The rape culture in India has been in the news again. This time, village elders ordered a woman to be raped because she had a relationship outside of her tribe. I have already written a post arguing against those who think the West is superior because of an absence of such a culture. (http://aryanism.net/blog/anthony/muslamic-rape-gangs/) The views on that post were confirmed today (although such confirmations are quite frequent, and not events of special significance) when the BBC, which was reporting the event, predictably promoted ‘education’ as the solution to these problems. In the earlier post, I pointed out that this behaviour is less common in the West due to ‘education’ and not biology. I also said that ‘education’ is a poor solution because it only masks these instincts and because we want a population of people who are sincerely good and not just who have been forced to be good.

I wanted to go into more detail about the explicit use of the word ‘education’ by the BBC. How exactly do you educate someone not to be a rapist? You cannot. The only thing you can do is appeal to their sensitivity, asking people to put themselves in the victim’s shoes, think about how they would feel etc. (or you can tell them that transgressions will lead to a fiery punishment in the afterlife or bad karma, but this dishonest approach is more accurately called ‘brainwashing’ than ‘education’.) But appeals to a person’s sensitivity will fail because if they are raping people, they don’t have any sensitivity in the first place, and if they are not inclined to rape there is no need to educate them.

The idea that we should educate people not to engage in primitive behavior such as rape actually exposes democracy for the shambles that it is. The idea is that government should be in the hands of the people, but before the people are allowed to make important decisions they have to be taught how to think. People should be allowed to make their own decisions, but first they have to be taught which decision to make. It is absurd.

There are only two honest systems of government. One is a democratic or anarchic system with no education from the state (which we do not advocate since, among many other reasons, this would not solve the rape problem in India!) AryanAim and I were arguing with someone recently who thinks that humans are naturally good and morality must come from the grassroots. We used the tradition of foot-binding to argue against this at the time, but this tribalist, Gentile rape example would also have sufficed. The truth is that most human beings are primitive, being only a few steps away from the apes and always taking the easiest option that gives the most gratification rather than making an effort to do the right thing. The second is a system where, rather than pretending you trust people to make their own decisions but indoctrinate them into your value system nonetheless, you simply put people in charge who have developed this value system independently or were born with it. Aryanism falls into this second category.

105 Responses to “More rape in India”
  1. Schuster04306 says:

    Exactly, Phoenix.

  2. Decebal says:

    @JJ

    “It seems what I’ve been trying to say is: how are we going to make it easy to show that future European folkish and Aryanist states are not part of “Western Civilization,” even though they are located in the geographic concept known as the “Western World,” which is synonymous with possessing “Western Civilization”, and would have historically been part of “Western Civilization”?”

    Perhaps changing it’s name and making it clear that, despite its origin, it’s spirit is of a foreign sort (without then going on to say, as some do, “It’s the evil Semitic spirit!” - and by “Semites” I mean Semites, not something else - and promoting the so-called Faustian spirit and goodness know whatever else in its place (I do realize the labels aren’t 100% accurate, but you get the point)) or that if it’s not foreign, it’s a product of our lowest types.

    By the way, JJ, have you changed your e-mail address? You know where to contact me if you have.

  3. John Johnson says:

    @John Taylor

    The problem in modern society is not “homosexuality,” it is promiscuity and the tolerance of perversion.

    How is a promiscuous “heterosexual” any different than a promiscuous “homosexual”? How is a “heterosexual” bum who goes to bars and has one-night-stands with random women everynight any better than a “homosexual” who does the same with men? How is a “heterosexual rapist” any better than a “homosexual rapist”???

    Do you think “straight pride parades” would be an effective counter to “gay pride parades”? (Some non-Aryans do). If so, why is heterosexual promiscuity somehow better than homosexual promiscuity?

    “Homosexuality is almost always accompanied by the same physical symptoms as masturbation and anorexia. Interestingly, those also tend to accompany one another. There is observable warping of the body towards one side, as it becomes shrunken and stiffened. The brain, body, and aura are all affected.”

    LOL, this sounds like one of those American PSA’s from the 1950s!

    “An activity cannot be “Aryan” if it damages the body; anything that damages the individual damages the nation as a whole.”

    Giving one’s life to protect another and dying in combat to destroy enemies of the folk are perhaps the most Aryan activities. There is a reason why most historic and mythological Aryan heroes have been martyrs, and that the most dramatic heroes in contemporary literature/cinema often die in the line of duty.

    The sentiment you mention is that of a non-Aryan survivalist, rather than an Aryan militarist.

    “That would be stupid and dangerous. So why misuse sexuality?”

    I think the misuse of heterosexual reproduction which has resulted in an increase of 5 billion people in only 85 years is much more dangerous than homosexuals who cannot reproduce.

    National Socialism aims not to conserve this trend of ‘heterosexual sexuality’, but to destroy it forever. Quality-based reproduction is the number one concern for any National Socialist. Non-violent sexual acts such as masturbation and consensual sex between ‘homosexuals’ are trifling compared to the very violent act of reproduction!

    “If they encourage this behavior publicly, we must denounce it publicly. People are being harmed. We cannot remain silent. ”

    Again, uncontrolled ‘heterosexual’ reproduction harms _every single human being on this planet_ by making resources scarcer, thus increasing the conflict over them. This is the issue that we cannot remain silent on.

    http://aryanism.net/philosophy/violence/
    http://aryanism.net/politics/population-and-demographics/

    “The issue with homosexuality is that it is not only self-harming, like masturbation, but it usually takes two.”

    ??? Do heterosexual rape, reproduction, child molestation, and one-night-stands not take two?

    “A boy of 13 or 14 can be “sexually mature,”

    I remember at least a dozen girls who were pregnant during my high school years… How many pregnancies have resulted from men who “seek other men for sex”? Men who seek women for sex are a much bigger problem!

    “So, homosexuality spreads from person to person, more like a viral blight than like genetic weakness. ”

    This isn’t how it happens at all.

    Homosexuals are estimated to be around 5% of the total population, there is no conceivable way that a majority of people have been exposed to “homosexual activity,” let alone any chance that they could somehow be “converted” into homosexuals…

    More damage happens from interest in ‘heterosexual’ acts spreading from person to person, especially among teenagers who end up bringing a poor child into this world after a night of careless ‘fun experimentation’.

    “The child in this case can still mature normally.”

    How the fuck is the ‘heterosexual rape’ of a child less damaging than ‘homosexual rape’???

    The results of ‘heterosexual sex’ damage incalculably more people than ‘homosexual sex’: A child born to a dead-beat teenage mother, to a drug addict who neglects her 10 children, or in a ‘family’ where the child’s father beats it everyday will most likely never be ‘normal’. Certainly all the children who have divorced ‘heterosexual’ parents will never live a “normal” life in a “traditional nuclear family”…

    “Still, they cannot be trusted with children not their own flesh, because of their past experiences”

    Also, why the hell do you keep implying that homosexuality and pedophilia/child molestation are anywhere near the same thing???

    Seriously, it is disgusting that your hatred of homosexuality overshadows your compassion for children. If you really cared about the harmful effects to children, you would recognize that “heterosexual molestation” can destroy a child’s life just as much as “homosexual molestation” and that it happens much more often. Not to mention the fact that reproduction by ‘heterosexuals’ is the reason that there is a supply of children to rape in the first place!!!

  4. John Johnson says:

    @Decebal/Anthony

    For example, the term “White Hordes of Homo Hubris” coined by David Myatt does not deny the existence of the “white” tribal identity, and it describes the same ethnic cluster/phenomenon that self-identified “whites” describe, but it presents a whole different perspective on what “whiteness” really is. No Aryan of European heritage would ever hold any affinity towards White Supremacists as it is, but using the terminology/perspective of “White Hordes of Homo Hubris,” no (respectable) average person would _ever_ desire to casually identify themselves with this concept of ‘whiteness’. However, many still do casually say that they are ‘white,’ because they know of no other perspectives from which to look at ‘whiteness’. They’ve been told that ‘light skinned people of European heritage’ are ‘white’ and that this crude category is ‘scientific,’ accepted by the establishment, and that no alternatives exist, so they are pressured into identifying with it.

    We’ve already shown that genetically/racially a Neolithic, farmer-descended Aryan people exist in Europe who are distinct from the Paleolithic descendants of hunter-gatherers, our goal now is to show that there has been an equally clear and distinct Aryan culture/spirit that’s existed (and continues to exist) in contrast to ‘Western Civilization’. I don’t think we can truly do this without defining ‘Western Civilization’ in a thorough manner. Right now, our definition of Western Civilization is rather vague, with bits and pieces of its aspects scattered on various pages. How can we strengthen it?

    We set up an Aryan mythological/historical narrative here: http://aryanism.net/culture/aryan-race/aryan-diffusion-part-6/ , but how do we make the _contrast_ between modern ‘Western Civilization’-the most influential (and problematic) civilization on Earth, the global status quo ‘mass culture’-and the Aryan culture of Europe as clear cut and readily apparent to average people who don’t understand our ideas as we have made the contrast between Paleolithic/non-Aryan and Neolithic/Aryan DNA and the hunting/herding/farming archetypes? We have clearly shown where we stand, but where exactly does the enemy (Western Civilization) stand? (I know Western Civilization is addressed on the page, but I feel it doesn’t go far enough; how can we strengthen our rejection of it?)

    “or that if it’s not foreign, it’s a product of our lowest types.”

    We must go a step further. Not only is it not foreign, but the types that created and continue to support ‘Western Civilization’ _never were_ “our” types to begin with! We may live in the same countries and speak the same languages as them, but they are a world apart from us. Just as Hitler spoke of “two Germanys”, this bifurcation exists in every country in “The West”.

    In other words, the concept of the ‘White Hordes of Homo Hubris’ leaves no confusion that noble Aryans are in no way related to “whiteness”. How do we show that ‘Western Civilization’ belongs to the ‘White Hordes’ and has always sought to destroy Aryan culture in Europe and is in no way related to it? We know what Aryan Civilization is, but how can we _prove_ that every aspect of modern Western Civilization is contrary to it?

    Do you guys understand what I mean now, or is it still confusing?

    @Decebal
    My email is the same, try resending it.

  5. Anthony says:

    I understand what you mean, and I definitely agree that ‘We must go a step further. Not only is it not foreign, but the types that created and continue to support ‘Western Civilization’ _never were_ “our” types to begin with!’ I don’t think it’s important to show that Aryan civilization in Europe is the opposite of Western civilization. Instead of focusing on the bad civilizations, we should be constructing the good civilization. This is what will attract people. Most people don’t want to simply define themselves by who and what they are against, because they don’t want to think of themselves as reactionaries. It is enough to construct the good civilization, and show that Western civilization is not this good civilization. Then people who want to identify with the good civilization will have to reject Western civilization.

  6.  
Leave a Reply