Channeling Mussolini….

Posted on September 27, 2015 by KG

NZ:   ‘Some families who have come to the attention of authorities may be stopped from having more children by the Government…’

Do women carry a fascist gene? There seems to be a hell of a lot of women in power who are eager to abuse that power and play mommy to the grown-ups on social issues.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Channeling Mussolini….

  1. The Gantt Guy says:
    September 27, 2015 at 18:51

    I’m actually not opposed to something along these lines. I think it should be a condition of receiving welfare (the “social contract”, as it were) that the recipient take all practicable steps to minimise the drain they place on the taxpayer. Therefore, it should be a condition of receiving welfare that all recipients – women and men – participate in a long-term contraception programme, and present a certificate from a doctor on such frequency as required as a condition of continuing to receive welfare.

    Of course, this is addressing a symptom rather than the illness (the disease being the welfare state), but it is a positive step.

    • KG says:
      September 27, 2015 at 19:14

      I’m less interested in the merits of the proposal than I am in the propensity of women who gain power to patronise and boss around those who don’t have it.
      Tolley is a demonstration of that. As is Amy Adams.
      (And I’d point out that plenty of wealthy people who would be unaffected by this are also receiving welfare – in the form of crony capitalism.)
      And no mention either from her about immigrants who are allowed to bring elderly relatives into NZ who are eligible for all kinds of welfare benefits.
      The post is about the way women use power, and the subject of reforming the welfare state may have to wait for another time.

      • The Gantt Guy says:
        September 27, 2015 at 19:33

        Completely agree on that score, KG. It’s why they’re so damned dangerous to individual liberty. They invent/implement/increase these nanny programmes which are doomed to fail, and when they experience adverse outcomes they throw an ever-increasing amount of money at them, and (as I mentioned above) treat symptoms rather than curing the illness.

      • Col. Bunny says:
        September 28, 2015 at 08:09

        I agree with TGG. We have an absurd system in all the West where we subsidize parasitism and irresponsible behavior. Going on welfare is catastrophic change in one’s situation and by itself ought not to entail immediate disabilities. Loss of voting rights should be an immediate disability however. Mandatory contraception for people with more than ___ children seems unavoidable. The alternative is what we have now, subsidized bastardy and a raft of problems.

        Population increase of any kind is a huge problem for the world. Africa will increase from 1.1 billion now to twice that in 2052, by some calculations, though Commander Malthus will be heard from before that time. Still, mankind now must face the fact that the world just won’t be pretty with a massive amount of additional people. Can mankind take draconian decisions even when it’s clear that they must be taken? The Chinese made very nasty decisions but they involved forced abortion which is an abomination and an after-the-fact option. There is no world wide discussion of this and, if Pope Francis is any guide, leaders of any stature in the world are much more focused on “climate change,” “income inequality,” and trashing the free market. Stormy weather in the forecast.

        The OTHER problem in this area is the one you’ve identified KG. There are good ideas to be thought and even necessary decisions that need to be taken but the West has all too casually assumed that good people make for good decisions and if good people are in charge what exactly is the fuss about the rule of law, popular sovereignty, and limited government?

        The trashing of the U.S. Constitution by its guardians is a terrible tragedy and the E.U. is a proto-authoritarian joke. And everywhere now — down in the weeds of life — we see these people like this woman chipping away at our liberties. Yes, yes, yes. The people who warrant her attention aren’t lovely, I’m guessing, and the woman isn’t bonkers. It’s just that it comes down to the question, What could go wrong? Criminal law developed in the context of fighting for the rights of “criminals” who are not always the loveliest of people. But the rights of unlovely people aren’t to be lightly taken away without a whole lot more discussion that what this woman is likely to want.

        We all know the background to this kind of thinking. As one bloke observed, our women have betrayed us with their lunatic agenda of pathologically reduced child bearing and feminists themselves have just taken discussion about the family and politics well into the Land of the Possessed. So that’s the “context” in which this woman operates. Nothing is out there to suggest this woman isn’t very much on board with the hatred of the patriarchy and the family.

        • KG says:
          September 28, 2015 at 09:13

          Thanks for that very thoughtful comment, Col. B.
          This jumped out at me:
          “..But the rights of unlovely people aren’t to be lightly taken away without a whole lot more discussion that what this woman is likely to want.”
          Well, yes. But a dispassionate review of the facts and a willingness to accept solutions one doesn’t like (or to accept that there may be no solution) isn’t possible in an environment which has become increasingly emotion-driven.
          And that, I contend, is a direct result of the disproportionate influence of so many women in positions for which they are unsuited by experience, nature, upbringing and intelligence.
          Because they got to those positions totally or in large part via their gender.
          In other words, the political and social climate now favours the very worst of women, while the best are scarcely heard from.
          And we’re all paying a high price for it.

          • Col. Bunny says:
            September 28, 2015 at 14:22

            Agreed, KG. Zargon of Akkad has the back story on vile feminist lunatics and it’s just hard to understand how women can get so unhinged. Complete nonsense is embraced and shouted to the skies. A decent man listening to that crap would walk away determined to going the Trappist Monks.

            I had a date with a woman who must have told me three times in the course of that dinner that her mother told her she could do anything a man can do except father a child. Thanks for a giant hint that she was, what, damaged goods?

            As I’ve said, our women have been our undoing. Not all of them but the public face of women is moronic “political” analysis and hatred.

  2. KG says:
    September 27, 2015 at 19:33

    We import trash because birthrates are too low in the West, yet it seems to me that it would be cheaper to pay our own citizens to breed than to import people who often don’t speak English and are often on welfare for years.
    That’s not to say all immigrants are trash – very far from it. But the current wave of sympathy for “refugees” – supported by this government – ensures that a lot of new arrivals will fit the description.
    Charity – and incentives to build strong families – starts at home.

    • The Gantt Guy says:
      September 27, 2015 at 20:53

      Yes, yes, yes and yes.

    • Col. Bunny says:
      September 28, 2015 at 09:39

      True dat. The option of encouraging larger families on the part of one’s own people is just something that can’t be discussed. No. We must import millions of foreigners, and the more loathsome and primitive the better. This is Treason Class “logic.”

      It’s like the various “European” navies in the Med. Could they be used to repel invaders, please? What?! What an absurd thought. ONLY the taxi and sandwich dispensing functions can be considered.

      The common sense option is mysteriously absent from all Western decision making. Close the borders? Absurd. STFU. Cut spending? Gag! Make rioting thugs regret the day they were born? Jamais! Deny welfare benefits to foreigners? Satanic!

      • KG says:
        September 28, 2015 at 16:19

        “The common sense option is mysteriously absent from all Western decision making.”
        Because the common sense option is anathema to those driving the decision making. They want one world of cheap labour and captive consumers they want it now.
        They also want to eradicate nationalism and the traditional family, because both those things have the potential to derail The Project.

  3. Jamie says:
    September 27, 2015 at 22:17

    Them power-whores obviously haven’t heard of adoption

  4. Gregoryno6 says:
    September 27, 2015 at 23:28

    Along similar lines – Miranda Devine in the Daily Telegraph:
    “If you want to break the cycle of violence, end the welfare incentive for unsuitable women to keep having children to a string of feckless men. ”
    Link.

  5. K2 says:
    September 28, 2015 at 05:27

    Note: “bossy” has been dropped from the latest Newspeak Dictionary.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ban_Bossy

  6. Darin says:
    September 28, 2015 at 09:56

    Never forget that the ultimate goal of the left is total population and societal control.They want to determine who lives,who dies and when and who is allowed to reproduce.
    They have a long,dark,depraved history of attempting to do just that.Look even briefly at Sanger,Mengele,Shaw and a few others and the depth of their evil becomes evident.

    I onced asked a pro-abortion supported why.The answer I got was “because too many children are being born to poor unwed mothers and those children grow up in a life of poverty and violence.”So my question then was,why is it then that poor women aren’t the ones having abortions,they are subsidized by the taxpayer via welfare,what do you intend to do about them if reducing poverty is you’re supposed objective?Her answer was “a one child policy and forced sterilization.”

  7. Wombat says:
    September 28, 2015 at 15:25

    When you take the King’s coin you kiss the King’s ring.

    The government excels at taking power to grant a solution, then taking more power to solve the problems their initial solution created.

    Ditch the welfare altogether. Problem solved. One generation of extreme hardship for a feckless underclass. The young will wise up fast. We can assert this now on our own terms or nature will assert it for us at a time not of our choosing.

    • KG says:
      September 28, 2015 at 16:21

      True. But welfare now is too often protection money paid to keep thugs more or less satisfied and pliable. Without the right to bear arms – and both a willingness and a right to use them – eliminating welfare will be to turn loose a wave of murderous assholes.

      • Darin says:
        September 28, 2015 at 17:45

        I was recently discussing the subject of government subsidies with a nitwit.I tried to tell him that subsidies and regulations are an arms race.

        The activists hire lobbyists to get regulations voted in.More lobbyists are hired to get subsidies and set asides.Still more regs are lobbied for and more subsides follow.

        Meanwhile us working schlubs are going broke,industries are being regulated out of business,the size of the government is growing by the minute,but the lawmakers and lawyers(is there any difference?)are cashing in and treating each other to a toast down at the local golf club.