Straining at a Gnat and Swallowing a Camel

Yesterday I was out walking with my wife and kid.  We were walking through my parents neighborhood, which is a rich and mostly white, and people feel so secure.  I moved out twice, and moved back in over the last ten or so years.

In any case, we were passing the entrance to this forest which lies between that neighborhood and two others, when I noticed two new signs.  What they said is no trespassing, or you will be prosecuted, and face fines and jail time.

I thought that penalty was a little ridiculous just to keep people from walking in the woods, which I did for years.  Seeing the sign there just made me want to go all the more, as I don’t do submission very well, and I resent people trying to regulate me when all I really want to do is exist and be left alone/at peace.  I have no urge to harm anyone, or even interact with others more than necessary.  I would rather walk in the woods, which is infinitely more interesting, inspiring, and comfortable than walking on the pavement in the glaring sun.  But I figured there were two reasons for the sign.

1. Stupid teenage kids go in there to drink and leave their bottles all around.

2. There are some people who live around the edge of the forest that don’t like the sight of people entering and leaving the forest.

As much as I wanted to go in there, I decided I had better not, because I am nearly 100% certain that if one of the neighbors saw me they would call the police.  It’s been done before, and the last thing I need is to have jail time or an arrest on my record, even if it’s over something stupid like walking in the woods.

So my first question was, who owns the forest, and why can’t I go there?  Some people might say, “the city owns it.”

OK, but who is “the city”?  Can you point me to this fellow?

“The city is everyone who is in the city.”

Really?  Is that so?  OK, then which part of the forest is mine?  I’d like to go in there and chill for a bit.

“…”

SO then really, nobody owns the forest, or at least nobody that we know of.  Still, someone is in control of that area, because if I go in, and someone gets hurt over it, then I’m going to get arrested.  So who’s property am I stepping on?  Let’s have the real owner come forward, so I can sit down with him and formally ask permission to take my dog for a walk in his forest (which he’s not using for anything anyways), and let me see if I can come up with some sort of arrangement.  Maybe I’ll pay him money in exchange for access?  I have no issue with doing that.  I respect private property and ownership, but I want to know who owns it.

Now, I’m fairly certain that someone, or a group of people, were so offended by me and other people walking through that area that they called the police enough times or complained enough to have it blocked off.  It’s not a zone which is actively policed, so it had to be someone who lives close that got annoyed.

So my question is, why is that person annoyed?  What can be so offensive about people walking through the woods that you would try to get someone arrested to make it stop?

The fact is, when it comes to modern white people, especially those in the west, there is a wanton lack of group solidarity.  This manifests in a variety of ways.

One way is the lack of advocacy groups.  There are no organizations that will give someone a scholarship or admit them to a university JUST for being white.  But for every other race such groups exist.  There is no collective white outrage over how we are treated in academia, or the media, or how we are the recipients of the bulk of racially motivated crime and violence.

But there are also examples of this galling lack of solidarity at the micro level.  Coming back to the rich white neighborhood, years ago my youngest sister went to the neighborhood swimming pool during the middle of the day.  Every resident has a key to the pool, but my sister didn’t have the key at the time.  There were plenty of people, they all knew who she was, but no one bothered to let her in.  So she just climbed over the fence.  No one said anything to her there, but the neighborhood busy-bodies made sure to send out a chastising email regarding the incident to EVERYONE on the local email list, and complained about how offended they were by it.

Why are we so eager to pick at and destroy one another over small, stupid, and largely irrelevant things?  Today we see a lot of people’s lives being crushed early on.  Why does a teenage kid need to be branded as a sex offender for streaking?  Why are people eager to have someone’s kids taken away by the state, just because they let their kids wander a bit?  What is this?  Why are we so eager to call the police on someone rather than attempt a civilized negotiation?  Why do we have so much malice and hatred for one another, that it spills over at the slightest provocation?

Well, while this is going on hordes of barbarians our pouring across our border every day.  While we strain and pick at each other over small stupid things, the rug is being pulled out from underneath our feet.  Soon we’ll all abruptly and painfully fall onto our bums, and when we look up we’ll be surrounded by a crowd of complete strangers, eager to run their hands through our pockets.

This is the definition of straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel whole.

It may seem like a victory, to some, that they are able to get the government to put up a stupid sign, curtailing the freedom of movement of their fellow citizens, but their kids and grandkids are going to feel the burn of their misplaced priorities.  OK, so you scared off a few middle aged white people.  Big deal.  None of those signs are going to stop Mexican migrants, who are going to be the majority around 2040, or at best 2060.

The Mexicans won’t care about any sign or FENCE.  They will go wherever they want.  They’ll come to your rich white neighborhood because you have nice stuff, and they’ll take it as they please.  If they get arrested, they’ll just return to their lifestyle as soon as they get back out.  They’ll live off your welfare money, and gang rape your girls whenever they feel like it.  They don’t care.  They don’t have any empathy towards you, or any respect for your history and culture, or the laws of your country.  They already broke the law when they came in.

So, you can enjoy the pettiness and personal security now, but you’re descendants won’t have that luxury.  They will be forced to face a grim and grinding reality where violence, litter, rape (not cry rape but real backwoods and back alley forced penetration), and squatting are daily facts of life.  At that point, even if you want to go into the forest it won’t be safe.  Or it may be that the forest next to your rich white neighborhood is replaced with a bario of mestizos who don’t speak English, and who are just waiting for an opportunity to catch you out walking alone so that they can loot your stuff and toss your body in a ditch somewhere.

Take the Red Pill: http://www.vdare.com/articles/memo-from-middle-america-reconquistas-anti-americans-natural-republicans-rage-at-ann-coulter-south-of-the-border

Advertisements

Published by:

Radamanthes

I could be described as a libertarian monarchist with religious leanings and sympathies towards anarchy and nationalism. I have realized that a lot of my views are reactionary. Most of the time it's when I see something I don't like that I feel inspired to write. I'm basically like a badger being poked with a stick. I'm fairly ornery when poked, but I don't wish people harm provided that they don't seek to harm me either directly or indirectly. I don't at all care for the left, and I am not at all happy that they are out to destroy my way of life and undermine my freedom. But one of my goals is to spread awareness as much as I can. My Manifesto in Short.: 1. Dejure rights and positive liberty are invalid concepts. Man in his natural state is free. He is free to create what he wants, occupy and defend a territory he exists in, associate with who he wants, wear what he wants, say what he wants, follow whatever religion he wants, and essentially do whatever he pleases. Government is an artificial imposition which requires force both to come into existence and to exist. Therefore, government is not in a position to grant freedom or rights, as those already exist prior to the institution of government. Government can curtail freedoms, but it can never give them. The only fully legitimate function of government is to protect the natural rights of others from being violated by forces which they are incapable of combating, for example, protecting a farmer from the Mongol invasion. Protecting someone from having their feelings hurt is not a legitimate function, as never having hurt feelings is not a natural right. 2. Freedom of association and speech are more important than anyone's feelings. Feelings are subjective, and there is no reason why one person's feelings are any more valid than anyone else's. A law to protect one person's feelings from being hurt is certain to harm another person's, therefore, feelings cannot be a basis for law. My freedoms do not end where another person's feelings begin. 3. Democracy is a failure, and it is predicated on faulty premises. In order for Democracy to work, two criterion must be fulfilled, 1) those who tally the votes must do so honestly, and 2) those who vote must be moral and intelligent enough to make wise and proper decisions. The first premise is impossible to prove, and the second is not true of most people, therefore, Democracy is a questionable endeavor at best, and ultimately doomed to failure. In fact, under the best of circumstances Democracy is mob rule, but aside from that it also opens the door to demagoguery, tribal politics, and lobbying. 4. Communism and Islam are no less evil than Nazism. Communism has killed more people than Nazism, and in fact Stalin alone killed more people than Hitler. Islam has killed, and continues to kill more people than Communism and Nazism together. The only reason why communism and Islam are given a free pass is because Cultural Marxists are in charge of education, the media, and entertainment. Cultural Marxists have decided to institute communism by attacking the culture, and they have recognized Islam as something which they can use as an ally (for the time being). That is why both of those toxic ideologies get a free pass, but really they should not. Hitler worked with both Communists AND Muslims before the allies entered the war, and during the war he continued to work with Muslims. If some guy were to go around in a Nazi uniform and goose-step and Sieg hiel as he walked down the street he would never be able to get a job. His life would be over, and he might even be met with physical violence. If a white guy did it then things would be even worse. However, Muslims are able to walk down our streets wearing their terrorist clothing, their robes and hijabs, which represent thousands of years of slaughter, antisemitism, and persecution of religious and ethnic minorities (not to mention violence against women), and people just let them go. I want a complete and indefinite hiatus on Muslim immigration, and I want us to start repatriating the Muslims that are already here. 5. I utterly reject the concept of the "social contract." I did not ask to exist, nor did I have any control over what part of the world I was born in, which people group I was born into, or what other groups might happen to exist around me. Since my existence is entirely involuntary, I cannot be held responsible for the fact that I exist, nor is my existence sufficient grounds to argue that I owe something to someone else. I do not owe anyone money, goods, or services simply on the basis that I exist or that they exist. 6. Collective guild is a rubbish concept. No one can help what group they are born into, and no one is born owing anyone else anything. Debt is the result of borrowing resources on some level, and having just entered in the world one does not have the capacity to borrow, or really do anything beyond the most basic biological functions. Therefore, the notion that one baby is born owing something to another baby is absurd at best. 7. I thoroughly support Israel. I fully admit to supporting Israel for religious reasons, but if those were not in place I would still support Israel out of enlightened self-interest. Israel fulfills the real world equivalent of the function Gondor serves in Tolkien's Middle Earth. By that I mean they are close to the evil army, and draw a lot of it's attention and focus, and in doing so they protect the west. The difference is, that in Tolkien's world the west does not actively seek to import orcs and other members of the evil army, behind Gondor's back, whereas our moron leaders in real life do constantly import the evil army. Also, Jews are not a monolithic group, There are both left wing and right wing Jews. Those who are on the left are not motivated by religion to do what they do, but by the perverse Marxist ideology which they have adopted in place of their religion.

Categories Uncategorized2 Comments

2 thoughts on “Straining at a Gnat and Swallowing a Camel”

  1. “So my first question was, who owns the forest, and why can’t I go there? Some people might say, “the city owns it.”

    OK, but who is “the city”? Can you point me to this fellow?

    “The city is everyone who is in the city.”

    Really? Is that so? OK, then which part of the forest is mine? I’d like to go in there and chill for a bit.”

    I love this. Ayn Rand said that “society” actually means everyone but oneself. So it essentially means no one, which in statist terms really means the monopoly of power: mostly, a bunch of bureaucrats.

    Like

    1. I’m going to read Ayn Rand (eventually). My good buddy I’m coauthoring with is in the process of reading one of her books.

      You might also consider reading Edger Rice Burroughs. He is one of the father’s of classic sci-fi, and most of his stuff is overtly and blatantly anti-communist and anti-egalitarian. He rags on communism without mercy, and attaches it to low intellect and bad morals. All of his villains are either overt communists or fascist dictators.

      He’s actually one of my major literary influences, right along with Isaac Asimov.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s