Sunday, 19 October 2014

I've think I've found the ideal way to expound my thoughts on the various aspects of the European Genocide: Socratic dialogues.

This format, it seems to me, has the following advantages:
1) It is concise. People don't need to plough through vast tomes to access the ideas. Not everyone is cut out for that, after all, and this is a message that needs to get through to ordinary people.

2) The language will be simple. Spoken language is simpler than written language. People find it more accessible.

3) It allows potential and predictable criticism of the ideas I am going to expound to be incorporated and "refuted" in advance" (prefuted?).

4) It seems to me to permit a level of complexity that is almost unlimited, much greater than would be easily achievable in standard prose works advocating ideas.

5) It allows nuance and uncertainty to be expressed, so that I can air issues I haven't completely made up my mind about but seem to me to be worth articulating.

6) Perhaps most importantly in the totalitarian context we live in, it offers a kind of plausible deniability should it come to "hate speech" prosecutions, which it may well do, in that none of the opinions expressed or statements made will necessarily be my own. The dialogues will feature various characters none of whom will be a perfect analogue of me. All of their ideas will be subjected to criticism by each other.

7) If I wanted to be lazy about the documenting claims made, casting them in the form of dialogues spoken by people whose statements I am not necessarily endorsing would certainly ease the burden of documentation on me, since I wouldn't have to back them up in the same way that I would if the statements were made in a conventially authored prose work. That said, this creates a serious temptation to laziness on my part so could perhaps be viewed as a disadvantage rather than an advantage.

8) It models the process of political debate. Ultimately, if our ideas are going to triumph, we need to get involved in political debates and win them. The dialogues will therefore offer a kind of template that people can use for their own argumentation. In this respect, parts of them will resemble the Sales Objection FAQs that some salespeople are trained with, telling them what their responses should be when the potential customer raises this or that objection.

9) Many of the ideas the Establishment power structure is based on simply cannot withstand critical scrutiny. They survive because they never receive that critical scrutiny. But in these dialogues, they will be unable to escape it. I will just have to do my honest best to express the ideas of the multicult in their optimal form and not simplistically caricature them to make them easier to knock down.

I'm not sure how many dialogues I will break it into. We'll see how it goes. The topics covered will include the following: whether what is happening to Europe and European diaspora societies deserves to be called a genocide; the importance of free speech; the Jewish role in suppressing free speech; the similarities between Jews and Muslims; the idea of Evil, its association with concepts of ritual purity, and how this forms the foundation for modern concepts like "racism"; how much of modern political disourse is based on the idea of attacking a person's motivation for making a certain political proposition rather than examining the intrinsic merits of the proposition itself, and where this style of discourse comes from; whether Jews have harmed the peoples they have lived among; what the word racism means; the Counterjihad movement and the role of Jews within it; human rights; bureaucracy versus democracy; the concept Religion, whether it has intrisic validity and whether the ideology of Equality deserves to be considered a religion; whether Islam is a religion of peace; Adolf Hitler and whether our culture's obsession with him is rational; Al-Andalus; the importance of genes in shaping behaviour; the deep cultural roots of the European Genocide.

No idea when it will be finished but I'm making much faster progress on this than I have been on the more conventional tome I've been working on for years. I may leave the website until I've finished the dialogues. I supposed I could also release them bit by bit as they're finished. I'll probably release a free ebook here in various formats and maybe publish it on Amazon Kindle.

Perhaps it's grandiose of me, but I do think that my ideas, if taken up by enough people, could still save European civilisation. I will deal with and overcome every possible rational criticism. In the end all that would be left would be the raw use of suppressive power. And that can never last long.

7 comments:

  1. The entry point of your new approach toward the ‘Dialogues on the Death of Europe’ is an excellent idea. I hope you are not too late. Every day brings the death of Europe one step nearer. Our leaders are keeping allowing tsunami waves of Muslims and blacks right from the jungle into Europe. Even if they know, for 100%, that the vast majority of these, so called, refugees are Jihadi terrorists. The phoney refugees are selected by terror organizations and financed by sheiks from Arab Opec countries; who are using now their petro-dollars to finance the take over of Europe. The heavy criminals – mostly from African countries – are buying their way to Europe with the gallons of innocent blood on their hands and under their nails. They are the merchants of the so-called ‘Blood Diamonds’. European leaders of today are not interested in the safety of their citizens. If they were more concerned, they should have done everything to defend the shores of Europe from Muslim “Jihadi-boats” carrying ‘Trojans’ into their countries. They had had long time ago, declaring the 25 sea mile zone around the shores of Europe as military environment and fire missiles on enemy vessels. WE ARE ON WAR the way we were in WWII. Only, the rules had changed and so the tactics. The enemy doesn’t need to cross borders by armoured forces and let paratroopers glide down from planes. This was the way, it happened on 10th May 1940. .. Now the modern enemy is finding his way to pubs and expensive restaurants in Brussels and Strasbourg. Deals are cut in those “War Rooms” upon bottles of Champaign Caviar and foie gras. The opponent ‘generals’ and ‘chief commanders’ are easy to bribe. For a ‘Fist Full of Dollars’ they are more willing than a hooker in a shabby brothel in Bogota or São Paulo. Part II

    ReplyDelete
  2. Europe will survive, the only question is how much territory future Europeans will inherit, and how pleasant their lives will be amid ethnic strife, bordering on areas occupied by the brown masses.

    Will be awaiting the release of these dialogues.

    ReplyDelete
  3. PART II
    “Many of the ideas the Establishment power structure is based on simply cannot withstand critical scrutiny. They survive because they never receive that critical scrutiny. But in these dialogues, they will be unable to escape it. I will just have to do my honest best to express the ideas of the multicult in their optimal form and not simplistically caricature them to make them easier to knock down”.

    Certainly the Establishment power-structure does not like critical scrutiny. It is bad for business. They are far more happy with citizens who are a bunch of zombies, gazing at their tablets and smart phones and playing games instead of reading and asking questions. Go to a near by airport and wait for a shuttle. I am sure you’ll have the idea you are sitting in a barn. The crouching cows look much like the waiting people playing with their gadgets. It should have to take a long way and lot of troubles before people will finally wake up. And the questions are: how long will it take and if we would not pass – for good – the momentum. I hope you will be able to come into a dialogues PART III

    ReplyDelete
  4. PART III
    “whether Jews have harmed the peoples they have lived among; what the word racism means; the Counterjihad movement and the role of Jews within it; human rights; bureaucracy versus democracy; the concept Religion, whether it has intrisic validity and whether the ideology of Equality deserves to be considered a religion; whether Islam is a religion of peace”

    It seems whatever is happening to the world the Jews are fucked up. On the 2nd Christmas Day of 2004 a tsunami wave was created by a seaquake near Sumatra. It swept the whole Indian Ocean from Indonesia to Somalia; living millions of victims. I was very much surprise that nobody had blamed the Jews for this disaster by nature? How can it be? If we don’t blame it on the ‘Bossa Nova’ (an old hit by Eydie Gorme https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PaRlW-jz1QQ) We blame it on the Jews.
    Now a piece of reality. One of the points is“whether Jews have harmed the peoples they have lived among”. A visit to the state of Israel can give a different answer. Every tourist who visit the country, will see something strange. People who are belonging to the same ethnicity, have the same religion and same traditions though are genetically total different. They do not even belong to the same race. There are people with features of the inhabitants of India, blacks, Semites, South Europeans, Slavic features and even Nordic Scandinavian. How can it be? Every folk share the same genes. You see for example that the Swiss are different from the Germans, Dutch from French- or British. The answer is: NOT THE JEWS HAD HARMED THE PEOPLE AROUND THEM. THEY WERE, IN 2000 YEARS, HARMED SEVERELY BY THE ENVIRONMENT THEY WERE LIVING IN. MASS POGROMS FOLLOWED BY MASS RAPE had changed them genetically totally from their Middle Eastern origin. Jesus Christ, who was a Jew, had (genetically) very little in common with a Russian Jew who has genetically more in common with Vladimir Putin than with the Biblical fathers.

    ReplyDelete
  5. www.theironpill.tumblr.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anonymous 22 October 2014,
      Beautiful pictures!. Is a nice comic booklet to read. But it does not help much. The point is: the odds are against us!!!. Take for example what had happened now in Canada. Canada is a good country with no "Colonial past". The country could easily allow the Australian 'white policy'. But Canadians are nice decent people and had let a whole lot of Third World people especially Muslims into the country. The government wanted to help the "Oh! poor people" having a better life. Now the low grade. inferior character strains of these baboons had popped up. What do you think? Canada will start cleaning up the mass of bad elements? Try to guard the Canadian population from unnecessery risk? Forget it. The same is happening now in Denmark. I've read today that Odense is a play ground for Jihadists. How long do you think it will take that those nice imported guests will grabe the country? You are only 5.4 Mio. People. The ones who convert themselves to Islam are not on a quest for a new God. The man are looking for a license to kill, the women for a sex fantasy with a potent partner that will fuck her half dead. However both of them are dangerous and both have to be taken out. In our time people have to guard their own right to live. The governments, they are electing, have their own agenda. They are not very interested in how the future will look like for other people children and grand children. The money they gain by betrayal will be used to get out on time. This had had already happened in The Netherlands on mid May 1940. The government had escaped, the folk was left behind.

      Delete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete