Who will take point?

Via Nourishing Obscurity, this report:

SWEDEN is on the brink of becoming a lawless state as the police force is losing the battle against unprecedented levels of crime and violence amid a growing migrant crisis.

The Scandinavian country is facing an existential crisis with on average three police officers handing in their resignations a day.

If the alarming trend continues, and police officers continue to resign more than 1,000 officers will have quit the service by New Years.

This ties in to what I was talking about here in relation to a possible President Hillary Clinton:

And to whom is who is she going to turn to implement the business end of her foreign policy decisions, quell the uprisings in America’s cities, and enforce the law?

It also fits in to what I was talking about what I suspect was an internal revolt in the FBI forcing James Comey to release details about Hillary’s emails.

It is all very well for educated, metropolitan elites to dream up laws banning X and making Y compulsory, but they need people to enforce these laws.  Ultimately the enforcement of laws comes down to having enough young, fit males to apply sufficient physical force to do so.  Without the threat of these young men physically carting them away to prison or shooting them, people will be free to ignore the law – as indeed many already do.  It will not be the police Diversity Department that kicks down the door of an apartment and drags a violent criminal off to a cell, and nor will it be a platoon of female soldiers ordered to take back a city in which law and order has broken down.

If the enforcement of laws requires the cooperation of young, fit men then keeping them onside ought to be a priority among those making the laws.  Only it’s hard to see how relentless campaigns to shove men aside in favour of women to even up the numbers are going to help with this, and when you look at voting patterns in the USA it appears men and women differ considerably as to what sort of country they want.  If young, fit men are not in agreement with the laws being passed, are unsupported by their superiors, and are increasingly dismissed as being thick, racist, and out of touch by privileged people with whom they have nothing in common then they we will see more and more instances of them refusing to enforce these laws.  This will take the form of their resigning from their current posts or simply not joining up in the first place.

Then what?

Chaos, that’s what.  If Swedish police officers are resigning en masse because they no longer believe in the job, then who will protect the liberal politicians and their supporters from the consequences of their policies?  Who is going to venture into an American city under lockdown, going block to block risking their lives, to restore the positions of politicians who brought this on themselves?

I don’t think we’re too far away from finding out that the answer is “nobody”.  Their cooperation has been taken for granted for way too long.


12 thoughts on “Who will take point?

  1. What happens if lots of Swedes, Germans, and Froggies decide to leg it, and settle in Britain while they still can. If they arrive here, will they then want to expel Moslems, blacks, and so on from our little archipelago?

    Last time there was a volkerwanderung there were probably quite a few Romans in Gaul who thought that Britain would be a safer place to live than their own province. And this time people would know that you really do have to expel the equivalent of the invading Anglo-Saxons and Gaels. Of course, in the end lots of Britons gave up and crossed the channel to establish Brittany, so the precedents cut both ways.

    We have no choice: we do live in interesting times.

  2. Dearieme is right: if push comes to shove we will happily take our fair-skinned, light haired kind from Europe above the ones who refuse to integrate and make trouble. We will gladly cooperate with and assist our own, and steer clear of those whose tendency is to spit at us (and yes, I have been spat at for no reason by a muslim on the street).

    In this no one can work out why successive UK governments are so keen on importing so many people who will, by lack of language, opportunity and social-intelligence even before we get to differing cultures and religion, solely congregate together in ghettos while grabbing what they can from what our society has built. No matter how many times people say airily ‘it’s a religion of peace’ there are frequent examples of how unpeaceful they can be. It isn’t that they are filling our factories as we continue to export technology to the world, and I doubt if many of them feel a compunction to join the military. Some of them seem to have a lot of trouble with the concept of poppy appeals. immigration may be done for votes, but it won’t be long before even Labour find that the new voters are choosing arabic speaking, pro-islamic parties instead of backing good old Jez.

    But I disagree with Dearieme on outgoing Brits. Yes, we may flee to Anglosphere countries but few of us would go to France, say, with its higher Muslim population and unless you are of the one true faith, you sure wouldn’t go to Pakistan.

  3. “Who is going to venture into an American city under lockdown, going block to block risking their lives, to restore the positions of politicians who brought this on themselves?”

    Here’s what many people often seem to forget. Police are there to protect us from criminals. But they are also there to protect the criminals from mob justice. There may well be pockets of lawlessness (i.e. Chicago) but it cannot and will not spread to the suburbs and rural areas. Do not underestimate gun ownership in those areas. Seriously, I can list 8 people off the top of my head who have what you would call an arsenal. All of them have a carbine (like an AR-15), shot gun, .22 LR, and several handguns. Combine that with thousands of rounds of ammo and that’s a man who can defend his patch. Add to that, I’m in a middle class suburb not a more rural area where locals are much more likely to be ever better prepared.

    Either way (say it with me now), this will not end well.

  4. Duffy,

    You make a very good point. I was thinking along the lines of rioters taking over a city block and the police refusing to go in and deal with them. But it could easily be the case that the rioters overstep the mark – and I think it is a matter of time before the BLM movement does this, egged on by clueless politicians – causing a massive, deadly backlash against them by the very people you mention. Then the government tries to get the police and national guards to take on the ordinary folk, and they refuse having realised the politicians and the BLM supporters despise them, whereas they have much in common with the ordinary folk.

  5. My point wasn’t that we’d go to western France, but rather that we might just go somewhere. New Zealand and Australia might be our ready-made Brittanies, if they’d have us. Or would Chile or Uruguay be interested? Or, not entirely seriously, should we just invade Argentina?

    Which “we”? Presumably the youngish: would the old be abandoned as if they were so many old Red Indians?

    The great lesson of The War was that race was dynamite – and in the case of the Jews, religion was dynamite. So why has this two-part lesson been ignored by Western politicians ever since?

  6. The great lesson of The War was that race was dynamite – and in the case of the Jews, religion was dynamite.

    Diversity + proximity = war, as some blogs like to state.

  7. Duffy,

    Are your well-armed friends going to have the balls to take offensive action against criminals in their area? Knowing how thoroughly they’ll be demonised?

    And knowing also that the police will come after them first? It’s far more urgent for the state to stop vigilantes than criminals, and probably easier too.

    Myself, I can’t see people taking up arms against the hostile elements of society before things are a lot worse than they are now. Most ordinary people want the law in place – they want society to work – so I don’t see them forming lynch mobs until there’s long since been no other choice. But maybe I think too highly of people.


    The same cultural forces that led Britain to import millions of Muslims (or the USA to import millions of Mexicans) are at work in Australia too.


    Given the obvious longing of the author for such a war, I think that blog ought to be taken with a pinch of salt.

  8. Oh, and I forgot to mention, pertinent to Tim’s original point, I read somewhere that a great historical predictor of revolution and similar turmoil is a surplus of young men.

    We see such a surplus now in the Islamic world, and the results aren’t pretty. The most peaceful Islamic countries are the ones who are adept at channelling the energy of these useless young men.

    British society was once very good at doing that: sport, empire, raising families and building society, being a gentleman with a stiff upper lip, etc. Perhaps one of the many unfortunate side-effects of feminism will be to artificially create a generation of surplus young men, with all the problems that follow.

    It’s a shame – it almost sounds like a threat – do what young men want or they’ll fight you – but it is what it is. As our host points out, the state cannot function without young men willing to enforce its laws, and if those young men wanted to, they could enforce something else. Better then to find a way to have them invested in society and working towards its happy future. Demonising them and trying to render them irrelevant is probably not going to help achieve that goal.

  9. The idea is that you create a society where there’s only one role for young men where their natural traits are valued and not despised: Beating down middle aged taxpayers.

    Supply goes where demand is. People are far too optimistic. The USSR got away with quite a lot for 70 years.

  10. It’s called the “Ferguson Effect”. If the police know they will be the political scapegoats if they use force (as in Baltimore), they just stay in their cars and take no action, and crime surges. (For example, the large increase in the murder rate in Chicago.)

  11. I don’t think it’s a matter of the police or National Guard even showing up. I believe it will cascade so rapidly it will defy anyone’s ability to control it. Los Angeles is a case in point. It has been close several times. I believe that if some of the riots had gone on a little longer, or spread any further you would have had chaos in large parts of the city, and it would have had to burn itself out.

    Lynch mobs though? No, not really, people ready to defend their lives and property, we’ve already seen it. In the Rodney King riots we had well armed property owners on the roofs of their buildings. They were ready to shoot, and the LAPD said not a word to them. No one even found the idea really disconcerting after the fact. I personally think we’re walking a lot closer to the edge than many people want to admit.

    I found your blog from Adam’s, I enjoy it.

Comments are closed.