The Fact that White Americans bawl about BLM but feel Zero Pity for Palestinian-Lives-Matter(PLM) is Proof that Jews Control the Gods — True Conscience cannot be Imposed from Above — The Paradox of how 'White Guilt' under Jewish Manipulation turned into White Evil in support of Jewish Supremacism

American(and Western by extension) morality is utterly bogus because Jews control the gods and most Western folks are pretty hollow inside. They have no internal engine of conscience. Their moral engines are usually dormant or in hibernation mode UNLESS switched on by some outside force. If some people are totally hollow, others are totally partisan in their morality, and this goes for both sides. So, Democrats who were okay with Obama doing A were suddenly enraged that Trump was doing the same. Okay if my guy does it, Nokay if your guy does it. Bogus morality. Or Republicans who were okay with Trump doing B are suddenly outraged that Biden is doing it. Thus, morality is just a partisan tool. Moral hollowness and moral opportunism are, as the cliche goes, old as the hills, and Americans, for all their conceit of 'exceptionalism' and 'indispensability', are no different.

Take BLM for instance. If indeed good, decent, and wonderful American 'Liberals' are so weepy-poo about the Black Problem, where were they on the issue until the media promoted BLM? Why were these people who were hunky dory with Bill Clinton locking up tons of Negroes, Obama prioritizing Globo-Homo over black concerns, Bloomberg using stop-and-frisk on blacks, Democrats using mass immigration to replace blacks, and real estate moguls using gentrification to drive blacks out of cities? They were fine with all that but suddenly they were prostrating themselves before BLM in 2020. Are they so hollow that their souls must be poured with moral content by an outside force for them to feel any sense of injustice? Interestingly enough, they weren't fully onboard with BLM even in 2016 when Obama was in office. There are two reasons for this. The Jewish-run media pushed BLM whole hog in 2020 whereas only half-heartedly in 2016. So, the hollow souls were filled to the brim with BLM outrage in 2020, and that accounts for their sudden rush of 'conscience'. Also, there was the Trump Factor. All the Trump-haters saw an opportunity to virtue-signal, especially with the hope that it would bring defector blacks back to the fold if the Democratic Party knelt before Negroes. In either case, it was Jews calling the shots and goyim following along. Jews lead, goyim follow.

If Americans had true morality, they wouldn't need the Power telling them to wave the BLM flag and wash Negro feet. They would have been doing it all these years. So, why did so many people become so obsessed with BLM all of a sudden? They are like children who must be told by adults what to think, how to feel, and what to say. Furthermore, they have no autonomous sense of facts or truth. BLM is based on a lie. White cops are NOT mowing down innocent blacks all across America. But many people refuse to accept the truth because they, like children, prefer the Narrative from the so-called 'adults in the room'. Their moral sense is tied to authority and who has it. And there are others who know BLM is founded on a lie BUT still go along because Negrolatry is central to their lives. As the result of all those Magic Negro movies, blacks sports-music domination, and 'white guilt' narrative about Slavery, many whites kneel before blackness as the holy of holies. Just like some people know God doesn't exist but still belong to a church because they love the idea and tradition, many whites know the facts of black crime & violence but stick with the faith in the Noble Negro. Emotions > Motions.

Also, notice the total lack of consistency in their moral outrage. If indeed human lives mattered, American 'liberals' would be MOST OUTRAGED by the countless Arab/Muslim lives destroyed by Wars for Israel pushed by Evil Zionist Hegemonists. If American 'liberals' had true moral sense, they'd respond to BLM with, "But the number of innocent blacks killed by bad cops is piddling compared to all the innocent Arabs and Muslims killed by the US war machine and US support for terrorists, aka 'moderate rebels'." During the Trump term, most 'liberals' were outraged(instigated by the Jewish-run media, of course, as most white 'liberals' utterly lack moral agency) by Trump's attempts to draw down troops in the Middle East. And they were utterly silent about what Obama did to Libya and Syria. Also, for all their conceit of 'knowledge' and 'critical thinking', most 'liberals' swallowed whole hog the Jewish Media Narrative that the US was working with decent rebels to overthrow bloody tyrant Assad. Or, the Jewish-run media pushed bogus nonsense about US troops having to remain in Syria to protect the Kurds from the Turks. Never mind it was the US that encouraged Turkey, along with other nations, to intervene in Syria and stir up trouble. So-called 'liberals' might as well be called Gulliberals. Of course, many conzos are gullible in their own way, what with the nonsense they swallowed about China-China-China and Iran-Iran-Iran when, in fact, their main enemy is Jew, Jew, Jew.

All these 'liberals' who were denouncing cops as killers and calling for defunding the police NEVER called out the US military as a killing machine when, in fact, it is far more so than cops. If anything should be defunded for its crimes against humanity, it is Pentagon. Apparently, a single life of a black criminal has more value than a million Arab lives. (Surreally enough, perverted US imperialism even spun American Shame into American Self-Righteousness. If BLM is true and the US is really an evil nation where innocent blacks are routinely murdered by 'systemic racism', shouldn't it undermine America's role in the world? Surely, a country that murders its own citizens shouldn't be preaching to the rest of the world, let alone pushing them around with its military might. But US foreign policy spun BLM as a point of pride, i.e. "Because we in the Foreign Service denounce Donald Trump and 'white supremacism', we are the Good Guys with the right to tell the world what's what."
While some bad cops do end up killing innocent people(more whites than blacks), the number of innocent people killed by US cops in any given year can be counted on two hands. In contrast, 100,000s of Arabs and Muslims have been killed by wars, sanctions, and support of terrorism by the Jewish-controlled West. And millions have been displaced from their homes. If anything, the US military deserves all the vitriol, but notice how gulliberals, just like conzos, have no problem with the stupid cult of Veteran-Worship. US military invades and destroys other nations, BUT we hear the endless tripe about how they are fighting to defend our freedom. What does occupying the oil-rich regions of Syria have to do with the freedom of Americans? If US generals and soldiers really want to defend freedom in the US, they should attack Wall Street banks that deny service to US citizens. They should attack Big Tech that denies free speech to people who dare speak truth to power. Cops only go after criminals whereas US soldiers invade OTHER nations and drop bombs and destroy civilian lives, but has there been calls to Take the Knee about all those dead Arabs and Muslims? Has any US corporation donated millions to BDS in solidarity with Palestinian lives and rights? Has any US street been painted with PLM or Palestinian Lives Matter sign?

What good is morality as approval by authority(a kind of 'morauthority') or partisan opportunism? And what is the authority and who calls the shots on the moral opportunism? Jewish Power. So, Jews essentially have the lock on what is moral and 'spiritual' in America. Jews control the gods, and it's no wonder all these goyim are such hapless idiots. But are conzos any better with their 'Muh Israel' and 'We Bless Jews' antics despite Jews doing the most to destroy true patriotism? It goes to show no genuine conservative or patriotic movement is possible unless it calls for white liberation or goy emancipation from Jewish Supremacism.

What's truly perverse is the paradox of how White Morality has been used to actually make whites less moral under Jewish Control. Jews are baiting 'white guilt' not to make whites more moral and conscientious. The last thing Jews want is a white person who is morally consistent. While Jeremy Corbyn's support of Open Borders and Diversity is nuts, he is at least consistent in his denunciation of both white and Jewish evils. So, if it was wrong for whites to practice apartheid in South Africa, it is wrong for Jews as well in Israel and West Bank. But oh no, Jews couldn't accept that and did everything to bring down Jeremy Corbyn and install a total Zio-Cuck in the Labour Party.

So, what are Jews really after when they bait 'white guilt' if it isn't to make whites more moral, more principled, more conscientious, and more consistent in their application of justice? It is to rob whites of pride, dignity, and worth as a race. It is to psychologically paralyze whites and castrate their sense of righteousness. Thus beaten and robbed of autonomy, whites are left without agency, independence, and liberty. Whites are made to look to the Holy Other for guidance, approval, and redemption. And who would this Other be? All the various diverse groups? Of course not. Imagine what would happen to Jewish Power IF whites heeded the calls for justice for Palestinians. No, the Holy Other is to be Jewish, and Jews use all their money power, media power, and state power to make sure the white mind is bound to Jewish Authority. As Jews control the media and academia(as well as the whores who run government), no white person grows up without worshiping the Holy Holocaust that associates all Jews since time immemorial with tragic sanctity(contra White 'Antisemitic' Evil). And because the Shoah happened in Europe and white Americans aren't culpable(except in the indirect sense that White America is an outgrowth of Europe), Jews make a big fuss about 'white guilt' in relation to blacks, and then tie the 'racism' toward blacks with 'racism' toward Jews in Europe — never mind Jews were co-partners with European Imperialists in invading and exploiting the world.

Now, one would think all this browbeating would make whites more moral and conscientious, but not so. It just makes them more servile and slavish to Jews, at whose feet they worship and beg forgiveness. This means Jews can manipulate 'white guilt' to support anything Jews wish. After all, if whites are stained with sin whereas Jews are aglow with sanctity, how dare whites dare to say NO to any Jewish demand. Then, it's no wonder that whites, burdened with 'white guilt', are totally onboard with Jewish supremacist madness all over the world. This is true of whites in Europe and the US. Germans have nothing to say about all the Wars for Israel. If indeed Germans were truly conscientious and morally redemptive in light of what happened in WWII, they would be denouncing Jewish Supremacism and Zionist Imperialism on grounds of "It was wrong for us Germans to be Nazis, then it's wrong for Jews to act like Nazis." But no, 'German Guilt' means Germans must look the other way while Jews push Zion Uber Alles across the Middle East and North Africa. So, 'German Guilt' hasn't made Germans more moral but made them more subservient to Jewish Evil.

In the end, any supposed guilt matters less than WHO is doing the guilt-baiting. For example, Germans in WWII led to the deaths of 20 million Soviets(or maybe more). Millions of Poles perished as the result of German aggression and occupation. And yet, Germans seem to have no conscience in regard to Russians and Poles. Germans have acquiesced to Jew-American 'new cold war' against Russia. And Germans pressured Poles to open their borders and allow their nation to be flooded with Africans and Muslims(many of whom were displaced by Wars for Israel). Considering what German invasion did to Poland in WWII, you'd think Germans would be the last ones to throw their weight around with the Poles(and call for demographic erasure of Poland), but Germans don't care. Their 'morality' is bogus and essentially comes down to sucking up to Jews as a holy people and obeying Jews no matter how evil the act.
And it's no different among White Americans. There is no genuine morality or conscience. While a sense of guilt can lead to higher morality, it is only so when the guilt is genuine, internal, and has agency. After all, we've all done something wrong, felt remorse, and wished to make amends. But 'white guilt' doesn't work like that. Rather, it was concocted by Jews who took advantage of the moral component in Americanism. America was founded as a Christian and Enlightenment Civilization, and there's been a running thread in American History to make progress and make amends. And that was all for the good. But Jews exploited this aspect of Americanism and turned in it into moral pornography. The Jewish Narrative wasn't about flawed whites who could be better(along with the rest of humanity) but about whiteness being the absolute worst. Instead of prodding the white conscience to be better, Jewish guilt-baiting was about sodomizing the white soul with total humiliation. It was to turn the white soul into a 'bitch' of the Jews. "You're my bitch!" Thus broken and robbed of pride and dignity, 'white guilt' only knows one thing: To seek the approval of the Master, the Jews. As the Narrative says "whites are the devil, and Jews are the god", whites have been led to believe their moral value is incumbent on sucking up to divine Jews, but it's the Jews who are the real devils in the current world order.

And it is in this sense that BLM is indirectly related to the mass mayhem in the Middle East and North Africa. After all, what is the real purpose of BLM? Sure, it is in part a Jewish way of flattering black megalomania to keep the alliance. But the other and bigger reason is to paralyze white pride and dignity. It is to burden whites with so much 'white guilt' that whites are reduced to cucky browbeaten saps. Do saps have agency? No, how can there be agency without pride and dignity? Thus robbed of agency by the cult of 'white guilt', white 'morality' is no real morality because saps always look to the Holy Other for benediction. And as this Other is Jewish Authority, the end-result is whites slavishly going out on a limb to appease Jews to win their approval. So, if Jews want to destroy the Middle East to further the Yinonist Plan, whites just go along. Thus, white pseudo-morality has been calibrated to serve Jewish Evil. 'White Guilt' is like the kind of 'guilt' shown by dogs that anxiously crave the approval and affection of their master uber alles.

The sheer 'bogosity' of 'white guilt' easily proves that Jews control the gods. If Jews did not and if white conscience was for real, whites would be mindful not only of injustice done to blacks but injustice done by blacks to non-blacks. Furthermore, whites would be mindful about the evils of Jewish-controlled foreign policy that destroyed so many lives in the Middle East and North Africa. Whites would be condemning Jews working with quasi-Nazis in Ukraine. Whites would call out all those homos working in the US deep state to spread terror and promote neo-imperialism. But no, 'white morality' is totally under the spell of the gods controlled by Jews, and as such, it totally supports all the crazy Jewish schemes(no matter the body count) and vilifies whatever Jews hate.

This is why nothing is possible without White Liberation from Jewish Supremacism.

But then, we are now living in a time where mere support of Free Speech gets you banned from banking and financial services. All of us pay taxes to bail out banks, but banks can deny us service merely for the fact that any of us might support free speech. Just ask GAB, a platform open to all. Because free speech leads to real discussion, speaking truth to power, and development of true conscience, it cannot be tolerated by Jewish Supremacist Power. For Jews, only Controlled Conscience is tolerable, with Jews doing the controlling. But of course, 'controlled conscience' is an oxymoron as no true conscience is directed from the outside. True conscience is what you feel from within, like with the soldier in HACKSAW RIDGE.

What Jews are pushing in AmeriKa is Konscience. And the so-called 'woke' are really hypnotized or dazed. Just about everything they 'think' and say has been instilled and ordered by Jewish Power, but of course, they don't know it because they were brainwashed from cradle. As children accept things uncritically and unconditionally and as current Western Society encourages infantilization, many white folks never developed critical thinking or true conscience. Also, the Jewish promotion of rampant sexualization further served to stunt the maturation of white minds. Sexualized at a young age, white kids became slaves of sensations and sensualism as transmitted through the electronic media controlled by Jews. They become animalized without the critical brakes that distinguish man from beast. In a way, animals are wild and out-of-control, but in another way, they are easier to control because they have simple minds. Look at all those idiot crowds screaming as one at rock concerts. As Jews control the means of titillation, they can associate the pleasures in Pavlovian manner with whatever agendas they hold dear. Have people scream out of control at a rock concert and then pull out a massive homo flag, and the screams will follow along. There is the abortion of killing unborn kids, but there is also the mental abortion of preventing the emergence of adult mentalities among goyim.

REGIME CHANGE 2021 by Brother Nathanael

Jews say America went from a 'White Supremacist' Nation to a World of Diversity, Inclusion, & Equity, but Current America is really a Jewish Supremacist Empire with Diversity used to serve Jewish Hegemonism Uber Alles

What is America supposed to be?

We are told it went from a 'white supremacist' nation to an inclusive empire of diversity, inclusion, and equity. But if so, why are Jewish Interests at the front and center of American Policy?

It seems US went from 'white supremacy' to 'Jewish supremacy' but with Jews having hoodwinked everyone that it's a whole new ball game. But just ask the Palestinians. If you support BDS, you can't rise up the ladder(or even hold a low-level job). Palestinian interests are not regarded on the same level with Jewish interests. It's the difference between heaven and earth.

It's true that US institutions and industries are open to more people than ever before and meritocracy counts for more(unless you're black, in which case, a B- counts as an A+), but mere ability doesn't ensure elevation to the top. As Jews control the gods, you have to prove yourself worthy before what Jews hold as sacred.

One is globo-homo. As Jews have the most control over globo-homo(and as homos are happy to work with Jews for power and privilege), one's submission to globo-homo is pretty much submission to Jewish Power by other means. Also, by accepting globo-homo, you are agreeing to the power arrangement whereby the majority bows down before the elite minority.
Another is BLM. Negrolatry undermines your own ethnic identity and power. You must put blackkness above your own identity, and this also serves Jewish Power because Jews pretty much control blacks. While blacks don't particularly like Jews, they know that Jews find blacks useful and as long as blacks play along, Jewish money and power go a long way toward favoring blacks as idols and heroes. So, there is a Jewish-Black alliance, and this means sucking up to blackness comes down to sucking up to Jewishness by other means. Take Al Sharpton. He got started by bashing Jews, but Jews bought him off, and so, he hollers about 'white supremacy' but never denounces Jewishness or stick up for Palestinians or all those Arabs murdered by Wars for Israel. Blacks are really into "what's mine", and if you pay them enough and stoke their vanity, their principles go out the window. They are like Scatman Crothers in ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST saying, "I'm on my knees, brother, I'm on my knees."
So, by putting globo-homo or Negrolatry before one's own ethnicity & origins, Identity Politics doesn't go very far for the POD or People of Diversity. Whether you're Hindu, Mexican, Chinese, Iranian, Arab, Turk, or whatever, you must put globo-homo and Negrolatry before your people, your culture, and your identity. So, while meritocracy will lead you up the ladder, you are stopped at the gates to the top unless you put globo-homo and Negrolatry before your own identity.
And of course, there is the Big Kahuna of Holocaust Worship and mindless support for Zionism. If you fail that test, forget about reaching higher. No matter how talented, intelligent, or well-credentialed you are, you will be stopped at the gates if you don't put globo-homo, Negrolatry, and Jew-Worship at the top of your concerns. Jew-Worship directly serves the Jews, and GloboHomo and Negrolatry indirectly serve the Jews as Jews pretty much own and manipulate both.

Homos eagerly work with Jews because Jews favor them as allies. And blacks know that, on their own, they haven't the money and the talent to amass much power or prestige. Blacks know Jews are using them, but they also get to use Jews. So, there is a symbiotic relationship, with both groups sticking it to Whitey to grab more for themselves.
If you only want to work in the engine room, you may rely on your merit alone. But if you want to reach any higher and come near the captain's cabin, you must pass the Smell Test, meaning you must reek of Globo-Homo, Negrolatry, and Jew-Worship.

How clever Jews played the game. Their Narrative has people believing that the US went from 'white supremacism' to the happy empire of D.I.E or Diversity-Inclusion-Equity, but the rules of the game is such that Jews remain at the top and rig the entrance exam whereby ability alone isn't enough for YOU to enter the upper echelons of power. If you want a place alongside the Jewish Masters, you better support globo-homo, Negrolatry, and Jew Worship. Otherwise, it's back to the engine room. You can work the machinery but you won't be anywhere near the captain's wheel. Jews own the wheel.
Because you must pass the Jewish Smell Test(rigged to favor Jewish Power uber alles), all this talk of D.I.E is just a big fat lie. In other words, the US didn't go from White-centrism to World-centrism but went to Jewish-centrism with the World being made to serve the Jews. Sure, many more diverse peoples now live in the US and can rise up the ladder, but if they really want to reach high, they must put globo-homo, Negrolatry, and Jew Worship before and above their own identity, ethnicity, culture, and values. After all, it is the elites at the very top who decide how all the money, military, and resources of America will be used. Most of us just work and pay taxes. We pay but don't have a say. Only Jews and their minions who passed the Smell Test have the say to use the wealth and power generated by all Americans to their favored ends.

So, for all the talk of 'multi-culturalism', you better not bring your Muslim, Hindu, or Confucian values if you want to reach high up the ladder. You must put them in the closet and instead wave the homo flag, chant BLM slogans, and kneel at the feet of Jews. Thus, the current order has the LOOK OF DIVERSITY but works according to the rule of "Is it Great for Jews?" There are many Hindus placed highly in Silicon Valley, but what are they all about? They are about Jew Worship and Globo-Homo. Even though Hindus remember the 'bad ole days' of British Imperialism, they don't say or do anything for Palestinians living under White Jewish Zionist oppression. Rather, they work with Jews and pledge total commitment to globo-homo and BLM. And look at Andrew Yang in New York defaming BDS by smearing it with the Nazi label. The yellow dog will say and do anything to be in good graces with the Jews who run NY. So, outwardly, it seems like Diversity is making gains over White America, but the diverse minions only serve the supremacism of Jews.

To reach the top, you can be critical of the Russian nation, culture, and people. You can be critical of the Chinese nation, culture, and people. You can be critical of the Iranian nation, culture, and people. You can be critical of the Mexican nation, culture, and people. You can be critical of the Turkish nation, culture, and people. You can be critical of Arab nations, cultures, and peoples. And of course, you MUST BE critical and even condemnatory of Western White Folks.
But you may NOT be critical of the Jewish nation, culture, and people. You may not be critical of blacks in any shape or form. You may not be critical of homos and trannies. What does that tell you? There is no equality within Diversity. Some groups are more equal than others. A Jew or black or homo doesn't have to praise Muslims, Chinese, Russians, Turks, or Iranians to reach the top BUT people who aren't black, Jewish, or homo must prostrate themselves before Negrolatry, Jew Worship, and Globo-Homo if they want in. And as they get in by totally cucking before Jewish Power, their only option is to slavishly serve Jews with the gratitude of having been let in.

So, America went from 'white supremacism' to 'Jewish supremacism', but so many people fail to see this because of the cover of D.I.E. People think, "Hey, look at the blacks and Asians in government!" Never mind that whether it's Nikki Haley or Kamala Harris, it's all about whoredom to Jews and sticking it to the Palestinians.
And given the nature of the Smell Test, no person of any conscience, integrity, or decency may apply. There's no chance that anyone like Ron Paul or Tulsi Gabbard will rise very high. While far from perfect, Ron Paul has stood by his libertarian principles, and Gabbard is sincerely committed to world peace. That simply won't do. No wonder the government is filled with shameless snakes like Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Mike Pompeo, Susan Rice, James Clapper, and the like who will sell their souls to the devil to be part of the In-Club.

Jewishness is the New Faith in the US, and that means Jews Always Win regardless of Political Outcomes — Jews as the 'New Whites' — White Conservatism Cannot Win Worshiping the Gods controlled by Jews and rigged to elevate Jews to Godhood while casting Whiteness down into Hell as Demonism

Jews control the gods, and that means they decide what is holy and unholy, what is sacred and what is taboo.

Now, if only one half the nation accepts those gods and demons, the other half would at least be free to worship its own gods. But what if ALL of the nation worships those same gods. Then, both or all political parties must honor those gods and hound those demons. As Jews control the gods of the entire nation, Jews are advantaged while whites are damned. Why? Jews who control the gods via media, academia, and organs of the state made Jewishness holy and whiteness unholy. So, whereas BOTH parties must kneel before Jewish holiness, neither party can stick up for whiteness. Indeed, the Democratic Party denounces and defames whiteness(to the point where the slightest whiff of white identity or interest counts as 'white supremacy'), and the best the GOP can do is to be timid and silent. Indeed, the anti-white Democratic Party has the gods on its side because whiteness is now the Devil. Surely, the side that denounces the Devil has the moral advantage against the side that is either silent or tepid in its anti-Devil rhetoric. Because whiteness is the Devil, neither side can speak up in its favor. One can denounce it like the Democrats or remain mum on the matter, like the GOP(though there are plenty of anti-whites in the GOP as well). GOP is NEVER explicitly pro-white. The great majority of White Conservatives vote for the GOP as the un-anti-white or less anti-white party than the pro-white party.

Now, if Democrats favored the gods of the Jews whereas the GOP favored the gods of proud whites, we can have a clash-of-the-titans scenario. "Their gods vs our gods." But when both sides worship the same gods and reject the same demons, the side that is more passionate in its worship and denunciation has the moral ground. Democrats are seen as morally superior and spiritually holier because they have the blessing of the Holy Three of Jews, Homos, & Negroes and make more sanctimonious noises in their honor.
In a world where Jews control the gods, those three groups are the ultimate icons of sanctity. And as white 'conservatives' have drunken the same Kool Aid with their 'muh Israel' & 'holy holocaust' invocations, MLK worship, and even acceptance of globo-homo, they are at a severe moral disadvantage. After all, no matter how much the GOP claims to be for Jews, blacks, and homos, the fact remains most Jews, blacks, and homos are with the Democratic Party. As Jews, blacks, and homos are holy and better than the rest, the Democratic Party must be superior as most Jews, blacks, and homos choose to be Democrats. If God blesses one thing over another, the former must be better as who are we to question God? Similarly, if Jews, blacks, and homos are indeed holier, their blessings upon the Democratic Party must mean it is the better party of angels. This is the fatal weakness of White American Conservatism. It values the Holy Other over its Selfness. Whiteness is like a planet revolving around the Jewish sun as the source of moral radiance. As if incapable of generating its own light, it relies on the Other, the Holy Jew, for the light. But then, what is the control of electronic media but control of the modern sun? Jews control the media. Those who can't or aren't allowed to create their own light/sun have no recourse but to rely on the light/sun of the Other, and the Jewish Light is coded with the message, "Worship and Obey Jews", as if without Jewish 'wisdom' and 'truth', there can only be darkness and ignorance among your kind. Indeed, the reason why Jews push Censchwarzhip in the Age of the Internet is there finally is a means by which goyim can independently create and share their own light. Jews want a world where they not only own the main bonfire but the means to make fire. After all, if everyone can make fire on their own, they won't have to rely on the main bonfire and could make their own fires to rival the bonfire. No wonder Jews ordered Amazon to shut down Parler and other free speech sites. It's like the British Imperialists once monopolized the salt trade in India. Making and selling of salt independent of British Control might as well have been called 'hate salt'. But then, today the dirty lowlife Hindus work with Jews to colonize and control the West.

At any rate, while the GOP denounces overt displays of white supremacism like KKK and Nazis, it doesn't go whole hog on denouncing whiteness itself. In contrast, the Democratic Party does. So, in the current 'spiritual configuration', the Democrats totally denounce the White Devil whereas the GOP does only half-heartedly. As if to compensate for this moral deficit(of fully condemning the Devil), white 'conservatives' make noises about how 'Democrats are the real racists' or how GOP is even more pro-Israel or how 'conservatives' care more about defending homos from Muslims. So, white 'conservatives' can never be for whites or whiteness. At most, they don't denounce the White Devil as vociferously as the other side, but this opens them to accusations of being uncommitted to fighting 'racism' and 'white supremacism'.

Jews have it so good because they control the gods, and that means both parties worship Jews, Zionism, Israel, Holy Holocaust, and Jewish Whatever. Jews know best, and that's that. So, even though Jews favor the Democratic Party, they know they will be revered, obeyed, and praised regardless of which side wins elections. If both parties and all factions in the US are united on ONE THING, it is total obeisance toward Jews.
It's like whether Catholics or Protestants win, God wins because despite their sectarian differences, both churches worship the same God and Jesus. So, God and Jesus can never lose among the Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox. The various churches may bicker among themselves over interpretations and institutions, but they are all for God. Also, the Devil is always the loser regardless of which church dominates society. Whether a particular society is ruled by Catholics, Protestants, or Orthodox folks, the Devil is always bad.
As Jews control the gods in the US, Jews are worshiped by both sides. Democrats and Biden praise Jews and Israel. Trump, McConnell, and the GOP praise Jews and Israel. Even Jewish crooks are allowed to run free and remain above the laws. Jews are to US political parties what God is among the three main Christian Churches: Catholic, Protestant, and Orthodox. Just like God always wins among the three churches, Jews always win regardless between the two parties. Jews are worshiped by all.
In contrast, whites and whiteness in American Politics are like the Devil in the Christian Churches. Regardless of which church controls society, the Devil is denounced, and regardless of which party wins office, whiteness is either bad(the Dems) or not good(the Repubs). Democrats now denounce whiteness with murderous glee, and the most the GOP can offer as counterpoint is, "We whites are okay because we go out on a limb to worship Jews, blacks, and even homos."

Things were so different in the past. Back then, US was a Eurocentric nation and proud of it. Whiteness was at the center of American Politics and Culture. So was Christianity. Neither political party could win by denouncing whites or whiteness. So, whatever differences there existed among the political parties, they all pandered to white identity and white interests because whiteness was, if not holy, a matter of pride, glory, and dignity. Even Jews and blacks sought to be a part of the White Order as a 'credit to their race' in the eyes of the great White Power. And neither Democrats nor Republicans had any notion of promoting anti-whiteness. And while there was white sympathy for other groups, such as American Indians, blacks, Jews, or poor immigrants, they were not objects of worship but of pity.

US used to be a nation where the glory of and respect for whiteness was a given. Just about everyone in the Democratic Party and Republican Party was pro-white and pandered to whites. FDR and Harry Truman relied on countless white voters who would now be called 'racist'. Also, the theme of Past Liberalism was "whites are good but can be better" and therefore must allow reforms for a more perfect union. It wasn't about 'whites are evil' or 'whiteness is demonic', the dogma of the current 'progressivism'. As for American Conservatives, they won't as yet join in the 'whites are the devil' chorus but they won't say anything good or proud about the white race, white culture, or white history. At best, they are into 'boomer antics' of appealing to either colorblindness(which no one cares about anymore) or sappily trying to prove that 'conservatives' are not 'racist', 'antisemitic', or 'homophobic'. Always defensive and apologetic than assertive and judgmental like the other side.

In more ways than one, Jews have become the New Whites. In the past, both political parties pandered to whiteness as the essence of Americanism. It was understood that Europeans settled and built America. Whites were proud that America was built with ideas, values, and skills brought over from Europe. So, whatever the ideological differences, whites didn't have to worry about the threat to whiteness regardless of which party won. Some whites may disagree with Republican policies and other whites may disagree with Democratic policies, but those were mostly over economic matters. GOP was better for more affluent whites whereas the Democratic Party was better for working class whites, but the important thing was both parties were pro-white. So, whatever the political or economic outcomes of elections, there was hardly any negative racial consequence for whiteness. Indeed, FDR running an anti-white campaign would have been inconceivable. If anything, even Liberals back then ran a very pro-white campaign against the 'Japs'. And the moral theme against Nazi Germany wasn't about White Evil but about good freedom-loving whites of US and UK against the tyranny-embracing Teutons under Hitler. In our time, however, the Democratic Party and even the GOP are loathe to speak of any goodness associated with whites or whiteness. Whites can only be good by washing themselves of the sin of 'whiteness'. This is what they teach in Whiteness Studies, which is nothing but Dogma on Deviltry.

What whites enjoyed in the past, Jews now enjoy. It is unimaginable for anyone in either political party being critical of Jews, Jewish privilege, Zionism, Israel, or Jewish Supremacism. Jewishness is a Given in the current idolatry. Just like Rudolf Hess once said "Hitler is Germany, Germany is Hitler", the current US order is about "Jews are America, America is Jews." Whatever differences may exist between the GOP and Democratic Party, they are 100% united on one thing: "We Cuck to Jews who are now bigger than god and jesus." Even with Jews doing everything to destroy Donald Trump and smear American Conservatism, the only thing we hear from GOP is 'Muh Israel', 'Destroy Iran for Jews', and 'Todd Bless Sheldon Adelson'.

If Whiteness was once a Given in Old America where no politician could gain office by bashing whites or whiteness, Jewishness is the Given in New America where no politician or pundit dares to call out on Jewish Power or denounce Jews when they do wrong. Indeed, it's gotten to the point where noticing that a Jew is doing bad is worse than a Jew doing bad. So, if a Jew sticks your behind with a knife, his violence is less problematic than you noticing 'A Jew stabbed me in the ass'. Jews were behind the Jew D'Etat over the bogus Ukraine Scandal, but that hardly mattered and the main worry was anyone noticing, "Hey, it's a cabal of Jews up to no good."

Goyim in the Democratic Party suck up to their Jews, and goyim in the GOP suck up to their Jews. And of course, the Jews of the Democratic Party and Jews of the GOP meet behind closed doors and work together on the basis of "Is it great for Jews?"

The more things change, the more they remain the same. True, whites are no longer on top, but Jews are now the New Whites. But actually things are worse. After all, even though whiteness itself wasn't attacked by politicians and leaders in the past, there were calls for reform against evils done by whites. At the very least, it was understood that whites could be good or they could be bad. Even though whiteness was a matter of pride and dignity, it wasn't a license to do whatever. This allowed for reforms within the white community. The idea was whiteness is a matter of pride, and therefore, whites must be mindful to live up to their dignity. So, even though whiteness was favored over non-whiteness, whites were hardly blameless or immune to criticism. Whiteness was proud but wasn't sacred.

In contrast, Jewishness is more than a matter of pride. It is regarded as downright sacred and holy, therefore, immune from scrutiny and criticism. Per chance some Jew commits a great evil and goes to jail, he gets special treatment and is likely to be pardoned sooner than later because Jews all look out for one another as fellow tribesmen. Jews believe that even a bad Jew's liberty is more precious than the lives of countless goyim.
Not only are Jews served by both parties but no one dares to criticize anything about Jewishness. Even so-called 'radicals' in the Democratic Party support anti-BDS legislation and travel to Israel and stand before the Wailing Wall like cucked dogs.

Even when whites had it all in the US, there was the reminderr among whites, "We are good but can be better and must strive toward creating a more perfect union", and this entailed necessary criticism of certain abuses of white power and privileges and also the obligations of Wasp power and privilege. But there is no moral pressure on Jews toward betterment because they and their goy servants regard Jewishness as holy and godlike.
A proud people of dignity are still human and have room for improvement, and that's how whites felt about themselves in the past. But why would a people into self-worship ever bother with self-criticism or self-improvement? They are holy, they are godlike, and that means goyim are mere cattle who exist mainly to serve Jews. And why would goyim dare to make criticism when Jews deserve not only respect but worship? After all, you don't criticize the gods. Either out of mindless obeisance or abject fear(or both), no one dares to name the Jew, and that means American Democracy has become dysfunctional. For all the talk of 'liberal democracy' and electoral processes, the modus operandi of American Political Psychology is hardly different from Stalinism, with Jewish Power now revered, worshiped, and obeyed like Stalin in the bad old days of the Soviet Union.

Political psychology matters as much as political processes. Imagine if North Korea became a democracy(as process) with free elections BUT the Political Psychology of the Kim Cult remained. It would technically be a democracy but still operate like a 'theocracy' because most people would have an irrational attachment to idolizing and serving the Kim Clan. Political Freedom is useless in tandem with Psychological Bondage, which is the case of the US. Despite all the talk of freedoms, liberties, and rights, the depressing truth is so many people, high-middle-low, are psychologically chained to the gods controlled by Jews. Appeasing Jews and their allies is the highest good in the emotional realm of so many Americans. It could be some no-name Karen whose entire life revolves around 'Muh Israel', BLM, and LGBT nuttery. Or it could be some cuckservative in the GOP so eager to win doggy biscuits from Jewish Power by praising Israel or embracing Lady Gaga. Or, it could be some Deep State goon who thinks he's on the side of angels because he serves the globo-homo neo-imperialism. (For shallow fools, celebration of sodomy is next to godliness. What do you expect in a society where Pop Culture is The Culture for most people, from elites to the masses?) Or, it could be Trump who can't stop blabbering about how he loves to take it up the arse from Netanyahu and did wonders for black employment rates. Never mind whites.

Ron Paul style Libertarianism is Useless against Globalist Gangster Fascism of the Deep State & Big Industry, both of which worship the Gods controlled by Jewish Power — Only Solution against Globo-Homo Gangster Fascism is the National-Humanist Neo-Fascism of the Patriots

When Fascism Comes, It Will be Wearing a Mask - Ron Paul http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/january/25/when-fascism-comes-it-will-be-wearing-a-mask/

The problem is not fascism as all power is fascist. The question is WHO controls it.

US is under Jewish Supremacist gangster fascism. THAT is the problem.

A true liberal democracy never existed and is impossible. Every system is dominated by one group and its arm of the deep state. And there’s always bound to be a close working relation between big government and big business. Japan Inc. developed that way. So did Germany in the 19th century. So, if state + industry means fascism, even democracies have been fascist. Israeli state and Israeli industry support one another. If that is the definition of fascism, Israel is fascist.

The real problem is that the use of power in the US is centered on Jewish Supremacist interests.

We see this in the apotheosis of the tranny. Now, did most women want this? Did they want to take a backseat to a bunch of freako men pretending to be ‘women’? No. It was Jews who wanted it. Why? Jews seek to suppress any notion of majority identity and pride. Among womenfolk, real women are more than 99% whereas tranny faux-women count for less than 1%. And yet, women now must make way for trannies as champions of female sports.
Why? Jews see tranny power/privilege as analogous to Jewish power/privilege. In both cases, it’s the minority-elite dictating and dominating over the vast majority. When the great majority of goyim let themselves fall under Jewish Power, stuff like globo-homo and transmania were almost inevitable as furtherance of Jewish Power Strategy. Jews see it as cultural rhyming: Jewish minority elite power rhymes with tranny minority elite power.

Against Jewish gangster-fascism, we need a fascism of our own. The problem in America is not the threat of fascism but lack of our fascism against their fascism.

Ron Paul is a nice guy and all. He means well, but libertarianism is useless as a power strategy because it atomizes people into individuals who only care about ‘muh freedom’. To fight the concentrated unity of Jewish supremacism, goyim must unite into ‘ouh power’.
Why did Western frontier towns need sheriffs and deputies? Whereas the outlaws led by Lee Marvin were united in their nastiness, the townsfolk were divided as individuals and too disorganized to come together as a fighting force against the bullies and baddies. It’s like Frank Miller and three men can subdue an entire town in HIGH NOON because the folks don’t think and act as one; each person thinks only of ‘muh life’. It’s like a small pride of lions can kill lots of wildebeest because the latter never unite as a fighting force but only flee with ‘muh life’ in mind. If wildebeest acted as one, there’s no way lions could kill them.

The weakness of libertarianism is evident in the post by the libertarian John Matze(CEO of Parler):

https://parler.com/

The pooter-boy posted a comment:

"Many upsetting things have occurred over the last year. The natural reaction is to cast blame, or to jump to pre-mature conclusions.
We should, in the spirit of Parley, place aside our differences, place aside our biases of one another, and have a respectful conversation in order to improve our society. We shall check our baggage at the door, and start fresh with one another.
I believe everyone in the tech community, political, and others should put their differences aside to move forward together."

What a wuss. Big Tech companies under direction of nasty Jews colluded to shut his company down, and Big Media, also run by Jews, praise the censchwarzship and smear his reputation(and encourage antifa types to make threats to his family), but pooter-boy Matze sheepishly pleads for civility and discourse.
A man so incapable of righteous anger is worthless, but that is the essence of libertarianism, and it affects so many even on the Dissident Right. The sheer dweebiness is sickening. While mere anger doesn’t get one anywhere, neither do mere ideas or facts. It is rage, anger, or passion that fuels whatever ideas one believes in or facts one espouses. Andrew Torba of Gab has the passion along with the idealism. In contrast, Matze is a wuss, a dweeb, a pooter-boy.

Even funnier is his notion that ‘in the spirit of Parley, place aside our differences…’

What? The whole spirit of a site like Parler is to air the differences and have honest discussions and let the chips fall where they may. If the spirit of Parler is to hold hands and sing kumbaya, Matze should serve as waterboy on the Oprah Show. This is why libertarianism is useless. It is weak. And many dissident right types are weak at heart because they began as libertarians who never appreciated the power of unity via fascism.

All power is fascist. So, we need to stop denouncing bad power as ‘fascist’. Rather, we should identify the bad power correctly as THEIR FASCISM while working to construct OUR FASCISM based on our identity and the real truth.

It is war. When the enemy is united and attacking as a force, the last thing you want to do is to tell the men on your side, “Fight as individual soldiers and never unite into a fighting force as that would be ‘fascist’.” Well, that's libertarian thinking. Ron Paul is a nice guy and means well, but his ideals are utterly useless in the real world. An atomized people will lose to a united people, indeed even when the former outnumbers the latter by a huge margin. Always. Consider. If there are 1,000 goyim and just 10 Jews BUT if goyim only act as individuals whereas Jews fight as a group of ten, Jews will win every encounter. There is no power without unity, and that is one of the essences of fascism. Jews act fascist but smear others as 'fascist'. It is a power strategy to keep the advantage of fascism for themselves while discouraging it among others. We need to call out on Jewish fascism and build our own counter-fascism. If you're honest, you'll know it's the only way.

FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR SARA CARTER AMPLIFIES DEFAMATION OF YOURS TRULY, PROVING FOX IS TRASH

Notes on THE ELEPHANT MAN(directed by David Lynch) as Reviewed in Counter-Currents Journal — How Goodness Can Grow Cancerous, Blind to Its Ultimate Badness

https://counter-currents.com/2021/01/the-elephant-man/

I watched THE ELEPHANT MAN long ago and didn't think much of it. Watching it again, it is clearly far from David Lynch's best though still head-and-shoulders above most 'serious' movies. One wonders why Mel Brooks chose Lynch. Did he think Lynch, the creator of ERASERHEAD, would do a humorless version of YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN, because some of the film comes across that way. It being a Mel Brooks production, Anne Bancroft was slipped into the unconvincing role of a famous British actress, but there are bigger problems.

One stems from the projection of Lynch's own universe onto material that has only passing similarities with his obsessions. The story of Joseph or 'John' Merrick(played by John Hurt) is one of physical, indeed all too visible, horror. It is also a morality tale premised on humanism and Christian sentiments. While Lynch's universe is not without moral meaning or spiritual dimensions, Lynch doesn't to morality tale very well. It's too simple and square for his sensibilities. The 'square' quality in Lynch's works tend to be squared. Square and queer intersect in his best works, making it all very 'squeer'.

YOUNG FRANKENSTEIN by Mel Brooks

THE ERASERHEAD suffers from the same problem that befell Andrei Tarkovsky's SOLARIS and other works where friction between competing conceptions led to clutter than spark. It happens when the original material and the auteur's take are so much at odds. Stanislaw Lem's SOLARIS is a philosophical novel about the limits of intellect and imagination in face of something that confounds our sense of time and space. To this, Tarkovsky added the thing about the Russian Soul and familial sentiments. Much of the film is impressive but Lem's intellectualism and Tarkovsky's iconography fail to fuse. It's like a chemistry experiment gone wrong. But then, there's little to indicate Tarkovsky had much interest in Lem's foundation and instead just poured his own material over it. It's like someone given the recipe and ingredients for Polish cooking but making a Russian dish with them. In some ways, SOLARIS is more problematic(though also more impressive) than THE ELEPHANT MAN because, whereas Lynch stuck with the basic material and only added 'Lynchian' touches, Tarkovsky wholly transformed SOLARIS in its trajectory and meaning. Instead of dry, it is wet. If Lem's novel is about staring into the vast unknown and resigning to its mystery, Tarkovsky's film is essentially about homesickness and the pull of Mother Earth. In the end, the man seems hardly interested in the planet of Solaris, and furthermore, his melancholia is about his ambition as astronaut over his duty as son(as his father will die without him at the deathbed).

Andrei Tarkovsky's SOLARIS, more about earth than space.

THE SHINING is an interesting case. Stanley Kubrick apparently had little interest in Stephen King's novel, which was used merely as base material for his own ideas, and yet, it not only works but far surpasses the original material. It seems he understood the potential inherent in the basic scenario more than King did himself. But then, Kubrick-and-King wasn't exactly like Tarkovsky-and-Lem. The former is like giant and midget whereas the latter is like giant and giant. A giant could more easily step over a midget than a giant over a giant. Also, Kubrick's broadmindedness allowed for playfulness(and masterly creative footwork) whereas Tarkovsky could become mired in the muck with his heavy boots.

While Lynch's touches in THE ELEPHANT MAN are immediately recognizable(and surely of interest to Lynch fans), they are out-of-place because Lynch imposed his unique inner-space onto a world that plays by a different set of rules. STRAIGHT STORY works better because Lynch made it more about the old man's journey than his own vision, and if 'Lynchian' touches are to be found, they are around the curve than right in front. But, the man who made THE ELEPHANT MAN was younger, less experienced, and perhaps over-eager. As he'd made his name as a cult film-maker, he surely had ambitions to break into the industry and gain real success. On the one hand, he had to be 'conventional' to reach a mass audience, but he also wanted to retain what made him unique and different. He wanted to buy in but didn't want to sell out. THE ELEPHANT MAN is both success and failure in this regard. It does appear as a unique directorial work, and it resonated with critics and audiences. But, one can't help feeling the basic material was too straight for Lynch's imagination and Lynch was too weird for the simple morality tale. It's like a tale of two movies, both the best of movies and worst of movies.

While it's true Lynch's cinema has hardly been a stranger to the ugly, grotesque, and disgusting, the deformities tend to reside in or originate from psychological and bio-psychological(where matter energizes into the mind) space. Despite the rotting dead bodies and the violence, the real horror in TWIN PEAKS is about inner demons. It's about distortions and contortions within the mind and soul that make Lynch's films so strange and dream-like.
In contrast, THE ELEPHANT MAN is about a man whose deformities could be spotted from a mile away. He's so ugly he wears a bag over his head wherever he goes. Also, as far as we can tell, he is all sweet soul inside. Also, the good characters are obviously so(as they look it), whereas the bad characters are just as easily identifiable. (Consider the convoluted multi-layered moral/spiritual dilemmas in TWIN PEAKS.) This hardly makes for a Lynchian tale, and THE ELEPHANT MAN has the touches but not the handiwork of the real Lynch. More problematically, the touches seem out of place.

If Mel Brooks thought Lynch made a natural fit for John Merrick's story on the strength of ERASERHEAD, he totally didn't get the film. As in a dream, the unreal becomes the real and 'normal' in ERASERHEAD. True strangeness derives from how the unreal or abnormal can seem real or normal, or vice versa. The hideous baby in ERASERHEAD is unsettling because it isn't human but assumed to be one, or the product of human pairing. Now, if the world of ERASERHEAD were totally fantastical, it wouldn't be strange because we could just suspend our disbelief and take it as fantasy. But the film is situated somewhere between grimy realism and warped surrealism. It has the logic and feel of dreams where the unreal is accepted as part of the mundane.

THE ELEPHANT MAN is wholly different. It's about a man with obvious deformities. As such, he's ugly and grotesque but never strange... unlike the baby and other oddball things in ERASERHEAD that are presented as normative within its closed space. Also, the notion of Merrick as ugly on the outside but beautiful on the inside is rather trite, though also timeless, I suppose. The two cliches of moral physiognomy has been (1) the good look good and bad look bad and (2) good look bad and bad look good. Though opposites, both are premised on formulas, as with CINDERELLA and THE UGLY DUCKLING.
In contrast, consider how evil slithers through the beautiful and the ugly alike in the world of TWIN PEAKS. Or consider the physiognomic instability in MULHOLLAND DR. In contrast, THE ELEPHANT MAN is about a very ugly man who is beautiful inside and the rest of the characters look and act good OR look and act bad. David Lynch was too good for this. The result is someone skilled in calculus assigned to simple mathematics.

THE ELEPHANT MAN is two movies, and they don't mesh well. It begins as a clinical drama about a doctor and his patient. As it turns out, the dynamics goes from medical to moral. The doctor cannot do anything to treat, let alone cure, the Merrick's deformities. Thus, the doctor is as useless as any of us. However, he can lend moral support and, furthermore, realizes that Merrick is less diseased than many people who, though looking human, don't act human. On some level, Dr. Treves(played by Anthony Hopkins) feels that he is the patient vis-a-vis Merrick as the doctor, that of souls than bodies.
Of course, there's another question. Did Merrick's ugliness have something to do with his goodness? Leered at, ridiculed, and abused, was Merrick compelled by personal agonies to be good? Is his goodness innate or the product of experience? Granted, ugly and victimized people can be wicked, and handsome affluent people can be good(like Dr. Treves), but Merrick's physical condition surely molded his soul. Perhaps, two kinds of people are most inclined to be good or 'good'(as its meaning has changed so much over the years): Those with proper upbringing and privilege to be educated and respectable, like Dr. Treves, and those who were denied freedom and tyrannized into submission, like Merrick. Treves has the means and even the 'luxury' to be good. In contrast, Merrick had no chance to be 'bad' as his entire life was about forced obedience and silent suffering. (The exaggerated sympathy for blacks-as-slaves confuses black suffering with black virtue. Blacks-as-slaves had no choice but to be 'good', which is not the same as being innately good.) Merrick was trained and kept like an animal. The two groups of 'good' people represent polarities, one where a person has the wherewithal to be decent and be rewarded for it and another where a person has no freedom but to obey and submit, i.e. 'be meek before the master'. In contrast, the 'bad' is more likely to be found among people who are free but only enough to get by. Most of their freedom is expended on making ends meet. Thus, their freedom has less means to grow nobler, and they're more likely to be self-centered and cynical, like the two louts in THE ELEPHANT MAN: the freak show operator and the security guard.

This dynamics plays out in current configuration of the virtue-signaling elites, the deplorables, and the wretched of the earth. As far as Western PC is concerned, the white elites are good(or at least better) people because they got higher education, rub shoulders with respectable members of society, and enjoy the luxury of being virtuous(or making a show of it); and the wretched of the earth, especially blacks and would-be-migrants from the Third World, are good people because, having been crushed and tyrannized by history, their struggle is one of elementary bread and justice(or so PC likes to believe). The noble-minded elites and the long-suffering victims.
In between are said to be the worst kind of people, usually working-class and lower-middle-class white types who, though free, lack the intelligence & the means to attain fancy education, don't hang with the right kind of people, and haven't the luxury to be generous as they're so focused on making ends meet. So, even though Treves is a good man whereas the two worst men, the freak show operator and security guard, are indeed pretty bad, the moral dynamics of the film does betray a certain class snobbery; indeed, the film indicates that some of the puritanism of current PC has its roots in the Victorian Era.
After all, despite all the misery among the working classes, it seems the elites in the film are more concerned about a one-in-a-ten-million rare freak to hang their cloak of virtue on. What an easy way for the snobs to feel superior to the rabble. And it's no wonder Mel Brooks the Jew was drawn to the story. Jews like him feel nothing for the white majority. They don't care that the Sackler Family peddled drugs that killed off countless whites. No, by emphasizing the freak(as a stand-in for the outsider-minority) as the paragon of victimized virtue, the film diminishes the hardships of millions of toiling workers in favor of a lone freak who becomes a virtue-trophy among the elites.

If the clinical drama between Treves and Merrick is pretty solid(much like in THE WILD CHILD by Francois Truffaut) and if Merrick as a social phenomenon — freak of nature worthy of mockery for lumpen gawkers but victim of fate worthy of sympathy for the well-heeled elites — is interesting(though could have been delved further), the crowd-pleasing narrative of Merrick being forcibly returned to the freak show and then rescued by a band of sympathetic freaks seems to be totally made up, especially as it's loaded with the familiar tropes. One more danger and one more escape to spice up Merrick's life. It's almost right out of PINOCCHIO. It works for what it is but undermines with high suspense and drama the steady and somber tone of the rest of the film, though it does culminate in an eloquent scene about Merrick being a man and not an animal. But was that outcry meant ironically? After all, an animal, dog or donkey, would have been less hostile to Merrick than many of his fellow human beings were. Indeed, the donkey is the most sympathetic character in AU HASARD BALTHASAR that might have influenced THE ELEPHANT MAN, which in turn, might have been an influence on A.I. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE.

Perhaps, the writers thought the film needed some dramatic uplift, and what better way than to have Merrick kidnapped, abused, and then returned to a relative state of grace? But that very approach mimics the dual purpose that Merrick served in his lifetime: Sensationalism for the masses, edification for the elites. On the one hand, THE ELEPHANT MAN wants to be a serious art film, but it can't help throwing a bone to the masses with trite dramatic cliches.

Lynch’s treatment is sentimental and compassionate, not lurid and exploitative.

It would have been better as cold-and-compassionate. The sentimentality cheapens it a bit.

the grotesque subject matter and sentimental manner of treating it are also quite Lynchian.

Not quite. Even though Lynch understands sentiment which is to be found in his works, there's usually a sense of irony or layers of dissonance between the recognizably shopworn emotions and the troubled gaze. He doesn't mock it or deny its value but observes as a zoologist might another species. Lynch has been like a zoologist of humans through the prism of dreams and fantasies. In contrast, the sentimentality of THE ELEPHANT MAN is worn on its sleeve and therefore isn't really Lynchian. Lynch veiled too much of his artistic self to convey more-or-less a straight story laden unfortunately with some Hollywood cliches.

In a way, Lynch held back his authentic self but didn't adjust to professionalism with much conviction. Too much in the film is perfunctory and merely scratches the surface. It lacks the probing quality of Ingmar Bergman in, say, SAWDUST AND TINSEL. Despite moments of reflection, we are left to take too much of the characters and conflicts at their face value. It is Lynch's most theater-like work, but the classic use of actors and dialogue was never Lynch's forte. He's been one of the most uniquely cinematic directors whose best works have no counterparts in other art-forms. Despite some Lynchian touches(most of which are irrelevant to the material), the result could have been done just as well or even better by Sidney Lumet or Sydney Pollack.

----------------------------------------

Back then, freaks needed sympathy and protection from scorn and ridicule. And ‘good’ people did show compassion, though one never knows if it was more about sympathy for a wretched creature or narcissism of their own virtue. The good folks deserve our respect, but there were seeds that could turn cancerous into moral narcissism, and over time, it has.

Indeed, white people in current Europe who hold up signs “REFUGEES WELCOME” are the perverse outgrowths of conceit of higher virtue of the Victorian Era. It just went from sexual repression to thought-repression. While some people simply wanted to be decent toward Merrick, others(like the Queen and High Society) seemed to bask in their exaggerated virtue. OH THEY CARE! But why all the attention showered on Merrick when so much of England at the time was beset with poverty, crime, and misery? Even many normal-looking people were mired in monstrous reality. And yet, it was easier to virtue-signal about the plight of some oddball freak than to do something about social problems affecting countless people. Social Darwinism for the masses but special love for the freak. In a way, it was an easy way for the elites to feel morally superior to the masses. As the ignorant and uneducated were less likely to feel sympathy for Merrick, the richer and better educated folks could sneer at the ‘bigots’.

Today, we see a similar dynamics on a much larger scale. There are so many problems in the West, but the ruling class and the elites ignore or deride much of that and would rather prefer to play savior-of-the-world. Down-and-out white working class are ‘deplorables’ (who are ‘racist’ and ‘bigoted’) while tons of illegals who barge in are compared to Jews fleeing the Nazis. (Does that mean their own people are like Nazis? If Guatemalans want to flee from other Guatemalans, it must mean Guatemalans themselves are the Nazis. But if they are the Nazis, why should we let them in? But then, if we say NO, we are like the Nazis. None of this makes any sense, but then, so much of current reality is a matter of ‘because Jews say so’.)

In the crazy present, the freaks get to define the New Normal. And, for the well-educated to feel virtuous, it is no longer sufficient to feel sympathy for natural freaks. It is necessary to prostrate oneself before them who’ve been elevated to the status of arbiters of values, health, and beauty.

How times have changed. From sympathy for the freaks to idolization of them.

And who is to decide what is healthy in America, physical and mental?

This creature, Rachel Levine, another crazy arrogant Jewish man pretending to be a 'woman':

In THE ELEPHANT MAN, a disfigured freak seeks meaning in faith in God. In the Current Year, we are supposed to find edification, ‘moral’ and ‘spiritual’, in the adulation of the freaks. Sodomy and cross-dressing are holier than god and jesus.

Of course, all this really took off with the normalization of homos. Before the film came out, the David Bowie stage version of THE ELEPHANT MAN was a sensation and won lots of accolades. Me thinks the prominently 'gay' theater people were especially ecstatic because they saw the play as an allegory about homosexuality.

https://www.davidbowie.com/blog/2020/7/29/bowies-elephant-man-debut-40-years-ago-today

With androgynous Bowie playing the Elephant Man, how could anyone miss that? Looks more like a homo’s vision of Merrick as St. Sebastian. Back then, many people, even Liberals, considered homosexuality to be aberrant or even monstrous, and AIDS was just on the horizon to reinforce such view. So, even though homosexuals don’t look monstrous in the literal sense, they felt society saw them as monstrous, which is why they were so violently opposed to the film CRUISING by William Friedkin.

And superhero series like X-MEN fantasize about freakery = special powers.

In a way, Dr. Treves was right to ask whether he’s a good person. Because even though he is good in the conventional sense, one can never know one’s deepest motives. Was it really humane sympathy for the freak? Or was it self-satisfaction in knowing that he’s unlike the rough-and-tumble mob that leered and jeered at Merrick? And is his goodness innate? Or was it the product of proper upbringing and elite education? Would he have been just as good had he been born into a poor working class family?

One thing for sure, even virtue carries the seeds of monstrosity. The virtues of altruism and trust in the West have turned into the monstrous will to commit racial suicide as detailed by Douglas Murray. We must be careful not to be bad, but beware of the 'good' as well. Too often, what is deemed as good is what makes us FEEL GOOD about ourselves, and it just so happens that mass passions are molded by the mass media controlled by the Power. It’s no wonder so many people who feel good about doing good today are so blind to the fact that they are really doing bad.

----------------------------------------

Given the opening scene with the elephants somehow having affected Merrick's birth, could it be suggesting that Merrick was a deformed elephant than a deformed man? An elephant deformed into the semblance of a man.

Man + Wolf has fascinated people the most, rather odd since man is closest to the apes. ALTERED STATES did touch upon the inner ape. Perhaps wolves are fascinating as wilder and more robust dogs, a sufficiently different but accessible species, whereas apes(that resemble us) seem ugly because we can’t help judging them by our standards. Indeed, they are too close for comfort. Come to think of it, we are even more likely to be repulsed by the sight of early humanoids than of apes. Closer something is to us, more we appraise and judge it by our standards. So, even though early humanoids are closer to us than snakes or crabs, they would freak us out more. Wolves are sufficiently different for us to feel this way. Btw, WOLFEN is one hell of a movie.

Man + Elephant seems totally weird because the species are so far apart. But in India, there are gods that are half man and half elephant. Ganesh has the head of an elephant.

----------------------------------------

Is there’s an ‘interracial’ element to THE ELEPHANT MAN?

The woman fantasizes about elephants(maybe in a sexual manner) and gives birth to a creature is hyped as half-man and half-‘elephant’. The fear of biological mixing? And what is an elephant? An African beast.

The other David who is more fascinated with the problems of racial mixing is David Cronenberg, who is Jewish.

In RABID, the physical encounter between a blonde ‘Aryan’ woman and a semitic-looking Jewish scientist leads to an outbreak of a horrific epidemic.

VIDEODROME is about inter-fusion between man and machine.

The remake of THE FLY is a Jewgro movie. A Jewish scientist’s DNA gets mixed with that of Superfly and he turns into a powerful hyper-sexual Negro-like Jew. The jerk publisher who competes for the woman also conveys the tensions of racial mixing. He looks Aryan but makes poses(like with a cigar) associated with the Semitic Sigmund Freud. He looks like a cross between Carl Jung and Freud, and of course, Cronenberg later made THE DANGEROUS METHOD, about the intellectual and spiritual friction between the Aryan spirit and Jewish soul represented through Jung and Freud(and other Jews).

And in EASTERN PROMISES, the old man says Naomi Watts’ kid died because she carried an interracial brood.

The Facts of WHAT Is Happening vs the WHY of Deep State Motives — Don't Waste Good Facts on Bad Faith — People of Power Know the Truth but Pretend Otherwise for Power or Opportunism

There's been lots of talk of Who/Whom, but it also comes down to What/Why, or one mustn't lose sight of the WHY in the blindsided pursuit of the WHAT. Of course, we need to nail down the WHAT, the facts of what's really happening. But, in focusing solely on the WHAT, there's the risk of overlooking the bigger problem of the WHY, or why do the elites who know the what(of what's really happening) keep pretending they don't know and push the big lie? Why the Lie?

People like Heather MacDonald, Colin Flaherty(of "White Girls Bleed A Lot"), and Paul Kersey of SBPDL have detailed ad infinitum on the WHAT of black crime and social pathologies. They said it over and over and over and backed it with facts caught on video, recorded in statistics, and/or reported by local news. So, there is no way the elites don't know the WHAT. They know. And blacks who live in the black community know the WHAT as well. They know most blacks are killed by blacks. And black leaders/elites know this too, the WHAT. (By the way, the police doesn't seem to appreciate support from conservatives because Jews control the gods. Police are people too and therefore affected by Jewish controlled media and academia; so, despite what they see on a daily basis, they too regard blacks and 'progressives' more highly than 'racist' conservatives. So, no matter how much conservatives support The Blue, the Blue feels disgruntled of being associated with 'bigotry' and 'racism' said to be rife on the Right.)

If indeed the problem of the elites were ignorance and naivete, we could concentrate on the WHAT and keep hammering the nails of facts in the hope that the ruling elites will finally realize the truth of what's really happening. But over the years, no amount of speaking the truth has done any good. The elites keep favoring lies over truth.
There is no way Jews don't know about the black reality. They saw what happened to New York from the 1960s to the early 1990s. And, there's a good reason why Israel especially doesn't want black migrants; Zionists know Africans are problematic. Jews know blacks are more muscular, aggressive, and impulsive. In private conversations among themselves and with goyim they trust, Jews will admit that 80% of America's problems owe to blacks. (They'll also admit Jews control the media.) So, they know privately but will not admit publicly. And when individual Jews enter media or government, they never speak the truth even though they know certain things to be absolutely true.

So, at some point, we need to obsess less on the WHAT and focus more on the WHY. And on that score, David Duke(despite his checkered past) is actually better than most figures on the so-called Dissident Right. Dr. Duke, though kooky in certain respects, directs the focus on the fact of Jewish Supremacist Power and explains the WHY of the Jewish Lie. Duke knows the problem with the Jews and the cucked goy elites is not ignorance but malignance. Jews are for total power, and they regard Black Magic as an effective way to bait whites with 'white guilt' and hook them with jungle fever.

DAVID DUKE: FACTS OF JEWISH SUPREMACY AND JEWISH RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE

Indeed, the Jewish Media and Elites are not suffering from the Big Ignorance but willfully indulging in the Big Lie because what matters most to them is money, power, prestige, and control than truth and justice. Jews value blacks as money-makers in sports and music industries controlled by Jews. Jews value black history/slavery as a gold mine of 'white guilt' that paralyzes white pride and agency, thereby turning whites into cuck-slaves of Jews and their allies, especially blacks and homos. Jews value black muscle to emasculate the white man into cuck-maggotry, thus rendering him even more servile. This way, the white man is cucked in both morality and manhood.

Also, by having holy blacks as allies, Jews can prevent the formation of the Black-Palestinian Alliance. Why was MLK so valuable to Jews? Because, even as MLK championed racial equality in the US, he supported Jewish Supremacism in Palestine/Israel. He became holy for his struggle for justice in America but was also allied with Zionists. Thus, Jews could push the political equation: Equal Justice = Support for Israel.
Mandela was a trickier matter for Jews because Israel was South Africa's #1 ally whereas ANC was allied with PLO. But of course, Jews hedged their bets. Even though rich Jews worked with Afrikaners against the black majority and even though Apartheid South Africa and Zionist-Supremacist Israel were joined at the hip, there were also Jewish Communists like Joe Slovo who bet on the Black Horse in South Africa. So, when Apartheid finally ended, Jews could say to blacks, "You see, we Jews were on your side." And Jews funneled so much cash to Mandela that he became chummy with Israel despite the fact that it had supported the Apartheid Regime and practices a far more brutal form of apartheid in the West Bank and Gaza. Of course, Jews must pay off blacks, and this isn't cheap, but then, Jews rake in so much money from black sports/music that the whole operation pays for itself.

It is time to focus less on the WHAT and more on the WHY. Indeed, the Power is mostly about the WHY than the WHAT. If we ponder the WHY, it's obvious why the Power so often prefers the Lie over the Truth. The Power is all about maintaining its grip, and more often than not, the truth is usually more damaging to the Power. It's like Elizabeth Holmes and other creeps at Theranos knew all about the WHAT, that they were pushing a fraud. So, WHY did they do it? Because they wanted the investments, profits, and adulation. No amount of facts would have convinced Holmes who only cared about How to serve the Why. Holmes was ultimately about her idolatrous apotheosis as the female Steve Jobs than about truth, health, saving lives, and etc. It was all about egotism. Likewise, the Sackler Family didn't care about all those dead white goy lives, which were expendable. Sackers surely knew that opioids were devastating white working class Americans. But they didn't care as long as they got the money, and with that money, they could buy moral prestige as famous philanthropists of the arts and good works.

Then, it's so easy to understand the WHY of Black Lives Matter. We can detail the WHAT of black crime and how BLM is built on a pack of lies, but BLM doesn't care about facts because it is really motivated by ethnocentrism of black self-worship. Blacks, like Jews and Homos, are perfect and never to be blamed. In the Bible, God is perfect and whatever He does or whatever happens can NEVER be blamed on Him. The blame must always fall on systemically sinful humanity. In our secular age, Jews control the gods, and the three holies are Jews, blacks, and homos. We must revere them as near-perfect, and so, even when bad things happen around them due to their bad behavior, the fault is not with them but with us for having failed them. So, if blacks loot and burn down cities, it is no fault of their own but their righteous punishment and smiting of us who didn't work hard enough to create a social order worthy of their divine presence.

Indeed, the fact that blacks, Jews, and progs resort to yapping about 'systemic racism' is they know BLM is factually unsound. The statistics invalidate BLM as facts tell another story: Too many blacks kill other blacks and non-blacks as well. So, to justify BLM, they frame the protests, riots, and vandalism in the larger perspective of the history and 'systemic racism'. Using this logic, anyone can justify anything. I can rob & steal and justify my crime as a rebellion against 'systemic oppression' since most of history has been about the powerful exploiting the powerless. I can invoke Cain & Abel and justify whatever I do as a rebellion against the sinfulness of humanity, i.e. since all of humanity has been so brutal and dark, I must be too in order to 'survive'.
It's a general rule that people invoke 'heaven' and make highfalutin claims because facts on the ground go against them. If a black steals from you, the facts favor you and incriminate the black. So, the black invokes HISTORY to justify his deed: "Heaven's on my side, so whatever I do, no matter how devilish, has the blessing from above." (Hunter Biden, Jussie Smollett, and BLM thugs all have one thing in common. In an order where Jews control the gods, them three stooges got new heaven on their side, so whatever they do can't be wrong.)
Any factual investigation of the Jewish-Palestinian Conflict will favor Palestinians, a wholly innocent people who did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING but were driven off their lands by Jewish Immigrant-invaders backed by Western Imperialists and even the Soviet Union. Since facts of the matter favor Palestinians, Jews invoke the Big History of the Holocaust to justify the theft. Never mind Palestinians had nothing to do with WWII or the Shoah, and furthermore, Israel was created AFTER the defeat of Nazi Germany, which means Jews no longer faced extermination in Europe. In the modern era, Jews won the war of worming-heaven with serpent's eggs of the new trinity of Jew-hova, Homo-mania, and Afrotheosis.

BLM is like a holy war, and it has no use of facts or moral consistency, but then, the same could be said of the Crusades. Christianity is about love, peace, forgiveness, and pacifism. Jesus never told anyone to pick up swords and fight wars and build empires built on skulls. So, why did the Crusaders and later European Imperialists wave the banner of Jesus while carrying out massive acts of violence that clearly went against Jesus's teachings? Because they were really about power and pride than anything else. They didn't care about the WHAT of their deeds. Factually, they were acting against Jesus's teachings. But, it didn't matter because they were into power, glory, wealth, and prestige. So, Jesus mattered less as teacher than as symbolism. He was used to bless and sanctify the power and wealth of the West. This way, Westerners could go around the world conquering, plundering, slaughtering, and pillaging. As long as they carried the banner and cross of Jesus wherever they went, they could make believe they were the holy warriors of justice and love.
BLM works much the same way. Blacks are most obsessed with pride and power that count for more than any actual black lives. Just like dead soldiers are the price for victory and glory, more dead blacks due to BLM are the worthy cost of something better: Negro godhood. More dead blacks are just casualties of a righteous war as far as many blacks are concerned. This is especially true of black elites as they won't be the ones doing the dying. From where they're perched, they will have gained immense prestige thanks to BLM sacralization of the Negro. (By the way, if blacks don't care about More Dead Blacks, why should the Dissident Right make a fuss about the actual WHAT? Why should they counter BLM with real-black-lives-matter that despairs of how BLM-led policies have led to more deaths among blacks? If blacks don't care about their actual dead and, furthermore, hate and attack your kind, the LAST THING you should be doing is worrying about more dead blacks.)

But then, ADL, AIPAC, and SPLC operate much like BLM. They are controlled by people who secretly know the WHAT. They are no dummies or ignoramuses. They know the truth about black criminality. They also know the facts of how Jews stole land from the Palestinians and are ruthlessly plotting to wreak more havoc in the Middle East to ensure Jewish-Zionist supremacism. Those reasons are WHY they do what they do. As the WHAT undermines their WHY, they use their near-monopoly of media and institutions to push the Big Lie.

Why does the Jewish-controlled Deep State operate as it does? Now, when it comes to small matters, the FBI probably does really good work. There's sure to be far less politics involved in going after lesser crooks and criminals. But higher up the FBI, the issue of justice becomes intermeshed with the ways of power. People-of-Power or POP don't want the justice to apply to them, and as they buy the politicians who appoint the top heads of FBI, CIA, and other elite institutions, the upper echelons of the Deep State operate solely on the HOW to serve the WHY than on the facts of the WHAT. Indeed, why is it that Jonathan Pollard was released and allowed a hero's welcome in Israel? How come Arnon Milchan can walk around freely in the US and serve as king-maker when he admitted to stealing nuclear secrets for Israel? Where is the FBI and the CIA?

It's possible that many in the Dissident Right prefer to discuss the WHAT than the WHY because it's less risque. By hammering on the WHAT, they can pretend that the Power is simply ignorant, benighted, or clueless. So, they go on and on with statistics like number-crunchers. They are little more than social accountants. They don't want to deal with the WHY because they would have to focus on Jewish Power and explain why the Jews who know the truth willfully push the lie to maintain their control and power. Going there, one would be accused of 'antisemitism' and worse. But, this is dishonest and even cowardly. No matter how much truth you speak, you are dishonest if you keep pretending that the enemy simply doesn't know when, in fact, you damn well know that he damn well knows but is willfully pushing the lie for power-sake.

Suppose there is Bob and Bill. Bill keeps letting the pitbull out, and it attacks Bob. So, Bob explains to Bill that pitbulls are dangerous and can hurt people real bad; therefore, Bill should stop letting the pitbull out. Now, Bob would be right to speak the truth to Bill if indeed Bill didn't know that pitbulls are dangerous. That way, there's a good chance that Bill will realize the truth and no longer let the pitbull out.
But, suppose Bill lets the dog out repeatedly and Bob gets attacked over and over. By this point, it should be obvious to Bob that Bill knows that pitbulls are dangerous, is feigning ignorance and willfully letting it out for the express purpose of having Bob attacked and bloodied. But if, after so many attacks, Bob is still discussing the WHAT of the dangers posed by pitbulls than redirecting his focus on the WHY of Bill's viciousness and sadism, he is pretty useless regardless of the facts he lays out. He can gather all the facts and statistics about pitbulls and lay them at Bill's feet, but Bill will keep letting the pitbull out to attack Bob because the WHY that really motivates him is to see Bob get hurt and humiliated.

It's like the scene in Federico Fellini's AMARCORD. The student is feigning ineptitude just to mock the teacher in front of the class. The teacher's earnest effort is all for naught in face of motivation whose sole purpose is to make him look ridiculous. Too many on the Dissident Right are earnestly arguing with bad faith actors. Don't waste good facts on bad faith.

So, whether it's BLM or the bogus War on Terror, we need to focus less on the WHAT of the facts and more on the WHY of Jewish Power(without whose media-and-money-support, BLM wouldn't be possible). At this point, an honest assessment of the political psychology of Jewish Power and the Deep State will be more useful than all the facts and data we can stack up. Indeed, Juliann Assange and Edward Snowden can tell you that. What did they do but reveal the facts and raw data of how the Deep State really operates? They were titans of the WHAT. So, how did the Deep State and Jewish Power react to this mountain of facts? They did everything to cover it up and destroy the lives of whistle-blowers. It's because the Deep State isn't about truth or justice but about the Power guarding its power to do as it pleases. The WHY directs the Deep State to focus on the HOW to keep the power than any other consideration. So, less about What's Happening than Why Is It Happening.