Home About

“Scum Rules, Not OK”

Lindsay Perigo



So kids’ Commie Commissar Kiro wants mandatory screening by the state of every baby’s home life. Compulsory visits from the infanto-nazis. Parents who don’t cooperate will be referred to “welfare authorities.”
It’s about what you’d expect from a state-worshiper with a PhD in “social policy” and a background of lecturing in said “social policy” (read: “Bolshevik bullshit”) at a socialist university.
Even Hitler didn’t nationalise kids from the minute they came out of the womb; compulsory membership of his various youth groups didn’t kick in until the age of six. Hard on the heels of Comrade Bradford’s anti-smacking law, Comrade Kiro wants our National Socialist government to take another giant leap in its kid-grab, getting its tentacles into babies—and their parents—from the moment of birth.
All in the name of preventing child abuse. Twenty-five children will have their lives saved at a cost of 25 million dollars over five years, according to Comrade Kiro.
Newsflash! It’s Comrade Kiro and her ilk in the Beehive who are ultimately responsible for child abuse.
Here’s how it works: scum (in this case, the socialist regime of Comrades Clark and Cullen, but including previous Labour and National governments) pays other scum to breed. In return, latter scum (let’s call it Bludge-scum) votes for former scum (let’s call it Nazi-scum) and keeps it in power in perpetuity. Or so Nazi-scum hopes. But Bludge-scum doesn’t really want taxpayer-funded children, since they interfere with his taxpayer-funded drinking, and kills them. Nazi-scum says it’s the fault of taxpayers who smack. Nazi-scum bans smacking. Bludge-scum keeps killing kids anyway. Nazi-scum, via Comrade Kiro, proposes to send its Gestapo into every home with kids.
Taxpayer accepts this outrage because he’s been lobotomised via Nazi-scum’s education system. Nazi-scum’s education system doesn’t instil bad ideas exactly; more cunningly, insidiously and lethally, it instils the notion that no ideas are worth taking seriously. That way, Nazi-scum can nationalise children, rape taxpayers and meet no resistance greater than an indifferent shrug and an apathetic “whatever”. The lobotomies can’t hold a thought for long enough to become indignant about its implications. And anyway, indignation would be “uncool.” Why, indignant folk might even end up calling Islamo-Fascism “Islamo-Fascism,” and that would never do.
Not that New Zealand is unique in harbouring this racket. University of Kent sociology professor Frank Furedi writes about its capture of Britain and America in his book, “Where have all the intellectuals gone? Confronting 21st Century Philistinism.” He recalls the reaction of a colleague to an article he’d written bemoaning the fact that students didn’t (couldn’t) read whole books anymore:
“He had no problem with the estrangement of undergraduates from the world of books; rather, he was angry about my arrogant assumption that books should have a privileged status in higher education. The tone of the article was to suggest you can dismiss as undemanding any programme in which students do not read whole books, he complained. As far as he was concerned, the book has become an optional extra resource for the present-day undergraduate.
“A public which is continuously spoon-fed platitudes and sound bites is likely to become estranged from the world of political debate. This development is particularly striking on university campuses, where students continually insist that ‘politics is boring.’ The language used on campuses reflects an intense sense of cynicism towards causes and ideas, and a distinct lack of interest in holding strong views of any sort. New York Times journalist Michiko Kakutani’s reflection on the language used by American college students captures this mood of disengagement. That familiar interjection ‘whatever’ says a lot about the state of mind of college students today, notes Kakutani. With such little importance attached to ideas, intellectual argument has acquired negative connotations.
“Scholars who pursue their points with vigour can now be accused of academic bullying. British universities encourage academics to ban an adversarial style of debate from the seminar rooms and provide a supportive environment for students. A strong argument has been redefined as a form of mental intimidation.”
It’s a much subtler racket than the brutishness of a Stalin or Hitler. Disable your subjects’ brains and disarm their capacity for emotion and you’ll never have to worry about their getting uppity. Comatose campuses are testament to Nazi-scum’s stunning success over decades.
As are the kid-killings that go on and will go on for as long as Nazi-scum like Comrades Clark and Kiro rule.