Surviving The Information War

Surviving the Information War

At the moment, YouTube can be used to say many things. There is not too much heavy-handed censorship. At the moment.

We must not take this for granted. We must make contingency plans and back-ups. We need to make our new freedom of expression and easy direct communication across the world more resilient. Our dependency upon YouTube is a great weakness. We need alternatives to YouTube, Google+, Facebook and Twitter. Of all of these Facebook is the one which is the least useful for alternative political messages because of the way Facebook makes it so easy for leftists and Social Justice Warriors to wear their hearts on their sleeves and indulge in virtue signalling. I am inclined to write it off completely as being of no use beyond keeping in touch with people you went to school with and playing online games.

Twitter, at the moment, is a much better tool for spreading our messages. But I wouldn’t go putting all our eggs in the one basket.

Have you heard of the phrase diversity is strength? In the usual way this is meant it is laughably untrue, unity is strength and diversity is weakness, but in resisting censorship diversity is indeed a strength. We should have more than one way of keeping in touch and more than one way of keeping in touch if one or more of our preferred methods of communicating is being interfered with.

For a long time now I have had my own personal website. It began as a way to communicate with the world. In 1999, I was brimming over with thoughts I needed to share and the internet was exploding all around me, so I joined in and launched my own website. Over the years I have changed the name and focus of my site. At various times it has been The Meme Machine,, Debate Unlimited, Right2Think. Org and most recently For clarification, my website was called the Meme Machine when nobody on the planet thought that a meme was a centred much-recycled photograph on a black border with a slogan underneath it. Memes were back then ideas which replicated, according to the theories of Richard Dawkins and meme theorists who took the concept much

When I started the big thing was atheism and this was what my site was mostly about. When forum software came along naturally it was atheism which linked together the people on my website. From the start I was using my real name. I didn’t think about it much. Basically, the people who I was pissing off were Christians, in America, an ocean away. People who thought turning the other cheek was a virtue. So why did I need to be anonymous? This was in 1999. Two years before 9/11. Islam wasn’t that big a deal to me back then. Of course, I didn’t regard Islam as being better than Christianity, it was obviously worse. But it wasn’t an immediate issue to me.

I first began to take Islam seriously because of the bravest man I know. He was an Iranian-born Canadian student, he had become an atheist and so he had broken with everybody he knew, family, friends, neighbours. Everybody. Any sacrifices that I might be asked to make could never compare to that. I won’t give his name because he has a quite genuine fear of persecution. You are not paranoid when they really are out to get you. I knew him first by his real name, a name which, like most names, marked him clearly with the culture and nationality of his birth. He goes by another name today, it isn’t, but it might as well be Scottie McMountie, it is a name which says he sides firmly with white Canadians without being Christian. Scottie warned me not to directly provoke Muslims and he taught me about several issues such as the so-called golden age of Islam. It was Scottie who first got me to take circumcision seriously as an issue. Of course, this will not compute for Jews, who think that the only reason anybody is against circumcision is that they hate Jews. Judaism didn’t even come into it, although subsequently I have had another perspective on the issue as my wife had been involved in looking after newborn Jewish babies. The first were girls and everything was fine, then she later had to look after boys. Direct experience of looking after eight-day old boys hours after circumcision hardly endeared the practice to her. Anyway, she’s dead now so I don’t need to keep quiet about it.

For many years, my website was 80% about atheism with a bit of other stuff on the side. My politics were liberal and internationalist. I was literally a supporter of a one world government, a marginal tax rate of 100% and making Imagine by John Lennon the effective international anthem. And I didn’t even have the excuse of being a teenager.

Hey, we live and learn. At least some of us do. I have ceased to be an internationalist a long time ago. I have gone from not caring whether or not races were equal (because equality of opportunity doesn’t need a belief in equality to be a sensible policy) to believing that the races probably were not equal. I also learned the true meaning of tolerance. Nobody needs to tolerate things which they like. Tolerance is what you have for poisons. I now tolerate promiscuity and homosexuality. I don’t celebrate them, I don’t think anybody should be attempting to celebrate them and if they do we should tell them the error of their ways. These days far too many people think everything should be illegal or compulsory. If it isn’t banned it should be celebrated. No. There are plenty of things which should be neither banned nor celebrated. Promiscuity, divorce, abortion, violent video games, nigger minstrel shows, felching, sadomasochism, jellied eels, shin-kicking, tattoos all these things belong in a category where nobody should be expected to say they want more and more of them. Can’t we be grown up enough to say that we personally disapprove of something without wanting to make criminals out of those who indulge in them? It is absurd to think that not approving of an activity means you really want to suppress it and kill everybody who is involved. Have these people got no imagination at all? Can’t they grasp that some things are just not to your taste without you feeling that you want to murder everybody involved with them? There is a nearly endless list of things that I don’t like and would cause me no pain at all if they dwindled into extinction but I have no desire to actively eradicate. Warbling sopranos, motorcycle scrambling, grey-bearded bikers with ponytails, Day-Glo cycle shorts, disco, hip-hop, R & B, Elvis, celery…

I think it is madness for any movement to be trying to create a rainbow alliance of misfits to try to destroy the mainstream. My attitude to homosexuality is that we are stuck with it. Whether we try to suppress it or we try to celebrate it we will have homosexuals indulging in their antisocial antics and spreading sexually transmitted infections with gay abandon. We know that smokers die on average seven years younger than non-smokers so our culture has been tweaked to discourage people from becoming smokers. But did you know that the average age of death of a homosexual male is TWENTY YEARS younger than that of a heterosexual male? Could you imagine allowing a group of smokers into schools to talk to the children about the choice they could make to become a smoker? But becoming a smoker is much less dangerous to your mental and physical health than being a promiscuous homosexual. So you say it isn’t a choice. Really? Does nobody get to choose if they are promiscuous? I call bullshit on that. Nobody is able to choose who or what they find sexually attractive but people can choose how they handle those feelings. A promiscuous lifestyle is a choice even if homosexual attraction is not.

These days there are a number of prominent intellectuals and provocative personalities who are homosexuals who are firmly on the right. I have a sneaking suspicion that some of them might be in effect gay for pay. Have we actually seen Milo Yianopolis take a big black cock? No, but he talks about it all the time. Talk is cheap Milo. Are you pretending to be gay so that you can get an audience to listen to what they wouldn’t take from a straight white male? Anyway, back to the digression. Many of my heroes these days are gay. Is that a problem? Of course not. I don’t admire them because they are gay any more than I admire Millennial Woes because he’s Scottish or Jared Taylor because he pronounces the H in white. Milo Yianopolis talks a lot of sense, too much cock and a little bull. But nobody gets everything right. Another homosexual who gets a lot right is Douglas Murray, he’s way too much of a hawk on military intervention overseas but he has a very clear view on what the biggest threats to our civilization are, which is Islam and crazy feminism. One more homosexual beacon of reason is the man who has for many years revelled in the title as the rudest man in Britain: Doctor David Starkey. Starkey sounds like a posh toff but he is a grammar school boy from the working class who made good. There is no finer sight than David Starkey skewering a posh lefty.

None of these men is worth listening to because they are homosexual. There’s nothing big or clever about homosexuality, sodomy or cocksucking. There’s certainly nothing good about transgressive sex. I disagree entirely with Milo Yianopolis when he claimed that the best sex is transgressive. No, it isn’t. The best sex is making love and making babies. Trust me Milo. While we all started off our sexual experiences with masturbation and furtive fumblings some of us can transcend that to have sex which is entirely wholesome and socially approved of, and it’s better than the furtive and sordid stuff. It’s cleaner, healthier, more wholesome and more natural, and it doesn’t need any special devices or lotions.

Enough of that digression, back to the big picture. We need to create networks of networked networks. It is the only way to defend against the enemies of free speech and the enemies of our people. Our enemies believe they have right on their side and we are monsters who deserve to be broken and driven into poverty or thrown in prison because we don’t agree with them. It is only a matter of time before they try to silence us. That is why we need to have alternative ways of getting our voices out there.

Of course I’ve got a website. I don’t trust any of the major players out there to refrain from censoring opinions they don’t like. Too many of them are owned by our enemies. They are owned by rootless cosmopolitans. They are the enemy. Not all the rootless cosmopolitans these days are actually Jewish, but they are represented at levels and proportions which are grossly out of proportion to their population numbers. I don’t hate Jews because they are Jews. I’m not a Christian, I don’t think they are evil Christ-killers or heretics. I think they are foreigners, people whose identity is different and whose loyalty is owed to a group outside my nation. People whose loyalty is to a group I am not a member of are by definition outsiders and foreigners. But that doesn’t mean they must be my enemy. I know my people are not all people, and I know that my people would not stand a chance if the whole of humanity was against us. Therefore, it should be self-evidently good sense to avoid making all outsiders into enemies. We need to be friends with most people, or allies, or at the very least we need to agree not to be enemies in a hot war. The same goes for every nation, no nation or race can survive against the rest of humanity. So I have to be nice to foreigners. But I don’t have to be nice to foreigners under all circumstances. I like the Scots and the Irish and Americans. But if they make me their enemy then why should I pretend that they are my friend? I am not crazy, I am not Christian. I will give all people the benefit of the doubt and I will try to be friendly, or at the least refrain from being hostile to them but if they identify me as their enemy and treat me as their enemy then naturally I will regard them as my enemy because they have made themselves my enemy. Live and let live is a reasonable approach, as is do as you would be done by, but turning the other cheek and loving my enemies is absurd. How many Christian Americans thought that turning the other cheek was the appropriate response to the attack on Pearl Harbor? Clearly if somebody attacks you then the moral response is defence and a counter-attack which ensures that nobody else ever mistakes you for a weak-willed pussy. This is exactly the way that the Christian leader Margaret Thatcher reacted in April 1982 when Argentinian soldiers captured the Falkland Islands. This outrage cannot go unpunished, initiate Plan Batshit Crazy. It is a tragedy that so many conscript soldiers and sailors had to die but if anybody thinks war is all honour and glory they obviously have precious little experience or empathy. War is terrible, which is why I don’t want to start any, or lose any.

I don’t want to start a war against Google or YouTube or Twitter, but if we are attacked then we will be in a war we must win. A war for survival. I have no intention of quietly giving up or stopping expressing my views. Ever. That is why I maintain my own website. This website needs a bit of a boost. It needs more activity. All websites thrive on activity and perish without it. I am about to have a few days off work and the plan is to give the website a good solid kickstart.

What the site needs is activity. Posts. Debates. I want people on the site who want to publish. I want content generators not just content sponges. If you want to have your say without putting your hand in your pocket to get your own website this could be what you are looking for. A free blog with free personal one-on-one tuition, be part of a new international movement.

My latest website is called Secular West dot net. Don’t read too much into the title. It is not an atheist website. I have no desire to be posting articles that prove that Noah’s Ark couldn’t contain all the animals or arguing whether or not Jesus was a historical character. Been there, done that. It’s dull and boring. It is also as futile as debating with Flat Earthers, chemtrailertrash and people who are obsessed about proving that everything is a false flag operation. The title suggests that we want to maintain what we have in the west, societies which are not dominated by religion, especially not Islam and Sharia law.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.