Thought Crimes in England… and Disinheritance

The stranger that is within thee shall get up above thee very high; and thou shalt come down very low.  He shall lend to thee, and thou shalt not lend to him: he shall be the head, and thou shalt be the tail. Moreover all these curses shall come upon thee, and shall pursue thee, and overtake thee, till thou be destroyed; because thou hearkenedst not unto the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep his commandments and his statutes which he commanded thee: — Deuteronomy 28:43-45

Hate Crimes, Thought Crimes

I would like to put a special emphasis on this part of the video (as quoted below, in TakiMag’s England’s Assisted Suicide )

It is quite clear that not only do the post-WWII cosmopolites who comprise the modern British managerial elite not only have no compassion for England’s poor and abused whites—rather, they actively hate them. The Metropolitan Police’s definition of a “hate crime” is enough to give George Orwell conniptions:

If someone does something that isn’t a criminal offence but the victim, or anyone else, believes it was motivated by prejudice or hate, we would class this as a ‘hate incident’. Though what the perpetrator has done may not be against the law, their reasons for doing it are. This means it may be possible to charge them with an offence.

These vague, slimy and ultimately unquantifiable “hate crime” laws are being used as a psychological cudgel to terrorize indigenous Britons into keeping their mouths firmly shut as they impotently watch everything around them being deliberately destroyed.

The Will of the People

Well, that’s your problem.

The people do not “impotently watch”: they support the current agenda, either by their indifference or their active encouragement. If they wanted a different culture, they would take responsibility to make a different culture.

In general, people get the government they deserve. And the antiChristian — and therefore tyrannical and lawless — attitude of the British (and Western) Ruling Classes are basically backed by the general population, just as (say) the North Korean elite is supported by their general population.

If a mere 3%-5% of a population decide to dump their rulers, those rulers are dumped. Period.

But a price must be paid to ditch the current leadership… and the distant gain must be seen as worth the immediate gain to change the ruling elite. Most of the British population simply don’t think that liberty is worth the price needed to gain it.

Assuming that they value those freedoms — rooted in a locally extinct religion and culture fewer and fewer people can even remember — over the ease and immediate benefits gained by supporting the current system.

If you value a particular culture, a people, a land, a way of life,
then you pay the price to build and promote and protect it.
If you don’t value it… you don’t.

The British lose what they do not value, and gain what they do value.


No Free Speech

In 2016, authorities in Telford petitioned British Home Secretary Amber Rudd to launch a Rotherham-style investigation into the decades of child sex abuse in their town, but they received no response. It is thought, however, that Rudd played a role in preventing 22-year-old conservative YouTuber Laura Southern from entering the UK on March 12.

Southern’s crime was that during a previous trip to the English city of Luton, she’d distributed tongue-in-cheek “LGBT for Islam UK” fliers which were obviously meant to shine a spotlight on leftists’ willful blindness about how Islam routinely blasphemes some of KultMarx’s most sacred of sacred cows. Ignoring the fact that Islam is not a race, the UK Home Office accused Southern of “distribution of racist materials,” said she advocated “Christian extremism,” and concluded that her presence in England “is not conducive to the public good,” and insisted that if her pale-and-frail toes were to graze British soil even for a moment, it would represent “a threat to the fundamental interests of society and to the public policy of the United Kingdom.”

Long, long ago, the United Kingdom abandoned any connection with Biblical Law, and the result is tyranny… as usual.

But again, that is to be expected. “Free speech” is rooted in the prophet’s insistence that the king hear and obey the law of the Greatest King, God.

Moderns don’t believe in the authority of God, King of Kings: only the authority of the King who controls the national armies. As such, they have no need to hear the word of the Lord, and thus, they will do their best to insure that His voice is not heard.

So, no free speech.


A Change of Elites

The current atheistic tyranny will be a short-lived phenomenon, though.

The real future can be seen by the opening of ~500 mosques every year in London, and the closing of ~500 churches in that same city.

The atheistic/secularistic ruling class don’t believe in having children, and have no hope for the future. They are only grounded by their hatred for Christianity — THE class marker as of 2018, backed by wealth and academia alike — and a love of immediate pleasure.

The young and committed Muslims of Britain have children and a goal of distant victory: a goal they are willing to make sacrifices for in the here and now.

In time, the Western ruling class and the growing Muslim demographic will come together over their shared hatred of Christ and their shared will of power. The dying party will insure a full transfer of power to the young and hungry…. and that will be that.

In the Long Run: Disinheritance

The story won’t end there: I am confident that Christ will cause even an Arab/Islamic Britain to bend the knee to the cross – just as “post-Saudi” Arabia and Egypt and Iran will, in time.

But by that time, Anglo-Saxon England will be only in the history books, remembered as a cautionary tale of

  1. God and patriotism and liberty, leading to
  2. Evangelism, liberty and increased dominion (land, science, wealth), followed by
  3. Darwinism, empire, racial self-infatuation, and ruinous, costly wars, completed by
  4. Nihilism, self-loathing, collectivism, slavery, foolishness and death.

Righteousness exalts a nation,
But sin is a disgrace to any people.
— Proverbs 14:34, ESV

Appendix: the definition of “Hate Crime” at the Metropolitan Police website:

Hate crimes and hate incidents

In most crimes it is something the victim has in their possession or control that motivates the offender to commit the crime. With hate crime it is ‘who’ the victim is, or ‘what’ the victim appears to be that motivates the offender to commit the crime.

A Hate Crime is defined as “Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice based on a person’s race or perceived race; religion or perceived religion; sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation; disability or perceived disability and any crime motivated by hostility or prejudice against a person who is transgender or perceived to be transgender.”

A Hate Incident is any incident which the victim, or anyone else, thinks is based on someone’s prejudice towards them because of their race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or because they are transgender.

Not all hate incidents will amount to criminal offences, but it is equally important that these are reported and recorded by the police.

Evidence of the hate element is not a requirement. You do not need to personally perceive the incident to be hate related. It would be enough if another person, a witness or even a police officer thought that the incident was hate related.

1 thought on “Thought Crimes in England… and Disinheritance

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.