Thursday, November 3, 2016

Freedom, Independence, and Liberty are NOT possible without EXCLUSION

INCLUSION is now the buzzword in PC lingo pushed by Globalists.

But inclusion can work against freedom, liberty, and security. Indeed, freedom and liberty are impossible without security. Does anyone really free in a jungle full of dangerous animals? Does anyone really feel free in high-crime Detroit? Does anyone really feel free in the war zones of Syria or Libya(caused by Zionist-imperialist intervention)? Radical Inclusion leads to breakdown of security(and stability) and that means less freedom and liberty. Coercive Inclusion of US military imperialism into the Middle East and North Africa led to countless deaths and chaos everywhere. And Coercive Inclusion of masses of Africans and Muslims into Europe is leading to crime and mayhem.

Inclusion forces intrusion(even invasion) of other homelands. When EU is forced to be 'inclusive', it means it must surrender to intrusion and invasion by masses of Africans and Muslims. When White Americans are forced to be 'inclusive' of masses of non-white immigrants, it means having to live in a nation where they are reviled and blamed for everything.

A woman who is forced to 'include' every penis can only be rape victim. A woman without the choice to exclude the men she doesn't like is no longer free.

And this goes for victims of stalking as well. Such victims call on the police for safety to keep stalkers away. A woman doesn't feel safe with such types trailing her. This is especially true with famous celebrities who are stalked by crazy fans. In order for such people, women or celebrities, to feel secure(and free and independent), the police is called on warn or even imprison the stalkers. Women and celebs want to EXCLUDE stalkers from their lives.

Freedom and liberty have often been about Exclusion. Exclusion can happen by expelling a people who are deemed dangerous or threatening(or invasive). Or it can be achieved by mass-escape or mass-exile.

In the case of the Vietnamese and Algerians, they finally got together to expel the imperialist French invaders. Natives used guns and bombs to send the French back to France. Vietnamese and Algerians sought national independence via the expulsion of the French. Independence was achieved with the exclusion of the foreign French invaders.

In the case of Moses and Hebrews(if the Biblical legend is to be believed), they self-exiled themselves from the Egyptians. For the Hebrews to be free, they needed to exclude Egyptian tyranny from their lives. Since they couldn't overthrow Egyptians in Egypt, they chose mass-departure from Egypt to found their own homeland. Thus, Egyptian power came to be excluded from the lives of Jews, especially with the help of God who sent the Pillar of Fire and split the sea to devour the Egyptian cavalry(according to myth anyway).

So, Jews found freedom by excluding Egyptian tyranny from their lives. (But in founding their own homeland, they intruded into the lands of other peoples and slaughtered tons of them, again if the Biblical legends are to be believed. In forcing those gentiles in the Promised Land to be 'inclusive' of Jews, there were blood invasions and reprisals. Recent history has similar themes of freedom-by-exclusion and oppression-by-inclusion. The 20th century Exodus is about Jews gaining freedom by excluding the gentile world from their own lives. By departing from gentile lands and creating a Jewish state, Jews would welcome only the Jews and keep out the gentiles. Jews in hostile gentile nations would seek exile and exodus to Modern Israel, thus excluding gentile tyranny from their lives and living freely with other Jews. But this creation of the Jewish homeland required the the intrusive 'inclusion' of Jews upon Palestinians. Palestine was forced to 'include' Jews who soon turned into intruders and invaders who came to lord over the Palestinians. Exclusion meant freedom for Jews, but Inclusion meant tyranny for Palestinians. It's like the Japanese found new opportunities in Manchuria, but it required the coercive 'inclusion-invasion' of Northeast Asia. Later, for the Chinese to be free of Japanese Rule, the Japanese had to be expelled and excluded from China.)

America was founded on themes of exclusion. Colonial elites(Founding Fathers) rebelled against the 'tyranny' by King George and the Brits(even though historians say it wasn't all that bad). Also, white folks worried about Indian raids and red folks scalping white folks and leaving them bald. So, in order for America to be created, the colonials had to declare independence and EXCLUDE British power from the Americas. And in order for white folks to be safe and secure(in order to be free as civilized folks), they had to exclude the 'red savages' and dangerous animals(bears, cougars, wolves, and etc) from their domain.

The very idea of INDEPENDENCE implies exclusion. After all, to be independent means to be free FROM something.

When the Pilgrims came to America, they chose exile in order to exclude British religious tyranny(or what they saw as such) from their lives. When Robert Duvall flees in THX 1138, he is trying to exclude the tyranny of the System from his life. He wants to be free. He wants to be free FROM something. It's like the movie THE GREAT ESCAPE. The prisoners are trying to be free FROM of the German Prison Camp System. They want to exclude the power of German Guards from their lives.

Of course, themes of exclusion and inclusion are often inter-connected, as in the Moses story. Jews seek to exclude Egyptian tyranny from their lives. But in seeking a homeland of their own, they force other peoples in the region to 'include' Jews who come as intruders and invaders.

Also, there is the troubled relation between man and God. In some ways, man wants to be free of God. God has too many laws and injunctions. So, some Jews wanted to dance and party around the Golden Calf. They wanted to follow Edward G. Robinson than Charlton Heston. But God insists on the Jews including His laws in their lives because He figures Jews freed from God's Laws will succumb to their wild egos and start acting nuts like Sarah Silverman and Anthony Wiener. (To be sure, God sometimes want to exclude human affairs from His existence because humans are pesky, ridiculous, and retarded. But just when He wants to say 'get lost, idiots', humans are praying to Him and beseeching Him for help after they mess up. And God figures He will include their prayers in His plan for humanity...)

In a way, one might argue that the theme of INCLUSION in current American politics allows freedom for all of humanity. US is the Promised Land to which all peoples of the world should escape to. All the world is like one giant Egypt, and every people who want to flee are like Jews. Just as Jews sought freedom by excluding Egyptian tyranny from their lives by seeking mass-exile, all these immigrants are trying to exclude from their own lives the tyranny of their own kind by coming to America. So, Chinese wanna flee from China, Indians wanna flee from India, Africans wanna flee from Africa, Mexicans wanna flee from Mexico. Their own people are their worst enemies, and they want to exclude their own race and culture from their own lives and come to America and be included as 'Americans' by presumably superior white folks who run a better political, economic, and social system.

But this is where the analogy with Hebrews break down. Hebrews were not escaping from their own people. They ran from Egyptians. In contrast, Immigrationism says that people should 'escape' from their own race, culture, and land. They should become McCitizens of America.
Yet, there is another contradiction, that of multi-culturalism. Even though all these immigrants say NO to their own race & culture and reject their own homelands in order to join the White World, the white/Jewish 'progressives' who control Western media/academia insist on immigrant-folks maintaining their non-Western 'identities'(as redefined by multi-culti politics). (Better to exploit tensions in the service of 'progressive' politics because non-whites who get along with whites might become 'Republicans'.) So, we have the strange phenomenon of non-white immigrants(and esp their children) rejecting and forgetting their own race, culture, and language(and becoming just generically American in Hollywood and MTV sense) but also taking on 'identity politics' of hostility toward whites. However, this non-white 'identity' is a political construct than something genuine or organic. It is imposed on non-whites by PC politics that didn't originate in their homelands. (For example, no non-Western culture has been traditionally homomaniacal, but multi-cultism would have non-white kids in America believe that worship of homosexuality is part of multi-culturalism. It even fuses Islamic identity with homo decadence.) Non-white 'identity' according to multi-cultism is less about the intrinsic assets of a race, culture, or language than about the politics of hostility toward whites. Indian-Indian identity isn't the same as Indian-American 'identity'(as constructed by PC). Asian-Indians in India are Indian regardless of events and developments in the rest of the world. Even if the entire white world were to vanish overnight, Indians in India would organically and historically be Indian. But 'Indian-American' has no such autonomous or independent meaning. It is premised on PC-ordained Indian-American hostility towards whites as the holders of 'white privilege'(according to venomous PC). Multi-culti identity is about the exploitation of identity politics to corral non-whites against whites. This kind of identity can only exist in opposition to something. It lacks autonomy.
A Japanese in Japan is organically Japanese even if the rest of the world were to vanish. Indeed, Japan was Japanese for many centuries in isolation. But Japanese-American 'identity', as constructed by PC multi-cultism, cannot exist except in the context of hostility against whites.
This is why we have PC-ized Asian-Americans identifying with blacks against whites. These clowns might have had an autonomous identity back in their homeland. But in the US, where they've lost their racial, cultural, and linguistic identities, they rely on multi-culti 'identity' of hating 'white privilege' with the implication that Asians have more in common with Africans than with whites(with whom Asians are closer genetically, in terms of civilizational achievement, and as victims of black violence). It also means Middle Easterners(who are Caucasian if not white and whose histories are more closely tied to the West) have more in common with Mongolian-Americans and Peruvian-Indian-Americans. As white Hispanics count as 'people of color', it also means someone like Marco Rubio can claim to have more in common with a Nigerian-American than with European-Americans. It just gets surreal. And the politics of victimhood identity means that white homos and white women can claim to have more in common with blacks, browns, and yellows than with straight white men. It just gets more and more surreal.

No comments:

Post a Comment