by MC

I like bananas, monkey nuts and grapes, but I don’t like cabbage and I simply hate cleaning the toilet after a drunk has vomited a five-finger spread all over it.

Is being a messy drunk a hate crime? No, it is perfectly acceptable, and I should just willingly grab my mop and bucket and try not to gag as I deal with the unpleasant consequences.

Alternatively I can say that Islamic immigration is going to have dire consequences to my culture and country. No foul smell, no case-hardened spew, just a true statement.

In many Western countries the above statement of truth is enough to get me banged up, unemployed and destitute, and that it is truth is just not relevant.

There is a narrative that crtiticising Islam in any way is just not acceptable, and it is increasingly mandatory throughout Europe. Here I am, an Englishman, sitting in Israel writing for an American blog. If I were still sitting in my native land I would be treated as a criminal because I deviate from this acceptable narrative.

Just who is hating whom?

The narrative demands that I keep stumm where the truth is considered ‘hateful’. I can point out that Jooz own the world, and because that is part of the narrative it is therefore acceptable, but if I point out that Islam is a religion of extreme violence, whilst provably true, it is a “hate crime”.

However did we get here, to this moronic place and time? How did the Enlightenment itself unravel?

It took a long hard journey to get to enlightenment, from rule by warlord to rule by informed consent, and somehow we have lost sight of that pathway. Our forefathers fought to open up the way and many died for it. But we, my generation, then squandered it, daydreaming our way back into bondage, our good intentions backfiring on us in a big way. Maybe through kindness and benevolence we let down our guard, and unfortunately, those jealous of our success were just waiting for the opportunity to strike.

Is it now ‘hateful’ to hate tyranny.

There were two great commandments arising out of our Judeo-Christian tradition:

“Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.” (John 14:15)

Jesus is then asked “Who is my neighbour?” and launches into the famous parable.

Whilst our societies kept these laws, things generally improved. Slavery, poverty and malnutrition were being eradicated from the land. But then society began to ignore the “first and greatest” and promoted the second outside of its secondary context as “like unto it”.

One gets a big virtue hit by loving one’s neighbour as one’s self, but we too need to ask “Who is my neighbour?” Is it the politician or the academic? Is it the robber? Or is it the despised Judeo-Christian (Samaritan) who picks me up, tends to my wounds and pays for my keep out of his own pocket?

People who come into a country in order to financially exploit it are not neighbours; they are robbers. They are the cause of all my woes not the cure.

In forgetting to love Yahovah with all our being, we lose the context of loving our neighbour and we generate a theological tumour. All men have religion, even if it is a religion of no religion. If they lose sight of the controlling factors of their religion then the cancer cells start to multiply and take us down destructive pathways where the ends justify the means.

One such destructive pathway that is now a festering tumour is the idea of ‘race’ as a defining quality of humanity. In days past, skin colour was a usable but not terribly accurate cultural indicator.

When we encounter somebody in circumstances where we may be vulnerable, we do an automatic threat assessment of the cultural factors presented by that threat. It is part of survival 101.

Skin colour and mode of dress are important factors in our threat assessment.

Lee Rigby was not murdered by white-skinned Mormons dressed suits and ties.

Whilst my threat assessment and subsequent actions should be personal and based upon my individual experience, the race-tumour industry seeks to demonise me if I make a decision that they consider contradicts their ‘ideal’ (another name for a religious belief).

So we have to pretend that the Islamic ‘race’ is intrinsically peaceful because the SJW oncologist demands it. And not only that, but I am required to treat Islam as the ‘neighbour’ when in fact it was the ‘robber’.

Loving one’s neighbour as oneself is both conditional and secondary to the controls defined by the first and greatest commandment. “If you love me, keep my commandments,” (John 14:15) says Jesus.

There is a corollary here: if you hate Jesus then you should destroy his commandments, make them obviously unworkable, and this is what the real truth of the ‘hate crime’ is actually about.

If we distort the Judeo-Christian ideal, we can make truth a lie and lies the truth. If we spin the word ‘neighbour’ out of its scriptural context, it becomes all-inclusive. Thus to deplore the ‘robber’ for his violence becomes a violation of the commandment to love thy ‘neighbour’, and we fall for it every time unless we are prepared to look it up for ourselves.

The scriptures define very precisely who is in fact our ‘neighbour’: it is the Samaritan. It is the person giving to us, not the person to whom we must give. The robbers, the priests and the scribes are NOT our neighbours because they beat us up, rob us or ignore us because they have other things that are more pressing in their lives and we are not important in their narrow world.

Our culture is Judeo-Christian, and we trust our leaders to be motivated in a way that is mutually and culturally compatible, even if secular, and herein lies the danger. For when Judeo-Christianity is disassembled and largely reconstructed around a ‘love all your neighbours’ concept, but devoid of its ‘Love God’ elements, it is no longer Judeo-Christianity; it is basically socialism. And socialism has a dismal record of murder, mayhem and ultimate failure.

Jews know that socialists hate Jooz and cannot therefore be trusted. Trotsky knew that a Jew could not replace Lenin as party leader and retain party political credibility amongst workers and peasants; their anti-Semitism was just too virulent. So it had to be Stalin.

Unfortunately, mainstream Christians as a whole have not yet had their Holocaust, and tend to be blind to the menace posed by the “principalities, with the authorities, with the world-rulers of the darkness of this age, with the spiritual things of the evil in the heavenly places.” (Ephesians 6:12)

Having been lulled into the ‘all you need is lurve’ meme, they have lost the ability to discern exactly who their neighbours are (and more importantly maybe, who they are NOT).

So to ‘not love’ is deemed to be to ‘hate’. Just think it through though: I do not ‘love’ bananas, monkey nuts and grapes, but I love steak eggs and chips. Does that mean I hate bananas?

I find Islam hateful. Its missiles are intended to do me harm, and when the ‘Sever Adom’ goes off I cringe. Does that mean that I hate Muslims? No? But I am well aware that they are not ‘Samaritans’, and are actually more likely to be ‘robbers’, so yes to that.

Of course the SJWs who would call this ‘hate speech’ but then they have probably not been caught outside by an incoming missile. I am a pensioner with a game leg and a dicky heart, so I cannot run for shelter. The last one that happened to me, in December, landed about a quarter of a mile away very near a colleague’s house.

Of course, hating Israeli Jooz and lobbing missiles at them is permissible, as is hating Christian extremists and fundamentalists. In fact, anybody who might open a Bible and actually check out the validity of the twisted dictates of this Christo-Socialism for themselves is fair game.

There is a carefully sculpted image of the violent Christian extremist that is pushed by the mainstream media, he/she is deemed to be every bit as dangerous as the clear and present Islamist fanatic; he/she is radicalized by hellfire pastors in a white supremacist church and is also a gun nut; is anti-abortion and hates LBGTIKJLM.

However, nobody has yet has managed to find a sample one of these bogeymen, and there is a reason for this. The Bible has a message of peace and goodwill at its core, and a fundamentalist (Bible-believing) Christian takes the Bible message both seriously and holistically, and would not resort to violence.

The Koran, however, is ‘hate speech’ central, and the fundamentalist Muslim takes the message of the Koran very seriously too.

The Bible tells us to love Yahovah. The Koran tells us to hate the unbeliever.

Isaiah 5:20   Woe to those saying to evil ‘good,’ And to good ‘evil,’ Putting darkness for light, and light for darkness, Putting bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.
    Woe to the wise in their own eyes, And — before their own faces — intelligent!
    Woe to the mighty to drink wine, And men of strength to mingle strong drink.
    Declaring righteous the wicked for a bribe, And the righteousness of the righteous They turn aside from him.
    Therefore, as a tongue of fire devoureth stubble, And flaming hay falleth, Their root is as muck, And their flower as dust goeth up. Because they have rejected the law of Jehovah of Hosts, And the saying of the Holy One of Israel despised. (Young’s Literal Translation)

MC lives in the southern Israeli city of Sderot. For his previous essays, see the MC Archives.

29 thoughts on “Hate

  1. Oy veh! Ya don’t have enough missiles already being lobbed at ya, eh, MC? 😉

    How did the Enlightenment itself unravel?

    ‘Twas Marx who unraveled it and all the King’s knitters couldn’t repair that garment.

    [Fortunately, America – not being tied down as Europe was, or as feudal as Russia was – mostly escaped. Not entirely, though – as you can see, our second-class academic intellectuals are still piping his tune. In a higher key.]

    • because they put their faith in princes and Darwin and not in the Lord. BTW, it’s on its way here, sniff. 🙁

  2. I was going to mention the verse in Isaiah about calling good evil and evil, good; as that is the tenor of these days, but you beat me to it MC. Best to you and yours and I look forward to seeing you when the last trumpet sounds. (Notice I didn’t say Trump, he’s been sounding off for the past year now, all a twitter, like some ‘tweety’ bird)

  3. Massive nonwhite immigration with its various hateful nonwhite agenda is already bad enough to any Western countries and Islam together with Muslims do tend to make it worst because most of them are using Islam to oppress and to have “power” over us nonbelievers.

    I mean other religions or other religious groups can be bad to us too but they don’t
    harm our western freedom that significantly.

    I am not one to believe in God but I do hope somehow there is a God that will miraculously get us out of this mess.

    • Just substitute the word “Truth” for “God”, and I think you will have your answer. What is true eventually seems to prevail throughout history.

      • What should also be stated about those that believe in unconditional love is that they are in violation of the very important Commandment “Thou shall not take the Lord’s name in vain”. There is nothing worse than using the word of God to support evil things. They are truly bearing false witness.

  4. “Having been lulled into the ‘all you need is lurve’ meme, they have lost the ability to discern exactly who their neighbours are.”

    Spot on. I know quite a number of the 90’s generation who broke all contacts with me after I told them I am against the middle east migration to Europe. They all went to the big cities, London, Amsterdam, New York, and they seem to just love the “black community”. Now I have nothing against the blacks, but my friend’s actions are in a way illogical – separating from their own group, but group with people who are not only foreign, but also distinctively different. Why do some of my childhood friends hate their own neighbors?

    • Why do some of my acquaintances love Hillary and broke up with me completely when we elected Trump? Why some of my colleagues in the office are frowning upon my insistence to celebrate Christmas and stubbornly correct me that it is “Holidays”?

      Why’s one after another … I do believe now that it is the march of Marx-Leninism, decades after its victory and decades after its demise which we had thought was final, decimating and historical. It was not. Look at our academia: our UV KSC’s apparatchiks would rejoice over California’s top schools!

      And now the whole “thing” with Islam … Gee. But at the root of this multi-kulti madness is something eerily monstrous: hate of your own, of your culture, sense of guilt for the past – this is fueling the self-loathing and what many of us perceive as treason on the West.

      Boy, the 80’s were so simple, almost black&white.

    • Barn-

      I empathize with you. I grew up in a small town in the USA, and I am disturbed by how many of my classmates have grown into Hillary-loving, open borders liberal freaks who think it is just peachy that Hilary, Obama, and the FBI are openly attempting to stage a coup.

      With regard to the blacks, I am utterly exhausted by the liberal fetishization and outright worship of blacks and anything related to them. I will stop there.

  5. As long as Islam is treated as a religion and not a political cult, we have no chance to fight back. They will use our own “religious freedom” rules against us.

  6. MC, do you think a predominantly nonwhite group such as Muslims is using Islam to break up United Kingdom and therefore gain control politically?
    I suspect Muslims is trying to break up United Kingdom just like what those Bosnian Muslims did to former Yugoslavia.

    But, I think it would be impossible at this moment for the present Muslims groups of migrants to break up the UK due to the fact that most Muslims are only recent migrants unlike the majority of Bosnians who were unfortunately mixed and Islamized due to the imposition of Ottomans hundreds of years ago.

    • Islam is a demographic timebomb, others are more expert in this than I am, but I understand that once there is a significant block of islamic voters then they will become the ‘swing’ vote that political parties must attract in order to win elections, this will give them an enormous political clout out of all proportion to their actual numbers.

      At some stage however the penny is going to drop with an enormous clang as people realize that they have been betrayed. What happens next is then up for grabs.

      • It is dangerous and unviable to depend on extremely aggressive Islamic voters/invaders for support due to the fact that most of them would only support a vile Islamic leader who would corrupt and infect the already vulnerable political system that is already weakened by other multicultural agenda.

        Manipulative Muslims give the false impression that Europe needs them when the truth is Europe doesn’t need them or their Islamic destructive communities.

        • Look at what has already happened in Sadiq Khan’s London-

          Crime of every sort and severity is skyrocketing.

    • @wpass
      Let us remember that Muslims were invited into Britain largely by polititians on the left of British politics.
      A former adviser to Tony B Liar Blair is on record as saying that they went around the world looking for people to import so as to “rub the right’s nose in diversity”. Labour (the Left) are importing Muslims to do the things that these days they cannot get native British to do. Vote for them is one thing, for the moment Muslims largely vote Labour but Tower Hamlets shows that when there are enough of them then the Muslims ignore Labour and vote for their own. Thuggery is another of those things, although there is a vocal violent crowd in Antifa and the Socialist Workers Party their numbers are not big enough to match the exploits of the Brown Shirts in previous times, Muslims to the rescue for they are brought up to be violently angry. For a long time, the Left has wanted to demolish Judeo-Christianity and replace it with their own religion of Marxism, Muslims to the rescue again as they have more practice at it than the Marxists. The Left does not sufficiently understand that Islam is more than a religion, or that Muslims are more than a “client group” of victims.

      The Left wants to break up the United Kingdom, which is why the EU has been so pushy for its beloved “Regions” answerable directly to Brussels and by-passing the now hollowed out Westminster. Muslims will help by making the present governance arrangements unworkable, the Left then hopes to capitalise on that disorder to impose its own tyrannical solution. Erdogan’s description of democracy (Like a tramcar, you ride it until you arrive at your stop, and then you get off) seems strangely applicable here. The establishment of that tyranny will go down like MC’s description of the bucket of sick with the British. Only then will we see spontaneous resistance from the remaining natives.

      The Left thinks that once the Muslims have done all the dirty work for them, they will retire from the fray and leave the Left in charge! Pretty nasty scrap going to develop there! Remember that both sides will have it in for the Jews and the Christians! As we are quoting scripture today, I will add in Matthew 24, especially vv 21 & 22. Jesus, Yeshua, was not known to exaggerate in order to make His point. It is going to be bad, but moderated by the sure and certain knowledge that the one true God, Yahovah, is in charge.

      In summary, I do not think that the Muslims have a plan to break up the United Kingdom. That plan belongs to the Left. At the moment the Muslims in Britain are still (but only just) in the “I’m a poor victim, do it all for me” phase that they pass through while establishing their dominance. In that phase, the kufaar can organise themselves however they like so long as the handouts/jizya are big enough. Once they get onto the next stage they won’t care how government is organised so long as the nation is their Ummah, and Sharia is the law of the land.

      • @Yokel
        Do you not think that Muslims setting up their many Islamic enclaves and mosques as an attempt to break up United Kingdom and spread their oppressive Islamic “influence” in Europe?

        I think many of their Islamic migrants from the Indian subcontinent invited themselves in during post world war 2 period and later those socalled refugees from Middle East who forced their way into Europe had make it worse for us who wish to have a normal life that is free from their oppressive culture/ideology.

        • @wpass who wrote: “Do you not think that Muslims setting up their many Islamic enclaves and mosques as an attempt to break up United Kingdom and spread their oppressive Islamic “influence” in Europe?”

          The short answer is “No I don’t”. That said, they will doubtless take advantage of any fracture to place themselves in a better position for jizya and hegemony. Sharia enclaves can spread in just the same way as at present* whether the nation is one or fragmented. The only advantage to the Muslims of fracturing the UK is to demoralise the resistance. But that will only affect the “fellow travellors” who could be relied on to desert from the resistance in times of trouble anyway.

          * Sharia enclaves spread by being bad neighbours. Whether it is the mosques causing eg parking problems throughout Friday, or residents annoying or attacking kufaar neighbours, or halal shops displacing the places where the kafir shops, is immaterial. All in all a Sharia enclave is a bad place for the kafir to be, and most will vote with their feet as they have enough stress in their lives without having to take on this lot as well. As I hope you can see, the spread of the Sharia enclave is completely independent of the temporary^ form of governance imposed by the kufaar.

          ^ temporary: as in it will end soon and be replaced by governance by Sharia as part of the Ummah as soon as Allah wills it. (And gives the Ummah the numbers and the arms to enforce it on the unwilling.)

          I repeat, it is the Left (Jeremy Corbyn and his hard left Momentum gang now bending Labour to do their Marxist will) who want the UK broken up.

        • @wpass who wrote: ” later those socalled refugees from Middle East who forced their way into Europe”

          They would not have come had not the Left (in the form of Mutti Merkel) invited them and the Left (in the form of George Soros) paid for their tickets, designer trainers and smartphones.

          Yes, traitors all, but that is the Left all over.

  7. It’s about time for a paradigm shift against Islam….the caveat being that all the Progressives want to use Islam to get political power. They feel they can manage Islam later….which is going to be a sort of grand historical joke on the Left.

  8. I think Christians in Bosnia ,the Middle East and North Africa have had their ongoing holocaust for years.

    It is just starting for Christians in the West .

    And only when it reaches its peak in the West will Western Christians understand what their fellow Christians are living through and begin to appreciate what solidarity really means.

    The West is overconfident.

    The average Westerner is still convinced that he is part of a large powerful majority , a ruling race and class.

    Sadly he is wrong.

    He is outnumbered globally by people who put their solidarity with their own racial ,cultural ,religious ,sexual orientation or language group first in the name of solidarity.

    And increasingly in his own country he begins to be outvoted by people of other racial religious, sexual orientations ,cultural or language groups .

    They all band together ,lobby together for their own advantage in the name of solidarity.And for doing this they are praised ,for their bravery ,their courage ,their heroism .

    But let the white ,the Christian ,the Westerner ,the speaker of a European language ,the heterosexual stand up for himself and instead of being praised he is vilified persecuted ostracized ,oftentimes jailed and barred from regular employment.

    It’s way past due time that the White ,the Christian , the heterosexual,the Westerner,the speaker of a European language, stood up for himself in the name of solidarity.

  9. I never knew for certain if those two commandments are collectively known as the Great Commandment. Anyway I take those two as two points on a vector if you will that make a path or direction to go in.

    Love seems too have taken on an ambiguous meaning like gender. I take it to mean genuine desire for good for others. I think I can say for everyone. It doesn’t mean you should support a single aim or goal or belief. You should support good for them, that they support good. I believe the Great Commandment means you inevitably support God’s love or goodwill forward man. Hence the second commandment that is not unlike the first. That doesn’t mean you accept how they are. That doesn’t mean you endanger others or destroy your society to help others toward a bad goal such as destroying or erasing your society with a worse one.

    • Well said.

      The word “Love”, like the word “God”, has been beaten to death. But I don’t know what vocabulary we have to replace them. Maybe they can be rehabilitated or resuscitated with lots of silence about the subjects. Just an idea.

Comments are closed.