Trans Indoctrination - A Mortal Threat to Children

More On Resistance to Evil by Force

Parents at a Mnchester school do the right thing and protest against LGBTQ grooming lessons. In Birminghams, Muslim and Christian parents stood should-to-shoulder in such a protest but - surprise, surprise - all images from their action have vanished down the liberal Memory Hole!

My headline of my essay on the proper and improper use of force focussed on the subject of resisting the ‘Great Replacement’. But lest anyone conclude that this is the only threat serious enough to qualify for a forceful response, let us consider another: The child-molesting agenda of trans indoctrination in schools.

Even if the Muslim grooming gangs had been stopped in their tracks by resolute action when they first started operating some six decades ago. Even if a magic wand could be waved to ‘deport millions’, the grooming of children for chemical and surgical mutilation would continue unabated.

In fact, the removal of the traditionalist tendencies of several of the largest immigrant communities would probably make the trans militants and their liberal-left allies even more aggressive in the promotion of their twisted agenda.

The promotion of this atheistic, transhumanist assault on the minds, bodies and souls of young children poses a mortal and spiritual danger to the new generation. Faced with such a grave and widespread threat, resistance is obligatory. Not merely complaining; not planning to vote for someone who promises to stop it, but active and militant resistance.

What form should it take? The answer to this vital question provides a good example of the application of the principles set out in On Resistance to Replacement by Force. Any normal father, learning that a teacher is grooming his pre-pubescent child for a probably shortened, most likely miserable, and certainly sterile, life, could be forgiven if his first reaction is to grab a pickaxe handle and rearrange both of the nonce’s kneecaps.

But, as we have seen, the use – or advocacy - of such violence comes with serious moral as well as legal shortcomings. Fortunately, however, there are many things which can be done which are safer and potentially sufficiently effective. What they do have in common, however, is a need for a bit of actual effort to identify and work with like-minded people.

As is so often the case, the answer to a serious problem has to involve serious work. Under certain rare circumstances, when all other avenues have been attempted and blocked by tyranny, bullets may be the answer, but, in real life, silver ones do not exist.

Even without the hard work of organising a collective response, parents have options by which to protect their children from such pernicious indoctrination. If it is to take place in specific, pre-announced lessons or days, then they can withdraw them from those lessons or keep them at home for the day.

If penalties are imposed for such absences, then they have the option of declaring the child sick, or simply paying the fine. How much is your child’s future worth? Many parents pay fines for taking children on a week’s holiday during term-time when flights and hotels are cheaper. If it’s worth paying a fine for a better holiday, it’s surely worth paying – if needs be - to protect your child from being groomed for trans mutilation. Even a heavy fine would be far less disruptive to a family than the prison sentence likely to arise from reaching for the pickaxe handle.

Action to protest against or boycott child abuse lessons would, of course, be far more effective if it involved multiple families co-ordinating a mass walk-out. If the lesson worrying you involved a trip to a mosque, then Muslim parents at the school would likely be part of the problem. But when it’s trans brainwashing, they are likely to be your staunchest allies.

Similarly, Christian Africans. Of course they shouldn’t be here. But since Blair, Johnson and Starmer between them let in hundreds of thousands of them, their traditionalist attitudes and strong family values could well help indigenous British parents protect their children from the teachers’ union grooming gang.

If school gate demonstrations and boycotts don’t do the job, then it could become necessary to move to a lawfare response. This involves an even higher degree of organisation and financial commitment, but any of the well-funded populist parties should be pleased to play a prominent role in helping ordinary parents take on an Education Authority or the Labour-run Ministry of Education. It is, after all, a genuinely popular cause as well as a good one.

The most productive legal route is probably to cite the protected characteristics of Christians or nationalists (the Redfern v Serco case from BNP times established the fact that British nationalism is a legitimate belief system. This is a victory which is still there to be used).

Failing all this, then the next line of defence is homeschooling. This is completely legal still in Britain, and it is growing rapidly in popularity. This happy fact obviates the only serious concern about homeschooling, which is that home-schooled children may miss out on sports and socialising with others of the same age. Team up with other homeschooling families, and that worry vanishes.

But what if it were to be banned – as it is in a number of liberal totalitarian states, including Germany, Sweden and Holland? Well, first of all it isn’t yet, and such a move is not likely, so the question is unnecessary at present.

Much further down the line, that might change. Such an extreme move, in response to the widespread use of homeschooling by traditionalist parents to protect their children and family lines from trans grooming, multicult propaganda and anti-white racist violence, would come very close to being the red line beyond which physical resistance could become legitimate.

Even at that stage, however, there would be the option to develop 21st-century equivalents of the ‘hedge schools’ used by Catholic and Presbyterian dissenters to resist Anglican persecution in Ireland and Scotland.

Only if that was in turn made impossible, for example by imposing state confiscation of children as the penalty for such moral resistance, would the case for physical force really come into play. A serious plan to snatch children from loving and responsible parents and force them into a ‘care’ system riddled with paedophiles would self-evidently demand a very militant response.

Even then, it would be restricted by the need to use the minimum force necessary to achieve the objective of dealing with the threat. In the case of stopping the grooming indoctrination, there would be a ladder of escalation, with the lower rungs involving intimidation and well-deserve humiliation, rather than permanent damage.

The tarring and feathering of the naked backsides of just half-a-dozen of the teachers giving such lessons, coupled with the viral distribution of images of their discomfort while cable-tied to lamp posts, for example, could easily bring the whole programme to a halt. Only if that failed to end the threat to the nation’s children should stronger deterrents be considered.

The fact that this even needs to be written, however, is a warning of the danger which continues to build in the absence of a firm response to what is already going on. It should not be necessary even to discuss the possibility of one day having to use physical force to persuade teachers not to carry out widespread and open child abuse. The fact that it is shows the extent of the decadence and madness which has already gripped our land.

This is already very clearly creating a reaction in favour of normality and decency, so it should never be necessary to move from theory to action. It certainly is not at present. But should it become necessary, such physical force resistance would be not merely legitimate, but obligatory.

How could it be otherwise? We are talking at truly wicked people, filling the heads of innocent children with cultural Marxist poison about sex being mutable, about the existence of dozens of ‘genders’, that they should poison themselves to stop the normal development of their bodies, that they should allow the medical-industrial complex to profit from chemical and surgical mutilation, and that their resulting infertility is a thing of no consequence.

This is an all-out attack on the past, present and future of the nation. It is a betrayal of our ancestors. It is the worst possible child abuse short of murder. And it will reduce the number of our kind in generations yet to come. It is war against Nature and rebellion against God. If this horror doesn’t require resistance by force, then what does?

“But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.” Matthew 18:6