Power To The People!

Long I’ve been wondering when the French people would revolt again. I started writing political entries on my blog due to what has been going on in France. If I as a Norwegian become angry after only having lived in France for a year then what can we expect from those who are actually French and are totally tied to the land?

Well here we go! Macron was the last straw it seems.

This is what happens when people vote for politicians they think look fancy; you get Trudeau, Obama & Macron. Just because someone’s got swag or can put together a nice sounding speech doesn’t mean that they’ll fix it all! Someone might have charisma and come across as a cool guy (or gal) that doesn’t mean that they’ll be fit to rule anything.

This is probably the most brilliant piece of propaganda material I’ve seen in the digital age! Here is Macron enjoying a luxurious holiday while his country is in flames!

“Let them eat cake” indeed!

This is modern leadership at its best! Sending out state-enforcers to mutilate and assault disobedient civilians while the leadership is chilling out in some beautiful location far away from the filthy “plebs,” who by the way fund the whole state system through taxes and purchases! “Shut up & consume” indeed! OBEY!

Screenshot 2019-03-17 at 16.56.24

12 Lessons Learnt From Being A Big Sister.

“Helping out” used to be the norm back in the day when our ancestors were more tribal and more connected to their immediate and (probably also) extended family.

The modern concept of “responsibility” means: gathering resources (making money) so that you can pay the bills that you have your own name on.

It usually means moving away from your family, preferably as far away as soon as possible, but not because you are starting your own tribe. It’s just vital for you to get away!

Back in older times responsibility meant: gather resources (hunting, foraging and/or farming), while there were other layers of responsibility that were acknowledged such as doing housework and looking after children among other things.

My situation as a teenager was dramatically different to that of my Norwegian peers since I actually had to help out with my younger siblings.

I did my part but felt miserable about missing out on what my friends were doing, in addition I also found gender-bias to be frustrating: namely that it was merely assumed that I as the oldest girl had to help out. When older women pointed out that this would be great experience for me when I one day started my own family, I was further angered at how it was just assumed that I would go along with gender-typical alignments.

When we moved to London and our Asian landlords assumed that I would be helping my mother in the kitchen I once again felt an inner dissonance, why did people just assume this?

Fast forward and I’ve realised a number of things:

  1. I didn’t really miss out on much during my teens.
  2. Whatever lessons I learnt from helping out; other people my own age simply had to learn later.
  3. A number of my old friends had to acknowledge that their parents had been right and that their own “rebellious” time as teenagers had neither empowered them nor benefited them long-term.
  4. While other people were hanging out and partying I acquired  proper skills.
  5. What I learnt from dealing with my family taught me things that I’m sure can be applicable to other situations, it even inspired me to write a children’s book.
  6. Helping out in the family is the norm in Africa, South America, The Middle East and (probably also)Asia and this is a benefit when it comes to having strong family units.
  7. It is much better to be part of a tribe (family) rather than family duties being outsourced to the impersonal State/government. It also saves taxpayer’s money to keep as much as possible within the family.
  8. I would much rather help out with stereo-typical female things rather than going to war or lifting insanely heavy objects.
  9. Stereotypical gender roles became stereotypical gender roles for a reason; and most people don’t even question it or think about it.
  10. The more people can do on their own and the less dependent they are on the supermarket-culture the more they enhance their chances of survival.
  11. I’m probably one of the most well-prepared Millennials in the Western world when it comes to managing and running a household properly due to my experience of co-running things with my mother. Not because I’m so awesome, but due to how uncommon it has become with traditional family structures and inter-family responsibilities. This is not a bad experience to have, especially when considering that the world is filled to the brim with other cultures where family is still seen as an important corner-stone.
  12. Nobody is too important to take out the trash. The Western world is failing due to an attitude problem and a value deficiency I’m sure!

IMG_8099

Immigration Red Flags, Article 13, & Petitions To Sign & Share.

Please don’t forget about Article 13! Watch the video at the end of this entry!!!

Lately I’ve been mentally drafting an entry about citizenship in an open world. There are so many contradicting laws that makes no sense especially in combination with facilitated mass movements of people. It is indeed a very interesting topic for many reasons:

  1. Just because a government is generous enough to give you legal permission to be in a territory doesn’t mean that the locals will.
  2. Assuming that immigration laws make sense is naive since a number of measures are carried out in an attempt to create an image of governmental efficiency.
  3. Assuming that a territory will be more welcoming towards geographical neighbours also fly in the face of incredibly generous offers directed towards non-bordering territories. A territory might be legally more hostile towards people next door.

Just when I had all of this in the back of my mind I came across The Windrush Scandal that perfectly illustrates my point:

  1. You are allowed entry into a territory that theoretically isn’t yours through claims of ancestry.
  2. You are told by governing forces that you are legally allowed to stay.
  3. All of a sudden you find that your status has been revoked several years even decades after you were welcomed into the territory and that you are all of a sudden being treated as an illegal immigrant.
  4. The digital revolution has wrecked havoc on the old system of file-keeping. So if you were born before 2000 you might struggle to get hold of school records and other “evidence,” because you were born before mainstream digitalisation. When I was little my name was just added in my parent’s passports, you had to have your own passport once you were a teen or something along those lines, so government bureaucracy and technological changes can easily land you in a grey area.

Did anyone say an open world? Think again. This is a topic worthy of a giga entry because the issue puts into question a myriad of things that we just assume in today’s digitally and commercially open world.

Once again:

  1. Just because a piece of paper grants you legal access doesn’t mean that you and your family will actually be safe – because there will always be many layers of “borders” – and if locals are pissed off and unhappy they might create their own border-control “service,” which you probably do not want to deal with, ever.
  2. An authority might change its mind about you or the ethnic demographic that you belong to regardless of whether or not you actually represent a threat as an individual or as part of a generalised group. You might just end up being targeted so that the government can look busy.

If the Windrush scandal illustrated anything it is how dangerous the illusion of an open world actually is. You might be safe in terms of residency for 40 years only to wake up one day to find out that you’ve been labeled an “illegal immigrant” and that you are on your way to a detention facility.

Here are some petitions to share about a more peaceful issue: the environment.

Fracking

Whaling

Plastic Pollution

Exotic Zoo Animals

Trophy Hunting

Detained Whales

Dog Fighting

 

 

 

The International Women’s Day.

Today it is the 8th of March and the whole world, including businesses, seem united in this socialist/communist celebration.

In my 1st blog entry about the 8th of March in 2015 I did the politically correct thing and featured 20 Badass Women from stereo-typically male dominated fields.

Once again I would like to remind my readership (and the world) that Russia was ahead in all things egalitarian. So there is nothing new with policies currently promoted in Western countries, in fact I highly recommend reading: The War Has No Female Face., a book about female Russian war heroes.

This year I will say thank you to mothers and women who are good at keeping our societies going; those who have gone down in history nameless in terms of the history books but whose memories were/are kept alive by their descendants.

Music wise I think that I’m a good role-model professionally for women who want to choose an untraditional career path, more than anything I think that I’m a good role-model for musicians regardless of gender, since a number of the pieces that I’ve recorded and performed had never been recorded by men nor women. The same can be said of my creative versatility, this is not a common thing to come across, whether you are a man or a woman or somewhere in between.

I hardly have any female fans and that has always been the case! I’ve received countless messages through the years from men telling me that I’ve inspired them to practise their instruments! So my influence is not over women.

The assumption that women will have female fans or that women will make other women purchase instruments is very wrong, or at least it is in my case.

So today I will use my blog to thank grandmothers, mothers, etc; who always worked in the fields, on the farms, in the house, in the home, those who were never thanked and are never thanked even today!

A great deal of “awesome female role-models” have no children in our societies which becomes a national crisis if it is too widespread! A great deal of propaganda material is currently being promoted seeking to discourage Western people from having families.

Infertility though is a major catalyst for depression in women who feel less womanly if they can’t give birth to a child. It is regarded as one of the worst news that a woman can get which is why adoption is seen as a Godsend and a blessing to those who can’t have children.

I woke up this morning to a news story about a woman’s group here in the UK promoting having no babies in order to save the planet, the article also mentioned a group of French people who have voluntarily sterilised themselves in order to be eco-friendly.

As I’ve already mentioned on my blog before: there has been numerous mass extinctions on this planet! Climate change is an ongoing factor, with or without man-made pollution. Trash and deforestation can in many ways be seen as the result of one species gaining too much ground, which the planet has a tendency of cleaning up on its own, regardless of what we want as humans.

An eco-apocalypse will probably happen at one point or the other, but there will probably also be some people who survive! My bet is that Scandinavian rangers, African bush-men and mountain people in Afghanistan will be among those who will inherit the earth. Our modern culture of consumption and tech-convenience is a lure that will result in the death of millions of people incapable of surviving without the crutches of a developed Nation-State.

Self-sterilising eco-friendly Westerners are completely missing the point and are yet another example of how our part of the world is mentally and culturally decaying.

Happy International Women’s Day.

IMG_4927

 

 

What Is Moral?

What would you consider to be moral?

That the various tribes in The Middle East dictate the future of their ancestral land or that their political structure should be defined by others?

What do you consider to be morally right?

That Africans should decide what happens to their own resources, population groups and territory or that China Inc. or European State Forces should form the future of the continent?

What is morally right?

To wipe out Natives and steal their land?

What is morally right?

That the various population groups of Europe should dictate their own future or that private tech companies in the U.S.A. should dictate what is appropriate?

What do you think sounds moral?

Is it right to place a territory under occupation? Is it right to exploit natural resources  while posturing about how diverse and virtuous your company is? Is it right to turn a territory into a financial or military colony?

In the land – of the land – with the land; sounds like an empowering position, but it only is for as long as you control the land.

You are born in a territory, shaped by that territory, you live in that territory, and in most cases: you die in that territory. It is an empowering position, because you have all of your ties and your ancestry in one place, and you have no illusions: you know the bad, you know the good, there are no fantasies, no nostalgia. You know that the territory offers you perfections and imperfections alike, but you learn to deal with it or you get involved to change things.

Whether you are a continentalist or a localist you are at home and that is a strength, but it only is for as long as you and your people can shape your fate. If not you are merely sovereign in name only.

Do you think it is moral if natives are not allowed to shape the destiny of their territory?

And if you think that is moral then how would you justify and explain its morality?

 

Globalism vs. Localism & The Rise of Nationalism.

A clear advantage that you’ll have if you’ve been raised internationally is that it gives you the ability to compare different population groups and Nation State Systems.

If there is one thing that is clear to me whenever I look at old entries that I’ve written it is that the challenges faced all over the Western world are largely the same.

When a music publication criticises the current U.S. President in the U.S.A. the Italian counterpart uses the same tone and style towards the current Italian leadership.

When there is a movement to remove statues of historical characters in the U.S.A. you see the same unfolding in the U.K.

When a Norwegian ad is deemed racist in Norway since it features Norwegians and a Norwegian flag you see the same type of activism other places in Europe.

What is interesting though is that the backlash to globalism is localised Nationalism from groups who don’t necessarily seem to realise that we all find ourselves in the same boat…

Nationalism is bad when it is expansionist, when a sense of superiority dictates to such an extent that it justifies waging war and invading everybody else. Take this attitude and couple it with redistribution of wealth and you have a true horror-show next door since said group will have to expand in order to find more loot to “redistribute.“

Nationalism that is non-expansionist though ensures the survival of your Nation, especially if you are non-isolationist and keep your “friends“ close.

France for the French, Italy for the Italians, Norway for the Norwegians and England for the English has become the slogan that a lot of people hold on to these days ignorant of the fact that “the elite“ always intermarried and travelled around Europe as they wished…

Rules do not apply to the super rich. One of their privileges is freedom of movement. This is a privilege extended to those who work for them or those fortunate enough to work for corporations with an international reach.

The major bulk of whatever population group though remains stuck. No movement for them!

If the E.U. did something positive it was to enable liberty of movement to everyone, this was probably done to benefit businesses  but what it meant in practise was that more people had the liberty to pack their bags and simply exit.

This resulted in retired Norwegians moving to Spain where they could get more for their money, lots of Italians moving North to get access to jobs and people from Poland going Westwards all in the name of “pursuit of happiness.“

Of course this started to bother the managers of Nation State systems at a certain point, resulting in legal changes intended towards those who dared to leave.

Benefit recipients in Norway realised that they could have a pool, great food and cheap liquor if they went South!

Norwegians with substantial salaries in Norway realised that they could rent or buy villas if they took their Norwegian oil money with them anywhere else in Europe.

If you are well-off or rich up North there is no end to how you can live down South and as more and more people realised this I imagine that more and more bureaucrats were having nightmares and premature seizures.

All of this liberty resulted in non-elites owning properties all over Europe, moving around the continent on a whim while poor people could actually enjoy themselves and not just struggle.

So far so good? Well, apparently not. Because even though the scenario above might seem like a dream come true to anyone who actually believes in liberty the EU (and the UN) decided for some strange reason to invite everyone else into the European Utopia…

Freedom of movement also meant that if you could get across any border into Europe it would give you access to the entire continent. All of a sudden there were hordes of people doing anything and everything to get to Elysium; the source of all of their aid money, the Utopia in the distance.

Which of course can make one wonder if it was the majority who wanted colonialists out of their territories or whether or not this was the wish of specific elites eager to dominate their own territory?

How do you explain fighting for your independence when the result is mass flight Northwards only some years later?

It goes without saying that Europe cannot hold all of the world since Europe is a relatively small continent compared to other territories and when all of a sudden you end up having security threats all around your territory then how can anyone expect civilians to be quiet?

I think the reason for the current rise in Nationalism in Europe can be blamed on this.

For some weird reason though it is a Nationalism that is localised rather than a continental one, which means ignoring the fact that no European Nation stands alone in the challenges that they are facing and that the E.U. does not equal Europe.

This type of Nationalism rejects everything and anything reverting back to how things used to be when only the elite and the ridiculously wealthy could enjoy certain privileges.

It sounds like a political movement that is simply fed up. It also means that it doesn’t seem capable of actually dealing with the root of the problem which seems to be  international non-State organisations….

What you end up having are atomised Nations convinced that their situation is a uniquely unfortunate one, completely convinced that their situation is particularly bad and than the solution to their problems is: them alone, first, in front of everyone else, rather than a network of Nations facing challenges together.

Because this is the reaction observed all over the Western world I’m not quite sure how things will play out. The challenges are not unique, they are largely the same and if you were raised in an international fashion there is no way that you cannot see that.

What will the future bring? I have no idea but it will probably be bumpy for everyone.