1000+ Dutch Grooming Victims Annually; the Weakness of an Amoral Society 1
Needs, born from human nature and interaction, create morality. Needs determine the myriad of codes, values and customs through which a society seeks to instil an intuitive sense into a person on how to act. Morality steers human nature, within the bounds of human nature. Within the bounds of the human environment. Add a new element to this environment, and the morality will adapt or die.
A safe, privileged society has few great needs. Pleasant personal interaction, caring for the vulnerable, relief from ennui. These are human needs in a safe, prosperous environment. Structuring society to fulfil these needs will not only feel moral via upbringing and general peer pressure, but even more through personal experience. Courteous norms are needed for cohesion, to let society run smoothly. The environment creates the need, thus creates the morality. A safe environment like this relies on the rule of law. It relies on a Leviathan.
To create such an environment, you must persuade men to forfeit their Honour Morality. Before men will hand over the function of honour; of retaliation as a deterrent to a third party, the State, it does help to have a powerful moral code that is counter to honour morality. A religion urging meekness could very well be what convinces the hearts of men to let their “better” nature rule their nature overall. Christianity, then, is the womb for the Leviathan; its meek followers partake in a social contract, a common understanding that kindness to thy neighbour is kindness to thy own. Its morals of pity carry over into the wider society. When the religion is attacked relentlessly and robbed of its confidence, it seeks to placate wider society by preaching the shared morals, and treating its demonised teachings as unwelcome artefacts from a irrelevant past.
The safe environment amplifies the need for politeness, and diminishes the understanding of danger, not to mention existential threats. War and conquest lose their reality, become notions of a distant and forgotten past. “Don’t thread on any toes”, sits firmly in the mind as a norm. When a threat to the survival of our culture, people and civilisation is addressed, the initial reaction is outrage. The moral priority is being polite, rather than survival, because the moral sense has been shaped by the illusion of continued safety.
The Netherlands now has an annual 1000+ girls being groomed and forced into sex-slavery by non-whites. Maybe it’s time to rock the migrant boat?
The state of Western honour should be considered.
Consider the chivalrous spirit. The wild, often bloody spirit of the protector and local ruler, a role integral to human society itself, “the noble”, bowed his head to the gentle Christian spirit. The powerful moral mandate of religion did not extinguish, but tempered, the primal moral of honour. The knight, the cavalryman, the officer, the gentleman. Men of strength, bravery and intellect; men embodying the West. Even among these exemplary figures, the wild lust for conflict would seek an outlet in dueling. A dangerous game for the educated classes, one might wonder how much intellect, talent and innovation have been lost to satisfy the pride of this tempered warrior-class. In the best light, we could conclude that for this reason, duels were forbidden. An end to the waste of young, promising life by royal decree. A more cynical view would be that the Leviathan shall crush all jaws but its own. It is in the nature of power to desire more power still, to gain full control. The tempered warrior was made into a tool for the state and nothing more, their chivalrous spirit regulated to rules of war and ceremony.
Thus the tempered warrior ceased to be.
With honour forgotten as an unwholesome, at best unfashionable, relic of the past, and reduced to plastic Hollywood tropes, the western man has no means to grapple with its reality. Whereas honour morality does not merely allow, but encourage retaliation, the Western man finds himself faced with a moral and legal hurdle. Worse yet, he will find himself with peer-pressure to kowtow:
“Go upright amongst those on their knees…. Your reward will be what people have at hand; whip of laughter, murder, trash”.
The proud white man shames the self-hating white through his mere existence, an unwelcome reminder of their own moral shortcomings. The cowardly will invent any hollow, faux-moralism to bring down the proud. Elevating themselves, soaring upwards on wings of lies and sneers. Who can blame them? Contemporary culture offers pre-packaged moral tropes of this nature, ingeniously twisting the sense of duty into betrayal, showing betrayal to be sacrifice, the frightful rictus a generous smile. Even with the wings of a cockroach one might soar over those who merely stand.
The roaches have their own morality. Do nothing, be nothing; cherish the phantasm of the nanny in your heart: never strike back. Feel it slither and slide to the tip of thine tongue; it is the moral of the herd. How fearful we are of locking horns, of the bull’s charge. And what purpose serves the bull, for our herdsmen are benevolent. With prods and bows to keep order, and no interest but the law, men should forget their horns: this makes for a safe and a just society. These herdsmen with their prods and bows will surely protect the mother and calf. And supreme in the moral mandate: do and be as others, this keeps the peace. This leads the herd to tranquillity. Within the herd, the moral need is acceptance and popularity. Lay down your horns, pull out your claws; take this shortcut towards the kingdom of the meek.
Opposed to this is the active encouragement of retaliation and sadism. A need not to be loved, but to be feared. All the more so with an absolute moral mandate, a religion, based on the schemes and delusions of a perverted psychopath. This was brought in among these meek, these clawless, these people living for pleasure.
“We could feel we had been raised to be soft, to be pretty, to be easy. A human petting-zoo. Do a google search on petting-zoos and Muslims, and you will see an analogy of our past 30 years.”
The banalities with which we try to describe this clash of civilisations really don’t do justice to the absolute evil and cruelty of this venture.
Revenge is a human urge. Honour is a primal morality. With the veils of collective self-denial becoming threadbare, there is yet one substantial dynamic keeping this down. Opening the eyes to the state of affairs is painful. Realising the implications are a scourge to the soul. Because, for men to accept honour morality once more, men must face their dishonour. Our societies raises us to be complicit in our own demise. How many young girls were gang-raped and tortured? How many families destroyed? While we, as non-communities, could only hope the test would pass us by. “If it happens to my own, THEN I will seek revenge”. But it has been done to your own. To the non-white and Muslim rapists, the white kuffar girl is your tribe, yet you don’t protect her. But then again, how could you, if you are not allowed to see her as your own, to not accept her as a precious member of your people?
The question was often raised: why won’t white Western European men protect their women? It is a dishonest question: in addition to the aforementioned loss of honour, the beaten breed of white men was told to never, under any circumstance, acknowledge their racial identity. White men act accordingly. A default state of surrender.
With sadistic pleasure, white men are told white women they are not THEIR women. White men act accordingly. The implications have become consequences.
Simply put, in liberal society, it is the liberty of any adult to hook up with whoever they want. But this is not entirely true, for white men were not free to openly state: if you rejected our race in favour of another, I am free to reject you on that basis. Abhor the reality as liberals may, but the Alt-Right hit the mark in their use of the phrase “cuck”: ultra-liberal culture demands of every white man to emasculate himself. And the noble front of personal choice and love was proven hollow by the cruel mirth in which the same “message of love” would be used to ridicule and deride the white male.
The shameful nature of the topic of sex, making it such an appealing instrument of psychological torture for the cruder class of sadist, made it harder to address openly. Because of this silence, the ultra-liberal ideal became ever more inconsistent in its presentation. The very absolute taboo on race (by whites) it relied on made it blind to its own folly: as in all racial matters, white men came to realise they will be branded sexist, racist and Nazi, no matter what. Whatever spirit of chivalry might have been left in the white, Western men faded away. To put it more bluntly: Western white men are more likely to resent white women than to feel a need to come to their aid. Observing the contempt with which white women treat white men, the meme of “White Sharia” gained traction.
Whereas chivalry was the result of an almost organic moral process, akin to Moral Cultivation, “White Sharia”, taken beyond the jest, would be an attempt to construct a system of Honour Morality our of thin air. The result of promiscuous, “unowned” white women appears to be attracting African and Islamic rapists, even justifying the rape in the rapists views. With amorality ruling our post-nihilist society and Islam being the only visible example of Honour Morality, something similar really might become its outlet.
Our lives have been ignoble; we are a ridiculed people who have excused their cowardice with the cowardice of others, and attacked those who would stand. But there is redemption. Simply accepting the shame, and the pain it brings, is the first step towards becoming better, and allowing the next generation to be better. It’s the difference between making excuses in a pathetic attempt to save face, and to bring about the circumstances where excuses are no longer needed. The hollow moral of suffering in silence can and must be conquered by the moral urge to protect the group as a whole, by the group as a whole.