"Re-education occurs in
the school curricula, which now include such treasures as Black
History Month and Gay, Lesbian and Transgender History Month, where
history is rewritten on the flimsiest (and even non-existent)
evidence that national icons such as Florence Nightingale and
William Shakespeare were homosexual" [Anthony Browne, The Retreat
of Reason, p. 17].
"After two decades with
some rather stunning successes, we took time to step back to
evaluate our experience fighting to abolish slavery. Here's what we
learned: A major flaw in the human rights community needs to be
addressed. The history of the modern day abolitionist effort is a
history of small, dedicated passionate groups of people, fighting
slavers and slaving nations - while the large, well funded human
rights organizations sat on the sidelines, or in the case of Sudan,
actually hindered our work. I spent more than a decade unravelling
why this was the case: how could the very people who led the fight
against apartheid in South Africa turn their heads away from the
plight of black slaves in North Africa who suffered much worse
oppression? The short answer is what I have called, 'the human
rights complex'. Briefly: Western rights groups consist mainly of
decent white people who are motivated to fight evil committed by
people who are like themselves. The vast majority of slave-owners
are non-white. If human rights organizations are embarrassed to
point out, much less fight hard against awful behaviour by
non-whites, they cannot be counted upon to be an important force in
a movement to abolish slaves around the world. Any effort to free
the some 27 million people who are today in bondage, without
addressing this human rights flaw, is destined to remain relatively
small, no matter how heroic"
"Compare the USA's short
Colonial slave history to that of the history of Arabs (Islamic and
Pre-Islamic) who colonized North and east Africa, who hunted,
enslaved, tortured and killed Ethnic Africans for several thousands
of years before the same geographical Arabs started/opened the slave
trade to Colonial America who merely (in comparison) bought slaves
for servitude. M.E. Arabs have a history of thousands of years of
human slavery, which even continues today in the M.E.'s 'modern
"Europe did not have a
monopoly on slavery. Muslim traders also exported as many as 17
million slaves to the coast of the Indian Ocean, the Middle East,
and North Africa. [Slavery was a] horrible, nasty trade in human
beings. Who could disagree? Eventually it was stopped, not least
because of the great work of a British man - William Wilberforce"
For more on Slavery see
"The fifth grade
Houghton Mifflin social studies text called America Will Be
... includes a series of lessons that idealize Native American
beliefs and lifestyles, then asks students the following 'Critical
Thinking' question: 'The Creeks [Native Americans in the Southeast]
and the Europeans had different ideas about how the land should be
used. Compare the Creeks' ideas with those of the Europeans. Which
ideas do you think are better?
[EMcD: Emphasis mine]
Explain your opinion.' The Teacher's Edition shows the
correct opinion, which is the predetermined outcome:
'Creeks believed land belonged to everyone and couldn't be
individually owned. They believed in a respectful use of the land so
it would continue to provide food and forest resources. Europeans
believed that land was a commodity to be bought and sold and owned
by individuals for their own benefit. They cleared forests to make
room for farms to make a profit. Students who agree with Creek ideas
might cite reasons such as this - clearing forests caused valuable
topsoil to be blown away and a loss of trees that produce the oxygen
people need.' Since students reading these misleading
suggestions usually receive negative information about European
settlers and idealistic images of native American lifestyles, they
are hardly equipped to resist the convincing conclusion. Committed
to doomsday environmental scenarios that fuel the demand for a
global government and earth-centered religions, educators hide the
fact that Native Americans often burned forests to expand their
cornfields and that 'forest growth in America exceeds harvest by a
wide margin'" [source].
Statism / Capitalism
/ Collectivism / Society
"The creation of a vast
State bureaucracy [in Germany, but also applied to in the Western
world] had created an influential class of people who were, in
economic terms, parasitic on capitalism (they were paid for out of
taxes), but in social terms antagonistic to it; a class which was
jealous of its own power, disdainful of the commercial classes (and
later envious of their growing prosperity); a class of
administrators and planners whose entire reason for existence was
predicated on limiting the freedom which capitalism tends to
encourage, and needs in order to flourish ... The modern State
did not arise in order to 'curb the cruelties' of capitalism.
Far from it. It arose specifically to preserve the privileges of the
existing ruling classes against the democratic, liberating,
enriching and levelling forces of capitalism" [source].
malevolently-misquoted speech about society, Margaret Thatcher
expressed her judgement very clearly. She said 'There is no such
thing as society' and so suffered the hysterical wrath of Marxists,
the left wing press, the BBC and the academic sociologists who make
a fine living out of their worship of the abstracted concept
'society'. But she went on to say that we are individuals in
families and in all kinds of benign associations and groups and that
we have a responsibility to one another. In other words, Margaret
Thatcher paraphrased that most hated thing, Christian morality..."
"'The whole direction of
politics in the last 30 years' [Margaret Thatcher] contested in
1981, 'has always been towards the collectivist society. People have
forgotten about the personal society. And they say: "Do I count, do
I matter?"' It was a boldness of expression that led to her
infamous 'no such thing as society' assertion to Woman's Own
magazine in 1987. In fact, the phrase has been so taken out of
context as to have had its meaning reversed. She was criticising
those who did nothing to help other people by using the excuse that
it was up to 'society' to do it. Her following sentence was, 'There
is a living tapestry of men and women and people, and the beauty of
that tapestry, and the quality of our lives, will depend upon how
much each of us is prepared to take responsibility for ourselves and
each of us is prepared to turn round and help by our own efforts
those who are unfortunate.' Far from being an ode to
selfishness, it was an appeal for good neighbourliness" [source].
Empire / Colonialism /
Imperialism / Leftist 'Guilt'
Charles Napier ... was the English Viceroy in India in the 1850s. A
Hindu priest had come to him to complain about the prohibition of
Sati by British authorities. ... After listening to the Hindu
priest, General Napier replied: 'Be it so. This burning of widows is
your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a
custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all
their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which
to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act
according to national customs.' No suttee took place then or
"After fifteen years of celebrating diversity in Blair's Britain,
General Sir Charles Napier today would have been reduced in the
ranks to Private Napier due to his lack of sensitivity to different
but equally valid cultural choices, while letters criticising
British 'Colonial Imperialism' would have appeared immediately in
the Guardian. It's a brilliant quote. Someone should send it to
Theresa May, together with a picture of a backbone"
"When upper-caste Hindus
forced Indian untouchables to work as scavengers and carry human
excreta in wicker baskets on their heads, it was Christian
missionaries, not Leftist activists, who touched them and told them
God had created them in his image and likeness. Christianity was the
only liberating solution to the worst form of racism the world has
ever seen - the Hindu caste system. It was Christianity and
capitalism, not Hinduism and socialism, that transformed India from
a s***hole to an economic and educational powerhouse" [source].
"Personally, I am proud
of the role that Britain has played throughout the ages in the cause
of freedom. This is the nation that brought common law, democracy,
industrialisation (which has caused a massive increase in life
expectancy and quality of life) and good governance to billions of
people across the globe. This is the nation that abolished slavery,
that confronted political hegemony, that defied fascism" [source].
"[Nelson] Mandela began
as a terrorist and never turned his back on monsters like Arafat and
Castro, whom he considered brothers in arms. When he was released
from prison by de Klerk, he showed unexpected statesmanship,
counselling reconciliation rather than revenge, no small achievement
in a country in which the 'liberation' movement (led by Mandela's
wife and party) placed oil filled inner tubes around the necks of
former comrades and set them on fire. But if a leader should be
judged by his works, the country Mandela left behind is an
indictment of his political career, not an achievement worthy of
praise - let alone the unhinged adoration he is currently receiving
across the political spectrum. South Africa today is the murder
capital of the world, a nation where a woman is raped every 30
seconds, often by AIDS carriers who go unpunished, and where whites
are anything but the citizens of a democratic country which honors
the principles of equality and freedom. Liberated South Africa is
one of the epic messes the Left created and promptly forgot about" [source].
For more on
please also see
Putting Socialism to
the Test: One
"An economics professor at a local
college made a statement that he had never failed a single student
before, but had recently failed an entire class. That class had
insisted that socialism worked and that no one would be poor and no
one would be rich, a great equaliser.
"The professor then said: 'OK, we
will have an experiment in this class on socialism. All grades will
be averaged and everyone will receive the same grade so no one will
fail and no one will receive an A.'
"After the first test, the grades
were averaged and everyone got a B. The students who studied hard
were upset and the students who studied little were happy. As the
second test rolled around, the students who studied little had
studied even less and the ones who studied hard decided they wanted
a free ride too so they studied little.
"The second test average was a D!
No one was happy.
"When the third test rolled around,
the average was an F.
"As the tests proceeded, the scores
never increased as bickering, blame and name-calling all resulted in
hard feelings and no one would study for the benefit of anyone else.
"To their great surprise, AL FAILED
and the professor told them that socialism would also ultimately
fail because when the reward is great, the effort to succeed is
great, but when government takes all the reward away, no one will
try or want to succeed. It could not be any simpler than that.
- You cannot legislate the poor
into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
- What one person receives without
working for, another person must work to contribute.
- The government cannot give to
anybody anything that it doesn't first take from somebody else.
- You cannot multiply wealth by
- When half of the people get the
idea that they do not have to work because the other half is
going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the
idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going
to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of
Putting Socialism to
the Test: Two
From an email
published on 09 February 2011. Reproduced
"For Conservative read Tory or
Republican (right wing & capitalist). For Liberal read Democrat,
Labour, Libdem or Green (left wing and socialist)."
"A young woman was about to finish
her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she
considered herself to be very Liberal, and among other liberal
ideals was very much in favour of higher taxes to support more
government programs: i.e. redistribution of wealth.
"She was deeply ashamed that her
father was a rather staunch Conservative, a feeling she openly
expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and
the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had
for years harboured an evil, selfish desire to hoard wealth.
"One day she was challenging her
father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need
for more governmental programs.
"The self-professed objectivity
proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated
so to her father. He responded by asking her how she was doing
"Taken aback, she answered rather
haughtily that she had a Grade Point Average of 4.0, and let him
know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a
very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left
her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She
didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many
college friends because she spent all her time studying.
"Her father listened and then asked:
'How is your friend Audrey doing?'
"She replied: 'Audrey is barely
getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies and
she barely has a GPA of 2.0. She is so popular on campus;
college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties
and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's
too hung over.'
"Her wise father asked his daughter:
'Why don't you go the Dean's office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off
your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That
way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair
and equal distribution of GPA.'
The daughter, visibly shocked by her
father's suggestion, angrily fired back: 'That's a crazy idea, how
would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades!
I've invested a lot of time and a lot of hard work! Audrey has
done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my
The father slowly smiled, winked and
said gently: 'Welcome to the Conservative side of the fence.'
If anyone has a better explanation of
the difference between Conservative and Liberal I'm all ears."
"European culture has
been gutted by Post-Modern 'victim'-obsessed PC indoctrination which
has already warped the minds of the young" [comment at:
extended extract is from the
The Origin of 'Identity Politics' & 'Political Correctness'
(sometimes dubbed 'political correctness') is the result of a
political-Left major backlash against the mass of ordinary people
(in Europe and 'the West'), beginning in the 1920s/30s, in the wake
of the persistent failure of Marxist theory to be realised in
European 'revolution' or any real change through democracy. In
shifting the blame away from Marxist theory and those gullible
enough to adhere to it, and on to those the theory had prescribed
and predicted would have been the beneficiaries, if only they had
responded accordingly ('the [white, male] workers'); then the
cognitive-dissonance within the political-left mindset caused by
this crisis to an extent was salved"
"As with any fervent ideology, a
hallmark of the political-Left is interpreting anything and
everything in its own ideological terms to claim as a manifestation
of the ideology and its prophecy - jumping on a bandwagon, so to
speak; though here only to hijack it. The bandwagon here was, of
course, the American civil rights movement, which though enjoying
ubiquitous support within black communities - to the point often of
various forms of extremism - featured virtually nil endorsement of
socialism ... It is from the time of this co-option that 'identity
politics' dates; many considering that the movement was incorporated
into the Left in the wake of King's assassination in 1968 - the
major turning-point year in political-Left politics generally"
"'Civil rights', as the first great
'single-issue' campaign, served not least to provide an acceptable
cloak for the Left to avoid provoking a resurgence of McCarthysim.
The major social upheaval of 'civil rights' with its large-scale and
widespread rioting was easily the nearest thing in then recent US
history to look like the promised Marxist 'revolution', and
obviously was just the practical application the 'theory' was
seeking. Moreover, the protagonists (black Americans) were eminently
separable form the now despised 'workers' per se, in being
presentable as a new 'group; from outside of the former fray of
'boss' versus 'worker'.
"This accident of history served to
add 'black' to 'woman' as 'the new oppressed' ... 'The worker' in
effect was retrospectively stereotyped as both 'man' and 'white'.
With the inverse of this stereotype of 'white' being not just 'black
American' but 'black' - that is, ethnic-minority generically ... so
it was that the new 'agents of social change' / 'disadvantaged' /
'oppressed' were extended from women to also include all ethnic
"It is only with the knowledge of how
this developed that sense can be made of why ethnicity is held above
the myriad other possible differences that could be utilised as
in-group markers, when in fact there is nothing inherent in
ethnicity as an in-group marker to produce inter-group prejudice
that is particularly more pernicious"
"Indeed, the worst inter-communal
conflicts nominally between different ethnicities usually are
between different cultural heritages with no discernible 'racial'
differences of any kind - and what (non-ethnic) differences there
are can be minimal; the lack of contrast actually fuelling the
intensity of conflict, such is the need for groups to feel
distinguished from each other"
"Furthermore, ethnic prejudice is
anything but restricted to or even predominantly 'white' on 'black':
inter-ethnic (eg, 'black' on Asian) and ethnic-on-'white' 'racism'
can be, often is and may usually be the greater problem; and a
negative attitude to a certain ethnicity does not imply a similar
attitude to other ethnicities"
"The specific US experience, given
the highly divisive politics in the wake of the American Civil War
over the basis of the Southern US economy in African slavery, does
not translate to elsewhere; notably not to Europe - as was starkly
evidenced in the experience of World War II 'black' American GIs
stationed in England in how they were favourably received by locals,
who sided with them when discriminated against"
"'Racial divides' in European 'white'
host countries are the result not of mutual antipathy but
affiliative forces, principally within migrant enclaves and
secondarily within the 'host' community; in both cases being through
in-group 'love', not out-group 'hate'"
[EMcD: though the latter
part of this observation is indeed true in normal circumstances,
this does not, of course, take account of the Islamic/Koranic
doctrines of Al-Hijra (Immigration), Taqiyya (Lying and Deceit), and Razzia/Ghazwa
(Rape and Slavery), Dawa (Cultural and Stealth Jihad), and Terrorist
and Violent Jihad, carried out by fundamentalist Muslims as
they settle in increasing numbers in Western countries with the sole
purpose of making every remaining Dar al-Harb ('House of War': i.e.
any non-Muslim country) into a Dar al-Islam ('House of Submission': i.e all Muslim countries) until Islam finally achieves its
longed-for global Caliphate.]
[End of Extract]
"The Frankfurt School
believed that as long as an individual had the belief - or even the
hope of belief - that his divine gift of reason could solve the
problems facing society, then that society would never reach the
state of hopelessness and alienation that they considered necessary
to provoke socialist revolution.
Their task, therefore, was as
swiftly as possible to undermine the Judaeo-Christian legacy. To do
this they called for the most negative destructive criticism
possible of every sphere of life which would be designed to
de-stabilize society and bring down what they saw as the
'oppressive' order. Their policies, they hoped, would spread like a
virus - 'continuing the work of Western Marxists by other means' as
one of their members noted.
To further the advance
of their 'quiet' cultural revolution ... the [Frankfurt] School
recommended (among other things):
(1) the creation of racism
(2) continual change to create confusion,
(3) the teaching
of sex and homosexuality to children,
(4) the undermining of
schools' and teachers' authority,
(5) huge immigration to destroy
(6) the promotion of excessive drinking,
(7) emptying of
(8) an unreliable legal system with bias against victims
(9) dependency on the state or state benefits,
control and dumbing down of media,
(11) encouraging the breakdown of
One of the main ideas
of the Frankfurt School was to exploit Freud's idea of 'pansexualism'
- the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences
between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships
between men and women. To further their aims they would:
the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and
mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary
educators of their children,
(b) abolish differences in the
education of boys and girls,
(c) abolish all forms of male dominance
- hence the presence of women in the armed forces,
(d) declare women
to be an 'oppressed class' and men as 'oppressors'."
eight levels of control that must be obtained before you are able to
create a social state:
Healthcare - Control healthcare and you control the
Poverty - Increase the Poverty level as high as
possible, poor people are easier to control and will not fight
back if you are providing everything for them to live;
- Increase the debt to an unsustainable level. That wa6y you are
able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty;
Control - Remove the ability to defend themselves from
the Government. That way you are able to create a police state;
Welfare - Take control of every aspect of their lives
(Food, Housing, and Income);
Education - Take control of that people read and listen
to - take control of what children learn in school;
Religion - Remove the belief in God from the Government
Class Warfare - Divide the people into the wealthy and
the poor. This will cause more discontent and it will be easier
to take from (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor" [source].
"Woe unto them that call evil
good, and good evil;
that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that
put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!"
note that the inclusion of any quotation or item on this page does not
imply we would necessarily endorse the source from which the extract is
taken; neither can we necessarily vouch for any other materials by the
or any groups or
ministries or websites with which they may be associated, or any
periodicals to which they may contribute, or the
beliefs of whatever kind they may hold, or any other aspect of their
work or ministry or position.