Muslim Kill Liberals pt 4

The UK's Evening Standard reports on more cultural enrichment in London in Battersea murder: Cyclist, 17, 'hacked to death by masked gang armed with machetes' on south London estate.

A 17-year-old cyclist was hacked to death by masked youths wielding machetes in a terrifying attack on a London housing estate, witnesses said today.

The victim was chased by a gang wearing balaclavas and carrying large knives who stabbed him multiple times and left him sprawled on the bonnet of a car in Battersea.

Neighbours told how they raised the alarm after being woken at 1.25am on Sunday by the boy’s scream of “help me, I’m dying”.

He was rushed to a south London hospital by paramedics where he he was pronounced dead around 90 minutes later.

He is the fourth teenager to be murdered in London in this month alone, and the eighth this year.

The article doesn't specify the identity of the victim, but you'd have to be pretty dense not to comprehend the source of cultural enrichment that gang stabs random teenagers with machetes and leaves them to bleed out in a parking lot. It does mention that it has been the fourth murder of a teenager this month. 

I would never tell a parent who lost a child that they deserved it, but then again you'd never find me raising my child in an area with such cultural enrichment. Native Brits who remain in Londonistan must realize they are taking on these kinds of risks by living amongst Europe's favored sons & daughters. Immigrants themselves are also the victims of immigrant violence, judging by the names, but even they made the willful decision to root their families out of their ancestral homeland. It's not apparent to me that the migrants are any safer in the European neighborhoods they end up in. But if I was living in Jihadistan and Britain was offering welfare bennies to anyone who could make it there with a sad enough sob story to apply for asylum...well I'd certainly be tempted.

There is another lesson in this story. The article mentions that knife and gun crime is on the rise. I'll spare you a gun control argument, but notice what's happening here. In London there are armed gangs roaming and killing people nearly at random. Four dead in a month. If four were killed all at once it would be breaking international news for a couple days. Since they're spread out, they're barely covered. Google News shows only four outlets picking up the story, all British.

If you're somewhat conservative or K-selected, this would be an abhorrent reality. In America, we pretty much look the other way as gangbangers shoot each other up, but once innocent citizens start getting hit we take strong action to stop the random criminality. This is a core distinction between r- and K-selected traits. In r, violence is okay just so long as it is random. The violence should not give any group selective advantage. Note the British stance on guns. Absolutely not allowed. Why, because it will lower crime? Certainly not! This article alone should be enough to destroy that narrative. No, they're against citizen gun ownership because it would give one group -- gun owners-- a competitive advantage. Guns by themselves don't give an advantage (in a lawful society), and random crime doesn't either, but put them together and the armed folk gain a survival advantage versus their gunophobic counterparts.

Ostensibly the r-selected rabbits don't want random violence or gun rights (which is equated with violence). They don't want any violence at all. That's what they say, but r/K theory would predict that, at a subconscious level, they should actually desire the violence. And in practice, isn't that what we see? Besides the gated communities of the very rich, every place liberals touch there is violence. The inner cities are violent. The refugee camps are violent. The Mexican gangs are violent. The Muslims are violent. BLM is violent. Their foreign policy (under Obama) tended to support violent radicals. Their protests turn violent. They bring violence to the peaceful rallies of their political opponents.

For a group that is against violence of all sorts, they sure seem to surround themselves in a perpetual cloud of violence. Still they loathe self-defense gun rights. This is probably the most confounding thing to standard conservatives, but it is all perfectly congruent with r/K theory.

Sweden: How Bad Could it Get?

When contemplating some social ill, it is important to avoid slippery slope arguments. For instance, when talking about Sweden, it would be easy to make some wild predictions such as these:

• Things will get so bad that the government will refuse to take crime statistics for fear what it will reveal. (1)
• Things will get so bad that journalists intent on disproving no go zones will be violently attacked and forced to flee. (1, 2, 3)
• Things will get so bad that boys who commit gang rape at school will be sympathized with as victims if they receive even light punishment. (1)
• Things will get so bad that Sweden will refuse to deport gang raping refugees out of concern for the refugees. (1)
• Things will get so bad that the police will quit in droves because of the danger and disrespect inherent in their jobs. (1, 2)
• Things will get so bad that they will be unable to build police stations in trouble areas because construction companies will refuse out of fear. (1)
• Thinks will get so bad that police will be forced to fire live rounds to protect themselves from rioters. (1)

Sadly though, these wild-eyed predictions are already the reality in Sweden. They seem like fanatacism to most people who are unaware of what is happening there. The base perception is that immigrants are culturally enriching and are filling critical occupations like doctors. What if your base perception was the items listed above, where police seem nearly powerless against their newest citizens? What would be the next level of slippery slope arguments?

• Things will get so bad that all women are compelled to wear headcovers.
• Things will get so bad that Swedish men won't feel safe walking at night (as is the case already for Swedish women).
• Things will get so bad that more than half of young Swedish adults will have fled the country.
• Things will get so bad that the government will have to make drastic cuts to social services, including cutting welfare payments to immigrants.
• Things will get so bad that internal civil war seems imminent.

Let's hope things never progress to the next tier, but I'm willing to take bets on a timeframe.

Trudon't Tread On Me

It looks like six spots have opened up for Trudeau's valuable refugees.

One of two gunmen who shouted 'Allahu akbar!' as they opened fire at a mosque in Quebec City was of Moroccan origin, a witness and local media reported Monday, revealing the first details about the attackers in the massacre that killed six people.

The terror suspects were identified as Mohamed Khadir and Alexandre Bissonnette......

A second source confirms they were both yelling Allahu ahkbar, and that the non-Moroccan had a heavy Quebec accent.

This is a strange attack because initial reports indicate a shooting on a mosque by Muslims, one an immigrant and the other possibly a native Canadian convert. However we do have to consider Coulter's Law on this. If the other shooter was white it would likely have been plastered all over the news by now.

Either way, the race of the perpetrator's is not highly significant: that they were killing in the name of Allah is. This is abysmal timing for Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, who just recently tweeted (the second being faked):

The virtuous PM is basing his nation's immigration on the notion that all refugees are, well, refugees. Even if that was the case I would strongly condemn such a policy. If for no other reason that if you believe it is our duty to help them, you can help 12 times as many by assisting them in theater. So for every refugee you bring here you're telling 11 others to screw off. But even worse it ignores the fact that a great many aren't fleeing persecution, terror, & war, but exporting it. The German interior minister has stated there are over 500 ISIS Jihadis posed as Syrian refugees. This isn't a vague future threat. It is already happening.

I stand by the notion that the worst thing you can do to the west is bring in the refugees, the worst thing you can do for the home countries is bring in the refugees, and the worst thing you can do for the refugees is bring in the refugees.

• It's bad for the west because it is a destabilising force. This "Diversity is our Strength" talk is utter nonsense. Has it ever been true anytime in history that diversity was strength? It could be argued that strength leads to diversity, because people want to live in the prosperous country. There is simply no evidence that diversity is strength. However there is a multitude of examples of homogeneous nations that became powerful, and then fell after they became diverse.
• It's bad for the home countries because it drains them of their key resource: their people. Look at Syria, where men of fighting age have been allowed entry to Europe by the hundreds of thousands. Who is going to rebuild the country? This is not just a problem of Muslims. The quaint east-European nation Latvia is struggling immensely with a demographics crisis because the most talented seek employment in the west. By letting them in the western countries are draining Latvia and other nations of life. That doesn't seem very charitable, and is certainly not a wise approach for long-term continental stability.
• It's bad for the refugees in the long-term. In the short-term it may seem charitable to allow them admittance to escape the savages of war. Except most of the refugees are not fleeing war. That vast majority are not from war-torn areas or even war-torn countries. They are opportunistic economic migrants. As the western nations lose their cultural, religious, and ethnic bonds, they largely are tied together by one force: economics. And that is precisely why the refugees come in the first place. It's only for material benefit. What happens at the next economic collapse? Surely it'll happen eventually; it always does. What happens when there are food shortages? If wide-scale violence ever descends on the west, the foreigners are going to bear the brunt of it. Groups of unassimilated foreigners will not fare well in a collapse situation. 

The great failure of democracy is that policy is now being made by feelings rather than intellect, despite the left's self-assurance that they are the defenders of science. This is not recipe for success. The decline is imminent. I never predicted Trump could save the west, but I held out some hope. As I've seen the visceral emotional reactions from the left, I'm quickly losing all faith in that. My facebook feed is insane, and it's only the more reasonable liberals that have not unfriended me over politics. I can only imagine what it would look like if I had never actively supported Trump. 

We can't have a democracy when feelings trump reason. We can't have a democracy when half the country actively pursues the demographic destruction of the founding nation. We can't have a democracy when one parties primary strategy for power is to import votes at taxpayer expense. We can't have a democracy when half the country is increasingly condoning violence in support of political objectives. (The definition of terrorism). 

Civilizations exist to solve problems. The hallmark of the left is their solutions always end up creating problems worse than what they were trying to solve in the first place. There are big problems with global capitalism but the solution of Communism is by comparison to anything else a disaster. There are two paths the US is likely to take. In one path we continue this long march to Communism. In the other the country becomes increasingly weakened to the point of dissolution of the union. I'm seeing the latter as more likely. We're already seeing a serious movement for Calexit. And if you are an intellectual or free thinker of any sort you should be hoping for the latter. Communists always start killing the intellectual dissidents first. If you care about yourself and your family you should be supporting liberal exits from the US, rather than having them drag us into an oppressive system where they control the state apparatuses of violence. And at this point I would also urge you to consider that liberal democracy does not offer long-term stability and we should be considering other forms of government.

UPDATE It's looking like the shooter was not an immigrant (he's white with a French name) and not a Muslim. However than doesn't invalidate my post. Cultural conflict is happening even if in this case it went in the other direction. Also this post was written in response to general trends, not a single isolated incident, although the incident did compel me to write on the subject.