Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old July 25th, 2005 #1
prozak
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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
 
Old July 27th, 2005 #2
nazibunny
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by prozak
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.
And how do you figure that the legality of abortion has a minimal effect on the whole? I would suggest that if abortion was not legal our population would begin an upswing in the white population within the white homelands.
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.
 
Old July 27th, 2005 #3
The Barrenness
Angry Shiksa
 
The Barrenness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: the unholy land
Posts: 10,011
Default

Quote:
It would also help put women back where they need to be, home having babies and being the woman the Lord and nature intended.
I am not an abortion advocate, but I do not think that abortion being illegal would help put a woman back "where they need to be" With how irresponsible men and woman are today if she was forced to have that baby(assuming she would not find a way to kill her child, back-alley abortion,etc) many of them, I would assume would give birth to the child, give up their little inconvienient problem, and go on with their lives. Obviously if there was not such a huge demand for abortion, by people who want to "live their lives however they choose" without facing any consequences, where would the abortion industry be? The irresponsible behavior that leads to the "choice" to have the abortion is the problem and that irresponsible behavior is not going to change much simply because abortion becomes illegal. I would also assume that if that choice was no longer available people would be much more careful with their birth control methods to ensure a pregnancy does not occur. So I fail to see how this would have the effect of putting a woman back in the home happy in her role of popping out baby after baby.
__________________
http://www.thephora.net/forum

FKA, Hitler Goddess, Starr

Last edited by The Barrenness; July 27th, 2005 at 02:18 PM.
 
Old July 27th, 2005 #4
Herman van Houten
Ausrotter
 
Herman van Houten's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Walhalla
Posts: 4,018
Default

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!
 
Old July 27th, 2005 #5
prozak
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hitler Goddess
Obviously if there was not such a huge demand for abortion, by people who want to "live their lives however they choose" without facing any consequences, where would the abortion industry be?
I agree. Biological determinism means we don't have to apologize for realizing that only quality people do quality things. The idiot horde will demand abortions regardless, and it's best to grant them those abortions - fewer idiots result. However, we should protect our own and give them a sane place to grow up and live in, and then we'd have fewer issues among the quality people who remain. Dating these days is so perverse and resentful and mundane that it's no wonder people have trouble not getting pregnant, STDs, etc.
 
Old July 27th, 2005 #6
nazibunny
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
 
Old July 27th, 2005 #7
The Barrenness
Angry Shiksa
 
The Barrenness's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: the unholy land
Posts: 10,011
Default

[QUOTE=nazibunny]
Quote:
I don't think there was a big demand for abortions.
I wasn't really talking about before Roe vs. Wade. I was talking about the demand for abortions now. But if it became illegal now, there are two main reasons plenty of people would still be seeking to have an illegal abortion. 1. obviously their behaviors would not change, much, if any so the need for this quick fix would still be there. 2. How many people, now, believe it is their "right" to have an abortion. To do what they want with "their body?"

Quote:
The so called death by illegal abortion numbers were hyped up. Typical jew behavior to create a "problem" and then presents the "solution".
No argument about that.
Quote:
Hey, why don't the media call it as it is, an un wanted CHILD, maybe folks will think a little harder about it.
I would hope that , even though they might not want to think about the fact that this unwanted "accident" is a child, they still should not have to hear this to know.
Quote:
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.
I couldn't agree more with that. :cheers: But, unfortunately, of course, that is much easier said than done.
Quote:
Abortion makes free love happen and it ain't a good thing.
This is somewhat true, but like the idea already basically expressed, "free love" will continue to happen anyway since there are plenty of other birth control methods out there so people don't have to worry too much about any negative consequences from casual sex. "free love" certainly makes abortion happen, though.


Quote:
I am pro life all the way baby,
Even for non-whites, and whites who for genetic reasons should not be having kids(what if the child has down syndrome, for example?) I know we are talking about abortion, but since you say you are pro-life all the way, does that mean, also perhaps, you do not support the death penalty? Serial and child killers are also "a life"
Quote:
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?
Again I agree with this. since the man helped create the child and would be held responsible if the child were born, why shouldn't they be able to step in so that the abortion does not occur? Makes no sense.


I have moved passed believing in the "fetus".
Quote:
Modern sciences shows us that, it's a baby, not a fetus. lol Once you realize that there is no turning back.
I am sure a lot of people who choose to have an abortion are completely aware of this and do not care. It might, after all, interfere with their precious and degenerate lifestyle.

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.
__________________
http://www.thephora.net/forum

FKA, Hitler Goddess, Starr

Last edited by The Barrenness; July 28th, 2005 at 12:25 AM.
 
Old July 28th, 2005 #8
Oy Ze Hate
We're the Good Guys
 
Oy Ze Hate's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Pediatric Burn Unit
Posts: 4,776
Default

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.
 
Old August 5th, 2005 #9
prozak
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:31 AM.
Page generated in 0.21716 seconds.