American Democracy was never what it claimed to be, but it's gotten far worse since the end of the Cold War. For democracy to work at least halfway, the Power has to be named and criticized. US had that at least that degree of democracy for most of its history. WASPs were in control, and they never denied it. Indeed, much of US history was about WASP dominance and WASP negotiation with non-wasps to make for a fairer republic. So, these processes did lead to genuine reforms and progress. Why? Because the Power was named and negotiated with. So, even though US democracy was always controlled by money and far from ideal, there was at least the fundamental dynamics among power, truth, justice, and compromise. Power was held by WASPs, and that was the truth. In a way, WASPs deserved this power because they laid down the foundations of America and did much to build and reform it. But, given what America stood for and the contributions of other groups as well, there was need for power-sharing and better justice. And to achieve this, there needed to be series of compromises between the WASPs and non-Wasps, white and non-white. And so, on those truths of power, justice, and negotiation, the US did lurch forth as a better-working democratic project and political experiment than most others. Furthermore, for most of US history, people worshiped God. Even in the 'bad old days' of so-called 'white supremacy', whites were not worshiped. They had the fear, respect, and/or admiration of others, but they were not objects of worship that one couldn't question.
But since the end of the Cold War, the US hasn't functioned even as a flawed, marred, or imperfect democracy. None of the elements necessary for a working democracy/republic is evident in the US. In terms of power, the US history has two parts: The long history of Wasp rule, and the new era of Jewish rule. Thus, only two groups really held dominant power in America. Wasps and Jews. But whereas Wasps never hid or denied their power and dominance, that's all Jews do 24/7. Indeed, Jews bitch and whine about 'white supremacy' just when white power is in steep decline while Jews are snatching up everything. It is a dirty trick to hide Jewish Power behind the bogeyman of the ever-present 'white privilege'. Also, Jewish screeching about 'white supremacy' is really fearful of white consciousness that wants independence from Jewish Supremacism that wages crazy wars, financially fleeces the world, and spreads lies & filth via control of media, academia, so-called non-profit organizations, and organs of the state. White desire for freedom, emancipation, and liberation from Jewish Supremacy is what is smeared as 'white supremacy'.
Now, is it possible to have a functioning democracy when the dominant power refuses to show its face? While the Wasp elites of old were hardly saints or angels, they at the very least admitted they had the power, and therefore, negotiations could be sought on that basis of truth. But how can any democracy work when the most powerful group won't even acknowledge it has the dominant leverage over the nation but instead hoists up puppets like Joe Biden who squeak about 'white supremacy'? What are these goyim but Jewish-controlled Whores or Jewhores? Biden is just a figurehead behind which Jewish Power does as it wishes, but we aren't supposed to notice or talk about Jewish Power. Instead, we must pretend that Jews are still a beleaguered minority whom we must protect and favor for sympathy. So, even though Donald Trump let Jonathan Pollard fly off to Israel and the GOP grovels before the memory of Sheldon Adelson(the freak) out of sheer cravenness, they pretend their stance is of compassion than fear.
Even an autocracy where it is well-known who has the power is likely to work more honestly than a so-called democracy where the true power won't even admit to its alpha dog status. In Russia, Putin's regime has the power, and this fact is known to all. In China, the CCP has the power. So, if people need to get something done, they know whom or what they must deal with. But what good is a democracy when, despite all its declarations of principles about truth-liberty-justice, people cannot even name who has the real power? It's like one's better off boar-hunting with a spear if, at the very least, one can spot and see the boar. But what good is a high-powered rifle in a boar-hunt when one isn't even allowed to see the boar? No matter how good the weapon, you'll never bring down the boar because blinders are always on to hide the beast. Because there is no truth in the current Jewish-run US, what passes for 'justice' and 'progress' are meaningless. Sure, there is much talk about 'racism', 'white supremacism', 'homophobia', 'transphobia', and etc., but they all miss the boat on what ship the US is sailing. The KKK is no longer around. And where exactly is this 'white supremacism' unless we gets all paranoid about so-called 'micro-aggressions' and 'Karens'? And does anyone really believe it's a great social injustice to say men-pretending-to-be-women have no business in the women's restroom or in women's sports?
Students at Oberlin College can hallucinate all the KKK they want. Jussie Smolletts of the world can cook up more 'hate hoaxes'. BLM can pretend innocent blacks are gunned down by 'racist' cops. Such nonsense will not fix the real problems of America, much of it metastasizing from Jewish Power. Jews run Wall Street and resort to insider schemes to rake in billions. Jews control the Fed and can pump endless cash to Wall Street. Jews control foreign policy and push the US to the brink with great powers. Jews have also turned much of Middle East and North Africa in hell holes. And what greater injustice taints the US than its aiding and abetting in Israel's annihilation of Palestinian nationhood and identity? Jews control the media as propaganda machines. Jews promote cultural pollution that have rotted the souls of so many young people. Jews control gambling, which is really theft on a massive scale. Jews use big pharma to addict people to all manner of mostly useless drugs. Sacklers were among the worst. Jews push for mass immigration/migration, legal and illegal, on all nations except Israel in order to use diversity as a wedge within goy nations.
All of the above are big, big problems, and they are matters of great injustice, but we can't talk about them because (1) we aren't supposed to notice Jewish Power and (2) Jews control the means of discourse & matters of dogma and convinced so many idiot goyim into taking poison as medicine. Indeed, much of the hot topics for debate have been devised by Jews to either (1) distract us from the truth of Jewish Power or (2) to serve Jewish interests by other means. Why do Jews tolerate and even encourage all the idiot conzos yapping about China-China-China? Because Jews figure it's better for idiot goyim to blame China than Jewish Power for the insane election of 2020 and other globalist shenanigans. And why do Jews hype up Russia-Russia-Russia? That way, all the 'suberals' (so-called 'liberals' subordinate in body and soul to the Jewish-controlled Deep State) will blame Russia for whatever goes wrong and, furthermore, support the 'new cold war' that is really a Jewish plan to destroy National Russia. Why not, as Jews regard Slavs much like Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did: A race of helots who should just obey and serve the superior race of Jewish Semites.
The US went from an imperfect union and flawed democracy to a supremacist ethnocratic state dominated by Jews who won't admit they got the power. This is surely the most surreal power-arrangement in history. US as lone superpower is the most powerful empire that ever existed, BUT its Jewish rulers pretend they haven't the power. But then, Israel has 300 nukes pointed at Iran whereas Iran has zero nukes, but the alarm is about "Iran will get the bomb to blow up Israel!" Like the saying goes, "Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you." That's American Politics in a nutshell and as America controls the world, it's the state of World Affairs.
In just about every case in history, those with the power were full of pride and glory, even outward arrogance and hubris. The saving grace was people knew who had the power. This was especially true with kings and emperors. In a way, the development of representative government(falsely called 'democratic' though technically a republic) began the process of obfuscating power. Unlike kings and lords who held the throne and hogged the power, representative government was based on the principle that elected leaders didn't govern for their own glory or pride but for other groups or The People. Thus, they were spokesmen for special interests or the chosen representatives of The People. But if representatives are chosen by the People, which people? Also, who are financing the campaigns to make certain candidates viable? Are elections decided more by money and special interests or the will of the people? And what is the will of the people when people's minds are molded by media concentrated in the hands of few oligarchs who generally hire reliable hacks than truth-seeking journalists?
Thus, despite certain advantages of so-called 'democracy', it is in some ways the most dishonest system of governance. Essentially, puppets of special interests win offices in the name of serving The People who are, more often than not, duped. Unfortunately, most people tune out of politics because it's boring, dirty, depressing, and corrupt. They say they despise politicians but don't want to get involved. So-called democracy or republic uses so-called politicians as fronts for the real ruling class made up of oligarchs and elite institutions. It's like the Corleone Family had a lot of 'buffers'. Radical Jews used fronts during the Hollywood Blacklist, but Jews continue to use fronts despite their immense power. George W. Bush, Joe Biden, and Barack Obama were total fronts/buffers. Donald Trump turned out to be a front also due to lack of will or lack of choices. But even prior to the rise of Jewish Power, democracy was always a kind of shamocracy because politicians were usually fronts/buffers of the real power. Indeed, a so-called democracy is rule by the Real Power(of industry and institutions) through vetted puppets whose playacting creates the illusion of being the People's Choice.
That said, when Wasps ruled America, it was well-known that Anglo-Germano-Americans dominated the industries & institutions and thus owned most of the political puppets. So, even though most politicians were tools back then as well, it was understood they were serving the Wasp elites as the real puppet-masters. And because the spotlight was on the Anglo-Germano-American elites, not least by Jews who grew increasingly powerful in the media, the ruling elites were under pressure to live up to principles of fairness and justice based on truth of power.
But today, with Jews having the power but lacking the integrity to admit to their power, any honest, truthful, and fair-minded discussion of power is impossible. No wonder there is so much talk of 'hate' and 'supremacy', but it is never directed against Zionism and Jewish hegemonism. When the Anglo-American elites messed up Guatemala and Vietnam, there was moral outrage about the military-industrial complex. But Jewish Power hardly gets any blame for what has been done to Middle East and North Africa.
But things are even worse. In a way, America was a more secular nation when most people worshiped God. God is bigger than any man or any group. Because God is so great and mysterious, American politics rejected any theocratic tendencies. God was too big for man's game of earthly power. People's spiritual life was devoted to God while their political participation was in the world of man. So, people went to church for God and looked to governments for politics. Spirituality was for divine matters, and politics was for human affairs. As God was real in people's lives, they looked to church for spiritual meaning. There was no need to seek out the godly or sacred in the secular sphere because God was very much alive in the church. But the more society became secularized, the less people looked to church for spirituality. And yet, just like vegans crave protein, human nature is such that it longs for the spiritual. Having rejected God and church, people begin to erect idols within the secular sphere. So, MLK went from a great man to a godly figure. Sympathy for blacks turned into Negrolatry of BLM and rich folks washing the Negroes' stinky feet. 'Gay rights' turned into Gay Rites, and now, Mainline churches are dominated by cynical lesbians whose only interest in religion is to make it serve globo-homo. And of course, Shoah went from historical tragedy to eternal faith in the holiness of Jews. Thus, paradoxically enough, the more secular society became, the more quasi-spiritual it became WITHIN THE SECULAR SPHERE ITSELF. Secular became sacral, resulting in 'Securalism'. Also, whereas secular society in the past remained secular precisely because people sought spiritual needs in the church, secular society became increasingly less rational, factual, empirical, critical, and skeptical because of the 'new gods' of Jew Worship, Holy Homo, and Magic Negro within the supposedly secular domain. Jews not only control the narratives and idols. They control the gods, the icons and narratives glowing with sanctimony and burning with moral outrage. If sympathy for Jews, blacks, and homos was sufficient in the past, it no longer is. One must show due reverence and worship. One must get down on the knees. And never mind the cold hard facts. Never mind that Jews are acting like the new nazis. Always see them as a bunch of Anne Franks. Never mind blacks are the top criminals and their thuggery is the product of 100,000 yrs of evolution alongside lions and baboons. Just pretend blacks are sacred earth children and all their problems stem from 'white racism'. And don't dare say anything that might hurt 'gay' feelings(such as "homo-fecal-penetration is gross, ewwww, and a pain in the ass") because homos are holy and that means their feelings are simply divine. And as trannies are closely allied with homos, don't even think of offending a man who says he's a 'woman'. Facts don't matter. Just take on FAITH that the gods controlled by Jews deserve our reverence and obedience.
In such a socio-political climate laden with pseudo-spirituality, what kind of people make it to the top? Obviously, no one with true or innate conscience has any chance of making to the top. The mere fact that you refuse to designate a tranny-man as a 'she' is grounds for no promotion, demotion, or even dismissal. No one with true conscience can rise in the current order of mendacity and compulsory worship of the new gods. Among all the political candidates, Tulsi Gabbard came closest to exhibiting some degree of principles and integrity, but how far did she get? Donald Trump seemed more brazen and principled against his opponents in the GOP primaries in 2016, but he won for style and swagger than integrity or honesty; and he proved to be a total dud, faker, coward, blowhard, and moron.
American Politicians and the Deep State ruling class bang their pots and pans about justice and progress, but none of it's about innate conscience or personal morality. Rather, it's about feigning moral outrage in tune with pre-scripted narratives. So, all these politicians drone on and on about how Israel is sacred to Americans and how they're committed to its survival, blah blah. But in fact, Israel is the biggest power in the Middle East and is in the process of totally erasing the remaining Palestinian territory. Politicians refer to leaders like Vladimir Putin as 'killers' because it's part of the Approved & Obligatory Morality Tale. All this moral furor is akin to dogs barking to win the approval of their master. Thus, it's not true conscience. Anyone with an ounce of real conscience, like Tulsi Gabbard, gets nowhere, while those who feign moral conscience on matters approved by Jewish Supremacists are slated for the top positions. "US intervention has ruined the lives of countless Syrians" gets you nowhere, but "Assad is tyrant and killer" gets you money support and media approval from the Jews.
Also, true conscience is near-impossible when people worship false gods of THIS world. Conscience requires people to be critical and factual. What's the point of conscience if it dares not speak the truth? In the past, someone like Daniel Patrick Moynihan exhibited something like true conscience. He felt genuine sympathy for blacks given their historical experience. And yet, he also noted certain problems of culture and values in the black community. Sympathy didn't negate criticism. Back then, blacks were big news but not holy. Even the later canonized MLK could be called into question. But how can there be true conscience now when we must believe the fiction of BLM and look upon Negroes as next to godliness? Sure, those who chant BLM slogans express lots of moral outrage, but it is mindless and stupid, either the product of cowardice or fanaticism. It's not true conscience. People like Moynihan aren't possible in government anymore because Jews control the gods, and there are certain things we can't be critical of or factual about. What passes for 'conscience' in our age is sheepishly swallowing the dominant narrative, mindlessly worshiping the approved idols, and stupidly regurgitating the catechisms of 'wokeness'. This has led to certain GIVENS in the current order, and even Tulsi Gabbard isn't immune to them, as when she felt compelled to join in the Zionist denunciation of BDS. It's understood by all that it's just a GIVEN of politics and power that you must kiss Jewish Ass if you are to get anywhere. Jewish Power is such that it's not even worth debating the moral merit. It's like Stalin was always right in the USSR, and that was a given, something you simply couldn't even question. Not only do Jews control America, not only are most goy elites a bunch of craven cucks, but the masses of Americans have been soul-poisoned by Jewish Media to favor Judeo-Nazis over Palestinians. So, even if a honest politician chose to damn the torpedoes and spoke the truth about the evil of Zionist Imperialism, he would not only get attacked from above but from below as his constituents will vote him out of office for having dissed holy-schmoly Jews and Israel.
The war on true conscience affects Jews too. There are Jews of some conscience, like Max Blumenthal, Philip Weiss, Glenn Greenwald, and Norman Finkelstein. But they've been demoted or dismissed. They are forced to work in the margins. Indeed, the current Jewish-dominated Rules of Elite Selection require Jews to be nasty and white goyim to be craven. If a Jew shows signs of genuine decency, he is rejected because his true conscience might criticize the iron grip that AIPAC has on America. As a decent Jew, he might be willing to work toward more humane solutions with Palestinians, Arabs, and Iran. And as a principled Jew, he might support free speech and call for honest discussions on all topics, even those inconvenient for Jewish Power. Of course, Jewish Supremacism that rules America simply can't tolerate such Jews. So, decency among Jews is a big no-no in the game of Elite Selection. Decent Jews need not apply.
Among white goyim, the favored trait is cravenness. After all, if traits of courage and toughness were favored, white goyim with brass balls may rise to the top, and such individuals may well speak truth to Jewish Power. Indeed, what Jews hated most about Trump was his tough-guy act and, at least in 2016, didn't act like a suckass at the feet of Jewish Power. (But in office, his bark turned out to be far worse than his toothless bite.) Among black goyim, the favored trait is opportunism. After all, if honest and decent blacks made it to the top, they would ask, "Why do we support racial oppression in the West Bank when we denounce it in the US?" So, the kinds of blacks most favored are the Obamas and Kamala Harrises of the world. These blacks will sell their own mothers for a piece of the pie. They don't care about what harm the power does AS LONG AS they get to share in it. They bitch about American Power in the past mainly because blacks didn't have a big role in it. As long as blacks are allowed to share in the power, these blacks don't care if the US war machine wrecks the planet or if the US financial regimen robs the globe. As long as blacks too get to play the game and hog some of the prestige, they are fully onboard with the game of empire. How many blacks raised a fuss about nations destroyed by Obama? Hey, he's a black man in charge, so that's okay.
So, under Jewish Dominance, US democracy is utterly dysfunctional, and in the game of Elite Selection, the trait of nastiness is favored among Jews, trait of cravenness is favored among whites, and trait of opportunism is favored among blacks. No wonder the ruling class is now completely worthless. Nasty Chuck Schumer and Jerry Nadler. Craven Mitt Romney and Dan Crenshaw. And opportunistic Obama and Harris. A world of maggots.
...the principle of authoritative revelation is not the main factor involved in the development of Western atheism, I think. The content of the revelation is critical. I believe that modern atheism is, to a great extent, a reaction to the disgusting character presented as “God” in the Old Testament. Yahweh’s obscenity has ultimately ruined God’s reputation... Richard Dawkins can only make his atheism sound plausible by first professing, correctly:
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”[1]
In his speech on “the relations of religious and moral ideas with republican principles,” read at the Convention six weeks before his death, Robespierre said:
“I know of nothing so close to atheism as the religion that [the priests] have made: by disfiguring the Supreme Being, they have destroyed him as much as it was in them; […] the priests created a god in their image; they made him jealous, temperamental, greedy, cruel, relentless.”
Is modern atheism a reaction to the 'disgusting' character of God in the Old Testament? But atheists have no interest in the New Testament God either. Also, has religion gained in strength by becoming more tolerant, forgiving, and flaky? The very nature of religion is to be judgmental, and that's why all 'tolerant' and flaky churches don't last long or they adopt New forms of intolerance, such as globo-homo dogma or 'muh Holocaust' or 'muh Israel'. Religion is intrinsically judgmental and damning because it is the rejection of the body and the material world as fallen, cruel, horrific, and vile. If one were content and satisfied with the body and the world, what need for God, spirit, and heaven? It is because the material world is so imperfect that people conceived of souls as separate from flesh. And this soul could enter Heaven if it were good and obedient to God. Or it could enter Nirvana if it rejected desire and attachment to the material world and the way of the flesh. A non-judgmental religion is ridiculous. Religion is essentially the judgmental condemnation of the body by what we imagine to be the 'soul'. It is rejection of the world in favor of Heaven and Nirvana. It is spiritual utopianism as utopia is impossible in the actual-material world.
Also, I find it unlikely that modern atheists were really put off by the ruthlessness of God in the Old Testament. Secular Social Darwinists were pretty heartless about the poor. Eugenics, another secular movement, believed the undesirables should be removed from the genetic pool. It had no use for the concept of the soul. Also, the great 'historical crimes' of the Christian West weren't based on the Bible but on pure greed, vanity, and adventurism. Even though the Church played a missionary role in imperialism, the real drivers were the profiteers and power-lusters. And consider ancient history. Alexander the Great was a ruthless conqueror-adventurer, and he wasn't inspired by the Jewish God. If anything, whatever one may find in the Torah, Jews were among the least militaristic peoples in ancient times. Not because they were nicer but because they sucked at fighting. Jews figured, Other Peoples may whup our ass physically, but we will whup their ass spiritually. Others will grab more land, but we will conceive of a God greater than all their gods combined. It's true that the Torah speaks of God ordering Jews to carry out mass-killings and the like. But in ancient times, pagans were just as ruthless, if not more so. Assyrians were terrifying. Spartans were bung-donging killing machines. (It goes to show acceptance of homosexuality does NOTHING to ensure a more humanitarian point of view. Some historians surmise Frederick the Great was a closet-homo, but he was among the most aggressive German rulers. Also, homos today are all over CIA, NSA, & Deep State, and they are among the most enthusiastic pushers of globo-imperialism. They love to play the world like a sex toy and cackle with glee at the horrors in Syria. Besides, though homos started out pleading for tolerance, once they gained dominant power in alliance with Jews, they've pushed globo-homo Queertianity as the new dogma that must be obeyed. Once a secular force in society, globo-homos are now festooning churches and even mosques with 'gay' colors.) National Socialists, Japanese imperialists, Soviet imperialists, and etc. proved time and time again that people can be just as crazy in service to secular ideology or pagan mythology. I don't think the Chinese in Nanking were fleeing in horror because Japanese were running around with Bibles and sermonizing.
As for Richard Dawkins, a fine biological scientist but moronic social scientist, he acts like the god of the Current Year. Whatever happens to be most PC in the present must be true and just for all times. His litany of complaints about God is truly hilarious. He's such a vain dolt that he is utterly unaware of how his brand of atheism is just as judgmental as old-time religion. He's so arrogant, contemptuous, sneering, sniveling, smug, and full of hot air. His personality is more despicable than that of any deity. Oh, he knows best, he knows everything, he is so very rational, he is all about facts and truth while those who disagree are all morons and monsters. What a prick.
I've always been an atheist but can't stand people like Dawkins who are really into self-worship and auto-cult-of-personality.
Let's consider some of his complaints.
1.God is jealous and proud of it.By 'jealous', it is meant that He is possessive. But then, why shouldn't He be? If He is the supreme Lord and the Creator of all, of course He would be jealously possessive of what He created. It means God is a great environmentalist. He created the cosmic and worldly environment, and He is jealous and possessive of the creation. He doesn't want it to be ruined, polluted, or befouled by sin and degeneracy. God created mankind and imbued humans with souls. Naturally, He sees mankind as His property because He created it. So, He wants mankind to be appreciative and not pollute their souls with sin. If you had magical powers and created an oasis, a beautiful garden, out of the thin air, wouldn't you be 'jealous' and possessive of it? And if you created creatures to inhabit the garden, wouldn't you want them to take good care of it and heed your laws? What is the point of being the Great Creator and Owner of the universe if you're not possessive of what you've made?
2.God is a petty, unjust, and unforgiving control-freak. Now, some of this criticism is valid because, after all, what is God or any bunch of gods but a projection of human nature and human personality? So, naturally what we find objectionable in God is a mythic reflection of our failings and our problems. Every pagan god is far from perfect. Zeus is often petty and nasty. Also, many pagan gods were far more frightening than the Jewish God. After all, Yahweh said no more to human sacrifice and that sort of thing. In contrast, certain pagan gods demanded human sacrifice, especially in the New World among the Aztecs and Mayans. I dunno, but I'll take the Jewish God over such pagan gods. Does Dawkins really believe the God of the Torah is worse than pagan gods who demanded human sacrifices of virgins or kids or thousands of captives?
Now, one problem with the Jewish God is the assertion of perfection. With pagan gods, as nasty-vicious-vile-petty-demented-sadistic-cruel they may be, they never claimed to be perfect. So, with a figure like Zeus, we can see his good sides and his bad sides. As for dark gloomy gods who demand tons of human sacrifice, they may be amoral or even immoral, but at least we know they aren't about justice. They are about POWER. They got it and flaunt it, and they demand we obey. In contrast, the problem with the Jewish God is the cult of perfection that, however, is undermined by Biblical evidence. If indeed God is so perfect and all-knowing, why does He contradict Himself so often in the Torah? Why does He say one thing here, another thing there? Why is He about love and forgiveness at certain times but about death and destruction in another? In a way, the history of Judaism(and even Christianity) has been the dialectics between (1) God's Word and God's Character (2) God's Promise and God's Deliverance. Of course, there is contradiction even within God's words as He says one thing through one prophet and another thing through another. Jews and others have tied themselves in mental knots to rationalize these contradictions: (1) The Scriptures are not infallible but flawed interpretations of God's way and will by prophets who could see further than most men but nevertheless fell short (2) Though God's ways manifest themselves in various and seemingly contradictory ways on the surface, they are all consistent and part of the plan at the deeper core (3) God really isn't perfect but fooling Himself and us (4) God speaks to us in ways that we understand, but His ultimate plan is too mysterious for us to understand rationally or through human faculty... much like mankind cannot really understand the mystery in 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY or MOTHMAN PROPHECIES. (Some people wonder how God could be perfect but His Creation is so imperfect. If He is perfect, why did He fail to create perfection? But maybe one could argue that it is perfect as whole, and paradoxically the 'imperfections' of the parts are integral to the perfection of the whole. It's like a painting. When we look closely at any part of the painting, it looks blurry and crude, even ugly and messy. Yet, when we move back and see the painting as a whole, we realize how each 'crude' brushstroke played a role in creating the great painting. Same goes for music. The final score is the coming together of all the 'imperfect' elements of music. So, for the cosmos to be perfect, it has to be made up of 'imperfect' parts. Not everything can be perfect because most things are part of something bigger. Perfection connotes wholeness, and no part on its own can be perfect alone. It is imperfect and works with other imperfect parts in the creation of the larger perfection.)
Now clearly, if we were to characterize God or gods as nothing more than projection of human nature/personality onto the universe, the deity/deities would merely be a bundle of magnifications of all that is noble and ignoble about us. Our good sides would be magnified but so would our bad sides. And on that level, there is a pettiness in all conceptions of God. On the one hand, they are so grand and awesome, the kings of mountains, skies, and stars. We want gods to be glorious and impressive. But to the extent that even such magnificent beings are slaves of all-too-human vices and vanities, there will be a massive contradiction between their august construction and all-too-human behavior. Zeus is a great god but is often animated by Beavis-and-Buttheadian 'boing'-mania. He is the god of gods but acts like Bill Clinton and Harvey Weinstein.
What is fascinating about the Old Testament is the dialectics among the various prophets, poets, and writers as to the true and ultimate nature of God. In a way, such dialectics were possible only because of the contradiction between the concept of God's perfection and evidence to the otherwise. Did God fail Jews and humanity? Or did Jews and humanity fail God? Did God betray the promise or did Jews/humanity violate the promise? Was the vision of God by every prophet merely a piece in the larger puzzle? Like the US Constitution, the Torah is a record of amendment. Just like there was talk of making the US a 'more perfect union', the Jewish project was about making their God a 'more perfect God'. While the notion of the Jewish God as perfect could be said to be delusional and arrogant, it also made Jews more sensitive to the failures of God(or of themselves, which were maybe the reason why God failed to deliver His promise). If Jews were okay with a flawed god(as the pagans were), they would have been less worked up about the contradiction between their spiritual conception and their political condition in the world. Jews came to believe their God is the only God who, furthermore, chose Jews as His favorite. If God is just and perfect, why is the world, His Creation, so flawed? If Jews are the Chosen, why do they suffer so much? Why can't Jews be masters of the world over goyim and eat like effendi? (Today, Jews are masters over goyim and eat like effendi, but this came about through Jewish adherence to secular satanism.) These questions made Jews a deep and profound people who raised among the most important spiritual questions. It also made them a difficult and neurotic people, rather like Dustin Hoffman in RAIN MAN trying to crack the mystery of "Who's On First?"
Anyway, the fact that most pagan religions turned into empty rituals, boring customs, or the butt of jokes(like what became of Greek Mythology via Ovid) whereas Jewish religion kept raising questions and even spawned Christianity and Islam goes to show that the Jewish conception of God was more powerful, provocative, inspiring, and meaningful. And despite all the dogmatism, it was adaptable in the sense that God went increasingly from an anthropomorphic super-being to a conceptual spirit, an abstract Deity. In a way, Dawkins' real beef with Judaism-Christianity-Islam is that its God was conceived of as a meme that cannot be dis-proven and has appealed to humanity for eons. With modern science/education, it's impossible for any rational person to believe in Zeus, Thor, or Osiris. As gods with specified dimensions, they now seem like characters in a superhero comic book. But God has been conceived of as a Being that is, at once so accessible and so mysterious. He can listen to our prayers and cares for us; but He is so great and mysterious that we cannot imagine what He looks or sounds like. Dawkins came up with the concept of memes, and as a radical rationalist, he can't stand the fact that an irrational meme still has such power over the world. But then, even as he spouts off about evolution, he seems blind to how spirituality may have been an evolutionary advantage for mankind. Religion gave people hope and meaning, and surely those with hope and meaning are more likely to believe in the future. Even today, why is it that religious people tend to have more kids than secularists who believe there is no meaning to anything? Secular science is superior at identifying issues and solving problems. It sent men to the Moon. But it tells us nothing about the meaning of the universe and why we are here. In all likelihood, there is no meaning to the cosmos, but such fatalism hardly makes for hope and survival.
Dawkins says God is unforgiving, but is He? Adam and Eve disobeyed Him, but He let them live. Cain murdered his brother, but God protected him. When Ham saw his pa Noah naked, God didn't kill him but turned him into a Negro. Given white folks now worship Negroes, that wasn't such a bad deal. When God was about to smite Sodom and Gomorrah, He listened to Abraham and was willing to compromise. Even though so many people were acting like proto-globo-homo tooters, God promised to spare the city IF Abraham could find just a few decent folks. God even sent angel-inspectors to look for evidence, but they were greeted by a bunch of degenerates yelling, 'squeal like a pig'. That's when God had just about enough and decided to blow the city up. Throughout the Old Testament, God is forgiving of Moses, David, and many others... as long as they face up to their own failings. He punishes Jews but forgives them over and over. God is often ruthless but also forgiving. At any rate, He could change His mind because He was the only God. There is actually less forgiveness among the gods in pagan myths. Whereas the Jewish God might hate you but then forgive you, pagan gods generally hate someone forever. So, if that someone is to survive, he needs the protection of other gods who favor him. If Hera hates you, it is likely permanent. If you survive, it's because some other gods grant you protection. Thus, pagan mythology is more political than moral. It's about balancing of powers. In contrast, the Jewish God is capable of changing His mind. He can go from judge to reformer. He can be executioner but change His mind and let you live. Some say what He did with Abraham and Isaac was pretty frightening, but a pagan god might have demanded the sacrifice of lots of young boys. God let Isaac live because, when push came to shove, He wanted to be worshiped as a good God than just a powerful God. Also, the fact that Judaism spawned Christianity goes to show there was an element in the former that was about love and forgiveness. If such an element hadn't been inherent in Judaism, there could have been no Christianity.
By the way, is Dawkins aware of his own contradiction? He has often condemned 'antisemitism' but then argues that the Jewish Spiritual Worldview(that also led to Christianity and Islam) has been the biggest curse upon mankind. If the main cultural, moral, and spiritual contribution of Jews has been so rotten, vile, and disgusting, shouldn't Dawkins agree with 'anti-Semites' that Jewish People have been the worst in all of human history? Also, if mythology is the collective representation of the spirit of a people and if Jewish mythology is the vilest in the world, doesn't it follow that Jews must have the worst human character since it led to the creation of the worst credo and belief system? Now, Dawkins may argue that he is opposed to biological antisemitism and okay with Jews as secular people. If so, why not demand that Jews give up on Jewishness, an identity that simply cannot be divorced from the religious history of Jews? Even secular Jews have an identity rooted in the Covenant with God. Also, if Jews suffered through the ages, it was because they insisted on their difference and even superiority based on the Covenant. So, the very notion of Jewishness should be condemned if Dawkins wants to be morally consistent.
Furthermore, what if the vileness of Jewish religion isn't merely the reflection of Jewish Imagination gone wrong but of Jewish personality itself? Maybe the problem wasn't in the spiritual vision but in the roots of personality, in attitude and mindset. Could it be God is especially arrogant, all-knowing, ruthless, judgmental, and vain because Jewish personality tends to be that way? As an evolutionist, Dawkins might ponder the relation between secular Jewish personality and the ideologies/agendas that sprung from it. Couldn't one argue that modern secular Jews, even without belief in God, tended to have personalities of the monomaniacal and megalomaniacal variety(that one encounters in the Torah)? Personality and attitude go a long way. A person with bland personality is likely to be less fiery and fanatical even with religion; in contrast, a person with strong personality is likely to have a god-complex even if he is irreligious — Josef Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Mao Zedong were non-religious but loved playing gods, even at the cost of destroying millions of lives. And look at Neocons. Most of these Jews are irreligious. Their sense of Jewishness is political and historical than spiritual. But they have strong personalities and are willing to smite 100,000s and even millions of goy lives to fulfill their dream of Jewish Supremacism. So, maybe Dawkins should look more into the problem of personality and attitude than faith.
As for God being a control-freak, I find this hilarious coming from an Anglo, member of a tribe known for its hoity-toity compulsiveness. Also, I see some projection here. Dawkins is a mental control-freak who laments that there are still religious people around the world who refuse to grovel before him as the all-knowing secular genius. And look at current Britain. It has the worst of what Sam Francis called anarcho-tyranny. The culture(which is mostly pop culture) encourages young Britons to emulate savage jungle behavior of blacks. And yet, there are also increased social pressures about how you can't buy knives, you can't tweet certain comments, you can't crack certain jokes, you can't use certain words, you must bend over to globo-homo, you must celebrate Diversity, you must agree that not one less than 6 million died in the Shoah, and etc. Current UK encourages increased levels of savagery that leads to social problems but then exerts more control-freakish state power over everyone in the name of dealing with the problems. Brits are now hoity-toity ho's. How about being sensible and NOT importing lots of blacks and discouraging whites from emulating the most savage race? But no, UK encourages whites to be like blacks and then exerts more state power to suppress the problems resulting from globalism.
3.A vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser. It is true that God watches over Jews as they leave Egypt and clash with pagan tribes to found their own homeland. The most frightening parts of the Old Testament is when God orders the Jews to wipe out entire enemy populations. But here's the thing. Why pretend this is a feature only or mainly of the Jewish God? Those who worshiped pagan gods conquered more and killed more. Romans invaded and killed tons of primitive Britons before they converted to Christianity. Huns, Mongols, Persians, Greeks, Assyrians, and etc. were great conquerors and mass-killers. Alexander the Great has been much romanticized, but he could be as ruthless as any tyrant. All mythologies have gods aiding one people to totally smash another people. The gods defend a people; the gods help a people to invade and take from another people. The Jewish God was no different in this. Still, there are also sides to Him in the Bible that call for mercy, peace, and reflection. The most blood-curdling parts of the Bible is when Hebrews, out of Egypt and in the wilderness, are looking to found their own homeland. It was going to be a bloody process. Now, some historians say that it's all fiction. Others contend Jews did fight and take lands from Canaanites and the like and committed mass blood-baths. But such were common among all peoples at the time, and they all worshiped gods who urged ruthless actions to whup the other side. Still, the blood-curdling God is only one aspect of the Bible, not the main thing. Besides, modern history shows one doesn't need God and religion to conquer, ethnically cleanse, and wipe out entire populations. While white Christians conquered America & Australia and wiped out native populations, they were mainly motivated by political, material, and economic interests, not religious ones. Sure, they invoked God to justify whatever they did, but they could just as easily have invoked 'progress', 'history', or 'justice'. To most people then, it was justice and progress for advanced white folks to take land from useless savages. Ayn Rand, a fierce atheist, said Jews should rule Zion because Palestinians are useless Arab barbarians incapable of building modern societies. Hitler and Stalin didn't need to invoke God to conquer and destroy entire peoples. Zionism wasn't a religious movement as its pioneers were non-believing Jews, and many were secular socialists. Still, they managed to manipulate the great empires to aid Zionists in the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians.
Too many terms here are subjective and un-scientific. What is meant by 'misogynistic'? From a religious-spiritual point of view, secular pop culture could be said to be 'misogynistic' because it encourages women to dress and act like whores. If by 'misogynistic', Dawkins means women being subordinate to men, that is nearly all of human history and human culture(and nature as well as most females are weaker than males across the species). Pagan Athens required women to wear veils, and women there were less free than in authoritarian Sparta. Black savage culture has been more expressive in female sexuality, so does that mean stuff like 'twerking' is the path to female 'empowerment' and dignity? By the way, despite open sexual expression among savage black women, male-on-female violence has been a bigger problem among blacks. Greek mythology's view of womenfolk is actually more damning than in the Torah. Though Eve causes great harm, Adam also shares the blame. At any rate, God gave Eve to Adam as a gift and blessing. In contrast, Greek mythology says women were presented to mankind as a curse from the very beginning.
As for 'homophobic', what is more intolerant and judgmental than current globo-homo Queertianity? BAKE THE CAKE, BIGOT. Or, if you say you find sodomy to be gross(which it certainly is), forget about working in any elite capacity. Also, even if religious intolerance and judgmentalism toward homos were excessive in the past, it was still intolerance in the name of normality, decency, and health. In contrast, current globo-homo intolerance of so-called 'homophobes' is a denunciation and negation of normality, nature, and decency in the name of consecrating degeneracy and decadence. Some things are worth honoring, and some things are only worth tolerating. Family and natural norms are worth encouraging and defending. Homosexuality is, at best, worth tolerating. NOTHING good can come of homo fecal penetration, guys sucking penises, and tranny-penis-cutting-and-balls-lopping. So, while one could argue that the Old Testament is too excessive in its anti-homo-ness, intolerance of homosexuality still makes more sense than intolerance of normo-sexuality and its natural attitudes toward homosexuality. I mean, why shouldn't a sane, decent, and normal person find homosexuality to be deviant and gross? Also, Ancient Jews lived in tough times when people had to focus on core values and core essentials to survive. They had no time for decadence. Is there any evidence that celebration of homosexuality led to civilizational strength? While Ancient Greeks were smart to harness homo talent, it was never good for any civilization to be overly celebratory of homos as it invariably led to decadence and degeneracy as homos are naturally vain and froopy-doop. They act like those trivialist freaks in Fellini films. Keep them on the side, not at the center.
As the Jewish God was a moral force focused on essentials, it's understandable why He was hostile to homosexuality. His laws were about reminding Jews over and over what really matters, what are essential and what are trivial. Naturally, sticking dongs up bungs was not only non-essential but gross and a good way to spread disease. Imagine you have special powers and you create a garden. And then you mold creatures and tell them, "This orifice you use for eating, this orifice you use for shi**ing', and that orifice you use for sex", but a bunch of freaks decide to stick sexual organs into poop-chutes. Of course, you-as-creator would be upset. Suppose you create a toilet bowl that is meant for pissing and pooping but a bunch of people use it for washing their faces and drinking water. Suppose you build a museum for appreciation for art, but idiots fill up the place with junk and have orgies inside.Of course, you will be upset. Naturally, God wasn't into 'gay' crap because He didn't design the bung for the dong.
Dawkins says God is 'racist'. Well, all gods tended to favor one group over others. But then, what's the point of worshiping a god who doesn't favor your side? Also, non-'racist' gods are not necessarily better. In the Trojan War, it's obvious that the gods whom the Greeks worship are not necessarily with the Greeks. Indeed, half of them favor the Trojans, and this prolongs the war. Would you want to worship a god that sides with your enemy? Greeks did, and it caused them all sorts of problems. Because there was no covenant between Greek gods and Greeks, it wasn't long before Romans took them and made them serve Rome. (Later, Romans took the Jewish God as their own, but Christianity was the doing of Jewish heretics who, Prometheus-like, smuggled the Jewish fire to the pagans, something Jews could never forget or forgive. Jews see it as a bigger failure than Rosenbergs sending nuclear secrets to Stalin who became the enemy of Zion.) But generally, most gods rooted for one people over another. Oftentimes, gods needed to be appeased to stay on your side. Gods also needed to be appeased for good weather. Or appeased so that they won't torment your people too much. Popular Chinese religion imagined heavens filled with corrupt bureaucratic gods who had to be bribed so as not to torture one's ancestors too badly. No wonder Chinese are morally screwy.
So, it seems the 'racism' of the Jewish God wasn't such a bad thing or a bad thing at all. What's wrong with your god favoring your kind? The elites should favor their own people, and gods should favor those who worship them. It's how spiritual contract works: A people worship a certain set of gods, and the gods favor them. British elites used to be grand and excellent as race-ist elites. They favored and cared for their own people. But ever since British elites became 'anti-racist', they've neglected and abused their own folks while sucking up to rich Jews, pandering to angry Muslims, cucking to savage blacks, and welcoming the Great Replacement. Race-ism is infinitely preferable to evil 'anti-racism'.
Granted, there was a contradiction in the Jewish conception of God because Jews increasingly claimed He is the only God and the God of all and everything. If so, why should God favor Jews over others when He is lord of all? So, the problem of the Jewish God has been less about 'racism' than conceptual contradiction, even hypocrisy. If God is the only God and if He is just and moral Being to all living creatures, why should He favor Jews over others when, in fact, Jews can act unjustly while non-Jews could act justly? But this contradiction led to the rise of Christianity and Islam.
At any rate, if Dawkins finds the Jewish God to be most 'racist', he is effectively condemning Jews as historically the most 'racist' people since their cultural character led to the creation of the most 'racist' Deity. As such, one could argue Dawkins' view is rabidly and virulently 'antisemitic', but then, the hypocritical fool makes a lot of noise about how he loathes 'antisemitism'. Following Dawkins' logic, Jews can be good ONLY IF they are culturally and spiritually de-Jewified. Jews must undergo spiritual holocaust to be good folks. They must be castrated of their ethno-spiritual roots. He loves Jews only as un-Jews.
Now, why should an evolutionist be opposed to race-ism? Evolution is about genetic divergences and emergence of differences among groups. Indeed, not only is evolution race-ist but it has been the generator of different species and different races. And these racial divergences can lead to different species. After all, there was a time when the ape-ancestors of humans were of the same species as the ape-ancestors of chimpanzees. But over time, one race of those early apes became chimps while another branch became the apelike proto-humans. So, if Dawkins has a problem with racial differences, he should blame evolution.
Dawkins says God is infanticidal, and it's true that God ordered the killing of kibblers when Jews were battling other tribes to found their land of milk and honey. And in Egypt, prior to the Exodus, He killed the first borns among the Egyptians. But His actions against Egyptians were punishment for Egyptian tyranny over the Jews. And when Jews were battling Canaanites and the like, it was kill or be killed. In other words, infanticide(as extension of genocide) was common practice in the ancient world. Your people, upon defeat and capture, were lucky if spared and kept alive as slaves. Quite often, the conquering folks raped, pillaged, and wiped out entire enemies. So, it's hardly surprising that the Jews, like other tribes, committed bloody acts and justified them as the decrees of their God. But before we judge the past too harshly, let's look at the modern world. During World War I, British blockades against Germany were a form of Total War. It wasn't just military vs military but targeted the entire population, driving many Germans to the brink of starvation. In the aftermath of the Gulf War, the secular 'liberal democratic' West enforced sanctions on Iraq that, by some estimates, killed 100,000s of Iraqi children. To create a new social order, Stalin and Mao were willing to sacrifice millions of lives in the name of History. To his dying day, the much celebrated secular intellectual Eric Hobsbawn remained a proud communist and said Stalin's actions were necessary. Also, many people see abortion as infanticide, especially as it is now allowed even up to the moment of birth when the baby is virtually fully formed. Also, the Modern West and Modern East are cursed with 'conceptocide' or 'fertilocide'. Never mind killing babies. These societies are not even conceiving and creating life necessary to sustain their civilizations. They live for elitism, individualism, hedonism, and vanity. They are essentially death cults and won't survive the way they're going. Is this what Dawkins so proud of?
Dawkins accusing God of 'megalomania' is rather silly. Megalomania is about having a self-image that is bigger than the actual self. If a nobody considers himself a big man, he is a megalomaniac. If a king regards himself an emperor, he is a megalomaniac. If an emperor considers himself an immortal god, he is a megalomaniac. But God has been conceived of as the supreme creator and ruler of all of universe. Naturally, He would have a grand view of Himself. Should the Creator of All be timid as a mouse? Indeed, the striking feature of God is that, despite His grandeur and awesomeness, He expresses an incredible amount of sympathy for a weakling tribe(in the Old Testament) and losers around the world(in the New Testament). The reason why so many people have clung to God through the ages via Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is because He is, at once super-powerful & almighty AND concerned with the little guy. In contrast, Dawkins worships his own infallible intellect.
Dawkins says God is pestilential. Now, we see what Dawkins' real shtick is about. He is trying to blame God for all the problems of life created by evolution. Since the beginning of life, organisms big and small have been slaughtering, devouring, murdering, tormenting, torturing, trashing, smashing, slashing, gnawing, goring, gouging, pummeling, cracking, smacking, and etc. each other. The theory of evolution may be elegant as a model in a textbook, but its practice in reality has been most brutal and horrific. We may wonder at the beauty of nature, but what we consider to be 'beauty' is really a range of survival mechanisms that were developed over eons via natural selection that weeded out so many 'innocent' organisms in brutal ways. Just watch any nature program, and these non-believing animals are murdering and slaughtering each other to no end. Animals evolved to survive because the natural environment was so unforgiving. In other words, evolution has been utterly genocidal toward all those that failed to survive. Evolution led to rise of all kinds of germs that wiped out entire species. It has been pestilential. Also, the uncaring godless universe sent asteroids to smash into planets and wipe out entire species that had evolved over eons in a single day. That is the godless world of the laws of nature and evolution. Look at chimp behavior. They bite off each other's penises and balls. Look at how big cats kill wild pigs. Look at how polar bears butcher seals and their cubs. Look at how sharks maim turtles. Look at how volcanoes and forest fires burn millions of animals to death. And mankind, with or without God, has been pretty miserable. Look at US policy toward Iran and Palestinians. Has Jewish behavior gotten better without God? Secular Jews gave us communist mass-killings and Neocon wars. Were Japanese less cruel because they didn't believe in the Jewish God? Look at their behavior in World War II. Is secular globalism and open borders the way of peace and justice? They are filling the West with savage jungle-jivers from Africa who are bound to turn Europe into New Africa.
Also, when most people lose religion, do they become rational and sane, or do they adopt a quasi-religion because it's human nature to seek spirituality? Look at the 'climate change' faith. Global Warming may be real, and something needs to be done, but for many people it's the new faith. When Western folks lost God, many more of them took up neo-idolatry of celebrity-worship, drugs, and debauchery than commitment to reason and science, the domain of those with high IQ. Steven Pinker says the world is getting better and better, but what will happen when tons of black Africans turn Europe into jungle-land? The effect will be worse than WWI and WWII combined. As long as Europe was still inhabited by Europeans, it recovered from both WWI and WWII in no time. But with blacks taking over Europe, it will turn into one big Detroit forever. This should be so obvious to any secular and rational person who cares about facts(that are race-ist), but Dawkins has a quasi-religious blindspot of his own: Political Correctness and 'anti-racism' as new catechism. Not unlike extreme religious bigots with their holier-than-thou sanctimony, the PC people are so theatrical and rapturous with their holy-shmoly 'anti-racism' when, in fact, the reality of race is so obvious and the black threat is so dire to the West.
Dawkins says God is sadomasochistic, but this goes for Dawkins and his ilk too. They're oh-so masochistic with 'white guilt' BS. Oh boo hoo, they must atone for their history of 'antisemitism' and 'racism'. But as GOOD WHITE PEOPLE SAVED BY PC, they sadistically love to bully other whites who refuse to kneel at the altar of White Guilt and debase themselves like a bunch of worthless cucks. In this, Dawkins is very much like the religious people he abuses. Just like certain insufferable Christians yammer about their sinfulness but feel morally superior precisely because they churn out such noises, Dawkins bleats about 'racism' but that very bleating fills him with the moral pride and arrogance to stick it to others.
Dawkins is a real pile of shit. As for Jews, they could be promoting Dawkins to dissuade goyim from worshiping God so that Jews can reclaim and own Him all for themselves. If someone owns gold and you want it, it makes sense for you to make him believe that his gold is worthless pile of crap. When he lets it go, you run off with it. So, Jewish support of Dawkins could really be a gambit.
God and gods never existed. They didn't give us life. Life emerged by process of evolution and survives by destroying other life. Evolution created life, and that is the curse. God or gods are the imaginary creations of life, and why did intelligent beings imagine gods? Because nature is so horrible. Because life is so full of agony. And this life was created by evolution, the beloved process of Dawkins. Evolution is a pack of hyenas eating a wildebeest alive. It's lions slowly tormenting and killing a hippo mother and its calf. Without life, there would be no terror. If Earth had no life, who'd care if volcanoes or earthquakes happened? So what if a giant asteroid crashed on Earth? The Moon was hit by tons of asteroids, but it was never tragic because there was no life to kill.
Dawkins got it backwards. He blames the Jewish God for cruelty and horrors, but all those resulted from life. Evolution created life, and life is about pain. Why pain? Because pain ensures better survival. An organism that feels pain is more likely to avoid danger. But the pain is often horrid and unendurable. Before mankind came up with the first spiritual idea, tons of life forms were destroyed by eating and devouring, volcanoes, earthquakes, asteroids, germs(that are also just more life), and etc. Life was so terrible and cruel that mankind came up with gods to explain why the world is so messed up. And by ascribing disasters to gods or God, they hoped to ease the horror by prayer and appeasement. It's true that the Old Testament God sends all sorts of disasters on life and mankind. But even before Jews conceived of their God, such disasters had been happening forever. There were floods, pestilence, violence, fires, and destruction. As people sought answers to such problems, they believed some higher force was behind them. And if gods controlled the universe, there were three possibilities.
1. God or gods are powerful but bad. God or gods are cruel and love to use their power for power's sake. They love to stomp on the weak, and that is the reason for the horrors. Therefore, the ONLY way to ease their sadism and cruelty was to make sacrifices and offerings.
2. God or gods are good but powerless. God or gods are good & loving but helpless to stop the disasters to protect or save mankind. They watch and weep but can't help us.
3. God or gods are powerful and good. God or gods are good & loving but use disasters to punish mankind when it does wrong.
Many pagans opted for #1. Aztecs believed in cruel gods that had to be appeased endlessly. Chinese popular religion believed in more civilized gods but they were utterly corrupt and had to be bribed regularly by burning money.
#2 is problematic even if it lets God or gods off the hook because it implies God or gods are rather weak and helpless to do anything. If they are good but lack the power to save mankind from the horrors, what good are they? Indeed, are they really gods when they are so lacking in power?
#3 is the one the Jews settled on. God is powerful and good, and so, He uses Power to protect the good and punish the evil. Jews believed that disasters weren't arbitrary muscle flexing of God but divine moral acts to punish the wicked. But this caused problems of its own as Jews couldn't help but notice that so many good folks suffered and perished while so many bad monsters got rich and powerful. And so, there was the Book of Job and the rise of Christianity that promised Heaven for the good and meek. For all its problems, #3 is still more assuring than #1 and #2.
As for science and evolution, it just says Things Happen, and if an asteroid hits Earth and kills all of us, that means we just ran out of luck, and that's that. I agree with this, but is it any more heartening than religion?
Commentator Rurik:
Am I the only one who’s struck by that characterization? Seeing how exactly it parallels the charactor of Israel today?
But here's the thing. While God is a projection of Jewish personality and has a Covenant with the Jews, He is also bigger than the Jews. If God were merely a tool of the Jews, then He would be lesser than the Jews. He'd be just a henchman and bouncer of the Tribe. But as creator and judge, He is bigger than the Jews, and Jews must bow down to Him. And even though He favors Jews, He is very tough on the Jews. Sometimes, He is tougher on the Jews because of the Covenant. When Jews betray Him, He takes it especially badly, 'personally'. It's like a father especially feels betrayed by his own children.
Even though He can be ruthless and brutal in favor of Jews, He can also be ruthless and brutal against Jews. Also, it's not enough that Jews do well and gain power in His eyes. Jews must gain power and wealth as GOOD people of virtue, piety, and conscience. God is not okay with power for power's sake. His message to Jews is NOT 'by any means necessary'. If Jews are to be blessed, they must be a good people who obey God and act moral. Through a prophet, King David was admonished of the wrongness of His ways. And even though God allowed ruthless and even genocidal tactics on the part of Jews during the land wars following Exodus, most of the Torah is a story of God warning and reminding Jews not to lose the way and often punishing the Jews for their perfidy and disobedience.
So, current Zionism and Jewish Supremacism are similar to the way of God only superficially. Yes, there is the ruthlessness and brutality but no morality. King David atoned, but has any Israeli leader said sorry about anything? Ancient Jews were a moral people who feared God, but today's Jews turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah with massive globo-homo debauchery. In our time, Jews feel as gods and answer to no one and nothing. Current Jewish covenant is with Satan. True, Satan doesn't exist, but Jews are totally amoral and nihilistic in their lust for power and more power.
Indeed, one reason why Jews remained limited in might and reach in the Ancient World was because of their moralism. Now, one could argue chicken-or-the-egg as to whether Jews chose moralism because they kept losing or they lost because they chose moralism. But if Jews ONLY CARED for power and might, their agenda would have been served better with them acting like Assyrians and Romans who were less concerned with morality and more with sheer might and endless conquest. Though modern people will wince at the punishments in Deuteronomy, the laws are still morally based. God put down such-and-such laws, and you get punished or killed for violating them. In contrast, Roman and general pagan brutalities were far more arbitrary without moral basis. Romans even staged massive gladiator bloodbaths where countless humans and animals were sacrificed for the fun of it.
In the modern world, Jews came to world power because they dropped God and morality. Jews no longer believe there is a higher force above them judging them. They now believe THEY are the new gods. Ancient Jews had a combo of big fat ego and mega-personality, and it was projected onto the Heavens. So, even though God came to possess many of the unpleasant qualities of Jews — but then, gods of any people embody the unpleasant as well as pleasant qualities of such people, as among Hindus and Mayans — , He was MORE than the Jews. Also, no single Jew or Jewish sect/tribe could claim Him as his/its own. God was bigger than anything, and His message to Jews was they had to be a good people in order to deserve great power. In modern times, Jews figured that morality(or true morality) is an impediment to their global dominance. Jews figured it's better to make a pact with the Satanic side of their nature. So, Jews became masters of vanity and vice industries. Also, Jews don't practice morality but rather exploit moralism in devious ways so that goyim must be ultra-conscientious toward Jews but Jews need not reciprocate. The 'muh Holocaust' thing that gives Jews passover rights over other people.
Zion today is about power without morality. It's about Jewish covenant with Satan. It's about there being no higher good or truth above Jewish egotism and supremacism. Today, Jews act as if they are gods. It's really closer to Golden-Calfism.
Way of the World. When people hear of easy gold, they drop everything and all go rushing for it.
Way of the World. When there is a Kill to Steal, other animals come to take it.
Way of the World. Ants flock to easy white sugar.
People need to understand The Way. The Way of the World is as follows: If someone or some people have something of great value, OTHERS will come to try to take it or partake of it. Greatness is great but has an Achilles Heel. Greatness is a double-edged sword. If you have something great, it is a thing to admire but also a thing to acquire. The whole world wants it, and if given a chance, will gladly take it. If a woman has great beauty and if it could be appropriated by plain-faced women, would they take it? Of course they would.
Just like something of great value has a vulnerability — everyone wants to take it —, something of lower value has an intrinsic security, a kind of a modest advantage. If you have something of low value, it may not be worth much, but then, you need not worry about others taking it from you. Who breaks into a house to steal a piece of iron? They’ll burglarize for gold though. It’s like a man with a beautiful wife is more insecure than a man with an average wife. More men will try to make a move to take the beautiful wife from the husband. So many invaders came to Ireland long ago because of its reputation for having the most beautiful women. It’s probably why Irish men had to be tough and unpleasant because they had to fight all the time to keep their women from Vikings and other horny invasive bastards. If you have something of great value, it’s wonderful to have it, but then, you must always remind yourself that everyone else wants it too; they want to take it from you. This is why anyone who finds gold better be very quiet about it or make legal claim backed up by guns to keep the gold for himself. Otherwise, there’s gonna be a Gold Rush, like in the days of the 49ers. Because white nations are deemed the best and most desirable in the world, Mass-Immigration-Invasions are essentially a form of White Rush. Non-whites salivate, “Let’s all rush to white nations and grab the white gold.” They will cook up any number of reasons(mostly bogus) to make their claim.
Jews understood this dynamics because they experienced it many times over as both takers and taken. Jews greedily eyed what the goyim had and tried to take it from goyim, and goyim greedily eyed what the Jews and tried to take it from Jews. Jews created the most powerful and profound concept of God(at least one that is accessible to most people, as Hinduism may be more profound but is exceedingly confusing and complex). With every passing year in the Ancient World, the pagan gods seemed sillier(just superhumans with lots of flaws) whereas the Jewish God seemed infinitely mysterious and meaningful. So, naturally, there was the real danger of goyim trying to take this God of the Jews for themselves. And so, Jews came up with the Covenant, a spiritual-legal contract between God and Jews. Jews told goyim, “Yeah sure, our God is the one and only God of all, but He has a special contract with us, so you filthy goyim back off and stay away from our God.” Now, that’s good thinking. But then, a bunch of renegade Jews managed to smuggle the concept and reformulate it for universal acquisition. Jews must still be pissed over this because Google never runs Easter doodles. Jews also mastered the Law because they amassed great fortunes. The Way of the World is for have-nots to grab stuff from the have-mores(or for have-mores to take even more from other have-mores). It’s been like that since time immemorial. So, Jews needed the protection of the Law to back up their claims. (But then, Jews also mastered the law to justify their taking of stuff from other peoples, such as land from Palestinians.)
Now, Anglos found the bestest land in the world. It’s hard to think of better expanse of territory than North America. Western Europe is nice but small. Russia is vast but much of it’s too cold, too dry, or desolate. China is huge but relatively lacking in natural resources for such a huge chunk of land. South America is vast but hot and jungly. Africa is huge but hotter, much of it parched and dry. Australia is huge but mostly useless. North America has prime land for agriculture and has tons of resources of all kinds. It has great natural beauty. It has everything. On top of that, it was settled by the most advanced and talented people of the Time with sound genetics and intelligent culture. And these early Anglos and Northern Europeans knew what they’d stumbled upon. It was like Second Eden come true. If they took over the territory and populated it with their own kind, it would surely be the greatest power in the world. And the prophecy came true. It wasn’t long before the US became the most powerful nation(and Canada became essentially US-lite, the 51st state). This is why the Founders were proud race-ists. They understood that the US needed a racial contract between whites and the land. Blood and Toil, i.e., because adventurous whites explored and found the land and toiled to build it, it was theirs by the covenant of vision and history. Indians had been here first, but they were savages who hadn’t made much of the land. Without such proud and powerful claim, others would come to the US and try the take it away from whites. Naturally, all throughout history, people have flocked to greatness and tried to take it or partake of it. Now, Jews have a great eye, having worked as pawnbrokers and jewelers forever. They know real value when they see it, and they never saw anything like America. Great land with tremendous resources and managed by talented Northern Europeans, the most capable people in the world. So, how could they take over this bounty for the Tribe? First, by flattering the white goyim. Assure the Anglo elites that Jews and immigrants are oh-so-very-grateful to assimilate into Anglo-America. Put forth the notion of the Melting Pot, the ‘dream’ that immigrants would simply and happily melt into existing America and become good Americans of the Anglo mold…. except that as more and more ingredients were added to the American Pot, the dynamics went FROM the new-ingredients-melting-into-the-existing-elements TO existing-elements-melting-into-the-new-ingredients, or from the World assimilating to White America to White America assimilating to the World. The US now looks like hapless Uncle Sam surrounded by a gang of gypsies pickpocketing him from every angle.
If you have something of low value, you need not worry much about keeping it. I don’t think the Congo has to worry much about being inundated with mass immigration from Asia, Latin America, Middle East, and other parts of Africa. But if you have something of high value(like Denmark), you better have a powerful contract or covenant with it on the basis of legality, politics, and passion because OTHERS will try to take it from you. If you don’t stake it, others will take it.
Israel and Sweden are nice nations. So, black Africans head to both. Israelis knows black Africans are coming to take from them, so they build walls and invoke the special covenant between themselves and the land based on race, history, culture, and morality. The covenant moralizes the Jewish national defense of Israel. In contrast, dumb Swedes listened to weasels like Barbara Specters and removed the stakes holding down their national tent. Because Swedish national ideology has been de-covenantized, it’s considered immoral for Swedes to defend what they got and considered moral for foreigners to invade and take from Swedes. It’s a case of ‘Inversal’ values where morality has been turned upside down. Without grounding with patriotic stakes, Swedish tent is blowing in the wind. Nice places come under heavy pressure of migratory winds. This is why nice civilizations always built walls to keep out the barbarians. Just like a house will fall apart if all the nails are pulled out, a nation(esp a nice nation) cannot hold together without a contract/covenant that hammers down ownership to a people based on race, culture, and history.
There is a great contradiction at the heart of Judaism. Jews conceived of the most powerful and greatest God of all time and all places. Indeed the only and only God. So, this God, as formulated by Jews, is infinitely greater than any people, place, or time. He isn’t just a great force above man but the greatest power beyond man’s capacity to fathom. He is non-specific to any single realm and is the owner & ruler of everything in the cosmos and beyond.
But if this the nature of God, the one and only Deity of all things and all times, then why would He have invested so much of His time and energy with a certain tribe? (It’d be like the FBI diverting its resources to track down the insipid troll who tormented Kurt Eichenwald on Twitter. Doesn’t the FBI have better things to do? It goes to show justice is never blind. Organs of the Law prioritize certain cases over others depending on which groups have the clout.) If a rich man had a billion dollars, would he care about one of his many dollars over the others? If God is so great and mighty, why would His destiny be affixed to the travails of some desert tribe? And, consider the man with whom God made the Covenant, Abram who was renamed Abraham. What was so great or notable about Abraham that he(and his descendants) deserved such a blessing from the one and only master of all the universe? Imagine if you’re the lord of all animals(that ever were, are, and will be) but choose a bunch of rabbits or rats as your ‘chosen’ creatures. But why would you do that? If you have lordship over all whales, elephants, lions, tigers, bears, wombats, kangaroos, sharks, dolphins, gorillas, rhinos, and etc, why would you favor a bunch of rabbits or rats as your special breed? And why would you give them special protection over others? Abraham may have been a good man — or better than most — , but he hardly exhibited greatness. So, why would God choose him & his tribe and bless them with great promise, power, and wealth? If God’s domain were limited to Earth alone, His special concern for Jews might be somewhat understandable — like a parent having a favorite child — , but as God happens to be creator, lord, and master over all things for all times, it means even ALL OF mankind is insignificant in His overall design. So, why would His fate be so closely tied to some tribe, half of whose members are either swindlers, comedians, and/or degenerates?
Was this a fair transaction and bargain betwee God and Jews? Which side gains more from the Covenant? If God is the owner and ruler of everything, what can Jews possibly do for Him? Even if Jews accumulated all the worldly wealth and offered it to God, it would be a pittance in the eyes of God who owns all the universe. It’d be like a homeless person offering his pennies, half-smoked cigarettes, and stained gumdrops to a billionaire. All the wealth on Earth would be nothing to God, the master and ruler of all the galaxies. So, there is nothing that Jews can do for God. Whatever Jews offer to God, God already has. Besides, if everything in the cosmos belongs to God, what Jews offer to God is His to begin with. Jews would only be taking something from God-owned world and offering it to God. It’d be like a kid buying a gift for his parents with allowance money given to him by his parents. So, God has no need for Jews. In contrast, Jews have everything to gain by being chosen by God. They would have protection and favoritism of the one and only God, the greatest power in the universe. Therefore, it’s a game in which Jews win, God loses. Jews get everything from God, God gets nothing from Jews.
HOUSE OF GAMES - David Mamet
So, how did Jews cover up the con or swindle? Jews created a narrative in which they portrayed themselves as beholden to God, faithful to God, and obedient to God. Jews would offer utmost devotion and to Him alone as the one and only God, the true God. Their fanatical subservience to Him would be such that, hopefully, He will take notice and offer them the blessings of protection, guidance, and favoritism. So, the Jewish Narrative would have us believe that Jews are the ones who are chained to God. They are the willing children, dogs, and servants of God who do complain of their bondage to Him. Whatever God tells them to do, they shall do it because God wills it and because there’s nothing holier to Jews than carrying out God’s will. So, given their obedience to God, it only seems proper that God should reciprocate and offer them good tidings in turn.
But this Jewish devotion to God is really useless to God. Why would God need such devotion from Jews or any other people when He has everything? He has all the power, matter, energy, truth, time, and wisdom of the universe. Jews could do nothing for Him. God is God regardless of what Jews or any people do, say, or believe. It’s like a person is a person regardless of what a colony of ants think. Suppose an ant comes to you and says its colony will be devoted to you. Okay, but what good will it do you? You have your life, your house, your wealth, and your happiness. And those things have nothing to do with some dinky dirt colony full of stupid ants. Whether the ant colony worship you or not, you are you and you have all your stuff. No matter how slavishly the ants try to worship and serve you, there isn’t a thing they can do for you. But, suppose these ants are tricky and persuade you that, in return for their undying loyalty to you, it’d be awful decent of you to return the favor and offer them protection(from all other critters) as the ‘chosen’ among all wild organisms. So, what is the nature of this bargain? You can actually do substantive things for the ants because a human is many times more powerful than a bunch of ants(whose colony can be destroyed a child’s foot or urine). You can offer them food, you can destroy critters that might harm the ants, you can build roof over them so that the colony won’t be soaked with rain, and etc. So, even though the ant narrative says they are slaves to you, you’ve really become a slave to them. After all, their supposed slavishness to you offers you nothing, but your favors for them make a huge difference.
Indeed, the Jewish art of trickery with God can be seen in the story of Abraham itself. In a way, the story seems to be about Abraham caught in a trap set by God. God gives Abraham a son, Isaac, and then, tests Abraham’s loyalty by ordering a blood sacrifice. Abraham dearly loves his son, but his main loyalty is to God, so he must do as God orders. So, he ties Isaac up and is about to slay him when God, in recognition of Abraham’s devotion, retracts His command and spares Isaac. So, on the surface, it sounds like a story of the first Jew’s unwavering obedience to God.
But seen in another way, it is God who is placed in a trap and bound ever closer to the Jews. After all, if God goes through with His demand, He will still have His power but not the glory as just and righteous God. He will still be the most powerful and the one & only God of the physical universe, but He would make Himself a stranger in the moral universe. He could be reduced to a nihilistic cosmic gangster who delights in the murder of an innocent & helpless child. Thus, He would be a God to fear and obey but not one to love and honor. (Also, there is vanity in the conception of all gods, and they naturally want to be worshiped by people of quality. If God had made humans dog-like, He would have had devoted followers but also clone-like dolts and yes-men. God wants to be worshiped by People of Quality, just like a famous artist or actor wants to be admired by intelligent critics & scholars than by saliva-drooling fans. The problem is, the more ‘quality’ a people are, more difficult is to earn their admiration and devotion. So, the problem of Judaism is God has the following of a very intelligent people but their very intelligence often puts them at odds with God. God wants total obedience from a people capable of total freedom. A great contradiction.) So, by testing His power and Abraham’s loyalty, the result was Abraham’s moral victory over Him and, furthermore, His need to make amends to Abraham and his tribe. After all, Abraham was a man of love for his son and for God. He wanted to raise his son and worship God. There was moral consistency in his fatherly devotion to his son and his sincere devotion to whom he believed to be a good & wise God. So, when God commanded Abraham to kill his son, it was God who was the violator of the Covenant. He ordered Abraham to do something horrible and unseemly. Abraham’s soul was divided. He wanted to protect his son, and he wanted to serve God. But God, the great Being who’d given him the gift of a son, ordered him to kill that very son for no apparent reason than to prove his loyalty to God. This great moral contradiction meant that things could never be the same between Abraham and God if the order was carried through. It would mean Abraham proved his loyalty but to a God who is amoral, capricious, and unhinged. So, in order for God to be both masterful and honorable, He had no choice but to nullify His own order. So, it was God who was caught in a trap and reversed His order to save His reputation. And so He did. But it didn’t end there. Even though God has proven His goodness by allowing Abraham to keep his son, He still has to answer for the fact that He made called for blood sacrifice in the first place. The fact remains that He ordered Abraham to do something that no human should be made to do. The moral equation favors Abraham over God since Abraham didn’t want to kill Isaac but willed himself to do so in loyalty to or in fear of God. So, Abraham was right on both counts. His moral sense abhorred the terrible request. But his spiritual devotion remained true to God to the very last; or he understood that he didn’t have a choice since it was an-offer-he-couldn’t-refuse. After all, if God is all-powerful, disobedient Abraham could be robbed of everyone and everything dear, not just Isaac. So, if only to save the rest of the tribe, he had no choice but to offer what God demanded.
From the other side of the equation, God made a horrific request of a good man who’d already proved his devotion to God many times over. And even though God reversed the order and allowed Abraham to keep the kid, He’s confronted with two conclusions that bind His power. First, He discovers a power beyond godly power. Morality is bigger than God Himself. So, even though God has the power to transgress any moral law, so doing will remove the righteous crown from His head. So, God, despite His power and greatness, lost His nerves and called off the sacrifice. The greatest being in the universe got cold feet. He couldn’t go through what He Himself had ordered, whereas Abraham was willing to go through with it.
Second, He is faced with the silent truth that He did Abraham wrong and has to make amends. Abraham had long ago proven his loyalty to God in accordance to the Covenant, but his loyalty was tested once again and in such horrible manner. Also, God, despite His claim of being Lord of the all that is, came across as insecure and neurotic in His need to ascertain and confirm Abraham’s loyalty to Him. It’s like a jealous husband who is never sure that his wife is faithful to him despite her seemingly impeccable fidelity.
So, in a way, the story of God and Abraham is more the story of God falling into the trap of the Jews than vice versa. According to the narrative, God ordered Abraham to bind Isaac to a rock and slay him, and Abraham had no choice but to obey God. But in the process, it was God’s power that became bound to the bedrock of morality. It was God’s nihilistic tendencies that were sacrificed, whereupon God finds Himself bound to the Jewish tribe — like Atlas bound with the sky and Prometheus chained to a cliff — because its founder proved his utmost loyalty and worthiness before God. And yet, the great irony is Abraham proved his utmost loyalty in a deed that God simply couldn’t see through to the end if He were to retain His reputation as a good God. Abraham proved his utmost ‘goodness’ to God through his unstinting resolve to carry out God’s order, and God salvaged His glory by reversing His own command. So, in a way, everyone wins and everyone loses. But given the power imbalance between Abraham and God, the latter had more to lose.
George C. Scott as Abraham in THE BIBLE by John Huston
Anyway, the power dynamics between Jews and their God is now played out in global politics, especially in the relation between Jews and the USA, the sole superpower. (USA has become like the monotheistic god of power, or a mono-power.) A kind of ‘political monotheism’ has come to govern the world. It’s as if the United States is the One and Only True Nation(and it and only it may serve as the model for all other nations that are seen not so much as distinct national entities but mere supplicants, dependents, clones, and mini-me’s of America; even non-Americans must obey & serve America before their own nations, just like all gentiles in the US and the EU are expected to serve Jewish identity & interests before their own). United States is claimed to be the ‘exceptional’, ‘indispensable’, and the ‘greatest’ nation that ever was, is, and will be. Indeed, it is so great that it is more than a nation. It is the world itself. It must take in the whole world, and the whole world must reflect and receive Americanism as the only true and correct way of organization, production, consumption, and conduct. America deserves to be the sole hegemonic power in the whole world and not just militarily and financially but linguistically, culturally, intellectually, morally, ideologically, musically, leisurely, spiritually, fashionably, faddishly, and in every other way. So, if America is a ‘nation of immigrants’, all nations must re-brand them as such too. If America worships Jews, homos, and Negroes, all other nations must pay special heed to that holy trinity. Monopower-ism says America is above the conventional laws & norms of other nations(with the exception of Israel, of course). So, the US may do whatever it wants around the world. Whatever it does is right and ‘just’. And since the US controls global-media, it spins anything to fits its own warped narrative. So, even though the US has been the aggressive power against Russia and Iran at the behest of Jews and/or Israel, the world is often duped into seeing US in a defensive position against ‘aggressors’. It’s like how the saying goes: "A Jew cries in pain as he strikes you." Jewish-controlled America is the main aggressor but whines the most about other ‘aggressors’. And even in cases where the world feels that the US has acted in unwarranted or criminal manner, there’s nothing that can be done about it since the US is the sole superpower that cannot be touched. Unlike Germany, Japan, and Iraq that paid a heavy price for their aggressions, the US can bomb & invade or subvert & destroy any number of nations but face no consequences or comeuppance. Whatever the US does is defended as matter of ‘defending human rights’ or ‘spreading democracy’ , and America has the gangster-muscle to back up whatever it chooses to do. The US can carry out a 1000 Pearl Harbors and laugh it off since no other nation can ever retaliate like the US did against Japan in WWII.
Even though the US was envisioned & created by Anglo conquerors and settlers, that narrative is no longer viable if the US is to ascend to its role as the One-and-Only-True-Nation-of-the-World. Thus, America is not a nation among many other nations but The Only Nation, the lone sun around which all other nations are mere planets. Indeed, other nations are not even real nations since America is the only nation that is also the world. Other nations exist only to be part of Pax Americana. America is about all the peoples of the world since their only true destiny is to become ‘New Americans’; some may opt to be ‘New Europeans’, ‘New Canadians’, or ‘New Australians’, but globalized Europe, Canada, and Australia are mere shadows of America. All peoples must be allowed to come to America and thereby transformed into ‘Americans’, and they must export Americanism to their places-of-origin that are to be relegated into planets revolving around the American Sun. Only America has the True Light, radiating from the torch of Lady Liberty and Hollywood, that outshines all other lights into irrelevance & insignificance. America is the One-and-Only-True-Nation and all other nations are false nations, just like the Bible says there is only one true God and all other gods are false idols. As false nations, they must abandon their false identities, histories, & territoriality, and instead, surrender to Americanism and remake themselves in the image of America: Rap Culture, Homomania, Jew-Worship & Holocaust Cult, Afrobatics, hedonism, materialism, and youth culture. If a nation like Russia or Iran rejects Americanism-as-the-only-correct-way, it must be smitten with fire and brimstone of economic sanctions, media denunciation, and/or military invasion. If a nation won’t accept the tenets of Americanism, then it must, at the very least, be slavish to the US in foreign policy. For example, Saudi Arabia rejects Americanism but remains in good graces with the US because it serves the US and Israel strategy of undermining other Muslim nations, especially Iran and its allies.
According to Jewish monotheism, there is only one true God, and all others are false gods. According to Americanism, there is only true nation, the United States, and all others are false nations. As such, America must be universal Rome-Israel-Mecca to all peoples in the literal or figurative sense. Peoples everywhere should aspire to abandon their own nations, make the journey to America, abandon their ancient identities for the superior American identity, and raise their kids in a culture of amnesia to grow up to be ideal consumer-hedonists. As for those who aren’t able to come to the US, they must do everything to turn their own nations ersatz-americas as much as possible. Instant gratification and immediacy of meaning — the hallmark of Pop Culture — should trump all other considerations. So, America is the only destination for emigration or the only model to follow. Margaret Thatcher once said, "America is philosophy, Europe is history." But (Jewish)American-style globalism extinguishes all memories and cuts off all connective roots to the past. For religion there is homomania. For meaning, there is Jew-worship and Holocaust-cult for all humanity even though most peoples had nothing to do with World War II and the Holocaust. And for culture and mythos, there is rap music and Hollywood comic-book-blockbusters. For ‘art’(among those with more discriminating tastes), there is American TV shows touted as ‘mature’ entertainment in this supposedly ‘true golden age of TV’.
Presently, even European nations have lost their sense of history and connective roots. European youths have Eurovision and the ‘bearded lady’ as their cultural icon. They hardly feel any connection to their own histories that have been denigrated and dismissed as ‘atavistic’, ‘uncool’, ‘racist’, and ‘reactionary’. The only Europe that matters is the New Europe to be created by massive Diversity in the image of the New World.
So, does this mean that Europe, like the US, is now about ‘philosophy’ than ‘history’? Actually, that would be too kind as Americanism, in the current incarnation, is more about propaganda than principles. Perhaps, there was something genuinely philosophical about Americanism when Thatcher made her remark, but as practiced today, it is little more than False Advertising for Jewish Supremacism. The New Americanism is about hysteria, mania, and fashion, a constant barrage of sensationalist distractions to obfuscate Jewish designs on the whole world. In simplest terms, America is a Mass Cult of Ephemera contrived to serve the shifting interests of the GLOB(globalist masters). Indeed, it’s to Jewish advantage to keep the rules of Americanism as loose as possible because real principles will bind the rulers to their own rules, just like morality tied God’s hands to do the right thing by Abraham and spare Isaac. Jews don’t want to be bound to any law or principle when it comes to their insatiable lust for more wealth and power. So, if More-Jewish-Power calls for the killing of 100,000s of Iraq children, Americanism must be remolded to justify that. (But after having killed all those innocent Arab/Muslim kids, Jews feigned compassion by aiding Muslims in Bosnia and Kosovo, a maneuver to their advantage since Serbia was backed by Russia.) Vaguer the meaning of Americanism, greater leeway for Jews to play fast and loose to bolster and maximize their own power. So, Jews, who insisted on the separation of church and state in the past(as an iron principle), are now saying the US must allow special privileges for Muslims and Sikhs in schools and other public places/institutions in the name of Diversity. Especially if the US is to invade & intrude into the affairs of the Muslim World(for the sake of Israel and Zionist hegemony), it needs to justify its act of aggression and interference with displays of ‘good will’, ‘compassion’, and ‘tolerance’.
Was Americanism always thus? Of course not. Even though the Founding of the United States had an element of universal idealism, there was nothing to imply that the US must become a Universal Nation, let alone the one-and-only template for whole world, a concept all-too-cynically employed by Jews to justify their global meddling expand Jewish power — Americanism and Homomania are proxies and fronts to mask Jewish supremacist-imperialism. Besides, for the first hundred years, the priority of the nascent republic was to defend & sustain itself and then wrest more land from the indigenous folks via the westward expansion. It was only when the entire continent was claimed and settled that America began to vie for a place-in-the-sun as a world power. But even then, America saw itself as one of the several great powers with no special right or authority to lord over others. It was really with the devastation of World War I that America emerged as a semblance of the most powerful nation on earth. With Germany defeated, with Russia caught up in the throes of revolution, and with victorious Britain and France set back by tragic losses of life and wealth, it was only natural that unscathed America would emerge as the premier power. Even so, WWI elevated Japan’s role in the Pacific, Great Britain and France still retained their vast world empires, and communist Russia was re-emerging as an industrial power from the bloody revolution. Also, as yet unfamiliar with the notion of America-as-a-superpower, most Americans looked inward and had no interest in taking on the role of global hegemon during the inter-war years.
It was only with the catastrophe of WWII that the US emerged as the undisputed superpower. WWII finished off the Empire of Japan. Germany’s ambition to be a great power was gone forever. And the rise of nationalism around the world doomed the British and French empires, already on shaky legs because of crises of the two World Wars. And even though the USSR emerged as the other great power, even a ‘superpower’, its huge losses in the war and its unpopular occupation of Eastern Europe force it to relegate most of its resources on rebuilding and defense. Also, the Cold War drove Europe and Japan to the US for protection. Thus, they essentially became vassal-states despite their economic re-emergence in the post-war era. Perhaps, if it weren’t for the Cold War, the US might have retreated once again to serving its national interests, as it had following the Wilsonian setbacks of the post-WWI era.
Or maybe US expansion was more the result of the breakup of the British and French empires. With the Third World no longer under the thumb of European powers, the US was tempted to step in and play the role of new boss or ‘policeman/salesman of the world’.
Even so, the notion that the US is the one-and-only true model for the entire world and that all national borders — except Israel’s — must be dissolved to facilitate mass migrations of peoples is a relatively new development. It is globalism, a radical departure from the internationalism — nations learning to cooperate and get along peacefully — of the postwar order. By massive movements of peoples across all nations — but especially headed to the West — , globalism’s agenda is to weaken and wipe out all distinct national identities and interests. So, what will replace national identities and national interests? After all, people need to feel as members of something, part of a community. Once all peoples are de-nationalized and deracinated, are they all to become ‘American’(as citizen or imitator)? This can be achieved by coming to America or by ‘Americanizing’ their own nations with Hollywood, MTV, Homomania, rap music, and PC. This globalism is really the brainchild of Jewish supremacists who loathe all nationalisms except their own in Israel and Judenia, Jewish networks of power-centers around the world. After all, nationalism commands that the elites of every nation are obliged to represent & defend the identity & heritage of their own people against the intrusions & interferences of other nations and imperial powers. For Jews, this means that every gentile nation must prioritize its own identity and interests against World Jewry that controls globalism.
Jews want elites of every gentile nation to serve Jewish supermacism than represent and defend their own people. Jews like Angela Merkel and hate Viktor Orban because Merkel serves Jewish supremacists against Germans whereas Orban serves Hungarians against Jewish supremacists.
But Jews target not only gentile elites for conversion but gentiles masses so that deracinated mobs will pressure their own elites to ditch nationalism and adopt Diversity, Homomania, and Globorgy-ism. This has happened already in Ireland where the majority voted for ‘gay marriage’ and, being addicted to Afromania in sports-music-sex, demand that Ireland welcome more demographic imperialism to erase Ireland as a distinctly European and Celtic civilization. So many Irish now want Ireland to become a St. Patrick’s Day celebration in America where anyone can be ‘Irish for a day’. Ireland has become just a Shamrock Puerto Rico of globo-America. Globalism is about the Puerto-Ricanization of the World. Because Jews control the academia, they infect elite minds all over the world with their brand of PC. And because Jews control mass media, Hollywood, and music industry(and much of the internet which they manipulate to favor their brand of ‘fake news), they’ve been able to sway countless gentiles from top to bottom with their globalist agenda — the Americanization of the World. Jews hate Trump’s talk of nationalism-over-globalism because, without US hegemony, the New-Jew-World-Order cannot be sustained. Jewish supremacist power piggybacks on the back of American might-and-muscle. Without the US as sole hegemon, nations of the world will revert to the national-sovereignty mode, and that means it will be more difficult for globalist Jews to penetrate and take over. As rich and powerful as Jews are, they need the obedience & cooperation of US muscle to do their bidding around the world.
For the above-mentioned reasons, America is now hailed and celebrated as the One-and-Only-True-Nation. It isn’t only the lone superpower but the only nation worth emulating and obeying. In the Jewish mind, there is America, ‘America’, and "America". America is a normal nation, one among many other nations. It may be the most powerful nation, but its power and wealth don’t invalidate or negate the uniqueness, autonomy, and values of other nations. The way of this America is for America only, and it isn’t necessarily suitable for other nations. Jews are allergic to this notion of America with its own unique history, dominant culture, and core majority population. Jews prefer the notion of an ‘America’ that is ‘fluid’ and in constant flux of ‘reinvention’. This ‘America’ is always changing, and ‘Americans’ aren’t supposed to settle upon who and what they really are. The ONE AND ONLY PERMISSIBLE CONSTANT in this formulation of ‘America’ is Jewish supremacist domination gaining added leverage the more ‘Americans’ become clueless about their identity, thereby more compliant to the vicissitudes of fads and fashions controlled by the Jew-run academia, media, and entertainment.
Katy Perry's 'Murica
With the rug under their feet constantly pulled away geographically, culturally, ideologically, and politically, it will be difficult for ‘Americans’ to consolidate a strong sense of who they are, where they came from, and where they are headed. Instead of a continuous thread running through various fabrics of Americanism, Jews favor the replacement of whole cloths in an ‘America’ gone demographically shopoholic as a ‘nation of immigrants’. Prior to the rise of globalism, white Americans had felt some degree of racial, cultural, and historical continuity from the time of the first settlers to the present period. But with massive arrivals of non-whites(whose children are indoctrinated with anti-white and anti-Christian vitriol), the white narrative has become increasingly paved over with New Narratives. And with unceasing waves of immigration, the New Americans will, in turn, be buried under More New Americans. It’s as if all Americans, ‘old’ and ‘new’, are condemned to be bored & enervated, therefore needing to be replaced by newer New Americans who, as fresh immigrants, might appreciate the good fortune of being in America and slavishly work for or vote for the globalist elites who let them in.
The only constant will be the Rule by Jewish Elites who will go on playing the game of ‘divide-and-rule’ between Settled Americans and New Americans. So, if Jews now encourage Mexicans to take over from whites as the New Americans, in the future Jews will use Chinese, Hindus, and Muslims against Mexicans. The Jew giveth, the Jew taketh away.
If America is the literal nation and if ‘America’ is the proposition of what Jews want it to be, "America" is the Jewish supremacist project to turn the entire world into reflection of ‘America’. So, every corner of the world, with the exception of Israel, must be turned into "America".
But there’s another interesting facet to the conceit of America as the One-and-Only-True-Nation, one that is ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’. Its relation with Jews has striking similarities to God’s relation with Jews. Recall that the Covenant between God and Jews is ostensibly about humble Jews faithfully serving the mighty God, yet upon closer inspection, it really has God serving the Jews since He can give so much to Jews whereas Jews can’t give Him anything He doesn’t already have. Jews can only offer Him prayers.
Likewise, Jews would have us believe (1) America is the greatest power in the world and (2) Jews are its most loyal & patriotic servants carrying out its true mission. But as 2% of America, there’s only so much Jews can do for America. Jews also say Israel is the most loyal and committed ally of the US. Because Israel is so devoted to America, it seems only right and fair for the US to return the favor and bestow gifts on the Jewish State. But in truth, Israel isn’t crucial to the US at all. If Israel were to disappear from the Earth, the US will do just fine, and maybe even better as one of the key obstacles to good relations with Muslim nations would be gone forever. Indeed, the notion of Israel as an outpost of ‘Western Civilization’ defending Europe and America is laughable. If anything, all the Wars for Israel concocted by Zionists and Neocons have destabilized the Middle East & North Africa and set off massive non-white migrant-invasions of Europe, a horror that is being aided by Israelis. So, the moral claims of the covenant between the US and Israel are fraudulent. Jews would have us believe Israel is so loyal to the US and indispensable for its well-being, but in fact, all the favors flow totally from the US to Israel. Without the US, Israel would be vulnerable and exposed. But without Israel, the US would do just fine.
Now, the relation between America and Jewish-Americans is more complicated. Obviously, Jews take more from the 98% of Americans who are gentile(especially from European-Americans) than the other way around. If the US were to lose all its gentiles and just have Jews, it would hardly be a great power. It would be a nation of 6 million Jews without the gentile population on whom Jewish wealth and power depend. But if Jewish-Americans were to vanish, the US would still be a great rich and powerful nation. In some ways, America might do better without those devious Jews playing tricks on Wall Street and those deviant Jews promoting decadence & degeneracy via media, entertainment, and vice industries(like gambling). After all, Iceland reversed its economic setbacks more effectively because it didn’t have to contend with Jewish elites with a lock on elite institutions, the state, and courts. Iceland is Icelandic and ruled by its own people. So, gentile America could do just as well without Jewish-America, but Jewish-America wouldn’t amount to much without gentile America(and especially Anglo-America that laid down Property Laws and other elements of Rule of Law that made rapid Jewish success possible like nowhere else on Earth). But Jews have hoodwinked or browbeaten gentile America into believing that the US must dole out favors to Jews because Jews are the most loyal and conscientious bunch of Americans when it comes to ‘true’ meaning of America. (Jews are also supposedly deserving of extra sympathy because the ‘world’ hadn’t done enough to prevent the Holocaust. The US, as the preeminent World Power during WWII, is especially culpable and in need of redemption for having failed to throw a lifeline to the Jews. If Germany is forever guilty for having killed the Jews, America is forever tainted for not having saved the Jews.) Of course, the Jewish meaning of ‘America’ is profoundly different from the original meaning of America as a nation founded and settled by Anglo-Europeans.
But just as Jews subtly rewrote the meaning of God, they rewrote the meaning of America. If indeed God is the master of the universe, there’s no reason for Him to be bound to some ridiculous tribe. Imagine some super-rich and super-handsome guy(who can have all the women in the world) being persuaded to stick with a nasty homely woman. She would be getting a lot from him, but what would he be getting from her? It’d be like Clint Eastwood, a world famous movie-star, being stuck with the crazy woman in PLAY MISTY FOR ME.
Likewise, given that the US had already developed into a rich and powerful nation without substantial input from Jews(who arrived in substantial numbers only in the late 19th century and early 20th century) — furthermore, Anglos everywhere amply proved that they can build successful economies on their own without Jews — , there was no need for the US to take in Jews or be bound to their destiny. Despite Jewish claims, the US would have done just fine even if not a single Jew had set foot on American soil. It’s like most nations of Western Europe following WWII were virtually Jew-free, but they did just fine without them. If anything, European postwar decline can be traced to the 60s generation that fell under the sway of radical Jewish ideas. Consider how Sweden would have done better without any advice from Jews. Also, the May 68 fiasco in France was led by Jews.
Anyway, just like ancient Jews disingenuously convinced God that His glory and grand design must be bound to the fate of Jews, modern Jews slyly hustled and conned America into believing that it needs Jews to serve and fulfill its ‘true’ meaning and purpose. So, God ended up doing a whole bunch of things for Jews(who never did Him any good in return), and the US ended up doing everything for Jews(who hardly reciprocated in kind). In both cases, passive/aggressive Jews feigned as loyal servants while pulling every trick in the book to make themselves the true master in the equation. Posing as eternal objects of pity supplicating at the feet of the great noble power, be it God or America, Jews feel deserving as the main beneficiaries of favors and protections granted by the ultimate power. Furthermore, Jews, playing their role of the most-tragic-and-wise-victims-of-history to the hilt, play on the moral vanity of the great power that also wants moral sanctification. Given the moral-and-spiritual capital of the Jews based on the Bible Narrative and the Holocaust Cult(the only thing that finally neutralized and overcame Christian ‘antisemitism’), what holier people than the Jews to offer benediction to a great power? Just like Abraham played on God’s moral vanity, Jews have played on America’s. If Jews say America is so great, it must be great since no people are as tragic, wise, and holy as the Jews. But just as God, in exchange for moral flattery from Abraham’s tribe, felt compelled to favor Jews over all other peoples, America, in exchange for the Jewish blessing, feels obliged to live up to Jewish ‘hope’ and ‘dream’ of what America should really be. (In a way, the rise of Christianity can be seen as God’s attempt to liberate Himself from Jews whom He couldn’t stand any longer. Perhaps, God figured that if He must do favors for pitiable creatures, why not for all of mankind than for pesky Jews? On the other hand, we are not being entirely fair to Jews. After all, God wouldn’t exist without the Jews, His creator. So, in a way, it is only right that Jews should really be the master in the equation, however disingenuously, since man created gods, not the other way around. So, if God is the one-and-only God and the sole master of the universe, He owes it to the power of Jewish imagination and thought. As God doesn’t exist except as an idea in the minds of men, His power is wholly dependent on what people think of Him. He is the Lord ONLY IF there are people to believe in Him as such. So, as long as God belonged only to Jews, Jews had the power to destroy God. If Jews were gone, God was also gone since ONLY Jews believe in Him. Jews could also finish off God simply by no longer believing in Him. So, His insurance for survival was through Christianity in case Jews were wiped off the face of the Earth or wiped Him out of their minds in favor of secularism or the Golden Calf. That way, it doesn’t matter what Jews do or think. Others will believe in Him even if Jews don’t, and that will ensure His survival as the idea of the one-and-only God, the master of all that is. It should also be noted that the relation between America and Jews has been a complicated one. While the US would still be a great, rich, and powerful nation even if not a single Jew had set foot on America — whereas Jews would be lost without gentiles — , it’s inarguable that, along with people of Anglo-or-Northern-European stock, Jews have made the most contribution to America in terms of wealth-creation, science, technology, medicine, literature, music, cinema, and ideas. True, Jews did a lot of bad things, and the current Jewish Globalist Agenda is downright wicked, but the positive contributions by Jews have been inestimable.)
