Moderation Is A Luxury Afforded By Peace.

Standard

Some days ago I opened up my comment section on YouTube to see if I had received any new fan mail as of late; what caught my attention was an extremely long comment written by a Christian guy who was basically preaching his viewpoints. I actually decided to check out his Twitter accounts and saw that he is spamming the world with his opinions and the teachings of Christ. I made the decision to delete his comment since it was enormously long and completely irrelevant to my guitar video and music. Today I saw that he had chosen to spam me basically, here he is:

crazy spammer

What was his message?

That the media lies. That division between the left and the right is bad, that we are taken for a ride and that we shouldn’t allow ourselves to be tricked and misguided by vain celebrities, etc;

It was the sort of thing that one would write when initially realising that reality is grim and that cynicism sucks. A sentiment that can easily be conjured by simply watching CCTV footage of accidents and observing human’s destiny of operating within specific loops. Change the scenery and change the situation and people will re-create habits or simply form new ones. So can true freedom ever be obtained? I sincerely doubt it. When looking at the text that was sent to me a second time around I couldn’t help but feel that the person behind it must be deeply depressed or just sad and is probably feeling isolated.

That’s not good of course. I remember years ago that I also felt that “the world” was fake. Or is it? The illusion of our world is I guess, but only because this “illusion” is about selling products and turning a profit whatever it takes. But advertisements, articles, the news, whatever, aren’t really reality as such; they can reflect and preach what they want it to be, they can try to move “the people” from one side to the other, or they can simply reflect what is actually happening; which can also be observed sometimes when major corporations are late to the party and try to reflect trends that are literally on their way out by the time they pick up on them.

Feeling that the world is fake has more to deal with feeling like one is falling in-between all chairs. It might be more common that most think since so many are feeling down in spirits. There are obviously many who feel an internal dissonance when it comes to our times and how we live when depressions and even suicidal tendencies are according to articles becoming increasingly common. There is apparently a mental health epidemic. Of course I have my doubts as I suspect that many who are healthy are misdiagnosed, or maybe not?

Once upon a time there was a certain natural selection process going on with us humans, ย while many children would be born many would also die and not survive their infancy, many women would die while giving birth. With our scientific breakthroughs we can now salvage those meant for the brutal premature grave of nature. Add to the picture the claim and theory that autoimmune diseases have sky rocketed after mandatory mass-vaccinations and you certainly gaze upon a pretty distorted landscape, where young people constantly complain about their own wellbeing and health. Maybe not because they are seeking attention or believe they are ill, but because it may be true that we are becoming an increasingly unhealthy bunch, passing dysfunctional genes on to the next generation.

Are we highlighting our dysfunctions because we have nothing else to focus our attention on or is there truth to it?

I’ve written before that it is a bad idea to believe in the reality of social media, as people share their good moments, their best moments, much like a photo album functioned back in the day. There is no reason to believe that old statues and portraits weren’t “photoshopped” either. Reality is what you see and experience here in the actual world; what you’ve experienced, what you’ve witnessed. There is probably more truth in “word of mouth” than anything else, but does this mean that it will be pleasing to hear? Many a child story also teaches us of how one feather turns to ten chickens, if you doubt what you hear on the street why wouldn’t you doubt what you hear from the media? And if what you hear from the media vs. what you hear from other people is widely different then who do you trust? If what you see aligns with what other people experience, then that is your truth and the media is lying for whatever reason. The best way to distill facts is for example to read many different books about the same topic. If several people with different backgrounds agree about certain facts, then you can draw the conclusion that they probably are indeed facts.

Living by our current mantra Doย What Thou Wilt will create a sense of emptiness within a great number of people, as individuals will feel like they are fragmenting internally when going against their personal values, even if they aren’t sure what those values might be. An individual might feel a great sting of subconscious unhappiness when simply purchasing lots of material goods, as these empty things won’t pacify a longing for love or a hunger for adventure. With too much comfort individuals grow frustrated and might seek out danger in order to survive numbing boredom and natural restlessness. Or a feeling of nothingness. That nothing matters, that life is pointless or whatever.

But these aren’t really “new discoveries,” they are old truths contemplated by many, who lived, wondered and eventually died. The one destination and fate that we all share.

The other day I saw a horrible collection of pictures from WW2 and how the Jewish people were hounded by hateful mobs, stripping them nude, beating them, unleashing their animalistic aggression upon them. Grizzly pictures to look at but even more alarmingly to be confronted with, when bearing in mind that this type of behaviour is not something that will ever perish from our species. We – here in Europe, are terrified of repeating the mistakes of former generations, but does that mean that other tribes will be? No. And that knowledge makes it even creepier to see the evidence of our inherent brutality.

There are people who will claim that there is no left or right, no Christian or Muslim, no Nations, nothing, only people – humans. One planet, one humanity, that there only exists one thing – existence, etc;. ย That there are forces constantly trying to divide us so that those who manipulates can stand by and reap the fruits of their mischief. There are those who only see power in everything; you have those on the top – an eternal enemy of the downtrodden people or those who are rich squeezing whatever life that there is within those who are wage slaves. Or tax cattle. You name it.

At the end of the day what you want is balance. Equilibrium. That the scale isn’t skewed too much in any direction, but balance is always challenged. Call it the battle between good or evil, chaos vs. order, freedom vs. totalitarianism, independence vs. enslavement,etc; Each generation has its foe, and one can of course wonder why that is?

At one point or the other when the scale is out of position it has to be put back into place, but which side does that manoeuvring shapes and dictates the future, and also the definition of what makes the scale unbalanced. That future, whatever it may be, is never solid and never guaranteed as it will be challenged at one point or another.

You are not uncertain about yourself if you decide to oppose someone who you perceive to be an enemy, and who is the enemy? Those who want you dead obviously or it could be those who want to tear down what you want to uphold or those who stand in the way of what you want to build.

Being politically moderate is a luxury you can afford during peacetime. When our democratic playpen is guarded by volunteers willing to die for their civilians, ย  ย  ย  ย  ย  ย deterring foreign enemies, we can discuss and quarrel amongst ourselves from dusk till dawn, we can endorse sentiments such as ” great minds don’t think alike they compromise.” And all of this is intriguing, interesting, fascinating, you name it, but the second that your society’s equilibrium ceases, everything changes because you will be forced to pick a side.

I had an interesting conversation some days ago when political parties were being discussed. A point was made that a political party should actually cease to be once it has reached its objective and fulfilled its mission. It was argued that the workers party in Norway should have dissolved after securing workers their rights as they had fulfilled their duty and promise. Their reason for existing had ceased but rather than doing this though they had to create a new raison d’รชtre and this is when democracy and politics become dangerous. When politicians refuse to let go even if it means selling out their nation financially, which extreme capitalists might do in their hopeless worship of unrestrained free-market capitalism or the left might do by letting in refugees ensuring lots of new voters and potential loyal foot soldiers – totally disregarding the inevitable cultural change. It’s obvious that there are plenty without any sense of honour who would sell away anything as long as they themselves profits and that there are those who wouldn’t really care who they govern or what they govern as long as they do.

Human beings will naturally clash, it is our destiny to disagree, just as anger is a very natural and real emotion. It is disturbing to hear of people who believe in unleashing this fury based upon information that might be false as one should be careful to let oneselves be used as weapons.

It would be good if everyone could be made aware of the fact that a social media giant conducted a psychological experiment proving that they could influence their user’s emotions. This is a piece of magic that was uncovered ages ago by press people and propaganda ministers alike. I guess it is a temptation too hard to resist, the idea of herding “the people.” The good news is that whenever scientist tried in the pasts to categorise human beings they always failed as there is too much diversity between individuals and their traits. Maybe they failed because the undertaking was too massive for the equipment that they had available at the time or maybe it is an impossible mission, which would truly mean that here is no such thing as “we the people.”

Still, even though this might be the case and the “not all” argument always seems to be applicable, it doesn’t minimise the fact that many base their political alignment on one survey, limited real-life experiences and/or headlines from well-respected, influential media outlets.

It is interesting that such little insight can wield such strong convictions. It is puzzling that everyone seems united in the belief that those who disagree with them are the uninformed party.

That may be; but at the end of the day does it really matter?

What are you aligning yourself with? What do you support? Who do you stand with?

Globalists and Nationalists hold values that are irreconcilable. It is true. The victory of one means the death of the other, there is no middle ground.

Expansionism and Isolationism are also polar opposites and there should be little doubt to anyone which one of the two you can have as a neighbour and which one you cannot.

Making statements like these doesn’t mean that you feel miserable about yourself or want to make yourself feel better by putting others down, it simply means picking a side. Based on what then? Idealism and fantasy vs. Reality and truth. Or more bluntly the demise of your tribe vs. the survival of your tribe. Who your allies are when facing an existential threat will differ from who your friends are when you are not.

Is reality pleasant, no. This is why we escape, myself included.

But that doesn’t make anyone fake or a worshipper of fakeness, or stupid or genuinely lost.

The guy who sent me the long comment on YouTube has made his first step towards seeing things for what they are: a basic division between your individual real-life experience of life and the assembly of selected information accompanied by carefully selected pictures presenting a one-dimensional vision or a partial or completely manufactured one of reality. It is called a facade or simply: marketing. Whether he progresses in his quest or remains stagnant remains to be seen, at the end of the day you might have to wake up to the world in order to return full circle to where you initially were, not necessarily because you want to but because it might be needed.

When People Can Not Process What They Are Reading.

Standard

Years ago I remember taking offence to a Serj Tankian song called “The Unthinking Majority” I thought of the title as extremely arrogant and felt it was disappointing that a political artist, or at least an artist with politically motivated work, would express himself in such a way.

I took offence to howย The Chimp Paradox.ย was presented as well as I don’t think of it as a good idea to address the masses like they are mongrels.

I don’t talk to people like they are s-t-u-p-i-d, I have no interest in saying “those people over there.” I’m part of this world just like everyone else, I’m not above the law, I will fail, I will be wrong and just because I’m right about certain things doesn’t mean that I will be right about others. (Depending on how you define what is right or wrong). We are all hiding behind statistics funny enough and drag out surveys like a final piece of evidence. Yet statistics can be misleading, which is why every side has “evidence” to back up whatever claim they might have. Yet once you de-bunk the collection of data, it might not seem as straightforward after all… ย someone disagreeing with you politically doesn’t give you the right to dismiss them as unintelligible, unless it has ย been clearly debunked time and time again that what they support is inefficient and false. Meaning: that “truth” has been consistently buried and banned on their part so that their “ideology” can prevail well-guarded from justified scrutiny.

” If I disagree with you, you have to be retarded…” is not a particularly well thought out argument. The same goes for name-calling. If you want to pull the “you are an idiot card” you truly need to have a substantial amount of hard evidence, just as if you are going to pull the “you are insane argument.”

Yesterday my brother and I had a very long and interesting conversation as he is currently reading a lot about genes & IQ. This is of course a very controversial topic as the current orthodoxy is that there is only equality. We spoke and agreed about the grandeur of a meritocracy, discussing how evidence shows that the general IQ at universities have increased since “future leaders” are recruited from all aspects of our societies. The general “intelligence” has therefore gone up since education isn’t only reserved for the children of the wealthy. Yet….the dark side of the moon are quotas enforced when politicians decide that they want to lift the “entire population” or 50% of the population up. As amiable as this may sound like it is simply not do-able.

The result will be a collection of educated people, with official papers for jobs that they cannot really do. This might seem un-fair, but it is actually true. (feel free to read up on all of this, there’s lots of information.).

(It has now been brought to my attention that this increase apparently can be seen among higher university education and that the average is actually decreasingย dramatically when it comes to the “regular” student body. So a bit different than what I describe here. Note added on Friday 28th of July 2017).

As horrid as it might be, 50% of the population will not be geniuses. If you drown people with knowledge this will not change as their brains just cannot process the information.ย This is of course very depressing if you fundamentally believe in “giving everyone a fair chance” by raising the population up, stretching towards national greatness. I take it that this is why those who “headhunt” for the best have to look internationally, to poach “the best people” for their projects.

Yet among the best you also have some cases of those who over think to such an extent that they almost think themselves into idiocy. That’s when ย degenerate social constructs are presented to the world, as it might make sense logically if you disregard the human factor or if your brilliance is restricted to one field. There are also those who use elaborate sentences, spending an enormous amount of time on research only to be biased or completely off the hook in terms of their conclusions. The mind is a tricky beast.

Different groups of people have different trait frequencies. There is a plethora of information regarding this. I’m currently reading articles that would certainly come across as “controversial” to all of those who subscribe to the notion that ” we are all created equal.” That said, just because we are “all created differently” doesn’t mean that civil liberties should only be reserved for a small group. I suspect that the furore against “admitting that genuine diversity exists” reminiscent of mass hysteria happens, because people don’t want the idea of “this group being better than that group” gaining ground once again. My point is that “supremacy” or feelings of superiority will emerge regardless, as people will always “find something” to make them “stand out,” even if it is not “legitimate.”

Whether it is a financial situation making someone feel superior to those who are destitute or whether destitution raises ones victim status to such heights as to make someone morally superior. Grievances can be perceived as legitimate and worthy of punishment by the state directed towards those guilty of wealth. The rich person might feel superior but the poor will too, as their struggle makes them superior morally speaking. Rich = mean, poor = good.ย In terms of appearance it is “all about personality” since slim and/or pretty = mean while fat and/or ugly = nice. A person who looks good and uses this as an asset might feel that this is the “ace up their sleeve,” but just as this can create a sense of “I’m better than you” the traditionally unattractive can relish in their misery by again being seen as the “victim” or “challenging traditional standards of beauty.” Someone who is good at school/academics and/or good in any other field such as sports, music, business you name it, will feel that thisย is their “ace” whereas those who aren’t good at anything at all can take pride in being morally virtuous since they are unambitious. They are nice because they will not make anyone else “feel bad” by beating them in a competitive sense.

Being honest about “diversity” is not the same as treating people horribly. It means being honest and aware of the challenges a nation faces, both internally and internationally. How can one create the best school system for example if people are in denial?ย Maybe it is a good idea to focus more on practical training than merely theory designed for the brainy? Maybe a division at an earlier age would be an idea, so that those who hate reading could thrive by learning “how to be handy?” Maybe segregating the genders, so that boys can be approached like boys without being reprimanded for not being like the girls could benefit boys who are falling behind in the effeminate education system? ย What will result from such a religious devotion to modern orthodoxies as we have today is the firing of any academics who dare to uphold “the truth,” which brings to mind the popular representation of “the dark ages.”

It seems like our enlightenment has gradually brought us closer to darkness since any truths violating the ย “feelings” of a group, regardless of how marginal the group is, are discarded or left in obscurity.ย Writing about democracy, in fact mentioning and addressing in-depth any of the issues mentioned above could result in volumes upon volumes of material, which is what we supposedly have academics for. They are not there to be fired if their findings collide with the “values” of our modern “dictatorship of goodness,” it is their job to find the truth or to seek to find the truth through empirical evidence.

To demonstrate how frustrating it is with people who cannot process information that isn’t even particularly complex, I’ve included a series of screen shots below. This is how democracy looks like in practice, this is why it is easy for critical thinkers, obsessed with “truth” to fall into the unforgiving, melancholic, grip of misanthropy.

On Friday, the 24th of March 2017, these three individuals were trending on FB…

Trending on FB

Katie Hopkins was making waves online due to her commentary about the terrorist attack in Westminster. People were raging because she had the audacity to suggest that England has a cultural problem and that the UK is weak in spirit. Her commentary pretty much addressed what I had been addressing in one of my own blog entries, so I was of course puzzled by the negative reactions she experienced as what she had written seemed spot on. (Unless one chooses to be in denial). While I was scrolling around the timeline connected with the “Hopkins topic” I came across a guy in the USA. I agreed with his entry and shared it on my personal FB.

Online Democracy 1

What followed was a public online argument where the guy who had authored what you see above had to defend himself from people who clearly didn’t understand his original post at all. It is not hard to comprehend what he is saying. An interesting thing to note is that he didn’t know that his post was set to “public….”

Online Democracy 2

Obviously I’m trying to protect the identity of these people, as one does…You can see that one individual agrees, then one is clearly disgruntled about Hopkins, someone else agrees, but then enters a very typical argument: “rather __________, than racist.” This is a slogan that has been advocated by Swedish Feminists in particular.

Racist Clear.

What you see next is a very typical argument…”the guy was British.” Well…to be fair no he was not…This was a muslim man of foreign descent, who happened to have a British passport and citizenship…in this day and age that is not really the same as being from that particular nation. A woman of absolute muslim descent, walking around in full traditional, muslim dress, is not Norwegian just because she happens to have a Norwegian passport. She is a citizen yes, and is lucky to live in a western country, where you can enjoy the full benefit of citizenship regardless of where you originally come from. The lady (note how these individuals are women) clearly does not understand the argument from the American man. Her conclusion is that he is “racist clear” whatever that may mean…..

Enters a proper Racist.

Then enters a proper Racist. This clearly illustrates what I’ve been addressing on my blog in so many of my entries. The guy who initially started this discussion has up to this point engaged in arguments protecting himself from the false accusation that he is racist, then enters a real racist, who generalizes and is completely unapologetic in his views. An argument then ensues between the “accused-non-racist” and the “I’m-proud-to-be-racist-racist.” The leftists have succeeded in destroying the meaning of the word “racist” just as they’ve dismantled the word “hate” as used in “hate speech.”ย False accusations of people being “brown shirts” have taken away the severity of “you areย a Nazi” since everyone who at this point questions the left in any way is labeled “literally Hitler.” The unavoidable result is that people will just get nauseated whenever the WW2 argument is brought up, and not for the “right” reasons…..people might even start saying “yeah…what did we really fight for? Maybe the Nazis should have won?” these type of sentiments will probably become more widespread as a result of the left’s way of arguing, rather than an explosion of pro-Nazi sentiments. In other words, if you poke someone long enough they’ll get sick and tired of your bullshit.

Exit Nazi & Permission to share posts

A certain somebody asks for permission to use this discussion in a blog entry….the racist from the previous frame, admits that he is proud to be what he is.

Enters random guy.

Another character enters claiming the “he was British argument” before the classical “IRA argument” is brought up. In fact this whole thread illustrates all the common narratives in the current political climate. Note how the “new arrival” in this thread uses the “fake news” narrative. The American who accidentally ended up in a public discussion, that ended up highlighting all of his points due to the contribution by those who are hating on him, is becoming tired….as can be understood by his posting below…

the IRA argument

Argument continues

The American who started the thread tries to conclude the discussion, at this point he also adds one of his comments in the thread into his original post, in order for people to see where he is coming from. The lady with the “IRA argument” clearly can not let it go, so another discussion then ensues with an evidently tired American, baffled by the inability to process basic information displayed by those attacking him….

Arguing Online.jpg

The thread, as it looked like at that point, ends with this:

Conclusion

This discussion alone prove the points I addressed above. It would have been one thing if these screenshots were my only evidence…..but no…hold on… I got more……

The argument below is more sophisticated in nature due to how the participants express themselves. Regardless of this the topic is the same; I’m calling this sequence ” The Oxford Argument.”

OA1

The post attracted one individual who decided to express his dissent….this was counter-attacked by a guy who was clearly interested in commencing a discussion.

OA2

OA3

OA4

OA5

” I read that paragraph but I just hear racism.” Again that same old card is used in an incorrect manner. Also note how these individuals perceive Muslims as the victims and any precautions on the part of “the west” as unjustified racism. The argument is made from “the dissenter” that concerns about Muslim supremacists are justified, especially when seen from a historical perspective. This of course clashes with the current orthodoxy or the false enlightenment claim, that all men are created equal. By admitting that there is an enemy you are merely engaging in discrimination. Even when “the dissenter” specified “NOT ALL muslims” it was still concluded that he was a racist and “good riddance.”

My last example before I conclude my entry stems from my very own Twitter. Yes you’ve read that right. I launched this blog a couple of years ago at the request of my fans, not really knowing what my blog would be about. ย I’m not a “pink blogger” I like to read, and enjoy to think, discuss and write about what I’ve read. I’m a virtuoso musician and would classify myself as pretty geeky. My blog entries where I’ve written about personal matters have proven very popular and overall I’ve certainly seen that people adore entertainment while abhorring intellectual discussions. I’ve shared my blog entries on my Twitter and in my entries I usually provide people with links to the articles and/or YouTube videos that inspired me to write that specific blog entry, so that people can see my “sources.”

This year I received a request to do an interview about my entries for the very first time. I was asked about the content on my blog regarding Islamism mainly, since it seemed like the interviewer was obsessed with ‘the terror threat.” I replied to the best of my ability and said among other things this:

“Itโ€™s obvious that there are some who are just born with a โ€œcomplaining gene.โ€ We are spoilt in our part of the world. I donโ€™t think thereโ€™s ever been a point in history where people had it better. There is healthcare for everyone, there is so much food that the poor are obese, everyone has access to some sort of education, pollution levels are much better than they were under the industrial revolution for example, you will not be imprisoned or chemically castrated just because of your sexual orientation, women can get an education, work their way up into the system. You can come from a minority background and become the leader of a nation or go into important government positions in a country that you werenโ€™t even born in. Weโ€™ve come as close as we can get to Utopia and should just be happy, but no. Then you get people complaining about trans-gender bath room issues, micro-aggressions, sexist snow-removal and pronouns. There is no end to the stupidity. I believe in equality when it comes to the starting point and opportunity, but it has now been brought to my attention that those who talk about egalitarianism usually advocate equality when it comes to outcome. Which doesnโ€™t make any sense to me.”

I also said this:

“Yes, there are plenty of disturbing videos of this, Iโ€™ve posted some of them on my blog. You got angry young Muslim men shouting and then you got angry young white men shouting. Looks like a mess, especially if tensions escalate.”

Then you got this:

“I assume that the majority are afraid, because people like to conform and donโ€™t want to be ostracised. They see what happens to those conservatives and classical liberals who speak out and decide to stay quiet, whereas those who shout the loudest are those who hate immigration because they actually are real racists and real nazis.”

…and this:

“What it is that we want immigrants to โ€œintegrate intoโ€ for example is a question nobody is asking. We keep on mentioning vague values, that apparently are โ€œour shared values,โ€ but it can easily seem that we donโ€™t really have a cultural identity anymore. It is not strange that foreigners should be horrified at the fractured families of the West or the unintelligible mainstream entertainment we have that produce nothing but icons of degeneracy and vulgarity.ย High culture of beauty and excellence is something we have sacrificed on the altar of modernity. Spirituality and faith has been crushed and is routinely mocked. Masculinity is actively worked against in the school system. It is understandable that people would be reluctant to โ€œintegrateโ€ into this. Letโ€™s not forget that. After all, why should anyone respect a culture that doesnโ€™t even respect itself?”

If you read through these segments you will understand that this is not a racist talking, but someone who is concerned, especially if you read the whole interview.ย What I say is critical of militant Islam and the effects of “the change” that has been imposed on Europe. When asked about: “What about Islamism in Scandinavia? Have you been back to Norway recently? What do you see happening there?”ย I replied in an honest way; describing a country where immigration has become stricter but where certain specific changes were observed by me during some visits back home:

“1-Norway has changed to such an extent that my father and I were the only white people at a supermarket up in the mountains, deep into the fjord land.
2-Iโ€™ve had elevator rides where I was the only white person and the only woman not wearing a burqa.
3-Iโ€™m not even Norwegian anymore, Iโ€™m an ethnic-Norwegian apparently.
4- I visited my grandmother some years back and there was a terror warning on the news โ€œtoday the terror alert has been raised to severe.โ€ That, in particular is ridiculous. Why are we supposed to accept this as a new reality?”

First of all it is important to specify that Norway is not America. If you live in the USA and you get surprised by encountering an Afro-American or a Native-American, well then you got issues. America has always been a diverse “nation,” there was diversity among the caucasian population, there was diversity due to slavery and the “original population.” Norway is not America. We got Norwegians and then we got Samis, who are nomads living up in the North, moving around between Northern countries with their reindeer, etc; It is just and right to question the changes that have been imposed on Scandinavia, as these are neither natural nor justifiable IF they result in demographic displacement or gradual demographic replacement. It is racist, to support this type of activity and the fact that these type of measures are supported and initiated by ethnic Europeans is nothing but extraordinary.ย (Obviously I have to specify that there is a major difference between some immigrants here and there, and demographic displacement/replacement. I hope that people can comprehend that….) It cannot be justified in any way, that English people should all of a sudden find themselves becoming minorities in certain parts of their country, nor can it be justified that there are “no-go-zones” in Sweden, but an interesting thing to note, and this is important, is that I highlight that the worst of these changes is the terror threat, that we are supposed to treat as “normal.”ย 

So far so good, one should hope, but no. Even though it should be ridiculously easy to follow what I’m writing above, I received this tweet after the release of the interview:

evil CIC 2

Curious I decided to check out this individual and saw this:

CIC evil1

First of all I said in the interview that I don’t live in Norway anymore. I also said thatย “my father and I were the only white people at a supermarket up in the mountains, deep into the fjord land.” This describes a supermarket. I also describe being in an elevator as the only woman not wearing a burqa. I’m clearly describing a country undergoing radical fundamental changes. But I’m not describing an entire town, and seen from a European perspective it all makes sense, if you’ve followed what I wrote above. In the interview I can be quoted as saying ” Iโ€™m not even Norwegian anymore, Iโ€™m an ethnic-Norwegian apparently.” Again this goes to demonstrate a “core change” within a Nation. I’m not even Norwegian anymore.” So you see a change of word-use in terms of how an ethnic group is being addressed and labeled. This is not minor.ย Obviously this is not hillbilly talk, as a hillbilly would probably behave like this:

Enters a proper Racist.

Some months later I received another Tweet from a different individual as a response to a blog entry I had published on January the 30th, 2017.

twitter argument.jpg

These are some quotes from the blog entry that he was referring to:

“We need to make sure that we advance into the future โ€œwith baby stepsโ€ so that we can successfully integrate the new-Europeans into the fabric of our societies, without losing ourselves.”

We are reaching a tipping point & the only sensible course of action would be to do everything in our power to prevent escalated chaos within our continent.”

“….then why not keep those who like it here & have integrated well, while sending out those who do not?”

“If โ€œrefugeesโ€ thrive at the expense of the original European population, it will create anger and resentment within the ethnic populace and rather than directing this anger towards government figures, we run the risk of this sentiment being directed towards innocent muslims.”

These things are clearly not written by someone who hates ALL Muslims. This is obviously written by someone who is concerned about EVERYONE. And someone who is critical towards Militant Islam. No wonder that people give up, when those who are “moderates” or tempered in their assessment, are accused of being “racist.” I did the dumbest thing and decided to engage with this man in a short Twitter argument as I obviously assume that my fellow human beings “can understand what I write.” I’ve made the mistake of expecting people to be reasonable. Which brings us back to the very beginning of my very long entry…. Here are the Tweets:

T1

t14

T2

T3

t10

t11

t12

T4

T5

T6

T7

T8

Again, I’m obviously not racist, but then comes the kicker:

t9

At this point I realised that what I was engaging in was pointless….When I then saw the thread further up in this entry later that month I realised that I had to write a blog entry. It is a serious issue that so many cannot comprehend the information that they are presented with. Sure, it is tough to read science papers, especially if written in an academic language, it is difficult to read ancient literature, of course this is hard, but none of what I shared on here today is. None of it. None.

This is why politicians talk “down to people” this is why there are PR agencies that are commissioned to create and manufacture easy slogans and “perfect” official personas. People who never say anything that contradicts or challenges the orthodoxy, even when they are aware of how bad things are, such as Podesta.ย This is how corporations get away with blood on their hands, because they are good at marketing and making their products “human.” How healthy is this for a society and how healthy is it for the west? Not particularly, which I’ll address in my next entry, where I’ll discuss an article I read some days ago about “Politics vs. Emotionalism.”