Counter-Currents
The War Against White Women:
My Account as a White Woman
Laura Towler
An actual boys’-sized T-shirt currently for sale at Zazzle.com.
3,064 words
See also Richard Houck’s “The War Against White Women”
My Awakening
In order to understand how I came to know about the war against white women, we must go back to the year 2006. I had moved from my quiet village in Yorkshire, northern England, to Bradford; a city which was seventy-six percent “white British” in 2001, sixty-three percent white British in 2011, and is likely to be around fifty percent white British today.
Before my move, I would have described myself as tolerant and open-minded. Although I’ve never been an open-borders enthusiast, I judged people as individuals and I chose to see only the good in everybody I would meet. My school report from when I was 11 read:
This term, [Laura] has focused on the Muslim faith learning a lot about their way of life. Laura sympathises with the different religions of the world and feels that being kind and helpful to others is the most important factor in life.
By moving cities, I was thrust from my homogeneous, safe, and familiar community to a population-dense district, made up almost entirely of Pakistani Muslims (around three-quarters of the population) and the white working class. I had no inhibitions at the time. There were a couple of Pakistani girls at my old school who, apart from their appearance, were just like me and my friends. I was also taught during my formal education that social class had a much bigger impact on group dynamics than race and ethnicity did. I anticipated that I wouldn’t experience much change moving from one working-class community to the next.
I was wrong. The following two years that I would spend living in Bradford would plant a flowering seed in my head that would subsequently grow into my realization and understanding of the war on the West.
Upon my first evening living in my new city, my housemate and I went exploring in order to locate the nearby shops. On that evening and many evenings after, we were leered at, approached, intimidated, verbally abused, groped, and followed by Pakistani men of all ages. We soon learned that it wasn’t safe to be out after dark alone, and it wasn’t safe to wander into some areas at any time of day. This was a shock to me, and a far cry from the community where I had grown up.
I could spend a lengthy amount of time detailing my experiences of living in Bradford. On one occasion, my friend and I had to run into a shop for safety because we were being pursued by a group of men. We phoned the police, who arrived, took a statement from us, and drove us home. There were multiple occasions where I was told to leave an area by Pakistani men because I was white and wasn’t welcome there. There were also times when I was offered money for sex in broad daylight. I was only a teenager at the time.
In my experience, Pakistani men, as a group, do not treat women with the same level of dignity and respect that white men do. I imagine if a feminist was to read this account, she would say that I had unconscious biases and inaccurate preconceptions about an entire ethnic group. I call it being able to recognize trends based on thousands of encounters.
In the future, I would learn that a number of the girls I went to school with (who had likewise grown up on my estate) had been “groomed” and raped by Pakistani men. It is estimated that hundreds of thousands of British girls have suffered at the hands of predominantly Pakistani Muslims – some were even tortured and murdered – yet our police and social services cover it up, our media ignore it, and anybody who draws attention to it is vilified and belittled by the state and media until the public either no longer take them seriously or they learn to keep their distance.
My exposure to multiculturalism taught me that we’re not all the same. I learnt that ethnicity influences culture, and cultures are often incompatible. I then followed the rabbit hole down the passage of mass immigration, “hate speech” censorship, state-enforced white guilt, and financier meddling, until I arrived at the conclusion I still support today: nationalism is not only healthy, it’s necessary for the survival of our people.
The War Against White Women
I consider the demographic replacement of Europeans to be the single most important issue we face today. In many nations across the West, we are merely a few decades away from becoming minority populations within our own land. This is, of course, completely unnatural and has been orchestrated by a rootless clique of international businessmen. This means that our replacement is not being carried out in the open. Although it does involve the mass importation of non-whites into our lands, the diminishment of whites is carried out in a less direct way. Native fertility rates in white countries are being lowered by the continuous promotion of feminism, abortion, promiscuity, and mixed-race relationships; all of which offer a temporary relief or thrill for the white woman, followed by long-term damage and feelings of unfulfillment, in most cases.
At the same time, our racial bonds are being weakened by the severance and rewriting of our history, and the popularized notion that to support white well-being is to be racist. For the white woman, this can be a confusing position to be in. We are often included under the umbrella of minorities, but only when this suits the mainstream narrative. If a white woman goes head-to-head with the number one enemy – the white man – in a sexual abuse case, for example, then we would be portrayed as the victim; the vulnerable sufferer of the straight, white patriarchy. However, if our position doesn’t conform to what is expected of us (for example, white women voting for Trump, or not being “intersectional” enough in their brand of feminism), then in these circumstances we are painted as the oppressor and the betrayer. It appears to me that as a white woman, I may live my life as individualistically as I like, and promote as much degeneracy, narcissism, or consumerism as I like, but collectivism is only an option for me if it is non-white collectivism that I lay on the table. To clarify: black lives matter, and we must stop the defamation of the Jewish people; however, it is not okay to be white.
I mentioned the promotion of feminism, abortion, promiscuity, and mixed-raced relationships above. These four tools, which are being used to speed up our demographic replacement, are also having a detrimental effect on the well-being of white women.
Feminism, masquerading as a movement based on so-called “equality,” has conditioned women into thinking that we can and should live our lives like men. It all seems somewhat pointless to me, if not solely because feminists are campaigning for the freedom to do things that they don’t actually want to do. A current (and rather heavily-backed) feminist crusade in Britain is to get more women working in politics in order to reflect the fact that our population is half male and half female, yet studies show that there is a lack of female representation in politics because there is a lack of female applicants, due to a lack of women aspiring to a political career. As a female who is interested in politics, I confirm that I struggle to find other females to engage with about this topic. So why, we must ask ourselves, are we forcing it?
I believe this correlates with other areas of female liberation, such as emotion and consequence-free sex, the abolishment of traditional gender roles in the home, and the all-round crushing of the patriarchy: Women are under the assumption that to be “equal,” we must be the same. This approach undermines both science and happiness. We’re unable to imitate our male counterparts because, quite frankly, we’re different to our male counterparts, both genetically and culturally. This is why fitness tests in the British Army and Police Service are being made easier for women, exam times are being increased at Oxford University so that women are more likely to pass, and state-enforced diversity quotas have been established across Britain so that women can be selected for their gender rather than their skill. By setting ourselves up for a life living as – as Francis Parker Yockey puts it – “inferior men,” we are not only setting ourselves up to fail, but we are setting ourselves up for a life of unhappiness.
Women have never had as many rights as we have today, yet our happiness is declining. Richard Houck mentioned this study in “The War Against White Women,” but I would like to reiterate it once more. Economists Betsey Stevenson and Justin Wolfers analyzed the happiness trends of American citizens between the years 1970 and 2005. They discovered that women rated their overall life satisfaction higher than men in 1970; however, this has gradually declined over the years. By the 1990s, women were less satisfied than men for the first time. A major survey carried out by Girlguiding in Britain this year also found that girls and young women aged 7-21 are more unhappy than they were when the same survey was carried out a decade ago. Twenty-five percent of girls who took part said they were “very happy,” compared to forty-one percent who said the same in 2009.
It is also interesting to watch the trends in pop culture. Adele, who has broken a colossal number of records with her songs about female heartache, loneliness, despair, and anxiety, is one of the biggest (if not the biggest) female musicians of our time. As Morgoth wrote in 2017:
The more pertinent question to ask is not ”why is Adele so popular?” but rather, ”why does the well of female gloom run so deep?”.
After all, hasn’t ”The Modern Woman” got it all? The modern white woman in Europe or North America, today, inhabits a culture and society which places hardly any restrictions on her behaviour at all! and yet alcoholism in women is at an all time high, women are beset with mental health issues: 20% of women in Britain are clinically depressed, they’re on pills for their nerves, pills for their insomnia, pills for their ADHD, it’s a veritable boom time for the pharmaceutical market.
I saw an article in the popular women’s magazine Cosmopolitan last week in which they advertised a wine glass for women which you can use in the shower. Women and young girls were “tagging” each other underneath the article and expressing to each other, for all to see, how much they needed this glass. This reminded me of a number of articles I saw during the release of Adele’s last album, in which a number of grief-stricken and heartbroken journalists advised women that it was time to crack open the wine and chocolate and have a good cry. Why is crying with a glass of wine the new “cool” and the new accepted norm? And why are white women becoming unhappier as the years roll by? Could it be that we were happier in simpler times, living under the natural dignity and virtue of our gender, embodying traits and carrying out roles that came organically and instinctively to us for thousands of years?
White women are encouraged to be self-sufficient and independent, but how many of us actually want that, deep down? And I don’t mean how many of us say we want it, I mean how many of us actually crave a life of individualistic self-governance and loneliness? Every single strong woman I know – even the ones who say they enjoy commitment-free sexual relations – secretly wants to be thrown over the shoulder of a dominant alpha male and led to a life of protection and comfort. It is no secret that women prefer the traditional, masculine male; however, societal pressure tells us that if we want to build a home and raise children, then we’re boring and weak. Subsequently, promiscuity is encouraged, meaning that feminism and progressivism are unmistakably encouraging some women to behave in ways that don’t meet our long-term goals and don’t fulfill us beyond the short-term.
Despite the mainstream media constantly advising us that a “childfree life” is what will make us the happiest, studies have shown that being a parent leads to feelings of fulfillment and meaning in one’s life. Regardless, the average age in which a woman is having her first child is increasing, and the number of abortions which have been carried out has been on a steady surge since the 1970s. In Britain, for example, approximately five women in a thousand had undergone an abortion in 1970; a figure which had increased to 16.5 women per a thousand by 2017. It is difficult to determine how many women regret having an abortion. Although accounts are often circulated of women experiencing heartbreak and guilt, feminists – a small but vocal minority – are prone to brag about their experiences, boasting of multiple procedures while wearing vile “I heart abortion” slogans on their chests.
I do not believe for one moment that using abortion as a form of contraception, as white women often do in 2018, has zero mental implications for our health, yet its significance is downplayed by the mainstream narrative. The mental well-being of the white woman is a small price to pay for a decline in native fertility rates; in fact, some may even argue that unhappy white people make better consumers, at any rate.
No account of the war on white women would be complete without me addressing the mass-marketing of interracial relationships which we see today in the West. As has been discussed in quite some depth at Counter-Currents previously, the populations of Western nations are constantly hounded with images of interracial relationships in advertising; usually the image of a black man with a white woman. In Britain, it has become a running joke – if you can call it that – that the Christmas adverts in our largest stores will always feature mixed-race families or couples. This is in a country which was eighty-seven percent “white British” at the date of our last official census. This is also in a country where ninety-six percent of white British people choose to date somebody of their own ethnic group.
The clear aim here is to normalize certain attitudes and influence public behavior. The more white women we have dating non-white men, the less white people there will be, come the next generation.
A couple of years ago I was asked by a girl at work – in front of an audience of about ten people – if I was attracted to Anthony Joshua, a black boxer in Britain. I replied that I wasn’t. I was then asked why. “He’s 6′ 6″ and pure muscle,” my colleague added, “what’s not to like?” In my moment of hesitation, I wondered if it was acceptable to admit that I was only interested in white men. I thought about making something up to avoid the uncomfortable conversation that I knew would follow, but stopped myself from doing so. Why shouldn’t I be able to admit that I am only interested in white men? It’s a perfectly natural and healthy way to think. When I answered truthfully, by suggesting that I wasn’t attracted to black men and that I wanted to date a white man because I wanted white children, I was met with expressions of shock and disgust. What I remember about this encounter was the following: If I, as an open nationalist, had to pluck myself up in order to embrace the onslaught that followed, how uncomfortable must questions like this make apolitical females feel? Whereas I’d be comfortable holding a conversation about our falling fertility rates and explaining that it’s important that we choose to date our own, most females wouldn’t have that reasoning to fall back on. They’d have to admit they weren’t attracted to black men.
As we know, over time, people are more likely to say that they’d be open to dating people of other races, but their behavior paints a different picture. This highlights that people are seeking social approval for what they do and are less willing to admit something if they believe it means they’re going against the grain. As a woman – the naturally more sensitive of the two genders – this can be a difficult task to undertake. This is why I believe it’s important to lead by example. We need brave women to admit that they’re making a conscious decision to date within their own ethnic group, so that other women are more likely to follow. And there are a number of reasons for wanting to do this that we can give.
Interracial relationships are dangerous for the white woman in more than one way. From a safety point of view, as we know, black people are more likely to commit violent crime, and are overrepresented in prison populations across the West. In London, just to give one example, African Caribbeans are overrepresented in acid attacks by a whopping two hundred eighty-five percent. In addition to this, white women with mixed-race children are more likely to end up as single mothers (by a huge percentage), and mixed-race children are at a higher risk when it comes to questions of health, school experience, smoking, and drinking, among other risk variables.
Conclusion
The tools which have been set in motion for the demographic replacement of those of European descent are no doubt having a hugely negative effect on the health, well-being, and happiness of white women. The most obvious factor is, of course, the mass import of (often violent) non-whites into our nations and the subsequent response of the mainstream media, who are leading white women into danger intentionally by guilting them into thinking that it’s wrong to fear predators.
I truly believe that the answer – and the key to our long-term fulfillment – is nationalism. Not only will this keep us safe on a physical level and allow us to live in more homogeneous, secure environments, but it will also allow us to experience an awareness of local community, healthy traditions, and natural order, all of which can only be achieved, for the most part, among our own.
Laura Towler is an editor and writer with Defend Europa.
23 comments
Great article. The psychological warfare being waged against White women is very real, and very evil. To retain social acceptance, you’re required to act contrary to all your instincts: to be a wife and mother; to date and marry within your tribe; to avoid dangerous foreigners.
The flip side of this is that White men are to be prevented from protecting their women from aliens, and are furthermore socialized to behave like utter betas. Go to the night club, and you’ll see negroes shamelessly grinding up against White women while White men stand on the sidelines. Our own instincts tell us to deal harshly with Interlopers who would take our women, but we understand too well that any intercession will be met by those same over-socialized women with cries of racism … just as, if we emulate non-Whites in their behavior towards White women, we will be accused of sexism.
White women understand that we’re supposed to protect them. We don’t, and they hate us for it, deep down where in the parts of their souls they have been conditioned to pretend don’t exist.
And then there are the night clubs themselves, where the dance floor – with its overpowering rhythmic noise, its gyrating bodies, its drunken abandon – replicates the natural mating environment of the African, and has nothing in common with the dances that Europeans require to evaluate their partners as a whole individual rather than just a piece of ass. We’re being forced to mate like negroes and are miserable in consequence.
Even in the absence of large numbers of foreigners, women’s lib does enormous damage to the traditional gender balance. Just look at Japan, where women were also encouraged to join the workforce but there has been very little immigration. They don’t have as much of an issue with foreigners pissing in the gene pool as we do, but the women there are materialistic to a fault and, empowered by their financial independence, many admit they refuse to marry a man who earns less than $70k a year.
This attitude consigns a large portion of Japanese men to a life of permanent bachelorhood. In contrast, the women can enjoy flings when they want to, have abortions on demand, and if they miss the boat on having children they can always just buy a puppy. And we know what that has done to the Japanese birth rate.
When given the option, it seems the majority of high IQ women will choose to pursue some shitty office job for the joys of financial independence rather than be a pregnant housewife with a couple of children to look after. The solution is to take the choice away from them. Perhaps employers should not hire a woman under the age of 35, with the expectation being she will spend her most fertile years finding a man and starting a family. By that time the kids should already be going to school everyday, so most of her work as a mother will be over. With the divorce laws the way they are, I’d say that’s a fairly good compromise.
Your example of social conditioning/pressure to do with Anthony Joshua is interesting.
I had a similar encounter in a group setting where I expressed – very politely – a view about the actual value of mass immigration for Australia. The group reaction was a mixture of nervous giggles and attempts to change the subject. Later, however, more than one of the group told me individually that they agreed with what I’d said. One went further, wondering aloud how to reverse the effects of 40 years of bad immigration policy.
It seems that despite what people know and believe, we’ve become socially conditioned to respond in ‘acceptable’ ways. The white Australian working class is not immune to this process, but being less concerned about maintaining a respectable image, is more likely to speak its mind.
Great article. Hope to see more from Laura on CC in future.
.
Very interesting to read a woman’s point of view on these matters. I hope to see more of these writings in the future.
My personal experience with dating is that the women who expressed a desire to also date other races (or ended up doing so) more often than not had mental issues, came from a broken home or generally had very low expectations of the men in their lives.
What always amused me were the self-proclaimed open-border feminists who expressed their desire for exclusively having children with a white man and did so with a straight face. Shit-eating grin usually ensued.
“…our long-term fulfillment – is nationalism … homogeneous, secure environments, … healthy traditions, and natural order, all of which can only be achieved … among our own.”
Imagine the awakening, when the British realize that they fought a World War fiercely opposing precisely these concepts !
And that without that bloodshed, today London would be British, Paris French and Berlin German …
Pretty good, but flogs the white genocide fallacy.
“. . . we are merely a few decades away from becoming minority populations . . . orchestrated by a rootless clique of international businessmen.”
Why would international businessmen want white populations to become minorities? How would that benefit them? White people have willingly gone along with consumer capitalism for decades, producing, buying and borrowing. Those Nazi types who blame Jews ignore the obvious fact that Israel depends on white Western support for its survival.
“Native fertility rates in white countries are being lowered by the continuous promotion of feminism, abortion, promiscuity, and mixed-race relationships . . . These four tools, which are being used to speed up our demographic replacement . . . No account of the war on white women would be complete without me addressing the mass-marketing of interracial relationships which we see today in the West . . . The clear aim here is to normalize certain attitudes and influence public behavior.”
Promiscuity lowers the birth rate? Anyway, race mixing is a result of immigration plus cultural assimilation – many people are naturally liberal and do not have strong racial identities. And children who grow up in mixed populations will regard it as normal by adulthood. For mixing not to eventually happen there has to be major cultural barriers (e.g. religion). Advertisers include racial minority people to maximise customer appeal – money, money. You’re on firmer ground with regard to programme makers, quite a few of whom probably do have an anti-white agenda. But do soaps and Doctor Who have a big influence on partner choice? I doubt it. Simple physical and cultural proximity are the main things.
It is easier to go off on witch hunts than accept the fact that most people just don’t care strongly about identitarian issues.
We don’t have to answer why certain things are happening to know they are bad and against the interests of white people. Whatever their motive, international businessmen and government policies put into effect policies and programs that dilute and displace whites in their own lands. Asking a rhetorical question about their motivation is not relevant. You are correct that white people have been their own worst enemy in pursuing consumerism and individualism to the point of near racial suicide, but it’s not an either/or decision between blame. There are elements of both.
Yes, promiscuity in a world of free or cheap birth control and pleasure worship diminishes birth rates.
Anti-miscegenation laws were on the books in America at least up to even one lifetime ago, and it had nothing to do with religion or anything else you were talking about. Racial identity existed implicitly, even for many liberals, until the programs of cultural Marxism in academia and popular culture poisoned and deconstructed that implicit identity for many whites.
Answering the question of why most people don’t care about identitarian issues, which you are right about, will.lead you back to the money, efforts, and especially ideas of Jews.
‘Why would Internatinal businessmen want white populations to become minorities?’
A good question – and one without a simple answer in my opinion.
During the late 20th century large scale (mass) immigration into Western countries proceeded on a scale not seen before WW2. Initially, some of this movement was simply for humanitarian reasons. But in time, it became clear that newly arrived migrants – particularly those from non-European sources – were generally less picky about wages and working conditions than local white workers.
During the 1970’s trade union power and the labour share of GDP were at their peak – and business was looking for ways to roll back the clock. By importing a competitive workforce that had few cultural ties or bonds of social solidarity with organised (white) labour, this was quickly achieved.
By the 1980’s, for example, the Australian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) were crowing about mass immigration ‘dampening wages pressure’ and calling for more of the same. Of course, in time some of the migrants from earlier waves were recruited by the union movement, so it was clear that fresh arrivals would be needed on an ongoing basis to keep the pressure on labour.
In addition to the expansion of the labour pool and the division of organised labour, mass immigration had the extra benefit for business of rapidly growing the local population; faster than would be possible through natural growth. This provided bigger domestic markets for businesses and more consumers in markets where affluence and consumption were the norm. An endlessly growing population also means endless economic ‘growth’, propping up the unsustainable Ponzi scheme that passes for our western finance system at present.
As even Noam Chomsky has said, modern capitalism doesn’t really care whether it’s customers or workers are black, white or other. It wants profit, that’s all. Individual global businessmen probably give little thought either way to the fate of white nations. But the system they rely on (capitalism) works remorselessly against us. Those who come to nationalism from the pro-business Right seem (in my opinion) to struggle with the idea that it’s capitalism, itself – rather than some crusty misfits on the left – which presents the greatest long term threat to our survival as white peoples.
.
I agree with your assessment of capitalism to a point. The thing with modern capitalism (in white countries of course), is that it’s free market competition for small time white businesses and lawyers, while the most successful businesses and non whites get ridiculous protections and concessions. Remember, intense competition *between* white nations (and individuals through market competition) is what drove Europeans to become the dominant cultural, political, technological powerhouse on this planet. This is why China or India did not come to dominate the world as Europeans have done; they never had the level of internal competition that Europe had. This is why China, in particular, stagnated after the Song dynasty.
Capitalism has def outlived its usefulness, though, at least as we have it today. Or I’m totally wrong. Lol
Dear Patrick, Jews believe in the Talmud, which is very heavily anti non-Jews, and extremely anti-Christian. Bearing in mind that Europeans have high IQs, high levels of education, advanced technology and a history of fighting against the Jewish problem from the moment it was discovered by Luther and Calvin… By eliminating Europeans, the Jews, in one go, eliminate 1. their only opponent (Asians and Africans don’t seem to recognize their enemy), 2. the only nation capable of spreading that knowledge and attitude, 3. Christians. All the while reducing the world population, which is another one of their famous goals.
The purpose of this whole charade is to lower white birth rates. Naturally this isn’t good for women, but the purpose isn’t to harm women or to wage war on women.
Woman that can break social conditioning can lead a very satisfying life. But biggest enemy to achieve this are women themselves. Most women know that feminism is hurting them in the long run, but they just cant resist the benefits of feminism when it suits them, they just cant resist the temptation. Even the “woke” women will make up some rationalization when it suits them.
In my country a housewife gets 60% of her deceased husband’s pension for 1 year only. After that, it’s about $100 per month. Only the underclass and the very wealthy “break social conditioning”. In many countries even getting basic health insurance is tricky.
Have you ever tried researching a topic before you form an opinion about it?
The sad situation you’re describing is result of feminism. And the $100 sounds like you live in Serbia or some developing country where economic standards are extremely low. Because this is most definitely is not the case in developed western countries. Traditionally elderly widows would subsist on savings and with assistance of her sons. I dont need to be “educated” on the legislation in each and every country to know that.
But other than that you make great case in point. Seize the benefits, but shun the responsibilities that come with it. Modern feminism.
It’s the result of highly efficient, mass producing capitalism, which moved the production of goods, and later services out of the homestead.
Pensions in Germany. (Image originally from Bild magazine.)
Savings? When raising 3+ kids on a single salary?
No, I would not want to live on the money of my children. They would need that for their own families.
Traditionally people owned property, that is, independent means that could sustain them in illness or old age. People without property often didn’t marry, they lived as servants in other people’s households. Today, almost no one owns property. People barely own the roof over their head.
There were of course poor people who owned nothing but their workforce, and they married and had children. But that was always considered a threadbare existence, worthy of pity and charity.
Please explain how to live as a housewife, and at the same time get full health insurance and pension, when all meaningful social security benefits are legally tied to jobs, not kids. (Again, not because of feminism. This is how social security systems have always worked, since their beginning in Bismarckian Germany.)
A compelling testimony from Laura, glad to see her here.
The following is crucial:
“What I remember about this encounter was the following: If I, as an open nationalist, had to pluck myself up in order to embrace the onslaught that followed, how uncomfortable must questions like this make apolitical females feel?”
The taboos must be broken.
Most of the jobs you can do after being doxxed are really tough manual labor jobs that women typically don’t do, so doxxing harms women’s earning potential more than that of men.
Hi, hope you see this, sorry for the major change of subject but I wrote to Mark C. and this might explain to you why Scotlands so fucked up. I”ve been trying to get folk aware that Scotland’s got this segregated school system and we get played off each other throughout adulthood, we can never get a real nationalist movement, like the jilet gaunes or a Gemma O’Doherty type cos folk will care more if their the same religion and refuse to support them if not. I went to both types of school and it’s the single biggest reason Scots can never wake up and its the best divide and rule in the western world.
It is exactly like N.I. without “The Troubles” (Civil War).
, I went to both Roman Catholic and Non-Denominational schools and my family is completely mixed Catholic and Protestant so I notice when we”re played against each other. Basically my understanding of how and why we have this apartheid school system and the damage it does to our society. Also that Scotland must appear as this super-left progressive nationalist place but the Nationalism part is just a word, they could be called the Scottish Bingo Party and would still manage fine as we’re all at each other’s throats.
Right, so at the start of the 20th century Communism/Socialism is catching on all over Europe at the same time West Scotland has a huge influx of immigrants from Ireland.
Glasgow had bread queues around George Square miles long and machine gun emplacements all around. Many people were shot dead during the riots that went on. Government does a switcheroo and says “No, No, the immigrants are the reason you are all piss poor and starving not us, so forget that Communism, it won’t help you. John McLean and the ” Red Clydesiders” are historical references for this time in Glasgow.
So the Catholic immigrants are put in separate schools as the Untermensch and are vilified as needing separated or converted out of Catholicism. This is 1912 I’m sure that went down and the school segregation began. My family came here as Catholics mid 1800’s I learned recently, it was my Grandad became a Protestant, I knew that.
Anyway decades later the Catholic population here is pretty much the equivalent of Muslims in the Western world. They have all the rights and protection (special treatment) possible but are still oppressed somehow. Recently a priest was spat on during an Orange parade, people have been trying to get them banned or highly restricted. I’m 51, when I was young both sides had flute bands and they were just parades and things were much less hostile. This caused an uproar in the media here, the flute bands were hammered and a man was prosecuted. Hope Not Hate are always showing up, Bhoys Against Bigotry is another one, the prejudice is only addressed in one direction not both ways, this serves to antagonise everybody and is a good recent example of the divide and rule that goes on here. Very recently one Glasgow football teams fans were banned under threat of prosecution from singing one particular song. Whereas a cause of wider public outrage for decades around another set of fans singing and celebrating terrorist atrocities from the troubles in Ireland goes completely ignored and is thus condoned as acceptable.
Kids at age five are split up from best friends and even relatives to go to their separate schools, this happened to me and I could not comprehend why my best freind had to go to a Catholic school miles away and I went to a “Protestant” school up the road. Also when I started going to an R.C. school age 14 I found I had cousins I had heard of or hardly knew, some only living a few streets away that I never knew of as we were schooled separately.
Catholics, in fact most, are oblivious it seems, I done all my research years ago and found forums where people say things like, ” I never noticed I was at a Catholic school”,or ” Looking back it is harmful, but I liked being there with only other Catholics”. The subject of splitting best friends, cousins that play together and even half-brothers and sisters to go to which ever school also comes on forums. Funny that all through “Protestant” school we used to say, ” Those Catholics don’t”get as good a Christmas as us cause it’s off to chapel at midnight and a tangerine Christmas morning”, then going to Catholic school I heard all the time, “You proddy’s don’t get as good a Christmas as us.” That’s what it’s like here.When someone asks what school you went to most take that as fishing for your religion and can be kinda sinister.
Anyway, I know this is more anecdotal than I wanted, but I wanted to give you something to go on if it comes up again. It explains why Scotland is politically a mystery to the rest of the UK and stays under the radar as even Millennial Woes might not know much of this as a lot of private schools will just look like a normal school for Roman Catholics or not. I am talking about the thousands of state schools that will only employ Catholics and is only justifiable economically when the divide and rule value is considered. I live between two large High schools, a few hundred yards one way is the school my son goes to, and a few hundred yards the other way is another school where 80% are bussed in from housing schemes up to 30 miles away. Financially it’s bonkers and I thought I would see mixed schools in my lifetime but no way,
It does not matter which party is in power though, no-one has ever raised this as it is just too valuable to them as a control method. Surely someone with an audience can do this issue justice, I tried to get Dr Ed Dutton interested, imagine his brain pulling this issue apart. At least it a mention if you can, Thank you.
All the best,
John
Glasgow
Thanks so much Laura! You have no idea how much I identified, reading this, or how touched I am by your impeccable phrasing. Every European woman needs to read this. Your best work yet.
Thanks for confirming you are a vile racist piece of shit girl! Your disgusting anti-black rhetoric almost makes me want to vomit! What makes you think you have the right to tell an entire race of people to not come to a country simply because a few bad apples did something?!! By your logic if a white person mugs me that means I have a right to not want white people to come to the US! Singling our an entire race just because of a few bad apples is the definition of racism! And nothing you or your vile neo Nazi following whom you have attracted with your abhorrent statements will change that!
Hysteria /hɨˈstɛɹijə/ (n.); behavior exhibiting excessive or uncontrollable emotion, such as fear or panic.
Funny. This word is exactly what describes you and your alt-right kin. You can’t let the rest of us NORMAL people just live in peace. You have to just keep bitching and moaning about “MUH WHITE PRIDE” over and over again. Hey, you want WHITE or as Jared Taylor would say HU-WHITE Pride so badly. Then go fuck off to Antarctica. It’s as white as the eye can see and you don’t have to worry about being a sensitive pussy because that black oil spill is fudging up your beautiful oasis. You and Laura Towler are no more a representative for white people than Osama was a representative of all Muslims. Yet, you don’t see the hypocrisy in labeling a entire group as Laura Towler has done as thugs or criminals. Showing pride in your race doesn’t mean you get to treat other races like garbage dehumanizing them then get to play the victim when people call you out on it, honey. Laura Towler doesn’t seem to understand that this dangerous level of thinking is what led to the El Paso shooting, Christchurch, as well as countless others.
tinyurl.com/yykmswje
Yeah, just reply to me with links and childish copy and pastes like a coward. Why don’t you address the points I made in my post or are you to scared to because you know your whole movement is based on nothing but lies and racist fears? What makes you and Laura Towler think white immigrants coming to Britain many are not even native Brits will suddenly culturally-enrich it but non-whites will ruin it?
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.