Political Correctness or Political Coercion.

The content herein is largely taken from Prophecy in the News with additional annotations of my own. The link to the video source is provided at the end.

Political Correctness: the fine art of censorship, it is culturally chosen language, supposed to favour certain groups and certain ideas, and multicultural developments which are meant to be good for society. When the apostle Paul talks about 'perilous times' it translates into a sort of social insanity, which we are seeing today, a distorted and inverted understanding of morality. And today there is a prevailing censorship over our very language,  you have to be multi-culturally conscious and sensitive in order that you not say the 'wrong' thing, however this political correctness or social morality is increasingly being used to extinguish the truth and abridge freedom of speech.

How does Political Correctness develop? Some rich and powerful group identifies a problem, and then they try to fix that problem. It's not long until there’s a  movement, which becomes a social cause in which 'good works' are trumpeted as socially superior. Then within that movement you have a developing language, things you can say and things you can’t say unless you become branded as politically incorrect. This becomes a sort of social morality. The result is that those who are branded as politically incorrect become excoriated by the cultural elites and the docile conforming masses.

 With the use of carefully crafted language, a cloud of emotions is evoked, it’s nice to say this but not nice to say that, which is skilfully captured by social planners who use the language to shape society, to attractively fashion what they perceive as a problem so that it becomes  a solution. And all you have to do is speak the right language. Creating a social awareness of the problem how-ever, and then then an intellectual movement is the crucial step.

In psychology it is recognised that certain labels inevitably develop into a pejorative term if they are associated with objects or people that are predisposed to being derided by certain trend-setting groups, particularly younger generations, so new labels are periodically crafted to remove the negative connotations of the pejorative terms. An example of this: the blind become ‘visually impaired’, those with special needs become 'special people', dyslexic become ‘verbally challenged’, and so on ad-infinitum.

Now days if a famous figure says something deemed inappropriate or politically incorrect they are excoriated, and made to come crawling onto the alter of  political correctness, to repent and apologise for their sins, under the duress of publicity and sensationalism by the media puppets. What is perceived as compassion and cultural sensitivity quickly evolves into political power, because some myriad of groups have to control the language, and these organisations and associations are invariably liberal.

Philip Atkinson: political correctness is the communal tyranny that erupted in the 1980s,  a spontaneous declaration that particular ideas, expressions and behaviour that were then legal should be forbidden by law and that people who transgressed should be punished. In present day England, Islam is engulfing the local culture and traditions, but no one can speak out against it because the British parliament has ruled that Islam is a peaceful addition to the British culture and must not be criticised. Today there are also certain things that preachers cannot say and get away with it.

Political correctness is just another term for ‘miss-speak’, the language of English socialism. Designed not to extend but to diminish the chain of thought, by cutting down the choice of words, the only language whose vocabulary gets smaller every year. The vocabulary of a people guides and shapes a nation. Certain associations and groups dictate the language in the education system. They are even banning images showing women as being more nurturing than men, men as capable leaders, men are boys in active problem solving roles, this in order to create a gender neutral environment so young children are more easily able to choose to be gay or lesbian. History is revised; pioneering women sitting in wagons while men walk must not be shown, pioneer women must not be shown sewing, cooking, sweeping, spinning wool or rocking babies. These are actual directives from such organisations. These are only a tiny fraction of the thousands of directives issued everyday.

In thousands of commercials the man of the house is an impotent whiner because he can't open a jar, he can’t make something work, he can’t find the cold medicine, he can’t fix food… while his wife displays wisdom and talent and problem solving ability. In sitcoms the husband is stupid, the wife is smart, and the children are beyond their years. But the man is supposed to be the spiritual leader of the household. And then there's is always the token gay guy who is disproportionately represented in every sphere of entertainment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJfGyE0KGw4

Lasciviousness and Criminality.

Lord Bingham, former Chief Justice for Britain and Wales describes the profile of a typical offender like this:

"He is usually male, often of low intelligence, and addicted to drugs or alcohol, frequently from an early age. His family history will often include parental conflict and separation; a lack of parental supervision; harsh or erratic discipline; and evidence of emotional, physical or sexual abuse. At school he will have achieved no qualification of any kind, and will probably have been aggressive and troublesome, often leading to his exclusion or truancy. The background will be one of poverty, poor housing, instability, association with delinquent peers and unemployment'

An environment of 'conflict', 'separation', a lack of 'parental supervision' or 'emotional, physical or sexual abuse' is essentially a product of bad parenting. Bad parenting in most cases can probably be attributed to teenage parents who have no clue how to raise a children, while having unhealthy lives revolving around addiction and partying. The father has usually left because the relationship was only a sexual fling, and he is emotionally immature and is indisposed to commitment in a relationship, nor does he recognise his moral duty and responsibility for raising his child and providing the necessities of life, yet alone love and affection.

Essentially this dysfunctional and maladjusted environment of parental neglect can be broken down into a few key causes which are: sex outside of a long-term committed relationship(ideally the bond of marriage); teenage mothers who are not mature and responsible enough to rear children; poverty, but that isn't an excuse in the West; and lastly drug and alcohol addiction. The slew of recent child-deaths in New Zealand were due to murderous, atrocious teenager mothers who were too young to even want children, and also because of the alcoholic, abusive criminal environment.

All of these problems boil down to a fundamental flaw in the character of certain individuals(who are disposed to these socially averse habits), and the social/moral fabric of our society, where society has fostered individualism, self-entitlement and condoned sexual promiscuity for teenagers without considering the consequences. The sexual liberation was really a milestone in the casting off of traditional Christian values, and may be seen as a stumbling-block toward further moral deterioration. This is so because human sexuality under-girds most aspects of our lives, and when the traditional sexual form, which is cohesive element of family-life is undermined, human character, I believe, seems to uncoil along with it. That's why I also believe the advent of internet pornography has led to a huge increase in the amount of sexual deviance and crime.

''The modern consensus is that the sexual revolution in 1960s America was typified by a dramatic shift in traditional values related to sex, and sexuality. Sex became more socially acceptable outside the strict boundaries of heterosexual marriage.''

I've personally seen around me, acquaintances who were sexually active at an early age with numerous partners, become pregnant, and in both occasions the father left. In one case the father was a delinquent youth-criminal, an all-round horrible person. In the second case the father ended up cheating on his girl-friend who now has 3 children to him. All around me I see young parents having more children than they can afford to have, and as a result are now dependant on the government and tax payer to provide handouts, and I mean a lot of money too. The economic cost for lasciviousness, single parent welfare dependency and criminal damage by juveniles is hard to fathom.

Scrutinising the Liberal

Upon reading the liberal-ideologue saturated news publications, when you come across an undertone demonising or disparaging the opposition(conservatives...) it's usually just an juvenile way of whining OVER NOTHING significant in an effort to get some social change in values. Not too dissimilar in method, but not extensively in intensity, to those Muslims who riot in Western nations for pathetic reasons. They are like petulant children throwing tantrums in order to get what they want. The problem is however, that it does get results. When there are dire things happening in the country, they turn the focus of the media toward relatively unimportant ideological issues and divisions, in order that the government would enshrine and enact their morality in legislation.

The gay marriage issue is so insignificant because gays already have rights and aren't marginalised like they used to be, and only consist of a minute portion of the population, who by the way think they have a 'right' to redefine the meaning of marriage for 99% of the populace. But now it has literally turned into a divisive crusade, intentionally escalated by MANY instinctual, emotionally driven, reality-averse infantile liberals, further entrenching disunity and opprobrium thrown against the other, hence my harshness here. The only driving force are their fickle feelings.

To me this slightly excessive characterisation, or figurative caricature, exemplifies the immaturity of MANY liberals. The unscrupulous interminable portrayal of conservatives, by some liberals as being uncaring, prejudiced, backward, bitter e.t.c., is merely a form of bullying and reveals the real character of these people, who will use what-ever tactics they can to achieve their goals (end justifies the means). These demeaning perceptions/attitudes generated by liberals are the prevailing ones in the public consciousness. And yes I have stooped to the level of liberal stereotyping so they can get a taste of their own medicine, but the fact that they have a monopoly hold on virtually all facilitation of public discourse on political and social issues, disparaging these people achieves virtually nothing. Despite this strong-hold of an influence on the minds and attitudes of the masses they endlessly, sanctimoniously deride conservatives and present issues in the most unbalanced way possible. Popular left-wing candidates and holders of office, their failings are hardly ever covered in detail, blame is always syphoned off by the assistance of the media, while the short-comings of the right-wing are magnified and scrutinised. They, the media and liberal elite don't hold their own ideologues to account in fear of undermining the reputation and influence they posses. The Benghazi cover-up assisted by the lack of media coverage is a prime example.

The fact that liberals use such dishonest tactics should say a lot about the 'ideals' they enshrine, or should I say the lack there-of. The mindset of MANY liberals seems to primarily revolve around self-absorbed gratification of crude desires, forgoing rationality or subordinating it to the service of those desires. For instance in seeking to establish sexual-liberation ideals but being negligent into thinking about the ramifications of said ideals, and further using specious arguments to support the cause. When the consequences of their implemented sexual-ideals come to the fore, they deny responsibility and come up with some other 'social-reform', like killing off unwanted unborn babies or a lax justice-system(to deal with the generations of neglected children), where we now have recidivist offenders who have been convicted of literally hundreds of offences happily at-large.

Liberals have essentially derailed society and provided the crooked platform for a terminal decline, always willing to continually direct us in the wrong direction with new failing policies, all because they haven't addressed the real issue, which invariably stems back to the social embrace of sexual perversion, the corrupting force behind most things. The logic is simple: sex produces children. If you have sex without being in a life-commitment with your partner you will probably produce children while you are unlikely to remain committed to your sexual partner in the long-term. This is the cause of familial breakdown. Familial breakdown harms children emotionally. Emotionally harmed children, by neglect or bad parenting, or by an absent father, are more likely to recoil and rebound by hurting the society they are in, and also perpetuate the sexual cycle of their parents. Social Policy and theory that doesn't address this core issue only amounts to putting a plaster on a wound that needs stitching.

The sum of the story is that feelings takes precedence over reason, and reason is only used insofar that it supports the emotional position of the liberal statesman, and that emotional position is usually caught up in ideals of sexual preference, economic-equality, equal-rights for gays(even to the detriment of adopted children), or equal opportunity for the hordes of poor masses to flood the country and deprive real citizens of jobs and dilute the local culture, probably in retaliation against the hated Christian past and its 'oppressive' values.

Liberal Propaganda

''Formerly the rulers were the leaders. They laid out the course of history by the simple process of doing what they wanted. Now days leaders can no longer do what they want without the approval of the masses, they find in propaganda a tool which is increasingly powerful in gaining that approval. Therefore propaganda is here to stay''

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. 

We are governed, our minds are moulded our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society.Our invisible governors are, in many cases, unaware of the identity of their fellow members in the inner cabinet.”
- Edward Bernays, Propaganda

Taking up the liberal cause, which represents the majority views of the superficially 'noble-hearted', the people who ostensibly care about the poor and marginalised despite an enduring failure to help them, this cause is easily commandeered by politicians and demagogues as a means to secure and maintain their position of power, mainly by promising to dispense handouts to all their dependent citizens. These citizens have been trained from an early age in the education system to become dependant on the government, to conform, while any sense of independence and free-thought are stifled if it doesn't align with liberal ideology. Not offending minority groups is the greatest maxim of liberal theology, the second is equality in every domain at any cost. A special few of these fully grown indoctrinated conformists are the ones who are short-listed for selection into the propaganda industry.

Even the those selected for roles in the propaganda industry, whether it be in the news networks or MTV, are only employed under the foreknowledge that such people will naturally express views in concordance with the elites who hire them. This is only possible because from a young age they have shown conformity and submission to state indoctrination in the schools and universities. They have been transformed into a malleable an state-dependent citizen ready and eager to promote the liberal-elite cause and fight the conservative opposition.

We know that the liberal movement have considerable sway in parliament and the media, but it isn't the case that the government administration always subscribes to ideas that promote the interest of the working-classes and worker movements. Because the government use the liberal narrative and cause as a means to retain their legitimacy and public consent for their office, they also first and foremost do in many cases what is to be in their own selfish interests to the detriment of the population. And to get away with it they have to use their media puppets to present their actions in a justified light, where these actions become the right thing to do. This is only possible because events are represented in a partially and tactfully construed narrative which is highly amenable to the approval of the public, but mostly far from a real account of current events.

The tricky problem is that it is not just government elites who are the problem, it is commercial elites, and many of these corporations exercise greater power than governments do. They own the media, because the government doesn't. The assumption has been thus-far that governments hold all the power, but many of these unknown powerful commercial leaders have the power to manipulate politicians and the legislative processes. They also have stakes and interests in more than one country, some political theorists suggest this aspect of globalisation is one of the powerful mitigating disincentives for geo-political conflict of important nation states. It should be noted that commercial elites before other things care mostly about maintaining their exuberant incomes, so for them conservative politics is merely an expedient end to this.

The elite in our world exercise power from a top-down chain of influence while rulers in many cases pretend like they are serving the best interests of the populace. It is a dialectical relationship between the popular hordes and government elites, through force and consent. The governments will marshal the favour of prominent figures in Hollywood, professional-sports and academia, namely  those who play an important role in shaping public opinion, by merely expressing their own  opinions and arguments in the public forum. Many of these prominent figures(government puppets) have already adopted the prevailing narratives and mantras of the ruling elites and academic propagandists. Despite this co-operation between the elites, the exchange of power still exists, that is, despite the ruling elites conferring benefits to the subordinate, or less powerful (even popular figures), those to whom benefits are bequeathed also reciprocate with their ostensible allegiance. In the end the person who benefits most is the more powerful person, because they ultimately have more discretion as to the conditions of the exchange and retain their position in authority.

Subversion from the Stronghold of Academia

Gender is intimately tied to sexuality. If one managed rearrange their sexual orientation they are left with a muddled and disordered understanding of conventional and long standing gender roles, which are based on a Christian foundation in the West. For instance, when a gay man engages in the perversion of sodomy the receiver puts himself in a position of submission sexually to another man, by the nature of this act he transgresses the natural role of the man, degrading and repositioning himself into the role of the feminine. So the perverted act distorts the gender role in the personal sphere, but since what happens in the personal avails the entire life of a man and envelops his character, such things inevitably seep into the public realm, and support the amending(for the worse) and re-negotiation of social norms concerning the gender roles– this simply by the influence of gay people. 

The problem now is that the gay movement has hijacked the feminist movement, suggested by their interminable literary assaults against the ‘evil’ patriarchal hegemony and the oppression of women and minorities. They intend to offset the influence and focus of society regarding the stereotypical ’Christian, white, middle-class male’ , having invented a methodology of 'affirmative action' to right the wrongs of this hegemony. The banal repetition of these ideas in the liberal arts becomes tedious to the extreme. Though there is some merit in a dash of affirmative action, not taken to drastic measures, but I feel the cause has been facilitated as a way of corroding at the foundation of Western values. Perceived inequality and resulting solution of Affirmative action forms a basis of resentment toward Christian social-influence, stirring an emotional reaction against Christian values in its passed suppression of homosexuality, and an exaggerated overstatement on the restrains imposed on women.

The hijacked feminist movement, by the gays, and the gay movement itself are motivated by the lustful gratification of sexual deviance, whether a desire to satisfy lascivious tastes or homosexual ones. They attack society because traditionally it has not approved of their perverted lifestyles and self-degradation, but also because they might gain a platform to espouse their alternative life-style and gather participating converts to revel with. They present a front of equality and such but their real ulterior agenda is to completely transform society, by removing all semblance of traditional gender roles, creating a neutral ground for sexuality. From this phase they will then proceed to gradually make society ever more gayer, until we become like a modern Sodom. It is possible because the majority of people in ancient Greece for example practices homosexual sex, in-fact the first 12 or so kings of Rome were gay. Eventually it will be common for normal heterosexual or bisexual men to experiment homosexually, and remove their inhibitions which were once propped up by Christian society.

Marxist ideas serve the liberal elite well, like feminism Marxism endorses the removal of the primacy of the family in replacement with government oversight, whether it be in control of the economy through central planning, or a government implemented moral conditioning, through positive reinforcement and coercion. The end game is a collectivist society where children are raised by the government, not families, so that their allegiances to the government system are not jeopardised by countervailing ideologies so easily formed in a family setting. The object is to snuff out the opposition, and we see liberals becoming ever-more controlling in their methods.

Since the liberal elite are both in academia and parliament they can change social attitudes about sexuality by lambasting and stigmatising people who express non-politically correct opinions(essentially any view which opposes their own). THis is a form of mental-manipulation and is already happening, and people are so influenced by these intellectual-taboos that they dare not speak out against gay-marriage unless they face a strong vocal backlash of the left in all spheres. The elites and activist who mould public opinion have progressively accustomed us to their message, disseminating the idea that a disagreement with the homosexual life style is tantamount to an hating gay people. When such opinions are duly expressed it is deemed necessary to publicly blame and shame a person who holds such prejudicial views. The problem here which I so frequently repeat is that such a basis for reaction against 'prejudice' is only an emotional seed, implanted by a recently developing social trend, by people who hardly have a ontological basis for morality.

Recently a Christian band with a large following of around 200,000 remarked on their Facebook that homosexuality is a sin, they faced a bombardment of incessant abuse for days. While the famous band Lost Prophets, their vocalist was just convicted for conspiring to rape an infant and possession of child pornography, no such backlash or furore. TO me this just suggests that it is a decidedly intentional attack on Christianity, which is based on more dubious psychological and subconscious motives.

The United Nations and the liberals there-in, discounting the Muslims, are aspiring toward a pan-gay utopia, across the world. Not only this but the U.N and it's conventions and stipulations are aligning themselves against the concept of a nation as a distinct group of people, so there is some connection with a one world government, behind efforts to enforce the liberal agenda, with its inversion of Christian values. It will be a key method to facilitate the quenching of Christianity and Israel.

Eschatology and the UFO Conspiracy.

Jesus said that God would give the masses over to a great delusion, that they would believe ‘the lie’. There are insinuations in the bible of a one world religion, and a one world governmental system. On account of the strongly entrenched schisms between the leading religions, and their devout adherence to their respective tenets, the most plausible way they could be led to give up their dogmatic positions is if their world-views were entirely upended by the appearance of an undeniable alien visitation. Yes I’m inclined to postulate that the anti-Christ is likely to appear in some highly advanced spaceship, to inspire the awe of humanity, then reveal himself as an alien in the form or body of a man.

Once he has sufficiently inspired the awe of men, and pronounced himself deserving of our esteem on account of his ascendency in technology, knowledge and temperance, He will claim himself to be the progenitor of the human race, and thus in a sense god. The bible described how, after the new temple in Jerusalem is built, he will sit on the throne and proclaim himself god of gods. The majority of people would only accept him and the new world religion if their world-views were sufficiently displaced and then remade by this man/beast.

Scientists universally accept the ‘reality’ of the existence of aliens upon contemplating the vastness of space, with its many millions of habitable planets, then coupled with the impelling and assured rise of life via the process of evolution, thus the jump to alien visitations by civilisations vastly more advanced than our own is not a great stretch. Since scientists and academics who submit themselves to the prevailing scientific theories are so influential the public even the Western religious groups will immediately subscribe to the consensus of the scientific community regarding the validity of this phenomenon. In-fact it might be so plain and obvious that deliberation be rendered redundant.

Since this alien figure is not from this planet and without prejudice and personal allegiance he will be considered an astute arbiter between state actors in geo-political conflicts, particularly the central issue in the affairs of the Middle East with Jerusalem. Upon establishing this new world religion and global peace, he will be able to re-establish somehow the Jewish temple without protest by the Muslims. If this is not the case, then Israel may have previously annexed the area due to escalating tensions spurring military action.

Despite my lack of a coherent theory of the sequence of events that are going to transpire before the end of the age, the book of revelations is fairly clear that the end will come after the anti-christ  rallies the nations of the world together to surround God’s chosen people, of the everlasting covenant, possibly due to unrelenting defiance of his(the anti-christ) claims to divinity, then in great desperation the Jews will be pressured to cry out to their Messiah whom they once rejected. Then the end will come, and a new beginning.

The bible describes an increase in the transpiring of signs and wonders in the heavens for instance; UFO sightings are greatly more prevalent than in the past, and this I believe is due to the manifestation of demonic power. This could be spurred on by the times themselves, or greater involvement in the occult, abandonment of the truth, and the increase in immorality. Most people who experience ‘alien abductions’ have some sort of involvement in the occult as stated by the secular literature. Many of these abductees’ gesture to invite demons into their lives upon witnessing a UFO in the sky, shortly thereafter they begin to experience more intensified demonic visions and abduction experiences; even those which involve sadistic torture and new-age indoctrination afterwards. Hence I believe that the demons are preparing people en-mass for the UFO conspiracy that will usher mankind into the very last days.

The elites which have control over the media and Hollywood instil snippets of their demonic revelations into the media, as to subtly and gradually prepare the psyche of the populace for the coming events. The narrative has already been rehearsed in their minds in preparation for them to credulously ingest this specially prepared lie. It is now ever-so important to dissect and interpret the symbolic significance of the cultural produce of our age. We can see the themes throughout our culture, and they aren't without significance like people will assert. Imagery and symbolism have a tremendous and powerful influence on people, if it didn't the historical faculties of propaganda wouldn't exist.

Refer to this link because this is the way we should be thinking, instead of mindlessly taking it all in like it is innocuous entertainment, if we take this attitude we make ourselves docile to their instruction and programming over time, our character becomes spoiled.

Here’s the link: http://vigilantcitizen.com/moviesandtv/the-cabin-in-the-woods-a-movie-celebrating-the-elites-ritual-sacrifices/