Is liberalism a movement encompassing a raft of coherent and principled positions? Or is it more simply a malign white disembowelment project? Obviously something with as broad a range and disparity of parts as that ideology would produce many answers, most interestingly if respondents were induced to candor.
It’s a question very much worth the asking given liberalism’s near complete victory in the west, with tanks now simply racing toward the rear unopposed. Of course you can still find them wailing away in rank slobber hovels about “racists,” Tea Baggers,” and some mythical Kochtopus monster (don’t tell them he’s for open borders). But this is simply the petulance of delusional children who got their cake and ice cream, yet have to wait a bit longer for the final cookies. Oh the tears.
Other than being obnoxiously poor winners, the Left is strutting in tall cotton. Though if you believe the first question above is the correct one, then the entire edifice will only be fleeting in its preeminence.
It all reminds me of so many hollow statements from the BushII years and before regarding an emerging Republican majority. The logic was that conservative states were rapidly gaining in population, influence, and electoral votes; while liberal ones were being relatively depleted. This would, statistics assured, create a permanent conservative majority. Now forget for a moment the acuity of hindsight. Tell me the Central-America sized flaw in that logic if you just heard it the first time 20 years ago.
Yes, the population of conservative states were increasing relative to liberal ones, but the newcomers weren’t conservatives. And so their swelling numbers could temporarily magnify conservative influence, but would ultimately, inevitably displace it. This is what we now all get to witness today. Of course white liberal robots are so obtuse, they can not grasp this concept even after watching it subsume their mortal enemies in this fratricide.
Thus, like the republican dullards before them, they cheer the tsunami of immigrants for the multiplying effects from their monolithic voting. And through those imported proxy votes, they now rule the West and liberalism is supreme.
Don’t get too used to it libs.
Liberalism plants its own demise, and the first seeds are already sprouting. Once liberal proxies have attained sufficient numbers and influence, does one imagine they will remain content to toddle along obediently behind their effete white patrons? The 8-ball replies: My sources say no.
We’ve heard of the Somalis displacing flummoxed white liberals in Minnesota. And there was the visiting African prelate hilariously attempting to exorcise the “demon of sodomy” from a squirming homo Anglican bishop (who wins when irresistible “racist!” meets immovable “homophobe!”?). These are merely the first shoots. Much more will blossom in the heavily shit-fertilized soil of the west. I thought this British article from three years ago captured the confused liberal quandary quite well.
Earlier this week, a disturbing headline appeared in my Twitter feed. “Church HIV prayer cure claims ’cause three deaths’,” it read. There was a link to the BBC website, but even before I clicked through I knew I would find the word “Nigerian”.
According to a leading HIV doctor, three women have died after attending London churches that told them to stop taking antiretroviral drugs. The news story singled out the Synagogue Church of All Nations (SCOAN), whose UK headquarters are in Southwark. Its website displays a photograph with the caption: “Mrs Badmus proudly displays her two different medical records confirming she is 100 per cent free from HIV-Aids following the prayer of Pastor T B Joshua.”
This being the politically correct Beeb, however, there was no discussion of the background to the story. Nigerian and other West African churches are the most vibrant expression of Christianity in Britain. Indeed, they’re so bursting with vitality that they buy up disused cinemas and warehouses (sometimes to the alarm of residents – there have been protests about “pop-up” West African churches). The Kingsway International Christian Centre (KICC) has a congregation of 12,000 every Sunday.
West African evangelists claim to be able to cast out demons and cure the dying. They also predict the imminent return of the Lord. A warning to Islingtonians who think a Nigerian pastor might spice up a supper party: don’t invite a gay couple unless you’re comfortable with the word “sodomy” thundering across the bruschetta. On the other hand, you wouldn’t want an early Christian on the guest list, either, since they shared the same beliefs about disease (curable by miracles), homosexuality (unspeakable) and Armageddon (coming soon).
But there’s also a distinctly un-biblical side to the new Christianity spreading across London. It’s obsessed with money. It’s not unusual for a Nigerian mega-pastor to own a jet: Bishop David Oyedepo of the Living Faith World Outreach Ministry owns four and is worth $150 million, according to Forbes. Temitope (also known as T B) Joshua recently donated $20 million to charity, which would be impressive if his “charity” didn’t include bogus Aids cures. Forbes claims that Matthew Ashimolowo of KICC earns a salary of more than £150,000, “but his real wealth comes from business interests, including his media company”.
Some smaller Nigerian churches are also on the radar of London’s social services because they incorporate the “exorcism” of child witchcraft into their teachings, which can have dreadful consequences. According to a social worker contact, some local authority employees belong to these churches themselves and view society through the prism of semi-Christian spirit beliefs.
Why don’t we hear more about this? Imagine the hysteria if this were white American Christian fundamentalism. But, because these are black-led churches, the media report the situation nervously and inadequately. Not that the Right is any more interested: it’s preoccupied with the excesses of Islam.
In the long run, however, we’ll pay dearly for our polite indifference. I don’t want to caricature the faith of West African Christians, but it’s a simple fact that it focuses intensely on “God-given prosperity” (ie making money) and spirit possession. And, if trends continue, it will soon overtake the mainstream churches as the dominant expression of Christianity in this country. That raises the real prospect of Christians and Muslims joining forces in a culture war on degenerate British society. What will happen then?
I can offer some speculation on what will happen then: many white British liberals will find their heads perched on the small of their backs.
But as we peruse the typical liberal platform, I wonder how many of these concerns will be stewarded conscientiously into the future by their intended population replacements.
* stem cell research
* the welfare state
* the environment
* gun control
* homosexual rights
* universal healthcare
* separation of church and state
* protections for Minorities
* protections for women
Will it be Indians maintaining environmental hygiene? Guatemalans funding and performing medical research? Haitians maintaining public order? Mexicans preventing corruption? Africans protecting homosexuals from abuse? Arab Muslims maintaining secular states apart from religious doctrine? Hutus being tolerant of minorities? Will Rotherham Pakistanis fight the rape culture? Has a western liberal ever honestly considered these questions for three nanoseconds before reflexively screaming “raysis?” It doesn’t matter.
In the end liberalism begets fundamentalism–and dies in the effort.