Progs attack Trump for favoring nationalism over globalism. Supposedly, in our Age of Global Citizenship, the notion of National Interest is no longer tenable. Anyone is an 'American', and if anything, US politicians should care about Americans-yet-to-be(future immigrants) than Americans who already are. Progs say we do away with nation-vs-nation antagonism and see the whole world as one community and US should allow endless immigration because there should be no distinction between the US and other nations. American military and money should flood the world, and the world's populace should flood the US.
But then, these same Progs say Trump is traitor for wanting Peace-with-Russia(that supposedly messed with US elections). Against certain nations, especially Russia, the US should be in total national defensive mode because... Russia is once against the Evil Empire? Because Russia hacked and rigged the 2016 election?
If Progs are truly anti-nationalist & pro-globalist, what does it matter if a foreign power messed with US elections? After all, Progs want foreign masses as new voters. (Of course, Russia did nothing of the kind, but when legend becomes fact, print the legend.)
If indeed, the notion of ‘national’ is passe and atavistic, so-called national elections should now be global elections. Democrats are now allowing illegals and non-citizens to register to vote in the spirit of globalizing US elections. But these same idiots bitch and whine about Russian meddling.
Progs say ANYONE should just barge into the US illegally, ‘dream’ of staying, and vote for Democrats.
Okay, if that’s the Prog logic, what is wrong with any nation interfering with US elections? If national sovereignty is atavistic and outdated and if millions of illegals have a 'human right' to invade EU & US and if Jewish globalists like George Soros should be allowed to game the entire world, then what exactly would have been wrong if Russia did mess with US elections, especially given that the US totally messed with Russian elections and even invaded and destroyed entire nations?
---------------------
So much corruption and abuse unreported in the Jewish-globalist-owned MSM. Sadly, most people are either unaware or don’t care since they are hooked to Pop Culture and other nonsense.
Maybe the following proposal is what all societies need: An ongoing TV series about the most powerful peoples, institutions, and industries in America. The Power Play.
So, imagine a TV show called the FED that dramatizes what happens in the corridors of power. It has to be based on proved facts. Since it takes time to ascertain facts, these shows will have to feature events from at least a month ago. Time lag allows for verification.
And the show will be about what kind of decisions took place inside the FED.
And a TV show called SUPREME COURT. A dramatization of key things that happened in SC. Again, a month-lag on the dramatization of what really happened or were said on record.
And the same for The PRESIDENCY
And the CIA.
And the FBI.
And the NYT and other elite media.
And IVY LEAGUES. A show on the major decisions made by university presidents and deans.
And the Pentagon.
And Goldman Sachs.
And Amazon.
And Microsoft.
And Google.
And Apple.
This stuff can be made entertaining with good actors and expert pacing. Fictionalization won't be allowed as everything has to be in accordance with verified facts. Of course, the narrative will have to be ironed and streamlined of slack.
This will be a great public service as the public will have a glimpse, however incomplete, of the working of power in the most important and consequential institutions.
And maybe every city or local community can have a Play Production about City Hall. A never-ending series based on what happens among politicians, big time folks, and etc in the seats of power.
That way, entertainment won’t always be about escapism but about focusing on what is happening among the powerful. Instead of escapism, 'enterism'. Use art to enter to domains of power.
Now, there are shows like HOUSE OF CARDS that offer a vague inkling of what happens in DC. But with fictionalized characters and exaggerated situations, it’s more escapism than enterism.
We need Enterism in culture. We need to enter into the way of power.
Showing posts with label globalism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label globalism. Show all posts
Saturday, March 10, 2018
Thursday, February 15, 2018
How Increased Representation of Asians in Elite Institutions Might be Useful for White National Liberationists
Here is a 4D chess move idea.
It might be advantageous for the Alt Right and White National Liberators to push for ending anti-Asian ‘affirmative action’ policies in elite colleges. Greater Asian representation in upper echelons of privilege might aid the cause of White Racial Emancipation from Globalist Supremacism IF more Asians took over the commanding heights of power and privilege.
Why?
As John Derbyshire once explained, the Jewish takeover of elite institutions went almost unnoticed because Jews are a subgroup of the White Race. Though distinct in ethnicity and religion, most Jews are largely European and even their Semitic side is Caucasian. Steve Jobs, half-European-American and half Lebanese-Caucasian, hardly looked different from other whites. Jewish mixture of European blood and Semitic blood is similar to that of Steve Jobs. So, Jews could play it both ways. They could pose as white and non-white. Their white side mingled and assimilated with white gentiles, especially in elite institutions where their intellect was admired. Also elite social domains are more manner-centric, and as such, even whites who didn’t like Jews couldn’t just blurt out epithets and make a scene, like working class ‘Polacks’, ‘dagos’, or ‘schvartzes’ might belittle lowly Jews in the mean streets.
Also, Jewishness gained a cachet of holiness with the elevation of the Holocaust Narrative to a secular religion. So, not only could Jews pass as whites but their ascendancy could hardly be blocked once the Holocaust narrative became sacrosanct in American consciousness. Saying NO to Jews might be like attaching yellow stars on Jews in Nazi-occupied territories.
In contrast, Asians will always be seen as Asian even if they work hard, succeed, and rise to the top. Asians won't be able to pass as whites. When whites(and blacks and Mesos) see so many Asians on top, they will be less likely to submit to the Globalist Plan. Globalism led by Jews is almost untouchable because Jews, as a Holy People, are untouchable. Anything associated with Jews is protected by a Taboo Shield. However, with more Asians visible in elite circles of power, Globalism will not only seem more alien to most Americans but will be open to more criticism for being associated with Ming the Merciless and Fu Manchu. If the Jew Taboo forbids criticism or condemnation of Jewish power and agenda, no such Taboo protects Asians and whatever their favored agendas may be. Indeed, given the amount of resentment and contempt that Americans feel toward Asians, anything associated with Asians might automatically be discredited. Asian elites may reach out to other minorities, but blacks, Muslims, and Mexicans will resent the fact that ASIANS have gained far more power and privilege than them. Despite anti-white animus among non-whites, it’s usually the case that blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims would rather see whites than Asians on top. At the very least, they are used to the idea of white man as overlord. It is a source of resentment but also assurance of continuity and stability, like sun rising in the east and setting in the west. Also, whites-on-top is useful as a perennial excuse for their own failures. White Privilege! But if Asians rise to the top, it means blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims can no longer blame whites as the source of their problems. After all, if Asians can make it in America, why can't they? (Btw, Asians are universally resented by all Americans because they lack the Cool Factor but got the School Factor. Celebrity-obsessed-America can accept handsome whites, tough blacks, funny Jews, and stylish homos as worthy winners because of their ‘popular’ appeal, but they have a hard time wrapping their heads around the fact that uncool, boring, dull, droopy, and lame Asians rise so high in elite institutions. It goes against the Law of Charismatics in the American Mind. Asians, a people so devoid of fabulous winner-qualities, don't deserve to win in life. Asian success violates the rule of celebrity.)
Also, while Jews are protected by the Shoah Cult, there isn’t much to feel guilty about when it comes to Asians. Sure, Chinese-Americans can mention the opium trade, but that was British and Jewish doing than American(even though the Roosevelt clan did make some big money). Filipinos can bitch about the American-Philippines War, but Filipinos hardly know their own history. Most Filos are clowns or whores. Besides, Filipinos tend to lag behind other Asians in rising to elite positions. As for Japanese-Americans, they’ve interbred so much with other Americans that they hardly exist as an Asian-American community. And even though there was the ‘internment’ thing during WWII, it wasn’t exactly the Shoah, and besides, the reticent Japanese-Americans haven’t been very savvy or forceful in pushing their own tragic narrative. There was Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the Narrative says Japan attacked first, was allied with Nazi Germany, and did horrible things in China, so that evens it all out. Koreans in America may bring up the Korean War, but the consensus among dog-like Koreans is that the noble US bailed them out and saved them from communism(even though it had been US machinations that divided Korea and handed over half to Stalin). The Korean Left is now mostly into Diversity and Homomania.
Chinese-Americans may mention the hardship of railroad workers in the 19th century, but even after the KUNG FU series, Americans could hardly make themselves care about the boring and scrawny yellows. Asians just don’t inspire much guilt because yellow cake is even more boring than ‘white bread’. Americans like to feel guilty about special people. They like their guilt gilded.
So, White National Liberationists don’t have to worry much about Asians guilt-tripping them as pushy Jews and nasty blacks have done. Therefore, nationalist whites(and other non-Asians) will likely freely speak truth to Asian power. Notice how even Jewish-run media love to play Yellow Peril tropes. So, if Asians become prominent in elite circles, Americans can declare Open Season on elite power.
Also, Asians as new elites will be confused and bewildered because they are incapable of coming up with new paradigms. When Jews gained power over Wasps, they had the vision and daring to rewrite the narrative, change the rules of the game, replace the idols, and alter the themes. This Jewish remaking of American culture and ideas happened across the ideological spectrum, from the ‘right’(Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman) to the ‘left’(Noam Chomsky and Norman Mailer). And Jews produced prophetic figures like Bob Dylan.
In contrast, most of the new Asian elites will be dull yellow dogs of PC, able to follow up the ladder of success but overcome with paralysis upon reaching the top. After all, Asian drones never had an original or independent thought in their lives. They may be higher in IQ but are low in PQ or personality quotient.
As long as Asians follow the lead of Jews, homos, white cucks, and blacks, they have something to parrot and imitate in idea or style. But in the role of elites, they will be confused and lost without a will, vision, or agency of their own. It’s like Japanese investment in America in the 1980s turned into a total disaster as Japanese weren’t adept at operating outside their cultural milieu.
As for the Hindus, most Americans may find them amusing as Apu on THE SIMPSONS, but no one wants to live in Planet of the Apu. Pushy Jews are bad enough. The last thing Americans want is another pushy people insulting them and telling them what to do. So, if Hindus-as-elites push against whites, whites will be far more likely to push back hard. Also, as there is no Hindu Taboo and no Hindu counterpart of ADL, whites have an easier time with Apu than with the likes of Apatow.
With too many Yellows and Hindus in the upper echelons of power, it will be much easier for White National Liberationists to wage war on the Globalist Elite project.
It might be advantageous for the Alt Right and White National Liberators to push for ending anti-Asian ‘affirmative action’ policies in elite colleges. Greater Asian representation in upper echelons of privilege might aid the cause of White Racial Emancipation from Globalist Supremacism IF more Asians took over the commanding heights of power and privilege.
Why?
As John Derbyshire once explained, the Jewish takeover of elite institutions went almost unnoticed because Jews are a subgroup of the White Race. Though distinct in ethnicity and religion, most Jews are largely European and even their Semitic side is Caucasian. Steve Jobs, half-European-American and half Lebanese-Caucasian, hardly looked different from other whites. Jewish mixture of European blood and Semitic blood is similar to that of Steve Jobs. So, Jews could play it both ways. They could pose as white and non-white. Their white side mingled and assimilated with white gentiles, especially in elite institutions where their intellect was admired. Also elite social domains are more manner-centric, and as such, even whites who didn’t like Jews couldn’t just blurt out epithets and make a scene, like working class ‘Polacks’, ‘dagos’, or ‘schvartzes’ might belittle lowly Jews in the mean streets.
Also, Jewishness gained a cachet of holiness with the elevation of the Holocaust Narrative to a secular religion. So, not only could Jews pass as whites but their ascendancy could hardly be blocked once the Holocaust narrative became sacrosanct in American consciousness. Saying NO to Jews might be like attaching yellow stars on Jews in Nazi-occupied territories.
In contrast, Asians will always be seen as Asian even if they work hard, succeed, and rise to the top. Asians won't be able to pass as whites. When whites(and blacks and Mesos) see so many Asians on top, they will be less likely to submit to the Globalist Plan. Globalism led by Jews is almost untouchable because Jews, as a Holy People, are untouchable. Anything associated with Jews is protected by a Taboo Shield. However, with more Asians visible in elite circles of power, Globalism will not only seem more alien to most Americans but will be open to more criticism for being associated with Ming the Merciless and Fu Manchu. If the Jew Taboo forbids criticism or condemnation of Jewish power and agenda, no such Taboo protects Asians and whatever their favored agendas may be. Indeed, given the amount of resentment and contempt that Americans feel toward Asians, anything associated with Asians might automatically be discredited. Asian elites may reach out to other minorities, but blacks, Muslims, and Mexicans will resent the fact that ASIANS have gained far more power and privilege than them. Despite anti-white animus among non-whites, it’s usually the case that blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims would rather see whites than Asians on top. At the very least, they are used to the idea of white man as overlord. It is a source of resentment but also assurance of continuity and stability, like sun rising in the east and setting in the west. Also, whites-on-top is useful as a perennial excuse for their own failures. White Privilege! But if Asians rise to the top, it means blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims can no longer blame whites as the source of their problems. After all, if Asians can make it in America, why can't they? (Btw, Asians are universally resented by all Americans because they lack the Cool Factor but got the School Factor. Celebrity-obsessed-America can accept handsome whites, tough blacks, funny Jews, and stylish homos as worthy winners because of their ‘popular’ appeal, but they have a hard time wrapping their heads around the fact that uncool, boring, dull, droopy, and lame Asians rise so high in elite institutions. It goes against the Law of Charismatics in the American Mind. Asians, a people so devoid of fabulous winner-qualities, don't deserve to win in life. Asian success violates the rule of celebrity.)
Also, while Jews are protected by the Shoah Cult, there isn’t much to feel guilty about when it comes to Asians. Sure, Chinese-Americans can mention the opium trade, but that was British and Jewish doing than American(even though the Roosevelt clan did make some big money). Filipinos can bitch about the American-Philippines War, but Filipinos hardly know their own history. Most Filos are clowns or whores. Besides, Filipinos tend to lag behind other Asians in rising to elite positions. As for Japanese-Americans, they’ve interbred so much with other Americans that they hardly exist as an Asian-American community. And even though there was the ‘internment’ thing during WWII, it wasn’t exactly the Shoah, and besides, the reticent Japanese-Americans haven’t been very savvy or forceful in pushing their own tragic narrative. There was Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the Narrative says Japan attacked first, was allied with Nazi Germany, and did horrible things in China, so that evens it all out. Koreans in America may bring up the Korean War, but the consensus among dog-like Koreans is that the noble US bailed them out and saved them from communism(even though it had been US machinations that divided Korea and handed over half to Stalin). The Korean Left is now mostly into Diversity and Homomania.
Chinese-Americans may mention the hardship of railroad workers in the 19th century, but even after the KUNG FU series, Americans could hardly make themselves care about the boring and scrawny yellows. Asians just don’t inspire much guilt because yellow cake is even more boring than ‘white bread’. Americans like to feel guilty about special people. They like their guilt gilded.
So, White National Liberationists don’t have to worry much about Asians guilt-tripping them as pushy Jews and nasty blacks have done. Therefore, nationalist whites(and other non-Asians) will likely freely speak truth to Asian power. Notice how even Jewish-run media love to play Yellow Peril tropes. So, if Asians become prominent in elite circles, Americans can declare Open Season on elite power.
Also, Asians as new elites will be confused and bewildered because they are incapable of coming up with new paradigms. When Jews gained power over Wasps, they had the vision and daring to rewrite the narrative, change the rules of the game, replace the idols, and alter the themes. This Jewish remaking of American culture and ideas happened across the ideological spectrum, from the ‘right’(Ayn Rand and Milton Friedman) to the ‘left’(Noam Chomsky and Norman Mailer). And Jews produced prophetic figures like Bob Dylan.
In contrast, most of the new Asian elites will be dull yellow dogs of PC, able to follow up the ladder of success but overcome with paralysis upon reaching the top. After all, Asian drones never had an original or independent thought in their lives. They may be higher in IQ but are low in PQ or personality quotient.
As long as Asians follow the lead of Jews, homos, white cucks, and blacks, they have something to parrot and imitate in idea or style. But in the role of elites, they will be confused and lost without a will, vision, or agency of their own. It’s like Japanese investment in America in the 1980s turned into a total disaster as Japanese weren’t adept at operating outside their cultural milieu.
As for the Hindus, most Americans may find them amusing as Apu on THE SIMPSONS, but no one wants to live in Planet of the Apu. Pushy Jews are bad enough. The last thing Americans want is another pushy people insulting them and telling them what to do. So, if Hindus-as-elites push against whites, whites will be far more likely to push back hard. Also, as there is no Hindu Taboo and no Hindu counterpart of ADL, whites have an easier time with Apu than with the likes of Apatow.
With too many Yellows and Hindus in the upper echelons of power, it will be much easier for White National Liberationists to wage war on the Globalist Elite project.
Thursday, July 6, 2017
Rule of Empire: Only the Master Race is allowed both Nationalism and Imperialism
If you want to know who controls the empire, look to the group that can play it both ways: nationalism and imperialism. All other groups must play only by the rules of imperialism.
In the British Empire, the Brits could be patriotic & nationalist(and guard British sovereignty) but also imperialist in transgressing against the national or tribal independence & sovereignty of other peoples. Since non-Brits couldn't insist on their own tribal or national independence/sovereignty, their only option was to submit to the imperialist agenda enforced by an external power.
So, even though there were many races and cultures in the British Empire, the Brits ruled whereas others were ruled. Brits guarded their power and independence in the empire whereas all other groups had to succumb to British power and obey.
And it was likewise in the Japanese Empire. Only the Japanese could be both nationalist and imperialist. Japanese territory, identity, and independence were inviolable.
In contrast, other Asian peoples within the empire had to play by rules of imperialism. They could not have national sovereignty or independence. So, Japan wasn't just part of the empire but its master. Empire was designed to glorify and increase Japanese pride and power at the expense of others who could only benefit as imperial subjects.
Today, globalism is the new imperialism that mainly emanates from the US. Now, which is the ONLY group that is allowed both nationalism and imperialism in the globalist game? Some might say Americans, but that's not true. After all, white Americans(and Europeans) are not allowed to have a racial, cultural, or national identity. Even Germans, French, Swedes, British, and Irish now must believe that there is no such thing as distinct or particular European Culture. 'Western Values' are now all about Diversity, Pop Culture, homomania, and opening white nations to endless tides of Third World thugs, savages, and grubsters.
Does this mean globalism is a kind of universal imperialism where ALL nations and peoples become equally invaded and overrun and transformed?
After all, the West easily invades and turns the Middle East upside down. And, the West is helpless to stem the invasive tide from Middle East and Africa. So, are all peoples equally helpless and victimized under globalist imperialism?
No. There is one people and a nation that are exempt from the imperialist rule. Look at AIPAC, Israel, and Holocaust-as-religion, and Jews are clearly exempt from the imperialist rule of having to surrender -one's identity, heritage, and nation-hood. If anything, there are more holocaust memorials going up all over Europe to spread the worship of Jews as a holy people. And if there is ONE ISSUE that both parties are agreed upon in the US, it is that we must all support Zionism and Israel, even turning a blind eye to 'apartheid' conditions in West Bank and war-torn ghetto conditions in Gaza.
So, globalism is not universal imperialism that equally tramples on the national sovereignty of every people. One people are passed-over, and if anything, all nations must sing hosannas to Israel. Even as globo-Jews insist that Germany, Sweden, Poland, Hungary, Austria, and Baltics states must fill up with Muslims and Africans(or else be denounced as 'far right' or 'nazi' by world media), all those gentile nations must pledge in unison the utmost importance of defending, preserving, and glorifying Israel as a Jewish State.
And even as whites must never ever fret about the loss of their identity and culture(and instead welcome non-whites as 'new Europeans' and 'new Americans' to replace them and spit on their graves), it's perfectly fine for Jews to worry about the loss of Jewish identity as the greatest tragedy imaginable.
So, if only the rulers of the empire can have both nationalism and imperialism, then it's reasonable to conclude that Jews are indeed the rulers of the globalist empire as they and only they are allowed to proudly keep and guard the distinctness of their identity, history, and territory.
In the British Empire, the Brits could be patriotic & nationalist(and guard British sovereignty) but also imperialist in transgressing against the national or tribal independence & sovereignty of other peoples. Since non-Brits couldn't insist on their own tribal or national independence/sovereignty, their only option was to submit to the imperialist agenda enforced by an external power.
So, even though there were many races and cultures in the British Empire, the Brits ruled whereas others were ruled. Brits guarded their power and independence in the empire whereas all other groups had to succumb to British power and obey.
And it was likewise in the Japanese Empire. Only the Japanese could be both nationalist and imperialist. Japanese territory, identity, and independence were inviolable.
In contrast, other Asian peoples within the empire had to play by rules of imperialism. They could not have national sovereignty or independence. So, Japan wasn't just part of the empire but its master. Empire was designed to glorify and increase Japanese pride and power at the expense of others who could only benefit as imperial subjects.
Today, globalism is the new imperialism that mainly emanates from the US. Now, which is the ONLY group that is allowed both nationalism and imperialism in the globalist game? Some might say Americans, but that's not true. After all, white Americans(and Europeans) are not allowed to have a racial, cultural, or national identity. Even Germans, French, Swedes, British, and Irish now must believe that there is no such thing as distinct or particular European Culture. 'Western Values' are now all about Diversity, Pop Culture, homomania, and opening white nations to endless tides of Third World thugs, savages, and grubsters.
Does this mean globalism is a kind of universal imperialism where ALL nations and peoples become equally invaded and overrun and transformed?
After all, the West easily invades and turns the Middle East upside down. And, the West is helpless to stem the invasive tide from Middle East and Africa. So, are all peoples equally helpless and victimized under globalist imperialism?
No. There is one people and a nation that are exempt from the imperialist rule. Look at AIPAC, Israel, and Holocaust-as-religion, and Jews are clearly exempt from the imperialist rule of having to surrender -one's identity, heritage, and nation-hood. If anything, there are more holocaust memorials going up all over Europe to spread the worship of Jews as a holy people. And if there is ONE ISSUE that both parties are agreed upon in the US, it is that we must all support Zionism and Israel, even turning a blind eye to 'apartheid' conditions in West Bank and war-torn ghetto conditions in Gaza.
So, globalism is not universal imperialism that equally tramples on the national sovereignty of every people. One people are passed-over, and if anything, all nations must sing hosannas to Israel. Even as globo-Jews insist that Germany, Sweden, Poland, Hungary, Austria, and Baltics states must fill up with Muslims and Africans(or else be denounced as 'far right' or 'nazi' by world media), all those gentile nations must pledge in unison the utmost importance of defending, preserving, and glorifying Israel as a Jewish State.
And even as whites must never ever fret about the loss of their identity and culture(and instead welcome non-whites as 'new Europeans' and 'new Americans' to replace them and spit on their graves), it's perfectly fine for Jews to worry about the loss of Jewish identity as the greatest tragedy imaginable.
So, if only the rulers of the empire can have both nationalism and imperialism, then it's reasonable to conclude that Jews are indeed the rulers of the globalist empire as they and only they are allowed to proudly keep and guard the distinctness of their identity, history, and territory.
Wednesday, July 5, 2017
American Identity went from National to Imperial. Identity has become like Currency. Jewish Globalists now act like British Imperialists.
American Identity went from National to Imperial.
It's like how Roman identity went from the property of real Romans to that of Non-Roman Others in the Empire.
Once identity becomes de-nationalized and then imperialized, the Core Population grows demoralized as what had once been special and unique to them becomes generic and diluted. And the new 'citizens' only care about the identity as a meal ticket.
Identity became like currency.
There was a time when currency was backed with precious metals, especially gold. But when gold standard was gone, any new amount could be printed at the whims of bankers or the state. Currency became easy to manipulate.
Likewise, Identity was based on blood. Once it was cut off from river of history and ethnicity, it was stamped with generic ink. So, anyone could easily become an American, and as Americanization is the globalist-imperium that sets the template for the world, every nation(except Israel with Passover exception) is 'Americanized', which means its identity must also go from National(unique and special) to Imperial(generic and mercenary).
So, there is no longer any difference between American, British, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Irish, Brazilian, and etc. 'Diversity' and Elite-Minority-Supremacism define their New National Identity, which is anything but truly national. They are interchangeably Global. France is turning into a nation of 'Americans' who speak French.
So, just as anyone can easily become American, a newly arrived African with no roots in France is just as French as a Frenchmen with racial & cultural roots going back many centuries, and a newly arrived Turk or Syrian with no roots in Germany is just as German as a German with racial & cultural roots in Germany since time immemorial.
Americanism is no longer just a national idea that applies only to America but the ONE AND ONLY IDEAL FOR ALL NATIONS(with the exception of Israel that must remain Jewish-majority and Jewish-ruled).
The reason why imperialists hate nationalism is two-fold.
Imperialists are filled with hubris, and their own nation is no longer big enough for their ambitions and pretensions. So, whereas Bismarck was content with German nationalism, Kaiser Wilhelm and later Hitler wanted world empires. And in striving for empire over nation, they brought ruination upon Germany.
In striving for empire, imperialists neglect the sober interests of their own nation and drive their nations to huge risks... like Japan did in WWII that led to defeat and destruction.
Today, we have Merkel and her Empire of Compassion that is based on Moral Hubris. That too is destroying Germany. And Sweden's pretensions as a 'Moral Super Power', a Empire of Political Correctness, is leading it to Swedish Suicide or Swecide.
Another reason why imperialists hate nationalism is it undermines the legitimacy and power of the empire. After all, imperialists have majority power only in their homeland. Outside the empire, they are alien minority elites over OTHER peoples. If nationalism were the norm worldwide, native masses will rise up and push out the elite minority imperial overlords. So, the ONLY way the imperialists can justify their power over Other Peoples is to make the latter feel as part of a Great Empire that transcends tribal or national interests.
This is what the British did. Consider how the Brits used to rule over India, Malaysia, Kenya, Uganda, Rhodesia, Palestine, etc. (And the Japanese sold their regional globalist-imperialism as a radiant project of the Great East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.)
By rules of nationalism, each of those peoples would have struggled for national independence & sovereignty, sought to drive out the British overlords, and have their own nation. Indians would have demanded India for Indians, Malaysians would have demanded Malaysia for Malaysians, Kenyans would have demanded Kenya for Kenyans, and etc. That would have meant end of empire.
So, the British Imperialists sought to convince their non-British subjects that it was glorious and gratifying to be part of this grand wondrous empire under the loving care of the gentle queen. Also, the British imperialist elites appealed to class/caste as a binding principle among various peoples in the empire, i.e. however different they may be in race or culture, the non-white (comprador) elites and British elites belonged to a shared community of superiority and privilege.
If nationalism emphasized the special bond between national elites and national masses, imperialism urged subject elites to collaborate with the ruling imperial elites while neglecting their own peoples. Under British Imperialism, the great contradiction lay in British elites' representation & defense of British masses while pressuring non-British elites to forgo their patriotic responsibilities to their own peoples. Only the British elites could be both nationalist and imperialist whereas subject elites in the empire had to operate only in the imperialist mode of obeying British mandates.
Today, as the Anglosphere World is the subject domain of Jewish globalists, the ONLY people who have the privilege of being both nationalist and imperialist are the Zionists. Only Jews can have both powerful nationalism in Israel while, at the same time, demanding that gentile elites cut their ties to gentile masses and serve Jewish Globalists elites instead. If you disobey, you become ostracized, isolated, and sanctioned by Russia under Putin and Hungary under Orban. (Jews saw right through the British BS, and early Zionists in Palestine had no desire to serve as comprador elites of the British Empire. In time, they used terror to drive out the British, and then used war to ethnically expel the Arabs to create a Jewish nation-state. Ironically, even though Israel was an imperial creation, it was the first non-Western nation to 'liberate' itself from European imperialism after WWII. Zionists, being imperialists themselves, understood the guile of Western Imperialism better than most.)
Today, Jews think and act not unlike the British Imperialists of old Jews are only a majority in Israel. While Jews want a Jewish state in Israel, their power and influence are precarious in all other nations. Why? Because there are few or no Jews in most gentile nations. Nationalism is a barrier to Jewish penetration and takeover. So, in order for Jews to take over the entire world(by using American neo-imperialism controlled by Jewish elites), Jews must convince the entire world to 'Americanize' as America goes from a white nation to a non-white one. So, America is to turn non-white, and Europe is to 'Americanize'. And then, all other gentile nations must dilute their national identities and formulate a new shared globo-imperial identity based on Americanism that says anyone can become anyone almost overnight based on 'rule of law' as devised by Jewish globalist lawyers. And the new shared neo-religion for all peoples must be worship of Homomania since Anno Sodomini.
It's like how Roman identity went from the property of real Romans to that of Non-Roman Others in the Empire.
Once identity becomes de-nationalized and then imperialized, the Core Population grows demoralized as what had once been special and unique to them becomes generic and diluted. And the new 'citizens' only care about the identity as a meal ticket.
Identity became like currency.
There was a time when currency was backed with precious metals, especially gold. But when gold standard was gone, any new amount could be printed at the whims of bankers or the state. Currency became easy to manipulate.
Likewise, Identity was based on blood. Once it was cut off from river of history and ethnicity, it was stamped with generic ink. So, anyone could easily become an American, and as Americanization is the globalist-imperium that sets the template for the world, every nation(except Israel with Passover exception) is 'Americanized', which means its identity must also go from National(unique and special) to Imperial(generic and mercenary).
So, there is no longer any difference between American, British, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Irish, Brazilian, and etc. 'Diversity' and Elite-Minority-Supremacism define their New National Identity, which is anything but truly national. They are interchangeably Global. France is turning into a nation of 'Americans' who speak French.
So, just as anyone can easily become American, a newly arrived African with no roots in France is just as French as a Frenchmen with racial & cultural roots going back many centuries, and a newly arrived Turk or Syrian with no roots in Germany is just as German as a German with racial & cultural roots in Germany since time immemorial.
Americanism is no longer just a national idea that applies only to America but the ONE AND ONLY IDEAL FOR ALL NATIONS(with the exception of Israel that must remain Jewish-majority and Jewish-ruled).
The reason why imperialists hate nationalism is two-fold.
Imperialists are filled with hubris, and their own nation is no longer big enough for their ambitions and pretensions. So, whereas Bismarck was content with German nationalism, Kaiser Wilhelm and later Hitler wanted world empires. And in striving for empire over nation, they brought ruination upon Germany.
In striving for empire, imperialists neglect the sober interests of their own nation and drive their nations to huge risks... like Japan did in WWII that led to defeat and destruction.
Today, we have Merkel and her Empire of Compassion that is based on Moral Hubris. That too is destroying Germany. And Sweden's pretensions as a 'Moral Super Power', a Empire of Political Correctness, is leading it to Swedish Suicide or Swecide.
Another reason why imperialists hate nationalism is it undermines the legitimacy and power of the empire. After all, imperialists have majority power only in their homeland. Outside the empire, they are alien minority elites over OTHER peoples. If nationalism were the norm worldwide, native masses will rise up and push out the elite minority imperial overlords. So, the ONLY way the imperialists can justify their power over Other Peoples is to make the latter feel as part of a Great Empire that transcends tribal or national interests.
This is what the British did. Consider how the Brits used to rule over India, Malaysia, Kenya, Uganda, Rhodesia, Palestine, etc. (And the Japanese sold their regional globalist-imperialism as a radiant project of the Great East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere.)
By rules of nationalism, each of those peoples would have struggled for national independence & sovereignty, sought to drive out the British overlords, and have their own nation. Indians would have demanded India for Indians, Malaysians would have demanded Malaysia for Malaysians, Kenyans would have demanded Kenya for Kenyans, and etc. That would have meant end of empire.
So, the British Imperialists sought to convince their non-British subjects that it was glorious and gratifying to be part of this grand wondrous empire under the loving care of the gentle queen. Also, the British imperialist elites appealed to class/caste as a binding principle among various peoples in the empire, i.e. however different they may be in race or culture, the non-white (comprador) elites and British elites belonged to a shared community of superiority and privilege.
If nationalism emphasized the special bond between national elites and national masses, imperialism urged subject elites to collaborate with the ruling imperial elites while neglecting their own peoples. Under British Imperialism, the great contradiction lay in British elites' representation & defense of British masses while pressuring non-British elites to forgo their patriotic responsibilities to their own peoples. Only the British elites could be both nationalist and imperialist whereas subject elites in the empire had to operate only in the imperialist mode of obeying British mandates.
Today, as the Anglosphere World is the subject domain of Jewish globalists, the ONLY people who have the privilege of being both nationalist and imperialist are the Zionists. Only Jews can have both powerful nationalism in Israel while, at the same time, demanding that gentile elites cut their ties to gentile masses and serve Jewish Globalists elites instead. If you disobey, you become ostracized, isolated, and sanctioned by Russia under Putin and Hungary under Orban. (Jews saw right through the British BS, and early Zionists in Palestine had no desire to serve as comprador elites of the British Empire. In time, they used terror to drive out the British, and then used war to ethnically expel the Arabs to create a Jewish nation-state. Ironically, even though Israel was an imperial creation, it was the first non-Western nation to 'liberate' itself from European imperialism after WWII. Zionists, being imperialists themselves, understood the guile of Western Imperialism better than most.)
Today, Jews think and act not unlike the British Imperialists of old Jews are only a majority in Israel. While Jews want a Jewish state in Israel, their power and influence are precarious in all other nations. Why? Because there are few or no Jews in most gentile nations. Nationalism is a barrier to Jewish penetration and takeover. So, in order for Jews to take over the entire world(by using American neo-imperialism controlled by Jewish elites), Jews must convince the entire world to 'Americanize' as America goes from a white nation to a non-white one. So, America is to turn non-white, and Europe is to 'Americanize'. And then, all other gentile nations must dilute their national identities and formulate a new shared globo-imperial identity based on Americanism that says anyone can become anyone almost overnight based on 'rule of law' as devised by Jewish globalist lawyers. And the new shared neo-religion for all peoples must be worship of Homomania since Anno Sodomini.
Friday, June 23, 2017
Globalism calls for Clash of Civilizations but also Mash of Populations. And the Problem of Excessivism and Homoholics.
Globalism calls for Clash of Civilizations but also Mash of Populations.
It's about forests at war with forests but trees being uprooted and moved all around.
So, we have these Wars for Israel that pits the West against Middle East and North Africa.
Western military invades and bombs those places. It's Western Forest attacking Muslim Forest in a strategy premised on Clash of Civilizations.
But then, Muslim trees are uprooted and replanted in Western soil. Thus, Muslim trees are planted alongside the Native trees(that have been severed from their roots, therefore no longer able to draw sustenance and meaning from heritage and history).
We are told that the forests must fight but the trees must get along together.
Another Clash of Civilization is the ridiculous 'new cold war' with Russia. We are supposed to support NATO of US and EU against Big Bad Wolf of Russia. At the same time, US and EU urge all Russians of talent and ability to move to the West and settle in Germany, UK, and US. Or Israel.
There is also growing Western intervention in black Africa for whatever reason: Terrorism, competition with China, neo-imperialist meddling. And we hear about how black Africa is 'less evolved' because it doesn't worship homos. So, that's another clash of civilization... but the EU actively promotes repopulating its nations with African 'migrant' invaders.
The West must intervene in Africa because African Values have made a mess of things, BUT Africans with African values are most welcome in the West, and white folks must 'welcome' them.
Another much-touted Clash of Civilization is between the 'liberal democratic' West and autocratic China ruled by Ming the Merciless. So, we are told that the US needs to surround China with massive naval presence. And maybe a war may be inevitable in the future.
At the same time, US-Australia-Canada welcome and allow tons of Chinese immigration. In some parts of Canada and Australia, Chinese are buying up entire areas. Get ready to fight the Chinese Forest but let in tons of Chinese trees.
What a schizo world. Clash of Civilizations running alongside Mash of Populations.
We are told the West must fight the Non-West due to clash in values and interests... but those non-whites are welcome in the West because the West is about 'inclusion', 'diversity', 'intersectionality'(of all groups with holy homos), and 'anti-white privilege'. Supposedly, all those newcomers will be Queeristened(homo-christening) in time, and all will work out. Like the queeristened Mosque in Canada.
"We will let Muslims Islamize the West, but we will Queeristen Islam."
The synthesis: Homoslam.
All of this could be avoided if the West didn't give into Excessivism. Lots of things are okay or even beneficial in moderation or proper doses. Diversity can be good if restricted or limited. But excessive diversity is a mess. Empires fall apart due to excessive diversity, so why make diversity the core character of a nation? The whole point of a nation is to have a homeland independent of empire. But if the homeland itself becomes excessively diversified, there is no peace and stability.
Homo culture is okay and even creative & productive if properly constrained. But let homos run wild with their narcissism and vanity, and we end up with Homomania as new religion.
It's like alcohol. In moderation, it's no problem and even has some health benefits. But excessive drinking and addiction leads to sickness, mental breakdown, and self-destruction.
Alcohol is okay but alcoholism is not okay.
Homos are okay, but homomania or homoholism is not okay. What we have now is Homoholics who are addicted to homomania as the central value and core conviction of their lives. Most homoholics are not even homo. They are straight but were raised from cradle with the 'sacralization' of the homo. So, just as Christians feel cleansed in association to Jesus, most millennials feel justified and redeemed in association with holy homos.
A certain cause or group is deemed more righteous if it has the blessing of homos. It's like 'God on our side' except as 'Holy Homos on our side.'
And they cannot get enough of this because they are addicts or homoholics. And there are also Afroholics who more-or-less worship the black race as Magic Negroes. Consider all those white fools who frothed at the mouth and fainted at Obama rallies or consider Chris Matthews with thrills up his legs.
And then you got Xenoholics who can't get enough Diversity since their self-righteous supremacist arrogance is predicated on hugging immigrants, minorities, and foreigners to showcase how 'tolerant' and 'inclusive' they are in contrast to all those 'racists'. It's their drug of moral supremacism to get high on themselves.
It's about forests at war with forests but trees being uprooted and moved all around.
So, we have these Wars for Israel that pits the West against Middle East and North Africa.
Western military invades and bombs those places. It's Western Forest attacking Muslim Forest in a strategy premised on Clash of Civilizations.
But then, Muslim trees are uprooted and replanted in Western soil. Thus, Muslim trees are planted alongside the Native trees(that have been severed from their roots, therefore no longer able to draw sustenance and meaning from heritage and history).
We are told that the forests must fight but the trees must get along together.
Another Clash of Civilization is the ridiculous 'new cold war' with Russia. We are supposed to support NATO of US and EU against Big Bad Wolf of Russia. At the same time, US and EU urge all Russians of talent and ability to move to the West and settle in Germany, UK, and US. Or Israel.
There is also growing Western intervention in black Africa for whatever reason: Terrorism, competition with China, neo-imperialist meddling. And we hear about how black Africa is 'less evolved' because it doesn't worship homos. So, that's another clash of civilization... but the EU actively promotes repopulating its nations with African 'migrant' invaders.
The West must intervene in Africa because African Values have made a mess of things, BUT Africans with African values are most welcome in the West, and white folks must 'welcome' them.
Another much-touted Clash of Civilization is between the 'liberal democratic' West and autocratic China ruled by Ming the Merciless. So, we are told that the US needs to surround China with massive naval presence. And maybe a war may be inevitable in the future.
At the same time, US-Australia-Canada welcome and allow tons of Chinese immigration. In some parts of Canada and Australia, Chinese are buying up entire areas. Get ready to fight the Chinese Forest but let in tons of Chinese trees.
What a schizo world. Clash of Civilizations running alongside Mash of Populations.
We are told the West must fight the Non-West due to clash in values and interests... but those non-whites are welcome in the West because the West is about 'inclusion', 'diversity', 'intersectionality'(of all groups with holy homos), and 'anti-white privilege'. Supposedly, all those newcomers will be Queeristened(homo-christening) in time, and all will work out. Like the queeristened Mosque in Canada.
"We will let Muslims Islamize the West, but we will Queeristen Islam."
The synthesis: Homoslam.
All of this could be avoided if the West didn't give into Excessivism. Lots of things are okay or even beneficial in moderation or proper doses. Diversity can be good if restricted or limited. But excessive diversity is a mess. Empires fall apart due to excessive diversity, so why make diversity the core character of a nation? The whole point of a nation is to have a homeland independent of empire. But if the homeland itself becomes excessively diversified, there is no peace and stability.
Homo culture is okay and even creative & productive if properly constrained. But let homos run wild with their narcissism and vanity, and we end up with Homomania as new religion.
It's like alcohol. In moderation, it's no problem and even has some health benefits. But excessive drinking and addiction leads to sickness, mental breakdown, and self-destruction.
Alcohol is okay but alcoholism is not okay.
Homos are okay, but homomania or homoholism is not okay. What we have now is Homoholics who are addicted to homomania as the central value and core conviction of their lives. Most homoholics are not even homo. They are straight but were raised from cradle with the 'sacralization' of the homo. So, just as Christians feel cleansed in association to Jesus, most millennials feel justified and redeemed in association with holy homos.
A certain cause or group is deemed more righteous if it has the blessing of homos. It's like 'God on our side' except as 'Holy Homos on our side.'
And they cannot get enough of this because they are addicts or homoholics. And there are also Afroholics who more-or-less worship the black race as Magic Negroes. Consider all those white fools who frothed at the mouth and fainted at Obama rallies or consider Chris Matthews with thrills up his legs.
And then you got Xenoholics who can't get enough Diversity since their self-righteous supremacist arrogance is predicated on hugging immigrants, minorities, and foreigners to showcase how 'tolerant' and 'inclusive' they are in contrast to all those 'racists'. It's their drug of moral supremacism to get high on themselves.
Thursday, June 22, 2017
Why is the Globalist 'left' far more Dangerous than the Classic Left? Its aim isn't to help the masses but to Replace them.
It's no longer about the Left vs the Right. Long ago, even leftists were patriots. New Deal was for Americans Only, and the French Communist Party was anti-immigration and for the French Working Class.
So, the victory of the Left was not an 'existential' threat to the nation. French Revolution didn't destroy France. Labour governments in the past didn't destroy Great Britain. And even though far-leftist communism was terrible, it still preserved the peoples and cultures of various nations such as Russia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, East Germany, Bulgaria, and etc.
The Left called for more power to the working class of the nation. It didn't call for the replacement of native folks with invasive foreign masses. So, regardless of political victory, left or right, the nation was preserved in terms of racial, cultural, and historical integrity.
Also, the Left used to be anti-imperialist and pro-nationalist. It championed the right of Third World peoples to cast off the yoke of Western Imperialism and amass their own power in their own nations, ancient or new.
That was then, this is now. Today, what is called the 'left' has nothing to do with the Classic Left. It is globalist, controlled by Jewish-Homo oligarchs, and seeks to destroy the ethnic/cultural/historical character of every nation. It is like Ugly Americanism on steroids. It is rude, intrusive, and arrogant. It goes to EVERY nation(except Israel) and demands that it 'welcome' endless immigration-invasion, even to the point of having the native folks(with deep roots in the soil) be REPLACED by others.
This new 'left' isn't about economic policy or workers' rights. Its Sorosian Agenda is to destroy the unique ethnic/cultural/territorial character of every nation.
When the Old Left won, it meant a change in economic policy. It didn't destruction of the nation's sense of history, identity, and territory.
But, if the globalist 'left' wins, it means your nation is lost forever. Worse, this globalist agenda of Replacism is pushed not only by these 'new leftists' but by neo-liberals and neo-conservatives who see no value in the preservation of History, Identity, Territory(or HIT), except in Israel of course.
The victory of this Sorosian 'left' means your nation is gone forever, and your people have been REPLACED by foreign masses who, btw, came to your nation not out of respect or admiration but parasitic self-interest.
History, Identity, and Territory. HIT, that is the essence of a nation. Be a HITTER against the REPLACISTS. The so-called 'new left' of REPLACISTS says your nation doesn't belong to your people. It says your nation belongs to the globalist oligarchs(like George Soros) and their Replacist hordes.
So, the victory of the Left was not an 'existential' threat to the nation. French Revolution didn't destroy France. Labour governments in the past didn't destroy Great Britain. And even though far-leftist communism was terrible, it still preserved the peoples and cultures of various nations such as Russia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, East Germany, Bulgaria, and etc.
The Left called for more power to the working class of the nation. It didn't call for the replacement of native folks with invasive foreign masses. So, regardless of political victory, left or right, the nation was preserved in terms of racial, cultural, and historical integrity.
Also, the Left used to be anti-imperialist and pro-nationalist. It championed the right of Third World peoples to cast off the yoke of Western Imperialism and amass their own power in their own nations, ancient or new.
That was then, this is now. Today, what is called the 'left' has nothing to do with the Classic Left. It is globalist, controlled by Jewish-Homo oligarchs, and seeks to destroy the ethnic/cultural/historical character of every nation. It is like Ugly Americanism on steroids. It is rude, intrusive, and arrogant. It goes to EVERY nation(except Israel) and demands that it 'welcome' endless immigration-invasion, even to the point of having the native folks(with deep roots in the soil) be REPLACED by others.
This new 'left' isn't about economic policy or workers' rights. Its Sorosian Agenda is to destroy the unique ethnic/cultural/territorial character of every nation.
When the Old Left won, it meant a change in economic policy. It didn't destruction of the nation's sense of history, identity, and territory.
But, if the globalist 'left' wins, it means your nation is lost forever. Worse, this globalist agenda of Replacism is pushed not only by these 'new leftists' but by neo-liberals and neo-conservatives who see no value in the preservation of History, Identity, Territory(or HIT), except in Israel of course.
The victory of this Sorosian 'left' means your nation is gone forever, and your people have been REPLACED by foreign masses who, btw, came to your nation not out of respect or admiration but parasitic self-interest.
History, Identity, and Territory. HIT, that is the essence of a nation. Be a HITTER against the REPLACISTS. The so-called 'new left' of REPLACISTS says your nation doesn't belong to your people. It says your nation belongs to the globalist oligarchs(like George Soros) and their Replacist hordes.
Wednesday, June 21, 2017
Paradox of Globalism. We are made into Animals and then Tamed into Obedience.
The Perverse Paradox of Globalism.
It says we should reject & abandon our old 'repressions' of civilization and be uninhibited(much like black-Africans). We should give into our wild animal nature in sex and aggression. It's no wonder that Rap, MMA, and pornification of mainstream culture are what the Current West is all about.
This return to 'natural' freedoms also means erasure of national borders and facilitation of free movements of peoples like wild animals and migratory birds. This is where globalism meets libertarianism. We should give into our natural urges and instincts and be like animals liberated from old inhibitions.
But 'nature' isn't only about fun & excitement but about tension, conflict, and crisis. Nature gains equilibrium through constant violence and counter-violence, through the endless friction between aggression and defense.
So naturally, when people are urged to feel, act, and express themselves like animals, there will be more tribal tensions among them. Nature seeks balance, pitting the aggressive drives and defensive reactions. This leads to social chaos, and this worries globalist elites who see rising problems all over the world. The elites tell us to act like animals but then admonish us for acting out-of-order or tribal-and-defensive.
Globalists want us to be like animals because people who give into their animal urges and impulses are more likely to be excessive consumers of goods and services. Also, humans-as-consumers are merely economic animals and have no sense of identity, culture, or heritage. They are easier to manipulate with the latest fads and fashions. They are useful minions who work and then blow all their earnings on 'fun and games' of the Moment.
The problem for globalists is that Being-Natural means being uninhibited not only as excessive consumers and hedonists but as tribal warriors and territorial defenders. A 'natural' person could be a mindless consumerist pig(favored by globalists), but he could also be someone who expresses his or her TRUE and HONEST feelings about Jews, homos, and blacks(the holy three according to PC cult). And Jews can't tolerate that kind of 'naturalness' since it challenges their supremacist claim to power. Jews want us to be like animals and children with big appetites for consumerism. They want us to be like pigs who will buy whatever pushed onto them. But they don't want us to be brazen and uninhibited with our true blue honest opinions about power(held by Jews), crime(dominated by blacks), and degeneracy(spread by homos).
For globalism to sustained(to the point of breaking the spine of European consciousness), we need to be turned into trashy animals who've lost their sense of identity, culture, and heritage. We need to be like animals who will go wild over the latest 'fun' fad or fashion. However, natural passions can also run wild and free against Jews, blacks, and homos. After all, the natural tribal passion among whites is to defend themselves against Jewish malfeasance, black brutality, homo pathology, and demographic imperialism by hostile peoples. But that is the natural side of white folks that globalists cannot tolerate. So, PC is used as Obedience School to TAME us to act proper when it comes to certain topics and issues.
We are no longer cultivated into thinking rational individuals with respect for heritage and culture. Traditionally, the Western Ideal was to elevate people from their base animal nature with a combination of critical reason, cultural reverence, and creative individuality. No more. Thanks to globalism, we are to be turned into wild impulsive animals(addicted to trashy junk pop culture and infantile pleasures) and then be tamed by PC to spare certain groups & interests (Jews, blacks, and homos) from our natural ire. If whites are allowed animal-like hatred, it is against other whites or whomever Jews hate at the moment(like Iranians or secular Syrians at war with Jihadis).
Globalism doesn't regard us as humans capable of rising about animality. It encourages us to be dumb animals enslaved to piggish appetites and restrained not by reason and civility but by sticks & carrots of PC with its simple-minded taboos and hysteria.
It says we should reject & abandon our old 'repressions' of civilization and be uninhibited(much like black-Africans). We should give into our wild animal nature in sex and aggression. It's no wonder that Rap, MMA, and pornification of mainstream culture are what the Current West is all about.
This return to 'natural' freedoms also means erasure of national borders and facilitation of free movements of peoples like wild animals and migratory birds. This is where globalism meets libertarianism. We should give into our natural urges and instincts and be like animals liberated from old inhibitions.
But 'nature' isn't only about fun & excitement but about tension, conflict, and crisis. Nature gains equilibrium through constant violence and counter-violence, through the endless friction between aggression and defense.
So naturally, when people are urged to feel, act, and express themselves like animals, there will be more tribal tensions among them. Nature seeks balance, pitting the aggressive drives and defensive reactions. This leads to social chaos, and this worries globalist elites who see rising problems all over the world. The elites tell us to act like animals but then admonish us for acting out-of-order or tribal-and-defensive.
Globalists want us to be like animals because people who give into their animal urges and impulses are more likely to be excessive consumers of goods and services. Also, humans-as-consumers are merely economic animals and have no sense of identity, culture, or heritage. They are easier to manipulate with the latest fads and fashions. They are useful minions who work and then blow all their earnings on 'fun and games' of the Moment.
The problem for globalists is that Being-Natural means being uninhibited not only as excessive consumers and hedonists but as tribal warriors and territorial defenders. A 'natural' person could be a mindless consumerist pig(favored by globalists), but he could also be someone who expresses his or her TRUE and HONEST feelings about Jews, homos, and blacks(the holy three according to PC cult). And Jews can't tolerate that kind of 'naturalness' since it challenges their supremacist claim to power. Jews want us to be like animals and children with big appetites for consumerism. They want us to be like pigs who will buy whatever pushed onto them. But they don't want us to be brazen and uninhibited with our true blue honest opinions about power(held by Jews), crime(dominated by blacks), and degeneracy(spread by homos).
For globalism to sustained(to the point of breaking the spine of European consciousness), we need to be turned into trashy animals who've lost their sense of identity, culture, and heritage. We need to be like animals who will go wild over the latest 'fun' fad or fashion. However, natural passions can also run wild and free against Jews, blacks, and homos. After all, the natural tribal passion among whites is to defend themselves against Jewish malfeasance, black brutality, homo pathology, and demographic imperialism by hostile peoples. But that is the natural side of white folks that globalists cannot tolerate. So, PC is used as Obedience School to TAME us to act proper when it comes to certain topics and issues.
We are no longer cultivated into thinking rational individuals with respect for heritage and culture. Traditionally, the Western Ideal was to elevate people from their base animal nature with a combination of critical reason, cultural reverence, and creative individuality. No more. Thanks to globalism, we are to be turned into wild impulsive animals(addicted to trashy junk pop culture and infantile pleasures) and then be tamed by PC to spare certain groups & interests (Jews, blacks, and homos) from our natural ire. If whites are allowed animal-like hatred, it is against other whites or whomever Jews hate at the moment(like Iranians or secular Syrians at war with Jihadis).
Globalism doesn't regard us as humans capable of rising about animality. It encourages us to be dumb animals enslaved to piggish appetites and restrained not by reason and civility but by sticks & carrots of PC with its simple-minded taboos and hysteria.
Saturday, June 17, 2017
A People without Patriotism is like Organisms without Defensive Mechanisms. Globalism is Secular Rapture.
All organisms have defensive mechanism.
Organisms can only survive by assessing threat and acting upon them. As humans are organisms, they are no different. In order for race-culture to survive on a territory, it must defend and preserve itself from outsiders and invaders. While it's true that every nation has history of invasions and incursions, they only became stable civilizations when there was sufficient political, military, and legal power to protect the nation from further invasions. Without such security and stability, national order isn't possible. This is why stuff like 'UK is a nation of immigrants' is retarded. UK was constantly invaded BEFORE it was a nation. The invaders came at will on warships and laid waste to native populations. (Also, the invaders of the past were fellow white Europeans, so they could eventually meld with the existing populations.) Once Britain gained security, order, and power, it defended itself from further foreign invasions. If foreigners did arrive(and settle), it was with the permission of the state in consideration of national interest.
A nation that cannot stop or control the inflow of outsiders is the victim of military imperialism, demographic imperialism, and/or financial-ideological imperialism(that colonizes native souls with the mental virus that 'diversity' is good when it spells doom for native identity and culture).
Look at nature. All animals must sense and assess degrees of threat level. When humans encroach on wolf territory, the wolves growl. Hippos don't like Negroes coming closer with spears. Bears fight other bears to maintain territory for food, mating, and security. Birds guard their nest and attack threatening species. Without such defensive mechanisms, no complex organism could survive. Bees don't just allow any bunch of organisms to come and eat the honey. Bees work like crazy to collect the honey to feed their own community. (Some say modern societies cannot produce enough life and that's why they need immigration to get new workers. But if modern societies have given up on life, it means they are soul-sick and culturally misguided, and THAT DISEASE should be diagnosed and treated. If someone won't eat, don't give his food to another person. Convince him to eat again.)
Globalism has infected Western minds with the notion that their natural defensive mechanism is 'evil', 'racist', and 'xenophobic'. It dilutes hormonal instincts and weakens carnivorous instincts, turning whites into human herbivores. Brits have been turned from lions(without a powerful pride of territory) to rabbits(who just wander around aimlessly in their own nation without claiming it).
Globalism is like quasi-spiritual cult of rapture. It’s the Promise of Deliverance, a hopeful ecstasy of departing from the ‘sinful’ nationalist flesh and becoming one with the transcendent globalist spirit. It's secular cult of being 'saved'.
Since all histories are associated with cultures/nations and since all cultures/nations are stained ‘sinful’ deeds, globalism offers deliverance from 'tribal' sins via collective union o all peoples in Glob Heaven. This rapture is experienced through PC kumbayah and Pop Culture orgiastics. Take leave of roots, senses, and obligations. Just scream, feel orgasmic, and let one’s soul lift from national earth to globo-heaven.
So, even though UK is being remade by massive invasion, Brits have no defensive mechanism left. If Brits still have any aggressive drives left, it is against their own will for self-preservation. (Jewish ideological control infected British minds with the sanctimonious notion that white Britons must serve the interests of the holy Jewish minority before their own. This elevation of minority-as-sacred-group led to white Britons placing every non-white minority above whites on the national pedestal. In time, white Britons even came to worship homos. That this is a globalist-imperialist phenomenon is made clear by what is happening in Ireland. Even though the Irish have defined their own narrative against Great Britain, its current national agenda is identical to that of the British because both nations are under globalist Sorosian control. Both nations worship non-white minorities and homos above native whites and real-sexuals who are to be attacked and denounced if they resist massive immigration-invasion and homomania. This is why Ireland has a Hindu-Homo prime minister and why London has a Pakistani-Muslim mayor. The two peoples who never agreed on much are now totally agreed on national self-destruction and white self-loathing as the highest virtue. Other than the ideological infection of Jewish-controlled globalism, there is the factor of Afromania and Jungle Fever that have whites all over the world worshiping Negroes as MLK-Mandela Magic Negro race and 'cool-badass' race whom whites must admire, praise, and emulate 24/7.)
It used to be Brits were most aggressive against would-be invaders, such as Spanish or Germans. Now, they are most aggressive against would-be-patriots-and-defenders. Brits get most passionate about attacking and destroying patriots and offering UK to the Sorosian god of globalism. UK is no longer seen as a nation among nations but a part of a globo-rapture-empire of Jew-worship, homomania, Afromania, and Diversity. UK must serve that higher god by surrendering national identity, borders, and sovereignty. UK is now to the world what Puerto Rico is to the US.
And the elites of UK, instead of standing up for national defense and preservation, lead the nation in surrendering to globalism and mammon. Also, elites have used the media and academia to infect the younger generation with the idea that UK has always been a 'nation of immigrants', a defenseless domain that welcomes invasions than fends them off.
What UK really needs is AUSTERITY AGAINST DIVERSITY, 'diversity' being just euphemism for invasion.
Now, some organisms are compatible. Even in the wild, lions coexist with gophers, turtles, vultures, and etc. The biggest threat to lions are other lions.
Likewise, people of any nation can co-exist with birds, squirrels, pond turtles, seagulls, chipmunks, rabbits, raccoon, opossums, and etc. People need to fear other peoples the most, just like lions need to fear other prides of lions the most. White Australians have nothing to fear from kangaroos, koala bears, or wombats. Not even from crocodiles as long as one doesn't get too near them and prod them with sticks. They have far more to fear from massive immigration of Asians, Arabs, and Africans.
Different groups of humans have competing identities, interests, narratives, and appetites.
Palestinians weren't done in by pigeons, fish, or jackals. They were done in by other humans: the British imperialists, Zionists, Soviets, and Americans.
Tibetans and Uighurs are not being done in by sheep, eagles, toads, or snakes. They are being done in by other humans, the Han Chinese. The biggest threat to any organism is, more often than not, others of its own kind. Because they have similar objectives, they compete and fight for the same thing. It's like a man who wants a certain woman need not compete with male pigs, wolves, moose, hippos, wombats, and etc for her. Those other species are not interested in the woman. He must compete with other men. A horse, bison, bear, hamster, python, or cougar will not take a white woman from a white man. It is the Negro who will.
Nation is the same way. To own it, a people must compete with other peoples. Lose the defensive mechanism(under whatever fancy pants 'progressive' idealism), and it's only a matter of time before you lose your nation, narrative, and culture.
Organisms can only survive by assessing threat and acting upon them. As humans are organisms, they are no different. In order for race-culture to survive on a territory, it must defend and preserve itself from outsiders and invaders. While it's true that every nation has history of invasions and incursions, they only became stable civilizations when there was sufficient political, military, and legal power to protect the nation from further invasions. Without such security and stability, national order isn't possible. This is why stuff like 'UK is a nation of immigrants' is retarded. UK was constantly invaded BEFORE it was a nation. The invaders came at will on warships and laid waste to native populations. (Also, the invaders of the past were fellow white Europeans, so they could eventually meld with the existing populations.) Once Britain gained security, order, and power, it defended itself from further foreign invasions. If foreigners did arrive(and settle), it was with the permission of the state in consideration of national interest.
A nation that cannot stop or control the inflow of outsiders is the victim of military imperialism, demographic imperialism, and/or financial-ideological imperialism(that colonizes native souls with the mental virus that 'diversity' is good when it spells doom for native identity and culture).
Look at nature. All animals must sense and assess degrees of threat level. When humans encroach on wolf territory, the wolves growl. Hippos don't like Negroes coming closer with spears. Bears fight other bears to maintain territory for food, mating, and security. Birds guard their nest and attack threatening species. Without such defensive mechanisms, no complex organism could survive. Bees don't just allow any bunch of organisms to come and eat the honey. Bees work like crazy to collect the honey to feed their own community. (Some say modern societies cannot produce enough life and that's why they need immigration to get new workers. But if modern societies have given up on life, it means they are soul-sick and culturally misguided, and THAT DISEASE should be diagnosed and treated. If someone won't eat, don't give his food to another person. Convince him to eat again.)
Globalism has infected Western minds with the notion that their natural defensive mechanism is 'evil', 'racist', and 'xenophobic'. It dilutes hormonal instincts and weakens carnivorous instincts, turning whites into human herbivores. Brits have been turned from lions(without a powerful pride of territory) to rabbits(who just wander around aimlessly in their own nation without claiming it).
Globalism is like quasi-spiritual cult of rapture. It’s the Promise of Deliverance, a hopeful ecstasy of departing from the ‘sinful’ nationalist flesh and becoming one with the transcendent globalist spirit. It's secular cult of being 'saved'.
Since all histories are associated with cultures/nations and since all cultures/nations are stained ‘sinful’ deeds, globalism offers deliverance from 'tribal' sins via collective union o all peoples in Glob Heaven. This rapture is experienced through PC kumbayah and Pop Culture orgiastics. Take leave of roots, senses, and obligations. Just scream, feel orgasmic, and let one’s soul lift from national earth to globo-heaven.
So, even though UK is being remade by massive invasion, Brits have no defensive mechanism left. If Brits still have any aggressive drives left, it is against their own will for self-preservation. (Jewish ideological control infected British minds with the sanctimonious notion that white Britons must serve the interests of the holy Jewish minority before their own. This elevation of minority-as-sacred-group led to white Britons placing every non-white minority above whites on the national pedestal. In time, white Britons even came to worship homos. That this is a globalist-imperialist phenomenon is made clear by what is happening in Ireland. Even though the Irish have defined their own narrative against Great Britain, its current national agenda is identical to that of the British because both nations are under globalist Sorosian control. Both nations worship non-white minorities and homos above native whites and real-sexuals who are to be attacked and denounced if they resist massive immigration-invasion and homomania. This is why Ireland has a Hindu-Homo prime minister and why London has a Pakistani-Muslim mayor. The two peoples who never agreed on much are now totally agreed on national self-destruction and white self-loathing as the highest virtue. Other than the ideological infection of Jewish-controlled globalism, there is the factor of Afromania and Jungle Fever that have whites all over the world worshiping Negroes as MLK-Mandela Magic Negro race and 'cool-badass' race whom whites must admire, praise, and emulate 24/7.)
It used to be Brits were most aggressive against would-be invaders, such as Spanish or Germans. Now, they are most aggressive against would-be-patriots-and-defenders. Brits get most passionate about attacking and destroying patriots and offering UK to the Sorosian god of globalism. UK is no longer seen as a nation among nations but a part of a globo-rapture-empire of Jew-worship, homomania, Afromania, and Diversity. UK must serve that higher god by surrendering national identity, borders, and sovereignty. UK is now to the world what Puerto Rico is to the US.
And the elites of UK, instead of standing up for national defense and preservation, lead the nation in surrendering to globalism and mammon. Also, elites have used the media and academia to infect the younger generation with the idea that UK has always been a 'nation of immigrants', a defenseless domain that welcomes invasions than fends them off.
What UK really needs is AUSTERITY AGAINST DIVERSITY, 'diversity' being just euphemism for invasion.
Now, some organisms are compatible. Even in the wild, lions coexist with gophers, turtles, vultures, and etc. The biggest threat to lions are other lions.
Likewise, people of any nation can co-exist with birds, squirrels, pond turtles, seagulls, chipmunks, rabbits, raccoon, opossums, and etc. People need to fear other peoples the most, just like lions need to fear other prides of lions the most. White Australians have nothing to fear from kangaroos, koala bears, or wombats. Not even from crocodiles as long as one doesn't get too near them and prod them with sticks. They have far more to fear from massive immigration of Asians, Arabs, and Africans.
Different groups of humans have competing identities, interests, narratives, and appetites.
Palestinians weren't done in by pigeons, fish, or jackals. They were done in by other humans: the British imperialists, Zionists, Soviets, and Americans.
Tibetans and Uighurs are not being done in by sheep, eagles, toads, or snakes. They are being done in by other humans, the Han Chinese. The biggest threat to any organism is, more often than not, others of its own kind. Because they have similar objectives, they compete and fight for the same thing. It's like a man who wants a certain woman need not compete with male pigs, wolves, moose, hippos, wombats, and etc for her. Those other species are not interested in the woman. He must compete with other men. A horse, bison, bear, hamster, python, or cougar will not take a white woman from a white man. It is the Negro who will.
Nation is the same way. To own it, a people must compete with other peoples. Lose the defensive mechanism(under whatever fancy pants 'progressive' idealism), and it's only a matter of time before you lose your nation, narrative, and culture.
Wednesday, June 14, 2017
Globalism is the Greatest Evil. Tyranny of Bad Ideas is Temporary. Tyranny of Demographic Transformation is Permanent.
Demographic Imperialism and Replacism are the most ruinous phenoms that can befall a nation, people, and culture.
Ideological disasters are nothing by contrast in the long run.
Ideas exist in the mind and may eventually pass away. Even an idea as disastrous as communism was no big deal in the wider scope of history.
While communism can wreak havoc on a nation’s economy, once it’s relegated to the dustbin of history, the nation and its people & culture remain intact and can thrive once more.
Communism oppressed Poles in Poland and Hungarians in Hungary, but Poland remained the nation of Poles and Hungary remained the nation of Hungarians. A nation under communism is tyrannized by a bad idea, not by a foreign people.
In the end, ideologies are come-and-go. Bad ideas lead to bad socio-economic results, but ideas do not alter or erase the essential character of a nation’s people and culture.
But demographic imperialism and replacism do just that. Once masses of foreigners take over a nation, they mean to stay and, absent a serious war and revolution, they will take over and grow in numbers until the native population has been eclipsed and replaced.
Communism’s ill effects on Eastern Europe were NOTHING compared to globalism’s fatal impact on France, UK, Germany, and Sweden.
Nations under communism could eventually be rid of the ideology, and once freed of the illusion, could carry on with the same people and culture.
But after globalism is finished with Western Europe, the result will be an entirely new world populated by Muslims and Africans.
It’s a daunting challenge to rid society of bad ideas and institutions, but it’s a gargantuan(and even impossible) task to be rid of demographic imperialists once they’ve taken over your own nation. Serbs will never take back Kosovo. Palestinians lost Palestine(now Israel) forever.
Communism was about proletariat overthrowing the bourgeoisie. As economically disastrous as it was, the nation still belonged to its people at the end of the day since the proles and bourgeoisie were of the same ethnicity and class. So, Romania run by dictatorship of the proletariat was still Romania dominated by Romanians.
If communism is about one class replacing another in power, globalism is about foreign ethnics replacing the native ethnic. This isn’t merely an ideological struggle but a biological and cultural one. Upon its victory, all nations(except for Israel, which is ‘passovered’ with special exemption) are transformed by globalism to the extent that native folks no longer even own and control what had been their homelands. Globalism is about making every people(except Jews in Israel) strangers in their own homeland. It turns a nation of kinfolk into a nation of strangers and foreign usurpers. The native folks are duped into welcoming this dire fate by having their minds infected with delirious mantras such as ‘Diversity is our Strength’ when only an idiot could believe such.
Globalism is appealing to the elites of advanced nations since it means more opportunities to make a buck. And it is appealing to masses in poor nations since it means an opportunity to demographically migrate to rich nations and leech off them.
It is also appealing to holier-than-thou me-huggers who see globalism as a utopian project of making the whole world sing in perfect harmony.
But for patriotic natives who care about preservation of ethnicity, culture, and history, it is an absolute tragedy.
In this sense, globalism is a far greater evil than communism. Communism forced bad ideas on a nation like Poland. It didn’t force Poland to be invaded and transformed by non-Europeans.
In contrast, globalism says Europe MUST welcome endless invasions by tons of foreigners, and its native populations must be REPLACED. And if Europeans say NO to Replacism, they are defamed as ‘Nazis’ by globalist forces controlled by Jews.
Anyway, the ill-effects of bad ideas can be reversed and repaired. But the impact of bad demographic policies is often irreversible. If you adopt a stupid idea, the stupidity is eradicated once you come to your senses. But if you swallow poison, its fatal consequences can’t be reversed even if your mind realizes you did something dumb. The poison will take over your body and will destroy you.
Communism was a bad idea that infected Europeans in the 20th century. Once European minds rejected the idea, it was gone for good.
In contrast, globalism force-feeds mega-doses of poison(in the form of massive foreign invasion) as ‘medicine’ to Europeans, and the poison spreads all over Europe.
Bad ideas, as illusions, are real only to the extent that certain people believe in them. Once the faith is gone, the ideas are also gone.
People are different. They are real, and once a foreign people take over your nation, they are there to stay regardless of what you think.
Imagine if your people adopt Islam as an idea. It may be a bad idea, but it’s just an idea. Therefore, there is the chance that your people may one day reject Islam and be rid of it.
Now, imagine if your people adopt Islam and accept 10 million Muslims. The dire reality is that those invaders are now part of your nation no matter what you think. Even if your people reject Islam, those 10 million Muslims and their offsprings are in your land and taking over. That is what globalism does and not to just one nation but all nations(except Israel). It is the greatest evil the world has ever seen.
Tyranny of Ideas is transitory and reversible. It can be undone once the native people realize the badness of those ideas.
Tyranny of Demographics is permanent and irreversible. It can't be undone even when the native people realize they made a huge mistake in letting in all those invasive foreigners.
It is the difference between Acute Illness and Chronic Illness. Globalism leads to chronic disease for any nation that surrenders to its agenda.
Ideological disasters are nothing by contrast in the long run.
Ideas exist in the mind and may eventually pass away. Even an idea as disastrous as communism was no big deal in the wider scope of history.
While communism can wreak havoc on a nation’s economy, once it’s relegated to the dustbin of history, the nation and its people & culture remain intact and can thrive once more.
Communism oppressed Poles in Poland and Hungarians in Hungary, but Poland remained the nation of Poles and Hungary remained the nation of Hungarians. A nation under communism is tyrannized by a bad idea, not by a foreign people.
In the end, ideologies are come-and-go. Bad ideas lead to bad socio-economic results, but ideas do not alter or erase the essential character of a nation’s people and culture.
But demographic imperialism and replacism do just that. Once masses of foreigners take over a nation, they mean to stay and, absent a serious war and revolution, they will take over and grow in numbers until the native population has been eclipsed and replaced.
Communism’s ill effects on Eastern Europe were NOTHING compared to globalism’s fatal impact on France, UK, Germany, and Sweden.
Nations under communism could eventually be rid of the ideology, and once freed of the illusion, could carry on with the same people and culture.
But after globalism is finished with Western Europe, the result will be an entirely new world populated by Muslims and Africans.
It’s a daunting challenge to rid society of bad ideas and institutions, but it’s a gargantuan(and even impossible) task to be rid of demographic imperialists once they’ve taken over your own nation. Serbs will never take back Kosovo. Palestinians lost Palestine(now Israel) forever.
Communism was about proletariat overthrowing the bourgeoisie. As economically disastrous as it was, the nation still belonged to its people at the end of the day since the proles and bourgeoisie were of the same ethnicity and class. So, Romania run by dictatorship of the proletariat was still Romania dominated by Romanians.
If communism is about one class replacing another in power, globalism is about foreign ethnics replacing the native ethnic. This isn’t merely an ideological struggle but a biological and cultural one. Upon its victory, all nations(except for Israel, which is ‘passovered’ with special exemption) are transformed by globalism to the extent that native folks no longer even own and control what had been their homelands. Globalism is about making every people(except Jews in Israel) strangers in their own homeland. It turns a nation of kinfolk into a nation of strangers and foreign usurpers. The native folks are duped into welcoming this dire fate by having their minds infected with delirious mantras such as ‘Diversity is our Strength’ when only an idiot could believe such.
Globalism is appealing to the elites of advanced nations since it means more opportunities to make a buck. And it is appealing to masses in poor nations since it means an opportunity to demographically migrate to rich nations and leech off them.
It is also appealing to holier-than-thou me-huggers who see globalism as a utopian project of making the whole world sing in perfect harmony.
But for patriotic natives who care about preservation of ethnicity, culture, and history, it is an absolute tragedy.
In this sense, globalism is a far greater evil than communism. Communism forced bad ideas on a nation like Poland. It didn’t force Poland to be invaded and transformed by non-Europeans.
In contrast, globalism says Europe MUST welcome endless invasions by tons of foreigners, and its native populations must be REPLACED. And if Europeans say NO to Replacism, they are defamed as ‘Nazis’ by globalist forces controlled by Jews.
Anyway, the ill-effects of bad ideas can be reversed and repaired. But the impact of bad demographic policies is often irreversible. If you adopt a stupid idea, the stupidity is eradicated once you come to your senses. But if you swallow poison, its fatal consequences can’t be reversed even if your mind realizes you did something dumb. The poison will take over your body and will destroy you.
Communism was a bad idea that infected Europeans in the 20th century. Once European minds rejected the idea, it was gone for good.
In contrast, globalism force-feeds mega-doses of poison(in the form of massive foreign invasion) as ‘medicine’ to Europeans, and the poison spreads all over Europe.
Bad ideas, as illusions, are real only to the extent that certain people believe in them. Once the faith is gone, the ideas are also gone.
People are different. They are real, and once a foreign people take over your nation, they are there to stay regardless of what you think.
Imagine if your people adopt Islam as an idea. It may be a bad idea, but it’s just an idea. Therefore, there is the chance that your people may one day reject Islam and be rid of it.
Now, imagine if your people adopt Islam and accept 10 million Muslims. The dire reality is that those invaders are now part of your nation no matter what you think. Even if your people reject Islam, those 10 million Muslims and their offsprings are in your land and taking over. That is what globalism does and not to just one nation but all nations(except Israel). It is the greatest evil the world has ever seen.
Tyranny of Ideas is transitory and reversible. It can be undone once the native people realize the badness of those ideas.
Tyranny of Demographics is permanent and irreversible. It can't be undone even when the native people realize they made a huge mistake in letting in all those invasive foreigners.
It is the difference between Acute Illness and Chronic Illness. Globalism leads to chronic disease for any nation that surrenders to its agenda.
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Demographic Numerology Game: Globalism says NATION IS A NUMBER. Don't you believe it.
Globalist use the Numbers Game to hoodwink peoples around the world.
Globalists say if a nation has a certain population, that NUMBER = NATION.
So, if Nation A has 50 million people of A-ethnicity, that nation MUST maintain that number in order to 'survive' as that nation. So, if the population is anticipated to decline to 40 million, it has to get 10 million people to maintain the magic number of 50 million. So, numbers trump ethnicity. According to this view, Nation A with 40 million people of A-ethnicity is less A-ish than Nation A with 40 million people of A-ethnicity and 10 million people of B-ethnicity.
Take Poland. Its population is 40 million. Suppose Poland's population is destined to decline to 20 million in 100 yrs. Now, a sane person will say Poland will be Poland whether it has 40 million or 20 million since Poles live in Poland. But globalists will differ and say 20 million people(even if non-Polish) must be added to keep Poland Polish. So, Poland is essentially a number. According to globalists, a Poland that is 20 million Polish and 20 million Nigerian is more Polish than a Poland that is all Polish at 20 million. Indeed, by globalist rules, a Poland that is 40 million Nigerian(with no Poles) is more Polish than a Poland that is 20 or 30 million all Polish.
Globalism says there is no deep connection of ethnicity, territory, and history for a nation. Anyone who barges into Poland has a 'human right' to be Polish. So, if 10 million Nigerians barge into Poland for gibs-me-free-stuff, they are Polish. And if real Poles condemn such invasion and demand that the Negroes return to Nigeria, they are un-Polish since such 'xenophobia' is not what 'European values' are all about.
Using this globalist logic, we could argue that Jews were not Jews after WWII. After all, if a people are defined by a number, then Jews were no longer Jews since they lost millions in the Holocaust, anywhere from 4 to 6 million. Let's assume the number of Jewish dead in WWII is 6 million.
Now, by some estimates, the Jewish population of Europe prior to WWII & Holocaust was 10 million. So, Jewishness = 10 million people. Since 6 million were lost in the war & extermination, it means Jews were no longer Jewish since 6 million were gone and the magic # of 10 million was lost. In order for Jews to be Jewish again, the 6 million losses have to filled in by any bunch of people. So, using globalist logic, Jews should have recruited 6 million gentiles to become 'New Jews' in order for Jews to be Jewish once again. And since Poles lost 3 million in the law, they had to get 3 million more people(even if non-Polish) to be Polish again.
Now, you see how stupid such logic is. Whether there are 1 million Jews, 3 million Jews, 5 million Jews, or 10 million Jews, the fact of Jewishness isn't about statistics but ethnics. If a Jewish nation has 1 million Jews or 10 million Jews, it is Jewish if Jews are the predominant ethnic group of the nation. If Nigeria has 100 million people and if all of them die due to some epidemic, it is not Nigeria again if 100 million Hindus or Russians resettle it. It will be New India or New Russia.
But globalists are playing a clever numbers game in persuading nations that their essence and identity are pegged to some demographic magic number. So, if Japan currently has 100 million, it must maintain that number in order to remain Japan. If the population goes down to 70 million, that ain't Japan no more. It needs 30 million additional people --- even if non-Asian and disruptive to Japanese society --- in order for Japan to remain Japanese.
Globalism is controlled largely by Jews, and if Jews want to use such logic, then we should say Jews in Europe are not Jewish since there are only 1.5 million Jews in current Europe. Since Jewish population of Europe was 10 million in 1939, there has to be 10 million Jews in Europe today in order for Jews to be Jews. So, what current Jews-in-Europe need to do is to turn 8.5 million gentiles into 'New Jews' in order to reach that magic number of 10 million.
Only then will there be Jews in Europe again. Therefore, unless Jews accept 8.5 million gentiles as 'New Jews', there are no real Jews in Europe since demographic numerology says there must be 10 million Jews in Europe in order for Jews to 'survive' as Jews.
Sounds crazy? Well, that's what Jewish globalists tell goyim around the world.
Don't you believe it.
Globalists say if a nation has a certain population, that NUMBER = NATION.
So, if Nation A has 50 million people of A-ethnicity, that nation MUST maintain that number in order to 'survive' as that nation. So, if the population is anticipated to decline to 40 million, it has to get 10 million people to maintain the magic number of 50 million. So, numbers trump ethnicity. According to this view, Nation A with 40 million people of A-ethnicity is less A-ish than Nation A with 40 million people of A-ethnicity and 10 million people of B-ethnicity.
Take Poland. Its population is 40 million. Suppose Poland's population is destined to decline to 20 million in 100 yrs. Now, a sane person will say Poland will be Poland whether it has 40 million or 20 million since Poles live in Poland. But globalists will differ and say 20 million people(even if non-Polish) must be added to keep Poland Polish. So, Poland is essentially a number. According to globalists, a Poland that is 20 million Polish and 20 million Nigerian is more Polish than a Poland that is all Polish at 20 million. Indeed, by globalist rules, a Poland that is 40 million Nigerian(with no Poles) is more Polish than a Poland that is 20 or 30 million all Polish.
Globalism says there is no deep connection of ethnicity, territory, and history for a nation. Anyone who barges into Poland has a 'human right' to be Polish. So, if 10 million Nigerians barge into Poland for gibs-me-free-stuff, they are Polish. And if real Poles condemn such invasion and demand that the Negroes return to Nigeria, they are un-Polish since such 'xenophobia' is not what 'European values' are all about.
Using this globalist logic, we could argue that Jews were not Jews after WWII. After all, if a people are defined by a number, then Jews were no longer Jews since they lost millions in the Holocaust, anywhere from 4 to 6 million. Let's assume the number of Jewish dead in WWII is 6 million.
Now, by some estimates, the Jewish population of Europe prior to WWII & Holocaust was 10 million. So, Jewishness = 10 million people. Since 6 million were lost in the war & extermination, it means Jews were no longer Jewish since 6 million were gone and the magic # of 10 million was lost. In order for Jews to be Jewish again, the 6 million losses have to filled in by any bunch of people. So, using globalist logic, Jews should have recruited 6 million gentiles to become 'New Jews' in order for Jews to be Jewish once again. And since Poles lost 3 million in the law, they had to get 3 million more people(even if non-Polish) to be Polish again.
Now, you see how stupid such logic is. Whether there are 1 million Jews, 3 million Jews, 5 million Jews, or 10 million Jews, the fact of Jewishness isn't about statistics but ethnics. If a Jewish nation has 1 million Jews or 10 million Jews, it is Jewish if Jews are the predominant ethnic group of the nation. If Nigeria has 100 million people and if all of them die due to some epidemic, it is not Nigeria again if 100 million Hindus or Russians resettle it. It will be New India or New Russia.
But globalists are playing a clever numbers game in persuading nations that their essence and identity are pegged to some demographic magic number. So, if Japan currently has 100 million, it must maintain that number in order to remain Japan. If the population goes down to 70 million, that ain't Japan no more. It needs 30 million additional people --- even if non-Asian and disruptive to Japanese society --- in order for Japan to remain Japanese.
Globalism is controlled largely by Jews, and if Jews want to use such logic, then we should say Jews in Europe are not Jewish since there are only 1.5 million Jews in current Europe. Since Jewish population of Europe was 10 million in 1939, there has to be 10 million Jews in Europe today in order for Jews to be Jews. So, what current Jews-in-Europe need to do is to turn 8.5 million gentiles into 'New Jews' in order to reach that magic number of 10 million.
Only then will there be Jews in Europe again. Therefore, unless Jews accept 8.5 million gentiles as 'New Jews', there are no real Jews in Europe since demographic numerology says there must be 10 million Jews in Europe in order for Jews to 'survive' as Jews.
Sounds crazy? Well, that's what Jewish globalists tell goyim around the world.
Don't you believe it.
Wednesday, June 7, 2017
The Uneasy Dynamics of Rancor, Religion, and Rationality
Religion stands in the way of reason, but intellect or higher mental activity is impossible without restraint of savage nature, the animal rancor in the heart of every man. Savage nature is beastly & brutish and prefers breeding & fighting over reading and writing. It has no use for learning, reflection, or cultivation of heart & soul. It is about the law of the jungle.
Religion suppresses & restrains animal rancor and steadies & prepares the mind for reflection & contemplation. Thus, religiosity/spirituality cultivates the life of the mind even as scriptures place strictures on what can be thought and said.
Rationality had to break out of the taboos of religiosity, but then, reason could arise only after spiritual authority had forced chaotic animal rancor inside the cage and tamed it.
Reason is the bird that flew out of the cage of religion, without which the wild cat of animal nature would have devoured the bird while still inside the egg. For there to be higher freedom of the mind, the lower freedom of savage instinct must be tamed. And religion played a key role in restraining lower freedoms so that higher freedom could finally arise, though, to be sure, they had to break out of the confines of religious taboos.
As most people weren't sufficiently smart or privileged for higher thought, the only viable option for them were spiritually guided moral life of restraints OR animal-driven beastly existence of excesses. If most people were moral, a stable community was possible and could sustain institutions for higher learning. But if most people were barbaric, social chaos ensued and even smart people had to scramble just to survive. (There are smart people in Africa, but they can't cultivate the life of the mind because most Africans indulge in animal nature of jungle boogie. Same is true in most black-majority communities in the the West.)
With the fading of religious authority and the weakening of constraints on animal nature, we are now witnessing the degradation and destruction of Western civilization by the savagery of black thuggery, harlotry of slut pride, and decadence of homo vanity. Blacks are especially dangerous because their animal nature is more aggressive, wild, destructive, and beastly than those of other races.
If there is a kind of 'religion' in the current West, it is Political Correctness, the official dogma of Jewish-controlled Globalism, that enforces taboos on honest minds that notice that the Emperor has no clothes. Honest people see the reality of racial differences and its dire implications. They also perceive the threat to the West(or any sane civilization) posed by black savagery, homo degeneracy, Jewish supremacism(via globalism), and feminist insipidity, but inquisitional PC imposes the politics of silence, shunning, or witch-burning on any brave soul who refuses to cower before the court of globalist dogma.
Actually, shallow & stupid PC is worse than real religions, which, at the very least and despite their repressive dimensions, were grounded in genuine contemplation, profundity of vision, and reflection of higher truths. PC is just a disingenuous tool of Jewish supremacists to bait and milk 'white guilt' so that there won't be a viable challenge to Jewish Power.
Religion suppresses & restrains animal rancor and steadies & prepares the mind for reflection & contemplation. Thus, religiosity/spirituality cultivates the life of the mind even as scriptures place strictures on what can be thought and said.
Rationality had to break out of the taboos of religiosity, but then, reason could arise only after spiritual authority had forced chaotic animal rancor inside the cage and tamed it.
Reason is the bird that flew out of the cage of religion, without which the wild cat of animal nature would have devoured the bird while still inside the egg. For there to be higher freedom of the mind, the lower freedom of savage instinct must be tamed. And religion played a key role in restraining lower freedoms so that higher freedom could finally arise, though, to be sure, they had to break out of the confines of religious taboos.
As most people weren't sufficiently smart or privileged for higher thought, the only viable option for them were spiritually guided moral life of restraints OR animal-driven beastly existence of excesses. If most people were moral, a stable community was possible and could sustain institutions for higher learning. But if most people were barbaric, social chaos ensued and even smart people had to scramble just to survive. (There are smart people in Africa, but they can't cultivate the life of the mind because most Africans indulge in animal nature of jungle boogie. Same is true in most black-majority communities in the the West.)
With the fading of religious authority and the weakening of constraints on animal nature, we are now witnessing the degradation and destruction of Western civilization by the savagery of black thuggery, harlotry of slut pride, and decadence of homo vanity. Blacks are especially dangerous because their animal nature is more aggressive, wild, destructive, and beastly than those of other races.
If there is a kind of 'religion' in the current West, it is Political Correctness, the official dogma of Jewish-controlled Globalism, that enforces taboos on honest minds that notice that the Emperor has no clothes. Honest people see the reality of racial differences and its dire implications. They also perceive the threat to the West(or any sane civilization) posed by black savagery, homo degeneracy, Jewish supremacism(via globalism), and feminist insipidity, but inquisitional PC imposes the politics of silence, shunning, or witch-burning on any brave soul who refuses to cower before the court of globalist dogma.
Actually, shallow & stupid PC is worse than real religions, which, at the very least and despite their repressive dimensions, were grounded in genuine contemplation, profundity of vision, and reflection of higher truths. PC is just a disingenuous tool of Jewish supremacists to bait and milk 'white guilt' so that there won't be a viable challenge to Jewish Power.
Saturday, June 3, 2017
Globalists promote Homomania to Young People to Sever their Connection to People, Culture, and History
Globalists promote the homo stuff because, when young people are made to primarily identify with or admire/praise homos, they lose connection to their own race, culture, and history.
Every people have its deep ethnic roots. Irish have deep Irish roots, Poles have deep Polish roots, and Japanese have deep Japanese roots. So, if kids are raised to primarily identify with and admire their own family, people, and culture, they feel a deep meaningful connection to their ancestors, lore, and roots.
Imagine there's a Greek kid who is raised to identify most with family, kin, nationality, and Greek culture. His main loyalty will be to Greekness. Also, Real Sexuality is about procreation and continuity since all human lives are the product of sex between men and women. Real Sexuality reminds us of our biological roots, the value of families, and our duty to life.
In contrast, homosexuality cannot produce and has never produced life. So, when young people are made to identify with or praise homos, they reject the very source and process of life.
As a result, Life becomes a game of vanity, theatrics, frivolity, and narcissism. Also, homos come in all colors. There are homos in every nation and of every race. And homomania is a global phenomenon than a national one. It's about the united supremacism of homos all over the world in spreading 'rainbow' degeneracy into every nation as the main theme of love, morality, and spirituality.
Since homos cannot produce life, they indulge in 'creativity over creation'. Homo acts, such as fecal penetration and vaginal grinding, can never ever produce life, not a single one. As substitute for life, homos create a cartoon-fantasy land that favors hair dyes, tattoos, and piercings. And these forms of degeneracy are spread throughout the culture. This is great for globalism since its agenda is to sever people from cradle to their sense of roots, origins, race, and history.
This is why globalists push homomania on your nation. Notice that people who come under homo-influence almost invariably lose their sense of roots and connection to the rich tangibles of race, culture, and history. Their main identity is one of vapid celebrity narcissism and pop culture fantasies controlled by Jewish globalists and Homo decadents.
Every people have its deep ethnic roots. Irish have deep Irish roots, Poles have deep Polish roots, and Japanese have deep Japanese roots. So, if kids are raised to primarily identify with and admire their own family, people, and culture, they feel a deep meaningful connection to their ancestors, lore, and roots.
Imagine there's a Greek kid who is raised to identify most with family, kin, nationality, and Greek culture. His main loyalty will be to Greekness. Also, Real Sexuality is about procreation and continuity since all human lives are the product of sex between men and women. Real Sexuality reminds us of our biological roots, the value of families, and our duty to life.
In contrast, homosexuality cannot produce and has never produced life. So, when young people are made to identify with or praise homos, they reject the very source and process of life.
As a result, Life becomes a game of vanity, theatrics, frivolity, and narcissism. Also, homos come in all colors. There are homos in every nation and of every race. And homomania is a global phenomenon than a national one. It's about the united supremacism of homos all over the world in spreading 'rainbow' degeneracy into every nation as the main theme of love, morality, and spirituality.
Since homos cannot produce life, they indulge in 'creativity over creation'. Homo acts, such as fecal penetration and vaginal grinding, can never ever produce life, not a single one. As substitute for life, homos create a cartoon-fantasy land that favors hair dyes, tattoos, and piercings. And these forms of degeneracy are spread throughout the culture. This is great for globalism since its agenda is to sever people from cradle to their sense of roots, origins, race, and history.
This is why globalists push homomania on your nation. Notice that people who come under homo-influence almost invariably lose their sense of roots and connection to the rich tangibles of race, culture, and history. Their main identity is one of vapid celebrity narcissism and pop culture fantasies controlled by Jewish globalists and Homo decadents.
Wednesday, May 3, 2017
What Black Lives Matter(BLM) and American Globo-Imperialism have in common
In a way, BLM or Black Lives Matter is as American as apple pie or fried chicken.
BLM throw fits when people say All Lives Matter. "No!!!", blacks holler. They say black lives have extra value and deserves special recognition and attention. So, it’s as though black lives are ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ in ways that other lives are not.
But, BLM is a great big lie because blacks are the most aggressive, murderous, and violent people in America. They cause the most trouble for themselves and attack-rob-rape-murder other races. Blacks cry victim and blame others, but they themselves are the main problem of America.
Well, Globo-Americanism is now like American Power Matters. America and America alone is declared ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’. If someone were to say every nation is ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ in its own way, American Power arrogantly fumes and throw fits. "No!!!", American power shouts. American Power says America has special value and deserves special respect and reverence around the world in ways that other nations do not.
But,APM is a great big lie because the US is the most aggressive, murderous, imperialist, warmongering, and violent nation on Earth. It causes the most problems for itself — like financial meltdown, PC, and decadence — and invades & destroys or bullies & intimidates other nations. American Power cries victim and blame others(esp Russia and Iran), but it is the main instigator of horrors around the world.
So, the disingenuous bullshit of BLM and the mendacious bully-pulpit of APM are really joined at the hip.
BLM throw fits when people say All Lives Matter. "No!!!", blacks holler. They say black lives have extra value and deserves special recognition and attention. So, it’s as though black lives are ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ in ways that other lives are not.
But, BLM is a great big lie because blacks are the most aggressive, murderous, and violent people in America. They cause the most trouble for themselves and attack-rob-rape-murder other races. Blacks cry victim and blame others, but they themselves are the main problem of America.
Well, Globo-Americanism is now like American Power Matters. America and America alone is declared ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’. If someone were to say every nation is ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ in its own way, American Power arrogantly fumes and throw fits. "No!!!", American power shouts. American Power says America has special value and deserves special respect and reverence around the world in ways that other nations do not.
But,APM is a great big lie because the US is the most aggressive, murderous, imperialist, warmongering, and violent nation on Earth. It causes the most problems for itself — like financial meltdown, PC, and decadence — and invades & destroys or bullies & intimidates other nations. American Power cries victim and blame others(esp Russia and Iran), but it is the main instigator of horrors around the world.
So, the disingenuous bullshit of BLM and the mendacious bully-pulpit of APM are really joined at the hip.
Tuesday, May 2, 2017
The Ugliness of Three Narcissisms & the Necessity of Tribal-Universalism
Narcissism is UGLY.
There is physical narcissism of those who are totally into how they look. This is promoted by celebrity culture, especially as controlled by vain homos.
There is talent narcissism of those who think they are so great because of high intelligence and ability. Ability and intelligence are good things, but they don't mean goodness of heart and character or soundness of mind. A person can be talented and smart and a total louse, like Mark Zuckerberg and Carlos Slim.
Libertarianism is the pathological narcissism of talent and success. The prog version of talent narcissism is the conceit of the 'creative class'. The fancy hipster urban elites deserve all the privileges because they are sooooooo 'creative'. The 'creative class' notion is also associated with vain homos, as spelled out by social critic Florida.
There is ideological narcissism of those love to self-hug themselves and pat themselves on the back for their goody-goodness. Ideological narcissism is appealing to most because ANYONE can partake of it. Physical narcissism only applies to those who really look good even though uglies do pretend to be hotter than they really are. And Talent narcissism is limited to those with real talent, and such people are relatively rare -- the kind who make it in Silicon Valley or some business venture. Most libertarians suck at most things and vicariously live through the talent narcissism of others with their Ayn-Randian worship of any rich or successful person.
But anyone can become an ideological narcissist, which explains something like antifa that is mostly made up of bottomfeeders of society. Even in elite colleges, most graduates will not become very successful, esp if they majored in something like humanities or social sciences. So, they are going to feel inferior to those with claims to physical narcissism or talent narcissism(in Wall Street, high-tech, or some business venture). So, what is left for these types to feel better than others? Ideological narcissism, a kind of secular-spiritual narcissism.
Emmanuel Macron is the favorite of physical narcissists, talent narcissists, and ideological narcissists. He is all about the look, the style over substance. Those with talent but without looks want to be associated with whatever is fashionable. Those with looks but no brains or knowledge want to be associated with whatever is officially approved, and of course 'nationalism' is condemned as a 'far right' vice. Can't have that. As for ideological narcissists, they want to feel superior about something, and PC tells them that white people are so much goody-gooder for white-knighting 'diversity'.
In the end, it's not about tribalism vs universalism.
A meaningful tribal-universalism is possible, and it's the best way. We need to take cue from the Jews whose religion is a tribal-universalism. Jews believe in the universal God, the one Truth for all. However, they have a special tribal Covenant with the universal God. So, even though God is God over all mankind, Jews have their special relation and destiny in relation to God. It's like Eskimos and Africans share the same Sun but in their own special way in different parts of the world. There is no need to make the Sun shine the same all over. The earth is round and revolving, not flat and constant. So different peoples and places get the Sun differently.
Tribalism is too limiting, but universalism is too confusing and generic. So, the Goldilocks middle is tribal-universalism.
And this should apply to secular realm as well. The notion of universal human rights is good and useful. There are certain basic ideas and values that are applicable to all mankind. And it'd be good for all peoples to adopt them. However, each people must shape and mold them according to their own history, experiences, demographics, heritage, culture, sacraments, taboos, and etc. So, these universal values will play out differently in Turkey, Iran, Uganda, Japan, Mexico, Kenya, India, Israel, etc. Also, different nations have different icons and narratives to buttress these universal values. Due to slavery and racial problems, human rights issues in the US have been represented by Lincoln and MLK, the Civil War and Civil Rights. Other nations and peoples have different experiences and different icons and different lessons they drew from history.
Same goes for free markets. It is a useful universal idea, but that doesn't mean the whole world should be part of one single market. Different nations need to have their own policies to make free markets work on the national level. And the main purpose of a nation is to serve the people of the nation than to make the nation useful to the globalist empire.
Same goes for democracy or system of republican government. When used properly, it works better than most other political systems. But that doesn't mean we should have world government of single democracy for all. Each nation needs its own national form of democracy where nationals vote for national interest.
The problem is globalists have taken control of too many key nations. And these globalists' main loyalty is not to any nation but to other globalist elites around the world. So, their main priority is to make all nations submit to the agenda of globalist elites than to have national elites represent, defend, and serve the interests of the nation.
Nationalism is the best kind of tribal-universalism. It acknowledges that other peoples should have nations of their own and their own national sovereignty. All peoples deserve their own nations as a universal human right. This mutual understanding among nations and peoples is the best recipe for peace. Also, it is on the national level/scale that universal human rights are best implemented. A nation can effectively ensure the humane functions of its national system for its own people. But a nation cannot save the world. And national identity and interests will be undermined with mass immigration-invasion.
Sweden used to practice more effective implementation of universal human rights when it was a homogeneous nation. Swedes embraced Diversity in the name of universalism, but it only led to rising tribalism and fracturing in Sweden. The result is less universalism for all those in Sweden and more contentious tribalism or cuck behavior among whites that is just downright sickening and humiliating.
Nationalism is also humble in admitting that a nation can only do so much. It is a form of hubris to play the role of savior of the world or all humanity. It's like a man claiming to be able to eat an entire horse. Hubris leads to both national degradation and imperialism, and we are seeing both in the Americanism of the 21st century. The notion that US is a limitless magnet of immigrants(the poor huddled masses) is turning entire parts of the US into the Third World. There is less unity and more enmity. America used to feel more universal when it was less diverse.
Also, the US elites now neglect the problems of Already Americans as they are too busy shopping for 'New Americans' as either cheap labor or virtue-signal-voodoo-dolls, or virdoo dolls.
And the megalomania of US as the 'indispensable' and 'exceptional' nation, the superhero savior of the world, has led to endless wars that has only destroyed countless lives. It has also compromised its allies and vassals as accomplices in these globalist war crimes by either going along or remaining silent in deference to the US. What is EU but a partner-in-crime of all the US foulness(in the name of 'humanitarian intervention') in the Middle East?
There is physical narcissism of those who are totally into how they look. This is promoted by celebrity culture, especially as controlled by vain homos.
There is talent narcissism of those who think they are so great because of high intelligence and ability. Ability and intelligence are good things, but they don't mean goodness of heart and character or soundness of mind. A person can be talented and smart and a total louse, like Mark Zuckerberg and Carlos Slim.
Libertarianism is the pathological narcissism of talent and success. The prog version of talent narcissism is the conceit of the 'creative class'. The fancy hipster urban elites deserve all the privileges because they are sooooooo 'creative'. The 'creative class' notion is also associated with vain homos, as spelled out by social critic Florida.
There is ideological narcissism of those love to self-hug themselves and pat themselves on the back for their goody-goodness. Ideological narcissism is appealing to most because ANYONE can partake of it. Physical narcissism only applies to those who really look good even though uglies do pretend to be hotter than they really are. And Talent narcissism is limited to those with real talent, and such people are relatively rare -- the kind who make it in Silicon Valley or some business venture. Most libertarians suck at most things and vicariously live through the talent narcissism of others with their Ayn-Randian worship of any rich or successful person.
But anyone can become an ideological narcissist, which explains something like antifa that is mostly made up of bottomfeeders of society. Even in elite colleges, most graduates will not become very successful, esp if they majored in something like humanities or social sciences. So, they are going to feel inferior to those with claims to physical narcissism or talent narcissism(in Wall Street, high-tech, or some business venture). So, what is left for these types to feel better than others? Ideological narcissism, a kind of secular-spiritual narcissism.
Emmanuel Macron is the favorite of physical narcissists, talent narcissists, and ideological narcissists. He is all about the look, the style over substance. Those with talent but without looks want to be associated with whatever is fashionable. Those with looks but no brains or knowledge want to be associated with whatever is officially approved, and of course 'nationalism' is condemned as a 'far right' vice. Can't have that. As for ideological narcissists, they want to feel superior about something, and PC tells them that white people are so much goody-gooder for white-knighting 'diversity'.
In the end, it's not about tribalism vs universalism.
A meaningful tribal-universalism is possible, and it's the best way. We need to take cue from the Jews whose religion is a tribal-universalism. Jews believe in the universal God, the one Truth for all. However, they have a special tribal Covenant with the universal God. So, even though God is God over all mankind, Jews have their special relation and destiny in relation to God. It's like Eskimos and Africans share the same Sun but in their own special way in different parts of the world. There is no need to make the Sun shine the same all over. The earth is round and revolving, not flat and constant. So different peoples and places get the Sun differently.
Tribalism is too limiting, but universalism is too confusing and generic. So, the Goldilocks middle is tribal-universalism.
And this should apply to secular realm as well. The notion of universal human rights is good and useful. There are certain basic ideas and values that are applicable to all mankind. And it'd be good for all peoples to adopt them. However, each people must shape and mold them according to their own history, experiences, demographics, heritage, culture, sacraments, taboos, and etc. So, these universal values will play out differently in Turkey, Iran, Uganda, Japan, Mexico, Kenya, India, Israel, etc. Also, different nations have different icons and narratives to buttress these universal values. Due to slavery and racial problems, human rights issues in the US have been represented by Lincoln and MLK, the Civil War and Civil Rights. Other nations and peoples have different experiences and different icons and different lessons they drew from history.
Same goes for free markets. It is a useful universal idea, but that doesn't mean the whole world should be part of one single market. Different nations need to have their own policies to make free markets work on the national level. And the main purpose of a nation is to serve the people of the nation than to make the nation useful to the globalist empire.
Same goes for democracy or system of republican government. When used properly, it works better than most other political systems. But that doesn't mean we should have world government of single democracy for all. Each nation needs its own national form of democracy where nationals vote for national interest.
The problem is globalists have taken control of too many key nations. And these globalists' main loyalty is not to any nation but to other globalist elites around the world. So, their main priority is to make all nations submit to the agenda of globalist elites than to have national elites represent, defend, and serve the interests of the nation.
Nationalism is the best kind of tribal-universalism. It acknowledges that other peoples should have nations of their own and their own national sovereignty. All peoples deserve their own nations as a universal human right. This mutual understanding among nations and peoples is the best recipe for peace. Also, it is on the national level/scale that universal human rights are best implemented. A nation can effectively ensure the humane functions of its national system for its own people. But a nation cannot save the world. And national identity and interests will be undermined with mass immigration-invasion.
Sweden used to practice more effective implementation of universal human rights when it was a homogeneous nation. Swedes embraced Diversity in the name of universalism, but it only led to rising tribalism and fracturing in Sweden. The result is less universalism for all those in Sweden and more contentious tribalism or cuck behavior among whites that is just downright sickening and humiliating.
Nationalism is also humble in admitting that a nation can only do so much. It is a form of hubris to play the role of savior of the world or all humanity. It's like a man claiming to be able to eat an entire horse. Hubris leads to both national degradation and imperialism, and we are seeing both in the Americanism of the 21st century. The notion that US is a limitless magnet of immigrants(the poor huddled masses) is turning entire parts of the US into the Third World. There is less unity and more enmity. America used to feel more universal when it was less diverse.
Also, the US elites now neglect the problems of Already Americans as they are too busy shopping for 'New Americans' as either cheap labor or virtue-signal-voodoo-dolls, or virdoo dolls.
And the megalomania of US as the 'indispensable' and 'exceptional' nation, the superhero savior of the world, has led to endless wars that has only destroyed countless lives. It has also compromised its allies and vassals as accomplices in these globalist war crimes by either going along or remaining silent in deference to the US. What is EU but a partner-in-crime of all the US foulness(in the name of 'humanitarian intervention') in the Middle East?
Friday, April 7, 2017
Why is Capitalism so closely tied with 'Progressivism'?
Why are capitalism, privilege, and success so closely tied with 'progressivism'? Are capitalism, wealth, privilege, and success inherently proggy? Perhaps in the sense that both capitalism and proggism are invested in change, transformation, and reinvention. Capitalism seeks new products, new technologies, new everything. Proggism feeds on the conceit of new frontiers in the struggle for justice. Both are at war with tradition, roots,and established norms. In economics, this makes sense since improved/advanced technology is objectively better than earlier ones. Surely, a new computer is better than one 5 yrs ago, let alone 10 yrs ago. Technology can demonstrate superiority. Also, Pop Culture must promote changes in fashions to hook new generations to new trends and the 'hottest thing'.
But can same rules be applied to arts, culture, morality, justice, and emotions? Is modern art necessarily more 'advanced' than classical art, and is post-modern art necessarily more advanced than modern art? Is today's concept of family really 'more evolved' than the concept fifty years ago? Is hipster sensibility superior to the sentiments of an earlier era?
To be sure, the more a society becomes productive and plentiful, the more various peoples(with full stomachs) tend to seek their own fetishized niche of ‘justice’ concocted to cater to his or her personal whims. Also, when even the personal is politicized or filtered through ideology, even trivialities or frivolities are mistaken as 'rights' deserving of moral recognition and benediction by all of society.
In a hungry society, the main priority is providing enough food for the masses. If Michael Jackson had been born into a sharecropper family in 1900, he would have worked in the fields and focused on food & basic needs. But he made lots of money in a rich nation and could indulge his fantasies. Eventually, the flight into fantasy became a new ‘right’, and so, we are witnessing the Michael-Jacksonization of society. Michael was effectively transsexual, transracial, and transage. He was a perpetual Peter-Pan-kid. At least he kept it to himself. Today, every freak is no longer content to indulge in his/her whims but demands all of society to recognize and celebrate what he/she is. Once homos went from a group-to-be-tolerated-and-left-alone to a group-that-must-be-praised-and-worshiped-by-all-of-society, freaks of all stripes began to take their cues from the homo movement and make similar demands.
Anyway, capitalism has lots of tendencies that aren't necessarily proggy. So, how did it end up being so proggy? Three possible explanations.
1. Most business and science/technology types don’t have much time or interest in ideas or culture. They are into money, success, ambition, and geek stuff. So, most of them don’t form their own ideas on society, politics, humanity, and history. Bill Gates is a very smart guy, but his main focus for most of his life was on geek stuff and making money. So, where do people like him get their ideas? From social sciences and media controlled by other sorts of people. So, if academia and media people lean proggy and globby(globalist), even apolitical people-of-success will gravitate in that direction. It could be that simple.
2. Mafia-type extortion. Businesses naturally want to be left alone to make money. Because Conservatives tend to be pro-business, they leave businesses alone. So, businesses have NOTHING to fear from Conservatives who kiss the butts of the business class. Why pay for something you can have for free? Conservative don’t run extortion schemes on businesses. Even when conservatives hope for donations from rich people and big business, they go pleading, not demanding and certainly not threatening.
But proggies and blacks do make demands. (And Jews make demands on gentile businesses to fork over money to Jewish causes and be mindful not to fund anything deemed 'antisemitic' or 'racist'. This means anti-white Jewish organizations & cause receive tons of donations, whereas any group even mildly associated with white interests get no funding from big business.) Jesse Jackson made an art of this and reaped a fortune by going from company to company, sniffing for ‘racism’, and extorting funds for his own coffers. (Jackson's extortion scheme ended only under Clinton & Co. that forged a deal with Big Business that progs would drop their knee-jerk anti-corporatism IF big business poured the bulk of their donations to Democrats, homos, and progs. Clintons even created a foundation to do just that on a global scale.)
Proggies, via power of media and NGO agitation/subversion, have devised an effective way to extort money and support from big companies. So, even if businesses are apolitical or conservative-leaning, they fear threats and attacks from progs who are funded and organized by the likes of George Soros. Businesses feel they have no choice but to pander to them. Progs act like a bunch of Don Fanucci’s. Just like the mafia gained control of labor unions and caused 'union trouble' for companies that didn't play ball, the Proglob(prog-globalists) operate the same way.
In contrast, since businesses have the unconditional support of Conservatives, there's no compelling reason to fund or support Conservatism. Businesses fear threats more than they appreciate support. After all, Conservative support for business is just that. It’s like a woman's devotion to a man no matter what he does. He can take her loyalty for granted. But proggy threats can get nasty, especially since proggies have close ties to media, academia, courts, deep state(with secret intelligence on everyone), and groups like SPLC & ADL and especially since Proggies can destroy careers and reputations with accusations of ‘racism’ and ‘homophobia’.
Also, to appease proggies even further, corporations have hired progsters to manage the publicity departments and to devise office policy, which means everyone has to attend endless meetings on PC this or that. Also, advertising has been taken over by the Proglob and is used mostly as a vehicle for homo, interracial, anti-white, hedonist, and nihilist propaganda.
And with the vulgarization of Gramsci’s notion of ‘cultural hegemony’, many progs and even creative types now believe that anything related to culture — even TV comedies, comic books, advertising, and manuals — must be used as vehicles of ideological indoctrination. Nothing is objective or apolitical anymore. Every image or sentiment is used to promote Jew-worship, homo-worship, mass-invasion & diversity, and idea that white wombs exist to produce black babies.
This is why Conservatives need to understand the paradoxical nature of power. If cons want businesses to be more pro-conservative, conservatives must be more anti-business. Only by threatening businesses with boycotts and lost revenue will corporations pay heed to interests of conservatives or, at the very least, not cave to proggy demands so much. For too long, businesses took Conservatives for granted since the Right has been so pro-business no matter what. The rebellion of middle America by voting for Trump’s anti-globalism and the hits taken by Target(over tranny stuff) & Starbucks(over refugee stuff) illustrates that the ONLY way to make big business respect your side's values and positions is by threatening it with dire consequences. Patriotic Americans need to formulate systems and organizations that enable massive boycotts of companies that go anti-white or anti-conservative.
3. Hipster factor. This is a conceit, especially among the young. Young people like to see themselves as forever young, cool, hip, and edgy. And the center of hip culture is in downtown areas of big cities with the glitter, fashion, buzz, dazzle, and the fun. It’s La Dolce Vita, and people want IN on this culture, like those revelers in LAST DAYS OF DISCO eager to be let into the hottest night club. Such a world is appealing for its permissiveness, experimentalism, individualism, ‘creativity’, and anything-goes-ism.
Despite the repressive aspects of PC, cultural freedom is still mostly associated with bohemian areas of NY, SF, Chicago, Austin, and the like. And the political culture of this community is proggy by default — even if most denizens of this world aren't hardcore leftists — because bohemianism is inherently anti-square and un-conservative. The whole spirit of experimentalism and alternative-lifestyle-ism, as carryovers from modernism, is a rejection of traditionalism and conservatism seen as stuffy, dull, outdated, and boring. Now, most people who hang around such communities are not so strange or ‘different’ themselves. They are mostly 9-to-5 working stiffs themselves. It’s like yuppies filled up Soho and other creative parts in NY in 80s. But they want to be around the vibes of latest trends. It’s like Charlie Sheen character in WALL STREET dates some decorator with connections with ‘creative’ types.
How come libertarians don’t fit well into this culture even though they are individualistic and pro-freedom? Because they come in two colors: (1) opportunists who will whore out to the rich and powerful for any price. They seem crass in their obsession with wealth and power, and those who can't gain success for themselves toady up to the powerful, like the contemptible Poe character in PAT GARRETT AND BILLY THE KID (2) cold-hearted ruthless greed of someone like Gordon Gekko or Jordan Belfort.
Bohemian types are for unfettered freedom, but they also want to feel justified as people concerned with 'justice' and 'meaning'. They want be cool, not cold. They want feel warm and fuzzy on social/moral issues, not hard and bullying like libertarians for whom individual liberty and self-interest trump all other considerations. Even though libertarianism is about freedom, it strikes those who want a more relaxed cultural atmosphere as too hard-hitting and hyper. Libertarianism is more about will to power than will to party. It’s like someone who is for freedom to exercise to build muscle. It’s calisthenics than aesthetics of freedom.
But can same rules be applied to arts, culture, morality, justice, and emotions? Is modern art necessarily more 'advanced' than classical art, and is post-modern art necessarily more advanced than modern art? Is today's concept of family really 'more evolved' than the concept fifty years ago? Is hipster sensibility superior to the sentiments of an earlier era?
To be sure, the more a society becomes productive and plentiful, the more various peoples(with full stomachs) tend to seek their own fetishized niche of ‘justice’ concocted to cater to his or her personal whims. Also, when even the personal is politicized or filtered through ideology, even trivialities or frivolities are mistaken as 'rights' deserving of moral recognition and benediction by all of society.
In a hungry society, the main priority is providing enough food for the masses. If Michael Jackson had been born into a sharecropper family in 1900, he would have worked in the fields and focused on food & basic needs. But he made lots of money in a rich nation and could indulge his fantasies. Eventually, the flight into fantasy became a new ‘right’, and so, we are witnessing the Michael-Jacksonization of society. Michael was effectively transsexual, transracial, and transage. He was a perpetual Peter-Pan-kid. At least he kept it to himself. Today, every freak is no longer content to indulge in his/her whims but demands all of society to recognize and celebrate what he/she is. Once homos went from a group-to-be-tolerated-and-left-alone to a group-that-must-be-praised-and-worshiped-by-all-of-society, freaks of all stripes began to take their cues from the homo movement and make similar demands.
Anyway, capitalism has lots of tendencies that aren't necessarily proggy. So, how did it end up being so proggy? Three possible explanations.
1. Most business and science/technology types don’t have much time or interest in ideas or culture. They are into money, success, ambition, and geek stuff. So, most of them don’t form their own ideas on society, politics, humanity, and history. Bill Gates is a very smart guy, but his main focus for most of his life was on geek stuff and making money. So, where do people like him get their ideas? From social sciences and media controlled by other sorts of people. So, if academia and media people lean proggy and globby(globalist), even apolitical people-of-success will gravitate in that direction. It could be that simple.
2. Mafia-type extortion. Businesses naturally want to be left alone to make money. Because Conservatives tend to be pro-business, they leave businesses alone. So, businesses have NOTHING to fear from Conservatives who kiss the butts of the business class. Why pay for something you can have for free? Conservative don’t run extortion schemes on businesses. Even when conservatives hope for donations from rich people and big business, they go pleading, not demanding and certainly not threatening.
But proggies and blacks do make demands. (And Jews make demands on gentile businesses to fork over money to Jewish causes and be mindful not to fund anything deemed 'antisemitic' or 'racist'. This means anti-white Jewish organizations & cause receive tons of donations, whereas any group even mildly associated with white interests get no funding from big business.) Jesse Jackson made an art of this and reaped a fortune by going from company to company, sniffing for ‘racism’, and extorting funds for his own coffers. (Jackson's extortion scheme ended only under Clinton & Co. that forged a deal with Big Business that progs would drop their knee-jerk anti-corporatism IF big business poured the bulk of their donations to Democrats, homos, and progs. Clintons even created a foundation to do just that on a global scale.)
Proggies, via power of media and NGO agitation/subversion, have devised an effective way to extort money and support from big companies. So, even if businesses are apolitical or conservative-leaning, they fear threats and attacks from progs who are funded and organized by the likes of George Soros. Businesses feel they have no choice but to pander to them. Progs act like a bunch of Don Fanucci’s. Just like the mafia gained control of labor unions and caused 'union trouble' for companies that didn't play ball, the Proglob(prog-globalists) operate the same way.
In contrast, since businesses have the unconditional support of Conservatives, there's no compelling reason to fund or support Conservatism. Businesses fear threats more than they appreciate support. After all, Conservative support for business is just that. It’s like a woman's devotion to a man no matter what he does. He can take her loyalty for granted. But proggy threats can get nasty, especially since proggies have close ties to media, academia, courts, deep state(with secret intelligence on everyone), and groups like SPLC & ADL and especially since Proggies can destroy careers and reputations with accusations of ‘racism’ and ‘homophobia’.
Also, to appease proggies even further, corporations have hired progsters to manage the publicity departments and to devise office policy, which means everyone has to attend endless meetings on PC this or that. Also, advertising has been taken over by the Proglob and is used mostly as a vehicle for homo, interracial, anti-white, hedonist, and nihilist propaganda.
And with the vulgarization of Gramsci’s notion of ‘cultural hegemony’, many progs and even creative types now believe that anything related to culture — even TV comedies, comic books, advertising, and manuals — must be used as vehicles of ideological indoctrination. Nothing is objective or apolitical anymore. Every image or sentiment is used to promote Jew-worship, homo-worship, mass-invasion & diversity, and idea that white wombs exist to produce black babies.
This is why Conservatives need to understand the paradoxical nature of power. If cons want businesses to be more pro-conservative, conservatives must be more anti-business. Only by threatening businesses with boycotts and lost revenue will corporations pay heed to interests of conservatives or, at the very least, not cave to proggy demands so much. For too long, businesses took Conservatives for granted since the Right has been so pro-business no matter what. The rebellion of middle America by voting for Trump’s anti-globalism and the hits taken by Target(over tranny stuff) & Starbucks(over refugee stuff) illustrates that the ONLY way to make big business respect your side's values and positions is by threatening it with dire consequences. Patriotic Americans need to formulate systems and organizations that enable massive boycotts of companies that go anti-white or anti-conservative.
3. Hipster factor. This is a conceit, especially among the young. Young people like to see themselves as forever young, cool, hip, and edgy. And the center of hip culture is in downtown areas of big cities with the glitter, fashion, buzz, dazzle, and the fun. It’s La Dolce Vita, and people want IN on this culture, like those revelers in LAST DAYS OF DISCO eager to be let into the hottest night club. Such a world is appealing for its permissiveness, experimentalism, individualism, ‘creativity’, and anything-goes-ism.
Despite the repressive aspects of PC, cultural freedom is still mostly associated with bohemian areas of NY, SF, Chicago, Austin, and the like. And the political culture of this community is proggy by default — even if most denizens of this world aren't hardcore leftists — because bohemianism is inherently anti-square and un-conservative. The whole spirit of experimentalism and alternative-lifestyle-ism, as carryovers from modernism, is a rejection of traditionalism and conservatism seen as stuffy, dull, outdated, and boring. Now, most people who hang around such communities are not so strange or ‘different’ themselves. They are mostly 9-to-5 working stiffs themselves. It’s like yuppies filled up Soho and other creative parts in NY in 80s. But they want to be around the vibes of latest trends. It’s like Charlie Sheen character in WALL STREET dates some decorator with connections with ‘creative’ types.
How come libertarians don’t fit well into this culture even though they are individualistic and pro-freedom? Because they come in two colors: (1) opportunists who will whore out to the rich and powerful for any price. They seem crass in their obsession with wealth and power, and those who can't gain success for themselves toady up to the powerful, like the contemptible Poe character in PAT GARRETT AND BILLY THE KID (2) cold-hearted ruthless greed of someone like Gordon Gekko or Jordan Belfort.
Bohemian types are for unfettered freedom, but they also want to feel justified as people concerned with 'justice' and 'meaning'. They want be cool, not cold. They want feel warm and fuzzy on social/moral issues, not hard and bullying like libertarians for whom individual liberty and self-interest trump all other considerations. Even though libertarianism is about freedom, it strikes those who want a more relaxed cultural atmosphere as too hard-hitting and hyper. Libertarianism is more about will to power than will to party. It’s like someone who is for freedom to exercise to build muscle. It’s calisthenics than aesthetics of freedom.
Friday, March 24, 2017
Muslim Violence is Not the Great Shame of the West. The Real Shame is the Lack of Fighting Spirit and Warrior Counter-Violence among Whites/Europeans. Whites need to know: Resistance, not Assistance, to the Enemy. Confront, not Comfort, for the Enemy.
I neither like nor want Muslim Immigration, but it seems the Muslims are doing what white patriots should be doing. Though violence is unpleasant and ideally to be avoided, it is essential in war. And the West is in a state of war, in which Muslims are hardly the main problem. If anything, Muslim entry into the West is a symptom of a much deeper problem that was NOT caused by Muslims. Indeed, one could argue Muslims are showing the way and the will of the proud warrior. To be sure, they fight stupidly and carry out useless acts, but their violence is nevertheless a virulent reaction to what is seriously vile & sick in the degenerate West.
There is a war on the identity, history, heritage, culture, and territory of white nations. White minds are being colonized with PC virus. It is a kind of covert, cultural, and psychological war, a ‘long march through the institutions and industries'. And Pop Culture has been politicized to promote white cuckery, white surrender, and colonization of white wombs, mainly by black Africans. It is precisely because white minds have been infected with the degenerate globo-virus that white people have been rendered so gutless and defenseless against the Great Defamation(of white character) and Great Invasion(of white lands).
Therefore, it is white people who should be organizing, uniting, and waging war and acts of counter-violence against the enemies of whites. Though psychological war, cultural war, and ideological war must be waged through words and images, there are times when outright violence is the only effective method. After all, Zionists didn't only use ideas and images but guns and bombs when necessary. Israel would never come into existence with words and persuasion alone. And in the end, it was guns, not words, that decided the fate of the American War of Independence, the American West, the Mexican-America War, the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, and etc. And Vietnam didn't only use words and images but bombs and guns to drive out the French and the Americans. And it wasn't merely through peaceful marches that blacks pressed their demands on White America. They also used threats of violence and real violence in riots. So, it is a myth that the 'civilized modern world' is all about peace. Just a passing glance at US foreign policy shows how violence is central to US power around the world. And what brought down the pro-Russian regime in Ukraine? Ultra-violence in the streets with the full blessing of globalist elites who claim to be about 'liberal democracy'.
Because white civilians have forgotten the Art of Violence, they've allowed Negroes to run riot and beat up white guys and colonize the wombs of white women. White men don't fight for their land or their women. PC infection brainwashed them to relinquish all-things-white to non-white usurpers. Worse, whites are expected not only to not offer up resistance but provide assistance to the very people who will displace them. PC-infected whites have allowed Jewish globalists to reinvent the meaning of America, Canada, and Europe. Globalists say even UK and Germany are ‘nations of immigrants’.
Whites have allowed homos to spread filth all over and desecrate marriage and even churches. Whites have allowed feminists to drive a wedge between the sacred unity of white men and white women. All this madness was NOT the work of Muslims but of Jews, globalists, feminists, Negroes, and homos.
The Muslim alternative to globalism is pretty crude, and it is not acceptable to us who aren't Muslim. That said, Muslims are to be lauded for their refusals of and reprisals against Cultural & Moral Filth that afflicts the West. They will not cave to ‘gay marriage’ or worship the Negro or take orders from foolish feminists or cave to vile homos. (If Muslims sometimes find themselves in alliance with Jews, white progs, feminists, and the like, it isn't out of craven submission to their agendas but in accidental alignment with their hostilities. Muslims side with globalist whites who attack nationalist whites with full confidence and sheer contempt that globalists will eventually follow the nationalists in the dustbin of history.) Muslims stick to their own values and visions. If any homo tried to stick a homo flag in a Mosque, Muslims would tear him from limb to limb, and rightfully so. And no Muslim father will accept his daughter acting like a whore. Now, I don’t like the Muslim Way for womenfolk, but Islam refuses to yield to decadent perverts(though, of course, individual Muslims do indulge in various vices).
Now, one might argue that Western Values are about ‘free speech’, 'tolerance', and 'individualism', and that is why Muslims, given their judgmentalism and taboos, are not to be trusted or welcomed.
But here's the problem. There is no one set of 'Western Values'. West gave us Marxism, and what was more censorious than that? West also gave us National Socialism and various autocratic ideologies. And censorship was always rife even in European democracies in the past. Many books and movies were banned in France and UK in the 1950s and 1960s. Only the objects of censorship have changed.
More importantly, the Glob, Progs, and the Left no longer even belief in ‘free speech’. Consider their happy endorsement of the punching of Spencer, and they didn't condemn the violence at Berkeley(over Milo) and Middlebury(over Murray). If anything, there were plenty who endorsed such acts of violence and mayhem.
So, we need to understand that we are in a State of War. When the other side is more than willing to use any means at their disposal to bully and attack you, counter-violence is justified.
So, when white patriots take pride by claiming, "WE don’t act like those violent Muslims", they really should feel shame for their choice of peace in a time of war. At least the Muslims knows it's war and act accordingly, even if not always intelligently. In contrast, white people carry on as mere civilians in a time when their nations have become the main experimental battleground of globalism.
It is because white patriots don’t act stand up and fight with counter-violence that they keep losing again and again to the Glob, Progs, Negroes, homos, and the Invasion.
When an attempt was made on his father's life, Michael Corleone understood he could no longer be a 'civilian'. He had to be a warrior for the clan. There are times when you have to see things clearly. The West is in a State of War waged psychologically, culturally, financially, sensually, sexually, and demographically.
One can no longer afford to be a mere 'civilian'.
There is a war on the identity, history, heritage, culture, and territory of white nations. White minds are being colonized with PC virus. It is a kind of covert, cultural, and psychological war, a ‘long march through the institutions and industries'. And Pop Culture has been politicized to promote white cuckery, white surrender, and colonization of white wombs, mainly by black Africans. It is precisely because white minds have been infected with the degenerate globo-virus that white people have been rendered so gutless and defenseless against the Great Defamation(of white character) and Great Invasion(of white lands).
Therefore, it is white people who should be organizing, uniting, and waging war and acts of counter-violence against the enemies of whites. Though psychological war, cultural war, and ideological war must be waged through words and images, there are times when outright violence is the only effective method. After all, Zionists didn't only use ideas and images but guns and bombs when necessary. Israel would never come into existence with words and persuasion alone. And in the end, it was guns, not words, that decided the fate of the American War of Independence, the American West, the Mexican-America War, the Civil War, the Spanish-American War, World War I, World War II, and etc. And Vietnam didn't only use words and images but bombs and guns to drive out the French and the Americans. And it wasn't merely through peaceful marches that blacks pressed their demands on White America. They also used threats of violence and real violence in riots. So, it is a myth that the 'civilized modern world' is all about peace. Just a passing glance at US foreign policy shows how violence is central to US power around the world. And what brought down the pro-Russian regime in Ukraine? Ultra-violence in the streets with the full blessing of globalist elites who claim to be about 'liberal democracy'.
Because white civilians have forgotten the Art of Violence, they've allowed Negroes to run riot and beat up white guys and colonize the wombs of white women. White men don't fight for their land or their women. PC infection brainwashed them to relinquish all-things-white to non-white usurpers. Worse, whites are expected not only to not offer up resistance but provide assistance to the very people who will displace them. PC-infected whites have allowed Jewish globalists to reinvent the meaning of America, Canada, and Europe. Globalists say even UK and Germany are ‘nations of immigrants’.
Whites have allowed homos to spread filth all over and desecrate marriage and even churches. Whites have allowed feminists to drive a wedge between the sacred unity of white men and white women. All this madness was NOT the work of Muslims but of Jews, globalists, feminists, Negroes, and homos.
The Muslim alternative to globalism is pretty crude, and it is not acceptable to us who aren't Muslim. That said, Muslims are to be lauded for their refusals of and reprisals against Cultural & Moral Filth that afflicts the West. They will not cave to ‘gay marriage’ or worship the Negro or take orders from foolish feminists or cave to vile homos. (If Muslims sometimes find themselves in alliance with Jews, white progs, feminists, and the like, it isn't out of craven submission to their agendas but in accidental alignment with their hostilities. Muslims side with globalist whites who attack nationalist whites with full confidence and sheer contempt that globalists will eventually follow the nationalists in the dustbin of history.) Muslims stick to their own values and visions. If any homo tried to stick a homo flag in a Mosque, Muslims would tear him from limb to limb, and rightfully so. And no Muslim father will accept his daughter acting like a whore. Now, I don’t like the Muslim Way for womenfolk, but Islam refuses to yield to decadent perverts(though, of course, individual Muslims do indulge in various vices).
Now, one might argue that Western Values are about ‘free speech’, 'tolerance', and 'individualism', and that is why Muslims, given their judgmentalism and taboos, are not to be trusted or welcomed.
But here's the problem. There is no one set of 'Western Values'. West gave us Marxism, and what was more censorious than that? West also gave us National Socialism and various autocratic ideologies. And censorship was always rife even in European democracies in the past. Many books and movies were banned in France and UK in the 1950s and 1960s. Only the objects of censorship have changed.
More importantly, the Glob, Progs, and the Left no longer even belief in ‘free speech’. Consider their happy endorsement of the punching of Spencer, and they didn't condemn the violence at Berkeley(over Milo) and Middlebury(over Murray). If anything, there were plenty who endorsed such acts of violence and mayhem.
So, we need to understand that we are in a State of War. When the other side is more than willing to use any means at their disposal to bully and attack you, counter-violence is justified.
So, when white patriots take pride by claiming, "WE don’t act like those violent Muslims", they really should feel shame for their choice of peace in a time of war. At least the Muslims knows it's war and act accordingly, even if not always intelligently. In contrast, white people carry on as mere civilians in a time when their nations have become the main experimental battleground of globalism.
It is because white patriots don’t act stand up and fight with counter-violence that they keep losing again and again to the Glob, Progs, Negroes, homos, and the Invasion.
When an attempt was made on his father's life, Michael Corleone understood he could no longer be a 'civilian'. He had to be a warrior for the clan. There are times when you have to see things clearly. The West is in a State of War waged psychologically, culturally, financially, sensually, sexually, and demographically.
One can no longer afford to be a mere 'civilian'.
Thursday, March 23, 2017
Russian Nationalism is the greatest threat to Jewish Supremacism
America is part of the Empire of Judenia(the most powerful empire the world has ever seen), and Jews hate Russia as symbol of white gentile national sovereignty. That is more threatening to Jews than communism and National Socialism ever were.
Why? Even though communism was universalist, its repressive statism didn’t appeal to many, not even in poor nations. Also, Marxism was too intellectualist for hoi polloi. So, there was little chance of communism taking over the world and robbing Jews of their power and privileges.
National Socialism(of Germany) was arrogant and supremacist. It said only ‘Aryans’ are great and the rest sucks. As such, it appealed to few nations outside Germany. If anything, much of the world came to fear Germany under Hitler's reign.
But Russian Nationalism is about respect for each and every gentile nationalism. It doesn’t seek wars of conquest. It isn’t supremacist. It is sensible and limited within national borders. It is mutualist with other nations. Therefore, many nations can accept and adopt the Russian Way. Not because Russia is some paradise. After all, Russia is filled with excessive numbers of lazy bums and drunken fools. No, it’s because Russian Way says, “You respect our nationalism, and we will respect your nationalism.” This can have appeal to gentile nations. Russia isn’t saying its way is the ONLY way or one-size-fits-all. It is saying what is right for Russia belongs in Russia. The corollary to this is that other nations belong to their majority populations who should determine what their national identity and destiny are really about. In contrast, America tries to force Americanism(now defined by Jews, homos, and Negroes) on the entire world. It tries to break down all national borders and subvert all cultures and traditions. Also, there is a great contradiction at the heart of Americanism. It says America is the 'exceptional and indispensable nation' but all other nations must follow it, obey it, and emulate it. How can unexceptionals hope to be like the sole exceptional?
In contrast, the Russian Way gives leeway for every nation to define its own ideas & values and decide on its own destiny without the meddling of other nations, Russia included. THIS ASPECT is the greatest threat to globalist Jewish Power predicated on destroying all nationalisms(while 'passovering' Jewish nationalism in Israel. Jews ought to be called Passovermen, or Passubermensch). Jews actually wish Putin was Hitler peddling Russian supremacism. That way, Jews can persuade many nations that Russian Power is a threat to the entire world and an enemy of mankind. But the fact is Putin is no 'hitler', and the workd knows it. If anything, Putin preaches independence for each nation from the globalist-imperialist domination of America as crown-in-the-jewel of Judenia.
That is why there is a Jewish War on Russia.
It’s not about Putin being a thug. If Putin is a thug, US leaders are super-thugs.
It’s not about Putin being a killer. If Putin is a killer, US leaders are mass murderers.
It’s not about Russia being ‘illberal’ or ‘undemocratic’. When political results in the West are displeasing to globalist elites, the elites demean them as ‘populist’(rule by yahoos) and even call for a Deep State coup d’etat. Some even hint at assassination of elected leaders.
‘Liberal Democracy’ is euphemism for globalist domination by the likes of George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, Haim Saban, Jeff Bezos, and the oligarchs.
Why? Even though communism was universalist, its repressive statism didn’t appeal to many, not even in poor nations. Also, Marxism was too intellectualist for hoi polloi. So, there was little chance of communism taking over the world and robbing Jews of their power and privileges.
National Socialism(of Germany) was arrogant and supremacist. It said only ‘Aryans’ are great and the rest sucks. As such, it appealed to few nations outside Germany. If anything, much of the world came to fear Germany under Hitler's reign.
But Russian Nationalism is about respect for each and every gentile nationalism. It doesn’t seek wars of conquest. It isn’t supremacist. It is sensible and limited within national borders. It is mutualist with other nations. Therefore, many nations can accept and adopt the Russian Way. Not because Russia is some paradise. After all, Russia is filled with excessive numbers of lazy bums and drunken fools. No, it’s because Russian Way says, “You respect our nationalism, and we will respect your nationalism.” This can have appeal to gentile nations. Russia isn’t saying its way is the ONLY way or one-size-fits-all. It is saying what is right for Russia belongs in Russia. The corollary to this is that other nations belong to their majority populations who should determine what their national identity and destiny are really about. In contrast, America tries to force Americanism(now defined by Jews, homos, and Negroes) on the entire world. It tries to break down all national borders and subvert all cultures and traditions. Also, there is a great contradiction at the heart of Americanism. It says America is the 'exceptional and indispensable nation' but all other nations must follow it, obey it, and emulate it. How can unexceptionals hope to be like the sole exceptional?
In contrast, the Russian Way gives leeway for every nation to define its own ideas & values and decide on its own destiny without the meddling of other nations, Russia included. THIS ASPECT is the greatest threat to globalist Jewish Power predicated on destroying all nationalisms(while 'passovering' Jewish nationalism in Israel. Jews ought to be called Passovermen, or Passubermensch). Jews actually wish Putin was Hitler peddling Russian supremacism. That way, Jews can persuade many nations that Russian Power is a threat to the entire world and an enemy of mankind. But the fact is Putin is no 'hitler', and the workd knows it. If anything, Putin preaches independence for each nation from the globalist-imperialist domination of America as crown-in-the-jewel of Judenia.
That is why there is a Jewish War on Russia.
It’s not about Putin being a thug. If Putin is a thug, US leaders are super-thugs.
It’s not about Putin being a killer. If Putin is a killer, US leaders are mass murderers.
It’s not about Russia being ‘illberal’ or ‘undemocratic’. When political results in the West are displeasing to globalist elites, the elites demean them as ‘populist’(rule by yahoos) and even call for a Deep State coup d’etat. Some even hint at assassination of elected leaders.
‘Liberal Democracy’ is euphemism for globalist domination by the likes of George Soros, Mark Zuckerberg, Haim Saban, Jeff Bezos, and the oligarchs.
Thursday, March 16, 2017
Why do Jews hate Gentile Nationalism? Same reason a man with a sword hates your sword.
Even though Jews love Israel and Jewish nationalism(aka Zionism), Jewish power really resides in gentile nations, especially the US and nations of EU. Since the survival and viability of Israel depend to a large extent on the support of Western nations, Jews feel they must ensure the loyalty of gentile nations to the Jews and Israel. In other words, white gentiles must favor Jews over themselves.
So, when Jews say nationalism is a bad thing, what they really mean is that the rise of gentile nationalism poses a challenge to Jewish nationalism. If nationalism means one's preference of one's own people over others, it means gentile nationalism will lead to gentiles favoring themselves over Jews. And that may pose a threat to Jewish nationalism and supremacism. China is nationalist and favors Chinese interests over any other. Iran is nationalist and favors Iranian interests over any other. Even though China and Iran may not be overly anti-Jewish, they will not place Jewish interests above their own. So, Jews cannot control those nations to serve the Jews. But Jews have persuaded white gentiles that nationalism --- at least in white nations --- is evil, a kind of 'Nazism'. (In truth, it was Polish nationalism, French nationalism, Russian nationalism, Chinese nationalism, and American nationalism that rolled back the tide of Axis Imperialism.) White gentiles, baited with Holocaust Guilt and in awe of Jewish power in media & finance, have become mentally colonized or psycolonized by Jews.
However, when Jews demean nationalism, it is not ALL nationalisms. Paradoxically, Jews attack white gentile nationalism to shore up and boost their own nationalism. Jews don't say ALL peoples, Jews included, must abandon nationalism. If anything, Jews justify their own nationalism among themselves on the basis that gentiles are innately evil and wicked.
However, when Jews demean nationalism, it is not ALL nationalisms. Paradoxically, Jews attack white gentile nationalism to shore up and boost their own nationalism. Jews don't say ALL peoples, Jews included, must abandon nationalism. If anything, Jews justify their own nationalism among themselves on the basis that gentiles are innately evil and wicked.
At any rate, Jewish fear of gentile nationalism is rational. If nationalism means the favoring of one's own people to others, then every gentile nationalism will favor the gentile majority to the Jewish minority. This doesn't necessarily mean 'antisemitism' or anti-Jewish discrimination. After all, Russia allows all sorts of freedoms and opportunities to Jews to get rich and pursue happiness & success. But gentile nationalism does mean Jews are not allowed to gain supremacist power in gentile nations, and this denial is no longer tolerable to Western Jews who now feel entitled to supremacist control over goyim. Jews no longer struggle for equality or fairness. They are addicted to maintaining their supremacist control over gentiles, especially whites. They want whites to spiritually worship Jews, financially serve Jews, culturally follow Jews, sexually surrender to Jews, etc. Jews accuse white gentile nationalists of being 'Nazi', but if 'Nazism' is a form of supremacism, then no people are as Nazi-like as the Jews are in today's world. Ironically, Jews fear gentile nationalism because gentiles will act like Jews: Favor their own kind over others. Since gentiles greatly outnumber Jews in gentile nations, this can be a real challenge to Jewish power and supremacism if gentiles were to have their own kind of gentile 'zionism'.
Nationalism is a political weapon. It is a shield with which to defend one's own people from others. It is a sword with which to fight the enemies. A swordsman uses his own sword & shield in his fight against other swordsmen with their swords & shields. In battle, a swordsman wields his weapon to disarm his opponents of their weapons. A swordsman prizes his own sword & shield but fears, even loathes, the swords & shields of his rivals. So, it is only logical that Jews, in love with their own tribalist sword & shield, seek to destroy the swords & shields of gentiles. Jews want to be the only ones with the sword & shield of nationalism lording over all others who kneel before the Jewish king and kiss his one and only true sword.
If we recognize nationalism as a powerful weapon, we can understand why Jews would fear the gentile nationalism of other peoples. If Jews had a nice big nation of their own, they might be content with what they have and tolerate other peoples' ownership of their own nations. But Jews are a majority in only one nation, the tiny state of Israel. So, unlike Russians, Chinese, Indians, or Iranians, Jewish power isn't much if located only in Israel. Jews must derive their power and wealth from gentile nations in which they are minorities, and therefore, Jews are keen on suppressing the nationalism of gentile peoples who've come under their thumb. Also, no people are as ambitious and arrogant as the Jews. If most peoples are content with control over their own nations and respect other peoples' control over theirs, Jews like George Soros feel this insatiable desire to remake the entire world in their radical image. Jews are tireless like rats in gnawing away at the national defenses of other peoples. Jews bitch about anti-Jewish hatred or 'antisemitism', but they ignore the fact that anti-Jewish hatred has often been defensive against Jewish aggression that gnaws itself into every region on earth to subvert and undermine gentile identity and interests. Even when Jews gain mastery over other peoples, they don't stand tall and upright as the new masters --- which would at least be honest and honorable --- but shrug their shoulders and underplay the Jewish nature of their agenda to fool the goyim. They want to be invisible masters, and this is why they rely so heavily on shabbos goyim to serve as Fronts.
From a purely strategic viewpoint, Jewish hostility to gentile nationalism makes total sense. If Jews want to ensure that gentiles in US and EU will primarily serve Jewish interests, Jewish nationalism, and Jewish supremacism(or Jewish 'Nazism'), then gentiles must be persuaded and/or pressured to forgo their own ethno-nationalist identities and interests that, if left to grow of their own accord, could turn into obstacles to gentile subservience to Jewish identity and interests.
History has proven time and again that the MOST POTENT force against imperialism has been nationalism. All anti-imperialist struggles were nationalist. Without the rise of nationalist consciousness, the subject peoples failed to unite to fight to overthrow the foreign rulers. It was with the spread of nationalist consciousness that the peoples of world began to regain independence and drive out the imperialists in places like Algeria, Cuba, and Vietnam. Creation of America has been portrayed as a birth of liberty, but it was more the birth of new nationalism against the overweening imperialism of the British. So, even imperialism births nationalism among the colonizers who rebel against it.
It was the rise of nationalism that finally brought an end to European imperialist domination. In some cases, the Third World nationalism was organic. For example, there really was a Vietnamese civilization going back over a thousands years. In other cases, the nationalism was newly constructed, as in Indonesia and even India, places that gained a sense of common destiny under the imperialism. The narrative of shared tragedy under imperialism forged a political bond. Rise of nationalism made imperialism no longer viable in the Third World.
It was the rise of nationalism that finally brought an end to European imperialist domination. In some cases, the Third World nationalism was organic. For example, there really was a Vietnamese civilization going back over a thousands years. In other cases, the nationalism was newly constructed, as in Indonesia and even India, places that gained a sense of common destiny under the imperialism. The narrative of shared tragedy under imperialism forged a political bond. Rise of nationalism made imperialism no longer viable in the Third World.
Today, it is the West that is under imperialist rule. It is called globalism, and it is essentially Worldwide Jewish Imperialism. All whites are under the globalist imperialist domination of Jewish supremacists. Globalism spares only one nationalism, that of Zionists. Israel gets Passover treatment while all other nationalisms are eventually to be extinguished by Jewish-globalist power. Because gentile nationalism seeks to shutter the window against this poison gas of the Jews --- Zio-Klon G -- , Jews want to shatter the glass of every gentile window so that the globo-gas will enter every nation(but Israel) and destroy national identity and pride.
Nationalism has a populist element in obligating the elites of a nation to represent, serve, and defend the people of the nation. According to nationalism, Hungarian elites should represent, serve, and defend Hungarian identity and interests. Japanese elites should represent, serve, and defend Japanese identity and interests. German elites should represent, serve, and defend German identity and interests. This is precisely what Jews fear. Jews want the best-and-the-brightest among the gentiles to serve Jewish identity and interests. Jews want gentile elites to collaborate with Jewish globalist imperialists than to represent and serve their own peoples. It's like the British imperialists wanted Indian elites to collaborate with the British than represent the aspirations of the Indian masses. And French imperialists wanted Vietnamese elites to collaborate with the French than fight for Vietnamese independence.
Now that Jews rule the West, Jews want Western gentile elites to serve their Jewish masters than lead and guide their own peoples. (But then, even the white gentile masses have been turned onto rejecting their own identity/interests and to serving Jewish globalism under the barrage of 'white guilt' indoctrination, 'jungle fever' in sports & rap, decadent faddishness of homomania, and the Cult of Diversity. So many white people have been reduced to virtue-signaling idiots who think themselves righteous because they champion their own demographic demise via mass immigration, race-mixing, and degenerate behavior.)
Now that Jews rule the West, Jews want Western gentile elites to serve their Jewish masters than lead and guide their own peoples. (But then, even the white gentile masses have been turned onto rejecting their own identity/interests and to serving Jewish globalism under the barrage of 'white guilt' indoctrination, 'jungle fever' in sports & rap, decadent faddishness of homomania, and the Cult of Diversity. So many white people have been reduced to virtue-signaling idiots who think themselves righteous because they champion their own demographic demise via mass immigration, race-mixing, and degenerate behavior.)
When Jews say white gentiles must forgo their national identity and interests, they don't mean it applies to Jews as well. They mean whites must put down their swords & shields to submit to the sword & shield of the Jew. If ten people have guns and if the Jewish guy happens to be anti-gun, it doesn't mean everyone INCLUDING THE JEW should surrender his gun. It means everyone EXCEPT THE JEW should give up his gun. That way, the Jew is the ONLY ONE with the gun, and he has the power over the others.
Indeed, Jewish attitude on gun rights is no different from their attitude on nationalism: It is For-Jews-Only.
Why do Jews want to take away gun rights in America? Jews have no problem with every Jewish family owning automatic rifles in Israel because Jews are the majority there. Gun ownership in Israel means Jewish power over Arabs. But in the US, Jews are only 2% of the population; therefore, a well-armed nation means many more gentiles with guns than Jews with guns. But then, Jews control the government and elite institutions that control the military and the police. So, if only the government has the power of firearms, it means ONLY JEWS have the power of firearms since nearly all politicians are owned by Jews and nearly all of the judiciary is under Jewish control.
Whether it's guns or nationalism, Jews want to monopolize it all. Know your Jew.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)