Select Page

Janusz Korwin-Mikke: Wanker of the Week

Janusz Korwin-Mikke: Wanker of the Week

Where to begin…?

Janusz Korwin-Mikke is little known here in the UK. He did, however, manage to gain notoriety this week when a video emerged of him expressing some ‘interesting’ views on women during a session in the European Parliament. Janusz thinks women are inferior, less intelligent and is probably of the mind that their sole purpose is to shut up and look pretty.

In a piece in The Guardian, Korwin-Mikke is described as the “eccentric” head of Poland’s Congress of the New Right. As you may be able to tell from the title of this post, “eccentric” is not the word I would use. Even “wanker” seems oddly kind. “Utter fucking plum” doesn’t even appear to describe this particular specimen adequately.

Despite looking like a cable-channel game show host, hearing his views is like one of those odd experiences where we’re introduced to a friend’s bow-tie wearing fascist grandad. Korwin-Mikke’s views are wide-ranging. If you thought his sexism was merely contained to believing he would win a game of backgammon against a woman, you would be wrong. Janusz is a rape apologist. He thinks women might say no, but they’re just playing hard to get so we can safely ignore them.

Magic Spunk!

He even goes on to suggest that semen has magical properties. In his bizarre mind, he argues that the attitudes of men are passed on to women in the jizz. Such a theory has all the scientific credibility of phrenology. Apparently, anti-contraception, he laments that this concept of female independence is because condoms are preventing men from passing on their wisdom in their goo. We’ll ignore the fact that a lot of women take the pill, shall we?

He’s not done yet, though. Korwin-Mikke isn’t a Holocaust denier, but he does deny that Hitler knew about the Holocaust. Janusz also believes that Mussolini was trying to help the Jews when he started stripping them of all their property and civil rights. Maybe he’s been reading the same playbook as Robert Mugabe?

Despite being democratically elected – somehow – Korwin-Mikke abhors democracy. The only form of rule that would please him is the return of the absolute monarchy. A slight worry, given that absolute monarchies tended to result in freaks like him becoming head of state. However, mass executions, murder, violence; that doesn’t bother him. Indeed, Janusz thinks that we’ve all turned into pansies. Peace in Europe is somehow unnatural and undesirable to him. We should all be given guns and swords because that has worked out so well for the past thousand years.

Too Hardcore for Le Pen

Perhaps the most damning indictment of Korwin-Mikke’s character is that Marine Le Pen considers him to be too extreme. However, our own Nigel Farage does not. Korwin-Mikke’s party of intellectually challenged troglodytes has allowed one of their MEPs to join Farage’s group within the European Parliament. Such an arrangement ensures that Farage and his buddies do not lose precious speaking time, and even more valuable cash.

Of course, UKIP’s parliamentary alliance, Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy (EFDD) have downplayed links with Korwin-Mikke himself. EFDD have stated that their newest member, Robert Iwaszkiewicz, joined as an individual and no deal was struck with the Congress of the New Right. That’s not what Korwin-Mikke and Robert Iwaszkiewicz have been saying, however. One could also argue that it is a lot like Colonel Sanders joining PETA, only for PETA to disavow any relationship with KFC.

There are a few ironies, however. Despite UKIP’s hardline views on border controls and immigration, Korwin-Mikke wants all borders opened. I assume this is so we can have a proper old European war of attrition to install that absolute monarchy he so desperately craves? He does want to destroy the European Union, so on that front, Farage and Janusz are united. Korwin-Mikke has even expressed desires to convert part of the EU’s headquarters into a giant brothel! A strange position for someone who thinks that most women are up for it. Why would he want to pay?

And for a final example of wankerism, Korwin-Mikke believes that if you give money to a homeless person, you should have your hands cut off. Isn’t it interesting that those most opposed to Islam are also those in favour of dispensing Saudi Arabian-style justice?

 

3 Comments

  1. Yasuf

    Bollocks. Somebody been gettin his facts from the sky 😉
    Rape – massive overinterpretation, he was talking about picking women up and how it resembles rape. ( f.e. I’ve heard “you know it’s never gonna happen” from my fiancee before we hooked up)
    Semen – he never claimed it was scientific or true, he just said it’s his idea as to what might be happening and pointed out thats how it works for one species of the fly. Again – never said it was true or scientific.
    Hitler – he said “there isholocaust that Hitler knew about holocaust” – which is 100% accurate, since Hitler was very careful not to leave a trace leaving to him, also spoke very vaguely about the subject in public. Korwin was riddiculing point of his oponent, who claimed his friend didn’t know about actions of his employees
    Monarchy – he didn’t say absolute, he just said “monarchy” – don’t know where you took the “absolute” bit from
    About you gloryfying democracy – I’d like to remind you that mr Hitler was elected democratically, yet yous still defend it. Mass executions, murder, violence – does that not bother you ?
    Cutting hands of was obviously an alegory – he believes social benefits are making people lazy and creating generations of families who take their income from the benefits.
    I’ve never heard about the mussolini bit so won’t comment on that

    Reply
    • yasuf

      “There is no proof that Hitler knew about holocaust”*

      Reply
    • C. John Archer

      No, I’ve been getting my information from various sources. He has claimed there is a thin line between consensual sex and rape. I assume you never forced yourself on your fiance? See… “No” means “no”. That an initial “No” might later become a “yes” is irrelevant here. The fact is that women do say “no” and some men presume they have a right anyway because they subscribe to caveman ideals like this arsehole.

      Semen – “Semen probably is not wasted, because nature usually makes use of the material it has, and there is a hypothesis that the attitudes of men are passed to women by way of the semen which penetrates the tissue,” – yes, he didn’t say it was definitely true, but that he said it in the first place more than implies his belief. He also went on to make his strange comments about women’s independence due to contraception (because they’re no longer receiving whatever he thinks they get from semen). And it’s not true, it’s bullshit, but he seems to believe it anyway.

      Hitler spoke about his desire to annihilate the Jews on multiple occasions. He told a crowd in 1939 “And we say that the war will not end as the Jews imagine it will, namely with the uprooting of the Aryans, but the result of this war will be the complete annihilation of the Jews.” In another speech, at the Reichstag he said “Today I want to be a prophet once more: if international Jewish financiers inside and outside Europe again succeed in plunging the nations into a world war, the result will not be the Bolshevization of the earth and with it the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!”

      Mein Kampf makes reference to his desired war on Jews. There are other texts, letters, and so forth, that reveal his desire to exterminate all Jewish people from Germany. You’re right that no document has been discovered authorising the Holocaust. However, the minutes of the 1942 Wannsee Conference are more than slightly indicative of Hitler’s overall consent to the “Final Solution to the Jewish Question”.

      The evidence certainly stacks up in favour of Hitler knowing damn well what was going on, unless we’re going to suggest that what happened is an extreme case of what happened to Thomas Beckett. Much like when Henry II yelled “Who will rid me of this turbulent priest?” and some soldiers decided to take matters into their own hands, are we going to assume that having heard Hitler spouting anti-Jewish venom since at least 1922, an entire wing of Nazis decided to take it upon themselves do him a favour without him realising? The Holocaust required massive resources in terms of financing and manpower. I know Hitler was no bureaucrat and relied extensively on his advisers throughout his tenure as Chancellor, but it’s a reach to suggest he wasn’t aware of what was happening throughout his annexed territories.

      The Independent and Guardian have both quoted him as wanting to see an absolute monarchy. His own website makes clear his support for absolute monarchies, as he laments in multiple posts the demise of absolute monarchies.

      “Glorifying” democracy? Not sure I did that. Merely pointed out that he abhors democracy and certainly prefers monarchies. Historically speaking, while you’re correct in pointing out that Hitler was democratically elected and that democratically elected leaders have managed to commit atrocities, most who have done so, including Adolf, have subverted the democratic processes of their own country. Others have done so through sham democracies, such as the situation in Zimbabwe. Far more atrocities have been committed by those who have absolute power, because, as the saying goes “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

      I’m actually quite supportive of beliefs echoed by Churchill in the House of Commons in 1947, from an unknown source that democracy is the worst system of government, except for all the other ones we’ve tried. There is no perfect system but a strong democracy, with checks and balances, significantly reduces the chances of massive human rights abuses carried out by a nation-state against its own people. Germany, when Hitler assumed power, did not have those checks and balances which allowed Hitler to take advantage of German law to appoint himself dictator. By contrast, as much as I dislike the UK’s current government, enough legislation exists that they cannot remain in power without standing for election at what is now set periods.

      It’s still not perfect here (our Prime Minister is not directly elected, for one) and I’m quite critical of the UK’s current democratic process – there are other posts on this site attesting to that.

      Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Before the Dawn’s Light

Hidden Horror

Subscribe

Recent Tweets

Copyrighted Image