Be Careful What You Search

locked-mouth.jpg

I recently came across a “news” article that was sent as a link in email format, prompted by a new phone app I had downloaded on the off chance that it might be beneficial in research. The headline read:

“The Women Behind The Alt-Right”

Initially I thought, ‘I’ll bite. Maybe this will give an interesting perspective on women who don’t fall prey to the counter-evolutionary third wave feminism’ – this could not have been farther from the truth. The article goes on about how the subject (Lana Lokteff) is a white supremacist nazi-esque propagandist, spewing hatred and nothing worth reading.

Naturally, I needed to investigate further. One obviously can’t trust a source that leads with a neutral headline, but then goes into character defamation and slandering. Who is this Lana Lokteff, and why is she targeted? Is it because she’s white? Is it because she says anything contradictory to the narrative of the new world ‘acceptable’ norm of media? Unsurprisingly, it was extremely difficult to find an unbiased description of the woman. Every search (even through other non-major search engines than Google) returned a slew of articles claiming she is a white supremacist, hate speech writing bigot, who contributes to her husband/boyfriend’s media group called Red Ice Media (which has been subsequently shut down following certain happenings which I will touch on later). Proceeding further into the research to figure out who she is led me to find out that anything regarding what she might have said or written is very difficult to find.

What I ended up finding as the best portrayal of what kind of person she is was video of her speaking at various conference type platforms. Before I explain what she stands for, let’s clear the air of confusion about what a "Nationalist" is versus what a "Supremacist" is.

Merriam Webster defines Nationalism as:

:  loyalty and devotion to a nation; especially :  a sense of national consciousness (see consciousness 1c) exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups

Merriam-Webster defines Supremacy as:

:  the quality or state of being supreme; also :  supreme authority or power

So, a nationalist believes in the promotion of their culture within their bounds as opposed to promoting other cultures; a supremacist believes that their culture is superior and above all others.

After watching her speak, the only non-factual topic she references is that of ‘shield maidens’ (perfect topic for Víkingar, but that’s neither here nor there). The main focus of her speaking is to promote women being women. She promotes the values that women have intrinsically: beauty, home and family. She speaks about the current state of affairs in Europe and other areas of the world where white/Caucasian men have built empires and are being overrun by the liberal regressive types who want to see one homogenous race and world. She adamantly promotes defending the white race against the encroaching threat that is forced multiculturalism, forced immigration and forced conformity. She strongly advocates that women become women again (specifically white women), and that these women demand that men become men again. No more of the skinny jean hipsters who have never worked a day in their lives. No more of the emotionally charged women running politics and occupying roles that influence the lives of others drastically. She advocates that in the face of the impending threat to the white race (note that as of 2016, 40% of youth aged 0-5 in Europe are of migrant background) men and women, particularly white men and women, must return to a nationalist-eugenic way of life.

A quick pause is necessary here: “he said nationalist and eugenics in the same sentence! RACIST”

Merriam-Webster defines Eugenics as:

:  a science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed

The question must be asked, does this make her a white supremacist? While I doubt she means to actually engineer a superior white race (as in the popular belief about the Nazis), I would argue she is not racist to promote her own culture in her own homeland and the homeland of other white people. That is a topic for another discussion though, and I digress.

With populations of non-white immigrants soaring in Europe and elsewhere (note that 40% of youths aged under 5 are migrant derived in Europe) and populations of white-nationals declining due to - you guessed it - rapidly dropping reproduction rates amongst whites due to multiple factors such as emasculation and racist-phobia, it is hardly a fair assessment to claim her to be a "white supremacist".

The essential point of this piece I write is to point out the terms that are being generously slathered all over any single person who might have a difference of opinion from the regressive left. Why is it that these terms are so easily attributed to people like her? Further research into what she has reported on revealed some interesting information. Other topics she has covered are the highly controversial conspiracy theories regarding the holocaust and jewish people. It is incontrovertible fact that anything said against jews, the holocaust or Israel will be censored, removed or wiped away from wherever it was said. Go ahead and research it yourself, I am not here to convince you one way or another about that. But the fact stands that Hollywood and the media are 90% owned and run by jewish-adhering people. It stands as a point of analyzing whether or not these two things are a coincidence, but again I’m not here to convince you of that.

Therefore I found the root cause of why she has been labeled a white nationalist: she expressed views contradictory to the regressive left, and the jewish run media. It is no surprise then that the Red Ice Media had been shut down, and anything regarding her speeches/reporting was branded as bigoted and racist.

Does that mean you have to agree with her or her nationalist views?

Absolutely not.

But in a world where free speech is ever more encroached upon by those wishing to snuff it out, it is extremely important to know that the majority of what you read and see have already been through the filter of political correctness, and speech monitoring.

We must at all costs remember to defend the right to free speech regardless of whether you agree or not. Be careful what you search for, you might not find it.