British Feminists Desperately Trying to Defend Themselves

Post image for British Feminists Desperately Trying to Defend Themselves

by W.F. Price on January 26, 2010

In response to undeniable evidence that British women have taken their newfound feminist privileges to mean that they are free to engage in something akin to mass prostitution, hardcore feminists are trying to find a silver lining in the PR disaster that feminism is fast becoming.

Writing for The Telegraph, Ceri Radford acknowledges that young women are letting it all hang out and, in her words, wearing “underwear to nightclubs.”

However, Radford, ever the optimist, writes that this is good because it proves that women now have a “choice” to have sex with whoever they want. Since when have men generally had a “choice” in this matter?

Finally, she suggests that it is better for a woman to be a shameless hussy than a wife:

I feel far more sympathy and concern for the woman trapped in a miserable marriage by a culture untouched by feminism than I do for the British girl shivering in her skimpy outfit on her way home through the snow because she’s too vain to wear a coat.

Indeed, this is what feminism was about all along: better a public whore than a wife.

{ 46 comments… read them below or add one }

Black&German January 26, 2010 at 13:52

ROFLMO! It’s like satire except that they’re serious.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Firepower January 26, 2010 at 14:08

Be forewarned:

This is the sum of Chaucer, Shakespeare,
Churchill, Millions of war dead, The Royal Navy
and the determination to build an empire.

It ends with the right for your picture to be published online sucking cock on a cobblestone street.
It ends with pasty-faced, flabby, emasculated sissies applauding the latest Muslim wave of immigration into their cities to advance Sharia Law still further.

We will become England.
Wise guy once said, the end times of an empire should be enjoyed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel January 26, 2010 at 14:16

Welmer, the article you linked to contained a link to this: Land of the living dolls.

In that article is an image of Jordan.

There is something odd, disturbing, about this image. It reminds me of Pris, a replicant, a genetically-engineered human designed as a “basic pleasure model” for military personnel in the movie Blade Runner.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Soap January 26, 2010 at 14:20

@ Martel

You’re right, except I’d far rather spend time with Pris, or with a vacuum cleaner, then touch that “Jordan”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Snark January 26, 2010 at 14:23

Although I despise the rag, the Daily Mail published a more realistic take on this just yesterday …

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1245807/Land-living-dolls-The-generation-believe-bodies-passport-success.html

“Ellie is an articulate, well-educated woman who went to private school and a good university, and was brought up to believe she could do anything in any profession – law, medicine, politics.

Instead, she decided she wanted to be an actor, but when jobs were hard to find and she found herself financially desperate, she took a sideways step in her 20s by going to work in a lapdancing club in London.”

LOL!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Snark January 26, 2010 at 14:24

Dammit, Charles Martel linked to it while I was typing …

You beat me to the punch, didn’t you? Why, you rascal!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Feminist Wisdom January 26, 2010 at 14:30

Actually, this is all Men’s fault…because men tell women what to wear to clubs…and patriarchy…and women have to whore themselves because men are equipped with penises and we’re not…and…urp. Women need more social programs! Raise taxes!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
E. Steven Berkimer January 26, 2010 at 14:52

I feel far more sympathy and concern for the woman trapped in a miserable marriage by a culture untouched by feminism than I do for the British girl shivering in her skimpy outfit on her way home through the snow because she’s too vain to wear a coat.

How do they not get the point that it is the latter, that makes most men not give a damn about finding the former. Where in gods name will you find someone who wants to be the first? (Having said that, I found mine a while back. Thank god she wasn’t/isn’t an Anglo woman – she’s better than that).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
adan flores January 26, 2010 at 15:05

Odds fish, guv! Darkest Chavistan gets darker by the nanosecond, doesn’t it?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Lethargic January 26, 2010 at 15:06

Interesting how many women who have had the priveleges of education choose this route.

It is women who also contribute to the whole sexual imagery that objectifies women, that says women are submissive and accommodating creatures or ‘up for it’.

It is a sizable proportion of WOMEN WHO OBJECTIFY WOMEN therefore yet men get the most of the blame. And for the women who take that ‘objectified’ route, they are seen as liberated by their feminist sisters?

It’s all too contradictory. I could never believe a feminist who preaches ‘liberation’ for these women yet does not see a contradictory link, never.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Feminist Wisdom January 26, 2010 at 15:12

By the way, I’m ashamed to say that chick in the photo looks a lot like my last long-term girlfriend (four years ago.)
In my defense, she would at least have had the decency to squat in an alley before taking a piss.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman January 26, 2010 at 15:17

Interesting how many women who have had the priveleges of education choose this route.

Education? Or brainwashing masqueraded as education?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
The Fifth Horseman January 26, 2010 at 15:21

In my Internet battles on the topic of Misandry, I consistenly see that right after the doctrinaire feminists, the most misandric zeal comes from manginas/whiteknighters/socialcons. Much more than from average women. Average women just side with whoever is winning (again, hypergamy).

So the fervor of misandric zeal is :

Radical feminist > Mangina/whiteknight > Average Woman

I see this pattern consistently.

This is important to keep in mind. If WE start winning someday, average women will switch sides, which will cause them to use shaming language against mangina/whiteknights.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman January 26, 2010 at 15:22

As a man, I would rather have Sharia Law than misandry, given those two choices.

Western Protestant Right-wing society > Islam > Feminazi hell.

Since the first is out, the next best option is the second.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Black&German January 26, 2010 at 15:36

The women in that link look like absolute monsters. How white guys can hit that sort of plastic sex-toy without retching is beyond me. It doesn’t surprise me that you guys are always fantasizing about the advent of real plastic sex toys. It’s not much of stretch after seeing the kind of women admired nowadays. The cost of their makeup masks alone could feed a third world country.

Here are some true, naturally beautiful white women:
Julia Ormond
Ashley Judd
Audrey Tautou
Scarlett Johansson

If you woke up next to one of them, you wouldn’t have to scream in fright.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Nutz January 26, 2010 at 16:29

@ Lethargic

Interesting how many women who have had the priveleges of education choose this route.

It is women who also contribute to the whole sexual imagery that objectifies women, that says women are submissive and accommodating creatures or ‘up for it’.

It is a sizable proportion of WOMEN WHO OBJECTIFY WOMEN therefore yet men get the most of the blame. And for the women who take that ‘objectified’ route, they are seen as liberated by their feminist sisters?

It’s all too contradictory. I could never believe a feminist who preaches ‘liberation’ for these women yet does not see a contradictory link, never.

This pretty much says it all.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Snark January 26, 2010 at 16:34

Lethargic,

It is women who also contribute to the whole sexual imagery that objectifies women, that says women are submissive and accommodating creatures or ‘up for it’.

It is a sizable proportion of WOMEN WHO OBJECTIFY WOMEN therefore yet men get the most of the blame. And for the women who take that ‘objectified’ route, they are seen as liberated by their feminist sisters?

It’s all too contradictory. I could never believe a feminist who preaches ‘liberation’ for these women yet does not see a contradictory link, never.

It makes sense, because women are quite happily objectified by those whom they deem ‘alpha’.

It is when lesser, ‘beta’ males dare to view them in a sexual manner, that they feel ‘violated’ in some way.

They might not conceptualise it as such – the alpha/beta dichotomy is a construction of Game theory, which describes the real world.

But feminism freed women to whore it up as they please for the alphas – the problem, for them, is all those beta males who subsequently see them in a sexual way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Gunslingergregi January 26, 2010 at 16:50

There probably so wild and free because they can’t believe their men went bitch either and didn’t protect them when they needed it. All those men who died in the wars and none to die for their rights. Of course woman will be affected by a bunch of men running around with dicks that should have honorary vaginas.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Lethargic January 26, 2010 at 17:35

@Nutz

True say that vid. Shouting liberation and victimisation at the same time.

Chimes with @ Snark

It makes sense, because women are quite happily objectified by those whom they deem ‘alpha’.

It is when lesser, ‘beta’ males dare to view them in a sexual manner, that they feel ‘violated’ in some way.

Spot on. The usual ‘cherry picking’ women have used from feminism’s ‘achievements’.

I’ve also heard on radio shows escorts and feminists arguing (so there are feminists who disagree but are powerless, extremely). The feminists get whoop-assed by their escort sisters (there’s just no budging an escort’s liberation). So therefore the only option is for the feminists to take the easy route which is ‘men are to blame’ and have ‘indoctrinated the weaker sex’. No way, these escort women are defiantly independent. It is their own choice.

Women are complicit in their own portrayal, period, and I get tired of men getting more than enough of the blame. Never once have I heard Harriet Harmen (UK fem-politician) argue that women need to consider their own life-choices first, with a view to the wider sexual imagery and its ‘objectifying’ effects.

Harriet Harman also goes on about prostitution and reducing the ‘demand’. Always aimed at the ‘pack of wolves’ (us).

Huh? Doesn’t a DEMAND have to be CREATED? And who’s just as complicit nowadays in the creating, enticing? Why women of course. These educated women are more than adept at it.

This topic is just so contradictory I spin round in circles. On the other side I see prostitution as an element of society that has its use, seeing as men are put through assault-courses nowadays just to even get a piece of gina.

But at the same time Feminists have to stop blaming men for everything when their sistas are more than capable of making their own choices.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
aussie girl in australia January 26, 2010 at 17:40

The public whore has more chance of being raped, physically assulted, doing major self-inflicted damage to her health (STIs, alcohol and drug problems etc) and likely to end up being supported by the tax payer in one way or another. How exactly is this preferable to being a wife?
For the middle/upper class woman there will be Daddy’s dollars to send her to doctors/psycologists and deal with these problems. What about the girls who are less well off? The taxpayer will end up either paying for their child or their abortion.
Feminism is a luxury for the middle classes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Phenomenal One January 26, 2010 at 18:24

The problem is that some woman (and some people in general) just can’t understand that there are consequence for their actions & that every action has a reaction.

woman’s action – become sluts
man’s reaction – pump & dump woman

Woman end up with alot of man wanting to have sex with em but few wanting to have a relationship.

You don’t like the consequences of you actions, than change your actions.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rebel January 26, 2010 at 20:17

“Wise guy once said, the end times of an empire should be enjoyed.”

Wise guy was absolutely right.

We, as a society have reached the age of decay. Nothing now stands in the way of our collapse as a civilization.
It’s not only feminism: it is also the huge debt we have accumulated and will never pay, it is a successive sequence of pandemics looming out there, it is the abbyss that now exists between those who should be the best allies: men and women. And so much more..

The West is committing suicide: don’t we all know by now?

So what are we to do?

CARPE DIEM!

Enjoy the moment. We should relly quit worrying about something over which we have no control. So, might as well let go. Rather, let us turn to another future: when Rome collapsed, it was followed by another civilization that surpassed everything that had been achieved.

After the Empire, comes decay, invasion and then the wheel starts turning again. Stronger than before.
Every time in History that a civilization fell, it was replaced by something better.

Let’s look forward to the demise of this old skin and for a yet newer world.

The king is dead! Long live the king!

How can we rebuild a civilization? That’s the question we should all be asking ourselves.

This time, instead of raising a new civ. for women, let us build one for ourselves and let’s just hope that women will join in.
If they won’t, then we’ll have to grow our own…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rebel January 26, 2010 at 20:19

Ooops!.. relly was supposed to be really. Sorry, it escaped my scrutiny.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Fifth Horseman January 26, 2010 at 20:39

How exactly is this preferable to being a wife?

It isn’t. That is why you are smarter than 99% of women.

The big lie (among many) that feminism sold women is that there were enough Alphas to go around. Feminism also replaced real education with brainwashing, which made many women incapable of grasping concepts like supply and demand, and cause and effect.

We see articles every day about women whining about there not being ‘any good men’. This is about as logical as a man whining about not being able to get a supermodel. Men have a realistic grasp of supply and demand, while these women do not.

This time, instead of raising a new civ. for women, let us build one for ourselves and let’s just hope that women will join in.

This is already happening. It is called ‘Asia’.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Get Real January 26, 2010 at 22:05

When an unattractive, overweight “woman” like the skank in the picture above behaves in this way, you just know how reeeaaaally f-cked up Britain (and America) truly is.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Steezer January 26, 2010 at 23:00

@Get Real: That woman isn’t overweight, really.
@correction: And Jews aren’t white? PS: She’s half Danish, hence the name…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
msexceptiontotherule January 26, 2010 at 23:11

I do think that the majority of women aren’t thinking about the future and the later outcome that will result from todays actions. However, a large number of men can be accused of the same thing – though there doesn’t seem to be as much demand for male strippers and escorts to the extent that places/services have crossed into the mainstream marketplace with their hiring as they have in the clubs/services employing women (note: my knowledge in this subject is limited to only the United States and based on assumptions that were made from limited research on the subject).

I say that men should have an equal opportunity to be treated like objects, if they so choose. Women shouldn’t continue their monopoly over the (according to third-party reports) lucrative escort/lap dance/sex industry, men should be a means of profit for someone else to collect on too.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Get Real January 26, 2010 at 23:47

@correction: And Jews aren’t white? PS: She’s half Danish, hence the name…

Who is the ‘she’ you are referring to, Steezer?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Niko January 26, 2010 at 23:49

Command economies always screw up supply and demand, reduce a little here overproduce there and voila you get a shit storm. Now the state has produced too many hos.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Paul January 27, 2010 at 01:30

I live in the UK. I don’t live in the most sophisticated part and I am certainly a long way from London. It is easily possible for me to see women dressed like the one in the picture, though I have never seen one with her knickers round here ankles. In fact the town is filled with such girls every weekend evening. But I would not jump to the conclusion that this is indicative of easy sex. If you look closely usually you will see that there are rather strong social dynamics at work. The girls are virtually always in groups with other girls. The boys may be present but they are in their own separate group. So the interaction between the boys and the girls is rather restricted. The closer you get to observing this the greater the distance between the groups can be seen to be. For sure the girls are showing off but I think it is only superficial.

I would not take what is written in a newspaper as being the embodiment of insight and accuracy. They always sensationalize and focus on extremes. For example I was a teenager in the sixties and never even saw a drug let alone used one. This was at a time when the Telegraph would have me characterizes as a drug ingesting junky.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Kulak January 27, 2010 at 01:43

Paul,

Appreciate your thoughts.

What are your feelings on the “Chav” (and their ladies) phenomenon in your country in general?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rageagainstfeminism January 27, 2010 at 06:57

The Fifth Horseman January 26, 2010 at 15:21
In my Internet battles on the topic of Misandry, I consistenly see that right after the doctrinaire feminists, the most misandric zeal comes from manginas/whiteknighters/socialcons. Much more than from average women. Average women just side with whoever is winning (again, hypergamy).

So the fervor of misandric zeal is :

Radical feminist > Mangina/whiteknight > Average Woman

I see this pattern consistently.

This is important to keep in mind. If WE start winning someday, average women will switch sides, which will cause them to use shaming language against mangina/whiteknights.
————————————————————————–

It seems as if this is beginning to take place.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Trouble January 27, 2010 at 07:25

If it weren’t for these women I’d have to get married to get laid.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Novaseeker January 27, 2010 at 07:28

I say that men should have an equal opportunity to be treated like objects, if they so choose. Women shouldn’t continue their monopoly over the (according to third-party reports) lucrative escort/lap dance/sex industry, men should be a means of profit for someone else to collect on too.

It already is — Chippendales exists and has existed for some time. The reality, though, is that the market for this is small. Why is that? Because women have access to sex, generally speaking, on demand. In order for sex-related industries to have a market develop for them, there has to be a scarcity (real or perceived) of sex in order for the demand to be there. Why would women pay a male hooker if she can get sex for free, if she wants it, at a bar, or on Craigslist, or what have you? There is very little demand for this both because women generally do not pursue NSA sex as much as men do, and because when they do they really don’t have to pay for it to get it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Kathy January 27, 2010 at 07:53

“It already is — Chippendales exists and has existed for some time. The reality, though, is that the market for this is small. Why is that?”

Because it is just not that appealing to women. Women having access to sex has nothing to do with it.
There have been female strippers and hookers for hundreds of years… Oh sure ,there are a few Gigolo’s around. But not many.

On the few hen’s nights out that I have been to, (not my cup of tea) where there have been male strippers, it is just one big joke. The majority of women do not get turned on at all. Just a bunch of drunken silly women.

Men on the other hand are often turned on by female strippers and their antics.

Seeing a man strip naked in public doesn’t usually send women into paroxysms of lust.. ;)
It’s like Fedrz said, men are more visual.. Women are more likely to get turned on by reading an erotic novel.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker January 27, 2010 at 07:59

Very true, Kathy. I suspect that the underlying reason is that women are turned on more specifically — that is, by a man they desire desiring them. A male stripper doesn’t play into this dynamic at all, whereas the vicarious association with a female protagonist of a romance novel can play into that dynamic rather well. Men, by contrast, are turned on by the desirability of the object of their desire, whether that object desires them or not. Big difference in how desire works between men and women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
George Rolph January 27, 2010 at 08:06

It was interesting to read all these comments but as a UK resident I would caution you guys from taking too much to heart from what you read in the papers. Most of the journalists now employed by them have been brainwashed into stupidity anyway. Remember, we are now into the second generation to be fed feminist bull.

The fight here is about the family right now and reestablishing cultural and spiritual morality as an antidote to the moral relativism of the left.

A lot of people hate the Daily Mail in this country and this blinds them to those at that paper who get it right. As an example I would like to introduce two articles to digest.

1. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1245758/MELANIE-PHILLIPS-Camerons-right-Broken-Britain-tax-breaks-reverse-descent-savagery.html#ixzz0daIPl6Cq

2. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1245535/PETER-HITCHENS-What-horrors-Edlington-visited-cosy-Notting-Hill.html#ixzz0dUX3zLbm

It is my contention that feminism depends on Communist ideas such as those articulated by the Frankfurt School and Critical Theory (Search YouTube and Google Video for both). Therefore, to defeat it, we must advocate for what those two ideas have been destroying. We cannot do that unless we educate ourselves totally about where our enemy (feminism) is coming from, I am sure everyone will agree. As Sun Tzu said in ‘The Art Of War.’ “Know your enemy.” Our enemy is cultural and political Marxism.

Feminists, Just like Engels, Marx and Lenin etc., truly believe that they must destroy the family, marriage and religion in order to undermine the very foundations of western civilisation. They are doing a good job of it too because the opposition has not (yet) formulated a strategy for fighting back and is quietly losing the propaganda war. To have any chance of winning that part of the war at all, the right wing MUST be brought on board. That means the political right and the religious right. I am happy to see that this is starting to happen but I think we have to push the message harder still.

Messages like this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6932943/Father-tortured-by-former-girlfriend-brother-and-her-ex.html

And this:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1225637/How-Kremlin-hijacked-Labour-Diary-Kremlin-insider-reveals-hold-Soviets-Labour-politicians.html

And this:

http://www.archive.org/details/FalseDomesticViolenceFiguresExposed

And finally, this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/6763718/Marriage-needs-to-be-nurtured-not-neutered.html?state=target#postacomment&postingId=6777486

These stories and one audio file contain some of the ammunition we need to be feeding to the right wing and we need to start asking very pointed questions concerning them. Questions that end with the question, “What are YOU doing to win the cultural war that threatens to destroy our way of life and IS destroying our children?”

The Men’s Movement must not become whining puppies but remain dogs of war, let slip to wreak havoc on feminists and feminism but undermining THEIR foundations and exposing them for the lies they are. A simple computer, the Internet, some research and some good targeted contacts, are what we need to raise awareness on the right. If we fail, THIS is what we will get much more of:

http://www.womynkind.org/scum.htm

I don’t want my grandchildren growing up believing this. I don’t want to see our daughters poisoned any more with thinking like these poor cretins have had to swallow. I don’t want our sons to be brainwashed into thinking they are worthless, by people who want to see all their grandfathers died to give them being pulled down around them.

To win we need allies and at the moment, they can only come from the right wing political and religious establishment. We need to pick the right people and start fighting back with everything we have.

Here is an example of someone in the Church who has woken up and is trying to wake others up.

http://www.brannonhowse.com/interviews.php/id-4350

Let’s help!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
Globalman January 27, 2010 at 09:08

For those of you not living in the UK it really is hard to believe what a bunch of horrible women they have become. Women are regularly vomiting and pissing in the streets in drunken stupor now. It is NOT an overstatement.

Often the argument is that ‘men have always been free to urinate in public’. Really? Then the Rolling Stones being fined for going around the BACK of a petrol station to pee out of sight after being refused use of the toilet in the 60s is proof of how men have always been allowed to urinate in public? Even in the 60s. Most men have been ‘caught short’ at some point of other. Pretty much ALL of us have then decided to urinate where we won’t be offending any women. Sure, a few yobs don’t. How many? A very, very small percentage.

I was at my local pub recently, quiet little place. And there was a wake for one of the local guys. His sister, in her 50s, went completely ape shit insane and was screaming, hitting, scratching, kicking people. She was screaming obscenities. Dressed in singlet and shorts and thongs(flip flops on her feet.). The MEN removed all the children from the scene she was making. The other women tried to calm her down but were completely useless, just like women are at everything else. She hit and scratched them like a crazed animal.

The owner tried to calm her down while not touching her and she attacked him in her drunken stupor. He merely stepped aside. So this woman flailed on for about 15 minutes before running out of steam and just sitting down and sobbing all worn out. Her problem was that “You left me all alone by dying you bastard” referring to her dead brother. The entire episode was a giant act of self pity that her brother had the termerity to die and leave her alone. If I had to put up with that bitch I’d want to die too. Quite a few women were injured by her tirade. The men would not touch her for fear of a false allegation even though there were AT LEAST 50 witnesses to what went on, perhaps even more as it happened in a quite large beer garden.

And western women wonder why I think they are crap and don’t want to be around them socially? Give me a break. It’s hard to believe they are that stupid but given the evidence at hand I have to believe it.

In pubs I have been in the men simply refuse to talk to the women. The shoo them away like flies. The women have to throw themselves at the much older guys who are really desperate for some sex. This is how unattractive’ the UK woman has become. The eastern women in the UK attract so many men that I don’t bother even trying to get laid in the UK. Not worth the trouble.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Globalman January 27, 2010 at 09:19

George Rolph January 27, 2010 at 08:06
“Therefore, to defeat it, we must advocate for what those two ideas have been destroying. We cannot do that unless we educate ourselves totally about where our enemy (feminism) is coming from, I am sure everyone will agree. As Sun Tzu said in ‘The Art Of War.’ “Know your enemy.” Our enemy is cultural and political Marxism”
George,
you are well informed and articulate. If you do not know him I suggest you drop by John Harris’ site http://www.tpuc.org. Our enemy is NOT Marxism. That is a political ideaology. Our real enemy are the men who tell men like Gordon Brown what to do. Your politicians are puppets of the banksters.

I have just posted here: http://www.the-spearhead.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=225

My set of scrubbed docs which show any man in the UK how to rescind his consent to be governed and to refuse the jurisdictio0n of your corrupt legal system. It is by leaving this corrupt system in large numbers that it will be stopped. All politicians, judges, lawyers and many of the banksters are corrupt and are deliberately getting the results they are getting. We are now running our first few cases to try such corrupt judges and magistrates and jail them. If you want to make a difference in the UK I’d suggest the man to back and to join in with is John Harris and his colleages.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Snark January 27, 2010 at 14:44

For those of you not living in the UK it really is hard to believe what a bunch of horrible women they have become. Women are regularly vomiting and pissing in the streets in drunken stupor now. It is NOT an overstatement.

I can confirm that, indeed, this is not an overstatement.

You see it in every town centre three or four nights a week.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
sex toys January 27, 2010 at 15:22

Globalman,

Appreciate your thoughts. Especially this part: As Sun Tzu said in ‘The Art Of War.’ “Know your enemy.” Our enemy is cultural and political Marxism”.

Very interesting indeed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
P Ray January 29, 2010 at 05:47

It’s spreading down Australasia as well, I can confirm that safely.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
George Rolph May 30, 2011 at 08:25

Globalman

I have attended a meeting by John Harris in London and listened closely to his video talks on the Internet and I think he is a misguided idiot. He spouts half truths as though they are carefully researched real truths and he does it a lot. I am afraid that Mr Harris is way out in left field and I have no desire to go there with him.

Sorry and no offence to you. I would only suggest that you listen to him with a much more critical mind than you have been and CAREFULLY look into what he is saying. Much of it is total bunkum and, in my view, a distraction.

Take a look here and think carefully about what you are hearing: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236#

You may be interested in this article I wrote also but as I say, don’t trust it because I sat it, go and check it out yourself.

The Legacy Of The Frankfurt School

Living in the UK today is like living in a well appointed comfortable cave that is slowly falling in on itself. The debris is slowly blocking the entrance and the light coming in is growing ever more dim.

The evidence that cultural Marxism is yet again failing to produce what its authors in the Frankfurt School desired (the imposition of Marxism) is obvious if one looks into the social statistics that have become available since the end of the second world war and the growing influence of the Frankfurt School on Western society. The desire to impose Marxism upon Western Capitalist countries by the left has never diminished, but the vehicle of the dialectic proposed by Adorno, Horkheimer, Fromm and others within the Frankfurt School has led rather to a decent into the beginnings of barbarism. This does not sit comfortably with the rigid conformity most Marxists are comfortable with. Neither, it should be said, does it ring bells of delight with the supporters of democracy. If the result of Frankfurt School ideas is antithetical to both left and right wings of the political spectrum, where, politically speaking, does the hope for the future lie?

Speaking from the context of the UK there is little room for optimism as neither right nor left wing political leaders have, so far, shown any willingness to tackle the growing social disorder and disillusionment among the people as their once solid values and traditions are replaced with a fluid immorality, based upon the moral relativism inspired by political correctness and an increasingly amorphous spirituality. In fact, leaders of both left and right have been judged by a growing number of the people as corrupt, complacent, lacking vision and incompetent. This is a very serious matter because it means trust in the political process — and even the system of law — is breaking down. The end result of which will inevitably bring social chaos. Social chaos will not necessarily result in the people embracing Socialism as a cure. It may even herald a return of Fascism or possibly some tribal based variant of it. Social chaos is, by its very nature, unstable and unpredictable.

My view of this is mirrored by Murry Bookchin, the late American socialist author and philosopher writing in 1996. He said “In a very real sense, the past fifteen or more years have been remarkably ahistorical, albeit highly eventful, insofar as they have not been marked by any lasting advance toward a rational society. Indeed, if anything, they would seem to [be] tilting toward a regression, ideologically and structurally, to barbarism, despite spectacular advances in technology and science, whose outcome we cannot foresee. There cannot be a dialectic, however, that deals “dialectically” with the irrational, with regression into barbarism–that is to say, a strictly Negative Dialectic. Both Adorno’s book of that name and Horkheimer and Adorno’s The Dialectic of Enlightenment, which traced the “dialectical” descent of reason (in Hegel’s sense) into instrumentalism, were little more than mixed farragoes of convoluted neo-Nietzschean verbiage, often brilliant, often colorful, often excitingly informative, but often confused, rather dehumanizing and, to speak bluntly, irrational. A “dialectic” that lacks any spirit of transcendence (Aufhebung) and denies the “negation of the negation” is spurious at its very core. One of the earliest attempts to “dialectically” deal with social regression was the little-known “retrogression thesis,” undertaken by Josef Weber, the German Trotskyist theorist who was the exile[d] leader of the Internationale Kommunisten Deutschlands (IKD). Weber authored the IKD’s program “Capitalist Barbarism and Socialism,” which was published in November 1944 in Max Schachtman’s New International during the bitterest days of the Second World War and posed the question that many thinking revolutionaries of that distant era faced: What forms would capitalism take if the proletariat failed to make a socialist revolution after the Second World War? As the title of the IKD document suggests, not all Marxists, perhaps fewer than we may think, regarded socialism as “inevitable” or thought that there would necessarily be a socialist “end to history” after the war. Indeed, many who I knew as a dissident Trotskyist fifty years ago were convinced that barbarism was as serious a danger for the future as socialism was its greatest hope. The prospect of barbarism that we face today may differ in form from what revolutionary Marxists faced two generations ago, but it does not differ in kind. The future of Civilization is still very much in the balance, and the very memory of alternative emancipatory visions to capitalism are becoming dimmer with each generation.” [1]

While I do not agree with the last sentence from that quotation, because I feel that the dangers of socialism are still very real, I think the overall thrust of his comments are indeed accurate. However, I would also say that it is not capitalism alone that is creating the seeds of barbarism it is being engendered by the very workings of political correctness as authored by the Marxist Frankfurt School. The social statistics are pointing directly at social chaos looming over the horizon. Our country is slowly becoming unglued on every level. Psychologically, we are in a mess and suicide statistics are rising as are many mental illnesses. The stress levels we all live with are increasing. Casual violence at street level, and despite what the police say in their suspicious statistics, is rising. Crime is relentlessly moving upwards in the statistics and has been for a very long time. Drug taking is at unprecedented levels. Alcohol abuse and its incumbent effects are also rising. Marriages and families are splitting apart at alarmingly high levels and the effects on our children are huge and largely negative. On and on the depressing statistics go and all the politicians seem to want to do about it is pretend that under their watch, these figures are coming down. The current political belief is that giving the police more and more draconian powers will somehow enable them to get on top of crime, is not only dangerous but also incredibly short sighted. It fails utterly to address the causes of the crime. This failure to come to grips with the causes of this disintegration means the fracturing continues and faith in the political and legal institutions grows ever weaker among the increasingly hostile people.

This failure is also, in part at least, based upon the current obsession politicians have with business, almost to the exclusion of all else. Business is good until business becomes the ‘god’ of the political classes. Then, like all powerful forces, it can become a force for evil instead of good. Today it is becoming increasingly obvious that business greed is out of control and the political classes seem to be revelling in that fact. Anxious to grasp at any opportunity to make ever more huge fortunes for themselves, while the people become the exploited providers of that wealth. Gone is the old business ethic of ‘the customer is always right,’ to be replaced with a new, unspoken idea that seems to proclaim that the customer as a mere fool to be taken advantage of. What is more, the very platform of business itself is becoming ever more out of reach of the average person. Vastly complex rules and regulations are making it harder and harder for people to even start a business. Punitive taxes and costs are adding to the problem. Anyone starting a new business today is forced to jump through a vast variety of ever more complex legal hoops, each costing an arm and a leg to put in place. Permissions, licences, laws governing every aspect ofminutia relating to materials and their storage; health and safety legislation; employment legislation and on and on. As the bar over which one must jump to become a fledgling entrepreneur gets ever higher, fewer and fewer people are able to afford the massive loans necessary to even start a business. Most young people cannot even afford a house to use as collateral for any loan. The net effect of this will be to increasingly place the business of doing business into the hands of fewer and fewer corporations. These corporations will then have the muscle to dictate all prices and so competition will be killed off. Business innovation itself will begin to stagnate. Neo-Feudalism, already a reality for too many, will become the dominant economic position until a powerful enough social explosion pulls it all down.

There can be no doubt that the march of Marxist Frankfurt School ideas since the late fifties in real social terms has been remarkable. Not least in the way that feminism has become one of the dominant political ideologies of the twenty and twenty first centuries, despite the massive damage it is doing to our people at street level and despite the fact that most of its major claims are false. What is even more remarkable, is the way in which the right wing of the British political spectrum have capitulated to the demands of this ideological nightmare, and by doing so, have been instrumental in creating the very real danger of a cacotopian society based upon theseallochthonous-like ideas, imported from the old Soviet Union via America and which are foreign to our own country’s historical and ancient social ideals. Add into this already toxic mix the staggeringly corrupt practises of the banking world which again, the political classes have utterly failed to come to terms with and deal with effectively and a recipe for future social collapse is clear even to the most blind social observers. I have not even mentioned the spectre of the European Union that a majority of people do not want to be a part of but who, nevertheless, are being systematically ignored for political and business reasons.

This atmosphere of an increasingly oppressive Zeitgeist is being felt all over the Western capitalist world and a sense of pessimism is taking hold of almost every class of people apart from the very wealthy who are, to some extent, immune from the day to day effects of the policies and practises they like to impose or ignore. Teachers, doctors, the clergy, political leaders, journalists, social workers, the police, local councillors, intellectuals and academics and every other once authoritative voice, are being regarded by ordinary people with dangerous levels of contempt. A very real and palpable rage is growing and can be heard in the murmured conversations of alcohol loosened tongues in bars and pubs throughout the land. In chat rooms on the Internet and in other forums, as well as, increasingly, among the e-mail traffic one reads every day, barely suppressed fury is the most common theme, alongside confusion. Some people are openly advocating a massive social rebellion. Others are trying to find peaceful ways to opt out of our society. [2] Men in particular, around the world, are growing increasingly angry at the discrimination they are facing in this feminised society and their arguments are many and justified. Gang culture among the young is a growing problem as they seek to find among each other the family connection they cannot find in their single parent homes. Sexual disease is the biggest killer of females on the planet yet our increasingly sex obsessed society continues to pound us with the polymorphous perversity ideas of the Frankfurt School ideology in unchecked waves. It is as if political cowardice has itself become a virtue in the face of these problems because a return to traditional values and morality is an anathema to the weak men and women now running our country.

It may be that a new politics will grow from the ruins of the old that will be beneficial to society. However, that would take the dissolution of the dominant two party system in this country that has, for too long, been interested only in securing power for its own ends and uses and not for any real and measurable social benefit. It would take the appearance of someone of Churchillian political stature and courage to stand up and take hold of the mess we are now in and to put forward bold, courageous and morally acceptable plans to get this country back on a socially even keel. To do that, he or she would have to tower above the weak lawyer/accountant types that run things today. All the people can do is hope it happens sooner rather than later and not out of the ashes of a wrecked country lost in a long civil war or oppressive police state.

George Rolph
London May 2011

*1 http://www.theyliewedie.org/ressources/biblio/en/Bookchin_Murray_-_Reader.html

*2 look for example at the Freeman Movement. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzHsIRpl8IE and the British Constitution Group. http://www.thebcgroup.org.uk/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
George Rolph May 30, 2011 at 08:27

CORRECTION: “You may be interested in this article I wrote also but as I say, dont trust it because I sat it, go and check it out yourself.”

SHOULD READ: You may be interested in this article I wrote also but as I say, dont trust it because I SAID it, go and check it out yourself.

Ooops.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Peachy June 18, 2013 at 02:42

‘Feminists, Just like Engels, Marx and Lenin etc., truly believe that they must destroy the family, marriage and religion in order to undermine the very foundations of western civilisation. ‘

I am a very happily married feminist who adores her four sons, likes men and simply wants both genders to have equality of opportunity.

Please don’t use hyperbole to deny my existence, and that of very many like me.

Also remember that the same freedom of speech that allows this to be published gives the radfems their right to a voice, even if it does not represent my own or your own.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Melody June 23, 2013 at 06:20

Wow, I found the link to this on a page that brought George Rolph’s motives for the hunger strike into question. I just want to start by saying that I am a woman, but I am NOT a feminist. However, all I see here are views of people that think we should be back in the days where women should be chained to the kitchen sink, not allowed to think for themselves, and beaten by men and be grateful for it. I am a woman who has been witness to domestic abuse in many ways. My mother was beaten by my dad who was an alcoholic, my father then remarried and used to beat his new wife (don’t get me wrong, she gave as good as she got, and it was partly her own doing) I was then subject to domestic abuse from my ex partner, and also raped when I was pregnant with my 2nd child by my ex’s cousin. Despite all of this, I never denied my ex-partner access to our children, he chose not to see them. I spent a great deal of time on my own, concentrating on running our home, providing for our children, and doing my best to make sure that they have the best life I can provide for them. He see’s the children now, but he doesn’t contribute to them. I am now in a relationship, one I have been in for 2 years. We do not live together and my new partner does not provide for me. Who know’s what the future may bring, we may end up living together, but I have very strong beliefs about making sure that a relationship will work. I do not go sleeping around, either when in a relationship or not. I firmly believe that a relationship takes a lot of work for it to be successful, however that does not mean that I believe that ANY woman should be stuck in a relationship where they are treated any less than an equal. The same goes for a man in a relationship. I know that abuse happens to men. Anyone who doesn’t think so would be a fool to think that, but these feminist AND “fathers rights groups” are just turning each other even further against each other by the constant bitching. I’ve drifted very much off topic here, but my point is, that just because some silly tramp goes off and sleeps around thinking that she can use any bloke in her sites, and attempt control through sex, it doesn’t mean that all women demean themselves that way, but at the same time, it doesn’t mean that men don’t do the same either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: