General Forum > Politics

Denneny 5: Cultural Genocide

(1/5) > >>

K6:

--- Quote from: Mogul on Sun, Mar 19, 2006, 20:55 ---Sure, the Vatican and other bigots would make much noise, but they wouldn't spend a penny to improve the situation of that poor devils.

--- End quote ---

With a gay independent State in the landscape,the Vatican will have to act cautiously.First,because we will then be able to out in complete impunity catholic priests who have homosexual interests (we should have a yellow press,just for that purpose).Second,because we will have one of the best
intelligence services,with eyes and ears in every country.And eventually with provocators as well,who will seduce homosexual priests and flush out that type of information.Imagine an article thus titled in the gay press of a country of ours: "ANALYSIS OF THE LAUNDRY WATER OF THE VATICAN: EVIDENCE OF LOT OF MASTURBATION GOING ON THERE".Or "CARDINAL OF THE HOLY SEE CAUGHT IN BED WITH A YOUNG MALE SECRETARY
AND OPERATIVE OF THE GAY REPUBLIC EMBASSY IN ROME: ALL THE IMAGES AVAILABLE ON PAGES 2 AND 3".

K6

K6:

--- Quote from: Mogul on Sun, Mar 19, 2006, 20:55 ---Smart diplomacy and pacting with the right allies would enlarge our safety. Spreading some rumour that we have inventeg the "gay bomb" turning brave heterosexuals into vicious faggots, we would protect our borders for millenia. =))

--- End quote ---

Well,we could spread wild rumors about what could happen to eventual invaders ending up as prisoners of war in our hands.Surely,you understand what I mean here,there is no need to be specific.

In my novel,there was such a collision between the gay colony and a foreign paramilitary invasion force.Part of the gay (also paramilitary) force
facing them was composed of young men who had almost no notion of what hethro foreign domination was,and therefore no fear whatsoever
of doing battle with the invaders.In the beginning,they thus set out to ambush and slaughter joyously the said invaders.The colony had forgot to inform them about the Geneva convention.After the war had ended in gay victory,prisonners beg gay colonial authorities not to deliver them into the hands of those cunning,cruel and barbarous young gay males.

K6

K6:

--- Quote from: Mogul on Sun, Mar 19, 2006, 20:55 ---
Therefore we must abandon the idea that the ballance of powers in the world wouls affect us directly: no one would send a single soldier to us out of concern about the fate of poor heterosexuals persecuted in the gay state.

--- End quote ---

It is possible that a certain number of hethro States will not be pleased with the presence of a new geopolitical actor with a reproductive apparatus entirely independent from the heterosexual culture and political body.We could however have in advance an idea of what would be lying ahead by studying the current opposition to new reproductive technology in nowadays heterosexual societies.People who hold power or monopoly over something - like reproduction and/or ownership of human ressources - will expectedly not accept with much enthusiasm the loss of that power or
monopoly.

K6

Mogul:

--- Quote from: K6 on Sat, Mar 18, 2006, 14:51 ---[..] 2) Exclusive national property over the human offspring coming out of those reproduction facilities 3) Exclusive national competence of ours over the education over the said offspring,including the determination of a gay sexual orientation 4) Exclusive moral and national authority over gay youth,wether originating from the above mentionned reproduction facilities or from immigration,along with social and historical role models for the gay youth.

--- End quote ---

I am inclined to agree to this suggestion, but with a very important correction: insted of "national" (=governmental) control I would insist on the "social" control. This is a very important difference: While the society consists out of many different groups, the government usually represents only a part of the entire political and social spectrum. It would be a very dangerous notion to lay every aspect of education into the hands of the government. No, this responsibility must be shared over a variety of responsible institutions - the government shall only create certain guildlines where it's really necessary. I am thinking of such institutions as libraries, museums, communal/clan education programs etc. While we of course shall create laws regulating the legal status of minors, their direct guidance and education is of no business to the state - instead the local communities/clans shall have the right to determin about their daily needs.


--- Quote from: K6 on Sat, Mar 18, 2006, 14:51 ---[..] *Complete independence* would be possible in a world where the UN would have no available State capable of enforcing its decisions.For example in a multipolar world with no global superpower. [..]

--- End quote ---

The recent history shows us, that any particular country (superpower or not) cares little abou the UN and the possible sanctions, if it has a real or imaginated interest in engaging military power. It should be clear to any sensible politician in our days, that war always has two loosers and no winners, but unfortunately there are always enough fools who believe they can win a war. Neither Saddam in 1991, nor Bush in 2003 were disturbed by the prospective of international sanctions or any other difficulties. The only contemplations such "military genious" make are of the following nature: 1) Can they realistically defeat the enemy, and 2) How much profit (either in ressources or land) can they win by accomplishing the aggression? Humanitary motivations never play any role, even if they are widely abused for propagana.

Therefore we must abandon the idea that the ballance of powers in the world wouls affect us directly: no one would send a single soldier to us out of concern about the fate of poor heterosexuals persecuted in the gay state. Sure, the Vatican and other bigots would make much noise, but they wouldn't spend a penny to improve the situation of that poor devils. Not that I was agitating for oppression of straights in the gay state (god beware!), but the only way to maintain souvereignity and prevent foreign occupation is the maintainance of sufficient defense forces and focussing on our own problems. Let the big boys play their games alone, and keep on smiling, but reserve the right to kill each and any agressor. Not the "servile" countries live safe, but those with good defence - among others North Korea, Vietnam and Cuba (directly in front of it's worst enemy - the US!). Smart diplomacy and pacting with the right allies would enlarge our safety. Spreading some rumour that we have inventeg the "gay bomb" turning brave heterosexuals into vicious faggots, we would protect our borders for millenia. =))


--- Quote from: K6 on Sat, Mar 18, 2006, 14:51 ---[..] As a culture and regardless of the fate of specific individuals,we will always exist.We have the ressources,but there is no gay country for them to go to. [..]

--- End quote ---

Here I must disagree with you. Though it is certainly true that homosexuals will always exist as they did before, we can very well be deprived of our culture, if we do not take care. Books can be burned, websites can be closed and historic records can be falsified. It is very easy for any future story-teller to make a famous gay ingeneur or mathematician to appear as hetero, and make of Adolf Hitler a homo. We will be well-advised to use the time slot now and secure our heritage, or what is left of this.

K6:

We are *marginally independent* at the moment,in the sense that our human ressources and existence cannot be taken away from us.As a culture and regardless of the fate of specific individuals,we will always exist.We have the ressources,but there is no gay country for them to go to.

We would be *relatively independent* in a country of ours,where we would have control over our own human ressources by way of immigration.But that would not amount yet to complete independence.

*Complete independence* would entail the following: 1) Absolute control over reproductive activity in a country of ours,by way of assisted reproduction facilities,and exclusive national property of ours over the said facilities 2) Exclusive national property over the human offspring coming
out of those reproduction facilities 3) Exclusive national competence of ours over the education over the said offspring,including the determination of a gay sexual orientation 4) Exclusive moral and national authority over gay youth,wether originating from the above mentionned reproduction facilities or from immigration,along with social and historical role models for the gay youth.

The international environment would perhaps not allow us to have *complete independence*.For it would remain under hethro political control and in the service of the hethro interest,and particularly of its claimed monopoly over reproduction and ownership over human beings.By way of the UN,it could easily declare reproductive activity a monopoly of the hethro family.And it could take sanctions against us should we take steps to achieve *complete independence*.That could go as far as calling for a military intervention against our country.They do so for weapons of mass destruction alledged or real,why they wouldn`t for a reason as strategic as hethro monopoly over reproduction ?

*Complete independence* would be possible in a world where the UN would have no available State capable of enforcing its decisions.For example in a multipolar world with no global superpower.

K6

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page