In a great essay of a hundred years ago, entitled El origen deportivo del Estado, or 'The Sportive Origin of the State’, Jose Ortega Y Gasset claimed that the state has its origin in rape. Imagine the ancient world: hunters, gatherers, early farmers, the odd cultic shrine. A great revolution takes place, he said, when young men “decide to rape girls of distant hordes”. They decide to do this, and are successful, or have to be resisted, and are resisted: and, either way, something new emerges.
Now just think about this.
Ortega said that no tribe or group could possibly tolerate losing its women to the men of warrior bands, so settlements had to be arranged, or wars had to be fought, and so our own men had to be armed.
A short history of marriage:
- The first matrimony was robbery and rape.
- The second was a protection racket.
- Perhaps the third was romantic. Ironic laughter.
- The fourth, of course, was a free-for-all: the somahexual confusion of ‘she came with her wife’, ‘how’s your husband, John?’ etc.
The old men of antiquity, dimly aware of what a mess the 21st Century would make of things, originally tried to hold onto their women and children by forming a senate, and amassing their riches to order the younger men into legions. The old men lived with the women and children; the younger men ventured off on their own. That’s the history of the world in one sentence. What does this
Discussion
Comments
This week across the site:
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to the Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The Establishment, via the Law and social coercion, has deliberately made it virtually impossible for British men to defend their women whilst at the same time encouraging young girls and women to dress and “express themselves” however they please.
They created a two-tier legal system, which severely punishes native men (and mouthy native women) who transgress, but treats imported terrorists, criminals and gang members extremely leniently.
Over the last few decades it has deliberately imported millions of 3rd worlders, and made no attempt to make them adopt our cultural norms. And in the past few years, has shipped in hundreds of thousands of barbarians.
The people orchestrating it want a One World Government and they are deliberately destroying the State (the whole West) in order to achieve it.
Women/girls have always dressed how they please, and so they should. They’ve never required ”encouraging” from anyone. Freedom of expression is a fundamental civil right in any democratic society. So is going out and assuming you won’t be assaulted. No matter what a woman chooses to wear on a night out ( or what your personal opinions are on her taste ), for instance, she is not responsible for the behaviour of men around her. Only the men are. Do you think sexual predators only prey on women who wear revealing clothes? Do these perverts go into hibernation in the winter when women are wearing more?
Do you know how many posts I’ve read on Twitter from men in response to news of yet another woman being raped or attacked by a migrant which blame her, not the perpetrator? Countless. And they always go like this: ”She voted for it.” So the chronically online incels seem to have a special super power which allows them to ‘accurately’ assert that the victim 1) voted, and 2) voted for a Left pro-immigration party, therefore it is her own fault she was attacked. And if she was wearing a short skirt, well, there… Read more »
That rape is an atavistic form of conquest can be seen in the rape of millions of German women and girls aged nine to ninety by the Soviet army in 1945.
All the women examined by British army doctors who had been ethnically cleansed under Operation Swallow from countries in central and eastern Europe had been raped.
The author’s piece here shows no understanding of the fact that rape permanently alters a woman’s state of being. That is, she remains raped for the rest of her life. Given that, the way convicted rapists are dealt with by the laws of England and the courts do not address this forced altered state of being.
Article says the rape of white girls by Muslims is a made up number, what ignorance. Largest non war systemic rape in modern history. A complete collapse of the state, security, police protection, law. Part of the Jihad and English men and this authour do nothing.
It is absolutely true that the 250,000 is a made up number. If you read Mr lowe’s report, and the references included, you must accept that.
The use of this number in the report, especially in the summary, should have included a qualification, in which case it would have retained the meaning, without creating a hostage to fortune for old pedants like me.
Meanwhile, yet another ad-hominem attack – “what ignorance” – hugely reduces the value of your contribution. Sadly this seems to be the way of commenters on the few excellent sites such as the DS and TCW.
Let us maintain our standards in discussion and debate; particularly with regard to ‘ways to disagree’.
NO, IT IS NOT A MADE-UP NUMBER !!!
It is EXTRAPOLATED, and perfectly valid to illustrate the enormous scale of these CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.
And calling out someone’s ignorance is also PERFECTLY VALID, and does NOT “reduce the value of the contribution”, you Pearl-Clutching, Handwringing, Weedy Wet Liberal.
Kindly demonstrate how/where it is extrapolated.
Apply your questionable Reading Comprehension Skills to the article above, upon which we are all commenting.
I’ve commented elsewhere about your ad-hominem attacks. When in a hole, stop digging!
I will continue to exercise my Freedom of Speech on this website, founded by Lord Toby Young, who also founded The Free Speech Union, now an international phenomenon and an enormous contribution to humanity.
So get lost!
Indeed. I hope you are a paid up member (as I am).
No one can comment on this website unless they ARE a paid-up member.
Yes, the rather flippant attitude of the author could be “balanced” if he read “Hellstorm: The Death of Nazi Germany” by Thomas Goodrich. It could also be “balanced” if he bothered to read the Koran while he’s working in Turkey, especially about “Rape Jihad”. Yes, we can blame the religion! And since the real Russian troops refused to participate as Slavic Christians in the horrific torture and gang rapes of East European women and children, Muslim Tatar and Mongol recruits in Russian uniforms were used instead, like the Muslim Algerian & Moroccan troops gang raped French women, and blamed the British & Americans, forgetting the fact that gang rape was almost unknown in the West until the Mass Third World Invasion.
Your crucial statement, Claphamanian, that “rape permanently alters a woman’s state of being” must also be extended to men and boys who have been raped, and their testimonies were encouraged, welcomed and included in Rupert Lowe’s Rape Gang Inquiry, which in itself is revolutionary.
Well, it’s dehumanizing, isn’t it? Whatever the context. Whether it be in a war situation, as you and the author describe, a rape gang/sex trafficking situation, a girl being sexually abused repeatedly as she grows up by a household member, or the opportunistic attacks that we’re reading about on a daily basis of women/girls being targeted when out and about. The victims are seen as a commodity ( gangs/sex trafficking scenario ) and/or mere play things, with no feelings, no rights ( certainly no bodily autonomy ) and to be discarded when they cease to be useful. Just easy meat and a means to an ends.
And yet many individuals ( shamefully, including women ), will first judge the victim for what they choose to wear ( as if they’re ‘asking for it’ on some subconscious level ) rather than condemn the man who ( using his own sense of agency ) makes a conscious and premeditated decision to assault her. Straight out of the misogynists’ playbook: ”Rule number 1: Always blame women for the bad behaviour of men.”
The fact that “rape permanently alters a woman’s state of being” is not at all relevant to the author’s piece. Other than that sentence your comment is useful, but why make an (unfounded) criticism of the author?
It’s called “Freedom of Speech”, a concept of which you appear to have a most tenuous grasp.
Actually I am a free speech absolutist. But i like to conduct discussions, whether speaking in agreement or disagreement with others, in a civil and respectful manner. Do you not realise how the use of ad-hominem attacks reduces the credibility of your views?
“Ελευθερία ή θάνατος” is my favourite tee shirt of the moment.
To quote MP Rupert Lowe, founder of Restore Britain,
“I don’t care!”
Civilisation started when we stopped raping. Ie when people started to respect the fact that if someone had something you don’t, you can’t just take it.