The War on Violence: The Cataclysm of the Post-National Police State [this is a work in progress. the beginning is dysjointed because it was exerpted from another \ More of a stream of consciousness, although the section on why the Police state has potential for a separate essay] Regimes like the 20th century totalitarians put great resources into assessing affinity, then selecting against ability, beliefs and lineage with brutal efficiency.
Another example is Rwanda. The massacre of a large portion of the population was carried out with crude implements. What is less known is that this large scale extermination was cleverly planned: lists of Tutsis of various strengths – political influence, intellect or courage – were compiled and they were hunted down. Thus stripped of the skeletal 'connective tissue', the likely already docile Tutsis were ripe for slaughter.
Targeted assassinations have been used for millions of years. Among the most obvious is challenging the alpha male. (Perhaps the very origin of murder is the capacity to recognize that it has happened out of sight. Look up cain and abel)
Whether they are obliquely sabotaged, expenses imposed, libeled, fired or eliminated, I assume scale and scope of dysgenic sabotage has been expanding. It is broad enough that outright violence need only be an adjunct to the Unrestricted Warfare. The Suspicions of white genocide, recently relegated to cultural fringes, has broken to the surface. Hasty and brazen efforts are being exhibited. It is now sloppy enough to 'redpill' those who are doctrinally civic nationalism. This is acceptable to its proponents since whites already verge on irreversible demographic decline. Generally, they are quicker to recognize what religion has already instilled in them such as aversion to sexual degeneracy or blasphemy. The cultural doctrines such as free expression are also safe to identify as being under siege. [How far it may be done expressly, I don't know. But it is understood, even by those who circumstances require they remains silent on it.]
It is sloppy. The six percent are fucking white women about half the time. [Naturally they are not half the murderers, reported or depicted.] They can be gangsters where necessary, but otherwise sexy, protagonists or benign. I note that the unhyphenated blacks, the African Africans, do not feature nearly so prominently, despite their massive demographic future. Africa's population growth is on a scale which would terrify the American Negro. No need to spook the livestock. After all, the American “Black” is likely as not to have more European ancestry than Black. The number of slaves was never very large.
They are of the Negro, by the Negro, for the Negro because it is not their lineage, but the fact that it is mixed that is core to the representation of their identity.
The contrast between this fetish and the Jew, along with their role in this ruse, has lead some to attribute it exclusively to the agency of organized Jewry. I defer to Kevin MacDonald, but I would call this a hazardous simplification. People have a pathological preoccupation with blame. Although Jews have been instrumental in the delusions that give us “Critical Race Theory” and “civic nationalism”
Outright murder is generally not generally even necessary under doctrines such as the Chinese method of “Unrestricted Warfare” https://www.oodaloop.com/documents/unrestricted.pdf
Similarly, as progressive intellectuals hasten to point out, the number of people killed in white countries by the religious moslem is really very small. Even the broadcasters cannot quite evade its sensational character, but they have adapted to it in a way that was not possible as recently as 2001. In each instance of violence involving Moslems in western countries – either as perpetrators or innocents [the innocence of muslims] – solidarity with the broader muslim community becomes a central narrative. The opponents is violent extremism, so they claim.
The efficacy of the Countering Violent Extremism narrative is beyond dispute.
1. Mockery of Islam as a religion is manifestly related to its proven ability to punish those who publicly deride its precepts, symbol or speak to its janus-faced nature.
2. Inter-faith organizations are prepared for high profile media events. The engagement of multiple demographics is impossible to resist for elected officials. The Jews have an opportunity to denounce Islamic aggression, the neo-Christians can conflate their doctrines of peace with the Muslims who say “Peace, Peace” where their theology of “Peace” is identical to that of militant and fundamentalist's understanding.
3. The educational background and brief of law enforcement is explicitly oriented towards enforcement of law, and not meet to grapple with alternative systems of law. Elected officials largely dictate the laws which are to be enforced. Although Cops are supposedly above political considerations and habitually circumvent statutes, their explicit task is to obey statutes constructed by politicians. 4. The more sophisticated intelligence and counter-intelligence agencies are aware of the religious component, but legally and dialectically prohibited from organizing their efforts as a religious battle. This is why individuals such as Phil Haney and Stephen Coughlin, despite their expertise, were vigorously expelled from the intelligence and security community. In the case of Phil Haney, murdered once slated to re-enter in a leadership role. 5. Possibly the most important role of the violent extremism narrative is its ability to be directed against any domestic insurgency, of any kind. In particular, against white 'radicalism'. This concept is far more expansive and ambiguous than Islam. Conservatives manage to sell themselves a free lunch: A coherent principled stance against Islam, without the political complications of opposing Islam. Since they are largely white, they gain the illusory advantage of sharing a common enemy with the left.
[*I must later examine a very interesting trait of this fifth point: The CVE narrative is only applied to “radical islam” in the sense that it is radical, but in “violent white supremacy” or “violent white nationalism”, the ideology itself is explained to be the target. This is partly because Islam has a legally enshrined status as a religion, but white cohesion is an intellectual's bugaboo. And partly because Muslims are politically situated to sabotage, and ideologically prepared to conduct violent actions against those who stand athwart their theology of dominance.]
The Countering Violent Extremism policy is a disaster. Nobody will be spared the consequences of this political accommodation. It is is a gift to the globalists with their Hegelian methodology. But it is more tragic than conspiratorial. The dispossession of Canadians as Canadians is already at hand. The state retains its monopoly of violence on the premise that its role is to maintain order among the people within its borders.
The corporate and economic interests provide for the interests of human beings alike. Immigration provide for a fungible and mobile body of labor. The social welfare system provides physical safety. The state promises shared identity by common system of law. By necessity, social welfare is not equally accessible (communism), and relies on an economic system which transfers organizational control of resources towards the state. The laws which are enforced constitute the only thing all citizens have in common. Without realizing it, we have build what is fundamentally a police state.
A police state? Impossible! In Canada, a law abiding person will have few, if any, interactions with police. A large majority are very happy for that protection. Safety is what matters. The safety of welfare services, the safety of police protection, the safety of available jobs. Self-defense is largely the provenance of political constituencies and they are obligated to do so non-violently.
A police state is jack-booted thugs hauling people off for political dissent. We imagine oppressed classes treated capriciously. We imagine a state where non-violent dissent is delegitimized and punished. But Canada is equitable. We are equal under the law.
A police state has been established. Safety is an illusion, although masked at the moment. Equality is a farce. And political constituencies do not share common interests, culture, racial proclivities or convictions. The narrative that some are oppressed has begun to seep into both culture and law, and differential treatment is growing – and will continue to grow. Moreover, the principles of international interests are eating away at the legal unity of the country. We have created a circumstance where the law is becoming internationalized, as with energy policy. Political constituencies are internationalized; the inevitable result of the multi-cult, which comes at the expense of a unified white nation. Non-violent dissent on the part of whites is becoming criminalized, while non-white nepotism is tolerated.
The premises that distinguish our imagined police state from the regime continue to fray. There is no way this can be sustained through severe crises. The belief that an inherently unstable system will remain unified is buttressed only from the confidence in the law. As the intellectual class becomes more irrational, laws become more numerous, specialized and intrusive, socialism becomes more uneconomical, more unequal, the inherent disunity of races, ideologies, religions and corporations will reassert their diverging interests, and the binding force will be the police.
*A little known atrocity: I read the british field officers in WWI averaged(!) an IQ equivalent of 120, but had the highest casualty rate given the tactics of the time.