Psychology of Social Justice Warmongers — The Addiction to the Hunt — The Predatory Nature of Mankind — Positive Identity of Jews, No-Identity of Whites, & Controlled Identities of Non-Whites — Ways of Empire in Suppressing Subject Peoples

People like peace and order. But as humanity evolved from hunters and warriors, there is also the side of us that exults in violence, craves the hunt, and thrills over the kill. And like hunger, it can never be satiated out of existence. Just like hunger returns, the hunting instinct returns... which is why hunters eagerly await the next hunting season. It's like sports fans soon forget about the trophy won the year before and look forward to the new season. And as horrible as war is, we are drawn to stories of men in combat. One of the foundational literature of Western Civilization is The Iliad, a poetic paean to war and glory. Even so-called Anti-War Movies draw in the audience with their explosions and mayhem that are as riveting as repulsive. APOCALYPSE NOW was presented as an anti-war statement by Francis Ford Coppola, but it was written by pro-war John Milius. Despite Coppola's best efforts at moralism, what came across most powerfully was the epic scope of war, its rapturous reveling in domination and destruction. The most famous scene in the film, the helicopter raid on a Viet Cong village, closed with Colonel's Kilgore's lamenting sigh that "Some day this war will end." Apparently, he's having such a great time that he wants it to go on indefinitely even though a side of him surely knows that war is hell. In the movie PATTON, George C. Scott as the great general admits that he loves war. It is the presence of death that makes one feel most alive, most intensely engaged with the world. The sentiment is surely understandable to those who risk their lives by mountain-climbing or jumping off cliffs with wing-suits. For them, merely being alive is boring. It's just sitting around with a pair of lungs that suck air in and out. They feel truly alive only when they dare death. In HURT LOCKER, the bomb-defusing expert feels bored at home and seems to want to return to battle in the final scene.


Regardless of one's ideology, there is inner drive within human nature that longs for the hunt, the fight, the struggle. It makes life exciting. Why do people go to drama or movies? Because storytelling is about conflict, the battle, the mutual-hunt between various forces deemed 'us' and 'them', 'good' vs 'evil'. We've all been told that the most important element of plays, novels, and cinema is 'conflict'. In that sense, all movies are 'war movies' though the conflict is usually resolved in rooms, streets, and halls of power than in the battlefields. But then, even men-in-combat are little more than pawns of men in quiet spaces, like the War Room in DR. STRANGELOVE or the palatial quarters where generals plot in PATHS OF GLORY. Jews dwell on mental combat; the goy pawns die in metal combat, shooting bullets and getting torn apart by shrapnel.
As Jews control the US, they control the world. Not only do Jews control the goy cuck puppets who direct foreign policy, but Jews decide which nations have access to the vast US goy market. Even though US is mostly goy, it is Jews who decide whom the American goyim can sell to and buy from. Jews have control over our purchasing power. Goyim don't decide whom Jews can do business with, but the vice verse is all too true. Jews do as they please, goyim do to appease... the World Jewry. If any nation is deemed threatening or displeasing to Jews or Israel, ALL of Goy America is directed against it by sanctions, encirclement, or threats of wars devised by Jewish puppet-masters. And as US puppet-allies depend on the US for economic and military support, they too must comply with Jewish demands. Jews not only control the media and finance but get to decide the economic choices of American goyim. If Jews say America can't do business with Russia or Iran, all goyim are made to comply as US policies are decided by goy cuck-whore-politicians of the globo-homo-shlomo Jewish supremacist overlords.

And yet, on some level, many goyim get their thrills in world conflicts cooked up by Jews. They are too craven, stupid, ignorant, and/or dumb to decide on their own as to what is good or bad for their own people or the world. They crave action but lack agency and vision. It's like dogs don't decide what and where to hunt. They are just eager to hunt ANYTHING, and as long as the master lets them hunt, they are happy whether they are running down rabbits, raccoon, badgers, foxes, or wild pigs. The master decides what is to be hunted, and when and where. He has agency and vision. Dogs just care for action and are satisfied as long as SOMETHING is to be hunted. Jew-Goy relations are much the same. Jews have a grand vision of the world. They know what they are all about and what they want. They see themselves as a proud ancient Tribe with Covenant with God or History; they see the world in terms of "Is it good for us Jews and our power?" Jews are more than 'identitarian'. They are 'covenantarian', a far more potent consciousness for it associates identity with history and destiny. Any tribe can have an identity, but it'd be just another identity among many others; an identity could be nothing special; every individual has an identity, but most of them mean nothing to the world; they are not world-shakers. In contrast, being a 'covenantarian' means your identity is special and has a unique place in the world by the blessings of God or design of history.
Now, as Jews are small in number, they naturally need OTHER peoples to serve the Tribe, and it means goy servants must have no identities or, at best, controlled identities. Because white servility to Jews is most crucial to Jewish Global Hegemony, the Jewish Agenda says whites are to have No Identity. Whites are to be 'Nodentitarians' or 'Zerodentitarians'. No-Identity or Zero-Identity for whites. After all, if whites do have identity, they are likely to become white-centric and try to make the world revolve around white interests(as in the past when the Jewish minority had to serve white elites and white nations/powers; there was a time when Jews served European kings and American Wasp elites). To make whites revolve around Jewish Power, white identity must be turned into 'nodentity'. But since humans crave an identity, whites without identity will still seek one to serve, and this is where Jews make deracinated & disoriented whites serve Zionism, Jewish pride, and Jewish holiness. Jews want whites to become like Charlie Kirk. If you want to visualize the essence of Jewish-White relationship in the Current Era, consider Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk side by side.

As for non-whites, Jews allow controlled identities. Jews don't want blacks, yellows, browns, and Muslims to have core identities, or autonomous identities independent of PC dogma. Take the identity of Palestinian-Americans for instance. If their identity were like that of Jews or current Hungarians, Palestinians would emphasize Palestinian nationhood(rooted in a particular history and territory), Palestinian power, and Palestinian future(especially by resisting Zionist supremacism). Such an identity could compete with Jewish identity, especially troubling as Israel was created by wiping Palestine off the map. Jews would rather have Palestinian-American identity be defined in terms of grievance toward white 'racism' and 'Islamophobia'(despite the fact that Zionist Hollywood did more than any institution or industry to spread anti-Muslim tropes). Political Correctness is, of course, a game of Grievance Envy where various non-white groups claim to be bigger victims of whites or at least on the better terms with blacks and homos, two groups that, along with Jews, are favored above all others by the Jew-run media. Thus, Palestinian-ness becomes a negative-identity than a positive one. It's an identity of opposition to Evil Whitey than an independent identity that has value regardless of its relation to white folks. Instead of thinking, "I am first and foremost a Palestinian with deep history and national aspirations in the Middle East", the controlled identity of Palestinian-Americans becomes, "I'm first and foremost a victim of White Power & Privilege, therefore defined mainly by my commitment, in alliance with other non-whites, against Evil Whitey." Thus, Palestinian-Americanism becomes a matter of virtue-signaling about 'white racism'. Instead of focusing on what is essential for Palestinian survival and revival, Palestinian-Americans come to focus on forming alliances with non-Palestinians against the Evil Right or 'white supremacism'. And this alliance effectively dilutes and weakens Palestinian consciousness by directing the emphasis of Palestinian politics toward an identification-of-shared-grievance with blacks, yellows, browns, and etc.(against Evil Whitey of course), with whom Palestinians have nothing in common except for the Jewish canard that all non-white groups are oppressed by Evil Whitey in the West. Jews would rather have Palestinian consciousness be generic as just another voice in the anti-white PC mantra than remain distinct & autonomous in calling out Jewish Power for having wiped Palestine off the map and stealing the remaining land from Palestinians in West Bank. BDS Movement that represents the true national interest of Palestinian Identity is to be suppressed. As far as Jews are concerned, Palestinians can have negative identity as anti-white Palestinian-Americans but NO IDENTITY as Palestinians longing for Lost Palestine, i.e. Palestinian Identity can hate whites but not love Palestine. Only Jews are to have a real identity in the US. Whites are to have No Identity, and non-whites are to have Controlled Identities that are essentially negative-identities as they have 'worth' ONLY IN OPPOSITION to whiteness(as orchestrated by Jews).
After all, PC and multi-culturalism never remind non-whites such as Palestinians to cling to their history and culture; rather, non-whites are urged to identify themselves in opposition to whiteness.

Ultimately, the rule of America is that whites and non-whites must, above all, serve Jews and homos. Imperialists have always had problems with the politics of identity because Other peoples with their own identities are less likely to serve the power of the dominant people, the imperial hegemon. Empires could be tolerant and let other identities & cultures survive but only in loyalty & service to the Core Power of the Empire. In some cases, the Imperial Power Dynamics took on a game theory logic of its own. Though the empire expanded from a core ethnic group, the main purpose went FROM the use of power to make the World serve the Core TO ensuring that everything(even the core) be sacrificed to expand the imperial power. There was the danger that the Imperial-power-for-imperial-power's-sake could become the main obsession of the empire. Thus, it no longer mattered if the original Core Group maintained grip on power or not; even if members of OTHER groups gained dominance, it was acceptable as long as the empire continued and expanded. The Roman Empire became like this. The surviving Byzantium or Eastern Roman Empire was mostly ruled by non-Romans. And the US has also become like this. It went FROM an Anglo-American empire that brought over non-Anglos to serve Anglo-American Power TO a World Empire where it no longer mattered which group was dominant AS LONG AS the world was turned into Pax Americana as envisioned by the enthusiasts of the American Century(or American Millennium as the case may be). If not for Jewish Power, the US might indeed have turned into a World Empire without a Core Group at its center. But the decline of Wasp Power wasn't followed up by the rise of colorblind elites but by Jewish-Supremacist takeover; as a result, the US as lone-superpower is now about making the world serve the Jews uber alles. Still, it is interesting how the American Empire went from mainly serving the power and glory of one racial-ethnic group(the Anglos) to serving those of another. Instead of the Anglo-American Empire falling apart like the Western Roman Empire, its reins were handed over to nouveau overlord Jews, much like Roman power eventually went over to non-Romans in the Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire. But just as the meaning of 'Roman' became meaningless as non-Romans became New Romans, the meaning of 'American' has become meaningless except as access to riches and power, either as lords or servants.

There are various cultural strategies employed by the empire to suppress, control, or manipulate the identities of subject peoples. The empire can paradoxically pose as a 'liberating' agent for the subject people. This is especially useful when the subject people happen to be caught between two or more empires. Then, Empire A can claim to defend the rights and freedom of the subject people from Empires B and C. Or Empire A, B, or C can claim to have liberated the subject people from their own tyrant. It's like the US justified its invasion of Iraq on grounds that Iraqis had to be 'liberated' from tyrant Saddam Hussein. Same rationale was proffered in the destruction of Gaddafi's rule in Libya.
If the empire has much cultural capital, it may entice its subject peoples with the fancy benefits of remaining within the imperial tent. The French Empire was advantaged in this regard as there was much that was glorious about French arts, culture, food, & wine. Use cuisines-and-sticks than mere carrots-and-sticks to seduce the subject peoples into compliance. Use the fist but also the feast. Consider the sheer effect of French cuisine in BABETTE'S FEAST.
Or, the empire can degrade the culture of its subject people into something small and humdrum. Ottoman Turks allowed Greeks to keep their culture, but it had to be humble than proud. Greeks could have their folklore, food, and dance, but they couldn't unite to politicize Greek culture as a national identity. Japanese went further and decided to erase Koreanness by forcing Koreans to take on Japanese names and speak Japanese as if they, as fellow a Yamato people, must forget they were ever Korean. Another imperial strategy is Mass Migration and Diversity. By moving peoples all around, the empire can undermine and weaken the connection between a people/culture and their ancestral soil. Stalin was an expert at this, moving entire populations from all around to replace tribal consciousness with ideological uniformity and his cult of personality.

In the US, Jews use many time-tested Imperial methods to weaken white power. Like Japanese in Korea, they wage war on White Identity and say it never existed. Or, if it really did exist, it was 'racist' & evil and have no reason to exist further. It was so wrong for British and French histories to have been almost entirely white. So 'racist'! Such historical injustices must be rectified with mass-immigration & mass-promotion of non-whites and by retro-fitting the past whereby the great white heroes and historical figures are re-imagined as non-whites, especially blacks.
Jews use 'restaurants' to entice whites into surrendering their nations. Let the foreign hordes with their cooking pots to create the melting pot. So what if you lose your nation? You will have 'better food'? And make white nations 'include' tons of non-whites to boost Diversity, now a Magic Word that has so many idiots believing that Diversity is a magic panacea for everything when, by and large, less diverse nations are much better off than diverse ones around the world, the only exceptions being homogeneous black nations like Haiti and those in Sub-Saharan Africa. Granted, just like Turks tolerated humble Greek culture, Jews do tolerate humble whiteness like the Amish who have NO chance of power or influence.
In a way, the Jewish Empire is more problematic than goy empires of old. At the very least, White Imperialists were willing to embrace non-white subjects as 'fellow Christians'. Communist Imperialists(like Russians for example) of one nationality were willing to accept communists of other nations as fellow comrades. And white Americans came around to a compromise, whereby both White Americans and Non-White Americans would primarily be 'American' and meet in the middle as 'fellow countrymen'. Furthermore, there were British and French Imperialists who were willing to regard non-white subjects as Fellow British or Fellow Frenchmen.
In contrast, Jews are NOT willing to regard non-Jews as New Jews or Fellow Tribesmen. And yet, they want total control over other peoples. As brutal as imperialism often was, there was still a generosity of spirit in Christian Imperialists willing to regard the conquered as fellow Christians. Or in the cases of the British and French imperialists willing to accept loyal non-white subjects as 'British' or 'French'. Or in the Japanese acceptance of Koreans as 'Japanese' even though Koreans weren't give a choice in the matter. But Jewish Imperialists don't regard their subject peoples as Fellow Jews, and the only time they invoke the meme of 'fellow white people' is to berate white goyim about 'white privilege' when, if anything, it's the Jews who got the most power and privilege. Jews are totally stingy with their own identity. Israel is for Jews only, and Jewishness is a closed club. And yet, the Jewish-American Empire expects non-Jews to serve Jewish glory unconditionally and wholeheartedly, indeed like the faithful are supposed to serve God. On some level, Jews surely sense this is a tall order that reeks of hypocrisy as well as tribal supremacism.

And this is why Jews have promoted Globo-Homomania as the main proxy of Jewish Hegemonic Power. While only Jews can be Jews, there are homos in every nation and group, and those homos can serve as agents of Jewish Global Power. Jews know that homos in every nation feel some degree of alienation from their core culture and tend to be vain & narcissistic in their nihilistic self-aggrandizement, therefore willing to betray their own people, nation, and culture for their own 'pride' as neo-aristos. Jews also know that homos have special talents and tend to be more driven, making them more successful than on average, like the homo guy in NO WAY OUT who always has a facial expression like he sucked cock in the washroom a minute before. And homo collaborators around the world know there are rich rewards for sucking up to Jews. Consider Palestinian homos and trannies who work with Israel because Jews finance the celebration of globo-homo. Homos of all stripes are so diva-like that they will even sacrifice their own nation & people for catwalks at fashion shows and the attention of paparazzi.

Anyway, what can be said about the human nature that thirsts for the hunt? When American Indians were forbidden to hunt and turned into farmers, many of them no longer felt alive. In BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES, the men are glad to be back home but realize they are 'nobodies' back in civilian society. War was hellish but they were heroes and tough guys. But in the world of peace, they are clerks and salesmen selling sodapop to teenyboppers. It's like retired boxers often hanker for life in the ring because, as brutal as it was, it made them feel most alive as warriors who held nothing back to the cheers of the masses.
Even though Oliver Stone's trilogy of Vietnam films are considered to be Anti-War, the fact that he revisited the subject repeatedly suggests that he felt most alive in war. Besides, his SALVADOR is less anti-war than pro-revolution, a form of war against the existing order. And his works such as ANY GIVEN SUNDAY and ALEXANDER leave little doubt that he is as obsessed with the Hunter Nature of Man as Patton was. And it's telling that George Lucas, who considers himself a Political Liberal, made his mark on Movie History with the series STAR WARS, which is about nonstop warmongering in outer-space. And for all their rhetorical denunciations of 'fascism', all those Hollywood Jews now rake in most profits from movies that exult in mega-violence carried out by cool superheroes and supervillains, both of whom revel in what could easily be characterized as 'fascist tropes'. And for all the association of blacks with 'social justice', the dominant black expression is Rap Music that is all about the thug-hunter and neo-jungle-warrior obsessed with guns, fighting, murdering, and raping. And even though Jews tend to loathe traditional military culture of America, they sure love to sign up for the Israeli Military and gun down Palestinians. Jews also denounce the Gun Culture of America but have no problems with gun-ownership in Israel because it means the Jewish majority population are armed against Palestinians.

Serving in the US military is for White Goy Suckers who aren't allowed to fight in the name of European-American Identity. Jews, such as David Brooks' son, join the ISRAELI Military, and they explicitly serve Jewish Identity & Interests. No problem with Jewish militarism and Jewish gun ownership.

Just because the hunt is over doesn't mean that the hunter-instinct is gone and done with. Just because the war is over doesn't meant that the warrior-instinct is over. Granted, there is no single human nature. Human nature is both individual and social. It is both aggressive and defensive. It is both self-interested and selfless. Every man can be greedy and generous. Some people have more of a certain nature than another, but few people are entirely one thing or another, which would be pathological. Some people are clearly more greedy than generous, while others are the reverse, but even greedy people can be remarkably generous, and even generous people can be overcome with greed.
Dogs have been bred to be far less aggressive than wolves, but wolf-nature is always there in the dog. Even the mildest dog can lurch into predatory mode and suddenly chase after rabbits. Cats and dogs may feel close to their masters/owners and appreciate the comfort of home, but they are also eager to go outdoors and run around in hunter-mode. Granted, as pets, they are allowed to act out their predatory instincts in ways that are acceptable to and approved by the human community. As such, we may think of them as 'good dogs', but they are still acting out their bloodthirsty wolf nature. Jews regard goyim as human dogs, and they've trained scum like Antifa to act out their hunter-instincts by going after 'nazis', which is just about any white person who says NO to cuckery to Jews. Even though the aggressive hunter-nature of Antifa dogs is being exploited by Jewish Power, they are too stupid to realize they've been led around on a leash and believe themselves to be devotees to the higher cause of justice. Antifa is essentially a sports club for weaklings like Washington D.C. is Hollywood for ugly people. The kind of people who join Antifa could never cut it as alpha males in athletics or get the best girls. So, they cover their faces and pretend to be tough guys at war with 'Nazis' when they aren't even smart enough to realize they're tools of the Establishment.

There seems to be a similarity between people characterized as warmongers and those who are called 'woke'; they could be called 'woke-mongers'. Both suffer from an addiction to the endless hunt, endless conflict, endless conquest. A warmonger hates peace even as he claims the next war is necessary for peace and order around the world. Even when wars end and their objectives have been met, warmongers must find new reasons to wage more wars, cold or hot. The military establishment seems to be full of them, the New Pattons who never say NO to prospects for new conflicts. It's their chance to go globo-hunting again around the world. Wars for them is an endless hunting season to bag new trophies. They are Game Theory Hunters. Granted, there are plenty of sane men in the military who understand the tragedy of war and regard war as an 'evil necessity' of the last resort. Still, many people who join the military tend to be the type with a penchant for aggression and destruction. Chickenhawks in civilian government can be even worse. At least military men feel pangs of conscience about needlessly expending the lives of their men.

But the hunter-instinct need not be restricted to use of lethal weaponry. Power manifests itself in myriad ways, and the Warmonger Mentality is alive and well in all fields. Just like there is no Final War for the warmonger who is always eager for more wars, there is no Final Progress for the Woke-mongers. They feel this obsessive need to find the New Evil and stamp it out. An extreme form of this was the Trotskyite Theory of the Permanent Revolution, whereupon there would be infinite new upheavals even after the triumph of communism. Mao Zedong unleashed the Cultural Revolution in 1966 on grounds that, without new campaigns and renewed vigilance, the reactionaries will regain power. But, such fanaticism often leads to a kind of cannibalism. After all, if all the bourgeoisie have been destroyed, whom should the new campaigns target? In communist nations, it often led to one bunch of communists accusing other bunch of communists of being the 'bourgeoisie'. Communists came to devour other communists, a bloodier replay of radicalism gone off the rail in the French Revolution. Worse, such blood-thirst fails to consider that, maybe just maybe, there is some value to the bourgeoisie in the development of modern economies, a fact that Karl Marx himself admitted in his observation that the industrial revolution was the product of the bourgeoisie. But then, fanaticism abhors complexity and ambiguity, insisting that history and the world be divided into Simple Good vs Simple Evil. Even Marx, for all his deep thinking, succumbed to the simplistic formulations of radicalism.

Some may argue that Woke-mongers or Wokesters are motivated more by ideology than by instinct, but this is doubtful. After all, if ideology premised on logic & principles matters most to Woke-mongers, why has 'progressive' thought been so malleable, illogical, contradictory, and childish especially since the end of the Cold War? It seems the new 'progressivism' is more about animal-like emotions of Outrage than cerebral understanding of reality and the world. The what and why of human events hardly matter to these Wokesters. And notice that they don't decide on their own as to the terms of their so-called progressivism. Rather, they are told what to be outraged about and then run after it like dogs after rabbits. The only 'agency' they have is in the tendency to be MORE outraged than the next person. So, if they are told that 'homophobia' is bad, they never question the validity of 'homophobia' as a concept but only go the extra mile to dig up another bone where others failed to. It's like the Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution never questioned Maoism itself. Instead, they only competed among themselves on who was more 'woke' on Maoism. It's so much like dog behavior. When made to chase after rabbits, they never ask why they should chase rabbits or why they shouldn't chase after other animals. They just compete among themselves to hunt down the most rabbits.

If there were a core logic or principles to current 'progressivism', it wouldn't be so easy to manipulate or alter. Indeed, old manifestations of progressivism did have some core logic or meaning to them. And the radical socialism of Marxism also had its core tenets. In contrast, current 'leftism', 'progressivism', or 'woke-ism' seems to have no rhyme or reason except What-the-Jews(and-their-Homo-Allies)-Want. So much of what goes by the name of 'leftism' has no relation to classic leftist principles or broadly defined goals. We are to believe that Wall-Street-funded-homos working for the Deep State to wage wars with the Pentagon against nations hated by super-rich Jews is about being 'woke'. The new 'leftism' is about Jewish-funded Antifa serving as the thug force of Wall Street and capitalist oligarchy to shut down peoples who dare voice opposition to globo-corporatism.

In a way, the instinct came to override ideology because we live in a post-literary and post-intellectual age. With the rise of Image Culture via Electronic-Idolatry, people's sense of the world are shaped more by celebrity, adulation, pageantry, and hype than by books, theories, and ideas. Specious is favored over the serious, the trivial
over the trenchant. Communists in the past had serious blind-spots, but they still knew what they stood for in terms of core ideology, and for sure, they were not about celebrating homo vanity backed by Wall Street and the Gaming Industry. Given their core principles, such was unthinkable. The same could be said of Christian Churches in a more serious and devout time. The very thought of desecrating churches with homo 'pride' flags would have been deemed sacrilegious, like the vandalizing of the Madonna statue in THE EXORCIST(though one could argue that William Friedkin's horror classic was really a desecration of Christianity under the guise of sanctimony). But beginning with the rise of youth-centrism and mania for pop culture(especially with TV in every room) in the late 50s, we ended up in a world where most people's idea of Good or Evil came to be determined by hysterics of fad and fashion. Without serious ideological or philosophical underpinning, the worldview of the majority is entirely at the whim of media-manipulators. Given the sign of the times, if THE EXORCIST were released today, people are likely to see the devil-possessed girl as 'woke' and 'empowered' like the many 'amazing' child trannies now promoted by the sick Jew-run media.

Another problem is that Jews went from ideology to identity. While identity was always a key factor among the Tribesmen, many Jews in the past never thought they would come to rule the US(esp as the sole superpower). As such, Jews thought they had a better chance at power, protection, and influence by championing certain universal ideas and principles. But as Israeli-Zionist Pride and the Holocaust came to define Jewishness, Jews came to favor identity over ideology. Also, as they grew in power and gain hegemony over the US, they began to think less in terms of "We-the-People against Wasp Privilege" than of "How do we Jews remain on top?" Granted, Jews continue to employ the Old Progressive Narrative of Non-Wasp Diversity united against the White Privilege of Wasps, and enough dummies still fall for the trick, but such has no resemblance to reality. Jews are no longer a bunch of Spartacuses leading the unwashed masses against Wasp Privilege. If anything, they are the 'New Wasps', the new ruling elites. Amusingly enough, the Wasp Elites have attached themselves to Jewish Power as total cucks like the Romneys and the Bushes. In the past, Jews were likely to side with the White Working Class(of all ethnic groups) against the Wasp elites, but today, they are more likely to work with cucky-wuck Wasp elites against the White Working/Middle Class who are demeaned as the 'deplorable' representatives of 'white supremacism'. (For one thing, white 'deplorables' are not 'white supremacist' in their thinking. Unfortunately if anything, too many of them are more likely to support the Jewish Supremacism of Zionists than think of their own people. Secondly, even if they were 'white supremacist', why should it matter when they have no power? Supremacism without power is like a palooka pretending to be the champion. Why should it bother anyone? Of course, what Jews really fear is not white-nationalism-as-the-latest-manifestation-of-white-supremacism but white nationalism as insistence on white national liberation from Jewish Supremacism that insists that white goyim serve as Janissary for the hegemony of World Jewry. What a strange world we live in when so many 'conservative' Christians practically worship Jews, the very people hellbent on desecrating Christianity with Homomania or Queertianity. Christian 'conservatives' are so reverential toward Jews that some are even coming around to waving the 'gay pride' flag as what conservatism and Christianity are all about.)

Because of vast demographic changes, the replacement of literary/ideological culture with an electronic/idolatrous culture, Jewish elites' refusal to admit their supremacist control of America(while pretending that the 'white privilege' of the 'deplorables' is the main threat to justice & peace), and general vulgarization of society, ours is a truly chaotic time in terms of reality vs perception. So much of what people think and 'know' is at odd with the truth and how things really are. But many seem not to mind, especially among the 'progressive' or 'social justice warrior' types because what they really after is not the truth and understanding but constant rushes of righteousness. They are all about feelings, with which they are satisfied in their convictions of right and wrong. (In the past, liberals were more likely to question the prevailing morality, the official dogma, or the social norm, whereas conservatives were more likely to accept it on habit or faith. In the present, conservatives are more likely to reflect on and resist what the Power commands as the Good. In a dominantly conservative order where most people stick with tradition, the liberals stand out as relative free thinkers who are willing to deviate from the established norm. But in a society where constant change has become the norm, the liberal-minded are likely to conform to the latest trends without thinking. As liberal pride is premised on enthusiasm for change, liberals face the danger of losing their critical faculty in their gushing adoration of the New. In contrast, the conservative, being less enthralled with the conceit of change as progress, is more likely to question the existing power and its agenda. In a way, liberal conformism in a liberal age is more dangerous than conservative conformism in a conservative age. While tradition can be foolish, it has the pedigree of deep history and experience over the ages. Thus, the core tenets of conservatism are often fundamentally sound. In contrast, liberalism's faith in change overlooks the fact that its truisms have yet to pass the test of time. So, if conservatives at least bet on what has been proven to work, liberals place their faith in new ideas in uncharted territories. Faith in experience is usually a better bet than faith in experimentation. Liberal experimentation is valuable ONLY IF done with caution as, after all, every new hypothesis in science or idea in technology is approached with caution, like wandering through a minefield. Furthermore, while one can be a true conservative in a ultra-conservative world, one cannot be a true liberal in an ultra-liberal world. If the essence of liberalism is critical thought, skepticism, and acceptance of controversy, such cannot survive in an ultra-liberal order where liberals are expected to forgo their individuality and critical acumen in favor of conformist commitment to the cause of change for change's sake. This is why Norman Mailer said freedom is truly endangered when even liberals give up freedom for dogma. If the great value of liberalism was the will to break out of the conservative shell in the name of freedom, what freedom is left when liberalism turns into a blind quasi-totalitarian commitment to change as decreed by Big Brother or Big Money?)
So, as long as the Social Justice Warmongering or NPI types are given something to feel outraged or angry about, they are content. It's like dogs are content as long as they are given something to bark at, something to chase after, something to bite and maul. Some on the militarist right are the same in their basic psychology. Men like John McCain and John Bolton don't really care about the What or the Why AS LONG AS they are given something to be outraged about, beat the drums of war, and flex their muscles as 'tough guys' or 'men of importance'.

If Jews were weak while the US were ruled by Arab-Americans, these cuck-dog white men would be barking for their Arab masters and beating the drums against Israel. While all people are capable of moral outrage and finding righteous emotional satisfaction, there are those who need to really understand what is going on and why. They want to feel righteous about WORTHY matters and causes in the Real World. They don't want to waste their passions on something as dumb and trashy as the Pussy March where a whole bunch of spoiled privileged brats played at being 'oppressed' because Monster Bitch Hillary, the favorite of the Deep State and War Department, failed to become president.
When the US was a more serious nation with men and women grounded in deeper creeds like Christianity or concerned with genuine intellectual ideas, they were less likely to be at the whims of fashion. Passion rooted in deep faiths or big ideas are less likely to bend to every new social trend that comes along. But religious roots have withered away. Cultural traditions and customs are almost non-existent. And the so-called End of History means that the Age of Ideas are over. All that is left for people to do is, "Don't Worry, Be Happy." But the so-called End of History didn't bring about the End of Human Nature that craves something to 'hunt' and something to feel excited over, be it politics or pop culture(though the two are increasingly difficult to tell apart). But without religion, roots, or deep ideas, what are people supposed to get all excited about? What great cause can they believe in? What noble value can they defend in a world defined by vapid consumerism? Well, the Jewish Power decided that the deracinated and 'devaluated' population can be manipulated by propaganda, pop culture, and advertising into moral outrages over just about anything. As most Americans have no Core Values or Essential Understanding of anything, their 'truth' is whatever happens to be hot at the moment. As unthinking dogs, their idea of Good or Bad is about turning their ears to the latest signals from central command and seeking the approval of like-minded drones. Since most of them are dogs and sheeple, few have the agency to decide what is Good or Bad on their own. They are like TVs with antennas that can pick up signals but cannot produce autonomous programs. The 'programs' are concocted and controlled by the mavens of mass media, entertainment, and state propaganda, and needless to say, the most important contingent of this power is Jewish and Homo.
The current Wokies are so stupid that they are utterly unawares of the contradictions of all the nonsense they spout. And this is true of Wokies in elite institutions as well as in lower ones. Elite institutions have plenty of people with intelligence, but high IQ is useless without emotional maturity and core virtues such as courage and integrity. Being emotional children, even high-IQ Wokies are easily swayed by the passion of the moment without questioning. They just love the FEEL of being swept along on the waves of righteous indignation and preening self-regard. Granted, righteousness can be as vexing as comforting. If one is outraged 24/7, he or she will have to pay an emotional toll, no matter how justified he or she may feel. Furthermore, self-righteousness can easily turn into a pissing contest of who is MORE righteous. Also, as righteousness is now so wedded to identity, white wokies must try ever so harder to be 'righteous' because whiteness is blamed for just about anything. But black wokies can become frustrated too. On the one hand, the official dogma says blacks are noblest and coolest... but the reality says blacks lag behind other groups in so many fields. How is it that intrinsically cooler and nobler blacks are less accomplished than other races in everything but sports and pop music? This discrepancy drives many blacks crazy. Also, black males are far more prized by pop culture than black women are, a reason as to why so many black women are 'angry'. Also, the so-called 'intersectionality' tends to lead to political gridlock than unity. After all, what happens to an intersection when cars come from all directions? The traffic drastically slows down. There could even be crashes. Indeed, 'intersectionality' has to be one of the dumbest ideas in politics as the identities, values, and leanings of the various ethnic, cultural, and sexual groups have little or nothing in common. PC says we must respect Islam and Globo-Homo both. It says we must be feminist but also support tranny men beating women in sports. It says Jews and Muslims are united against Evil Whitey, but in fact, Jews are eager as ever to make Evil Whitey destroy Muslim lands while whispering into Muslim ears that Jews and Muslims must work together to destroy white Europe and white America. We are told that race is just a myth, a social construct, but it is the so-called Liberal Media that disseminate so much of 'racist' or 'progracist' propaganda whereby the various races have been pigeonholed into familiar stereotypes. Consider the black-male-white-female pairing in popular culture. It's not about colorblindness but based on the perception/proposition that black males, as the top males, are most deserving of white women as the most desirable females.
Also, PC's clampdown on free/honest speech has less to do with attempts to eradicate 'racism' and supremacism than to conceal them as practiced by the globalist elites. After all, even honest 'bigoted' speech is more revealing of the truth and in waking people up to reality. For example, suppose someone in the Deep State said, "We admire Jews as the high-IQ superior race, and we will serve Zionist power to bash and destroy all those dumb worthless 'Muzzie' Arabs, a bunch of subhuman camel jockeys." That would be nasty stuff, but it would expose what US foreign policy is really about. And then, the American people might wake up and stop supporting Zionist hegemonism around the world. In order for the Jewish-controlled Deep State to make the American foreign policy palatable, it pretends that the US respects Muslims and that American power is a fair arbiter to all sides in the Middle East and North Africa. Of course, that is a fiction. US foreign policy IS Jewish-Zionist-supremacist, but that fact has to be covered up to justify Wars for Israel against Muslims. And in order to mask the Jewish Supremacist nature of supporting Israel over Palestinians, the US must pretend that pro-Israeli policies are not about Jewish supremacism but about protecting poor poor Jews from 'another holocaust' at the hands of 'Anti-Semites'.
Likewise, the anti-black policy of urban gentrification is most effective when anti-black rhetoric is suppressed. To DO the anti-black thing, one must suppress anti-black speech lest people realize what is REALLY happening. For instance, suppose gentrifiers spoke HONESTLY about their agenda. They'd say something like, "Too many blacks act like crazy niggers. They commit too much crime and mess up entire neighborhoods. Blacks are the biggest destroyers of cities. Just look at Detroit or Baltimore or any place where blacks gained the upperhand. To make urban living amenable to affluent whites, Jews, and Asians, there must be ways to drive urban blacks out of many parts of the city. And there must be ways to lock up many black males because, out in the streets, they have a tendency to act like louts and thugs." That would be honest speech, but it would also give the game away. White/Jewish gentrifiers would no longer be able to conceal their true agenda, and blacks would wake up and realize what is really being done to them. So, in order to gentrify and drive the problematic blacks out — the Black Nakba or Blakba — , the Power must suppress free/honest speech that spills the beans and gives the game away. Speak BS and Carry out the Plan, a more effective way than 'Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick'.

Anyway, the so-called Social Justice Warriors might as well be called Social Justice Warmongers. Just like warmongers feel stifled and constricted in peace time and crave more wars to feel truly alive, social-justice-warmongers can never feel at ease because they feel alive only when AT WAR against some evil. As most Social Justice Warmongers are pretty dumb, stupid, or insipid, they are incapable of assessing what is really wrong with the world. Thus, like dogs, they are vulnerable to manipulation by those who hold the whip-hand in media, academia, and deep state. Incapable of seeing with their own eyes or hearing with their own ears, they need to be told what to be outraged about, what to bark at, and what to bite in the ankle. Thus, they have far more in common with the likes of John Bolton and John McCain than they would ever realize. McCain, Bolton, and the Social Justice Warmongers crave the hunt, the fight, the crusade. But being feeble-minded, they have no way of surveying the world and seeing what is really wrong with it. Rather, they depend on their Masters to tell them what to growl about. And in both cases, the Masters are Jews. Jews order the likes of McCain and Bolton to wage Wars for Israel. "White dog, go attack Muslims and Russians." And Jews order Social Justice Warmongers to bark and bite at white identity and white pride. In a way, both sets of dogs are complementary in service to Jewish interests. After all, in order for Jews to make whites suppress their own identity & interests to serve Jewish Power, white identity must be disparaged and vilified. Thus, the likes of Bolton and McCain(and Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney) have been well-trained and groomed to never do anything that is in the interest of white people. By fanning anti-white rage among the Progs, Jews effectively castrate white identity. Then, without an identity and interests of their own, whites have no choice but to be dogs to another identity and its sets of interests, and of course, it is Jewish and Zionist. Yes, the world spins around the axis of Jewish supremacist neurosis, and white goy warmongers and Social Justice Warmongers are two sides of the same shekel.

Cynics and Sinners — The More Cynical You Are, the More You Need Saving as Sinner — The De-Sanctification of White Bodies to Make Whites Serve the Supremacist Power of Jews

It’s been oft-remarked that humans are naturally spiritual, religious, or magic-minded. Even people who know astronomy is a real science while astrology is superstition would rather dabble with the latter. It’s not only because real science is far more difficult and daunting than fanciful assumptions about how stars affect our fates. After all, there is much that is fantastic that doesn’t appeal to most people, at least not in any deep way. Kids may get into dungeons-and-dragons video-games but don’t much care about them after ‘game over’. Also, kids eventually grow out of Santa Claus myth about a fat old man in a flying sleigh who distributes gifts to all the good boys and girls around the world. While many people are drawn to the fantastic as means of escapism, they don’t seek nor find much meaning or depth in that stuff. So, when we say that humans are naturally ‘spiritual’ or ‘religious’, we don’t simply mean that they are drawn to outlandish fantasties. Rather, we mean people need to believe in the sacred or to experience holiness in certain figures and fables. Without this element in their lives, they feel empty and meaningless.

And by considering this aspect of human nature, we may better understand the Prog Paradox of the Cynic/Sinner Complex. This phenomenon especially applies to white(non-Jewish) progs. Jews and certain non-whites, especially blacks, are allowed self-worship and auto-sanctimony. If a secular Jew wants to feel holy-schmoly, he merely needs to invoke the Shoah or the Holy Holocaust and feel himself to be a member of the Eternal Victim People. And blacks, being emotionally crude and childlike, can easily be goaded into worshiping themselves as the Sacred Slavery Folks. The Cult of Christian Guilt/Conscience never affected Jewish Culture. Traditionally, Jews could feel guilty toward God or fellow Jews but almost never toward ‘dirty filthy goyim’. If anything, Jewish Culture stressed over and over that God’s laws and Jewish morality mattered only within the Tribe. Jews had no obligation to the rest of humanity that existed to ultimately serve Jews. So, it was permissible for Jews to cheat others IF it was good for the Jews, the Chosen of God.
Granted, not all Jews approved of such contemptuous attitude. Many secular Jews adopted universal Enlightenment principles. Some turned to socialism and world revolution. But in the end, even secular Jews concluded that Jews will always be Jews and the goyim will always be inferior in some ways(especially in intelligence, depth, wisdom, or will-to-power, wit-to-power, and cunning) or superior in other ways infuriating to Jews(whereupon Jews must seek to either destroy this threatening superiority or gain ownership over it): Jews found Aryan features to be superior in beauty, so they gained ownership over it by pornifying white society and reducing white beauty into a mere commodity that no longer belonged to the white race but could be bought and sold by the highest bidder. When white beauty was in noble race-ist mode, it belonged to the white race to maintain the organic unity of white men and white women who'd evolved as a single genetic-phenom for 10,000s of years. But once white society was altered with Jewish anti-race-ism, whiteness was no longer a sacred property of the white race but something to be bought and sold. As Jews gained control of media and entertainment(and vice industries), they turned white beauty into something to be traded like wheat and pork bellies. Today, Jews sell white beauty to black men while white men are reduced a bunch of pathetic cucks.
As for blacks, Jews noticed the Negroids have superior strength; Jewish athletes, even tough ones like Max Baer, were no match for Negro athletes; Sambo could destroy Samson. If a Jew faced off with a Negro, the latter would surely kick the former’s ass. BUT, what if Jews gained control of black bodies by ownership of sports and entertainment media? Thus, black bodies too were commoditized in the meat market controlled by Jews. Even so, there is a holiness attached to black bodies that is not with white bodies. Jews promote books like the one by Ta Nehisi Coates(aka The Nasty Coates) that wax spiritual about the tragedy of black bodies(at the hands of evil whites). So, even as Jews market black bodies as profitable meat in sports, music, dance, and pornography, they also allow for black bodily tragic dimension, especially in relation to North American slave trade. (Jews would rather not have us realize that the biggest slave trade was in Latin America, especially Brazil, and that Jews played a very big role in it.) This way, even as Jews economically exploit black bodies, they can pretend that they sympathize with the Holy Negroes and weep for their suffering under White ‘Racism’.
In contrast, even as White Bodies are also exploited by Jews as sex meat — Jewish men see white girls as ‘shikse whores’, and Jewish women delight in Jewish men and black men abusing & degrading white women because they envy the superior beauty of Aryan women — , they aren’t allowed any tragic dimension(unless they are martyred in confrontation with something like Nazism, as in SAVING PRIVATE RYAN; white bodies gain a bit of holiness only when combating White Evil). All those whites battered, beaten, robbed, raped, and murdered by stronger & more aggressive blacks in the US and South Africa aren’t allowed a moment of grace or sympathy. Jews know what white people are capable of IF THE SAXON IS AWAKENED.

It was not preached to the crowd.
It was not taught by the state.
No man spoke it aloud
When the Saxon(or English)began to hate.

It was not suddenly bred.
It will not swiftly abate.
Through the chilled years ahead,
When Time shall count from the date
That the Saxon(or English) began to hate.

When Jews in the Weimar Period pushed Germans too far, it led to rise of National Socialism and the terrifying war on the Jews. When the Japanese pulled a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor, the American Saxon finally awoke and killed millions of 'Japs'. When Anglo-Americans heard about the massacre in Alamo, they got riled up and went about smashing the Mexican military and taking huge chunks of land. Jews know that there’s no greater rage than Moral Rage. It is when people feel tragic about themselves or their own kind that they can become most angry and mete out the greatest kind of violence to their enemies. If violence against a people is denied a tragic dimension, it just seems unpleasant and nasty, not necessarily sacrilegious and outrageous. It’s like the destruction of a church seems worse than the destruction of any random building. A church is supposed to be a holy place. A destruction of a great work of art feels far worse than the destruction of some random painting of little value. We think of great works of art as priceless. To destroy them is to destroy something quasi-sacred. And there was a time when white people regarded their own bodies as blessed with holiness. So, the idea of non-whites killing a bunch of whites seemed outrageous to whites. The unholy act of desecration had to be dealt with and corrected. Even if dead white bodies couldn’t be resurrected, white honor had to be restored through vengeance against the destroyers of the white body. When Jews in Weimar Germany abused and exploited so many German people(especially the women) as pieces of meat on the sex market, German men and women said enough is enough. They turned virulently anti-Jewish. And when Japan struck Pearl Harbor in a sneak attack and killed thousands of white people, enraged White America was outraged and felt it had to teach the vicious yellows a lesson. In a way, America’s Pacific War was like a White Riot against the yellow desecration of white. (Likewise, the reason why the Japanese were so traumatized by defeat was they didn’t see their nation as just a political entity but as the sacred land of the gods. Just like Jews needed to de-sacralize white bodies in order to gain control over white souls, the US needed to de-sacralize Japan[and its spiritual relation with the Emperor] into a soulless & plastic economic zone in order to gain control over Japan. Thus, Japan just became one big factory and marketplace, and its women became a bunch of whores for the globo-marketplace.) A people feel moral(and even spiritual)outrage against their enemies when they believe in the holiness of their race and bodies. They see their own people and culture as a Temple than as a mere bazaar. In order for Jews to gain power over whites, they had to de-sacralize white bodies into mere matter and then to 'toxify' it with 'white guilt'; thus, whites feel filth but not faith in their own bodies. Jews went about doing this by associating white beauty with Nazism and ‘racism’/slavery. Jews said National Socialism was an Aesthetic Movement to preserve Aryan Beauty. Thus, any ideology that values white beauty as something holy is evil. (Ironically, globalists value blackness above other racial traits for aesthetic reasons. They are addicted to black muscle, dongs & butts, and voice. A kind of Afro-'Aryanism' informs much of globo-homo cult, even with the bung of Milo.) White beauty may be appreciated but only as a commodity to be bought and sold, especially by Jews, non-white races, and blacks. Jews also re-interpreted American Southern History as one of white men using racial discrimination to preserve white beauty and white womanhood from challenges posed by black men equipped with harder muscles and bigger dongs. So, any white male attempt to keep white women and preserve white beauty was(and is) evil and ‘racist’. White beauty may be white, but it must no longer belong as a sacred property of the white race. It must exist to be bought or taken by other races. White race must become like a Dairy Cow to be milked by the World. It used to be white teats produced milk for white kids. Now, white teats are to be milked by all the world, especially Jews of course who take creme dela creme for themselves: White Elite Power must serve Jewish Globo-Homo interests.

Because whiteness has lost its sacred dimension, it no longer seems tragic for whites to suffer, especially at the hands of non-whites. In the past, when blacks raped white women or killed white men, white folks got together to teach the Nasty Negro a lesson(like the 'Japs' were taught a lesson for Pearl Harbor). How dare the Nasty Negro violate the sacred bodies of white women or white men? But today, PC has instructed countless people that black lives are holy — Black Lives Matter — whereas white lives are just commodities. So, it doesn’t matter how many white lives are robbed, beaten, raped, or murdered by blacks. It doesn't matter that white inmates in prisons are routinely anal-raped by monstrous 'groids'. We must pretend that the mayhem isn’t happening OR that it’s no big deal since it’s happening to lame white people(who probably deserve it). (Consider the attitude of Sarah Jeong, the yellow dog mind-poisoned by the Jews. Just like South Koreans in the past were trained by the US to kill and torture Vietnamese, Korean-American yellow dogs are now trained by Jews to bark and bite at whitey. Jews know yellows are servile dogs that always obey the Top Power.) Indeed, because white bodies no longer have sacred value while black bodies have much sacred value, white women feel that their wicked white bodies have value only when taken by black men and impregnated with black seed; and white boys cuck out to this new racial dynamics because they believe whiteness is just ‘white bread’ and exist to serve the Holy Three: Jews, blacks, and homos; nothing would make these cucky-wuck boys happier than to see the next James Bond be a Negro. (White bodies also gain special pokemon points IF they take homo penises up their bungs: Poopjobs.) Because of the Slavery Narrative — even though slavery was universal, the only worthy victims of the Slavery Narrative are blacks of North America — and Shoah Narrative, black and Jewish bodies are seen as holy and sacred. It’s like Jesus’ body was made especially sacred by the Narrative of the Crucifixion. TV shows like ROOTS & THE HOLOCAUST and movies like AMISTAD & SCHINDLER’S LIST — and all those shows with Wonderful Jews and Magic Negroes — created the impression that No Peoples suffered so nobly, tragically, and beautifully as the Jews and Negroes. For most people, Seeing(TV)-Is-Believing. Jews understand the Psychology of Tragedy and how it relates to the Sense of the Sacred. A people are appalled by desecration of the sacred but don’t much care about destruction of non-sacred things. Why do Hindus react violently to non-Hindus mistreating cows in India? To Hindus, cows possess a certain sacred essence. In MCCABE & MRS. MILLER, even the whores and ne’er-do-wells try to save the church when it’s on fire.

Jews know that a people are most empowered when they see their own kind and their own shared property(especially the homeland territory) as (1) sacred and (2) belonging to themselves. A people are bound to be far more furious and outraged when their own kind is attacked IF they regard themselves as special and united in that specialness. After all, that’s been the bedrock of Jewish Power. Jews regarded themselves as not just another tribe but a special Tribe with the Covenant. The Chosen People. This made them feel holy about themselves. Also, even in exile, Jews regarded the Holy Land as sacred because God gave it to them. Many peoples got beaten and crushed so many times in history, but Jews took their setbacks with greater sense of tragedy because they regarded their bodies as holy and ‘chosen’. Also, while Jews were hardly the only people exiled from their homeland, Jews never forgot it because they maintained the Narrative of how God had given it to them and to them only. If Jews hadn't had such feelings about themselves, they would have been just another Tribe. But because of this auto-sense of sacredness, Jews never forgot their self-chosen destiny in history and the world. Naturally, Jews don’t want non-Jews to think likewise because it will mean competition in the Holiness Sweepstakes. After all, holiness isn’t democratic. In every religion and tradition, some things are holy, most things are not, and some things are marked as wicked. And even among holy things, some things are holier than others. Crucifix is holier than rosary to Catholics. So, if Jews are to be a holy people, non-Jews must be made either less holy, unholy, or downright evil. After all, could the Zionist project have succeeded beyond its wildest dreams IF Palestinians had been made equally holy? If whites in the US and EU saw Palestinians as equally holy as Jews, would they have supported the Nakba pogroms of 1948? Would there be such a deafening silence among most Americans concerning the massacre of Palestinians in Gaza IF they regarded Palestinian lives as just as precious as Jewish lives? Of course not. This is why the Politics of Holiness can never be egalitarian. It must deem certain peoples and narratives as holier than others. White silence about dead Palestinians is similar to white silence about dead whites(especially those killed by blacks[directly] and by Jews[indirectly] — blacks often rob, attack, and murder whites, whereas Jews use Wars for Israel, opioid addiction, gambling, and other vice industries to destroy whites indirectly, like all those American Indians killed indirectly by alcohol). Whites don’t care about Palestinian bodies for the same reason they don’t care about white bodies. In the Jewish-controlled West, white bodies and Palestinian bodies are not holy. They are just bodies. Palestinian bodies are usually associated with ‘terrorism’, and white bodies are usually associated with ‘nazism’, ‘white supremacism’, ‘far right’, and also ‘terrorism’. Even though it’s the Jews who de-sanctified the white body and insult whiteness(just like Jews defamed and destroyed Palestinian bodies), whites worship and serve Jews while hating on Palestinians. Why? Because human nature worships the sacred, even when it attacks your kind; and human nature attacks the ‘unholy’, even when it’s in the same straits as your kind. Imagine a monarchy where the king is deemed divine. You revere the king as special while seeing yourself as merely ordinary. Indeed, while the king possesses autonomy of value — he has value just for being what he is and serving his own needs — , you possess no such and your value only derives from serving the divine king. Now, suppose this king mistreats you. And suppose he mistreats another lowly servant. Shouldn’t you, as a lowly mistreated servant, identify with the other servant who is being exploited and kicked around? You would IF you regarded the king as just another person. You might ask yourself, "Why does that a**hole get to push me around? And that other servant too?" But what if you do regard the king as divine? Then, you’d believe the great king has the right to make demands on you, judge you, and punish you. After all, you exist to serve him. And if the king gets angry at another servant and kicks him around, you naturally side with the king because he is great while the other servant is just another lowly body. Even though you yourself is a lowly servant, you want to prove that you’re the best servant there is and win the approval of the divine king. So, upon seeing the king mistreat another servant, you egg on the king while hurling abuse at the terror-stricken servant. It’s the Politics of Status, especially when the higher-above is regarded as holier(than merely rich and powerful). In our world, people want to climb the ladder and serve someone higher. Still, if one is serving a rich white person, there is no special aura to one’s service to him. It’s just a matter of worker serving the boss. But, if the higher-up is Jewish, there is an added element of holiness. By golly, you’re serving a Holy Jew. Now, we know why it was so delicious for John McCain and other such cucks to be serving Jews. They felt as loyal dogs before their holy masters. As Jews came to be the Holy Holocaust people, brainless cucks like John McCain could easily be manipulated into believing they were doing something especially noble because they were doing whatever it takes to appease the agenda of the Holy Jews, the people of infinite wisdom and tragedy. Then, we know why John McCain felt zero sympathy for Palestinians and other Muslims. (He only felt programmed-selective-sympathy for those Muslims who were willing to collaborate with Zionists to destroy much of the Muslim world. So, if Jews informed John McCain that Jihadi terrorist types in Iraq and Syria were ‘freedom fighters’ on the side of ‘democracy’, he went along because doing so would please Jews, the holy people).
According to the Bible, God often punishes the Jews like He punishes non-Jews. In the Old Testament, the oft-angry God kills lots of Jews and goyim. Given that all humans, Jews and non-Jews, suffered under God, why don’t Jews side with non-Jews against God? Because God is holy. And Jews can gain a measure of holiness of themselves ONLY THROUGH the blessing of God. So, Jews try to appease God and win His approval by presenting themselves as the best servants of God. While Jews fear God, it’s not only a matter of power. After all, power is simply might-is-right. It can be magical but it’s not holy. The holy must be righteous and blessed. And according to Judaism, God isn’t merely powerful but holy and good. So, even if God sometimes bashes Jews, there must be a good reason, and it is the duty of Jews to atone and regain His grace. So, just because God punishes Jews and non-Jews, it doesn’t mean Jews should empathize with non-Jews as the fellow-victims of God. Rather, they should seek to grow closer to God so that He will favor Jews as His favorite servants, the Chosen. Similar kind of logic prevails among the goy cucks of Jews. Due to the Holy Holocaust Narrative, these cucks don’t see Jewish power as merely powerful but as holy. They see Jews as the race of New Messiahs. Supposedly, the Shoah crucified the entire Jewish Race that emerged from the ashes of WWII as virtually the second coming of Jesus. Since Jews are holy, they must be perfect. So, even when Jews do bad things to whites, maybe whites deserve it because they are no longer a holy people.
Indeed, PC has successfully impugned the history of white holiness as ‘racist’ and ‘supremacist’. In the past, when whites did everything possible to defend white lands, preserve white beauty(by keeping white women together with white men and having kids together), promote white pride, and defend white honor, they had to favor their own kind as special and holier than other races and peoples. So, American Indians had to be removed to make way for the white man. And black prowess had to be suppressed as a threat to white manhood because black men are more muscular and have bigger dongs. And whites had to mete out ultra-violence against any people who dared to mess with divine white people. So, if Mexicans dared to massacre the gringos at Alamo, they would be crushed without mercy. If the yellow ‘Japs’ dared to attack the US, Japan would be crushed, and Japanese-Americans would be ‘interned’. And if a bunch of commie Jews sent atomic secrets to Stalin, they would be captured and fried on the electric chair. In order for the white race to be divine, whites had to favor whiteness over non-whiteness.
It was difficult for Jews to gain mastery over white people when whites saw their own kind as most sacred, not least because they, as Christians, felt they were the favored of God, especially as the White West spread the Faith all over the world. Jews didn’t seek equality with whites. Jews sought to take the Divinity-Rights from whites. After all, how could Jewish Power gain supremacy if Jews only sought equality-of-human-value, especially when they were a small minority? How could Jews create Israel IF the world were to regard Zionists and Palestinians equally? The great powers had to favor Zionists over Palestinians, and in order for this to happen, Jews had to be regarded as the Holier People. And it was precisely because Jews had more respect and reverence than Arabs in the Western Mind that Jews were able to pull off the Zionist project by gaining support from great white powers. But that was just a rehearsal for a much bigger project: To gain power over all white folks and all white lands. Since Jews didn’t have the numbers to conquer and take over the white world physically, they had to do it psychologically, or psycho-‘spiritually’. They had to manipulate white minds into regarding Jews as a people as holy as whites. And then, Jews had to make whites believe that Jews are holier than whites because of the Holy Holocaust. And then, Jews had to make whites believe that whiteness isn’t holy but wicked and in need of atonement, mainly by cucking out to holy Jews. And to really humiliate whiteness, Jews had to promote blackness as the other great holiness next to Jews. Whites had to cuck out to Jews and blacks. White elites had to serve Jewish globalist-hegemonists, and white masses had to cheer for black athletes and surrender their women to black men. And then, to finally destroy Christianity once and for all, Jews promoted Homomania as the neo-religion of the West. Jewish Media made homos(and even trannies) another Holy People.

Now, we know why Jews were so obsessed about the field of psychology in the 20th century. A people who can’t be conquered in body can be conquered in mind. And then, the body will follow as it is dictated by the mind. After all, how did Christianity conquer Rome? It’s not like ragtag Christians defeated the Roman Military. No, Christian psycho-‘spiritualists’ had a way of telling stories, spreading symbols, manipulating minds, and winning over souls. Body may be strong, but it obeys the commands of the mind. Jews pulled the same stunt in the 20th century. Even though Jews admired the great feat of Christians(whose early proselytizers were mostly Jewish), they hated the fact that Christianity passed the righteous authority of God over to the gentiles. Thus, even as non-Jews were mentally conquered by Christianity, they became empowered by the authority of God and gained moral power over Jews. As the Gospels say Jews killed Jesus the Son of God, Christian Converts didn’t see Jews as the Holy People of the Book but the stingy Tribe that refused to share God with humanity and even went so far as to kill the Son of God whose mission was to bless all of humanity. For this reason, Jews have always hated Christianity and never gave up their long-term agenda of destroying it for good. And they finally succeeded in the 21st century by elevating Homomania as the neo-religion of the West. Today, an average person in the West finds a homo’s fecal-smeared penis holier(and rainbow-like) than Jesus. If anything, Jews have used homo-pervert-agents to festoon Christian churches with homo colors, as if to suggest that Jesus’ main message to mankind is ‘a homo dick up the anus’ and ‘tranny turning his penis into a fake pussy’ are the main reasons why he sacrificed himself for mankind. Jews are cackling among themselves at how easily the white shmucks and shikses fell for the Jewish shtick with the shekels and schmaltz. And to bring about such transformation, whites had to be addicted to the Dumb Culture of Youthful Impatience and Mindless Hedonism. Those with infantile minds can be manipulated far more easily than those with strong values and deep faith. Infantile clods demand instant-answers, whether it’s the idiot-patriotism of chanting USA USA USA at sporting events or imbecile-deliverance of worshiping Oprah, Obama, or Homos as the new messiahs. So many shallow souls cut off from roots, family, history, & heritage(and addicted to pop culture, drugs, hook-up sex, & celebrity-mania) were bound to be easily manipulated by fiendish Jews who know how to read and manipulate minds.

Now, a certain curtailing of white holiness wasn’t a bad thing. Indeed, few things are as awful as radical self-worship. When a people come to regard themselves too highly, they become blind to the suffering and dehumanization of others. It was wrong for white Americans to take part in the slave trade and use blacks as chattel labor in the South. And there was another side to the ‘Remember the Alamo’. In fact, the US was the aggressor manipulating events to take over the SW territories from lazy and mediocre Mexicans. And the yellow journalism of William Randolph Hearst exploited the theme of sacred white bodies to ignite a war that Spain did not want. False stories were spread about white American women being stripped naked and abused by swarthy Spanish brutes. Also, so-called American 'liberators' instigated a war in Philippines where things spiraled out of control and unleashed hell on earth. And the US-Japan conflict in the Pacific was really a contest between two forms of self-worship. White Americans though they should rule the Pacific, and the Japanese thought they should. Both sides were too full of themselves to recognize their own hypocrisies and arrogance. Japanese, increasingly into self-worship as the rightful divine rulers of Asia, couldn’t see how much harm they were causing all around. And the US failed to understand its role(along with the UK) in encouraging the rise of an aggressive Japan(mainly to counter Russia). Also, it was rather amusing that the US would be championing China against Japanese aggression when its own attitude toward China had been hostile and contemptuous. If anything, until the embargo, the US had been one of the main enablers of Japanese aggression in Asia, and US culture was filled with stereotypes of the fiendish Chinaman. As long as Japan served as a bulwark against the USSR and checked the rise of China, it had been useful enough to the US & UK. But when Japanese got overly ambitious as the rightful Asian hegemon, tensions increased and led to the Pacific War. But both Japan and White America couldn’t see their own moral flaws because they were so full of self-worship. Japanese arrogance was two-fold. As the holy Yamato race, they were supposedly better than other Asians and fit to rule over them. But as ‘fellow Asians’, they were supposedly the generous brother and comrades of all yellow peoples. This contradiction between ethno-supremacism and pan-Asian-camaraderie was never resolved because the Japanese were too full of themselves. But White America was also blinded by too much power and racial narcissism. According to the US narrative, Pearl Harbor was truly wicked and venal. But in fact, the US had pulled off moral equivalents of Pearl Harbor many times over in Asia(and with Mexico and Latin America). The US war in Philippines was many times worse than Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor. Also, the US and other imperialist powers had used all kinds of brutal means to pacify Chinese resistance since the 19th century. And the US had aided Japan’s bloody aggression into Asia. But what did it matter as long as the dead bodies belong to the Filipinos or Chinese who weren't deemed sacred? As long as holy white America and divine Japan(as a kind of honorary white nation) had a gentlemen’s agreement to divvy up the Pacific, neither side was bound to be very self-aware of their moral hypocrisies. But the craziest kind of self-worship was that of Nazi Germany(and later that of Jewish globo-homo supremacism). That was radical self-worship gone utterly bonkers. It’s one thing to defend one’s race, territory, and heritage. It’s one thing to love one’s own people and appreciate everything associated with tradition and blood-and-soil. Nazi German self-love didn’t end there. It turned into the most extreme kind of cultish self-worship of one’s race as the superior breed. Just like a person who’s excessively filled with self-regard cannot regard the worth of other individuals, a people into excessive self-worship cannot appreciate other peoples. It was Racial Diva-ism. And this most dark side of Nazi Germany revealed itself in its imperialist wars and genocidal massacres. Indeed, what was truly frightening about the Shoah was it went far beyond revenge. German feeling of revenge toward Jews was understandable given the Jewish role in Bolshevism and degenerate Weimar Period. But vengeful rage eventually burns out. It’s like Russians felt vengeful rage and carried out horrors in Germany, but eventually the hatred abated. And White America felt vengeful rage toward the ‘Japs’ and went about destroying much of Japan. But once the war ended, the animus gradually subsided. In contrast, Nazi German policy toward Jews went beyond revenge. Radical Nazi German self-worship not only failed to recognize the humanity of Jews but came to identify Jews as the source of all evils against the Aryans. But the Nazi moral argument against Jews didn’t make much sense. What’s the point of condemning Jewish supremacism IF your side is pushing a supremacism of its own? The only sensible moral argument would have been to condemn Jewish supremacism and viciousness while, at the same time, pledging not to engage in your own supremacist projects. But, even as Nazi Germans condemned the Jewish Agenda of World Hegemony and supremacism, their strategy wasn’t all that different. Indeed, the Nazis embodied much of the evils they identified in Jews. They were invasive, imperialist, contemptuous, and exploitative of other peoples. Indeed, the main point of Nazism seemed to be that, whereas Jews had no right to conquer and rule the world, the Germans apparently did. Why? Seemingly because Jews are ugly and Nibelungen-like whereas Germans are tall, handsome, and magnificent. Since Jews are ugly and craven, they can only take over the world by fraud and deception whereas the noble and tough Germans can take over the world like great warriors. Alberich vs Seigfried.

Better to be invaded by eagles and wolves than by rats and weasels. But ask the peoples who experienced Nazi conquest in Poland and Russia, and being mauled by wolves and clawed by eagles is hardly more pleasant than being gnawed by rats and bitten by weasels. The National Socialists had a chance, but they blew it because Hitler was pathological and driven by radical racist theories. National Socialists could have denounced Jewish Bolshevism and Jewish bad behavior during Weimar years and offered a sounder alternative to the world. They could have presented themselves as honorable nationalists who oppose communism, finance capitalism, and cultural degeneracy. Regarding Jews, they could have done two things. Expel them or, better yet, forge an alliance with good patriotic German Jews while dispossessing the bad ones who fleeced Germany, spread cultural degeneracy, or promoted communism during the Weimar years. But worse, Germany failed to stick with principles of nationalism and instead lurched into the imperialist project in the very heart of Europe, setting off another political earthquake even more devastating than World War I. But to the very end, pathological Hitler and his cohorts couldn’t understand why they failed. Hitler just blamed the others because he was blinded by worship of the self and the volk. He was too full of himself as the Man of Destiny to see what a reckless degenerate gambler he really turned out to be. His failure obviously couldn’t be blamed on him because he was just so very great. And why should he feel remorse for the Germanic invasions of Slavic lands and the massacres? After all, weren’t the Germanic Aryans the ubermensch, the people most sacred and fit to rule the world? The example of Nazism goes to show the dangers of self-worship when it becomes radical and crazy.

And so, it was not a bad thing for White self-regard to be tempered by criticism from both within and without. And if there was a valuable lesson from the Vietnam War, it was the realization that White America isn’t always right simply because ‘Cowboys should beat the Indians’. Furthermore, if the Pacific War had at least been triggered by real Japanese aggression(and had great emotional support from Americans), White America failed to come up with a compelling reason as to why Americans should really risk life and limb in Vietnam and kill countless 'gooks'. Gulf of Tonkin Incident, a kind of faked mini-Pearl-Harbor to engage American emotions in the war effort, was bogus. As Vietnamese bodies piled up, the American excuse for the war made increasingly less sense. There was something about saving South Vietnam from communism, but if so many people in the South really loathed invasion from the North, why didn’t they take up arms and resist? Why didn’t they support the government that had to be propped up by US forces? Whether North Vietnam and Viet Cong were good or bad, one thing was clear. People in the South didn’t have the will to fight to defend the existing order that could survive only with massive US military presence(that was resented by many Vietnamese patriots). Some white Americans may have supported the war out of feelings of revenge. After all, they saw white Americans dying and coming home in body bags. So, why not go get the ‘gooks’? But even this argument didn’t work. At least, Japan attacked the US. North Vietnam never attacked the US. If anything, the US military was in Vietnam. Also, if the US vs Japan was a simple case of whites vs yellows, the Vietnam War was sold to the American public as noble white Americans defending wonderful yellows from commies. On the one hand, the Vietnam War seemed like a ‘kill the gook’ affair, but it was billed as ‘save the good gook from the bad gook’, which really complicated matters. Anyway, as awful as the whole affair turned out to be, one of the positive outcomes of the war was the awareness that, in certain world affairs, ethical issues are far more complicated than ‘Cowboys and Indians’. Vietnam War couldn’t be explained by John Wayne’s GREEN BERETS.
But the Vietnam War proved to be morally instructive for the Left as well. So many naive idiots on the Left had romanticized the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong as salt-of-the-earth saint-warriors. They were so sure that once the US pulled out, Vietnam would become some kind of socialist paradise. While it’s true that North Vietnamese soldier and Viet Cong were patriots and tough warriors, their communism wasn’t going to be a picnic. So, following the war, just about everything fore-warned by anti-communists came to be realized. Vietnam came under Marxist-Leninist tyranny, and as for Cambodia, its horrors went beyond even the wildest ‘paranoid’ fantasies of the most hardline anti-communists. So, the Vietnam War proved to be a sobering event for both the Right and the Left. The Right realized that it’s stupid to see the world in terms of Good Guys(our side) and Bad Guys(the commies). The world is not always that simple. As for the Left, it ended up with eggs on its face with the Boat People fiasco, reports of gulags in Vietnam, and the horror in Cambodia. In the end, the so-called Vietnam Syndrome was good for both the Right and the Left in the US. It urged caution in militarily engaging in other nations; it also urged against childish idealism that was common on the Left. If the Right erred by thinking Cowboys could fix any problem, the Left erred by thinking the Indians were the Real Good Guys. In the end, the Vietnamese Communists(yellow Indians) proved they could be nasty and brutal, and Cambodian communists proved how utterly crazy a totalitarian system can be.
Given the lessons of Vietnam, one would think the US would have valued the Vietnam Syndrome as necessary medicine for a mature empire that should be cautious(and wiser) with its power around the world. And you’d think the American Left would have grown wiser too. But it didn’t happen that way. Increasingly, the Vietnam Syndrome came to be regarded as a disease and evil curse than medicine and good lesson. Not only were there idiot movies like RAMBO, but, as the Cold War wound down, there were new policy experts saying the US could fight and win all future wars with the assurance of No-More-Vietnams. With the Soviet Union having thrown in the towel, the US as the lone superpower was apparently unstoppable. And supposedly all the lessons had been learned and all the problems fixed. All future wars would be winnable and efficiently executed. Why the sudden war fever? US elite power fell into the hands of Jews and Zionists, and they were hellbent on more Vietnams in the Middle East, except that the US would win all of them handily under the guidance of brilliant globocrats. We all know of the result of these New Vietnams. Hardly what anyone would call successes.
As for the Left, the hope for sobriety and maturity was soon lost. The rise of Political Correctness and Globo-Homo Degeneracy led to the Left allying with mega-Jew-run corporations and the Deep State to push a new kind of radicalism divorced utterly from classic leftist themes and serious thought. Since the Left couldn’t gain power through a Working Class Revolution or Third World Rebellion(and given that Jewish Leftists, the leaders of the movement, got tired of working class dummies and people-of-color idiots while becoming addicted to massive rise in Jewish privilege and wealth), it figured it was more fun to join the Power, especially when so many Jews actually had taken power from the Wasp elites. As Jews took over the elite institutions of power and created newly dominant industries(especially in finance & high-tech and amassed huge fortunes by normalizing vice industries such as gambling), it wasn't a matter of Jews compromising with the powers-that-be. It became a matter of Jews becoming the new powers-that-be, and if anything, non-Jews had to compromise their own values and principles in order to be allowed into the Jew-world of globo-homo power. Sure, Jews kept up with some of the leftist rhetorical flourishes about the workers and the have-nots, but year after year, the New Power came to fixate more on elite-privilege than the People. For example, all the cult of Diversity was essentially about forming an alliance among Jewish elites, white elites, black elites, yellow elites, brown elites, and etc. It was (Fareed)Zakaria-ism. By invoking Diversity, the elites could justify their own privilege by showcasing how their world of power and privilege is oh-so-inclusive, goo. So, it didn’t matter that society became generally less equal and that the rich got richer. The fact is the New Power had token diversity of blacks, yellows, browns, Hindus, and etc., and that apparently meant that The Power was 'fair' and 'just'. Diversity wasn’t about promoting greater equality for all peoples regardless of power. It was about justifying elite wealth and privilege by showcasing that the upper ranks are diverse. So, it’s okay if billionaires get richer and richer if they spread the wealth around to guys like Obama(who got a $60 million book deal). Another major theme of Globo-Homo elite supremacism was Homomania. The Jewish elites made Homos(and even trannies) the poster-children of New Progressivism, and this was even more advantageous than Diversity-ism to the Elites because no people are as obsessed with vanity, privilege, and power as the Homos are. Emancipate and Elevate the Homos, and all they will do is stick around fancy cities and cater to the rich, privileged, and narcissistic. Homos spread diva-ism. Homo Diva-ism + Diversity = Divarsity. Homos are gushy-wushy ass-kissers of the rich and powerful; this is nothing new as the history of the Aristocracy has been about homo artisans making nice fancy things for the rich and powerful. Who do you think made all those powdered wigs for the French aristocrats? It was the fancy-pants fruitkins.

And so, the hope of a more sober and mature Left went up in flames. The Real Left vanished as it was body-snatched by a new bogus ‘leftism’ that justified Elite Privilege with displays of Diversity Tokenism(where the likes of Zakaria kissed the asses of the Empire of Judea, or EOJ) and blessed Elite Power with diva-like homo ‘rainbow’ colors. You see, we shouldn’t care about how Amazon.com is all about super-oligarch Jeff Bezos lording over his underpaid minions. Instead, we should praise him to high heaven because he doles out huge sums to promote Homomania as a neo-religion. And we should honor him for using Washington Post to further the interests of the Deep State that takes orders from the ‘minocracy’(or rule by minority-elites) of Jewish-Globalists. Deep Pockets and Deep State, they go hand in hand by the twisted logic of ‘new leftism’. Worse, the fact that patriots and nationalist continue to refer to such super-powerful people as ‘leftists’ only helps the globalist oligarchy because it creates the false impression that the Elites are for the People. True Leftism has been about People Power, and all successful modern movements had a noble leftist as well as sacred rightist element. If nationalists and patriots had real sense, they would take the mantle of leftism and declare that they represent the fusion of both the left and the right. Instead, they keep calling globalist oligarchs, Jewish ultra-supremacists, and their Deep State minions the ‘left’, creating an impression that Globalism is all about People Power of the downtrodden.


Anyway, white people are not allowed to have autonomous value like Jews and blacks do(especially). Their bodies are not sacred. Jews insist on this because, if whites regarded their own bodies as sacred, they would go into ‘Remember the Alamo’ or ‘Day of Infamy’ mode upon perceiving harm to white bodies. They would be outraged at the notion of their enemies, especially non-whites, massacring or committing atrocities against whites. What is John Ford’s THE SEARCHERS about? It’s about a white man who is driven to rage because of violations committed against what he deems to be sacred white bodies. (Why do Muslims react violently to desecration of Muhammad? He is sacred to them, and defiling his name or image isn’t merely an insult but an infamy. Even crazy Negroes who believe in nothing get all wild and angry when someone says something about their mama, the one person dear to them.) Ethan(John Wayne) is outraged that Red Savages raped and mutilated white women, especially ones dear to him. And he wants to save a white girl from the Red Savages before she is turned into their sexual property who gives birth to half-breed Braves who will wage war on whites. His sense of outrage is nobly race-ist because he doesn’t just see white bodies as instruments of white power but as temples of white sacredness. Indeed, one of the justifications of White Imperialism was that whites have a sense of sacred White Worth whereas non-whites just see their own kind as cannon-fodder and chattel. Of course, in truth, white civilizations used tons of white folks as mere cannon fodder too. Consider how soldiers are used in the famous battle scene in BARRY LYNDON.

They’ve been trained to walk straight into rows and rows of gunfire. Still, ideally at least, Christian and later Enlightenment ethos instilled white folks with the idea that each and every white person is an individual with a unique soul and has value as a member of the most advanced race and culture in the world. So, even though all peoples sacrificed large numbers in wars and revolutions, white elites seriously grieved over their own dead as fellow tribesmen whereas non-white elites just saw their own fallen as expendable dirt. The narrative about the Greeks vs Persians would have us believe that Greek warriors regarded themselves as free men fighting for their independence whereas the Persian army was filled with slave-soldiers who just took orders from above.
This ‘we care for our kind as sacred’ vs ‘they treat their own kind like dirt’ dichotomy was used even in white-vs-white wars. So, in World War I, Anglos and Americans were led to believe that they fight for freedom and honor whereas the Germanic ‘Huns’ just fight out of mindless obedience to tyranny. And whereas Anglos and Americans care for their own fallen, the wicked ‘Huns’ don’t care how many of their own kind die. And similar themes were used in World War II. We’ve all seen movies and TV shows where Americans go out of their way to save their own — like in SAVING PRIVATE RYAN — whereas Germans will even kill their own to gain an advantage. In so many TV shows, American soldiers will lay down their weapons to save one of their own who is held hostage by Germans, but when roles are reversed, the Germans will shoot the German hostage and then the American. Of course, Germans saw things differently. After all, Nazism operated on the premise that German Aryans were infinitely more precious and valuable than the subhuman Russian Slavs, i.e. Germans deserved to win because they regard themselves and treat each other as members of a Noble Race whereas the Slavic order is all about tyrants treating their own kind like serf-like cattle who sheepishly accept their own inferior lot. If the Slavic way is to be slave, then why shouldn’t the Slavs be lorded over by Germans? After all, wasn’t the Russian Empire replaced by the Soviet Empire that had Stalin and Jews rule over Slavs as a slave-race? (Granted, the Soviet Line was that communism values all people as equal comrades whereas Nazi-Fascism is all about capitalist tyranny secured by stooge-demigods such as Mussolini and Hitler. Nazism had difficulty arguing that Soviet Union must be destroyed because it was about tyranny and equality. Both? Apparently, Jewish communists needed to be destroyed because they were tyrannical and egalitarian at once. And Slavs needed to be destroyed because they were slavish and demanding of equality.) If Slavs must be slaves, why not before the most superior race, the Aryans? Of course, Germans were blind to how they themselves had become mental slaves of Hitler who, despite his theory of Aryan Value, used too many of his men as cannon fodder in outrageous wars. Indeed, excessive self-regard of one’s people as sacred can paradoxically pave the way to their slaughter. After all, if one’s race is so sacred and great, any amount of sacrifice is necessary to serve its glory. Japanese had such mindset with their Yamato Race cult. To fulfill the destiny of the Yamato race, Japanese were to go to extreme lengths in war efforts, even if it meant sacrificing millions of Japanese lives. The idea of Japanese sacredness justified the sacrifice of countless actual Japanese lives. It was a mega-macro version of the Japanese cultural principle that honor must take precedence over human life. It is honor that makes life sacred, and therefore it must be preserved at all cost, even if the person must die. Thus, committing seppuku to save one’s sacred honor is dearer than life itself. And in the closing months of WWII in Europe, Hitler and his radical loyalists were willing to have Germany utterly destroyed than survive as a defeated power. Why? They had such high regard for the sacredness of the great Aryans that they preferred that the Aryans all perish in a glorious death than survive as a defeated race.
Finally, the Cold War also used the trope of ‘we care for our kind’ vs ‘they treat their kind like dirt’ as moral justification. So, the US was a Christian nation ruled by principles of liberty whereas the Communist world was all about tyrants using their minions as a slave-army. Given the ways of Stalin and Jewish Bolsheviks, there was a certain truth to such view of the Soviet Empire. Stalin and Jewish Bolsheviks didn’t seem to care how many millions they killed to build industry or enforce ideology. And it seemed even truer with China under Mao. Despite communism’s message of Social Justice, Mao treated his people like so many expendable slaves, dogs, and minions.

Anyway, for much of Western history, especially following the Enlightenment, there was the sense that the white race is more precious because they have a sense of sacred racial worth, something missing from other races where the elites regarded their own people as just minions, slaves, and cannon fodder(and where the people accepted such servile lot, like in the TV show SHOGUN where the Japanese never think in terms of 'my self worth' but 'my service to my superior'). When the US fought China(in the Korean War) and the North Vietnamese(and Viet Cong), it was often noted by Americans that whereas White Americans care for their own kind, the ant-like yellows with their hive-mind and collectivist-outlook, are willing to sacrifice any number of their own kind. White folks thought, "Why should we care for their lives when they don’t care for their own lives?" Of course, the yellows might have argued that they were sacrificing many of their own kind because they had no choice: They had inferior weapons and had to rely more on raw manpower; furthermore, they had a sacred cause worth dying for — National Liberation from Imperialism — and, in that sense, were freely offering up their lives for freedom and independence. Still, the white American viewpoint was, "We deeply care for each of our dead, whereas our enemies don’t care how many of their own kind die."
We hear this theme in regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, i.e. that whereas Jews care for Jewish lives, the dirty ‘raghead’ Arabs are willing to sacrifice any number of their own kind(even children), even in suicide bombings, to further their insane terroristic cause. In other words, whereas Zionism is a culture of self-preservation, Arab-ism is a cult of suicide(to commit homicide). When Israel was raining bombs on Gaza, we were told by Israel-Firsters that whereas the Israeli Air Force goes out of its way to avoid civilian targets(LOL), the dirty Arabs use their women and children as ‘human shields’. Never mind it was the Jews who took the land from Palestinians. Never mind Zionists were more than happy to give aid to extreme Jihadi terrorists to wreak havoc in secular modern Arab nations. (The last thing Jews want is the Kemal-Ataturkization of the Arab World. Better to have the Arab world ruled by theocratic Medievalists who depend on Western technology or be overrun with Jihadis who blow up anything that resembles modernity and civilization.) One thing for certain, all the Arab women and children who died in Iraq as the result of US sanctions were not ‘human shields’. They were just victims of the Judeo-Nazi US foreign policy to enforce Zio-Hegemony all across the Middle East. (In such cases, both sides could accuse the other of cold-blooded heartlessness. The Jew-run US could argue all those women and children died in Iraq because cold-blooded Hussein wouldn't budge and would rather have his people die than submit to the righteous West. But others could argue that the Jew-run US was heartless enough to sacrifice countless Arab women and children just to weaken Iraq as a rival power of Israel. Or, both sides could be blamed. Hussein and Zionists were both utterly heartless in their power-obsession, and countless civilians had to pay the price. In the end, it was about power, not morality. After all, Israel has committed many Human Rights abuses and has tons of WMD. It has also sponsored lots of terrorists. But would any Jew support sanctions on Israel that leads to the deaths of 100,000s of Jewish women and children? If such happened, Jews would call it the Second Holocaust, probably claiming the number of 600,000.)

Anyway, whites are no longer allowed to have a sense of sacro-autonomy. Jews are surely aware of what the Awakened Saxon can do when he is outraged by attacks on his kind. In the 19th century, white people had a sense of sacro-autonomy, and this fired up rage against American Indians and violent blacks. While we can argue that American Indians had their own reasons(much of it legitimate) to use violence against White Invaders and that blacks had reasons for rage and rebellion against white oppression, the fact is whites couldn’t abide by non-white violence on whites. So, if black slaves rebelled and raped/murdered white folks, white folks got outraged and taught the Negroes a real serious lesson in violence. And if Indians went on a bloody run against whites, whites made sure that Indians got it much worse. This is how a people with sacro-autonomy react. They get spitting mad over wrongs done to their own kind. This is why Jews had to de-sacralize the white body. For one thing, as Jews came to rely more on the pornification of the white body(as sex meat and commodity to be sold globally via pornography and white-slavery in Israel) for their profits, they had to remove the element of divine-rage from the white soul. It’s like Kosher bleeding of animals. Remove the blood, and the animal grows weak and dies. It’s like castration. Remove the hormones produced by the testes, and the animal is much easier to tame and control. White sacro-autonomy depended on white blood and white balls. Even though we like to think of spirituality and sacredness as divorced from flesh and blood, the fact is we can’t be outraged by defilement and desecration unless we remain hormonal. Why are viewers outraged when demonic forces desecrate the Madonna statue in THE EXORCIST? If we were all spirit and no flesh, we’d just be flaky and feel no emotions at all. We feel outrage when holy things are desecrated because of powerful hormonal drives. If you suck out all the hormones from a Christian, he won’t feel outrage when a Church is destroyed. He’ll just be zonked out and find everything ‘equally beautiful’. An experiment was done on some guy who had all his hormones sucked out, and he couldn’t feel anger over anything and found everything equally 'nice'. Nothing offended him. So, Jews needed to castrate and bleed the white body. Castrated white male goes cucky-wuck and feels no manly pride and manly outrage over the Jewish defilement of the white female body, especially as plaything for Negro men. (In contrast, precisely because Jews do feel a powerful sense of sacro-autonomy, they would be OUTRAGED if pornography was controlled by Arab men and exploited mostly Jewish women as sex-meat for Negroes. Or if Jews found out Slavic gangsters were enslaving Jewish women and forcing them into prostitution to serve filthy goy men.) Anemic white souls devoid of blood cells after PC-kosherization feel no special sense of outrage when they hear about how white bodies have been attacked, raped, brutalized and mangled by black savages in South Africa or in the US. This is why Jews and blacks can use white women as cum-buckets & sex-meat BUT there is no pushback from white men. When Jews did this to Germans in the Weimar period for a decade and half, especially during the dire yrs of Depression, Germans just about had enough and decided to teach the Jews a lesson for defiling the German body and soul. And if Jews had done in the first half of the 20th century what they’re now doing to the white race, many white Americans would have been outraged by the filth of the Christ-killing Race. (If there was far less outrage over Jewish Communist massacres of the white race in Russia, it was because whites in Western Europe and the US had gotten accustomed to regarding the Eastern Slavs as not fully white or worthy. And Orthodox Faith seemed like some exotic heresy.)
But that was then, this is now. Jews have so thoroughly messed up the white mind that white people now think it is sinful — ‘racist’ or ‘antisemitic’ — for white folks to be outraged by violence done to sacred white bodies. Via Ta Nehisi Coates, Jews got white people to fret about and atone for sacro-tragic black bodies but never ever to worry about white bodies. This is why Jews hate any white person who cares about whites in South Africa. This is why Jew-run Youtube shut down Colin Flaherty who documented the black-war-on-white-bodies all across America(and even Australia). Today, white elites who yammer on and on about how ‘black lives matter’ and how we must care about sacred Jewish bodies in Israel say NOTHING about all those White Death resulting from drug overdose, opoiod addiction, and suicide. If anything, they are deathly afraid that any expression of white-on-white sympathy will be denounced as ‘racist’, ‘nazi’, ‘far right’, and ‘white supremacist’. Indeed, Jews have convinced white people that whites suck so bad that they don’t even deserve to give birth to white kids to inherit white-created civilization. Instead of preserving and bequeathing the white-and-white-made world to white kids, whites must import tons of non-whites to take over as not only New Americans, New Canadians, and New Australians but even as New Europeans in the very birthplace of the white race. BBC even goes out of its way to retro-fit European heroes and great men with Negroids. And white wombs are no longer the sacred creators of white lives but to be regarded as colonized spaces for creating black mulatto babies. The ONLY kind of permitted white rage is against signs of recovery of white sacro-autonomy. According to Jews, whites-caring-for-whites is evil because it will lead to white supremacism.
Now, if white self-regard turns into radical self-worship, it can lead to something dangerous. But what is wrong with whites wanting to survive in their own nations? Why do Jews and non-whites fear ‘white separatism’ and ‘white independence’ so much? It’s one thing to denounce white imperialism and white aggression, but what is so wrong with whites who want to live in a world of their own and mind their own business? After all, non-whites can live in their own worlds and mind their own business too. Of course, we know the reason. Jews and non-whites fear white separatism not because it’s aggressive against Jews and non-whites but because it means Jews and non-whites will have to make it on their own in their own worlds. The fact is they want entry into white worlds because, deep down inside, they believe whites do everything better and are better people to be around. Indeed, the cult of immigration & diversity are about demographic imperialism into white lands by Jews and non-whites who want to partake of white success because they do so much worse among their own kind in their own worlds. So, if they prefer whiteness so much, why do they attack and disparage whiteness? Because they must shame whites with ‘white guilt’ in order to lower white defenses against non-white immigration-invasion. Look at Jewish immigration patterns, and Jews always chased after white people and white success. If Jews now have it so good in white lands, why do they push Immigration and Diversity? Because they fear the rise of the Awakened Saxon who might bring down Jewish Power. Why might ‘Saxons’ awake to take on the Jew? Because Jews know themselves to be a bunch of a**holes. Jews know that too many of their kind are like Howard Stern, Sarah Silverman, and other nasty creatures. Jews know they can’t help their Jewish a**hole nature. Jews know that, eventually, they will wear out their welcome as they’d done over and over throughout history. Because so many Jews act so wretchedly, even Holocaust Guilt will fade in time, and the Awakened Saxon could very well kick Jewish butt. This is why Jews promote Diversity-Democracy where the once-majority will become just another minority, and then the various goy minorities will be tearing each other apart while Jews at the top eat and enjoy life like Effendi.

Jews bitching about white ‘racism’ is too funny because the #1 demand that Jews make on white people is to favor Jews, Zionists, and Israelis over Palestinians and Arabs. And it’s even funnier when Jews pretend to care about Arab lives. Remember when parts of Syria like Aleppo were on the verge of being liberated by Assad’s military from Jihadi terrorist elements? The very Jews who’d aided and abetted the Jihadis who tore Syria apart were pretending to care for poor innocent civilians who might fall into the clutches of evil Assad. Also, vile Jews who pushed for the Syrian War that turned so many people into refugees were pretending to care about those refugees who were to be resettled in Europe. Jews never opposed the wars that forced so many people into refugee-status. If anything, Jews instigated those wars and loved to see Arabs turned into refugees. Jewish faux-sympathy began ONLY WHEN those refugees poured into Europe. Jewish morality doesn’t oppose the forcing of millions into refugee-status. It only makes noises about caring for those refugees to be resettled in the West. Jewish Sympathy is never genuine when dealing with non-Jews. It is always weaponized and politicized. A Jew will burn someone’s house down and then blame YOU for being a cold-hearted bastard for not taking in the stricken family. If you mention that the family lost its house because the Jewish guy burned it down, he will scream ‘antisemitism’. What a vile people. Now, we know why antisemitism existed for so long. And we know why Jews are so eager to push Diversity. A people so dirty and lowdown are bound to be found out sooner or later. Jews are like Gypsies or Southern Italians with higher IQ. They are like Puerto Ricans with IQ of 115. Too many of them have no integrity or honor. Their greedy-profit and arrogant-prophet mentality makes it impossible for many of them to be self-aware of their pathological wretchedness. Ironically enough, their pathology is similar to that of Adolf Hitler who was impossible to reason with. Consider the personality of Ayn Rand and Adolf Hitler, and there is little difference. Sure, Rand talked of individual liberty, but she really meant the right of the super-duper uber-individual towering over the dummy masses.

Anyway, white people can no longer regard themselves as sacro-autonomous. Jews can feel holy for being Jews and demand that the world do something to safeguard Jews wherever they are. And blacks can feel holy for being black and make demands on the white world to do MORE for blacks. (Never mind that blacks among themselves don’t treat blackness as holy. They see blackness as something to beat and kill, what with rappers insulting one another endlessly. And black Africa is about tribal jungle savagery of black-on-black violence not unlike violence found among crazy chimpanzees and howling baboons. Among themselves, blacks see and treat each other like wild apes. Ironically, even as black bitch about white ‘racism’, their ticket to holiness is through white eyes because, despite white historical violence against blacks, it was white people who created the sacral image of the Noble Negro as something akin to black-christ who done suffer and get whipped for the sins of white folks, sheeeeeeiiiit. While blacks in Africa saw each other as jigaboos and jungle-bunners to chuck spears at, white folks instilled with Christian Guilt and Enlightenment Hopes saw in the Negro the hopes of salvation, for both Negro and white man alike. Via the white man, the Negro would rise from savagery to spirituality. And via the Negro as slave-to-savior, white man would rediscover the true meaning of Christianity. After all, Christianity began as a slave religion. Thus, as slaves, blacks would carry the American Cross, and whites would be soul-saved by it. This was all the product of white imagination and idealization. It was a projection of white fantasy onto the Negro. Ironically, white oppression of the Negro was necessary for sanctification of the Negro. It wasn’t only a matter of white sympathy for oppressed blacks but white molding of more powerful black energies. Savage black energies under slavery and white domination couldn’t just run wild like a pack of chimps and baboons. Under white rule, blacks had to curtail and restrain their raw and powerful drives. Thus, Afro-savage energies sang about serving Da Lawd and loving Jeeeeesus. The themes were spiritual, about ‘muh soul’ than ‘muh dick’. If not for white oppression, this ‘noble’ side of the Negro would never have emerged because, when allowed to run free, the Negro has only one thing on his or her mind: ‘Muh dick’ or ‘muh booty’. Upon black emancipation, year after year, black culture has been drifting toward reversion back to jungle savagery. Among blacks in the US, there is constant violence and mayhem. Among black Africans, it’s endless ape-like tribal violence, mass rape, and murder. This is why blacks rely on White Guilt and White Hope to maintain the myth of black holiness because, all on their own, the only thing blacks care about are black holes[either bullet holes or vaginal holes] than black holiness. This is what sets blacks apart from Jews. While Jews exploit and manipulate the cult of white guilt, they’ve long possessed an idea of Jewish Holiness rooted in the Covenant with God. Jews were not a bunch of savages but among the most civilized peoples in the world. In contrast, blacks were totally into oogity-boogity jungle savagery before modern world encroached on Africa. Blacks never thought it morally wrong to capture tons of blacks and sell them to whites and Arabs. There was nothing transcendent about their world that had no written language, no deep religion, and no mythology beyond primitive animism. Indeed, it’s telling that the Noblest African figure has become Nelson Mandela, whose mythology is totally linked to White Guilt and White Redemption. It goes to show that while whites care about white injustice done to blacks, blacks across Africa don’t give a shit about what they’d done to other blacks.)

Anyway, we now have whites with no sense of independent self-worth or sacro-autonomy. It is wrong for white folks to worry about the state of white bodies. (After 9/11, the Jew-run media were careful to frame the attack as an outrage against American freedoms[such as shopping and whoring around] than against American bodies, especially white ones who did most of the dying on that day.) You see, White Guilt informs whites that when they fought to defend or avenge white bodies, they committed all sorts of evils against non-whites, most problematically against Jews and blacks. So, whites must stop caring for fellow whites because that would mean white bodies are sacred, which would be a form of ‘far right’ supremacism. BUT, Jews must care for the holiness of Jewish bodies. So, if there’s any violence against any Jew in some part of the world, not only all Jews but all whites must do something about it because Jewish lives are oh-so-very-precious. As for blacks, we should ignore all the black-on-black violence and black-on-white violence and just fixate on how White Guilt must atone for all the violence done to black bodies and make amends by massaging black ego and opening Europe to endless migration-invasions by Black Africans. Furthermore, jungle-feverish white women and cucky-wuck white boys should worship black bodies as superior because of harder muscles and bigger dongs and bouncier booties(though not to the extent of GET OUT where black-worshiping whites want to literally take over black bodies; the fear in GET OUT is rather like Aryan fears of Jews as the parasitic agent upon the host body).

If whites cannot care for whiteness, what is left for them, especially if they are ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’, i.e. filled with the conceit of being secular, rational, skeptical, and even intellectual? Should they merely be cynical about most things? Should they always be in the satirical mindset, mocking naive beliefs and passions of the mob? Should they raise questions about everything and fix a cold gaze on any assumption or prejudice without the backing of hard evidence? And surely enough, plenty of White ‘liberal’ or ‘progressive’ types display such demeanor and act as if they’re too smart, educated, and sophisticated to fall for idiocies, superstitions, prejudices, and mob passions that characterize so much of American Life and Politics. TV fare like THE DAILY SHOW, THE STEPHEN COLBERT SHOW, BILL MAHER show, and etc. played on such conceits. You see, being ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ meant they weren’t afraid to challenge authority, ask hard questions, and cut through the nonsense to get at the truth. Unlike the moronic masses hoodwinked by religion or chants of USA-USA-USA, these supposedly rational and skeptical ‘liberal’ or ‘progressive’ types were properly irreverent in their discussion of politics, power, and the larger world... except that they really weren’t.

For intellectual, sophisticated, and/or satirical types to be truly rational, skeptical, and secular, they must have a reserve of cynicism about all the official dogmas that govern our society, culture, and power structure. And yet, these so-called rational-skeptical-secular types get all mushy-gushy about certain subjects, themes, and issues. Their rational and empirical mental faculties completely shut down when confronted with certain icons and narratives. Why is this? Part of it could be fear and cowardice on their part. After all, anyone who doesn’t toe the PC line about Jews, blacks, and homos will be destroyed by the Powers-that-be. But another reason could be that, given human nature’s innate leaning toward the sacred and religious, they need SOMETHING to worship, something to hold dear as sacrosanct and redemptive of the soul. It became apparent pretty early on that Marxism and Leninism, despite their claims of ‘science’ and ‘reason’, could only survive as neo-religions. Indeed, most communists felt a need to not only admire Marx and Lenin as great thinkers but worship them as prophets and deliverers. Not only was communism vulnerable to rational and empirical(and moral) scrutiny by naysayers but communists would have felt pretty empty if they believed that their ideology was correct simply as an economic theory. The appeal of communism had to do with the idea that Marx, godlike in his wisdom and prophecy, figured it all out and threaded all the themes of history, morality, philosophy, economics, science, and politics into a single unified idea. Though communism claimed to be a materialist philosophy, the sheer feat of Marx’s depth and breadth of understanding was deemed so astounding that he was virtually worshiped as a god-man. Thus, Marxism-Leninism not only satisfied the vanity of modern intellectuals who regarded themselves as scientific and rational but their repressed spiritual longing for deliverance and redemption.

We now live in the post-Marxist age, and the new batch of ‘liberals’ and ‘progressives’ like to consider themselves as more knowing and aware than the leftists of the past who’d foolishly fallen for the false utopian dreams of communism. Indeed, even people who claim to be ‘communist’ today more likely got their ideas from songs of the Clash or Rage Against the Machine. They are pop-communists or punk-radicals, more attitude than conviction. Some of them are really just anarcho-terrorist thugs who need to justify their shitty behavior with something. In this, they aren’t much different from ISIS that hides behind Islam to revel in rock-n-roll kind of anarcho-terrorism. At any rate, most of today’s Progs and Libby-dibs are not communist or even socialist. Sure, they may call themselves ‘socialist’, but their primary interest is cultural(mostly pop-cultural) than economic. And even their socialism has less to do with justice for the working class than with more free stuff and benefits for wanna-be-elites who didn’t make the cut. Vast increases in college enrollment created a vast pool of graduates who think they have a ‘right’ to be professors or have some fancy ‘creative’ profession. When things don’t pan out that way, they want Bernie Sanders to write off their college debts and offer them SOMETHING that resembles ‘creative’ professions. They want to maintain the illusion that they too belong to the Creative Class or Creass. So, their main fixation is about attitude and conceit of being part of the hip, cool, smart, creative, sophisticated, and irreverent clique(that now counts for more than class): Claque. They act like they are so aloof and above it all. But being human, they have human nature, and human nature is innately spiritual. So, even as they act like they are above most things, they still feel a need to feel immersed in something holy, sacrosanct, and redemptive. Some find it in New Age cults, but that stuff is too flaky and weak to satisfy one’s longing for sacro-religious deliverance. Then, this explains why PC is so strong among those who claim to be rational, skeptical, & secular OR hip, cool, & aloof OR satirical, cynical, & irreverent. Despite or precisely because of those claims, they feel empty unless they have some strong sense of the holy or sacrosanct. Since they are too educated or hip for Old Time Religion and too cynical(and/or impatient) for elaborate textual theories like Marxism(that sought to explain everything with the Big Idea), they are drawn to icons, idols, narratives, the ‘feels’, chants, delirium, hysteria, and/or fits of righteous rage. They must believe in something to feel justified and blessed. So, paradoxically, some of the most cynical, irreverent, and mocking people tend to be totally delirious and enraptured with the sanctity of certain things. If they were cynical about everything, they’d feel empty because human nature longs for the sacred. But since they are utterly cynical about most things, they do feel a great deal of emptiness(because glib and smarmy derision of others cannot be the emotional core of life), and this emptiness has to be filled by their faith in SOMETHING. Since they are too cynical and derisive to conceive of something holy on their own, they rely on others to supply the holiness to them. And this is where Jew-run PC does its magic. It offers neo-holy-relics to the cynical, the hip, the aloof, the irreverent, the smarmy, and etc.
Jews understand the paradox of human nature. By promoting cynicism, they also promote sinner-ism. The more someone feels cynical, the more he feels like a sinner since he doesn’t believe in anything. Therefore, the cynic longs for some strong faith, but he doesn’t know where to find it since he is, well, too cynical. It is then that Jews supply such people with The Answer. Because the modern cynic tends to be secular and ‘educated’(and/or hip or cool), he can’t accept Old Time religion. Because he’s too immersed in pop culture, he cannot sit still and read to imbibe complex theories and philosophy. Rather, he must find the Answer in jolts of images and sounds via electronica. And because his mind is too aloof and cynical to accept the ‘spiritual’, it has to enter through modes of sensory-overload... which is why TV, Hollywood, pop music, and glitzy celebrity-images(as well as massive colorful homo-tranny pageantry) are so crucial in turning cynics into sinner-converts seeking redemption. Whether it’s Lindsay Lohan or James Comey, the cynic-sinner complex works more or less the same way. Lohan blew her career with excess of cynicism. She was into drugs, alcohol, partying, and the wild life. She indulged in all sorts of vice as if life is about nothing but fun, fun, and fun. But at the end of the day, she felt empty and found meaning in PC notions of SAVING people... like in her recent stunt involving 'refugee kids'.

James Comey hasn't been a debauched lunatic, and he got the best of secular modern education. He couldn’t go for Old Time religion or Tradition. He regarded himself as a rational man who understood power. And he climbed the ladder in the FBI. No one can get that far in such a field without much cynicism about power and privilege. And Comey was a social-climber and status-seeker. Cynical operator who knew the tricks of the trade. But that wasn’t enough for him as human nature calls for sacredness. So, Comey attached himself to PC globo-homo faith and convinced himself that his foibles in the bowels of the Deep State was all about honor and serving the holy writ of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD and feminism-with-pussy-hats. And look at Michael Moore. Nasty, boorish, irreverent, cantankerous, and cynical about power and the official story. But is Moore consistently cynical about everything? No, his excessive cynicism about the world made him long for certain sacred truths, and like so many of his ilk, he found it in presenting Negroes as the Holy Race who are ALWAYS VICTIMS. Even fat disgusting irreverent Moore has to believe in something. In contrast, whatever one thinks of Jim Goad(who is a self-admitted a**hole and not a very nice guy), he has the courage to be an equal opportunity offender to all sides that dare to champion some form of holiness. In this, Goad is something of a mutant, a freak of nature, because he has overridden the innate longing for the sacred. In his brief debate with Kevin Michael Grace, we see the difference between cynic-sinner and cynic-cynic.
VIDEO DELETED BY YOUTUBE
Kevin Michael Grace is a rightist-cynic who has a sharp tongue about most things, but he feels a need to believe in God and the sacraments of Catholicism. Cynicism about everything would feel empty and hollow to him. In contrast, Goad has either the courage or madness to embrace cynicism wholeheartedly and rain abuse on all sides that dares to say skepticism should be sacrificed for the sake of the Faith(in God or PC). But generally, people who believe in nothing feel a need to believe in something for compensation to patch the spiritual deficit. This is what Vito Corleone understood about Luca Brasi, a self-loathing monster of a man with no sense of meaning in life. So, when Vito Corleone, obviously a superior man, offered his friendship to Brasi, it was like a Saul/Paul in Damascus Moment for the thug. The fact that a man as impressive as Vito Corleone offered friendship to a monster such as himself was overwhelming to Luca Brasi. And in RESERVOIR DOGS, Mr. Blonde(Michael Madsen) is one crazy bastard psycho-killer who believes in nothing. And yet, it is all-too-credible that he, of all people, turned out to be the most loyal member of the crew to the father-and-son team. His one redemptive point of pride was that he keeps his word. He may be a predator but he’s no rat, and he is loyal. A total psycho-cynic, he feels his sins are redeemed by his total devotion to his boss. And consider the very cynical thriller CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER where it turns out that the government is overrun with cunning, unscrupulous, and devious operators. After all, what do we expect from politicians and the Deep State? And yet, despite all the cynicism about power, the film-makers felt a need to present a Magic Negro in the form of James Earl Jones as an ailing CIA director. (We are supposed to believe that the head of the CIA has the heart of an angel, but then, cynics-as-sinners must believe in something, and PC has promoted the Magic Negro as one of the most reliable tropes.) And incredibly, Oliver Stone’s conspiracy-epic JFK would have us believe that the US government and Deep State are utterly corrupt, compromised, and ruthless BUT John F. Kennedy was the great hope of Camelot who was a true pearl among swine. But if the system is really that corrupt and compromised, how did it allow such a noble idealist to gain the presidency, finally to be murdered as Caesar-as-Christ? Also, why is a man as cynical as Oliver Stone so willing to believe in the nobility of ‘great men’ like John F. Kennedy, Fidel Castro, or Hugo Chavez? Doesn’t power have its own logic and corrupt anyone? But Stone seems to believe that it’s all about personalities: Noble ones vs Nasty ones. His rampant cynicism makes him feel empty and cries out to be delivered by some myth of the Noble Deliverer, the man who offers hope and cleansing to sinners. (It’s like BLADE RUNNER 2049 presents an utterly bleak and cynical future of ruthless power and mindless hedonism BUT asks us to ponder the possibility of the redemptive ‘miracle’.) But such a man doesn’t exist as no man, even the best, is no angel or messiah. So, it’s not surprising that JFK the movie is all about the myth and not the man. In contrast, NIXON is all about the man, the one who embodied what we ‘are’ than what we want ‘to be’. It is truer about the nature of power but also bleaker... and people want that light at the end of the tunnel, even if it's artificial light.