MILLENNIAL DEFENSE — Culture suppression and the asinine persecution of Millennial Woes

I had planned to highlight the story of Millennial Woes’ doxxing in a larger article about media attacks on individuals, and media being wielded as a tool of persecution but the more I thought about one particular line from the article Woes addresses in his latest video, the more I felt Woes’ story merited its own post and not be buried in a larger piece. It was this line from Alan McEwen’s Daily Record hit piece on Woes, published on January 9th, that inspired me to write about Woes’ recent difficulties:

Neighbours said they’d seen police officers call at his home late last year.

What could Woes have done to warrant a police visit to his home? Having read McEwen’s article it uses all kinds of heavy-handed adjectives like “racist”, “vile”, and “despicable” to describe Woes and his views on certain matters like multiculturalism, race, religion, culture. As I read the piece, even I started to wonder: Is there a crazy video on Woes’ channel where he burns an effigy of a Jewish person, or a video where he recommends his viewers harass a minority group? Those are the kinds of acts any reasonable person would consider “despicable”, “racist”, or “vile” and the Daily Record article is very damning against Woes in its tone. Yet the article mentions no examples of that severity. In his piece McEwen does not dedicate many lines to describe the kinds of the content found on Woes’ YouTube channel. McEwen seems intentionally sparse with details, as if he wants the reader to channel thoughts of Hitler goosestepping down a neighborhood block while Nazi soldiers push scared-looking children into the backs of trucks, to evoke explicit imagery of pure evil in the reader’s mind as he describes Woes with those unholy adjectives. The Daily Record is, after all, trash tabloid journalism in the vein of those magazines that line grocery store checkouts in North America and demean female celebrities for not looking absolutely fabulous in a bathing suit. Yet, people do read it.

Woes was an easy target. Last November he attended the NPI alt-right conference in Washington, DC where a handful of attendees performed a Nazi salute during Richard Spencer’s speech when Spencer mirthfully declared “hail Trump!” to the audience. Hilary Clinton had previously tried associating the alt-right to Trump, while comparing the alt-right to neo-Nazis. Why a handful of conference attendees performed a Nazi (or Roman) salute towards Spencer is anyone’s guess. Perhaps the alt-right attracts real neo-Nazis much like the left attracts real communists. Perhaps the salute throwers were paying homage to Clinton’s accusation of the alt-right being neo-Nazis, perhaps they were just being edgy jackasses. Woes was not caught on film throwing the salute, however. There is no reason to believe he participated in the gesture. He has even denounced the incident.

Towards the end of McEwen’s article McEwen mentions Woes’ belief in keeping Britain for the British people. The preservation of British culture and its ethnic British people is a controversial topic in modern times. Woes is hardly the only Brit to believe Britain should be for the British, let alone the only Westerner who believes his country should preserve its own take on Western identity through the preservation of its people and their culture. Woes’ concern is shared by millions of people around the Western world who feel uneasy by the thought of their culture being challenged or replaced by foreign ones. Culture creep does not end at airports or at train stations or along migrant paths. Culture defines people and people take it with them wherever they go. When large amounts of people move into an area and do not assimilate, as is happening in places in the UK, the social fabric that defines these places will begin to fray.

It is hard to believe that large scale immigration and multiculturalism is keeping British culture firmly intact when there are so many examples of culture clash in the UK and other Western countries. For instance, last year the Daily Mail reported about a store in London being criticized for its “insensitive” name, “Truly British”. Passerby’s have allegedly harassed the store’s owner and his employees with accusations of racism. It is clearly an attack on British culture when the owner of Truly British and his employees are harassed for the store’s patriotic name, a name that describes the British knick-knacks it sells like figures of The Queen, tea cups and small Union Jack flags. However, the store’s owner violated an unwritten multicultural rule it seems, a rule that prescribes nothing can be “truly” British. By doing so he exposed himself to personal attacks and attacks against his own culture. London, by some accounts, is not very “British” anymore. A 2011 survey revealed that 44.9 per cent of Londoners were “white British.” Clearly, Truly British’s owner did not read the memo about British identity and culture being replaced with multiculturalism. If he had, he might have realized the name “Truly British” is considered by some as a passive-aggressive attack against people who are not British in origin but hold paperwork declaring themselves as stakeholders in the nation. It is not hard to imagine people who might be offended by the store’s name who consider themselves Pakistani, or Nigerian, or Jamaican while they conveniently hold British nationality, live on British soil and proclaim pride in their own ethnic roots. Yet, few would openly call these people unpatriotic British for having such pride in their ancestral homelands. It is clear that Woes and people like him want to keep the traditional white Brit alive and strong. The Brits who make Britain, Britain. The real Brits. Alas, Woes and his fellow traditionalists and patriots are tasked with keeping the flame of their people burning in a multicultural environment that has been formed to protect the interests of non-white Brits, even when they hold traditionally non-British values, and the interests of white Brits who see opportunity for themselves in furthering multiculturalism such as the politicians who pander to the minority vote.

Several of the topics Woes tackles on his YouTube channel are considered “third rail” or “untouchable” in the West due to the way people who broach them are often intimidated with threats of unpopular labels like “xenophobe”, “racist” or “Islamophobe.” These topics include: race, multiculturalism, nationalism, national identity, refugees, etc. These are discussions many people believe are worth having, even just to address and discount certain stereotypes, yet nearly everyone avoids openly discussing for fear of being ostracized. It is an unfortunate phenomenon because it ensures some social problems are not properly defined thereby making them difficult to address. People who broach these topics often fear being ostracized to a degree that would be shadowed in comparison to the kind of ostracizing Woes has experienced after he was confronted by the Daily Record and the ensuing shitstorm that resulted in his private life from being doxxed. Being called a racist is a scarlet letter you cannot easily remove in this rapidly expanding multicultural Western society.

Today Westerners hold the burden of being unable to openly question the benefits that certain foreigners bring to the West, especially those of vastly dissimilar cultures. It is something our ancestors, the people who handed us the reins to this civilization would undoubtedly be shocked by if they could witness modern day immigration practices and the lack of open criticism towards them. Then again, it might be said of our ancestors that they were old-fashioned and bigoted people by the likes of Carl the Cuck’s ideological twin brother or his “CIS-white male”-hating friend Yasmin, whose parents arrived in the West sometime after 1965 when the West began absorbing large amounts of non-Western immigrants. Our ancestors preferred their countries to stay culturally homogeneous (even if that meant mostly racially homogeneous), without the good or the bad effects large scale immigration would bring. Numerous countries with majority non-white, non-European populations operate in this way today. Yet, it is only Western nations that are forbidden to even question the benefits of multiculturalism. Perhaps that is because Westerners have already made their nations haphazardly multicultural to begin with, filling them with people who hold very different ideas for the nations that absorbed them. More and more, Westerners find themselves surrounded by foreigners who want to surround themselves with more people culturally and racially like themselves. It leaves some Westerners feeling as if their nations are being pulled apart in several directions.

I consider myself to be pretty sympathetic to non-Western people’s values and beliefs, even some of those values and beliefs I do not necessarily agree with. This is so because I realize non-Westerners are as beholden to their values and beliefs as I am to mine. Yet, that does not mean I must recognize their beliefs, their values, or their culture when they conflict with my own. We see time and time again examples of people from non-Western cultures trying to poke holes through our own Western customs and traditions, laws and social norms, so they can practice customs that we would never accept for ourselves. It sometimes feels as if “tolerance” is a one way street and cultures foreign to the West are permitted special passing privileges.

Right now the United States is experiencing deep political division and social upheaval and it may be, in part, caused by multiculturalism. The cultural, religious and ethnic divisions are cut in so many ways across the social fabric of the US that the election of Donald J. Trump, who was branded by his opponents a populist leader and described as being hoisted by the white working class to the presidency, has left the nation in a stupor (one half of it, anyway.) The idea that Trump was elected to stop illegal immigration and to protect the nation from external threats, threats that are seen as threats by one segment of the population, but not by another, is a damning blow against multiculturalism. In the current western order “diversity” is considered empowering and “unity”, is, well, something to be diversified. Diversity, it would seem, has some severely negative societal consequences around election time.

So why, exactly, would police visit the home of someone like Woes, someone who broaches topics such as culture, immigration, religion and race on his YouTube channel as McEwen’s article so ominously states.

Woes, visibly upset, explains in his latest video titled “A Woes By Any Other Name (the Daily Record, Alan McEwen, gutter journalism, etc.)” the circumstances which lead to his visit by police.  Undoubtedly these circumstances are something Woes would have rather kept private. The police visit, as witnessed by neighbors who are unlikely to be privy to the details of the situation, then later described to a tabloid reporter, and then published in an article, might incline any ignorant reader to jump to the conclusion that Woes had been a threat to public safety. That insinuation was certainly the Daily Record’s intention when they mentioned the police visit in their article. There is no other reason to mention it.

Woes recounts that on the day of the Brexit referendum last June he was contacted via his YouTube channel by an individual he had previously communicated with regarding the individual’s depression. On this particular day the individual was threatening to kill himself. Woes did what any decent person would do, he contacted police. Police visited Woes’ home twice that day regarding the issue, the second time to help Woes contact the individual and prevent him from taking his own life. The individual had attempted suicide. With Woes’ help Police were able to locate the individual in time and save him.

Woes had police at his home to help him save someone’s life.

Without the police visiting Woes home, a person who needed help would not have gotten it. That person would most likely be dead and quite possibly be another news story for another news paper to write about. His name would be printed in a rolled-up newspaper sitting on someone’s doorstep one morning.

If you would like to hear the story from Woes himself, click here. I have pegged the video to start at the spot where Woes get into it. I wholly recommend people watch or listen to the entire video. I also recommend watching Woes other videos especially his Millenniyule 2016 series.

I do not know Woes personally, but what I do know is McEwen’s article is trash. McEwen provided an unfair, insincere analysis of Woes’ work. McEwen’s article was the literary equivalent of a drive-by shooting. His intention was to take down Woes’ character, even ruin his life, and then casually move on to the next target.

Follow by Email