18 May 2012

Reality Check


Here it is: Nine British Muslims, eight of Pakistani and one of Afghani origin, gang-raped dozens of underage white girls in the northern England town of Rochdale between 2008 and 2010. One of the nine just happens to be a father of five and a religious-studies teacher in his local mosque.
There were 47 known victims, mostly aged 12-16 and living in local government children’s homes. But there were probably many more victims and many more rapists.

Allow me to make three observations:

First, this story should serve as conclusive proof that anarcho-libertarianism is a pipe dream at best and, more realistically, completely unrealizable.  Why?  Some men are simply brute savages, who have no concerns for the rights of others.  In England, where such behavior is illegal based on the understanding of thousands of years of legal doctrines, judicial rulings, and common law heritage, there were men who were apparently incapable of understanding the concept of rights or were otherwise completely unconcerned with the general behavioral implications of such a policy. These type of people cannot be reasoned with, and they should simply be treated as rabid animals, to be put down or otherwise cast out of civilized society, for  they have no place therein.  More broadly, though, there are always and ever men like this:  unthinking brutes who have no empathy or regards for the rights and personhood of others.  Because there are always people like this, it is thus impossible for the dream of absolute unlimited freedom to be recognized.

Second, this bolsters the case that Islamic culture is on the ascendancy. Not only do current demographic trends suggest that Islam will have a numerical advantage, it also appears that the West has no will to combat the barbarism brought about by Islam’s practitioners.  Furthermore, Muslims do not appear to be hampered in any way by feminism, which indicates that their culture is not yet ready for suicide.

Third, and in keeping with the second group, young ladies would do well to discriminate against Muslims and Middle Eastern men.  By this I simply mean that young ladies should avoid contact with these cretins, if at all possible.  Unless said young women are hot and desire thugs and/or a good raping.  But assuming you don’t want to be raped and beaten, it would be best to avoid areas where Middle Eastern Muslim males are known to live and congregate.  Carrying a gun is a good idea as well.

6 comments:

  1. I remember reading that in the US, far more women than men are converting to Islam. There may be an important message in this behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
  2. @TGaPO- I would suspect that the trend you mentioned is more evidence for Roissy's claim that chicks dig jerks. I don't think that's true to the extent that twelve-year-olds want to be gang-raped by foreigners, though, so there's that caveat. I suspect the lesson to be learned is that the men in the West need to stop being wimps (note: this doesn't mean they need to go around gang-raping women), else they will lose their women, and eventually their culture and society to savages.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anarchy-capitalism does not mean no force, means no monopoly of force. These men got away with it because of the UK itself. They were kids in gov care and the cops didnt want to go after them because of fears of appearing racist. I dare say our ancient and more free ancestors would have responded with their own savage violence, and fear of that violence would have likely made them keep their dicks in their pants. This is more a sign of the general decay in the west and UK in particular. UK and really the west are just rotting corpses, get used to the taste of ashes.

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Anonymous- Every anarcho-libertarian I've read has theorized that the stateless society is one where violence is unnecessary, because of the tautological assertion that only the state causes and/or needs violence. If you could point to any anarcho-libertarian writers who have theorized the role of violence in a stateless society, and how it would be addressed in the absence of some form of coercive power, please provide links (if all you know of are books, Amazon links would suffice as I would actually be interested in buying some of those books).

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rothbard talks about the best examples of anarchy-capitalism being the american wild west and medieval Iceland. Now Rothbard did pride himself as a historian, and anyone doing the most minimal research into either places/times will see that basically the private use of force kept problems down. Actually the iceland histories are a good read. Mostly stable then into family war brought on by dickery. IIRC there was also an article a while back on mises.org about gunfighters which makes the arguement for the private hired gun. Humans are voilent creatures, all but the most dense see that. I think the face of anarchy-capitalism shys away from this because people are horrified by private voilence but in love with state violence. Sorry no links at moment, on my phone. And state right here that anarchy-capitalism is a pipe dream, the masses are in love with the dominace of the state. Hell look at the progress of the states growth and the voting patters of women in the past century.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @Anonymous- I recall reading that mises article. My reading of anarcho theorists has been pretty limited, so I've always understood it to be the case that violence was always tacitly defined (by them) as evidence of the state. As such the idea of a truly stateless society is more or less definitionally impossible because man always has the desire to dominate and control others.

    And it's not just that people are in love with the dominance of the state, at least in most democratic societies. People just like the idea of being able to use such massive power against "other people." Of course, this is really an illusion, but it is a powerful one nonetheless.

    ReplyDelete