Saturday, February 17, 2018

All Respectable Ideologies and Movements Are Base and Primal at Their Root - Making Sense of George Hawley

George Hee-Hawley, professional investigator of the radioactive movement called the Alt Right

Making Sense of George Hawley.

George Hawley the so-called expert of the American Right has written couple of books on the subjet. One, RIGHT-WING CRITICISM OF AMERICAN CONSERVATISM, doesn’t exclusively deal with the Alt Right but does touch upon the views of certain key Alt Right figures. MAKING SENSE OF THE ALT RIGHT is like an addendum to the earlier book and, despite its short length, focuses solely on the Alt Right movement. Hawley, a dork who should be called Hee-Hawley, is essentially an academic toady and cucky ass-kisser of Jewish supremacist power; therefore, it’s hardly surprising that he resorts to the usual name-calling so common in academia and media. That said, because the academia and so-called mainstream media are such no-go zones for anyone right of Conservatism Inc., some Alt Right and Race-ist(aka Race Realist) figures are grateful for Hee-Hawley’s coverage of their movement. They figure any attention is better than no attention.

From Hee-Hawley’s writings, you come across the same old same old accusations of ‘racism’ and ‘white supremacism’. Granted, there are unsavory figures on the Alternative Right landscape, but Hee-Hawley’s labels fail at grasping the dynamics of what’s really happening. And if on some level he does sense there’s far more to the Movement than current PC labels can do justice to, he’s too much of a wimp to follow the facts and logic to their conclusion because his wussy self might wet his pants over the sheer shock of realization. So, to keep his pants dry, he sticks to the usual labels and formulations to explain the shifting ideological landscape. He makes an effort to be sufficiently empathetic to understand where the Alt Right is coming from and why, but the plug up his ass is too tight for him to break wind to make space for new air. If you’ve seen pictures of him, you know he’s a Grade A dork and dweeb, lacking in sufficient-sized marbles to venture into places where others dread to tread. He hasn’t the nerves to be a real hunter for truth. He’s at best one of those guys with binoculars on a safari venture, watching the animals from afar.
At yet, a part of him is surely drawn to the Alt Right because it’s a movement with white guys with nuts bigger than his own. It’s like that dweeby officer in HEARTBREAK RIDGE who finds Eastwood’s character crude and vulgar but nevertheless can't help admiring him for his manliness.
Boyd Gaines as Lieutenant Ring in HEARTBREAK RIDGE, a professional careerist dork like George Hee-Hawley
Even as the goo-goo bourgeois side of Hee-Hawley constantly reminds him that Alt Right is made of up ‘baddy bad guys’, he can’t help but be fascinated because the only white men with any spine and balls can be found on the Alt Right. Hee-Hawley is like Richard Dreyfus’ character in AMERICAN GRAFFITI who, despite being intimidated by the local hoodlums, feels honored to take part in one of the exploits.

Hee-Hawley’s squirrel-sized nuts simply don’t provide him with enough mojo to speak truth to the homo, mofo, and the Zio, so he leans his ear to the Alt Right. Of course, having been raised to be a goody-two-shoes nerdling, he is disturbed and distressed by what he hears from the Alt Right, but surely a subconscious side of him must feel, "these guys are persecuted by the entire power structure because, by golly gee whiz, they say it like it is."
To understand someone, it’s not enough to know what they’ve read or committed to ideologically. You need to get a sense of the man, and in Hee-Hawley’s case, he’s the kind of guy who still goes to work with a lunch box with tidily packed sandwich, a cookie, an apple, and love-and-kisses note from ma(or wifey). But we can’t really blame him because it’s genetics. A man born with chipmunk-sized nuts simply can’t be expected to burrow for truth like a gopher.
In terms of emotional makeup and overall sensibility, Hee-Hawley is strictly middle-of-the-road, incapable of grasping what has really transpired all around him. He's rather like the main character in IDIOCY who remains clueless as to how the world became like that when, even in his own time(prior to arriving at the future), signs of troubles were all around him.

Hee-Hawley is the sort of guy who should go around wearing a shirt with the words, "I’m a good boy", his other shirt having the words, "I feel even gooder today". Now, it’s good to be good, and we’re all sure that Hee-Hawley is a good person and all that. But there are times when being good isn’t good enough. After all, ‘goodness’ is relative. Goodness can mean conscience and integrity, but its connotation of moderation usually implies something nice, tame, pleasant, and compliant. Any social and political order has its share of good people. You could find good people among Nazis, Commies, Japanese militarists, and Fundamental Muslims. They all share the same traits. They are polite to others in the community and mindful not to upset the apple cart. They want to get along and be good to others. But because goodness tends to be moderate and cooperative, it rarely asks the Big Question of the What and Why. It’s like a good German in Nazi Germany was civil to his neighbors, obedient to the state, and dutiful to his country. But being modestly good, he didn’t have the yarbles to ask the question of "What is Hitler really about?" Same goes for militarist Japan. Take a Akira Kurosawa film THE MOST BEAUTIFUL that’s about patriotic, dutiful, and self-sacrificing young Japanese women who work at a factory to make armaments for the military. They are good girls and don’t mean harm. They are full of simple virtues, but they don’t have the vision and soul to ask the really big question of what’s up with Japan’s foreign policy. Similarly, Hee-Hawley is surely a good person. If he saw an old lady struggling with grocery, he would surely help. He wouldn’t be like a ghastly Negro who knocks her over and runs off with the purse. But all said and done, it’s his mild and modest goodness that prevents him from asking the great big ball-busting questions about the true dynamics of power in the US and the world.

Paradoxically, the preponderance of good people can support a great evil system. Indeed, the reason why Nazi Germany, Soviet Union, and militarist Japan were so dangerous was because they had so many good people: hard workers, civic-minded idealists, comrades, patriots, men of discipline, women of loyalty, and/or etc. Because there were so many such people that the elites were able to summon up great industrial and military might. After all, if Nazi Germany was about Hitler ruling over a bunch of jiggity Negroes and lax Mexicans(aka Laxicans) who throw garbage all over the place, there would have been no industrial might to conquer other nations with. Consider Mussolini Italy where so many people were lazy, sloppy, corrupt, and acting like Giancarlo Giannini in SEVEN BEAUTIES. There never would have been a Wehrmacht worthy of its name, and if Hitler gave orders to invade France, the soldiers would have soiled their pants and run off to mama like a bunch of petty cowards without honor. It’s like the part in Ernest Hemingway’s FAREWELL TO ARMS where a couple of Italian deserters eat the food but the moment there’s any trouble, they bolt to save their own asses. Unlike Italy, Germany had lots of good men and women with a strong sense of honor and duty. But their narrow goodness failed to ask big questions about this dark-souled sorcerer named Hitler ruling over them. But then, the reason why Germany and Japan recovered so spectacularly from the rubble of WWII is because there were still so many good people who were willing to work hard and together to rebuild their nations. So, good people are a great asset, but because they lack vision and depth, they could easily be hoodwinked into serving a diabolical power that manipulates the trusting ‘innocence’ of goodness in men and womenfolk.

In a perfect world, it should be enough for people to be good. But in a world beset with excessive corruption and deception, it takes people with the Will to be ‘Bad’ to make a difference. Badness is also relative like goodness. What is deemed good in one system could be deemed bad in another. Still, there is a kind of universal badness that all systems would condemn. After all, despite their great differences, I think Nazis, Zionists, Communists, Catholics, Muslims, Anarchists, and Homomaniacs would all agree that it’s bad to kidnap a baby, roast it on a BBQ, and feed it to a pitbull. I think even Satan Worshipers would agree that’s not good. Also, virtually all social systems(at least ones controlled by non-blacks) believe stealing is bad. So, there is bad as bad. And there are plenty of criminals and thugs who do things that they know are bad. The men in GOODFELLAS don’t pretend that they are good citizens. They enjoy doing bad things. They get a kick out of it. That kind of badness has no value.

But there is another kind of badness that isn’t badness-for-badness’ sake. Rather, it’s the courage to be impervious to accusations of ‘badness’ in defiance of established norms. Such a person is not trying to be bad per se. Indeed, he may have a strong moral sense. But because he dares to prefer truth over social acceptance at any cost, he is willing to risk being considered ‘bad’. He may even get an edgy kick out of being shunned or denounced by society and peers. Not because he’s a criminal or sociopath but because of an innate sense that the big truth cannot be had simply by being nice and getting along. It’s like if you want catch the big fish, you can’t just hang around the beach fishing with worms. You won’t catch marlins that way. You have to be like the character of Santiago in Hemingway’s THE OLD MAN AND THE SEA and set out to deeper waters and be willing to risk it all and put up a fight.

And this is what the Alt Right has. It has the will to sail into darker and deeper waters to fish for the bigger truth. It is out to harpoon the whale. (Just a metaphor for we don’t condone the killing of whales.) In contrast, Hee-Hawley hasn’t the spine and nerves to get onboard to go after Moby Dick. He is afraid of losing sight of the establishmentarian harbor. So, the most he can do is interview some Alt Right individuals without plunging for depth as to the true configuration of power in America and the world. As such, Hee-Hawley is essentially a scribe of the Power than a true intellectual that asks the big questions.

Now, we don’t mean to suggest that Hee-Hawley has to agree with the Alt Right or admire Alt Right ideas to arrive at a deeper truth. Besides, there is no single Alt Right ideology, and there are some loony figures in the movement who need to get their heads screwed on right. But if the Alt Right is not the answer for Hee-Hawley, he should find his own way to comprehend what is really going on, but he has utterly failed in this regard because he’s too puppyish to bark at the master who’s holding the leash attached to the collar around his neck. After all, for honest people, whether they agree or disagree with Alt Right ideals and visions, it should be plainly obvious that the US is really a Jewish Supremacist nation. This is not just opinion or conjecture. It is a FACT. The fact that the media and academia in America cannot address that FACT is the proof of its factuality. Power protects itself with Taboo.
If the Alt Right has any single value, it’s as the ONLY voice that is willing to address this FACT in a sane and rational way. True, there have been Neo-Nazi types who screamed about Jews a million times, but they were cartoons growling at cartoon Jews. In contrast, the Alt Right addresses the real problems caused by real Jewish power that has its hooks into nearly all elite institutions and industries. In this sense, the Alt Right is ‘bad’ in the most essential way. If one’s entire life is about goodness, one will lack the daring and audacity to ask the big questions about the Power. A modest and nice kind of goodness means to have grown up to gain approval and acceptance from the System controlled by the Power. While such good people may sometimes offer criticism and/or rebuke the system, by and large they accept the main premise of the system without really questioning its underlying dynamics or transformations.

Granted, it’s possible that the foundation of the system is sound, so why try to fix what is not broken? But then, every system, despite its ‘timeless’ principles, is really a tool of those who control the main levers of power. In the case of the US, so many people have believed they’re living in the same wonderful system with its ‘timeless’ set of principles going back to 1776 because, after all, the US has continued to be a democratic republic since its founding. Because politicians still pledge loyalty to the Constitution and participate in regular elections, there’s the widely shared impression that they’re all living in the same good ole USA. What people fail to realize is that revolution can happen silently and invisibly without the eradication of the system. By this, I’m not talking about new presidents and newly elected officials. Nor am I talking of great scientific breakthroughs and technological transformation of society that are integral to the modern world. What I mean is that a new kind of force can surreptitiously take over the key instruments of power and fundamentally alter the course of the nation. Indeed, everything could be different despite the same/similar-sounding official rhetoric. Consider the issue of Immigration. There was a time when the most American thing to do was to control demographics so that whites shall remain as the essential core of America. The notion of America as a nation of immigrants meant a nation of white immigrants. But then, beginning in 1965, the notion of ‘nation of immigrants’ began to change. It still prioritized the existing Americans with historical roots in America but also believed in the hope that new immigrants, many of them non-white, would learn to appreciate the great achievements of Americans and try to assimilate and become Good Americans themselves. But now, the notion of ‘nation of immigrants’ means that those yet-to-come are more-American-than-existing-or-rooted-Americans because the essence of America is the dream of what is yet to be, especially by welcoming the entire world. So, the idea of America as a ‘nation of immigrants’ is not fixed but always remolded in accordance to the agenda of those who have the Power. Because Jews have the most power in America, they altered the meaning of ‘nation of immigrants’. But because so much of the New(and disruptive and destabilizing) is described and defended using the same rhetoric and terminology, Americans are misled into thinking that America Now is a meaningful and organic continuation of America Then. In fact, the revolution that happened in American Power is as dramatic and radical as the changes that occurred in Russia with the fall of communism. But the revolution in America happened under the radar because the mechanics of the system remained intact even as a new kind of people, mainly the Jews, took over the system.
Now, imagine if the American Democratic system remains intact but the Chinese-American community takes control of US media, academia, deep state, finance, gambling, law firms, & narrative(thereby making Americans, especially white Americans, especially guilt-ridden about and servile to Chinese), and furthermore, steered US foreign policy to be especially favorable to the interests of China. Wouldn’t one say a kind of great revolution took place in the dynamics of American Power? Even if America would still have the same system of elections and due process, the fact would be virtually all politicians, financial industries, media power, academic influence, intelligence services, high-tech, and the war machine would be controlled by the Chinese-American community that constitutes a small percentage of American people. US would defacto be a colony of globalist Chinese imperialism. What happened in Russia in the 1990s is a testament as to how a nation, despite the trappings of sovereignty and independence, could effectively be controlled by an alien power. With Jewish oligarchs having bought off so many whore-politicians and controlling so much of the media and banks, they were the defacto lords of Russia, the puppet-masters behind the throne and parliament. Indeed, the big visible revolution, the fall of Soviet communism, was followed by a silent and insidious second revolution whereupon Jewish insiders of a globalist network took control of Russia. But because these Jews used Russian gentile fronts as their puppets and because the global media are mostly controlled by Jews, this startling ethno-revolution — a revolution where the political system remains intact but another ethnic group takes power and steers national policy to their own benefit — was hardly investigated and analyzed around the world. And most Americans dared not notice because doing so could have gotten them labeled as an ‘anti-Semite’, which is like the mark of Cain in American media. (Jewish power in Russia was so insidious that it took another insidious power, that of Russian intelligence services, to regain some measure of wealth and sovereignty for the Russian nation. Putin's experience in the KGB & FSB and his deep state connections made it possible for his faction to rein in the worst excesses of Jewish globalist power. To regain total control, Jewish globalists pushed stuff like Pussy Riot and Homomania, a proxy of Jewish influence, into Russia. When Russia pushed back, Jews went about toppling the Ukrainian regime and pushing all kinds of sanctions against Russia on bogus grounds. Hee-Hawley simply doesn't understand that the struggle of Russians, Palestinians, Iranians, European Right,and Alt Right all have one thing in common in that they are pushing back against Jewish supremacist evil.)
Just ask Rick Sanchez who got fired from CNN and couldn’t get another gig after he mentioned Jewish Power in the media.
Ultimately, Hee-Hawley has no desire to understand the nature of the Real Power and the significance of the Alt Right in relation to it. Instead, he is a servant, scribe, and water-boy for the Real Power that uses him as a shabbos goy clerk. The Power needs someone to do the ‘dirty work’ in accessing and explaining the Alt Right. While many reporters have written about the Alt Right, they just followed the preordained narrative about Alt Right being just a new bunch of ‘white supremacists’, ‘racists’, and ‘Neo-Nazis’. And the reason why MSM makes a big deal of the clownish Andrew Anglin(who jumped on the Alt-Right bandwagon only when it attracted media buzz despite having impugned it earlier) is they want most Americans to believe that some errant ‘skinhead’ is the core of Alt-Rightism. As far as the Jewish-run media are concerned, the hoi polloi shouldn’t know anything about the Alt Right except the $PLC line, which everyone in journalism has to toe whether he wants to or not. But for the more educated and curious, the boilerplate PC narrative won’t do. There has to be subtler and more precise delineation of Alt Right ideas, and this is where Hee-Hawley enters the picture. Now, he has the right credentials as a scribe of the Power. He’s too goody-goody, neutered, and well-trained to run free of the PC leash. He’s been trained and conditioned to be a good doggy all his life. He fetches and rolls over when ordered. So, there is no chance of him going off the reservation and joining the Alt Right wolf pack that stands for white identity and freedom. Rather, he’s like a scout dog who’s been trained to go near the perimeters of the Alt Right movement and pick up enough scents and on occasion get a good sniff of wolf butt. And then he goes back to his masters in the academia and duly reports what’s he’s seen, heard, and sniffed. Now, it’s possible that, being a white male, there are elements of the Alt Right that stirs some long-forgotten warrior-instinct within him. It’s like dogs are fearful of wolves but also feel excited in the company of wolves that haven’t been turned into obedient servile doggies. When a dog goes from canned or dry dog food and tastes raw meat for the first time, it begins to growl as its predatory instincts are revived. But alas, a dog is a dog, far too domesticated to be a wolf, and it must return to its masters. And Hee-Hawley is the same way. On some subliminal level, he might sense something organic and genuine about Alt Right white identitarians, but the conditioning ultimately makes him withdraw and retreat in fear and panic.
So, if wolves exult in tribal-pack unity and solidarity when they pick up each other’s scents, Hee-Hawley’s dog-like conditioning makes him recoil from the White Racial Odor as ‘noxious-odious’, and he runs back to his Master, rolls over, and barks, "Wolf butt smell stinky. Ewwwww." It’s like a Hindu dotkin being conditioned to find the smell of curry offensive.

The Stink Factor is important in tribal politics. Why did so many Jews love FIDDLER ON THE ROOF and YENTL? Those movies reek of Jewishness. This stink, though offensive to non-Jews and wasp-ized Jews, remind Jews of their lost home. Even Wasp-ized Jews who might be offended by it initially can’t help thinking it’s a reminder, a scent-signal from a long lost corner of their consciousness. In a nation like America, many people lost their Stink Factor for two main reasons. The Anglo-Americans, German-Americans, and Celtic-Americans who played the foundation role of American civilization were non-odorific peoples. Their foods tended to be bland, with less use of spices and stuff like garlic, which is why Mr. Potter in IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE refers to Italians as ‘garlic eaters’. For Anglo folks, tribalism was visual. "I’m white, he’s white, they’re white; we are all white." But many other cultures had an element of Stink Factor. It’s like that story the "Jewbird" by Bernard Malamud. Part of becoming American was to be scrubbed clean of the ‘stink’. It’s like the thesis of Michael Novak’s THE RISE OF THE UNMELTABLE ETHNICS, a more scholarly version of the kind of sentiments shared by Mike Royko.

The other reason why Americans became ‘odorophobic’ is paradoxical. On the one hand, the mass immigration of different peoples made Americans more tolerant of different odors. And in time, even Anglo-Americans became excited about ethnic cooking from all over the world. And in the UK, Indian food is a big deal now. But, diversity also meant people smelling weird to one another. It wasn’t pleasant to stand inside an elevator where some Negro smells like onions, some Mexican smells like chili peppers, some Korean smells like kim-chee, some Italian smells like garlic, some Pole smells like pickles and herring, and some old Hindu not only smells like curry but blows a nasty fart that is so pernicious that it renders a Negress hysterical in crazy laughter. So, over time, all these different kinds of ‘Americans’ became more mindful not to offend others by curtailing their own Stink Factor. So, everyone in America kinda became ‘white bread’. For diehard odorificists, a Hindu fart will cure them of their fetish.

Still, there is a longing for something real and authentic. Maybe everyone being more ‘white-bread’ is the best formula for social peace, but it feels generic and boring. Then, it is not surprising that there was the rise of multi-culturalism where Jews, various non-white groups, and White Latin-Americans posturing as honorary ‘people of color’ craved for something realer than assimilating into ‘white bread’ Americanism. And yet, the emphasis on the visuals in the concept of people-of-color reflects considerable Wasp influence. Multi-culturalism is really multi-coloralism. Indeed, its Jewish conceivers weren’t really interested in the cultures of non-whites because, after all, most non-white cultures are very conservative and traditionalist. So, if every non-group were to stick with their own cultural values, they would be an obstacle to ‘progressivism’. So, what multi-culturalism or multi-coloralism was really about was convincing non-whites that they are victims of white people and must unite on the basis of their shared colorfulness. Forget about your culture, just focus on your color, remind yourself that people of your color are oppressed by white people, and join with other peoples of color under the banner of whatever ideology Jews put in front of you. Then, it is not surprising that the essence of ‘multi-culturalism’ is a bunch of peoples of color standing together under the banner of Homomania, the most ‘colorful’ symbol ever concocted. For some reason, homos, who comprise 2% of the population, came to own all the colors of the rainbow. Jews sure are clever this way. Via ‘multi-culturalism’, Jews hoodwinked non-white peoples into forsaking their true and traditional cultures, pretend they have anything in common with other non-white groups — according to multi-cultural logic, an Arab has more in common with an Mexican Indios than with Europeans despite the fact that Arabs are mostly Caucasian and have had contacts with Europe for over thousand years — , and worship Homomania as the essence of what their cultures are really about(or should be about). No wonder Jews feel contempt for goyim. Jews manipulate goyim of all colors like Bugs Bunny manipulates Elmer Fudd.
Some say the Alt Right is a reaction to the rise of identity politics of the ‘left’, but the truth is far more complicated. After all, Alt Right is one but not the only white reaction to the identity politics of the ‘left’. But more crucially, Alt Right’s concept of identity is far deeper and more meaningful than the nonsense pushed by Jewish-controlled Political Correctness. As stated earlier, ‘multi-culturalism’ is a fraud, at least in America. It’s not about encouraging non-whites to reconnect or preserve their cultures of origin. Rather, it’s about persuading non-whites that their main identity is ‘victimhood’ under ‘whitey’. It’s not an identity of roots but of resentment. Multi-culturalism doesn’t care if a Hindu-American, Iranian-American, Chinese-American, or Mayan-American knows nothing of his own history or culture. But it will be disappointed with any non-white who doesn’t see himself as a victim of ‘whitey’. So, the main identifier of ‘multi-culturalism’ is shallow sense of self-pity and victimhood. Indeed, take away the victim narrative, and multiculturalism offers nothing. This is why so many non-whites who’ve come under multi-culti-nonsense are so insipid and trite in their same old PC cliches. Their simple formula is "Me victim of whitey; me love homos and trannies uber alles; me too angry with ‘racist’ whitey" to notice that it’s the Jews who got the real power.
And of course homomania, in waging war on ‘essentialism’, has turned identity politics into a real farce. Homomania led to LGBT-backed Trannymania that says a man with penis and balls must be accepted as a ‘woman’ if he so chooses. This dealt a serious blow to feminism. Feminism used to be about ‘Sisterhood is beautiful’, but what is ‘sisterhood’ worth when a brother with a penis also counts as a ‘woman’ if he so insists? And some say that trans-gender mania will open the way to trans-racial-mania in which case anything goes.
I mention this because Alt Right is not just another variation of this kind of Identity Politics. Instead, it is a true politics of identity rooted in biology, history, culture, and territoriality. It’s not a fanciful game of "Oh, I suddenly discovered I want to wear a wig and pretend to be a woman." Also, Alt Right identity doesn’t require victim-ism to have value. Now, all peoples have their victim narratives that fills them with a sense of tragic nobility. Poles remember Russian imperialism. Greeks remember Turkish occupation. Chinese remember European and Japanese imperialism. Vietnamese remember 1000 yrs of war with China. Jews remember the Shoah. But true identity is about far more than victim-hood. After all, no people were always victims. They won sometimes, they lost sometimes, they ruled sometimes, they got ruled sometimes. History is a complex symphony. Alt Right identity is about taking the full measure of European-ness. It isn't just another tune in the Identity Politics songbook but a wholly separate songbook conceived differently.
Also, Alt Right seeks autonomy of authorship in its writing of its Narrative and Template. In contrast, the core body of Identity Politics has been scripted almost entirely by Jews to be foisted upon others. If Asians, Muslims, blacks, browns, and etc. had all written their own Identity Narrative, would they all be standing under the homo rainbow banner made and paid for by Jews?

According to Hee-Hawley, Alt Right is ‘racist’, but he refuses to question how that loaded term was conceived and has been used as a political weapon. Calling someone ‘racist’ today is like calling someone a ‘savage’ in the 19th century. So, if European imperialists killed a bunch of ‘savages’, it hardly raised eyebrows because, of course, ‘savages’ act savage and had to be put down. Likewise, ‘racist’ is this bad evil white guy who just hates non-whites and Jews just for the sake of hating. They live for ‘hate’ because they are bad people, and so, they must be banned from public discourse. But this is all babytalk. By using the loaded Establishment meaning for ‘racism’(that has no consistency of meaning), Hee-Hawley is simply incapable of understanding not only the Alt Right but bigger world phenomena. While it’s true that racial theories can become radical and dangerous, that doesn’t invalidate, morally or scientifically, all views and theories on racial realities. Similarly, just because Christianity and Islam have been invoked to commit some of the worst bloodbaths in history doesn’t mean they are ONLY about religious fanaticism. Likewise, just because a virulent form of socialism called communism led to Stalinism, Maoism, and Pol-Pot-ism doesn’t mean socialism must always be radical and murderous.
Then, this logic also applies to the meaning of race-ism. I spell it as 'race-ism' to accentuate the meaning of Ism. Ism means belief, so race + ism should really mean belief in reality of races, possibility of substantive racial differences, and/or the need for racial consciousness. Now, such an idea can be made radical or fanatical. It can degenerate into something like Nazism just like socialism can morph into communism and Christianity can turn into Jim-Jones-nuttery, the African Lord's Resistance Army, or the insane Taiping Rebellion.
But the notion that the even the most basic consciousness about race must always be associated with the most extreme radical racialism is utterly disingenuous. If Hee-Hawley were a honest scholar, he would question the very rules by which the term ‘racism’ is defined. Why is Race + Ism automatically defined as supremacism, hatred, hostility, and etc.? Again, race-ism can become radicalized, but then, the real evil is radicalism. Now, ‘radicalism’ is also defined differently by different peoples. It has both negative and positive connotations. For California teenagers, it just means something is far-out cool. For the CIA, ‘radical Muslim’ means a Muslim who has committed himself to purist fundamentalism and terrorism. I personally favor the negative connotation because radicalism in the modern world almost always means something purist, hubristic, intolerant, all-knowing, arrogant, self-righteous, and totalist. A radical is so sure of his ideas, devotion, and abilities that he believes in the rule of 'by any means necessary'. While such people may be admirable in their courage and conviction, they have god-or-messiah-complex in believing that their version of truth is the only acceptable one. Nazism was dangerous not because Germans gave thought to racial ideas but because Hitler and his henchmen insisted on a single racial theory that had to be accepted by all Germans. So, Nazi Germany wasn’t merely race-ist but radical-racist. It was the radical element that made its race-ism so dangerous. But one can apply radicalism to any idea and end up with the comparable results. Indeed, radical pacifism can be just as harmful as radical socialism(aka communism) or radical German race-ism(aka Nazism). Gandhi urged the world to use peaceful resistance against Nazi Germany. If Soviets had taken his advice, they would have committed total national suicide. And why is the West dying today? It’s not because of Diversity but Radical Diversitism that says the West must never ever doubt the goodness of More Diversity. Now, if the West had accepted moderate diversity and added some color to their nations, no big deal. But radical Diversitism says the West must keep taking in more and more non-whites until it becomes majority non-white and then take in even more. It says white Europeans have no special claim to European lands. As if that committing racial and national suicide isn’t bad enough for Europe, the West is exporting these crazy ideas even to the non-West. For example, the Jewish-controlled West keeps pressing on Japan to welcome Diversity and have Japan turn into Islamo-African-Asia. What made Diversity poisonous and cancerous was the radicalization.
And same is true of Philosemitism. Given the history of anti-Jewish violence, it made good sense to be sensitive about Jews. But Philosemitism is radical Jew-worship. Jews are to be regarded as a holy race who can never do wrong. Any criticism of Jewish power or Zionism is ‘antisemitism’, to be associated with Nazis and the Holocaust. Radical servility to Jews, aka Philosemitism, is doing great harm to the West. (If Jews were without power, fawning over them couldn't do much harm. Many Americans fawn over Tibetans, but Dalai's people have zero influence on the West. But uncritically fawning over the most powerful people in the world is bound to be very dangerous. It's like adding more fuel to a fire raging out of control.)
Powerful Jews in Wall Street, Las Vegas, Hollywood, and Deep State go unpunished despite 2008 financial debacle and the terrible Wars for Israel. Indeed, it is a sickening sight to behold when Jews, the very people who caused the wars in the Middle East, posture as humanitarians who care about Muslim refugees. Considering that Israel stole Golan Heights from Syria, you’d think this would be a good time for Jews to make amends and let refugees settle there. Or, if Jews are such humanitarians, they would be pressing on Israel to stop aiding ISIS along its border with Syria. But no, Jews keep pulling all sorts of dirty tricks to destabilize Arab nations but then make grandiloquent save-the-world gestures as weepy-eyes humanitarians who just can’t bear to see all those suffering Muslims... who are to be steered to Europe in one of the most massive human-cattle-drives in history!

If Hee-Hawley had true insight, he’d realize the true source of any evil is not some -ism but its radicalization. It’s good to be nice to Jews who deserve it, but it’s insane to be servile to ALL Jews, especially when so many Jews are so powerful, corrupt, devious, and/or demented in their hatred(like Jennifer Rubin and Max Boot).
It also goes for homos. Radical anti-homo hostility is ugly and stupid. It’s also anti-scientific. After all, it’s a fact that some people are born homo and naturally want to indulge in fecal penetration. It’s just a fact we need to accept, and on that basis, we need to let homos do their fruity thing. But it’s also true that homosexuality is a natural DEFECT. The idea of sticking a male sexual organ up an bunghole is NOT something to praise or celebrate. And a bung is NOT a sex organ. And two lesbians grinding their poons together is not real sex. It’s pseudo-sex among lesbians whose confused sexuality is the result of weird bio-chemistry. Anyway, we can both accept homosexuality as a naturally occurring phenomena and acknowledge that it’s a natural defect because it violates the basic principles of sexuality. Basic biology 101 makes it plain as day that male sex organs and female sex organs were meant to be complementary. Why do balls produce sperm? Why do women produce eggs? Because one was meant to fertilize the other. What good is sperm up a bung with the poo? So, we could have arrived at a scientific and rational understanding of homosexuality and its deviant but particular role in society. But instead, Jews decided to radicalize homo agenda into homo worship or homomania. We were supposed to believe that homosexuality is just as legitimate as real sexuality on both biological and moral grounds. That meant homos should get ‘married’ and be ‘two daddies’ or ‘two mommies’. And we should associate homosexuality with ‘rainbow’ colors and have massive parades, destroy bakers who won't make ‘gay wedding’ cakes, and place homo symbols even inside churches as if Jesus died so that Bruce Jenner could be a ‘woman’. Initially, the homo cause was on the side of science against Christians who just read Bible as ‘God hates fags’, Freudian psychologists who thought homosexuality resulted from childhood trauma, and certain therapists who thought homos could undergo ‘conversion therapy’ and be made straight. (But apparently, sex-change operation can really turn a man into a woman and vice versa.) The scientific fact is some people really are born homo. But people who sympathized with homos as ‘victims’ overlooked another scientific fact about homos: Homos are naturally vain, narcissistic, prone to artificiality and fantasy. Such traits have given homos a certain edge in arts and creativity, but it also meant they would never know where to stop if allowed to run wild and free with their fruitkin egos. The radicalized form of homo admiration, Homomania, denigrated anyone who opposed the homo agenda as ‘homophobic’. Yes, you are sick in the head(suffering from a phobia)and should be treated as a pariah if you think it’s ewwwww for a penis to be up a bung. Apparently, all mentally healthy people happily associate homo fecal penetration with the rainbow. They blissfully adore and love homos so much that they support the homo-makeover of entire churches. So, homo agenda went from a secular movement for individual rights for homosexuals to an all-out deification of homos and trannies as angels and saints. (Because homos came to be so revered, millennials couldn't be warned about the dangers of fecal penetration lest homo feelings be hurt. The result is many more millennial girls experimenting with 'butt-sex' and even guys going for 'pegging', and unsurprising, cases of rectal cancer have quadrupled among that age group. If this isn't evil, what is?) The radical sickness of Homomania is connected to the radical sickness of Philosemtism because the main sponsor of Homomania has been Jewish power. Homomania could have been checked if Jewish power had been held accountable for funding and enabling the radical sickness, but the taboo against criticism of Jewish Power meant people couldn’t counter Homomania because Jewish Power and Homo privilege were joined at the hip. This is the danger of radicalism, but Hee-Hawley just doesn’t get it. He just plays good doggy and falls back on cliched terminology to dismiss the Alt Right as just ‘racist’.

But what is especially clueless on his part is the contention that certain elements of the Alt Right are merely fancy-waxing the same old ‘racism’ with high-toned sheen of respectability. So, the scholarly articles in THE OCCIDENTAL OBSERVER or the reviews of books & culture in COUNTER-CURRENTS are not the real thing but just fancy wrapping over what are nothing but repellent, odious, and noxious views. Beneath the veneer, it's all just a fraud.
Now, it’s true that people can package BS with pretty words or pictures. Indeed, Hee-Hawley doesn’t need to look to the Alt Right to find such examples since today’s academia are so rife with second-rate & third-rate theses and articles that are little more than same old PC tripe or ‘leftist’ identity politics. This is especially true of Black Studies, Women’s Studies, and Gender Studies departments. But even the English Department has been taken over by ideologues who wrap their PC agenda with highfalutin discourse on art and culture. And consider what Donna Zuckerberg, the whiny spoiled-bitch sister of Mark Zuckerberg, has done to Classical Studies. For her and her minions, it’s little more than a weapon against whiteness, by which she means white gentileness. As for the media, we know it’s nothing but a Jewish supremacist propaganda organ that dishes out endless fake news to keep the goyim dumb and ignorant as mindless sheeple. Despite all the professional-sounding hemming and hawing, most of the media is nothing but the shill of Jewish supremacist power. It would be most refreshing for every news program to run a disclaimer that it’s been funded and managed by Jewish-Zionist globalists. That would at least provide some truth in advertising.
In finance, Wall Street Jews bundled good loans with bad loans, stamped them with AAA approval rating, and sold them to goy suckers all over the world. In foreign policy, Neocons and Liberal Zionists in deep state and big media colluded to mix real news with fake news to create bogus narratives about Hussein & WMD to invade and destroy a nation.

Given such reality in academia and media, why should things be any different in the Alt Right? Yes, there are simpletons and nimrods in the Alt Right or Other Right or whatever Right that wrap their stupid tripe with fancy packaging with neo-classical images or allusion to arts and philosophy. It's like plenty of third-rate ‘African-American Studies’ professors have nothing to say except ‘muh race’ & ‘gibs me dat, whitey’ and dress up their racial hucksterism with academic jargon and scholarly-sounding terminology. So, if one stumbles upon similar counterparts in the Alt Right sphere, it’s just part of the universal phenomena of people padding their empty rhetoric with fancy-sounding talk or people wrapping simple & primal objectives with bogus abstractions.

But of greater importance is the fact that, even when people do have something to say of intellectual substance and/or have the proper credentials to lead the discourse as bona fide culture critics, their ‘high’ ideas are always connected in many more ways than one to themes and energies that are elemental, primal, and ‘chthonic’. When we boil anything human(or even spiritual) to its essence, there is the ‘animal’ in basic form and energy. Just like all phenomena in the field of physics can be reduced to calculations of matter and energy, all of politics and culture are rooted in something elemental and primal. It’s like we may go to fancy restaurants, order items with haute-sounding names, and act with impeccable manners, but the fact is we are animals chewing on dead animals. Whatever fancy-sounding dish you order and however exquisite the porcelain dish & the silverware may be, the fact is you are using your beastly teeth to grind the tissues of a dead animal that was bashed in the head and then slaughtered & butchered in the most brutal way. So, fine-dining is a pretense. All said and done, you’re just a human animal who is devouring a dead animal whose meat is gnashed between your teeth, churned into goopy-goo in your stomach, and then changed into feces as it’s processed through your intestines. That is the truth.

Now, I don’t say this as a polemic against fine-dining and good manners. While we are animals, we have enough intelligence and foresight to understand that we live in a world of greater comfort and efficiency if we arrange our behaviors around rules, manners, and decorum, at least if you’re not a ‘crazyass’ Negro whose main mode of thinking is "Gots to have me..." Just look what Negroes did to Detroit and whole swaths of Baltimore and St. Louis because they don’t understand the importance of agreed-upon rules. But then, even if they did get the concept, their emotional makeup, that runs in three main modes of impulsiveness-laxity-slickness, tends to derail their understanding. It’s like an alcoholic can’t stop hitting the bottle even as he understands the detrimental effect of chronic intoxication. It’s like some people have a tendency toward degenerate gambling and can’t stop rolling the dice even when they know they’re destroying their lives. So, the problem with Negroes is twofold. Too many Negroes don’t understand the centrality of rules and manners, but then, even those blacks who do get the idea are plagued with emotional imbalance. Blacks lack the Goldilocks emotion of moderation and balance. They are prone to be overly aggressive & impulsive, exceedingly lax & lazy, or slickity-slackity than truly well-mannered. Consider blacks in schools whose modes are (1) hollering, fighting, or dancing on desks (2) snoozing off & yawning because the instructions be too ‘white and shit’. It’s like dogs get excited about running outdoors & playing fetch OR just want to lie around & sleep; there's almost nothing between those two modes of thrill or chill. Black character was colorfully illustrated in the cartoon "Scrub Me Mama with a Boogie Beat". Notice how the Negroes be so lax and lazy, feeling drowsy and nodding off. But when they see a sexy mama and hear da music, they be flipping out and acting wilder than baboons showered with bananas. Granted, the cartoon is heavy in stereotype and offensive, and I can understand how Negroes would be offended, but there is a rough truth to racial stereotypes. Indeed, traits we see in past Negro caricatures are all-too-visible today. If indeed blacks believe their culture should be about respect and dignity, they sure are blind to their current culture being little more than rap-ho-bling-twerking that is as ‘offensive’ as anything in the cartoon.

Anyway, given that the root of any idea or system is elemental and primal, Hee-Hawley is missing the point when he says certain Alt Right figures just give a high-toned scholarly sheen to what are plain old ‘racism’. The fact is all ideas and traditions, at their root, is elemental, tribal, sexual, or animal. This is perfectly illustrated in the story of the Covenant between God and Abram. God in Heaven, as we know, represents the highest truth, spiritual holiness above and beyond man. And yet, Judaism wouldn’t exist with that high abstract idea alone. Judaism is the association of that abstract cosmic idea with the Jewish tribe. It says God bestowed His blessing on, of all things and for all time, Abram’s pud, and all the descendants of Abram must carry on this tradition via circumcision that reminds every Jewish boy of the connection between God and his wiener. Judaism is about seeking the highest truth but in relation to the primal nature of man: ‘muh dick’ or ‘muh schwarz’. Without that animal-primal-elemental side, there is no Judaism. So, despite all the highfalutin rhetoric and exegesis coming from Jews about the profundity of their faith and tradition, the fact is Judaism is a blood religion that links Jewish tribalism/nationalism to the Heaven above.
But this fact about Jews totally goes over Hee-Hawley's head. If he'd dug deeper and posed bigger questions, he might have connected the dots, but being a dweeby and goody-good scribe of the Power, he takes at face value the Narrative that Jews are for truth, meaning, and morality whereas the ‘anti-Semites’ are a bunch of ugly tribal-primalists who only care about blood-and-soil and disregard higher truths. Nothing can be further from the truth. While it’s true that many Jews are involved with intellectualism, scholarship, research, and the sciences, it’s no less true that they are rooted in their own tribal blood-and-soil and pud-and-poon mentality; and therefore, the ultimate goal of their ideas and discourse has been to prophetically guide, lead, and serve the Jewish community and Jewish power.
Because Jews were intermittently victimized by gentile tribalism or collective fury, there is a tendency to believe Jews are anti-tribal. In fact, Jews were targeted by gentile communities because Jews themselves were so resiliently tribal in their own pursuit of wealth, influence, power, and privilege. Indeed, had Jews surrendered their own tribalism and just assimilated into rest of humanity in the spirit of ‘race is just a social construct and we all bleed red’, there never would have been ‘antisemitism’.

So, there is no difference between an Alt Right publication(highbrow or lowbrow) and a Zionist-funded publication(like Commentary, American Interest, Weekly Standard, New Criterion, etc) to the extent that both, while discoursing on intellectual and cultural matters, are essentially rooted in the mindset of blood-and-soil and pud-and-poon(as sexual behavior shapes and determines the identity of a people; if all white women in the UK had children with black men, it'd be a very different nation with a different culture; this is why Jews seek to sever the covenant between white puds and white poons to make white women surrender to ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. A people are finished if the women of the race no longer respect the men and go off to sexually/reproductively serve the men of another race). After all, will Commentary magazine publish an article, no matter how intellectually brilliant it is, IF the writer happens to sympathize with Palestinians who live under apartheid conditions in West Bank due to Israeli occupation? Has Weekly Standard ever printed an article by a renowned intellectual or academic who is critical of Israel or Zionism? In the case of Weekly Standard and Commentary, their pro-Zionist positions are blatant. But it’s hardly different in the National Review. Though explicitly a magazine of American Conservatism, isn’t it rather odd that it is so vociferously for identity-ideology for Jews and the ethno-state of Israel BUT so harshly hostile to Trump and his America First nationalism & implicit pro-white politics?
As for most mainstream journals like Time magazine and the Atlantic that are supposedly above partisan politics or tribal-national interests, has it ever occurred to Hee-Hawley that their anti-tribalism is implicitly pro-Jewish tribalist? For starters, the true nature of a thing can be understood by the power behind it. A puppet’s actions cannot be understood without the hidden will of the puppet-master, and the puppet-master cannot be understood without the artist wrote the puppet-play. Likewise, most people working in the media are either puppets or dogs. Puppets are happy to just do as the bosses command. Dogs are a bit more curious and sniff around for clues, BUT all said and done, they cannot run free of the leash... or else they’ll be fired like Rick Sanchez and Helen Thomas.
Now, who owns and controls all those media outlets? It ain’t Eskimos. It ain’t Hawaiians. It’s mostly Jews. And even non-Jews like Jeff Bezos and Carlos Slim(a Lebanese Semite pretending to be ‘Mexican’), despite their heavy investment in US media, must stick with the overwhelming Jewish-controlled Narrative that has spread its ivies into every institution. So, the reason why MSM condemns tribalism is actually to serve Jewish tribalism. Because the US is majority white, the media war on tribalism is really mostly directed at whites. Furthermore, MSM doesn’t condemn all identities and tribalisms equally. Rather, it promotes non-white tribalism as weapons against white tribalism. So, in denouncing and demeaning the tribalism of whites, MSM pretends to be condemning tribalism itself when, in fact, the pretext for attacking white tribalism shields and encourages the tribalism of Jews and their favorite allies.
But all of this goes over Hee-Hawley’s head because he’s a goo-thumbsuckapoo boy. He is fooled by ‘respectable’ professionals with nice manners in suit-and-ties in the Big Media and Establishment Academia as honorable people whose hearts and minds are devoted to things of higher truth and value. He’s blind to the reality that the lives, ideas, and activities of those people are no less rooted and linked to the raw struggle for power. They too are about the primal urge to dominate. After all, even if members of the Liberal Elite are not white tribalists or ‘white supremacists’, they are imperialist-supremacists who believe the US should be the only superpower, which is another way of saying the US must remain the one and only supreme power in the world. It is Imperial Supremacism. These people who work for FBI and CIA know that the Deep State is all about dirty tricks and acting above-the-law. They know all about the history of CIA subversion, terrorism, and covert wars all over the globe. They know that the FBI always played loose with facts and data to push a Narrative and Agenda favored by the ruling elites. They know that the US government have been telling lies in collusion with the Jewish-run media to favor Zionist-globalist interests, Wall Street greed, and the insane military-industrial complex.
They have estimable academic credentials, wear nice suits, and comport themselves with an air of dignity(like James Comey), but if we take a hard look at the nucleus of their egos and ambitions, they are all about obsession with power, privilege, and control. They seek power not to serve the good of the nation. They relish it because they're addicted to Power Supremacism. They love power for its own sake just like a crack addict smokes crack because he’s addicted to the highs. They are a bunch of nihilists. But, in the end, even their nihilism ultimately goes to serve the tribal supremacism of Jews. While for white gentiles, the cocaine-high of power-nihilism is enough, Jews believe in something other than power and privilege; they believe in the Covenant that says Jews are better than stupid goyim that should serve as cattle to the Jews. Since nihilists just want power-for-power’s sake, they lack a coherent worldview and agenda, and this is why Jews ultimately get to tie a leash around their necks because Jews do have a tribal agenda and sense of historical direction & tribal prophecy. Jews give these power-addicted nihilists a sense of meaning and direction just like Vito Corleone gave meaning and direction to a bunch of crooks and hoodlums in THE GODFATHER saga. Nihilists don't care what they do AS LONG AS they get to use power to mess with the world. It's like hunting dogs don't care what is being hunted as long as they get to tear the prey limb from limb. So, if Jewish supremacists say the role of the US is to serve Israel by 'spreading democracy' around the Middle East or to start a New Cold War with Russia, the gentile power-nihilists are more than willing to play along since they just love the FEEL of using power. It's like mercenaries don't care which side they're fighting for as long as they get paid and get to use big guns to blow things up. Of course, these power-nihilists will claim to be patriots or idealists, but if so, why have they been so blind to the problems of the white working class whose lives have been devastated by globalism and the opioid crisis resulting from the Jewish Sackler clan's promotion of addictive drugs on Middle America? If they're such humanitarian idealists, why have they been so silent about what the US policy has done to Palestinians? Why, after having witnessed the devastation of Iraq and Libya, are they willing to push for more wars and confrontations with nations and peoples hated by vicious Jewish supremacists?

Compared to these disingenuous freaks, the Alt Right is refreshingly honest. For example, unlike white conservative libertarians, the Alt Right doesn’t hide behind abstract principles to justify their political position and ideological objectives. Right-wing libertarians were always implicitly pro-white because their line of reasoning figured that meritocracy would favor whites over most other groups since whites are naturally smarter. Many pro-white people gravitated to right-wing libertarianism because Jewish-supremacist media and institutions instilled white people with the notion that White Identity and White Interests are evil. So, right-wing libertarians invoked ‘universal’ principles that might be most beneficial to white interests. It was indirect white race-ism.
Clever or not, it was fundamentally dishonest because it was just a case of tribalism hiding behind the veneer of universalism and individualism.
Alt Right won’t have any of that, and its candidness makes it the most honest ideology and movement in America. While Jews push for Jewish tribalism under the guise of attacking Tribalism and while right-wing libertarians try to achieve pro-white ends via the rhetoric of meritocracy and individualism, the Alt Right is open about it being a an identitarian movement for white people and their interests.

Furthermore, even ‘highbrow’ Alt Right journals and organizations do not try to mask or deny their core convictions and visions in the way that most outlets and organizations attempt. For example, despite the obvious, Weekly Standard will call itself a conservative journal about America when, in fact, its real goal is to steer the US foreign policy to serve Jewish tribalist Israel.

So, when the likes of Hee-Hawley think they are unearthing and exposing some dark truth about COUNTER-CURRENTS PUBLISHING or OCCIDENTAL OBSERVER, they are full of BS. Kevin Macdonald and Greg Johnson, like them or not, never tried to hide their core beliefs and objectives. In other words, the Alt Right is not trying to hide anything. Alt Right ideas range from highbrow to lowbrow, but all are honestly and openly grounded in the fact of identity, biology, history, and territory.

If anything, it’s the Zionists who put on this veneer of moralism and universalism when, in fact, their true motives are not only tribal and nationalist but downright imperialist and supremacist.
ADL, for instance, presents itself as an ‘anti-hate’ organization committed to not only protecting Jews from ‘antisemitism’ but other ‘victim groups’ from bigotry. And SPLC or $PLC claims to be a group committed to identifying ‘hate groups’ and warning the larger society of their existence. In actual truth, the ADL is a totally Zionist-supremacist organization whose activities are closely coordinated with that of AIPAC, the most powerful lobby(and foreign one at that) in America that pressures all politicians and big businessmen to support the Zionist occupation and oppression of Palestinians. Sure, ADL and AIPAC operatives wear nice clothes, are well-spoken, went to good schools, and act like gentlemen, but, in fact, they are committed to stealing more land from Palestinians(who've already lost so much) and using the shabbos goy US military to wage more Wars for Israel and Jewish globalist hegemony. As for SPLC, it’s essentially a Jewish-funded organization that is on the outlook for dissident voices at odds with the Jewish agenda. While SPLC makes big noises about going after Nazis and KKK(hardly existent in current America), their real targets are just about ANY group hated by Jews. So, even Christian groups that resist the Homomaniacal agenda have been labeled as ‘hate groups’. Why would SPLC do that? Because it’s funded by Jews who use Homomania as their proxy.

Many responsible journalists, on left and right, have reported on SPLC fraudulence, but MSM continues to consult the organization(and ADL) as if it’s a responsible and expert source of news and information on ‘hate’ in America. Why is this? Because MSM is owned and controlled by Jewish globalist supremacists working in cahoots with organizations like ADL and SPLC. Indeed, consider the clear violation of First Amendment and Civil Rights in the bills and laws that would criminalize one’s vocal support of BDS movement that calls for justice for Palestinians who lost their nation 70 yrs ago and have been living as an oppressed or exiled people ever since. And since 1967, Palestinians even lost control of West Bank and Gaza. Furthermore, neither Clinton, Bush, Obama, nor Trump has been able to stop the building of invasive new ‘settlements’ in the West Bank. But there is nary a voice in the media or among American politics of this great injustice. And even an academic like Hee-Hawley mainly serves as a shill of Jewish globalists or is too afraid to speak honestly about the Real Power.
In his books, he mentions one, yes one, prominent donor to Alt Right causes: William Regnery. He makes a big deal of this even though it’s just ONE individual whose donations are peanuts compared to the billions and billions that pour into Jewish-globalist-supremacist-controlled organizations, institutions, think-tanks, lobbying groups, and etc. Indeed, just about all the tax dollars that go into Pentagon, CIA, FBI, Federal Courts, and Public Education are also paying for Jewish Supremacism because Jewish elites control all the top industries and institutions. It sure wasn't the Alt Right that controlled US foreign policy and wreaked so much havoc upon nations hated by Zionists following the end of the Cold War. So, not only are explicitly Jewish organizations showered with tons of cash and prizes but even institutions and departments that are supposed to represent and serve all Americans are essentially little more than vehicles of Jewish supremacism. Just ask the Palestinians about the impartial justice of US foreign policy. It sure isn't fair-and-balanced despite the Official rhetoric that America treats all people equally, especially as atonement for its past 'racism'. Then, why does the US support Jim-Crow and Apartheid policies in West Bank that is still being colonized by Jewish imperialism? Again, you bet Hee-Hawley will never look into this issue or raise questions along these lines. Dogs don't question their masters. They just serve.

For every dollar that goes to Alt Right, a billion dollars goes to forces of Jewish Supremacism. But being a goody-good dog of the Establishment, Hee-Hawley sees more alarm in the fact that NPI got some cash from this one donor Regnery. As things stand, Jared Taylor has been banned from Twitter even though he didn’t violate any terms of service. He’s been denied use of Paypal even though he was never associated with a violent group. His organization American Renaissance operates at a pittance compared to what SPLC and ADL get. For many yrs, Taylor could barely find a venue to hold his conferences. and NPI are also denied Paypal service and host of other internet services. They’ve been banned by Patreon that also banned Lauren Southern for calling out on the invasion of Europe by Muslims and Africans.
In contrast, any Jewish supremacist who calls for more oppression of Palestinians and more Wars for Israel(this time against Iran or Syria) is showered with cash, appointed to the most prestigious positions in universities & think-tanks, provided with all kinds of favors, praised by politicians of both parties, and etc. Red carpets are rolled out and all doors are opened to them. These Jews are the ones who came up with Wall Street schemes to fleece the world. These Jews are the ones who used ‘privatization’ of Russian economy in the 90s to grab all the loot and leave Russians destitute. These Jews are the ones who forced sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s, leading to the deaths of 100,000s of women and children. These Jews are the ones who spied for the Israeli nuclear program. Israel has 300 nuclear weapons and even transferred the technology to South Africa during Apartheid. And yet, these Jews used their power to make the US force sanctions on Iran, a nation with zero nuclear weapons, a nation that passed international nuclear inspections with flying colors.
If supremacism is about favoring one group over another — as if certain special groups should be above the law — , then no honest person can deny the fact that the US is a Jewish supremacist nation since all Americans are made to support whatever Jews demand and since Jews don’t have to live by the same laws and principles as goy peoples and goy nations do.
But all of this goes right over Hee-Hawley’s head. Being an Establishment scribe, he just conforms to the Official Narrative that Jews are just little darlings who are so kindly and loving, so committed to world peace and social justice because, golly gee whiz, those are the core values of Jewishness. Well, just ask the Iranians, Iraqis, Palestinians, and Russians what ‘Jewish values’ can do to a nation. Just ask morally decent bakers who, out of religious values or individual conscience, refuse to make ‘gay wedding’ cakes in celebration of a total abomination that says a man’s anus is a sex organ and that it’s so beautiful for two homos to indulge in fecal penetration or for trannies to be pumped with tons of artificial hormones or have their genitals mutilated into the organs of the opposite sex. Jewish Bankers have waged total war on Christian Bakers. Jewish dough attacks white bread.

All of this fails to register in the mind of Hee-Hawley not because he’s a bad person but because he’s too much of goody-goo-thumbsuckapoo-boy to look and think beyond what he's been taught from cradle in PC-controlled America. There’s too much of the Teacher’s Pet about his mental makeup for him to raise the antennae higher and pick up the signals of truth jammed by near-total Jewish control of media and platforms.
Of late, Twitter and Facebook, in cooperation with Jewish-supremacist ADL, have gone on a rampage in deleting irreverent voices and daring accounts that are seen as threatening to the Zionist Narrative and Jewish globalist agenda. Naturally, Jews and their allies are allowed to spew all the vitriol they want and then some, but then, it’s how supremacism works. "There is only one side." Only one side is above the law, gets VIP treatment, enjoys the protection of a special shield, and can get away with things others aren’t allowed. Just like Jews and Palestinians are treated differently in Zionist-occupied West Bank, Jews and their favorite allies get special treatment in the US whereas others, especially White National Liberationists, are treated like the Palestinians of America. Just like Palestinians were vilified as terrorists and haters by hateful Jews who invented and employed modern terrorist tactics to commit a massive pogrom against Palestinians called the Nakba, white people are vilified and dehumanized by Jewish globalist supremacist Jews whose endgame for white people is hardly different from the fate of Palestinians.

In Palestine, Jewish colonizers had the numbers to take over and reduce Palestinians into a helpless minority. In the US and EU, Jews don’t have the numbers to become majorities and gain dominance. Jews can only rule as minority elites in the West, and in order to keep their dominance indefinitely, they push for Diversity so that there won’t be a gentile majority that can unite against Jewish power. Jews figure on making gentiles bicker with gentiles while Jews play both/multiple sides against one another.
For example, the Invade-Invite Strategy is about using White Christian Soldiers to smash Muslim nations to boost Israel’s advantage in the region and then 'welcoming' displaced Muslims to the West and setting them against white Christians.

Unlike all those Establishment individuals and institutions that put on airs of respectability but are really engaged in the supremacism of Zionism-on-steroids, Wall Street robbery, Las Vegas crookery, Hollywood degeneracy, Big Pharma narco-trade(not unlike how the Jewish Sasson family drugged the Chinese with opium in the 19th century), ACOWW(or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs promoted by Jews as a message of white male inferiority vis-a-vis the ‘badass’ Negro), and Deep State nihilism(so evident in the manufactured hysteria of bogus ‘Russiagate’), it can safely be claimed that the Alt Right is downright refreshing in its admittance of aims, values, and beliefs.
The Alt Right view of power is like a tree. A tree has beautiful leaves fluttering in the wind and bears fruits up high, but its roots are deeply seeped into the ground. The sky realm of tree is thus connected with its earth realm. The high cannot exist without the middle and the low. While there are clearly distances and barriers between the high and the low, everything high must be linked to the low in the realm of truth. So, even though it’s important to have fine manners at a nice restaurant, we must never lose sight of the fact that eating is about humans-as-animals devouring the flesh of dead animals that were brutally slaughtered for that purpose. Alt Right understand the connection between the high and low. Alt Right understands that America was created through conquest, invasion war, and violence as well as with ideals and principles. In other words, even though a people must be guided by higher principles in order to be human than merely animal, the higher values must ultimately serve and ensure the survival and well-being of a set of human organisms. In the end, ideas must serve the human-animal than vice versa. Before we have ideas in our minds, we must exist and survive as a set of human-animal organisms with their own distinct identity, history, and mythology. Andrei Tarkovsky the great Russian film-maker illustrated how the high is integrally related to the low. Art, though a lofty endeavor, must be fueled by real experience. In ANDREI RUBLEV, it wasn’t the painter’s genius alone that inspired him to create those great iconic works. Rather, it was genius enriched by historical experience with all its tragedies and miracles. And consider the processes that went into the making of the bell that rings a pure sound. Yet, it was made of blood, sweat, tears and rose from the mud.

Finally, if Alt Right is ‘white supremacist’, it is in the sense that white survival, white well-being, and white heritage are of supreme priority to the people in the movement. It is intra-supremacist, meaning white people who care about their own kind. It is not extro-supremacist meaning that white people should conquer and dominate other peoples. In contrast, Jewish Supremacism and Globalism are extro-supremacist because they seek hegemony over all other peoples. Jews seek to convert all the peoples of the world to their pseudo-religion of Homomania. Jewish supremacists seek to convince all American to hate Iran and Russia as nations that must be destroyed as rivals or obstacles to Jewish globalist control. Jews demand that all Americans support any policy in the Middle East that favors Israel even if it destroys millions of Muslim or Arabs lives. Jews say BDS movement and White National Liberationist speech & assembly must be banned or even criminalized because such hinder the cause of Jewish Globalist Supremacist Agenda. This is the Real Power in America and the World, but there is nary a voice or movement to challenge and counter this power. The only such voice comes from the Alt Right, but instead of appreciating its role in blowing the whistle on Jewish Globalist supremacist power, Hee-Hawley meekly sides with his Zionist masters in trying to smear and discredit the Alt Right. Now, if Hee-Hawley’s point is that there are some people in the Alt Right who are unhinged or extreme, he’s right. But this is true of any movement. Barack Obama was associated with Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. Howard Zinn, the popular historian, was friends with Bob Avakian, the avowed Stalinist-Maoist who still thinks the Bolshevik Revolution was just dandy. So many Liberal academics gave aid and support to far-leftist lunatics of the 60s that set off bombs, and some of those former-terrorists got tenured gigs in universities. Especially Jew-heavy New York University hired a professor who welcomed White Genocide.
When we take an honest look at the real Power Structure of America(that controls the world), any person with integrity should understand that the greatest dangers for the future comes from Jewish Supremacism. That being the case, a person of integrity should welcome any voice or movement that gives criticism to this looming evil force. In history, one must always have a sense of priorities. For example, Nazi Germany was so evil that the US had to ally even with the other evil, the USSR, to stop Nazi expansion. And the US role in Vietnam got so out of control that even anti-war criticisms from the Left became invaluable. One doesn’t have to agree with Noam Chomsky’s core ideology to admit that he’s been very perceptive about the insane reach of US military-industrial complex. One doesn’t have to agree on everything with Oliver Stone to appreciate his contention that the Deep State has long played an insidious role in US politics.
So, while it’s true that there are things about the Alt Right that leave much to be desired, it is an invaluable presence in the current political discourse because it is the only honest and effective critic of Jewish power.
The reason why Jews and ultimately even Hee-Hawley seek to conflate the Alt Right with the 14/88 crowd is because Jews actually welcome Neo-Nazis clowns as self-defeating paranoid lunatics who make a mockery of countering Jewish Power. It’s like the Jewish-run media purposely hyped the Westboro Church to give the false impression that those opposed to the homo agenda must be similarly cuckoo. Because the Alt Right criticism of Jewish Power is so cogent and so true, Jews regard it as the biggest threat to their power, the David to the Jewish Goliath. This is why Jews are trying to BAN THE STONES. It’s because the Alt Right is so adept at gathering up stones and aiming them at the Jewish Supremacist godhead. And this is why Jews are so eager to silence people like Jared Taylor than some of the more outlandish ‘shitlords’ on Twitter. Taylor’s arguments are too rational and often irrefutably based on empirical data. He doesn't fit the stereotype of the far-right skinhead or Hollywood Nazi disseminated by the Jewish-run media.
In fact, most White Identitarians, White National Liberationists, and White Advocates are sane and normal people. Hee-Hawley got it backwards. He thinks white people who are for their own kind are, deep down inside, like the Neo-Nazi freaks in AMERICAN HISTORY X. He thinks Alt Right people are just closet-skinheads larping as normie-looking people. The truth is actually the opposite. Most white people who care about their race, culture, and heritage are not skinheads, Neo-Nazis, or militia-men who are training for RED-DAWN-type of invasion. (By the way, notice it’s Liberal Jewish Hollywood that instilled so many American minds with fears of Muslim, Russian, and North Korean invasions, what with the new version of RED DAWN having Norks invading Michigan. ROTFL. If Wakandans want to rule the white world, they should forge an alliance with North Koreans who apparently can invade and rule whole swaths of America with ease.) Most white patriots are people who look and act normal and sane. If anything, the Ugly Demented Style has been promoted by (1) LGBTQ gender degeneracy (2) celebrity & sports culture big on tattoos (3) the cult of universal narcissism that would have us believe even Lena Dunham is a sex symbol. While there are ‘white trash’ elements on the Alt Right who go for tattoos and the like, such deviants are far more likely to belong in the 14/88 crowd, which has had its share of Jewish infiltrators urging low-IQ whites to make fools of themselves as 'white supremacists'.
The fact is the core of the Alt Right is not about skinheads and Neo-Nazi thugs. If people like Hee-Hawley think so, it’s because they’ve been brainwashed by decades of Jewish propaganda. The Alt Right is not a case of degenerate skinheads in nice suits and neat haircuts. Alt Right people are exactly what they are in dress, demeanor, and speech. Rather, it was the Jewish supremacist media that created the impression that any white-person-into-white-interests must be a sinister extremist figure who worships at the altar of Adolf Hitler and has a swastika tattoo on his butt. This anti-icon of White Pride has been so deeply ingrained in the minds of people that even an academic like Hee-Hawley is taken aback upon encountering sane and sober white people who believe in white identity and heritage but don’t yell "Heil Hitler" every other minute.
So, Hee-Hawley concludes that the Alt Right people must be concealing their true selves. But really, what is there to hide when the ideas, critiques, and objectives of the Alt Right are so out in the open?
The great paradox is that so many people oppose the Alt Right precisely because, deep down inside, they can't help feeling that the Alt Right is right or at least more right on most issues than other groups are. People are naturally triggered by exposure to truths made inconvenient by the Power. People want to believe that their lives have heretofore been free and/or meaningful within the predominant system of rules and rationales; therefore, when they're presented with alternative perspectives that may turn their worldview upside down, they are torn asunder by conflicting emotions: One part of them finally feels as if the scales are falling from their eyes, but another part of them feel triggered & disturbed because everything that had given them meaning & purpose in life has been exposed as false. They become like the despondent mother in GOODBYE LENIN who prefers to live in her own communist bubble. And this is why Jewish supremacists were so frightened by the Charlottesville Rally. It wasn't the occasional Nazi flag or the odd KKK sighting. It was the possibility that the world might get an earful of plain Alt Right talk about the True nature of power in America. This is why the Jews had to shut down the rally like the nascent movements are suppressed in MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON and MEET JOHN DOE in which the Power is afraid of losing control of the Narrative that sustains its wanton abuses. But, one may ask, "If Jewish power is understandably triggered by the Alt Right because it fears loss of power, why do so many whites recoil from Alt Right ideas that can liberate and emancipate them?" For some, especially politicians, it's pure opportunism. As they made their careers by collaborating with Jews, they stick with the official script. But even many whites who have much to gain from Alt Right ideas reject them with fury because their sense of moral worth has been molded by the PC cult of 'white guilt' and white atonement. Accepting the Alt Right would mean that all those yrs of cuckery on their part had been just a fool's errand; it would mean they wasted so much of their lives on an illusion fed to them by Jews. And no one wants to feel that the entire meaning of his or her life had been built on a falsehood.

If anything, even nations that essentially operate on the basis of Alt Right ideas can’t admit to doing so because of decades of official indoctrination that associates any concern with white interest and/or criticism of Jewish Power with Nazism or some such. Consider Hungary and Poland that ban Alt Right gatherings. And yet, their recent political policies are essentially Alt Right. Viktor Orban identifies rootless Jews like George Soros as a threat to European survival. He’s about identity, culture, and borders. And Polish defiance of Judeo-Franco-German-dominated EU has everything to do with nationalism, rational race-ism, Polish pride, and cultural sovereignty. Poles don’t want to be pushed around by Jewish globalists who seek to Afro-Islamize Poland. But because the global media and narrative are so dominated by Jews, even white people who organize around Alt Right principles must pretend they are motivated by Other ideas more palatable to the globalist cognoscenti of know-it-alls.

Hee-Hawley’s writings may be informative to some. And his book MAKING SENSE OF THE ALT RIGHT may be a useful primer for those who know NOTHING of the movement. But Hee-Hawley is incapable of seeing the larger picture. He frets about ‘white supremacism’ or ‘white racism’ when, in fact, the real supremacism that is destroying America and the world is Jewish. Let me list just a few of the recent tragedies and disasters around the world. Who had a hand in them? Jews or the Alt Right?

1. Massive Wall Street theft via bubble economies in which countless peoples lost so much of their savings. (Who controls Wall Street and the Fed? Keith Preston of Attack the System?)
2. Spread of gambling that has led to addiction, destitution, and degradation of morality and culture. (Who are the top 10 biggest gambling tycoons in the US? Is Daniel Freiberg among them?)
3. Opoiod epidemic that turn so many Americans into junkies whose lives spiral out of control, often leading to OD death or suicide. (Is the Sackler family Jewish or Alt Right?)
4. Mainstreaming of Pornography to the point where young girls are raised on Disney idols who all grow up to turn out like Miley Cyrus who ‘twerk’ and act like degenerate apes. (Does Richard Spencer or Jared Taylor run Disney? Or is it another group of people?)
5. Promotion of Rap thuggery whereby most black males grow up emulating lunatics with guns who got nothing on their minds but ‘blings’ and ‘bitchass hos’. (Who runs the music industry? Greg Johnson?)
6. Wars in the Middle East that coincidentally targeted nations hated by Israel in the name of ‘spreading democracy’. But if US is all about secular values, why has it been so close to Saudi Arabia while working behind the scenes to destabilize secular modern nations like Syria? (Who could be behind the US foreign policy that committed war crimes on Iraq, Libya, and Syria? Is the State Department run by Greg Conte?)
7. The spread of rectal cancer among millennials with the normalizing of Homosexuality and mainstreaming of porn. Rates of anal-rectal cancer multiplied 4X among millennials who imitate the latest buzz created by the media. (Which people have been behind homomania and the normalization of fecal penetration and ‘pegging’? Has Vincent Law been going around passing out flyers recommending that straight women take it up their bungs?)
8. The sharp rise of homicide rates among blacks since 2015 with Ferguson and Baltimore riots. (Which group fanned the crazy irresponsible flames of BLM that had blacks believe that innocent brothers and sisters were being gunned down by out-of-control white ‘racist’ cops? The hysteria forced cops to retreat from heavy crime zones, leading to more violence and death among blacks. Who controls the media to push such a crazy narrative that only made things worse for blacks? Let me guess. All those blacks got their crazy ideas from Red Ice Radio.)
9. The erosion of civil liberties whereupon nearly all politicians support the criminalization of BDS, a movement that calls for justice for Palestinians who not only continue to live under Occupation but keep losing more lands to Jewish invader-settlers. (Maybe Kevin Macdonald is behind this one. I dunno. I mean who else could be pulling the strings of politicians to shut down BDS?)
10. The rape of Russia in the 1990s that left most people destitute while a handful of globalist oligarchs snapped up 50% of the Russian economy almost overnight and then bought up all the media and traded Russian women around the world in one of the biggest cases of white slavery in modern times. (It must have been the guy who does Black-Pigeon-Speaks videos and his cabal of vegetarians. I mean, I can’t imagine another people who would pull off something so dirty.)

If one knows the REAL POWER in America, one should value the Alt Right as an essential critic and challenger to what is now the most dangerous, most evil, and most insane power in the world. Given the totally corrupt and sociopathic state of the media, deep state, Wall Street, Las Vegas, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and etc., one would have to suffer from total lack of understanding to side with the People of Power against the one of the few budding voices of dissent that has the simple audacity to notice that the Emperor Wears No Clothes.

Madeline Albright... she was not Alt Right.

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Rejection of Nature is the Source of Self-Righteous & Holier-than-Thou Sanctimony among the Religious and Politically Correct

Ever notice that religious people and so-called 'progressives' tend to be the most self-righteous, sanctimonious, and holier-than-thou? This may seem rather odd, even counter-intuitive, considering that the two groups are usually billed as polar opposites. Religious people are said to favor faith and spirituality. 'Progressive' people are said to embody secular values of reason, science, and intellect.
So, why are they so alike emotionally? Why do they so prone to moral one-upmanship, moral narcissism, me-huggery, and pious snobbery. Why does it seem as though their mode of identity derives from feeling superior to most people and being part of an elect community of special people? Sure, both Christians and Progressives claim universality and the welcoming of the entire world into their tents. But then, terms of entry have been devised to be as exclusive as inclusive. After all, if everyone joined and became part of the club, those in the club would no longer feel special. It's like an elite university, however 'inclusive' it claims to be, is no longer an elite university if anyone can be admitted.

What religion and political correctness have in common is the rejection of nature as the basis for understanding humanity. Christian cosmology begins with the perfection of God and the purity of His Creation. According to the Judeo-Christian view, God is perfect, and He created a perfect order, but mankind betrayed, defiled, and corrupted it. But God, out of love for mankind, sent His Son to die on the Cross so that humanity may be redeemed through holy blood sacrifice. According to the Judeo-Christian view, the natural is sinful, filthy, and obscene. It is part of the Fall, the exile from Eden. And the redemption offered by Jesus is one of self-abnegation and condemnation of fleshly desires as the temptation of the Devil. Thus, even though Christianity is open to all who seek salvation, it isn't easy to be a good Christian and nearly impossible to be a perfect one. Christianity is obsessed with sin, like a germ-freak is obsessed with ‘filth’. A good Christian must always purge his or her soul of sinful desires of the flesh and instinctual animal drives. Both the will-to-power and will-to-procreate are treated with heavy suspicion. (Even though Christianity claims to uphold and represent universal, eternal, and immutable truths, it isn't impervious to the socio-politico-cultural pressures of the here-and-now. Consider how Catholic Church once made a pact with Fascists, how the Russian Orthodox Church caved to Stalinism, and how the Church of England — among many others — has bent over to the neo-religion of homomania pushed by Jews. Given that the biggest 'sins' according to dominant PC doctrine is 'racism', 'antisemitism', and 'homophobia', much of today's Christianity is obsessed with atoning for those PC-defined ‘evils’ than for upholding Core Christian Beliefs and Values that are bound to be offensive to Jews, homos, and Negroes. Core Christianity says Jews are to be damned for rejecting Jesus. Christianity, like true Judaism, is anti-homosexual and anti-decadence. Also, Christianity's morality of humility and spirit-over-flesh is at odds with the Afromaniacal jungle-jive that places thuggery and animal lust at the center of life.)

Now, the conundrum is not Christianity's problems with nature per se. After all, even nature has problems with nature. Nature is in constant state of warfare. Animals are always attacking and/or eating other animals. Animals of the same species fight for territory and mating. They often fight out of fright and panic. Because nature is so brutal, mankind cannot have community, let alone civilization, if members act purely in accordance to raw nature. Natural instincts and animal impulses have to be controlled and proscribed among mankind to have social cooperation and relative peace. So, the problem is not with Christianity's conflict with nature. Any kind of civilization must be in conflict with nature. No civilization can sustain itself by surrendering to the ways of nature. This is why black Africa has problem creating and maintaining civilization. Being naturally a wilder, more aggressive, and more animal-like race, blacks are less likely to restrain their wild nature. They are more likely to loot and pillage than to do business. They are more likely to rob and rape than respect social contracts and higher principles.

Anyway, the problem with Christianity is it rejects the validity of nature. It sees nature not as the foundation of life and the world around life but as the work of the Devil. Instead of seeing nature as something essential, vital, and powerful, the raw material from which civilized mankind is to be molded and sculpted from, Christianity sees nature as the problem itself. (Buddhism goes even further in rejecting all of reality as false illusion.)
Imagine you come across a dog. Suppose the dog is wild and aggressive. You want to raise the dog, but the dog needs to be tamed and housebroken. It needs to be trained to obey orders. You value the dog and its canine nature. But you also understand that the dog cannot be a companion of man unless it is tamed. So, you value its canine nature but also see the need to tame and control it.
Now, imagine an alternative scenario where you come across a dog and see it as a demonic creature(as indeed many Christians regarded cats as witch's companions during the Middle Ages). Suppose you figure you need the dog to serve you and guard the house. But instead of regarding the dog's nature as healthy and vital, you see it as wicked and foul. So, instead of trying to control and tame a healthy and vital natural-force, you try to expunge it and turn the dog into a creature of total obedience that is furthermore, ashamed of its dog-nature.
Both the first dog-tamer and second dog-tamer have one thing in common. They understand that the dog has to be tamed. Its nature has to be controlled. But the first dog-tamer values the dog's nature. He values the dog's natural hunting instincts, fighting instincts, and mating instincts. He values the dog's energy, spunk, curiosity, and adventurousness. They are hallmarks of the dog's nature, and he doesn't want to destroy them. He wants to tame them to the extent that the dog will be able to work with mankind.
In contrast, the second dog-tamer sees the dog's nature as essentially ugly and lowly. As such, he would like to destroy the dog's nature as much as possible so that it will be tamed into submission of total obedience. It's like Muslims see nothing good about dogs and their nature.

Because of Christianity's cosmological principles of the Creation and the Fall, followed by Jesus' offering of redemption by the pure ritual of self-sacrifice and spiritual transcendence, it cannot accept nature — wild nature and human nature — for what they are. For Christians, nature itself is sinful. It is not something that is vital and healthy that must be controlled but something that is sinful, wicked, and obscene. Before the Fall, spirit and flesh were one. Both were immortal, pure, and eternal. But with the Fall, the flesh began to age, rot, and wither. It became part of the world of decay and death. Only the spirit had the possibility of surviving death. For Jews, the spirit was carried down through the generations. For Christians, the spirit could rise above the flesh via Jesus sacrifice and enter Heaven.

Such a mindset led to sanctimony among Christians. This may seem counter-intuitive since Christianity says all flesh of all humans are wicked. That means even the flesh of earnest Christians are sinful. So, if Christians themselves are wrapped in impure flesh, why should they feel so holier-than-thou and self-righteous? It is because Christians feel they are at least closer to God, whereas heathens are without God and Jesus. At the very least, Christians feel that they are aware of their sinful condition and doing something about it to cleanse their spirits to prepare for Heaven. In contrast, the heathens are blissfully ignorant of the sinful nature of their flesh.
But then, even among Christians, there are further opportunities for sanctimony and holier-than-thou one-upmanship since some Christians work harder to be nearer to God whereas others just go through the motions.

In contrast to Christians, the neo-fascist accept nature for what it is. Neo-fascists don't see nature as wicked or sinful. Nature is the product of billions of years of evolution. The process of life is brutal, ruthless, and violent. And humans are the product of this long evolution from single-cell organism to fish to reptile to mammal to ape to man. Whatever we think of nature and its processes, they are what they are. They are neither good nor evil. Without nature, there is no life, and no life means no humans. So, we have to accept the truth of nature as the foundation of all that is. However, humans developed advanced communities and civilizations, and for such to be maintained, we need to control and tame nature, even as we harness its power, both internal and external. Raw nature will bring down any civilization. We may find Rock-n-Roll acts fun on stage, but if most people acted like that, we will revert to savagery or worse.
Neo-fascists understand that nature created different species. And within the same species, there are different subspecies or races/breeds. And these differences can be significant, indeed significant enough to deeply influence patterns of crime, violence, sex & mating, achievement, dominance, success, and status. For neo-fascists, not only species but subspecies are obvious. They are too evident to be denied. After all, who can deny that Ashkenazi Jews achieve far more than blacks in mental endeavors due to higher IQ? And who can deny that blacks achieve far more than Jews in sports due to greater strength and speed? Even though the prevalent characteristics of a race don’t apply to every member, they exist generally more among certain groups than among others. There are more people like Mike Tyson among blacks than among Jews. There are more people like Alan Dershowitz among Jews than among blacks. And these differences have a huge impact on society in terms of finance, media, sports, sex, crime, and violence.
This is why neo-fascists, race-realists, and race-ists(meaning those who believe in the reality of race and racial differences) have little need for self-righteousness, moral one-upmanship, and me-hugging sanctimony.
Now, neo-fascists, race-realists, race-ists, and Alt Right types do believe in morality as the means to control nature. Letting nature run wild is like letting dogs and cats run wild. It's like a lion tamer who lets the lions do as they please. That will lead to mayhem. So, morality and laws are necessary. Unless human aggression, sexuality, gluttony, and greed are contained, things will fall apart.
So, we need morality and rule of law. But for neo-fascist, race-realists, race-ists, and alt-right people, it's not a matter of being holier-than-thou or self-righteous but being right about the ways of nature and controlling them. Neo-fascists, race-realists, race-ists, and alt-rightists value nature for what it is. Without natural urges, energies, drives, and passions, we wouldn't be human. After all, humans are hairless apes in many ways. Without emotions, we would be anemic robots. But, if we just gave into our raw natural drives and desires like young people did at Altamont Rock Concert in 1969,that is recipe for chaos and disaster. Indeed, look what happened to much of the black community once blacks reverted to their wild African-jungle nature. Many black communities look as though populated with baboons or chimpanzees.
This is why neo-fascist, race-realist, race-ist, and Alt Right moral philosophy is about being sane, sound, and sensible than self-righteous and holier-than-thou as me-huggers. Unlike Christians who believe that God's perfect Creation was destroyed by man's wicked surrender to the desire of flesh and ego, neo-fascists believe that man is the way he is because he evolved from apes that evolved from monkeys. Animal nature is part of what we are. And this nature is valuable as the primary fuel that makes us seek food & shelter, compete with others, seek sex to create new life, express ourselves to gain attention, and etc. Religions such as Buddhism and Christianity idealize the transcendence of spirit from the flesh. They favor the total abnegation of fleshly desires in favor of spiritual uplift. Christianity envisions the spirit departing from the flesh and entering Heaven. Buddhism goes the extra mile and informs the spirit that it too is an illusion and must also be extinguished in the void so that there will remain nothing in the end, neither filth of flesh nor fantasy of spirit.

The difference between neo-fascists and Christians in relation to nature is like the difference between the two dog-tamers. The first dog-tamer values the dog's nature but knows it must be tamed in order for the dog to be a useful companion to man. He doesn't deem the dog's nature as wicked or wrong. Indeed, a wild dog must rely on its wild nature to survive. But in the world of man, a dog cannot act wild. But then, there is much in dog's nature that is appealing and even useful to man. So, the first dog-tamer respects the dog's nature but tames it and channels it in ways that make the dog compatible to the world of man.
And this is the neo-fascist view of human nature. Neo-fascists understand the organismic foundation of man. Unless we understand the biological foundation of humanity, we won't understand its true nature. Neo-fascism believes in the necessity of morality: A morality of realism than purism. Since Neo-fascists understand man's animal origins and essential animal-organismic nature, they understand those factors must be controlled and channeled in order for man to rise above savagery and barbarism. Without the fuel of animal nature & drives, mankind would be without the Will to Power and creative energies. But if mankind fail to control those drives, they will remain on the level of the savage, like among Negroes who hardly developed great civilizations and turned Western cities like Detroit into jungle-lands. (The question is, "Do men want to have mastery over nature or allow nature to have mastery over them?" All animals, even the most intelligent, are slaves of their nature and instincts. They cannot break out of their natural programming. They are driven by their instincts and drives. The only way they can be freed from enslavement to raw nature is by coming under the control of man, but then, this makes them slaves of man. Only man can understand his own nature and gain mastery over it with the use of consciousness, reason, morality, context, and wider perspective. Man can go from being the horse-of-nature to horseman-of-nature. Man can be like a dumb horse or be like a smart rider atop the horse. Only man can ponder how human nature can lead him astray or how he can become the slave of other men. Only man can create culture as a bulwark against nature. But then, man can also understand how culture, turned tyrannical or corrupt, can rob him of sense, reason, morality, freedom, and natural essence. A man's search for his true self is like the myth of Sisyphus: A never-ending struggle. The Hellenic ideal seeks mastery over nature by envisioning the free man of reason & will who shapes his own destiny. The Hebraic ideal seeks mastery over nature by having man serve the only true master, the one and only God.)

So, morality is a necessity. Indeed, even among animals, especially social ones, certain 'rules' or 'understandings' come into play to regulate and restrain raw instincts. Without such checks, a wolf pack or lion pride wouldn't be possible since those species rely so much on cooperation. In contrast, Christian morality is one of purity because it is premised on the Edenic bliss that had been bestowed upon man by God but was lost through man's disobedience and surrender to pleasure and thrill.
Neo-facists don't believe there ever was an Eden or could there be any such in the real world. Also, Neo-fascists, even as they respect Jesus and the religion He found, don't believe in the redemptive transcendence of the soul from the body. However noble or uplifting such ideas may be, they have nothing to do with reality. They only lead to more neurotic frustration, preference for fantasy over reality, or radical attempt to purge the world of sin, leading to wretched violence and repression.
Emma Sulkowicz's 'struggle' for 'social justice'
Christian way is like the second dog-tamer. If the first dog-tamer recognizes and values the dog's nature but stresses the need to tame and control it, the second dog-tamer reviles the dog's nature itself as inherently wicked and in need of being purged of its essence. He not only tries to tame and control the dog but instills it with guilt over its nature.

Given PC's official secularism and, for the most part, anti-religion-ism, you'd think 'progressives' would be like the first dog-tamer. After all, they know of the animal origins of mankind. They know that mankind's animal drives are natural, formed by millions of years of natural selection, than the work of the devil. For the most part, they don't believe in God and a set of perfect purist laws as set forth by Him. They don't believe in Eden or Jesus and the Resurrection. So, why are they so much like Christian moralists? Why are they like the second dog-tamer?

It is because, in a way, the 'progressives' have their secular twist on the Edenic narrative and christo-redemption narrative.

For starters, the French Enlightenment, even as it stressed facts and logic, was less the product of scientists than philosophers or philosophs. And the proto-social-scientific views of these philosophs were idealistic than realistic. They imposed their vision of hope, redemption, and progress on the cult of reason. Thus, their idea of 'Reason' wasn't necessarily rational or even reasonable. It's like Marxism imposed its theories as 'scientific materialism' even though much of its theory was founded on sketchy or flawed evidence, downright falsehoods, intellectual egomania, and Messianic fervor. The French Enlightenment was for reason but was more defined by the overly optimistic Cult of Reason. The philosophs were sure that the triumph of Reason would lead to their desired social or political goals. But their Cult of Reason lacked reasonableness and the cautious curiosity of true rationalism whereby every side would be required to assiduously weigh the arguments and evidence offered by other sides. This is why the supposedly Rational French Revolutionaries were soon massacring one another. If Christians butchered one another on the premise of "God on my side", the Rationalists butchered one another because each side was so sure that its position was the truly rational, therefore incontestable, one.
Now, it's one thing to claim that 2 + 2 = 4 in mathematics. But there are too many variables among humans, society, and history for any single theory to be conclusive. And even things that are correct may be so only in certain contexts. For example, one can argue that democracy is a good political system. But democracy can only work in a certain historical, economic, political, and demographic context. Just because liberal democracy works well in one nation is no guarantee that it will have the same effect on another nation with very different content and context. It's like what works for one breed of dogs will not work so well with other breeds, let alone cats. Try using bloodhounds to herd sheep and try using collies as tracking dogs.
The French Enlightenment had its Edenic vision in the ideas of Rousseau, and this optimistic vision of human nature has always been a feature of 'progressivism'. This Edenic view of human nature says that all humans are born with these positive, noble, and wonderful qualities. But society, burdened with the history of oppression and corruption, tarnishes human souls and lead people astray and, thus, problems get worse. Anarchists believe in the goodness of human nature and blame social institutions for corrupting individuals to become nasty exploiters, oppressors, or criminals. A variation of Rousseauean view is found in THE CATCHER IN THE RYE where Holden Caulfield is distraught at the compromised, hypocritical, and even corrupt world of humans. And this mentality carried over into the 60s where one of the biggest hits of the decade was THE GRADUATE, a story of a young man who doesn't want to graduate to adulthood of ‘plastics’. Woodstock Concert was about going 'back to the garden'. Apologists of black pathology have insisted that Negroes are so wonderful and radiant BUT so many fail in society because of the legacy of slavery and racial discrimination. So, the Edenic Negro soul and even once-Edenic Africa are now the way they are because the Greedy West perverted and corrupted their true nature that is so sunny and wonderful.
Also, the entirety of Jewish history is narrated as one of victim-hood under Gentiles, especially white ones. So, these nice, innocent, and wonderful Jews were oppressed, exiled, and brutalized by these bad nasty Gentiles, and that is why Jews are so neurotic and traumatized. And according to feminists, female nature is so wonderful and glorious, but evil patriarchy kept it inside a cage and enslaved it. So, for women to be free, they must run wild and do as they please. And in the 60s, there was the cult of youth that said young are so wonderful and pure-of-heart, but the Man and the System of Older Folks are standing in the way. As Times-they-are-a-changing, the Man and the System need to step aside and let the youth run wild and free.
Monterey Pop - 1967 - 'Summer of Love'
So, the result of all this was a kind of neo-Edenism, a secular variation of Christianity. Certain groups — Jews, blacks, womenfolk, youths, and later homos — were innately so noble and wonderful but were held back from reaching their full potential by the Man and the System. There was a burst of optimism in the 60s when so many social barriers fell. Finally, blacks could be freer and more equal than ever before. Young people had the leisure and freedom to indulge in youthful energies. Women, encouraged by the feminist movement, decided to do their own thing. And later, homos began to run wild too. And Jews began to challenge and even eclipse the Wasps as the dominant elites in America. There was no more restraints by the Man or the System. According to neo-Edenism, all should have gone well. After all, those wonderful people were no longer hamstrung by the Man(especially the Wasps).
But, what happened? Something like the crazy-birds-gone-wild in Alfred Hitchcock's famous movie. Youth movement degenerated into excesses of drugs, sex, and alienation. Negroes ruined city after city, and crime went through the roof. Womenfolk turned into nasty unhappy bitches, with rising rates of eating disorders and sexually transmitted diseases. Homo orgies led to the HIV epidemic. And Jewish power led to New Cold War, mass corruption on Wall Street, destruction of the Near East, a culture of greed to make previous greed seem piddly by comparison, and degeneration of culture by Jewish control of media.
Given these outcomes, one would think 'progressives' would have wised up a bit. And some, like Steven Pinker, saw the light at least halfway. He realized the dark-side of the libertine-ism of the 60s and 70s. But most 'progressives' never saw the light, and why not? They are still stuck on the neo-Edenic vision.
Yes, they will admit that a lot of things went wrong with blacks, womenfolk, homos, youths, and Jewish power. But, they still blame OTHERS for the failures. It is always The Man. So, how do we explain the HIV epidemic? Should homos be held accountable for their irresponsible mass orgies that spread the virus via fecal penetration? No, that would violate the neo-Edenic view of homos as angels and saints. Just blame "Reagan's Indifference". So, homos did nothing wrong in butt-banging one another across so many continents. The real culprit was Reagan didn't spend enough on some magic cure so that homos could do their thing without worry of disease.
As for youth culture, we are fed the same theme over and over. Blame the Adults. This has gotten tricky for boomers who first identified as Youth as an Identity. Now, many boomers are in their 60s and even 70s. So, shouldn't young people blame them? Liberal Boomers have dodged this responsibility by always pandering to a new batch of young people by vilifying the Conservative Boomers. Following this logic, all would have been well if every single Boomer was more like Bill Clinton than Newt Gingrich. But then, didn't even Liberal Boomers go for big money, privilege, power, and stuff like locking up record numbers of blacks to revive cities?
As for feminism, it is still stuck on blaming men(especially white gentile straight men) for whatever is perceived to be wrong with women and girls. So, even though Jews and Homos run the fashion industry that make women feel neurotic and insecure about their looks, the blame only goes to White Male Patriarchy. And even though the problems faced by non-white women owe to culturally distinct sets of circumstances(as well as to globalism), feminism makes believe it’s all Donald Trump’s fault.
As for Negroes, it is never their fault. So, if black students get suspended more, it must be the fault of 'racist' teachers. If too many blacks are dying by gun violence, it must be the white police than blacks killing one another. Even the GOP will never blame blacks. Donald Trump panders to blacks and blames all their problems on the Democrats, which is a twist on the Democratic habit of blaming all black problems on the GOP and 'racism'.

Now, a sensible attitude would call for the realization that human nature is a form of animal nature, and as such, it needs to be restrained, tamed, controlled, and channeled. Just as white males allowed to do as they please will act like barbarians or drunken frat-boys, the same holds true for any other demographic. Now, 'progressives' will admit as much about white males. After all, white-boys-gone-wild is often vilified and condemned as a sign of degradation of social mores. It is associated with the Duke Lacrosse Gang-Rape of a black woman that, by the way, turned out to be a hoax. It is associated with the UVA Gang-Rape of Jackie Coakley that, by the way, also turned out to be a hoax. But then, white-male-craziness isn't blamed on unrestrained male-animal-nature but on 'white privilege', as if it is the evil of privilege that makes males want to act like animals. (Germanic Barbarians who sacked Rome must have been filled with snotty 'white privilege'.)
UVA Rape Hoax
Anyway, if white males can act stupid, crazy, and dangerous if their natural urges aren't restrained, why wouldn't the same apply to other groups? If allowed to run loose, wouldn't they cause the same problems? And yet, 'progressives' have a hard time grasping this simple fact since they cling to the neo-Edenic view of certain groups as naturally good(and corruptible only by the Man and the System). So, when blacks act crazy and cause havoc, they are called 'teens' or 'youths'. Or, the news is suppressed and covered only locally and in dry & neutral manner. Or, when the violence is so extreme and obvious, black rage is explained in terms of legacy of slavery or lingering 'racism'.
And the same logic applies to Jews too. Recently, some Israeli-American was caught making hate-hoax bomb threats to Jewish centers across America. Jews made a big stink about the rise of 'antisemitism'. But, when it turned out that the main hoaxer was a member of the Tribe, Jews like David Schraub of Berkely Law School cleverly twisted logic to argue that the guilty Jew is really just another 'anti-Semite' who hurt Jews than a Jewish-Supremacist who defamed white gentiles to serve Jewish interests. So, even when Jews do bad things, the fault is with others. A Jew who pretends to hurt Jews to really hurt white gentiles brings shame on 'anti-Semites' than on Jews.

In a sense, 'progressives' share the Christians' rejection of nature. This may sound counter-intuitive since 'progressives' seem to embrace the natural in sex, fun, thrills, and frills. Also, 'progressives' love violent sports and licentious pop music.
But, here's the difference. Their understanding of nature is hedonistic, illusory, and/or utopian, in spirit neo-Edenic than evolutionary. They indulge in the fun & pleasurable part of nature without pondering the dire consequences, which have been suspended or delayed with the aid of technology such as modern medicine, surplus food, welfare safety nets, and/or contraceptives. A society of plenty can sustain(and even grossly profit from) a lot of bad behavior by formulating ways for the masses to indulge in excesses without suffering consequences that had been virtually inevitable in the past in conditions of relative scarcity and hardship.
Furthermore, the progressives’ ideological conception of nature is philosophical-political than biological and evolutionary. Even though they know humans evolved from apes, their concept of human natures owes more to the Narrative than to natural history. This 'narratural' view of mankind or 'narraturalism' divides mankind into those with pure/holy natures, those with neutral natures, and those with impure/unholy natures. In a way, it is a variation of the modern 'scientific racist' view that also ascribed different 'human narratures' among the races. According to this view, most extremely pushed by National Socialists, the white race evolved to be most noble, wise, and heroic. In contrast, the Jewish race evolved to be cunning, vicious, and vile. And the black race evolved to be savage and primitive. And the Asian race evolved to be slavish, servile, and despotic. Both the radical anti-racist and radical racist view of various human groups go for hierarchies, and in some ways, the PC anti-racism is an inversion of European radical racism and indeed could not exist without it. Radical racism, once prevalent on both left and right, presented the intellectual and moral rationale for white imperialism, white 'antisemitism', and white racial domination over other races, especially blacks. This led to much violence and oppression, as well as imperialist wars(between imperialists and subject peoples & among the imperialist powers vying for mastery), and the horror of World War II. Due to moral doubts arising from WWII & the post-imperialist world order and due to Jewish attainment of supremacy in the West, the official narrative was used to invert the hierarchy. Even though the leftist argument was for equality, in terms of symbolism, iconography, and storytelling, the narrative was skewed to present certain groups — especially Jews, Negroes, and later homos — as intrinsically holy and pure while making the white race, especially the males, the official face of all evils.
Given the white domination over the world for so long, the rising PC attempt to redress past wrongs might have seemed understandable, at least for a time. And it was good and necessary to tear down the myth of nonsense ideologies such as 'Aryan' supremacism that could only lead to nihilism. The reason why National Socialism turned so monstrous was its concept of right-and-wrong was ultimately determined by race. Since 'Aryans' were deemed the superior race, they are always right, and since non-Aryans are lesser races, they must be wrong. So, even a bad 'Aryan' is better than a good decent Jew. The great irony is that PC works the same way. By ‘sacralizing’ certain races as Noble Races of Eternal Victim-hood, peoples such as Jews, homos, and Negroes never need to make any attempt to be good, and when they do bad, they are easily forgiven or the transgressions are forgotten since they run against the Narrative.
PC moralism is also a nihilism because morality and righteousness become a matter of group inheritance than individual cultivation. Using such logic, if your grand father was a great noble man, you are noble too even if you're a worthless piece of turd. Or if your grandfather was a thieving pirate, you too are stained with sin since you inherited it from your grandfather. PC morality is for the lazy and spoiled. Interestingly enough, even though scientific race-ism and radical racism could be offensive and simplistic, they were still closer to the truth than current PC anti-racism is. Even the old scientific race-ist views of Jews, blacks, and Asians were closer to the truth than today's PC anti-racist views of them are. Jews do have a more cunning and devious nature than whites do. Blacks are more aggressive, wild, and demented. Asians are more servile and slavish, which explains why so many Asian-American academics are mere yellow dogs of Official Dogma of PC without ever coming up with a single original idea. Even though the adherents of scientific race-ism used their ideas to oppress and abuse others, any honest look at the world will demonstrate that their views of race were closer to the mark than PC anti-racism that would have us believe Jews are noble & blameless, blacks are pure & sacred, and homos are angelic & magical. Also, if the world carries on with current PC anti-racism, the result will be far more dire than even WWI and WWII. While those wars were horrible, Europe still survived and civilization survived. Whites destroyed one another, but whites still ended up on top after the conflagration, and they quickly rebuilt their nations. But what will happen when the West continues to let Jews dominate the institutions, infect & paralyze white minds with PC virus, encourage Afro-Colonization of White Wombs, and welcome endless non-white immigration to the point where US turns into New Brazil while Europe turns into Afro-Arabia? Then, it will be the end of the white race, and once-greatest-center-of-civilization will be just one big Morocco-Pakistan.
Political Correctness or PC is premised on the rejection of nature. This may seem odd since PC is secular and accepts science & biology. But science can also be affected by ideology, passion, and dogma. This was true enough of National Socialists who rejected certain scientific ideas as 'Jewish Science'. By rules of National Socialism, Jews were a wicked race, therefore any idea that originated from Jews must be wicked and nefarious in intention. National Socialists were so fanatical in their negative views of Jews that even scientific truths uncovered by members of the Tribe were suspect. And consider the role of ideology in science in the Communist world. What came to be known as Lysenko-ism was ideology imposing its views on science. Communists were so fanatically resolute in their moral philosophy that they willed their preferred vision onto science. When PC types accuse Western Science of such biases, they are not entirely wrong, but their criticism is ultimately useless because, instead of rooting out anti-scientific biases, its agenda is to institute and enforce new biases. Worse, they even accuse real science of being ideological science, in effect projecting onto real scientists their own ideological fanaticism to weaponize science to further ideological agendas. (In a way, such animus, sometimes approaching inquisitional fury, is really a form of masked envy because only those in hard sciences can claim recognition as discoverers and caretakers of actual truth. As such, hard science attracts the most advanced intellect, and its findings can be verified as true independent of agenda. Thus, hard science is above politics, ideology, and opinion, though clever charlatans may twist and corrupt the findings to serve their own pet causes. For this reason, science is the object of envy by religion, ideology, culture, and popular opinion. Science is threatening to all other fields of knowledge because its only loyalty is to factual truth regardless of how it may impact a particular dogma or cause. So, just as the Catholic Church once applied pressure on science to adhere to Divine Truth, today’s ‘progressive dogma’ or Progma bullies science to be ‘careful’ lest it be denounced as an Evil White Male Patriarchal Conspiracy.)
If humans were without emotions and worked like computers programmed to obey rules of logic and facts, political correctness would not be a problem. But humans are emotional beings, and emotions trump facts. After all, emotions, not facts, lend meaning to life and, more crucially, the ‘crazy’ will to live and fend off death as long as possible.
This is why religion or spirituality is still going strong even if all facts point to a godless cosmos.
From cradle, many young ones were raised to believe in God & Jesus, that God created everyone equally, and that we must love all of humanity equally. Among non-religious families, the kids were raised from cradle to worship MLK, see 'racism' as the greatest evil, and associate any scientific theory about races & racial differences as 'Nazi-like'.
Much of PC is about ideological passion and sanctimony. Those emotions are so powerful that PC-addled minds panic and recoil from facts and ideas deemed 'racist'. But they are also confident that facts and science are on their side since academia is infected with PC and has cleverly doctored research and papers with smug disingenuous terminology. For example, Charles Murray's ideas have often been dismissed as having been 'discredited' by the 'scientific community'. To impressionable young minds, such a message has a double effect: "Don't even consider Murray's ideas because they are just flat-wrong and NO ONE takes them seriously" and "If you want to move up the professional ladder, views such as Murray's will NOT be tolerated." There's the smear factor and fear factor. Humans are socio-economic players, and status & peer-approval mean a lot to them. With the rising numbers of servile East Asians in the academia willing to serve as toadies and commissars, the problems of PC will increase.

Another problem arises from Jewish control of the Narrative. How powerful is the influence of Narrative? Consider why the Judeo-centric Narrative came to dominate the West and the Middle East. It is because the Jews wrote the Torah that centralized their view as THE TRUTH in regards to Ancient History. Even though other peoples and cultures also produced written texts — even more than the Jews — , the Torah formulated a powerful unity of narratives. The Torah brought together holiness, mythology, history, genealogy, poetry, prophecy, laws, ideology, and politics in one unified volume. It’s everything in a single canon. (Bob Dylan holds a central place in Rock history because his two albums, HIGHWAY 61 REVISTED and BLONDE ON BLONDE, are seen as having interwoven all the various disparate strands of arts & culture: Rock n Roll, Country, Folk, Poetry, Religion, Modernism, Traditionalism, Personalism, Satire, Rebellion, Reverence, Love, Hate, Circus, Theater, Realism, Surrealism.) It was to knowledge what the Ark was to all of life. The essential core. So, even though Jews were never a great political power in the Ancient World, their Narrative came to dominate the world, in time leading to the Christian-ization of the West and Islam-ization of the Middle East. Neither the New Testament nor the Koran is conceivable without the Torah.
The power of the Narrative is even more evident in the case of Jesus. He got whupped and killed real bad. When He was stripped naked, whipped, tortured, and nailed to the Cross, it's hard to imagine a bigger loser. And that would have been that... but for the fact that a handful of men spun an inspired narrative about Jesus and then worked tirelessly to disseminate their accounts and interpretations all around. It was the power of Narrative that resurrected Jesus from a hapless loser to the King of Kings. The Narrative has the power to do that. People love a good story. And Jews, the craftsmen of the Torah and the New Testament, know the art of storytelling and 'sacralization'.

So, how does Jewish control of the Narrative play into neo-Edenism that led to White Guilt? By arguing that the US is a 'proposition nation', Jews claim that America was created as a New Eden of equality, justice, love, and harmony. But, according to the Jewish PC-narrative, whites befouled this Eden with 'genocide' of Indians and the slavery of blacks. (To be sure, the 'genocide'-of-Indians Narrative gets far less play, not least since it undermines the notion of America being a 'nation of immigrants'. Immigrants are, after all, invaders, and therefore, favoring immigrants must disfavor Indians as native inhabitants. Jews prop up Emma Lazarus as the prophet of justice, but if she really cared about the 'huddled masses', why didn't she champion the huddled Indians who were losing their lands to white & Jewish immigrants? In the end, Jews favor their own tribalism over interests of others. Indeed, the championing of Indians in the 1960s was more a neo-pagan thing about hippies, who took their cultural cues from aspects of German Cult of Nature, than the main topic among Jews who preferred the Negro Narrative and then the Homo one.) According to the Jewish Narrative of the US, the white Adam and white Eve failed, especially with the Original Sin of Slavery. Notice that the 'genocide' of Indians not considered the 'original sin' of America even though whites had to conquer the red man's land before blacks could be brought over. Also, consider the oddity of associating slavery with 'original sin'. Slavery has existed for 10,000 years according to anthropologists. It existed for eons in Africa, Arabia, Asia, Europe, and in the Americas among the native Indians themselves. Slavery had existed in the Americas for at least 10,000 yrs before the white man came. Also, Spanish and Portuguese who conquered Central and South America practiced slavery there BEFORE Anglo-Americans founded America. So, why is slavery an 'original sin' in America? This notion works ONLY WHEN we adopt the notion of America as a 'proposition nation'. Supposedly, that 'proposition' made the New Nation in a New Eden. Thus, America was no longer part and parcel of human history, with all its bloodshed and turmoil, but a New Eden founded on perfection of ideals and values. And given that Edenic proposition, America had an obligation to be perfect. But it had slavery and other problems that later came to be deemed as 'unjust'. Therefore, the failures, shortcomings, and hypocrisies of America were not the same-old-same-old replays of the flawed nature of man but a Great Sin against Edenic Justice and Truth.
Now, the notion of America as a 'proposition nation' isn't entirely a Jewish Creation. Rather, it is a Jewish radicalization of the founding principles of America. It is true that the Founding Fathers did have high-minded ideas and were dedicated to creating a better nation with ideals of liberty, tolerance, justice, rule of law, and acknowledged talent. But they weren't naive sop-eyed idealists with utopian dreams. Indeed, the fact that they were Deists than literal-minded Christians shows they preferred reason and caution than messianic visions. Also, their policies regarding France and Great Britain indicate pragmatism than ideological fervor. After all, their victory of independence was won with the backing of France, a nation that was then politically more monarchical than Britain.
But just like Ayn Rand radicalized American capitalism and individualism as purist ideologies(than as competing and cooperative ideologies along with religion, tradition, community values, and some socialist principles), the Jewish Narrativists radically idealized the founding of the US. Initially, such idealization seemed to flatter the Anglo-Americans. After all, Jews were patting Anglo-Americans on the back for having founded and built the greatest nation on earth with the noblest set of principles. It's no wonder Anglo-Americans like Theodore Roosevelt sucked it all up from Jews like Israel Zangwill. Anglo-Americans failed to understand that they were being hustled. Jews were rolling out the red carpet before them as a trap only to pull it from under their feet when they got on it. If Jews said US was created as the most perfect nation and if Anglo-Americans fell for this bait, then it was only a matter of time before Jews began to berate Anglo-Americans for having failed to live up to such perfection. If someone praises you as perfect and if you accept the praise, he can then inspect you more closely and then accuse you of failing to live up to the ideal of perfection. So, when Jews were praising America(as envisioned and built by Anglo-Americans), the more sensible thing for whites would have been to reject such praise and realistically say that America is no Eden and wasn't meant as such. Rather, it is a continuation of Western Civilization(especially that of Anglo-tradition), which itself is a continuation of human history filled with all manner of tragedies as well as triumphs. Then, Anglo-Americans and whites in general could have evaded the Flatter-Flatten Strategy of the Jews.
Indeed, beware most he who comes to you with praise. He gives you empty praise to stoke your vanity while planning to take your pride and property. You gain empty words in exchange for a real world. And in the end, you even lose the words of praise because, after all, your world was taken away on the basis that you are not worthy of those words. Jew says to Anglo, "You're perfect." Flattered Anglo lets Jew into his world. Jew then says, "You're not all that perfect", meaning that the Anglo isn't deserving of pride of property. So, to appease the Jew and hear more words of praise, the Anglo hands over more and more of his world to the Jew. But the Jew only complains more, and in the end, the Anglo has given everything to the Jew. And then, the Jew takes back even the word(of praise) as well since, as things played out, the Anglo wasn't the perfect person deserving of his property, his world.

It is because of the Neo-Edenism of the American Narrative that the moral failures or shortcomings of the US seems so horrific and traumatic. Everything depends on context. After all, how come the eating of the Forbidden Fruit seems like the worst thing in the Bible even though far uglier and horrific things happen later? I mean, how can eating a fruit be worse than fratricide, rape, wars, eradication of populations, and ceaseless bloodshed in the later stories? It is worse because Adam and Eve did an imperfect thing in a perfect world. It's like belching at a classy dinner in a fancy restaurant is far worse than farting like crazy at a drunken frat party. Bible is filled with wars and other horror, but they are terrible things done in a fallen world. In contrast, Adam and Eve disturbed the order of a perfect world.

Similar dynamics shape our view of American History(that has come to inform ALL of Western Narrative as the entire world is being Americanized) given the prevailing neo-Edenic vision enforced by Jewish Power. Because of the over-idealized vision of the Edenic 'Proposition Nation', we believe the US should have been perfect from day one. It should have been a utopia of freedom, liberty, equality, justice, happiness, bounty, and peace. But in fact, the some of the Founders were slave-owners. And their intentions weren't entirely noble or idealistic. There was a huge discrepancy between their rhetoric and their deeds. None of this should surprise us since the Founders and the men of the time were humans with their flaws and imperfections. But within the neo-Edenic context of the utopian Proposition-ism, all their failings are magnified, especially as PC becomes shriller as shaped by the pushy personality of Jews, savage personality of blacks, bitchy personality of feminists, and hissy personality of homos. (And yet, these groups could be falling into neo-Edenic traps of their own making. The way they bitch and whine, you'd think they're pure and perfect angels un-besmirched by history. But all one has to do is assemble the Black Book on each of them, like a Black Book was compiled on communist crimes by French former-communists. And then, they can be made to look dirty and stained as their real histories are so at odds with their professed innocence and 'eternal victim-hood'.) Of course, the Jewish mind-trick couldn't have been possible if the Anglo/American mind hadn't been instilled with Protestantism that promoted conscience, reform, and rectitude. It is no accident that the Protestant World came to lead the crusade in abolishing slavery all over the world. Jews sensed that the Northern European Protestant Mind had a Will to Progress & Redress that was lacking in most cultures, including that of Jews of course. So, by flattering this good-and-noble side of Protestant Northern Europeans, Jews could ingratiate themselves into the Order as aids and admirers. But once ensconced within the Order, the Jew could keep pestering the Anglos about all that is imperfect and wrong. And having been accepted into the Order, the Jew could use his wits to gain financial supremacy over the system and gradually buy off one Anglo leader after another... until it is the Anglo elites who are held by the Jewish purse-strings. And with all that money, Jews also buy up much of the media and use the power of information to shame & defame Anglos while presenting themselves, the Jews, as faultless angels.

Neo-Edenism comes naturally to people since humans, like all organisms, are naturally amnesiac. Humans, like all animals, are born without memory of the past. Also, most people are not interested in history. They see it as recordings about the dead past that are most irrelevant to the present. It is not natural for most people to sit down, read books, and concentrate long hours on knowledge that has no immediate relevance to the moment. This goes for spirituality as well. For everyone who bothers to sit down and read the Koran, thousand others prefers to watch TV or listen to pop music. Of course, people love stories and want spiritual uplift, but they want it to be immediate and powerful in impact. So, people prefer movies to books, and they prefer popular history(for general reader) to academic history with lots of details and footnotes. And people like easy spirituality of singing in churches or feeling New Age vibes at a Rock Concert than reading and pondering Hindu, Buddhist, Rabbinical, or Christian texts. Most people are not interested in the minute details of what really happened with MLK and Lyndon B. Johnson. They just want the myth, as seen in PBS documentaries. Most people are not interested in multi-layered facets of spirituality and religion; they prefer the 'kumbayah' feeling they get from Oprah or the celebrity-shtick of the current Pope Francis the attention-hog, a kind of Catholic Bono.
And the power of electronic Pop Culture and infantile Political Correctness have made mass amnesia ever more attractive. Pop Culture shapes minds to favor things of instant gratification and click-bait-appeal. It's like the effect of the Remote Control x 1000. Pop Culture mentality feeds into Political Correctness since both are predicated on shallow impatience and snippy intolerance of anything of deeper meaning. Just like a Pop-Culture addict can't stand something that requires more curiosity, depth, attention, and concentration, the Politically Correct mind-set can't abide by anything that doesn't fill them with instant self-righteousness. Just like Pop-Culture addict don't have the requisite patience to appreciate classical music, folk music, or serious literature, the Politically Correct Mind-set cannot tolerate anything that is deemed to be 'evil' by its narrow rules of righteousness. So, if anything that smacks of 'racism', ‘homophobia', or 'antisemitism' — though, off and on, 'sexism', 'xenophobia', and 'Islamophobia' could be added to the mix — is immediately dismissed or denounced without any consideration to its deeper meanings or values. Furthermore, the Politically Correct are incapable of examining the credence of their own convictions just like the devoutly religious are incapable of pondering that, maybe just maybe, God isn't real. Even though Pop Culture prefers fantasy over reality and even though Political Correctness prefers falsehood(or semi-truths) to the truth, they are naturally appealing to the masses because they are so easy. That's why Jews prize them so much. Pop Culture is designed to be appealing to everyone, from intellectual to idiot. In the past, elitism played a role in pressuring the educated to focus more on serious culture than on easy mass culture, but the decline of shamelessness has made Pop Culture the main culture of the elites as well. Is it any wonder that the cultural sensation among elites is HAMILTON the rap musical? And once the elites have embraced vulgarization, they infect even high culture with the vagaries of Pop Culture mentality and stupidities of Political Correctness, as one can see in Donna Zuckerberg's brand of Classical Studies.
The rise of amnesia also creates a kind of Perpetual Neo-Edenism. Lacking depth in history and culture, the faddish mind of amnesia foolishly falls for every new fashionable attitude or 'ideology' as a quantum leap in human evolution. According to the Jewish Narrative, America was founded as an Edenic 'proposition nation', but it failed to live up to its billing. So, it can ONLY REDEEM itself by constant reinvention, replacement, and reformulation. So, existing Americans have to be replaced by New Americans. After all, the US is a 'nation of immigrants'(or future Americans) than existing Americans. Then, it follows that true American Values are the yet-to-be-values of Americans who, as newer and newer Americans(via never-ending mass immigration-invasion), become 'more evolved' with notions such as Bruce Jenner being a woman named 'Caitlyn' or there being 50 genders or some such. People get so swept up in such nuttery that they failed to see how their vision of creating New Eden is turning into new hells or that decadence has become the new deity.

Another thing we need to consider is that heaven is its own kind of hell. This is true enough in the utopian visions of heaven where radicals, so sure of their rightness, are willing to commit to any level of violence, terror, and repression(where they to gain power). But even when heaven is attained, it is a kind of hell. While mankind has never created heaven-on-earth, some societies have come close(or at least closer) to achieving the utopian dream of man. But such success, while solving many problems, has created a host of new ones. In one sense, Eden(as heaven on earth) was cursed with boredom. Since all was well, harmonious, and peaceful, Adam and Eve led uneventful lives. And they were tempted to eat from the Tree of Knowledge precisely because they were so bored. Men in the hell-fire of war may dream of home, but once back home, they may miss the eventfulness of conflict which, despite its dangers and horrors, lent meaning to their lives. Whether it's Ethan Edwards(John Wayne) returning from Civil War in THE SEARCHERS, the Swedish knight returning from the Crusade in THE SEVENTH SEAL, or soldiers returning from WWII in THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES, men forged in furnace of war feel empty and purposeless in peace. Though soldiers are expendable in war, they die for a Cause. In peacetime, people get to live but to stock shelves as a supermarket. To die for something Big is more exciting than to live for something humdrum. When one is at war, he feels more as a man than men who stay behind for whatever reason. Soldiers are heroes; men who stay behind are zeroes. But when the soldiers return home, they are hardly distinguishable from the zeroes. Worse, zeroes(despite their cowardice, luck, or disqualification) are in one piece whereas the heroes may be physically broken, like the young man who lost his arms in THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES or Ron Kovic(Tom Cruise) in BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY. This is why some soldiers fear surviving as a cripple than dying as a hero in war; consider the Gary Sinise character in FORREST GUMP.
Peace is nice, but it can lead to boredom, apathy, decadence, naivete, and/or hunger for purpose. Boredom manifests itself different among intelligent/sophisticated/educated and among unintelligent/simpleminded/uneducated, but the results are equally dire. Among the elites, it leads to decadence in attitudes, values, and arts/culture. Among the masses, it leads to indulgence in trash culture & neo-savagery(usually of the Afro-black kind), addiction to drugs(legal or illegal), and ugly expressions, such as tattoos, piercings, and hair-dyeing. If many people stave off boredom with decadent conceits or degenerate fantasies, others just fall to apathy and become emotional vegetables, like the Apathetics in ZARDOZ.

Another problem of peace is naivete, especially in a Trust Culture. Some societies tend to be more immune to naivete because, even in peace-time, corruption and/or clan-based mentality is everywhere. Thus, Southern Italians, even in peacetime, are keen about the tawdry side of human nature. But in Trust Cultures like Sweden, peace means relatively clean government, economic efficiency, and social order. This leads to trust in institutions and official dogma. Such naivete is hardly dangerous IF borders remain secure and cultural cohesiveness is maintained. But when such a society enters into globalism, the naivete can become fatal, and we are seeing the death of Sweden and similar nations in the global order. Swedes, having had semi-heaven for several generations, grew naive and trusting. They only knew their own nice quiet society. This led many Swedes to think that all of humanity are as trustworthy as Swedes themselves. Also, being only around fellow countrymen, Swedes lost a sense of relative worth. Because Sweden has been a nice place, even the slightest failing of Swedes has been exaggerated and amplified. So, Swedes feel scandalized by the 'moral' shortcoming of any Swede even though, by world standards, it is trivial compared to the horrors in Africa, Latin America, Middle East, and parts of Asia.
In a way, Swedish cult of tolerance has made it far less intolerant in other areas. Humans are naturally righteous and judgmental. If humans are pressured to be tolerant in one area, it must be balanced by rise of intolerance in other areas. Purely from the viewpoint of political pragmatism, in order for one thing to be tolerated, its rival ideas/attitudes must become objects of intolerance, especially if the object of tolerance is also to be celebrated and semi-worshiped; this is true enough of homomania that, as the neo-religion, cannot tolerate ideas, icons, and attitudes deemed 'homophobic'. But apart from the issue of power-dynamics, there is an emotional craving for intolerance. While tolerance may make people feel fuzzy-and-warm, it doesn't make them feel righteous and justified. Such strong emotions can only be had through intolerance, the rallying of the faithful to hunt witches and burn them at the stake.
So, it's not surprising that, as Sweden became more tolerant racially, sexually, and culturally, it became more intolerant politically, ideologically, 'narratively', and 'iconographically'. It's like people who either abandon religion or subscribe to religious tolerance must compensate with heightened intolerance in ideological matters. It's no wonder that some of the most self-righteous prigs and progs are to be found in secular institutions such as colleges. For those who celebrate homo-fecal-penetration and tranny-mutilation-of-dicks-and-balls-to-get-fake-pussies as beautiful-as-a-rainbow, tolerance for so-called LGBT isn't enough. That makes them feel fuzzy-wuzzy good, but it doesn't make them feel justified. The ONLY way they can feel righteous and sanctimonious is by screaming 'burn the witch' at those who remain unconvinced of homo quasi-sexual acts and tranny genital-atrocities as noble & inspiring ways of human behavior worthy of association with the beauty of rainbows.
Sweden is a case of how a kind of heaven can turn into a kind of hell. All that peace and prosperity led to boredom. Boredom led to neurosis and then to decadence. It also led to naivete in the absence of 'red-pilling' bitch-slaps by reality(by most of humanity).
Worse, Swedes grew accustomed to their decadence, and this made things worse. And in a way, the political formula that allowed Western societies to remain socially stable and economically productive despite decadence prepared Sweden for the terrible fall that it is experiencing today. When Ingmar Bergman made his films, he was presenting a new Sweden freed from traditional restraints of class, mores, values, and religion. And yet, Bergman and others like him had still grown up under the older certitudes(even as such were ebbing away). So, even as they welcomed social changes and greater freedoms, they also felt a conflicted sense of anxiety and even pangs of guilt. Yes, there were all these new libertine freedoms that overturned the social repressions and spiritual dogma of the past, but what could and should be done with this freedom? For a time, neurosis was the new religion. Though it didn't provide mankind with certainty(like the existence of God and His goodness), it offered something that was quasi-religious: a sense of inner-conflict and inner-struggle. If meaning of life could no longer be expected from God, it had to be found through psychology or philosophy. Modernist Art and new schools of philosophy, such as existentialism, reflected this anxiety and, as such, staved off complacency and shameless indulgence in narcissism and hedonism. It's like Guido in Federico Fellini's 8½ wants to be free of the gravitational pull of tradition, family, church, intellect, money, morality, & socio-economic crisis and fly around by the whims of his spirits. According to tradition, highest spirits are those of God and Heaven. But Guido, like so many of his generation, has lost faith even though there is still a side of him that longs for the holy and pure.
Through a Glass Darkly - Ingmar Bergman
8 1/2 - Federico Fellini
In the age of Freud, the spirits are merely repressed sexual energies. If Christianity taught that spirit triumphs with the subjugation of sexuality, Freudianism taught that true spirits will be released with the rejection of religion; and this idea was at the center of JULIET OF THE SPIRITS, a film where a wife discovers her true self by finally purging herself of the guilt complex inculcated in her childhood by the Catholic Church. (It was also a convenient way for Fellini to rationalize his womanizing, i.e. the problem wasn't so much his affairs with other women but his wife’s hangups due to Catholic upbringing.) Anyway, the point is the generation of Bergman, Fellini, and Antonioni, even as it valued and welcomed the new freedoms, was ridden with anxiety and doubt. This was especially true of Bergman, relative to whom Fellini became rather euphoric & careless(in his role as the Wizard who believes in his own Oz) AND relative to whom Antonioni dabbled in the purgative power of revolution(as in ZABRISKIE POINT) though not without trepidation. ZABRISKIE POINT, like Jean-Luc Godard's WEEKEND, is radical to the extent that it believes the System must be destroyed, but there is little to indicate that the youth generation of the 60s has anything going for them but the naivete of radical hope. Their vision is of destruction, not construction. It’s nihilism than idealism.

Swedish generations since the 1960s have grown up in a libertine world devoid of traditional themes and restraints, and the result is a culture of shamelessness and moral decadence. In some ways, things might not have been so bad IF such new modes had led to social, cultural, and economic collapse. Such would have had a sobering effect on the population. But capitalism managed to not only weather the rise of decadence/degeneration but thrive & profit from them. So, the degradation in social mores that would have destroyed earlier societies made modern capitalist societies even richer and more productive.
The prediction of some observers that the spartan communist east will triumph over the decadent capitalist west didn't come to be. While rise in decadence/degeneration did lead to all kinds of social problems, they also made rampant hedonism the great incentive for work and ambition. After all, once the basic needs of survival are met, there’s no greater incentive for work than pursuit of happiness & pleasure. So, as more pleasures(however decadent and debauched) were offered to the public, the more tirelessly people were willing to work to make more money to indulge in more fun. And once capitalism broke out of the moral restraints of Protestant Work Ethic(that said work is noble simply as work), there was the exponential explosion of Vice Industries that catered to all sorts of whims and fantasies. As for industries, they were willing to sell anything to make a buck, and since outrage = sensationalism = easy publicity, the culture got coarser as a series of whores, especially beginning with madonna, competed with one another with the Latest Whore Outrage of the Month. Granted, the rise of Vice Culture or Vice-olution had led to problematic class divisions. It had divided people into three basic groups. The morons who are dumb enough to accept Vice as their main culture and indulge to the point of destroying self, family, and community. This is especially true of the Negroes. And then, there are those who indulge in vice but have it under control to the extent that they are willing to work hard to enjoy more vice. They've succumbed to the enticements of vice, and as such, they are moral-spiritual zombies by traditional standards. But they still have the work ethic and sufficient self-control to delay immediate gratification. They live for Prurient Work Ethic; they work like Protestants-of-old but for the attainment of Prurience-of-new.
And then, you have the elites who are like the smart drug-lords: They don't get high on their own supply. It's like the smart British and Jews sold opium to the Chinese; they didn't use it themselves and banned it among their own kind. Many elites who work in Vice Industries push vice-dope on the masses but they themselves see it for what it is and raise their children differently. It's like Jews push the false god of Diversity on all gentile nations but not on Israel. Smart Jews don't get high on their own supply, though there are less-smart Jews, like Naomi Wolf, who get high on PC themselves. Jews look down on her as an idiot who smoked the PC that she was supposed to push onto others, the goyim. To be sure, there are some principled smart Jews like Norman Finkelstein and Philip Weiss who are critical of Jewish Power & Israel out of higher ideals, however misguided or naive they may be.

Anyway, the ever-'creative' ingenuity of capitalism managed to monetize decadence and degeneration in ways that made society even richer and more powerful. And first real understanding of this potential perhaps arose during the Prohibition. Back then, many people worried that alcohol would have a debilitating impact on family, morality, and the economy, made all the more worrisome with immigrant populations and growing licentiousness of the Negroes and their music. (Gorbachev dabbled in limited prohibition in the USSR in the 1980s because alcohol-related problems were taking a toll on the Soviet economy.) Many hoped that Prohibition would lead to a more sober, sane, and productive America, and maybe such would have been possible if US was not a democracy. But being a democracy, a relatively free society compared to much of the world at the time, people could get away with all sorts of illegal activity, and the Prohibition led to rise in urban organized crime and corruption in government. So, the US eventually ended the Prohibition but with rules and regulations that gave the state increased powers to contain alcohol-related problems, all the more necessary due to the rise of the automobile. (Prior to the automobile, a drunkard on feet or atop a horse, was hardly a threat to others. But put a drunkard in control of an automobile, and you have a machine of death for both the driver and other people.)
Still, when Prohibition ended, America was still mostly a conservative society with families, importance of church life, patriotism, and sensible race-ist understanding of the dangers posed by the savage Negro who is more muscular and more aggressive than the white race. But, over the years, the US and the Modern World as a whole, have been growing more and more decadent and degenerate in all levels of society. So, while something like the Prohibition could be contained by a mostly moral society and while the race tensions & youth culture excesses of the 60s could be balanced by the stability of the 'silent majority', a most pressing question of the present is what will contain and stabilize the increasing levels of decadence and degeneration we see all around? At the current rate, the family as an institution is breaking down in huge segments of society. Many boys fail to grow up into real men, and many women are stuck in trashy whore culture and unfit to be wives and mothers. Colleges are places of excessive Negro trash culture and radical political correctness. The People of Correctness or the PC gang claim to stand for idealism and truth, but their main objects of reverence are crazy thuggish Negroes and narcissistic self-indulgent homos & trannies.

Vice can be controlled and even serve as a useful incentive in a moral society. It's like some junk food and soda/beer won't destroy health as long as people believe in exercise, remaining fit, and eating healthy. Indeed, some vice-food-and-drink serve as incentives so that one can have some fun in life too. But what happens when vice-foods are promoted as being of equal value with virtue-foods? What happens when the casino becomes as much a family-place-to-be as the church? What happens when a slickster phony like Barack Obama is made to the equal of Jesus, a 'kind of god'? What happens when a homo's anus is said to be equal sexual value as a vagina? Is it any wonder that we are now seeing homo symbols displayed even in churches? And look at the state of Fine Art today. Most of the stuff is only good for hype, speculation, and investment among the money-men who keep the charade going just to have something through which to launder their money. When society becomes this demented, decadent, and degenerate — where the solid-silent-majority itself is turning into a minority — , the system itself will eventually buckle and fall. It will be like yeast feasting on sugar and eventually dying in the very alcohol it produced. The glamour and glitter of modern globalist cities are built on the fecal muck of moral degeneration and social decay.
Sweden is a nation, but it can also be seen as a state-of-mind or a self-enclosed prosperous social order of excessive boredom, trust, naivete, and good-will; we might call this ‘SwEden’.
There are SwEdens all across America, places that are mostly white, prosperous(compared to other parts of America), well-educated, and politically correct(above the national norm). Though most SwEdens are not inhabited by Scandinavians, they benefit from the same advantages and suffer from the same deficiencies. The problems of Minnesota can also be found in Maine, Vermont, and Washington, especially around the cities. Being overwhelmingly white, these places are less aware of the dangers posed by blacks and excessive Diversity. Their view of Negreality(Negro-reality) and Diversity comes mainly from the Jew-run media that indoctrinate minds with the mantras 'blacks are holy and cool' and 'diversity is our strength'. So, even though SwEdens are nice places because of lack of blacks and Diversity, they go out of their way to bring more blacks(even from Africa) and immigrants. Like Sweden the nation, SwEdens are populated with white people who are bored, naive, and trusting. Being bored, they want some excitement or vibrancy. Being naive, they fail to see that other races/cultures can be threatening and destructive. Being trusting, they fall for Jewish-promoted PC that is programmed to instill homogeneous societies with 'guilt' of lacking 'inclusive' diversity. Also, being societies of spineless Tolerance, the only way that the people of SwEden can feel righteous is through Intolerance of those who remain skeptical of the panacea of Magic Negroes, Divine Diversity, and holy homos. (In a way, the puritanical mindset of Protestantism has never left them. If their forebears denounced the corruption of the Catholic Church and went about purging impurities of faith, the current secularized crop of rectifiers, pegged with same mindset, call for the casting out of all evil spirits in accordance to PC, the reigning faith of the age.

One problem of Sweden or SwEden is that the peace-taken-for-granted leads to an unrealistic impression of nature. Just like cinema can give the wrong impression of war as 'heroic' or violence as 'cool and fun', social peace can lead to the naive misreading of nature and the larger world. Such protectiveness has the same impact on animals themselves. If you raise wild animals in a safe surrounding with love and affection(and plenty of food), they are less likely to have the necessary ruthlessness and 'cunning' to survive in Real Nature. In a man-made zoo-setting, even wild animals can be raised from early age to be trusting of humans and other animals. So, tiger cubs, wolf cubs, bear cubs, piglets, and calves can be raised to 'trust' one another, tolerate one another, and get along. Even though predatory instincts remain even in human-raised carnivores, they are likely feel fondness even for 'natural enemies' with whom they were jointly raised. It's like dogs and cats raised together as puppies and kittens become lifelong friends... as long as there is human supervision and provision of food & comfort for both. But outside the man-made enclosure or environment, the 'learned' or 'instilled' affections and attitudes of the animals have little use or relevance in the natural world. A bear in the wild must fear the tiger. Pigs must run from wolves. Real nature is a world of merciless conflict.

Humans who live in close proximity with nature know this. They don't romanticize about lions that can kill them or eat their mother. Eskimos or Inuit in Alaska fear the polar bear and brown bear. They don't play games like the 'Grizzly Man' did(in Werner Herzog's movie). Indeed, the German romanticism about nature was possible only because all of nature was pretty much under human control in Germany and Western Europe. (When a group of Germans went to colonize some area or Brazil in the 19th century, they were met with forces that undid them much like the expedition came apart in Herzog's AGUIRRE THE WRATH OF GOD. If you want to create your own Racial Zion, don't attempt it in the jungle.) The white frontiersmen who had to fight Indian savages and survive against bears, wolves, cougars, moose, and rattlesnakes knew nature was not about funning around. Even so, the white American conquest of the gigantic North American continent was so swift and dramatic that it wasn't long before a romantic myth grew up around the 'red savages'(as noble savages) and the lost wilderness. Out of guilt or nostalgia, the white man came to favor myths than reality about Indians and nature, both of which survived in a world of brutality and cruelty. By the time the 60s came rolling around, the the romanticism about 'touching Indians' and going 'back to the garden' had the whiff of naive German idealism about nature, albeit without the German discipline and tidiness; German nature-worship, naive as it could be at times, didn't lead to something as gross as Woodstock or demented as Altamont. One reason is Germans have fixed territory, and every inch of Germany is seen as homeland or heimat. So, if you made a mess of things, you needed to clean up. In contrast, there is an element of American psyche that is somewhat similar to the Russian one: Both people have vast territories, and so, they(or some of them) developed this tendency to just run off to greener pastures if they made a mess of one area. American Mythos was built around 'getting away from problems of Europe' and starting over in the New Land. And if they couldn't make it in the East Coast or if they made a mess of things, they could just move inland, and then move westward ever still. And when the US was all settled and unified, move from cities to ever-expanding suburbs. US could indulge in endless sprawl from the cities because of all that space. If white men once chased after Indians to take more land, they could later run from Negroes to live in safer neighborhoods. In contrast, people of smaller nations have no such option... that is unless they themselves decide to forgo domestic responsibilities by moving to the US or Canada. But given what is happening to UK, Sweden, and France, it seems even the mentality of small(er) nations have been Americanized. Even nations that can't afford or accommodate endless sprawl are going the American Way, inviting more diversity, and forcing European natives to seek residence away from darkening cities. But how far can this go on in cramped Europe? As for Germans, who've been world-renowned for orderliness and cleanliness, they've decided to open their nations to waves of brutish, vulgar, and uncouth Arabs, Muslims, and even Africans who throw garbage and urinate/defecate all over. Germans, who are so hard on one another over issues of sanitation and recycling, have decided it's wonderful to let Germany be flooded with people whose culture of hygiene and sanitation is completely at odds with the German model. It'd be like a school where every student is pressured to be respectful and diligent letting in tons of students who have no use for discipline and respect. Could it be that, on some level, Germans are vicariously enjoying the barbarism of non-Germanic invaders who don't give a damn about social rules and regulations? Since Germans themselves don't have the guts to give a middle-finger to social order, they've outsourced social rebellion to the invaders who, furthermore, don't give a shit about the Jews and the Holocaust, two things all Germans must worship. So, even as Germans are appalled and distraught by the mess caused by the invasion, there might be some repressed glee upon witnessing the invaders act in vibrant unrestrained ways that are not permitted to Germans who've become slaves of Political Correctness and National Shaming.

Anyway, just like those who don't know real nature tend to romanticize nature(as a kind of wild eden) — pictorial wonderland show in PBS documentaries where even brutal hunts are made 'thrilling' and 'exciting' with pulsating music and slow-motion cinematography — , people who don't know the reality of the Other tend to underestimate its savagery, barbarism, hostility, and/or degeneracy(due to cultural, ideological, or genetic factors). People of Sweden and SwEden see the entire world/humanity through the prism of their ideology of PC, which is naive and stupid as hell but drills confidence and conviction of absolute faith in its followers. This is because PC dominates big media and elite academia.
Naturally, people who pay attention to the news(what's going on) and devote themselves to study(higher knowledge) know more than most people. Ideally, that should be the case IF the media and academia are doing their job. But as PC is the reigning ideology in the West, those who rely most on establishment media and higher education for the truth often tend to be the most naive and stupid. They may be smart, diligent, and dedicated, but in their trusting earnestness, they swallow whole hog all the crap that is fed to them by the Jew-run Media and PC-virus-infected academia. So, we have the current situation where to 'know more'(according to media and academia)often means to know less(of actual reality).
Now, I’m not endorsing a populist anti-elitist argument that lazily champions the 'common sense' of the silent majority over the conceits of the eggheads. When it comes to specialized knowledge in many fields, the elites and experts do indeed know best. And ideally, if social sciences and humanities were to do their job, they would do much to sustain an elite community where critical thinking, empirical truth, free exchange of ideas, and necessary revisions define the culture. But PC has corrupted elite culture with dogmatism, conformism, cravenness, cowardice, opportunism, and/or bullying. So, as long as PC dominates the discourse, many of the most 'informed' and 'educated' people are far from the truth. And unbeknownst to their inflated egos, they fail to realize that they're worthless running dogs of PC because they will do ANYTHING to gain status by spouting the approved catechisms of the Current Year.
But the disease isn't limited to the elites, though it is most consequential there since they control the levers of power and decide national policy. The disease spreads to the populace at large through Public Education, Pop Culture, and State Policy. Even when the people begin to sense that something is wrong with globalism and PC, they feel at a moral disadvantage since they've been drummed day in and day out with mantras about 'white guilt', 'racism', 'xenophobia', 'diversity is our strength', and 'homophobia'. So, even an illegal Mexican in the US has moral advantage over white American 'gringos'. Under current PC, he can just spout cliches about 'diversity', 'xenophobia', and 'racism'; therefore, the white American is put at a moral disadvantage and feels pressured to defend his values against such character-assassinations. Given current PC, no one asks the illegal Mexican, "Why don't you respect the laws of another nation? Who gave you the right to violate American laws and barge into another nation?" Also, "If you Mexicans love your own kind so much, why do you want to get away from them and come live in gringo-land?" And, "If gringos are wrong to reject Mexicans, why do Mexicans reject other Mexicans?"
Indeed, there is a moral contradiction in the illegal Mexican who accuses the 'gringo' of not wanting to be around 'too many Mexicans' when he himself fled from Mexico because he himself doesn't want to be around many of his own kind. The illegal Mexican may argue that he came to the US for jobs, but when the patriot should ask the Mexican, "Why can't you Mexicans build industries and create enough jobs in your own nation? What's wrong with you people that you let your own nation be run over by drug gangs and corrupt politicians while you guys don't fight and only want to jump the fence to come live in the US?"
Anyway, PC inverts morality and truth so that the lawful, natural, and patriotic are placed on the moral defensive against the criminal, degenerate, and treasonous. So, the treasonous who create 'sanctuary cities'(which ought to be called 'treason cities' or 'illegopolis') act holier-than-thou to the patriots who call for implementation of national laws. So, we have homo-degenerates who indulge in fecal-penetration sermonizing to normal straight people about moral and even spiritual values. (We are told Christian churches must make way for homo symbols.) Blacks who commit the most crime and violence strut around like they are radiating with divine holiness. And Jews, the most powerful and most destructive force in the world, bitch about the 'human rights' abuses of other peoples. And since white elites must go along with such nonsense(if only to maintain their status and privilege in the Jew-run world), the PC dogma & narrative are foisted on ALL white people, and then disseminated around the entire globe by US media and Western academia(that educates the elites around the world).
True understanding of nature is the best antidote to the Edenic illusion of lion lying with the lamb. But when neo-edenism infects a society, its people lose sight of the true horror of nature. It's like the Eternals in ZARDOZ have become so accustomed to security and safety in their world of privilege and complacency that they're not only naive about barbarism & death but welcome them as a kind of 'spiritual' deliverance. If Christians were fed to the lions, the Eternals feed themselves to the barbarian hordes as ‘saviors’. And such decadence descends very quickly, indeed in a few generations.
And even though we may scoff at the naive fools of PC, in a way we can't blame them as people's sense of reality relies on available sources. If you live in some nice white community in Minnesota or Maine and have no direct contact with Negroes or Diversity, then your only source of information are Hollywood movies, news media(run by Jews), and education. Hollywood movies give you Magic Negroes and 'evil white racists'. Also, even thug Negroes are presented as 'cool', 'badass', or 'glamorous. So, even black pathology is given a positive spin. Or, even a supposedly realistic show like THE WIRE is ideologically framed and contextualized so that black problems are seen as the product of 'history' or 'society' when, in fact, they are mainly due to BAMMAMA, or "blacks are more muscular and more aggressive".
This is why some idealistic white students enter into education and dream of going to teach blacks. The result is almost always hopeless, with whites teaching little and blacks learning little while acting like louts and messing things up. Black pathology is bad as it is due to black nature that is wilder, more thuggish, and nastier than those of other races. But it's made worse by the Magic Negro cult, 'white guilt' cult(that must be shared even by non-black minorities or NAM), and 'badass nigga' cult. The Magic Negro Cult or MNC says blacks are naturally and innately more soulful and spiritual than other races. Given natural black predilection for egomania, such adulation is like adding gasoline to fire or passing a case of whiskey to an alcoholic. In association with the MNC is the White Guilt Cult or WGC that says whites(and indeed all non-black minorities) must atone and apologize before the Negro who suffered like no other race has done. This, of course, is nonsense, but since whites came to dominate the world, even 'white guilt' has been universalized. If in the past, whites pressured the world to worship the Christian God, today's West pressures the world to worship Holocaust Jews, holy homos, and Magic Negroes. When whites worshiped God & Jesus, whites tried to convert the world to Christianity to worship the same God and His Son. Now, that whites have lost faith in God & Jesus and instead worships Magic Negro, Holy Homo, and Holocaust Jew, they apply pressure on the entire world to worship the same gods. Of course, Jews, Negroes, and Homos love this since it means all of humanity will be made to worship them and put out to them. This is why those three groups love globalism as conveyors of the PC religion that seeks to convulse and convert the entire world toward worshiping the new holy trinity of Jews, Negroes, and Homos.
For people who only know the safe & secure world of artifice, there is much to learn from the brutality of nature. Thus, one is made to appreciate the safety and security provided by artifice while also respecting the awesome power of nature. Indeed, seeking haven from nature is part of nature. Even in the wild, all organisms seek safe space. Birds build nests. Bears, badgers, and wolves dig dens. Bees and wasps build hives. Beavers build shelters. Humans took this furthest by developing technology to wipe out all animals deemed dangerous to human habitation and by building towns and cities with roads and barriers. In a way, artificial is natural to the extent that organisms have this innate natural tendency to create havens and shelters that separate them from rest of nature. Just like babies are created within the safety of the womb, organisms feel most secure within a sanctuary. Since they cannot return to their mothers' wombs, they create physical havens that protect their own kind from threat posed by hostiles. And yet, even as we seek protection from nature, we cannot live without nature that provides the air, trees, soil, animals, vegetation, water, and etc. Likewise, most modern nations cannot survive without worldwide trade. Germany and Japan make good machines, but they are deficient in energy resources. Saudi Arabia produces lots of oil but is deficient in fertile soil and manufactured goods. So, peoples around the world must trade and interact with one another. But they must also secure their own nations and cultures in order to survive as a special & distinct civilization.
The best way is to appreciate the artificial world and the natural world for what they are. One must understand that the artificial world cannot exist without the natural world, but then, neither can it exist without barriers against the natural world. So, artificial world has to be appreciated as providing humanity with safety and security, and the natural world must be respected as a awesome amoral force that poses a threat to humanity but also possesses the raw materials necessary for all life on earth. Without trees, there wouldn't be enough oxygen. Without ants, much of vegetation would die, and humanity would also face extinction.
Likewise, every people need to value their own nation as a repository of their ethnos, culture, and history. But other nations have things of value in materials, goods, services, ideas, and arts/culture. Therefore, a balance must be struck between protecting & preserving one's own nation from other nations & people while, at the same time, being open to the ideas, goods, and expressions of other peoples that may be of value as utility, instruction, or inspiration.

But PC has undermined such balance. When it comes to nature, PC paints a simpleminded portrait of humans(especially Westerners) as villainous despoilers and nature as holy mother victim raped by her sons. Given the power of modern technology and the extinction of so many species of animals, concern for nature and environment is certainly understandable and necessary. But such view overestimates the power of man while underestimating the power of nature.
Also, it lets nature off the hook as some Eden of harmony. But, in fact, this 'harmony' found in nature is merely the balance maintained by ceaseless warfare among the animals. It is ‘harmony’ as the end-product of ceaseless mayhem. Without predators to devour cute bunny rabbits and beautiful deers, the herbivores will eat all the plants, and then, they too will starve. So, there must be predators waging war on herbivores who, in their own way, are predators of plants. So, predators are the best friends of plants who, if they had consciousness, would fear herbivores the most. Also, if humans seem 'ravenous' and 'piggish', it is because their 'human nature' is part of nature. Nature is ravenous. Bacteria and viruses try to take over everything. A forest tries to expand in all directions. Ants will grab all they can. Lions try to conquer as much territory as possible and devour their prey without mercy. Pigs and rats are horribly destructive of whatever they run across. And locusts will eat up entire fields. So, if humans have a 'hungry', 'greedy', and 'ravenous' nature, it is because their emotions and appetites are part of nature. Nature is excessive as every organism must be excessive in its effort to hold its own against other organisms. But the flaky New Age PC version of nature would have us believe that all things in nature cooperate according to some symphonic harmony. So, even when predators attack and kill prey, it's a musical like THE LION KING. It's as if the prey animals are instinctively 'understanding' and 'accepting' of the role they must play in the natural balance of things when their only modus operandi is the Negronic "Run like a mothafuc*a".
Given Western PC's willful naivete about nature, it's hardly surprising that it has concocted similarly naive fantasies about other races, cultures, and peoples. Especially because of the cult of 'white guilt' that admonishes white folks to atone for the past sin of 'racism' and 'supremacism', whites feel this New Burden to reject any sense of white pride while exaggerating the 'achievements' of non-whites, however piddling they may be. So, we are believe that the Apollo mission's success owed especially to the three Negresses of HIDDEN FIGURES(though with all the chicken and watermelon they be consuming, their figures aren't exactly easy to hide). The combination of PC ideology, cult of youth(that favors immaturity), and fantasies about nature has led to neo-edenism that is destroying the West.

At this point, the ONLY correctives are Neo-Fascism and Organicism that counter and repel the willfully naive dogma of PC that’s been manipulated and programmed by Jews to weaken gentile societies so as to make them more penetrable to the Jewish virus. Are all secular Jews consciously working to push such an agenda? Some Jews are surely self-aware and know full well what their kind has been up to for millennia. But many secular Jews push this agenda with only a subconscious understanding of what is really animating them.
For thousands of years, Jews have struggled and survived as an intensely tribal and nomadic people. This made them both more principled and more opportunistic than other peoples/cultures. In their devotion to God and their identity, many Jews kept the fire burning, even through the darkest times. The idea of the Covenant bound Jews to the one and only true God, and this mind-set made Jews more resolved to stick to their sacraments than any other people. And yet, especially as a people without a home after exile after exile, Jews had to hustle and wheel-and-deal with goyim in order to put food on their table. And over time, they got so good at it and perfected ways to fleece the world. And this aspect of Jewishness made them the most opportunistic, cunning, and devious people on Earth.
Perhaps, Jesus’ rebellion against both Romans and Jews was to break out of this mold. Indeed, it must have seemed outrageous to an idealist like Jesus. After all, if indeed there is the one and only God and if He has blessed Jews over all other peoples, why should Jews cower and compromise so much in relation to other people? If the Jewish God is the only God and if Jews are His Chosen, then Jews shouldn’t compromise, especially with the pagans who’ve conquered Jews. Why claim something so lofty as the Covenant — special connection between God and Jews — but then act so cravenly, bowing down before pagan Romans(and before them, other pagan powers) and begging for mercy and favors. Jesus refused to play the game, and He got killed... which proved the ‘wisdom’ of Jews who’d compromised and survived. And then, it fell to St. Paul to find a way to resolve the contradiction between pure principles and clever pragmatism(especially by saving his own neck by invoking Roman citizenship) to spread Jesus’ message far and wide. According to this formulation, there are four kinds of people in the world. (1) The highest is the person of pure principle who never compromises. Such a person is usually destroyed. Even those who admire him fear him because purity of principles threatens the way of the world. We admire such a person because he sticks to principles with courage and conviction while most of us seek compromise to self-interest and resolution. Jesus, according to Christian myth, was that kind of pure perfect person. (2) Below the person of pure principle is the person committed to the pure principle but incapable of being pure himself(mainly out of fear but also matters of self-interest) but uses his compromised pragmatism to further the spread of the pure principles. This would be St. Paul who wasn’t as pure as Jesus. Indeed, had he been like Jesus, he would have been killed much earlier, and then, he couldn’t have achieved what he did. St. Paul had to compromise and play the game at times, but he always did it with the ultimate purpose of spreading the Gospel. So, even though St. Paul was often pragmatic than confrontational(in the mode of a purist) and could even be said to be opportunistic at times, his cunning was ultimately in the service of God and Jesus. If he learned the art of living another day by compromise, he spent the next day to spread the Word to one more person. (3) Below the person-without-purity-who-nevertheless-uses-pragmatism-to-serve-the-pure-principle is the person who uses pragmatism and opportunism for no other purpose than to serve oneself. If for St. Paul, pragmatism and compromise were means to an higher end — he had to survive and live another day so as to spread the Gospel — , there are those for whom pragmatism and opportunism are ends in themselves insofar as they’re useful in helping them attain status and goods of self-aggrandizement. Such people may ascribe to some principle and, in a superficial way, believe themselves to be committed, but their bogusness will be plain to see when the ideological winds blow in the opposite direction. Their so-called ‘conviction’ will shift with the winds. Is there something lower than an opportunist-pragmatist? (4) There is the person of pure principle of the profane. If some people are committed to the purity of principled truth, the polar opposite is not the devious opportunist without principles. As contemptible as such people may be, they are not the most dangerous since they will bend with shifting winds. The bigger danger is the people of pure principle of the profane, false, and vile. A good example of such holy cretins is found among so-called SJWs or Social Justice Warriors. These morons are indeed true believers, and some of them are even willing to risk their lives to push or defend their commitment.
But what are the obsessions of their ‘pure hearts’? Worship of Jewish Power that has come a long way from WWII & Holocaust and is now the predominant evil force in the world. The ‘sacralization’ of homosexuality and trans-gender nonsense, whereby humanity is supposed to derive its moral and spiritual meaning with rapturous ecstasies around the wonders of homo fecal penetration and tranny genital-mutilation. Apotheosis of Celebrity Madness or Celebristianity as the new christianity.
Yes, we are to look to ‘inspirational figures’ like Bono, Lady Gaga, madonna, Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry, Oprah, Ellen Degeneris, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, gangsta rappers, and Negro athletes as founts of wisdom. No wonder Obama, the celebrity candidate, made so many shallow idiots foam at the mouth and faint left and right.
And of course, there is the false god of the Magic Negro. In our demented Jew-controlled world, the vilest and nastiest race that is most destructive and defiling of civilization is to be worshiped as the soulful chosen of the cosmos, that is after Jews and homos. While there are plenty of opportunists who go along with the PC charade just to get theirs, there are SJW-types who really and sincerely believe in all this nonsense with purity of conviction. When such purity of devotion is wasted on falsehood, corruption, and dementia, it is truly a tragic farce indeed.