Religion Of Hate

Imagine that you can go back in time and have a conversation with your younger self, maybe explaining events of today. Since my audience is getting younger all of a sudden, I will keep this bit of make believe relatable for all ages. Imagine you go back to 2005 and meet your 2005 self with all the knowledge and experience of your 2016 self. I am picking 2005 because that precedes the collapse of the Bush presidency and the beginning of the manic phase of the Great Progressive Awakening that started in the 90’s.

Now, 2016 you sits down with the 2005 you and says, “In a decade, our black Muslim president, who may be bisexual (Google Reggie Love), will issue an edict forcing schools to let mentally ill men in dresses into restrooms, so they can watch your daughter pee. The Republican Party will sneak a provision into a mammoth budget bill legalizing this edict. When challenged, the President will claim the Christian Bible requires it.”

It is reasonable to assume that your 2005 self would think your 2016 self had gone insane or was pulling some absurd joke. A normal person in 2005 could not imagine that serious people would be talking about trannies at all, much less allowing them a free shot at children in restrooms. Think about it, in 2005, Obama and Hillary Clinton were against homosexual marriage. Now, Clinton is a click away from coming out as a lesbian.

How in the hell does this happen?

One way to understand the threat to civilization from the neo-puritan cult we call liberalism is to look at the language. Somewhere in the mists of time, the cult started insisting we say “gender” instead of “sex.” No one thought much of it. It just felt like one of their silly ticks so they can feel special. Normal people are not obsessed with waging war against society so they tend not to assume these ticks are part of a larger plan.

Biology tells us there are two sexes so claiming there are three or four is never going to fly. Humans do not have genders so once you get outside the world of the real, you are free to make up whatever you like. That is how we ended up with 85 “genders.” Once you expand the definition of something, you can start to include other stuff that was never part of the original definition. That subtle shift from “sex” to “gender” opened the gates of Hell.

Similarly, it was not so long ago when men had wives and women had husbands. Now, we have “intimate partners” which means nothing, so it can mean anything. This sounds like a harmless neologism to dodge the whole queer couple issue, but that is not where it ends. It is never the end. By conflating all sexual relations into this formless term, there is no distinction between marriage and an orgy or porn shoot. All of a sudden, your marriage is no different from a random hookup.

I was reading about the Baylor “sexual assault” scandal the other day and it became clear that sexual assault is a term that means nothing and everything, depending upon the social justice warrior’s inclination. Rape is a real word with real meaning. When a woman is raped, we know it means non-consensual sexual intercourse. There are degrees of rape, but they are based on the degree of violence involved. The sex is still sex and non-consensual.

Sexual assault, on the other hand, means anything from an unkind word on-line to violent rape. In the Baylor case, one of the two players involved was accused of sexual assault. He spent the night drinking with a girl, who invited him into her apartment in the late hours. He says sex was consensual and she says she did not want sex. There is nothing more to it beyond that, but it is in the same bucket as violent rape, because of the language.

Again, normal people think sexual assault is just a polite way of saying rape, but normal people are not nursing elaborate revenge fantasies against all men. The whole point of creating this new expansive term was to accuse otherwise innocent men of horrible crimes. It lets unhinged coeds turn a college campus upside down by making reckless accusations of sexual assault. It makes it easy for the demented harpies of the Cult of Modern Liberalism to wage war on normalcy.

Think about the kind of people who cook up the phrase “undocumented worker.” These are not just dishonest people. These are crazy people. They are so committed to their cause, which always involves immiserating normal people and pulling down civil society, they will endlessly plot to pervert the language as a part of the longer term goals. Everything about their lives is directed at destroying what you consider to be normal, including you.

It is an important part of our reality. The people on the other side, call them liberals, globalists, moonbats, commies, whatever, they are fully committed to the end of you and everything that defines you. It is a religion for them, a religion based on hatred of you. Whatever it was or whatever it may claim today, it is just a religion of hatred, mostly a hatred of white people and specifically a hatred of white men.

There is no reasoning with fanatics. There are no bargains that can be struck. The lesson your 2005 should learn from your 2016 self is that every deal struck with these people was broken. They never stopped demanding more and more, because they will never stop until they pull the roof down on all of us. The folks cheering on the Mexican mobs attacking people in San Jose are never going to consider you a friend. They hate you, so you better be prepared to hate them back just as hard.

37 thoughts on “Religion Of Hate

  1. Pingback: Racial Conscience As A Big, Knotty Stick

  2. This is outstanding.

    One wastes much energy trying to understand events in the West in terms of some sort of inexplicable delusion but it may just be that many citizens just nurse a profound hatred of their nation.

    It is a hatred for the nation (and those who built it and sustain it) that does not recognize their innate loveliness; daily confirms their sense of inadequacy due to their knowledge of how inadequate, ignorant, and lovely they really are; and refuses to maintain them in a cocoon where they may live carefree lives.

    They are not deluded but live at a stage of arrested development where their dress, speech, self-mutilation, drugging, and lifestyle are just a more elaborate form of self-defilement that you see in infants. The rage is infantile but cloaked in the body of a seeming adult. These people elect the Obamas, Merkels, Sarkozys, Blairs, Clintons, Camerons, Hollandes, McConnells, Turnbulls, and Salins.

    Only the discipline of harsh reality will neutralize these people. Reason is wasted on them.

      • I would ask one question: Where is the tolerance and respect that Jesus taught in this forum?

        • “Gentle Jesus, Meek and Mild” is a construct of liberal theology–not reality. The real Jesus “made a whip of cords” and forcibly drove out of the Temple those who were defiling it. The real Jesus called the Pharisees “Sons of vipers” and told them “You travel land and sea to make ONE convert, and then when you do you make him TWICE AS MUCH A SON OF HELL as YOU are!”—does this sound “tolerant”? “Respectful”? Nope. But it was TRUE……which, of course, is why the religious (NOT “Godly”, just “religious”—just like liberals are VERY ‘religious’ about “tolerance and respect”, meaning that we don’t EVER call ANYTHING “wrong”) and political leaders of Jesus’ day hated Him, and plotted to kill Him……….

  3. Pingback: The "I'm Just Going To Leave This Here" Thread - Please Add Your "Finds" - Page 57

  4. “These are crazy people. ”

    One of the great civilizational benefits of Protestant Christianity is that it provided an immensely supple and ever adaptable vehicle upon which crazy people could attach their notions, whether theological (the nature of the trinity, etc.), or social (Oneida, etc.). Christianity could absorb almost any amount of crazy (see Mormonism) and purpose it in ways that while perhaps not necessarily benign, were usually so funneled as to not constitute direct assaults on the body politic and the general social order – albeit, with some big exceptions (slavery, temperance). The exceptions are especially pertinent as these were instances in which believers were not merely content to follow the divine path of their own accord, but rather sought access to the state to impose a set of beliefs on those unwilling to accept the message.

    Chesterton is usually credited with the observation that a man who won’t believe in God is likely to believe in anything, which is certainly true as far as it goes. Yet what it elides is that the human animal seems to possess a deep wellspring of crazy which Christian beliefs somehow, for the most part, domesticated.

    With the remarkable collapse of Protestantism, 21st century America has lost this safety valve. As a result, crazy, blue-haired jigglypuff lesbian no longer seeks solace in her odd beliefs, confident that they bring her closer to God’s plan, but rather is impelled to force her version of transgender utopia on the rest of us. And even stranger perhaps, in the modern state she’s found a more than willing accomplice.

  5. I do not hate those people. They are uninformed; they know history only in a warped, disinformed way; they do not know how to think. They are more mentally maladjusted than anything else. Those people make me angry. It is that way between me and stupid. There was a time when stupid embarrassed me; now, stupid makes me angry because it is correctable, but those people are too lazy to make the fix.

  6. It’s very clear that Barry’s plan was always to F*ck it up so bad that it can’t be fixed. He succeeded.

    This is going to require a reboot, after the virus is deleted. You know what I mean by ‘deleted’.

    “Heavenly Father, into Your hands I commit my soul”. “Forward!”

  7. You know that scene in poltergeist when the girl has been sucked into the vortex space between this world and the next and she is trying to get back, she feels the intense presence of the false preacher and isn’t sure if that is the way out.

    That is the space girls coming out of their teens are in. Be strong, be purposeful and encouraging and don’t give up on them and they will come to see the fraud in all its horror, if they sense an alternative and are not too far gone.

  8. Pingback: Burn a flag of Mexico on the Fourth of July! | News Headquarters

  9. We’ll all be undone by our adherence to “playing by the rules” against those who have no rules and no boundaries. A month ago had to cross through a bunch of Trump protesters at the Hyatt outside GCT and then wade through a bunch of them that got onto the central room of the terminal floor and were gumming everything up. My first thought looking at them was “geez, I’m an old guy, but could roll a half dozen of these little fucks in about a minute”. At some point here the gloves are going to come off and we get this crap settled. Better my generation than my kids.

  10. It’s not just an attack on normalcy, it’s an attack on the ability to use reason. Remove the practicality of logic and reason from everyday transactions, and the function and power of society is at the disposal of the people making up all these new definitions.

  11. I’ve hated them all my life and will never stop,tricky teaching my little uns how to navigate through the modern liberal minefield though,the traps are set early.

    • To cultural marxists the goal is not the intent. The coercive means of achieving the goal is the intent. Given unfettered room and time then the goal takes care of itself. The means more than justifies the ends.

    • You know, me too. Some analyst might say, it started when I was in War Zone C and they were pissing on the flag draped coffins of my brothers. I don’t know, the left are wreckers, depraved ignorant fools who put on the airs of intellect when they’re really not so clever frauds.

  12. This article reminds me that politics, as much as I care about it is not the most important thing in our individual lives.

    If I could go back to 2005 and tell myself one thing…

    “You wouldn’t believe it now but soon you’ll meet the most wonderful woman you’ve ever imagined. Not only that but by some inexplicable turn of events she’ll even marry you.

    Years later you’ll have two excellent little children that you’ll both love almost as much as you love one another. One day you’ll get a call from the daycare saying that one of them is isn’t feeling well and needs to go home early. Your wife will suggest that she pick him up and take him to the doctor while you go pay for the new furniture you picked out together to put in your dream house with the big yard you just moved into.


    Sorry, I understand this isn’t what’s intended here and what would any of you care. But please do consider, for the love of God, that whatever you’re angry about in the world there are things that you have today that matter so much more to you. Enjoy these things – while you can. Wake up dancing every day because of these things, all the rest you can accept.

    Again, sorry.

    • I understand. My second husbands wife died of lung cancer. He always says the he wished he’d done more to get her to quit smoking. And I wish I’d insisted that my late husband go to the doctor.

      But those are things that we didn’t control then or now. Regrets are a different thing. We need to notice how the Left was then and now, with the eye towards worse behavior in the future. It’s very possible that people could be locked up in re-education camps. The Left likes to claim the Right will do something that the Left actually does.

  13. Religion of Hate? It’s the religion of human extinction. If these psychopaths are not stopped, just where do they stop?

  14. “It’s a religion for them, a religion based on hatred of you.”

    I’d argue they might hate themselves even more than they hate you. I like to think of Progressivism as being more or less the same as Islam, minus personal self-respect. Islam is meticulously constructed to destroy cultures from the outside in, while Progressivism destroys cultures from the inside out.

    • @ Buckaroo – Well said! It’s combination that will, as is often said here – “Not end well.” What I find really interesting, is the progressives haven’t yet figured out that Islam is keen on eliminating them too. They have yet to realized that their progressive agenda of “whatever goes” isn’t quite so popular with the “religion of peace” they seem to admire so much. And yet they think Christians are narrow minded! Then again, maybe they’ll have a change of heart when they see enough of their gender-whatever friends hanging from a construction crane.

      • Oh, Progressives have certainly figured out that Islam is keen on eliminating them. It’s a huge part of the appeal. Progressives love Islam because (A) their ideologies are virtually identical, and (B) since they secretly despise themselves, they openly welcome the day when Islam comes to slaughter them.

  15. It’s pretty much come down to civil war or slavery, hasn’t it? And slavery is the best case. The very worst in the bitter weirdo movements would just as soon exterminate all of us and return the world to “nature.”

  16. I would probably go back further than 10 or 11 years. My starting point for the conversation with my innocent self would be something like 1985. The reason is that even within ten years of that I knew the UK was screwed: we hadn’t then started freely letting muslims into the country, and there was a clear division between right and wrong. The progressives were still naive — though credit them with fast learning about power grabbing — and the BBC, as an example of mass media bias, was largely still reporting news and not toxic, lefty-opinion.

    In 1985 we couldn’t in Britain see the damage that Tony Blair and ‘New Labour’ would wreak on the UK and the EU was outwardly still interested in commerce less about political control. Also, while the young were having the usual yoof-driven excesses and fads, the lack of social media meant if you didn’t care about some things they wouldn’t be relentlessly rammed down your throat. There were no gay issues to fret over (or exult over if you were of that mind) and people largely kept to their own. Plus, we still had old-school judges who were capable of seeing the nonsense in certain lunatic court cases and state interference and diktat was not the master it began to become within a decade.

    So my advice to my 1985 self would be: watch the borders, and guard against the hordes outside as well those who allegedly want an ‘open’ society inside. Don’t allow those who want war in far off places to get their way in order to forcefully change our home society, and above all stand against anyone who uses the words ‘social justice.’

    They are your greatest enemy, and you will in 30 years time be at their mercy, yet they will not stop the march of your destruction whatever they get. These strange people and the invading hordes pressing in both want you gone. The only reason to sit back and watch and do nothing would be to see whether the invading hordes will put up with the SJWs who made it all possible. My guess is the hordes will win, but it would be better not to set the fight up in the first place.

    • UKer, you say UK muslim immigration was controlled back in 1985. My understanding of UK immigration is minimal, but I always thought that Commonwealth passport holders had always been allowed to settle anywhere in the Commonwealth. When was this not the case? What’s the exact timeline for these policies?

      • There was the precedent of Commonwealth citizens being allowed access to the British isles, that is true. Other than people from the Caribbean in the 50s, it never seemed all that many wanted to come here. But under the Major government (immediately after Thatcher) the rules began to change. I understand that the then Tory administration decided to offer muslims who were a problem in other countries the opportunity to reside in these islands on the strict understanding they did not commit crimes against Britain while resident here. (Cynics may observe that this plan might have a flaw in it). Then the New Labour government began to actively encourage and even seek out other muslims to come here, whatever their level of anti-social intent. The story goes that Blair’s ‘team’ thought what fun it would be to rub the right’s noses in it by actively flooding the UK with non-Brits. This policy was fully operational by the year 2000.

        I suppose I wasn’t being accurate when I said controlled: it was just that in 1985 there were few incentives to bring people to a cold climate from a hot one, especially as the welfare state gave much smaller cash handouts than they do now. Perhaps I should have said ‘not encouraged’ rather than ‘controlled’

  17. When I read an essay like this, I keep thinking “yes, yes, yes, yes”… So perfectly and completely stated, I have nothing to add – except that this should be a Must Read for everyone and passed on to everyone they can think of, regardless of their politics. Thank you.

Comments are closed.