Colonisation Apologetics

Why "fighting for your country" is in fact fighting for your government against your country

I get accused a lot of supposedly “making excuses for colonisation” when I simply point out examples in history where the colonisers weren’t as bad as the local government that took over after the colonisers left.

I’m not making excuses for colonisation or any type of tyranny. It’s a straw man to suggest this.

Why then point out such observations? Because by the end of this short article, the insight you’ll gain will be priceless.

I grew up in a former British colony that was much better off under British rule than under the “independent” rule that followed. Many natives today have the decency to at least acknowledge this — others don’t.

I understand: The lazy, predictable, and straw-man accusation after this statement is that I somehow make excuses for tyranny, for colonisation, for oppression of native populations, etc.

Not at all.

My point here is several levels beyond that.

First, I wish to point out that tyranny has no ethnicity, and that your own people — those with ethnic proximity to you — can be just as oppressive toward you, if not even more. History shows time and time again that foreign occupation can sometimes be more lenient than local occupation (national government). There are countless examples of locals greeting invaders as liberators, sometimes out of fear, but other times out of genuine affiliation.

The valuable insight from this acknowledgement is this: Whenever you are called to “defend your country” from invading forces, you are tempted to ask what you are really defending. You’re not defending your country — your country could be safer and more prosperous under a foreign tyrant with potentially less barbarism than your local leaders.

When you’re supposedly “defending your country”, you’re actually defending your government. You are literally the slave who goes out to fight other slaves just because you prefer your sitting slave master to one who speaks a different language. You assume that common ethnicity is somehow a guarantee that they will be a lesser evil. But it’s not a guarantee.

Who says that the foreign government willing to take over your plantation isn’t going to be a better one, or a less evil one? Isn’t the lesser evil the whole point of the scam of democracy?

In the case of the current war between Russia and Ukraine, Ukrainians would’ve been much better off if they had totally submitted to the Russian neo-imperialist paradigm, rather than the EU neo-imperialist paradigm. From a governance perspective, the Russian state can’t be as corrupt as the Ukrainian one — Ukraine’s corruption is on another level. A simple change in administration would have made zero difference to normal Ukrainian citizens.

Refusing to go to war and simply allowing one dictator to displace another would have spared their population from the war and countless young deaths. Nonsense nationalist propaganda of “defending your country” ends up being the thing that actually kills your country. If not the young of your ethnic group, “your country” is nothing else. Your country is definitely not your government, which isn’t even made up of your compatriots (Zelensky isn’t even Ukrainian). Oh, useful fools, you died for less than nothing.

So, when you are called to “defend your country“, you’re actually defending your government at the expense of your youth who will be slaughtered in drone-trench warfare just to protect the cozy positions of corrupt state bureaucrats.

---

Sure, you might point out that an invading government that endeavours to take over your existing government could arguably be worse and more oppressive.

First, this is subjective and up for debate in the cloud of war propaganda. And how oppressive an invader might be depends on how much of a fight the slaves put up against the invading slave master. If you don’t put up a fight against a simple switching of the slave master, then the new slave master will likely be kinder to you, or at least less oppressive. If you fight back and you are defeated, you are in for a very bad time, simply because you defended your local tyrant, of all things to defend. And your family will pay for your agitation, not just you.

If you fight back and repel the invader, you’re still stuck with the losses of the war, plus your own tyrannical government, which will inevitably become even more oppressive toward you as a consequence of war-necessitated austerity.

Even if the invading government would be more oppressive, regardless of whether you put up a fight or not, that’s a weak motivation for me to just abandon my family alone and defenseless back home, so that I can travel far away to make myself a target in trenches, follow orders by some retard with Napoleon syndrome who sees me as canon fodder, and the get blown up in hole by a nerd with a drone. And all this to expose my defenceless family to be raped and brutalised by either the invading advancing forces or the local military police, and the privileged compatriots who were spared the front line. In war, your own people will loot your property and brutalise your family, as history shows time and time again.

In any of these cases, it is not a wise thing to wear the submissive uniform of the slave and blindly follow orders from your government to defend your government. At best, you’d be defending a slightly less oppressive slave master. And risking brutal death and the rape of your family is too high a price for perhaps securing a lesser tyrant. This is why war propaganda always portrays the enemy as Satan incarnate. James Corbett of The Corbett Report has put together an insightful documentary on enemy-demonising war propaganda: ‘The WWI Conspiracy’.

---

And given that, in any armed conflict, losses from friendly fire are just as numerous as losses from enemy fire, then truly your own people are just as hazardous to you as an invading enemy — but only if you obey, enlist, and go fight like a mindless, useful pawn.

So, you’re better off deserting. Fighting, killing, and dying as murderous roadkill for your government isn’t worth it.

If they could speak now, all those who’ve died for their government would know now that it wasn’t worth it — they fought, killed, and died for nothing. All the ideals, all the promises, all the things they were told they were fighting for… it was all for nothing, as time proves. Less than nothing, actually, because their obedience enabled war and empowered psychopaths in positions of power. They were complicit in atrocity, and they died without a soul.

Conclusion?

It is never a wise decision to submit to your government’s standing army to go kill other slaves just like you, for the well-being of your oppressors, no less.

It is not worth fighting, killing, and dying for any alleged “justification” or appeals to duty and honour, and all the bullshit propaganda that only works on insecure males who desperately need to prove themselves in masculinity — something that evades them.

If you truly need to defend your community and family, this is why we have voluntary militias, which engage in unorthodox guerrilla warfare that no standing army can stand against (pun intended).

It’s just too much of a risk for you to go die as a murderer only for your government's mismanagement and failure at diplomacy, thus leaving your family unprotected, and your country exposed to aggressive immigration, just like in Ukraine right now. Young Ukrainians went and killed themselves for nothing, leaving their women behind to be colonised by replacement populations elbowing their way into the country unchallenged — people who never fought for nor cared about the country. The young men of Ukraine naively heeded their foreign government’s call to arms and ended up dead, leaving their women and children defenceless back home.

Ukraine is already ruled by foreigners from Israel — I don’t understand why a switch of foreign dictators would make any difference to the average Ukrainian.

This is why you should never fight for your government: Because fighting for your government is fighting against your country. Exposing your country’s youth to the decimation of war is what ends up killing your country.

And if Ukrainians had taken up arms against their own government instead of against their Russian brothers, no less, this needless war would’ve been avoided. All wars are needless, by the way. Even if they had to live under Russian colonisers, they would have been better off than any realistic outcome the war can bring from now onwards.

This is why I seem to be “making excuses” for colonisation. I’m not. I simply point out the folly of the ridiculous notion of “fighting for your country”, which, under all the nationalist propaganda, is actually fighting for your government. Because killing and dying for your slave masters who keep throwing you under the bus is never worth it.

Your government is a greater enemy to you than any invader. We know this because of how easily your government is willing to send you off to brutally die like nothing.

Oh, and for the state propagandists and their women’s shaming tactics, call me “coward” all you want. While you’re sitting behind a computer spewing minimum-wage propaganda for a living, and comforted by the fact that you’ll never see a front line, know this: With “bold macho men” like you willing to “fight”, there is no need for useless cowards like me to join. I’ll just be in your way. So, go fight, macho men! I’ll be cheering for you! Useful maggots.