Friday, 3 July 2026

Woke: The Product of Psychopathic Women?

Okay,  I've had an insight into the reason that the country and the West in General is in the Fucking Mess it's in right now.

Psychopathic Women.

More generally, we have let Psychopathic Women into positions of authority and power. 

Let me explain. 

Psychopathic women are more likely to be career women and are more likely to compete with men directly in a men's world. They are driven, competitive, all the things required to succeed in a competitive, dog-eat-dog male dominated space.

Most women are nuturing, and don't really care for all the elbows-out edgy competition of the boardroom. You're not likely to see a nurturing type of woman in a boardroom. They're happy to be at home looking after kids. Or if they have to, take a small job, possibly as a care worker, or maybe a assistant at school. In my day they were dinner ladies.

But, oh boy, the other end of the spectrum is the Psychopathic Woman. She revels in the competition, she'll bury her competition, destroy them, usually through reputational damage. She is totally ruthless and you can rate her success on the number of bodies she leaves in her wake.

You find them on the board of large corporations, charities, local government, the post office and the civil service. See also female MPs. Generally they are useless at the job they are employed to do, because they priority is their reputation. They use other people to do their job for them. She uses underlings to bolster her status and gladly burns them out and casts them aside to maintain it.

I met one once, when I went for a job interview. All the terms of the job were agreed in interview, I was a good fit and was offered the job. A week later I was contacted by her and told I could have the job only if I accepted a 25% pay cut. 

I'm not a huge pussy, so I told her where to go. It was an absolute no from me and she was welcome to go and find someone elsewhere who could do the job for that money. 

And that's the sort of woman I'm talking about: deceptive, manipulative, ruthless, and without a shred of morality or decency. If you offered someone a job at a certain salary, and that was the salary offered before the interview, it was agreed and shaken on in the interview, who in their right mind would then phone up a week later and say "actually, I was thinking of paying you considerably less money than we agreed on".

That's not etiquette, that's not how you build loyalty. But the Psychopathic woman doesn't care, doesn't value those things. You're just another body in her wake to the top. She's crushed the souls of so many people to get to that point, you're another victim.

But where does woke come into this, I hear you ask?

Well, the Psychopathic woman uses virtue signaling to cover her lack of natural empathy. She will virtue signal HARD.

Her lack of true empathy means she will virtue signal a company into the ground (sound familiar?).

Her lack of empathy means she will virtue herself out of existence. And here comes woke. The Psychopathic woman will virtue signal men into women's spaces, will virtue signal rapists into those spaces and berate the woman who was raped for highlighting the problem, because it interferes with her virtue.

Another example being the Rape Gangs. How a woman can argue against the wrongness of the rape of another woman staggers me. But we have huge numbers of women excusing the rape of children, because the virtue afforded by the promotion of diversity trumps (in their mind and their social spaces) the virtue of saving kids from being gang raped. 

Another example is the woman who blocked the ICE convoy in America and was surrounded by ICE agents with guns. Any normal woman would have stopped and complied once the agents drew their guns. But not the Psychopathic woman. She will continue past the point that any sane person would. She got shot in the face for it. 

There are plenty of instances of clearly Psychopathic women being interviewed and you get the sense they would insist that black is white in order to secure some tenuous virtue or reputational point over their interviewer. The same applies if the Psychopathic woman is the interviewer: she will do her utmost to trap the person she is interviewing in some sort of gotcha moment, in order to raise her social status and virtue.

For instance calling someone a racist for enquiring about the reasons and mechanisms why a large proportion of Pakistani men are child rapists. There's that social status hierarchy at play again. Raped working class kids aren't half as valuable in the virtue stakes as promoting the importation of families from war torn countries. And even if you try to burst the Psychopathic bubble and show evidence they aren't families, they are 90% fighting age male coming into the country, they will refuse to believe it.

Psychopathic. Up to to the point of eradicating all that affords them the comfort of their cushy (usually middle-class) societal bubble. Even as the Muslim hoards are wrapping the Burka round her head and enforcing it by beatings, as the female rights her grandmothers and great-grandmothers won by protesting even to the point of death are eroded, the Psychopathic woman will be trumpeting the how eradicating all of those hard-won rights affords HER some higher status above her peers.

Psychopathic women, I feel are responsible for the rise of woke. They are also responsible for a lot of other new malaises that have started to corrupt society.

The thing to look out for is that claim of a raise of status above her peers. The latest efforts to "think of the Children" and censor the internet, ban kids off it, and now to ban VPNs because the kids can use them to get around the laws the adults created. 
All are the result of some form of fake virtue, some claim for faux status to raise her up compared to her peers.

Wednesday, 1 July 2026

New Land Tax: We've Been Here Before.

Thatcher came up with the poll tax. A tax based on the value of your property and payable, divided between the adults in the house.

When that happened, we had riots in the streets. The Poll tax riots of 1990

The Socialists revolted, because they had to pay part of the bill that their parents typically paid.

The government then relented and although notionally based on the value of your property (set in bands) council tax was per household. The bands created a reasonable variation between upper and lower bands. Because we're all paying for the same services, it's reasonable to expect to pay a similar amount, with those better off paying a slightly higher cost. With this new system, how can government justify demanding 300 quid from one household and 48 grand from another for the same service?

It wasn't a percentage of the value of the property up to an unlimited value, there was at least an upper limit, controlled by the tax bands.

Now we have the idea of a land tax, based on a percentage of the value of the property, with no upper limit.

If I had a house worth £1 million, my tax liability would be £48,000, more than any wage I've ever earned in my life. In fact I currently earn half that figure. So for me, owning a million pound house is completely out. Thanks Labour.

So how do Labour intend to limit the land tax based on the ability to pay? 

Or is this a way of freeing up expensive properties by seizing them from people that can't pay? New HMOs for the migrants?

Also, I can't say that the charity Omaze and similar charities are happy about this. They buy high value properties, and raffle them off for charity. 

Now currently, you could aspire to owning such a property, because the council tax on it wouldn't be higher than your annual earnings. It won't even be close to rental costs. So it makes sense to have a punt on the charity and hopefully live the high life in a million pound mansion.

A land tax kills that model instantly. Why would you want to be saddled with a tax liability that takes years of salary to earn? 

It kills aspiration. Which is a typical socialist scumbag move. Let's drag everyone down to our level of misery, because they're jealous of your wealth.

Tuesday, 30 June 2026

Sinister Moves Afoot Regarding Legislation Changes.

The recent announcement that the government had just repealed the Vagrancy act has got my Spider Senses tingling.

I've blogged before that despite protestations from the lefties, people who claim asylum have rights given to then by the UN charter on refugees. 

The government of the country they claim asylum in has a statutory duty to provide housing , etc. The things we're already seeing like hotels, HMOs, etc.

As I have blogged previously, there is no such statutory obligation when it comes to housing people that already live here. So who do you think gets the home and who gets made homeless? 

One of the big failings of government was the failure to introduce legislation to make the statutory legislation apply to all. I assume no-one thought that the amount of immigration would impact the availability of social housing and that there would be plenty of housing supply for all. How Naive.

Removing the vagrancy act removes the pressure on councils to house homeless people. Those homeless people being the people with no statutory rights granted to them regarding housing, i.e. you and me. 

Now, add to the mix the rumour that a government led by Andy Burnham is looking at a land tax, that is taxing you a percentage of the value of your house instead of council tax. While it may make it cheaper for some people, for others it makes it a damn sight more expensive. 

It kills charities like Omaze overnight, because winning a million pound mansion will instantly incur a tax liability higher than the average wage.

At the moment, if you don't pay council tax, you get the bailiffs knocking at the door to take goods. But your home is relatively safe. It would take years to rack up a debt large enough to require the sale of your dwelling to pay off.

What's the chances that any new legislation that introduces the land tax changes the way the government claim the money back for non-payment? What are the chances that the changes the rules to say if the new tax is on your property, rather than payment for services, the remedy for non-payment would be seizure of your property? 

You see where this is going? Yep, more people homeless and less pressure on councils to house them. They're getting ahead of the game.

And don't get me started on how the government can charge a tax on an asset you don't own. If you have a mortgage, the house is not yours until it's paid off. The bank or building society hold the deeds. So technically the owner is the bank. 

I bet if the bank got charged the property tax, you'd get it lumped on your lap with a nice administration fee stuck on top...

This is the WEF plan writ large. The government is now making a move to make land grab, a grab for property, YOUR property. 

Remember the outcome has always been, you will own nothing, forget the bit about you will be happy, they don't care.. Happiness has nothing to do with it. You will become a slave, a cash-cow. You will work for board and food and you will be grateful in the new socialist utopia. No foreign holiday, in fact no travel outside your 15-minute city. That would be a bourgeois idea.

The unproductive will be culled. The government are well on the way to introducing that assisted dying legislation. Once it's in place, it won't take much to make it mandatory for the unproductive in society. 

I've a feeling someone has already done the maths on what happens when A.I. takes 90% of the jobs and what you do with the masses of unemployed. 

And if you don't think that's the way the road is leading, you're worse than an idiot, you are a grade A moron.