Mock General Election - Labour Party Political Broadcast

[MrPenguinPerson]

I'm Labour and I go to Colyton Grammar School!

[alekumrank]

Ah, RoyalistNationalist, I see this is not the first time you have been a complete idiot on YouTube.

youtube.com/watch?v=aqNWSz22PB­o

[RoyalistNationalist]

You forgot a few of their best achievements:

Hundreds of thousands of Middle-eatern people killed in two illegal wars.

The further dissolution of our sovereignty into the anti-democratic NWO EU superstate.

Mass immigration that no one got to vote for or has been allowed to properly question, changing the demographics and culture bit by bit.

Inciting Islamic extremism.

Further indoctrination of society with immoral teachings.

etc etc

But at least they raised the minimum wage!

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

On your YouTube channel you claim to be "pro-race distinction", "anti-homosexuality", "anti-communism", and "anti 'rehabilitation, not punishment".

Are you by any chance a supporter of the BNP?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

I am pro-nationalism, I believe in putting the country and its people first. I don't believe in ethnic cleansing, I believe the people have the right to vote on matters of significance and choose their own destiny. I don't support totalitarian regimes like Communism and Fascism. I do recognise white people as having as much right to identity as ethnic monorities. I stand for traditional values that have worked for centuries.

If the BNP are of like mind, I support them.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

If you are basing your views on Communism on the USSR, Vietnam, or any other of the so-called 'communist states' of the 20th century, then I will have you know that none of these countries has ever come close to achieving true communism. Few of the dictators of said countries can truly be described as people who ever attempted to create a communist state, but merely power-hungry fascists who ruled capitalist states and attempted to set up their own authoritarian, fascist

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Ah I've heard of this argument before. The old "If only they had been allowed to go a bit further, then things would have been better!" line. A Communist/Socialist apologist that promotes the Labour party, glad I have had some confirmation that is their real stance.

As to 'far-right of the BNP', have a look at some of their actual policies, they are quite a lefty party in many areas, just because they are anti-immigration does not mean they must be 'radical far-right extremists'

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

What on earth are you talking about? I never said "if only they had been allowed to go a bit further, then things would have been better". If I had said that, it wouldn't even have made any sense. I explained very clearly that none of those states were heading in the direction of communism, but rather in the opposite direction of fascism. And if you believe that a party whose members have denied the holocaust, had photos taken of themselves heiling Hitler, and whose...

[alekumrank]

@alekumrank

...supporters are openly prejudiced against homosexuals are a non-extremist party, then I suggest you take a step back and think some things over.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

1. Yes, but that excuse is the same as the others. Socialism has always led to rampant misery, you can argue whether it was done properly or not, but it has had enough attempts in my eyes to be deemed useless.

2. Yes, the earlier days of the BNP and nationalism in general were more of a thuggish affair, but that was partly because of the resistance said organisations were up against. It has become a far more moderate affair these days.

3. I am anti-homosexuality. So what?

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

What do you have against homosexuals?

Do you have a phobia against said people?

Why should they not be allowed to be different in a way that has no negative impact onto others?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

That is hardly a subject that can be answered here. Let us just say I believe it to be one of the Frankfurt School of Subversion methods. I also consider it against the Bible, which I realise has no sway over Marxist/Socialist types who hate Christianity and religion. And no, I am not religious, but I do not class myself as an Atheist either. I am open to a variety of possibilities on that score, but I do recognise Christianity as the religion that most of the West is built upon.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

So you believe that regardless of religion, we should all follow The Bible to an evangelical degree? And no, I hold no hatred towards those who are of a religion be it Christian, Muslim or whatever. I do hold great contempt, however, for those who try to force religious views onto others, as you are clearly trying to do.

And since you clearly follow the belief that, as do most of the BNP, that anything of the methods undertaken by the so-called Frankfurt School of...

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

No, we shouldn't 'follow the Bible' as you put it, we just shouldn't actively go out of our way to do the very opposite of what it says. Allowing people homosexual practises in their own homes is one thing, actually teaching it in schools is purposely going against the Bible. In fact calling it 'the Bible' portrays this whole thing in a Christian fanatic light. It isn't 'the Bible' I am directly refering to, it is our century old moral code BASED on the Bible that is important.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

Yes*, but is it the moral code that reflects The Bible, or The Bible that reflects the moral code.

*does not indicate agreement

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Moral code based on the teachings of the Bible and Christianity, like I said.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

Why shouldn't teachers be allowed to acknowledge the existance of homosexuality in school?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank I explained that earlier. The Bible condemns homosexuality, re the Sodomites. To not persecute people for it is one thing, but to actually teach it to children is quite another. Not that I'm used to using the Bible for quotes and things but it does state that a person who causes a child to sin should be executed. Harsh nowadays ofc, but the principle remains. Teaching children about a sin will encourage some to do it. It shouldn't be allowed. This is traditional stuff, not far-right.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

Furthermore, your argument is flawed as teachers do not force homosexuality on their pupils and make them *sin* [sic], they simply do their job and teach children of the world around them.

Afterall, teachers teach children of the BNP or The Holocaust because they exist, not because they are trying to convert children into supporters of either of the said examples.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Using words like 'force' doesn't do you a service. I never said they force anything on the children, but by teaching it in schools means that homosexuality has lost any of its less then desirable position in society. Meaning homosexuality in the childrens eyes is no worse than hetrosexuality. This of course will lead more and more children into thinking it is perfectly acceptable. So, by teaching it, they are directly contributing to its rise.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

"Meaning homosexuality in the childrens eyes is no worse than hetrosexuality."

Oh no! Can you imagine how terrible it would be if everyone suffered from the *illusion* [sic] that homosexuality is no worse than hetrosexuality?

It's those uppity gays, thinking that they're equal to other people, isn't it.

For the benefit of any who disn't realise, my comment in the lines above were meant in sarcasm.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

And there we are, right back at the beginning of the discussion. First you ask why I think it is immoral, I answer you, then you ask what I would propose doing about it, I answer you, then you find fault with one of my suggestions, and I answer you, and your final move is to go right back to the beginning of the discussion.

Against the Bible.

Against the century-old moral code of this country.

Against all traditional values.

A Frankfurt School of Subversion technique.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

Everything you said above is true, except for the parts about you giving me logical, well-though out, sane answers in return.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

It is a similar type of discussion as 'Does God exist?', if you were after some hard facts being brought to the table, I am sorry to disappoint. There are none to bring on either side.

The only things that can be brought to the table are history, personal views, applicable religious sentiments and pertinent subjects like the Frankfurt School.

[sebread1]

@RoyalistNationalist I am sorry, but your so called 'argument' does not add up. For a start, I have read through the entire argument and not once has it given any justification for you (you say ignoring, but your general attitude towards them is of disgust) 'ignoring' homosexuals. Just what do you have against them? How are they so different to you that you consider it just to not teach children that people of the same sex can love each other? Your 'holier than thou' attitude disgusts me.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@sebread1

Well I have explained that several times. As I said:

"The only things that can be brought to the table are history, personal views, applicable religious sentiments and pertinent subjects like the Frankfurt School."

This isn't the type of subject where facts are brought in. And neither side will persuade the other to change their stance.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

You're right, it IS fundamentalist discriminatory fascists like you who give the people of this country a bad name.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

"The people of this country" - do you mean genuine natives here, or are we talking about the colonisers? 

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

If by 'genuine natives' you mean white people, then you are sorely mistaken (good to see you are keeping consistant), as the only 'genuine natives' are the Homo neanderthalensis (neanderthals, commonly).

You just proved your ignorance.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Natives being the people who have been here since the last Ice Age at least, who's DNA comprises of around 77% of British people today, the other 23% being a combination of other European settlers in the last few thousand years.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

So anyone whose lived here since the end of the last ice age must leave.

(Even though that would mean EVERYONE, or NO ONE if you acknowledge the fact that we are still in the last Ice Age since there is still ice at the poles.

This Ice Age will not end until the global warming has progressed a bit further.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Who said everyone must leave? The ones that should leave are illegals, foreign criminals, and so-called "asylum-seekers" that mysteriously seemed to bypass up to 20 safe countries to arrive in little old Britain, all in the name of "fleeing persecution" of course.

As for "global warming", are you talking about genuine global warming that has been happening recently across our entire solar system - caused by solar activity, or the 'man-made global warming' scam?

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

'man-made global warming' scam?

So you are denying the existance of the greenhouse effect?

Well, I can't say I expected any better from you...

I suppose it's another conspiracy. I daresay those pesky immigrants and homosexuals are in on it as well, are they?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Errr....no.

If you do some research you will see just how much of a fraud this thing really is. I could give you some links but there is so much stuff on it you can easily do it yourself.

The science behind it has been proven to have been tampered with (that was even on the mainstream news, which is clearly the only source you go to). Loads of scientists say there is absolutely no evidence for it, it is a purely political 'theory' in order to introduce global carbon tax.

[sebread1]

@RoyalistNationalist No, I'm sorry. You still have not explained why you personally hate homosexuals, just justified why you have a right to your perverted view.

To put it shortly and crudely, you're talking bollocks.

Now I will ask again - why do you personally have this view against homosexuals which few other people share? Why do you consider them a subject not worth teaching children about? What has happened in your wasted life to give you this grotesque view against other human beings?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@sebread1 This "view" was the norm not so long ago, and as you clearly believe that we have entered some kind of "Enlightenment" in recent decades, as opposed to a degradation of moral fibre and values of decency, nothing I say will have any impact. Fact is, homosexuality just isn't natuiral, it goes against natures intended path, there wouldn't be any humans in existence if homosexuality was pursued en masse. That is setting aside the religious views which condemn this practise quite explicitly

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

How ironic that you complain about homosexuals because they are not bringing more children into a Britain that you previously stated was to overcrowded to allow immigrants in.

You can't have it both ways, moron.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Lets take that feeble statement to the extreme and say that I agree with murderers because they help keep the population down.

It is a well known fact to any sane person outside of the PC brigade that people of northern European origin (yes, thats "white people") all over the world are having below-replacement birth rates and thus are in decline. It is importation of Third World people that is causing the overcrowding, not the natives.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

So what are you complaining about then?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Errm...this subject was about homosexuality, which I think is wrong.

The other subject was about declining birth rates, which is in dire need of correction.

The other subject was about mass immigration.

Exactly what are you asking?

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

I am asking why you seem to believe that non-British children are inferior to British children. So far you cannot come up with an acceptable answer - i.e. one that does not involve constant use of weasel words/weasel arguments to make up for a lack of statistical evidence, opinions based simply upon hate and nothing else, or indeed free from utter crap.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Another strawman argument. Where did I say British people are superior to non-British people? Native British have a right to their own country and a right to say whether they wish for demegraphics to change in that country. Exactly the same as Chinese people, Indians etc etc.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

Oh I see - you are suffering from delusions and believe that homosexuals are all murderers somehow.

[sebread1]

@RoyalistNationalist Also, why can facts not be brought in. Since you need so direly to be taught about homosexuality, then here's a brief lesson:

1. Homosexuals are actually exactly the same biologically to us. This might be quite a surprise to you.

2.Just because they love people of the same sex, does not mean that they are stupid strange, etc,etc. In fact, all the things that you are.

3.Homosexuals do not 'love' every person of the same sex. Therefore your clear fear of them is unfounded.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@sebread1

1. I agree, therefore their 'condition' is psychological not physical.

2. It means that some experience/s in their life has disturbed them, and as modern society no longer condemns this type of thing, they believe they are undergoing some kind of acceptable transition into homosexual tendencies that should be pursued and embraced.

3. More useless words like 'fear' and 'hatred', neither of which are applicable, so leave off the PC brigade terminology, would you?

[sebread1]

@RoyalistNationalist

1.You call it a 'condition'. There's only one person with a condition in here, and you and I know both who it is. How is it not correct psychologically to love people of the same sex? Why should this be condemned? Again, you are saying what you believe, but not justifying it.

2. You have to make excuses for people being homosexual. No 'experience has disturbed them', you moron. They love other males, not for a reason, but because that is the way they are. Deal with it.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@sebread1 Repeating the same drivel over and over will not make it true.

1. It's natural for one person to love another of the opposite sex, that is how procreation and survival of race/species works. It is unnatural to be "in love" with a person of the same sex as no progress can come from it. That is my scientific justification for it.

2. No, failing society and degredation of moral values. Often combined with a disturbed upbringing. Lack of proper boundries and values taught to a child etc

[sebread1]

@RoyalistNationalist

This endeth the lesson that you should have learnt when you were a child.

Now, for a change, think about it.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

After all, teachers acknowledge the existance of the BNP, and that doesn't turn pupils into BNP supporters.

Although that may say more about the BNP than the influence of teachers.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

I can only imagine in what way pupils are taught about the BNP. If it is in a bad light, which it would be, then the authorities will look the other way in terms of teachers not bringing politics into the class. But if it is in a good light then they'll come down on them like a tonne of bricks.

Pupils will leave with the impression the BNP is a far-right racist, Nazi extremist organisation. (btw I am aware this is how the brain-washed like yourself view the BNP).

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

You still fail the understand the difference between acknowledging the existance of something and telling people how morally right/wring it is. Notice that I said 'teachers acknowledge the existance of the BNP'.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

And I explained that by acknowledging the existence of it to children will inevitably lead to some of them believing it is acceptable and then going down that path themselves. Therefore they are encouraging it just by acknowledging it to children.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

By that logic, teachers shouldn't teach about alcohol, drugs, or illnesses.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

The major difference is when they teach about alchohol and drugs, they tell the pupils how bad they are and how they should avoid them.

If a teacher did that with homosexuality they would be thrown out of the job and labelled a homophobe by the PC establishment.

Not sure what illness has to do with anything.

[henrytdsimmons]

@RoyalistNationalist As a person that describes themselves as center right libertarian, i take offence at you being allowed to preach this crap giving people like me a very bad name. Your channel page is full of hypocrisy and juxtapositions. Your 'beliefs' are clearly not based on any conscience or thought out views, it's clearly based on what benefits you.

Anti-homosexuality

Anti-Zionism

Anti 'rehabilitation, not punishment'

And in the same breath:

Anti-supremacist

Anti-establishment

What?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@henrytdsimmons

I'll explain my position on homosexuality further.

I do not think it should be made illegal like it was in the 50s and previous, put it that way. What people get up to in their own homes can stay there as far as I'm concerned. On that basis alone I reject the 'Nazi' names.

However I do not think public displays should be allowed and homosexuality should certainly not be taught at schools. The state should not formally recognise it, certainly no marriage etc.

[henrytdsimmons]

@RoyalistNationalist Your argument is fundamentally flawed as you base your beliefs on being 'not as bad some....' it still does not justify a blatant hatred of homosexuals.

[RoyalistNationalist]

@henrytdsimmons

Hatred is not the right word. I fight their activities morally objectionable and because of that I might ignore them as individuals, but hate doesn't enter the equation.

[henrytdsimmons]

@RoyalistNationalist  I have nothing to say about that.

[alekumrank]

@henrytdsimmons

"...hate doesn't enter the equation."

Thank you, RoyalistNationalist, for providing the most moronic (and quite possibly oxymoronic) quote for quote some time.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

So you refuse to accept the individuality of homosexuals.

Of course this is nothing to do with hate.

(In case you are too Goddamned moronic to notice it, one of the above sentances was meant in sarcasm.)

[RoyalistNationalist]

@alekumrank

Oh yes, because ignoring something means you hate it, doesn't it?

I ignore a child if they have been naughty. i.e. I ignore them because of what they have done. The same applies to homosexuals, I ignore them because of what they do. How does hatred enter either example?

[RoyalistNationalist]

@henrytdsimmons

As for 'centre right libertarian', forgive me, but how does Socialism and Communism fit in with this? Michael Savage is a libertarian, alot of his views I completely agree with, and he is conservative, but nothing of what you have said sounds remotely like his views.

[alekumrank]

@RoyalistNationalist

(continued) regimes under the cloak of communism. No true socialist or advocate of the left would consider any of the so called 'communist states' of the 20th century anywhere near the left on the political compass, but nearer to a far-right wing authoritarian political party like, say, the BNP.

[alekumrank]

I thought I had uploaded this months ago.