Friday, 5 February 2016

The Assange case perfectly encapsulates what is wrong with the very idea of human rights. Although lots of windy, idealistic rhetoric surrounds it, in practice "human rights" boils down to this: 
You have a set of written rules that sound impressive and noble but are extremely ambiguous. 

This ambiguity must be resolved through interpretation of the written rules to determine their applicability to any specific case. 

The people who do the interpretation are usually unelected and unaccountable and often driven by strong political agendas of their own. 

The rulings of these unelected people hold sway over the judgements of elected governments.

"Human rights" is, quite simply, a democracy-suppression mechanism. It is a scam through which elites exert power over dumb plebs who, left to their own devices, tend to get the "wrong" answers. Yet, such is the halo of moral authority that surrounds the very idea of human rights, that the dumb plebs tends to resign themselves to being cheated out of their democratic will. But they shouldn't. 

There is only one human right; that is, there is only one moral entitlement that deserves to be considered "primal", meaning it exists for all people in all circumstances. That is the right of self-defence. Every other supposed right is socially-constructed and contingent upon circumstances, meaning it is not a "human right" at all but a "civic right". "Human Rights" is nothing but a gigantic scam. 

And the criticisms I have made about the legal infrastructure of "human rights" are just about equally applicable to almost any other constitutional restraint framework, such as the American Supreme Court or the proposed British Bill of Rights. These are anti-democracy mechanisms. All patriots should oppose them. What we need to get out of the predicament we are in is democracy red in tooth and claw. European peoples did not want to be minoritised in their own countries. And they don't want it now. It has been forced upon them through anti-democratic action. 

As for the Wikileaks cables themselves, they brought some useful information to light. Notably, they revealed how the American government was establishing a "rapport" with Islamists in Europe (see here) and was promoting their cause in various ways, including ghost-writing articles for them and having them placed in the press to win public favour (see here). They also revealed how the Americans have been pushing Turkey's bid to join the European Union and stymieing potential opposition to it, for example when Sarkozy and Merkel, both initially anti-Turkey, came to power. The Americans worked their behind-the-scenes magic on them (see here), and lo, Turkey's bid to join the EU is still on track. 

Lest anyone be inclined to sympathy for Assange, however, and even setting the rape allegations aside, remember this: Wikileaks has published the personal details of various European patriotic organisations such as the BNP. This was designed to facilitate attacks, threats and harassment, all of which have actually taken place as a result. Patriots, that is people who believe that Europeans have the right not to be minoritised in their own homelands, are the "dissidents" within European civilisation just as much as democracy-campaigners are in China or anti-Mohammedans in Iran. We are subject to state-sanctioned persecution. And Julian Assange and his coterie of leftist supporters have done everything they can to facilitate and intensify that persecution: because they approve of it. They deserve no compassion from us.

Watch the video below, featuring a hilarious interview with ridiculous negro Roland Ajovi, a member of the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, which produced the report.

RolandAjovi by zakalwe2

More of this funny negro who sounds like Jar Jar Binks.


  1. Could they seriously not find someone with a better grasp of English to defend their side of the argument?