What’s in a Word?


To make sense of the way the western world is at the moment one simply must understand the core tenet in Neomarxist postmodernism that ‘everything is political’. And when these activists say EVERYTHING, they mean EVERYTHING – and that includes language itself. For these zealots have assigned all manner of twisted meanings to words that you are most likely unaware of. The only way to stop their ongoing incursion by word theft is to wholeheartedly reject their entire lexicon and reclaim those words back to their original meanings.

Let us start with the word ‘gay’.

Now this re-branding of a Leftist version of homosexuality is a perfect example of the insidious nature of this mind-warping word-play. You see ‘gay’ used to describe an emotion – one that each and every one of us could feel freely at any time but has now been so thoroughly co-opted as to have lost all its original meaning. Wind back some decades and you shall find in the pages of Ian Fleming’s original James Bond novels that even Bond himself felt gay, and quite often too. A few dry Martini’s and a good run of rubbers at the bridge table were enough to heighten his mood to the point of gaiety.

We aren’t allowed to feel gay now, more’s the pity – it is a word synonymous with a politically Leftist stance with regards to the politics of homosexuality. It has been completely re-written, and no one was asked – we simply capitulated and handed an entire feeling over to those that would use it against us. You see, it’s a cover. It still has those age-old connotations but now only a certain type of homosexual man is allowed to feel that way – it no longer means what it meant. This was a linguistic power-grab designed to disarm the wider population of the fact that homosexual men – just like any other group in society – have the capacity to be complete bastards too. It’s like a trick to make them all appear as if they are magic and can do no wrong – indeed are incapable of being evil in any way shape or form… which is obviously a lie. A stolen halo for successful activism. One doesn’t necessarily need to be ‘gay’ to be homosexual and not all homosexual men hide behind the facade of ‘camp’, which is akin to some weird form of shared personality that comes with a vernacular, an accent and a body language of its own. It’s a distraction. A magic trick. Just like any other sector of society, homosexual men in this instance are as perfectly capable of being as devious and underhand as any other section of society. To deny that is frankly insane – and the sane one ones would totally agree (increasingly agree, as they repel the Neomarxist push to dominate homosexual activism).

The other word that is bandied about with gay abandon these days is ‘queer’, which as we all know used to mean something out of the ordinary – and maybe, perhaps, not so nice.

This term was ‘reclaimed’ by the postmodernist Left in the 1960’s in the aftermath of the Frankfurt School and their reinvention of Marxist theory to include everything – including the sexuality of children that are vulnerable and open to suggestion. Your children. Your grand-children. So-called ‘Queer Theory’ seeks to apply the Marxist doctrine of the dichotomy of oppressor/oppressed to sex and sexuality and speaks in terms of ‘sexual minorities’, which all seems innocent enough at first glance, but when one realises that one does not necessarily have to be ‘gay’ to be ‘queer’ or vice versa the whole thing disappears off down a particularly noxious rabbit hole.

There is a growing movement, and one backed up by an ever-increasingly creepy media (step forward elements of the BBC), that seeks to throw a societal guilt trip on us for ‘oppressing’ the ‘sexual minority’ of ‘pedosexuals’. You read that right. This is the re-branding of pederasts and paedophiles that has been gathering strength over the last few years and is now described by the zealots of the wider LGBT ‘community’ as an ‘orientation’.

This is not a joke.

The darker corners of the internet are awash with propaganda that seeks to make us more traditional folk feel sorry for this poor oppressed sexual minority that seeks to have intimate sexual contact with our children. Don’t be fooled by the glitter and the unicorns or the rainbow flags. BBC3 has been producing puff pieces about ‘virtuous paedophiles’ with YOUR licence fee money. Should we all feel extremely proud of them for being so progressive? This warped postmodernist lens gives rise to the Neomarxists’ Achilles Heel – that of being incapable of drawing a red line for itself. We had this back in the 70’s with the notorious Paedophile Information Exchange inveigling its way into leftist and Marxist groups (some attached to the Labour Party), but what we have now is far worse, buoyed by the Web and all manner of immediate communications.

The Neomarxists have also poisoned the well of the West with a noxious mix of propagandised pornography; ‘pornoganda’ – and are targeting ever younger children with this truly despicable brew. This is the worst of Queer Theory in action – and it doesn’t stop at pederasts. It’s a small hop skip and metaphorical jump to zoophilia – the ‘furry’ subculture are already exploring this particularly bestial avenue right this second. Even worse, it is a tacit political approval of even necrophilia – and there have been recent spottings of a nefarious ‘N’ being added to the ever lengthening queer acronym so beloved of the Neomarxist fascists of the rainbow flag-waving Left.

Now, isn’t THAT enough to make you swell with ‘Pride’?

How should decent folk react?

As a society we can always play linguistic tricks back on their inventors. Be gay! Feel queer! Reject the lexicon of the postmodern Left – else they shall have you tacitly agreeing to things that you aren’t even aware of.

Most people that use the term ‘queer’ as part of their political identity are blithely and blissfully unaware of just what it is they are promoting and approving. And the question is thus begged: do YOU think that people that hold such views should be working anywhere near children? Should they be allowed to be teachers or paediatricians? Some of these perverts actually truly believe that leading sexual contact between an adult and a child isn’t harmful – and even more worryingly, they now have great swathes of the confused or penetrated police offering support and sporting little rainbow icon badges to boot.

How do I know? I’ve met these people.

This is Marxism pure and simple – the same old dichotomy applied to sex, sexuality and gender with the implicit drive to demonise loving parents as evil sexual oppressors and destroy the family unit. The kids don’t know any better – they are kids – and most teenagers hate their parents. The insidious Hard Left have weaponized teenage angst and we cannot let them get away with it.