I’m relocating and altering this entry, originally posted a week ago, because, on second thought, whites have a better chance to survive under Sharia than under the current Judeo-liberal system imposed on the West.
Annoyed at the infamous TV series Toledo I tried to find some consolation in the epic film El Cid, “a romanticized story of the life of the Christian Castilian knight Don Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar, called ‘El Cid’, who in the 11th century fought the North African Almoravides and ultimately contributed to the unification of Spain.” But even that movie released in 1961 starts with a politically-correct scene. El Cid, interpreted by Charlton Heston, spares the live of a Moorish king in the hope that the Moor will behave in the future after an anti-Christian raid (and in fact he behaves like a gentleman in the rest of the film). Then in the royal palace El Cid has a private conversation with the woman he loved, acted by Sophia Loren, and makes a speech about his pacifist intentions when he is accused of treason for having spared the life of the Muslim king.
Well, well… What about forgetting old and new movies altogether and focus instead in the Spanish literature of the Middle Ages? What will we find there? Big surprise: the historical “Cid” found some work fighting for the Muslim rulers of Taifa of Zaragoza! This happened after his falling out of favor of Alfonso VI, king of León and Castile, who in 1081 ordered Rodrigo Díaz’s exile.
But what else can the literature of the age say about the ethno-nationalist mores, values, moral grammar and zeitgeist of medieval Spain? Let’s take a look…
This is a photograph of Soledad Anaya Solórzano (1895-1978), who graduated in Spanish letters at Guadalajara in Mexico. From 1920 to 1923 she served as Director of Primary and Higher Education in the Mexican government. She also taught Spanish literature, a field that she mostly loved, and was the Principal of the Secundaria Héroes de la Libertad until her death (the Middle School in Mexico City where I studied). Of course, when Miss Anaya taught me she was in her late seventies and looked a little older than in the photo, but she still was in command of her intellectual capacities. Anaya never married and was the single author of Literatura Española (1941), a textbook of more than thirty editions that we used in her classroom and I will use below and in the coming entries on the subject of Spain. I must say that in the first chapters of Anaya’s textbook, first published during the Second World War, she unabashedly uses the word “arios” (Aryan) when referring to the first conquerors of the Iberian Peninsula.
However, about the first ancient text that Anaya analyzes, the 8th century legend of King Rodrigo and the Loss of Spain (pages 28-31), the jew-wise reader is shocked to see that no accusation is made of Jews inviting any Muslim into the peninsula. The old legend tells instead that Florinda, a Visigothic maid (a purely Aryan young woman) was seduced by King Rodrigo, another Iberian white, in Rodrigo’s castle. As revenge the Count Julián, Florinda’s father, “opened Spain to Muslim expansion” Anaya wrote: an expansion that had been previously contained by the Count himself. The Moors then invaded the peninsula “and easily destroyed the Visigothic power that already was much debilitated.” Anaya adds that “it is not known what happened to King Rodrigo, who caused so much harm” and that the “historical happenings related to this legend occurred in 711 A.D.” Note that King Rodrigo, not Count Julián (or the Moors, or a purported Jew who opened the gates) is blamed. Presumably, the accent of the legend was on the sense of honor among the Iberians of those remote times.
Later, on pages 40-47 of the textbook I used in my middle teens, Anaya mentions the case of the legend of The Seven Infants of Lara, which recounts other Iberian whites using other Moors to take revenge about other cases of Aryan offences! This very famous medieval tale has Gonzalo Gustios, the crying father of the seven decapitated white boys in Córdova, marrying Aixa, the daughter of Almanzor (Almanzor, who had imprisoned Gonzalo Gustios, was one of the most powerful characters in the Caliphate). Mudarra González, the mongrel son of the Christian Gonzalo Gustios and the Muslim Aixa, is the one who is destined to avenge the father. The victim of course is not Almanzor, the Moor that ordered the decapitation of the boys on behalf of the valiant knight Ruy Vásquez. The victim is Ruy Vásquez himself that the mongrel dispatches at the end of the story.
Once more, for the medieval Spaniard race did not seem to be the central issue at all: but a knightly sense of honor, especially during in-group vendettas.
In the next chapter Anaya approaches the ancient texts about El Cid. His life inspired the most important epic poem of Spanish literature: the Cantar de mio Cid. Now that I reread her book after forty years of reading it for the first time I was shocked to see Anaya’s sentence that El Cid was “the terror of Moors and Christians” (my emphasis). When I finished the chapter I was surprised to learn that El Cid’s fame was not entirely based on the feat of expelling some Moors from the peninsula, but mainly on the chivalrous character of this historical (and legendary) figure of the Reconquista.
This, and similar cases I’ll be recounting in these brief series about the classics of Spanish literature, moves me to expand the category of this blog previously known as “White suicide” as the “Aryan problem (white suicide).”
Further to my post “Empty-headed Britons.” Of the television series I have been reviewing, I have found the first season of the Spanish-produced Toledo: Cruce de Destinos, premiered the last year, as the most offensive to date. It starts with a stunning scene in a Spanish garden of a wealthy family of whites in the 13th century. After some idyllic moments the family is attacked by the Moors with women, adolescents and children being assassinated in cold blood. One would expect that when the men return and see their families butchered the plot of the entire series would be revenge and expulsion of the Moors, right?
Nope! The whole series is an attempt to demonize the patriot Spaniards of such century, some of them real historical figures, that tried to expel the enemies by force. No kidding: that is exactly the ethos behind the script.
King Alfonso X of Castile is filmed as talking about “el sueño de la convivencia de las tres culturas” (“the dream of the coexistence between the three cultures”), meaning the Christian, the Muslim and the Jewish cultures as his ultimate dream for Castile. The series are perfectly Manichean: the hawks who crave for a war against the Moors and the Semites are absolutely evil; and the multicultural doves are the goods guys of the films. The first season actually ends with King Alfonso saying that his son Sancho, the hawk, is going into exile for life while the dove, his son Fernando, will inherit the crown to pursue his dream.
The whole series can be sketched thus:
• The Moors are revealed as the cruel invaders that they were in real history
• The Christian patriots who hate them are depicted as intolerant bigots throughout all episodes
• No single piece of mischief—nothing at all!—is ever committed by the Jews, who are always depicted as innocent doves
In a heated discussion in the first episode, the very one that depicts realistically the butchery of a white family, the Queen Violant of Aragon gives a speech to the main hawks of the story, the Archbishop of Toledo and the Count Miranda. The Queen says that Christians are supposed to turn the other cheek. Most surrealist of all is that the central character of these Spanish series, Rodrigo Pérez de Ayala whose eldest son and wife were among the victims of the butchery in first scene, sides the pacifist monarchs against the hawks!
Then Rodrigo returns to his home after not seeing for ten years what was left of his family. Who is the first guest to share Rodrigo’s table? Abraham Rubini, a Jew: his best friend throughout the series in fact. So much so that Rodrigo has a conversation with Abraham almost ignoring his surviving family who had been entranced to see that his father had finally came home after a decade…
The hawks Sancho and the Count Miranda are depicted as almost rapists or as rationalizing or excusing the rape of an innocent commoner girl. And—typical—the casting directors chose a very stunning actress to interpret the role of a Moorish woman: the one who speaks for the Muslim side (in the pic, sat at the front center).
In another scene, Abraham (extreme left in the pic) tells Rodrigo that Rodrigo’s role in the Castilian government must be “to defend the weak” of Toledo against the hawks. And in a discussion between Abraham and the Archbishop (standing at the right with his hands together) inside the royal court, the Christian is depicted as pig-headed and the Jew as wise. The richest Muslim of Toledo is also depicted as wise and concerned about the inexcusable intolerance of the Archbishop. It’s the Archbishop the one who incited a mob of fanatic Christians to attack the candid scholars working in Toledo’s school of translators, a school headed by Abraham. Afterwards there’s a scene where the hawk Sancho cowardly tries to stab the dove Fernando in the back, also in the royal court.
It is unnecessary continuing to recount more outrageous scenes, except adding that the series also contain typical scenes of soft-porn that have become so fashionable in recent TV series.
What alarms me is that Spaniards are largely clueless about what is happening to their media. Yes: it is true that in the blogosphere some Spanish critics have pointed out that the historical King Alfonso, also called The Wise, did not participate in such alliance of civilizations between Christians, Muslims and Jews, and that the series puts Toledo as a mainly Muslim city when really at the time they were a distinct minority in the city, surpassed even by the Jewish quarter. The TV story “invents a conspiracy of radical anti-Muslim Christians against King Alfonso, when in fact there was no such company.” But what made me laugh was a comment in “La serie Toledo” stating (my translation) that “the series could have been called ‘Zapatero in the country of the Alliance of Civilizations’.”
Even these critics don’t see the obvious: that patriot Christians have been painted with black; warrior Muslims with grey, and the Jews of Toledo with white! (In contrast to these fictional white doves, those interested to learn how the Jews behaved in historical Spain are advised to read the pertinent sections on the subject in Kevin MacDonald’s Separation and Its Discontents.)
The following sentences of March of the Titans: The Complete History of the White Race by Arthur Kemp caught my attention:
The test of ethnicity:
Switzerland, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia
In the first chapter of this book, the difference between race and ethnicity was discussed. “Race” is a collection of individuals sharing a common genetic base; while “ethnicity” refers to the actual cultural manifestations of a particular group of people. Ethnicity is easily transferable amongst members of the same race—only when there are significant racial differences amongst the transferring societies, does the process falter.
The truth of this is perfectly illustrated in the comparative histories of three nations where ethnic conflict has played a major role: Switzerland, the Czech and Slovak Republics, and the former state of Yugoslavia. Switzerland, which retained the highest degree of racial homogeneity, overcame its ethnically based differences with relative ease.
The other two nations—Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, were however less racially homogeneous than Switzerland, and each therefore dissolved after conflicts, the intensity and length of which were inversely proportional to their homogeneity. The rule is that the higher the racial homogeneity, the more likely there is to be peace amongst racially similar ethnic groupings—the lower the racial homogeneity, the higher the discordance.
In this way the Czechs and the Slovaks entered a period of peace after the German minority were forcibly expelled after 1945, and finally they divided their country peacefully in the 1990s. However the far less racially homogeneous Yugoslavia collapsed into frightful civil war before physical division produced any measure of peace.
[After discussing the history of Switzerland, which had not succumbed to non-white immigration until very recently, Kemp writes about the Czech and Slovak republics:]
The continual occupation of the various regions led to the establishment of defined ethnic groupings—the majority being in sub-racial terms, White, but with a significant minority being of mixed Asiatic-White descent, along with a not inconsiderable overtly non-White “Gypsy” population—who numbered some 500,000 in 1992—being descendants of Indians who entered southern Europe at the time of the great Asiatic invasions and who remained biologically isolated from mainstream society.
Each of these White cultural groupings became associated with the various major players in the region: Germans, Austrians, Slavs, with a mix of Slavic and German producing a new ethnic grouping, the Czechs. These territories—Bohemia, Moravia, part of Silesia, Slovakia, and sub-Carpathian Ruthenia, all eventually fell under the control of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Neither the Czech nor Slovakians have ever encouraged immigration from anywhere, and as such, still retain an high degree of racial homogeneity, if the part of the population which shows slight Asiatic ancestry is excluded. The dominant sub-racial types remain therefore Slavic, a combination of Nordic and Alpine sub-racial types.
Ethnic and racial stew, caused by non-white Ottoman occupation
The state of Yugoslavia was created at the end of the 19th Century out of a number of ethnic cultural groupings in the Balkans. The volatile mix of White Slavic, Asiatic invaders and Islamic Turks in the Ottoman Empire have fused—and often clashed violently—to make this region one of the most unstable in all of Europe, with its wars still dominating Europe at the end of the 20th Century.
Yugoslavia was created out of a number of smaller territories, some of which were independent of the foreign invaders in Eastern Europe, and some of whom were not.
Before the progress of the actual state of Yugoslavia is overviewed, it is therefore crucial to briefly review its main component regions: Croatia, Serbia, Montenegro, and Slovenia.
The conflicts in the former Yugoslav republic have ensured that the region has not been targeted by any legal or illegal immigration, and so the region retains much of its original population make-up.
However, a significant part of the population shows definite traces of the hundreds of years of non-White Turkish Ottoman occupation left from the time before the creation of the Yugoslav state. This admixture is culturally reflected in the fact that a large proportion of the population are in fact Muslims and not Christians—in real terms this means that as much as 20 per cent of the population may originally be of mixed ancestry to one degree or another, with the notable exception of the Croatians (who remain predominantly Nordic/Alpine sub-racial stock).
When comparing the Swiss, Czechoslovakian and Yugoslavian approaches to settling ethnic conflict, the importance of race is once again brought to the fore. Switzerland and Czechoslovakia, both being almost racially homogeneous, but ethnically divided, have managed to settle their differences constitutionally; while Yugoslavians, divided ethnically and racially, have been forced to carve out their living areas through violent conflict.
1) No it hasn’t. It has been far from good for the white race.
Internal warfare and external threats to the White Race in Europe were not abated by Christianity. Some of Europe was converted by 5th century by the Roman Empire, which saw the enslavement and death of 3 million White Gauls, and then their slow spiritual degradation.
The rest of Europe was converted to Christianity circa 11th century (by the point of the sword I might add). Over the next millennium there was much internal warfare which led to the destruction of people, property and ideas. What’s more is that Christianity did a poor job of defending White Christendom from invaders. So not only did it cause internal warfare, but it failed to defend the Christians from external threats, thus it was a double-edged sword of evil against the white race.
Muslim Expansions in 7th & 8th Centuries
Auburn – Muhammad’s conquests, 622–632
Atomic tangerine – Rashidun Caliphate, 632–661
Amber – Umayyad Caliphate, 661–750
Remember that it was Nationalists who defended White Europe from invaders. Not Christians but Nationalists. Christians had no desire to help one another despite the pleas that were sent by Kings from the Balkans when the Muslim Turks were invading. Europe was defended by Stephen cel Mare of Moldavia, Vlad Tepes of Wallachia, Ivan the IV of Muscovy, Ferdinand of Spain, amongst others. These men were Nationalist Champions first and foremost. They fought for their kin, for their family. Nationalists were the ones who fended off the invaders, not Christians. Christianity has done nothing to give internal security, nor external security. It’s crap as a police force, and worse as a military force. It causes destruction of all those who believe it. Other races would be wise to give Christianity a wide birth also, as it would likely have the same effect on them.
2) Christianity left the White Race genetically impoverished (as it does to “all races” who believe it). The most intelligent men and women were sent off to monasteries and nunneries to study instead of raising families and being innovators (like Farnsworth, Darwin, who had families and children) which means that the race didn’t benefit from their excellent genes. Obviously a race that degrades is only going to get worse. Is that what God intended when he created the universe: That we all end up thick, and physically unfit? I doubt it.
3) Christianity has achieved next to nothing in technological terms. Compare the Christian Civilisation / Empires that sprouted circa 1500, to the Pagan Empires of the Middle-East. The Christian Empires were obsessed with “making money,” hence the phrase “the Protestant Work Ethic” which is about being nothing more than a money grubber. Here are some of the achievements of the Pagans: the library at Alexandria, the Pyramids, Agriculture, Metal working—from the R1b Hittites, and astronomy. Now what have the Christians added to that in the millennia that they’ve had cultural dominance? Where are the pyramids, where is the great library? There are none of these things. As Arthur Schopenhauer pointed out the achievements of Europe during the Enlightenment era were made “in spite” of the faith known as Christianity.
Your life and happiness will be better served by believing that which is true, and that which begets good works. You’ll get neither of these things from Christianity, but both from truth. Whether that truth lays solely in spiritual-paganism or hard-headed science I don’t know. Uppsala Online is an intelligent website that straddles both worlds: the world of science and the world of spirit, and shows that you don’t have to fudge words or babble in order to defend your position like so many Christians seem to do. The truth serves you well and is simple and crystal-clear.
Under Christianity Europe gave us modern firearms, Gothic Cathedrals, modern medicine (to be fair the Romans were far ahead of Medieval Europeans) and the printing press. Unless you’re referring to a time when Europe was 100 percent theocratic. In that case, Christianity achieved very little. The good in Christianity was put there by White men, as was the good in Paganism. Paganism, by being intrinsically ours, is the healthier/better fit.
Though all races adhere to similar laws (logical, physical, biological etc., we’ve all got to eat and sleep!), there are differences between the races, and those differences are best satisfied by a belief system that is unique to them. A belief system along the lines of the Proto-Indo-European religion will probably be best for the White race. hyperborearising.wordpress.com seems to have a good grasp on such matters.
Finally, here’s the quote from Schopenhauer on “Christianity and Civilization”:
The reason civilization is at its highest point among Christian peoples is not that Christianity is favourable to it but that Christianity is dead and no longer exercises much influence: as long as it did exercise influence, civilisation was at a very low point among Christian peoples. All “religion” is antagonistic towards culture.
(Essays and Aphorisms, Hollingdale translation.)
The following sentences of March of the Titans: The Complete History of the White Race by Arthur Kemp caught my attention:
The third great race war – the Moors invade Europe
The invasion of Western Europe by a non-White Muslim army after 711 AD, very nearly extinguished modern White Europe—certainly the threat was no less serious than the Hunnish invasion which had earlier created so much chaos. While the Huns were Asiatics, the Moors were a mixed race invasion—part Arabic, part Black and part mixed race, always easily distinguishable from the Visigothic Whites of Spain.
[To give a flavor of the content of this chapter I will add some subtitles to the images that Kemp chose for this specific chapter—omitting the images:]
• Above: A dramatic painting—based on actual events—showing Moors celebrating the fall of a White Spanish town, with White females captured alive. For several years the Moors demanded—and received—a yearly tribute of young White girls for use in their harems after the great Moorish victory of 711. This yearly tribute continued until 791 AD when the Whites had recovered their strength enough to break the terms of a treaty with the non-Whites.
• Above: The non-White Moorish advance into Europe seemed unstoppable when in 732 AD they launched a massive invasion of present day France. The king of the leading White tribe in that country, Charles Martel of the Franks (who had their headquarters in present day Paris) mobilized a counter attack. A great race battle took place between the towns of Tours and Potiers in central France in October 732 AD. The battle was one of the most momentous in the history of the White race. Defeat would have meant that all of Western Europe might have fallen under the sway of Islam, and the mixed races from the East would have poured into continental Europe. Accounts have it that 375,000 Moors were killed—the White army was utterly victorious over the non-White army and the Moorish invasion of Europe was halted in its tracks. Charles Martel earned his name—Martel means “hammer”—; at this battle he personally bludgeoned to death a large number of non-Whites with his favorite weapon, a mighty hammer.
• Above: Captured White prisoners about to be decapitated by Saracens: note how the Spaniards are depicted with blond hair.
• Above [In the 2011 edition]: A Jew pictured on a thirteenth century European manuscript. He is wearing a circle badge, in terms of a papal law intended to mark out Jews in medieval society.
Expulsion of 250,000 mixed race moors
Finally in 1609, the Spanish king Philip III ordered the physical expulsion of some 250,000 “Moriscos” or Christianized Moors from the country. The Moriscos were in fact of mixed White/Moorish ancestry and in this way a large number of mixed race inhabitants of Southern Spain were forcibly expelled from that country.
The expulsion of the Jews
The Spanish Jews were amongst the first to feel the full effects of the fall of the Moors from power in Spain. In 1492 Isabella and Ferdinand formally expelled all Jews from that country, punishing the Spanish Jews for having actively collaborated with the Moors during their 780 year long occupation. The victorious Moors (who, because of their common Semitic ancestry with the Spanish Jews and the already poor relations between the Jews and the Goths) employed several Spanish Jews in their administration of Spain in some of the highest posts, even though there were occasional outbursts of anti-Jewish feeling amongst the Arabs themselves.
In the city of Grenada, the last to fall to the White armies, the Spanish were enraged to learn that the Moorish king’s prime minister and most of his leading advisors were Jews. A massacre of Jews in the city followed that discovery. This alliance between a number of Spanish Jews and the Moors inflamed the anti-Semitic feeling amongst the subdued Goths even further; a sentiment which would later flare up in the form of the Spanish Inquisition and the expulsion of the Jews from Spain.
When Spain was finally liberated from the non-White Moors, the long suppressed anti-Jewish sentiment broke out in full fury. In that year all unbaptized Jews were expelled en masse from Spain, and the infamous Spanish Inquisition, set up to enforce Christendom, was used to persecute Jews, who, because of their collaboration with the Moors, were regarded as the implacable enemies of White Spain.
Earlier Isabella had obtained from the Pope in Rome a dispensation to establish the Inquisition in Spain, which soon turned into a fully fledged anti-Jewish campaign under the name of Christianity. The first hearings against the Conversos were held in February 1481 in Castile; it combined with the outbreak of the bubonic plague. Many Christian fanatics linked the outbreak of the plague to the start of proceedings against the Conversos, and the Jews were blamed for the plague as well as their other real or imagined crimes, which included accusations that they had betrayed the city of Toledo to the invading Moors by opening the city gates at a crucial junction in the siege of that city.
The leading Conversos held a secret meeting to resist the Inquisition with force. Isabella’s spies however found out about the planned rebellion and arrested the ringleaders, most prominent amongst them a rabbi named Diego de Susan. He, along with six other Jews, was tried for subversion, found guilty and executed by burning at the stake in late 1481.
The Conversos then broke rank in panic, and starting fleeing Spain in large numbers, some going to Italy, but many going to Muslim held Turkey, where they once again enjoyed special status. Much property belonging to the Converso Jews—who by some estimates made up as much as 20 per cent of Spain’s pre-Inquisition population—was seized by Isabella and added to the state treasury.
Spain’s Golden Age
After the expulsion of the Moors and the Jews, Spain entered its Golden Age. It created a huge empire, and along with Portugal, became one of the most powerful nations in Europe. Unfortunately for Spain and Portugal, both countries declined soon afterwards due to a change in their population make-up, as detailed in the previous chapter.
Nonetheless, the liberation of Spain from Moorish rule saved Western Europe from complete Arabic domination, and as a result the Visigothic warriors who undertook this 700 year war, will always be remembered for their great feat of arms.
Homosexualism is a psychopathology and subsection of Sexual Bolshevism which encourages human males to participate in abnormal “sexual” relations with each other. The modern idea began in decadent urban centers of liberal-capitalist Western Europe during the 19th century; the term “homosexual” was coined in 1869. The modern movement was politicized by Magnus Hirschfeld, a Jewish Marxist, who used it as means to undermine gentile society; this was carried on by the likes of Wilhelm Reich of SEXPOL.
The word comes from Greek homos “same” + Latin sexual. The word is argued to have been created by Karl-Maria Kertbeny in an anonymous pamphlet published in Germany in 1869. It and rival terminology were created as replacements for earlier derogatory words. The word appeared in English in 1892 in a translation of a German work. In 1897 Havelock Ellis stated that it is a “barbarously hybrid word, and I claim no responsibility for it. It is, however, convenient, and now widely used.”
A propaganda campaign has been launched to usurp the word “gay” to refer to male homosexuals to make it sound like something positive. The word lesbian is sometimes used to refer to females of such a disposition. LGBT refers lesbian, “gay,” bisexual, and transgender. An alternative term for LGBT, or even broader, is queer, supposedly today without its original derogatory implications. Derogatory terms for male homosexuals include words such as pansy, fruit, faggot, poof, daisy, nelly, mincer, shirt lifter, s**t stabber and arse bandit which etymologically often imply effeminate men.
Even the seemingly neutral Lesbian has been seen as derogatory by inhabitants of the island Greek Lesbos from which the word derives and who have campaigned against its use.
Views on homosexuality
Homosexuality is rejected by various religions and conservatives. Consequently large amounts of criticisms can be found in such sources. For example Conservapedia has a large number of pages dedicated to religious as well as non-religious criticisms, with sources, regarding areas such infectious diseases, physical health, mental health, substance abuse, crime, pedophilia, lobbying, coverage in media, history, and other topics. The liberal views can similarly be found in liberal sources such as Wikipedia. See the links below in the “External links” section [omitted in this entry].
Any negative association with homosexuality, for homosexuals themselves or for other persons, is generally dismissed by supporters as completely due to stress caused by persecution which is at best an unproven hypothesis. There are many other possibilities. One is that that confusion regarding gender identity may be stressful in itself. Another is that if homosexuality is caused by some factor(s) affecting the brain regions involved in sexual behaviors, then these factors could possibly also affect other regions of the brain causing various, possibly negative, effects.
The “natural” argument
An influential argument in support of homosexuality is that it is actually a “natural” variation of human sexuality. [Chechar’s note: Greg Johnson’s take on this subject] This argued to be supported by homosexual behavior in several historical societies, the relatively high prevalence in Western societies, homosexual behaviors in some animals, various theories regarding evolutionary benefits, and some evidence of a genetic causation. Furthermore, if homosexuality is predominantly genetically caused, then homosexuality will not become more common if homosexuals raise children or work with children. Many of these arguments are ignored by religiously influenced critics who do not believe in evolution.
Against this a number of points can be raised. There are very few descriptions of homosexual behavior in traditional societies such as hunter-gatherer societies. These are the ones most similar to the societies in which humans spent almost all of their evolutionary history. The only exception are some related tribes on Papua New Guinea. This consist of apparently highly ritualized and culturally obligatory initiation rites for boys. [Chechar’s note: as a child abuse researcher I know that kids are forced to fellate adults in these New Guinea rituals] As such there is very little individual choice in participating. Depictions of sexual behavior are not uncommon in prehistoric art such as cave paintings but depictions of homosexual behaviors are nonexistent or possibly rare if generously interpreting two unclear cave paintings as homosexual. This is in contrast with ethnographers having been able to document many not culturally approved behaviors such as murder, theft, infanticide and extramarital affairs.
There are some forms of homosexual behaviors in some animal species but exclusive and predominant homosexuality by animals is rare in nature. The basic biological design of all species is heterosexual reproduction. […]
The first homosexual supremacist rally was in 1970, which have become common.
Conservatives and even some liberals themselves have argued that the liberal Hollywood deliberately inserts homosexual propaganda in movies and television. Thus, in 1987 gay activists stated that “Where we talk is important. The visual media, film and television, are plainly the most powerful image-makers in Western civilization. The average American household watches over seven hours of TV daily. Those hours open up a gateway into the private world of straights, through which a Trojan horse might be passed. So far, gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the battle to desensitize the mainstream”.
In a 2013 speech, then United States Vice President Joe Biden publicly spoke about how the push for homosexuality and the changes toward it were done entirely by the Jews who run Hollywood. He spoke his speech as praise to avoid accusations of anti-Semitism. […]
Homosexuals are often a particularly strange part of the leftist-Islamist alliance with homosexuals and homosexual organizations in Europe generally supporting the mass immigration despite this meaning a rapidly growing number of Islamists with far harsher views than Christian conservatives on homosexuality and on what society should do.
(See the complete article, and help us to edit it, here)
Silly boiled frogs…!
From Gates of Vienna:
A third night of rioting has engulfed the suburbs of Stockholm, spreading from Husby to Tensta, Kista, Rinkeby, Jakobsberg, and other culturally enriched neighborhoods. The Swedish and Norwegian media are covering the events—assiduously avoiding saying anything about the ethnicity or immigrant status of the perpetrators.
Elect crazy people, take away border controls, feed the population with pc kook aid and voila! We don’t seem to respond to wake up calls anymore.
Let it burn. Don’t send in Fire Rescue, Police or Paramedics. Let them burn down their homes and then be smart. Tell them they have no homes to put them in. They can live on the streets in the ashes they made or go back to the Hellholes they came from.
That is what sane people do. These idiots will cave in to the Muslim demands immediately.
Burn down the whole city. When a country reaches the point that fathers would rather bow to political correctness while their own daughters are being sexually taunted, abused and even raped…. Swedes don’t deserve Sweden anymore.
See also what John Martínez commented about it here at WDH.
A prelude for the “rivers of blood” predicted
by Enoch Powell more than 40 years ago
From Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch site:
Words of the murderer:
“You people will never be safe. Remove your governments, they don’t care about you. You think David Cameron is going to get caught in the street when we start busting our guns? You think politicians are going to die? No, it’s going to be the average guy, like you and your children. So get rid of them.”
Note: this post was modified on May 23.