly vague.
That way the elite can control how far things advance, sometimes they lose control and things go too far. In the long run that has always proved good for Liberalism as it can then consolidate what it has achieved. It can also pretend that it has achieved most of what it wants so any further changes are simply smoothing out the rough edges. It's important that people not get too spooked.
But of course it doesn't stop, it is relentless in pushing itself forward, what it calls progress. Progress has two meanings, 1. something new 2. making thingthing better. As anyone who has ever thought about progress can attest, it is easy to confuse something new for something better, and vice versa. This confusion is never discouraged, in fact it is encouraged. Progress is good without any qualification.
What Liberals do not understand is that as Liberalism changes the world around them, that changing world also changes Liberalism. Two centuries ago Liberalism didn't have anything to say about women and their role in society, but as Liberals and Liberalism changed society so did their ideas about women. Now take that basic idea and apply it to each and every subject that Liberalism has ever touched. Liberalism has not and does not remain static, it changes as the world changes, it changes as the generations change. It takes ideas from strange places, such as Communism for example, and applies them in new and confusing ways.
That means that when people talk about the good that Liberalism has brought, or is supposed to have brought, they may not be talking about modern Liberalism. Just to give one example, it is not unusual for civil rights in the United States to be presented as a Liberal victory. Even though the prevailing political philosophy in the United States in the bad evil 1950's was Liberalism. But more importantly the civil rights era is 50 years in the past. Liberalism has moved on, just as it moved on from the 1950's, it moved on from the civil rights era.
In the case of the civil rights era, the Liberal political system was challenged by other Liberals who won. Liberalism fought Liberalism, it claimed complete victory by discrediting the older version of Liberalism and supporting the newer version 100%.
Today Liberalism has moved on and it will continue to move, it cannot stop, it will still keep it's core ideas, but to achieve those things it needs to change. For Liberalism change is it's constant.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Nazism, Why We Are Not Nazis
Friday, 29 June 2018
Wednesday, 27 June 2018
Does Your Life Have Meaning?
What I'm exploring is what gives life meaning? In real life and on the internet I find many people are unhappy and for a good reason. They have no meaning in their life. They know that something is missing, something important, but hardly ever can they identify what is missing. I think that we are missing multiple things and not simply one.
In the past people had much of the things that we are now missing. However they were missing many of the things we now take for granted. Health, long life, plentiful food and constant pleasure in the form of countless types of entertainment. Think how if you went back in time, even a hundred years, how you would explain your life and your experiences. That you can fly, that you heat food in 5 minutes, that you know what the Amazon looks like because you've either been there or you have seen it in colour on your television. But by gaining all of those things we have had to make sacrifices, something that we often refuse to acknowledge. Because to do so might make what we have gained not seem so important. It might even make us wonder if this thing we always thought was mana from heaven, that was free, was in reality quite costly.
I have heard it said that the cemetery is filled with men who were once indispensable, and it's true. Non of us are irreplaceable, even if we are wanted and needed. However life is that thing that occurs between the cradle and the grave, a time of action and possibilities. Much of it is repetitive and we like it that way. The same people walking the same streets doing the same things, it gives us comfort, it marks our place in life. But so much of our lives seem unimportant, does it really matter if I turn up to work on time? Is it important? If you open the store it might be, but what about if there are 100 other people all starting work at the same time? Many people do things because they are habit or expected of them, not because they are important.
Feeding a baby is important, it's dull and repetitive and still important. In this context important means, if it wasn't done would it really matter.
Administration is important, however after a certain point it loses all importance. How much of our life is like that?
Let me put it another way a peasant a thousand years ago knew that he had to work or he and his family went hungry, maybe even died. He had to defend his family from violence, he couldn't call the police or the army as he was both. His life was harsh, it was hard work and more hard work followed by some more hard work. But his life had meaning, everything he did was important. What is important in our life?
To be fair he didn't do all those things by himself, he had quite a bit of help. He had:
Religion
Family
Work
Was needed
Was wanted
Achieving objectives
Belonged
Everyone of those is important.
Today many are quick to reject religion, to say that we don't need it or that we are too sophisticated. People need more than just religion to be sure, however it seems to fill four holes that people often have and don't realise. One is it fills in many intellectual conundrums that people have, you are not the first to ask the question and many great thinkers have gone before you. You don't need to reinvent the wheel, it's already been invented. Two it provides emotional support, again it provides answers to questions and it provides a community of mutual support. Thirdly it answers the spiritual void that many experience, too often our modern life tells us that we have no spiritual life, but we do and we need to accept that we do. Fourth, it provides limitations on our actions and behavours. Modern life is Liberal and Liberalism says that we should be free to do as we please. However that is not human nature, our true nature rebels at such freedom, we cannot handle it. Here want to know our own limitations and we want help.
We need husbands and wives respectively, we need children, we need purpose and continuance. We need to pass on our life to another. Family is the past, the present and the future. Without it we are diminished. Without it life loses it's lustre. Without family we are left without love and without love life loses much of it's meaning.
Work occupies our hands and our minds, meaningful work also occupies our soul. It fills our time and gives us a purpose. It is more than simply money, although most of us do work for money.
We need to be needed, we need to know that our existence is important to others, that we serve a purpose.
We also want to be wanted.
But if we are not achieving things then we can feel that life lacks meaning. We need to affect things, to see some progress. Without achievements we feel as if our life is standing still and that we do not matter. In truth we want to matter, even if in some small way.
Lastly but not least by any means is belonging. We need a place that we fit, we need a home and we need others to accept that we belong. Family, friends, neighbours, countrymen, we need them all to belong. We need communities just as we need our nation.
For life to have meaning we need to fill as many of these as we can, because if we do not we wander through life filled with holes.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Why Rhodesia Failed
In the past people had much of the things that we are now missing. However they were missing many of the things we now take for granted. Health, long life, plentiful food and constant pleasure in the form of countless types of entertainment. Think how if you went back in time, even a hundred years, how you would explain your life and your experiences. That you can fly, that you heat food in 5 minutes, that you know what the Amazon looks like because you've either been there or you have seen it in colour on your television. But by gaining all of those things we have had to make sacrifices, something that we often refuse to acknowledge. Because to do so might make what we have gained not seem so important. It might even make us wonder if this thing we always thought was mana from heaven, that was free, was in reality quite costly.
I have heard it said that the cemetery is filled with men who were once indispensable, and it's true. Non of us are irreplaceable, even if we are wanted and needed. However life is that thing that occurs between the cradle and the grave, a time of action and possibilities. Much of it is repetitive and we like it that way. The same people walking the same streets doing the same things, it gives us comfort, it marks our place in life. But so much of our lives seem unimportant, does it really matter if I turn up to work on time? Is it important? If you open the store it might be, but what about if there are 100 other people all starting work at the same time? Many people do things because they are habit or expected of them, not because they are important.
Feeding a baby is important, it's dull and repetitive and still important. In this context important means, if it wasn't done would it really matter.
Administration is important, however after a certain point it loses all importance. How much of our life is like that?
Let me put it another way a peasant a thousand years ago knew that he had to work or he and his family went hungry, maybe even died. He had to defend his family from violence, he couldn't call the police or the army as he was both. His life was harsh, it was hard work and more hard work followed by some more hard work. But his life had meaning, everything he did was important. What is important in our life?
To be fair he didn't do all those things by himself, he had quite a bit of help. He had:
Religion
Family
Work
Was needed
Was wanted
Achieving objectives
Belonged
Everyone of those is important.
Today many are quick to reject religion, to say that we don't need it or that we are too sophisticated. People need more than just religion to be sure, however it seems to fill four holes that people often have and don't realise. One is it fills in many intellectual conundrums that people have, you are not the first to ask the question and many great thinkers have gone before you. You don't need to reinvent the wheel, it's already been invented. Two it provides emotional support, again it provides answers to questions and it provides a community of mutual support. Thirdly it answers the spiritual void that many experience, too often our modern life tells us that we have no spiritual life, but we do and we need to accept that we do. Fourth, it provides limitations on our actions and behavours. Modern life is Liberal and Liberalism says that we should be free to do as we please. However that is not human nature, our true nature rebels at such freedom, we cannot handle it. Here want to know our own limitations and we want help.
We need husbands and wives respectively, we need children, we need purpose and continuance. We need to pass on our life to another. Family is the past, the present and the future. Without it we are diminished. Without it life loses it's lustre. Without family we are left without love and without love life loses much of it's meaning.
Work occupies our hands and our minds, meaningful work also occupies our soul. It fills our time and gives us a purpose. It is more than simply money, although most of us do work for money.
We need to be needed, we need to know that our existence is important to others, that we serve a purpose.
We also want to be wanted.
But if we are not achieving things then we can feel that life lacks meaning. We need to affect things, to see some progress. Without achievements we feel as if our life is standing still and that we do not matter. In truth we want to matter, even if in some small way.
Lastly but not least by any means is belonging. We need a place that we fit, we need a home and we need others to accept that we belong. Family, friends, neighbours, countrymen, we need them all to belong. We need communities just as we need our nation.
For life to have meaning we need to fill as many of these as we can, because if we do not we wander through life filled with holes.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Why Rhodesia Failed
Saturday, 23 June 2018
Friends and the Coming War
A friend is someone who when you call or knock on their door at 2am because your life is falling apart, is glad that you contacted them. Some people like to talk about how many friends they have, but how many people would really be happy to hear from them at 2am? The truth is that if you have five people in the entire world who would be happy to hear from you, you have more friends then most.
Over the past few days I have been having a long talk via text with someone who was once a great friend of mine. Over the years we have had our ups and downs, we grew up together but somewhere along the way he went down the left path and I went down the right. In the past five years or so he has put nearly 100% of the effort into our relationship. The truth is that I have no desire to keep our friendship going, however I do miss what we once had, but that is gone and it isn't coming back.
For a long time I ignored the things I didn't like, as I get older I find that harder and harder to do. I decided that if someone isn't on my side then I shouldn't be on theirs. And by side I mean me, personally. How often do we put up with people in our lives who are against our interests? Who side against us and who choose to support our enemies. The world is hostile enough without having friends who don't look out for your interests.
The Left has a reputation for putting ideology before friendship, I tend to agree with them. Are friends who aren't on your side really friends?
Everyone of you has to decide for yourselves if you want to continue to break bread with people who are against you. I no longer do, I have had enough of their treachery. Every day we move closer and closer to civil war and this is simply one symptom of the disease. Painful but not as painful as defeat or as painful as the war will be. Because there cannot be peace without compromise and I am so sick of compromise and so is the other side. It is a old fashioned as White countries with only White people in them, as old fashioned as women only working because they needed to, as old fashioned as top hats.
Every day we move closer.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
What it is to be French
Over the past few days I have been having a long talk via text with someone who was once a great friend of mine. Over the years we have had our ups and downs, we grew up together but somewhere along the way he went down the left path and I went down the right. In the past five years or so he has put nearly 100% of the effort into our relationship. The truth is that I have no desire to keep our friendship going, however I do miss what we once had, but that is gone and it isn't coming back.
For a long time I ignored the things I didn't like, as I get older I find that harder and harder to do. I decided that if someone isn't on my side then I shouldn't be on theirs. And by side I mean me, personally. How often do we put up with people in our lives who are against our interests? Who side against us and who choose to support our enemies. The world is hostile enough without having friends who don't look out for your interests.
The Left has a reputation for putting ideology before friendship, I tend to agree with them. Are friends who aren't on your side really friends?
Everyone of you has to decide for yourselves if you want to continue to break bread with people who are against you. I no longer do, I have had enough of their treachery. Every day we move closer and closer to civil war and this is simply one symptom of the disease. Painful but not as painful as defeat or as painful as the war will be. Because there cannot be peace without compromise and I am so sick of compromise and so is the other side. It is a old fashioned as White countries with only White people in them, as old fashioned as women only working because they needed to, as old fashioned as top hats.
Every day we move closer.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
What it is to be French
Tuesday, 19 June 2018
You are Responsible for You
Early last week a young woman walking home alone at night through a park was attacked, she was raped and murdered. The next day a man went to a police station and handed himself in. This all took place in Melbourne. The police said that the area in which she was attacked was dangerous and that women should avoid the area at night as other women had been attacked nearby. A horrible crime, an outrage followed by what you would think was common sense advice.
Feminists then went on the attack, accusing the police of victim blaming. However offering advice on how to remain safe is a traditional role of the police. But that wasn't good enough, no not now. In my last post I wrote about how men are the exploiters and women are the exploited, at least according to the Left. And here we can see an example of that. One man murdered one woman, there is no dispute about that, but it is portrayed as if all men committed the crime. Even Australia's disgusting Prime Minister Mr. Turnbull got in on the act, telling Parliament.
"Women must be safe everywhere. On the street, walking through a park, in their homes, at work. We need to ensure that we have a culture of respect for women.
"what we must do as we grieve is ensure that we change the hearts of men to respect women"
"We start with the youngest men, the little boys, our sons and grandsons, and make sure that they respect their mothers and sisters and all women in their lives"
This is nauseous, but not surprising, the idea that little boys are brought up to hate women is simply stupid. In fact it's an outrageous statement that fails to put the blame where it so rightly sits, with her murderer. It does sum up the Feminist argument, he is a male Feminist after all, that women should be able to live without consequences. Living without consequences is one of the principle ideas of Liberalism.
The truth is that this young women made a foolish decision and she paid a terrible price for it. Honestly we have all made foolish decisions and in most cases gotten away with it, we were lucky she wasn't. We do not live in this world by ourselves, we live in it with many others and not all of them have our best interests at heart. Just because someone should not do something does not guarantee anything.
The law was entirely on her side, she was going about her lawful business and they are correct he had no right to do any of the things that he did to her. That is why it is a crime because he had no right to do as he did. But all of that is mute, it shouldn't be but it is. The law will not protect you in all circumstances because it cannot. The person who must do everything to protect you is you.
Do not put yourself at risk if you can help it, it's not victim blaming, it has another name it's called common sense.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like.
Fascism, Why We Are Not Fascists
Feminists then went on the attack, accusing the police of victim blaming. However offering advice on how to remain safe is a traditional role of the police. But that wasn't good enough, no not now. In my last post I wrote about how men are the exploiters and women are the exploited, at least according to the Left. And here we can see an example of that. One man murdered one woman, there is no dispute about that, but it is portrayed as if all men committed the crime. Even Australia's disgusting Prime Minister Mr. Turnbull got in on the act, telling Parliament.
"Women must be safe everywhere. On the street, walking through a park, in their homes, at work. We need to ensure that we have a culture of respect for women.
"what we must do as we grieve is ensure that we change the hearts of men to respect women"
"We start with the youngest men, the little boys, our sons and grandsons, and make sure that they respect their mothers and sisters and all women in their lives"
This is nauseous, but not surprising, the idea that little boys are brought up to hate women is simply stupid. In fact it's an outrageous statement that fails to put the blame where it so rightly sits, with her murderer. It does sum up the Feminist argument, he is a male Feminist after all, that women should be able to live without consequences. Living without consequences is one of the principle ideas of Liberalism.
The truth is that this young women made a foolish decision and she paid a terrible price for it. Honestly we have all made foolish decisions and in most cases gotten away with it, we were lucky she wasn't. We do not live in this world by ourselves, we live in it with many others and not all of them have our best interests at heart. Just because someone should not do something does not guarantee anything.
The law was entirely on her side, she was going about her lawful business and they are correct he had no right to do any of the things that he did to her. That is why it is a crime because he had no right to do as he did. But all of that is mute, it shouldn't be but it is. The law will not protect you in all circumstances because it cannot. The person who must do everything to protect you is you.
Do not put yourself at risk if you can help it, it's not victim blaming, it has another name it's called common sense.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like.
Fascism, Why We Are Not Fascists
Wednesday, 13 June 2018
What is Cultural Marxism?
For decades I have heard people get confused about Equality. The beauty of Equality is it's simplicity, every ones equal, nothing complex there at all. However in real life it never works like that. Why is it that women need special laws in regards to employment, protection from sexual harassment, domestic violence and so forth? Why aren't both sexes protected? Why do different races, ethnic groups and religions need special laws to protect them? Aren't we all equal? Why do our laws and regulations so often seem to have been written by George Orwell, some animals are more equal than others?
Here we can quite clearly see the collision of two modern Liberal ideals, Equality and Identity politics. In most cases Identity politics will win and the reason is Cultural Marxism. So what is Cultural Marxism?
Put simply it is any idea that comes from Communism, which is also known as Marxism, that is in a place were there shouldn't be any Communist ideas. Communism has two major ideas, Class Struggle and Control of the Means of Production, only Class Struggle concerns us here.
Class Struggle is the idea that there are two classes, the exploiter class, known as the Bourgeois and the exploited class, known as the Proletariat. The exploited work for wages and are also known as the workers. Classic Marxism says that these two classes are engaged in a titanic struggle for supremacy, which will be decided through Class Struggle and it will end with a classless society. Imagine two big blocks of concrete each grating against the other, the resulting friction will result in each block of concrete being reduced to little more than dust and pebbles. From such things a Communist society will be created.
What does that have to do with Homosexuals having special laws to protect them?
The original Class Struggle was between two social classes, between the rich and the poor. To aid that Communists sort to influence people who were not Communists. Socialists and Liberals being prime targets, they sort to make them support Communist ideas by cloaking them as general principles. This goes back at least to the 1870's, but picked up pace after the 1917 revolution in Russia. Once the Soviet Union existed support was forthcoming. Money, training, leadership could all be provided and was. The aim was to introduce by stealth programs that supported a Communist future. One idea was to get Liberals to support the idea of Class Struggle, by the 1950's it was. However something else happened that the Communists did not expect, just as they influenced Liberalism, Liberalism influenced Communism. Today you will rarely meet a real Marxist, although you will often encounter Marxist thinking.
Identity politics is what you get when you cross Communist Class Struggle with Liberalism. Instead of being the economic struggle that Classical Marxism wanted, you instead get a Cultural Struggle. Here different "cultures" struggle and in time will result in a classless society. Not a Communist utopia, but a Liberal utopia. Because Liberalism, like Communism, believes in an end time where Liberalism will rule supreme and each person will be "fully human", completely autonomous, completely self made, completely free to make themselves in anyway that they so desire. But before we can arrive at that destination we need to go through the struggle, everyone must be made Equal no matter what it costs or who it hurts.
The Class Struggle in Classical Marxism said that the exploiters were always wrong, they were corrupted by their class status and no matter what they said or did, that did not change the fact that they were exploiters. In reverse the exploited were always victims, anything they did to fight back against their exploitation was justified....anything!
Now look at our current situation where certain groups get special protection and can do no wrong, here is Class Struggle for all to see. Who is the modern exploiter class? Whites are the exploiter class, Christians are the exploiter class, Men are the exploiter class. Because in the 1950's when the idea of Class Struggle was finally accepted by Liberal intellectuals and thinkers, Whites were the dominate group with most of the wealth, Christians were the dominate group with most of the wealth, Men were the dominate group with most of the wealth. In the 1970s being Heterosexual also became can exploiter class. They are the exploiters who achieved their position by violence and deceit and no other answer is acceptable. The logic of Class Struggle means that the exploiter class must be destroyed, it is the only way to achieve equality and the Liberal utopia.
As they are not White, Christian or Men, everyone else is being exploited, they must be protected from the exploiters. Nothing the exploiter class says or does changes the fact that they are the exploiters. That means that the exploited have every right to fight back and to be accepted and supported in their struggle. Muslim rape gangs are the victims, remember that the Whites girls they rape are the exploiters. Women are always right because men are always the exploiters. Homosexuals and the Transgendered are the exploited class, they need protection from their Heterosexual exploiters. And on it goes.
It's totally and utterly mad, it always was and it always will be.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
How Socialism Helped Destroy Marriage
Here we can quite clearly see the collision of two modern Liberal ideals, Equality and Identity politics. In most cases Identity politics will win and the reason is Cultural Marxism. So what is Cultural Marxism?
Put simply it is any idea that comes from Communism, which is also known as Marxism, that is in a place were there shouldn't be any Communist ideas. Communism has two major ideas, Class Struggle and Control of the Means of Production, only Class Struggle concerns us here.
Class Struggle is the idea that there are two classes, the exploiter class, known as the Bourgeois and the exploited class, known as the Proletariat. The exploited work for wages and are also known as the workers. Classic Marxism says that these two classes are engaged in a titanic struggle for supremacy, which will be decided through Class Struggle and it will end with a classless society. Imagine two big blocks of concrete each grating against the other, the resulting friction will result in each block of concrete being reduced to little more than dust and pebbles. From such things a Communist society will be created.
What does that have to do with Homosexuals having special laws to protect them?
The original Class Struggle was between two social classes, between the rich and the poor. To aid that Communists sort to influence people who were not Communists. Socialists and Liberals being prime targets, they sort to make them support Communist ideas by cloaking them as general principles. This goes back at least to the 1870's, but picked up pace after the 1917 revolution in Russia. Once the Soviet Union existed support was forthcoming. Money, training, leadership could all be provided and was. The aim was to introduce by stealth programs that supported a Communist future. One idea was to get Liberals to support the idea of Class Struggle, by the 1950's it was. However something else happened that the Communists did not expect, just as they influenced Liberalism, Liberalism influenced Communism. Today you will rarely meet a real Marxist, although you will often encounter Marxist thinking.
Identity politics is what you get when you cross Communist Class Struggle with Liberalism. Instead of being the economic struggle that Classical Marxism wanted, you instead get a Cultural Struggle. Here different "cultures" struggle and in time will result in a classless society. Not a Communist utopia, but a Liberal utopia. Because Liberalism, like Communism, believes in an end time where Liberalism will rule supreme and each person will be "fully human", completely autonomous, completely self made, completely free to make themselves in anyway that they so desire. But before we can arrive at that destination we need to go through the struggle, everyone must be made Equal no matter what it costs or who it hurts.
The Class Struggle in Classical Marxism said that the exploiters were always wrong, they were corrupted by their class status and no matter what they said or did, that did not change the fact that they were exploiters. In reverse the exploited were always victims, anything they did to fight back against their exploitation was justified....anything!
Now look at our current situation where certain groups get special protection and can do no wrong, here is Class Struggle for all to see. Who is the modern exploiter class? Whites are the exploiter class, Christians are the exploiter class, Men are the exploiter class. Because in the 1950's when the idea of Class Struggle was finally accepted by Liberal intellectuals and thinkers, Whites were the dominate group with most of the wealth, Christians were the dominate group with most of the wealth, Men were the dominate group with most of the wealth. In the 1970s being Heterosexual also became can exploiter class. They are the exploiters who achieved their position by violence and deceit and no other answer is acceptable. The logic of Class Struggle means that the exploiter class must be destroyed, it is the only way to achieve equality and the Liberal utopia.
As they are not White, Christian or Men, everyone else is being exploited, they must be protected from the exploiters. Nothing the exploiter class says or does changes the fact that they are the exploiters. That means that the exploited have every right to fight back and to be accepted and supported in their struggle. Muslim rape gangs are the victims, remember that the Whites girls they rape are the exploiters. Women are always right because men are always the exploiters. Homosexuals and the Transgendered are the exploited class, they need protection from their Heterosexual exploiters. And on it goes.
It's totally and utterly mad, it always was and it always will be.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
How Socialism Helped Destroy Marriage
Monday, 11 June 2018
The Sixty-Third Month
Another modest month, although I did get over the 3000 mark in May, 3072 to be exact. I added a new link Occidental Defense, Occidental meaning West. I also had a link from Social Matter which I appreciate.
My best day in the last month was the 3rd June when I had 285 visitors, a lot of them from Spain. My worst day was the 19th May when I had 41 visitors.
My best day in the last month was the 3rd June when I had 285 visitors, a lot of them from Spain. My worst day was the 19th May when I had 41 visitors.
April-May
The United States is back over 1000, Spain is up, as is Canada.
The United Kingdom and France are both the same.
Australia and Germany are down.
Russia, the U.A.E. and the Ukraine are out of the top 10.
Brazil, Finland and Ireland are back in the top 10.
I have also had visitors from the following countries: Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, Italy, Portugal, Czech Republic, Serbia, Macedonia (FYROM), Greece, Bulgaria, Romania, Ukraine, Lithuania, Russia, Georgia, Turkey, U.A.E., Qatar, Iran, India, Bangladesh, China, South Korea, Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia, Algeria, Ghana, South Africa, New Zealand, Mexico, Bahamas, Peru.
I hope you all visit again soon.
Mark Moncrieff
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Wednesday, 6 June 2018
Employee or Cultist?
In 2009 I lost my job due to the Global Financial Crisis which had happened the year before. So I was looking for another job and I remember one interview quite well. I arrived at the address I had been given but I was a bit confused as it was a normal suburban street instead of an office. I had arrived a little early and as I waited I saw about 15-20 people come out of the address. Now I knew it was a group interview...and that it was the correct address. When it was my time I went in and soon there were around the same number of people waiting to be interviewed, the interview was done outside on a verandah. The women who ran the company was trying to create a version of The Secret which had been a great success when it came out in 2006. However as I listened to what she wanted I realised that she wasn't looking for an employee, what she wanted was someone to join her "cult".
I never got the job and for that I will forever be grateful. Ever since then whenever I look at a job advertisement or have had an interview, I look for whether they want an employee or a cultist. I know someone who had to go through a White privilege class, as I told them if you really had White privilege you wouldn't be sitting in that class. I also know someone who was told by their company to wear a pin supporting homosexual marriage during the Referendum last year. So many workplaces have become cults. Support this cause, mouth this platitude and don't let us hear any insincerity in your voice, your job depends on it.
The fusion of Big Business, the Government and Left-Liberalism continues unabated and the cult is a big part of that. Those who run it don't even think it's strange. They believe that they are helping people who are still asleep to become "woke". To become woke is to accept the Left-Liberal definition of how the world works. But as they believe in people being blank-slates and that creating a Utopia are real things, being woke means being deluded. The cult believes in the delusions and it needs more cultists to also believe.
The question I have is why do people put up with it? It didn't start this bad but it has gotten this bad. However people have gone along with it, at every level from senior management to the newest trainee. Why? We all do things we don't really want to do, however here we are being not asked, but directly told that we must think in a particular way. Why don't people complain to the Union? I think because many of them think that the Union won't be on their side. Why not speak up in the workplace? I think because many people will not find allies. So what can be done?
Unfortunately, until people say no more, insist that it end, it will go on. The cult does not feel any pressure to end, in fact it feels that it is nearly there. A bit more push and it will finally breakthrough. Thats not true, but it feels like that to them. Here are some ways you can fight back.
1. Keep doing your job, be a good employee.
2. Complain, formally and informally.
3. Complain in the "training"
4. Have some slogans and jokes to say
"I've heard it said that Diversity only means less White men, is that true?"
"I was told at the last LGBTQI meeting when I asked when was Heterosexual Appreciation Day, that that was every day. However I have not received any memo on the "Hetero Day" at all, if an organiser is needed I'm available."
"I was informed by HR that women only receive 77% of a mans wage. Could I have my female colleagues pay details so that I can confirm that statistic?"
It's good to make these offers in public so that everyone gets in on the joke.
5. Offer to "run" the training (then make it so generic that it's worthless)
6. Get another job.
The most important thing is to be a good employee, that makes it harder, not impossible but harder to get rid of you.
I think that things are going to get worse before they get better. The only way things get better is if we call them out on this unprofessional behaviour.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Rest Of The World Is Doomed
I never got the job and for that I will forever be grateful. Ever since then whenever I look at a job advertisement or have had an interview, I look for whether they want an employee or a cultist. I know someone who had to go through a White privilege class, as I told them if you really had White privilege you wouldn't be sitting in that class. I also know someone who was told by their company to wear a pin supporting homosexual marriage during the Referendum last year. So many workplaces have become cults. Support this cause, mouth this platitude and don't let us hear any insincerity in your voice, your job depends on it.
The fusion of Big Business, the Government and Left-Liberalism continues unabated and the cult is a big part of that. Those who run it don't even think it's strange. They believe that they are helping people who are still asleep to become "woke". To become woke is to accept the Left-Liberal definition of how the world works. But as they believe in people being blank-slates and that creating a Utopia are real things, being woke means being deluded. The cult believes in the delusions and it needs more cultists to also believe.
The question I have is why do people put up with it? It didn't start this bad but it has gotten this bad. However people have gone along with it, at every level from senior management to the newest trainee. Why? We all do things we don't really want to do, however here we are being not asked, but directly told that we must think in a particular way. Why don't people complain to the Union? I think because many of them think that the Union won't be on their side. Why not speak up in the workplace? I think because many people will not find allies. So what can be done?
Unfortunately, until people say no more, insist that it end, it will go on. The cult does not feel any pressure to end, in fact it feels that it is nearly there. A bit more push and it will finally breakthrough. Thats not true, but it feels like that to them. Here are some ways you can fight back.
1. Keep doing your job, be a good employee.
2. Complain, formally and informally.
3. Complain in the "training"
4. Have some slogans and jokes to say
"I've heard it said that Diversity only means less White men, is that true?"
"I was told at the last LGBTQI meeting when I asked when was Heterosexual Appreciation Day, that that was every day. However I have not received any memo on the "Hetero Day" at all, if an organiser is needed I'm available."
"I was informed by HR that women only receive 77% of a mans wage. Could I have my female colleagues pay details so that I can confirm that statistic?"
It's good to make these offers in public so that everyone gets in on the joke.
5. Offer to "run" the training (then make it so generic that it's worthless)
6. Get another job.
The most important thing is to be a good employee, that makes it harder, not impossible but harder to get rid of you.
I think that things are going to get worse before they get better. The only way things get better is if we call them out on this unprofessional behaviour.
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
The Rest Of The World Is Doomed
Friday, 1 June 2018
Why I Support Tommy Robinson
As I'm a week late on this I won't go into any of the details as to what happened. Instead I will state simply that I support Tommy Robinson and that I despair of those on the Right who don't. Here I will go through some of the arguments that have been made as to why we should not support him and why I reject them.
He broke the law!
A basic principle of the law, in fact plain common sense, is that justice must not only be done but it must be seen to be done. When a Judge or the Government says that a trial must be conducted in secret it is a gross violation of the spirit of English law. That is exactly what happened here and people are defending it. They say "but the Judge said!". The issue is that the Judge should never have been allowed to say such a thing. That such a thing, a secret trial, has been allowed to take place is simply wrong. Why is it that this particular trial was being conducted as if it was secret? We all know why and it isn't good enough.
Justice was not done and justice has not been seen to have been done.
He violated parole!
Again we have people simply going along with this injustice. He was in violation of an order that should not exist. He is a political prisoner, not a criminal, why is it that so many on the Right can ignore this?
He is a Civic-Nationalist!
I am not a Civic-Nationalist, I don't care about someone's paperwork, I care about their blood. So we are on opposite sides here. But to win we must ally ourselves with the least objectionable people so that we can defeat those who are most objectionable. Tommy Robinson is good on only one issue, he is against Islam and the effects it has had on the West. So am I, so why would I not support him on this issue? Why isn't everybody?
He supports Israel!
It's a non-issue because the one thing he does well is not support Israel. The one thing he does well is that he opposes Islam. I don't care how he feels about homosexual marriage because it's not relevant, nor do I care about most of his opinions because they are not relevant. He does good work opposing Islam, it's that simple.
He did this for publicity!
Many people are ready to talk about how someone should do something, but when someone does do something are quick to condemn. Tommy Robinson does not simply talk the talk, he has gone to prison for what he believes, to defend his country and his people. He did that because he likes the attention!
How much attention do you think he got when he was in solitary confinement?
It's one thing I hate about the Right, we are quick to attack those on our own side, particularly if someone actually does something. It's quite pathetic.
I will leave you with a story from 1945, the first year of the Cold War. A middle aged Communist in New York City has become ill, it's touch and go whether he will live or not. His fellow Communists turn their backs on him because he is of no further use to them. But someone does pay him attention, an FBI man. He begins to visit him and they talk about politics, his illness, about life. The FBI man also helps with some money. The man recovers his health but the experience has changed him. He changes sides and becomes a spy for the FBI. He stayed in the Communist movement, he meets with a great number of the leading Communists in the world. And he passed on that information to his FBI contact for 30 years. Do you think any of that would have happened if that FBI Man had not made an effort?
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Liberalism, Why We Are Not Liberals
He broke the law!
A basic principle of the law, in fact plain common sense, is that justice must not only be done but it must be seen to be done. When a Judge or the Government says that a trial must be conducted in secret it is a gross violation of the spirit of English law. That is exactly what happened here and people are defending it. They say "but the Judge said!". The issue is that the Judge should never have been allowed to say such a thing. That such a thing, a secret trial, has been allowed to take place is simply wrong. Why is it that this particular trial was being conducted as if it was secret? We all know why and it isn't good enough.
Justice was not done and justice has not been seen to have been done.
He violated parole!
Again we have people simply going along with this injustice. He was in violation of an order that should not exist. He is a political prisoner, not a criminal, why is it that so many on the Right can ignore this?
He is a Civic-Nationalist!
I am not a Civic-Nationalist, I don't care about someone's paperwork, I care about their blood. So we are on opposite sides here. But to win we must ally ourselves with the least objectionable people so that we can defeat those who are most objectionable. Tommy Robinson is good on only one issue, he is against Islam and the effects it has had on the West. So am I, so why would I not support him on this issue? Why isn't everybody?
He supports Israel!
It's a non-issue because the one thing he does well is not support Israel. The one thing he does well is that he opposes Islam. I don't care how he feels about homosexual marriage because it's not relevant, nor do I care about most of his opinions because they are not relevant. He does good work opposing Islam, it's that simple.
He did this for publicity!
Many people are ready to talk about how someone should do something, but when someone does do something are quick to condemn. Tommy Robinson does not simply talk the talk, he has gone to prison for what he believes, to defend his country and his people. He did that because he likes the attention!
How much attention do you think he got when he was in solitary confinement?
It's one thing I hate about the Right, we are quick to attack those on our own side, particularly if someone actually does something. It's quite pathetic.
I will leave you with a story from 1945, the first year of the Cold War. A middle aged Communist in New York City has become ill, it's touch and go whether he will live or not. His fellow Communists turn their backs on him because he is of no further use to them. But someone does pay him attention, an FBI man. He begins to visit him and they talk about politics, his illness, about life. The FBI man also helps with some money. The man recovers his health but the experience has changed him. He changes sides and becomes a spy for the FBI. He stayed in the Communist movement, he meets with a great number of the leading Communists in the world. And he passed on that information to his FBI contact for 30 years. Do you think any of that would have happened if that FBI Man had not made an effort?
Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future
Another Article You Might Like?
Liberalism, Why We Are Not Liberals
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)