Soya, Soy and Sof, the 3 neutral white Goys of the same class, tried to get out from the cafeteria early after the noon meal in order to have some time together for playing and whispering with each other, without the bullying interference from the other classmates. After 15 minutes, Sof saw suddenly their classmates getting out from the school building, all together at the same time. This one is a very long 1984ish rant; you do not need to feel imposed in reading it. When you feel ready, after a strong bitter coffee, fully awake, then enjoy my rant. Take it as my own perspective in seeing the global situation, for now. Maybe it will incite you in thinking differently, in searching for more information, in verifying facts, whatever, or maybe not. I am not looking for approval : adopt what is good for you and reject what it is not good. Enjoy my rant while there is still some limited freedom of expression, but that will not last long. We will all enter, soon, in a worse dystopian world than the one where Soy is thrown in. The Hate Behind the Anti-Hate Laws. Hate and Love are natural feelings and we have the right, the obligation, to express either on anything or anybody that has a direct impact on us. I hate some laws, I hate some ideologies, I hate lies, I hate those who attempt to hurt me or my family. Everybody has that right; it is a question of survival. There should be a valid reason for hate, however; even Jesus Christ hated the hypocrisy, for example. There should be a valid reason for love, also; loving pedophilia is unacceptable. Hate is everywhere, but some pretend that they have no hate; they are the hypocrites. They say they love, but indeed they hate, Orwellian style; for example, they say they love equality, but they hate democracy, they hate freedom. For some, the use of evidence-based logic is hate speech. What is hate? Has anybody found a clear and precise definition that can be codified into laws that everybody can understand and find it logic. Talking about anything negatively or criticizing it IS NOT HATE. An example : I can criticize my child for doing wrong things; does that mean that I hate him/her? NO! Indeed I love him/her, but not his/her bad actions; that way, I encourage good behavior and discourage the bad ones. If I am not doing that then I neglect my child and I am not a good parent. It seems to be that the action of criticizing or doubting a narrative or an idea is implied in anti hate laws now or in soon-to-be adopted laws. Such laws are a code name for censorship laws. They are conceived for protecting some people, groups and ideologies from being questioned; members of these entities become ABOVE THE LAW. As a consequence, these members become entitled to hate and to commit crimes with impunity, because of the anti-hate law, we cannot expose those members. This is what is happening in the United Kingdom with well knows child prostitution grooming gangs; the parents of the abused children who complained about that are facing justice, but not the criminals. A valid question : Why that specific religious group is protected above any other religious group? Why is it illegal to ask such a question? A quote from Voltaire : "To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize." The first amendment of the American Constitution contains every aspect of individual expression that could make it illegal, like libel, directly endangering people and enticing explicitly to commit any form of violence. Under the constitution, I can criticize or question anything and anybody; this is a FUNDAMENTAL principle for any democracy. I should be able to criticize a specific publication by a Jew, without being labeled as an anti-Semitic. That Jew could be my friend, and I will be ready to protect his life and reputation, but I should be able to disagree with some of his ideas. There are criminals among whites, blacks, Christians, Jews, Muslims. As Martin Luther King have said in his public speech in 1963 : "Judge a man not by the color of his skin, but by the content of his character." This great principle applies, not only about the man's color, but also about his religion, culture, ethnicity, wealth, intelligence, skills, etc. It should equally apply, and that was his intent, to men AND women. Nobody should be above the law; but ironically, it seems that we are accepting that all members of specific "protected groups" are indeed above the law. Even to be proud of ourselves will be viewed as hate speech; eventually, the only acceptable expression from a white would be self-hate. Why are we accepting the unacceptable? Why are we silent about that? Our children and grandchildren, our ancestors and grandparents will never forgive us for our passivity about such dangerous direction that our government is taking. But, many western countries are now, in the process of adopting, various anti-*****ism laws, anti blasphemy laws and many other purposely vaguely defined anti-hate laws that cover expression about specific religious or ideologist groups. Such law will gradually transform any democracy into the combined worst of nepotism, fascism, Islamism and communism, on a global scale. The same group who subverted Russia has already subverted America to the extent of social unrest, at the edge of communism-like revolution. While we still have some shred of freedom, we should voice our opposition to such freedom-killer laws; otherwise, be ready for the new Gulags. Anti-hate laws are indeed an incitation of violence on whites. Like Tommy Robinson, who has been totally silenced, we will be silenced very soon, and unpunished crimes will be committed upon us. If a member of such "protected group" has the right to accuse me of lying, why may I not have the same right on him. Otherwise, any of his accusation will be unchallenged, ever, and he will have ABSOLUTE power on me, including my life. This mischievous principle is already implemented, some member of "protected group" may hit a white, without any legal consequence; I have seen so many videos showing that. Think about it. Here 2 examples of what I like/love and hate : I hate communism ideology, but I feel sympathy for communists. So many of them are indeed victims of communism, or are indoctrinated. I hate narcissist-sociopath rulers who, by their authority, have caused millions of deaths, like Joseph Stalin and Pol Pot. I can hate an ideology, but I will like honest members of that ideology. I can admire a cause, but I will hate individuals who pretend to defend that cause while betraying it. To be suspicious is not hate, nor love either, but it is an absolute necessity. We cannot love nor hate blindly; we cannot accept any narrative blindly as true; we have to investigate and obtain reasons why we decide to like/love, to hate, to believe or not, or to stay indifferent and suspicious. No scientist will accept any statement, as true, without his own personal investigation of that statement, staying skeptic about it, until he has collected enough evidence for himself to decide on its reality status. If he is not doing that, he is no more a scientist; he has just a title that means nothing and he does not deserve respect any more. However, the hate laws are codified in such a way that even being a skeptic about a narrative promoted by "protected groups" will be considered to be a hate crime. Even, telling the truth will be labeled as hate speech. We are forced to believe things blindly, even against overwhelming evidence to the contrary, or we can face prison terms. By definition, this is a form of Fascism. The U.S.A., the land of freedom and opportunities for all, there will be a federal vote, very soon, about such type of hate laws. If such a law is passed as it has been proposed, the American Constitution would, no more, be the guide for the American legal system; it would become "obsolete" and it would be betrayed by the American legislators. Soon after, a chain of events would push America to its downfall. The whites, who have been the staunchest promoters of individual freedom for the whole humanity, will disappear under some form of genocide. There will be no more freedom on Earth : there will be a few ultra-rich sociopath globalists and all the others would become their slaves, with has much freedom as cows on a farm. This is our last chance, before the coming of the new Dark Ages that will last thousands of years. My Orwellian-style statement of this week : "My truth is as valid as your truth." It implies that there is no such thing as THE truth. How can we achieve any scientific conclusion, or even a legal conclusion, with such absolutely stupid belief? It is like saying that there is no reality, that everybody is living in his/her own imagination. Are we ready to be ruled by nihilists? Are you sure? Thank you for reading my whole long rant of this week; I hope that will give you ideas and motivations to take legal actions for protecting, not only our freedom, but also our dignity. Freedom of expression is a non-negotiable value; promote it, defend it, live it, share it! It is the core value for creative minds, like us : the artists! Be prepared, be ready!