Showing posts with label race-mixing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label race-mixing. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 6, 2021

Race-Mixing is NOT Leftist or Progressive — Race-Mixing has long been a weapon and product of War, Conquest, Imperialism, & Domination — It is No Different in the US where Jews push Jungle Fever and Whites embrace Cuck-dom in celebration of Black Superiority over perceived White Inferiority

Why People Can’t Face the Truth

In the past, blacks gained via cultural crossbreeding with whites. Whites also gained this way, especially in music. Charlie Parker and Miles Davis both had extensive knowledge of white and/or modern music. James Baldwin read extensively the classics of Western Lit. There was little race-mixing back then. The dynamics of racial mixing then was cultural and intellectual.

Nowadays, blacks don't care much about white culture. The attitude ranges from blissful indifference to toxic hostility bordering on phobia. Everything white is 'racist' or has something to do with 'white privilege'. Or, it is 'sexist' or 'homophobic', amusing coming from nonwhites because all human societies, white and nonwhite, have been mostly 'sexist' and 'homophobic' by today's insane standards.
But then, many whites don't care about white culture either. Raised on insta-thrill pop culture centered around rap, superhero movies, videogames, and pornification of just about everything(even kiddie culture at Disney), a lot of white kids haven't the patience or curiosity for anything that requires some effort and commitment. Or, they've been indoctrinated that Western Civilization is 'racist'. And yet, because of the undeniable greatness of the West, there is the OTHER agenda of blackening it. It used to be 'Hey Hey Ho Ho, Western Civ has got to go', but we increasingly hear, 'Hey Hey Ho Ho, Western Civ was Negro'. Not only are there theories that Ludwig van Beethoven was black but even clearly white historical figures, male and female, are increasingly depicted as black by Jewish-and-Cuck-run media. British queens, Finnish heroes, Roman generals, and etc. have been presented as black.

Sheeeeeeeiiiiit, was Beethoven a brotha?

Maybe Robert E. Lee will be rehabilitated if he's presented as black while the slaves are made white. The 'Hamilton'-ization of history. Then, maybe blacks and progs will feel, "Black Robert E. Lee was a great man for fighting to defend an institution that enslaved all those evil racist honkeys who deserved no freedom." What blacks denounce as 'racist' is suddenly cool if the great white man/woman is made black. And white cucks and even conzos seem to embrace this. Maybe they figure it's the only way to save Western Civ. Any great white figure in history or culture can instantly go from 'punkass lowlife racist honkey mofo' to 'badass supercool dude' IF black-faced. Maybe it will even impact Neo-Nazis who decide to make Hitler black.

Anyway, if cultural crossbreeding of yesteryear is gone due to black self-absorption and decline of serious appreciation of culture and ideas, it seems the only way left for blacks to gain from whites is via miscegenation. The hell with white ideas and culture. Rather, hump the white ho and appropriate white genes(pertaining to higher IQ and attractiveness) for the black race. After all, the product of white/black mixing is considered fully black than half-black/half-white. No one called Obama a half-black president. No one called Tiger Woods a quarter-black golfer. And this is gaining steam because race-mixing is considered as 'progressive'. But is it really?

Actually, race-mixing isn't leftist or anything new. It's older than the oldest profession of prostitution. The fate of Neanderthals can attest to that. Men like to pork anything, the age-old tradition of victors taking the women of the vanquished. This is why white folks got some Neanderthal genes. Cro-Magnons defeated and destroyed the Neanderthals but porked their women as sexual trophies. So, race-mixing isn't anything new but a weapon and product of war, invasion, conquest, oppression, domination, and humiliation. And what is happening today between whites and blacks is just another chapter in this power struggle of winners and losers, not of equals.

Were the Ancient Egyptians 'progressive' or 'leftist' for taking women of defeated tribes for sexual pleasure? Were the Romans 'progressive' or 'leftist' for having done the same? Were Arabs 'progressive' for having used white slave women as sex objects? Were the Moors 'leftist' for having humiliated Southern Europeans by race-mixing with white women? Were the Ottoman Turks 'progressive' for having used Greek girls(and boys) as sexual trophies? Were the Mongols 'leftist' for having sexually exploited all the peoples they conquered? Did Persian and Russian rejoice over this 'liberation' by the Golden Horde? Were the Spanish Conquistadors a bunch of 'leftist progressives' for having forced race-mixing on the brown natives of the Americas? Were Southern slave-owners 'leftist' for having sexually exploited black slave women? Were US troops 'leftist' for having turned the women of Vietnam into a whores for the US military? (If memory serves me right, it was the Viet Cong that was considered leftist in that struggle.) So, there is nothing that is intrinsically leftist or progressive about race-mixing. The history of race-mixing has been mostly brutal, aggressive, and humiliating(especially for the men of the losing side).

Now, there is a way race-mixing could be construed as leftist or progressive. The universal strain of leftism may argue that all men and women are brothers and sisters under the skin. Therefore, the ideal is for all of mankind to acknowledge one another's humanity and shared destiny and fall in love regardless of race and skin color or whatever. A colorblind coming together of the races based on the global union of the heart.
But is this what is happening? No. The fact is Jungle Fever isn't colorblind but color-bound because black men associate white women with more attractive features and because white women associate black men with more muscle and bigger dongs. It's about ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs premised on BAMMAMA, or Blacks-Are-More-Muscular-and-More-Aggressive. It's about black sexual imperialism, conquest, and colonization of the white race. There was a time when genuinely leftist Jews(though they could have been disingenuous back then) pushed the notion that all races are essentially alike apart from skin color. Especially Jews who grew up under communist parents seem to believe this. David Horowitz was one, but in the Sixties and Seventies, he couldn't help realize that blacks were about thug-muscle power and felt hostility toward geek lefty Jews. Blacks cynically exploited Jewish idealism whereas Jews, for all their smarts, were blind to the actuality of racial dynamics. In the book DESTRUCTIVE GENERATION, the story of Fay Stender, a Jewish leftist lawyer who defended black criminals and had sex with them, suggested that there were racial-sexual dynamics between Jews and blacks that went beyond common cause based on ideology.


Since then, Jewish Leftism has pretty much vanished. Almost no Jew accepts Marxist theory of anything. No Jew of any consequence is a communist, or even a real humanist. Most Jews who matter know privately that race does matter and that racial equality is just a pipe-dream. Most Jews now regard themselves as superior and deserving to rule over dumb and/or weak-willed goyim(like the 'darn tootin' guy in FARGO). If Jews carry on with the proggy-sounding agenda of 'anti-racism'(in a world where they instigate wars and crises in which Zionists are favored and countless Arabs are pushed through the meat grinder), it is only to guilt-bait whites into cucking and sucking up to Jewish Supremacists. The current prog-agenda isn't to defeat all forms of supremacism but to sustain Jewish supremacism by labeling any hint of white autonomy and agency as 'white supremacist'. Bait-and-Switch.

Indeed, this is why today's race-mix propaganda is so different from that of yesteryear. In a movie like Stanley Kramer's GUESS WHO BE COMING TO DINNER?, the white girl hardly notices that she's hooked up with a NEGRO! She just goes on and on about his fine character and social status as successful doctor. So, it's all about content of character or some such. It's not about Jungle Fever but a sexual version of TO SIR WITH LOVE, with Sidney Poitier reliably playing the capable and upstanding Negroid.
Fast Forward to today, and the message is clearly race-conscious, or Jungle Feverish. It's not about color-blind unity of the races but how white women should go with black men because they are superior to white men in manhood. It's essentially the Saigonization of the white race. In Saigon during the war, Vietnamese women were turned into whores and sexual property of the conquering white and black soldiers whereas Vietnamese males' roles were as cucks, collaborators, and coolies. Today, this dynamics is pushed all across America. Robin DiAngelo's stuff about White Fragility is just BS. We know she has Jungle Fever(and most white men have Cuckitis).

The massive race-mixing in the US isn't part of anything new. It's not 'leftist' or 'progressive' but continuation of the age-old racial dynamics of the conquering race taking the women of the loser race. Whites may be smarter than blacks, but that doesn't matter because Jews are smarter than whites. With their money and power of persuasion(with sticks and carrots), smarter Jews have pressured smart whites into worshiping dumb but stronger blacks. If there's only Bob and Billy, and if Bob is smarter than Billy, Bob will likely control Billy, even if Billy is stronger. Brains often wins over brawn. But if there's also Bruce and if Bruce is smarter than Bob, and if Bruce favors Billy over Bob, Bob too will end up favoring Billy over himself because smarter Bruce insists it be so. And that is where the US is at today. If there were no Jews in the US, whites would be better positioned vis-a-vis blacks. Whites would use their smarts to come up with best ways to control blacks. But because Jews are smarter than whites and effectively control white minds, if Jews say, "Blacks are holy whereas whites are assholy, therefore whites must kiss black ass for redemption", plenty of whites go along in obedience to Jews with the prestige of higher IQ.

Today's race-mixing isn't about colorblind coming together of the races. Rather, it's about power and preferences. Jewish and black power prefer white women, and white men just accept their lot as cuck-losers and not only shut up but CELEBRATE Shtetl Fever and Jungle Fever as the greatest thing since sliced bread.
Even though the power-dynamics have changed drastically in the US, the public discourse still carries on with outdated paradigm of 'white supremacism' or 'systemic racism'. This is especially so because Jewish Power has yet to rear its head as the true master of New America, and white morons, cucked and craven, don't have the guts to spell out the nature of the new reality. The effect is downright surreal. We have the Jewish supremacist overclass forcing white cuck-elites to carry on with the charade that the US is ruled by 'white supremacists' who must be resisted in order to create a society of greater 'equity' and 'inclusion'. If so, how about including some Palestinian-Americans in Joe Biden's Jewish-packed government? How about some real talk of equity between Jews who grow ever richer and goyim who grow ever poorer? Super-rich Jewish Supremacists control all the institutions and industries with supremacist sway over us, but we are supposed to believe that the 'supremacist' threat comes from truck drivers and lower-middle class & working class whites who call for fair elections.

The current race-mixing propaganda is about dominating, humiliating, and erasing the white race. It's about the white race reduced to a mere prize or trophy. Like horses, or canines at a dog show. The race-mix message is that White Beauty now belongs to Jews who got all the money and blacks who got the glory as rap stars, athletes, and studs. In other words, Jews and blacks are active agents of power. Jews are in the game of money and influence. Blacks are in the game of celebrity and sports. As white males lost to Jews in the brain-game and lost to blacks in the brawn-game, they should accept their loser-dom. They no longer deserve to keep white women as racial possessions. No, white women are for sale or up for grabs as trophies and prizes for the real winners of America, Jews and blacks.
Trophy or Prize is coveted but passive, not active. Athletes are active. Winners take the trophy. Men in business and institutions are active in the struggle for power. Jewish message is clear. Jews and blacks are active as competitors in the power-grab. Whites, especially white women, are merely passive as trophies. If white men want to play an active role, it must as 'assists' to Jews and blacks, much like Sikhs were sidekicks to the British Imperialists. Active in assistance, not resistance, that is the Rule for Whites according to Jews. No wonder Jewish 'conservatives' tell whites that the Critical Race Theory(pushed by 'progressive' Jews) isn't anti-white but just anti-something-or-the-other. Jews of all stripes feel they must snuff out any spark of white consciousness. Both 'progressive' and 'conservative' Jews insist that white activism must be to ASSIST than RESIST Jewish Supremacism. So, while Jews tirelessly call for RESISTANCE to 'white supremacist' MAGA, whites are supposed to embrace ASSISTANCE to Jewish Power. Even when Jews ravaged Trump's presidency, what did the orange-man clown do? He pardoned Jewish crooks.

Jewish supremacist race-mix message is as follows: "You white guys lost to us in mental power and lost to blacks in muscle-power. So, just be a bunch of dweeby cucks while your women come over to us as our trophies." This is NOTHING NEW. It's the same sexual dynamics of age-old imperialism and conquest. It is like when Spanish men sexually conquered native brown women or when US neo-imperialist G.I.'s turned Vietnam into one big race-mixing whore-house. It's just that the Saigonization is now happening to the white race. This is what the removal of Robert E. Lee statues and Confederate monuments are all about. And there is hardly any resistance from Southern Whites, especially as white men down there are also cucked in their mindless worship of black-dominated college football where Negroes take white women.
This is especially so as Jews pegged the New Morality to idolatry than idealism, a policy as profoundly eventful as the creation of the Petro-Dollar where oil was fixed to the value of the dollar. If the Petro-Dollar meant Oil = US currency, the creation of the Jewgromo(Jewish-Negro-Homo)-Dollar meant Jews, Negroes, Homos = Morality and Spirituality. Moral Currency has been pegged to Jews, blacks, and homos. It isn't about all races bound by same rules and being judged by the same yardstick but about some groups being intrinsically precious whereas others are innately tainted. So, celebrating blacks even as blacks burn down cities and beat up innocent people is deemed 'moral'. Praising Jews and Israel to high heaven even as Jews spread terror and mayhem all across the Middle East and Ukraine is deemed 'moral'. Celebrating homos and trannies even as they turn mainstream culture into one big degenerate infestation is deemed 'moral'. Never mind what these groups do. Whatever they do must be right because their very identities have been pegged to moral righteousness and spiritual sanctity. As a result, the white race isn't merely sexually cucked but spiritually cucked to Jews and blacks(and homos).
Of course, there is ONE way white males can gain some holy 'woke' points but it is as homos who take dongs(often black, as with Andrew Sullivan) up their bungs or as trannies in flowery dresses and pretend to be 'women' despite the hairy chest, pud, and balls. (Jews will favor white male trannies over women because they tend to favor deviant-minority over any natural majority, seek to undermine morale-boosting moral clarity among goyim, and insist that reality is what Jews say it is regardless of any objective truth. Anyone who can make others accept 2 + 2 = 5 despite the obvious truth of 2 + 2 = 4 has awesome power indeed.. like the overlords behind Big Brother Cult in Orwell's 1984.)

DID WHITE PEOPLE INVENT THE IDEA OF RACE?

Thursday, October 1, 2020

Notes on Steve Sailer's Review of CASTE: THE ORIGINS OF OUR DISCONTENTS by Isabel 'the Dumbell' Wilkerson

https://www.takimag.com/article/caste-aspersions/
(Dwight) Garner is a normal white guy from West Virginia, so I guess he feels he has to say these kind of things to avoid being canceled from his nice job at The New York Times by ambitious underlings.
On the other hand, if Garner is from W. Virginia, then caste-over-race theme may be advantageous to his kinfolk. After all, prioritizing race lumps ALL whites together as ‘privileged’ and ALL blacks as ‘under-privileged’. But if we focus on caste, poor whites in W. Virginia become objects of sympathy while rich blacks get lumped with rich whites as members of the upper caste. Because of the fixation on race, poor West Virginia hillbillies get lumped together with billionaire Jews and white goy oligarchs like Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos. By the way, how do Jews feel about the caste issue? They are the ultra-brahmins of the West, both ‘spiritually’ and financially. They are deemed the Holy Holocaust race/caste, i.e. a historical event sanctifies Jews just for being Jewish. No matter what they do, their crimes are automatically washed clean by Shoah Soap or 'shoap'. They invoke Nazi evil to perpetuate Nazi-like evil against Palestinians and countless other goyim. And because of their great wealth, goy politicians and others flock to them like dogs to their master. Because Jews count as white, they can veil their power and wealth as 'white'; therefore, whites get blamed for Jews having too much. But if American discussion focuses on caste as well as on race, people may become more conscious of the fact that Jews are the uppermost caste among whites, that is if they should be counted as white at all.
Hence, many of her memories involve less-than-electrifying encounters with fellow passengers in first class who give her a funny look when she asks for help lifting her carry-on luggage or the like.
Isn’t she being caste-conscious? Why should she take offense at being mistaken for a flight attendant or airline worker? Why the touchy pride of an elite member of the scholastic class who only handles 'clean' work with ideas? If she is truly against caste-consciousness, she should be PROUD of being mistaken as a member of the Proles or regular working folk. But, she wants others to recognize that she belongs to the master class, the better kind of people. Oh, she’s not the type to handle baggage. That is for the LOWER CASTE losers of society, not for her esteemed self.
Isabel Wilkerson: “Race is a social concept, not a scientific one,” said J. Craig Venter, the geneticist who ran Celera Genomics when the mapping was completed in 2000.
One can argue that race is a social construct in that it has often been misapplied. But, the discipline of genetics, especially with the latest technology, is not a social construct. Geo-genetics or 'geonetics' is real. It’s like, even if alchemy isn’t real, chemistry is real. ‘Race’ can be deemed a social construct insofar as people with insufficient knowledge about genetics in the 19th and early 20th century leapt to broad conclusions, some of which were baseless and even harmful. But then, the notion of ‘racial equality’ is an even bigger social construct, and it too has done much harm. Indeed, the pretense that Europe should take in tons of black Africans because 'race is merely a social construct' will lead to the tragic Africanization of the continent: Europe will look more and more like Africa. Of course, white 'liberal' ideas about race went from believing that blacks are merely white people with black skin(or same with whites in every way except in skin color and hair texture) to believing blacks are the superior race for being better at sports, funkier in music, and wilder in sex. So, the current welcoming of black Africa into Europe is less about racial equality than about white bedazzlement with blackness. By the way, if the notion of race is to be rejected, is imperialism now acceptable? If race A invades race B, no one should complain because there’s no such thing as Race A and Race B? The ONLY issue is that some are more privileged than others regardless of the invasion? 'Nation' is a social construct, and so, does that mean any nation can invade any other nation on the basis that "nations are not real"? So, your nation wasn't really invaded by another nation since your nation and the invading nation are both 'social constructs' or falsehoods? So, Palestinians shouldn't complain about Zionist invasion and the great replacement. Jews and Palestinians, what's the difference? It was just one bunch of humans replaced by another bunch of humans. Nothing changed. The only issue is Israel and Occupied Territories have rich and poor. And Jews shouldn't make so much fuss about the Shoah because it wasn't really about Germans killing Jews but humans killing humans. People who think they are German killed people who think they're Jewish. So, Jews shouldn't think in terms of 'they killed us' but 'we killed us' or 'they killed themselves' because Germans and Jews are the same thing. Nation and Culture are far more social constructs than race is, but people believe in them and, furthermore, people are nothing without memory and myths. This is why nations are important even among the same race, such as Europeans. Or between Chinese and Mongols. Social constructs matter. They shouldn't be confused with scientific categories but people don't live on cold reptilian data alone. Race has both scientific basis and meaning as social construct. It's an indefinite term with multiple meanings, like the term 'nature'. But there is a definite scientific meaning to it, and to emphasize this, a new term is necessary for the scientific discussion of differences caused by evolution. As race is essentially the product of genetic differences that developed via evolutionary divergences due to geographic separation, maybe 'geonetics'(geo-genetics) or 'geonet' should be considered.
Isabel Wilkerson: Were height the measure for determining race, as arbitrary a measure as any and less arbitrary than some, the Dutch people of the Netherlands would be the same “race” as the Nilote people of South Sudan or the Tutsis of Rwanda.
Steve Sailer: No, they would not, because race is about who your ancestors were.
Furthermore, people naturally identify others as ‘my people’ or ‘not my people’ based on combination of facial features, hair texture, and skin tones than height or body size. It’s just the way of human psychology. People don’t categorize human groups by height because it simply isn't natural for human psychology to do so. Same goes for sexual differences. A small woman and big woman both feel as women first and foremost. A big woman doesn’t primarily identify as ‘big person’ alongside a big man. Height is an adjective whereas race and sex are nouns. Race comes first as existence, size follows as characteristic. It’s like there must be canines before there can be sizes of canines. Race and sex are facts, height and size are features. Some dogs may be more comparable in size with wolves but they are still dogs first and foremost. Before we notice the sizes of apples, a feature, they must exist in the first place as a type of fruit, a fact. There are big apples and small apples, but both are apples first and foremost. Same with peaches. People categorize fruits by kind, not size. Consideration of size follows categorization of kind. Apples and peaches are not placed in the same basket based on size.
In reality, there is of course a country where the racial groups are distinguished not by color but by height: Rwanda.
Height is merely one of the differences between Tutsis and Hutus. More significant are facial features. Tutsis have more angular features, Hutus have more round features(and look more typically black-African). Tutsis are Abbots, Hutus are Costellos. While Tutsis are taller than Hutus generally, there are surely Hutus who are taller than Tutsis, just like there are Japanese who are taller than Dutch. But a Tutsi surely sees a short Tutsi with Tutsi facial features as one of his own than feels natural kinship with a tall Hutu.
While Wilkerson is wrong about race, she may be onto something about the future of America. Much of American History was about race and caste. In the South and even in the North, being white had advantages over being black(or any other race). Race mattered. But as race becomes less of a factor, caste may come to dominate the debate. New groups are being formed on the basis of intelligence, ability, and connections than on the basis of race. Consider the high rates of intermarriage among Jews and Asians and increasingly among whites. And with 'Affirmative Action' opening many slots for blacks in elite institutions — Harvard is 12% black — and with most white elites being enthusiastic about race-mixing, they may form new elites who are products of high IQ mating with high IQ. Lots of elite white women seem especially hellbent on marrying outside the race or adopting black kids who, even if not the brightest bulbs, will benefit from connections and racial preference. Purely on meritocratic basis, there shouldn't be so many blacks in elite institutions, but Affirmative Action is real and, furthermore, whites and others are so willing to believe that the 'affirmatives' are just as intelligent. There is also the jungle fever factor. If Hinduism and Jimduism(Jim Crow) developed by trying to prevent race-mixing as much as possible, the new caste in America(and EU) will be created by enthusiasm for race-mixing. Race-mix or not, there will always be the upper-crust, middle crust, and lower-crust. If smart whites, Asians, Jews, Arabs/Muslims, 'Latinos', and blacks mix, they will form a new kind of caste. The only kind of race-mixing that might lead to broader equality is a random one based on lottery, e.g. match high IQ white man with low IQ black woman, match high IQ Latino with low IQ white woman, match high IQ Jewish woman with low IQ Arab, and etc. But race-mixing among the elites is not happening randomly. It's the Ivies mating with Ivies. Now, Wilkerson seems to be either confused or disingenuous. Her book is ostensibly against caste but ultimately argues for it. Without racial or national identity, there is only one's social position. If you don't matter as a person of race, a patriot of a nation, or member of a culture, the only thing that matters is money and status. It's the only thing that provides meaning and comfort, that is as long as you're high up the ladder. If Wilkerson rejects race as a 'social construct', then she likely rejects other social constructs such as 'nation' and 'culture'. Then, what else is left but success, status, and money? That being the case, how can she make a case against caste when, devoid of things that give people meaning and sense of belonging(such as race, nation, and culture), there is only money and one's socio-economic position? And in a status-conscious world, people will be even more eager to marry smart people and have smart kids. This may lead to more race-mixing among the smart and smarter(among blacks), but the end-result will be more racial stratification. Latin America, unlike India, allowed far more race-mixing, but there is still lots of stratification based on race and caste. Also, as a person of upper caste favored by the powers-that-be, why would someone like Wilkerson really want to be equal with everyone else? She is feted, favored, and promoted. She is a 'made' person. Better 'made' than maid. Maybe the upper caste should be called the 'mades' as the US is turning into a gangster state. I'm sure she's an admirer of Barack Obama, and what does he represent? High IQ black and High IQ white producing a child favored by ultra-rich Jews who even made him president, one that fixated mostly on globo-homo issues, the pet cause of the super-rich who prefer Gay Day to Mayday. So, Wilkerson's book is really a manifesto in favor of caste. Her only gripe is that not enough blacks are allowed into the upper crust. Her message to Jews and rich whites seem to be, wink wink, "If you don't want people like me to badmouth your wealth and privilege, give us some more." So, paradoxically, Jews and whites should be 'colorblind' and let in more blacks into the upper-crust. "We don't see color, and that's why we are welcoming MORE BLACKS into the club." The layers of deception are truly astounding. COVID TRANCE: HOW THE IRISH WERE HYPNOTISED BY THE MEDIA (WITH JOHN ANTHONY)

Tuesday, April 7, 2020

Without Race-ism, Your Nation, Race, and Culture will NOT survive — It's really that simple, and that is precisely why Jews have vilified white race-ism above all else

We've been told by the Jewish-controlled and cuck-managed media and academia that the greatest 'sin' is 'racism'. Now, if by 'racism', they mean blind and mindless hatred and hostility toward other races based on ignorance, arrogance, and contempt, I would agree. But we must ask why Race + Ism has been defined in such manner. 'Ism' means belief, therefore Race + Ism = Belief in the Reality of Race and Racial Differences and/or the need for Racial Consciousness. Race-ism should mean belief and conviction in certain facts, ideas, and principles associated with racial realities. It shouldn't mean the worst possible extreme and radical manifestation of that particular belief system. After all, being a Christian means one embraces the Faith and accepts Jesus as one's savior. Christianity has ranged from extreme theocracy to something approaching New Age flakiness. There have been hardline Christians, moderate Christians, tolerant Christians, and progressive Christians who reinterpret the Bible in startling ways. So, there is no single way to be Christian. But suppose someone defined Christianity by its most extreme expressions and actions. It'd be ridiculous. It'd be like defining 'socialism' by pointing to Stalinism, Maoism, and Khmer-Rouge-ism. But in fact, there have been other forms of socialism that weren't tyrannical and ruthless/murderous. Then, how does it make sense to define 'racism' or 'race-ism' only by the extreme actions of the KKK, Nazis, or Nation of Islam? (By the way, the longest radical racism of contempt, paranoia, and hostility is probably certain strains of Judaism and Jewish World View.)

Anyway, I will use the term 'race-ism' to mean belief in the reality of race & racial differences and/or the need for racial consciousness. And by 'race', I also mean sub-race or ethnicity. There is the broad white race of Europeans and then ethnic groups or sub-races such as the Germanics, Slavs, Anglos, Celts, Italians, Greeks, and etc. Now, what do I mean by no race or nation surviving for long without race-ism? I obviously don't mean the people of a nation must act like Nazis and 'invade Poland' and commit mass-killings of the Other. Instead, a people must know that they are unique and particular by blood & genetic inheritance and/or culture & history. Even if whites and blacks were to be raised and instilled with same language and ideology, they would still be different races with unique features, temperaments, and styles. They might learn from each other and borrow ideas from one another, but if either group is to survive as a unique people, it must maintain a general separateness, sovereignty, and autonomy over its own territory and affairs.
Next, even if two peoples are genetically nearly identical, they could have different histories, cultures, customs, and legends that distinguish one from the other. There isn't much genetic distance between Anglos and the Irish, but they have different histories and cultural consciousness. Same is true of Southern Chinese and Vietnamese. Many Greeks and Turks are similar in genetics and blood, but they are culturally and historically separate groups. Same goes for Germans and Swedes, even more so between Norwegians and Swedes. Just because Finns and Russians are both white Europeans doesn't mean that they don't have rich and varied differences in language, culture, and historical narratives. And those differences are what makes the world fascinating. For the world to be colorful and diverse, there must remain distinct nations of peoples and cultures who maintain borders, identities, and territorial integrity.

And that's why no nation, people, or culture will survive without race-ism and culturism: A belief in their racial and/or cultural uniqueness and the conviction to preserve such distinctions. It is by race-ism and culturism that people get to LAY CLAIM to their bios, ethnos, mythos, cultos, and terros. Without such claim, your people own nothing; they have nothing to call their own; everything about them, their lands, their wealth, their culture, their history, and etc. are all toss-up objects for sale at the global flea-market and meat-market. The entirety of your people, culture, land, and history has been turned into mix-and-match items in a Jewish pawnshop. They may continue to exist physically but no longer as the property of your people. Everything about your people now exists to be raided, auctioned off, looted, and passed around the world. Just like cattle exist but don't own their own bodies and therefore are slaughtered, chopped, and sold around the world, your people-culture-and-land will be turned into meat-and-dairy products under globalist hegemony. Cows can't say NO to being slaughtered, butchered, and sold because they don't own their own bodies. They belong to humans-as-either-sellers-or-buyers. They are mere economic units to be bought and sold on the global marketplace. Beef from Argentina may be sold to Mexico, the US, India, China, Europe, Saudi Arabia, and etc. Cows are organisms like we are, but they have no racial consciousness, no culture, no history, and no means to lay claim to anything. They are clueless creatures that eat when fed and don't know they are to be killed, cut up, and cooked for humanity. They cannot connect the dots. If they had human intelligence and means of speech, they would be able to assert themselves.
But then, maybe not. After all, so much of humanity are being turned into faceless & mindless consumers and even commodities(especially as sex objects to be marketed by Jewish shysters) and their identities, cultures, and territories are being robbed from them right under their feet, but they are either unaware of what is happening or deliriously supportive of this process of dehumanization, de-nationalization, and de-culturalization. And even though Jews do the very opposite for themselves while pushing commoditization on the goyim, so many goyim praise and honor Jews as their masters — it's like how the animals on the farm all praise the vile and vicious Pig Elites in George Orwell's ANIMAL FARM where the promise of equality caves to the ruthless logic of IQ hierarchy, art of cunning, and Will to Power. It goes to show that human intelligence and consciousness are malleable. Rationally or irrationally, mini-minds and weak wills are warped and manipulated by big minds and strong wills. While all people think and feel, most people 'think' and 'feel' as the elites direct them to. And the big-minded and strong-willed elites of the current West are heinous and hideous Jews.

Possibly, the most effective means by which Jews robbed white goyim of their claims to blood, soil, culture, history, and morality is by using the Jew-run media, academia, and deep state to spread the notion that there is no greater 'sin' than 'racism'. Paradoxically, Jews suppressed white race-ism in order to bolster their own racial supremacism. Jews attack even the slightest show of white identity and interests as 'white supremacist' while compelling whites to mindlessly support what is clearly Jewish racial supremacism as it's quite obvious that Jews aren't content with Jewish national sovereignty in Israel or expression of Jewish interests(among other interests, some of them counter to Jewish interests) in the US. Instead, Jews insist on Zionist imperialist tyranny over Palestinians and use their control of the US to destroy perceived enemies and rivals in the Middle East by sanctions, invasions, and support for terrorism. In the US, Jews will not tolerate Palestinian-American support for BDS or a foreign policy that balances Zionist lobbying with counter interests of Arab-Americans, Muslim-Americans, and others. Instead, all of US must be for Jews Uber Alles, Israel First, and Zionic hegemonism over the Middle East and North Africa. And of course, Jews have done everything to destroy or desecrate Christianity with globo-homo Queertianity. Despite Zionists having turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah with massive homo 'pride' parades, the christ-cucks in US churches praise Jews and Israel in the most embarrassing way. As for principled Christians like Rick Wiles who refuse to kneel before Satanic globo-homo Zion, they are censored, banned, and denied service by Jew-monopolies like Youtube and Paypal.

Incredibly, Jews have gotten away with forcing all of us to support their supremacism, imperialism, and hatred by pushing the pretense that they're combating 'white supremacism' and 'antisemitism'. According to Jews, even the slightest sign of white consciousness is 'white supremacist'. Even "It's Okay to be White" must be shut down and investigated by the FBI. And if you call out on Jewish imperialism and Zionist tyranny, you are smeared and destroyed as an 'Anti-Semite'. They are truly a vile and vicious people, the biggest hypocrites and arrogant scoundrels in the world. As far as Jews are concerned, White History has been nothing but one of 'white privilege', 'white racism', 'white supremacism', and etc. And because White History is so tainted with evil and guilt, Jews insist that even a smidgen of white consciousness, let alone pride, is reason for alarm. In other words, whiteness = disease = evil. Whiteness is so toxic and noxious(and apparently infectious to other whites) that it must remain fumigated and quarantined at all times. Even if just a tiny bit is allowed to escape and assert its worth and autonomy, it might spread like a virus and threaten the Jew World Order as all those 'infected' whites will want to burst out of the Jewish-made PC bubble. Whites must be made at all times to believe that they are ACCURSED with whiteness. They were born with a sickness and, as patients infected with evil, they must listen to Jewish social science doctors who tell them that they must show no pride or unity in their whiteness. If anything, whites must welcome mass-immigration-invasion, the Great Replacement or White Nakba, and massive race-mixing. Whites must all be turned into brown people like those of Latin America or North Africa. Having mixed blood, there shall no longer be proud white consciousness that may stand up to Jewish perfidy. And Jews figure that even if anti-Jewish sentiments may linger among browned folks, they will be too confused in identity to ever unite against Jewish Power. After all, the mixed-race populations of Latin America have been extremely ineffective in overthrowing the white Latin elites who've ruled South America since the days of the Conquistadors.

Whites no longer own their own history. White history has been doctored by Jews who associate whiteness with evil and guilt. Of course, if one does the same with Jewish History, Jews cry 'anti-Semite'. Jews have an effective moral and polemical shield against those who rummage through Jewish History for various evils, but whites have no comparable defense mechanism(and they need to develop it against Jews). Also, Jews covered up the fact that some of the darkest 'evils' of white history have been inseparable from Jewish History. Much of the slave trade that sold Slavic whites to North Africa and Near East were done by Jews. Jewish bankers financed much of Western Imperialism. Jews took part in the Atlantic Slave trade, especially in Brazil that brought over the greatest numbers of slaves. Jews of the British Empire sold opium to the Chinese. Jewish merchants worked with whites who wiped out the American Indians. Jews dominated much of organized crime in Europe and America. And Jewish communists played a key role in the Russian Revolution that ended up destroying millions of lives. So, the evils of genocide, imperialism, brutality, and slave-trade done by whites were also done by Jews who acted as merchants or financiers. But clever, cunning, and nasty Jews make us focus ONLY on the WHITE aspect of those evils. Also, Jews spread the notion among non-whites that WHITES AND ONLY WHITES were guilty of all the wrongs done to them. Indeed, Jews even pretend to be allies and fellow-victims of the so-called People of Color by selectively pointing to events where Jews were attacked by whites while failing to mention that, more often than not, Jews in Europe worked with the European Imperialist elites in the conquest and exploitation of the world. Imagine if the French selectively pointed to periods when they were attacked by the British and claimed to be fellow victims of the British Empire while totally ignoring the historical fact that the British and the French competed and cooperated side by side in their conquest of the non-white world. Jews are fiendishly sneaky that way.
One thing for sure, the Zionist project came to fruition with backing not only from British, Soviet, and American imperialists but even from Nazi imperialists. But then, Jews do a number on naive and stupid non-whites as well. By creating the impression that nationalism in white nations is 'racist' and 'xenophobic', Jews persuade non-whites into thinking that Nationalism = White Supremacism, and therefore, all goyim must reject this Nazi-like nationalism and embrace globalism. But in truth, whites didn't conquer the world through nationalism but through imperialism, and if non-whites eventually regained autonomy and sovereignty, it was through native nationalism and national liberation from Western Imperialism that had been thrust upon the world not only with white arms but with Jewish money. Jews sure are cunning and crafty. By conflating Nationalism with White Supremacism, Jews seek to kill two birds with one stone. They mean to destroy nationalism not only in white nations but in non-white ones. Of course, there are people who know this is BS, but as those in elite circles are mostly fixated on status and as the Jew-run US rules the world, they dare not stick out their necks and speak the truth; instead, they just hunker down and go along with the globalist project on the basis of "I got mine."
Without race-ism, there is no racial consciousness. The only kind of racial consciousness that Jews allow for whites is negative-consciousness or anti-consciousness, i.e. whites are to denounce consciousness of white identity, white history, white culture, and white territoriality as either evil, ill-gotten, or misconceived. Whites must not feel pride and a sense of ownership to what they are, where they live, what they've done, and what they believe. The great achievements of whites must be attributed to ALL of humanity. White history must retroactively be made 'multi-racial' and 'multi-cultural' so that ANY people can lay claim to it. The media put on historical programs where Past Europe has lots of blacks and other non-whites. Even the great white leaders and heroes must be made black or non-white. Jews say there was no WHITE History. Europe was never white but always 'multi-cultural' because NOT EVERYONE in Europe was white. (Using this logic, Japan and China weren't yellow because whites like Marco Polo and other came to visit.) Apparently, the Middle Ages weren't white and European because there were some Arabs and blacks in Europe at the time; therefore, Middle Ages were just as Arab and black. Of course, this isn't really about blacks or Arabs but about Jews. Jews hate the idea of white consciousness that thinks in terms of "we white Christians" and "those Semitic Jews". Such might lead to white consciousness that seeks White Liberation from Current Jewish Supremacism. So, Jews not only push a Diverse Future on the White West but try to fool whites that this Diverse Future isn't a break with the White Past but a merely natural continuance because the White World was always Diverse and into Multi-Culturalism. (Never mind that most of these white relations with non-whites were violent and bloody: Moorish invasions, Mongol invasions, and European Crusades and incursions into non-white territories. If anyone wants to celebrate Ottoman Occupation of Greece and Moorish conquest of Spain as wonders of Diversity, he or she is a mental slave of Jews. I suppose Jews should celebrate Roman tyranny over Judea.)

There are two kinds of histories. Factual history, which should be left up to professional historians who pore over records, documents, data. But for most people, the kind of history that matters isn't factual but mytho-narrative. While this kind of history should stick close to facts and truth as much as possible, its real objective is to fashion a story of a people and imbue it with meaning, significance, and purpose. It's like a biography isn't merely a collection of data on someone. It is a lively tale and summation of his life and what it has come to mean. Thus, certain facts must be selected over others. Certain details are emphasized over others. Necessarily, if you want to portray a man as a villain, you will focus the bad sides of his character and deeds to drive the point home. On the other hand, if you want to portray a man as a hero, you will focus on facts and details that would support such an image. Of course, no man is all villain and all hero. Everyone is a mix of both, and all biographies and all histories should dwell on both the light and the darkness of any person or people. Still, the main purpose of mytho-narrative is to defend, glorify, and romanticize the story of your people. Take the Old Testament. While there are passages that show Jews to have been unworthy of God's love and blessing, it is ultimately a narrative that justifies the story of Jews as a special people with a sacred contract or Covenant with God. This is why it is necessary that mytho-narrative history must be owned and controlled by your own people and its champions. Such historians are essentially word-warriors. They master the power of words and knowledge to fashion a narrative that honors, defends, and justifies your people. While it's possible that a foreigner may be sympathetic to your people while one of your own may be hostile to his own kind, there is a greater likelihood that the history of your people will be sullied, befouled, and condemned in the hands of the Other.
Tragically, white folks outsourced their mytho-narrative to the Jews who selectively spun a tale that made whites out to be the Devil, Cancer, and Virus of human history. Would Jews be so stupid as to out-source their mytho-history to Palestinians, Iranians, or those deemed 'anti-Semitic'? While those hostile to Jews may tell a compelling and convincing story of Jewish Perfidy and Evils through human history, Jews themselves would be stupid not to own their own history and narrative. While it would be good for Jews(and any people) to face up to the dark chapters in their own history, ultimately their narrative must be more of light than darkness. Otherwise, the people will end up like whites under Jews who turned White History into one of exceptional evil that can be redeemed ONLY BY cucking to Jews, ACOWW(or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs) , and White Nakba(aka the Great Replacement).
Now, consider race-ism and the ownership of homeland. Any territory without the stamp of race-ist claim will be lost no matter how rich and powerful a people may be. American Indians lost their lands to whites because they were outnumbered, out-gunned, and out-fought. In contrast, whites are losing their lands in US, Canada, Australia, and Europe not because they are weak and poor but because they've lost race-ist claims on their nations. Despite dire demographic trends, the White West is still the most powerful bloc in the world. Then, why is it so helpless against preventing White Nakba or the Great Replacement brought about by Mass Immigration Invasion? It is because whites have rejected race-ist claim to history and territory. The claim of history and claim of territory are interrelated because, after all, territorial claim is justified by historical narrative. "We Hungarians own Hungary because it's the land bequeathed to us by our ancestors." "We Jews founded the Jewish State in Palestine because it was our land in ancient times." "We whites deserve to own and rule the US, Canada, and Australia because, even though we took it from other peoples, we founded and built great new nations in ways that ONLY WE could have." Such race-ist historical claims serve as basis for race-ist territorial claims. These claims say THIS is OURS, and NOT yours: Either the land belonged to our people from time immemorial OR our people built new nations out of the wilderness. But once a people reject race-ism, they lose racial consciousness. Their sense of story and territory becomes merely individualistic. 'My Story' and 'My Property' but no sense of 'Our Story' and 'Our Property'. Once whites rejected race-ism, they rejected the very concept of white people with white history on white territory. So, while whites-as-individuals have personal stories and private properties, they have no sense of collective narrative(except one that emphasizes 'white guilt') and collective ownership of territory or national property. While individualism is useful and productive, the question is what must it ultimately serve? As no individual lives forever or is a god, it makes no sense to put oneself at the center of existence and meaning. Every individual must realize he is part of a link, an inheritor, and that after he dies, what he'd been a part of shall be bequeathed to others whose obligation is to keep alight the torch of identity, history, and territory. The problem with libertarian individualism is it has no sense of life beyond 'me, me, me'. Furthermore, the fact that so many libertarians nevertheless suck up to Jews, blacks, and homos indicates that even for hardcore libertarians, liberty and individuality aren't enough. Even as they denigrate and negate white identity in the name of individuality, they feel this craving to serve something-bigger-than-themselves, and it's usually 'muh Israel', 'muh Magic Negro', or 'muh holy homo'.
Anyway, despite the greatness of white power and wealth in objective terms, the White West began its slide into oblivion because it subjectively abandoned race-ism, the consciousness that had once united whites in white nations into proud peoples with a powerful claims over the lands on which they lived and their ancestors fought for and died. Without race-ist consciousness, they could no longer felt united as members of a white race in a white nation. Without racial solidarity, they lost their sense of racial history and racial territory. If they no longer cared for white identity, it meant they no longer made white claims over white territory. Indeed, the new dogma was that whiteness is just a social construct or, worse, a disease/cancer, and therefore, the greatest evil is for whites to identify proudly as white or European. Lacking such consciousness, how could white people say WE WHITE PEOPLE OWN THIS WHITE LAND? How could a particular land belong to whites when whites no longer have white identity? Without white identity, there is no claim of white territory.
Thus, it doesn't matter how many white people there are in a certain nation; it doesn't matter how much wealth they own or how much power they have in objective terms of guns, tanks, and bombers. As long as they have no race-ist or racial consciousness, they no longer believe that their territory belongs to them as a race and people. So, even as tons of non-whites pour in as immigrants, whites cannot say NO since their anti-race-ism tells them that it's wrong for whites to think, feel, and react collectively(except in denouncing white unity). Indeed, white nations have been rendered defenseless even against rag-tag illegal migrants because, as whites no longer believe in white identity and territory, who are whites to tell non-whites, legal or illegal, that they don't belong in white nations that are no longer deemed WHITE nations? And so, we see the sorry sight all over Europe. Europe is so much richer and stronger than African and Muslim nations, but they are also helpless to stop the invasion.
Worse, while white identity is taboo, white anti-identity is all the rage among the neo-puritanical progs whose minds have been infected by Jewish Propaganda. So, not only are whites defenseless against the invasion but they are hastening the invasion and Great Replacement with enthused aid to non-white marauder-migrants. Some do it in the name of humanitarianism, but if they truly care about justice, why don't they call out on the factors that have turned so many people in the Middle East into refugees in the first place? Why don't they condemn Jewish Supremacism and Wars for Israel? But then, how could they since, even as they reject white identity, they've embraced Jews-as-Deity, and that means Jews cannot be condemned for their foulness. Why, it'd be 'antisemitic'. So, even as Jews mess up the Middle East, whites cannot condemn the Jews but must suffer the cost of the mess created by Jews. Imagine if I burn down someone's house and force you to take in the family that is now without a home. Naturally, you should be condemning me for burning down the house, but you dare NOT do that as you've come to see me as your master and god; so you feel YOU must bear the burden of what I have done.
It doesn't matter how powerful you are objectively if you're weak and cucked subjectively. Suppose you live in a home with lots of guns and bullets. You have strong walls and lots of food and supplies. Objectively, you are well-protected and secure indeed. But suppose you subjectively believe that you have no special claim to the house. As such, when trespassers arrive and ask to be let in, you just let them in. You have the guns but dare not use them against the invaders because you don't believe the house belongs especially to you and your family. Same logic applies to nations. If you lose race-ist consciousness, you've lost the race-ist claim on your land. Then, it is open to invasion from all the world... which is what is happening to the West. Next time Jews tell you to lose your race-ist claim on your land, you ask them why they maintain a powerful race-ist claim on Israel? The damned buggers.
One of the most important assets a race or people have is possession of the women. A people are effectively finished when the women of the race lose respect for the men. Such women are likely to forgo wifehood and motherhood, thereby failing to produce the next generation. Or worse, they might go with the men of another race, even the invasive and colonizing race because it is the nature of women to go with winner-conquerors(even of enemy races). Always, the conquering race takes the women of the vanquished race. When People A conquer People B, the men of People A don't go to the men of People B and say, "Hey, come and hump our mothers, wives, daughters, and etc." No, it's the winning side that conquers and colonizes the wombs of the losing side. When Turks ruled over Greece, they took Greek women. When Mongols invaded China, Iran, and Russia, they took the women of the conquered. When whites were masters over blacks as slaves, white men humped black women. When Zionists took nearly all of Palestine and carried out Nakba, they raped Arab women as sexual trophies. When Soviet Troops entered Germany, they raped countless German women. When US defeated Japan, they used Japanese women as whores. When the Spanish Conquistadors took over South America and Mexico, they took native brown women.
Now, not all conquering folks were enthusiastic about race-mixing. The British Empire was far less into race-mixing than the French Empire and Spanish Empire were. National Socialists discouraged race-mixing whereas Soviet Empire encouraged it. At any rate, the fate of the brown natives of what is called 'Latin America' goes to show what happens when men lose possession and the respect of their own women. Brown men were defeated by white Spaniards who took brown women to produce a neo-race of 'mestizos' who became confused in identity and, to this day, have no real sense of what they are. While race-mixing of any kind always weakens and dilutes the identity of the conquerors as well as of the conquered, it is always far more damaging psychologically and culturally to the conquered side. It was painful for Russian men to see their daughters taken by Mongol barbarians. It was painful for Vietnamese men to see their women turned into a bunch of whores by US military. It was shameful for black men to see their women be taken by 'honkey-ass mothafuc*as' in the Old South. Consider the trauma of French men who were helpless to stop French women from running into the arms of German occupiers. (Granted, some of these French women weren't necessarily treasonous in spirit. They might have regarded pre-Occupation France as a Jewish-dominated tyranny and therefore welcomed German victory as liberation of France from the Juif.) Without women, there is no future for the race. And while men can produce kids with women of any race, if they want to perpetuate the aesthetics, soul, and temperament of their own Volk, they should have children with women of the same race. Spanish men had children with native brown women, and the results were rather Guillermo-ish(of the dreadful Jimmy Kimmel Show). Guillermo may be a nice guy and all, but he doesn't look quite like a Spaniard. Nor does he look like a proud Mayan warrior. He looks like a human burrito.

In our time, the biggest threat to white ownership of white women and white beauty comes from 'anti-racism' and Jungle Fever, a kind of double whammy. Political Correctness is the colonization of white minds by Jewish propaganda, and what might be called Biological Correctness is the colonization of white wombs by black seed. In a way, both PC and Jungle Fever are 'natural' insofar as smaller minds cuck to bigger minds and wussier men cuck to tougher men. When whites began to practice inter-meritocracy, they were bound to lose out to the 'best man'. White Power could only be sustained with intra-meritocracy that rewarded the best among the whites AGAINST non-whites. But once whites adopted universal inter-meritocracy, white minds lost out to Jewish minds that are higher in IQ and stronger in will. And white muscles lost out to tougher black muscles, and white dongs lost out to bigger black dongs. Now, why did whites forsake intra-meritocracy that had served and sustained White Power so well and instead go with inter-meritocracy, a universal call for 'may the best man of any race win'? Part of the reason was the rise of rationalism and its concept of universal justice. Another reason was rooted in Christian ethos. Also, the radical racists such as the National Socialists gave racial consciousness a bad name. Ironically though, even as Jews reviled racial consciousness among whites on grounds of Nazi Evil in World War II, they revamped their own racial consciousness in pushing through the Zionist project and in making whites submit to Jewish Supremacist Power. (Also, let's remember that the Pacific War was pushed by both Conservatives and Liberals alike as a race war against the yellow 'Japs', and Jews did their part in dehumanizing the Japanese like the National Socialists had dehumanized the Jews.)
In any case, when white people gave up on racial consciousness, each and every white person was encouraged to be a mere individualist, consumer, hedonist, celebrity-obsessed idol worshiper, and etc. White women felt 'liberated' and no longer 'owned' by white men, the evil patriarchs. But most of them being stupid or dumb, they just came to be mentally owned by Jews and sexually owned by blacks. They went from women of a race, history, and heritage to mere commodities of Jews and playthings of blacks. And white men, instead of waking up and fighting the Jews and blacks, were too brainwashed themselves with 'white guilt' and too gushy with 'white fever'(for black thrills in sports and rap) to unite and fight to defend race, homeland, heritage, and honor. And at this point in history, it all looks hopeless. The great lesson, at any rate, is that a people will lose their identity, history, homeland, and women when they abandon race-ism. While sane people need to forsake extreme race-ism(like religious people should reject theocratic fanaticism), they need to realize that there is nothing more precious and valuable than race-ism in the preservation of a people and culture on their sacred land. If whites want to reclaim their land and culture for their posterity, they must say NO to Jewish Supremacism and regain white race-ist consciousness.