|
July 25th, 2005 | #1 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
The Silent Majority
The Silent Majority
by Vijay Prozak www.nationalistpartyusa.com According to some sources, almost fifty-five percent of the American registered voters did not vote in the last presidential election. This suggests, once we compensate for the inevitable portion of slackers and those who are disinclined to vote as a practice, that for over half of the American people, there was not a candidate worth choosing. This is not surprising, given their options. The differences between Republican and Democratic parties can be counted on one hand, and for the most part, comprise issues which are symbolic more than rational. Abortion, gay marriage, prayer in schools, ten commandments, reparations, drilling in national forests. These are issues in name only, as whichever way they are decided, there is minimal effect on the whole. For example, regardless of the legality of abortion, our population is declining and children will be murdered because of the reckless sexual behavior of adults. While the two-party system reduces voting to a practice so simplistic that even a moron can do it, and many morons do (apparently), it is destructive in that the parties are so competitive they are barely different. Neither party would do anything to change the overall direction of our society; both focus mostly on issues of emotional significance to their constituencies, and defer big change indefinitely. It is not their concern, they say, because they satisfy those who support them. However, because fewer than half of the eligible electorate chose to cast a ballot, this should tell us that there is a silent majority who are not being represented. For them, undoubtedly, the choice between two well-connected millionaires with cronies in multiple industries is moot. This silent group are probably well-adjusted, and have found ways to make a reasonable living, and thus are stable enough to need very little in terms of what candidates can deliver. What this silent majority would find appealing is something the mainstream political system cannot bestow: a more sane living, a healthier culture, a safer way of life. Since the methods of making this happen are generally politically taboo, as inevitably they would involve sacrifices in personal freedom and lack of responsibility, no candidate who wishes to be elected in the popular system will discuss them. And thus the symbolic issues continue to be bandied about, and many of our country's best citizens continue not voting. Even more appalling is that the constant transfer of power makes it impossible to establish any kind of longstanding policy, because as soon as one party establishes a precedent, a new election comes along and blows it away. The population who do vote probably consider themselves "empowered" for being able to switch to the "other side" anytime things get rough with the current administration, but that practice is as effective as changing cell phone companies: sooner or later, the other guy gets enough power to begin abusing it, and thus you have to switch again, and again... One could, as in the 2004 election some did, opt for a candidate like Ralph Nader. While even Nader himself recognized he would not win the election, and probably was not ready to be a president quite yet, it would have been smartest for Americans to vote for Nader so that they could have had a third party on the ticket. In fact, if Nader had cast aside the debate over his actual opinions, and said simply, "I'm running so that next election we can have third parties," he probably would have doubled his vote. Such things as third-party politics or a drastic change in our political system appeal to the silent majority. They are intelligent people, whether "educated" or not, and they are practical people, regardless of what economic stratum claims them. Their goal is to have a normal life, enough money to live well on, and they tend to have family-centric, traditional but not uptight "conservative" values. No candidate thinks like this, of course, because it's too moderate and undramatic to be a good source of scrounging votes. While these moderates are clearly apolitical in a two-party system, and often write off politics entirely as something beyond their control, they are not without opinions, and they are people of action who would participate if someone else got the ball rolling. In a way, they could be described as extremist moderates, in that while their views are moderate, they're accustomed to getting things done by stepping over the ineffective, delusional, neurotic and defective people inevitably in their way (think about driving down a busy road on Saturday, and you'll see what I mean here). The silent majority, unlike the people who normally vote, does not need a dramatic celebrity-style president, but they will support any sane plan no matter how drastic it seems to normal voters. To this silent majority, if you have the right plan, there's no reason to hold back from forcing it into place with maximum effectiveness; this is how they run their businesses and lives, and it is a more sane political view than believing we are "empowered" by a see-saw power struggle that makes long-term planning impossible. Naturally, it is not in the interest of the oligarchs - the business owners, media magnates, and influence brokers behind the scenes in our society - to support such action. For one thing, it threatens to actually end problems such as organized crime, drugs, and ethnic tension from which a great deal of profit can be made. For another, it would literally end the power of the oligarchy itself, by removing the highly-visible but ineffective populist political drama and replacing it with a sensible and less ostentatious form of government. Luckily for those who live in this time, the silent majority is gaining more power. The normal citizen, voter or not, is realizing, as oil runs out, as wars proliferate, as our society gets increasingly authoritarian, as pollution (and cancers) increase, that our civilization is not on a healthy path, and that we've been lied to, not by one party or even by both, but by the assurances that our system works at all. They're starting to want change that isn't necessarily radical or not radical, but effective. In this they are delegating support to the Silent Majority, who are no longer as concerned with being painted as extremists, because the problems we face have now reached such an extreme that there is no way to deny them. As the two-party system thus fades in importance, third parties are gaining predominance, as unlike the visible political drama, these stand for change and a practical plan, which is something the Silent Majority and any other thinking citizen will now support. http://www.nationalistpartyusa.com/VP.htm#silent |
July 27th, 2005 | #2 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
I know the masses are building outside of the states and Europe but that doesn't concern me as much anymore. I am concerned about building white numbers within our white homelands. If abortion was not legal maybe this would begin occuring. It would also help put women back where they need to be, home having babies and being the woman the Lord and nature intended. |
|
July 27th, 2005 | #3 | |
Angry Shiksa
Join Date: May 2004
Location: the unholy land
Posts: 10,011
|
Quote:
Last edited by The Barrenness; July 27th, 2005 at 02:18 PM. |
|
July 27th, 2005 | #4 |
Ausrotter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Walhalla
Posts: 4,018
|
If you want to promote large families, reward it. It's as simple as that, spend some of that 700 billion dollars that's now wasted to pay for the war for Israel on the support of white children and make it financially more attractive to take care of a large family than to work as a slave for the kikenvermin, and make it cool to have large families.
__________________
"People, look at the evidence the truth is there you just have to look for it!!!!!" - Joe Vialls Fight jewish censorship, use Aryan Wiki Watch online television without jews! |
July 27th, 2005 | #5 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
|
|
July 27th, 2005 | #6 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
lol, abortion is a touchy subject here on VNN.
I don't think there was a big demand for abortions. The so called death by illegal abortion numbers were hyped up. Typical jew behavior to create a "problem" and then presents the "solution". The abortion idustry is there cause of our society promotes it as the "easy solution" to an "unwanted pregnacy". Hey, why don't the media call it as it is, an un wanted CHILD, maybe folks will think a little harder about it. And I don't think making abortion illegal forces women to have children. Plenty of birth control eh? Abortion should not ever be used as a form of birth control. And hey, I got an idea, let's not reward "free love" with walk in baby killing clinics. lol That will snap women into a bit more seriousness towards birth control like one of you state. In fact, let's get rid of the whole idea of "free love". I think I'm about tired of it about now and it has been done to death and it is certainly not the first time in history. Abortion makes free love happen and it ain't a good thing. Abortions makes women think they are men. Abortions help women forget about what they were put on this beautiful earth. Abortion makes the women's body more of a toy and less of a beautiful womb that creates a beautiful life with another special person. Birth, the one thing a woman can do that a man can't. Why would I want to toss it away? I speak against abortion because most young girls hear the "other side" all the time. Young girls are easily mislead, as most youth. I speak for them, not you pro deathers, I know your gig and don't expect to change ya's minds. Thank you for your answer prozak, I will study this a bit more. I know what you are saying and would usually agree but not now at this late time. I will find better words to explain it when I have more time to jot it down, but till then..... I am pro life all the way baby, and I was raised by pro deathers. lol I am aware of all arguements. I never expect to have many women or men to be on my side. Most women love the idea that they can kill the baby that takes two to create. No permission from the man needed, right? lol Oh, that cheap way out of a little pickle and another life instantly gone in this throw away society, that would be the upswing for the dude too of course. I have moved passed believing in the "fetus". Modern sciences shows us that, it's a baby, not a fetus. lol Once you realize that there is no turning back. But please carry on, it makes interesting reading. And I doubt that I am the only pro lifer on the board. |
July 27th, 2005 | #7 | ||||||||
Angry Shiksa
Join Date: May 2004
Location: the unholy land
Posts: 10,011
|
[QUOTE=nazibunny]
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I have moved passed believing in the "fetus". Quote:
Sorry, Prozak, this has gone a bit off the intended topic, but all you have to do is mention the word abortion and that will probably happen. I think at times I could argue with myself on this issue. LOL. Last edited by The Barrenness; July 28th, 2005 at 12:25 AM. |
||||||||
July 28th, 2005 | #8 |
We're the Good Guys
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pediatric Burn Unit
Posts: 4,776
|
Abortion on demand is the woman's right to get out of the house and chase money.
If more women had children and pro-white husbands who could provide the plenty that the family needs, they'd see that raising children and taking care of them is the noblest and highest calling for women. What we've got here is millions of women who have been brainwashed into putting on the man-pants and spending their best years slaving away for money so they can be as self-centered and vain as the media tells them they should be. Nature intended women to raise and nurture children, espcecially white women. It has nothing to do with male domination or sexism. Men work and provide for their family, women bear and raise children. What's wrong with that? Nothing at all. It's simplistic, but I don't have time to sit here and write 2,000 word essays. Way too many women working, and for peanuts, a lot of them. Men too. The anti-white nature of the system has made this so, pitting us against each other and watching while the birthrates plummet. The dream isn't enough money to buy a bunch of junk that will outlast your short life by a long shot. The dream is lots and lots of little white children to carry the race into the future. |
August 5th, 2005 | #9 |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
It doesn't have to be binary - either 100% for abortion or 100% against it. It can be used selectively. I think the point most here would like to make is that it cannot be used as a form of birth control. That's disrespectful to life and women.
|
Share |
Thread | |
Display Modes | |
|