The defining question of the 21st century: Can We Say No? By David Cole.
Last year, [Justin Barrett, leader of Ireland’s National Party] attended a public meeting in his hometown of Borrisokane, Tipperary. The meeting was ostensibly a chance for the locals to be heard regarding the government’s surprise plans to house Third World “refugees” in the town. Many at the meeting felt ambushed by the scheme. More than that, they felt helpless, as if nothing they could say would deter the government’s resettlement machinations. As if their opinions just didn’t matter.
Over audible objections from those running the meeting, Barrett rose to speak. He pointed out that every time such “refugee” programs had been forced upon Irish communities, an immediate increase in violent crime, vandalism, and intimidation of the locals followed. “I love my country and I want my country to be an Irish Ireland and I am not ashamed of that and I shouldn’t have to be ashamed of that,” Barrett proclaimed.
“I have one question to ask: Can the people of Borrisokane say no?”
Can we say no? There, nailed it. Is the destruction of the West predetermined? Are we just going through the motions of letting “the people” decide, just pretending that the citizens, the voters, the taxpayers can say no to what the powers that be have already decided must occur? Either we can say no or we can’t. And if we can’t, just admit it; drop the illusion that anything we say, or anything we do, can stop the civilizational decline.
Can we say no to the Third Worlding of the West? Generally, in Western Europe, you can’t. If you say no a little too stridently, you get arrested as a hate criminal, banned from speaking publicly, and banished from political organizing and activity.
But what about here in the U.S.? Can we say no to our demographic decline? Well, we certainly tried in 2016. Candidate Trump ran on the most unambiguous platform (with the most specific pledges) in recent American history. No Michael Dukakis “uncertainty of purpose” there! Trump voters knew what they were voting for. So, we said no to open borders and lawless aliens, only to be told by the Democrats, most Republicans, the media, and Trump’s own inner circle that “yes” was the only allowable answer. …
Okay, so we can’t control our national borders or our local ones. Can we at least say no to people who want to enter our places of business with intent to commit theft? Nope, can’t say no there, either. “Progressive prosecutors” in big cities are effectively decriminalizing shoplifting by making it a citation-only, non-arrest offense. Someone wants to walk into your store and clean out the shelves? Don’t you dare say no to that! …
Okay, so we can’t control the bad actors who come into our country, our neighborhoods, and our stores. But at least we have final say in our own homes, right?
Very funny. …
Because you can’t say no to trespassers. England’s already where the left wants us to be in a few years. To quote The Guardian’s guide to trespassers’ rights: “Homeowners actually owe a duty of care to trespassers to ensure they do not come to any harm.” Indeed, homeowners “might reasonably be expected to offer some protection” to those who enter their homes without permission, and that includes “not leaving sharp tools lying around” where trespassers might hurt themselves as they rob you.
Read it all, and weep or laugh at how little control the majority have in our “democracy”.