Friday 23 December 2011

Pour encourager les autres

It seems one can hardly move at the moment without tripping over a hate crime prosecution, usually a thought crime involving the use of prohibited speech.  For instance, the Uruguayan footballer Luis Suarez (above), who now plays for Liverpool, has been banned for eight matches and fined £40,000 ($ 62,496) for using a word which sounds like 'Negro', to serial hate crimes victim Patrice Evra. It mattered not that the word which Suarez used does not have any of the connotations which have been imposed upon it in the West when used in his own homeland, where one of the most revered figure in the history of Uruguayan football is Obdulio Varela, captain of the side that won the World Cup in 1950 whose nickname was "El Negro Jefe",  meaning the black boss, the word sounded like a racial insult so poor old Suarez had to pay.

One is reminded of the official in Washington who was forced to resign in 1999 for using the word “niggardly” in a speech.  Yes, it really happened!

Of course it appears that any number of words are equally toxic, as ex-football player turned TV commentator Alan Hanson discovered this week when he found himself clinging to his job and forced to issue grovelling apologies on account of having uttered the word “coloured” during a discussion about alleged “racism” in football. Does anyone care to bet on whether whether Hanson will suddenly vanish from out TV screens in they which David Starkey appears to have done since he accused white rioters of adopting black culture 

At the same time, the infamous “tram lady” Emma West is spending Christmas on bail following having been secretly filmed failing to express sufficient delight at her enriched multicultural environment, and England football captain John Terry is facing criminal prosecution for allegedly using an unkind word to a black player with whom he was having a heated encounter.

As British readers will also know there is a trial taking place at the Old Bailey, however, for the time being I demur from referring to that, given what happened to Rod Liddle when he did so

However, there is a purpose tor all these trials, the same purpose for which other totalitarian police states and dictatorships have used similar show trials at different times and in different places.  When rulers seek to impose unpopular policies on their citizens, they require victims whom they can make examples of, punish, humiliate and destroy so as to frighten the public into obedience, and to silence any objections to what is being done.

These trials, together with the regular press vilification of anyone who ventures into prohibited speech, either by accident or design, are intended to silence dissent, and they are very effective.         

Our rulers depend on the fact that few of the public are sophisticated enough to draw a distinction between “racism” and legitimately opposing mass immigration. Of course, it has never been illegal, or indeed racist to oppose mass immigration, but it has always felt as if it was.  That, of course, is deliberate, as the establishment, together with their acolytes in the press and entertainment media have done everything in their power to make it feel that way.    

Show trials were of course a feature of Nazi Germany, but, as with much else they were perfected to an art form in Stalin's Russia, where, by very publicly eradicating members of the pre-revolutionary Bolshevik party, for made up or ideological crimes, the cunning old monster achieved the dual result of getting rid of potential rivals, whilst at the same time keeping the Russian public terrified and obedient.

Show trials can also be used as racial retribution, such as in South Africa where four white teen aged boys can be convicted of murder and sent to prison on the evidence of the body of someone killed elsewhere, by someone else and at a different time.

However, such trials are intended to placate a racist majority, rather than to intimidate the majority as is the purpose of show trials in the West.     

Trials conducted in order to influence the behaviour of the wider public and where the punishment of the defendant is a secondary consideration are nothing new.  For instance, as early as 1756, the trial and subsequent execution of Admiral Byng for "failure to do his utmost" to relieve the siege of the British garrison on Minorca” was less about punishing the unfortunate Byng than it was about ensuring that other Admirals would try considerably harder in future.

Likewise the prosecution and swift dispatch of poor shell-shocked wretches, on charges of cowardice, during the so called "Great War" were ruthless and cruel attempts to make other young soldiers view staying in those terrible trenches and fighting that evil and misguided war, slightly less terrifying than running away.

In very many ways the prosecutions of John Terry and Emma West serve a very, very similar purpose. They are show trials, they are exhibitions, they are theatre, they punish, humiliate and usually destroy the offender but they are intended for the audience, the public. They are acts of terror, intended to make us obey.

Pour encourager les autres: "in order to encourage the others" —said ironically of an action (as in a flogging or an execution) carried out in order to compel others to obey or submit


EYE OF HORUS said...

As you can now plainly see, the Real Terrorists that want to destroy England are not Al Qaeda and their band of barbarians, but the barbarians that have already breached the gates: Blair and his Infernal Menagerie of Anti-White Turncoats in the Labour sic. Communist Party!
The Tories don't seem to be much better with their multicultural cult of White Genocide!
Hopefully, the English will embrace Nationalist Parties before the tipping point is reached, and dark savages plot a feast of Roasted Englishmen!

Laager said...

@ Eye of Horus

I am not so sure that there will be organised civil or racial war against white caucasian Britons

Take a look at South Africa as a case study.

At present it is random slayings of normally 4 to 6 blacks against 1 white. In many cases it is women and children and old and infirm males.

If it comes to a pitched battle you will see the anti-white brigade run a mile. They are fundamentally cowards.

The real problem lies in letting the immigrant invaders get into positions of administrative control. Not only are they incompetent [example Detroit USA] but they will be prejudiced against their erstwhile hosts. It is bad enough that they have allies in the left wing loonies who occupy these posts now.

The UK still has time to win this battle through the ballot box.

That is why the various nationalist groups must unify and consolidate into a single movement.

I read that a recent survey revealed that 70% of Britons are opposed to the current rate of immigration and want it stopped. The majority is already there. It is up to the nationalist to provide a political home that is acceptable to this majority to stop this mess and turn it around.

Anonymous said...

As much as the Suarez and Terry affiars amuse me because they highlight the insanity of PC, Suarez is pulling the wool over people's eyes with his "it's not an insult in my country" defence.

I speak fluent Spanish. What is critically important in the language is context.

People call blacks "negro, negrito/a" all the time. You can use it as a greeting "que pasa negri/o/ito/a" or as a nickname. There is no malice or bad intent so no offence is taken.

But if I were to say to a black guy "Que miras negro?" with menace, then I am in effect saying

"What are you looking at nigger?"

And I had better be prepared for a fight! It's all about meaning and context. There are many such words used in this way, especially conjo, cabron and maricon. I'll let you find out for yourself what these mean :)

But these football clubs have been giving it the "Let's kick racism out of football" towards the fans who they blame for it for years. Now it turns out that their own players are guilty of this Orwellian thought-crime, suddenly, kicking racism out of football isn't that important. If a fan had said "Black c***" or "f**k off negro", you can bet the clubs involved would've been all to keen to condemn them and join in the resulting witch-hunt.

Merry Christmas Sarah and to all British patriots fighting to save our country from the Marxist PC lunatics.


Anonymous said...

to serial hate crimes victim Patrice Evra

I am glad that someone picked up on his being a serial victim. Why even the referee victimised him when he booked him later and Evra said "You are only doing that because I am black."

Laurel said...

This is really, really going to backfire.

People will just stop talking and going out in public.

Instead, they will retreat from the society and the society will collapse.

Galafrin said...

A recent example of friendly use of the word negro in spanish headlines.

A photo of El negro Acacio.

In Colombia the guerrilla is so old the public has got familiar with, sort of.

Also in english, refering to President Obama as Barack the black would sound neither racist.

Anonymous said...

When a former Feyenoord player was called a black bastard the media had no problem with it happening to him.

It is discrimnation I tell you!