A contributor to Urban Dictionary gives us a definition:
Fem-pocalypse is the END of the naturally functioning modern global society due to hyper-masculinization of woman and hyper-feminization of men, and the END of traditional gender roles, which is also characterized by the preferential treatment of women combined with shameless bashing of men and bashing of all things male by both men and women.”
He may have got a bit carried away, but let us investigate. Beware of the ‘Fem-pocalypse’.
Feminism will eventually bring about an economic and social collapse”
One bright spark states that: “Feminism. Of the top three ‘isms’ (communism, fascism and feminism) that wreaked havoc or potential havoc, on Western society, Feminism takes the cake.”
One blogger observes:
“There have been many thinkers like Karen Straughan and Jordan Peterson that have suggested we are heading towards creating extremely oppressive, tyrannical, Marxist regimes, and potentially murderous governments.”
MenShouldHaveRights continues:
“As extreme as it might sound, we could be heading towards a a 1984 like future and maybe even a genocide of men.”
Elsewhere he comments:
“Society is like a moth getting distracted by a candle, we are going to burn for this.”
All sorts of comments are made such as rant from a disgruntled male:
“On the first of October, the government ran out of spendable money because of a budget impasse in the U.S. Congress related to the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) and the eternal struggle between the two main political parties (Democrats and Republicans) to see who can be the biggest white-knight mangina.
Our favorite man-hating peg lady, Amanda Marcotte, has her underwire all scrambled over this government shutdown because Vaginas are Hurting — since the government exists to transfer money from men to women, a government shutdown means that the ladies are in DANGER.
The shutdown means the WIC program (‘The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children’ — but not for starving men) will have to be funded through the states, at least until the Federal government is functional again.
Likewise, college financial aid, which goes disproportionately to women in Women’s Studies indoctrination classes, will be delayed, restoring some of the balance to men who work to pay their own way through school ....
Karen Straughan discussed what will happen when enough men walk away from a feminist society — that society breaks down and crashes. ...
This is but the smallest taste of what will happen when enough men opt out of society.”
In the replies, one commenter states:
“Slavery is not a life-style choice of men. It is imposed upon them by women.”
Men are waking up to ‘The Secret’. It needs to be buried so that women can get the men out working for them. And another comment:
it is telling that the feminists are panicking that the hated patriarchy is coming apart. That’s the thing about government...it may give them all the goodies a man can give a woman and she can be whatever toxic personality she prefers. But once its runs out...it could care less about their well-being or feelings of unhaaaaaaaaaapiness. Feminism is a faith-based manifestation of traditional privileges and special treatment demanded from society by women. It certainly has nothing to do with equality or human rights, as they are perfectly happy to disregard both men’s and women’s rights to advance the agenda.“That feminists are panicking about collapse (or at least exposure) of their Patriarchy upon which they depend so much.”
Now back to some more reasoned debate by the exceedingly popular Jordan Peterson:
“This transgressive behaviour that your are describing is part of the all out assault on Western categories of thought. And I think that was started, not even so much by the Marxists as by the French intellectuals in the late 1960s. Especially Jacques Derrida, who maybe is the most dangerous person of the last forty years since he is of course the hero of the humanities and much of the social sciences. He believes and states this in his work that the whole purpose of categorisation is for exclusion. And so ??? categorisation is the basis of cognition. And so basically, he has made the claim that though itself is an agent of oppression and that’s absurd except that he’s the dominant thinker.
I had a call in tell me that he’s very worried about the encroachment of ‘Political Correctness’ on campuses. But he said he wasn’t sure what to do about it because, if he stood up against it, the personal cost would be overwhelming and the social effect would be negligible. And I thought - God - that’s such a horrible thing to think. But I mean, I took it seriously, right. It’s a serious thing for him to say. ...
We are in far worse shape than we think. ...
Many of the kids on the left regard arguments — they equate arguments in favour of free speech with racism. They just assume they are the same thing.”
Speculations about societal breakdown can sound scary, but do not forget that the U.S. Government was shut down for lack of money. Other cities have rioted over the death of a child. I often ask: “Who has the authority to create the money of a nation?” The clear answer is: “The government” So we should ponder why the government should be in debt. Nations are in debt to banks owned by private interests because a group of Jewish businessmen in England offered the crown to the Dutch William of Orange provided he agreed to borrow fictitious money from them rather than create it himself as the entitled sovereign. The ‘moneymen’ have dictated politics ever since. But you would have to wonder if they were truly Jewish, or whether they claimed to be Jewish. Although land was a freely created commodity and money is a freely created commodity, almost everyone wallows under a burden of debt, yet money is freely created. There is a nation of people working exceedingly hard to earn money to pay debts in money that cost nothing to create. many live on the streets, deprived of any share in land due to a society that worships the banks that make fictitious money used to secure the temporary use of land to the complete exclusion of those disenfranchised from the lending institutions because they cannot be bled of their income. If you don’t have a significant job in a corporation with its accompanying wage that can be bled to feed the sharks at the lending institutions that inflate the value of land in any area of high employment. Monstrous cities favour the money lenders — the usurers of biblical times nowadays dressed in suits.
But as the men work hard and pay the bulk of the tax harvest, we have to tolerate Ellie Guzman. Compare this to the rant above about government shutdown.
“2018 has brought us a bountiful harvest of ready-to-use white male tears. Don’t get me wrong; 2018 has also been the year of vomit-inducing male triumph and creepy smiles. However, the tear harvest has been bigger than ever, and us womenfolk are free to collect these tears for many fun recipes.” [2]
Under ‘Political Correctness’, we have created a fearsome system where you are now: ‘Guilty until proven Guilty’. Innocence is not an option. If a feminist screams: “Guilty!”, you are guilty because you were accused. It is far from perfect, but it is all you are going to get. If you complain, you are guilty of standing against the ideals of the state feminism.
Let us look at the history of Muslim invasions. The Islamic invasion of India appears to be the greatest genocide in history. At about 1000 A.D., it is believed that India had around twenty-five to thirty percent of the world’s GDP. It was rich — and so it was prone to invasion. Mahmud Ghazni started a fearful Muslim invasion of the Indian subcontinent and their despotic looting continued for seven centuries. The destruction ended their preeminent position in mathematics and science and destroyed Indian knowledge. The struggled with Islamic barbarity for many centuries. The Islamic historian Firishta [Born in 1560. Died 1620] talked about the medieval bloodbath in India during Muslim rule. Firishta records that 400 million Hindus got slaughtered during the Muslim invasion and the subsequent occupation of India by these Muslims. The survivors were enslaved and castrated. It is believed that India’s population was around 600 million before the Muslim invasion. By about 1550, this Hindu population had been genocided down to 200 million. That is an awful lot of Hindu testicles. There had been successive Muslim invasions that caused massive massacres of Hindus. Even the Hindu women started to commit suicide to escape the life as a sex slave to these Muslim invaders. Schools and temples of the Hindus were routinely destroyed. The Hindus of the time had little ability through their religion to counter the invasions. Christians of Europe will have the same problem. Love and peace is all very well until under attack. It is why Christianity ‘toughened up’ and created the ‘Crusaders’. In the current anti-Christian genocide, they have not used swords nor employed castration. The current forces against Christians have used propaganda to encourage promiscuity and porn to discourage real sex. Condoms, abortion and porn-induced-impotence has been more successful than the removal of testicles.
Back to India and its Hindus, as late as 1921, there was an Anti-Hindu rebellion conducted by the Muslim Mappila (Moplah - British spelling.) community of Kerala in 1921. Driven by resolutions in Karachi, the Moplahs murdered, pillaged, and forcibly converted 100,000 Hindus. Annie Besant describes the riots:
“They Moplah murdered and plundered abundantly, and killed or drove away all Hindus who would not apostatise. Somewhere about a lakh (100,000) of people were driven from their homes with nothing but their clothes they had on, stripped of everything. Malabar has taught us what Islamic rule still means, and we do not want to see another specimen of the Khilafat Raj in India.”
I can now under stand why the rickshaw driver on my first visit to India in 1975, exclaimed: “The British were gentlemen rulers.” The British tended to build the locals to run the show rather than terrify the locals with testicle removal. The British united the nation and ruled India as one entity. Although they did not invade for the benefit of the Indians, they ruled as if it was part of their Empire and even called it “The Jewel in the Crown of the British Empire.” — to be improved not plundered and castrated. It is not uncommon for persons to state that the lives of the Hindus improved under the British rule. And some say that it wasn’t an invasion as such but that they just became rulers by default as the Mughal empire declined. They prevented inter tribal warfare and instituted rule of law. They love their laws and procedures, those Indians. Hindus tend to believe that the current Muslims in India turned to Islam at the pointy end of a sword. Expect the same for the peoples of Europe. The women of Europe are in for a shock in the near future:
Ghandi did some strange things. He was trained in English law. He used the logic in interesting ways. He defeated the British by using the logic of the British — British law. But he divided a nation and inflamed religious violence whilst pretending to do the opposite. The Muslims and Hindus went on a killing spree. The Sikhs, recognising what was happening in their region, turned the fracas against the Muslims and in retaliation, created an extremely efficient killing machine that history will not forget. “Don’t mess with the Sikhs!”
I am beginning to doubt the common sense of Ghandi. He was the little boy that brought down Goliath with a stone. But was it for the better. The country was torn apart by a killing spree that resulted in the nation being divided into the nations of India and Pakistan. Expect the same problems when the ratio become similar in Europe. Although a Hindu, he said:
“Hindus should not harbour anger in their hearts against Muslims even if the latter wanted to destroy them. Even if Muslims want to kill us all we should face death bravely.”
The Europeans will be told the same. “Tolerate the rape and murder by the Muslim invaders.” Ghandi was a case and a half:
“If they established their rule after killing Hindus we would be ushering in a new world by sacrificing our lives.”
Gandhi’s advice to Punjabi survivors of Pakistan in India:
“If all Punjabis were to die to the last man without killing, Punjab would become immortal.”
The man is a logical legal fruit loop. They will publish similar stupid advice in Europe. The machinations of various forces in India resulted in an orgy of violence in 1947 from the Lahore Resolution. For centuries, tensions had existed between Hindus and Muslims. The British democratic politics unfortunately ensured that religion based group-think would also occur. As in America, black people will vote for a black irrespective of the politician’s policies. Hispanics will vote for a Hispanic irrespective of the policies and reputation of the politician. Divisions exacerbate divisions. It was expected that women would vote for Hillary Clinton. What a way to destroy the democratic political system. Democracy requires people to vote for the politician that will look after all people best — the politician that will run the country best. To vote along party lines, gender lines, racial lines, or any other affiliation is to destroy democracy and invite tribal warfare. Attempting to bring Hindus and Muslims together by keeping religion out of politics is but a pipe dream — gone in a puff — Gandhi’s puff of religious bias. Gandhi stated that he was Hindu first and anything else later. He was Hindu before Indian. Just as Jewish people put their allegiance to their Jewish faith and the Jewish community before the welfare of their various adopted nations. Unfortunately, they manipulate the politics of a nation using their cohesiveness to their own ends and then get upset when they become disliked. This unfortunate behaviour has got them thrown out of almost every country in which they have taken residence. Bamford tells us that Gandhi toured every corner of India accompanied by radical Muslim leaders, resulting in the stirring up a religious frenzy. The slogan ‘Islam is in danger’ became a danger. [3] K.A. Karandikar writes:
“Gandhi was responsible for jettisoning sane, secular, modernist leadership among the Muslims of India and foisting upon the Muslims, a theocratic orthodoxy of Maulvis” []
Gandhi was the problem, not the solution. Gandhi fanned the flames of religious fanaticism. The Ali brothers, traveling with Gandhi, were lifting vast crowds into a state of religious frenzy by calling for forty million Muslims to give their lives for Islam. This clearly affected the Hindus who had never completely forgotten the four-hundred-million of their ancestors that had lost their lives and testicles under Muslim occupation. Gandhi effectively destroyed the possibility of Hindus and Muslims living together in a peaceful India. He had supported the Khilafat movement even though the Turks had killed two million Armenian Christians in what is now conveniently called ‘the Armenian genocide’ (Leaving out the word Christian as if the death of Christians is not a significant issue on the anti-Christian media machine.) The partition of India into predominantly Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan displaced fifteen million people and lead to the death of greater than a million persons. During the partition, Sikhs in particular, many of whom had been farmers or successful businessmen were forced to migrate from Western Punjab and elsewhere to Eastern Punjab in India, having lost everything including the lives of family members. Their women had particularly suffered from rapes, abductions and massacres in the hands of Muslim League vigilantes. This led the Sikhs to retaliate with typical Sikh efficiency. Muslims suffered bitterly at the hands of the very efficient Sikhs.
Religious encounters are terrifying. Don’t forget that. Of interest, the propaganda machine in the West relentlessly demonises Adolf Hitler and the National Socialist Party that was loved by the people, brought Germany out of the grip of the money-men’s Versailles Treaty induced hyperinflation, and turned Germany into an efficient productive nation. Even Austria freely decided to join in the benefits of National Socialism under the genius of Gottfried Feder’s Economic theories. The ‘manipulators of high finance’ were the cause of Germany’s woes in the mind of Gottfried Feder. Whilst there are endless films and information condemning German National Socialism and Adolf Hitler, the opposite is the case for Muslims.
Muslims of the modern era hero worship their ancestors who had raped, looted, and murdered. Many think it was acceptable to persecute Hindus. And they think that it is acceptable to continue to persecute Hindus. One of my former employees, a big tall man by the name of John Tinkler from Bristol, said to me a few times: “Hitler — my hero.” I thought he must have picked up a bit of madness. But I investigated. I listened to some of his speeches and read parts of Mein Kampf and I heard a lot of sense. He was not as evil as all the Hollywood bluster was portraying. I could see why the people followed him and why another nation wished to freely join Germany. Yet Gandhi is promoted as the ‘father of the nation’ of India. What he said and what he did were different. Lawyers are good at that. If you pay a lawyer, they will convincingly argue one way. If another person pays them, they will convincingly argue the other way. Gandhi fanned the flames of religious intolerance and we are all suffering from it to this day.
I am writing this in Jakarta. Although it is a horrendously overcrowded and broken city with horrendous traffic, broken pathways, and smelly waterways, the people are extremely pleasant. It is similar in Malaysia. It appears that the way a religion, in this case Islam, spreads influences the way that it is accepted. Indonesia accepted Islam but not at the point of a sward and so it is accepted. Similar in Indonesia. Buddhism was actually desired by other nations and spread naturally. Hinduism spread naturally to other countries and is accepted peacefully. Islam accepted by force leaves bitter undercurrents. As Islam spreads into Europe bringing a form of ‘Rape Culture’ in a ‘Penis War’ of heavy breeding amongst the Muslims and rape of the original inhabitants, the white people, great hostility will occur. So I am happy traveling in Indonesia and have done so for many years always receiving hospitality, but I am not happy with the Muslification of Europe. On the Trans-Jakarta bus, locals have often stood up and offered me their seat, although, I don’t like to think I look that old. And while you are at it, listen to the Dr Mahathir speech on the internet. The one labelled ‘73rd’ is good but the most revealing is ‘dr mahathir speech jews control world economy’.
Where a religion is imposed forcefully, it will have a future of hostility as history is not forgotten. Where is spreads naturally, it is mostly accepted. Thailand is Buddhist because it wanted to become Buddhist. Christianity initially spread because it was wanted by the families and I believe it was primarily the mothers that wanted it because Jesus became a good role model for their potentially troublesome males. The real Christianity, in my learning is the Christianity that is passed from mother to child, particularly to the potentially troublesome young males. Mothers, supported by fathers, sent their young sons out into society as a force for good which also meant that the males laboured for the betterment of females so that the females could be freed from the worry of provisioning a family.
As for forceful imposition of a religion, no more dramatic can be brought back from history than the Muslim invader Nadir Shah who made a mountain of the skulls of the Hindus that his troops had killed in Delhi. Babur also created towers of Hindu heads in 1527 at Khanua where he had defeated Rana Sanga. He repeated this horror after capturing the fort of Chanderi. In 1568, Akbar ordered a general massacre of 30000 Rajputs after the defeat of Chithor. The Sultans of Bahamani had an annual agenda to kill at least 100000 Hindus annually. Medieval India is full of such stories. Peace with the Muslims is ever fragile. The Hindu religion, like the Christian religion, does not have violence written into it so its adherents tend to be prone to violence from more violent or manipulative religions. So the Christians and Hindus tend to suffer at the hands of violent Muslims and manipulative Jews. As I said to a Jakarta girl yesterday:
“The problem with the Muslim faith is that a thousand years ago, someone persuaded them that they needed to pray five times a day with the consequence that they think god will sort everything out for them. They were also told that the Quran was a rulebook, so that every decision was already made for them. They did not need to think because everything was already decided for them. Mohamed made rules for people to follow. The Christians are told that the bible is a guidebook only and that they are responsible for their own future. Thus, the Christians tend to be more progressive.”
Muslims in the Philippines constantly appear in the news with headlines that include: “A bid to end decades of violence.”, and “Philippine Muslim Group’s Violent Streak Raises Specter of New War.” Rebel-linked violence has killed about 120,000 people in Mindanao since the 1960s. Only the arrival of Spanish prevented total collapse to Islam and Islam was limited to a few southern islands. Much of Southeast Asia welcomed the European conquerors because they were preferable to Islam.
The Muslims in Thailand create headlines such as: “Southern Thailand’s separatist violence shows no signs of ending.” and “Thailand’s Muslim insurgency roars back to life.” The effect of the Muslim activities is to fuel reciprocal violence. It is causing a rise of a new Buddhist nationalism in Thailand.
Non-violent Christianity created the ‘Crusaders’ to ward off Muslim incursions. It is all very well saying that you are entirely against violence but it leave you prone to violence from those with different views on violence. The Christians of Europe need to toughen up in the ways of the ‘Crusaders’ if they are not going to finish up as piles of skulls. This little message is given to his fellow Hindus by Proud Hindu:
“We Hindus have not appointed Salman Rushdie or American intellectuals to rewrite history for us. The history repeats itself in the actions of our arch enemy the Muslim Pakistan who is sponsoring killing of Hindus inside India even today. Todays Hindus are strong and determined enough to make any Muslim who tries to attack her bite the dust. Pakistan tried four times and failed.” []
India still suffers from Muslim-Hindu conflict as in this comment by Ram on a blog entry titled ‘Religion of Genocide, Rapes, Terrorism’:
“After independence, the Indian leadership is only to blame for the troubles by Muslims. Once the country and was divided proportionately, why were all Muslims not sent to Pakistan?” []
Mike Konrad writes:
“When one thinks of mass murder, Hitler comes to mind. If not Hitler, then Tojo, Stalin, or Mao. Credit is given to the 20th-century totalitarians as the worst species of tyranny to have ever arisen. However, the alarming truth is that Islam has killed more than any of these, and may surpass all of them combined in numbers and cruelty.
The enormity of the slaughters of the ‘religion of peace’ are so far beyond comprehension that even honest historians overlook the scale. When one looks beyond our myopic focus, Islam is the greatest killing machine in the history of mankind, bar none.”
Yet again:
Even the Blacks suffered under Islam. John Allembillah Azumah estimates that over 110 million Blacks were killed by Islamic forces:
“... a minimum of 28 Million African were enslaved in the Muslim Middle East. Since, at least, 80 percent of those captured by Muslim slave traders were calculated to have died before reaching the slave market, it is believed that the death toll from 1400 years of Arab and Muslim slave raids into Africa could have been as high as 112 Millions. When added to the number of those sold in the slave markets, the total number of African victims of the trans-Saharan and East African slave trade could be significantly higher than 140 Million people.” [John Allembillah Azumah. ‘The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa: A Quest for Inter-religious Dialogue’]
If you are ‘Islamophobic’, you have good reason to be so. Labelling is a good way of ‘shutting people up’ and to ‘shut people down’. Many report that the media is run by ‘Jews’ and the media is good at labelling people without good reason. Mike Konrad continues with:
“Much of Islamic slavery was sexual in nature, with a preference for women. Those men who were captured were castrated. The mulatto children of the women were often killed, which explains why Islam was not demographically shifted towards the black race, unlike slaves in the West, who bore children to breed a mestizo class. Add in those dead children; and we arrive at well over 200 million.”
William D. Phillips reports that in the Middle Ages:
“many slaves were passed through Armenia and were castrated there to fill the Muslim demand for eunuchs.
Similar occurred in Spain when it was run by the Muslims. Northern Europeans were captured in raids that extended as far as Iceland. The enslaved fair haired males were neutralised in the castratoriums of Islamic Spain. Many died from the operations. Unfortunately, you need to learn a little history. Even Hitler had knowledge of the killing machine religion. Muslims prized blonde women for their harems and so there was a good trade in the enslavement of Slavic women in the bazaars of the Muslim Caliphate.
We are headed towards the creation of oppressive, tyrannical, Marxist regimes, which will lead to murderous governments.