It's My Dam

It's My Dam




Source

January Garden

January Garden
[Photo By: KPA]

"The belief in objective truth is the keystone of traditional Western culture, and the explicit basis of the United States of America. For America's founding generation and their posterity, man's inalienable rights to liberty and self-government proceed, not from from the will and desire of man, but from "nature and nature's God." Man's freedom is ordained, and constrained, by a reality higher than man. It was the shared experience of that truth that formed the American nation."

Lawrence Auster
Our Borders, Ourselves: America in the Age of Multiculturalism
Chapter 4: The Spiritual Effects of Multiculturalism
P.58

To Reach the Invisible God Through Our Own Visible Means

Sistine Chapel

There is a fascinating dialogue going on at The Orthosphere, Becoming a reactionary is only the beginning of thought, where the writer Bonald quotes from Chesterton's What we think about:

“What can [the thinking Catholic] be thinking about, if he is not thinking about the Mistakes of Moses, as discovered by Mr. Miggles of Pudsey, or boldly defying all the terrors of the Inquisition which existed two hundred years ago in Spain?”

He continues to say, quoting from his own post:

Some time ago, I wrote that rejecting the Enlightenment is only the beginning of thought.

One way that the Enlightenment controls the minds of billions, locking them into a degrading and absurd mental slavery, is by making people imagine they know what’s on the other side. “Without the social contract…tyranny! Without separation of Church and state…religious warfare! Without feminism…rape! Without capitalism…communism! Without cosmopolitanism…Nazis! So love your chains, and repeat the slogans like a good boy.” You know how it goes.

[T]hose blinded by the Enlightenment have no idea what is on the other side. How could they, with such a narrow, unimaginative, and parochial worldview? In fact, the world of alternatives is vast, so vast that anyone beginning to step outside Enlightenment strictures should be warned that the greatest intellectual challenge is still ahead…

His point, I believe is to stop thinking in (impossible) negatives and to think in positives. Why not? Why not be cheery and optimistic? Why not believe that the world can be a better place and in fact is a good place!

Of course this requires two things - in my humble (and clearly unenlightened) opinion:

1. This is God's world. To destroy and discard it is sacrilegious. As we stand by God, he will guide us and show us the good way.

2. We need more than just the ephemera of ideas. The world of ideas should become something concrete. We are beings of flesh and blood and therefore so should be the world we create - emitted and ejected from our "thoughts."

From that we should discern that we are social beings. And the most sincere and sturdy manifestation of our "socialness" is through geography, with concrete land. Our countries!

And where else can we build that goodness so that it lasts, so that it is of Godly use for this (our) and future generations?

For example: we need to worship God not (only) through ephemeral thoughts but through clear actions. Our imaginations become something tangible.

We build churches for this reason, where the sights (the stained glass windows) the smells (the incense) and the sounds (the lovely choral and organ music) allow that we may concretely perceive God; that we are sure he is there, next to us, using all our senses to convince us of His presence.

But a French church is different from an English church as of course manifested even by the words used to praise God. As is an Ethiopian church from a Mexican one.

To reach the invisible God, we must search for Him through our own visible means: our own language, our own musical compositions, our own artistic creations.

By glorifying God thus, we also glorify our selves, our lands, our attachments, our solid bases.

Imagination is a necessary start (as all artists will tell you). We NEED to imagine God. But left on its own, imagination becomes like a beautiful flicker on a cinematographic screen. As we reach out to it, we can never attain it, and are left frustrated and bewildered. And bitter at this god who we feel with all our hurt, and heart, has abandoned us.

But we just got the strategy wrong. We listened to the wrong "experts."

Bonald writes:

It is no doubt a great thing to free oneself from the cloud of humbug into which we are all born. However, clearing one’s vision is only the start of seeing; next we must actually look around. One way that the Enlightenment controls the minds of billions, locking them into a degrading and absurd mental slavery, is by making people imagine they know what’s on the other side. “Without the social contract…tyranny! Without separation of Church and state…religious warfare! Without feminism…rape! Without capitalism…communism! Without cosmopolitanism…Nazis! So love your chains, and repeat the slogans like a good boy.” You know how it goes. You heard it, and you remember how it kept you bound for a long time after you realized that you didn’t particularly like what they were pushing…It is not true that conservatism or reaction needs to postulate any kind of ideal time in the past, but the Enlightened must commit themselves to the belief that the past was an utter horror.

And continues:

However, those blinded by the Enlightenment have no idea what is on the other side. How could they, with such a narrow, unimaginative, and parochial worldview? In fact, the world of alternatives is vast, so vast that anyone beginning to step outside Enlightenment strictures should be warned that the greatest intellectual challenge is still ahead…

The Warfare Against a Homeland

Driving through Upstate New York
July 2009
[Photo By: KPA]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"People want a homeland despite all the psychological warfare against it, and the world can provide it."
Laura Wood
The Thinking Housewife

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"I love thy rocks and rills,
Thy woods and templed hills;
My heart with rapture thrills,
Like that above."

Excerpt from "My Country, 'Tis of Thee"
(Also known as "America")
Written by Samuel Francis Smith, 1832
Via The Orthosphere, July 24, 2018
From the Article "The Shabbiest Gospel"
By: J. M. Smith

Running a Country

This will be an iconic image of this latest "war."

Whatever happened in Syria, and the truth will come out, President Assad shows the composure and perseverance of a true leader. Briefcase in hand, he makes the long and solitary walk through the great hall of his presidential palace to continue with the business, and responsibility, of running his country.

Trudeau Lite and His Crooked Ways

Image courtesy of The Proud Boys

So Trudeau Jr. shows up in Barrie basically doing his vote canvassing for his second primeministership term and...talked about childcare!

Well he talked about government handouts for children "Suffer the little children" said Jesus and woe to those who deign to make profit in their name. And in the name of the poor: "For you have the poor with you always, but Me you do not have always," said Jesus shining a harsh bright light on the money-grabbing hypocrites who will use the tattered rags of the destitute to fill up their tainted coffers.

But not jobs. Why did not this false prince talk jobs? As in: "Let's build on the Barrie initiative and move manufacturing jobs to Barrie?" And: "We the government are in full support of helping people become self-sufficient?" He could have just said it. Delivering on his words (which he likely couldn't and wouldn't do anyway - who abracadabra waves a wand and jobs land from fairy dust?) would have been another story. People are more generous to those who try to help than those those who hoodwink them with their deceits.

Government is now so clearly the paleolithic mountain standing between the people and the reality that (some of) these people will be (are) completely ignoring it and going about building their own lives. And once they get used to this, well lets say Marie Antoinette got off easy.

Imagine the surprise on Trudeau Lite's smug face (and there will be a surprise) when Canada resumes its true pride and reconstructs a new Jerusalem.

God help him.

150 Year Old Canada Experiencing Highest Levels of Immigration Update on Comments

I wrote the followng response to the comment on the article 150 Year Old Canada Experiencing Highest Levels of Immigration Ever , by Ricardo Duchesne on the website Council of European Canadians (I've also posted the article here):

-------------------------------------

Jakob Scheffer • 20 hours ago
We should not use free-standing figures, but put them in perspective. In a link you gave, it is revealed that the total net cost of non-Western immigrants in Denmark is 33 billion kroner. That is 6.6 billion CAD, or about 1,200 CAD per capita. Better is to see what this 33 billion kroner is as a percentage of Danish GDP expressed in kroner. Denmark's GDP is about 2 trillion kroner, so those 33 billion kroner are 1.65% of Danish GDP. That is not a very high percentage.

A Swedish economist said it best when he stated that immigration has not brought any net economic benefits to Sweden, but that it hasn't been an economic calamity either. The problem of course is that it will become a calamity if it continues undiminished.

Regards. JS

-------------------------------------

Kidist Paulos Asrat Jakob Scheffer • 16 minutes ago

It is people like you who make wonderful pro and con pronouncements sitting from, no doubt, a comfortable perch, who haven't the God-given human (and humane) common sense to extrapolate on the consequences. These immigrants are not stupid. They know they cannot kill the goose which lays the golden eggs. Instead they cleverly cull and accumulate what they would need when THEIR time comes.

Of course they can do this because the structures are sound and solid and whites still continue to make the big and important societal (science, art, technology, medicine, community, etc. etc.) contributions.

But go to certain locations, both in the US and in Canada, and you will see what happens, and much sooner than you think.

Immigration has been sugar-coated by elitist intellectual language for so long now that these elitist intellectuals actually BELIEVE what they say.

Have some grit and take a stand. I challenge you.

Kidist Paulos Asrat

-------------------------------------

MoxNix Kidist Paulos Asrat • 8 hours ago
"They know they cannot kill the goose which lays the golden eggs."

Could've fooled me.

-------------------------------------

Kidist Paulos Asrat MoxNix • 5 hours ago
LOL. I meant to say that the intelligent ones know that. But eventually they have to destroy (are destroying) in order to set up their worlds.

By the way, Steve Paikin of The Agenda has a fascinating program this evening on diversity and multiculturalism. It will be on his website by the end of the day. Please watch.

The language of multiculturalism has entered fully into our language. It is astonishing.

150 Year Old Canada Experiencing Highest Levels of Immigration Ever by Ricardo Duchesne

The dishonest Canadian establishment wants us to believe that the incredibly high levels of immigration we have been experiencing since the early 1990s, ranging from 225-000 to 320,000 immigrants per year, are not historically unprecedented but part of a normal pattern in our "nation of immigrants." Century Initiative says: 

Historically, Canada has successfully supported very high levels of immigration. In 1913, 400,000 immigrants arrived in Canada, representing over 5.2% of the population at the time.

On the surface this may seem like an honest statistic. Stats Canada is even more emphatic that "record numbers of immigrants were admitted in the early 1900s...The highest number ever recorded was in 1913, when more than 400,000 immigrants arrived."

Ethnic Composition of Immigrants Today Is Fundamentally Different

However, as Stats Canada notes, before the 1970s, immigrants "were mainly from European countries." As I also observed in a widely read article: 

Over the 400 years before Confederation, there were only "two quite limited periods" of substantial arrivals of immigrants: from 1783 to 1812, and from 1830 to 1850. In these two periods, the immigrants were "overwhelmingly of British origin." [...] Between 1896 and 1914, Canada experienced high immigration levels with more than 3 million arriving within this period. However, the ethnic composition of the nation remained 84 percent of British and French origin, while the European component rose to 9 percent. Between 1900 and 1915, the high mark in "Asian immigration" before the 1960s, 50,000 immigrants of Japanese, East Indian and Chinese descent arrived, but this number comprised less than 2 percent of the total immigration flow. In contrast, in 1914, there were nearly 400,000 Germans in Canada, the largest ethnic group apart from the British (which includes the Irish and Scots) and French.

Facing these facts, the personnel of Century Initiative, and the academic establishment which has an inherent incapacity for critical thinking, would likely reply that their point has nothing to do with race but with the numbers of immigrants, as well as how "successfully" Canada integrated these high numbers in the past.

But this is a simplistic reply. For it matters a lot that the Canada that accepted high numbers in the early 1900s was a Canada determined to maintain the Anglo-European character of the nation. Ninety percent of the immigrants who came to Canada before 1961 were from Britain. In stark contrast, the top three sources countries for immigration in the last 10 years have been China, India, and the Philippines.

It is rather lazy to extrapolate that our current majority non-Western immigrants are bound to be "successfully" integrated because the Anglo-European immigrants before 1961 were so integrated. There is abundant research showing that Europeans are more individualistic in their values, whereas non-Europeans are more collectivist. Due to complex historical reasons, Whites have a greater inclination to value the individuality and rights of each person, whereas Asians, and non-Whites generally, have a stronger inclination to think in terms of the interests of their ethnic in-group members.

Here are some links to studies corroborating the individualist values of Europeans versus the collectivist values of non-Europeans: 

• Individualism vs. Collectivism in Different Cultures: A Cross-cultural Study
• Collectivist Value Orientations Among Four Ethnic Groups: Collectivism in the New Zealand Context(PDF)
• Understanding the Individualism—Collectivism Cleavage and its Effects: Lessons from Cultural Psychology (PDF)
• http://web.uri.edu/iaics/files/07-Catherine-Konsky-Mariko-Eguchi-Janet-Blue-Suraj-Kapoor.pdf (PDF)
• http://gsappweb.rutgers.edu/cstudents/readings/Summer/Summer/Kelly_Diversity/Coon%202001%20individualism%20and%20collectivism.pdf (PDF)

Therefore, one cannot use the White-only immigration numbers of the early 1900s to justify the current majority Asian numbers. What we are witnessing today, with our historically high immigration numbers, is an extreme experiment aimed at the destruction of the ethnic identity of White-created countries in the name of an idea written on paper about the superiority of race-mixed nations. There is absolutely zero evidence that this experience has been "successful" anywhere in the world since it has never been tried before. History shows that those nations with historically-inherited diverse populations have been the most divided and conflict ridden (Joan Esteban and Debraj Ray, "On the Salience of Ethnic Conflict," The American Economic Review, Vol. 98, No. 5, 2008).

History is also showing that the ever more diversified nations of the West are now experiencing continuous terrorist attracts, massive welfare expenditures for immigrants, and systematic raping of White girls by members of collectivist cultures.

Historically Highest Number of Immigrants Since Early 1990s

Moreover, the fact is that, strictly in terms of the numbers alone, the period between 1896 and 1914, which is the period that diversity hacks say experienced the "highest levels of immigration," has been surpassed by the longer period from 1990 to 2017. We have been experiencing since 1990 the longest period of high immigration in Canada. Between 1991 and 2000, about 2.2 million immigrants were admitted to Canada, and between 2001 and 2006 an annual average of 242,000 individuals were welcome with open arms. During the five year period from 2006 to 2011, Canada welcomed over 1,162,900 immigrants, an average above 250,000 per year. The trend has been upwards. In 2012, it admitted 257,905 immigrants; in 2013, it welcomed 259,024, and in 2014 it admitted 260,411. In 2015, the number was increased to 271,660, and in 2016 to 300,000. It is estimated that as many as 320,000 new immigrants will be welcomed in 2017.

In contrast, only for the singular years of 1907, 1908, and 1911 to 1914, that is a mere 4 years, did the number of immigrants to Canada stood above 200,000, whereas since the early 1990s, the number has remained at an average of approximately 235,000 new immigrants per year. We have everything reason to mistrust the "experts" who tell us with a smug attitude that Canada had higher levels in the early 1900s. Let them know that during the last 25 years or so we have been experiencing the highest levels of immigration.

The Century Initiative plan to bring 450,000 per year until the end of this century has no parallels whatsoever in the history of any nation since the origins of humans. It is a malicious act of deception, therefore, to justify current immigration levels by referring to the "historically" high levels of immigration of the early 1900s.

Immigration numbers today are fast destroying the ethnic and cultural identity of the founding peoples of Canada. The prediction is that by the end of this century White Canadians will constituted only 20 percent of the population inside a nation controlled by 80 percent non-Whites lusting to eliminate what they will happily identify as the "White trash" leftovers.

If you don't want your children to live in this impending dystopia, support CEC.

 Research the anti-Canadian Century Initiative.

Identity

Blue Nile Falls

This is an email I sent to a correspondent:

My cousin...was here the other day with her children as well as her brother and his wife.

It is interesting. She stopped her memoir as she entered Canada. I was right about her reticence to write about her Canadian "experience."

[...]

She told me she is [now] writing a "fiction.

[...]

She brought up "identity" as part of her concern in her book...

I told her that "identity" in Canada was always going to be an issue for her (and people like her, although didn't say that).

"Ethiopia is going through some kind of renaissance. Why don't you and your family figure out a way to return? To go 'back home?' You came here through the most difficult way possible (they crossed deserts and countries before reaching Djibouti and finally coming to Canada as "refugees.")

Don't worry about culture and language. Both, especially for Ethiopians who live the culture daily, are easy to regain. Your children (they don't speak Amharic but understand it) will easily pick it up.

A country is a big thing. Everyone needs one."

She (and her brother) were listening to me intently.

I am glad I attended the dinner. I was curious to see what she would do after her "memoir."

[...]

I also said that in general that people like my father, important people ("big people" in the Amharic literal translation) could set an example and make the exodus back home. My parents have bought two houses from the inheritance house (which they sold at a fantastic price to high-rise developers) in Addis Abeba. They go back now every few months. They have invited me again in November but I have declined the invitation.

They could set an example for all these destitute, culturally bereft Ethiopians by returning (to Ethiopia). A courageous exodus.

Ethiopia is undergoing a "renaissance," I told them at the dinner. "After famines, revolutions, communist governments, ethnic wars, it still stands. Ethiopia, and Ethiopians and specially the Amhara, is resilient. It has withstood incursions and invasions through the centuries. The Amhara are still Amhara. Ethiopia is still Ethiopia. You could be part of this renaissance."

My father was quiet but I could see that he was stunned. He didn't expect me to say these things openly, although he knows my views.

I didn't plan this either. It was as though I HAD to do this. And I'm glad I followed this direction.

My cousins left without rancor or ill-feelings. I have told the truth, and they know it.

Interestingly, the last part I said, "Ethiopia, and Ethiopians and specially the Amhara, is resilient," is almost a direct quote from what her father said to them as they started their journey across the desert, which she discusses in her interview with the CBC. I hadn't listened to this part of the interview until today.

She says about her father (my father's now deceased brother):

He grew up hearing about Ethiopians defeating a common enemy and keeping Ethiopia independent for centuries. Ethiopians were very proud people then and I'm sure they still are. So he has that in him. This desert wasn't going to defeat him. He's done it. His ancestors have done it before. And that kept us very strong, because he was 100 per cent sure we would make it.

I am simply telling her to make that journey in reverse, so much easier now that they have so much more than those clothes on their backs when they crossed that desert.

Then they can be Ethiopians once again.