25th October 2021
When writing or merely expressing an opinion about topics that are considered ‘taboo’ or at least controversial in some way, we must remember that political correctness is simply a control mechanism that effectively prevents us from expressing an opinion on any given subject which would seriously conflict with the prevailing agenda as laid down by our ‘controllers.’ Political correctness originated in the USSR in the 1920s under Stalin and was a tool used to suppress dissent against the regime by making it unacceptable within that society to hold certain opinions on certain topics. This of course is an efficient yet simple way of controlling people’s thoughts deeds and actions, using their peers as gatekeepers.
Society today, and those who run it with an iron fist, are absolutely dedicated to creating a total political, cultural, economic, and spiritual monopoly, otherwise known as the New World Order. This is the real reason for the existence of deliberately manufactured, false paradigms such as ‘racism,’ ‘anti-Semitism,’ ‘hate speech,’ ‘homophobia’ and ‘political correctness.’ It is not about protecting the ‘freedoms’ and rights of minorities as it is portrayed to be, it is really about the restriction and ultimately the enslavement of the majority.
The truth is always the truth, it is totally unaffected by any form of bias, prejudice, coercion or attempts to suppress it. In fact it does not even need defending. It is similar to a lion, simply let it loose and it will defend itself! But political correctness is an attempt to bend and/or distort the truth, in effect.
And today, with the advent and furtherance of extreme political correctness, we are slowly being forced to subscribe to an agenda with which we maybe do not agree and also to curb our opinions which are nevertheless being subtly moulded to match this agenda. This is totalitarianism at its worst. We are not allowed to have opinions anymore that contradict what our controllers deem to be acceptable to them.
For example, if you believe that so-called ‘diversity,’ a deliberately positive sounding term which simply means the forced mixing of cultures, as is happening constantly now throughout the western world, is wrong, then why are we no longer allowed to voice this opinion openly? We are forcibly told by both the controllers and members of our society alike (who of course have been subtly conditioned to respond this way) that this is ‘racism’ of the worst kind.
What we casually refer to as ‘racism’ is so blatantly one-sided in any case. What actually constitutes racism and where do we draw the line? An obvious example of racism would be calling someone a ‘black b*****d’ for example, but why is that now accepted and reviled universally as being a crime worse than simply calling someone a ‘French b*****d’, a ‘ginger b*****d’ or even just simply a ‘b*****d’? Referring to someone of the white race such as a Frenchman in that way is less unacceptable is it? It certainly would not invoke the same outrage as the use of his skin colour would. We need to read between the lines and ask why this has been deliberately engineered to be the case, as it most certainly has, and not just overreact to conveniently arbitrary, artificial distinctions, as we have become programmed to do. Abuse is abuse and I do not condone it in any way, but it seem that some abuse is less acceptable than others, specifically that which defies the currently decreed political narrative.
But what we are subtly coerced into overlooking is the fact that if someone has genuine reasons for believing that this ‘diversity’ is not acceptable to them in THEIR opinion, then who are we, or anyone else for that matter, to deny them their opinion? What seems on the surface to be a ‘positive thing,’ the inclusion and equality of all races, may well be so to some people and that’s just fine, but the opposite opinion is simply not tolerated by our newly engineered ‘norms.’ And who is to say who is right and who is wrong? Having a contrary opinion to the mainstream does not make us ‘bad’ or ‘evil’ people and it is vital for our freedoms that we are not only allowed to have our OWN opinions on any topic, but also that we are allowed to express them freely, too. Any other outcome is absolute tyranny.
“When even one American who has done nothing wrong is forced by fear to shut his mind and close his mouth, then all Americans are in peril.” Harry S. Truman
Likewise with sexuality. In our society today, everyone is being cajoled and at very least, encouraged to accept the laid-down new ‘norms’ of sexuality, otherwise known as the LGBTQ agenda (amongst other acronyms) which places a totally positive spin on any form of non-heterosexual behaviour whilst demonising those whose genuine beliefs lead them naturally to the opposite viewpoint. Again, we must try to be very open-minded indeed in order to not ‘take offence’ at the previous sentence. We are being strongly conditioned to believe that the only valid point of view is the one that absolutely embraces all forms of sexuality, often as stated, to the detriment of heterosexuality. The problem with this is not the fact that some people are genuinely non-heterosexual, in whatever form that may take (and there are deemed now to be many) but the fact that there is a deep, underlying agenda which strongly advocates the abandonment of heterosexuality in favour of homosexuality and other forms of sexuality.
I feel that I must point out that there is absolutely no problem at all with people whose genuine sexual proclivities are non-hetero. Absolutely and categorically not, and this is obviously a perfectly acceptable state of affairs to some. However, the caveat to this is that this narrative is rapidly and forcefully pushing us down a route that some people do not wish to go – the blind acceptance of laid-down societal norms, such as LGBTQ. And in much the same way that those who strongly advocate this way of life find it thoroughly ‘offensive’ that some people do not share their beliefs, then surely it should also be acceptable that in some people’s opinions, likewise yet contrarily, LGBTQ behaviour is ‘offensive’ to them? Unfortunately they are being denied the ‘luxury’ of having a contrary opinion to the current narrative.
I cannot stress strongly enough however, that I have absolutely no issue whatsoever with non-hetero activities but am merely trying to express MY opinion that it is the agenda itself that gives cause for concern. This is the agenda that pushes the non-hetero ‘norms’ onto children in British schools at the age of five, the agenda that forcefully glorifies overt ‘gayness,’ making it appear attractive to anyone who is ‘undecided’ about their own sexuality, and the agenda that pushes confrontation between the sexes almost to the point of dysfunctionality. In short, the agenda that openly advocates non-heterosexuality as part of an even wider agenda for world population reduction. Of course sexual relationships of the non-hetero variety cannot produce offspring and this I believe, is the very real reason for it all.
And to reiterate the original point for clarity’s sake, we are all being constantly and surreptitiously pushed into beliefs and norms, by this insidious prevailing agenda, that are not necessarily what we would otherwise normally embrace as our own, whilst being simultaneously blinded by outright propaganda that leads us to believe that any opposing viewpoint to that mandated by our controllers is at best plain unacceptable and at worst, utterly depraved and deserving of strong condemnation.