tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-39890638045650179952024-03-12T18:41:22.353-07:00Andrea Crisis CenterAndrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.comBlogger579125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-42657439851267242592022-12-19T01:24:00.000-08:002022-12-20T17:20:34.067-08:00A Consideration of the Opening Scenes of the GODFATHER by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola<p> <img class="aligncenter" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/030/012/original/321b5c6a142b509e.jpg" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The opening part of a movie or novel sets the tone and provides the framework. It is loaded with clues and symbolism, the essential baggage with which the plot leaves the station. Significantly, the narrative unfolds in subtle variations of or in contrast to the introductory material. The story may come full circle or conclude in opposition. Below is a reading of the opening segment of the Godfather. It covers the movie to the closing of the wedding scene.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Michael Corleone arrives at his sister Connie’s wedding in his military uniform. His status, represented by his very appearance, sets him apart from the family. He’s something of a family black sheep for being a mainstream white sheep. In contrast to Michael’s position in society, there is Sonny Corleone’s overt hostility to the Feds. Michael and Sonny belong on opposite sides of the law, but then, organized crime is less about lawmen vs outlaws than the grey zone between hypocritical virtue and corrupting vice. Gangsters aren’t radicals, or Tony Montana(of SCARFACE) isn’t Che Guevara; they break the law but have no desire to upend the order. They just want a bigger piece of the pie and grab for it with bigger balls. As Barzini later says at a meeting among the bosses, “We are not communists.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="171"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, there’s another significance to Michael’s soldierly image: He’s a fighter whose predilections are essentially toward order, discipline, sense of duty & honor, and a powerful sense of loyalty. The characteristics that served him well in the US Marines could just as well serve the Family. In defying his father and fighting for his country, Michael exhibited a shift in priorities but not in qualities.<br />Indeed, it’s not long before he serves as a foot-soldier for the Family by mowing down police captain McClusky and the dope dealer Sollozo the ‘Turk’. (Then, in his exile in Sicily, he feels at ease with two men with shotguns slung over their shoulders. And upon Sonny’s death, he rises to generalship in the Family.) Sonny patronizes Michael as a ‘civilian’, but Michael has always been a member of the warrior caste who knows how to fight with both mind and body, a concept of manhood somewhat unfamiliar with Sonny who relies too much on guns and muscle.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="197"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The opening segment lays out several different and contrasting notions of manhood. There’s the power of Sonny, the BIG MAN of the family. He attracts women with his raw masculinity. He’s a big strong guy, athletic, loud and brash. Somewhat similar is the manhood of Johnny Fontane who relies on looks, charm, and sensuality to win affection and adoration. Such prowess comes and goes, has its peak then burns out, much like the rollercoaster career of athletes.<br />(The other kind of manhood is, of course, more mindful and strategic — no wonder Hyman Roth of THE GODFATHER PART 2 is formidable even in his physically withered state.) Despite his limited presence in the movie, Johnny Fontane occupies a key role because it is through him that we see the linkage between two old men with similar understanding of power: Don Vito Corleone and the Hollywood mogul Woltz. (Fontane is later situated between the rising stars Moe Green and Michael Corleone in the great game for Las Vegas.)<br />Neither Vito Corleone nor Woltz has to command the main stage and make a show of themselves, like hothead Sonny or head-turner Fontane; rather, they are the pullers of stringers.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="351" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/898/original/daddad83bf096384.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="647" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, there is a key difference that gives Vito the upper hand over Woltz. Vito is a sober family man. Though his business is gambling, he isn’t a gambler. He knows the difference between risk, a matter of calculation, and gamble, a matter of carelessness. He certainly doesn’t gamble with emotions. Vito believes a man of worth mustn’t succumb to animal lusts that can easily unhinge his equilibrium and cloud his judgment. Man must think in terms of honor & fortitude and maintain a clear division between family and business.<br />Business is a matter of wheeling and dealing, of compromise. Family, in contrast, revolves around loyalty and fixed values. Vito’s sexual philosophy is not to be confused with repressed Victorianism or Catholic dogmatism; it is really a matter of balance and (self)control, without which men are easily led astray; after all, mythology and history are rife with examples of men losing their bearings over women, from the war over Helen of Troy to Mark Anthony’s doom with Cleopatra.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="267"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Vito harbors doubts about Sonny for muddying up what should be a clear division between family life and business by slapping his man-meat around. Emotionally and physically, Sonny makes himself vulnerable and even risks losing respect among his men, rather like Ted Kennedy’s sexual peccadillos turning off even his staunchest supporters.<br />Woltz may be Vito’s equal in many ways but is closer to Sonny on sexual matters. Woltz’s sexual vanity makes him rash and childish, endangering the empire he’s created. Woltz is excessively ‘personal’ over Fontane’s stealing his girl, letting the humiliation get the better of him; he’s deluded enough to think women are attracted to him for something other than money. He rants about his handmade goddess being soiled by Fontane when his business is trading in whores(not unlike what Tataglia the ‘pimp’ does).<br />He thinks he’s hot stuff. He lost his balance over Fontane’s eloping with his ‘piece of ass’. This is something that Vito would never allow in his own life; emotionally involving himself with a ‘piece of ass’ and then getting all butt-hurt over losing it. Vito’s ‘wisdom’ is his understanding that greatness is built on limits, not boundless megalomania. He understands that business is ruthless, chaotic, and corrupting; against these factors, a man needs a sanctuary of peace and stability immune to the ups and downs of the impersonal world. He needs a family and must fulfill his duties as the family patriarch; preferably, a family with a housewife for she preserves from the inside what the man provides from the outside.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="387" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/900/original/ae318ee25be2b6c4.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="679" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Woltz, who could have accepted Vito’s offer and gained something in return, instead blows up like a child crying over spilled milk. He can’t control or suppress his silly sexual jealousy, blind as ever to the stupidity of having invested so much in a harlot. He says a man in his position cannot be made to look ‘ridiculous’, but he needs no help in that department in Tom Hagen’s eyes.<br />A tail that grows long enough will be stepped on, and same goes for the dong. Or, to modify an aphorism from Fistful of Dollars, ‘When a man with an unzipped fly meets a man with a zipped fly, the man with an unzipped fly is a dead man’, or at least a man with a dead horse in his bed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The idea of sexuality as strength and weakness is developed throughout movie. It’s a strength in that sexual prowess can earn a man adoration from women and admiration(and envy)from men. It’s a weakness in that men may become distracted from their obligations and priorities. Woltz even ignores the fact that women are attracted to him only for his power and wealth, thus clouding his judgment. Woltz the Freudian creature is no match for Vito the Machiavellian.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="302"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even the cold and rational Michael succumbs to the power of love in Sicily. In an instant, he forgets all about Kay. Unlike the other sexual relations in the movie, his feelings for Apollonia go beyond affection, sociability, status & class, sexual desire, ethnicity, and strategy(like the marriage among the aristocrats). Apollonia has an overwhelming impact on Michael who is struck with feelings beyond his power of reason and intellect, indeed emotions he wasn’t aware he was capable of. Kay is nice and pretty, and they made a nice pair, but just one glance makes Michael fall completely for her. She’s Sicilian but said to be almost ‘Greek’ in appearance, suggesting a timeless mythic quality.<br />Though the hit on Michael fails in Sicily, it is partly successful in that a part of him dies with Apollonia; and even though we don’t hear anything more about her(until THE GODFATHER PART 3), Michael is surely haunted by guilt as she died in his stead, much like the bomb that killed Darya Dugina than her father, the intended target.<br />Apollonia, like the monstrous opposite Luca Brasi, suggests there is a power beyond rationality and ‘business’, something irrational and obsessive(therefore inherently dangerous) but, if channeled constructively, inspiring or intimidating. The problem with Michael and Kay’s marriage is it’s too much like ‘business’, especially as Michael ‘settled for’ Kay after he lost Apollonia. It might have been different had he never known Apollonia as Kay would have been his first true love. But post-Apollonia, Kay is just good wife material. As Apollonia is above ‘business’, Luca Brasi is below it. He isn’t a gangster but a monster, a creature out of ancient mythology, which is why Vito, for all his dread and trepidation, finds him indispensable for certain jobs.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="383" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/915/original/6dd2648d30e05c54.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="667" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, it’s a sign of Michael’s strength and intelligence that, despite having bee hit with a bolt of lighting(or Cupid’s arrow), he maintains his composure and doesn’t lose his head over the girl. He patiently goes about to sanctify the matter, make it respectable, and lay the foundation for a stable long-lasting marriage with the blessings of all involved.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="176"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Sonny doesn’t love his wife enough, one senses Mike loves Apollonia too much; when she dies, something dies in him, and his second courtship of Kay sounds more like a business proposition than an expression of true love. His words betray a certain degree of exhaustion, resignation, acceptance of less after losing what mattered most in his life.<br />Perhaps, Vito’s emotional discipline is rooted in his childhood, when in one fell swoop he lost his entire family and then found himself in a world of strangers in the New World. He was too busy trying to survive and give his life some semblance of order and stability to indulge in passion for anything or anyone. Vito, judging from THE GODFATHER PART 2(where Robert DeNiro plays the younger man), feels gratitude for what he has and loves his wife and is a stranger to deep, all-consuming passions of whatever kind. Even his ‘personal’ act, the vengeance on the man who murdered his family, is mixed with ‘business’. It was partly about alliances and territory.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, Vito’s humiliation of Woltz serves not only as a favor to Fontane but as a lesson for the Hollywood Mogul on how not to be stupid. Vito offered help in matters of ‘business’ in exchange for something so trivial(giving a movie role to Fontane), but Woltz acted like a child by mixing the ‘personal’ with ‘business’. Smart players should know that betrayal is part of business and just get on with life, but Woltz invested not only time and money in some bimbo starlet but his emotions and pride as well. After what’s done is done, the scene cuts from Woltz’s hysterics before a horse’s head to Vito’s calm and amused demeanor. Vito waltzes around Woltz with too many character warts.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="387" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/916/original/63826fceb560d0c5.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="691" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Vito later tells Michael that serious men, unlike women and children, can’t afford to be careless. This is evident in the opening segment where most people are singing, dancing, and celebrating, whereas Vito, in contrast, puts business before pleasure in his dim-lit vampiric den. When he steps out, it’s to greet other Dons like Barzini and dance with his wife. And later to take a family photo and to dance with his daughter. He stays aloof of the circus atmosphere. Vito delays the first family photo shoot because Michael hasn’t arrived. He’s careful with details and won’t settle for less unless absolutely necessary. He believes in patience and diligence because the devil in in the details when one must be ruthless. Vito’s refusal to take the family photo just then also foreshadows how Michael is later drawn back into the family, how his life becomes framed within the world created by his father.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, Vito is only human, illustrated by his relationship with the undertaker Bonasera, the first character shown in the movie, which begins with Bonasera pleading with the Don for ‘justice’. Vito listens to him patiently but with quiet contempt. Bonasera cuts a pathetic figure, like an ant crawling before Vito. Bonasera’s business is death, but Vito is the one with the power of life and death. When asked to kill the boys who harmed Bonasera’s daughter, Vito exercises veto power over who lives or dies(further emphasized by his sheer will to live following a frightful assassination attempt that would have killed most men). Still, the limitations of Vito, his ultimate mortal status, comes later in striking contrast to the undertaker’s begging for help. With Sonny’s death, it’s Vito who is rendered helpless and pathetic, beseeching the funeral director to summon all his powers to make Sonny presentable at the funeral. By the way whereas the undertaker’s daughter had kept her honor and survived, Sonny never had much honor as a husband and ended up dead.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="33"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bonasera the undertaker’s plea sets the tone for the entire movie, which revolves around vengeance. Mike, Sonny, Connie, Carlo, and daddy Tataglia all want to get even at one point or another.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="253"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bonasera the undertaker also introduces the thorny theme of ethnic tensions in American society. He says he wanted to be a good American and allowed his daughter to associate with presumably WASP boys, but alas they treated her like a greaseball. (She kept her honor, and perhaps Vito has more respect for her than for her spineless father who, in his petty desire to be a respectable American, forsook the Sicilian sense of bond and loyalty, playing the whore to the Waspy ‘pezzanovantes’).<br />That her jaw was broken by non-Italian boys is echoed in what happens to Michael at the hands of Irish cop McClusky. If the undertaker’s predicament shows the darker side of ethnic relations, there’s a lighter side with the arrival of Kay with Michael. With her light brown hair and pale complexion, she sits in contrast to the dark-haired, greasy, and swarthy Italian-Americans.<br />In an America of the post war period where WASPS still reigned supreme, an Italian girl(like Bonasera’s daughter) could easily be just a plaything for privileged WASP boys. To an Italian-American male like Michael, however, a WASP woman is a prize, a symbol of upward mobility. Michael’s love for Kay is genuine, but she’s more than just an individual; she represents respectability and progress. As Jenny, the Italian Catholic, says to rich WASP Oliver in LOVE STORY: “I love not only you, but also your name and your numeral.” Michael’s feelings for Apollonia, in contrast, go beyond all such considerations.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="373" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/921/original/a0a7a879401e89dd.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="669" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="235"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of Tom Hagen, Mike explains to Kay how he became part of the Family, even being considered for the special role of consiglieri. It’s in marked contrast to the brutality of the undertaker’s account of ethnic tensions. Yet, Tom is an anomaly in the Family; for one, Vito insisted Tom keep his original last name, apparently in respect to his ancestry but possibly as a reminder that one is a true Sicilian only by blood. (Ironically, Vito’s real last name isn’t Corleone, but it’s somewhat appropriate as he comes to represent an archetype of a cultural community, a time and place, than a mere individual.)<br />Vito shakes befriends anyone of whatever background; he’s not a man predisposed to blind prejudices. But, he is a man of deep suspicions and devoid of illusions about human nature and ethnic politics; then, it’s no wonder we hear him tell Hagen to contact some “Jew Congressman”, who, by the way, probably calls Vito a ‘dago’ or ‘greaseball’ behind his back. Still, where there’s ‘business’ to be done, it’s smiles and handshakes. At least among Vito’s generational peers, different ethnic groups did business but kept a certain distance. As a mafia chieftain says later in the movie on the matter of dope-dealing, “We’ll keep the traffic among the colored. They are animals anyway so let them lose their souls.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="73"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, there is a built-in contradiction in the Sicilian cultural value system. On the one hand, its loyalty and clannishness serve as basis for strength. But, because loyalties are so narrow and deep, divisions within the Italian-American community grow worse. Corleones and the Five Families are like fratricidal Italian principalities, sometimes bleeding one another dry, even as they try to unite against the hostile machinations of the Irish, the Jews, and the WASPS.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="190"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It is further complicated by the notion of ‘family’ in THE GODFATHER. Vito believes personal loyalty belongs within the family; outside the family, it’s ‘business’, a matter of opportunism and convenience but never deep-seated loyalty. But the larger meaning of ‘Family’ includes non-family members who serve the Corleones. Tom Hagen perhaps best epitomizes this tension for he’s not Italian but treated like a son. But, what about Clemenza, Sal, and and other chieftains? To what extent are they business associates or members of the ‘Family’? Sal and Clemenza are almost like uncles to Sonny, Michael, and Fredo(who later betrays the Family worse than anyone for sake of ‘business’, but then it turns out to be ‘personal’, which could be even more deadly). The very notion of ‘godfather’ suggests Vito feels as a patriarch over a certain Sicilian community in New York. Thus, Family Loyalty makes for ruthless machinations but also a certain sentimentality. (We see Sal dancing with some girl who stands on his shoes. This suggests that Sal will be stepped on by Michael whom Sal watched grow up since childhood: “I always liked the kid”.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="376" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/926/original/a4963ffec02377e5.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="668" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="92"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Carlo isn’t much of a character(and doesn’t have much character); however, he’s a crucial figure because he’s the bridge between festive hope & joy and death & tragedy for all involved. The movie begins with a wedding, and everyone seems to having a great time. It looks like the American Immigrant Dream. Carlo, a handsome nobody, is marrying into a top underworld family, and Connie is mad about Carlo. The other Families at the gathering seem at peace. Indeed, the scene could make a great HAPPY ending.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="365"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, everything unravels soon afterwards. Contrast the festive spirit of the opening scene with the solemn atmosphere of the baptism of Carlo’s son juxtaposed with the baptism-in-blood of the heads of the Five Families. Near the end of the movie, Carlo thinks he has made it, indeed outsmarted everyone. True, he’d been upset that the Corleones kept him at the margins and took out his frustration by cheating on Connie and sometimes beating her up. And, when Sonny pushed him too far, he had a vendetta of his own and ‘fingered’ Sonny. But, he did change and come around(and win back Connie’s love), and Michael appointed him to a key position in the family, a case of keep-your-friends-close-but-your-enemies-closer. He became a devoted husband, and Connie forgave him. Connie and Carlo came full circle, back to hope and happiness.<br />But then, Michael kills him and Connie goes mad and ruins her life, as depicted in THE GODFATHER PART 2.<br />This other tragedy of THE GODFATHER is generally overlooked because the main focus is on the moral tragedy of Michael, plus the fact that most people don’t much sympathize men who hit women(but then, even Michael finds himself striking Kay after she killed the kid in THE GODFATHER PART 2).<br />But then, as Vito might have said, Carlo never would have gotten into that situation had he kept his fly zipped as his infidelity unwittingly set into motion a series of events. His fooling around led to angry Connie which led to black & blue Connie which led to Sonny seeing black & blue Connie which led to angry Sonny beating Carlo black & blue which led to black & blue Carlo setting up Sonny, so that when Carlo once again beat Connie black & blue, it led to angry Sonny being turned black, blue, & red, which then led to angry Michael whose men turned Carlo blue in the face. The Moral: Keep your fly zipped. One should note, however, that both Carlo and Connie are pushed to do something against their nature, respectively betraying Sonny and ‘ratting’ on Carlo to her brother, only when pushed beyond the limits of their endurance.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="364" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/932/original/6d4fc14476ef5406.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="643" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="250"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The opening also lays out the differences among the main players, the central contrast being between Vito and Sonny. The more we watch, more we wonder how this guy Sonny is be the heir to his father’s empire. Vito is at once economical and graceful; he doesn’t waste a single word or movement. Even his stroking of the cat communicates plenty. His actions are like Strunk-and-White’s advice on grammar applied to life.<br />Sonny, in contrast, is a busybody, unfocused, bullheaded, easily distracted, the locus of his attention being his penis than his head. Sonny is a man of some intelligence but can’t use it intelligently as his emotions usually outpace his mind.<br />Vito is later said to have politicians like so many coins in his pocket, but he also knows the value of each coin. Sonny, however, is a waster of energy. His casual tossing of few bucks from his pocket after smashing a fed’s camera says volumes about Sonny’s style of power. Sonny has no strategic sense and meets his enemies head on. Vito pulls his enemies closer and then outflanks them when least expected. He’s a Machiavellian whereas Sonny is a Macho-Ballian. Vito is like Lord Shingen in Akira Kurosawa’s KAGEMUSHA, whereas Sonny is like the hothead son. (One might note a parallel between Sonny’s smashing the fed’s camera and Barzini’s ripping out the film and tossing it on the ground. This links them as future enemies.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Somewhat later, when Fredo says Paulie called in sick, Vito instantly senses something amiss. But, Sonny, so full of himself, never even suspected Paulie could be a traitor; later, when he plays mental games with Paulie, it is after the fact.<br />When Sonny smashed the Fed’s camera at Connie’s wedding, sidekick Paulie kicked it. It’s a wonderful moment, Paulie’s kick being weak and half-hearted like his character and his devotion to the Corleones. It also foreshadowed Sonny’s death: Full of rage, out of his mind, splattered on the ground, kicked in the head.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="347" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/943/original/ef28189ed6e009de.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="656" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="272"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The tragedy of Vito owes to the crisis of succession. He has some tough hombres working for him, but few can understand or inherit his vision. Besides, his is a family empire, which means he has a limited pool of successors. Sonny, Tom, and Fredo each lack a key ingredient, and whereas Michael has what it takes, it’s not what Vito wanted for the boy; indeed, Michael’s return to the Family is a bittersweet affair as Vito dirtied his hands so that at least one of his sons could rise in the world with ‘clean hands'(in the eyes of respectable society).<br />Hagen, while smart and alert, is a negotiator without the keen ruthless instincts to keep the family ahead of its enemies. Hagen understands the law and the means, but his loyalty is more conceptual than heartfelt. On grounds of ‘business’, he could advise Sonny to negotiate with the murderer of his father. Besides, even though he’s like a son, he still isn’t a Corleone by blood, and blood matters(as later evinced in THE GODFATHER PART 2 by Kay’s revulsion for the ‘Sicilian Thing’ and killing of the ‘son’). Tom’s arguments are impeccably rational, but it takes something more to be a true family member. Sonny, while tough and masculine, lacks sense. Fredo, while calm and gentle like his father(at least in the first part of the movie before his stint in Vegas), is a dufus. Michael certainly has the goods, but he too lacks something the old man had in spades: A bigness of heart that sentimentally bound so many to the Don.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="47"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Vito’s ideal of manhood comprises the best qualities of Fredo, Sonny, and Michael. Someone with Fredo’s cordiality and warmth, Sonny’s toughness and courage, and Michael’s will and vision. But, Sonny is a baboon and Fredo a puppy, and Michael has too much venom.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="264"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Vito insists on Sonny’s presence when he lectures Fontane about what it means to be a man. Sonny’s idea of manhood is a dumb joke to Vito. Vito has a soft spot for his godson Fontane but what a knucklehead he turned out to be, getting into a mess by falling for some cheap floozy. And, the wedding isn’t exactly a cause for celebration for Vito who feels Carlo is a poor choice for groom: Just a good looking hunk who wants a piece of the family pie. That Sonny introduced Carlo to Connie doesn’t do much to increase confidence in his first son. In this sense, his older sons ‘betray’ him — eventually Fredo turns into a stupid playboy in Vegas and Hagen handled the hit on the Don rather impersonally — while, ironically, the rebellious Michael turns out to be the most loyal, but then he ends up expanding the empire at the expense of the family in Part 2. (Hagen is amused by Sonny’s sexual antics in the washroom and with the Don’s scolding of Fontane. It’s this cool quality that’s both a strength and weakness with Hagen. Hagen gets everyone but has no fixed ethical center. He can as easily get along with horny Sonny as with the prudish Vito. In this sense, he’s not only a problematic war consiglieri but a poor consiglieri, period, for such a position requires not only lawyerly knowledge but a kind of compass for the Family. Hagen needs to be more like Tango in Akira Kurosawa’s RAN.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="371" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/947/original/838d1926b92aca08.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="669" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Vito likely worries the Family doesn’t have much of a long-term future with these fellas(prior to Michael’s return, anyway), not when he’s up against real men like the masterful Barzini and Sollozzo the ‘Turk’. As Deke Thorton said to the ragtag bounty hunters in THE WILD BUNCH, “We’re after real men and by God I wish I was with them…”<br />Sollozzo the ‘Turk’ later says of the Don, “With all due respect, you gotta admit the Don was getting soft.” But then, Sollozzo’s impression of Michael as a softie civilian proved a fatal error on his part.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="348"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At the wedding, Clemenza asks Paulie for wine and tells him to take a look around, but it’s Clemenza whose guard is down, in effect, asking a fifth columnist to act as security. This is rhymed with Sonny telling his wife to watch the kids whereupon she tells him to watch himself, but then of course he doesn’t. Sonny’s wife extends her hands to demonstrate the size of Sonny’s dong, and then we see Sonny go off with Lucy, and next we see older folks singing an Italian song with rather naughty connotations as if to suggest young men and women falling in love/ lust is, far from acts of defiance or individuality, is simply conforming to established patterns, a form of supervised child’s play. Few minutes later, as Sonny bangs Lucy the scene cuts to a fat soprano as if to link all of culture and society to basic sexual drives. Most of the relational dynamic in the opening segment revolve around sexuality. Carlo and Connie’s marriage. Baker who wants Enzo, an Italian POW, to marry his daughter. An undertaker whose daughter was nearly raped. Sonny’s jealous wife and his thing with Lucy. Michael and Kay. Fontane driving women wild. Old coot singing some song and making lewd gestures. Vito, like Merlin in EXCALIBUR, is the only one who seems above all this dancing and hairpulling is all about; he has a kingdom to rule. (Does ‘Fontane’ mean fountain? How ironic he has run dry except for womanly tears. He shows up just when Hagen informs Vito that many judges and politicians didn’t show up. This matters a lot for Vito is not just a man who prizes money and power but reputation and respect, one of the reasons he declines Sollozzo’s offer as the already tenuous associations he has with respectable society would be jeopardized. There’s a layer to Vito’s character that is genuinely warm and in need of friendship, and though Vito knows Fontane is a sap and an opportunist, he appreciates the respect.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At his best, we see Vito’s skill in complementing the various strengths of those around him, making the best of what he has. Sonny is a hothead but hard as a hammer when necessary. He’s the Thor of the Family. The somewhat anemic Hagen is superb with details. Fredo amiably performs his duties without complaint. Clemenza knows how to throw his weight around.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="374" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/030/179/original/3232b0fbff3fe79c.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="666" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="276"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The strangest character in the opening segment is Luca Brasi, the only man who unnerves Vito. There’s something monstrous and brutish about Luca. Kay calls him a ‘scary guy’. He’s like a Frankenstein monster, and Vito is his master, the only man with the key to Luca’s black soul. Luca is almost like an Neanderthal, less evolved than the rest of humanity. He isn’t easily definable as man or beast, Italian or non-Italian, man or child, simpleminded or psychotic. He’s a pit-bull beast obedient only to one master, like Mike Tyson to Cus D’Amato. He’s like a mass of unformed humanity, perhaps what in a Kubrick movie would be the ape-man, the raw stuff from which mankind in all its variations has been carved from. He’s the unmolded clay, unchiseled marble. When he says he wishes the first son will be a masculine child, it sounds as much a curse as a blessing. He tries to make the most dignified impression on the Godfather but the result is crude and primitive, made even worse by kids rushing into the room. But Luca also serves another function. He didn’t expect to be invited to the wedding, but Vito is not a man to slight those who have served him well. Unlike Bonasera the undertaker who had shunned Vito or the politicians who refused the invitations, Vito is a man who honors those who have been loyal to him. (When kids rush into Vito’s room when Luca Brasi is present, Hagen fails in his duties as guardian which again plays out when Vito gets gunned down by Sollozzo.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="375" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/956/original/9aa86bc3226b83db.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="668" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="155"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Vito knows there are two kinds of power. The raw kind pushing people around and built on fear, often creating unnecessary enemies and alienating allies. But, if you make many friends, with everyone from looney Luca to a high-strung baker to some ‘Jew Congressman’, there may be unforeseen payoffs down the line. It’s like collecting interest.<br />For example, consider Enzo(the prospective son-in-law of the baker) who is not a central character nor a member of the Corleone family. But, it’s his gratitude that sent him to that hospital with flowers on that fateful night, which led to his encounter with Michael who used him to bluff as a Corleone strongman, in effect saving Vito’s life. Surround yourself with grateful friends and they might help. Vito Corleone is like the George Bailey(IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE) of the Mafia. A lot of people he helped would do anything for the godfather.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The following is discernible only in the full-frame versions shown on TV and on VHS. At one point, Vito walks back towards the house, approaching the camera, and then he sticks his finger into the lower right corner of the frame, and then it cuts to Michael(sitting with Kay)being surprised by Fredo sticking his finger to the back of his head. This subtly illuminates what Michael told Kay about how his father freed Fontane from a contract by holding a gun to the back of a ‘band leader’ and making “an offer he couldn’t refuse”. The editing of Vito’s finger with Fredo’s finger to the backside of Michael’s head suggests that the Family is sticking a gun to Michael’s head and making him an offer he can’t refuse; in effect, saying, “Look, Fredo is a dummy, Sonny is a hothead, and Tom isn’t really Sicilian, so YOU Michael got to return and pick up the slack.”</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="381" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/123/029/962/original/b795afa8ee8a8c40.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="677" /></p></div></section></div><span id="_bottom" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><div class="nav-group" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; clear: both; color: #888888; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="nav-item alignright" style="border: 0px; float: right; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"><span class="nav-item rightside" style="border: 0px; float: right; font-family: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; text-align: right; vertical-align: baseline; width: auto;"><br /></span></span> </div><div><br /></div><div id="subscribe-block-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-59156151174979179172022-12-17T20:32:00.000-08:002022-12-20T17:20:56.233-08:00Alex Jones vs Nick Fuentes on the JQ and HQ(Or Hitler Question)<p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/948/792/original/41638368163d4b85.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/VVmjMEiEfVsp/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/VVmjMEiEfVsp/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/VVmjMEiEfVsp/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span style="font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant-caps: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit; font-weight: inherit;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">We believe Alex Jones’ genuine revulsion for Hitler(and other tyrants), but there is more to ‘Hitler’ than Hitler, indeed from the fact that he’s singled out as the worst of the worst. For Jews, the answer is obvious. Not only did Hitler kill Jews but conceived of a post-Christian political culture that came closest to replicating Jewish tribal-supremacism. (Had Hitler killed millions without targeting Jews, the Jewish-controlled academia and media would make far less of his evil. Always a game of who/whom.) As for respectable ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ whites, Hitlerism is a pornography of white power, i.e. Hitler’s brazenness spelled out the true nature of imperialism and conquest, thus denuding the West of its self-serving myths; after all, it wasn’t 1776 alone but the ‘genocide’ of the natives that made America what it became. Western Imperialism of the Christian or Liberal variety was often legitimized on grounds of sharing the faith and spreading progress, but when push came to shove, the natives were ruthlessly mowed down and, in some cases, replaced by whites and their compradors; there was also the massive exploitation of black slavery in North and South American colonies. So, if Hitlerism strategically mirrored Jewish tribal-supremacism, it also held up a dark mirror to the West that expanded on grounds of racial supremacism but preferred to believe otherwise. In a similar vein, American Jews are most triggered by the outspoken far-right politics in Israel, not because they oppose the Jewish Supremacist program of Zionism per se but because the sheer brazenness of ultra-right rhetoric gives the game away: The essence of Zionism isn’t about ‘democracy’, ‘socialism’, ‘western values’, or even ‘nationalism’; it’s really a Jewish Master Race ideology and gaining hegemony over all the world.</span></span></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="border: 0px; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background: white; border: none; float: left; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">‘Hitler’, as opposed to the historical Hitler, is more than a modern dictator, the war-monger responsible for the bloodiest war in human history, and the architect of a dark ideology of racial supremacism. ‘Hitler’ has become the secular equivalent of Satan(as Richard Spencer explains in the short introductory excerpt). As such ‘Hitler’ is bigger than history and morality. It’s a trope, an incantation. Consider how many times ‘Hitler’ has been invoked by the Powers-That-Be to justify, ironically to put it mildly, all the wars and atrocities in the name of ‘democracy’ and ‘war on terror’, which are, beneath the rhetorical surface, neo-imperialist actions in service to yet another form of supremacism, that of the so-called ‘neocons’ who are Jewish-Zionist master-racers who employ nihilism for tribalism’s sake. As Madeleine Albright said, it was ‘worth it’ to kill a half million Arab children. Just remember, all you good ladies and gents(and people of 60 other genders in the West), the blood sacrifice of Arab children wasn’t for imperialism and supremacism but for ‘democracy’ and the ‘rules-based order’.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/b_29yvYpf4w?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; height: 360px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Big Lebowski - Nihilists" width="500"></iframe></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="67"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Indeed, pure nihilists would be preferable in their principled amorality for amorality’s sake, whereas the Supremites(supremacist-Semites) weaponize the most cynical nihilism possible against goyim to maximize Jewish Supremacism. By rhetoric, the US is about ‘democracy’ and ‘diversity-equity-inclusion’, but the walk, as opposed to the talk, says the US is governed by the Jewish Master Race ideology that employs homos as commissars and blacks as cossacks.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="49"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Now, Adolf Hitler was a dark figure simmering with extreme visions and pathological impulses. There was something demonic that drove him to greatness and madness. Nick Fuentes is right about Hitler’s admirable(and even enviable) qualities but overlooks a darkness that was far deeper than his bright spots.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">A caller to the program asked Alex Jones if Western Europe would have turned out better had the Germans won the war. It’s a tempting question given the dire state of the current West. But there’s no guarantee that the West wouldn’t eventually have taken a decadent and degenerate turn even with German victory. After all, communist takeover of Eastern Europe couldn’t halt the march of Western degeneracy. And Franco’s traditionalist right-wing regime only forestalled the soulless degeneracy that now pervades Spain. Sparta prevailed over Athens, but Sparta fell too within a generation. Nothing lasts forever. Who could have foreseen that the radical Maoist China would go the way of Deng Xiaoping’s reforms and market economy?</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="206"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Still, concerning only the Western/Central part of Europe(excepting Poland), one could argue German victory would have been better; but then, supposing Stalin somehow swept through all of Western Europe(and UK) in 1945, that too would have been preferable to the trajectory of Western Europe in the past several decades. In retrospect, Germany would have done better united under East German than West German rule.<br />Anyway, here’s the rub. Nazi victory would have been something entirely different for the East. German conquest of Russia would have paved the way for the single greatest crime in European History, possibly in human history. The main theater of bloodbath in WWII wasn’t in the West, where generally fewer people died than in World War I. What made World War II the greatest war in was the epic confrontation between Germany and the Soviet Union, one which went beyond ideological differences and territorial squabbles. It was a winner-take-all ‘race war’ of enslavement and extermination. The Pacific War was also a race war of sorts, a clash between White America and Yellow Japan. But despite all the hatred and blood thirst, the US had no grand plan of exterminating and/or enslaving the entire Japanese people upon victory.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" height="631" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/912/454/original/51405273004af4d3.jpg" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="649" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Still, Hitler has to be appraised as a historical figure, not some Evil Incarnate, a spiritual concept. ‘Hitler’ turns the historical Hitler into Satan, which allows for political invocations, usually opportunistic, to justify whatever the Jewish-controlled US empire covets. By turning Hitler into ‘Hitler’, a figure of absolute evil, politics becomes a cartoonish binary of good and evil: The ‘muh democracy’ of the US against whatever is demonized as the ‘new hitler’.<br />Never mind Jews are the foremost practitioners of the Master Race ideology. Just ask the Palestinians, Syrians, Iranians, the ‘deplorables'(too many of whom are still dumb enough to bleat ‘muh Israel’), Russians(who’ve been targeted since the end of the Cold War), and the civilians of the Donbass regions shelled ceaselessly by Sub-Nazi types allied with Jews. The alliance of Neocons and ‘Ukro-Nazis’, or the Neoconazi Phenomenon, illuminates the depths of Jewish megalomania that will even recruit neo- and sub-nazi morons as muscle to attack Russia as one of the few sovereign countries in the world that can say NO to Jewish Hegemony.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" height="553" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/855/116/original/e91e3e3443448f65.png" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="632" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Because ‘Hitler’ has so often been the go-to excuse for Jews and their Anglo-cucks, it’s time to say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. Hitler was a sinister figure but a man of history, not the lord of hell. He wasn’t the devil at war with angels. Josef Stalin was comparably evil, and the evil of Jewish Supremacism did its share to bring about World War II. Besides, what made Hitler so formidable was he happened to be the leader of an advanced industrial power with a large pool of capable men; if Albania had produced a hitler, it would have been a joke.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/948/928/original/5109256784419aaf.png" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="212"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Increasingly over the years, the British Narrative of WWII is that of a war to ‘save Jews’ and combat ‘racism/supremacism’, but it’s ret-conning of actual history, not least to score points with the Jewish Masters of the UK. In truth, British policy was in keeping with a long history of ‘balance of powers’ on the Continent. Besides, it was less out of sympathy for beleaguered Jews under German occupation than for rich and powerful Jews above British politicians. Jews had become partners-in-crime of Anglos in the imperial game.<br />Also, even though British racial attitudes weren’t as extreme as the Nazi ideology, the Anglos were obviously triggered by the forthright brazenness of Hitler who, in a way, spilled the beans on the essence of Western Imperialism. The Anglos upheld a supremacism of their own in their non-white colonies and carried out genocides or semi-genocides in parts of the world, especially Australia and the Americas but disingenuously flattered themselves as beneficent civilizers(which they were too but only as half-truth).<br />An honest thief triggers the con-artist who keeps it under the table. (It’s like Joe Pesci’s Tommy in GOODFELLAS was too much of ‘cowboy’ who gave the game away and had to be dealt with to keep up appearances.)</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Furthermore, Nazi Germany vs World Jewry wasn’t a game of supremacism vs egalitarianism but supremacism vs supremacism, of which there should be no doubt in light of the nature of Jewish Power since World War II. Jews took over as the new elites in the US, and what has been the result? Equality for all groups or the rise of neo-hierarchy where Jewish Power is virtually above the law and served by brown-nosing Anglos and their ilk who suck up to the Jews like like Johnny Ola to Hyman Roth(in THE GODFATHER Pt 2)? The Zionist project certainly wasn’t about equality between Jews and Palestinians. Neocon and Neolib wars concocted by Jews(via control of both political parties, intelligence services, and media) always favored Zion over whomever Jews happen to hate. Do Americans, most of whom have been thoroughly brainwashed by Jewish monopoly of flow of info, ever ponder why Russia came to clash with the US and West? Do Americans even about Russia in the 1990s or what Neoconazis have done to Ukraine, especially since the Maidan coup of 2014?</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">The ‘Hitler’ trope has compromised Russia as well. Pushed to the edge by Jews, you’d think Putin would finally address the JQ as the diabolical force leading the world to the brink of World War III(where goyim slaughter goyim while Jews watch from atop with hideous glee), but he justified the SMO(Special Military Operation) as a means to ‘de-Nazify’ Ukraine. Yes, there are Naziesque types there, but they are mere dimwit muscle of the Jewish Mastermind.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" height="868" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/922/804/original/64a3f2ac0954bf9d.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="651" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Because of the metaphysics of ‘Hitler’, Russia perpetuates the myth that the ‘neo-nazis’ are calling the shots in Ukraine and that Russians, as the moral brethren of Jews and other historical victims of Nazi Evil, are rooting out the poison weed. But, Jews were no less supremacist, which they are to this day(at an even higher pathological level because, whereas German supremacism was utterly condemned, the Jewish kind was given moral cover via the Anne Frank cult). It’s the Jews who’ve instigated semi-genocidal Wars for Zion in the Middle East. If not for Russia, where would Syria be today? It was the Jews who exploited Russia in the 90s and have been doing everything to destroy the its economy. Jews as the Master Race engineered a coup in Ukraine and installed puppets and gangsters to murder civilians in the Donbass. Yet, because of the ‘Hitler’ mythology, even Putin and Russian elites are under historical pressure to tone down honest talk of Jewish Power and and instead yap about the ‘Nazis’.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">It’s all the more pathetic because, despite Russian condemnation of Nazi Germany and its horrors against Jews, there is ZERO reciprocity among Jews for Russians who were also targeted for extermination/enslavement and died in the greatest numbers in World War Ii. If anything, the Jewish view of Slavs is the flipside of the Nazi view. (But then, given Jewish Power pushes White Nakba and ‘Diversity’ on the entire West, it doesn’t think very highly of Western Whites either who are being dispossessed of land, deposed in power, dehumanized by ideology, degraded via globo-homo, and disoriented via ‘diversity’.)</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="53"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Russians say they’re fighting the ‘nazis’, the kind that killed innocent Jews in World War II, but Jews are cheering on the ‘nazis’ to kill as many Russkies as possible. Jews seem delighted by news of dead Russians, much like Israelis get high on the deaths of women and children in Gaza.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Time has come to retire the ‘Hitler’ trope. As it’s especially associated with ‘muh holocaust’, it has a way of portraying Jews, the most powerful and most murderous people in the world, as pure-as-snow eternal innocent victims than as major historical players in their own right who did their share to bring about World War II. The ‘Hitler’ trope enables Jewish Power and their cucks to constantly invoke ‘Hitler’ to justify never-ending wars and terror, as well as increasing surveillance and censorship in the West. Jewish Power acts like ‘Hitler’ but justify its agendas as wars on ‘New Hitlers’.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" height="592" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/922/370/original/15f0ff0ddc0c3d9b.jpg" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="639" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="64"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">We need to confront the Hitler of History, not the ‘Hitler’ of demonology. Of course, we certainly don’t need the ridiculous counter-myth of the ‘Good Hitler’ or ‘Cool Hitler’. A sober consideration of Adolf Hitler and National Socialism can discuss the positive, even outstanding, features of the man and movement, but let’s not pretend Der Fuhrer was some saint or misunderstood hero.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">In the debate, Alex Jones regurgitated the oft-repeated truisms about the Third Reich, such as Hitler as gun-grabber. This wasn’t true. (Some argue Jews in Germany would have been secure with more guns. When outnumbered 99 to 1, guns are useless. Jews are anti-gun in the US because they are outnumbered but pro-gun in Israel because they are the great majority.) Hitler-grabbed-guns is one of the memes that just won’t go away, illustrating that those on the ‘right’ can be just as mendacious or gullible as those on the ‘left’.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="245"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Jones argued that the leftists, the real enemy, wrap themselves with Judaism or Jewishness as moral protection, but he got it backwards. The dominant power in the West is Jewish Supremacism, not leftism. In truth, Jews wrap themselves in ‘leftism’. Jewish Power is essentially ultra-rightist in its obsession with Master Race outlook, tribal zealotry, and near-genocidal imperialism. But, Jews package their true agenda with bogus ‘liberalism’(as with Chuck Schumer who is ever so cozy with far-right Benjamin Netanyahu) and ‘leftism’(the bogus kind that replaced real leftism with racial-supremacist Negrolatry and hyper-capitalist Globo-Homo; indeed, what now goes by the name of ‘leftism’ is usually celebrating vain homos who cater to oligarchs and the deep state).<br />Jews use the smoke-n-mirrors of DEI, or ‘diversity-equity-inclusion’, but ‘diversity’ is only for goy nations as Jewish divide-and-rule tactic, ‘equity’ means whites forever sucking up to blacks controlled by Jews — it never means noticing Jews are the richest and most unequal group in the US or calling for equal treatment of Jews and Palestinians/Arabs by US foreign policy — , and ‘inclusion’ means favoring whatever groups and voices vetted by Jews while excluding those that displease or threaten Jews. It certainly doesn’t mean including more BDS voices. Did Jones really think these matters through? True leftism is about more equality, not more concentration of power for capitalist oligarchs and ultra-tribalists. Survey globalism over the several decades, and the super-rich get super-richer while Jewish Supremacism is now at hyper-gangster level.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" height="840" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/860/590/original/7ed5408bedd3750a.png" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="622" />In typical boomer fashion(though he’s really part of ‘Generation X’), Jones says his hero is MLK who stood for colorblind justice. Jones claims to see past the BS, but he’s like Glenn Beck(and mainstream ‘conservatism’) in idolizing MLK as something he was not. Sure, MLK did make speeches about ‘the content of character than color of the skin’, but he was totally for Affirmative Action and race-based agenda for blacks. MLK simply made his message more palatable to whites by appealing to a generic sense of fairness. Characterizing the essence of MLK-ism with the phrase ‘content of character’ is like pretending Jefferson was some radical egalitarian on the basis of ‘All men are created equal.’ In truth, Thomas Jefferson was a race-ist who believed in group differences and had no use for equality between whites and blacks.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Now, one could argue that MLK had good reasons for demanding certain reparatory justice for blacks given the history of discrimination and social disadvantages faced by blacks. If indeed whites and blacks are equal in all respects but skin color, several decades of remedial policies and programs may have bridged the gap. But, hopes through such rose-tinted glasses were bound to run aground because racial differences are real, with blacks being lower in IQ and higher in impulsiveness.<br />This is why both the ‘right’ and the ‘left’ have been bonkers on the issue. The libertarian ‘right’ has argued that Affirmative Action suppresses black ability with the ‘bigotry of low expectations’. So, something like ‘school choice’ will fix the problem, and blacks will be acing tests in no time.<br />Meanwhile, the egalitarian ‘left’ has argued the notion of racial differences is just prejudice, therefore, the ONLY reason for black underachievement is ‘racism’.<img class="aligncenter" height="634" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/922/666/original/64e48a76319f80b0.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="634" /></span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Still, foolish as libertarians and egalitarians are, they are nevertheless principled in sticking to their guns. More individual liberty to encourage black initiative or more social programs to lend blacks a hand.<br />But what really prevails on the Black Issue is a kind of idolatry, or Negrolatry, that defies ideology. This idolatry looks upon blacks as magical, wonderful, and even superior, along with Jews and homos. Such idolatry has so many whites(and non-blacks) cheering for blacks to win in everything because they deserve more than the rest of humanity; or, we must make Wakanda come true because blacks are so badass. Suppose black IQ suddenly jumped by 50 pts and blacks became 70% of Ivy League schools based on meritocracy. The Negrolators wouldn’t complain about black over-representation and would be celebrating black domination, just like they see nothing wrong with black domination of sports.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="253"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Alex Jones contends that the real power is with institutions like WEF and individuals like Bill Gates and his ilk, many of them goyim. But ask yourself… has the WEF condemned Zionism, the rape of Russia in the 1990s(by mostly Jewish globalists), the disenfranchisement of the Palestinians, Israel’s aid to ISIS to destroy Syria, spread of globo-homo degeneracy, the use of BLM & Antifa to terrorize cities with anti-white pogroms, and the US aid to sub-nazi types in Ukraine? Isn’t it rather odd that all the policies of WEF are either aligned with Jewish Supremacist interests or, at the very least, not at odds? If indeed WEF is independent of Jewish power and interests, why is it always so mindful to be good graces with World Jewry?<br />Klaus Schwab did once spout a sentiment that was faintly pro-Palestinian, but he was soon groveling before the Jews like a sappy dog. As for goy oligarchs like Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, sure they are rich and have immense pull of a sort… but they don’t control the ‘gods’, the themes and idols of what’s sacred and what’s profane. Also, we can bash goy oligarchs all we want. But say something about Soros, and you are attacked as an ‘Anti-Semite’. Indeed, the MAIN reason why Jews used the Sandy Hook controversy to destroy Alex Jones ws because he ragged on powerful Jews(even if he was careful not to name the Jewish Power and only attacked them as individuals).</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/859/312/original/b2525c17d2b06c93.png" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Also, real power isn’t ceremonial. Bilderberg Group members may periodically convene at a gathering, but the real power is what happens every second of every minute of every hour of every day of every week and in the direction decided by those who control the ‘gods’. It’s about non-stop communication and coordination, as well as a sense of unanimity, a totality of mindset and methodology most prevalent among Jewish elites across academia, media, entertainment, finance, law, government, and deep state(across many countries), not least because Jews are interconnected not only by ideas and professions but by blood: A Jew in finance related to a Jew in law related to a Jew in the State Department related to a Jew in Hollywood related to a Jew in Las Vegas and so on.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Alex Jones says Jews don’t constitute a monolith, but we aren’t talking of all Jews but the main thrust of Jewish Power, which, to any honest person, is monomaniacal in tribal supremacism and paranoia. There are genuine dissident Jews, but they only exist at the margins, much like German dissidents in the National Socialist era. Even the well-known Norman Finkelstein has limited reach, and most powerful Jews, ‘left’ and ‘right’ work together to suppress the likes of him. Jews who condemn prejudice against Jews are promoted, but Jews who condemn all kinds of prejudice, even the Zionist kind against Palestinians, are condemned.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="161"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Usually, powerful ‘liberal’ Jews work with ‘conservative’ Jews to silence and suppress genuine dissident Jews. Bill Maher is supposedly a ‘liberal’ Jew but cavorts with far-right Benjamin Netanyahu who, in turn, schmoozes with both the ‘left’ and ‘right’ in Congress. Most goy whores of Jews certainly know how the game is played. While ‘conservatives’ accuse Nancy Pelosi of being ‘far left’(LOL), she always flag-waves for ultra-right Israel. Netanyahu recently won yet another election by allying with ultra-right elements, but what chance is there that ‘liberal’ politicians in the US will cut off ‘aid’(which is really a tribute) to Israel? Just like Neolib Jews gave cover to Neocon Jews, Neocon Jews sided with Neolib Jews against Donald Trump even though Trump was a total pro-Zionist; his mildly anti-war stance was sufficient to make the Neocons work with the Democrats. Imagine that. Neocon Jews went over to the Democratic Party in the Trump years because it was more receptive to warmongering.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/949/279/original/4da4c0bef41243f8.png" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">As for Hasidim and Chabad Jews, they are tolerated by Jewish Power to serve as emissaries of Jewish Hegemony. The Jewish Hegemonic Rule is as follows: If you don’t agree with the Jewish globalist ‘liberal’ agenda 100%, then at the very least kiss the ass of the Chabad or Hasidic Jews to prove that you still hold the Jews as holy. “If you won’t suck my d***, at least kiss my cousin’s ass.” Besides, even if Hasidim, Chabad, or Orthodox Jews are conservative, their worldview is predicated on tribal supremacism and contempt for goyim. It’s been said the biggest funeral in Israel was for an ultra-conservative Rabbi who said goyim exist only to serve Jews and it’s okay to kill a goy to harvest his organs for a Jew. It’s certainly (ultra)’rightist’ but makes even Nazism seem mild by comparison.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Indeed, rightism, premised on particularism, doesn’t make for compatibility on a large scale. Rather, rightists around the world get along best when they acknowledge their differences and respect one another’s borders, or “you do your thing in your space, we do our thing in our space.” Not that leftism/universalism always makes for world peace or mutual understanding. Christianity, Islam, communism, and libertarianism are all universalist but don’t see eye to eye. Multi-polar world order is essentially rightist as it calls for world peace and mutual understanding based on civilizations having different values, traditions, interests, and narratives. Does that mean globalism is leftist in seeking a universal one-size-fits-all world order? Only superficially. Scratch the surface, and current globalism is actually ultra-rightist as an instrument of Jewish Supremacism. Globalism deracinates whites only to make them submit to Jewish Master Race ideology. Globalism erases goy nationalities and borders but demands that all goyim honor Jewishness and defend Zion. So, the current struggle isn’t between ‘right’ and ‘left’ but between right and ultra-right.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Contrary to Alex Jones’ contention that Left-wing Jews persecute right-wing Jews in Israel, the fact is Israel has grown increasingly right-wing over the years. Indeed, the two main parties are both right-wing, and the Jewish Left has been going extinct in Israel. Besides, even the original left-leaning Zionist founders were National Socialists, not universal socialists. Their socialism was for the Jewish Nation, not for Jews and Arabs alike. Zionism was a synthesis of economic leftism and ethno-rightism. While Israel is officially a secular nation, it provides special privileges to religious Jews, not least because they have the most kids to offset the population growth among Arabs, thereby avoiding the fate of the white Afrikaners in South Africa who became outnumbered by blacks via birth rates and migrations.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" height="481" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/859/277/original/9bab54cb101e38d0.png" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="639" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="163"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Nick Fuentes says the problem with Jews is they are the ONLY people who came to America with a deep-seated hatred for Christianity. He says Muslims revere Jesus as a great prophet, and other cultures are either respectful or neutral. In contrast, Jews see Jesus as a punk boiling in excrement and semen for all eternity. Fuentes says the problem is rooted in the religiosity of Jewish immigrants in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. But this isn’t true. If anything, the most problematic Jews weren’t the religious ones but the radical secular ones, usually associated with socialism, communism, or anarchism. It wasn’t the rabbinical Jews, whatever they may have felt about Jesus or Christianity, who led in political agitation, bomb-throwing, spying for communist Russia, and the like. As for the culturally subversive Jews, they too were mostly secular and materialist. And if they felt as Jews, it was mainly an ethnic badge of honor than about spiritual matters.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">Nick Fuentes says he doesn’t care about the Holocaust because history is full of tragedies and sad stories. So, why all this talk of Jews, Jews, Jews and the Holocaust? Indeed, Norman Finkelstein has also argued that the obsession with the Holocaust Narrative has blinded the West to other tragedies and injustices.<br />Furthermore, the great irony of our age is that Jews invoke the Holocaust to push a Master Race supremacy of their own. Jews used to say ‘never again’, but Jewish-globalist war-mongering since the end of the Cold War amounted to ‘again and again’, except that Jews don’t care about goyim being destroyed in great numbers as long as the Jewish Agenda is served. It’s one thing to mourn the Jews killed in WWII but perversely quite another for Jews to use their dead in the Shoah as moral cover to kill countless others to serve what is essentially a Judeo-Nazi or Neoconazi program.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;"><img class="aligncenter" height="580" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/849/147/original/3cf0b5699ff0d239.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="628" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">By the way, Fuentes is being somewhat disingenuous on the subject. After all, it was Christianity itself that perfected the art of eternal victimhood, replaying in sermon, song, and drama the death of Christ and the martyrdom of the Early Christians. Countless paintings, verses, stories, and compositions reminded Christendom of the crucifixion of Jesus(by Jews & Romans) and the persecution of the Christians served as cat chow to the lions.<br />If Christians kept this violin going for 2,000 yrs, why shouldn’t Jews cleverly turn the Holocaust into a secular religion and milk it the same way for all its worth? When Fuentes says “Christ Is King”, it’s not really all that different from Jews saying “Holocaust is god”. Christians like Fuentes can’t get over Jesus, the Son of God, having been murdered by the JOOS. And Jews can’t get enough of rubbing white/Christian nose in the mass-murder of the ‘six million’, or the Cru-Six-fiction.</span></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="161"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="font-family: georgia;">And while National Socialism was essentially pagan(and Hitler had little use for Christianity), the fact remains that ‘antisemitism’ among Germans was rooted in Christian tradition(just as Jewish contempt for goyim is rooted in Judaic tradition). And plenty of Christian Germans supported Hitler out of nationalism, revanchism, materialism, and/or revulsion for Jews. Even Christians with grave reservations about National Socialism regarded it as the lesser evil, even a necessary evil, against Bolshevism and/or Jewish subversion. After all, whereas the commies were smashing churches and persecuting(and even murdering) religious folks, the Nazis at the very least tolerated the Christian community, as did the Italian Fascists with their Lateran Pact. National Socialism wasn’t Christian, and Christianity sure isn’t ‘nazi’, but they did make common cause in parts of Europe against communism and Jews. But given Jews are now working with sub-nazi elements in Ukraine, they’ve pretty much lost all credibility when it comes to ‘muh holocaust’.</span></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="699" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/859/266/original/9d0b1bc17933b26d.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="625" /></p></div></section></div><span id="_bottom" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><div class="nav-group" style="border: 0px; clear: both; color: #888888; font: inherit; margin: 5px 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="nav-item leftside" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; float: left; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"><span class="nav-item leftside" style="border: 0px; float: left; font-family: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: auto;"><br /></span></span><span class="nav-item alignright" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; float: right; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"></span></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-64995645873844847312022-12-14T22:45:00.000-08:002022-12-20T17:20:03.111-08:00Five Queasy Pieces, or Five Queasy Observations About a World Gone Wrong: Kurds and Diversity - White Vacuity - US and EU as Replay of the British and French Empires - Jewish Two-Way Strategy vs Goy One-Way Strategy - Moral Paradox of the Self-Righteous<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjjLQFoeIw92Ko1bZGemDJEis56hNxniGjoIz-xzg1nDHCKV9HykkE5zBHxvgGRlRtbpOWdeZ1OK8NK-JaD-nKzP_-pTxx48rKzQSagdo-BnXH_29WIpsIekfcAJCcqVwV2Bdnlkm7tpHKnmjxB7BhWMjQg7Jkk4FATBuNy96ztwhJUtYWgonw6iSeJ" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img data-original-height="562" data-original-width="700" height="514" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjjLQFoeIw92Ko1bZGemDJEis56hNxniGjoIz-xzg1nDHCKV9HykkE5zBHxvgGRlRtbpOWdeZ1OK8NK-JaD-nKzP_-pTxx48rKzQSagdo-BnXH_29WIpsIekfcAJCcqVwV2Bdnlkm7tpHKnmjxB7BhWMjQg7Jkk4FATBuNy96ztwhJUtYWgonw6iSeJ=w640-h514" width="640" /></a></div><p></p><h2 style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 20px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.25em; margin: 35px 0px -5px 1em; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/five-queasy-pieces-or-five-queasy-observations-about-a-world-gone-wrong/#kurds-and-diversity" id="kurds-and-diversity" style="border-bottom-color: rgb(3, 93, 166); border-bottom-style: solid; border-image: initial; border-left-color: initial; border-left-style: initial; border-right-color: initial; border-right-style: initial; border-top-color: initial; border-top-style: initial; border-width: 0px 0px 1px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="Anchor Link to This Heading">Kurds and Diversity</a></h2><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="328"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If, as our globalist masters keep assuring us, there’s nothing more </span><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant-caps: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit; font-weight: inherit;">wonderful than ‘diversity’, then the Kurds would be the most blessed people on Earth. Having no nation of their own, homogeneous or majoritarian, Kurds are dispersed across several countries in which they are minorities. Thus, they are surrounded by ‘diversity’ wherever they happen to live. In no place are they cursed with homogeneity or majority representation. Rather, they must rub shoulders with various other peoples, the majorities and other minorities, of Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and etc.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="328"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish Globalists and their shills, such as Bill Clinton and Joe Biden, have been promising new wonders for whites who are to welcome their future as minorities in the US. And given current trends across much of Western and even Central Europe, ‘diversity’ is remaking those lands too. By some estimates, nations like Britain, Ireland, France, Germany, Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, and etc. will, within several decades, become white-minority nations bursting at the seams with ‘vibrant’ Diversity. In other words, the fate of whites around the world shall be that of the Kurds, a people without a nation to call their own.<br />And yet, the globalists, who push for ‘diversity’ on white and various goy nations, constantly remind us that the plight of the Kurds owes to their lack of a homeland to call their own. What?<br />If indeed ‘diversity’ is such a blessing and all goy nations should blissfully anticipate a future when the indigenous or founding folks are reduced to minorities, why has history been so troublesome for the Kurds who are minorities in every country they inhabit?<br />Of course, the globalist sympathy for Kurds is just crocodile tears to justify the Zionist-controlled US occupation of entire swaths of Middle East in the name of fighting terrorism(even though the US has been protecting ISIS and Alqaeda against Syria) and protecting Kurds, who’ve been cynically exploited by the most evil people in the world, the Zionist Supremacists.</span></p><div class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; display: flex; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 10px 0px; max-width: 500px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 500px;"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" class="" data-tweet-id="1599466639740706816" frameborder="0" id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=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%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1599466639740706816&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fjfreud%2Ffive-queasy-pieces-or-five-queasy-observations-about-a-world-gone-wrong%2F&sessionId=d48d15efe78e5c180190fd8298be86063d8d6c65&theme=light&widgetsVersion=a3525f077c700%3A1667415560940&width=500px" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; display: block; flex-grow: 1; font: inherit; height: 751px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: static; vertical-align: baseline; visibility: visible; width: 500px;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe></div><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"></p><h2 style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 20px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.25em; margin: 35px 0px -5px 1em; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/five-queasy-pieces-or-five-queasy-observations-about-a-world-gone-wrong/#white-vacuity" id="white-vacuity" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="Anchor Link to This Heading">White Vacuity</a></h2><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="684"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s been a lot of yakking in ‘woke’ circles about White Fragility, but the real problem seems to be White Vacuity. White people are hollow, empty of mind and soul. Sure, the ‘woke’ or so-called ‘progressive’ crowd generates a lot of noise with their righteous rage and fight against ‘hate’ and the like. But, true conscience grows out of individuality, reason, skepticism, and grounding in facts. It’s not true conscience when one’s sense of right-and-wrong simply derives from a dog-like obedience to the scepter and megaphone.<br />Take the Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution in China. They were so full sound and fury in their crusade against ‘counter-revolutionaries’. But, did any of them think it through? As mindless minions of Mao, they screamed and smashed as told and directed. A gigantic case of the Hollow Yellow.<br />And now, we have White Vacuity all across the West. The very people who never had an individual thought, let alone idea, have been suddenly mobilized into howling mobs marching with Antifa and BLM to smash monuments and wreak havoc from Los Angeles to Chicago to New York to London and other European cities.<br />If, at the very least, the rage genuinely flowed from their individual hearts and minds, however twisted such may be, one would have to give the devil his due; he really means it, indeed would fight and die for it. But all these tantrums have been orchestrated from above, prepackaged like microwaveable meals. The very people who’d been perfectly fine with gentrification of big cities were suddenly out in full force as part of the BLM mob demanding ‘justice’ for blacks. Never mind ‘blue cities’ politics had always been controlled by Democrats, not by GOP or Trump.<br />Hardly better than the howling mobs are the genteel ‘educated’ and upper-middle class whites. They too are vacuous in their own way, and one need look no further than their needy gullibility for crackpot notions such as ‘white fragility’ and whatever nonsense peddled by the likes of Ta-Nehisi Coates and Ibrahim Kendi X, black personas carefully curated by Jews to bait and milk whites with collective ‘guilt’. People with real sense and living souls don’t fall for such garbage; they also have hardier defenses against status anxiety and social/class conformity. Populism can be dumb, but even worse is statusism where one’s worldview is essentially a matter of social anxiety among statusites.<br />White Vacuity must be for real as only a soul-hollowed people could fall for Globo-Homo, Tranny-Wanny, 100 genders, Drag-queen Story Hour, Russia Collusion Hoax, BLM baloney, Magic Negro tropes, Holocaustianity(whereby historical tragedy is worshiped as a cult), ‘diversity’ & open borders, Covidian Cult & ‘trust the science’ Fauci-mania, ‘Muh Ukraine’ & Zelensky adoration, Climate change hysteria, slut-feminism, and etc.<br />White Vacuity reveals how empty white souls eagerly swallow whatever’s being peddled by Jews IN THE MOMENT. Nature abhors a vacuum, and white souls are the same way. Hollowed of their traditional values and convictions, they crave meaning but cannot find or construct it on their own as whiteness has been degraded. Who are they, as yucky white people, to say what is right or wrong? No, they must rely on the Holy Other to tell them what is what, and vacuous whites have outsourced conscience to Jews who exploit ‘social justice’ to run circles around whites as wheaks and whummies. I mean, what kind of people believe themselves to be ‘more evolved’ because they admire homo-fecal-penetration as ‘rainbow’ wonderment? What kind of people fall into the protocol of introducing themselves with ‘my pronouns'(and accept that ‘he’ can be a ‘she’, even a ‘they’, and if you disagree, YOU are ‘misgendering’ a fat hairy guy with delusions that he’s a ‘girl’)?<br />But then, maybe the problem goes deeper. Why did the White West adopt Christianity? Why were their souls filled with an alien spiritual system in rejection of their own indigenous pagan cultures? A sign even back then that whites were weak in spiritual imagination and moral substance and needed the OTHER to fill their famished souls?</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Image" class="aligncenter" height="617" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FjynA7qX0AE3i6s?format=jpg&name=small" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="617" /></p><h2 style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 20px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.25em; margin: 35px 0px -5px 1em; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/five-queasy-pieces-or-five-queasy-observations-about-a-world-gone-wrong/#us-and-eu-a-replay-of-british-empire-and-french-empire" id="us-and-eu-a-replay-of-british-empire-and-french-empire" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="Anchor Link to This Heading">US and EU, a Replay of British Empire and French Empire?</a></h2><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="384"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Once upon a time, Britain and France vied for world dominance. With Spain and Portugal in irreversible decline, Germany as yet to unite, and America still being developed, the great rivalry was between the British Empire and the French Empire. In time, with mastery of the seas, rapid industrialization, and closer ties with America(despite the bad blood of 1776), the British gained the upper-hand. But, instead of opting for absolute world mastery via ever more costly wars with France, the Brits arrived at an accommodation. Besides, if excessively alienated by the British, the French would inch closer to the other powers. Better to keep France as an imperial partner whereby the British Empire got the first picks with the leftovers going to the French.<br />A similar dynamic now exists between the US and the EU, though it’s complicated by Jewish Power that controls both. The US and EU are allies, but it’s far from an equal partnership. As the British got the choicest picks and the French gobbled up the leftovers, the US eats first and the seconds for the EU. Consider the Iraq War. Saddam Hussein cut a deal with the EU to trade in Euro and negotiated with European oil companies. A good deal for Europe. But the US, as the premier partner, had other ideas, and the US got to grab Iraq and its oil fields. France signed a deal to supply Australia with submarines, but the US cut in with its own deal.<br />Of course, if only the US benefited while Europeans got nothing, the EU would eventually go its own way(and grow closer to Russia and Asia). So, despite the piggish ways of the US, the EU is still favored for the second-pickings. The US eats first, the EU eats second. Japan & East Asian Pussies eat third. And as part of NATO, EU nations get to flex their muscle as the junior partner of the World Hegemon. But if the current Russo-Jewish War, aka Ukraine Conflict, effectively de-industrializes Europe to the benefit of the US, can this neo-imperial pact between the US and EU last for much longer? One thing for sure, UK and France were once sovereign powers, whereas the US and EU are essentially whores of the higher power, the Empire of Judea.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/569/311/original/53a7bd421d05ef50.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></p><h2 style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 20px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.25em; margin: 35px 0px -5px 1em; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/five-queasy-pieces-or-five-queasy-observations-about-a-world-gone-wrong/#jewish-two-way-vs-goy-one-way" id="jewish-two-way-vs-goy-one-way" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="Anchor Link to This Heading">Jewish Two-Way vs Goy One-Way</a></h2><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="548"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One of the key advantages of Jewish Power is the Two-Way Strategy, which is doable because goyim aren’t protected by taboos. It’s fair game to bash any bunch of goyim in the West, with the exception of blacks(protected by taboos on ‘racism’) and homos(protected by taboos on ‘homophobia’). The Two-Way Strategy allows Jews to both work with and wage war on certain goyim. So, Jews will work with China but also bash China. Jews will work with Russia but also wage war on Russia. Jews beat up on Trump but also worked with him, especially to favor Israel uber alles. Jews impugn Christianity but also flatter Christians as the biggest whores for Zion and Wars for Israel.<br />Jewish Power both slaps you and shakes your hand. It spits on you and kisses you. It kicks you and massages you. The Nice Jew tactic disarms you from calling out on the Nasty Jew tactic; after all, you might offend the ‘Good Jew’ or ‘friendly Jew’ by cursing out the Bad Jew or Nasty Jew. (Rather odd that the ‘good Jew’ usually sides with the Bad Jew than with the good goy wronged by the Bad Jew.)<br />Now, power is the product of being nasty as well as nice. Guys who are ONLY NICE finish last. If you want power, you have to get nasty, at least to a degree. It’s dog-eat-dog. Jews act just nice enough to keep the deals going but then get nasty to make sure they’re on top. If Jews only acted nasty, goyim would quit dealing with Jews. But if Jews only acted nice, they’d be pushovers than the pushers.<br />Of course, Jews are advantaged in this game because of the taboo of ‘antisemitism’. It’s no problem for Jews or any people to badmouth Russians, Iranians, Turks, Chinese, Mexicans, Arabs, and etc. but any critical talk about Jews is deemed ‘antisemitic’ and ‘unacceptable’, at least in the West and its satellites. So, while Jews can both slap the goyim and offer a handshake, goyim can only shake but not slap. So, while Jews play nice-and-nasty, goyim can either play ‘nice’ and lose to Jews OR play ‘nasty’ and be shunned from global commerce(like Iran is).<br />But imagine how things could be different IF goyim could play it like Jews. The Two-Way Strategy. Jews work behind the scenes closely with the Chinese, often against White America, but Jews also bash China in public to direct white frustration at the ‘Chicoms’. Jews also denounce China of ‘genocide’ of the Uighurs, all the while brokering deals for profit.<br />Now, imagine if China could do the same thing. Work with Jews to get what is good for China but also get nasty about the Jews. If Jews drone on and on about Uighur ‘genocide’, China can go hard about the Zionist ‘genocide’ of Palestinians and Arabs. The world would be a lot more interesting if goyim could handshake and slap the Jews like Jews handshake and slap goyim. But first, one must clear the hurdle of taboos that protect Jewish Power from criticism. Jews work with goyim but also beat on goyim. It’s time for goyim to work with Jews but also beat on them. It’s only fair.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/569/328/original/18c6e185f017048d.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></p><h2 style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 20px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.25em; margin: 35px 0px -5px 1em; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/five-queasy-pieces-or-five-queasy-observations-about-a-world-gone-wrong/#the-moral-paradox-of-the-self-righteous" id="the-moral-paradox-of-the-self-righteous" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="Anchor Link to This Heading">The Moral Paradox of the Self-Righteous</a></h2><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="872"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Morality is about right and wrong, but so often the case, stronger the moral passion, weaker the ethical principles. Those so sure of themselves feel anything is justified in service to that certitude, even if it means violating every rule in the book. It was so with the Catholic Church that surely knew many of the ‘miracles’ were hoaxes, but hey, as long as they were useful to God and the church!<br />Given American Conservatism has been characterized by defensive moderation and moral timidity, it had no chance of standing up to radical and hysterical passions. And given American Populism was defined by arrogance and appetite — “We Americans eat more and kick more ass” —, it wasn’t very conducive to the cultivation of moral sensibility. Rush Limbaugh was essentially about steaks and cigars, and Trump’s popularity owed to a flashy display of luxury.<br />Against such timidity(of ‘respectable’ conservatives) and crudity(of vulgar populists), it’s no wonder that the so-called ‘liberals’ and ‘progressives’ gained the moral upper-hand. Though decadent and/or degenerate, they were imbued with an impassioned, indeed rabid and virulent, vision of ‘justice’, of the war between angels and demons. Also, whereas the ‘right’ always caved to Jewish Power, the main source of anti-white hatred, the ‘left’ was given green light from Jews to wage total war on whites.<br />No wonder the so-called ‘progressives’ came to believe they were the sole proprietors of justice and truth. When faced with timidity or crudity on the ‘right’, your side must be better because it’s all fired up about the issues with the most currency: ‘racism’, ‘sexism’, ‘antisemitism’, ‘homophobia’, and etc.<br />Feeling so justified and believing the other side to be either totally evil or totally stupid, especially with the Jewish-Media-Monopoly presenting Donald Trump as ‘literally Hitler’ or ‘worse than Hitler’, the globo-degenerates could only believe ‘god’ is on their side. Being so ‘woke’ and correct, at least in opposition to the ‘evil right’, anything could be justified.<br />After all, in a war with Satan, even imperfect angels are preferable to the Devil’s minions. Via control of academia and media, Jews have shaped the ideology and idolatry by which most people, ‘conservatives’ included, live by.<br />The ‘woke’ sheeple are so prone to seeing the world in binaries of Good and Evil that they believe ANYTHING they do, no matter how dirty and lowdown, is justified against Great Satan. If Putin’s Russia is really so very evil(for its national sovereignty defiant of the all-mighty-and-holy globo-homo and its revival of traditional Christian values), then ANYTHING, even war crimes and support for Ukro-sub-nazis, is justified in service to the great crusade in the name of the holy homo bung.<br />It’s not unlike how religious folks through the ages, Christian or Islam, felt justified in doing horrible things in the name of God. The acts may have been dubious in and of themselves but ostensibly redeemed in service to God against Satan. Some of the most insane mass-killers have been ideological purists(like the Khmer Rouge) and the religiously righteous(like ISIS, Alqaeda, and of course Jim Jones).<br />Then, it’s hardly surprising that some of the most unprincipled and unethical deeds are being done by those who feel most (self)righteous. Black megalomania of holy victimology will push any lie — “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot”, BLM hysterics, hate hoaxes galore, nonstop defamation of white people, tons of criminality & victimization of nonblacks as righteous retribution — in the name of combating ‘racism’. Jews are so high on their Holocaust Martyrdom mania that they are always feel, even when they’re clearly wrong. Every Jewish Gangster feels as Anne Frank.<br />And today’s ‘woke’ journalists are essentially quasi-religious zealots and inquisitors who believe ‘god’(in the form of sacred Jews, magic blacks, and miraculous homos) is on their side. With such blessing from the holies and committed to the ‘right side of history’, they believe any breach of ethics and rules is justified IF it serves the Good Cause, with the ‘good’ defined of course by Jewish Supremacists. So blinded by their moral narcissism, they never bother to ask if their worldview is based on truth and reason, or logic applied to the facts of the world.<br />Morality is essential but has a way of devouring itself when so full of itself. Morality into self-adulation believes itself to be above the rules. So, doing well in school thanks to diligence and self-discipline is ‘white supremacism’ because it hurts the pride of blacks deemed sacred simply for being favored in the currently debased moral hierarchy. (One thing for sure, it goes to show people can be made to feel very moral about immoral things. We live in an age when so many ‘educated’ fools feel so absolutely righteous because they’re so sure that a fat hairy guy is a real woman if so he insists.)<br />And there’s the US constantly invoking ‘muh democracy’ to justify all its criminal and neo-imperialist actions around the world. Granted, some do it cynically for Machiavellian tactics, but there are enough people who’ve drunk the America-the-exceptional-city-on-a-hill BS so often that they believe the US is always justified no matter what it does and how.</span></p><h1 class="page-title" id="video-title" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 18px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.2em; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/skAnckLU3kg/" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/skAnckLU3kg/">JOE ROGAN & MATT TAIBBI EXPOSE THE WOKE MEDIA!!!</a></h1><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/skAnckLU3kg/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/skAnckLU3kg/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/skAnckLU3kg/'">Video Link</a></span></p>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-81602642526005818072022-12-07T18:33:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:04.254-08:00Kanye, Nick Fuentes, and the Jews, or the Most Crucial Crossroads in the Destiny of the Clown World West<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="360" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/069/265/original/28e0f7117bbd03ec.png" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="107"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/M4rSszVoDaxp/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/M4rSszVoDaxp/">NICK FUENTES – “YOU CANNOT TALK ABOUT THE JEWS… OR THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS.”</a><br /><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/M4rSszVoDaxp/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/M4rSszVoDaxp/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/M4rSszVoDaxp/'">Video Link</a><br />When Donald Trump ran on the populist platform in 2016 and called out Open Borders RINOS and Neocon warmongers, he angered Jewish Power that, for the next four years, was hell bent on doing whatever it took to dismantle his agenda and presidency. A sideshow at the time was Kanye West’s surprising support of Trump and unsurprisingly finding himself in hot water, much deeper than anyone realized at the time. One thing both figures had in common since that moment until recently was either subordination or silence about the power of Zion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" trigger="1365" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Jews were at the forefront of the Dump-Trump campaign, the Donald understood they were too powerful for him to fight back effectively; Jews and goyim relying on Jewish support held all the cards in the institutions and industries that matter. Democratic Jews bashed him mercilessly, but all he could do was suck up to Israel and Neocon types(or Neocucks like Mike Pompeo) even more in the hope that Jews won’t whip him too badly. He could never hope for Jews being pro-Trump, only for Jews being somewhat less harsh on thump-Trump.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Trump likely wished that if he caved to every hardline Israeli demand, his Jewish ‘allies’ would communicate to Democratic Jews to ease the pain on the Bad Orange Man. The only choices were being rammed in the ass seven days a week OR rammed in the ass six days a week with one day off for ‘good behavior’. Needless to say, Jewish Power was doing a Good Jew/Bad Jew number on him. The ‘bad Jews’ would attack him relentlessly, forcing Trump to lean on ‘good Jews’ for help. Of course, the ‘good Jews’ understood Trump’s reliance on them stemmed from attacks by the ‘bad Jews’. The classic methodology of Good Cop/Bad Cop. For the Good Cop to get the goods, the suspect must come under immense pressure from the Bad Cop.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, it’s no wonder that even as the ‘good Jews’ pretended to be Trump’s friends, they hardly did anything to alleviate the endless needling and tormenting of Trump from the ‘bad Jews’. For all that Trump did for the ‘good Jews’, he got rammed in the ass seven days a week. He couldn’t even get Sunday off from the constant ass-ramming but nevertheless continued to cuck to the ‘good Jews’ in the hope that, gee whiz, maybe he could have at least one day without the Jewish dong up his bung. Trump gave Israel and Netanyahu all they demanded and rolled over and played fetch for Zion, even scrapping plans for improved relations with Russia, leaving US troops in Syria, and assassinating general Soleimani. It was truly a pathetic sight to behold.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="485" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/594/427/original/f0af4be30214d775.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And when it was time for Jewish Power to pull every trick in the book, the key election year of 2020 was torn asunder with Covid tyranny(and economic downturn) and BLM pogroms and mass protests. The very Jewish voices, who’d insisted everyone must stay put due to the pandemic, cheered on the riots and mass protests, as if Covid 19 virus somehow passes-over the ‘woke’, much like the Old Testament tells of God’s wrath passing over the Jews and only smiting the bad Egyptians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="63"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish Power did all this to Trump and dragged him through the dirt. It ruined his presidency and rigged elections(most certainly), and the cucked deep state was in on the sham. Meanwhile, Trump’s Jewish ‘allies’ hardly did anything to push back against the fraud and scandal, and most of them were probably working behind the scenes to get Joe Biden elected.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After all, both Jewish-Libs or Jewish-Cons are about Jews-uber-alles and Zionic supremacism, and so, why shouldn’t Jews on both sides of the aisle favor Biden over Trump when Biden is, incredibly enough, even more servile to the Jews? Whereas Trump played on being implicitly pro-white as well as explicitly pro-Jewish, Biden is explicitly pro-Jewish and explicitly anti-white(as long as his own white collaborator-clan get protection and privilege as ‘made men’). Even as Trump took it up his rump from Zion and delivered on just about every Israeli demand, he did stoke white populism, a total no-no in the eyes of Jews, ‘left’ or ‘right’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="221"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, many Neocon Jews in the GOP attacked Trump ceaselessly(as their ideal white goy is someone like Mitt Romney or Lindsey Graham) or even openly joined with the Democrats. For the longest time, Jews had regarded the Democratic Party as the Jewish Party and the GOP as the Other Party. Thus, the main reason why some Jews joined the GOP was not to adopt American Conservatism but to infiltrate and alter the party so that it would, at the very least, be servile to Zion.<br />The Democratic Party was 100% aligned with Jewish demands: Pro-Zionist, globalist, open borders, anti-gun, globo-homo, Negrolatry(against whites), and politically correct. The Republicans, on the other hand, stood for certain values and interests at odds with the Jewish-American domestic agenda, and this reality could have(and should have) led to the GOP being the Anti-Jewish Party. Jews feared such a development, and so, some joined the GOP as neocons and tantalized the Republicans with the hope that smart, rich, and energetic Jews(who also radiated with Holocaust Glow) would come to their side. Republicans and conservatives were so taken with the idea of Holy Genius Jews coming over to their camp that they went out of their way to roll out the red carpet(and silence anyone on their side who might displease these Jewish guests).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/069/334/original/8ab1a9b52091b7f1.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="587" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, even as the GOP continued to support various interests at odds with the Jewish Agenda, it was completely committed to revering Zion, if only to appease the relatively few but oh-so-very-precious Jews in the Party. Indeed, the fact that the GOP disappointed, angered, or infuriated Jews on many domestic issues compelled Republicans to cuck even harder on Israel and foreign policy as compensation. It was especially so with the presidency of George W. Bush who handed the entirety of foreign policy to the Neocons on a silver platter.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Trump Experiment or ‘Trumperiment’ has been eye-opening about the character of Jewish Power and its relation to whites. The essence of Trumperiment was to respect Jewish Power while insisting on the validity of white populist nationalism. In other words, Trump’s deal to the Jews went as follows: “We whites and Christians will support Israel and not badmouth Jews, and you Jews will, at the very least, tolerate(if not respect) white populism and nationalism as counterbalance against unfettered globalism. Something for you people and something for us, with Jews getting a larger share of the pie but not everything.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="92"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, what has been the Jewish Response? It was to employ all means(that would make Joe McCarthy blush) to crush white identity, white pride, white unity, white interests, white history, white genetics, white everything. As for traditional values and social norms, down the toilet they go. The only way forward is globo-homo and tranny-wanny as proxies of Jewish Hegemonism. And if Trump, despite having cucked on Russia, didn’t provoke Russia to war, Biden’s Jewish-heavy administration did just that by taunting Putin as too pussy to do anything about it.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="105"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In other words, Trumperiment was an abject failure. Whereas Trump and MAGA were willing to make big concessions to Jews in exchange for Jewish tolerance(if not acceptance, let alone support) for American nationalism and populism, Jewish answer was “F*** you, get down on your knees, and suck my d***.” And it all came to a head in 2020. Despite Trump having allowed Jonathan Pollard the lowlife scum to fly off to Israel and take photos with beaming Netanyahu and despite his mob-hit on General Soleimani, Jews pushed their putsch just the same with Covid tyranny(that complicated elections, especially with mail-in voting) and BLM terrorism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="57"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, Trump is still using the old playbook, sucking up to Jews, shining their boots, kissing their ass, and sucking their d***. Jews tell Trump to get the shine box and always get their shoes shined while they mock and laugh at him. Spit-Shinin’ Trump is no Tommy(Joe Pesci) who won’t take that shit anymore.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2-RwaVhhV_8?start=86&feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Goodfellas shoeshine box HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="202"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Instead of waking up and being a real man and admitting, “I shined their shoes but they just f***ed me in the ass over and over”, he’s been whining and bleating about, “I did so much for Israel and I love you Jews, but boo hoo hoo, you Jews don’t love me back? Why not? I’m so hurt, boo hoo hooey.” He’s been acting like a pussy maggot since 2020.<br />And even though most MAGA types around Trump witnessed what we all did, they too have been mum about Jewish Power and its total war on them. MAGA is about pretending Jews are still the best of neighbors and friends even after they’ve burned down your house, raped your mother, murdered your father, and sold your brothers and sister to slavery. (Not that HDB is much better.)<br />So, Kari Lake goes on and on about election fraud but never mentions Jewish Power pulling the string. Her ilk will blame China but won’t mention Jews who control both parties, media, finance, law firms & courts, and all that matters. When push comes to shove, they are servants and slaves, dogs and cattle fearful of uttering the truth.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="209"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Politics is essentially as follows: Jewish Masters and Deep State Operatives on top, and the Democratic Party as Alpha Dog and Republican Party as Beta Dog. Trump’s unforgivable sin in Jewish eyes was that he, as a Republican, barked like an alpha dog. Still, Trump remained a loyal dog to Jews, barking for Zion. But, a beta dog must play the role of beta, not act like alpha, and he simply had to be put down(as his obedience school training in NY had obviously failed). Trump is surely deeply angry over what happened in 2020, but he’s too afraid and too intertwined with Jewish Power to break free and speak the truth. Thus, his 2024 isn’t about MAGA and destroying the Deep State for good but about stoking his wounded ego. He wants to win again just to feel good about himself. He’s no longer a nationalist but a personalist trying to massage his butt-hurt pride. After taking it up his ass for four years, he got a red poker up his ass in 2020 from the Jews. And since 2020, Jews have gone after him with FBI raids, lawsuits, financial warfare, and endless hype about 1/6. But his main message is ‘muh lower taxes’ and ‘muh Israel’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Trump sputters on as if Trumperiment hadn’t been a total failure, mainly on account of Jewish Power’s limitless will and unlimited means to get what it wants. Undeniably, Trumperiment failed spectacularly because it failed to assess the true character of the Jewish Will to Power and its depths of pathology and depravity. As with the Terminator, Jewish Power cannot be reasoned with. As Reagan said of the Cold War, “We win, they lose”, Jews see the whole world in those stark David-Mametian terms, and the main engine of Jewish Power is white cuckery and obeisance. Without whites as dogs and brown-nosers doing the bidding of Jews, Jews have no global power despite all their wealth. All these Wars for Zion wouldn’t be happening if whites weren’t such wheaks and whummies brown-nosing before the Jewish Supremacist arse. That is why Jews couldn’t stand a man like Trump.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zu0rP2VWLWw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Terminator will not stop .... Ever" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For Jews, it didn’t matter that Trumpism was premised on favoritism for Jews, i.e. Jews as the top gods of the West. Jews insist on being the ONLY GOD of the whole world as globalism means everyone everywhere must submit to the ‘gods’ controlled by Jews.<br />Jews are only 2% of the US population, but Trumpism reserved a vaunted place for Jews. The US would remain pro-Israel and bring back anti-Iranian sanctions. It would scrap friendlier ties with Russia. Trump would appoint a whole host of neocons and neo-cucks(despite his anti-war stance) and go on and on about how much he loves Israel, how much Israelis love him(LOL), and how we worship ‘muh holocaust’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="82"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, any other group in the US would have jumped at such an offer. Greek-Americans would find it more than fair if they were offered such a deal. They might even blush that they’re being favored this way. But, it wasn’t enough for Jews who want it all. They insist on absolute mastery over America, which means over the world as the US is the lone superpower. So, Jews cannot tolerate even the slightest expression of white agency and autonomy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Trumpism, despite its doggish servility to Jews, was still predicated on some degree of bargaining, i.e. whites support Jews but Jews have to give something in return, like secure borders, modicum of concern for the white working class, respect for Christianity, and no more excessive ‘wokeness’ as Jewish proxy. But Jews had to have it all, and so, they ambushed MAGA especially hard in 2020 with BLM riots and Covid nuttery. And then with Biden’s Jewish-heavy regime, the US implemented the most radically anti-white and anti-normal agenda in US history, with the likes of Rachel Levine working with Big Pharma to determine health in America. Border security, a big theme of Trump, was totally gone. Globo-Homo was expanded hundred fold, and Negrolatry is everywhere. A war was provoked against Russia. And in order for the Democrats to own the anti-China line, Biden has been even more anti-China than Trump.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even after all that, Republicans hardly gained anything in the 2022 elections, hopelessly rigged in the aftermath of the changes implemented by Jews in the 2020 election where ballot-harvesting pretty much legalized ballot-stuffing and encouraged lazy-voting by people who usually wouldn’t vote. The ‘most likely voter’ category is obsolete as the Jewish Machine is revved to reach every apathetic lazy moron who is likely to vote Democratic. And what is the main message from the GOP? ‘Muh Ukraine’ and ‘Trump bad for speaking with Kanye and Nick Fuentes’. Even Marjorie Taylor Greene is back to sucking Zionist dong.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="341"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even with things falling apart in ‘blue’ areas, most people there will continue to vote Democratic because Jews control the gods. It’s like Christians will always support corrupt and bad Christians against Satanists because, however compromised the Church may be, the Temple of Satan is far far worse. Likewise, blue-city-and-suburban ‘wheaks’ and ‘whummies’ are so brainwashed with Jewish Dogma that they see Trump and MAGA as not only wrong but downright evil, worse than Hitler, and etc. while they regard Jews, blacks, and homos as the holiest of the holy. In their minds, they’re on the side of angelic ‘love’ while the other worships demonic ‘hate’, but then, why not since the GOP and even MAGA more or less play by the same rulebook as their highest gods are Jews(‘muh Israel’ and ‘we must honor Jews even when they kick us’) and blacks(the fantasy notion that MLK was a model Republican and the KKK was Democratic) and increasingly even homos. Unless whites effectively reject and demolish the gods controlled by Jews and elevate their own, they will always lose in the ‘spiritual’ war. You don’t let your enemy dictate the terms of what is good and evil. Jews would lose the spiritual argument with Christians if they accepted Jesus as the Messiah, and Christians would lose the spiritual argument with Muslims if they accepted Muhammad as the last great prophet. Whites lose to Jews because they accept the gods created or favored by Jewish Power than having their own set of gods. This is why ‘Christ Is King’ is triggering to Jews; it implies that there is some power that is higher and holier than Jews, blacks, and homos, albeit higher than whites as well. According to Jews, Christianity ideally should be Cucktianity that worships Jews, blacks, and homos than for Jews to convert to the True Faith, for blacks to remind themselves of a holy power greater than their silly megalomania, and for homos to repent for for their sins of sexual deviancy and fecal-penetration.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="409" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/069/251/original/693689216897af96.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="264"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And this is why the Kanye-Fuentes-Milo moment matters. Now, this Milo character is rather Loki-like(from the Germanic mythology). He’s slippery and two-faced, and he may well have ulterior motives. But whatever his reasons may be, he did name the Jewish Power and call out on Trump as a hopeless ass-kisser of Zion. Some of Trump’s ass-kissing in 2016 made sense as some kind of compromise still seemed a possible even if the odds weren’t good.<br />But after what happened in 2020, his clinging to the discredited old formula is a sight to behold. A totally busted and broken man who’s been rammed in the ass like a bitch but still begging for more. The Trump-n-Jews Show goes like this. Most Jews say, “you’re disgusting and we hate you”, and Trump says, “I love you and did everything for Israel, so why don’t you like me, oh boo hoo hoo.” If some people hate you, hate them back. What’s the point of unconditionally loving those who murderously hate you. It’d be like a Jew who loves Himmler and the SS. It’s a form of dog-mentality as a dog that is abused still wishes to gain the approval of its master. Jews are the mental, moral, intellectual, political, and spiritual masters of whites. It’s embarrassing to see the white race turned into a bunch of wheaks and whummies. Weak-minded fools without core values and those dumb enough to fall for every Jewish Supremacist lie. It may well be that fully 90% of whites are either wheaks or whummies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="271"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, it could be Trump doesn’t really care for most Jews and even suspect those around him. Maybe he’s playing 4-D checkers, a game of ‘keep your friends close but your enemies closer’, but he’s no Michael Corleone. We all know that Jews are so powerful that all politicians must maneuver in a war zone over which Jews have air supremacy. Well, Trump played that game for four years, and it was a total disaster IF his intention was to ‘Drain the Swamp’ and ‘Make America Great Again’.<br />At this point in his life and the nation’s history, his main purpose shouldn’t be to win an election or keep his wealth. He’s an old man, so how many more years does he have to live? He’s had his full of luxury and lifestyles of the rich and famous. He tried his luck at the presidency and discovered there isn’t much a politician can do between the Scylla and Charybdis of Jewish Supremacism and the Deep State. The ONLY thing he can do for the good of the country is to spill the beans on Jewish Power. Sure, he will be dragged through the mud and won’t win in 2024, and Jews will try to take away his last penny, but he will have played the Spartacusian role of calling out the true tyranny of the US empire, which is the Jewish Master Race ideology. Is Trump the kind of man who is willing to cross the Rubicon to break the existing Narrative? No, and that’s why Nick Fuentes and Kanye West matter.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="615" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/069/307/original/35972408fac558f6.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="133"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What Kanye West or ‘Ye’ is doing isn’t anything new. Many in the dissident communities and alternative outlets have been saying it forever. Even some in the ‘respectable’ academia and media have discussed Jewish Power and its problems, albeit in a more ‘civil’ manner. But what goes by the name of ‘public discourse’ isn’t just a matter of WHAT is said but WHO says it. You can be a little known person and say a lot of things on Twitter but go unnoticed for the longest time. But if some famous person, politician or celebrity, says the same thing, it becomes ‘news’, the talk of the town or the whole world through the worldwide web. And that’s why Kanye matters. Not because of WHAT he said but WHO he is.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="175"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, he matters even more because of WHAT HE IS, which is black. He’s not only famous and has millions of fans/followers but is a Negro, and Jews have sought to own and control blackness as a moral bludgeon, not least because they, as the wealthiest and most privileged people on Earth, are finding it increasingly difficult to portray themselves as a ‘victim’ group. (Conservatives insist on Jewish-victim-status for mere opportunism to have smart and rich Jews come over to the Cuckservatives side. “Look! All those darkies hate you Jews whose riches and privileges can be secured only by us servile white cuck dogs.”) Jews also know whites are most likely to feel guilty about blacks because so many whites worship blacks as athletic, sexual, musical, and/or oratorical gods. If the Holocaust is traumatic to whites because of the idea of 6 million Albert Einsteins dead, Black Slavery is traumatic because of the idea of millions of Jay-Z made to pick cotton and whipped to say he’s name is ‘Toby’, not ‘Jay-Z’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="54"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Also, the Jewish-Black symbiosis carries a certain logic as the combo beats whites both mentally and physically. While Jews can outwit whites, they aren’t stronger than whites. So, even as a ‘dumb polack’ loses to a Jew in wit, he can win with muscle, like with the Eugene character in the movie GREASE.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Kkzm4nKW6Vw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Grease - Hey Eugene!" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But if Jews are allied with blacks, the Jew-Black Union can beat whites mentally and physically. Jews use blacks to beat whites and use whites to beat Arabs and others on the shit-list of Zion. Jews certainly got a lot of mileage using Joe Louis to pummel Max Schmeling in the first round. So, the Holy Holocaust people get their revenge on whites with wits, and the Sacred Slavery people get their revenge with fists(and dongs, what with Jews pushing ACOWW or Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs as the main theme of commercials on TV and internet). This is why Jews are extremely nervous about cracks in the Jew-Negro alliance and ruthlessly destroy any Jew or any Black who threatens this mutual wink-wink understanding.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Unlike Kanye, Donald Sterling didn’t publicize his views, which were leaked by a worthless ‘ho’, but Jewish Power still had to take him down for the ‘breach’. Of course, Jews knew about Sterling’s personal feelings(and largely share them in private), but they made a big show of how the JEWISH COMMUNITY will not tolerate any Jew, however rich and prominent, who says ‘racist’ things about the Noble Negroes, who be black gold in the Jewish ‘moral’ crusade against whites. Sterling, like so many Jews and blacks who’d violated the ‘deal’, relented under pressure.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="332"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The difference about Kanye is that, more the Jews push, he pushes back. Also, he said it sober and straight unlike Mel Gibson who was under the influence and spoke gibberish along with the hard talk about Jewish power fomenting all these wars. Also unlike Mel Gibson who disingenuously said he had NO IDEAR what he was ranting about on the night of the pull-over for DUI, Kanye doubled down on his statement and went even further in a manner righteous and riotous. Jews stole most of his money, but he refused to bow down and got even more defiant. (It’s amusing that Jews are diagnosing Kanye as mentally ill. While he is clearly mentally unstable, Jews have been promoting every nut-job demento pervert celebrity forever. Jews promoted gangsta rap, the main themes of which were ‘bitchass ho’ and ‘shoot dat nigga’. Jews even argued for First Amendment rights for Ice-T’s song about wanting to kill cops. Jews pushed skank Miley Cyrus as a role model for young girls. And we’re to believe Rachel Levine is an ideal person to be lecturing to us about health. And a fat hairy man is really a ‘woman’ if he so insists. And the elites have no problem with fashion industries like Balenciaga. But suddenly, these people detect mental illness in Kanye and why? For noticing that Jews control the music industry and banking. Yeah, Ye is really delusional! I suppose Rick Sanchez was mentally ill too for noticing Jews are very prominent in the media. We live in a world of inversion. The real mental illness of the West is the inability or unwillingness to notice the 900 lb. gorilla in the room: JEWS GOT THE POWER AND ABUSE IT IN THE MOST NEFARIOUS WAYS. Ever heard of FTX, anyone? The US is rabidly and virulently Philo-Semitic. Trump’s main sickness is begging to suck Zionist cock after it’s been rammed up his ass so many times. Now, THAT is sick.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="54"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s no wonder Jewish Power has been so obsessed about using ‘handlers’(or controllers) to keep the flock on the farm. Jewish elites cannot tolerate a Randall McMurphy(of ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST). You don’t want to work on Maggie’s Farm no more? Well, there is Desolation Row.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fgphPFNiVZw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Bob Dylan - Maggie's Farm (Official Audio)" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/frwzLFZKCMY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Desolation Row - Bob Dylan Lyrics" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Einstein, disguised as Robin Hood</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With his memories in a trunk</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Passed this way an hour ago</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With his friend, a jealous monk</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now he looked so immaculately frightful</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As he bummed a cigarette</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then he went off sniffing drainpipes</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And reciting the alphabet</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">You would not think to look at him</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But he was famous long ago</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For playing the electric violin</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On Desolation Row</em></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dr. Filth, he keeps his world</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Inside of a leather cup</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But all his sexless patients</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">They’re trying to blow it up</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now his nurse, some local loser</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">She’s in charge of the cyanide hole</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And she also keeps the cards that read</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">“Have mercy on his soul”</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">They all play on the pennywhistle</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">You can hear them blow</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If you lean your head out far enough</em><br /><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">From Desolation Row</em></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="240"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Personally, I have no use for rap music and don’t care for Kanye’s stuff any more than the foul-mouthed nursery rhymes of his peers. I understand some rappers have a knack for what they do, but the genre seems mainly an attitude of arrogance of ignorance. And that is one of the drawbacks of Kanye West’s current controversy. In naming the Jewish Power, he has stepped on the third rail of American Politics, but is he up to the job? The defiant style of the rapper has prepped him with a damn-the-torpedoes attitude, but will he try to understand the issue better(in the manner of Malcolm X who grew over the years) or will he keep shooting from the hip(hop) just to reap cheap attention?<br />Did he really think this out or has he just gone off the reservation(only to return when he’s grown tired of all the notoriety)? Does he know that there’s no going back because he’s gone too far and that this latest chapter of his life has to be played more intelligently, even wisely, than the kind of energy went into his rap album projects? (He would drive the Jews crazy if he did a rap album in tribute to the Palestinians and all those Arabs killed in the Wars for Zion, but will he? Or will he just stir up more dumb attention talking about hitler-and-nazis?)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Nick Fuentes, for all his immaturity, egotism, and narcissism(and various oddities), has really thought about the Jewish Factor in America and the World. He came to political consciousness like so many mainstream conservatives and then realized the ONLY HONEST way to understand what’s happening is to focus on the top power, Jewish Supremacist and vile. He grew attached to Trump because the Donald in 2016 broke through the ‘Neocon-sensus’ that had long mandated GOP’s priorities. For a young man, it was exciting to see American Conservatism come alive as an exercise in exuberance and irreverence of the established way of doing things.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="511" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/069/278/original/84389794bfbe4468.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="242"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Though Richard Spencer turned out to be a pretty loathsome and despicable character, it need be acknowledged that he refused the thirty pieces of silver from mainstream Conservatism Inc., where he could easily have been the Next Mitt Romney. Likewise, Nick Fuentes was a standout personality among the new crop of conservatives, and many doors would have opened for him had he taken the Charlie Kirk road. But he risked losing all that by choosing truth over opportunity. The difference between Fuentes and people like Steven Crowder is the substance matches the style. Fuentes talks big about big issues, the biggest one being the Jewish Influence in the US and the world. In contrast, so many conservatives act macho and talk big in style but steer clear of the Jewish Question in substance, a template perfected by Rush Limbaugh, a blowhard who fulminated on taxes, terrorists, and ‘Chicoms’ but always sucked up to Zion. Donald Trump and Alex Jones along belong in this category: Talking Big and Walking Tall but always careful to tiptoe around the question of Jewish Power. Unlike WASP elites that tolerated and even appreciated criticism, Jewish Power does not, and that means one has a choice: Serve one’s career by shutting up about the Real Power or jeopardize one’s career by speaking truth to power. Because that’s how Jews play power-politics, those are the only two options, aka the ‘red pill’ or the ‘blue pill’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="145"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish Media and cucks have denounced Nick Fuentes of being a ‘Holocaust Denier’ based on a Cookie Monster joke he made about Nazi concentration camps. It was more Shmolocaust-mockery than Holocaust Denial. (By the way, does it make sense to treat history like religion, whereby one must ‘believe’ or else be condemned for the blasphemy of ‘denying’?) Holocaust is the actual historical tragedy, whereas Shmolocaust is the shameless Jewish milking of it as a cult and cash cow. While people who mock the actual event deserve censure, the Shoah-business invites parody, just like phony Televangelist types deserve all the ridicule. Genuinely devout Christians who’d be offended by blasphemy against God and Jesus don’t mind charlatans and fraudsters in their midst being exposed for what they are. Faith in God is one thing but feigning sanctimony to amass fame and fortune is quite another.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It is undeniable that Jewish Power has milked the Holocaust for all it’s worth, constantly invoking ‘muh Anne Frank’ to justify so many abuses and crimes, even Crimes-against-Humanity. If anything, the real problem is Shmolocaust Denial by Jews, i.e. Jews denying their shameless exploitation of the WWII tragedy to maximize their power and privilege, incredibly even to wage wars predicated on a Master Race Ideology not unlike that of the Nazis. In the irony of ironies, the Neocon Jews are now allied with Sub-Nazi elements in Ukraine, making them Neoconazis. Via their near-monopoly of finance, deep state, academia, and media, Jews have made themselves so godlike via the Shmolocaust that we mustn’t question their enabling of quasi-nazi elements to get what they want.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="434" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/358/193/original/3424fb6e7ebe772e.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Fuentes had been less of a provocateur, he could easily have avoided that joke(that became the basis of his notoriety as a ‘holocaust denier’) and instead focused on all the victims of Jewish Supremacism around the world. Instead of diminishing Jewish victimhood(even if exaggerated), it’s so much better to focus on victimization of so many at the hands of Jews. Only belatedly did David Duke learn that it’s better to make common cause with victims of World Jewry than don a stupid KKK robe and make a fool of himself. Likewise, Richard Spencer and Matt Heimbach would have gotten more mileage against Jewish Power if they dropped the ‘Sieg Heil’ clown world antics.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, concern for the oppressed is difficult for many rightist-leaning people because of the dynamics of powerism and powerlessism that animates the right and the left. Essentially, those on the right tend to be powerists. Powerism comes in two types: Submission to the existing power and the dream of the Ideal Power. Most white ‘conservatives’ are brown-nosing cucks to the existing power, i.e. they will kiss the ass of whomever or whatever happens to be on top. As Jews are now on top, GOP is mostly about sucking up to Jews. Thus, so-called ‘conservatives’ are really just Servatives or servant-squires. Mitt the Shit Romney, Lindsey the Pansy Graham, Mitch the Bitch McConnell, and just about every Republican are in awe of Jewish Power and get on their knees. This type of quisling powerists are like the East German Stasi. Many who’d been part of the National Socialist power structure were soon serving the new boss in town, the communists backed by the Soviets.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But another kind of powerism refuses to submit to what it deems to be the wrong power even when it holds the whip-hand. This is what sets people like Nick Fuentes from those in Conservatism Inc. who suck up to Ben Shapiro as the master gatekeeper. He is Jewish after all, and what is current ‘conservatism’ about but brown-nosing to win some more cigars from Jews?<br />Cuck-powerists are like those whites who accepted blacks as the new champions in sports because they’re about sucking up to the top winners, whoever they may be. In contrast, idealist-powerists are deeply troubled that the sports ‘heroes’ went from white to black in the West; they idealize a system that upholds the iconic status of whites, even if it means excluding blacks and others who threaten white dominance, at least within the white order.<br />Contra the cuck-powerists, Nick Fuentes and the Christian Nationalist crowd have a counter vision of powerism wherein their side should be on top. But because powerism fixates on the prestige of power itself, it tends to ignore or even impugn the powerless or the ‘victims’ of society, a common sentiment among those on the Right. This may seem odd because rightists and conservatives are now the powerless ones dehumanized by Jewish Globalism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="176"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Look what was done to the 1/6 protesters. Look how even Trump, the president, was debanked and deplatformed. Given the lowly status of whites in the West, shouldn’t pro-white patriots and nationalists identify with the Palestinians and the like? After all, White Nakba is pretty much following the trajectory of the original Palestinian Nakba. But this is a difficult psychological hurdle for right-leaning powerists because they are so in awe of power as prestige.<br />For cucks, current power or any power is enough for them to serve and obey; they just want to be with the winning team. If Hindus or Chinese were to rule the US in the future, men like Romney and McConnell will grovel at their feet.<br />For the proud nationalist types, however, the power must be in accordance with their vision and values, BUT they still get high on the mania for power. They love the mighty and feel contempt for the weak; their side may be the loser now but wants to be the winner and crush the enemy without mercy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, it’s no wonder that, despite having been Palestinianized by the Jews, most rightist or ‘conservative’ whites don’t want to have anything to do with Palestinians. They want to be associated with the winners or want to be the winners; they don’t want to be with the ‘losers’, those pathetic lowly Palestinians and the like.<br />For some, sucking up to Jews is enough because, even if most Jews are anti-white and anti-conservative, Jews are the biggest winners in the world, and it’s just so ‘cool’ to be rooting for Zion and World Jewry as the New Master Holy Holocaust Race, rah rah. For others, ‘white nationalism’ shall somehow prevail thanks to “Christ Is King” or “They Saved Hitler’s Brains”.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Consider the biker community in America. Most bikers don’t have much, and many are just hanging on. But they see themselves as modern Viking warriors and a good number are military veterans. They feel powerful-like because they once flew choppers or own two dozen assault rifles. Never mind the military they served took orders from Jews pushing globo-homo and BLM. Never mind all their guns are useless without a viable ideology and vanguard. It’s no wonder ‘muh military’ and celebrations of veterans mean so much to conservatives. Even without power themselves, their fixation on the might of the US military and the heroism of the soldiers make them feel on the side of the winners, the greatest and most powerful nation in the world. So, even as MAGA types cheered for Trump’s anti-neocon-war rhetoric, they still swooned at Trump’s pledge to increase military spending and blow up any part of the world standing against the will of the US as the lone superpower.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/122/014/273/original/e0279b1a6270dfcd.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="492" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even in their lowly status, they see themselves as ‘winners’ because they’re ‘badass’. And this goes a long way to explain why MAGA and Nick Fuentes have been reluctant to warm up to Palestinians and other victims of Jews. They have no use for ‘losers’ and either want to serve winners or be the winners. So, as Jewish Power pummels whites to the ground as the New Palestinians, the brown-nosing cucks whimper, “But we want to serve you great awesome Jews” while the nationalist types say, “We want your power to rule the world as WE please.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such fixation on winning and contempt for losing turn a blind eye to the victims of Jewish Supremacism. With the likes of Richard Spencer and Himmlerist Greg Johnson, one got the impression that their main grievance with Jewish Supremacism was it was Jewish, not that it was supremacist. In other words, move aside Jews, because ‘We Anglos and Germanics should have the real supremacist hegemony over the world.’ Johnson speaks of nationalism for all, but it’s never convincing because he’s obviously committed to the Naziesque ideology in Ukraine that works with Jews to destroy Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If right-wing types favor powerism, left-wing types favor powerlessism. For the left, there is no shame in being powerless. If anything, the powerless deserve more sympathy, respect, and representation. The Left doesn’t see the powerless as a bunch of ‘losers’. Then, it’s no wonder that more people on the Left(and I mean the Real Left) than on the Right feel sympathy for the Palestinians. The powerist mentality of the Right favors Jews and Zionists over Palestinians because Jews are ‘winners’ and Palestinians are ‘losers’. (Never mind Jesus favored the losers over winners at every turn.)<br />Even those on the Right who call out on Jews and express ‘antisemitic’ views tend to snub the Palestinians. Some on the Right, like David Duke, have come to the defense of the Palestinians, but BDS is heavily dominated by the (real) Left.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The problem for whites on the Right is they’re stuck in the powerist mentality when they’ve become so powerless and without prestige, indeed even to the point of dehumanization. White goy elites are still rich, privileged, and well-connected but lack agency and pride; regardless of their possessions, they must prostrate themselves before the perversion of homos and verbal abuse from blacks, the two groups most stage-managed by Jewish Supremacists. When not kowtowing to blacks and homos, white goy elites of both parties are gutless tools of Jewish Power. Jews say, they obey.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="639" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/963/182/original/a58b7d5a89d586b8.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s the ever-shrinking white middle class, and white working class & rural folks have been made to bear the burden for ‘white privilege’; in other words, a truly privileged white goy has a better chance of entering an elite institution or top industry than a white middle class or working class person without privilege. Indeed, white communities, no matter how economically depressed, are targeted for exclusion by Jewish-dominated bastions of power and prestige. For all the talk of the evils of ‘white privilege’, Jews favor privileged white goyim over unprivileged white goyim because (1) the privileged ones are more likely to be status-striving brown-nosers indoctrinated by Jewish media/academia and (2) official recognition of unprivileged whites would give the lie to the notion that ALL whites enjoy some great advantage in life.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="69"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the Right fixates on the powerism either out of craven brown-nosing desire to suck up to the winners or to grab power for itself, the Left runs on powerlessism, calling for justice for the unheard, the broken, and poorly represented. This is why the Left has a moral advantage against the Right, especially as the West is still defined by Christian Morality(even in the currently perverted state).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While leftism can get out of hand(just like rightism), the element of powerlessism is valuable as, all throughout history, every group had its time with its face in the dirt. Thus, it is only decent to sympathize and help out the less fortunate, the oppressed, the dehumanized. When Jews dehumanize whites, whites would do better to understand the plight of Palestinians who’ve for so long been kicked around by Jews. If whites must ‘take the knee’, it should be in atonement for their aiding and abetting the Zionist erasure of Palestine. But too many whites on the right, either due to brown-nosing tendencies(to serve the current winner) or supremacist urges(i.e. “WE WHITES, not the Jews, should rule the world!”) either suck up to Jewish Master Race ideology or ‘Aryan’ master race ideology. It was Russia that bailed out Syria from the vile machinations of Jewish Supremacists and their cuck-minions, whereas most on the Right remained utterly silent about the horror unleashed by the Jewish-run US, Israel, and their proxies against the people of Syria.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The problem with powerlessism is when ‘eternalization’ trumps conditionality. Powerlessness is a condition, not a permanent status. Germanic tribes that had been powerless before the Roman onslaught later trounced their former conquerors and went so far as to sack Rome. Aztecs, once so powerful, collapsed before the Spanish Conquistadors. Once mighty monarchies and aristocracies crumbled into dust. Anglos, once the backwater of Europe, came to world dominance; today, they are reduced to hapless cuck-dogs at the feet of Jewish Power. Hindus, once at the mercy of the Mughal Empire and then the British Empire, are now rising in the world. Blacks, once used as slaves in the American South, are now venerated as the stud-athlete-and-rapper race by today’s whites reduced to pitiful cuckery. Throughout history, great empires fell and once-nobodies rose to greatness.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/981/216/original/f555ae53e9c72aee.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="533" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, in order for leftism to be sensible, it has to focus on the conditionality of powerlessness, which is never a permanent status. Poor can become rich, the rich can become poor. Dominant religions can fade, even vanish. Elites of yesterday may be nowhere today.<br />And if History is used as excuse for permanent-powerless-status, every group can dredge up their own sad stories and demand permanent-victimhood.<br />Besides, history tells us that even people who were conquered and/or oppressed often gained something from the experience due to contact with a more advanced civilization. While the Atlantic Slave Trade was horrible and black suffering in America is undeniable, what would blacks be without contact with the West? Bunch of jungle savages or savanna bunnies chucking spears at hippos and beating on bongo drums. And what would China and India be today if they had been left to their own devices? Chinese would still be binding women’s feet, and Hindus would still be torching widows. So, even as the powerless do suffer under the powerful, they also gain and learn. For one thing, the black argument against slavery is a moral internalization of Western values. Even Gandhi, who found much wanting about Western Civilization, admitted Hindus had something to learn from it.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="205"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Powerlessness or victim status is like one’s stay at the hospital. It’s conditional, not an entitlement. You stay as long as you’re sick and then leave when you’ve recovered to make room for other patients. You don’t stay in bed indefinitely on account of your illness having been particularly nasty. It’s your right to remember your sickness, but you’re no longer sick once you’re back on your feet.<br />The problem with Jewish Power is plays Permanent Patient in the ward even though it is by far the strongest player in the US as Lone Superpower. And Jews don’t occupy just one bed in one room but lay claim to entire floors of the hospital. And when you look down the hallway and notice it’s furnished like a lavish mansion with people are throwing parties with caviar and champagne, you wonder why they’re still pretending to be sick and weak. But when you call out on this, you get called an ‘anti-semite’. Oddly enough, the truly tragic European Jews in the aftermath of WWII had more grit and decency than the super-rich Jews today who act as if they’re the feeblest of all victims.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/m4NUFTwAlQc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Casino House of the Rising Sun" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The most insidious feature of the current West is that ultra-powerist Jews — one is hard-pressed to think of another people with a comparable Weasel Will to Power — have eternalized certain powerless-narratives so as to own and manipulate so-called ‘leftism’ to their advantage. No doubt, Jews learned a thing or two from Christianity, which mastered the art of invoking ‘holy victimhood’ long after its adherents gained overwhelming dominance and ruthlessly crushed whatever and whomever stood in their way. Destroy pagan arts & culture and pile up countless bodies of ‘heathens’ but lament about the killings of Jesus and the Apostles(and the Early Christians fed to lions) as if they happened only yesterday and forever sanctified Christians as holy victims regardless of their current hierarchy in the power sweepstakes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="154"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Christians had a long run with this hypocrisy for nearly 1500 years. They eternalized their once-powerlessness to such degree that grew blind to all their abuses and excesses. Their remembrance of oppression under Jews and the Romans produced a holy narrative whereby the mere fact of being Christian made one a member of the Holy Victim Club. It was when this hypocrisy was exposed and inveighed upon that Christians came to terms with their true history. It also led to their demise. Then, it’s no wonder that, even as Jews pull the same trick, they are determined not to make the same mistake. Unlike Christian Whites who admitted their betrayal of Christian ideals for conquest and plunder, Jews haven’t confessed, let alone atoned for, any of their historical ‘crimes’ and ‘sins’ though their list is as long as that of any other great people, even longer considering they have the longest continuous culture.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/970/878/original/43d77a15eab8066c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="636" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="418"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews are extremely powerist at heart, thereby ultra-rightist when it comes to tribal will and unity, but they know hubris invariably leads to downfall. Better to nag about victimhood than brag of victory, especially when they’re vastly outnumbered by goyim and when their global power is centered in the West, which, despite being post-Christian, is guided by Christian sanctimony, which can be turned against itself, as indeed Christians who’d historically accused Jews of being Christ-Killers are now on their knees begging forgiveness for having been Jew-killers. In other words, smarter for Jews to hide their ultra-powerism with endless kvetching of powerlessism. (And, Jews figure it isn’t smart to emulate the individual conscience of Christianity because they would then have to confess their trespasses unto others as well as complain of trespasses unto them. No, whereas Christian morality is premised upon all peoples and every individual being sinful and capable of evil, Jewish morality, at least vis-a-vis goyim, is about Jews always being perfect innocent victims of those pesky ‘Anti-Semites’. It is Group-centered Morality whereby Jews are always right simply for being Jews, or Chosen. Christians believe goodness is a matter of individual salvation. Jews, in contrast, believe they’re always right and owe nothing unto others, BUT all the goy world owes it to Jews and must apologize if they fail to live up to this obligation. To be Christian is merely a starting point to being a good person, and fulfilment comes with being a good person onto others. In contrast, the mere fact of being Jewish makes Jews better than goyim. While being Jewish isn’t enough to make one a good Jew in the eyes of the Jewish community, it is enough to make a Jew, any Jew, superior to any goy. And the highest moral-spiritual obligation of Jews is to be good for other Jews, which means if Jews swindle goyim for Jewish gain, it is GOOD. Some Jews put forth the Tikkun Olam argument that Jews are especially moral and righteous for the benefit of all mankind, but if Jews are so universally minded, why not join with the rest of humanity than stick to a tribal identity? Besides, the notion that Jews are especially conscientious and morally-minded is just another form of supremacism, i.e. Jews must rule over goyim because Jews are wiser and have a better grasp of what’s really good for the goyim than the goyim do themselves. Yeah, like drag-queen story hour for toddlers.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="148"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The current so-called ‘leftism’ has been rendered useless because it is essentially Jewish powerism hiding behind the rhetoric of powerlessism. ADL exists to remind and intimidate us that Jews are to be seen as Forever Holy Holocaust Victims despite their riches, power, and harm to the world. But then, ADL was founded upon the lie that a sicko pervert rapist-murderer Leo Frank was some kind of an innocent victim. Some(including Jews) call out on ADL for Jewish hyper-sensitivity and extremism, but it seems most institutions and industries controlled by Jews more or less march in lockstep with the ADL(and SPLC) agenda. Is there any notable difference among ADL, New York Times, Harvard, Hollywood, Big Tech, FBI, and Blackrock? Jonathan Greenblatt isn’t the cause, any more than Abe Foxman before him, but rather the symptom of dirty Jewish tricks of laundering Jewish Powerism as Jewish Powerlessism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To make things even worse, Jews have extended this eternalist privilege to blacks and homos. Blacks, by far the biggest thugs, rapists, robbers, and murderers in the US(even unto one another), are to be regarded as Forever Slaves jim-crowing without end. And even though homos brought upon the AIDS fiasco unto themselves and now work with US Deep State as the most fervid agents of globalist imperialism and warmongering(for Zion), we are to celebrate homos as heavenly angels. And let’s pretend trannies are tragic victims of TERF women infected with ‘transphobia’. These tranny men demolish women in sports, but THEY are the victims! And via homos and trannies, we are on the path of even normalizing pedophiles, now called MAPS in the ‘more evolved’ communities.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/970/871/original/37b1238a1d85cf2f.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="591" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="220"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews are nothing if not clever(and goyim are nothing if not dumb), and they pulled off one of the biggest hoaxes in modern history. I’m sure they’re awfully proud of themselves and perhaps deserve to be because hoodwinking so many people, up and down, left and right, is no mean feat. Just how is it that the most supremacist group in the world driven by a Master Race Ideology managed to fool so many people that it stands with the ‘left’ and the powerless? Sure, there’s stuff about morality and justice in Judaism, but it’s for Jews only, the Chosen. And when those ideas of justice were universalized under Christianity(and Islam), most Jews rejected them and kept with the Chosen Master Tribe Narrative. It was only with communism that many Jews sincerely joined the universalist cause and dreamed of a future of the New Man(but not the man as ‘new woman’). But despite initial Jewish successes with the Marxist enterprise, Jewish Global Power took off in the capitalist world, especially in the US. And if communism suppressed Zionism and insisted upon Jews to be good comrades(or patriotic ‘Russians’, ‘Poles’, ‘Hungarians’, etc.), capitalism not only allowed Jews to amass unprecedented fortunes but to favor Zionism and Holocaustianity as the defining themes of Jewishness.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews in the West kvetch about ‘atavistic’ nationalism and tribalism among the goyim, but they ultimately chose the Capitalist West over the Communist East for tribal reasons. The Communist East had no use for Zionism as it compromised Jewish loyalty to the Union of Workers, and besides, Israel chose to lean to the US. Also, even though communism regarded Nazism as the worst of all evils, it had more or less equal consideration for ALL victims of ‘fascism’.<br />In contrast, the capitalist West not only allowed Jews to embrace Zionist tribalism but did nothing to counter Jewish efforts to elevate the Holocaust as biggest tragedy of World War II, maybe of all time.<br />Holocaustianity was conceived to sacralize Jews forever while cursing white goyim for either having killed Jews, collaborated in the killing of Jews, stood by and let Jews die, or been too slow to come to aid of Jews. It is a totally Judeo-centric view of World War II, and of course it ignores all the Jewish provocations that drove Germans crazy enough to support a demagogue like Adolf Hitler.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="190"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The perversely disproportionate attention given to Jewish victims ironically smacks of Master Race Ideology as it implies Jewish Lives matter more than goy lives. It ignores the fact that the Nazi plan for countless Russian Slavs was almost indistinguishable from the plan for Jews. Heinrich Himmler surmised that 30 million Eastern Slavs would have to be eliminated to make room for German colonization. That being so, shouldn’t Russians also be counted as ‘holocaust survivors’? Consider: To qualify as a ‘Holocaust Survivor’, a Jew need not have been anywhere near a concentration/death camp; if he happened to reside in any part of Europe under Nazi control, he or she qualifies as a ‘Holocaust survivor’. Using such logic, tens of millions of Russians and other Slavs under Nazi German control should also count as ‘Holocaust Survivors’ since Nazis had an extermination plan for them as well. But what are Jews doing today? Jewish Neocons are working with Ukro-Sub-Nazis against Russia that has every right to be as appalled with the Jewish Master Race Ideology as with the German ‘Aryan’ one, which is why the Russo-Jewish War is a struggle against Neoconazis.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="410" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/970/866/original/ed79214f7e5ab73c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="116"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s surreal how Jews insist they’re especially sensitive about injustice because they suffered from ‘antisemitism’ and the Shoah but then use all means to ever expand upon the Jewish Master Race agenda. Within the West, powerful Jews now act like gangsters with brazenness that is breathtaking. If Bernie Madoff got caught today, would he even go to prison? It seems like Sam Bankman-Fried is being treated with kid gloves because he’s a ‘made guy’. The release of Jonathan Pollard, the biggest traitor in US history, sent a message to Jews and goyim alike that the Elites of Zion are the Master Race of America and you better just suck it up… or else.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/XxDAJY2jCKWq/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/XxDAJY2jCKWq/">Watch FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried SQUIRM Under Questioning!</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="7"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/XxDAJY2jCKWq/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/channel/XxDAJY2jCKWq/">https://www.bitchute.com/channel/XxDAJY2jCKWq/</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="190"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whether it’s Wall Street, Big Pharma, Mass Media, or legal institutions, the only rule is “cuz Jews feel like it.” It’s become a national ritual with presidents of both parties to pardon Jewish crooks who’ve done the worst things. Aid to Israel is essentially a tribute since Israel is rich and can be funded by World Jewry who are richer than all the Russians, Chinese, and Indians combined. Israel receives the most ‘aid’ from the US as a symbolism of who’s the boss. Even though it’s really tribute to Jews as the Master Race, it’s designated as ‘aid’ to further the impression that the US is helping out a defenseless ally. It’s like those TV ads about Holocaust Survivors living in poverty. With all the money Jews have, why should any ‘holocaust survivor’ be going hungry? Don’t Jews take care of their own? Of course they do, but they air such ads to create the impression that Jews, as ‘holocaust survivors’, cannot even afford food. How shamelessly sleazy. But then, the goyim are SO DUMB and fall for it Every Single Time.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="313"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, playing devil’s advocate, it’s understandable why Jews turned out the way they did. Supposing many leftist Jews in the early part of the 20th century were sincere about the Brotherhood of Man under communism or liberal democracy led by the US, why did they end up with Zionism and Jewish Master Race ideology? Perhaps, it was because, despite all their sincere(and even radical) effort, Jews couldn’t help realize that goyim are SO DUMB. Jews in Russia couldn’t help noticing Slavs are lazy, stupid, and clueless. And Jews in the US couldn’t help but realize that Anglos are really a silly and shallow bunch, white ethnics are a bunch of morons, Asians are a bunch of servile dogs, Mexicans are a bunch of beaners, and blacks are a bunch of wildass mofos.<br />Just think. If Jews observed that Slavs are as smart and driven as themselves, would they have turned against Slavs and socialism? Would they have so brazenly ripped off Russians in the 1990s.<br />Sure, what Jews did was terrible, but what the hell were Russians doing by letting a bunch of Jewish weasels rob the whole country? As for the US, what the hell were the Anglos doing handing over their great legacy to the Jews and falling for every BS cooked up by Jewish academia and media? And non-Anglo Americans are even dumber.<br />Of course, if Jews were truly decent, they wouldn’t have taken advantage of other peoples being dumb and dumber. But there was bound to be an itch to toy with the goy, like how the Marx Brothers can’t resist whenever they cross paths with a bunch of DUMB goyim. Or like in a David Mamet movie where the clever take advantage of the dim, where the strong-willed conquer the weak-willed. Why? Because it’s a jungle out there, dummy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="13"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/ajFNZMz8Gkg/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/ajFNZMz8Gkg/">Robert Barnes bitches about Nick Fuentes being a ‘grifter’ with VivaFrei</a><br /><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/ajFNZMz8Gkg/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/ajFNZMz8Gkg/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/ajFNZMz8Gkg/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Robert Barnes addressed the Nick-Fuentes-Kanye-West controversy on VivaFrei’s show, and his shtick was ad hominen attacks and name-calling. Supposedly, people like Milo Yiannpolis and Nick Fuentes are ‘grifters’. Milo certainly chased after fame and fortune, the fast life of a celebrity, but he would have gotten more mileage by toning it down and not associating with the Alt Right in 2016. Had he gone the way of Douglas Murray or Jordan Peterson(or Charlie Kirk), he’d be much bigger and richer. But he dared tread where others wouldn’t, and he paid a big price. THAT doesn’t sound like the definition of ‘grifting’. He’s clearly a slippery character(as Kanye is an unbalanced figure), but he still chose a far more courageous path than his peers and more than paid the price.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for NIck Fuentes, he could have taken his thirty pieces of silver and been another Charlie Kirk. With his engaging cartoonish looney tunes personality, he could have been as big as Ben Shapiro, but he forged his own path because he decided the JQ is too important to ignore for a true understanding of what’s happening and what-is-to-be-done. He’s said some crazy things(ironically or not) and has his share of weird peccadillos, but he’s certainly not a grifter. A grifter doesn’t stick to his guns and gets deplatformed and de-banked and denied air travel, a prohibition that was lifted only after a year.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If anything, Robert Barnes is more the grifter because he won’t address the JQ and disingenuously mischaracterizes those who. (People like Barnes claim that we blame Jews for ALL OUR PROBLEMS and ALL THE PROBLEMS in the world. No, we blame Jewish Power for what it does and way out in the open. Sam Bankman-Fried is not a Hawaiian or a Polack. Mexican-Americans didn’t provoke the war in Ukraine. Hillbillies in West Virginia didn’t cook up CRT. American Indians are not the ones funding tranny stuff and globo-homo. Greek-Americans didn’t come up with Covid madness, medical tyranny, and election ‘fortifying’.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Those who bring up the JQ are not saying ALL Jews are up to no good or that ALL Jews are in positions of power and doing bad shit. After all, conservative or liberal, there are principled Jews like Glenn Greenwald who, at the very minimum, stick to classical liberal principles of free speech and transparency. JQ is about the reality of Jewish Power and its increasingly pathological agendas with ‘no reverse gear’. There is a Jewish Hive Mentality among the elites and wanna-be-elites, and their agenda is driven by Jewish Master Race ideology.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="344"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">How else can we explain the madness that now bedevils every corner of American life? Jews get away with so much bad behavior at all levels of society. It wasn’t just Bernie Madoff but all of Wall Street behind the 2008 financial fiasco. It’s Blackrock weaponizing ‘woke’ morality, not for genuine social justice but Jewish supremacism because Blackrock not only ignores the Palestinian issue and the Wars for Israel but has no use for BDS. Would Blackrock support any company that pledges moral support to Syrians under attack from ISIS backed by Israel? When pigs fly.<br />There’s also Jewish backing of globo-homo and all the associated cultural ills, which have now grown cancerous with drag queen story hours for children, genital mutilation galore, and even murmurs of normalizing pedophilia.<br />As for foreign policy, virtually every major overseas crisis has been orchestrated by ‘neocons’ and ‘neolibs’ in pursuit of the Jewish Master Race agenda. So many nations wrecked and so many lives destroyed, from North Africa to Ukraine, because Jews must have it all.<br />And there’s the relentless anti-white agenda, indeed to the point where whiteness is almost synonymous with ‘sinful’, ‘wicked’, ‘soiled’, ‘stained’, ‘irredeemable’, and etc. It might as well mean ‘nazi’. Because whiteness has been so degraded, people are afraid to attribute any positive emotion or quality to whiteness. So, ‘white pride’ can only mean the ‘pride of evil’. ‘White Nation’ means a diseased order, one that can be remedied only with ‘diversity’ of endless nonwhite immigration-invasion and ACOWW.<br />Sure, blacks and various nonwhites utter all kinds of anti-white invective but what is the source of this torrent of abuse and hostility? The river of hatred flows from the lake of Jewish Master Race ideology that is hell-bent on CRT-ing whiteness to the point where whites are so browbeaten and ashamed that they will cling to Jews(and blacks and homos) for redemption. Whiteness alone is either worthless or wicked, and therefore, whites can only be good in association with certain idolized groups, the Tri-Idolatry of Jews, blacks, and homos.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, Robert Barnes overlooks the blatantly obvious and pretends people who bring up the JQ are closet-nazis and nutcases who indiscriminately hate ALL Jews, blame ALL JEWS, and see nothing good about Jews. While there are serious neo-nazi nutcases out there, the core of JQ is about speaking truth to power. It’s about noticing that the US isn’t run merely by big money, the elites, the oligarchy, the military-industrial-complex, tech geeks, and the like; no, there clearly is an ethnic component to the direction of American Power, and it is committed to Jewish Master Race ideology. Barnes supports Russia in the current war and sees nothing good about the US continuing to occupy parts of the Middle East and bringing misery to the peoples over there. But he won’t name the Jewish Power behind this mess. He won’t address the issue of Israel supporting ISIS in Syria. Like so many right-wing types, he’s opposed to the Jewish Agenda but cannot name the Jewish Power behind the agenda.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="32"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/inAryreuXQ7l/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/inAryreuXQ7l/">Reason for Barnes’ soreness: Nick Fuentes bitch-slapped his stupid bald head in the debate about Israel – ROBERT BARNES FREAKS OUT, CALLS NICK FUENTES A NAZI AFTER LOSING DEBATE ABOUT ISRAEL</a><br /><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/inAryreuXQ7l/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/inAryreuXQ7l/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/inAryreuXQ7l/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Barnes is really sore at Nick Fuentes because someone less than half his age totally mopped the floor with him in the debate about Israel. Over 70% of people said Nick Fuentes slapped that big fat bald head of his. It was like Bambi vs Godzilla. Did Fuentes win decisively because he’s smarter? No, Barnes, from his various appearances on podcasts and videos, is a pretty smart guy and a grizzled veteran who’s seen politics from inside out. The main reason why Fuentes won for the simple reason of being candid about Jewish Power and its manipulations of US policy premised on the false notion that “Israel is America’s greatest ally.” Says who? Says the Jew, and that makes it the final word in America!</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In truth, the US supports or submits to Zion not because Israel per se is so important to America’s standing in the world but because Jewish Power decides who rises and falls in the socio-political-economic hierarchy. In other words, even if you privately believe that Israel is detrimental to US interests in the Middle East(and elsewhere), you better keep your mouth shut if you want to move up the ladder. So, it’s not as if Fuentes’ genius beat Barnes’ imbecility but that simple honesty noticed Emperor Barnes’ fatso nakedness on the subject. But the baldo-beardo fool just couldn’t admit defeat and doubled down on sucking up to Zion. And now, he’s reduced to calling Nick Fuentes a ‘grifter’. If Fuentes is a ‘grifter’, he has to be the least competent of the lot because he said things that made almost all doors close on him. It’s a testament to his real talent(for something, whatever it is) that he has maintained his visibility in the Culture War despite all the suppression and blacklisting.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="69"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for Tim Pool’s interview with Kanye, Fuentes, and Milo, it would have been better if they’d finished the interview instead of impetuously walking off over a perceived slight. You can’t be thin-skinned in this game. At the very least, Fuentes should have remained the complete the interview instead of choosing loyalty to Kanye. Loyalty is a virtue to a point; no sense being a lemming.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="202"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, it’s understandable why Kanye was exasperated with Tim Tool’s contention that his problem was with ‘individuals’ who happen to be Jewish than with Jewish Power itself. After all, the entire Jewish Power Structure closed the walls on Kanye from all directions the instant he named the Jewish Power, albeit not very sensibly. Tim Fool should know that old canard about Jews being mere individuals has no currency with the honest. If indeed most Jews merely acted as individuals, one could argue that they just happen to be Jewish. It’s like most bald people just happen to be bald and don’t act in service to bald power. Same with fatsos. For all the noise about the ‘body positive movement’, there is no fatso empowerment agenda. Most fatties just happen to be fat and aren’t working for the fat hegemony. If someone happens to be fat, bald, and Jewish, the chances are he just happens to be fat and bald BUT is guided and driven by his Jewishness. Take meathead Rob Reiner who is indeed fat, bald, and Jewish. Guess which characteristic informs his worldview? I never heard of a homeland for fatsos or global plan by baldies.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/970/860/original/fd8a3affc1cdd781.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="598" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s undeniable that Jews act as Jews and insist on others to venerate Jews, revere the Holocaust Cult, condemn all criticism of Jewish Power as ‘antisemitism’, and support Israel’s ethnic erasure of Palestine(because opposing Zionism has also been added to the laundry list of ‘antisemitism’). When AIPAC applies pressure on all members of Congress, is it just a case of individuals who happen to be Jewish doing the bidding of a foreign state(which lords over as the spiritual mecca of the entire West)? While there are indeed people who happen to be Jewish but act as individuals in the public sphere, that’s hardly the case with most Jews in the upper echelons of power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Among Jewish individuals who refrain from acting on the basis of Jewishness-First are those who reject Judaism and Jewish culture/power. Often labeled ‘self-loathing Jews’, they see Jewishness as just another or even the worst of all identity politics. Then, there are Jews who are very consciously Jewish but only in their personal lives. In the public sphere, they act in accordance with civic duty, not tribal loyalty or empowerment. There are also Jews who are proud to be Jewish but are critical of Jewish Power because they see the current manifestation as corrupt and ill-suited to serve the interests of the overwhelming majority population that is not Jewish. Norman Finkelstein is harsh on Israel because he believes its actions have betrayed the core principles of Jewish values.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, such Jews don’t command the power in the US. Rather, it’s Jews like Anthony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, Janet Yellen, Chuck Schumer, Michael Bloomberg, the Google Oligarchs, Mark Zuckerberg, Larry Fink, and so many others who are clearly totally Zionist, Jewish Supremacist, and contemptuous of goyim(as Fink’s social-justice decrees are totally selective and have no place for BDS).<br />Does Tim Ghoul really believe that Hollywood is run by individuals who just happen to be Jewish, which is merely incidental to their worldview? If Martin Scorsese announced an interest in a project about the Palestinian Nakba, all those ‘individual’ Jews will be on the phone huffing and puffing to ruin Scorsese’s career and reputation.<br />Tim Mule claims to be a free thinker opposed to political correctness and ‘woke’ censorship, but he’s got to be playing dumb to keep his Youtube account. He wants to have the cake and eat it too: Invite controversial guests but then feign ignorance about certain matters lest he too be labeled an ‘anti-Semite’ and face deplatforming.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/ArX49RIZvg1z/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/ArX49RIZvg1z/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/ArX49RIZvg1z/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="192"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, Tiny Tim may regard himself as an individualist, a centrist, a libertarian, and etc. but it doesn’t matter what YOU are if the other person thinks differently. Even if you consider yourself an individualist and sees others as individuals, there’s no guarantee that they will think and act as individuals or regard you as merely an individual. You can see a bunch of Muslims as ‘individuals who happen to be Muslim’ but they may think and act in accordance with shared Muslim beliefs. One can look upon Hindus as mere individuals who just happen to be Hindu, but they may think and act as a team, as members of a cultural and historical community.<br />Of course, there are Jews, Muslims, and Hindus in the West who do primarily act as individuals, at least in the public sphere, and do not mix civic duty and professionalism with tribalism, but not all people function as either deracinated libertarians or principled liberals(with a colorblind sense of fairness). Some are committed to identity politics & tribal power, and their individualism is in service to a ‘higher good’ of tribal loyalty and power-maximization.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If most Jews are indeed mere individuals, isn’t it strange that so many of them work in concert to shut down BDS in every state while pressuring politicians of all parties to support Israeli Jews over Palestinians living in apartheid conditions? While plenty of tribalist-supremacist Jews have succeeded at the individual level(as inventors, innovators, enterprisers, brokers, etc), at the end of the day they also coordinate at the tribal-cultural level to expand and fortify Jewish Power while weakening goy rivals and destroying all goyim deemed as ‘enemies’. For example, it’s well known that Jews have a deep-seated hatred, contempt, and fear of Eastern Slavs, and the current US foreign policy toward Russia cannot be understood apart from Jewish psycho-politics about Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, it’s now all come to a head. What some of us have been saying forever has been forced out of the ghetto into the public square by Nick Fuentes and Kanye West. It is the truth that NOTHING is possible unless we address the problem of Jewish Power. It has to be exposed and examined, discussed as the ruling power of the West that exerts unrivaled influence on the economy, culture, and foreign policy, sometimes for the good, often for the bad(as Jewish Power has grown corrupt on the maxim of “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”). Jews came to realize they don’t need a secret police like the Cheka or Gestapo to gain near-absolute power. Just control the ‘gods’ and remold goyim into idolaters of those ‘gods’. Once the masses are turned into ‘pod people’ like in INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS, Jews only need to direct their finger at someone and yell ‘Nazi’ or ‘Anti-Semite’ and then howling mobs of PC or ‘woke’ types will mobilize into hysterical action. Indeed, so many white Democrats now support Censchwarzship and all manner of Deep State abuses because Jews have convinced them that anything pro-white is ‘nazi’ and anything critical of Jews is ‘antisemitism’ and ‘hate’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="541" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/912/755/original/741d10771eb69d8a.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="234"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After 2020, there is only one crucial choice left, and that’s why Nick Fuentes and Kanye matter. We must talk about Jewish Power. All the advices, ideas, tactics, tricks, proposals, and hopes that sidestepped the JQ have failed. Trump was a clown, but the Trump Test made one thing clear. Jews won’t accept a partnership with white populism-patriotism. It’s either their way or the highway. Even though Trump and MAGA offered Jews total support for Israel and fulsome respect for Jewish power, privilege, and wealth, that wasn’t good enough for Jews demand control and command of everything. In Jewish eyes, whites are merely More Palestinians. Whites are to be shepherded and controlled in the Jewish Animal Farm.<br />With BLM and Covid, it became clear Jews will go to any length to get what they want. They unloosed black thugs on whites. Jewish lawyers protected Antifa thugs who destroyed entire city blocks and even attempted to burn federal buildings. Jews even sunk the entire economy with medical tyranny to control people with fear and to ‘fortify’ elections. They keep dredging up Emmett Till as if ALL whites are forever guilty for what happened to some black punk who sexually harassed and threatened a white woman. Jews push globo-homo and tranny-wanny degeneracy to the point where the unofficial religion of the West is the holy homo anus and the mutilated genitals of trannies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="206"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At this juncture not only in politics but History Itself, all those who’ve refrained from addressing the JQ should hang their heads in shame. Never mind the GOP and its cucked RINOS and careerists. Even on the so-called alternative sphere and dissident right, all those who advised against calling out on Jewish Power need to face the music.<br />The cancer has spread far and deep, and the ONLY WAY to heal the body is to properly diagnose the primary source of the disease, and it is Jewish Supremacist Power. Robert Barnes, Steve Turley, Jared Taylor, Steven Crowder, Pat Buchanan, Pedro Gonzalez, John Derbyshire, Mark Steyn, Tucker Carlson, and etc. have come up short because they refused to address the central issue of American Power. It’s not good enough if you run 99.99% of the marathon IF YOU DON’T CROSS THE FINISH LINE. Naming the Jewish Power is to cross the finish line and complete the race. It won’t be the End of History or an answer to our prayer, but it will be a genuine start from which REAL solutions can be formulated on a sound foundation. The correct diagnosis doesn’t end the disease, but it is the beginning of the healing.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="193"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The real problem isn’t that the Democratic Party is the ‘black party’ but that both parties, or the ‘uniparty’, are so thoroughly controlled by anti-white Jews. Even Kevin MacDonald has held onto his Twitter account by blaming the ‘left’ than the Jews. I understand the tactic, but it’s just another form of compromise. Steve Sailer spoke of the MOST IMPORTANT GRAPH, which is of the Black African Population Bomb, but the MOST IMPORTANT GAFFE — Michael Kingsley said “a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth” — is that Jews totally control the US, and this absolute power has rotted the souls of Jewish elites and corrupted the entire system of government, finance, communication, and education. It has also degraded the value of respectability. The old bourgeoisie may have been narrow-minded, petty, and shallow in their status-anxiety, but the themes back then were infinitely sounder than what we have today. What kind of respectable middle class value takes one’s children to drag queen story hours and worse? What kind of elite society holds as the highest virtue the veneration of the holy homo anus that is fisted and donged countless times?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/912/740/original/ea7557df9cdbfa2c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="494" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Nick Fuentes and Kanye matter because they went right to it: The problem is Jewish Power, and it has to be addressed. Whether they will succeed or not, it is the ONLY way forward if there is to be any kind of solution, any kind of real healing, any kind of reversal of the rot all around us. Focusing on trannies and the military-industrial-complex doesn’t go far enough because both are now tools of Jewish Power. Railing against the puppets turns one’s gaze away from the puppet master.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="221"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Nick-Kanye show is a shit-show, but it need to be said: Anyone who obsesses over the symptoms but refuses to name the disease is the enemy or worse. I understand that there was once the hope that if our side was nice to Jews and just complained about their agenda but never mentioned them(and also praised Israel to high heaven), then the smart and rich Jews would come over to our side or, at the very least, not be too nasty towards us. That ship-of-fools has sailed after 2016 and especially after 2020. Jews are in by-any-means-necessary mode and will use any gangster tactic to destroy us. The time for playing ‘nice guy’ or being part of ‘polite society’ is past. Anyone who bitches about homos, trannies, blacks, immigrants, and etc. but doesn’t talk about the Jewish Power that has weaponized all of them against whites, conservatives, true liberals(like Tulsi Gabbard), true leftists(who support BDS), and much of the world isn’t for real. After 2020, those who are still allergic to the JQ are next to worthless. Ultimately, those who speak the truth are masters over those who lie or tell half-truths. To the extent that Nick Fuentes and Kanye will not back down on the JQ, they are masters of the likes of Jared Taylor and Robert Barnes.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="511" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/912/730/original/01682446c0cc1bf2.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p></div></section></div><span id="_bottom" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><div class="nav-group" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; clear: both; color: #888888; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="nav-item leftside" style="border: 0px; float: left; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/critique-of-eugyppiusbloggers-mis-characterization-of-wokeness-as-a-decentralized-movement-of-nutters-when-in-truth-it-has-been-directed-from-above-by-jewish-master-race-ideology/" style="border: 0px; color: #1a374c; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">← Critique of Eugyppius (Blogger)'s Mis-C...</a></span></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-90902906524576259792022-12-07T18:29:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:04.726-08:00The Great Lesson of the Russo-Jewish War, Aka the Ukraine Conflict: Don't be Nice Unless You Hold the Megaphone - As It Happens, Neoconazis Got the Big Speakers<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/484/582/original/241d2372eb145a28.png" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="470" /><a href="https://thesaker.is/the-ukraine-is-committing-suicide-by-cop/" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://thesaker.is/the-ukraine-is-committing-suicide-by-cop/">Ukraine Is Committing Suicide by Cop – By the Saker</a></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="61"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">…I kept thinking about utter insanity of the Ukrainian actions. An outside observer could be forgiven for thinking that the Ukrainian people have some kind of death wish, and if maybe not most people, then at least the leaders of the Ukraine. And then it hit me. </em><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Ukraine is doing what is known in the USA as “<strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">suicide by cop</strong>” …</em></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A bulb went inside the head of Andrea Raevsky, aka the Saker, making him suddenly realize that the Ukraine Conflict is akin to ‘suicide by cop’, i.e. Ukrainian actions are so irrational and deranged that Russia has no choice but to apply full pressure. Raevsky has a point based purely on the externalities but fails with the internalities. After all, the meaning of ‘suicide by cop’ makes sense only in relation to the intentions of the suicidee-by-other-means. He wants to die but, for whatever reason, can’t make himself take his own life. Furthermore, in most such cases, the suicidee-by-cop has no intention of harming the police officers. Most often, he barges out of the house guns blaring but not aiming to kill. Or, he may shoot off blanks or make threatening gestures until the cops decide to put him down.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="113"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Kiev’s actions resemble those of a suicidee-by-cop only in that both were meant to provoke the stronger party to deadly action. But the intentions of Zelensky(and the Jewish Globalist Masters behind him), as well as those of the Ukro-Sub-Nazis, are entirely different from those of a genuine suicidee-by-cop. Unlike the latter who fires roughly toward cops only to provoke a deadly response, the Kiev regime has been targeting the Donbass region in particular(and Russia in general) for maximum harm. Whereas a suicidee-by-cop only feigns at being a homicidal maniac to draw gunfire from the cops, Zelensky and the Sub-Nazi scum around him are truly homicidal psychos driven by pathological impulses.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Zelensky’s worldview is in concert with that of his supremacist-minded tribal brethren, and the Sub-Nazi Slavs are merely the flipside of Cuck-Maggot-Slavs. If the Sub-Nazis bask in the nostalgia of the Aryan Nazi West waging war on the ‘Asiatic’ Slavic East, the Cuck-Maggot-Slavs wet their pants in the dream of being accepted, if only as servants and dogs, by the more affluent and supposedly more advanced, more sophisticated, more fashionable, and more ‘cool’ West.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whether it’s reveling in Nazi Nostalgia fantasies or celebrating Globo-Homo & Negrolatry, it’s a case of self-loathing Slavs looking to the West for inspiration and approval. The Sub-Nazis hark back to the brief period when National Socialist Germany defined the fate of Continental Europe as the future of the West, whereas the Cuck-Maggots are slavish to the Current West dominated by Jewish Masters and Anglo Dogs.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="562" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/537/241/original/dd6a54def81534c2.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Sub-Nazi Ukrainians(who look to Hitler and Bandera) and Cuck-Maggot Ukrainians(the Cuck-Sacks) are diametrically opposed in many respects, they are united in their servility to their respective ideal vision of the West, be it ‘Aryan supremacist’ or ‘Jewish-Homo-Negro-centrist’. Especially as Russia partly defines itself as both Anti-Nazi(especially in relation to the Great Patriotic War) and Anti-Globo(especially in defiance of Jewish Supremacists who demand that the Russian Bear bend over and take it up the arse like Uncle Sam and others have done), it has resulted in the perverse alliance of the Far-Right and the Ultra-Cuck in Ukraine.<br />Something similar has been brewing in Poland. Prior to the Ukraine Conflict, the Polish Globalists and Polish Nationalists have often been at loggerheads. But if the two sides are united in one thing, it is self-loathing Slav-ism and contempt/hatred for Russia. The Globalists want Poland to go the way of Paris and London, even Los Angeles. As these people tend to be well-educated and urbane, they aren’t exactly Dumb Polacks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Actually, they’re worse; they are Stupid Polacks, hardly surprising since stupidity now defines much of Western elite culture and ideology. As for the Polish Nationalists, they stand on questionable foundations. Even though Poles are a Slavic People, Polish Nationalism is predicated on how different the Poles are from other Slavs, especially the ‘backward’ kinds in the East. Of course, the West will always look upon Poles as a bunch of Slavic bumpkins fit only to be plumbers and sausage-makers, but Poles are so eager for approval, if only as inferior or second-rate ‘Central’ Europeans. Then, it’s no wonder that Polish Globo-Homo idiots and Polish ‘patriot’ tards are currently united and working with Jews and Homos to prolong the war in Ukraine to hurt Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="93"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, Poles aren’t as deranged as the Ukrainians. After all, due to their proximity to the West and Catholicism & Latin alphabet, Poles among the Slavs, along with Czechs and Croats, have forged something like a unique national identity. Likewise, even though Swedes and Danish are Germanic peoples, they are clearly distinct from Germans. But this has hardly been the case for Ukraine, of which there never was a single well-defined historical concept or cultural entity. Indeed, much of Ukraine is simply inconceivable without Russian civilization, which originated from parts of Ukraine.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/291/646/original/4bf64fd2f20898da.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="232"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Paradoxically, precisely because Ukrainian nationality is so inchoate and ambiguous on its own, i.e. artificially made distinct from Russia, extreme policies have been implemented by Ukrainian elites to exaggerate Ukro-Russian enmity and to dehumanize Russians in general. While the differences between Russian language/culture and Ukrainian language/culture have been greatly amplified, the similarities & shared histories have been suppressed, even criminalized.<br />Then, it’s no wonder both ‘neo-nazism’ and globo-homo have been so appealing to entire swaths of Ukrainian self-loathing Slavs. Via globo-homo, Ukrainians can conveniently set themselves against Russia that said NO to celebration of homo bung-donging and child-genital-mutilation. And via ‘Neo-Nazi’ antics, Ukrainians can pry their history apart from the Great Patriotic War Narrative that once united many Russians and Ukrainians in shared memory even after the end of the Cold War and the creation of Ukraine as an independent republic. Needless to say, Jews are privately appalled by Ukro-Sub-Nazi types but are willing to work with ANY group against what is deemed their biggest global enemy, Russia. Anything that can be used to stoke anti-Russian hatred is worth its gold to Zion. Furthermore, it’s a convenient way for Jews to persuade that the Great Famine was the doing of Big Bad Russia than by the Soviets, most of its top leadership during the political terror and massive starvation was composed of non-Russians, many of them Jews.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="411" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/537/935/original/32c2ea19fd97de12.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A faker, if at least to fool oneself, has to be more extreme than an authentic person. The fact remains that, for all its worthless loathsomeness, Polish nationality is clearly distinct from that of Russia, just like Vietnam is from China. But the concept of a wholly unique Ukrainian nationality is as much hokum as Taiwanese nationality contra China, all the more hilarious in Taiwan’s case because, for the longest time, the Taipei government claimed to be the sole legitimate representative of all China.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="71"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, this isn’t to state that Ukrainian nationhood need be dissolved into greater Russia but merely to acknowledge that no sense of Ukraine-ness would be complete without taking into account its profound connections with Russia. Indeed, it’s hard to discern where exactly Russia ends and where Ukraine begins. Only in parts of Western Ukraine can one speak of a culture distinct enough to merit a separate nationality from Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, just because peoples have deep connections doesn’t mean they have to belong to one nation. Brits and Irish both speak English and have a deep shared history as well(though often contentious), but they belong to different nations(though it will be difficult to tell them apart in the future as both are being neo-colonized under the Jewish globalist regimen that demands open borders, globo-homo, and Negrolatry). The US and Canada developed as profoundly Anglo-European countries but remained separate countries, also true of Australia and New Zealand. And Mexico and Central American countries remain independent despite having the shared background of brown native cultures(that of ‘Tacoans’) and colonization at the hands of Spanish Conquistadors.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the same spirit, it had been workable for Russia and Ukraine to remain separate countries while acknowledging their deep historical ties. Viktor Yanukovych sought a path that was conciliatory to Russia while remaining friendly with the EU. He accepted Russia’s more favorable deal over the EU’s proposal, but it didn’t preclude Ukraine from dealing with the West either.<br />But whereas Russia could accept Ukraine dealing with both the East and the West, the US and EU, under Jewish control, deemed it unacceptable and thereby engineered a coup, which finally succeeded with the recruitment of sub-nazi elements(and possibly Mossad assassins).</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/018/425/original/c94a412dcc62bd90.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="561" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="209"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Maidan crisis gives us a glimpse into the Jewish Way. Unlike most peoples who are okay with multi-polarities, Jewish Power insists on ‘my way or the highway’. It’s certainly been no different in the US, where all the ‘Arabists’ were purged from the US government and institutions. Jewish Power could only accept ultra-Zionists and pro-Israelites. And whites can’t even express a mild sentiment like “It’s Okay to be White”. Never mind overt ‘white supremacism’; a mere hint of positive white consciousness triggers the Jews who demand that whites totally negate and purge their own identity while offering complete loyalty to Jews and Israel.<br />Then, why would Jewish supremacist mentality be any different abroad? Just like whites in the West cannot be both pro-Jewish and pro-white — they must be totally anti-white and totally pro-Jewish — , it was intolerable that Ukraine under Yanukovich would negotiate with both the EU and Russia for its own national interests.<br />Rather, it was decreed by Jewish Supremacists that Ukraine must deal ONLY with the Jewish-controlled West(or Schwest) and cut all ties with Russia, even murdering Ukro-Russians who looked eastward or expressed the obvious: Russia and Ukraine have been joined at the hip forever. Also intolerable was any skepticism of Schwestern intentions.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A massive de-Russification campaign began, one of the most harrowing ethnic conflicts in European history after World War II. The West, which once sermonized against excessive ethnic enmity in former Yugoslavia, did everything to stoke ethnic hatred in Ukraine, even to the extent of recruiting, encouraging, and arming sub-nazi and far-right elements. Anything that was anti-Russian was funded and elevated in the institutions. Though Jews denounce people like Greg Johnson in the US, they recruited such Naziesque types who wished the Germans had prevailed in the East in WWII and reduced Russia into a German colony of Slavo-helots.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/121/175/305/small/b300bbd8bf97c26f.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For Jewish Power, its word is final, indeed the word of god, and that’s that. Look how Jewish supremacists are at the forefront of purging Free Speech in the West. Now that they got the power and no longer need constitutional and legal guarantees of free speech for themselves(as they control most of the institutions and industries that matter in Narrative-creations and public discourse), what now goes by ‘free speech’ boils down to “Jews say, goyim obey.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, the main reason why Russia and other relatively sovereign nations are pushing back against Globo-Homo has nothing to do with ‘gay rights’ per se, or the freedom of individual homos to be tooty and do their own thing. No, globo-homo isn’t about ‘gay rights’ but about homosexuality, trans-nuttery, and related deviances as the mandatory and official ‘spiritual’ themes of the Empire of Judea. In other words, politicians and prominent people in the West are compelled to march in the ‘gay pride’ parades and consent to public buildings & big companies displaying signs and symbols that would have us believe that homo-fecal-penetration and tranny-penis-cutting are uniquely wonderful things, indeed so much so that an entire month must be devoted to affirming the West’s celebration of them.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Western goy elites, having become so accustomed to the rule of “Jews Decree, Goyim Agree”, hardly protested the demands made of the Ukrainian government following the ouster of Yanukovich in the Maidan ‘revolution’. Perhaps, privately some of these goy cuck-elites wanted a more moderate policy, but Jews had the whip-hand, and that meant working with the most cynical and most radical elements in Ukraine to use the country as a battering ram against Russia, to intimidate and demoralize it, as if to say, “We are right on your doorstep, we are stamping out Ukro-Russians, we are murdering people in the Donbass, and YOU RUSSIANS can’t do anything about it.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="195"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In retrospect, it was foolish for Russians to think they could come to any terms with Zion. Russians should have realized, upon surveying conditions in the West, that Jewish Power, once sufficiently entrenched, won’t accept anything but total mastery. Indeed, consider the fate of the Anglos in the US, the UK, Canada, and Australia. Anglo ‘peace’ with Jews isn’t an accommodation but a total surrender to all their demands. Why would things be any different with Jewish demands on Russia? And of course, once Russia was beaten, Jews would then have moved against the Ukro-Sub-Nazis, purging them once their usefulness was past due. Henry Kissinger once said, “To be an enemy of America can be dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal”, but me thinks he was really talking about Jewish Power. After all, it’s dangerous for Russia and Iran to be the enemies of Jewish Power, but it’s been totally fatal for Anglos to be the friends of Jewish Power. Jewish Supremacists, as ‘friends’, gained complete access in the Anglo World to control everything and run Anglos into the dirt, where they now snort like pigs on a farm.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/537/856/original/2953966c0d879ed5.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="520" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="156"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, if there is any lesson to take from the Russo-Jewish War, aka the Ukrainian Conflict, it’s that there’s no use being nice if you don’t control the megaphone. Suppose Bill is a big tough guy and can do real damage to little Bob. Bill wants Bob to listen and show some respect. He doesn’t want to hurt Bob too badly. He decides to play nice, relatively speaking. Knock Bob a few times but not deliver the knockout blow and punch out his teeth. Now, if Bill commanded the megaphone and made it well known to Bob and observers that he’s going easy because he doesn’t want to hurt or kill Bob, his relatively humane approach would be noted, even respected. He would be acting from the position of strength, not only in raw muscle power and bigger size but getting the message across for all to hear, especially Bob.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="208"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, what if Bill doesn’t control the megaphone. Then, his ‘humane’ approach(given he could do serious damage if he really wanted to) is likely to be counterproductive to his aims. Bill is being nice, but suppose the owner of the megaphone spins the ‘narrative’ so that Bill is failing to deliver the fatal blow because he’s a wuss, he’s a pussy, he’s scared, he’s lazy, he’s incompetent, he’s confused, he’s all talk and no walk. Bob, emboldened by this spin, is likely to taunt Bill and hurl objects at him. Bob drops his pants and moons Bill and say, “kiss my ass, you fa**ot!” Then, he turns around and pulls out his dong and say, “Suck on this, maggot!” Meanwhile, the observers, taking their cues from the megaphone, will cheer on Bob as the defiant and feisty underdog standing up to Big Dumb Bully Bill who gets no respect, not from Bob, not from the crowd. Thus, Bill’s ‘nice’ approach would have been for naught. He only would have wasted time, and the Bill-Bob conflict would have been prolonged, with both getting hurt far more than had Bill gone all in to knock out Bob real quick.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="175"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s possible that something along those happened in the Ukraine Conflict. Russia’s relatively humane approach, sparing most civilian infrastructures and being rather conciliatory in tone, went totally unappreciated by most people in Ukraine and the West(though not so much in the non-West with their independent media that, over the years, have grown cynical of the US and EU). Every time Russia was trying to be ‘nice’ and come to the negotiating table, it wasn’t appreciated as an offer from a position of strength but desperation from a position of weakness, even cowardice by a paper bear that needs to rip out computer chips from washing machines to launch missiles. Russia hadn’t gone all in against Ukraine, but the Jewish-controlled megaphone assured Ukrainians and Western observers that Russian power is spent and all out of missiles, bombs, tanks, artillery, and men, most of whom are running with tails behind their legs to hide under the bed and cry to mama. In other words, Russians are just like Italian mama’s boys.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/537/981/original/c920d969be16ed2a.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="506" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, even though Russia’s rather light approach limited civilian casualties, it was ignored and made hardly any difference in Western opinion. Again, Russian efforts not only went unappreciated but were defamed by the Jewish-controlled megaphone that spun the conflict as the GREATEST HUMAN CATASTROPHE since the Holocaust. The megaphone told the West that evil Russians were wantonly targeting hospitals, blowing up schools & concert halls, and indiscriminately murdering civilians on a massive scale. Much of this ‘reporting’ was just projection of Ukrainian war crimes since 2014. Even though the Jewish-controlled Kiev regime used sub-nazi morons to bomb civilians in the Donbass region, the megaphone made it seem as if Russians are the ones routinely terrorizing Ukrainian innocents. And whenever Ukrainian atrocities were discovered, they were blamed on Russians with full complicity of the Western Media that take their cues from Jewish Supremacists.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the Russian side had been heard throughout Ukraine, perhaps more Ukrainians would have considered Russia’s reasons and its offers. But, most Ukrainians got the news only from Kievian and Western sources, and all they heard was ‘Russians are monsters’, ‘Russians are scum’, ‘Russians are the worst of the worst’, and etc. But then, since the end of the Cold War(and especially following the Maidan Coup), generations of Ukrainians were indoctrinated with a nationalism that defined itself AGAINST Russia. Many young Ukrainians came to feel that London and Los Angeles are culturally closer to Ukraine than Russia is. That’s how retarded a lot of Ukrainians are. So, even as Russians went in regarding Ukrainians as Slavic brothers and sisters, Ukrainians saw themselves as part of the ‘West’ and regarded Russians as ‘orcs’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, what’s the point of being nice if you’re going to be blamed as the worst monster that ever lived anyway? If the megaphone is going to vilify you NO MATTER WHAT, you might as well go King Kong or Godzilla and really deal a heavy blow to show who’s boss. Niceness has value only when respected, appreciated, and reciprocated. But when it’s seen as weakness or stupidity, it will be wasted. That’s where Neville Chamberlain failed with Adolf Hitler, where Nikita Khushchev failed with Mao Zedong, and where Vladimir Putin failed with the Jews.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="335" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/538/063/original/b57079bc98777793.webp" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Niceness is nice ONLY IF met with gratitude. Otherwise, it’s just vulnerability and weakness, something that will only be abused. Indeed, the whole of Russian approach since the end of the Cold War has been fatally flawed for being overly nice to those who are hostile and hellbent on gaining supremacy over Russia, from Jewish eyes nothing but the land of dumb, lazy, and drunken Slavs. While Russians were referring to the US and EU as ‘our friends’ and ‘our partners’, the Jewish-run West ran countless articles about gangster Putin, new hitler Putin, thug Putin, and about all those stupid dumb retarded Russians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, one could argue that Russia’s friendly diplomacy was necessary, at least until now. Far weaker than it is today, Russia had to swallow its pride, choose caution above all, and play for time while developing its industrial and military capabilities, as well as ties with key non-Western nations, especially in Asia and the Middle East. But one thing for sure, in the current Ukraine Conflict, every ‘nice’ action by Russia went ignored, impugned, ridiculed, spun, and/or defamed. From this perspective, Russia would have done better to have Pavel Craig Robertsky at the helm instead of Putin. Fully aware of the mendacity and contempt that runs through the Western Media, Pavel the Terrible, Horrible, and Awesome(and his top commander General Asskickovich) would have brushed aside any proposal of going in ‘nice’. His motto would have been “No More Mr. Nice Guy”.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="501" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/538/111/original/0d17f63f6059ea67.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At this stage in the conflict, Russia has only one option left. Totally smash and dismantle Ukraine, take all of the eastern half. Those who want to stay are to be welcomed as brothers and sisters. Those who hate Russia must be forced into the western part of Ukraine. And there can be no mercy for those Ukrainians whose nationality is defined by self-loathing Slavism, fantasy ‘Aryanism’, imitating Dumb Polack-ism, and celebrating globo-homo-ism. There’s nothing to mourn or regret in killing as many of those scum as possible.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="18"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/j6ELpxi4RUFZ/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/j6ELpxi4RUFZ/">RUSSIAN FM LAVROV REVEALS THE INSIDIOUS PLAN OF NATO AND THE SUDDEN ROLE OF THE OSCE IN UKRAINE</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/j6ELpxi4RUFZ/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/j6ELpxi4RUFZ/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/j6ELpxi4RUFZ/'">Video Link</a></span></p>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-83238814614495252712022-12-07T18:25:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:04.976-08:00The Pros and Cons of Vladimir Putin's Speech and Rashid Tlaib's Remark on the Current State of the World, Aka Jewish Supremacist War on Russia and Palestinians/Arabs<p> </p><p><br /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="433" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/015/970/original/881d50241a9d4976.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/c5T5BZV8wZWz/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/c5T5BZV8wZWz/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/c5T5BZV8wZWz/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="501"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Some time ago, Vladimir Putin delivered an important speech to the Russian nation(though ignored by the Jewish-ruled West as expected) while the US Congresswoman Rashid Tlaid ruffled some feathers by appealing to the supposedly progressive wing of the Democratic Party, i.e. its values stand at odds with Israeli Apartheid. More than in previous speeches, Putin went further to detail Russia’s conflict with the Collective West(which should be called Schwest as it’s Jewish-supremacist-dominated), all but concluding that Russia can no longer hope to negotiate or compromise with what is now an Anti-Civilization given to Satanism; and Tlaib, the first Palestinian-American voice in the national government, went further than any US politician, Republican, Democratic, or Independent, in exposing the hypocrisy of American Politics, especially Democratic, that spouts forth about equal justice and ‘anti-racism’ while turning a blind eye to what is nakedly Jewish-Supremacist tyranny in Israel and West Bank, formerly Palestine. (Plenty of fellow Democrats piled on her for ‘antisemitism’; they framed her criticism as denying the right of Israel to exist without ever noting that the Zionist Colonization erased Palestine off the map, i.e. the existence of Israel rests on the eradication of Palestine. Apparently, while Israel has some God-given right to exist, Palestine doesn’t. Jews have often and willfully misquoted the Iranian government as having threatened to wipe Israel off the map, but it was the Zionists who erased Palestine with the full backing of the US. Just when Jewish Americans were doing their utmost to end racial discrimination in the US in the 50s and 60s, they were doing most to ensure that White America support the Zionist imperialist and colonization project against Palestinians and other Arabs. Intentionally or not, Jewish virtue-signaling on the one served to mask their vice-indulging on the other. Given the current Jewish globalist agenda, it appears Jews weren’t merely content with easing or ending racial discrimination in the US but pushing what amounts to White Nakba for Anglosphere and Europe. It wasn’t enough that white racial privileges ended in the US and the West in general; rather, whites are compelled to welcome the Great Replacement by nonwhites just like Palestinians were bamboozled into accepting continuous waves of Jewish immigration, sadly with the collaboration of Palestinian landowner elites who had much to gain financially from the back-dealing. Just like white elites will happily stab white masses in the back to get ‘what is mine’, Palestinian land-owners did much the same, selling large tracts to Jewish colonists with no consideration for the Arab masses. But then, it’s much worse in the current West because so many white people themselves have been mentally colonized to welcome and celebrate their own replacement; at the very least, the Palestinian people knew that endless Jewish Immigration was going to be disastrous. Not many ordinary Arabs were holding up signs saying “Welcome Jewish Migrants” or speechifying about how it is good and necessary that Arabs be reduced to a minority in Palestine.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="248"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Putin’s speech was the most ‘epic’ he ever gave. Prior to the Ukraine War(which is really a Judeo-Russo War), the Russians had always been accommodating and conciliatory, addressing Americans and Europeans as ‘our partners’ or ‘friends’. And even when Putin spoke of the need for national sovereignty and the end of Western Aggression(especially in the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia), he discussed the issue as a matter of diplomacy. He characterized the West as misguided or delusional, not evil, demented, and satanic. In contrast, Putin’s latest declaration was more ominous-sounding than Ronald Reagan’s denunciation of the Soviet Union as the Evil Empire. If Reagan, a clueless politician without clear understanding of anything, was just reading from the Cold War script, Putin’s speech exposed some dark and discomfiting truths about the current state of the world, something other national leaders share as well but dared not say(out of fear of the Jewish-run US). Previously, even Russia had sidestepped the evil trajectory of the West, preferring negotiation and compromise over war, hot and cold. But any real negotiation was impossible since 2014 when the Schwest pulled off the Maidan Coup and even recruited Sub-Nazi lunatics, much like how Israel coordinates with Alqaeda remnants to torment Syria to no end. With the Schwest using Ukraine as a giant dildo to peg Russia in the arse, Putin understood it was time to finally throw down the gauntlet and spell out what is really what.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="93"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">He came close but, alas, failed to mention the most important factor, which is Jewish Supremacism. Jews go Russia-Russia-Russia-Russia, but Russia, even at this crucial juncture, dare not say ‘Jew’ even once. It shows that Jewish Power isn’t only about control of finance and military but about souls. The West, including key elements in Russia, is so taken with the myth of Jewish Holiness(much of it associated with Shoah Narrative) that, even at this time of ‘existential’ crisis, Putin and other prominent Russians fear the backlash from naming the Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the current West, most whites dare not struggle for white identity, interests, and independence, but many are willing to fight to the death over Jewish pride and power. It’s like what Nancy Pelosi said: Even if Congress burns down to the ground, the US will be there for Israel and Jews. (GOP’s message seems to be even more pitiful, i.e. even if Jews urinate and take a big dump on so-called conservatives, the latter will play dog and horse for Jewish Power.) In 2020, the Jewish-controlled US government hailed the BLM and Antifa mobs to burn and loot the D.C. area to flatter black rage narcissism and to belittle Donald ‘Cuck’ Trump. Then, it’s hardly surprising that the White West won’t fight for the White West but go into total war mode, even nuclear Armageddon mode, for the Jews, its master.</span></p><h1 class="page-title" id="video-title" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: 18px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.2em; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/8Y508ld4fBC8/" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/8Y508ld4fBC8/">THE DURAN – ALEXANDER – PUTIN’S HISTORIC SPEECH FINALIZES REFERENDA, INFURIATES COLLECTIVE WEST</a></h1><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/8Y508ld4fBC8/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/8Y508ld4fBC8/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/8Y508ld4fBC8/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="210"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On some level, Putin seems to understand this. Relations have utterly deteriorated between the West and Russia, and it’s about time Russia regarded the West as an implacable enemy(at least as long as Jews control it). If Jewish Power isn’t named, Jews will go on using the West to torment Russia. But if Jewish Power is named, Jews may go into full panic mode and engineer a total war, even World War III, against Russia, lest white people do indeed mull over the idea that Jews do indeed control the West. While the Russian rebuke of Europeans and the Collective West may upset some whites, the mostly cucky-wuck whites, ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’, can’t get very worked up about such things as they’ve been mentally colonized to believe that Western Whites aren’t deserving of pride and glory to begin with. After all, bashing the West has become a daily ritual in the West itself. In the UK, statues of historical figures have been torn down by blacks and cucky whites alike. In the American South, Jews order cuck politicians to order Southern White Men to bring down Confederate statues, and there is hardly any murmur of resistance, let alone show of action, among white Southerners.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="199"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As the national instinct has been suppressed among whites, they can find such tribal jollies only by cheering for the Favored Groups, especially Jews, Homos, and Blacks. Attacking the West won’t inflame Western rage, but speaking ill of Jews, homos, and blacks will. Plenty of white Westerners who shrug off Putin’s condemnation of Western Imperialism and Greed will seethe with rage over any remark about the Sacred Semites or Holy Homos. Indeed, so much of anti-Russian rage in the West owes to Russia’s policy on globo-homo nuttery. So many Westerners, especially elites and ‘statusites'(status-parasites), have been ‘converted’ to homo-anus-worship and predictably reacted to Russian policy with the passion of crusaders. But even holier than homos(and trannies) are the Jews. Even at this late date, Putin fears that, if Jewish Power were named, Jews will unleash 100% than merely 90% of their rabid and virulent fury at Russia and, furthermore, whites in the West will call for World War III because these cucky-wucks hold Jews higher than anything else. Plenty of whites who turn a blind eye to blacks robbing, raping, and murdering white people will go into nuclear Armageddon mode over ‘muh Jews’ or ‘muh Israel’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="438" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/016/384/original/9ca8e7fc70b502db.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="218"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for Rashid Tlaib, she did name the Jewish Power, at least pertaining to Palestine. Her case shows the power of identity vs ideology. While plenty of Democrats claim to be ideologically committed to ‘equality’ and may privately sympathize with Palestinians somewhat, it’s not something they’re going to lose sleep over. Because they themselves aren’t Palestinian, it’s not a personal or tribal matter, only a political one, which is mainly about calculations and compromises? For Tlaib, it’s far more than a political matter because she’s a Palestinian and emotionally wedded to her people and the Nakba Narrative. It’s not a pet cause but the heart and soul of what she and her kind are about. But as the lone Palestinian and one of the handful of Arab politicians in Congress, her personal commitment is swamped by the political considerations of other Democrats for whom the Israeli-Palestinian issue is either purely a political issue or part of the Holy Holocaust Jew Narrative. Upon cold calculation, Democrats know that Jews control the media, Wall Street, law firms & courts, academia, deep state, and just about all else; Jews also provide something close to 65% of all funds to the Democrats. So naturally, most Democratic politicians, as whores of Congress-as-big-brothel, side with Jews against Tlaib.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="196"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, Jews not only spread the cash around and use blackmail via lawfare and media power but have used their reach and influence in education and entertainment to instill countless American minds, high-middle-low, that Jews are the most tragic people, a race of Anne Franks, and that the creation of Israel was just compensation for the Holocaust. Thus, Arabs are the New Nazis, and America must stand with the Anne Frank Nation against all the New camel-jockey Hitlers all over the Middle East and North Africa. Given the reality of US power and politics, Tlaib was bound to be shot down from all sides. Most Democrats not only failed to come to her aid but excoriated her for denying the right of Israel to exist. Of course, no one mentioned that the very creation of Israel was predicated on Palestine having no right to exist. Still, she must be credited with having said what needed to be said and having exposed the utter hypocrisy of the so-called ‘progressive’ movement that has been totally co-opted and corrupted by Jewish Power, which is actually ultra-rightist-supremacist but larps as liberal-leftist to own and control ‘progressivism’ to Jewish Supremacist ends.</span></p><h1 class="page-title" id="video-title" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: 18px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.2em; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/W2w06ZPgEqQ/" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/W2w06ZPgEqQ/">PUTIN CALLS GLOBALIST ELITES SATANISTS!!!</a></h1><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/W2w06ZPgEqQ/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/W2w06ZPgEqQ/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/W2w06ZPgEqQ/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="463"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Putin named the Satanic West but not the Jewish Power behind it. Tlaib mentioned Jewish Power but not its complete hold over her party of Democrats, rendering US progressivism utterly useless. (Indeed, what goes by ‘progressivism’ boils down to rich Jews, affluent whites, and snotty yellow dogs blaming middle class and working class whites for the problems of inequality and injustice, i.e. the top and the upper middle blaming the lower middle for the failings of the bottom.) Tlaib pleaded with a segment of the Democratic Party that the current support for Israeli Apartheid runs counter to Progressivism, but in truth, ‘progressivism’ in current reiteration has been tailored for Jewish Supremacism, and wittingly or not, she has participated in this madness, not least by endorsing the Jewish Supremacist Grand Plan in Ukraine against Russia. Besides, Globo-Homo and Tranny-Spanny, which now feature so prominently among current ‘progressives’, can only be pro-Zionist because most homos and trannies are vain and narcissistic, favoring winners over losers. Naturally, homos and trannies are happily allied with winner-Jews against loser-Arabs. And as Jews flatter, favor, and fete homos and trannies all over the world, it’s no wonder ‘progressives’ look favorably upon Israel with its massive homo ‘pride’ festivals funded by Global Capital, whereas Arabs and Muslims are still regarded as ‘homophobic’. Homos and trannies are like Jews and blacks in this regard: Supremely self-centered and narcissistic, their idea of good-vs-evil boils down to “Is it dandy for homos?”, not unlike Jews fixating on “Is it good for Jews?” and blacks on, “What be in it for me?” Jews, with all their power and money, not only bought off the homos but elevated them to angel-saint status. So, why would a ‘progressive’ movement centered on homo celebration choose Arabs and Palestinians over Jews when globo-homo ‘pride’ and ‘glory’ are the product of Jewish marketing and propaganda? Globo-Homo isn’t about equal rights for homos as individuals but special status of superiority, even sanctity, for for the toot community. It’s not about equality but elitism. Same goes for BLM. It’s not about equal justice for blacks but special consideration and treatment for blacks: Always make excuses for black failures and problems; always look the other way while blacks rob, rape, and murder. Surely, Tlaib is fully aware that many Arab-American businessmen in the Detroit area were looted and attacked during the George Floyd riots. Why was such a big stink made over the ghastly Negro George Floyd when there have been many more nonblack victims of black savagery? It was because Jews use blacks as their cossacks(and use Antifa white morons as their Janissary) against White America, and Jews don’t care if the ensuing pogroms lay waste to Arab, Asian, and Brown properties as well.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, if current ‘progressivism’ is understood correctly, it’s not about equality, or holding all groups to the same standards. Rather, it’s about special consideration and treatment for certain groups on the bogus grounds that they either suffered more than other groups and/or deserve more attention, even reverence, for their holy, wondrous, or ‘special’ qualities. So, using George Floyd as justification, blacks have the license to steal and kill not only whites but browns, yellows, Muslims/Arabs, and etc. Blacks are cast as the stars of the narrative, with others relegated to the status of extras. Then, BLM and Globo-Homo(or LGBTQXYZ) aren’t progressive in the classic sense(of struggling for equal justice for all) and only favors certain groups over others, granting them special license to wage war, physical or cultural, on norms of sanity, decency, and reality. Just like Jews, based on the Holy Holocaust Narrative, always get to pose as a bunch of Anne Franks even as they act like New Hitlers allied with Sub-Nazis in Ukraine.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As currently construed, ‘progressive values’ are subservient to Jewish Supremacism and Zionist Apartheid. (The most shameful unspoken understanding between the so-called ‘left’ and the so-called ‘right’ that both sides are utterly gutless and spineless in the face of Jewish Power.) Consider the official logic: Jews as the Holy Holocaust people are always right no matter what they do to Palestinians, whereas Palestinians are a bunch of ‘anti-semites’ for opposing the holy Jewish agenda. Thus, Jews are above the law. Consider Jonathan Pollard and a bunch of other venal Jews pardoned by cuck presidents of both parties. Consider how Jewish gangster-operatives were able to take out Jeffery Epstein lest he talk; there was hardly any investigation as to what really happened.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="461" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/016/661/original/e81cb08dcfa9efca.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just as Jews are above the law on a global scale, blacks are above the law on the street level. As allies of Jews, they have special license to run riot to rob, rape, and murder. And apart from Jews and blacks, the only group that gets any love from the ‘progressive’ movement are the homos. Tlaib should ask why an entire month is devoted to celebrating Arabs and Muslims, whereby all US institutions from schools to libraries to government buildings fly Palestinian flags and recommend books by Yasir Arafat, Edward Said, and other prominent Palestinian figures. Why should homos get special treatment? Why must even non-homo issues be laundered through homo sanctity and symbolism to gain cred among so-called ‘progressives’? And why are Arab-Americans trying to win plaudits by endorsing globo-homo when most homos and trannies are totally aligned with Jewish Supremacism and Zionist Imperialism?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="168"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Instead of arguing that Zionism or Jewish Supremacism is at odds with progressive principles, Tlaib would have hit closer to the mark if she’s said current ‘Progressivism’ has been manufactured to serve as a vehicle for Tri-Idolatry or Tridolatry of Jews, Blacks, and Homos and no other group. Sure, the ‘progressive’ movement will give nods to certain groups for political expediency, like when it raised a fuss about Muslims-as-American-as-Apple-Pie when Donald Trump was accused of implementing a ‘Muslim Travel Ban’, but those are come-and-go antics, not permanent fixtures in the current Prog-Firmament as arranged by Jewish Power. After all, most ‘progressives’ had zero concern for Obama regime’s utter devastation of Libya and Syria. If indeed these people really care about the lives of innocents, why have they been perfectly fine with the US occupying one-third of Syria and supporting terrorist groups? Most ‘progressives’ are as phony as most ‘conservatives’. They lack agency, and their conceit-faking-as-conscience merely parrots the party line handed down from Jewish Power above.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="256"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, one of the problems of understanding Jewish Power, especially over the lone superpower, owes to its strangeness. Indeed, one wonders if there was anything like it in history. Just about all great powers were based on military conquest and dominance. The conquering power won the right to rule and dictate. Such power was naked to the eye, out in the open for all to see. (One could argue that Leon Trotsky, as the head of the Red Army, did secure power for the Soviets by military means, and that surely accounts for Jewish admiration for him regardless of ideology. Better-informed people will argue that Trotsky was ignorant about military affairs, and it was really the goy generals under him who created the Red Army, but Trotsky was still the official head, and the Reds won. As for whites and blacks, what accounts for black triumphalism? Even though blacks didn’t militarily defeat whites, blacks conquered whites in the sports arena, the modern gladiatorial ring of athlete-warriors. The endless sights of Negro athletic prowess pummeling white men into the dirt led to the ‘psycuckology’ of the pussification of the white male into ‘fa**otyass white boys’. To the extent that so much of national and racial confrontation is fought in the sporting fields and rings, it could be said black men defeated the white man and took over as the alpha male of the West. In that sense, whites are a conquered race that cheers for blacks who beat up white guys and hump white girls.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="237"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Military conquest and domination are like a fist in your face or a boot on your head. You can’t wish it away, and there are clear winners and losers, like in a sports game where one side wins, the other loses. Roman domination was based on the Roman means to smash and subjugate other peoples. And before the Romans, the Persian and Greco-Macedonian empires were based on military prowess and triumph. Who was going to argue with an army of 100,000s that could wipe out your village. The Muslims, the Mongol hordes, and the Mughal Empire also came to prominence through military conquests. Turks gained control of Anatolia and much else as fierce warriors. And the Spanish, French, and Anglos were great explorers, adventurers, and conquerors. They proved their mettle in the seas and lands by vanquishing rivals. And the French Republic, soon to become the French Empire, made itself known as the dominant military power in Europe. And the American Republic, also to grow into an empire, was founded by military victory(against the British Empire, though with crucial support from the French Empire) and conquest over the indigenous tribes. The Japanese Empire, though short-lived, was also based on military aggression. Anglo/European claims on Canada, United States, and Australia followed in the footsteps of history. Anglos were the indisputable conquerors and expellers/eliminators of the natives. Good or bad, Anglos were the clear winners.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="427" src="https://dutchreview.com/wp-content/uploads/roman-empire1-1.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="359"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, it only seemed natural that the US would be essentially an Anglo-American country, and newcomers would assimilate to Anglo norms and become Anglo-Americanized. And they would acknowledge and respect Anglos as the founders and rightful leaders of the civilization. And, when the British Empire ruled over various nonwhite folks, it made its superior military power known. The Mughals didn’t volunteer to cede India to the British. The Chinese didn’t allow the British access to the ports just because. Before black African tribes submitted to British rule, some had to be shot as a lesson to teach who’s the new boss in town. The case of Palestine-into-Israel also conformed to the historical norm. Jews won militarily and took the land by force when war finally broke out between the Arabs and Jewish settlers. But Jewish takeover of America is indeed something strange and possibly unique in history. Jews certainly didn’t conquer America militarily, and yet they became the rulers with an iron grip even tighter than the Anglos ever held. How did this happen? (Furthermore, it’s an undeclared power, a power more akin to a black hole than the sun. When Stalin ruled the Soviet Union, he made it known he was boss. Same with Mao’s grip on China and Hitler’s reign in Germany. It’s well-known Turks rule Turkey. And for most of US history, Anglo-American elites ruled America, and everyone knew and discussed it, Anglo and non-Anglo alike. It’s well-known that EU, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea are puppets of the US. But when it comes to who rules the US, we must pretend it’s turd-brains like George W. Bush or Joe Biden, or some ideology such as ‘conservatism’ or ‘diversity, or the power of money or greed. The fact of Jewish Domination remains hid within the black hole of US power dynamics. It is the most powerful force that sucks everything in but dares not declare itself and, if anything, excoriates anyone, especially via ADL, for noticing that Jews are indeed the masters. So much power in the dark… it’s a form of cryptocracy on steroids.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="461"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There was certainly a distinct Jewish worldview and ethno-personality that could be traced back to ancient times, one that may explain at least in part the nature of their power in our time. Jews were odd and different even back then and deviated from the political norms of the period. Jews were a minor power in military terms, usually overshadowed and overwhelmed by much bigger powers. At best, Jews sought to co-exist or survive in a contentious neighborhood with great powers vying for domination. Most minor powers thought and behaved normally under such circumstances, which was to acknowledge and submit to the bigger power as the awesome lord of the universe. While Jews were pragmatic enough to show respect to the greater power(s), if only to survive, they always felt themselves to be the greatest power of all destined to rule the world because of the Covenant with the one and only true God. So while other powers might be bigger and stronger, it was a temporal than an eternal matter as far as Jews were concerned, i.e. God or History would eventually put the world to right, and Jews would finally be on top and for all eternity; in a way, Karl Marx’s dialectic on class struggle may have been subconsciously inspired by the profound Jewish sense of historical and spiritual dialectic between the Chosen and the Filthy Goyim. Of course, as Marx had it, the proletariat would inherit the earth for all eternity once the dialectic played itself out. Jews like Jennifer Rubin, Max Boot, Chuck Schumer, Merrick Garland, Janet Yellen, William Kristol, Antony Blinken, Victoria Nuland, and etc. — ever notice Jewish ‘neolibs’ and Jewish ‘neocons’ are merely two sides of the same tribal coin? — believe the Jewish Tribesmen are the rightful eternal masters of all the world. No other conclusion can explain the crazy logic of Jewish Globalist Supremacist behavior. So many tensions involving the US, Russia, the Middle East, China, and etc. boil down to the dialectics between Jewish Supremacism and goy sovereignty. What clouds the issue is the strange partnership between whites and Jews in the globalist enterprise. Whites value globalism as a means of white deracination, whereupon their race will merge and be interchangeable with the rest of humanity, whereas Jews value globalism as a means of Jewish hegemonism, whereby Jews shall lord over all nations, not only through the power of finance and military power(managed by whites) but through the proxies of globo-homo and Negrolatry. Precisely because whites are committed to deracination, globalism has the veneer of ‘progressivism’ to reduce and eventually eradicate atavistic tribalism and ‘racism’ all over the world, when, in truth, Jews have deracinated whites only to make them serve Jewish tribal supremacism instead of their own.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="565" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/016/891/original/f50e86d1f6b97fe4.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />Indeed, it’s telling that Jews tend to see the World and History in terms of Jews and Gentiles, which is rather odd since Jews constitute only a small fraction of the world population. It was somewhat understandable that the Chinese divided the world in terms of themselves as members of the Middle Kingdom and the Barbarians. After all, the Chinese Empire was huge and the most populous in the world. Even after the great tragedies of the 19th and 20th century, China constituted one-fourth of the world population. But Jews were always a relatively a tiny group, so the notion of dividing the world between Jews and Gentiles(meaning everyone else) was rather chutzpaistic. The Ancient Greeks were a proud(and sometimes arrogant lot) and prone to looking down on barbarians, but they still had high regard for the Persians, Egyptians, and other great civilizations. They gave others their due and even superiority in certain regards. Besides, Greeks also became great conquerors and, under the helm of Alexander the Great, even steamrolled over the seemingly insurmountable Persian Empire. So, one could forgive the Greeks for their overt self-regard.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="382"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Jews never amounted to a great power in the ancient world. Their greatest king, David, beat up mostly third-rate tribes and barely clung to power when one of his sons began to act like Adam Sandler. So, the idea of dividing the world between Jews and Gentiles seems, on some level, not unlike the Uzbeks dividing the world between themselves and non-Uzbeks, i.e. Uzbeks are SO SPECIAL that they constitute a universe unto themselves whereas the rest of humanity are to be lumped into the generic category of Unuzbek. Uzbek contra Unuzbeks, who would be 99.99% of humanity. This is why the notion of ‘Jews and Gentiles’ sounds ridiculous. Who speaks of, say, ‘Norwegian-Americans and non-Norwegian Americans(which would include everyone else)’? We speak of Irish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Swedish-Americans, Polish-Americans, Mexican-Americans, etc. among whom Norwegian-Americans constitute one ethnic group. It’s only with Jews that there’s a sense of uniqueness so great and awesome that it distinguishes them from all other groups that are lumped together into the category of ‘gentiles’ that includes Wasps, beaners, Polacks, Negroes, yellows, Muslims, Hindus, Hawaiians, Amish, Mormons, and etc. If any group should have such a vaunted place in America, it’s the Anglo-Americans as the conquerors, settlers, founders, and primary developers of the country, but they too are lumped into the ‘gentile’ category while Jews stand apart(and above) as the Special People. Interestingly, there’s also the division of people into ‘straight’ and ‘gay’, even though homos are a small percentage of the population. It’s as if homos, instead of being regarded as a deviant sexual minority, make up fully one-half of sexual reality-identity. The 2% is treated as the 50%, just like trannies, though even a smaller fraction of the population than the homos, are given equal voice and standing when it comes to matters of womanhood and femaleness. Jews-and-Gentiles, Homos-and-Straights, Trannies-and-Women. See a pattern? Indeed, homos, trannies, and related deviants are considered so special that they are divided into special sub-identities such as ‘gay’, ‘lesbian’, ‘bi-sexual’, ‘trans-gender’, ‘queer’, and more pubic-hair-splitting categories. It’s as if straightness is just so boring and generic and comes only in one variety, whereas LGBTQXYZ identity is so magical that, despite its minority status, it spawns endless variations, such as the 50+ offered by Jewish-run Facebook.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/017/096/original/02e2c2c7ff282225.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="508" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="204"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">How can the majority lose to the minority? It depends on the size of the mouth. Big Think swallows up little think, and certain groups have developed the power of will, intensity, and the drive to conquer & command. If a fish tank has a thousand minnows and one perch, the minnows far outnumber the perch, but the perch has the bigger mouth and will swallow all the minnows one by one. If the minnows all come together and cooperate in attacking the perch, the perch will lose. But minnows aren’t programmed to fight together, and each minnow merely flees to save itself. So, the perch, with the bigger mouth, dominates them all despite its minority status. It devours or scatters them. Whites have small-mouth brains in their currently atomized state, whereas Jews and Homos have big-mouth brains. So, even as minorities, they dominate the majority, just like a single perch can dominate a thousand minnows in a fish tank. A tiny minority of trannies dictating to women what femininity is about is indeed a sight to behold, ghastly to be sure but fascinating. All those minnow women groveling at the feet of perch trannies like minnow whites sucking up to perch Jews.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="216"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish Power in our times is something unique or almost unique in history. The idea of a people gaining mastery over the world through non-military means. When else did that happen? Perhaps, the only comparable case is the rise of Christianity. The early Christians, composed of heretical Jews and converts among non-Jews, certainly had no means to militarily conquer the Romans, then the rulers of much of the known civilized world. The Arab Muslims later came to dominate much of the Middle East and North Africa through military might. While Christians later did spread the faith at the tip of the spear or point of the gun, the early Christians couldn’t conceive of taking over the Roman Empire militarily. But they did take over the empire by conquering it spiritually and conceptually. The Empire of proud warrior pagans chose to bow down to the New Faith and, in time, waged a massive culture war on their indigenous and/or traditional pagan beliefs, customs, and rituals. Surely, Jews throughout history, even in their bottomless hatred for Christianity, realized something remarkable about the Christian spiritual conquest of the Romans. The seemingly invincible empire that mercilessly laid waste to the Old Jewish Order folded under the spiritual power of some Jewish ‘loser’ who got nailed to the cross.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Granted, even as Christianity conquered Rome, it was the Romans themselves who kept the power. It wasn’t as if Romans surrendered their power to a band of ragtag Christians but merely converted to the Faith as their own and joined in the Christian brotherhood. In some ways, it also complemented their imperial mission because, finally, the Romans could not only conquer but convert other peoples. Render them both materially and spiritually of the empire. Christianity managed to conquer Rome spiritually(or quasi-ideologically) than militarily, but the actual power was still held by the Romans, now converted to the New Faith. When the Roman domain finally collapsed and fell into other hands, it was due to warrior conquests by the Germanic barbarians(in keeping with historical norms).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, Jewish Americans(and other elite members of World Jewry) could argue that they hold power and wield influence not as Jews but as citizens of the American Way, Democracy, Liberalism, Rules-Based-Order, Western Values, Diversity-Inclusion-Equity, and etc. In other words, their Jewishness is incidental or secondary, something they just happen to be than something that guides their agendas and policies, i.e. they are Good Americans who simply happen to be Jewish than Jewish Identitarians whose mission is to keep America and the West behind the Zion Curtain. While such could theoretically be possible — Jewish elites ruling for the good of all peoples in the West — , hard evidence says otherwise. First, too many prominent Jews make a BIG DEAL of their Jewishness and Jewish History, always reminding fellow Jews and goyim that their worldview and values are steeped in Jewishness(as having only positive and zero negative values).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="421" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/019/699/original/1589c3b0a45afc1e.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, if Jews are indeed All-American in the public sphere and Jewish only in the personal sphere, why do they work to suppress BDS and pressure the US to support the Zionist Imperialist-Supremacist agenda in the Middle East? Why is their ancient/tribal hatred/contempt for the Slavic peoples, especially Russians, so central to the current Western and American foreign policy? Why do they use influences(of the most nefarious sort) to get the worst kind of Jewish crooks pardoned by presidents, Democratic or Republican. If Jews are for the Good of All, they should be siding with good goyim against bad Jews and bad goyim. But Jews protect bad Jews and work with bad goyim who are more than willing to sell their own people down the river for more carrots and fewer sticks from Jews. Who really believes that people like Jake Tapper and Cass Sunstein are neutral rules-based journalists or academics who operate on the principle of the general good for all Americans? Has Tapper the journalist been fair-minded in his coverage of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict? Is Sunstein critical of Jewish gangster-fascist tactics to silence, suppress, and destroy anyone at odds with the Agenda which is largely pro-Zionist and Jewish Supremacist? Of course not.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews couldn’t have used military means to take over the West, but they did become the new rulers, indisputable to any honest person. As Judaism isn’t conversionary, it’s not as if Anglos or other goyim became the New Jews, like how Romans became Christians. Rather, they became the cuck-maggot servant class of the Jews as the new masters. This is far more remarkable than the Christian spiritual conquest of the Roman Empire.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="160"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After all, the appeal of Christianity is that God loves all of humanity and that anybody, Jew or non-Jew, can be saved through the grace of Jesus Christ. It offered equal standing and dignity to all converts regardless of ethnicity. In contrast, Judaism is wary of prospective converts. It is an ethno-religion premised on Jewish specialness, even superiority over others. Some Jews take this to extremes and don’t even regard filthy goyim as human; goyim are regarded as beasts whose sole purpose is to serve Jews, God’s chosen master race or tribe. When Romans spiritually surrendered to Christianity, they had something to gain as well as lose. They lost their pagan traditions but gained redemption and salvation in the eyes of the True God. Furthermore, Christianity also elevated its converts and faithful above the Jews, the originators of the Faith, who were deemed lost to God because they not only rejected the Son of God but killed Him.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, what’s been the point of surrendering power to the Jews in the US and current West? What do whites get from this? Jewishness is predicated on Jewish uniqueness, sacredness, and specialness. It’s not about Jews and humanity meeting halfway and respecting one another as equals; Jewishness means to be ABOVE humanity. It’s about the Jewish destiny of ruling over inferior goyim.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, playing devil’s advocate, perhaps Jews aren’t entirely wrong to feel this way because goyim sure can be stupid, albeit for different reasons. Take the Ukrainians and Anglo-Americans. As we all know, only a tiny share of the Ukrainian population is Jewish, but Jews run the whole place. And Ukrainians made Zelensky their president on the strength of his TV stardom as a fictional leader of the country who fights corruption – ROTFL. I mean even Americans, for all their retardation, wouldn’t mistake a show like WEST WING for reality. But Ukrainians bought the sham hook-line-and-sinker and made Zelensky their leader. Now, some may argue, whaddya expect, they are Ukrainians after all, descendants of semi-barbaric Cossacks who roamed the steppes shooting arrows at Tatars or plundering Polish caravans? A bunch of hillbilly Slavs good for nothing but guzzling vodka and arm-wrestling with fellow dimwits.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="152"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, what about the Anglos in the UK and US? Unlike the lowly and backward Slavs, weren’t Anglos among the key creators of the modern world and the builders of some of the best managed societies on Earth? So, what’s their excuse for having become such tools of Jews? Indeed, how strange that the most thick-skulled & corrupt Ukrainian Slavs have so much in common with so many intelligent, successful, sophisticated, & best-educated Anglos in the UK and US. For all their apparent differences, both groups are such total cuck-maggot-monkey-dogs of Jewish Power. Both groups sit, fetch, and roll over at every Jewish command. What accounts for the same behavior between the two groups when there’s such a divergence in their respective histories, cultures, achievements, and standings? How can both the lowliest Slavs and the loftiest Anglos be such servile minions eager to carry the jock-straps of Jewish Power?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="430" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/017/262/original/8a6fa48649bf2068.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="188"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A demonstration that stupidity isn’t synonymous with dumb. One can be smart but plenty stupid, and one can be dumb and not-so-stupid(if possessed of core convictions and intuitively wary of charlatans). It could be Jews exploit Slavic dumb-stupidity and Anglo smart-stupidity. In the case of Russia and Ukraine following the end of the Cold War, clever Jews simply ran circles around Slavs who seemed so utterly confused, incompetent, and childlike. It was like a man taking control of animals. The level of stupidity and retardation among Ukrainian Slavs is truly legendary. How does a nation of so many Slavs allow itself to be leeched by obviously nasty Jews like Victoria Nuland and her cuck-whore gang? Why would any self-respecting people take cookies, like silly little children, from that fat-faced harridan? Of course, plenty of Ukrainians, easily manipulatable, thought they were being smart by leaning to the West deemed ‘advanced’, ‘sophisticated’, ‘cool’, and/or ‘liberal’; the Ukrainian variation of the Polish Disease. If striving Polacks aspire to belong to the West than to East(which includes Ukraine), West-leaning Ukrainians fancy themselves as Polish-like, as the fancier Slavs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ukrainians are especially easy to manipulate because their identity isn’t only unclear but divided. Divided between Western-leaning folks and Russia-leaning folks, Ukraine could never come together and function as one, a fact exploited by the West. Besides, Ukrainian identity and history make little sense without consideration of their deep and long interaction with Russia; indeed, there is no clear demarcation between Russian-ness and Ukrainian-ness, like there exists between Russia and Turkey or between Russia and China.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Because post-Cold-War Ukraine stressed(and strained) its own unique identity by denying and denigrating its profound connection to Russia, its ethnic sense of self grew weak, confused, shallow, and washed-out. It’s like Taiwan trying to invent a sense of Taiwan-ness separate from Core China and ending up with globo-homo garbage that now dominates the island colony as an insipid whore of Uncle Sam who bends over to Boss Semite to be rammed in the arse. Precisely because Kiev(or Kyiv) so desperately sought to create a unique sense of Ukrainian culture, it relied on Western advisors, Jews and cucks, whose answer for Ukraine was: “Real Ukraine is about Jungle Fever, ‘Gay’ Pride, TV shows with Zelensky as fictional hero, emulating the Polucks(Polish Cucks), and virulent hatred for all things Russian, even if it means taking up Sub-Nazi attitudes and expressions against Russo-Slavs.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="243"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Only a people with total contempt for the Ukrainian people could foist such a trashy agenda on them. Yes, Jews despise Ukrainians as animals and children, but the majority of Ukrainians have fallen for the vicious agenda and see nothing wrong with shelling fellow Slavic civilian populations in the Donbass. Ever so eager to win plaudits from the West, they cackle hideously at the news of women and children torn to shreds in the towns and cities. But then, is it all that different in the US where so many white Americans, with hollowed-out identities and culture, find most meaning in ‘woke’ stupidities that elevate them as ‘good whites’ against all those ‘bad whites’ whose great sin is saying NO to White Nakba(aka the Great Replacement), black crime & thuggery, and Globo-Homo degeneracy; the ‘badder’ ones go so far as to Name the Jewish Power. People uprooted from a sense of race, history, culture, and community seek out new meanings and new sense of belonging. Lost and confused in their inability to find meaning and place on their own, they allow the powers-that-be to do it for them, and of course, Jews have control over the means, which are used to mold idols and narratives that steer whites to anti-white attitudes in favor of the globalist agenda(where goyim shall have no deep identities and cultures of their own but are compelled to support and fight for such among Jews and Israel).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="83"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Marx Brothers’ DUCK SOUP offers a clue as to what differentiates the dumb-stupid Slavs from the smart-stupid Anglos. The Slavs do notice but are too dumb to do anything about it; in contrast, Anglos pretend not to notice out of fear of losing their composure. The Slavs are like the lemonade seller who, to the best of his ability, tries to fend off Chico and Harpo but simply can’t because they run circles around him. He’s driven out of his wits.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/q9OUIk4Oaq4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Duck Soup (4/10) Movie CLIP - The Lemonade Vendor (1933) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="63"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the Anglo-esque character surely sees Chico and Harpo acting totally ridiculous but pretends not to notice and carries on as business-as-usual to uphold his sense of form and manners. The Anglo culture of the lady and gentleman could be maintained inside the domain because of protection on the outside by brute force, which was the ‘dirty’ secret of the Anglo Order.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FNSNLXNnx-o?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Duck Soup (3/10) Movie CLIP - These Are My Spies (1933) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="294"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All that civility, manners, and dignified air could be maintained within the sanctum and polite society because there were those hired for the brutish enforcement of the law and/or order. There were three ways by which Jews could destroy this Anglo Order. One was to militarily destroy the protective outer ring, but Jews lacked military power. Another way was to convince the Anglo elites and strivers that their idea of civilization was a mere facade or rank hypocrisy AS LONG AS their power and privilege rested on the brute force of the military, police, and racial populism. In other words, the Anglo mind must justify itself without the racial and cultural unity with the white muscle, it must seek ethical consistency and redemption by either severing ties with the nationalist-populist force or by directing the force to ‘protect’ nonwhites from whites(though, of course, it never applies to protecting ‘brown’ Palestinians and Arabs from ‘white’ Jews). As Jews were smart and wealthy, they gained access to the institutions of academia and media that came to profoundly alter the outlooks and values of elite Anglo children. But what happens when a society of ladies and gentlemen is no longer protected by brute force from those below? It comes under the threat of nonwhite fist-shaking and cowers before it. Why? Because ladies and gents are all about maintaining ‘dignity’ and manners. Earlier, when nonwhites shook fists at them, they got their white brutes and ‘thugs’ to handle the nonwhite buggers while keeping their hands clean. But without white muscle to protect them, they need to take up the fight themselves but they are too lady-like and too gentlemanly to revert to warrior-barbarian mode. So, they end up ‘taking the knee’ and washing stinky Negro feet.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another way Jews could break the bond between white mind and white muscle was by spreading excessive vulgarity among the hoi polloi. Thus, if past Anglo society was organized around the lower elements striving for middle class respectability and the middle class elements striving emulating their ‘betters’, the later white culture turned into a cesspool of reveling in vulgarity and giving the middle finger to their ‘betters’. The have-nots and have-lesses don’t have much but can still possess simple dignity and self-respect, both of which are lost with tattoos, piercings, and trashiness. Of course, at least in our time, given the utter corruption of the white elites, there is no longer any reason for white lowers to show any respect for white highers.</span></p><div class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" style="border: 0px; display: flex; font: inherit; margin: 10px 0px; max-width: 500px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 500px;"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" class="" data-tweet-id="1594739389199835137" frameborder="0" id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=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%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1594739389199835137&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fjfreud%2Fthe-pros-and-cons-of-vladimir-putins-speech-and-rashid-tlaibs-remark-on-the-current-state-of-the-world%2F&sessionId=91d6e3daa1505195a4854ec4810093c5d403e5ea&theme=light&widgetsVersion=a3525f077c700%3A1667415560940&width=500px" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; display: block; flex-grow: 1; font: inherit; height: 823px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: static; vertical-align: baseline; visibility: visible; width: 500px;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe></div><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, a key reason for the demise of the white race is the severing of the race-ist bond between the white mind and the white muscle, between the white class and the white brass; and of course, the white penis and the white vagina, as Jewish media complex now instill young white minds that white vaginas now belong to black penises. When whites are most allergic to what secures their survival and power — white race-ism — while most beholden to the three strikes to White Civilization — Jewish Supremacist Mendacity, Negrolatry, and Globo-Homo degeneracy — , it’s seems nothing can save the White World unless there is a profound race-ist, sex-ist, and fascist reevaluation of what’s going on.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="148"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Slavs are so crude and corrupt that they gave up on each other(in a low-trust society deficient in work ethic and individual conscience) and came to rely on Jews(and others), Anglos did manage to create and maintain a well-run and efficient society. Given that Slavs and Anglos are such diametric opposites, it is truly remarkable that Ukro-Slavs and Anglo-Americans ended up in more or less the same situation. But then, if Jews are anything, they are fluid and adaptable, taking full advantage of differing circumstances for maximum gain. Among Slavs, exploit the chaos and confusion, the ineptitude and distrust. Ukraine is said to be the most corrupt country in Europe, and Jews sure took full advantage of it, not least because Slavs are so lacking in trust for one another and even of oneself that they’d rather have the Other take control and lead.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="630" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/018/046/original/557de04c8597c5fb.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Anglos have proven themselves to be perfectly capable of running some of the least corrupt and most efficient societies, but such reality could be also taken advantage of by Jews. Well-run societies based on Rule of Law tend to pride themselves as favoring fair-minded and meritocratic principles over petty politics of personal interest, kinship, clannism, tribalism, and even nationalism; in other words, it’s an order based on abstract ideals that transcend ‘atavistic’ sentiments and loyalties. With their wit, intelligence, and drive, Jews were perfectly suited to take full advantage of the Anglo Order(no less than of Slavic Chaos) and gain success/power on the basis of those colorblind principles. Not only did Jews gain much via Anglo-made meritocracy but gained even more by shaming the Anglo Order for its failure to perfectly implement those principles on account of ‘racism’, ‘antisemitism’, and the like.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="154"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But as things turned out, even though Jews used relatively colorblind meritocracy to gain power, they then used their increased influence to ensure favoritism over others regardless of the stated principles of ‘justice’ or ‘liberty’. So, it has become de facto taboo to critique and expose abuses of Jewish Power in the manner that Jews had once shamed abuses of WASP power. And for all the mantras about ‘diversity-equality-inclusion’, it never means that the US media should be more ‘inclusive’ of pro-Palestinian, pro-Russian, and pro-Iranian voices; it never means US foreign policy should strive for equal justice for Jews and Palestinians; it never means the institutions and industries dominated by Jews should be diversified at the top to represent all identities and interests. Rather, it boils down to Jews working with homos to prop up blacks as idolatrous symbols of ‘social justice’ while Jews keep most of the wealth, privilege, and power for themselves.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, one might say the crude and chaotic Slav, for all his stupidity, has a better chance against Jewish Power in the long run. Notions of dignity, manners, and good form matter far less in the Slavic World that takes for granted that the world is a corrupt place run by gangsters and thieves. So, when push comes to shove, Slavs might just lose it and use any means, however crude, brutish, and ethically dubious, to get what they want. They will turn ‘animal’ and get all bloody and muddy to get ‘what is mine’; or, they will act like gypsy thieves.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="398"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the Anglo self-image simply cannot descend to the level of beasts at the expense of ‘reputation’; as the saying goes, plenty of whites would rather choose death than be called ‘racist’, oh no! Indeed, in DUCK SOUP, the crude and boorish lemonade seller still fares better than the Angloesque gentleman; he has no inhibitions about playing equally dirty and squirts lemonade down Harpo’s pants(whereas an Anglo gentleman would have serious reservations about stooping so low; it’s no wonder that ‘vulgar’ and ‘crude’ Russian Slavs have been more effective against Jewish Power; Russkies have fewer conceits and inhibitions). Anglo ideal was the gentleman, and a gentleman is nothing with propriety and form. After all, gentlemanly virtues aren’t simply about outward manners but a sense of virtue, a sense of honor and fair play. Jews understood this as the Achilles Heel of the Anglo psyche. If Jews could gain sufficient control of the discourse via the media, they could poke holes in the Anglo Myth of Fair Play. They could point to Anglo ‘racism’, ‘antisemitism’ and the like. Because of the Anglo conceit of gentlemanly virtues, Anglos couldn’t just say, “So what? You Hebes do the same shit, just like the Irish Micks and Italian Goombas.” No, Anglo elites as a collective just couldn’t go there and opted for two solutions to the Jewish assault: Work towards forming a fairer social order via meritocracy, which would lead to Jews winning over Anglos in brain-power & big balls and blacks winning over whites in brawn, beating white guys into a pulp. The other way was to flatter the smart and talented Jews as a special people. Thus fawning over Jews, the hope was the Tribe would stop nagging on whites and even join forces on grounds that Jews would be the favored minority and even the superior partner in the White-Jewish alliance. Or, it was a combination of both, as in the case of William F. Buckley who finally conceded that MLK was a great man, an American Giant, while also sucking up to Jews(especially on Middle East issues) in the hopes that Jews would identify mostly as white and dial back their hostility. Of course, Jews with their X-ray eyes saw right through the Wasp BS and never relented on their secret weapon against Anglo-American power, thereby turning blue-blood into blue-state.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="360" src="https://appwk.baidu.com/naapi/doc/view?ih=810&o=jpg_6&iw=1440&ix=0&iy=0&aimw=1440&rn=1&doc_id=948c62d5650e52ea5418989d&pn=2&sign=bb0f5c551fc8af45dfa08b41651fc284&type=1&app_ver=2.9.8.2&ua=bd_800_800_IncredibleS_2.9.8.2_2.3.7&bid=1&app_ua=IncredibleS&uid=&cuid=&fr=3&Bdi_bear=WIFI&from=3_10000&bduss=&pid=1&screen=800_800&sys_ver=2.3.7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="137"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish Power wasn’t content to harass and torment Anglo-Americans(and Anglo-Americanized whites) with meritocracy and fair play alone because such rules could limit Jewish Power as well. In order for Jews to attain limitless power, it was necessary to burden White America not only with the betrayal of meritocracy and fair play in the past but with the ‘guilt’ of persistent inequalities(or ‘inequities’ in fashionable speak) in the present, at least in regards to blacks. So, it doesn’t matter if whites earnestly rooted out racial discrimination. If blacks continue to lag in some fields, whites are still to blame and MORE is expected of them in cuckery, concessions, and obeisance. That way, whites are indefinitely chained to ‘white guilt’, rendering them morally, emotionally, and spiritually beholden to blacks and Jews(who control black politics).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="202"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sincere fairness(on the part of whites) could also be harmful to Jewish Supremacist interests. If whites must atone for past ‘white supremacism’, the moral logic of such argument would mean whites are obliged to condemn racial or ethnic supremacism of all kinds. For the sake of fairness and equal justice, it means whites mustn’t favor Jews over Palestinians or do the insane bidding of Jewish-Zionist supremacists against Russia, Iran, Syria, and etc. If white ‘racism’ was bad, then Jewish supremacism must also be condemned, but then Jewish Power will be limited(and may even go the way of WASP power).<br />So, even as Jews torment the white conscience about past white ‘racism’, it is never to make whites fair to ALL sides. Rather, it is to morally paralyze whites and reduce them to pathetic guilt-ridden cucks seeking the ‘wise’ advice for atonement and redemption. As Jews control the academia and media, they get to tell whites what-is-to-be-done, which usually boils down to sucking up to Jews, homos, and blacks. Ever notice the question is always about the ‘right of Israel to exist’ than about how the creation of Israel wiped Palestine off the map and denied its right of existence?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="31"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, in what ways do the words of Putin and Tlaib, for all their potency, fall short, and how are their words compromised by the grim political realities of our time?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="231"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Tlaib is truly in a thorny situation. She is the lone Palestinian-American politician in Congress in a country that is resolutely pro-Zionist and anti-Palestinian(as well as anti-Arab in general). She gets NO love from anyone. Donald Cuck Trump lambasted her while showering praise and money on Israel that in 2020 cozied up to Joe Biden, the US president with the most Jews buzzing all around him. Given the Jewish antipathy to Trump, one might think he might have some sympathy for Palestinians, but he made his fortune in New York, aka Jew York. Also, despite all the Jewish revulsion for the MAGA populist crowd, good many of Trump supporters were mentally molded by Jewish media & entertainment and Christian Zionism(as a kind of safety valve for their repressed white nationalist consciousness, i.e. if whites can’t root for themselves, they can at the very least root for ‘white’ Jews against ‘brown’ Arabs). And there’s also the sentimentality factor as Trump surely became golf buddies with many Jews in finance, real estate, and entertainment. Jews look upon MAGA folks exactly the way they do upon the Palestinians. Jews want Palestinians in the West Bank replaced by Jewish settlers, and they want whites in US and EU to reduced to minorities as the result of massive influxes of foreigners and of interracism(especially of the Afro-Colonization of White Wombs kind).</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s nothing in the academia, media, entertainment, and/or Jewish intellectual/spiritual circles to remind Jews constantly that it’s their moral imperative to be nice to whites, care about whites, support whites, defend whites, and pledge allegiance to whites. If anything, Jewish consciousness about whites mainly revolves around (1) how to get revenge on whites (2) how to destroy True Christianity as the bedrock of European civilization (3) how to prevent the revival of white consciousness that may rival Jewish Power (4) how to ensure white interests always being subordinate to Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In other words, even as Jews extensively co-exist with white goyim in the West, the relation isn’t grounded in love, trust, appreciation, and reciprocity. (There is an element of admiration for white history and achievements but often entwined with envy and/or fear.) Jews primarily regard whites as a source of danger, a potential threat. Thus, Jews obsess about how to manipulate and control white goyim, much like a lion-or-bear tamer always approaches his animal property with trepidation — what if the animals want to follow their own nature and do their own thing and stop obeying the tamer as master?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="271" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/018/207/original/a9f11663122760fa.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, of course, whites have been led to regard and approach Jews with praise, wonderment, adoration, reverence, eternal guilt(as ‘anti-Semitic Christians’ and/or Nazis or Nazi-collaborators), and infinitude of spiritual indebtedness. Jews are supposedly owed all this not only because the Shoah was the greatest tragedy in cosmic history but because Jews are pretty much the source of all the great things white folks have. It goes like this: No Jews, no God. No Jews, no Jesus(as He was a Jew too, along with all the Apostles). Without Jews such as Moses, whites would have no morality, no laws. Without Jews, whites would have no spirituality as their indigenous pagan kind was third-rate crap(but then Jews are to be revered for superhero comic fantasies based on goy pagan mythology). No Jews, no medicine. No Jews, no nuclear power. No Jews, no nothing. Jews are so awesome in every way, you see, but whites committed the greatest crime against the greatest people.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="162"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Therefore, whites must bow their heads and beg forgiveness when they aren’t fawning over Israel and singing hosannas to all things Jewish, even pretending Barbara Streisand is some kind of sex symbol. A Jew among Jews would be deemed a moron if he expressed sympathy for and trust in goyim, but a white among whites would be eviscerated for expressing the slightest doubt about the greatness, holiness, and awesomeness of Jews. (If some Jews really do bad, whites must always make sure to refer to them as anything but Jews. Call them ‘neocons’ or ‘globalists’ for example, and after doing so, always demonstrate that you’re not an ‘Anti-Semite’ by hailing Israel and denouncing fantasy Nazis.) Given this fact of white mass mentality, Trump couldn’t be anti-Jewish even if he wanted. He wouldn’t merely be up against Jewish power and white cucks in the Democratic Party but even MAGA Christian Zionist morons who’d would be howling at him.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="446" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/018/318/original/7162d6f32b96de46.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="238"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The biggest obstacle for Putin and Russia is the anxiety about naming the Jewish Power. Such stark silence is proof that Russians do know that the real controllers of the West are Jews who, even as of now, are too powerful to mention. Perhaps, the Russian government fears that Jewish Power will go all in against Russia if it is named. In other words, Jewish anti-Russian hostility, extreme as it is, may be around 70% of operational capacity. But, if Putin and his cohorts were to go all the way and blurt out the whole truth, Jews will go 100% against Russia, or treat Russia like Kanye West. Elon Musk, for one, fears the full brunt of Jewish Power, which still hasn’t gone 100% against him. Against Trump, Jews went in around 90% and totally crushed him.<br />But then, Kanye West is just a rapper with a hyped up celebrity. And Musk and Trump operate within the West and are thus vulnerable to Jewish machinations, both ‘legal’ and financial. Given the extreme, indeed unprecedented, measures that Jewish-controlled West pushed following the Russian attack on the Kiev regime, could it be that Russians are overestimating Jewish power and reach? Do Jews really have many more options left to harm Russia, which thus far has weathered the storm? After all, unlike Germany and Japan in World War II, Russia isn’t reliant on other parts of the world for most of its needs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russians are right to worry that, given the impact of Holocaustianity and general Jew-Worship in the West, white Americans and Europeans will be even more rabid in their anti-Russian vitriol if Putin expressed anything that could be construed as ‘antisemitism’. Besides, Putin had carefully tailored Russia’s image over the past two decades to be Jewish-friendly and close to Israel in deference, cynical or not, to the Western Narrative that hold Jews to be near-holy as a wise and tragic people. Even though Jews hardly express any sympathy or appreciation for all the Russian lives sacrificed in World War II, Russians conformed to the Western norm of paying endless tributes to the Holocaust as the worst evil of WWII, even more than the war on Russia. So, what did Russians get out of it? Nothing in the way of favors from Jews who’d been vilifying Russia ever since Putin consolidated his power against the most egregious Jewish oligarchs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, even if Russians get no love from Jews(who even heap abuse on white Americans who’ve done so much for them), they might fear even higher levels of hatred(and indeed Jewish hatred can be downright pathological, especially warped by moral narcissism). For example, if someone hates and abuses you and there’s no chance he’ll reciprocate your niceness, there’s still the chance that he’ll abuse and beat you even harder if you don’t suck up to him. All these years, it seems Russian choices in regard to Jews were (1) show World Jewry some respect and be kicked around & spat upon and (2) show World Jewry no respect and be kicked even harder & beaten with a baseball bat. So, the best that Russia could get out of showing Jews respect was to be kicked around a bit less. There’s no chance that Russian consideration for Jewish historical suffering will be reciprocated with Jewish consideration for Russian historical suffering. If Russians, like Solzhenitsyn, say “We were sometimes wrong, but you Jews were sometimes wrong too, so let’s try to understand each other better and bury the hatchet”, the Jewish response is pure rage as the ONLY ACCEPTABLE consensus is “Russians were always wrong toward Jews, and Jews were never ever wrong.” Jews have the God-complex, but then their tribal character was projected onto YHWH, the always perfect Being.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/018/425/original/c94a412dcc62bd90.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="561" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="111"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Putin’s continuing reluctance to spell out the true nature of Western hostility(so totally rooted in Jewish control) suggests that Russia still operates in this mode. Why the fear when, as some have argued, the Jewish-controlled West pulled all the stops to destroy Russia in the Ukraine War(which is really Russo-Jewish War) and failed? If Jews threw everything at Russia but Russia remains standing, shouldn’t Russia repay the Jews in kind? Perhaps, the Jewish War against Russia isn’t only at 70% or 80% operational capacity but 100%, and Jews really did fail to destroy Russia. If so, Russia should go into anti-Jewish juggernaut mode and counter-declare war on Jewish Supremacism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, Russian restraint can be understood through its key partnerships with China and India. While Chinese are also upset with Jews, the world economy still depends on Jewish-Chinese dealings. As for India, which has thus far shunned Western pressures for anti-Russian sanctions, it too is playing a double game. On the one hand, it maintains the historical understanding with Russia(built up during the Cold War), but on the other, so many Hindus became economically prominent by dealing with Jews who control the West. If Russia were to come out hard against Jews, India might come under even more pressure to sanction Russia, or else lose its opportunities in the West that is so totally under Jewish Control.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And this brings us to a problem with Putin’s rather antiquated division of the World between the ‘imperialist’ West and the Rest, aka the Global South + China + Russia. Given that Anti-Russian hostilities all stem from the West while the so-called Global South has more or less refrained from an outright condemnation of Russia’s actions, as well as from joining in the sanctions regimen, one is tempted to agree with Putin’s assessment of world affairs at first glance. The West(the US, Canada, Australia, Western & Central Europe, Japan & the East Asian Pussies) against Russia, China, and Iran, with many countries of South America, Africa, Middle East, and Southeast Asia refusing to take sides, which is to Russia’s advantage as it’s the West pressuring them to be anti-Russian than Russia pressuring them to be pro-Russian(and anti-West).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Image" class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fh5ON2bVIAE4KZp?format=jpg&name=small" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="584" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="73"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, the attitudes of the Global South is due to the US-as-lone-superpower fatigue; they’re tired of the US pushing the whole world around with money and military power. Or maybe, as Putin indeed hinted, it has to do with the accelerating decadence and degeneracy of the West. It was one thing for the US to promote democracy, free markets, Hollywood, and Rock music. But Globo-Homo as the official cult of the West?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It could also be the product of some degree of confusion and frustration in the Global South. Love it or hate it, the West was once synonymous with white(and Christian) power. But as the Chinese and Russians know but don’t say it out loud, the current West is controlled by Jews with the white elites reduced to a bunch of worthless cuck monkeys. How is the Global South supposed to respond to a West where whites, the former owners & masters, have been reduced to mental and managerial servants of Jews who, for all their great wealth and power, refuse to show themselves as the true masters?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="271"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">That said, Putin’s formulation of the West vs the Rest belongs to the 20th century, especially the first half, and the 19th century. One thing for sure, the West’s relation with China since the 1980s is hardly comparable to what it had been in the 19th and early 20th centuries. One could argue that the Western globalist elites have been exploiting China’s vast pool of cheap labor, but they also allowed China to grow economically by leaps and bounds within the US-led system. Perhaps, such ‘kindness’ was a way to turn China into a big Japan, Taiwan, Singapore, or South Korea. As the US lacked direct control over China, the kind exerted on Japan-Taiwan-and-South-Korea, perhaps US elites thought China could be wooed into becoming a seamless part of the globalist system, especially through the influence of so many Chinese students indoctrinated with the ‘Western’ way in American(and British) universities. At any rate, China’s recent rise couldn’t have been possible if the West’s attitude was a mere continuation of past imperialist arrogance(and naked exploitation).<br />It’s also worth mentioning that Russia was more than willing to join the Western economic system AS LONG AS the West didn’t press upon Russia too hard on political and cultural matters. The severance of ties between the West and Russia wasn’t the result of Russian protestation of Western exploitation of the Global South but the West’s inability to overcome the pressures of its Jewish Masters’ rabid and virulent hatred for Russia. In other words, Russia was forced to choose the Global South over the West.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/5Lck1eMJHYc/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/5Lck1eMJHYc/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/5Lck1eMJHYc/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, there’s the question of who is invading, colonizing, and exploiting whom in the current era? Recently, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni denounced the France of Emmanuel Macron for its hypocrisy. For all of Macron’s professed concern for African refugees(rejected by Meloni’s Italy), she pointed out that it was French neo-colonialism that keeps Black Africa poor and under-developed, which is why black Africans become migrants headed towards Europe. It was effective as rhetoric but hardly convincing as reality. While it’s true that Europe still does take advantage of Black Africa, it is because black Africans have proven themselves useless in managing their own affairs. After all, plenty of Chinese and Hindus also operate in Africa in a manner that could be construed as neo-colonialism. This wouldn’t be an issue if blacks could manage things on their own.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Besides, the African migrant crisis far exceeds whatever France may be doing to countries like Burkino Faso as it is a continent-wide problem. Even African countries untouched by French ‘exploitation’ produce tons of migrants headed up north. Sweden doesn’t have much of a history of imperialism over nonwhite lands, but migrants target it as well, not least because Swedes are such simple-minded soulless saps who fall for sham Jewish Morality about ‘diversity’ as the new sacrament.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="63"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Over the last decades, it’s Europe that has come under colonization by the nonwhite world. To an extent, the mass migration has resulted from Wars for Israel pushed by Jews and rubber-stamped by the Cuck-West, but during the Syrian Crisis, only one-fourth or one-third of the migrants entering Europe were actual Syrians. Countless non-Syrians merely claimed to be ‘Syrian’ to gain entry.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The main reason for Europe’s inability to say NO to this invasion is Jewish control of the goy elites, as well as the hearts-and-minds of the average white goyim who live by the dictum “Jews Decree, Whites Agree”. Thus, the West’s colonization by the non-West is due to its prior colonization by Jews, which only complicates matters. Contra Putin, the reality is not so simple as the Narrative of the West practicing neo-imperialism against the Rest. Contra people like Ann Coulter and Douglas Murray, it’s not so simple as the Narrative of the West now being colonized by the Rest. Rather, the West consents to the current reality of being invaded because it has already been colonized by Jews intellectually, morally, and even ‘spiritually’, whereby the new demons are ‘racism’ and ‘xenophobia’ and the new angels are ‘inclusion’ and ‘diversity’(which however are suppressed in Israel for some reason with the full blessing of the West).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Image" class="aligncenter" height="585" src="https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FhzmM7kVQAE4LPy?format=jpg&name=small" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If indeed nothing has fundamentally changed in the relations between the West and the Rest, why is London now 60% non-British? Why are Hindus the biggest property owners in London? Why did BLM spread like wildfire in the UK, and why are people in Britain, whites and nonwhites alike, attacking statues and monuments of past glory? Why has ‘wokeness’ spread far and wide even in the most elitist and hierarchical British universities? Why is blackness treated as something near-sacred by so many Britons, top to bottom?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And what of France with its burgeoning Arab/Muslim and black African populations? There are suburbs of Paris that now look like the Third World? Marseilles is now majority nonwhite. The French soccer team is black, like much of British boxing. Indeed, all across Europe, there’s hardly anything like European pride and white identity to be found. Nowadays in the West, the term ‘pride’ has become synonymous with glory to homos and trannies. ACOWW(or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs) is now a big part of the US and Europe, what with countless TV shows, commercials, movies, and educational instructions featuring the ‘ideal’ matching of black male and white female… while the white male is expected to accept the ‘new normal’ with total cuckish delight(lest he be denounced as ‘racist’ for opposing interracism).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For all of Putin’s remarks, the US and the European West have been far more open to mass invasion-colonization by nonwhite hordes. Some may argue that many of these people from the Third World come to do menial jobs and remain poor. But it’s no less true that many have become rich, even famous. Some have gained top jobs in the realm, with even the supposedly ‘conservative’ Tories in the UK celebrating the replacement of whites by Hindus and blacks. In contrast, the general image of Russia is that of an overwhelmingly white country, and even its Muslim population in the Caucasus are whiter than those in the Middle East.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="58"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, one could argue that even the most successful nonwhites in the West are little more than ‘servitors of the empire’, essentially comprador elites who’ve joined the West in impoverishing, exploiting, exploding, and corrupting the Rest; they took their thirty pieces of silver from WEF and work against the interests of their own kind back home.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="102"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, are these nonwhite ‘collaborators’ really puppets of White Power or are they shills of Jewish Power? If they have one thing in common with white goyim, it’s that both groups are cuck dogs of Jewish Power. Thus, it isn’t so much a case of ‘the West vs the Rest’ but the fusion of whites and nonwhites in the West as lapdogs of the Jews. What do Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have in common in the UK, along with Keir Starmer of the Labour Party? White or nonwhite, man or woman, they are cuck maggots of Jewish Power.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/018/750/original/5e7af8625fe2a68d.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="481" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="107"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And even though much of the Rest may appreciate Russia(and China)’s counterbalance to the overbearing West(especially as the instrument of obsessively aggressive and intrusive Jews), the fact remains that many aspiring individuals all across the Rest still look to the West as the favored destination for education, profession, and habitation. So, even as India has close ties with Russia on the national level, countless Indians have moved to Europe, Australia, Canada, and the US to rise in the world. And Hindus are among the richest people in the UK and the US, and many work with Jews in Big Tech to suppress pro-white voices.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such Hindus in the West may be looked upon with distrust(and even disgust) by people who actually run India. Or perhaps India is playing a clever game by working both systems. Keep close to Russia as leverage against China and the US(and also buy oil at a discount) but also send many Indians to the Anglosphere and gain access and opportunities as a means of expanding the reach of Hindu business networks and political ties. Indeed, even in the ‘bad old days’ of the British Empire, Hindus and Muslims in India did gain lots of advantages by operating within the global framework as devised by the British.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="161"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, it’s not as simple as Putin lays out, especially because the West has gone a long way to diversity itself in the name of ‘diversity, inclusion, and equity’, which really boils down to the official idolatry of Jews, blacks, and homos, BUT the fact remains globalism has also made the West, from US to Canada to Australia to UK to EU(as well as the ‘honorary west’ of Japan and East Asian Pussies), to accept vast numbers of nonwhites, some of whom(especially among the Hindus) have gained elite positions and considerable influence in business circles, often revolving around Jew-Hindu partnership(though there may be increased Jew-Hindu competition as well, and it’s just possible that Hindus could use the ‘Anglo Guilt’ card effectively because of the 200 yrs of British Rule over India, which led to the rise of Gandhi as perhaps the first great political saint of the 20th century, which became a template for others, especially MLK).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given Putin’s dependence on non-white giants like China and Japan and the so-called Global South in his titanic struggle with the Jewish-infested Collective West, it’s understandable why he framed the conflict between Russia and the US as one of neo-Anglo-imperialism vs the nonwhites of the world(and Russians) yearning to be free of globalist hegemonism, but ultimately his rhetoric is politics than reality.<br />He is correct that most of Europe is now politically zero in terms of sovereignty as it is a complete whore of the US, which in turn is a complete whore to Jewish Supremacism, aka ‘Neocon-ism’(or Neo-Cohnism). But the fact remains nonwhites inside and outside the US, Canada, and EU see more of an opportunity for empowerment and enrichment in the Collective West than elsewhere.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="248"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, this was obviously illustrated by Barack Obama’s hostility towards Russia. While Russia didn’t import black slaves or profit from the slave trade(and has no history of Jim Crow and the like), it remains Russian-nationalist and devoid of ‘white guilt’. So, even though Russia isn’t anti-black, it can’t be milked by blacks either for reparatory special privileges. In contrast, whites in the West are so cucked with ‘white guilt’(as well as with jungle fever and jungle faith, respectively sexual attraction and spiritual fascination with Magical Negroes) that they were willing to elect someone like Obama(product of ACOWW) for the top position. (Likewise, Jews hate Russia more than Germany even though Germany carried out the Holocaust while Russians defeated Nazi Germany because Jews have control over Germany through ‘German guilt’ whereas no comparable Jewish emotional weapon against Russia exists. It’s all about control.) Whites in the US are so cucked that they hold up BLM signs even as blacks burn down cities and attack innocent whites. So, even though the US and the West in general have a long history of violence toward and exploitation of blacks, the whites there have been lobotomized and castrated into Jew-Worship, Negrolatry, and globo-homo. Obama also understood that globo-homo was useful to black power insofar as it favors minority prestige over majority norms. As homos and blacks are minorities in the West(along with Jews), LGBTQXYZ and BLM go hand in hand against majority power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="74"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Russia’s pushback against globo-homo suggests its national values are invested in the norms of the majority, and that very concept is threatening to men like Obama whose sense of racial entitlement depends on the minority being favored over the majority. Despite America’s racial past, the fact is it elected Obama as president. Lloyd Austin the Negro is the top general, and BLM-CRT is the official ideology of the US military.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, imagine such a thing happening in Russia where all the top leaders are whites(or mostly white)! Obama’s outlook is likely shared by many blacks in Africa and Europe. So, even if, on the national level, African(and other nonwhite) countries have much to gain from good relations with Russia as a model of resistance against Western hegemony, on the individual level they have far more to gain from the Collective West that is increasingly looking like a giant white beached whale for the Rest to feast upon.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="556" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/121/017/549/original/9d05e9dfd75e5c5c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-87558045816137824562022-12-07T18:19:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:05.222-08:00Developmental Pains of Natural Great Powers in the 21st Century That May Finally Restore Balance to the World<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="426" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/397/original/ed1b15bb8e130984.jpeg" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="176"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Small may be beautiful, but big is powerful. Dog beats a cat, bear beats a wolf, lion beats a leopard, and elephant beats a rhino. And a heavyweight boxer beats a welterweight boxer. Of course, on a pound-for-pound basis, the smaller may be tougher. A cat the size of a dog would destroy the latter instantly. Also, quantity isn’t necessarily quality. Some countries are huge but lacking in fertile soil and/or natural resources. Some countries have large populations but without much discernible aptitude for wealth creation and social organization. And in the world of sports, Jamaica alone produces faster sprinters than China, India, and the White West combined. Arabs and Muslims far outnumber Jews in Israel and possess far more territory and resources but haven’t made much of their advantages. Brazil is a gigantic country with tons of resources but hasn’t lived up to its potential due to its lackluster Latin leadership, diversity & division, and, worst of all, a very large black population(who are equally good at soccer and crime).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">That said, World History from the 18th century to the 20th century seemed ‘unnatural’ or imbalanced, in large part due to the rise of certain key nations in the West, especially France, England, and Germany. Spain and Portugal gained a head start in the discovery and exploitation of the New World, but their subsequent fates cohered with the ‘natural’ logic of History, just another chapter in the cycles of rises and declines/falls from the dawn of civilization. It seemed only ‘right’ that such limited kingdoms couldn’t effectively rule over such vast territories across the seas for long. Also, the maddening diversity of Latin America seemed fated for conflict and confusion, a world of wariness and mutual distrust leading to apathy and enervation than unity and morale.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Britain, France, and later Germany went from strength to strength, and it was almost as if they’d arrived at the secret formula of eternal greatness, an overcoming of the historical cycle of rises and falls. The supposition held even in the 20th century following the calamitous double whammies of World War I and World War II, after which Europe rebounded quickly and provided living standards superior to any previous period. Even after wholesale destruction of cities and the death of millions, it was as if the Modern West would only move forward and onward. And certain non-Western nations proved adept at emulating the West; Japan was the prime example, rapidly rebuilding following the Pacific War, possibly the biggest calamity in Japanese history.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/380/original/4e326dccdf506a14.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="559" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="237"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just like economists in their search to break free of boom-bust cycles, it was as if the West had been seeking, if only subconsciously, to transcend or at least bypass the Iron Law of the Rise and Fall of Civilizations. The West certainly stumbled upon something because, not only did it avert the declines but kept rising higher and faster even after momentous setbacks, thought at the moment to be the death knell of civilization.<br />While the West came upon this formula(that broke free from History to make History), the Rest seemed dazed and confused, unable to make heads or tails of the profound changes emanating from the West and utterly clueless as to how to respond to them. China was typical in ignoring the problem and hoping it would just go away. Civilizations that were so accustomed to the rise-and-fall model of history perhaps thought that the West, despite all its dizzying successes, would sooner or later succumb to the historical logic and decline, like all the kingdoms, dynasties, and/or empires. But what happened to Spain and Portugal(and to Greece and Rome long before them) didn’t happen to certain key powers in the West. Also, unlike Spain and Portugal that failed to create viable world powers in Latin America, the Anglos who founded and settled North America laid the foundations of what would become the greatest power the world had ever seen.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If far-seeing space aliens had visited Earth around 1500 A.D., they would likely have bet the future on the consolidation of several great powers: China, Indo-sphere, Russia, Europe, and whoever comes to dominate the Americas, especially North America. China then was obviously a great civilization with deep history, rich culture, lots of talent, and large land mass with considerable resources. Indo-sphere, though to coalesce into a modern ‘nation-state’ only under and via independence from the British Empire, was also well-populated with peoples who made key contributions to the world, not least in spirituality. Russia would have seemed backward then, but the potential was tremendous. Europe, by which we mean Western and Central regions, was a special case.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="467"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/351/original/d9efc4673272eab8.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="598" />Europe’s weakness was its strength, and vice versa. Unlike other civilizations, imperial dominance was short-lived, and all of Europe failed to coalesce into one unified state like China. The biggest European empire(post-Roman and west of Russia) with any longevity was the Austro-Hungarian Empire, but it was mostly Austrians ruling over second-rate Slavs and others. Napoleon came closest to forming something like a unified European Empire, but he failed, denying Europe the unity of China, Russia(and the Soviet Union), or the United States. Yet, historians have noted certain advantages in the failure to bring all of Europe under a single authority — conflict bred competition that rewarded innovation in production and military power. At most, unity came at the level of ethno-nationalism, especially with the Germans who united under Prussia; the great tragedy for the Balkan Slavs was the failure to unite as the Germans did, what with Yugoslavia tearing(and being torn) apart after the Cold War; but then, Serbia, the dominant power in Yugoslavia, never gained the prestige and respect of the Prussians. To an extent, the persistent division of Europe owed to deep and genuine ethnic differences, mainly among the Latins, Germanics, and Slavs. But then, even most of the Latin states failed to unite, as was the case with the Germanic peoples and the Slavs, not least because they undermined one other’s efforts at unification. The Latin powers were committed to keeping the Germanic states apart, Germanic powers likewise felt about the Slavic states, and etc. (Even now, consider the sabotaging of Russia’s attempt to revive the Russo-Slavo-sphere in Ukraine.) And there was the influence of Great Britain, the absence of which would have profoundly altered the history of Continental Europe, for better or worse. British priority at all times was to prevent European unity, allying with just about ANY power to maintain the ‘balance of powers’, something which made the British skilled in diplomacy and duplicitous in nature. Very possibly, had Britain never existed, men like Napoleon and Hitler might have succeeded in the political unification of Europe into a kind of federation. If the influence of the Moon has been to stabilize Earth, the influence of Britain was to sow divisions, even chaos, so that Europe could never meld into a united empire. One might argue the EU of late has finally arrived at some kind of unity, but the EU project isn’t about European sovereignty but about vassalage to the Jews who rule the US as the lone superpower. Indeed, the European Union is less about the proud union of European countries than a spineless surrender of Europe to a union with Africa and the Third World under the watchful eyes of the Jewish-controlled US as the master of the Collective West(more like Cuckative West).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="285"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Through the 19th century and well into the 20th century, the world witnessed two great trends in political power, one ‘natural’ and the other ‘unnatural’. ‘Natural’ in this case signifies a big country as big power, and ‘unnatural’ a small country as big power(and big country as small power). The rises of Russia and the US as great powers were most ‘natural’ as both entities were vast in resources. Russia had more population than any other European power, and the US had a high birth rate among whites in the 19th century, and there was also what seemed, for a time, like endless immigration from all across Europe. The US clearly outpaced Russia in the 19th century and throughout the 20th century, even following the Russian Revolution(when for a time many intellectuals in the West looked to Russia as the future, especially as the Capitalist West seemed to have fallen into permanent depression), but Russia averted the fate of the Ottoman Empire(even though the calamities it faced in World War I, Bolshevik Revolution & the ensuing civil war, forced collectivization, and World War II were on a scale beyond any tragedy of modern Turkish History). Even though Russia lagged the US and Germany in industrialization and progress, it still managed to advance in key fields. Even with the defeat in World War I, Russia(as the heart of the Soviet Union)managed to industrialize at breakneck pace under Josef Stalin, weathered the storms of World War II, and emerged as a superpower that, for a time, even led in the space race. For all its ups and downs, Russia, whether Tsarist or Communist, did manage to stay in the great power game.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for the US, the whole world knows the story. Best land, fine lineage of Northern European settlers, and first-rate legacy of the Rule of Law, at least relative to the rest of the world mired in arbitrary and/or mystifying use of power. With all that land and resources, quality of culture and habit, and good genes, what came to be the US arose from a sound foundation, and the mostly European immigrants who followed respected and adopted the Anglo model. So, it was only a matter of time: The US was destined to be a great power without even trying to be. It was a ‘natural’ great power that could easily become a superpower, which it became.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="480" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/324/original/a433759a9671f330.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Contra Russia and the US, the other great powers were ‘unnatural’, though hardly unique in history. All through history, peoples of small regions gained in military prowess and began to dominate their neighbors who were far larger in number. Assyrians and Macedonians ruled over vast territories and peoples, and perhaps the most remarkable of its kind in pre-modern times was the Roman Empire, with Persian and Mongol empire as contenders. Ottoman Turks also gained hegemony over vast areas inhabited by non-Turkic folks. The rise of empires in the modern era surpassed the history norm due to the mastery of the wind and seas. European Imperialists went from sea-faring to ocean-crossing and forged the first truly global empires by conquering vast expanses of territory far from the homeland, something unimaginable in the time of the Romans.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="256"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, the ancient Roman Empire and modern British Empire had in common their ‘unnatural’-ness. Of course, it was ‘natural’ that such a well-organized, highly disciplined, and capable people should conquer and dominate others. Still, such empires are built on shaky grounds as, despite all the carrots-and-sticks and ‘inclusive’ magnanimity, there’s always bound to be a sense of resentment among the subject peoples. There’s also the burn-out factor as such an empire can be maintained only with extra, even extraordinary, investment of time and effort as it must rule over vast alien territories and populations. One slip-up, and the whole thing can begin to unravel. Nothing can be taken for granted in such an empire; it was said the sun never sets in the British Empire(and NY is supposedly where no one ever sleeps), and it was a point of pressure as well as pride, as the empire had to be overseen and managed around the clock around the world. The movie BOUNTY shows the iron determination, discipline, and organization necessary to maintain an empire, especially an overseas one as control of the seas demands constant motion of voyages and patrols. It calls for almost inhuman levels of self-restraint and self-denial, as well as hierarchy and power over others. Once such a fire burns out, it’s hard to turn on again. In a way, the movie serves as metaphor for what happened to the Anglo World. Society eventually mutinied against the Old Way and gave itself to revelry and decadence.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KDc6dZxh0Cs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Bounty (2/11) Movie CLIP - Second in Command (1984) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FVEiScxUQyY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Bounty (3/11) Movie CLIP - Mixing With the Natives (1984) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Likewise, Jews are incessant in their imperial obsessions because their empire will fall apart the minute the they’re asleep on the job and take things for granted. A Russian can take for granted that Russia belongs to Russians, and an Iranian can that Iran belongs to Iranians. But the current World Jewry, like the British before them, can never take for granted that their hegemony will last if they just took it easy. Such imperial energies can be exhilarating but also exhausting, and it seems the Anglos, like the Romans long before them, reached a burnout point where they simply couldn’t sustain it any longer, especially with the two major wars in Europe.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Imperial authority depends on the clear presence or threat of force, absent which signs of agitation appear among the subject folks. In other words, while Turks continued to accept the authority of diminishing Turkish Power, non-Turks such as Greeks and Armenians saw the fissures as an opportunity to finally regain independence and autonomy. In the 20th century, China went through hard times but remained intact because most people in China were Han Chinese who, despite their disappointments with the inept, corrupt, and/or crazy governments, still accepted the authority invested in leading and representing the Chinese people.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Russia(and Soviet Union) and the US were ‘natural’ great powers, the other great powers were ‘unnatural’. They were Great Britain, France, Germany, and later Japan. (Ottoman Turks lost out in their desperate gamble in World War I.) China and India were also ‘unnatural’ in that they had the elements to be great powers but faltered as the two Sick Men of Asia. What took shape as ‘India’ under the British Empire was rich in talent, history, and culture but lacked in cohesive will to come together under inspired authority. Things were so pathetic that, prior to the British, the Mughals kicked the Hindus around like dogs and spread Islam far and wide. And China, also rich in history and talent(and considerably bigger than India), failed to meet the challenge of modernity; and if Hindus were ruled by Mughals before the arrival of the British, the Han Chinese were ruled by Manchurian dynasties even to the first decade of the 20th century. One wonders how history would have played out if China had understood the challenges and caught up with the West before imperialism got a foothold in China. China was as much an ‘unnatural’ weak power as Great Britain was an ‘unnatural’ great power.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/300/original/cd23c7be0fd9888f.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="596" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="240"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Western/Central European nations are relatively small, the European continent(including European Russia) is bigger than the US. Even without Russia, Europe is two-thirds the size of the US. As a combined power, it’s potential would have been awesome, but it couldn’t overcome the problems of diversity like the US more or less managed to do. The difference is each European nation is deep in history and culture, therefore obliged to preserve and remember what is unique about itself. A true Italian is Italian before (pan)European, and the same goes for a true German and true Hungarian.<br />In contrast, the US was founded by Anglos who set the template for entry into the US. Those choosing to emigrate had to adopt the American Way as set forth by the Anglos(and fellow Northern Europeans). So, even as the US tolerated and even respected ethnic diversity, the understanding was that YOU are an American before you’re a Pole, Italian, Swede, Irish, Greek, or whatever; furthermore, it was thought that Americanism and the Melting Pot would eventually erase memories and attachments to the Old World. Besides, Anglo-Americans themselves practiced what they preached(sufficiently) by accepting as fellow Americans the non-Anglo-Americans. So, while a Polish-American could have his Polish culture on the side(with kielbasa and sauerkraut), it had to be a secondary feature to Americanism that bound him in a sense of fellow-citizenship with non-Polish Americans.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such a formula was never going to work in Europe because there wasn’t a single or superior formula for being European. An Italian, in simply being Italian, is fully European. He doesn’t have to demote Italian-ness to the periphery to be ‘European’. Whereas Anglo-Americans owned the founders’ rights to the United States in defining the essentials of Americanism, no such authority existed in Europe. Even when some figures came close, as with Napoleon and Hitler, it was unity by conquest than by free will, the choice of immigrants voluntarily choosing and pledging to become ‘Americans’ above all. Immigrants were joining and participating in the Anglo American conquest of the New World that rubbed out the Indians to make way for the Europeans of all stripes under the stewardship of Anglo-Americans. Because European chances at unity, usually short-lived, came by the way of conquest and coercion, they deteriorated sooner than later when the imperial power diminished or was defeated, the fate of Napoleon’s France and Hitler’s Germany.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="391" src="https://historiek.net/wp-content/uploads-phistor1/2009/05/Napoleon-Bonaparte-en-Adolf-Hitler-1024x626.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="69"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Europe was united by certain themes, especially the Greco-Roman, but these were a matter of cultural authority than political-military authority. Whereas immigrants to the US were well aware of the political, economic, and military might of the Anglo-Americans who controlled the levers of power, all that was left of the great Greek and Roman civilizations was their legacy; if anything, modern Greece and Italy were thought of as jokes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There was the shared faith in Christianity, but it was as divisive as unifying, especially due to Europe being divided along Orthodox, Catholic, and Protestant lines. Religious differences even scarred those within the same nation or similar ethnicities. The Catholic-vs-Protestant strife in Northern Ireland is a famous example. Poles and Czechs, part of the Slavic folks, became further estranged from Eastern Slavs due to their Catholicism, a tension that also played out in Yugoslavia with Catholic Croatians duking it out with Orthodox Serbians, and with both of them duking it out with Slavs who’d converted to Islam in Bosnia. (Unification of Germany overcame the Protestant-Catholic difference, but the tragedy of Yugoslavia was the bridge the religious and cultural gaps through a sense of shared blood and history.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the pre-World-War-I years of the 20th Century, the world power arrangement seemed thus: The US, a great power, destined to become a greater power. Russia, an underachiever but still a great power on the move. Great Britain, the premier great power around the world, ruler of one-fourth of the globe. France, the second great European power after Britain. Germany, a rising power overtaking Great Britain in industry. Japan, rising rapidly as a great power in Asia.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="333" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/171/original/7e2ae8a0db1e7613.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="332"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In Europe, the main source of tension was between the two ‘unnatural’ powers, the established one, Great Britain, and the rising one, Germany. The British had come to terms with the French as a worthy competitor — Britain usually got the first pickings while French got the second-round picks. Two could be company, but three seemed a crowd. Besides, whereas Britain regarded semi-industrial France(40% of whose population was rural after WWII) as a perennial second runner in the economic front, it nervously eyed Germany as a power that could overtake the British Empire(a foolish fear as Germany only wanted its ‘rightful’ share of the world). This all came to a head in the events that led to World War I. If not for the British, Germany could have ended the war in a year, defeating both Russia and France. Far fewer lives would have been lost, and Germany would have been the dominant power on the Continent. Defeat was tragic for Germany, but it had a second chance at world power status under Adolf Hitler but, once again, Britain was instrumental in preventing German victory. (Given Hitler’s pathologies, British machinations in World War II were more justified than in World War I; indeed, one wonders if the UK and USSR would have gained much moral advantage in the 20th century if not for Hitler, against whom the British painted themselves as defenders of the free world when, in fact, they were the biggest imperialists in the world; and Soviet totalitarianism was redeemed in the eyes of many by its victory over Nazi imperialism, without which Soviet Union would have been remembered as the most murderous power in the 20th century. Even today, despite all the bad blood between the UK and Russia, their national self-perception revolves around the war with Nazi Germany.) World War II finished Germany as a world power for good. Thereafter, it recovered as the economic powerhouse of Europe but lost all rights of sovereignty, independence, and pride.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="536" src="https://alchetron.com/cdn/japanese-invasion-of-manchuria-c6a95d9a-8025-431c-957b-bdb35ba1a26-resize-750.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="338"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Japan’s problem stemmed from being a rising ‘unnatural’ power at odds with an ‘unnatural’ weakling, which was China. Had Japan and China modernized around the same time, there would likely have been far less tension between the two civilizations. Modernizing China, being bigger and more populous, would have been stronger than modernizing Japan, and the Japanese would have accepted this reality. But as Japan modernized first and faster while China lagged for reasons domestic and foreign, Japan joined the other imperialist powers in targeting China as the Sick Man of Asia(or the Whore of Asia) to carve up. This would have grave consequences for Japan-China relations that linger to the present(and seems to be getting worse as Japan is now part of the Neocon US satellite). China failed to modernize before the West got a foothold and forced concessions, and then, Japan exploited the weakness as well. Japan first grabbed Taiwan, but it was Manchuria that would poison relations and lead China and Japan on a warpath of utter devastation. Just like Jews now use Ukraine against Russia, Japan used Manchuria against China. Japanese ‘benevolence’ claimed to honor and defend Manchurian independence and nationalism against Chinese belligerence when, in fact, the Japanese planned to turn Manchuria into another Korea, a Japanese colony, at best a puppet state. While Manchurians had once been a separate ethnic group, their long rule over all of China dissolved many of the national and cultural barriers between the two worlds. Still, the nationalist movement in China did curse out the Manchu rule and reasserted Han Chinese sovereignty as the forerunner to driving out rest of the imperialists, and the Japanese took advantage of this China-Manchu tension, except that many Manchurians didn’t buy the Japanese line at all, and it was only a matter of time before China would demand Manchuria back, and this all came to the fore when, following the Xian Incident, Chiang Kai-Shek changed his policy of finishing off the communists first before tackling the Japanese threat.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="252"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Incredibly to the Chinese, Chiang made a national front alliance with Mao against Japan. This meant Japan would have to defend Manchuria in a forever war with China, which would only grow stronger in time. Or, Japan could go on the offensive, punish the Chinese, grab a bigger chunk of northern China, and force the Chinese to accept Japanese rule over Manchuria and whatever else they conquered. Japan chose offense than defense, but this led to unforeseen consequences beginning with the US sanctions under FDR, who promised to resume the sale of iron and oil only if Japanese withdrew back to Manchuria. In retrospect, Japan should have taken the deal, but doing so would have been construed as Japanese defeat at the hands of China, the Sick Man of Asia. The world media would have said, “Proud and brave Chinese fend off the Japanese attack; Jappers run back to their base in Manchuria with tails between their legs.” Without US iron and oil, Japan figured the only way to secure resources was to take southeast Asia where the European imperialists had developed various extractive industries, but an open war with white nations could mean a confrontation with White America, then still an awesomely race-ist country. And the rest is history. Japan lost in the most catastrophic manner and gone for good was its global ambitions. Its economy under the US empire grew faster and larger than ever, but politically and militarily, it’s been a whore-geisha to Uncle Sam, now Uncle Shem.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="606" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/126/original/4dd642d95cd33aca.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, after World War II, the two ‘unnatural’ powers Japan and Germany were out. They were allowed to prosper as whores of the US, but they lacked anything like national pride and autonomy. Germany and Japan built and designed things but had no control over their own destinies, let alone those of the world.<br />Then, soon followed the demise of two other ‘unnatural’ powers, Great Britain and France, what with their outmoded justification for world domination, especially when Democracy, Nationalism, Communism, and Post World-War-II Narrative all rebuked old-style imperialism. Democracy was about people freely choosing their representatives and leaders. Nationalism was about national sovereignty for each people. Communism was about spreading the Marxist formula of social justice around the world, and it conflated capitalism with imperialism. And the Post-World-War-II Narrative held that the West was morally superior for having resisted and defeated the world-conquering imperialism of the Evil Nazis and the ‘Japs’, and increasingly, ‘racism’ made the Holocaust the centerpiece of World War II Narrative.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="130"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, it’s no wonder the British, the French, and other European Imperialists found themselves on the moral defensive for their rule over their non-European colonies, especially as their economies were drained by the war & reconstruction and challenged by various nationalist resistance movements that were either tacitly supported by the US or aggressively championed by the Soviet Union. The Soviet Empire was very much an empire but justified as an anti-imperialist imperialism, or an empire in which everyone was a comrade of equal worth and dignity. Unlike British privilege over the darkies, there was no Russian privilege over non-Russians in the empire, i.e. Russia was the main body than the mastermind of the Soviet Empire that came into being under the leadership of men of diverse ethnic backgrounds.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="229"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, in a way, the US vs USSR, aka the Cold War, was more ‘natural’ following the defeat and/or demise of the ‘unnatural’ powers. In due course, Great Britain, France, and of course, Germany and Japan learned to live within their limitations. Their unstable empires over vast numbers of foreigners couldn’t last forever. In contrast, the US and the Soviet Union were empire-sized political orders. However, world affairs were still not in a ‘natural’ state of balance as China and India through most of the 20th century remained hopelessly backward or in a state of perpetual crisis. It was only in the final decades of the 20th century that China and India began to make their move toward achieving something like their true potential. Finally, only under Deng Xiaoping did China have a stable leadership that was open-minded and rational enough to make pragmatic than dogmatic decisions, not least based on the modernization of East Asian nations, especially Singapore. And true economic liberalization came to India only in the 1990s. The globalization of the Western Economy based on seeking the most cost-effective means of production and services not only did wonders for urban Western elites but for manufacturing in China and the tech boom in India; and with their growth, China and India began to diversify their economies from excessive dependence on Western(and especially US) demands.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the last quarter of the 20th century, there was much focus on the G-7 countries, which seemed both right and wrong. Right because those were indeed the top economies in the world but wrong because it ignored so much of the world. When G-7 was born, the world remained divided by the Cold War, and China and India were still economic basket-cases despite their vast populations. In the 21st century, the prestige of the G-7 has been slipping(and may one day seem quaint if current trends continue). Not only have Japan and Western Europe been fading, but Japan(along with the East Asian Pussies) face steep demographic decline, whereas Western Europe and Canada are effectively being erased racially and culturally by Third World newcomers; and what with all the anti-white cult in the media and academia, not least ‘educated’ whites themselves, even elite positions are being opened up to nonwhite usurpers handpicked to be the New Cucks of the Empire of Judea. Incredibly, the ‘conservative’ Tory Party of the UK now takes pride in marginalizing native white British males for top positions while bending over for the globo-homo ‘gay’ dong up the bung. In the future,the G-7 may go the way of the aristocracy.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="626" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/085/original/5271c28b0fff6715.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="317"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the 21st century, we are finally witnessing the emergence of what better resembles a ‘natural’ world order. The US with its vast resources and large population remains the lone superpower. Russia, with its considerable population, vast resources, and some degree of aptitude, has re-emerged from the post-communist crisis-period as a power to acknowledge. China has rapidly grown into an industrial powerhouse and is expanding its military power. India, once written off as a joke, still faces epic challenges, some of them seemingly insurmountable, but it too is taking shape as a genuine power, at the very least as a country that can’t be pushed around. (Of course, it seems the Hindus are playing a clever game. On the one hand, work with Jews, who control the West, to gain greater access to and leverage over globalist institutions while, at the same time, operating from the perspective of national sovereignty to make India more or less immune to globalist pressures, e.g. refusing to go along with Jewish-decreed Western Sanctions against Russia.) If current trends continue, the future will belong to the ‘natural’ powers, big in size, population, and talent, whereas the former ‘unnatural’ powers shall never reclaim their great power status. No chance of France taking back entire swaths of Africa and Asia. The idea of the UK re-colonizing India or taking back Hong Kong is now a joke. If anything, it seems globalist Indians are colonizing Britain, which is depressing, but at this point, who the hell cares as the Anglos have degenerated into the most pathetic bootlicking and brownnosing cuck-maggot-collaborators of the Jews. Even Anglo cultural influence has been degraded over the years. Britain once gave the world the Beatles and James Bond. Now, it’s Harry Potter and the cult of Princess Diana. (In the past, British actors took pride in playing British characters but now mainly seek relevance by playing Americans.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="71"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, size and population alone don’t guarantee great power status. A Brazil filled with Germans would be a superpower overnight, but it has too many corrupt Latins and too many blacks. Indonesia has a large population and vast resources in its many islands, but the native population is pretty lackluster and are unlikely to amount to much. Indeed, what would the Southeast Asian economy be without the overseas Chinese?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="426" src="https://imgs.search.brave.com/q2KCwVUPQkbC7lNPi3FBLuOX4zipl4BJ2GPpMTdKaeo/rs:fit:1200:799:1/g:ce/aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cu/dGhlc3Rhci5jb20v/Y29udGVudC9kYW0v/dGhlc3Rhci9uZXdz/L3dvcmxkLzIwMTEv/MDcvMTcvd2h5X2lu/ZGlhX2NhbnRfZmVl/ZF9oZXJfcGVvcGxl/L2luZGlhZm9vZGdh/cmJhZ2UuanBlZw" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="92"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Among all the contenders of future greatness, India is the most interesting case as it has some of the biggest extremes in exceptional talent and mind-boggling ineptitude. A high-tech giant where half the population still shit outdoors. On the other hand, Hindus are, along with Jews, the ONLY people in the world with a spirit and culture powerful enough to withstand the pressures of globalism. For example, whereas Chinese outside China soon lose their sense of Chinese-ness, Hindus outside India still know what they are. Class is more easily deracinating than caste.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="204"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Can the emergence of a ‘natural’ world order proceed peacefully? Currently, the US is the lone superpower. China is a great power, along with Russia. India is making heady progress in various areas and asserting its own course of action(to the ire of the US and UK). The lesser but important powers like Iran are also gaining in prominence and despite the crippling sanctions by the West. At this point, it seems most of the world, especially in the ‘Global South’, is ready and willing to accept the rise of a new world order(not to be confused with NWO of Bush and the Neocons) where nations with the potential to be powerful are indeed becoming just that. And in the rise of the ‘natural’ giants, the chance of any ‘unnatural’ power to gain world dominance is unlikely. (Of course, Jewish Power is the most ‘unnatural’ as Jews don’t even have a sizable nation of their own. Israel is very small. Yet, in an odd way, Jewish Power is also the most ‘natural’ as power is centered in elite institutions, and Jews have silently seized and captured those key areas in the West. After all, invisible germs can take over entire organisms.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/334/964/original/0993b64968e9a3d6.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="596" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="193"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This poses a problem for the US as the lone superpower. In the 1980s, there was much talk of Japan’s emergence as the economic behemoth(destined to overtake even the US). Despite its political subservience to the US empire, Japan was still regarded as an economic superpower. However, the US always knew that, when push comes to shove, it could pull the plug on Japan, a nation so utterly dependent on the US control of the world in terms of trade routes, markets, resources, and ‘protection’(actually an extortion racket). In contrast, the Collective West is realizing with the Ukraine Crisis that the rug cannot be so easily pulled from under Russia that can feed itself and has bountiful resources. Furthermore, the sanctions are compelling Russia to develop its own domestic industries in key areas or lean to the ‘Global South’ and China for supplies. So, even as Germany and Japan were deemed economic powerhouses with their rapid recoveries from the rubble of World War II, they could always be undone overnight by the US, just like the Jews could turn Kanye West from a multi-billionaire to a mere millionaire almost overnight.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="46"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But as Russia, China, and India rise(and furthermore increase trade and act on mutual interests in the vast territories of Eurasia), the US is far more limited in what it can do. The US can’t do to them what Jews did to Kanye West.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="216"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whatever tensions exist between China and India, it’s over slivers of territory than world domination. Also, both nations have come to appreciate the benefits of close ties to Russia that has too few people for too many resources. Furthermore, neither Russia, China, nor India wants to dictate to one another about ‘values’, unlike the US that prides itself as the ‘exceptional nation’ with some divine right to preach to the rest, which is kind of weird given that ‘wokeness’ obsesses so much on the ‘great evils’ of the American Past/Present and Western History; but then, white moral arrogance paradoxically stems from white self-flagellation, i.e. “We whites are in a position to preach to the rest of you because we’ve been redeemed at least in part by prostrating before the holy trinity of Jews, Negroes, and Homos, the most sacred peoples that ever lived”, or “Because I repent for my white guilt about Emmett Till, I have the moral justification to hate China”, or “Because I take the knee to George Floyd and wash stinky Negro feet, I’m justified in painting bombs with BLM and drop them on hapless Arabs”, or “Because I’m so sorry for the ‘homophobic’ sins of the West, I’ve earned the moral credit to nuke Moscow.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the end, war or peace will be up to the US. Is the US willing to accommodate the rising great powers and live with them in peace and mutual respect? Or will the US insist on remaining the lone superpower on both the military and ‘moral’ level(as plenty of Americans think they are ‘more evolved’ because they associate homo fecal-penetration with the ‘rainbow’). Of course, it’s all the more problematic because the US is ruled by Zionic Jews who are by nature supremacist.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Interestingly enough, the fact that Anglo-Americans and Christian Whites submitted to Jewish Power suggests that they aren’t so obessively supremacist. If indeed white Christians were pathologically committed to supremacism, why would they have allowed Jews to gain power over them? It seems many white Christians, including the elites, were perfectly willing to share power with Jews after World War II. However, they miscalculated because Jews were never content with mere power-sharing on an equal basis. Jews lusted after total domination, control, and supremacy. Incredibly, white Christians caved to Jewish demands. And in the current UK, it seems white Britons are even willing to bow down to Hindus and the like. Thus, based on the evidence of white attitudes, it seems a white Christian-ruled America could make peace with a new world order of ‘natural’ great powers, i.e. the US could learn to live in peace and on friendly terms with Russia, China, India, and even Iran(in a ‘let bygones be bygones’ sort of way).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/334/930/original/854819e0d2238045.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="554" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The reason why the current US cannot accept such an outcome is because of the Jewish Factor and mainly for two reasons. Not only is Jewishness innately the most supremacist consciousness in the world but Jewish Power, the greatest power that ever was, is actually built on sand. It is not based on and rooted firmly in the soil. Rich or poor, strong or weak, China is about Chinese people on Chinese land as their base. Russia is about Russian people owning Russian lands. Indeed, the history of Bolshevism shows that the national majority can reassert its authority in time. In the 1990s, Jews ran much of Russia(mostly into the ground), but they were too few, and when a man like Vladimir Putin emerged, he was supported by the vast majority of Russians. India is something of an ethnic and cultural mess, but an indisputable sense of Indian nationality has developed and taken root. Besides, over 90% of Indians are Hindu, and Hinduism isn’t just a religion but an ethnic identity.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="137"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the Jews who rule the world(via the US as lone superpower) may have more wealth and power than Russia, China, and India combined, BUT they are ‘alien’ elite overlords over vast numbers of goyim. Only in Israel are Jews the solid majority, but Israel is a tiny speck on the map, and its survival and power depends on the favoritism and protection of the West that is now under Jewish control. Thus, Jewish Power isn’t based on something that they can take for granted. Chinese leaders, whoever they may be, can at least rest assured that they are Chinese ruling over vast numbers of Chinese. For all the unrest and turmoil that may grip China, there’s the sense that the Chinese people will only accept other Chinese as legitimate rulers over them.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/060/original/f4874320efec3a69.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="488" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, for how long can Jews rely on goy support in the West? What if the goyim go ‘Kanye West’ and begin to ask questions and challenge Jewish Power? It’s no wonder Jews work so hard to invalidate, discredit, shame, and impugn the very notion of whiteness. That way, whites will be too guilt-ridden, ashamed, and self-loathing to unite and work for white interests. Also, whites will look to the sacrosanct forever-holocaust Jews(and blacks and homos) for moral guidance and do as told. With whites under their command, Jews can maintain their position as the rulers of the US as the lone superpower and direct the West’s forces against perceived foes and rivals, like Russia, Iran, and increasingly China, which has infuriated Jews for its ties with Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, one wonders if Jews are creating for themselves a two-front war. Sure, all the white-bashing may lead to more white apologetics, cuckery, and submission, but there is also the chance that whites may say, “this is just about enough” and turn against the Jews, in which case Jews(and homos and cuck whites) will have to face Russia, China, and Iran on one side while facing White Rage politics on the other. If you beat a horse hard enough, there’s the chance that it may kick you, smashing your skull to pieces.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The transition of the world to a system molded by several great ‘natural’ powers can be peaceful as the examples of China, Russia, and India have shown. None of them seeks world domination nor has the messianic impulse. China and Russia were in messianic mode only under communism, but that ship has long passed. India knows that its defining culture, Hinduism, isn’t for export. What all three great countries have in common is seeking mutual interest by trade.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the US seems hell-bent on dominating, reshaping, and leading the world. This impulse seems to stem from various sources. There is the legacy of Anglo Imperialism, which passed from Britain to the US, even though the latter masked its dream of empire in ‘progressive’ piety of ‘liberty’ and ‘democracy’. There is the Protestant missionary impulse, the idea that the US is a City on a Hill, an exceptional nation, a beacon of light for all the world. There is the hyper-capitalist drive, one not merely of commodities and goods but popular culture as the new religion: Coca Cola as the new holy water, Hollywood as the new vatican, and Rock/Rap as the new gospel.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/334/883/original/e6e4b5b898b52ce5.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="529" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given the conceit of America’s founding as a bold new experiment, there’s less in history and deep culture that Americans can boast of; rather, American pride comes from the obsession with Something New as the leader in fads and fashions. There is also the sports culture, especially because of blacks. Blacks, being the best athletes, made the US the powerhouse in global sports. American blacks outran, out-jumped, and out-fought the other peoples around the world, and blacks are naturally into showboating and blinging their championships. A kind of Black-American athletic imperialism has been approved by the world community, not least because black champions aren’t necessarily seen as expressions of black arrogance and supremacism but as the triumph of the underdog after a couple of centuries of picking cotton and being called ‘nigger’. (In truth, blacks were never underdogs in speed and strength, and Jack Johnson and Muhammad Ali’s destructions of white boxers were really the natural results of black over-dog-ism in athletic prowess.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, blacks have the support of Jews who intend to use the black song-dong-strong formula as instruments of world control. Jews want every non-black nation to take in blacks, have blacks take over the national sports and be idolized as the ‘national’ heroes(as has happened all across Europe and in Japan as well), thereby subverting the representative native face of the nation. Consider the French soccer team that is nearly all black. To the extent that athletes are, rightly or wrongly, seen as ‘national heroes’, such a shift has had a profound impact on French self-image and national identity.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="590" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/335/230/original/3c28ebc1b413912c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />And there are also the homos, even a closer ally of the Jews. Indeed, the Jewish use of Globo-Homo gives the game away as to their real designs. Jews well know that the Globo-Homo agenda is designed to undermine and degrade any politics of sovereignty among the nations of the world. This is where Jews are most different from Russians, Chinese, Indians, Iranians, and etc. Russians don’t mind other nations being ruled by their own representatives of the majorities with their unique national interests. So, despite all the tensions between Russia and Turkey, not least because Erdogan is such a skunk, Russia has no problem with Turkey being about Turkish pride, history, culture, and interests. And whatever bad feelings some Turks may have about Russians, at the very minimum they understand Russia is Russia and has its own unique interests and concerns. And this consideration applies to China, India, Iran, and etc. Iran isn’t trying to turn China into a Shia Muslim country, and Chinese couldn’t care less if Iranians never read a book on Confucius or Mao. It’s all a matter of national sovereignty.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="526" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/385/384/original/1ed1161739f08f6d.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />But such an outlook and approach don’t sit well with Jews. Why are Jews so allergic to any notion of goy national sovereignty? They pretty much destroyed it in the Collective West and are working to undermine it in Latin America, Japan, and the East Asian Pussies(aka Asian Tigers but they’re more like pussy cats). It’s because acknowledging such sovereignty in non-Western countries implies that it should also apply to countries that Jewish minority elites rule over. If Chinese sovereignty is about the Chinese being ruled by fellow Chinese, the kind of leaders that the great majority of the population identify with(and the same logic applies to Russia, Iran, Turkey, Arab nations, and etc.), then why should the nations of the West be any different? Why shouldn’t all Western nations be like Hungary where the overwhelming Hungarian majority have voted in elections for pro-Hungarian leaders who represent Hungarian nationhood, history, heritage, and territoriality? If Russian leaders represent the solid majority of Russia, if Turkish leaders represent the solid majority of Turkey, if Chinese leaders represent the solid majority of China, and if Iranian leaders represent the Iranian population, it would seem such is the norm around the world, a matter of national rights or sovereignty.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But if such a principle were validated in the West(as in Hungary, one of the few exceptions to the current ‘Western’ rule), what would it portend for Jewish Supremacist Power? What would happen to the George-Soroses of the World whose tentacles have reached into every crevice of Western law, finance, media, and deep state? It could very well mean the end of Jewish Supremacism.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="588" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/334/660/original/4399903df00f96a6.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And that is precisely why Jews employ Globo-Homo as the joker up their sleeve. Jews cultivate, fund, and promote homos in every country and also indoctrinate the non-Western elites and their children as to the magical wonders of globo-homo, which is associated with Western power, privilege, connections, wealth, celebrity, creativity, and etc. In other words, to be allowed INTO the globalist glitz club, one has to fully take ‘communion’ with Gay Rites.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="176"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, what happens when the elites of a country imitate the West in showering praise and protection for homos(and trannies) as a special people and, furthermore, when those very homos are fawned upon by Jews who rule the West and also monopolize ‘spiritual’ authority? It means the country is no longer ruled by true patriots who represent the needs, values, and the will of the national majority. It means the elites, ever so status-conscious and beholden to Western Standards, will always favor the vanity-politics of homos who, feeling alienated from the majority ‘homophobic’ population while being so grateful to World Jewry that made them the new darlings and princelings of the world, will do the bidding of Jews whose ultimate agenda is to subvert and weaken every goy nation for Jewish takeover. It’s like an octopus injects enzymes into crabs to soften the meat inside, which turns to goo, which is then sucked up by the octopus, rather like what the Jewish-like space aliens do to earthlings in the sci-fi film UNDER THE SKIN.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/J7bAZCOk0Sc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Under The Skin | Official Trailer HD | A24" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Because Jews rule the West and push globo-homo to secure world control, the 21st century may not witness a peaceful transition to the new order of great ‘natural’ powers. Without Jews, the West may accept the new ‘natural’ order. After all, Europeans gave up their empires and made peace with the new reality after World War II. And if not for Jewish-led US pressures, it’s likely Germany and Russia would have already sealed the deal on Russian gas for German goods. Even globalists like Angela Merkel were looking to work with Putin’s Russia even after the 2014 fiasco in Ukraine, but the US threw one monkey wrench after another into Russian-German relations. But why? Because of the legacy of Anglo imperialism? In part, perhaps, but the real reason is Jewish Power that is waging war on all sovereignties… except of course in Israel. Today, most Western ‘leaders’ are puppets of Jews much like Warsaw Pact leaders were puppets of the Soviet Union during the Cold War.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/334/720/original/a10b123570a953a8.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="588" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One of the biggest contradictions in the world is the quality/quantity deficit neurosis among Jews. Jews believe themselves to be the Chosen or the Superior, yet the only majority Jewish country is Israel, a tiny piece of the world. Perhaps, Jews would be less neurotic about world control if they had a country of their own the size of Brazil or India. They might feel that they, as a great people, have a great chunk of territory to call their own. But as things stand, Jews who regard themselves as the best of the best have only a sliver of land as the Jewish State.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As a Euro-Semitic people, Jews could easily identify with the ‘Aryans’ of the West or the ‘Semites’ of the Near East(the Arabs and the like), but Jews opted to set themselves apart from both. This led to a powerful identity and a strong sense of tribalism and cohesiveness, but it also meant an exclusionary outlook on the world, i.e. most of goyim were not good enough to be Jewish, and the ones with superior qualities in looks or intelligence were married into the Jewish tribe and their children were raised as Jews. Thus, Jews were bound to be numerically disadvantaged and persist as minorities in goy majority lands.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="81"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">By superior wit and cunning(along with sheer chutzpah, which made for steely will combined with strategic flexibility), Jews could gain influence and even domination over goyim, but the countries were still defined by majority goyim, which means Jews were, at best, ‘guests’. Jews may have run circles around ‘Dumb Polacks’ in Poland, but Poland still belonged to the Poles. Jews have gained tremendous leverage over Ukraine(as a Jewish Gangster Paradise), but it’s still known as Ukraine, not Jewkraine.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="493" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/334/776/original/7b3fd19b6339100a.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />The very exclusive nature of Judaism limited the number of Jews. Jews could be European or Semitic, but goy Europeans and goy Semites(such as Palestinians) could not be Jewish. If Jews accepted their numerical limitations and its implications, things would have been fine. But even as Jews exclude the world in Jewish identity and community, they demand that the world open up to and be owned by Jews. It’s like someone who never invites you to dinner but always demanding to be invited to your dinners. It’s like someone who would never let you do his wife but always demands that he do your wife.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Since Jews cannot overtly lay claim to goy countries, they’ve devised other means to gain control. A lot of it has to do with financial manipulation. Jews may not officially own the country(in the way that Israel is said to be a Jewish State), but they can become the financial masters and control much of the economy, pulling the strings directly or indirectly, as the financial sector makes the rules of where the money goes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, it was through finance that Jews came to control much of the world, and Jews thought their power was ironclad until they recently bumped against Russia and other countries with their control of commodities. The other ways of Jewish control has been ‘spiritual’ and idolatrous. Via the Holocaust Cult, Jews have pretty much converted Western ‘souls’(as holes) to Jew Worship. And through the idolatry of BLM and Globo-Homo, countless goyim around the world have been converted to believing that their worth is to be measured by how cucked they are to Negroes and Homos.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="199"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, there’s nothing like the security of land. Land is real. It is tangible, the ground under your feet, the soil from which food grows, where oil is found, where minerals are mined, where your ancestors are buried. In contrast, no matter how much financial and ‘spiritual’ power Jews may gain over others, Jewish Power is utterly dependent on the complex networks and systems of control. Even when the political system broke down in Russia, Russia was the reality on which Russians lived. Rich or poor, Russians owned Russia as their homeland. In contrast, financial power can vanish overnight if the system breaks down. It’s based on legality and contracts, or connections and controls. When Jews lost oligarchic power over Russia, the country reverted to Mother Russia from Whore Russia. As for ‘spirituality’, it too can vanish into the thin air when the narratives change and paradigms shift. Gods, demons, and angels are all in the mind, and it’s very possible that the world will wake up and reject Globo-Homo as a sick and disgusting Jewish Power Play. Then, in an instant, Jewish Power over so much of the world just goes ‘poof’ in the air.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="488" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/120/334/812/original/c6f28b7d33a46967.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-39848524167471975262022-12-07T18:11:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:05.458-08:00How the Japan-Poland Thought-Project Demonstrates Race Is More Essential Than Culture<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="562" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/452/776/original/a717a6bd9fbf1e73.png" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="10"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Race or Culture, what is more important to a people?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="82"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Many will answer ‘culture’ because race is about biology. Unlike animals that are entirely defined by biology, mankind is more than his biological content. A boy raised by wolves or apes in the wild without connection to human culture may appear even lower than an animal. He seems incomplete, whereas animals are complete in their biological composition. A wolf possesses wholeness as a predatory pack mammal. A chimpanzee is complete as a wild ape making funny sounds and humping anything that moves.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oXy4LlRzF7o?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="1970 The Wild Child Official Trailer 1 Les Artistes Associés" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, man is incomplete with biology alone, as the film THE WILD CHILD(by Francois Truffaut) well illustrates. Hugh Hudson’s arty version of GREYSTOKE: THE LEGEND OF TARZAN also shows the deficiencies of the man of savagery without culture, albeit with the Romanticist twist that man of nature is, in some ways, truer than the man of civilization with his inhibitions, deceptions, and hypocrisies. (If Tarzan begins as a white boy raised in the jungle by apes in the proximity of savage black tribes, it seems modern Britain is committed to importing Jungle to Civilization in the hope that sunshiny fat-lipped black soul will kiss and thaw & liberate the frigid English sensibility.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vhidWw1yWR8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Greystoke The Legend Of Tarzan, Lord Of The Apes Trailer 1984" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="67"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Culture is so important to mankind that even savages aren’t really savage in the cartoonish sense(though certain Negro behavior patterns indicate otherwise, ironically in the civilized setting, but then the modern cult of individual freedom has unmoored entire peoples not only from old repressions but simple obligations, a condition that has affected the black community especially negatively as blacks are more prone to act ‘crazy’).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even among savage tribes in the Amazonian forests, Eskimos in the far north, American Indians hunting bison, and Congo jungle-dwellers, there was a complex culture of language, signs, symbols, stories, craft & expressions, and moral values(that, at the very least, applied to the members of the tribe). Savage folks don’t act like Caveman stereotypes in Hollywood movies where they grunt instead of talk and just shove live animals in their mouths. Even the Neanderthals had customs and rituals.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, mankind, as we know it, simply isn’t conceivable without culture. Of course, culture has purpose only as an outgrowth of or an application onto life. While mankind, brutish and stupid, can exist without culture(albeit in an ugly way), culture cannot exist without mankind, the diversity of which has been manifested through the various races, or variant rivers of genetic flow.<br />Culture is always an addition to life, not life itself, though it has a profound impact on life and its future.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Also, culture is shaped by the nature of the organism. Different dog breeds can be taught the same lessons, but they learn and respond differently. Different races of mankind can be instructed with the same lessons, values, meanings, and modes, but they will process them differently in accordance to their racial natures. Teach Christianity to blacks, and it turns into a disco for Jesus. Democracy takes on different forms and characteristics among the various races, even ethnicities(though ethnic identity is largely molded by culture).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/452/765/original/d87c4efce0b2385f.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="501" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="186"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Naturally, a race with more stable emotions and higher intelligence tends to make more of democracy(or any other form of political organization) than the races with lower intelligence, especially if given to impulsiveness. Surveying the history of popular music, what blacks did with white music and what whites did with black music goes to show that, despite the cultural origin of the music, the racial processes alter the very character of the expression. A white person may act black but, instead of really becoming black, produces a synthesis of white nature and black style. And when blacks imitated white music, they couldn’t help jiggiting it up a little in tune with their own nature. This may account for white sensory fascination with blackness because blacks tend to add salt-and-pepper to white expression. And even though most blacks are loathe to admit any kind of indebtedness due to their Afrocentric megalomania and/or insecure touchiness(which are two sides of the same coin), the more honest among them do appreciate and admire the greater sophistication, complexity, and refinement that whites often added to black culture.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, instead of arguing race vs culture, the relevant question here is about Race and Which Culture. To put it simply, is it better to survive racially with the culture of another people than to vanish racially while the culture is preserved by another people. For example, would it be better for the Russian people to become Muslims speaking Arabic(while abandoning or forgetting about their Russian culture) OR for Russian culture, history, and language to be preserved by non-Russians(while real Russians fade into oblivion).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="522" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/452/813/original/1606bdab30b75278.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The question clarifies what is more important, race or culture. Now, we accept as given that mankind simply isn’t complete without culture, i.e. there is a need for culture, any culture, even not one’s own, in order for mankind to function as Man(contra the animal). So, even if a Russian knows nothing of Russian culture, history, and language, he can still function as a thinking, feeling, and imaginative being if imbued with some culture, any culture.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, there are countless examples of such phenomena in the US. Many, or even most, Americans know little or nothing of their cultural origins. Most Italian-Americans can’t speak Italian, have never been to the Old Country, and know little of Italian history and the arts. I’ve known Greek-Americans who know less about Greece, modern and ancient, than I do, and I’m no expert on the subject. So, to be functional as a rational and sociable person, a knowledge of one’s original culture isn’t necessary. When Europeans abandoned their indigenous pagan cultures in favor of Christianity that originated among the Semites, they still remained functional on most levels and even gained in certain areas of morality and spirituality. Over time, plenty of Slavs became citizens of non-Slavic lands and made perfectly fine Germans, Frenchmen, and even Englishmen.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, it is agreed that there is a need for some culture, any culture, in order for man to be complete as a Man. The white boy abducted by some Amazonian forest tribe in John Boorman’s THE EMERALD FOREST(a kind of a twist on John Ford’s THE SEARCHERS) was also raised in a culture which provided him with meaning, purpose, and sense of place. Even at the primitive level, he was raised in a culture and cosmology.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FR4riTsF21o?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Emerald Forest Official Trailer #1 - Powers Boothe Movie (1985) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The crucial question is what is more important, racial preservation or cultural longevity? Upon consideration, the preservation of the race seems of the utmost importance. For starters, whereas culture is something we made in a matter of decades or centuries — most ideas and expressions that have lasted for thousands of years were created within a rather short time frame — , we ourselves were made by the massive forces of nature — geography, geology, climate, fauna, flora — through the eons. In this sense, the difference between race and culture is the difference between a mountain and a man-made mound. While we can seek to understand the origins and meanings of culture, we still can’t wrap our minds around the processes that led to the evolution of mankind and the emergence of the various races through tens of thousands of years across the vastness of the Earth. Culture is what we create, but we are what nature created, and the latter is deeper in mystery and sheer awesomeness.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="190"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whereas the oldest civilization is 6,000 yrs old, human races are at least 200,000 yrs old. European History is traced back to the Greeks around 2,500 yrs ago, but the European races have been around for at least 40,000 years. Of course, even prior to the rise of civilizations, the various primitive tribes had cultures(like the few remaining primitive folk do today), but the racial-biological development of man preceded culture. It is the egotism of the human intellect that tends to put ideology before biology, even at the expense of failing to secure the bio-ethnic survival and preservation of a people. So accustomed to prioritizing BELIEVING over BEING and to modern comforts & conveniences, it’s as if our survival and well-being are guaranteed by a set of values and systems of production; such an outlook totally overlooks the fact that NOTHING matters if a people failed to secure their own survival through reproduction and racial consciousness. So-called ‘reproductive rights’ are not about reproduction per se but about the right to end reproduction in favor of ideology and individual impulse, the promotion of which led to the unwanted pregnancy in the first place.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With so much emphasis on creativity(a cultural matter), there’s hardly any discussion of the importance of procreativity(except as a matter of self-fulfillment, i.e. “career isn’t enough to satisfy me, so I need some kids too”). It has degenerated into Extinction Rights and has nothing to do with real reproduction rights. There’s a lack of understanding of Our History, the very map of ethno-story, i.e. that illustrates the connective links from point A to B to C to D to etc. Without a map, one has no sense of place and direction.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="62"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A sense of Our History maps the existence, past-present-future, of a people, and one of the key reasons for Jewish Power is a profound sense of Our History. Jewish Consciousness, religious and secular, have a sense of where the Jews began, how they became what they are, what journeys they underwent, where they met the greatest dangers and found the greatest treasures.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/452/806/original/7b9319386fa13cc6.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="529" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pathetically, whites allowed their sense of Our History to slip into the control of Jews who interpreted White History as an Evil Narrative; besides, White History is just a myth because ‘whiteness’ is really a modern ‘racist’ idea, and therefore European-ness may be claimed by ANY race. Of course, Jews control the entertainment complex that now fill up any movie or TV show about past European History with Negroes in key roles. According to Jewish media, Russians are not European but recently arrived black Africans most definitely are, indeed so much so that they must be put upon the pedestal as idols and icons above white Europeans, the meaning of whose existence according to globalism is to serve Jews, homos, and Negroes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="138"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Because whites no longer own their own Map of Time, they have no deeper or broader sense of self. They only care about the self or individuality. And if they do feel a need for something bigger than themselves, it’s about the historical sanctity of Jews and Negroes mostly, with homos thrown in for good measure. It goes to show that your people must learn to map their own history because, if left up to others, the map will be manipulated to highlight directions and destinies at odds with those of your people. It’s like the notion of the New World is Eurocentric, as if the natives of the Americas lacked a past and culture of their own before the arrival of the Conquistadors, whose explorations made the Americas known to the rest of the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, let’s consider why Poland and Japan(or any such ethnically distinct nation) may be useful as a model as to why race matters more than culture. Of course, ideally both the ethnos and the culture of the people should remain intact and survive. Poland should be the land of ethnic Poles with their Polish culture, language, and history, just like Japan should be the land of ethnic Japanese with their Japanese culture, language, and history.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, let’s do a simple mind experiment whereby Poland can exist as a white nation with a non-Polish culture or a non-white nation with a Polish culture. Imagine a Twilight Zone scenario where the people of Poland remain ethno-racially what they are but take on a different culture. Suppose they all turn Muslim and speak Arabic or turn Hindu and speak Hindi and worship cows. Racially, these hypothetical Polacks are just like real Poles by blood, but they no longer remember Polish history, belong to the Catholic Church, speak the Polish language, have a stupid hatred for Russians, and defer to the book of Dumb Polack jokes(written mostly by Jews) as a cultural manual on thought and behavior. They remain ethno-Poles but minus the Polish culture.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/j0-aQHrA7-U?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Polish jokes - Jackie Mason" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the other Twilight Zone scenario, Polish language, culture, and history remain, but the Poles have been wholly replaced by ethno-Nigerians. Or ethno-Mongols. Or ethno-Hindus or whatever. For some reason, these people regard themselves as Polish and speak Polish and eat kielbasa, sauerkraut, and pierogis and listen to polka music and third-rate imitation jazz. Poland remains culturally but is racially gone, vanished, or replaced. For the extreme culture-centrists, Poland still remains because Polish culture is still ‘alive’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="241"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, both scenarios are visions of hell for the Poles, but which is worse? Loss of Polish culture or loss of Polish ethno-race? If Poles had to choose between Poland turning into a land of ethno-Poles without Polish culture or a land of non-Poles with Polish culture, which one would they choose? Surely, Polucks(or Polish Cucks) will opt for a Poland with Polish culture but no Polish ethnos, but I’ll bet the majority of Poles would rather choose a Poland with ethno-Poles but no Polish culture. It’s Race before Culture because race is deeper and more real than any culture. Nature(or God for the religiously inclined) created man, whereas man created culture, and nature’s work over eons far outweighs whatever mankind has created in his midst. (Of course, the brown-nosing Polucks care neither for Polish ethnos nor for Polish culture, much like the current Anglucks or Anglo-Cucks have relinquished the right of both race and culture. Polucks and Anglucks don’t care if their lands are remade by other peoples and other cultures. Anglucks are resigned to entire British cities being taken over by immi-vaders who not only racially replace whites but don’t even care to preserve Anglo-British culture, and there are plenty of Polucks who don’t care if Poland is replaced both ethno-racially and histo-culturally. All they care about is being smiled upon by globalist elites whom they regard as their superiors.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="133"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What would be closer to your true self? Suppose you are to be exterminated and you’re offered two choices of continuance after your death. One way is to make a genetic clone of you but without the memory of what YOU were and valued. The other is to embed all your beliefs & memory in the head of another person whose DNA is entirely different from yours. Suppose Baptism matters a lot to you, but your clone is raised to be a Mormon. In contrast, the other person is indoctrinated with your exact take on Baptism. Who is more a continuation of what YOU are? What would be more of a continuation of Tom Cruise? A clone who isn’t into Scientology or a Seth Rogan whose mind is programmed with Cruise-isms?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="530" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/452/798/original/778fe298ff809ccf.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="219"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, consider Japan. Which would be more like the real Japan? The continuance of the race but the loss of the culture or the continuance of the culture but loss of the race? In a way, modernization has already answered that question at least halfway. Westernization/Modernization has drastically remade Japan, East Asia, and indeed all of the non-Western World. In terms of ideas, values, methodology, habits, and practices, today’s Japanese have more in common with modern Western folks than with bygone Japanese folks prior to the coming of Commodore Perry’s Black Ships.<br />Indeed, much of Japanese culture has either been erased or simply forgotten, barely existing as museum exhibits or empty festival rituals. Of course, there are many continuities in language, sense of history, and etc. Still, much of the original culture has been lost, probably forever. Still, Japan remains Japan because the people are ethno-Japanese. In the modernization period, there was even some talk of replacing the Japanese language with a European one, and had such been realized, Japan would still have remained Japan because of the ethno-racial factor. After all, Hindu elites in India are well-versed in English(and some of them even speak it better than Hindi and other Indian languages), but they are still Indian above all due to the blood factor.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Saving culture instead of race is doomed to fail even in its stated goal. In time, the people will come to feel that the culture they’re preserving and practicing isn’t really theirs. Imagine you’re a Nigerian as the New Pole but you look at Polish historical paintings, and the images are of another people. I suppose the Nigerian as New Pole can blacken all the faces in the paintings and pretend Poles were always black, but that’s just a big lie and degrades the culture — it’d be like pretending that black slaves in the American South were white or Hindu OR that Jews in ghettos were a bunch of Hawaiians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, certain cultural ideas and practices can be universalized, but much of the meaning of a culture is closely associated with a particular people, like Shintoism and Japanese customs. Furthermore, even something as universalist as Christianity takes on particularist significance and meaning for different peoples of the Faith. What Catholicism means for Poles is different from what it means to the Spanish or the mestizos of South America. Many Poles regard Catholic Church as the stalwart defender of the nation and culture against foreign oppression. In contrast, many Spanish came to regard the Catholic Church as a tool of Franco’s tyranny. Christianity meant different things to Southern Segregationists and the black(and white) followers of MLK, the nasty lout with the big shout.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, if Nigerians were to become the New Poles in the cultural domain, the shtick couldn’t last for long. In time, the Nigerians would come to reject the culture as not really their own; or they will change it drastically to render it more palatable to black sensibility, resulting in something that bears little resemblance to the original thing. They will surely make use of the culture but as something to exploit than to protect. It’s the difference between butchering an animal for food and taking care of it as a valued specimen.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, the problems are obvious with blacks in the US(and EU as well). For centuries, whites tried to acculturate blacks to Western standards. Blacks were forbidden to beat on drums and dance like savages. They were given Western names and had to answer to ‘Toby’ than ‘Kunta Kinte’. They were brought to the Christian Faith. But over time with greater freedom and choice, blacks began to feel, “Dis be some honky-ass shit.” Sure, blacks take advantage of white ideas and values — ‘slavery is an absolute evil’ is a Western moral development — , but they don’t embrace them as their own culture.<br />Besides, even when a people dutifully try to preserve or recreate the culture of another, the result is far from the real thing. Initially, the Germanic Barbarians sacked Rome but, in time, shouldered the burden of imperial legacy. But it was never the same thing. There really never was a Third Rome despite the ambitions of Charlemagne, the Russian Tsars, and Adolf Hitler.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="529" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/452/794/original/e3df9881bb67da8c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="616" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And for sure, the attempt to Anglo-Americanize or Europeanize the Jews failed miserably. Jews make poor standard-bearers of Americanism because, for all their Zeligish exploitation of American freedoms and opportunities, their main loyalty is to Zion and the Tribe. Thus, when push comes to shove, if having to choose between the Tribe and what’s-good-for-America, Jews will choose the Tribe. Jews may argue that their globalism is in allegiance to a higher calling, namely choosing what is good for the whole world than what is only good for America(or ‘America First’), but Jewish ‘internationalism’ is really about the interests of World Jewry. Just ask the Palestinians and countless Arabs/Muslims destroyed by Zion. Just ask the Eastern Ukro-Russians in the Donbass.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="186"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even if the culture is lost, the survival of the race offers the possibility of cultural recovery or renaissance. In some cases, the culture can be recovered and reunited with the race. Modern/Western Archaeology has had a most profound impact on how peoples around the world regard their own sense of selfhood, history, and heritage. Consider the rediscovery of much of Ancient Egyptian culture that had been forgotten or lost under Muslim rule. Their once forgotten past is now an integral part of Egyptian-ness. Cambodians lost the Angkor Wat to the jungles, but French archaeology rediscovered it, and today’s Cambodians cannot conceive of their heritage and history without it. Christian ‘cultural genocide’ nearly wiped out all vestiges of indigenous paganism of Northern Europe, but some of it survived(mostly in distant Iceland) and later came to serve as inspiration and source of deeper identity to the German Romantics and nationalists. At one time, Hebrew was essentially a museum language, ignored by most Jews. But as long as the Jewish ethnos survived, Hebrew could be revived as the official language of Israel, the Jewish nation-state.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="303"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, even if the entire culture of a certain race or ethnos is irretrievable, lost and gone forever, the racial nature can nevertheless produce future expressions in ‘mythic’ tune with the lost culture. Consider the American blacks who were cut off from Sub-Saharan Africa and only knew the cotton-picking fields of the South. They knew nothing of African folklore, dances, and music. They didn’t know their ancestors were named ‘Wagabunga’ and had names like ‘George Smith’. Their idea of music was imitating white folks’ songs and dance. Despite all that, their racial culture subconsciously reproduced something imbued with the spirit of Black Africa, which was written into their DNA. When the massuh and overseers weren’t watching, they couldn’t help wiggle their butts, pumping their groins, and hollering like James Brown. Even with church music, their racial nature couldn’t help but junglize it and turn hymns into humping noises. Of course, it wasn’t exactly black African culture(as the jungle tribes didn’t have blues and jazz and the like), but it had a similar blackity oogity-boogitiness. It’s sort of a Jungian thing, the seeds of culture within the racial psyche, whereby even if the culture is wholly lost, something of the same spirit is created from the racial nature. If we erased white minds and put a whole bunch of whites on a hypothetical island to produce a culture from scratch, there’s no guarantee that it will lead to what we know of as ‘Western Civilization’. However, the arising culture will be animated by the same kind of spirit and mythos that fueled the Old Europeans. Likewise, if we were to erase black minds and put black folks on a hypothetical island, the result would likely be something along the lines of Black Africa(or Detroit).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="541" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/118/452/783/original/2cc8ef68c38a5967.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="588" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="62"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As glorious as the achievements of the West are, if one had to choose between losing all the culture and maintaining the race and losing the race but maintaining the culture(for other races to preserve), the former is always preferable. Because, for all the genius and inspiration, culture is the outward manifestation of what lies deep within the nature of man.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="54"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, if whites had to create a new culture out of whole cloth without memory of their past, the results will be different from the achievements of the Greeks, Romans, and other Europeans. Nevertheless, so much of what is expressed will have been inspired and fueled by the same temperament, passion, and imagination.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="153"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Likewise, if blacks had to choose between preserving the race but forgetting all about blues, jazz, soul, & rap OR losing the race but having other races appreciate and practice black music, which would they choose? Even if they were to lose their current genres of music, they could create new ones grounded in the same soulfulness, and thus, the essence of blackness would be preserved. But if blacks are gone as a race while black culture is kept alive by other races, what the hell is that? Blacks made that shit but other races be enjoyin’ it while blacks be nowhere to be seen. (Granted, in purely civilizational terms, it might not be bad for the World if blackness vanished racially and lingered only culturally in a few musical genres. A Detroit with rap music but no black people would probably spring back to life as a thriving and mostly safe city.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And what would Jews prefer? Keeping the race and losing the culture or losing the race and keeping the culture… alive in goy hands? Suppose some super-hitler had killed off every Jew in the world, BUT Jewish culture was still prized and preserved by various goyim. Would Jews prefer that over Jews surviving as a people but forgetting their culture? (Jews don’t seem too happy that goyim in the form of Christians and Muslims adopted much of Jewish culture in sacred text and cosmology.) In the end, cultocide is a lesser horror than genocide. If indeed culture means more than race, a super-Holocaust where all Jews are racially exterminated wouldn’t be so bad. It wouldn’t be the end of Jews because any bunch of goyim could culturally become Jews, and then, Jews are all around once again.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If a city faced the destruction of every building, museum, monument, garden, and institution but kept its population, it would be a great loss, but something similar could rise from the rubble. Paris is a city rich in arts and culture, and it would be an incalculable loss to witness their destruction. Still, as long as French people were around, French civilization could be rebuilt… much like German and Japanese cities were rebuilt after World War II. Same was true of Warsaw, of which 80% was destroyed in the war.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="190"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On the other hand, if all the arts and buildings remained intact but the population was replaced by another, it would be a wholly new civilization or a barbarism degenerating into savagery(if blacks were to take over). Warsaw suffered tremendous wreckage in World War II, but the Polish people still lived there, and it rose once again as a Polish city. But imagine if today’s nice and orderly Warsaw were kept intact brick by brick but taken over by the Chinese, Hindus, Arabs, or Africans. Chinese, Hindus, and Arabs could make use of Polish buildings and infrastructures, but their societies wouldn’t be Polish, which would survive only as an empty shell for other peoples to use and exploit. If blacks took over Warsaw, they would turn it into another Detroit. They will dismantle the city brick by brick if left to their own devices. So, race always matters more than culture. Hiroshima was smashed to bits in World War II, but the surviving Japanese rebuilt it. But imagine if today’s Hiroshima were left intact but its native population replaced by blacks. That would be another Detroit.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PIaj7FNHnjQ?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Mammy - Al Jolson (Jazz Singer performance)" width="500"></iframe></p></div></section></div><span id="_bottom" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><div class="nav-group" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; clear: both; color: #888888; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-18527241688399962732022-12-07T17:49:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:05.691-08:001996 Edition of Roger Ebert’s Video Companion - Titles Under 'B'<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="484" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/112/158/032/original/4b098c3bcaf00a77.png" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="26"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">We continue with the survey of the 1996 Edition of Roger Ebert’s Video Companion. What follows are entries in the B category.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="14"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Titles in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">bold</b> letters: Seen by Me; otherwise, not seen or only partly seen</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Numbers in parenthesis: Star Ratings by Roger Ebert</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Numbers in brackets: My Ratings</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Babyfever (3) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Baby It’s You</b> (3)[4] – 1983</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="60"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A demonstration, happy and sad, of what John Sayles was capable of when he left his do-gooderism, boomer ‘radicalism’, and striving for ‘significance’ on the shelf. A most happy result, by far his best work, as well as a sad reminder of why his other works fall short, not due to lack of talent but excess of self-aggrandizing ‘social consciousness’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/bdyS-cFTTi8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Baby Its You (1983) trailer" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Baby’s Day Out (1 ½) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Backbeat</b> (2) [2 ½] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This film accentuates the problem of the inimitable nature of celebrity. Some people are significant for what they’ve done, but celebrities owe much of their fame to their image. The Beatles clearly accomplished much in music, but the unmistakable faces of John Lennon, Paul McCartney, and George Harrison have been etched in our collective consciousness. Anthony Hopkins looks nothing like Richard Nixon, but Oliver Stone made it work because it came down to Nixon the doer, a key agent of history. In contrast, the Beatles became pop icons, and it’s never convincing for others to play them, just like Elvis movies fail for the simple reason that there was only one King of Rock n Roll. Similarly, Martin Scorsese’s THE AVIATOR was least convincing with Cate Blanchett and Kate Beckinsale in the respective roles of Katharine Hepburn and Ava Gardner. There was only one Hepburn, only one Gardner. At any rate, BACKBEAT is a rather lackluster telling of the Early Beatles, all the more disappointing because those were heady times for the young lads.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5hbfyo8alXg?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Backbeat (1994) ORIGINAL TRAILER [HQ]" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Backdraft (3) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Back to School</b> (3) [2 ½] – 1986</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="22"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rodney Dangerfield and Sam Kinison(as an unlikely gung-ho history teacher) are just about the only reasons for watching this stupid movie.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/k9DO26O6dIg?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Back to School (1986) - Professor Terguson Loses It Scene (5/12) | Movieclips" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Back to the Beach (3 ½) – 1987</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="14"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This is considered better than the original 60s movies with young Annette and Frankie.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Back to the Future</b> (3 ½)[3] – 1985</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="230"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As a sci-fi comedy vehicle for Michael J. Fox, it was sold as light-hearted fare. Yet, there’s a rather nasty shading to the fantasy, one about replacing the parents you have with the ones you’d prefer. No need to murder your parents and replace them with perfect robots. Just go back in time and tweak things so that, in the New and Improved Reality, your father’s a Cool Guy and your mother a slim babe, all the while the ‘bad’ people of town grovel at their feet. Michael J. Fox plays a cool kid burdened with the cosmic injustice of having uncool parents. It’s as if the mom and dad never got over the fact that a pretty girl settled for a loser pushed around by the ‘winners’ in school back in the 50s. Over the years, the father’s self-confidence cratered to zero, and the mother led a life of repressed remorse, putting on the weight. No wonder the son is eager to coach the dad into shape. Usually, fantasies like this involve a wish to go back in time and change one’s own past. But as Michael J. Fox’s character is picture-perfect, the problem involves not himself but his parents, whom he loves but is obviously ashamed of. As life lessons go, isn’t it better to accept people as they are?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LM1RbOEOTHI?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Back to the Future, Part I: Family Dinner (1985) [HD]" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="6"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Back to the Future Part II (3) – 1989</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="6"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Back to the Future Part III (2 ½) – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bad Boys</b> (3 ½)[3] – 1983</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="25"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Watched this long ago at the insistence of a friend. At once grimly realistic and shamelessly exploitative. Sean Penn got noticed for his powerful performance.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="10"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bad Boys (2) – 1995 (the one with Will Smith and Martin Lawrence)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bad Company (3 ½) – 1995 (Ellen Barkin and Lawrence Fishburn movie)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bad Girls (1 ½) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I recall the silly trailer.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bad Influence (3) – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Badlands</b> (4)[4] – 1974</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="27"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hard to believe Terrence Malick made two masterpieces in the 1970s before returning a couple decades later as one of the most pompous figures in cinematic history.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bad Lieutenant</b> (4)[2] – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="129"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A pile of garbage, a mondo trasho imitation of Dostoevsky and Scorsese. A kind of porno-Morality Tale. The ‘bad lieutenant’ is a corrupt cop as anti-hero whose gambling debts are coming due(and coming for his life); he grabs for last-minute redemption by means foul and fair. Among the ‘graceful’ moments is a vision of Jesus in a church that turns out to be, yes you guessed it, a Negro, sheeeeiiiit. Still, Keitel wears his heart on his sleeve(and bares his dong in the bargain, perhaps as a reminder that the real Jesus died on the Cross with privates exposed). Far inferior to even Scorsese’s weakest efforts but, playing devil’s advocate, arguably truer in some ways; it’s raw sewage than treated sewage ‘cleaned’ into art.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JQRV5_auS_Q?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Bad Lieutenant (6/9) Movie CLIP - Baseball Gambling (1992) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bagdad Cafe (3 ½) – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ballad of Little Jo (3) – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ballad of the Sad Cafe (3) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bang the Drum Slowly (4) – 1973</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="21"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What’s with baseball movies and tearjerkers? Another variation of PRIDE OF THE YANKEES? Maybe I’ll see it one day.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Barcelona </b>(3) [2 ½] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="64"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whit Stillman, so good with the ensemble cast in METROPOLITAN, falters here with two main characters who do little but nag at each other. What a drag. As for the protracted final part with one of the fellas clinging to dear life while friends and associates read passages from War and Peace, it’s gotta be among the most insufferable things in movie history.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/O50cySmUtWY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Barcelona (1994) ants" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Barfly (4) – 1987</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="10"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Once again, Ebert can’t resist a movie about drunkards.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bar Girls (1 ½) – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Barton Fink</b> (3 ½)[4] – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="51"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With BARTON FINK, the Coens finally came into their own as a force to reckon with. While ample talent and ingenuity were on display in their first three offerings, skeptics wondered whether the Coens could move beyond inspired parody and homages. BARTON FINK turned those ‘bugs’ into features of genuine originality.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Basic Instinct (2) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="57"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I only caught a few scenes on video because of the hype about Sharon Stone’s snatch and the sex/violence. What garbage. Over the years, some critics reappraised the movie as a biting satire on the predatory nature of American sexuality(interwoven with capitalism), less a piece of sensationalism than a critique of it. Yeah, sure.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Basketball Diaries (2) – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Batman (2) – 1989</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Batman Forever (2 ½) – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Batman Returns (2) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Beauty and the Beas</b>t (4)[2] – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="22"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I vaguely remember this, one of the follow-ups to LITTLE MERMAID, heralded as Disney’s return to cultural relevance. It was okay.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="subscribe-button" href="https://www.unz.com/subscribe/?domain=jfreud" style="background: rgb(3, 93, 166); border: none; color: white; cursor: pointer; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; height: 27px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0px 10px; padding: 10px 15px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_subscribe" title="Subscribe to New Columns by Jung-Freud">Subscribe to New Columns</a></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Beetlejuice (2) – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Before Sunrise</b> (3) [2 ½]- 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Richard Linklater is best as a personal film-maker than as an ‘intellectual’ film artist. BEFORE SUNRISE is painstakingly(sincerely and conceptually) everything DAZED AND CONFUSED is not. The approach is ‘European’, and the cerebral romanticism is rather precious. It reminded me of the man on the porch in IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE: “Why don’t you kiss her instead of talking her to death?”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Before the Rain</b> (3 ½)[3] – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Like PULP FICTION released in the same year, BEFORE THE RAIN plays games with chronology, perhaps inappropriate given the gravity of the subject. The tricks seem designed more as display of ‘brilliance’ than pathway to revelation. The contrived plot(especially one involving forbidden love) tests one’s credulity, but genuinely powerful moments are interspersed throughout. The film appears to contrast the tribal Balkans with the Liberal West of London. But, isn’t the so-called ‘Liberal West’ really animated by Jewish tribal supremacism? And what has the ‘liberal’ immigration and ideologies policies done to the UK? With Africans running around with machetes and Muslims battling Hindus in the streets, the future of UK will likely make the Balkan problems look mild by comparison. At least ex-Yugoslavia halfway solved the crisis by separatism that allowed for more homogenous states. In contrast, the UK embraced Diversity as the cure for everything. What fools.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3U5qi9YhGmg?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Before the Rain - International Trailer (High Resolution)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Being There</b> (4) [3 ½] – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="59"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The performances and the direction(by Hal Ashby) are impeccable and make the film seem more intelligent and insightful than it really is. Upon closer scrutiny, it barely registers as satire. That said, given the trajectory of American Politics since the 1980s, the film got one thing right. The joke has become real, and no one can tell anymore.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Belle Epoque</b> (3 ½)[2] – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="12"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It won the Best Foreign Film Oscar, never a good sign. Fluff.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Benny and Joon (3) – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Best Boy (4) – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Betrayal (4) – 1983</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Beverly Hills Cop (2 ½) – 1984</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="31"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I heard this is pretty decent. The director later went onto to make MIDNIGHT RUN, one of my favorites. I did see BEVERLY HILLS COPS II, and it was unbelievably bad.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Big</b> (3) [3 ½] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One of the few times a ridiculous idea made for movie magic. Penny Marshall’s oddball comedy has just the right balance of silliness and sensitivity, the opposite of what John Hughes concocted with WEIRD SCIENCE. A role Tom Hanks was born to play. In BIG, he played a boy in a man’s body, and later he played a man with a child’s mind in FORREST GUMP, a Mt. Rushmore for dumb innocence.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3ERuhks3GNk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Big (1988) - Josh Doesn't Get It Scene (3/5) | Movieclips" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Big Chill</b> (2 ½)[2] – 1983</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In 1975, Michael Medved and a compatriot wrote “Whatever Happened to the Class of 65?” BIG CHILL offers some clues as to what came of the generation a decade later. Middle-aged, the boomer characters have come to the realization of how they weren’t so ‘different’ yet were. Did they ‘sell out’ as professionals and ‘yuppies’ or simply grow wiser? Is there integrity to rebellion or has it become a futile irrelevance? The balanced and ‘fair-minded’ approach makes it passionless and dull. (On the other hand, FOUR FRIENDS is full of partisan passion but also painfully obnoxious.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Big Easy </b>(4)[3] – 1987</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="19"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I recall it was pretty good. Most memorable scene was when Ellen Barkin grabbed the wrong guy’s crotch.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ESvZ51pBN14?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Big Easy (6/10) Movie CLIP - A Good Guy (1986) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Big Red One</b> (3)[3] – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THE BIG RED ONE THE RECONSTRUCTION is the favored(if not definitive) version of Sam Fuller’s war movie based on his experiences as a young soldier at Normandy and beyond. Fuller worked with limited means, and it’d be foolhardy to compare this work with big-budget productions like THE LONGEST DAY and PATTON(or SAVING PRIVATE RYAN). Still, Fuller wasn’t much of a director, and his reputation largely rests on having touched on racy issues that Hollywood generally overlooked. Working in the B-movie department, Fuller had more ‘artistic’ leeway. Still, he was no Nicholas Ray, and his turgid moralism was on par with that of Stanley Kramer.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Big Town (3 ½) – 1987</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="7"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bill & Ted’s Bogus Journey</b> (3)[2]- 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="60"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mildly amusing. The two leads’ <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">California Teenager </i>antics seem like bogus imitations of Sean Penn’s landmark role in FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH. But then, all-around bogusness, even that of Bill and Ted, is part of the charm. Penn’s performance was truly <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">awesome</i>, but something so remarkable wouldn’t sit right in a piece of fluff like this.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bird (3 ½)3- 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="41"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I watched about 10 min of this. Charlie Parker was marrying some Jewish broad. I know Eastwood loves Jazz, but his visual style was never jazzy, and I have a hard time imagining him as a director of a movie about Jazz.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Birdy</b> (4)[3] – 1985</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="20"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Far-fetched but tantalizing premise that might have worked in the hands of someone less obnoxious and sensationalistic than Alan Parker.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/r69aRoIGGR8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Birdy (1984) Original Trailer [FHD]" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bitter Moon</b> (3) [3 ½]</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="71"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Roman Polanski at his perverse nastiest. It’s about appalling people and doesn’t make for easy viewing(despite the humor). A middle-aged man hooks up with a young woman but dumps her in the most unceremonious way imaginable. She gets even by turning him into a paraplegic and having sex with ghastly Negro. Entangled in their web is a rather conventional English couple whose assumptions are shaken to the core.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Black Marble (3 ½) – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Black Rain</b> (3 ½)[4] – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Shohei Imamura’s Hiroshima film is best when detailing the subtle after-effects of the Bomb, the way people sweep faint but troubling signs under the rug(or tatami) for a peace of mind and social acceptance. But the inevitable catches up despite the hope and denial. The film is weakest in showing the horrors of the bombing. The production values simply aren’t up to the task and rather negates the understated aspect of the film. The over-acting by a mentally damaged veteran is also a minus. Still, one of the most measured and thoughtful films about the war.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AkemncYRHIk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Black Rain (Kuroi Ame) 黒い雨 1989 Trailer, Shōhei Imamura 今村 昌平" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Black Stallion</b> (4) [3 ½] – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="37"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The opening on the ship and the scenes on the island are wonders to behold. The middle part sags a bit, but Mickey Rooney takes the reins and leads the boy and horse to a rousing ending.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blade Runner </b>(3)[4] – 1982</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="47"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Did BLADE RUNNER create the Future Noir aesthetics? Its retro-noir style is understandably celebrated but no less impressive is the film’s neo-classic & neo-gothic motifs and mythic aura. More about poetics of mood than poetry in motion, it failed at the box-office. Vangelis’ score is amazing.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blaze (3 ½) – 1989</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blink</b> (3 ½)[3] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_91" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="12"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Clever idea for a thriller involving cure for blindness and unsure memory.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_92" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blood Simple</b> (4)[4] – 1985</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_93" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="64"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It put the Coens on the map along with Jim Jarmusch as the independent film-makers to watch in the 1980s. The self-conscious style and outlandish neo-noir plot certainly got the film noticed. Still, it seemed too clever by half, overly addled with film-school look-at-me antics. In retrospect, its sense of riddle was no mind-game but an obsession the brothers would pursue throughout their career.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_94" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blown Away (2) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_95" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blow Ou</b>t (4) [3 ½] – 1981</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_96" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Film-makers love what they do but, given the sensationalism of the medium, are sometimes given to doubt, even pangs of guilt. Clint Eastwood both pushed his killer image to the hilt and unveiled the dark side of violence. Likewise, De Palma, who came to prominence with sleazy horror, also made works that called into question the exploitative nature of the medium, especially with guys like himself in charge. Perhaps, people prefer horror elements contained in the horror genre than leaking into a semblance of reality, which is what happens in BLOW OUT. It failed big at the box-office but remains among De Palma’s best works.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rDve1A5EAvk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="BLOW OUT (1981) Trailer - The Criterion Collection" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_97" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blue </b>(3 ½) [2 ½] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_98" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="58"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Kieslowski was a typical Polack. A total suck-ass to the West. While earthy and humorous among his own kind, he got all precious and reverential with Western Europeans(as hopeful models for Dumb Polacks). Kieslowski was a man of some talent, but his westward-looking films are marred by hunger for approval by the West. What a stupid Polack.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_99" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blue Chips (3) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_100" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blue Collar </b>(4)[3] – 1978</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="subscribe-button" href="https://www.unz.com/subscribe/?domain=jfreud" style="background: rgb(3, 93, 166); border: none; color: white; cursor: pointer; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; height: 27px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0px 10px; padding: 10px 15px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_subscribe" title="Subscribe to New Columns by Jung-Freud">Subscribe to New Columns</a></div><p class="container" id="p_1_101" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When Paul Schrader wasn’t being so artsy and ‘European’(usually modeled on Robert Bresson), he could make a decent film, and BLUE COLLAR is one such work. Like Martin Scorsese’s IRISHMAN released about four decades later, it’s about corruption in the world of the working class and unions. It works best with details of daily toil(at work and home) but falters badly with the Big Statement, which isn’t convincing. The characters in the film are such idiots that they don’t need top dogs playing divide-and-conquer to mess them up.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_102" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blue Kite</b> (4)[4] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_103" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="34"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It covers a momentous couple of decades in China under Mao. History moves on a grand scale, like an elephant through a village. The film meets the turmoil with a steady and meditative gaze.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_104" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Blues Brothers</b> (3)[3] – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_105" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With Belushi and Ackroyd as bluesmen, the result is both homage and parody of black music. The brothers, touched by disco light at a black church, take on wealthy restauranteurs, disgruntled country music band, the state-troopers(nearly all of them, the Illinois Nazis(who say, “Jews are using the blacks…”; so, where’s the lie?), Carrie Fisher with an array of advanced weaponry, the Chicago Police, and City Hall. Too elaborate for a silly premise but has its share of laughs and some amazing car crashes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_106" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blue Sky (3) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_107" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blue Steel</b> (3)[3] – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_108" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="44"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jamie Lee Curtis in this demented Katherine Bigelow movie plays a NY cop who is stalked by some sado-masochistic Jewish yuppie who seemingly goes instan-psycho upon picking up a pistol at a crime scene. Ridiculous and over-the-top but compelling as a sleazo action thriller.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aJTOmShc9E0?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Blue Steel (1990) Trailer" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_109" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blue Velvet </b>(1) [3 ½] – 1986</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_110" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="74"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ebert hated this film because of what was done to Isabella Rossellini. She must have been like a goddess to him. I hated it too but for a different reason. The whole thing seemed an exercise in retardation and sadism. (It was my first Lynch film.) Having come to know Lynch better over the years, I can better appreciate his aims in BLUE VELVET. I still don’t like it. “Baby wanna fuc*” indeed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_111" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blume in Love (4) – 1973</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_112" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bob Roberts (3) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_113" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="24"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Tim Robbins’ crack at FACE IN THE CROWD? He satirizes David Duke and Pat Buchanan, but can a balless cuck-maggot play men with balls?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_114" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Body Double</b> (3 ½)[2]</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_115" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="20"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One of those DePalma’s movies that’s all style and on substance. It was notorious for the murder-by-drill scene.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_116" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Bodyguard (3) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_117" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="24"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This sounds like a horror movie. Kevin Costner not only kisses a vain Negress but dies for her. Find another line of work, fool!</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_118" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Body Snatchers</b> (4)[4] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_119" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="58"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Wonders never cease. Scumbag sleaze-meister Abel Ferrara actually made a first-rate sci-fi horror flick, all the more remarkable given the success of the original(Don Siegel) and remake(Philip Kaufman). What were the odds that another good film could be made from the material? Ferrara’s version is as unsettling and thought-provoking(and politically relevant) as its predecessors.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/sR8pqAB788U?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Body Snatchers (1993) - Theatrical Trailer" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_120" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bonfire of the Vanities (2 ½) – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_121" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I heard that DePalma’s most eagerly awaited movie was a total wash. I avoided it for years and finally gave it a look a few years back but could stand only about 20 min. Did the ‘liberal’ side of DePalma get cold feet and sabotage the project lest he have to get real with some uncomfortable truths? Or, was he simply not meant for satire?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_122" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Boomerang (3) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_123" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Boost </b>(3 ½)[3] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_124" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="57"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">James Woods is intense as a go-getter whose ambition is fueled by cocaine. It works as a character study of a man driven in equal parts by vanity and insecurity, wildly exacerbated by the white powder. But the movie becomes more or less a cautionary tale on the dangers of drug use, and message movies are boring.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XwS5WsjPg9U?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Boost (10/11) Movie CLIP - Lenny Ruins the Deal (1988) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_125" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bopha! (3 ½) – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_126" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="6"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Born on the Fourth of July</b> (4)[4] – 1989</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_127" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="17"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Oliver Stone’s Vietnam follow-up to PLATOON is a richer work centered on individuals than on archetypes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_128" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bostonians (3) – 1984</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_129" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Bounty </b>(4)[4] – 1984</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_130" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A balanced retelling of the ‘Mutiny on the Bounty’ story that gives Captain Bligh his due. (It nevertheless does justice to Fletcher Christian’s ill-fated romanticism as well.) Bligh remains unlikable but is presented, for good or for ill, indispensable to the enterprise of empire. Ant-and-grasshopper tale for adults. Most interesting is the ambiguity of Bligh’s authoritarian ways, i.e. to what extent they are of necessity or flaws of character, of strength or of weakness.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_131" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Boyfriends and Girlfriends</b> (3) [3 ½] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_132" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="23"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Never cared for Eric Rohmer, but his consistency as a maker of intelligent films on the relations between men and women is undeniable.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_133" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Boys on the Side </b>(3 ½)[1] – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_134" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="93"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Incredibly, John Simon the snob loved this movie. Maybe he had the hots for Mary-Louis Parker. This is a thoroughly detestable movie, as terrible as THELMA AND LOUISE, and I only wished all the characters died in a horrible car crash(with the gas tank exploding and burning everyone alive). To make things worse, Drew Barrymore’s character is pregnant throughout the movie and at the end gives birth to a mulatto. Ewwwwwww. (Damn the Christ-Cucks. Keep abortion legal.) I’ll take a slice of MYSTIC PIZZA instead. Or even SHAG THE MOVIE.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2rXXJpdwGnI?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Boys on the Side (1995) Official Trailer - Whoopi Goldberg, Matthew McConaughey Movie HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_135" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Boy Who Could Fly (3) – 1986</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_136" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Braveheart (3 ½) – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_137" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Brazil</b> (2) [2 ½] – 1985</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_138" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="50"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Terry Gilliam’s star has faded over the years, but BRAZIL was greeted with plenty of accolades, and Ebert and Siskel were in the minority as nay-sayers. It’s a very busy film crammed with lots of ‘ideas’, but like the planet Jupiter, it’s more gas than core substance.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_139" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Breakfast Club </b>(3)[3] – 1985</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_140" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="50"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s a dishonest and stupid movie pandering to the worst and most self-absorbed tendencies of American Youth but nevertheless works its magic within those contemptible perimeters. If you shut off your critical faculties and go along with the hammy cliches, it like MTV’s idea of Eugene O’Neill.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_141" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Breaking Away</b> (4)[4] – 1979</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_142" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="49"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The love story isn’t convincing. Would a girl so pretty and smart fall for such a guy with his ‘mama mia’ act? Still, it works as a dream, and the rest of the film has a wonderful combination of class realism and social nostalgia, of individualism and familism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_143" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Bridges of Madison County (3 ½) – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_144" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="33"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Clint Eastwood and Meryl Streep in a soapy movie based on Oprah’s Book of the Month. Wild Horses and the entire starship fleet will have to drag me to see this one.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_145" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bright Angel (3 ½) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_146" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bright Lights, Big City</b> (3 ½)[3] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_147" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="54"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The book isn’t much, but the movie could have done with a less limited(and less well-known)actor — Michael J. Fox is indelibly Michael J. Fox — and more inspired director. What happened to the James Bridges who made PAPER CHASE, even URBAN COWBOY? This is directing-by-the-numbers. Phoebe Cates doesn’t add much either.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VdPuJoGSFlc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Bright Lights, Big City (1988) ORIGINAL TRAILER [HD 1080p]" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_148" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="7"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia</b> (4) [3 ½] – 1974</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_149" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="47"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sam Peckinpah finally got to make a film exactly the way he wanted to, and the result ranges from powerful and fascinating to repulsive and ludicrous. I think Paul Seydor, an expert on Peckinpah, called it the worst of the great American Films. That sounds about right.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_150" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Broadcast News </b>(4)[3] – 1987</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="subscribe-button" href="https://www.unz.com/subscribe/?domain=jfreud" style="background: rgb(3, 93, 166); border: none; color: white; cursor: pointer; font-family: Arial; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; height: 27px; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 0px 10px; padding: 10px 15px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_subscribe" title="Subscribe to New Columns by Jung-Freud">Subscribe to New Columns</a></div><p class="container" id="p_1_151" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="270"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Holly Hunter was on the up-and-up in the 80s, and this is her triumph. She plays an obsessive producer, a stickler to detail, a demanding boss. She’s a control-freak for whom everything has to be done by the letter. (If she’s so principled,why work in TV news than in print, where quality is easier to maintain?) But for all her commitment to standards and integrity, it’s a business after all, and she’s assigned to make a shallow(and rather dim) hunk look good. She also finds herself falling in love with him, and in the end, she must choose between principle and love. She chooses principle, but the man she rejected becomes a success anyway, and the news business is changed forever regardless. In between is a Jewish guy(who lacks the looks but has the smarts) who is driven(and driven half-crazy) by principles and personal issues, envy especially. In the end, they all accept their compromises and the world as it is and move on. They arrive at a certain peace but with a certain melancholy. The movie associates dumbness with shallow deception and intelligence with hard truth, but isn’t the bigger problem in our world the fact that so many smart Jews in academia and media are openly committed to spinning lies to maintain their facade of ‘muh democracy’ that amounts to little more than Jewish Supremacist Empire? What did Sam Harris say recently about Hunter Biden’s laptop? What is the strategy of Cass Sunstein and the NYT? Smart is better than dumb but no guarantee for integrity and truth.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/A5xTu6AMxq4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Broadcast News (2/5) Movie CLIP - Aaron Struggles on Air (1987) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_152" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Buddy Holly Story (3 ½) – 1978</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_153" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="14"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This is considered one of the better Rock n Roll movies, a superior biopic.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_154" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bugsy (4) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_155" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="9"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Is Warren Beatty convincing as a hot-blooded Jewish gangster?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_156" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Busy Malone</b> (3 ½) [2 ½] – 1976</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_157" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="17"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A cute idea that works for about 15 min but isn’t enough to sustain a whole movie.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_158" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bull Durham </b>(3 ½)[3] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_159" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="31"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Heard this is a good movie but didn’t care for anything associated with baseball. Did finally see it, and yes, it was good, but I don’t remember a thing.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_160" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bullets over Broadway</b> (3 ½) [3 ½] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_161" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="34"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This certainly has its share of laughs, but a Woody Allen movie without Woody Allen is like a Clint Eastwood movie without Clint Eastwood. Where’s the beef? A kinder and nicer BARTON FINK.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_162" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Burden of Dreams </b>(4) [3 ½] – 1982</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_163" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="64"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Many consider APOCALYPSE NOW as one of the greatest in cinema, but naysayers nevertheless appreciate HEARTS OF DARKNESS the documentary on the making of Coppola’s film. Likewise, many viewers prefer BURDEN OF DREAMS over Wernor Herzog’s FITZCARRALDO, which is more forbidding than formidable despite(or precisely because) all the blood and sweat poured into it. Art isn’t about A for Effort.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" birds="" don="" frameborder="0" height="281" in="" pain="" screech="" sing="" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uL99NDUWJ0A?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" t="" the="" they="" title="Burden of Dreams - " width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_164" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Buster (3) – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_165" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="10"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I heard this movie with Phil Collins is pretty fun.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_166" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Butcher’s Wife (2 ½) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_167" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bye Bye Brazil </b>(4) [3 ½]- 1979</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_168" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="45"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It follows a ramshackle circus troupe, reminiscent of early Fellini and Bergman. The communities in which the characters ply their trade have only a faint semblance of modernity. They are outcasts and hucksters but also bringers of joy and dreams to people that time forgot.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jyvexkKMH6c?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Bye Bye Brazil - Chico Buarque" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_169" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bye Bye Love (2) – 1995</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/enx0USCpMnM?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Siskel & Ebert Review - Flash Gordon, Stir Crazy, Bye Bye Brazil, Popeye" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"> </p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-25782823675582575822022-12-07T17:43:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:05.935-08:00What Makes Stevie Run & Hide: Poltergeist, or Steven Spielberg's Proto-Sorosian Nastiness<p> <iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9eZgEKjYJqA?feature=oembed" style="background-color: white; border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Poltergeist (1982) Official Trailer - JoBeth Williams, Craig T. Nelson Horror Movie HD" width="500"></iframe></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="205"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>‘s question of authorship stands out among Steven Spielberg’s works. Spielberg wrote and directed some of his movies or directed what others mostly wrote; he also handed second-rate material to others to be made in pale imitation of his style. The story(and parts of the screenplay) of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> was by Steven Spielberg, but it was officially directed by Tobe Hooper, most (in)famous for <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Texas Chainsaw Massacre</b>, which seems, at first glance, the diametric opposite of the kind of cinema Spielberg became renowned for. But on second thought, Spielberg began his career on TV directing episodes for the creepy <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Night Gallery</i></b> and first became noticed with the action thriller <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Duel</b>, in power and suspense far beyond the routine fare of made-for-television movies. Everyone working in TV wanted to hit the big screen, but Spielberg was especially eager to prove what he had up his sleeve as an entertainer. He wanted to be noticed and was(and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Duel</b> even got a limited release in theaters). Also, judging by <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Goonies</b>, which clearly borrows elements from <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Texas Chainsaw Massacre</b>, Spielberg obviously has a grudging respect for Hooper as a man who can play with your spine like a rock guitar.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="198"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The movie that really put him on the map was, of course, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jaws</b>, followed two years later by <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters of the Third Kind</b>, which sealed his reputation not only as a master-technician but a magician. Then, with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b>, he hit his third home run. He had a special handle on things, a magic touch, and no one came anywhere close in bridging the lowest common denominator with the highest cinematic skills. (Like Tom Hulce’s Mozart in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amadeus</b>, he was deemed an unserious person who had to be taken seriously for his rare talents.) With the exception of George Lucas with his <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</b> goldmine, no one’s works appealed to as many people around the world. Spielberg made them feel giddy and gushy, sometimes at once. The movies were rated PG, meaning children could see them without parents. Spielberg was also mindful with the language and nudity — he seemed to be naturally averse to obscenity —, even though his reveries could be so unabashedly rapturous that they almost qualify as ‘innocence’-porn, perhaps something he learned from the American brand of Evangelism. As such, his works were deemed fun for the whole family.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="336"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, it became almost an annual ritual for young ones to flock to the new Spielberg blockbuster in early summer. But there was plenty of horror elements in Spielberg’s movies in more ways than one. Apart from the physical terror in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Duel</b> is the question of who and why, which is never explained. And <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jaws</b> is especially terrifying because the Great White seems driven by something other than mere hunger. It seems almost willful in its violation of picture-perfect Americana, like Jack the Ripper meets Norman Rockwell. And even though the space aliens in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> ultimately turn out to be benevolent, their crazy antics are enough to turn the Devil in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b> green with envy. (William Friedkin’s instant horror classic probably had a huge impact on young Spielberg, especially as it was an A-production unlike most horror movies before and then. Perhaps the first true horror equivalent of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Citizen Kane</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">2001: A Space Odyssey</b>. Most of the grisly gore was in rather disreputable independent horror movies, such as Night of the Living Dead and its imitators. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b> had the full backing of Hollywood and even the muted blessing of the Catholic Church, yet its horror was utterly unrestrained, even more so than in sicko horror indies, what with its young female character caught in a tug-of-war between the porn industry and the Vatican. A cynic might say Friedkin bundled horror-porn in spiritual wrapping, but whatever he did, he did it well. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b> made all-out horror respectable, no longer the cultural aberration of those working in the margins of industry. Horror popped its cherry, the dam burst, and the genie could not be put back in the bottle. While Spielberg’s movies of the 70s and 1980s were incomparably more ‘innocent’, they operated more or less on the same principle of pulling all stops and letting it all hang out — the 1993 <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jurassic Park</b>, though sold as a family/children’s movie, is surely one of the most frightening ever made.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/SutDTIhbQ2g?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Duel (1971) Official Trailer - Dennis Weaver, Steven Spielberg Thriller Movie HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="88"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given the level of suspense, terror, and mayhem in his movies, Spielberg has amazingly managed to present himself as the great maker of mainstream entertainment. Spielberg eschewed those G-rated late-Disney-style movies that people found generic and soft, or pabulum for five year olds. The secret was to make movies equally appealing to children, teenagers, and even adults. He understood the mainstream audience wanted to be thrilled but not unduly offended, like at an amusement park where the rides are scary but also safe, suitable for adults and children.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, Spielberg was carrying the torch of his predecessors like John Ford, Howard Hawks, Alfred Hitchcock, David Lean, and others. Where he differed was in the shameless sense of immediacy, impulsiveness, and uninhibited sensationalism. While old masters maintained a semblance of form and structure(as a matter of professionalism and dignity), Spielberg had a more shambolic approach that shattered conventions but, amazingly enough, instead of surrendering to chaos, reorganized the detached, fractured, and uprooted forms into a new vision of order, one more dynamic and vibrant. It’s hard to think of another director whose works are simultaneously so over-the-top and on-top-of-things. Spielberg’s madness isn’t a loss of order but a realization of greater order upon increased chaos, a feat nearly unequaled in cinema.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="160"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In this, he had something of Orson Welles’ showmanship by the way of Looney Tunes. He had an affinity for Cecil B. DeMille, the most shameless of the showmen in Old Hollywood, whose Biblical epics went more for pie-in-the-sky than for piety. And for Akira Kurosawa whose action-dramas were charged with urgency and directness rarely seen in cinema, at least before the advent of Spielberg and others like him. Even though Spielberg’s sensibility had little in common with the Counterculture, he did imbibe the Rock Culture’s sense of no limits and going all in. And even though Spielberg lacked the Art-House credibility of New Hollywood’s roster of ‘auteurs’, he shared their sense of frontiers and doing what comes naturally and personally. Spielberg’s natural and personal was popular entertainment. He sought to please himself by pleasing as many people as possible. He couldn’t sell out because he was sold on movie magic from a young age.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="185"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg’s ‘innocence’ was to a large measure calculated, but it was also genuine. Though he clearly had a flair for the darker side of genres, he felt happiest when calling out the inner-child within the mental closet of every adult. He was never going to be Stephen King. And as much as he admired <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Clockwork Orange</b>, he wasn’t made for something so ‘extreme’ and disturbing. Quantitatively, many of his movies had far more violence than Kubrick’s controversial work but in the escapist mode or in the humanist, tragic, or patriotic strain(as in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Empire of the Sun</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Saving Private Ryan</b>). He wanted to be regarded as a mainstream entertainer(whose movies were suitable for the whole family) or middlebrow maker of serious films, or a combination of both. He sought popularity and respectability. He evaded anything that might raise eyebrows or stir up controversy. (His most excessive work was probably <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">1941</b>, for which he got scorched by the critics and ridiculed by peers. It’s one of the few times when the project outpaced his handle on things.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="219"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">His serious movies were never quite art(with the notable exception of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I.: Artificial Intelligence</b>, bequeathed to him by Stanley Kubrick as either gift or curse, or both; I suspect it was out of respect for Kubrick that Spielberg didn’t overly revise it for sake of audience-pandering), and his entertainment movies weren’t exactly light. It is why his genre works are more intriguing in a way. It’s like a child reveals more of himself in play than in good behavior. If Spielberg’s sober attempt at cultural good manners tended to inhibit his truest instincts, his plunge into unfettered entertainment set free his innermost energies. (It’s like Woody Allen says more about himself in funny than in serious mode, which had a stilted effect on him.) Spielberg’s serious movies were made with meticulous craftsmanship(and have much to recommend them), but what is lacking is the verve and intensity of artists like Martin Scorsese and Sidney Lumet(at his best with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dog Day Afternoon</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Prince of the City</b>). There’s a sense that Spielberg is working hard at something that doesn’t come naturally, as if insecure that he’ll be remembered only for childish fantasies and popcorn movies. One senses the effort even when the result is more successful than not.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_19pRsZRiz4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="A.I. Artificial Intelligence - Official® Trailer [HD]" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg has two modes of storytelling, the escapist and the earnest(or the childlike and the serious), and his best works maintain a porous boundary between them(in the tradition of Frank Capra, for better or worse). So, there are serious dramatic elements in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> and magical touches in the near-tragic <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Empire of the Sun</b>. The problem for Spielberg arises when the seriousness is suited up in formal wear, as if to prove he has grown up(or has an adult side to his character). But this kind of seriousness is more composure than commitment. It becomes a manner of presentation, about tone than truth. Take <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bridge of Spies</b>, certainly respectable and absorbing enough, but without any hard truths, only warmed-up cliches about the Cold War, albeit flavored with ‘nuance’ and ‘sophistication’. (What’s true of Spielberg also applies to Tom Hanks, a comic actor who did well enough in serious and/or earnest roles but at a cost to what came naturally.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="148"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Thus, Spielberg’s consciously serious(or even ‘important’) works are akin to the products of Merchant-Ivory who perfected the middlebrow Art House fare, especially with Oscar season in mind. But, genuine film artists don’t approach subjects in terms of high, middle, or low. Theirs is a relentless pursuit of truth and/or vision, come what may. It’s more about immersion than aspiration, going wherever the clues lead than worrying as to whether the leads are ‘acceptable’ or not. It seeks the Grail than the trophy. It’s the difference between Dances with Wolves and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Goodfellas</b>, both released in 1990. The former is ‘serious’ in intent, meant to be inspiring, uplifting, and ennobling(perhaps even a bit redemptive given America’s bloody history). In contrast, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Goodfellas</b> seems down-and-dirty, vulgar, and crude but not because it’s lowbrow entertainment but is committed to the truth of the criminal underworld.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="55"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Or, consider the difference between <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Agony and the Ecstasy</b>, the Michelangelo epic directed by Carol Reed, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Andrei Rublev</b>, a historical meditation by Andrei Tarkovsky. Reed’s work is respectable, Tarkovsky’s is revelatory. One remains within the established perimeters of ‘good taste’, whereas the other breaks new ground in the way of seeing.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="249"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, the honest entertainer has more in common with the honest artist than the dishonest or half-hearted artist does. The honest entertainer really loves and believes in what he’s doing regardless of its cultural value. He trusts his talent in winning over the audience. Likewise, the honest artist believes in what he’s doing and trusts the audience, however limited in number, to join him on the journey. In contrast, the dishonest or half-hearted artist hedges his bets or doubts himself, fretting whether it’s insufficiently or overly serious. This is why Woody Allen the comedian had more in common with Ingmar Bergman. At the very least, both were being true to themselves. It is also why some of Spielberg’s most personal and inspired works are his entertainment movies where he simply followed his muse, at least far more so than in his serious movies made with a yearning for respect. As harrowing as <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Saving Private Ryan</b> are as blood spectacles, they ultimately fail as art because Spielberg keeps the Capraesque bulb alight in the closet than delving into the darkness. David Lean’s model is as far as Spielberg is willing to go with his ‘serious’ works. Respectable, dignified, honorable enough but, all said and done, life and history as a bed of flowers than a crown of thorns. Besides, Lean, for all his limitations, was being true to his socio-cultural sensibilities, whereas Spielberg seems to be putting on airs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="212"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There are two kinds of weirdness in culture, and Spielberg exhibits both qualities. One is of external influence, prominent in our culture and easily available even to young ones, especially via the TV. (Of late, gender-bender-mania and Negrolatry have enforced weirdness as the New Norm in TV shows and commercials.) Spielberg would have grown up watching stuff like the <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Twilight Zone</i></b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Outer Limits</i></b>, as well as reruns of all kinds of horror, sci-fi, and suspense movies on the telly when his young mind was most vulnerable to manipulation and flights of imagination. (Just imagine the impact MTV exerted on the generation coming of age in the 1980s. It became a ritualization of every avant-gardist fresh out of film-school having a stab at pop surrealism via the music of weirdo Rock stars who celebrated excess as the American Way.) So, even if Spielberg didn’t become a niche specialist in extreme genres, like John Carpenter, Wes Craven, and Tobe Hooper, he was affected by the same kind of weird stuff, later culminating with Tarantinoia, a weirder case of niche sensibility gaining mainstream appeal(that half-redeemed itself with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Once Upon a Time… In Hollywood</b>, derived in equal measures from Sergio Leone Westerns, Roger Corman Drive-In flicks, and Richard Linklater’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dazed and Confused</b>).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="212"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, there’s another kind of weirdness, an innate tendency that distorts one’s perception and interpretation of even what is deemed decent, hopeful, sane, safe, mundane and/or wholesome. A weird mind warps even the normal world around him. It may see something popular through ‘cultist’ lens, like the story of the husband in After Hours(dir. Martin Scorsese) who has a sexual fetish about Dorothy in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Wizard of Oz</b>. Or, it sees through the apparent veneer of normality and discerns what lurks beneath. This seems true enough of the chemistry between Spielberg and Disney classics. In his youth, Disney was synonymous with family entertainment(and even after the founder’s passing, it was some time before Disney released its first PG-rated movie, regarded as a cultural milestone). On one level, like so many other children, Spielberg was captivated by the magic kingdom. But more sensitive(and obsessive) than other children, he reacted(and interacted) in a more personal ‘aspergy’ manner, much like David the robot-boy in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I.: Artificial Intelligence</b>, for whom the <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pinocchio</b> story isn’t just a fairytale but a myth to live by, a dream to be fulfilled. Like the little girl in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, Spielberg the boy was likely ‘communicative’ with the rays on the tube.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="344"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Not only did boy Spielberg respond peculiarly to something deemed normal and mainstream, but he sensed something far darker about the fantasies and fairytales. Those who fall deeper into fantasy are ultimately confronted with the traumatic discrepancy between fantasy and reality. Despite Disney’s best attempts to bowdlerize the source material to make it fit-for-family, enough of the grim and frightful elements remained. And indeed, it’s this very quality that has ensured the lasting value of certain Disney movies. Though Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Pluto, and the like have gained pop-icon status, no one cares about cartoons featuring them. Rather, it’s works like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Snow White</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dumbo</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pinocchio</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bambi</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alice in Wonderland</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sleeping Beauty</b>(relatively weaker but perhaps the last of the great Disney movies) that have passed the test of time — as for <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Fantasia</b>, it defies categorization. The enchantment shines against the backdrop of horror. Spielberg understood the real magic of Disney, something ignored by later executives for whom Family Entertainment had to be harmless to the point of innocuousness, or mildly amusing for children and deadly dull to adults. In contrast, the best of Disney gave adults an excuse to attend the screenings by taking their children. It presented dreams as the flipside of nightmares. Villainy didn’t merely characterize the antagonist but was woven into the very fabric of the world. No wonder Disney classics used shadows so effectively, the looming figures symbolizing the outsized influence of the will, often malicious. Maleficent in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sleeping Beauty</b> not only renders the princess comatose but corrupts the air all around her. It’s as if Bambi’s mother isn’t so much killed by one bad actor as by man’s bloodthirst that turns the entire forest into a killing field, or ‘naturocaust’. It’s the sheer terror and desperation that make the characters (re)appreciate the true meaning of home and family, as in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Wizard of Oz</b>(or The <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Empire of the Sun</b>). After being stalked by a squadron of flying monkeys, Kansas doesn’t seem so bad after all.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/80U6u9GtRtA?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Bambi(1942) - Man The Villain" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="272"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg’s formative years were when censorship was fading in all of media(and the TV screen would eventually follow suit with the advent of cable and home video in the 1980s), his sense of the bizarre and grotesque went far beyond anything in the time of classic Disney(and Hitchcock). American Cinema was producing some of the goriest, sickest, and vilest movies in the years prior to Spielberg’s real breakthrough with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jaws</b>. Though he didn’t share the taste of the genre-extremists, they’d all been affected by the same kinds of movies and TV shows and mastered similar tricks albeit for different purposes. Though never as lewd and nasty like DePalma and his ilk, Spielberg was no stranger to pushing the envelope of sensory overdrive. Just as Rock Culture thrived on volume and intensity, the Newer Hollywood overtaking New Hollywood(with its personal ‘auteurs’) was a high-octane race of thrills, shocks, raptures, hysterics, and special effects. The overall mood shifted from creative anarchy to competitive industry, distilling and amplifying the effects and emotions shown to produce the biggest sugar-highs and fizzy-wizzes in the audience. It could be bigger splashier special effects or sped-up technique for maximum sensory stimulation(like with the fast-cutting in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Flashdance</b> or bombastic spectacle of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Top Gun</b> — Michael Bay later became almost a parody of this race to top the other in hyperbole). It needs to be said, however, that even though movies like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Tootsie</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Terms of Endearment</b> were advertised as more adult fare, they operated on the same rule for ridding the material of anything but push-button emotions. All that remained were those ‘moments’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="308"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jaws</b>, Spielberg delivered all the thrills of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b> but without the controversy. Cleaner fun to have a woman’s torso bitten off by a shark than to have a teen’s clit diddled by the Devil. (Even though Spielberg was many times more visceral and ‘frontal’ than Old Hollywood directors like John Ford and Howard Hawks, he shared with them more a reliance on technique than on detail to convey the impact of violence. It goes to show mastery of technique leaves a stronger impression. It’s like a boxer is rocked hardest by a punch he doesn’t see coming.) <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> indulges in the tricks of the horror trade but left the audience aglow with wonderment. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b> is a brutal(and brutalizing) movie, with people getting impaled, hacked by propeller blades, run over by a truck, and dispensed with in all manner of creative ways. And the catharsis comes with grisly effects with flesh and eyeballs melting off skulls that explode. But Spielberg perfected the method of pushing violence to the threshold without tipping over to R-rating. It didn’t hurt that most of the bloodied or bludgeoned happened to be Arabs and especially Nazi Germans, whom Spielberg’s movies did more to dehumanize than earlier movies(with the possible exception of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Dirty Dozen</b>) that vilified Nazis but didn’t use them as test-dummies for sadistic Jewish revenge fantasies; it certainly was a major inspiration for Tarantino’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Inglorious Basterds</b>. Even <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial</b> had stronger-than-usual suspense elements that had kids freaked out in theaters(or have nightmares about afterwards). It was a testament to his skills either as an unparalleled film-master or shameless master-manipulator that his ostensibly family-friendly movies left an imprint on the psyche of a whole generation the size of T-Rex footprints in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jurassic Park</b>.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="410"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And this brings us to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, one of his most revealing works, wittingly or not. Indeed, I suspect he hired Tobe Hooper to direct as a kind of insurance, aka plausible deniability. His title is as producer and co-scenarist, but it is presented as a ‘Tobe Hooper Film’. Of course, Spielberg could have cited any number of reasons as to why he got Hooper to direct. After all, didn’t George Lucas do the same with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Empire Strikes Back</b>? It’s been said that it was a legal matter, that his movie contract forbade him from directing another movie while working on <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T.</b> But then, why not direct it after <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T.</b>? Why was it necessary for both movies to have been made and released simultaneously? Perhaps, Spielberg thought it was a throwaway idea, something he wanted to see realized but wasn’t fully invested in. But, it doesn’t seem like a mere piece of exploitation(of his brand) like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Goonies</b>, little more than a financial scheme. Too much of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> comes across as obsessively personal on Spielberg’s part. It was obviously a major investment, not only of money but of the imagination. He didn’t just pen an idea for someone else to play with but insisted it be done as he envisioned it, right down to every detail. No wonder then the result is Spielbergian than Hooperian. It’s as if Hooper served as Spielberg’s clone-double. And the music by Jerry Goldsmith approximates John William’s style almost note-for-note. In the movie, someone remarks that all the houses in the neighborhood look so much alike, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>’s signature style matches that of Spielberg. And it’s not a pale but a bold piece of imitation, which may sound odd because boldness usually tends toward originality and strong personal will. Either Hooper peered into Spielberg’s psyche and drew inspiration from the jumble of magic and terror or Spielberg breathed down Hooper’s neck at every turn, using him as a hapless bitch. Given his own fame(and notoriety), one might have expected Hooper would have imposed his own demented take on the material: A Spielberg idea gleefully shredded by chainsaw filmmaking. In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T.</b>, the boy and the space creature soulfully merge into one, and a similar dynamic seems to have come over Spielberg and Hooper on <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>: A kind of telepathic linkage, like with remote control devices in the movie.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BKn9QIaMgtQ?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) - Original Trailer (4K)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="339"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Texas Chainsaw Massacre</b>, the work that put Hooper’s name on the Cult Movie map, is trashy but primitively effective and surprisingly more reliant on suspense and mood than on outright gore. Still, it’s butcher-porn that had a corrosive impact on the culture that became accustomed to sicko movies as respite from boredom and apathy, which were made only worse by the desensitization that called for ever stronger doses for the same effect. (Though ugly and pointless, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Texas Chainsaw Massacre</b> is a masterpiece compared to most of Hooper’s works, none of which I managed to get past the 20 min mark with the exception of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, another clue it’s more Spielberg than Hooper.) Horror, like hard rock, needs to justify itself more than other genres. Otherwise, something so abusive becomes decrepit torture-porn. Given <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>‘s horror credentials, it’s hardly surprising Spielberg hired a well-known specialist in the field. While Spielberg’s earlier works(and even <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T.</b>) borrowed from horror, perhaps the fantasist in him didn’t want to be directly associated with the genre. People might have raised eyebrows and wondered about the darker side of Spielberg. (This has left <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> in an authorial limbo, if not dispute, comparable to that of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Thing from Another World</b>, of which there has been considerable debate as to the real director, Christian Nyby or Howard Hawks. But then, this ambivalence certainly adds to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>‘s mystery as to the source of the haunting.) Still, why Hooper of all people, a man associated with one of the most notorious horror movie, even more so than <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Night of the Living Dead</b>? It’s one thing to show brain-dead zombies doing gruesome things but quite another to show people with souls acting even grislier and without explanation. Was it because Spielberg and Hooper were roughly of the same generation and came to prominence around the same time, one with a chainsaw and the other with a shark? Appalling or appealing, both were predicated on overwhelming the senses.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="197"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg’s Midas Touch made <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> into one of the rare post-60s horror movies(along with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Omen</b> and inexplicably <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Burnt Offerings</b>) that earned a PG-rating, not too surprising given the relative lack of gore. Especially since the early 70s(and the landmark <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b>), an R-rating could actually be an advantage as any loss of youth audience was compensated by a larger older audience eager for the latest thrills far beyond the once shocking threshold of Alfred Hitchcock’s <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Psycho</strong>(which aired on TV uncut in the 70s and 80s). Indeed, a PG-rated horror movie seemed rather lame by the time works like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Carrie</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dawn of the Dead</b>, and especially <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Halloween</b>(and its unfortunate imitations) redefined the genre. It was as if <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> was trying to have it both ways. Not only was it Spielberg’s movie but not his movie, it walked a fine line between magic and monstrosity. It’s like a sledgehammer made of sponge or a teddy bear stuffed with firecrackers. As such, it seems more the work of a prankster than a depraved soul. And, no one gets killed though the dead have something to do with all the trouble.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Spielberg has never been regarded as a thinker, let alone an intellectual, a closer inspection suggests he always understood far more than he let on. Precisely because of that aura of ‘innocence’, sincere and cynical in equal measure, critics and the audience have tended to overlook the colder and more calculating side of Spielberg, often dismissed as a hopeless man-child(or a rather mushy maker of serious movies). In truth, while Spielberg did remain a child-at-heart, he knew well enough of the snake oil in the elixir of family entertainment. In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jaws</b>, we are made to identify with the heroic Chief Brody(and give the scrappy Hooper his due), and if there’s a villain in the story, it’s the mayor for whom business trumps everything, but the movie is premised on the same logic: Anything to get the audience into the theater.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="154"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It was Spielberg’s childlike qualities that made his subversive streak less noticeable and all the more ‘dangerous’ for that very reason. Indeed, it wasn’t so much that Spielberg failed to grow up but retained what it was like to be a child, also true of Hayao Miyazaki. For Spielberg, the soul of a child is like solid gold, like the idol in the opening of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b>: so rich and so vulnerable to theft. A child can believe in dreams and magic, which makes David’s case in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I.</b> both a blessing and a curse. A blessing because he sees the world in mythic terms(of a blue fairy that can turn him into a real boy) but also a curse because he’s trapped in a dream that can only turn into nightmare. It also makes him vulnerable to manipulation by others who feed on the dream.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There are two daughters in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, and the older one(sixteen) feels less because she knows more. Coming into adulthood, her main concerns seem to be pleasure and friends(who are never shown). In contrast, the younger daughter(who’s five years old) still has a dream-mind that believes in the soul of a dead canary and the spirits emanating from the TV set, whom she calls the ‘TV people’. Before mankind gained a more rational and fact-based map of reality, it believed in the gods, spirits, and demons. People lived in a magic world. Christianity both subdued and heightened this dream sense. The concept of Heaven and Hell envisioned souls after death destined for either Heaven or Hell. Without such certitudes, who knew where those souls would be wandering, perhaps as ghosts driven by envy, spite, or revenge?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="360"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On the other hand, precisely because Christianity elaborated on the hereafter(in contrast to Judaism), life after death became a central theme, and much of horror was premised on the notion of souls failing to make it to Heaven or Hell(or realizing such don’t exist after all). (Spielberg’s favorite movie, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Guy Named Joe</b>, is based on such an idea, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> pays it homage for reasons sentimental and thematic because <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> is also about spirits trapped between life and death. Later, Spielberg remade <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Guy Named Joe</b> into <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Always</b>, perhaps the most endearing of ghost movies, though it was dwarfed at the box office by the next year’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ghost </b>in which Patrick Swayne’s spirit enters Whoopie Goldberg’s body to have lesbian ‘sex’ with Demi Moore; now that sounds like HORROR.) Because children believe in dreams, they live in a kind of a spirit world. In that sense, they can be said to be ‘wiser’, at one with the ancients who also believed in gods and spirits as part of the fabric of reality. Growing older, modern people dismiss their childhood dreams as mere silliness, stuff about dragons and princesses when they once played with toys and believed in fairytales. But along the way they lose something integral to what lends meaning to life. This is especially so in the modern world where educated adults are expected to know they live in a material world, not a spiritual one. Thus, magical/spiritual consciousness is strictly associated with childhood whereas adulthood is about cold-and-sober assessment of reality in material and rational terms. It wasn’t always so, however, as the ancients(and indeed most people up to the rise of modernity) did believe in God, many gods, and/or the spirit world. Before modernity, people went from childhood to adulthood without losing a sense of magic-consciousness. Magical thinking wasn’t dismissed as Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy that children eventually grow out of. (On the other hand, even though modern folks no longer believe in gods, angels, and demons, they have a harder time emotionally growing out of fantasies like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Harry Potter</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Batman</b>.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/VerlHBy9UAA?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Poltergeist and ET (1982) movie reviews - Sneak Previews with Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg has an acute appreciation of the magical thinking of children. It is what makes the little girl in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> ‘wiser’ than the others. Her mind doesn’t neatly dissect the world in categories of real and unreal. And it’s no wonder that <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T. </b>and the young Elliott form such a strong bond. Before you see, you must be willing to believe(bordering on faith), like with Spielberg’s yearnings for U.F.O’s(as his Holy Grail) that led to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b>.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, Spielberg also knows the openness of a child’s mind is vulnerable to manipulation, even corruption. Thus, the little girl in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> sees more but is also easily hypnotized. She senses the TV people but is mesmerized and led astray, made to mistake hell for heaven, heaven for hell; she cannot find her way out of the haunted closet without the well-coordinated plot of others.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="274"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">First and foremost, Spielberg is profoundly Jewish. Not so much because Jewishness(or sense of Jewish tragedy) was instilled in him as a child but because, in his search for meaning and purpose later in life, he returned to the ancient(but also timeless, therefore futurist as well) tribal identity, which he’d been ambivalent about in his youth surrounded by goy kids. Jewishness may have offered less fireworks(than Christmas and pagan fantasies) but was more resilient as fire. In a way, one might surmise Jewishness came to matter more to Spielberg precisely because of his utter enchantment with fantasies concocted by Gentiles; you might say he was a Born-Again Jew, also true of Bob Dylan. When many Jews were grumbling about Uncle Walt the ‘crypto-nazi Anti-Semite’, child Spielberg was sucked into Disney fantasies on the TV screen. And later in young adulthood, some of his favorite movies were by goyim like Howard Hawks, John Ford, David Lean, and the like. By today’s Judeo-centric standards, many of the great film-makers of yesteryear qualify as ‘Anti-Semites’, amusingly detailed in the book <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Secret Lives of Great Filmmakers</i></b> by Robert Schnakenberg, who I presume to be Jewish. The book’s moral outrage about the ‘secrets’ of certain directors is relieved by the generally silly tone and sillier illustrations, so that the details about their bigotry even become endearing. It certainly had me laughing. An example of Schnakenberg’s revelations: “… John Ford was… an Anti-Semite; he was known to address letters to Jewish friends with ‘Dear Christ Killer’.” ROTFL (Of course, there’s no suggestion that Jewish attitudes about white goyim or Christians count as bigotry.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDemvA2F__RKZIkgb6zaZbNybmNwP37_SOSp7YNtvn9orpOUvrB87qiwwrsavmGQMtnPTgKteXVWd3kqGc_NNbhSedfLshBB-F3b37kcvaPtA0MLfXdE71s5pjul8ExYqpc2sJ-1vJXuX9xFnpwdK0TJmqMM1iU9TpuzT-Avrqxq3bLth64ON4CAXOMA/w477-h640/img134.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="477" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/7967769565264393928#" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/7967769565264393928#"><img border="0" class="aligncenter" height="234" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaRYABWEA8LGP-HT_ogq5XY6tkYznu9o0SvatkBSqpM6rBbEO6RA7F_yMPUZbyHXX5K8EE8Bc9oE-sILfza4YrP_NH3YhcweCM9F94VLk96gMmZGBlp0RtvOpAuavQlmdeDdzOFXAzPSPVrmul0k3ZukrN-P23NDHIubPT4mhcsKLXH-nin0A7ePdmLw/w640-h234/img132.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There are certain parallels between Cecil B. DeMille and Steven Spielberg. The half-Jewish DeMille realized his Semitic roots later in life as his Jewish mother had converted to his father’s Episcopalian Faith(now known as globo-homo-anal-faith). DeMille recognized himself in the story of Moses, the subject of his biggest success The <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ten Commandments</b>, who is raised Egyptian but realizes he’s really of the Tribe. Even though Spielberg grew up with full knowledge of his (rather stereotypical)Jewishness, his fantasies derived from pagan and Christian sources, not least because he grew up in overwhelmingly goy settings. How might Spielberg have turned out if born and raised in New York like Woody Allen and Mel Brooks than in Phoenix, Arizona.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="277"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> is Spielberg’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ten Commandments</b>. The space aliens represent the superior race of Jews, and the protagonist Roy(Richard Dreyfus) discovers his true destiny, which is to make cosmic aliyah with hyper-Einsteins from the Planet Zionia. (It also stars Francois Truffaut who, only later in life, discovered his real father is a Jewish dentist.) For Spielberg, the Goy World, especially that of whites, is the stage(or stadium) on which exciting things happen, but the Jewish World is his home, the place of continuity and communion with his REAL tribe. Spielberg’s imagination may wander all over the place, but his blood flows from the river of his tribal ancestors, whether he likes it or not. Then, it is no wonder the cemetery is a key motif in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>. Rather than a mere dumping ground for the dead, it is the truest metaphor of homeland, i.e. a nation is not only where your tribe was birthed, physically and/or conceptually, but where your tribesmen are buried. Americanism, with its relentless emphasis on mobility, opportunity, liberty, and individuality, looks forward than backward. More than in any place in the world, there are ample spaces for cemeteries in North America, but American modernity(now gone global) is about the living(especially the young) than the dead(or the old). It’s about seeking new thrills than revisiting old spirits. Jews, with their entrepreneurial and hustling spirit, took to forward-looking Americanism like sharks to blood, but Jewishness wouldn’t be what it is without the anxiety of memory. Americanism and Christianity only require faith and conviction, whereas Jewishness is nothing without deep sense of connection and loyalty.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With goyim, it boils down to diplomacy & contract. With Jews, it’s family & covenant. No matter how much Steven Spielberg has in common with George Lucas or Robert Zemeckis at the professional level, he probably feels a deeper connection with some Jewish guy he doesn’t even know in Israel or New York. Similarly, even as E.T. comes to share his ‘soul’ with Elliott, he must return to his own kind, without whose proximity his heart ceases to beat. No matter how much Elliot(and his siblings) love and care for the strange creature, there’s no substitute for E.T.’s deeper connection to his race of E.T.’s. It’s a happy ending because E.T. does reunite with fellow E.T.s, all of whom look like a cross between Carl Sagan and Whoopie Goldberg.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, David’s story is ultimately tragic in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I.: Artificial Intelligence</b> because his ‘soulful’ imprinting on Monica as ‘mommy’ is lacking in reciprocity on her part. Worse, she died a long long time ago before he was thawed from the ice, a fact his emotions cannot accept. As for Elliott, despite bidding a most tearful farewell to E.T., he comes to appreciate his own family more upon realizing E.T.’s need to be back with his own kind — it’s sort of like the moment in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Gandhi</b>(1982) when the would-be national leader tells a well-meaning white guy that the struggle must be that of the Indians; they can be friends but not of the same family. (A child or a childlike creature’s reunion with parents, parental figures, or family is a running theme in Spielberg’s movies such as <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Empire of the Sun</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Saving Private Ryan</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">War Horse</b>, and others. And it is at the heart of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> as well as the little girl goes missing, albeit in some mysterious other-dimension within the house.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, does it then follow that Spielberg respects and defends the right of all peoples to have a sense of homeland and heritage? Hell no. Just ask the Palestinians whose land was taken by Jewish immigrant-colonizer-invaders. Palestinians have roots in that part of the world just as ancient as those of Jews. And Spielberg is fully onboard with the Jewish-dominated Democratic Party platform that pushes White Nakba on all the West. He is also a supporter of globo-homo and the mental castration of white male psychology. Spielberg’s born-again Jewishness isn’t merely about healthy tribal pride but arch-Jewish-Supremacism of the Victoria-Nuland-Neocon school.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="376" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgRMAGDeX2_0_nOxur2VT3DQ6W4XVFPd5MyRI9P7OIqqhZ4c6S2BbqBM2KSihpUUEkhbd2fYiok_N5DQarR_0rbhbe-GkqhpPHiXSBtAdZhumoJ7BOeNhRpjOh0TKJ8qtMy2Af7lgNfXUabrp15OOHlUiwBrSdVT6NfFIinxdmVsWQVn7pgez-TSvhu0A/w640-h376/img139.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="246"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though his movies seemed to idealize the norms of White Suburbia, a kind of revamped Norman Rockwellism, the ultimate message is a rejection, or a redemption by serving the higher nobility of crypto-Jewish forces. Just like the Jewish God drove the Egyptians crazy before they relented and let Moses and his people go, Spielberg’s Middle America is tormented to no end(albeit in a fun and entertaining manner) until the higher forces get what they want, like in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> where the space aliens finally take off with Roy, ostensibly an All-American on the outside but Cosmo-Zionic on the inside. So, even though one of the threads of the movie is about a woman trying to reunite with her son, the bigger reunion story concerns Roy and the space aliens. Now, one may ask how such could be a reunion when Roy is an Earthling and has never been with space aliens before. But according to Spielbergian logic, one isn’t necessarily in sync with his TRUE self. Just like Moses didn’t know his True Calling before the Burning Bush, Roy finds his Truer Self with the Space Jew Aliens; indeed, he seems to forget his earthling family soon enough. In a way, Spielberg came up with his own Scientology that has its adherents believing that their true self can be realized only with an understanding of cosmic forces. But if Scientology is literal in its sci-fi-like psycho-cosmology, it’s allegorical with Spielberg.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="166"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">From the very first imaget, it’s clear that <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> is a movie of ideas, Spielberg’s stab at something more along the lines of Stanley Kubrick, David Cronenberg(especially of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Videodrome</b>), David Lynch, and maybe William Friedkin of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b> and Brian DePalma of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Carrie</b>. And of course, Joe Dante, one of the most adroit pop-satirists of Americana, who made The Howling the year before, contributed what many consider the best segment of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Twilight Zone the Movie</b>, and would gain his biggest success with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Gremlins</b> in 1984. At face value, it appears Spielberg’s role as provocateur came short of those ‘auteurs’. Furthermore, he got himself Tobe Hooper(a second-rater at his best) and to serve as a clone rather than an ‘auteur’ in his own right. (One wonders what the result would have been if Hooper had been given free rein to interpret as he pleased. Probably a worse movie but definitely R-rated.) Outwardly, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> seems too tame for horror and too bombastic for thought.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But beneath the surface there’s a lot happening in the movie, at least on the level of John Ford’s Symbolism 101. It’s also the work of Spielberg as a very naughty boy, feigning innocence through mischief. Precociousness usually leads to sophistication in adulthood, but it retained its pristine quality with Spielberg, whose emotions remained childlike, which is what makes <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> especially odd; it’s like horror-porn made by a child.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiOXcRgLl1kAWgMHxFFF8Pr02O5T1svE-_iNrGTcG7c8loNSpAkP7QyjR6ILbTA11-8E-RpXbYCGrzYXf-A1nELQPxGUh2PkT8GZJuzl6WbqaBfcF-I4OraD6quXC-4v9Tjim6t004bSLIvxuNs2gMQ9Zbb7FSW0WSyuhyogUCf-jmNu6_IYyHEb_broQ/w640-h262/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-%20mothman.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="356"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The movie begins with the Star-Spangled Banner as the TV station is about to go off the air. The patriotic images of places and monuments around Washington D.C., especially the Iwo Jima memorial lend a sense of security and confidence in the US, the greatest country in the world. (Spielberg’s later role as executive producer for <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Flags of Our Fathers</b> directed by Clint Eastwood suggests a certain ambiguity about American Heroism in World War II, at least pertaining to the Pacific War. Likewise, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">1941</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Empire of the Sun</b> are far less anti-Japanese than one might expect from such movies. Killing Nazis was great in the European sphere, but maybe White America’s War on the ‘Japs’ had parallels to the Nazi race war on Jews.) Yet, the extreme close-up of the TV screen suggests a quantum mechanics world of chaos, of reality deconstructed into subatomic particles. What TV-viewers take for granted as distinct images seem a rattling mass of pixels, as if to suggest we experience only one plane of reality among multiple dimensions. But what is the deeper reality beyond mundane reality, those infinitely smaller and bigger than the one we are accustomed to, indeed trapped in, the theme of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mothman Prophecies</b> that surely owes a thing or two to Spielberg. At most times, we no more think about the deeper realms of reality than about the multiple angles of history. (One thing for sure, those who control the media regard reality differently from those who consume the media. The latter exist to passively receive and accept what is shown as the reality, or official narrative. In contrast, media operatives know that ‘reality’ is what they themselves shape it to be. For them, reality is fluid in accordance to powerful interests, whereas for the public it is fixed by the truisms of the Current Year.) Most Americans are rather like the family in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>. They seem content in their comfort and relative prosperity, taking it all for granted. They have no reason to question the official narrative by the big media that sign off every night to the national anthem and patriotic images.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="309"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The father has fallen asleep on the recliner in front of the TV screen, which turns to ‘static’ after the station has shut down. The static(accompanied by irritating buzz) is a jumble of chaos but are also the raw material that comes together to form the images on TV. It has no narrative value but reveals the primordial animal-spirit of the TV. It looks like pure unfiltered energy. When a show is on, viewers focus on the characters, locations, story, and effects. They are carried away by what is presented to them as a product, be it a sitcom, soap opera, movie, documentary, or the news. One becomes immersed or distracted by the narrative and the tricks of the trade and doesn’t bother about the nature of the TV medium itself. The images and information streaming through the TV seem definite and familiar, connected somehow to the reality all around us. People and places on TV look like real people and places, and people conveniently overlook the fact that TV images are assembled from a chaos of electronic signals, much like paintings are made of countless tiny little brushstrokes of various colors. In their preference of the recognizable product, people hardly think about the process that turn, for example, a mess of colors into recognizable shapes and patterns in a landscape painting. But if fine art had its Modernist moment when the attention turned from the product to the process itself, movies and TV remained more or less within the conventional narrative, of which <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> is a part but one that at least suggests at the deeper realms of the medium. (Of course, TV could be a metaphor for reality as physics states that ‘matter’ is really a form of energy, i.e. what we consider to be real reality is just a TV show for God.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="267" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEicH4eqj6VGofb9pgpnwyqifjy50F9p4wqFwJKTBG4aLcDM9T8ITtmwsketbWNo7R2gKN0BB3xn2gHNm_TsPDfVD_RqS_0Dj3y_cDWhSAtJJ0zG5YMXOhCFgXNg93lf6Ue8Qc5hkihk7mA9d8fita0TEYB2NdZzBYhEVCLn3PrY1hQfyiCEZven8boiLQ/w640-h267/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-16h53m15s736.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As TV is considered entertainment and escapism(even more so before TV eclipsed cinema as the favored venue of more mature-oriented works), people tend not to notice the profound impact it has on their emotions, bias-formations, worldviews, and sense of norms. It was once called the ‘idiot box’, a dispenser of mostly second-rate material done with third-rate production values. It lacked the prestige eventually attained by cinema, eventually recognized as the Artform of the 20th Century. (And until relatively recently with the advent of digital technology and larger screens, the image quality even on the most expensive analog screens was far from satisfactory.) But even if ignored by most serious thinkers(though there were exceptions like Marshall McLuhan), TV had the most profound impact on billions of people. Incredibly, the dumbest medium had the biggest influence on the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, TV’s hold on our imagination went further precisely because so many of us deemed it beneath serious consideration. It was just there, for light entertainment, sentimental melodrama, cheap thrills, kiddie programs, inane advertising, and the local news(with the usual platitudes). People are more likely to be thoughtful and/or wary of what is deemed serious(possessed of meaning and significance). In contrast, so much of TV just washed over the viewers with their guards down.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Notice how the family members in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> routinely fall asleep with the TV on, snoozing through the station closing with the montage to the national anthem. (They are so different from the frontier families in John Ford movies who make sure everything is safe and secure from animals, Indians, and outlaws before going to bed, always with a rifle and ammo at hand. In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, the father nodded off on the recliner, and the bedroom doors are open for the dog to move in and out of each one, without anyone noticing.) The TV might as well be a lamp or a piece of furniture; indeed, family photos sit atop it. The family obviously never gave much thought about the TV and its power over them and the whole country(and the world). Now, there are real spirits and ghostly presences in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, but the movie seems in large part about the power of the electronic medium, the television and by extension the movies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="478"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, our underestimation of TV has been like the general dismissal of Spielberg. Whereas Spielberg far outshone TV in quality, both were regarded as escapist entertainment. One could admire Spielberg’s talent but think no more seriously about his works than any cheapie junk on TV. The consensus has been Spielberg made super-fun movies but offered little in the way of meaning, which is why he later made ‘serious’ movies to gain some recognition, which peaked with the accolades and awards for <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b>. (Of course, in recent years, popular culture and mass media have become a focal point of scholars and culture critics, whereas highbrow culture has fallen off the radar. But, this isn’t because popular culture has grown in meaning and depth — if anything, the opposite is the case — but because their power to shape attitudes and change ‘minds’ are undeniable; consider how TV shows convinced Americans to celebrate globo-homo, a point made by Joe Biden who now praises TV advertising for instilling white minds with Jungle Fever and ACOWW, or Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs. Thus, fluff has become the right stuff in the Culture War, premised on the notion that most people are irrational dimwits & dummies, incapable of any real thought, and perchance they are, better to suppress their critical faculty lest it question and challenge the Power. Therefore, use irrational means of manipulation via mass entertainment, advertising, and bacchanalia to sway public opinions, and while at it, fuse the news media and state propaganda into a single entity, and why not, as both are now firmly in the control of Jewish Supremacism. So much attention is now focused on pop culture and mass media, far more so than on serious art, books, and culture, but not because the former is deep but because the masses are shallow, with the conclusion that the vast hordes are best swayed and controlled by ‘circus’. It’s telling that the term ‘influencer’ now has more currency than ‘intellectual’. The latter tries to persuade you through argument and reason, whereas the former appeals to you with personality and the ‘cool’ factor, often amounting to Queer Pressure. It used to be the Right relied on unquestioning faith in conventions and trust in authority, whereas the Left stood for challenging sacred cows and fostering a critical perspective, but now, we have ultra-rightist Jewish Supremacists masquerading as ‘leftist progressives’ and relying on unquestioning trust in authority as the cornerstone of their legitimacy and power. Because of the oppositional character of leftism, the current Power maintains the aura of adversarial politics, e.g. ‘critical race theory’, but the discourse is carefully curated to serve the dominant power of Jewish Supremacism. The suckers are fooled into believing they’re engaged in a holy crusade against all-powerful and all-threatening ‘white supremacism’ when, in truth, Jews denigrate whiteness to ensure white obeisance to all-powerful Zionist global-hegemony.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="57"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, however, his fun movies have been far more impactful and not merely because they drew larger audiences. They’ve indeed taken quasi-spiritual possession of countless impressionable souls. The audience experienced something akin to rapture, a feeling that went far beyond the WOW of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</b>, which awed the senses but didn’t capture souls.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="219"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Some things are worthy of serious consideration because of their artistic content, but some things draw serious attention because of their tremendous impact on the mass psyche. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Harry Potter</i></b> books may not be much(even by standards of children’s literature), but they came to define the imagination of several generations. And even though Rap music is stupid and corrosive, its cultural impact on the world is truly momentous, what with even the nursing profession filled with ‘twerking’ ho’s. Spielberg is an interesting case because he ranks among the greatest film-makers but is also the most successful director ever. The only comparable figure is Alfred Hitchcock, great artist and entertainer. Usually, the film artist tends to lose out at the box office whereas the movie-maker tends to lack creativity. Cecil B. DeMille was no slouch and formidable in his own way, but he was no Orson Welles. On the other hand, Welles had difficulty getting his films made. Spielberg had the talent of Welles and the sensibility of DeMille. A cultural mutant who redefined mainstream movie culture. (While the sensual/emotional impact of both Spielberg and Michael Bay is primal and visceral, Spielberg’s methods are subtle, almost subliminal beneath the bombast, whereas Bay’s are crude and simplistic. It’s the difference between fireworks and mere dynamite.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_wYtG7aQTHA?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Steven Spielberg vs Alfred Hitchcock. Epic Rap Battles of History" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="175"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Carrie</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Halloween</b> are horror in the truest sense. The girl is demon-possessed in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b>. Carrie has the power of telekinesis and, though a decent girl, is caught between a crazy mother and nasty bitches. And Michael of Halloween is an embodiment of evil so powerful that he’s near-indestructible. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> has supernatural or paranormal stuff as well, but Spielberg seems to be implying that the electronic medium IS the ghost that haunts(and manipulates and ultimately controls) the modern world. As such, it may qualify more as satire than as horror. There’s a TV in every room, so those who control the TV signals control the spirits that enter into our homes and into our dreams. Every time we turn on the TV, it’s electronic Normandy Invasion, with the spirit-armies created by Jews invading our minds, weakening all defenses, and occupying yet another piece of our souls. Electronic signals know no boundaries. Each house is fenced off from other units, but TV signals intrude(or trespass) into every home.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In other words, those who control the TV stations effectively gain entry into the private spaces of every home. And, like moths before a flame, people are drawn to rays from the tube. This condition is accentuated in the scene where the TV is affected by the next-door neighbor’s remote control. The father has friends over to watch an NFL game but the screen keeps switching to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mr. Rogers</i></b> because, as it turns out, the neighbor keeps tuning to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mr. Rogers</i></b> for his children. There’s a tall fence between the two houses, but the electronic signals cross back and forth with ghostly efficiency. Both are irritated by their respective TV set being affected by electronic interference from the other remote, oblivious to the larger truth that perception of reality is ‘interfered’ with in every home by the TV stations, which are the mother of all remote controls. The owner of a TV may decide between NFL and Mr. Rogers, but the narrow set of options is decided by the media oligarchs. Free to choose among what is offered or allowed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="201"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I suspect the young Spielberg, something of a geek, was more fixated on the TV than other children who merely regarded it as an entertainment box. Spielberg, being more sensitive, intelligent, and obsessive, was more fascinated than most. He wanted to enter into the world behind the TV screen(like in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alice in Wonderland</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Wizard of Oz</b>). One can imagine that boy Spielberg, like the little girl in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, stared into the TV set even after the station shut down for the night. Mere static may have seemed almost like a secret message privy only to himself. And unlike most children whose relation to the TV(and movies) was merely passive and pleasurable, Spielberg finally entered the dream by entering the dream factory. When Dorothy and her friends discover the truth about the ‘sorcerer’ in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Wizard of Oz</b>, they are disillusioned and angry(and David in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I. </b>says his mind seems to be frying upon meeting his real ‘mother’, a neurotic scientist), but that moment was what Spielberg relished most, that HE could be a dream-weaver and draw others into his web of dream-work, especially in their childhood when humans are most vulnerable to manipulation or ‘conversion’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, Spielberg seems to suggest, beaming with pride, that ghostly powers are indeed real enough, but they are not supernatural, paranormal, or otherworldly but electronic(and they shoot out of his fingertips). The signals are invisible but all around us, transmitting carefully selected and arranged sights-and-sounds to billions of devices(expanded exponentially since the 1980s with personal computers, laptops, and ‘smartphones’). Storytelling is as old as mankind itself, but cinema and especially television went one step further. The stories became a kind of watched ‘reality’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Classic storytelling could captivate the reader or listener, but there was always the sense that it was something in the past, even very long ago. Not for nothing are most stories told in the past tense, a recollection of things that happened already. But the past unfolds as the living present through the medium of cinema and TV. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</b> begins with the line “A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away…” but immediately dissolves time and distance as its presents the spectacle right before our eyes as a gigantic Star Destroyer hurdles over us.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="218"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Cinema/television brings back to life the dead as if standing and breathing before our eyes. Ghosts are materialized into living images, almost tangible to the eye. Consider the TV shows <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Roots </b>and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Holocaust</b>. Both were cases of Jews in control of ghost-narratives, i.e. those who control the electronic media decide which ghosts of the past are revived to haunt(and accuse) every home. In the 1970s, someone randomly turning on the TV had a good chance of being mentally whipped with the trials and tribulations of Kunta Kinte, aka Toby. Or you might be watching a denuded Jews getting mowed down in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Holocaust</b> the television event. Those trauma-inducing or shocking images were meant to haunt the psyche of the viewers, especially the white folks whom Jews wanted robbed of racial pride of identity and history. It was the Jewish Way of spooking white psychology with black and Jewish ghosts. And given the immense capacity of human memory, those images and sounds were bound to linger long after the series ended. White folks made to weep over the mountain-sized Negro who done love a little white mouse in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Green Mile</b> were probably marked for life. “Save that poor helpless Negro, boo hoo hoo.” It explains all the hair-pulling about St. George Floyd of Fentanyl heaven.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="163"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, an archetypal white family is haunted by the dead who communicate with the little gir through the TV set(and stereo devices) and are eventually captured on video equipment. It doesn’t matter that the family is innocent of the ‘crime’(of not having removed the bodies along with the gravestones when a cemetery was cleared for housing development). The developers were the guilty party, but the family must suffer too, just like all Egyptians were punished for the decisions of the Pharaoh in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ten Commandments</b>. The family’s name is Freeling, which could be German or Jewish(as many Jews took German surnames), but there’s no indication that the family is Jewish except that the father happens to be one hell of a salesman. If meant to be Jewish, he’s one of those types fully assimilated into White Gentile Culture(for which he must be punished), but my guess is the family isn’t meant to be Jewish.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="166"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Because <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> really concerns the Jewish control of electronic media that select which set of ghosts shall haunt the households via TV sets — for sure, it won’t be about the Palestinian ghosts of Nakba or Ukrainian ghosts of the Great Famine — , it diverges from the Horror convention of evil or demonic spirits. Even though the fright-stuff appears diabolical throughout the movie, it is revealed to be justified. It is righteous rage upon the living by those who’ve had their graves desecrated. (It’s significant that the father is a real estate agent as so much of the world’s troubles arise from ‘location, location, location’, or what is lawful to some is deemed illegal by others, and what is home to some is claimed as holy by others.) So, unlike the Devil in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b> or telekinesis in Carrie(that ultimately proves destructive), the apparently evil spirits in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> turn out to be understandably frustrated spirits seeking righteous release(and a bit of revenge).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In this way, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> took something from fellow Lawrence Kasdan’s script of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b> based on the idea from another Jew Philip Kaufman who contributed the ‘ark’ angle to George Lucas’s original story. (<b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b> may have been transformative for Spielberg. For the first time, he could be upfront and aggressive about Jewish themes of vengeance, and the effect likely rubbed off on the <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> project.) Near the very end of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b>, the ghosts released from the artifact are spooky enough but turn out to be good angels of death hellbent on destroying Evil Nazis. In a similar vein, the spirits in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> are in turmoil because the developers economized by relocating the headstones but not the bodies in a cemetery purchased for development. (Given all the land in California, was it really necessary to turn graveyards into suburbs?)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s likely an allusion to the Holocaust, or Spielberg’s not-so-subtle way of saying, “You goyim think World War II is history and forgotten, but we Jews will NEVER FORGET all those Jews murdered by your white Anti-Semitic scum.” Also, if Americans in the postwar years preferred to believe that Nazism was just an aberration of Western History and ultimately defeated by good ole God-fearing Christian America, which happens to be a liberal democracy, or the Home of the Free, Jews have another perspective: The Holocaust is really a culmination of the entire history of Christian antisemitism and Aryan racial consciousness that go back eons. So, if White Americans view themselves as the Good Guys who beat the Nazi Bad Guys, Jews see World War II in terms of less-bad-guys defeating the more-bad-guys, but less-bad-guys are still bad guys whose day of punishment, humiliation, and destruction must come. No wonder Jews push the Great Replacement or White Nakba. No wonder Jews push ACOWW(or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs) and the cuck-castration-of-white-balls.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="62"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> is also a dig at the American Capitalist mentality, especially resurgent in the Reagan Era. Materialism based on free enterprise posited that development and prosperity are the true metrics of Americanism. It is also the great redeemer, baptizing U.S. history of its ‘sins’ with improved lives for all. American Indians lost their tipis but now have homes to live in.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="33"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And many white Americans, deracinated and consumerist, seemed content with such an outlook. (Later, this became George W. Bush telling Americans to go shopping to show the world that they stand strong after 9/11.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="297"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While Spielberg became a super-capitalist himself(and always wanted to be one), wealth and luxury are not his highest priorities. In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b>, the protagonist Roy even loses his job to discover his true place in the cosmos. In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b>, the main character is initially motivated by money alone(than by Nazi ideology or animus toward Jews) but later sacrifices his entire fortune to save the Jews. (It’s telling that, whereas the highest good for a Jew is to serve his own kind, the highest good for white goyim is to betray their own kind in favor of Jews. Now, given the great crimes associated with Nazism, one may argue that Schindler in Spielberg’s film didn’t so much choose Jews over Germans, his own people, as choose justice over evil, but I’m not sure Spielberg cares about universal justice. He must know the history of Palestine, how it was destroyed by the Zionists, but he lacks any Schindlerian sentiments about victims of Nakba. He’s perfectly happy with World Jewry and white goyim in the West supporting Zionists and stomping on Palestinians. So, his tribal morality dictates not only that Jews stick with Jews even when they do wrong but that white goyim stick with Jews even when Jews do wrong. Like Sam Harris, Spielbergian morality is tribalism packaged in faux-universalist wrapping.) In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Empire of the Sun</b>, a British boy(born and raised in China) becomes entranced by Japanese fighter planes and enamored of an American smuggler but discovers his real place is with his parents; the boy clearly serves as surrogate for Jewish feelings of cultural orphanism, i.e. Spielberg grew up chasing after so many goy fantasies but found his true place in the bosom of his own kind.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="192"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, the family lives in a fast-developing community of clean and spacious new homes. It seems like a slice of paradise, the American Dream come true in the era of Morning in America. But, dream turns into nightmare when it turns out the developers, for the sake of expediency, profits, or just plain old greed, violated the trust of the families whose dear departed are buried in the cemetery that was converted into residential space. Thus, beneath the placid surface of American Suburbia, there lies the dark truth of deception and betrayal. It’s clearly meant to be allegorical as Spielberg the closet-super-Zionist is profoundly Jewish. In a nutshell, it was Spielberg’s way of sticking it to White America: “Don’t think it’s the End of History because of the good life and the American Pie getting bigger for everyone. We Jews will never forgive you white Christian goyim for the hell you people put our ancestors through.” So, the dead forgotten bodies allude to the Holocaust. Spielberg’s apparent paeans to White Suburbia are deceptive. His movies are as much about what they hide than what they show.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-9Z3VoyInIgiK_-T7vs-lsocLX6qZ1h_eHm255P40eQCtqUC-xwMtjrb9OauwW9R62b-VQAk5cQaJEWXV62oBP2Yc3EvQIX4jqtVSFMcm56caWjGUYOfF1xyaORPQDWmtLSnCqfAfu9u4E6IOX2HkL5CbDALv2i07kva5diZmpsckt1PpplE95HELHQ/w467-h640/img126re.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="467" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="601" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzKhrgttW3Eca03XYONjaC_Tvbsg5aoE7zPL1cnU7VOZBAzsUS-f5L2qKrr63DP-DDR2ofS_qo7qitfwYlr4kS8Wt3z-B_-5kHW4KA9XX5Vc-ka7ZJqVOXh9Gd9svp9bhuHbcQV1LQrHPozitM68JLHjxOOjYQ9V_v7pyZBjweEFce3BAcE-p3TtnwCw/w640-h601/img128.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="193"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the opening scene, we notice family photos atop the TV set. It’s as if the television has become the central object in the living room(and there is one in the master bedroom as well). It not only serves as a source of news & entertainment(or portal of Jewish Mind Control) but as the family altar. That everyone is asleep could be an allusion to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Invasion of the Body Snatchers</b>. The family dog, a golden retriever, goes from person to person, mainly sniffing for morsels. Being a dumb animal, it has no motive beyond food, but it inadvertently wakes up the little girl, setting into motion a series of mini-events that turn the family upside down. Perhaps, it’s to suggest that humans, especially goyim, are like dogs and go through the motions without understanding their significance and implications. The dog was just looking for food but woke up the little girl by sniffing around her. Later, the mother surmises the girl, Carol Anne(played by Heather O’Rourke), was sleepwalking, but her daughter was fully awake when she came down the oddly-situated staircase, albeit in an almost trance-like state.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Why was SHE contacted first? (Carol Anne looks like a female dead ringer to the little boy in Close Encounters; Spielberg sure knows how to pick them for the eyes.) She is the first to commune with the ‘spirits’ while everyone else remains asleep. If <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Invasion of the Body Snatchers</strong> is about “get them while they’re asleep”, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> begins as if to say, “get them when they’re young.” Children, with limited capacity for distinguishing reality from fantasy, make ideal pickings for manipulation. Then, it’s no wonder that the spirits(or ghosts, phantoms, or whatever) came for her first.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, it anticipates what was to come with the rise of globo-homo, pornification of kiddie entertainment, and the Jewish politicization of childhood. (But then, religions have long understood this as well, initiating young ones into the order before they develop critical faculties and ask questions. Still, outside matters of God, it was widely held that childhood is mostly about innocence and ignorance, and so, children shouldn’t be politicized, let alone sexualized, at such a tender age, no more than an unripened fruit should be picked from a tree.) Jews know it’s more difficult to bring people to certain ‘values’ and inclinations at an older age. Conversion is harder as it has to overcome the initial aversion. Immersion is easier as the child grows up into those ‘values’ as the norm. It’s like circumcision is far easier with a baby than with an adult, who must be convinced(and even forced) to undergo the painful ordeal.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, the demeanor of the older daughter Dana(Dominique Dunne) is usually nonchalance or eye-rolling cynicism(until the shit really hits the fan and makes her hanker for ‘faith’). And the middle child Robbie(Oliver Robins) is too young for conceit but old enough to recognize strangeness. When the TV people contact Carol Anne, she finds it ‘normal’, not weird. In contrast, when Robbie later finds his fork and spoon suddenly twisted, he knows something has gone awry.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="206"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, the trick is to ‘get them when they’re young.’ It might as well be the motto of Jewish-controlled ‘wokeness’. That way, Jews and their allies won’t have to convince anyone that the weird, kinky, demented, and perverted are the New Normal. Young children, with blank and open minds lacking in context, can be introduced to the New Normal as something ‘natural’, indeed as their first cognition of social reality. They can be led to accept perverted tranny drag-queens as magical fairies. And if introduced to kink at an early age at ‘pride’ festivals, they might come to regard kink as something ‘ordinary’; it’s like children born and raised in head-hunting or human-sacrificing tribes don’t find the practice sick or odd. It’s no wonder so many children’s books have been politicized with globo-homo kiddie-porn or BLM narratives(but nothing about how the IDF routinely terrorizes Palestinian children). It’s no wonder places where children congregate, especially elementary schools and public libraries, have been targeted by the get-them-while-they’re-young agenda. It is to acculturate the young ones into ‘woke’ idolatry so that they will grow into it as the First Norm than be made to accept it as the New Norm.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After all, the notion of the New Normal implies there was(or still is) an Old Norm, which invariably leads to comparisons and contrasts. But if children are raised into the New Normal as the First Normal, they will think it is the ONLY Normal. Because Spielberg made all these family movies(and has a gun collection and is pals with John Milius), some may believe that he’s a closet-conservative, but whatever is conservative about him is Judeo-centric, and that means supporting any policy to weaken white goyim into serving Jewish Supremacism. Globo-Homo and Tranny-Wanny are such Jewish tools and proxies. As a big donor to the Democratic Party, one may reasonably surmise that Spielberg is fully onboard with drag-queen story hours, ‘gay pride’ parades, kink for kibblers, cult of ‘white guilt’, and encouragement of gender-lunacy(and mutilating the genitals of boys and girls). All said and done, his agenda is hardly different from that of George Soros and the lowlifes at $PLC.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="130"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Carol Anne talks to the TV screen, waking the others to assemble in the living room in a state of puzzlement. She then puts her Two Little Hands on the screen, whereupon the screen cuts to Two Big Trees on a hillside. It’s an idyllic image(especially with Jerry Goldsmith’s effective imitation of John Williams), but something’s a bit off. It looks like summertime, but the trees are barren. The view from the hills is a perfect encapsulation of suburbia, snugly distanced from both urban problems and small town backwardness. Suburbia is at once old-fashioned and up-to-date. It’s like the latest manifestation of homesteading, except the dwellers are professionals and consumers rather than toilers of the soil. It’s about keeping green lawns than growing corn.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="264" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaZz0HGWZRM60-nkniut-e9_riEz3Rin1e6nZjJluG-WmllAdvN2gcALnDD_YysgCJS8eLouiBLWf_V1yIhZFPg69BbB6n3p9G8qK0b5SffRKd68-iQO8l-jX-b2UfQETPonLYN7VQ-4ft-UbFItgTGqIVU36dXPEGhg5E-suVTyPhErKN7j-gtM7pfQ/w640-h264/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-idyllic.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="231"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">We are treated to a funny sight of a bald bearded guy with a case of beer on a kid’s bike. He’s in a hurry, as if he might miss out on the most important thing. Still a boy at heart, he’s rather like Spielberg, except that Spielberg mastered childhood emotions as an instrument, even a weapon, to conquer the global imagination. As the baldo-beardo pumps the pedals, four mischievous children plan a prank with remote-controlled toy cars, which make the guy fall off the bike with bursting beer cans. The kids laugh, and it looks like innocent fun but foreshadows what lies ahead. Just like the kids use invisible electronic signals to move objects(toy cars) to mess with the path of the man-on-bike(who, by the way, remains in the dark as to what happened), the spirits later use all sorts of energies undetectable to human senses to wreak havoc on the family. The control of electronic signals that light up our devices is the dark power of modernity. It can be used for a harmless prank or to control satellites that beam news(and propaganda) to billions of viewers(or to lob missiles at nations hated by Israel). Spielberg certainly gained ‘Poltergeistal’ power with his mastery of the movie medium, through which he entered and haunted the minds of entire generations, parents and children alike.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The baldo-beardo with the beer is so eager to gain entry into the Freeling house(where his friends are watching an NFL game) that it hardly registers what happened with the bike. Things get a bit naughty here as he enters through the kitchen with leaky beers. In the foreground is Dana the daughter biting into a pickle(phallic symbol) while the baldo-beardo with the leaky beer cans looks like he’s ejaculating. (No wonder Spielberg distanced himself from <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> with Tobe Hooper as a buffer.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjB_jtyVX9R9q_HtpFOBee_U2fGHUhyE8n4MWpI5_-jvMbfRazqiXc6W1Dv3bM3vh3lsJuv25u3Cz69NTbpQdFxP_dyJBi2Z65w5d53ENuoz4IxEXvdXr8Keua9F41KxCDV_SVnhc2Loj0CSjEjrUu_Gj9NxcXfLlkA0GqHsp6hEr1thq9wkKBXnq9yLw/w640-h260/vlcsnap-2022-08-01%20adult%20in%20kiddie%20bike.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEipsSBmo1kh_Mv8n431v93c11KinTrBS1mZWzJNhHGXJfbvQ56hDqp5p5QPdW5BOz48TJCzk_JDKTmY-mhxL9sliLl0EAgnulPVit68KNTWm0J5J3Z8Qhb7vWI5oClXQ0xkQ2QYbkCq-NiIkA6tT-uY5XFUd3tC9PdHG27Rd9zSEaDlTq3pJRT_GqCXsA/w640-h265/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-16%20contro%20remote%20device%20via%20signals..jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="259" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgkHyTDyJeLk2uTKEiaesR4DCLdpI9P5gbqJ15SLPwwkdlEac-RI0uDZyEvHY8iuvorcnmDv6VRXj1qe-pV1oFZFwqaxeKRbtW8JgpUi-qiww3b1Yz4yHj3LaS8IM4QjV-apHu5yHBXSqP8cWF91Xc4JiRbISOFDI6pH7ZFMWTx6PIUoHXueg1PrxC-Aw/w640-h259/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-16h57m33s047.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The men all excited about the football game seem to be in their 30s or 40s but act like teenagers. It’s as if the game is happening right before their eyes, the most important thing in the world to which they are entitled and addicted. But, it’s really just electronic signals controlled by the conglomerates. Suddenly, when the men get most hysterical, the TV switches from the game to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mr. Rogers Neighborhood</i></b>. The men are aghast, speechless, until Steve, the father, explains what likely happened. You see, his TV and the neighbor’s TV respond to each other’s remote control. That explains it, but the men are outraged, and Steve appeals to the neighbor’s good graces but is rebuffed, whereby the two men act like gunslingers with remotes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="136"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As with the toy cars, Spielberg plays on the theme of invisible powers. Despite the clear physical separation between Steve’s house and his neighbor’s house, electronic signals know no borders and pass ghostlike through fences, walls, ceilings, roofs. Thus, electronic signals enter like burglars(or the secret police) into every home via TV and radio(and now computer devices) to steal the hearts and souls of the unwitting public in their private places. The next door neighbor isn’t identified ethnically but could be Jewish, what with a push-back personality who insists on doing it his own way, even if it interferes with the game-day fun for the men in the other house. (Spielberg’s works are like a cross between football games and Mr. Rogers Neighborhood, which explains their appeal. People like thugs-and-hugs.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="293" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgR_eNRCT4pxK_lJYTfFK-R1iIxMrdvFfMfATrvfDJ-L3ajOozn_wSaurH2uZjOdFVUQ4gsKvuCuYR9hi1s1Tdc1TbtmDsD8BLIaOcEBdIasttRadjEyCnlbWK4Gs3WMk1xzGN4RNGUznmURHhc_esLy9ZwXwS6UxEqpWkiVPjetKe0Iz8Y8L3EIYWgow/w640-h293/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-%20separated%20physically%20but%20not%20signally%20that%20affect%20both%20sides%20-%20%20serious%20man%20the%20power%20of%20signal%20porous%20and%20has%20poltegeist%20like%20powers%20inclusion%20is%20intrusion%20intrusive%20-%20cigar%20suggest%20jew.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While the men are all excited(or upset) about the football game, Diane the mother(JoBeth Williams) makes the bed in the room shared by her son and younger daughter. The bed sheet has C-3PO, and the room is full of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</b> toys and memorabilia, as if to suggest the Freelings are a typical deracinated white family whose only culture is sports and entertainment. Thus, what seems like a homage to George Lucas could also be a dig at him and White America. The pagan Force can’t protect the kid from the power of the Jewishy dark magic controlled by Spielberg.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="22"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It seems just another weekend for the mother, but she notices the canary is dead. Does it signify the canary-in-the-coalmine, a harbing</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="265" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEifeNCL0QBr0zCgmMU5meYdGsu2g1LKkKdBWZ8d_ar6xRJlRBejaAMUm0SFz1L0ZzG4xTMS9RPe-2TIPweybJCSLieSWK33SyZbmcz4Zuny0pzsB1WHwtSOoLU5rxdD5f1jlH-IKra6K6TACvWjGE_8acwUs8Og-pBipE8YJTl9ZCyzQK9QvjTPoLuTlQ/w640-h265/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-16h58m12s835.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="248"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">er of things to come? More likely, the canary represents Anne Frank, or the dead Jew. Indeed, when she notices something odd about the bird, she holds a pair of metal skates that perhaps symbolize the train-tracks that sent Jews to the death camps. But more relevant to the theme, her sadness seems minor, a mere matter of inconvenience. She asks the Anne Frank bird why it couldn’t have died a day or two later when the kids would have been at school. And her solution is to flush it down the toilet. The shadow of the canary on the upright toilet seat looks like an icon of Virgin Mary, and Carol Anne appears just when the bird is about to be dropped into the bowl. The mother chooses a more dignified farewell for the bird to spare the little girl’s feelings(and to salvage her own image before the child), more a product of self-conscious anxiety than conscience. The bird is given a dollhouse version of a ‘christian burial’. It is placed inside a cigar box, and the little girl includes a photo, licorice, and napkin as if bidding farewell to her dearest friend in the world. The cigar box may be linked to the next-door neighbor(the one who bickered with the remote) who had a cigar in his mouth. Cigar produces ashes, which could be an allusion to the Holocaust. That minor detail, along with another later, suggests the man is indeed Jewish.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="257" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnhzVE0VpG_ayQvW5_0nC0pYax77_M_NtBEyvadlrcnaTlZZJNVQlxDDORWfFkj9KEvqZohPvp6jHokf5fDahWckAnDboK86uqTpqpkDoXxqFJHLBvSX-F_O05PTNNCmf74jOpOMhXm6iJL2-ryhALMxgN59kSXFqgG00Wpp5HhPsFOTshBmkcYoXmtA/w640-h257/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-16h58m57s886.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhW7kyZBf8NhAYa7Ruht7SAs_XaDZSvZxM3C7BJVUKn2vrdlJYXhnojcaTgFmDbZjuyocBFvYvKgZNFOutzvlybJMEeQHIM_6wUXjJSmH9eW4Cv8EOejIWrKr9Q7TPwgys0gVTyqbwIU_sxFpveNNR_rDlTYAl9pWnVqKdDNjqG2XKeeWM1uo9P8PxdDA/w519-h640/virgin%20mary%20icon.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="519" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While mother and daughter are preparing for a ‘christian burial’ for feathery Anne Frank, the son stares up at a tall tree right outside his bedroom. If the trees shown earlier were alive but leafless, this tree seems long dead. It serves as a double visual pun. It stands as a mangled crucifix, or how Jews look upon the Jesus symbol. For Christians, it represents sacrifice, redemption, and salvation. For Jews, it represents something far darker as, in their eyes, Jesus and the Disciples were renegade Jews who betrayed the Tribe by passing the Jewish Secret to the filthy goyim who, to make things worse, used the Faith to label Jews as a bunch of Christ-killers undeserving of trust and respect.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="238"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, the tree has another meaning, and Spielberg gets naughty here. He associates the mangled crucifix with the penis as its branches jut out like so many erections. Thus, it also serves as the Dong Tree. (Later, a black character enters the picture, and the tree could also be an allusion to lynching Negroes in the South. A rope also enters the picture later. Given movies like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Color Purple</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amistad</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Lincoln</b>, it’s obvious Spielberg loves to play on ‘white guilt’ as much as the next Jew, albeit in a more heart-tugging way.) Robbie the son climbs the tree and sits atop a big branch as if to say ‘muh dick’. He looks far into the distance and sees storm clouds gathering towards the area. It’s as if the tree, rooted to the ground, is calling out to the clouds, much like Jesus on the Cross calling out to Heaven. As it turns out, the house was built on a great injustice, and the dead tree is like a conduit between the power of heavenly justice and souls beneath the earth calling for deliverance. It’s like Christian mythology but in service to Jewish angst. Just like the Jewish spirits in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b> called upon heavenly powers to destroy the Nazis, it’s as if the dead souls in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> are calling for heavenly powers to bring upon their release.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgTHiej7akl55E4wz8kEveMXjgledSrv3IQIG1XZlemN7dwFuYkzZz4USGiAvkdKxF4J4b69zKHSYbL-BTHlt5hd1JHh3j2peO59I7qfJFozWoGUiYsguQE7nUn2VhNmd-ayl96Us5dPquHUaPzL0pCqseP-xSadVyec1K1oQBzHrm3CK2dXFoRHTmyZA/w640-h262/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h02m06s644.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While the boy is perched atop the Dong Tree, the three women of the family kneel at the garden performing funeral rites for the bird. The masculine tree and feminine garden both signify life, but the tree is dead and what’s being planted in the soil is not seeds but a stiff canary. The girl is tearful, and mommy gives her a hug, warm and approving(while Dana, the bored older daughter, just goes through the motions). The dog licks its chops as the bird is buried. The dog, with the odd name of E. Buzz, only sees it as food(or a piece of bone) with no understanding of the solemnity of the moment. Its mental field of primal appetites cannot comprehend the complexity of human behavior, and it may be Spielberg’s way of saying goyim similarly cannot understand the higher consciousness of the Jew, i.e. goy is to Jew what dog is to man. (That said, the dog does have more acute senses and notices something strange before everyone else, with the possible exception of Carol Anne.) The goy-animal comparison is later accentuated when the mother imitates a shark when saying nighty-night to Carol Anne and when her husband Steve imitates a duck on the bed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="224"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Carol Anne seems truly saddened by the death of her bird, as if she’ll never get over it. But, as soon as the mini-ceremony is over, she is all smiles and sunshine and asks for a goldfish. It could be Spielberg’s way of reminding fellow Jews that they cannot rely on goy’s emotions. All said and done, it’s just sentimentality, here today, gone tomorrow. So, even though Jews were showered with sympathy and affection following World War II, white goyim will likely forget about it soon enough and fixate on something else; they will go from ‘canary’ to ‘goldfish’. It implies Jews must continue haunting the minds of goyim forever and ever because, the moment Jews let go of that grip, the goyim will forget about the Holocaust and move onto some other passion as the new fashion. Indeed, look how easily white goyim forgot about God and Jesus once the Church lost its grip on morals and spirituality. White goyim today are more likely to be enthralled over Noble Negro, Holy Homo, or even Kinky Tranny, the new passion-fashions of the age. But then, white folks surrendered to God and Jesus, the product of Jewish Culture, in the first place because they lacked prophetic imagination and a deep-rooted sense of their own identity and heritage, something like the Covenant.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="292" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhD5HjH8giR3pL8RucyfhcAoaVBHVMxfgmK8O9JxPinIQ5626_nLuhAc9POfjVfHU7jM1wK3xmAca2p6uodieCEZqecn8vaqsHLtuserle-mFzeP1kDKdBG6EwizAuS6A22UESaKcvShbqIZShm6OxqYj8NbVVPZSg_PAx0zwIEpsZy4Kmu4a98F1OTdg/w640-h292/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-women%20on%20the%20ground%20-%20bush.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Later that night, what had been the fun Dong Tree(for Robbie to climb) looks forbidding outside the window. It looks like a mangled crucifix. If Jesus suffered on the Cross, the dead tree itself seems in torment and agony(and rage). The storm clouds the boy had seen earlier atop the tree now looms above the neighborhood. The rain and thunder make the tree seem even more ominous. Carol Anne has her goldfish and reminds mommy to keep the light inside the closet, as if artificial electricity provides security from spooky things in the dark and the thunder outside.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the master bedroom, Diane rolls a joint while Steve reads a book on Ronald Reagan. It plays almost like an introduction to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Big Chill</b>(released a year later, written and directed by Lawrence Kasdan who did the screenplay for <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b>). It’s a typical 80s Boomer Moment(though the marijuana is rather out of character for a Spielberg movie). Movies like Albert Brooks’ <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Lost in America</b> and TV shows like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Family Ties</i></b> presented boomers who’d gone from radicals, hippies, idealists, or romantics to settled materialist professionals and members of Middle America. Steve may not qualify as a yuppie because he’s a suburban man. A subuppie? Steve comes across as a typical striving middle class boomer who put the Counterculture behind him(if he was a part of it) and is content to gain success as the top salesman of a development company. He’s not filthy rich but part of the upper-middle-class, and Diane can stay at home.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="195"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, for all the material comfort and economic security, something seems to be amiss, though whatever’s lacking is open to interpretation. It’s the spooky crisis just around the corner that leads to a ‘re-evaluation of values’, progressing from the pagan to the Christian to the Holocaustian. Lawrence Kasdan’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Big Chill</b> was about middle-class midlife anxiety for a generation so defined by youth and idealism. In having settled down with a modicum of prosperity, did they ‘sell out’? Unlike Kasdan, Spielberg seems relatively disassociated from the Sixties as a cultural expression, and based solely on his movies, one would hardly know the Counterculture even happened. Whereas directors like Oliver Stone, born in the same year, constantly revisited Sixties themes, most of Spielberg’s historical references involve the 19th century, World War I, and World War II. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Catch Me If You Can</b>, an exception, is almost entirely inspired by consumer culture and advertising that hardly reflected the political and social changes afoot(so unlike today when they play a leading role in proselytizing ‘wokeness’). Indeed, it’s about a man escaping from personal and social reality by living a fake life financed by fraud.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When most people of Spielberg’s age were into the Rolling Stones and drugs(or avant-garde European cinema), Spielberg’s biggest hero was David Lean, then being written off as old-hat. Then, even though the dawning of the Reagan Era in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> seems eerily amnesiac, the real ‘crime’ isn’t about the betrayal of Sixties Idealism but of something deeper and more tragic: What happened in World War II with the Jews.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_9HOFrHv_QSbBTwB8jZyJl7ZH8aom0bV_WutIdMHokVlb0rXPnkYAg2wisALp-5SqyRMa0EFwnI9rVDuhWIAAyf-CEX1EahSvotF96LlieRWngC-Fa_Di5wWD3ibyWEsN9V3nJ3Nyou2GPMIpAd4tEnyUCWwdd728lImV6XW6LLo7pclcmpLjUc9Dlw/w640-h262/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h03m58s576.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="408"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Diane’s mind is on the joint and Steve’s on the Reagan book(an odd but telling combo), the TV is on and playing <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Guy Named Joe</b>, one of Spielberg’s favorite movies(and one where the hero finds himself between life and death). The TV seems to be turned on like the lamp as neither Steve nor Diane seems to pay particular attention to what’s playing. It has become the modern equivalent of the fireplace, something that makes the house glow. (It’s like the first thing many people do upon entering the hotel room is turn on the TV regardless of what’s on. The rays and buzz fill up the room with the semblance of life, a sense of connectedness with the world.) Diane says there must be a genetic thing between Carol Anne and herself, who used to sleepwalk as a child — she doesn’t know Carol Anne was not sleepwalking. She recounts an episode when her younger self sleepwalked into a car belonging to a stranger. The motif of sleepwalking suggests how people routinely move through life unawares. The trouble that befell the unfortunate driver(later investigated by the police for a possible abduction of young Diane) is similar to what happens to the family. The man wasn’t guilty of any crime but grilled nevertheless. Likewise, the family isn’t guilty(of what the housing development company did or failed to do), but it is put through the wringer just the same. It’s like the Jewish God’s wrath is collectively targeted against the enemies of His Chosen People. So, it doesn’t matter that not all Egyptians were responsible for the plight of the Hebrews; they must ALL be punished. Likewise, it doesn’t matter that most whites didn’t terrorize or murder Jews or had anything to do with the Holocaust. What matters is that the White West must be collectively held responsible for ‘antisemitism’ and be punished one way or another for all eternity(as Jews control the <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> machines of the media to haunt the minds of every new generation with vengeful ghosts of the Jewish Past, along with Negro ghosts and homo fairies); indeed, not only do Jews haunt goy minds but goyim haunted by Jews also haunt goy minds. Quentin Tarantino isn’t Jewish, but he obviously channeled <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b> in the theater-burning finale in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Inglorious Basterds</b>.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So much in Spielberg movies seems harmless or mundane, the familiar stuff of suburban life, but lurking beneath are matters of deeper significance. (No wonder the bulk of the action in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Goonies</b> happen underground, right below the seemingly placid community.) For example, Diane expresses anxiety about the construction of a backyard swimming pool — what if sleepwalking Carol Anne falls into it? — , but the conversation shifts to jokes about diving. Steve makes several poses and makes Diane laugh. He mentions the Olympics, and one wonders if this isn’t an allusion to Leni Riefenstahl’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Olympiad</b>, of which the diving montage is among the most famous. The swimming pool may symbolize Aryan health and vitality, and later it is from the half-dug pool filled with rainwater that the buried bodies begin to emerge. It goes from Riefenstahl’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Olympiad</b> to Kubrick’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Shining</b>.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="297" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgH8vhRNMmPUkXQlMycLiGd--gtDklozDsgKhH7bjwu_0VLWnr4GkZeElZ56j3qhkvjWz_exZHnC2Mj7RvpB8dOpUMalsImuHmW-88D3KvtVBvatLobxrpX-TNdg1pXIxE3ME6MankiHUnUPjnIXpmzUNC0BlhiSBYIVGcpN6n22P08wQVK33t_g1egNw/w640-h297/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-%20riefenstahl.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="175"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The thunder frightens Robbie, made worse by the Tree outside the window flared up by lightning. He ascribes sinister motives to the tree, but Steve assuages him with alternate interpretation, that it’s a wise old tree looking over the house and family. (The boy has a similar reaction to a jester or clown doll. It looks harmless in the daylight but menacing in the dark.) Interpretations are useful, a way of coping, but not to be confused with the truth. Steve’s interpretation may do the trick to relieve Robbie’s fears, but the truth(according to Spielberg’s story idea) is far darker. It’s Spielberg’s way of saying that goyim may explain or understand such-and-such phenomenon in their own way, but what really matters is not the interpretation of the observer but the intention of the thing itself. So, while goyim may interpret Jews as these wise and wonderful people, the actual Jewish Heart could be full of contempt and vengeance toward goyim. One interprets benevolence, but the other intends malevolence.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Be that as it may, the thunder continues, and we see Robbie and Carol Anne in bed with their parents. Again, they fell asleep with the TV on, and it’s a replay of the movie’s opening with the national anthem and the flickering images of Iwo Jima monument as the station prepares to go off the air, leaving only static on the screen. And as before, Carol Anne wakes up and communes with the screen, except that this time, a ghostly limb reaches out of the screen. Then, in a rather disturbing scene, it’s as if the screen ejaculates a beam of light onto the wall above the headboard of the bed. The light passes through Carol Anne’s head, and then the bed begins to shake orgasmically like in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b>. Father, mother, and son wake up thinking it’s an earthquake.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="264" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiXZ5zrxXdwcSaEwTKhJwYlhpaWcPJFWzKiGs2JLHfUdtnXzPLpushtjpdcBKiHRTl46MkRXW7lCfckkfR28jA2Gd9ihz5XMb8ij-T6n4DkI3OzxpqdrPO0wfS1v_Jn_ReCzuCBZgrirwFUxkEwdEL1-Na0cGTYoJIAFzSd7pa_CdlMHNnjzPFM-hAUtw/w640-h264/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h06m43s566.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Next, we see a bulldozer in the backyard plowing into the grass to make way for the swimming pool. Again, what looks like mundane activity in suburbia has deeper symbolism. The machine recalls Holocaust film footage of bodies bulldozed into pits. The wooden markers around the bulldozer resemble crucifixes, nudging that Christendom itself is guilty of what happened to Jews. The cigar-box-coffin holding the Anne Frank canary is unearthed by the blade of the bulldozer. It foreshadows the coffins emerging from the ground at the end of the movie. It’s also as if Anne Frank’s vengeful spirit has been released upon the community, somewhat similar to the unearthing of the Pazuzu figurine in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b>, the difference being the spirits are justified in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj4jnLrXkZG__kGXAZ4K3lykaW_xTGni5y3HtCWd8Di2NXaU9-nEIug559piGEwyRWRwdcR_INoBfR3fexHACWS3yGwgotbJkYAvTjNzhFBHxzumbkhlh_ax0Ra6WZOUn0VL2fPlgzID3LsuDe73BXIHO2bnkEee4Ygkn8l1fZ4fG2NmWLpn48EfeZxwQ/w640-h266/bulldo.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /><img class="aligncenter" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiScIr5VSbyZJZdsdwckohPp-wRa9wifJRWFZ9FmTGSuD5j6KMLc-mzbbB0S-Z9ohbTWzc4PRjaNwjsFP3HASJ32ztBMGaRT83macX43mxR-HEanKAyIbWaYDMCdySBXC5Fd88_b-WwvnD1CO5nJQmknfT4gIl2Lpe04o1tQwTH1c1vdPH3UMKnwzktxw/w640-h260/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h07m56s283.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /><img class="aligncenter" height="359" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhT35qlHdEEK9YyQQxl9NwBFVd6B-FuL_cUEhUXM37RVWpjic05RjzigjOPohDpymvKNl81GoQzLxWQIP48dRRlFXkr1rAQwQvthR6eoKdruyNl-Gvqz9okIVxz3-PrL6keNra6fRJ8Q9AEGDKlxVebvWge-DYD_P6A25HEryAp6cjl1P5dkpEEOVy3FA/w640-h359/36a.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But for the most part, despite the tremors of the last night, it’s just another sunny day as the father prepares to go to work while Diane makes breakfast for the kids. Spielberg gets naughty again, as Robbie’s glass breaks and spills milk all over Dana, seen earlier with a pickle between her lips while the baldo-beardo ‘came’ all over with leaky beer cans. The sexual innuendos are unmistakable, again perhaps explaining why Spielberg handed this project to another director, Tobe Hooper. (<b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Goonies</b> is also full of sexual innuendos, mostly dealing with the penis and ejaculation. Sometimes, a water slide isn’t just a waterslide. It might as well be titled, “Everything You Wanted to Know about Sex but as Innuendoes in a Kiddie Movie.” It’s as if the whole point of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Goonies</b> is, “Goy Michelangelo made a nice statue of David, King of the Jews, but made his penis too small, so my movie will show the full force of the Jewish hydraulics.”)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0S6Uirf9a-A?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Goonies recut: Statue scene" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pYrO-ljqwEc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Goonies: The nutshot felt round the world" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/jNs0Ftbn81Y?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Goonies (1985) - 'Water Slide and Galleon' scene [1080]" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Dana leaves for school, she’s hooted at by the construction crew(for the swimming pool). She takes it in stride(and Diane watches in amusement, even with pride, as her girl can handle such situations — this was before helicopter-parenting), but it also betrays Spielberg’s disdain for macho blue-collar types, the kind who taunted Jews in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b> and cheered for robot-destruction at the Flesh Fair in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I.: Artificial Intelligence</b>. Spielberg was bullied by the ‘chad’ types in school, and his works are uniformly wary of them whether set in the past, present, or future. The men digging up the swimming pool aren’t exactly German soldiers in Nazi uniforms mocking hapless Jews, but they do seem crude and boorish.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhMgCHyjLjThkkmc9h8YOxsPnhh_4yNnVoiL_1Oh33MJIu88Xi4YeNvyNtvW1ERgktTnp2z-bWCo_D7J3jeRZG2Uvh0N5dh-PfEVAFrGA26wxAk1dwFPiM_7nhOoq2fwOaqUqeMm3e_RSPlcxrZfHDCuW9J15kEzu7FpE--AddlPwGrKMVDqxTxaGfkw/w640-h262/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-holocaust%20image,%20wood%20look%20like%20crucifix,%20christians%20guilt%20of%20holocaust%20digging%20dirt%20-%20the%20barbarians%20like%20teuton%20nazis%20laughing%20at%20jews%20-digging%20riefenstahl%20pool%20-%20baptism%20-.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">From a young age, Spielberg learned to win such types over by offering them plum roles in his films. One day, some big Dumb Polack kid might be pushing little Stevie Spielberg around, taking his lunch money, and calling him ‘kike’, but the next day, Spielberg might make him the star in a home-made war movie, most likely about heroic Americans fighting the evil Nazis. Suddenly, the Dumb Polack kid who’d been knocking the weakling ‘Jewboy’ around would feel appreciative, unwittingly sucked into Spielberg’s fantasy. Goyim is to Spielberg what the colt is to the young man in War Horse. Something to tame and use for one’s own purposes. And what better way to tame the goyim than through fantasy and pop-spirituality(in a world where Pop Culture has become The Culture)?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With Robbie and Dana gone to school, only Carol Anne remains, staring at the static of a portable TV in the kitchen. Diane switches the channel to what looks like a World War II movie, once again alluding to history as trauma for Jews. With most of the ‘Greatest Generation’ dead and gone forever, World War II movies are now ghost stories, the main political utility of which, at least from the Jewish angle, is to haunt future generations with the moral burden of the ‘Good War’. You don’t have to make horror movies to haunt the psyche. Ultimately, the power of haunting is less about momentary fright than lingering effect.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Diane cleans things up, she notices the kitchen chairs are not pushed under the table. There are six chairs. Why six when there are only five family members? The number six is significant in Jewish numerology(for ill-fortune) and also refers to the Six Million. She thought maybe Carol Anne moved the chairs but is startled to find them oddly assembled atop the table while her head was briefly turned away. She’s convinced something strange is afoot; something perhaps to do with the ‘TV people’ mentioned by Carole Anne when asked what she meant by “They’re here”.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYyopbYiOqdtdc7r8EslFXLyPo01B8tllL7NsNczVQgQYcEB60MgKfff0p3jZRo7YeR6ZpnReTtbWB8LeL3g9LyuuOoH8UFkErEoLJp_yOwf4wWwXd8ycYUisRFoNodFunoBD4NiKampSu2UA8hOT4PFTGCGLOS6ig_3oDcdxgA0kUXKKanmXrfNkWVA/w640-h262/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h09m41s105.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="263" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjo1uQhkv1CSMPaFIcgqP7t4drdAjes9fuKWV6eZ54gLMLUa5OqeOktPPkXjsSDK4rnRyV8yZIMbwmNl2kiVgAB5NEzFSDdXV33yAsqs1z1UEZuYXjU776JDRKhR0C8o-tS4WZo9yq3ATMoBZao1lgASixHzOrCaSurq9eeUSmr22A4ksvygHG3pbPRqA/w640-h263/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17%20-%20ghost%20like%20dissolve%20-%20they%20are%20all%20like%20ghosts%20in%20same%20house%20-%20people%20on%20tv%20are%20like%20ghosts%20controlled%20by%20jews%20-%20roots%20and%20holocaust%20tv%20show%20to%20haunt%20us.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="288"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then comes the most artful moment in the movie. As Diane holds Carol Anne in her arms in the kitchen, they and the table/chair seem to fade into the air ghostlike, leaving an empty kitchen. Just then, Steve enters the frame with a couple who turn out to be prospective buyers. The space actually belongs to a near-identical kitchen of another unit in a newly developed part of the community. It could be intimating that Americana, enticing as it is, is without substance. All the houses are well-designed and built, but they are virtually identical and without character. People can lead nice and comfortable lives in this world but might as well be interchangeable if defined by their property. (After all, if solely characterized by property and status, there’s no meaningful difference among an affluent Irish-Catholic, an affluent Jew, and an affluent Hindu.) One American family in a nice house is like another American family in a nice house and so on, all with their TVs turned on all day long, even when asleep. Comfortable and happy, but comfortably and happily numb. It is what Roy in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters of the Third Kind</b> breaks away from(even if it causes distress to himself and his family). He has to find his true self rather than just be like the rest, the kind of people satirized in the Carole King song(for the Monkees), <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">“Pleasant Valley Sunday”</i>. It’s also what the yuppie couple strives for in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Lost in America</b>, albeit with the Jewish guy discovering that the true home of his restless kind is the city where the money and action are. A Jew must shake hands(and grab ass) than touch Indians to be real.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fsfAL6IO78Y?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="THE MONKEES Pleasant Valley Sunday (+lyrics)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_91" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews fear both the ghetto and assimilation. Ghetto means discrimination and being marked as different, separate, but then, acceptance and assimilation means dissolution of what makes Jews distinct and special, a theme of the Coen Brothers’ <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Serious Man</b> as well. So, even as modern Jews strove for full integration with goyim, they’ve maintained an internal ghetto. Rather than being walled inside a ghetto, the ghetto is walled within their hearts. It is this deeper(and often neurotic) inner sense that distinguishes Jews from most groups who, over time, just become interchangeable Americans(or citizens of the world) lacking a substantive identity or sense of roots/heritage.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_92" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Steve comes home to find Diane in an excited state, indeed as if she reverted to her boomer youth self. She pleads with Steve to be open-minded, like in the Sixties when hippies and the like were into neo-paganism, Eastern Mysticism, crystals, and the like. She finds the odd things happening in the kitchen to be far-out and groovy. It’s a paganist or animistic explanation of the phenomenon, i.e. there are spirits all around us, and it’s so cool to be in ‘touch’ with them. It’s nothing to be afraid of or worry about. Just something to accept(and exalt) as a wonder-window to the hidden dimensions of the universe. She makes her case by letting the paranormal power slide a chair across the kitchen(and then Carol Anne too). Steve can’t make head or tail of what he observed and is lost for words.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_93" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">They go to their next-door neighbor(with whom Steve bickered earlier over TV signals) to see if similar things have been happening in other houses. Mosquitoes buzz all over Steve and Diane while the neighbor says he doesn’t recall ever being bitten by them. This is yet another clue that he may be Jewish. In the Exodus story, God punishes the Egyptians but makes sure to PASS OVER the homes of the Jews. God also sends locusts and all manner of pestilence upon the Egyptians but spares the Jews. So, while the mosquitoes dine on Steve and Diane’s blood, they seem to Pass-Over the next door neighbor. (That said, his son looks more like a big fat Dumb Polack than a Jew-kid. But then, the fat Jewish kid in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Goonies</b> didn’t look all that Jewish either but as played by a member of the Tribe.) Nothing weird has been happening at the house of the neighbor who looks confused, as if Steve and Diane have either gone funny in the head or are pulling a fast one on him. The neighbor’s name is Ben, which(if he is meant to be Jewish) could be a reference to Ben-Hur or Dustin Hoffman’s role as Ben in <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Graduate</strong>.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="291" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEis6AAqNv3v5V3O5fY6rtE6DoZxDMaAj_gI40ftE5ORn1Fo9seroqcaFM3y6rGNegdkZanI2k8I0k1gibRfx1AyPS1TUu50DF09herMeotrpm0tC56W7wxnu6_qYwJmacChG_b4F18v2JZF7WLnYicPceLOIncqN6epUuWr-kTuXoR0Qw-qj5x97AV3-A/w640-h291/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-%20poltergeist%20german%20term%20-%20%20jewish%20neighbor%20-%20passover%20-%20no%20affect%20them%20by%20mosquito.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_94" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="51"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">That night, flaky New Age vibes give way to terror, both natural and supernatural. All day, Diane has been feeling blissed out — she even leapt for joy when the chair moved in Steve’s presence. And her high spirits seem to have rubbed off on Steve. Both are perplexed but untroubled.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_95" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, it all changes that night as the storm rages once again. Suddenly, it’s as if the thunder activates the dead tree into a bundle of rage. Its branches move like arms and crash through the window to carry Robbie away, and then a part of its trunk opens like a mouth and begins to swallow the screaming boy. But, if this horror could at least be half-attributed to nature(the storm), what happens to Carol Anne is purely supernatural. It’s as if the closet turns into one big vacuum cleaner and sucks everything in; but what it’s really after is Carol Anne.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_96" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Robbie seems the endangered one, Steve and Diane do their best to pry him loose from the ravenous tree-gone-mad. This leaves Carol Anne all alone to fend for herself, and her little arms can’t grab onto the headstand for long before she is sucked into the closet, now a portal to another dimension. Saving the son but losing the daughter may be an allusion to <em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sophie’s Choice</strong></em>, a Holocaust-themed novel adapted into a movie released in the same year as <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>. The closet(or more precisely the wardrobe), which is a path to wonderland in the Christian C.S. Lewis’s fiction, is quite something else in Spielberg’s movie. Steve and Diane save Robbie in the nick of time as the tree is suddenly swooped up into the sky. Dana, their daughter, believes a tornado passed by, a natural explanation of the incredible phenomenon just witnessed. (But what kind of a tornado would target only the tree but spare the house?)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3COgc1vZWl2Cct8GDu_wHK8j78dXIZdyhU52zqZrz44mL8XKpM3nz1QgVgPFl-2CB9edbSpSgg1HOzmqhdlzwILnoTtgDPoNAvAKEg0l21DW7yj2DJzuZ0NPAPkHQPhvWuBy-5IIO9xh69dX7whc9hHgl7Yk3dq5ZscGpKH5PkGZKu40s775Y6C6JBw/w640-h260/vlcsnap-2022-sophies%20choice.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_97" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The happening is rather Spielberg’s vision of heavenly power(representing the Jewish God) responding to the lamentations of the earth(representing the cries of forgotten Holocaust victims) and doing whatever is necessary to bring about divine justice. Freelings are not a bad people, and they themselves aren’t specifically targeted for punishment. Rather, they are punished almost by accident because they happen to be situated between the buried bodies and the higher power above(and because Steve works for developers who kept their cost-cutting measures unknown to the public, even to highly valued representatives like Steve).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_98" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="193"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Throughout the movie, the family(and we the viewers) come to assume all the weird occurrences are centered around the family, i.e. they must have done something to agitate the spirits or there’s something about them, especially Carol Anne, that is irresistible to the spirits, much like human blood to mosquitoes. But, as things turn out, they weren’t at the center but merely between. If something stands between you and your loved one who must be saved, you will do anything to get through it, even if you have to destroy it. The real animating core of your action is to save the one you love. What stands between you and your loved one is a mere hindrance, not the objective. If you stand between a mother bear and her cub and if the former mauls you to get to her cub, you sure got messed up real bad, but it wasn’t about you. It was about the bear and cub. You were physically in the center between the mother bear and child bear but not at the emotional center of the event. It was all about the bear.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_99" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Freelings believe all the weird phenomena have something to do with them, but they are more the inconvenient obstacle than the guilty party. They stand on the hallowed ground of the buried and forgotten and thus must suffer the consequences of the higher power restoring justice to the dead. So, even as the movie seems family-centric, it is actually spirit-centric. The conflict really boils down to justice for the spirits than peace of mind for the family.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_100" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It serves as a useful metaphor for what’s happening all across the West. So many things are going wrong, and white/Christian folks think it’s really about themselves, their need to understand, atone, and seek redemption. In other words, the world may be saved if white folks finally see the light. The world hangs in the balance of White Salvation. But, as the world is really controlled by Jews, Jewish concerns are at the center of events. All this stuff about ‘white guilt’, ‘white fragility’, ‘white supremacism’, ‘homophobia’, ‘antisemitism’, and etc. are really ‘Poltergeistal’ mental tricks used against whites to better serve Judeo-centric interests and agendas. Whites are not at the center of this History but merely NPC-like extras.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_101" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the tree outside is phallic, the closet door is vaginal. Steve, Diane, and Dana dash around the house looking for Carol Anne while Robbie remains in a state of shock. The family can’t find the little girl anywhere, not even in the half-dug swimming pool now filled with water. Then, Robbie hears his sister’s voice coming out of the TV set in the master bedroom, a moment reminiscent of the eerie ending of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Fly</b>(original version) where tiny screams are traced to a mutated man-fly on a web about to be devoured by the spider. Carol Anne has somehow been hurled into another dimension that sends intermittent signals through electronic devices, especially the TV.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxmyUs5r-a-oITuh3syZHorMVqwFcy5f7UQ8j4cIefGKC37eQz2_e0WWJ3GLIZJL3pSCEGFWTJbZNxSqXsOHUUXEdllS7HDmM46eEUZeysFjMNPKdX2xyLADcDBAGIF3FA-KU_X8j2hB5fRT-85lY56xpQvG_4yNHzfd4tUG5g3hUl6vQB9chYlLwQpQ/w640-h240/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-%20trinity.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_102" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="52"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Steve consults a psychologist, Dr. Lesh, an elderly woman who moonlights as a paranormal researcher at a university; one might say it’s more a hobby. With her is Ryan, a black guy, and Marty, a white guy(thus forming a trinity) who handle the equipment(for recording and gauging supernatural activity).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_103" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="56"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At Steve’s place, they can’t believe their eyes: Robbie and Carol Anne’s bedroom has gone utterly looney-tunes. It’s like Regan’s bedroom(in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b>) on steroids(and sugar high). So far, the movie went from Happy Americana to New Age flakiness to Shocking Terror. Now the story moves into Christo-mythic territory.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_104" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dr. Lesh and her crew had seen weird stuff before but NOTHING like the crazy circus at the Freeling home. They are utterly dumbfounded. It’s like going from catching faint signs of U.F.O’s to having Darth Vader drop out of the sky. Despite her ‘scientific’ expertise in the field, Dr. Lesh can only offer cliched speculations about hauntings and the like.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_105" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, what is the answer? Perhaps, the power of faith? Even though Jesus and the like aren’t invoked in the movie, what ensues is characteristic of Christian emotionalism, likely of considerable curiosity to Spielberg who, after all, made movies for mostly goy(and largely Christian) audiences. Like Morris Dees of $PLC, Spielberg probably learned a lesson or two about the art of conversion and rapture from Christian ways, especially the Pentecostal variety. From Encyclopedia Britannica: “Pentecostalism, charismatic religious movement that gave rise to a number of Protestant churches in the United States in the 20th century and that is unique in its belief that all Christians should seek a post-conversion religious experience called ‘baptism with the Holy Spirit’.” Spielberg, an avowed Jew, rejects Christianity as a faith but not as methodology. He has distilled and bottled certain features of Christianity for his own purposes. The crypto-Jewish spaceship in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> looks like a Catholic Cathedral(or an opulent Christmas Tree), and the feelings of rapture and deliverance are not unlike their counterparts in various forms of Baptism.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="297" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpWOvAClscrI8Rqm9T2aguTDE1e2lt_gl7DkE0N8xM4HFmzYIkf_3qy8tmsqRFegP5qe7iqzEWDTvsjy9yZRuWjkZ0kwpLgo4sP9RkkMufkyQw_rdsc1Xf_DwgWtXOvx78L1AbPLOtWP6ruyg-cxhufnWVBLKcASbUR9qWHExQ4rcJqFNIzdesWbG-TA/w640-h297/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h16m19s401.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_106" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, Spielberg is deserving of the title of the greatest religious director in Hollywood history because, despite the absence of Christ as the guiding light, his movies delivered in ways the Biblical epics failed to do. A number of ‘prestigious’ movies were made about Jesus Christ and Christian themes in the 1950s and 1960s(culminating in a total drag called <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Greatest Story Ever Told</b> by George Stevens), but the spirituality on display was overly solemn. The storytelling was as wooden as the Cross, and the emotions leaden than uplifting. These movies were meant to be watched with reverence and good manners as if everyone was done with caution than inspiration lest any group be offended. The result was invariably stilted and stuffy — <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ben-Hur</b> was one of the few exceptions but mainly because of the fun pagan stuff with naval battles and chariot races.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_107" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, what the Biblical epics failed to deliver was in abundance in the movies of Spielberg. The shark in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jaws</b> was one helluva a preacher, scaring the bejesus out of everyone. Space aliens in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> put on one big Hallelujah festival though their chosen Son of Heaven turned out to be a nutty Jew. And in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, the mother tries to wrest her daughter from the dark forces by regaining faith(in what, we have no idea, but it is about redemption by boundless love and heartfelt prayer, hallelujah, amen, like in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Blues Brothers</b>).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PZpH9Khn0E0?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Blues Brothers: The Gospel Scene" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_108" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the evening, TV is turned on in the living room before Diane calls out to Carol Anne. Apparently, there is no greater bond than between mother and child, especially through the telly. As distortions of the little girl’s voice emanate from the TV, Diane’s maternal affection grows into quasi-spiritual passion, and she looks as if in prayer. It’s like something out of the documentary <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Marjoe</b>, about a sham preacher who sure knew how to work a crowd. People have their own brand of addiction. Diane has her joints, Lesh her whiskey flask, Evangelicals their Jesus, and American youth in the 80s had <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T.</b></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_109" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, Spielberg’s own brand of televangelism(or cinevangelism) could be a commentary on the Christian Revival in the early 80s of the Reagan Era. Record number of Jews voted for the Gipper in 1980, largely because of Jimmy Carter’s perceived fumbling of Middle East issues(and by then, even Liberal and Leftist Jews had soured on the Soviet Union and were more likely to put up ‘Save Soviet Jews’ signs). But by 1984, Jewish votes had reverted to the norm, overwhelmingly Democratic. Increasingly, Jews came to favor Republican foreign policy but feared signs of a Christian Revival, which Spielberg competed with by appropriating Christian Passion for his crypto-Judaic pop fantasies. Even though Christian Revivalism eventually petered out(and totally crashed and burned with the utter idiocy of the George W. Bush presidency), it was often in the news with personalities like Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and (for a time) Jim & Tami Bakker. And it was a time when the most prominent black political figure was a reverend, Jesse Jackson.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_110" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="136"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Partly, the revival was a reaction to the Sixties Counterculture and Seventies Me-Generation. It complemented what was called the Reagan (Counter)Revolution. Hippies were long forgotten, disco was out, and maybe it was time for God again, or at least the New Patriotism. Sylvester Stallone got the message and churned out a series of (moronic) flag-waving fantasies like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rocky IV</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rambo(pt 2)</b> with its stab-in-the-back theory, i.e. the US military would have won but for those lily-livered politicians who, by the way, abandoned US P.O.W’s in the jungles of Vietnam. Few movies were made on the Vietnam War while it was raging. The Seventies saw some damning movies on America’s involvement, especially <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hearts and Minds</b>(documentary), <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Coming Home</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Apocalypse Now</b>, with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Deer Hunter</b> sitting on the fence politically.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_111" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="298"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the good part of the 1980s Hollywood pandered to gung-ho-ism, with stuff like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Red Dawn</b>(conceived by John Milius who focused on the ludicrous Soviet Threat to the American Heartland than on the real threat posed by Jewish Globalists subverting the culture), <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">White Nights</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Uncommon Valor</b>, culminating with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Top Gun</b> starring Tom Cruise before Oliver Stone revived Counterculture politics with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Platoon</b>(and recruited Tom Cruise for <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Born in the Fourth of July</b>). (<b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Killing Fields</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Eleni</b> were outliers among the films critical of communism in their humanism.) <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rambo</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Top Gun</b> vs <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Platoon</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Born on the Fourth of July</b> offers a clue as to why the Right lost the Culture War, not that the Real Left won either as the main victor in the so-called Culture War seems not ideological but idolatrous(of the Tridolatry of Jews, Negroes, and Homos, which would make classic leftists roll in their graves). Whatever Stone’s deficits as a thinker and artist, he nevertheless struggled for some truth and meaning, one that went beyond facile cliches about heroes and villains, whereas what often passed for ‘conservative’ or ‘right-wing’ culture was mindless flag-waving, a childlike longing for simplicity(like Pat Buchanan’s love for the awful <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Forrest Gump</b>), or the historical fantasies of Mel Gibson; furthermore, whereas Jewish ‘Liberals’ have routinely vilified American Whites as the biggest villains, white ‘conservatives’ focused on foreign enemies(who pose no threat to America) while sucking up to all things Jewish. Gee, one wonders why whites lost the Culture War to Zion. Jews use BLM & Antifa to tear down white monuments(especially in the South) and use ISIS to blow up ancient sites in Syria, but all we get from ‘principled conservatives’ is ‘Democrats are the real racists’ or ‘muh Israel’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_112" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="62"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Too often, conservatism either hardens into traditionalist dogma or softens into feel-good pap. Or, it’s all about the money. Christian Fundamentalism represented neo-theocratic dogmatism, neo-patriotism(with outlandish fears of the Evil Soviet Empire) pandered to stupid prejudices, and Reagan’s prosperity politics proved shallow and inane and, worse, often advantaged the worst elements of the boomer Jewish community on Wall Street.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_113" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="295"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, given what had preceded the 1980s — the race riots, exploding urban crime, rising divorce rates, the drug problem, ignominious retreat from Vietnam, Watergate scandal, stagflation, the Iranian hostage crisis, and etc. — , the Feel-Goodism of the Reagan Era was widely appealing across the nation, which was still solidly white and Christian. And even though Steven Spielberg was a lifelong Zionist Democrat and George Lucas a cuck-maggot ‘liberal’, both anticipated the political and cultural climate of the 1980s, which is why they came to be despised by many who preferred the myth of New Hollywood and its personal film-making, that is before the double whammy of Lucas and Spielberg hit the big screens with populist yahoo visions, turning the industry into a competition for pop-corn movies. Or, so the cultural narrative went for those who looked back on the Counterculture Sixties and/or New Hollywood with rose-tinted glasses. For them, Spielbergism was as dumb as Christian Fundamental revivalism while Lucasism seemed to complement Reagan’s new militarism targeted at the Evil Empire. (How times have changed. These days, the ‘woke’ types greatly value mega-franchises like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</b> and Superhero Movies as the most effective conveyors of ‘values’ and propaganda. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Black Panther</b> is like the greatest movie ever made in their silly minds, but then ‘conservatives’ wet their pants over Christopher Nolan’s ridiculous <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Batman</b> movies. The so-called ‘progressives’ went from deriding Lucas-ism to riding it as their preferred Culture War Horse. But then, Lucas himself always wanted to have it both ways. He took full advantage of the New Economy under Reaganism and drew inspiration from the fascist mythologist Joseph Campbell but was ever so careful to distance himself from Reaganism by denouncing SDI and offering remarks that the Ewoks represented the heroic Viet Cong, LOL.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_114" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The critics of Lucas and Spielberg certainly had a point, even if they tended to understate the failings of New Hollywood, especially pertaining to self-indulgence and drug use. Spielberg did contribute to cultural infantilization, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</b> movies made militarism far-out and cool, much more than <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rambo</b> movies ever did, and if the Reaganites were the pro-military crowd in the 80s, the new militarism is the providence of ‘wokesters’, homos, Democrats, Neocons, RINOS, and Jews(whose idea of ‘liberalism’ is to cram globo-homo-BLM-Zionic hegemony up the arse of every country). Lucas can flash his ‘liberal’ card all he wants; the fact remains his imagination did more to glamorize war and destruction than anything else in movie history.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_115" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="161"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But if Lucas’s vision was ultimately limited(and insular, as the Skywalker Ranch’s effect on him was similar to Neverland’s on Michael Jackson), Spielberg sensed and conveyed far more than he seemed to be letting on, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> is evidence of this. It plays on the same kind of emotions as Evangelicalism does but with a twist: What seems the solution(or salvation) is merely an illusion beneath which lurks a far more powerful truth, at least from the Judeo-centric perspective. What passes for Hallelujah is really a kind of Hell, from which the avenging spirits of Jewish Power arise to demolish or punish anything that stands in their way. Even though Spielberg was pandering to the childlike side of our nature, he did so with ulterior motives, the kind that requires something far more perceptive, devious, and sophisticated than a childish mentality. It was really to replace Christianity with Holocaustianity and ‘White Guilt’, especially regarding the Negro.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_116" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, Spielberg’s movies of this period didn’t so much complement but compete with the Christian Revival, which ranged from feely-good gatherings to celebrity cult(usually associated with Prosperity Gospel) to hardcore Fundamentalism(of the ‘God Hates Fags’ variety) — even as Jews detested all this, they exploited Christian Zionism and employed Neocons to forge an alliance with Pat Robertson and the like. As the conclusion of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> makes plain as day, Spielberg was really mocking the Christian Way of believing; it believes it is the be-all-and-end-all of truth, but there is a truth far more powerful, and it’s not about Love but about Vengeance, which is at the core of Judaism, for which the biggest holy day is the Passover when God spared the Jews but ruthlessly destroyed the firstborns of Egyptian goyim.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_117" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="202"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, as Diane calls out to Carol Anne in devotional manner, the little girl’s voice comes through the TV set and calls back at mommy. It’s as if the ‘prayers’ are working, and even Dana, the ironic teenager, begins to tremble(like folks possessed by the Spirit at Pentecostal gatherings). It’s as if Billy Graham has entered the room, Hallelujah, and the family might as well learn to speak in tongues, Amen. With faith and devotion, Diane talks to her girl on the other side, a realm of ambiguous light that could be good or bad depending on one’s station. It could be that the Light’s purpose is to guide dead souls lost in limbo to their proper place in the afterlife. It beckons them to stop wandering and enter into Heaven or its equivalent. However, it isn’t for Carol Anne because she is still alive. Going with the Light will mean entering the realm of the afterlife, or joining the dead. If the theory is true, the family is faced with quite a predicament. How do they corral the dead souls to the Light while separating Carol Anne from them, leading her back to reality?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_118" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="129"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, while Diane communes with Carol Anne, a part of the ceiling flickers with plasma-like flames, whereupon trinkets drop from it. What do these objects(mostly jewelry and watches, some antique) mean? They certainly aren’t Carol Anne’s nor anything recognizable to the family. It later turns out they are relics of the dead, belongings placed in coffins, not unlike objects put in the cigar box holding the dead canary. The trinkets may also be a reminder of Jewish treasures confiscated by the Nazis(and other ‘Anti-Semites’) through the ages. Spielberg could have been subconsciously prepping the mass goy mind with what he would fully reveal later: Schindler’s List we are made witness to Jews being robbed of property, then life. Rub it into the white goyim!</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="263" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhZXoOI5jM3yFbxPTTcsQSFAXyU6ENmpDvpqZXptOHMhI72ojMdliXCvacb5zZ9VgnNj51fSB_6FVZ9_LHfqMP2nKiP1MXZv_xHX6BkFcXqxpGqY8EkQ9Yu4lLtSLFAhYzUJeF_Y3nTqe2h3NJHKk3ZBPHvhSHQPoPCTp7iFCO3y3mS6hWoPFgX2uVLiQ/w640-h263/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h16m36s868.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_119" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="283"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Granted, one may well ask why the world should care so much about Jews when Jews don’t give a crap about most of humanity? Just ask the Palestinians and all the victims of the Wars for Zion. Jewish finance played a significant role in Western Imperialism. Jews in America benefited from the ‘genocide’ of the American Indians. So, if white goyim must atone for Jewish suffering, Jews must also for all the pain they caused unto others. But, such moral logic is alien to the Jewish Mind that believes a single Jewish life has more value than all the goy lives in the world. The quote in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b> about how saving a single life is to save the world only applies to Jews. After all, while Jews have kvetched endlessly about how the US didn’t act fast enough to save Jews from Hitler, they didn’t volunteer to take up arms to save Tutsis from Hutus in Rwanda. Indeed, the idea of Jews expending their own lives to save goyim must be hilarious to them. Only a Dumb Polack would fall for such nonsense. Heads I win, tails you lose, or “Shame on any Dumb Polack for not sacrificing his life for a Jew, and shame on any Jew who’d sacrifice his life for a Dumb Polack.” Most Jews seem to have zero conscience about all the goyim destroyed by Jewish Supremacist meddling in Russia, Ukraine, and the Middle East. Granted, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Saving Private Ryan</b> is about saving a goy life but only because all his brothers have been sacrificed. That’s Jewish grace for you: “You can live because all your brothers are dead.” Thank you, Mr. Spielberg.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_120" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="233"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In other words, Jews have better things to do than worry about Dumb Polacks and the like, the inferior goyim; however, there is no greater calling for goyim than caring about Jews because Jews are so very special and the best of the best and the holiest of the holiest. Indeed, even Jewish feelings are more precious than goy bodies. So, if you hurt some Jew’s feelings, you better get on your knees, apologize, and grovel. However, if a Jew hurts your kind(and even wipes out a whole bunch of them), it’s just… meh. So what, it’s just inferior goyim, dime-a-dozen and disposable, like all those dead Syrians as the result of the Wars for Israel. Of course, not all Jews think this way(as there are righteous ones like Brother Nathanael), but the likes of Spielberg seem to. It’s like Jews howl about Iran getting nukes that may threaten Israel but are so blasé about Israel having 200 nukes, bulk of them targeted at Iran. Jewish Lives Matter, Goy Lives not so much… though Jews push BLM to guilt-bait whites into moral paralysis and obeisance. It’s not because Jews really care about blacks(as BLM only ended up killing MORE blacks) or historical truth because, if it were so, they’d confess to their own significant role in the slave trade, involving both black and white captives.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="255" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTYi7W_qFbJY7TDy4jjqyz1hVdTAuN1lJuHCtNO-7vHOvz5CqVqb095s6S_zk6-BG2KaffoN4TSnhOMGyeH3Sgtwu6BEx4pMBAggTk6JFvvb5WGT4RDWv0BXMBo7Kct5nMVnDZlyCr8ub7qcB8KaIPYNDI5kewRimmHnRR14tsRZtOw8FOb7zSSOgrOQ/w640-h255/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h17m55s838.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_121" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="155"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All the distress brings Diane and Carol Anne closer together, as if reverting to the very moment when Diane gave birth to her. Diane had always loved and cared for Carol Anne as a physical presence, someone to talk to, hug, tuck into bed. But now, as Diane yearns for her return, she comes to know her daughter on the ‘spiritual’ level. (It’s like the love between Holly Hunter’s character and Richard Dreyfus’s character in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Always</b> grows more beautiful because it can only exist at the mythic or dream level. Only myth bridges the impossible divide, though the myth is ‘materialized’ in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I.</b>‘s final scene as a false dream come true.) Diane can’t see Carol Anne and vice versa, but standing on the stairway she suddenly feels Carol Anne’s essence rushing through her, in tune with the Christian notion of the spirit as fully separate from the body.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_122" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Thus, despite all the trauma, Diane comes to know Carol Anne in a ‘purer’ manner, almost like an angel. Carol Anne remains invisible but passes through her like a breeze in a fleeting soul-embrace. Spielberg dials up the Pentecostal energy level, as if Diane’s faith is being restored among the flock. But just then, the living room is rocked by a frightful force, as if some beastly entity won’t tolerate the mutual divining between mother and daughter to form links, however tenuous. Diane came closer than ever, but hope once again eludes the family. They made progress with the help of Dr. Lesh and her crew but ultimately failed to break through. For that, Dr. Lesh figures, additional help is necessary. Mere knowledge and expertise, like her own, are insufficient. It calls for someone with the ‘gift’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_123" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="345"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, before the night is over, two strange things happen, one subjective, the other objective or noticed by all(and even recorded on video). Marty, the white aid to Dr. Lesh, scrounges for food in the kitchen, only to find a piece of steak crawl across the kitchen counter rupturing with gooey stuff. Shocked, the drumstick falls from his mouth onto the floor where it wiggles with maggots. Marty rushes to the washroom to rinse his mouth only to find his face covered with boils or warts, and his panicked reaction results in tearing his face apart. But, it was all purely subjective, a chain of hallucinations caused by the spirits messing with his mind. Marty, restored to his normal state of mind, hastily goes back to the living room, a place of relative security(as the others are there), but only to find something even stranger happening. Marty’s ordeal in the kitchen is perhaps a reminder that we go through routines without thinking about the implications and repercussions of our actions(and needs, for survival or pleasure). Steaks and drumsticks are products of animal butchery, but we regard them merely as food rather than product of death forced upon living creatures. Living and killing intermingle on so many levels, but we prefer not to think about our role in the destruction of others, not only all the animals turned into food but the death and destruction that preceded the conquest and development of civilizations. And, people don’t like to think about their own mortality either. It used to be that people buried their loved ones to remember, but now, they bury to forget, and many people now don’t even have children(and that means no grandchildren either) who will remember them. (On the other hand, they sure love to watch killing on TV and movies. Act of killing is thrilling, the reminder of death is depressing. We’d rather see soldiers or gangsters get shot than decay as corpses. Even anti-war movies focus more on the killing than on the death.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="258" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhi3zx1FIwLX9K-RClJrTvrIGOsj9kUZXIkysv7wf1gVl-FKnuVQnPDCQqd7PnK4EncZJs5YGhbvHxBsutUE5qMCPLjKKzDlN0ox7mYmVjTATbIKsJjZtV0DesxmjF_nPqc2s1VycImHB69KJzUjWrAbN8E91qvVDlHhCHPvb1zCg0rGvwguyG5i1M7kg/w640-h258/vlcsnap-2022-08-0%20reality%20as%20is%20and%20manipulated.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_124" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="82"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After the freaky thing in the kitchen, Marty went back to the living room for assurance, but he can’t believe his eyes, and this time, it’s no mere hallucination as Ryan takes notice as well. From Robbie & Carol Anne’s bedroom, swirling and glowing tendrils emerge and slowly descend the stairway. It’s difficult to discern but seems angelic in body and demonic in head. Everyone, especially the Negro Ryan, watches in wonderment(than fright) and with mouths agape.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_125" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="107"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">They run the video footage to see if it was captured on camera and notice more details. Whereas everyone was fixated on the swirling entity that came down the stairs and vanished into the ceiling, the video footage shows additional details, what appears like two rows of transparent figures(human in form with objects on their heads, perhaps signifying Jewish headwear). What does it all mean? Is the house blessed or cursed? Dr. Lesh, being psycho-analytic by training, opines the ghostly figures must be ‘lonely’ psyches. But from a Christo-Mythic perspective, they’d be lost souls in need of the Light to guide them to the Afterlife.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnmYZRW1443PUOD2tlYLMoJ8go-Aogz6SVOy5u7tmI7dVIVHJSAo7jvrdgrPVuINDxZXQNJ7Dwbwy5Z_15Ye2abGNG0AAikSIM0LiMaX2UHRLcFZULNwhox5GllBqr7j88gUSKORA1T-_fZ57St_F8ux8iRDOFra1iLDjcDTcDnnwcy6I5VYipu924wA/w640-h260/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h20m50s442.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_126" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="38"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The bright day offers some respite, and Dr. Lesh informs Diane that, even though the spooked Marty won’t be coming back, Ryan the Negro will stick around the house, and furthermore, she promises to bring special help.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_127" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Meanwhile, Steve gets a visit from Mr. Teague, his boss who’s inquisitive as to why Steve’s been missing work lately. Apparently, Steve called in sick with the flu, but Teague wonders if Steve is really looking elsewhere for a better offer. Teague doesn’t want to lose a man of Steve’s caliber as a salesman and makes a generous offer: A new house for the family atop a hill overlooking the community. If America is the City on a Hill, how nice to be king of the hill?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_128" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Here, Spielberg resorts to one of his favorite methods. If David Lean was famous for his establishing shots, Spielberg often worked the other way around, culminating in the ‘unveiling shot’. So, when we see Steve and Teague walk up the hill, it is just two men on an outing. Then, we see them walk beside a white picket fence, a symbol of suburban tranquility. But as the camera pulls back, we notice tombstones on one side of the fence, and then comes the long shot that reveals a hilltop cemetery extending into some distance.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_129" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Steve likes the view but seems a bit uneasy about the site — who’d want to live right next to a cemetery even if the view is great? Besides, there won’t be enough room for a swimming pool, something Steve obviously wants. But Teague tells him not to worry. The house won’t be built next to the cemetery as the whole area will be cleared for development. All the bodies and tombstones will be relocated to another place. Steve opines such a drastic measure might be ‘sacrilegious’, whereupon Teague says it’s been done before; indeed, Steve’s very house was also built on former cemetery ground that was cleared in 1976, the bicentennial year. Steve says he didn’t know, and Teague says it wouldn’t have been good business to declare such things. It’s a key scene, akin to the bridge in a song, as it offers a vague but tantalizing impression as to what might really be the cause of the spookery about the house.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="261" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjAYcYQX91WUbyJeIKqslV0zPtzraPWPuJaZ4nipq_Sr5Gk96H8GhFJqLDSXudAd-q-1iC3m5m-M_yRa7kicfzriAtjpViOmZft2hNr8ULnBPZ2kOp9F6sjkVhjgOLWBzhW27JuJKUHkXSP5XcDlj4rU4NVSLvIzwDd22GjLNKFj9jCqmxTuMMk3xvAjA/w640-h261/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h22m57s438.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="291" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyMbYCSG5XTS0MkaSQJePNgyPk62xMSEcJ_ZYoDgUGUmEhETm1seuaLkC1AmoNoOd_61BRc0nEnD2r_vJexZ5Yi5oTq2aVhdInpfstTgGyOTzLL_hcK16mR67iiIP0S-Mm1ioplwyU5IANZ1vdkO_xxm9I7-JRUeMkmmvQni7pHeTTJaIIvBehb2fOvA/w640-h291/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-cemetery%20not%20shown%20til%20end%20of%20scene%20-%20manipulative%20power%20of%20storytelling.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_130" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The question of origin and duplication(or possibly theft) has been at the center of Jewish(and Anti-Jewish) Consciousness. After all, Spielberg owes a great deal to past film-makers, many of them goyim. And scholars say Judaism borrowed many of its key ideas from various ancient goy sources. Jews incorporated the fables and myths of other peoples into their own culture, cosmology, and narratives. More recently, Bob Dylan’s music wouldn’t have been possible without white country and black blues. Jews have long been accused by ‘Anti-Semites’ of being incapable of originality, always pilfering or ‘pawning off’ others. Both ‘Aryans’ and ‘Africans’ have made this charge, e.g. Aryans-create-while-Semites-imitate and Jews-like-Gershwin-done-steal-from-black-creativity. When Paul Simon agreed to an interview at the black Howard University, he was met with hostile questions and accusations about how he done stole black music from Jamaicans and South Africans.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_131" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But borrowing isn’t necessarily stealing, like emulation is far more than imitation. If various influences are digested or amalgamated via inspiration, the result is something new, original in its own right, and this can be said of ancient Jewish culture(and Bob Dylan and Steven Spielberg). It’s like an alloy is more than the metals used to produce it. Thus, they are borrowers rather than thieves.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_132" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="63"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, from the Jewish perspective, the ‘Aryans’ and whites could be charged with thievery, even wholesale robbery. Foremost among the theft was taking the Jewish God as their own and, more perversely, persecuting Jews in His name. It’s a kind of kidnapping in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, but Christianity in Jewish eyes is a case of father-napping(or stealing the Heavenly Father of the Jews).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_133" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But it doesn’t end there. Even Christianity, though loathed by the Tribe, was the brainchild of Jews. It wasn’t as if white European goyim took elements of Judaism and invented a new religion with their own prophecy and imagination, the least that could be said of Muhammad and Islam. Rather, white goyim took as their own a religion formulated by heretical Jews. In that sense, whites are the biggest raiders and robbers of all time. (It is then no wonder Jews are eager to recast the Western Narrative with blacks in the roles of white historical figures. It could be revenge for whites adopting the Jewish History and Culture as their own. After all, white Christians came to routinely invoke not only Jesus and the Apostles but Abraham, Moses, David, and the like. It’s parent-napping in Jewish eyes.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_134" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="56"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">That said, it’s undeniable the White West made something special out of Christianity and, of course, Christmas, and Jews in turn composed a lot of memorable Christmas songs and cashed in big on the Holiday Season. And Spielberg’s cinema uses Christianesque images and feelings to perversely pop-universalize what is really an intensely tribal worldview.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_135" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg and Kubrick, who became close, almost older brother and younger brother(even more so than Francis Ford Coppola and George Lucas), surely saw eye-to-eye on certain matters. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I: Artificial Intelligence</b> began as a Kubrick project but was handed or gifted to Spielberg. David the robot boy considers himself special and unique, but it turns out his ‘father’, the scientist, has a plan to make countless copies of him, each one to be totally committed to his ‘mommy’, whoever she may be. David deems himself as unique and seeks communion with ‘mommy’, but he’s just a prototype of commerce, merely the first of the many. Likewise, the various sections of the community in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> are called ‘phases’, but they are all nearly identical with houses built from the same blueprint. The Freelings live in phase one, slightly older than the other phases, but soon, they will all be the same and indistinguishable from the other, except for the pride of ownership that makes believe the ‘grass is greener’ on one’s side of the fence.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_136" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="152"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This anxiety regarding originality/uniqueness and generality/universality is very much at the center of Spielbergmania. It’s hard to think of another director with such wide global appeal yet so obsessively personal(and tribal) in his own oddball way. Take <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">E.T.: The Extraterrestrial</b>. It’s the variation of the boy-loves-dog story but bigger than ever, and the ‘dog’ looks like a walking-talking pile of turd that, incredibly enough, even attains christ-figure status. But all said and done, E.T. isn’t for humanity but for his own kind, with whom he must reunite. It’s like Oscar Schindler saved the Jews, but Jews must ultimately have a world of their own. Jews don’t belong to Schindler, no more than E.T. belongs to Elliott who did so much to protect him and take care of him(or is it her?) Who could pull off such a feat but Spielberg?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_137" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The view from the hill could be Spielberg be alluding to Nazi death camps where the bodies are buried and hidden. In one shot, a crucifix tombstone figures prominently in the foreground while Steve rests his arms on the picket fence. One might interpret it as the power of commerce, amnesia, and ‘greed’ pushing out tradition, culture, and continuity. But Spielberg doesn’t care about Christianity and Christians(except as instruments of Jews, like the Christian soldier in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Saving Private Ryan</b> who kisses the crucifix around his neck before felling another German soldier. Not exactly ‘turn the other cheek’ but rather a talisman of goy subservience to Jewish vengeance).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_138" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The meaning of the crucifix could be threefold. Steve, pushed to the edge of nervous breakdown, finds himself in a religious frame of mind, like when George Bailey, not particularly a religious man, finds himself praying in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s a Wonderful Life</b>. It could also represent the collective guilt that the Christian West bears for what was done to Jews. Also, the cemetery, though filled with Christian symbols, could have a generic meaning, applying to the Jewish Forgotten as well.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_139" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, given Spielberg inundated movie screens around the world with childish fantasies, one would think he’d be the last one to complain about cultural amnesia(in favor of commerce and profits), but what seems amnesiac on the surface may not be so underneath, where all sorts of Sorosian wizardry are at work to manipulate goy hearts and minds. His movies are like Christo-Pagan amusement parks where the rides are powered by vengeful Jewish spirits.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="294" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj5bK4zGa9mtoQf0K_VSmbVULTWYAVww8nw0V_bdb863DWv04vjKzWITqw-jtbX3-YsS-xexe8kOkYgv_bMs3f4dt4Ds5RSaURBRoAX8pCVRJMVJpXwQNV7WeAiFvmHQN1KWkn2853JuHc3CkB1aY5PENvE04wMzyzFpI7XeJI42wYPpEiZ2hXu1GO0Fg/w640-h294/vlcsnap-2evangelicalism%20unlike%20close%20encounter's%20catholicism%20-%20don%20rickles%20we%20blew%20xmas.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_140" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">That night, Dr. Lesh returns with a munchkin said to possess special powers of clairvoyance. She’s a child-sized woman of advanced years named Tangina who, though played by the Jewish Zelda Rubinstein, plies her talents in the style of a Southern Baptist Preacher. (Hers is a performance every bit as remarkable as that of fellow munchkin Linda Hunt in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Year of Living Dangerously</b>.) Being physically unimposing and funny-looking, she has to impose her authority with her psychic prowess. (Tangina could mean tangential, i.e. ultimately she touches on tangential matters but fails to get to the core.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_141" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the family can only hope and if Dr. Lesh can only theorize(and Ryan can only record), Tangina can divine what may be happening on the other side. Her mind comes with a set of antennae. No more amateur hour with second guessing and false hope. This time, the exorcism or ‘cleaning’ shall be carried out by a real preacher-practitioner of the art. She’s like Father Merrin, Max Von Sydow’s role in the William Friedkin movie, except the style is Evangelical and the magic is of an unknown source, even un-Christian. Tangina has ‘cleaned’ houses before and comes with experience as well as the gift.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_142" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This time, the methodology is somewhat ritualized. Ostensibly, Tangina asks others to kneel before her because it strains her neck to look up, but the gathering looks like a preacher giving a sermon to her flock. Though she speaks hocus-pocus, it has the feel of “you must get on your knees and repent before Jesus!” In other words, you must be BORN AGAIN, hallelujah, and it pushes Diane more into a “give my trust to God” state of mind. Yessir, whatever she or her husband may have done to offend the Great Divine, whatever ‘sin’ she may be stained with, she’s now on her knees to be saved and to save the kid. It’s like she turned the others into her congregation. By the way, Tangina was likely the inspiration for the Kiyoko character in the anime <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Akira</strong>: <a href="https://akira.fandom.com/wiki/Kiyoko_(manga)" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://akira.fandom.com/wiki/Kiyoko_(manga)">https://akira.fandom.com/wiki/Kiyoko_(manga)</a></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiA7iR-SDYqi7lek8jspx3hghH3urVAw0pOuLGNzxpXvN-axEWX0GphJoGVGW4x1N2iYkgKfE6lORM_X_OW7EoiWYa2M7hfm52RuKKHhBn_0B-4b5aSrQDBWOWLgEyIjZnBgPkqkl4arFIKh4GbH9hNtEBd5bQgsUTjcACaFkkQJJe7GaZ03Vr8mPFvag/w640-h400/Untitled.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_143" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="326"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Tangina’s take on the paranormal phenomena is quasi-Christian in its view of lost souls needing to go toward the ‘spectral light’. She believes the house is cursed with souls who don’t know they’re dead. It sounds like criticism of American Materialism, i.e. people are so attached to possession and pleasure that they just can’t let go and enter the spiritual realm. And so, those lost souls flock around Carol Anne because she is alive and radiant with youthful vitality, which they no longer have. She’s like a campfire to hikers lost in the wilderness. (But, Carol Anne’s unmistakably ‘Aryan’ features of blonde hair and blue eyes suggest another explanation, namely that Semites are drawn to European folks for their vitality, beauty, and normality, qualities lacking among the neurotic, insecure, and paranoid Jews. Steven Spielberg and Jewish comic-book writers before him created ideal fantasy Aryans, the kind beneficial to Jews or their agendas, like beating Nazis, and even <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ten Commandments</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ben-Hur</b> have aryan-looking Charlton Heston in Jewish roles. Even against the Aryans, employ Aryanism pulsing with natural virility lacking in Jewishness. If the horror movie <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Get Out</b> is about White Liberals obsessed with possessing black bodies deemed more appealing, many Jewish-created fantasies are fetishizations of the Aryan Ideal but made Jew-friendly. Granted, another side of Jewishness wants to destroy the Aryan Image altogether as it is a daily reminder of the Jewish Inferiority Complex. It pushes race-mixing, especially ACOWW or Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs and the Great Replacement, or White Nakba. In the opening part of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">War of the Worlds</b>, we see a white woman holding a mulatto child with a wide nose and fat lips. Steven Spielberg’s movies may not appear overtly hostile to whiteness, but he is undoubtedly on the same team with George Soros and Tim Wise. When push comes to shove, it all boils down to Jewish Vengeance fueled by Jewish Jealousy, or “Jews win, whites lose.”)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="292" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiWO1s7Pg2ORB-g6gwFrEAUliBIadeAilqCcAtHKv4HH0Z2-ta4Pn2QYk9Pteu5IdUKutPtL16dy91NQ6B7YyRQbmSPqdzpy5eas4slqkqNY3qhmsIhlWuAF0nYlcU_t03e9NU8Dp3U4P8eLdkv9NIcUINRzEMEAbs7RTCCx6Kru6ImVUt4rPh1Bij0Fw/w640-h292/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h24m05s690.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_144" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s another facet of Christology in Tangina’s ‘divination’, and it poses the greatest challenge. The lost souls aren’t demonic, only troubled, and could be shown the path to ‘salvation’. And Carol Anne could help them by playing an angel-like role, guiding them toward the Light. So, what’s the problem? Tangina fears there is another force within them, one filled with demonic rage and malevolence. It also works by deception and appears to Carol Anne as a ‘child’ playmate. Tangina calls it the ‘beast’, in line with Christology’s tendency to see everything in binaries of good and evil, divine and demonic, and pure and profane. It’s not so simple with Judaism, a deeper and more complicated belief system with much of the contradictions left intact and unresolved.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_145" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="180"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Christianity is an inversion of Judaism(and Spielbergonics is an inversion of Christianity, especially in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>). In Judaism, God cannot be seen or touched and exists as pure spirit; in contrast, even though Jewish souls are real enough, their continuation depends on bodily functions, namely sex through the ages. Thus, the living Jews are torchbearers of the flame passed down through the ages. In other words, no bodily functions(sex), no more Jewish souls, which means end of Jewishness. In contrast, Christianity presents God as seeable, touchable, and intimately knowable through the tangible figure of Jesus Christ, Son of God, a blasphemous idea to the Jews. And whereas Jewish souls are limited to bodily forms, with their essence being passed down through the ages by man-and-woman-lying-together, the Christian concept says one’s soul can be completely liberated from the body and ascend to a higher state in Heaven with God and the angels. Christianity materialized God into the figure of Man but abstracted the soul as worthy of reaching the realm of God Himself, an inversion of the Jewish Formula.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_146" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As things turn out, the ‘beast’ is, if not exactly a ‘good guy’, a most justified entity whose wrath may seem demonic on the surface but actually burns with a righteous sense of grievance. We are getting ahead of ourselves as the revelation comes only in the movie’s conclusion, but it demonstrates Spielberg’s mind-humping prowess. The ‘beast’ is akin to the spirits of the Ark in the first Indiana Jones movie. It is beastly for a reason. Not because it revels in evil but because a grave injustice has been committed and must be corrected.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_147" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="155"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Because the Judaic avenging angels at the end of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b> attack the Nazis but spare the All-American Indy and his girl, the audience may walk away assuming that the spirits are A-Okay with Christian America. But from the Judeo-centric angle of Philip Kaufman, Lawrence Kasdan, and Steven Spielberg, the final image of the Ark being stored in the State Archive may suggest that the spirits will haunt America as well(and guide it a new direction) because Jewish Rage will not be placated by the destruction of the Nazis, who are but a symptom of a far deeper disease, which is Christendom that defined its sanctity against Jews as Christ-Killers. (Christians accused Jews of deicide, and Jews as the god-race shall charge whites/Christians with the neo-deicide of killing the Jewish god-men.) <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> could be construed as an esoteric but powerful pop-testament of Jewish vengeance on America as the New Rome.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="295" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEizSOKwp57Bgm7gm-oLRniH08SJrjKIeYAXslkOYupetJeABo9uSGExMnAl9uDVO0QTRXPcgLepYpA2mILF9HzrisU6HrcYVqVgn_zQkjIvvALN7S9bIBwGyd4TvIXRdgJgX8uaHbpouklscOLLWYVgPPNOEyRbJu7kqgS49uCjHalQ_d1ohp8T7ZSENw/w640-h295/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h25m24s711.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_148" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It could have Zionist overtones as well, Spielberg’s way of saying that Jews got nothing personal against the Palestinians, BUT they happened to be situated on the sacred ground of Jewish forebears whose souls called upon modern Jews to try anything, however monstrous, to regain the land for the Tribe and put things to right — likewise, the <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Candyman</b> horror movies feature a dark force that was gravely wronged in the past, i.e. a Negro in a relation with a white woman was lynched. So, just like the Freelings had to be scared out of their wits to depart from their home(claimed by the souls buried underneath), Palestinians also had to be uprooted because Jews supposedly have a deeper claim to the land. Also, as a lesson for goyim to understand what it’s like to be without a home(land), the Freelings look like nomads in the final scene. But, that’s for later.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_149" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="433"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In most horror, the dark forces are evil and demonic. Their mission is to hurt and destroy, propelled by madness or sadism. There’s nothing good about the dark spirit that possesses Regan in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Exorcist</b>. In contrast, the forces behind the chaos in Close Encounters and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>(and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b>) are, if not benign, not without reason or higher purpose, though usually beyond man’s limits of logic and understanding. Spielberg implies that higher/deeper powers are justified in manipulating, testing, and/or forcing lesser forms of beings, not unlike mankind’s treatment of animals, as in medical experiments, which aren’t meant to hurt the poor creatures, though it may come to that; it is for science or medicine. On the most primal level of human emotions, what happens to the mothers in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> is unforgivable. Imagine the pain of a grief-stricken parent whose child was abducted by who-knows-what. It made for powerful drama in Akira Kurosawa’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">High and Low</b>. Few things are conceivably worse, like a child losing his parents, as with the orphans in <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</strong> and the near-orphan in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Empire of the Sun</b>. The aliens in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> nab the kid in a scene that looks more like horror than science-fiction(though, to be sure, the kid seems eager to go with the aliens, like a dog running after cars). The woman should hate the aliens forever, but she is all smiles and joyful tears as the spaceship returns her son. No anger, no bitterness for what she’s been put through because, presumably, she came to the understanding that the aliens, being infinitely smarter and wiser, have a cosmic license to be snatching kids away from mothers, like zoologists taking the offspring from mother animals for study before returning them, that is if meant to be returned. Equality doesn’t exist in the Spielbergian universe. It’s a world of higher powers and lesser beings, and the only question is, “Is the higher power benevolent or malevolent?” <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> or <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">War of the Worlds</b>? American Military or German Wehrmacht? In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, the dark power seems evil but is actually trying to undo an evil. (Among the child abduction movies, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Emerald Forest</b> has to be the loopiest in its Tarzanism. The white father makes peace with his son choosing to be with the brown natives who nabbed him as a child because being a noble savage means unity with mystical nature. Surely a twist on John Ford’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Searchers</b>, which may also apply to <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> with its child-napping.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_150" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg’s obsession with higher powers is like the current Jewish Supremacist mentality whereby the members of the Tribe are justified in the unconventional breach of norms because they, being the Chosen, simply know better, meaning we inferior goyim should just learn to live with it, which is indeed the case with so many cucked goyim. So, if Jewish gender-’scientists’ want to take your kid and mutilate his/her genitals, just nod and smile because Jews know best.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_151" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the Tangina sequence, Spielberg plays along with the quasi-Christological interpretation of things. It comes down to the battle between the Light of Salvation and the Dark Beast of Damnation. American Materialism prevents the lost souls from letting go of worldly attachments in favor of the Light, and some beastly power fends off all attempts to rescue Carol Anne, to whom it appears as a kindly friend. Sticks for the parents, carrots for Carol Anne. It uses force and deception. Tangina devises a plan, but is her psychic prognosis correct? They all decide to go along with it. What else is there to do?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_152" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="266"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Everyone is relying on Tangina to get to the heart of the matter — indeed, she did remark that the house has ‘many hearts’ — , but her strategy for truth requires Diane and Steve to use deception, especially to draw Carol Anne from the ‘hands’ all around her, presumably belonging to the lost souls. To do this, Steve must play the role of the tough dad, one even willing to spank the kid. The distinction between man and woman becomes clearer here, a departure from the modern norm/tendency to view everyone as a mere individual. It’s as if a bit of ‘old school’ is necessary to put things to right. The threat of ‘spanking’ especially harks back to the Old Ways before Dr. Spock and the New Psychology. So far, Steve and Diane have been presented as more-or-less permissive parents, but they must get tough to brace for what’s to come. (It’s like Sarah Connors in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Terminator</b> must go into warrior mode to survive what’s ahead, the rise of the killer machines. <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, like <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Terminator</b> and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Red Dawn</b>, suggests Americans have become too soft and must reconnect with either spirituality, history, and/or warrior instinct.) Tangina not only commands Diane to tell Carol Anne to go towards the Light but to lie that she’s waiting for her in the Light. Presumably, Tangina is trying to draw Carol Anne to the Light and then to grab her before she gets sucked into the Final Destination along with the lost souls. (Or, Tangina is rather unsure herself and playing it by ear.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_153" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="330"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The only equipment for the ‘cleaning’ operation comprise a rope and two tennis balls, and this is where the righteous Negro Ryan gains significance as an archetype. Now, the movie came out in 1982 when the rope hadn’t yet gained the significance in recent years. Back then, a noose was usually associated with some horse thief in a Western on the verge of being hanged. Or, with Clint Eastwood in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hang Em High</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">High Plains Drifter</b>. Today, the rope or noose is almost exclusively associated with Negrucifixion(and maybe the knee will gain significance via St. George Fentanyl Floyd). Long ago, some famous person said if Jesus had been hanged than crucified, the Noose than the Cross would have been the sacred symbol of Christendom. In the Current West, the Noose has taken on such a significance in association with the Noble Negro. After so many years of Jewish influence and goy cuckery, many white people now worship the Magic-Tragic Negro as their god. Then, it’s hardly surprising that Fake Noose stories have proliferated, as if inspired by fake or imagined miracles reported by Catholics of yesteryear. Though regarded as expressions of ‘hate’ and ‘white supremacism’, they are prized as reminders of ‘white guilt’ and need for white atonement. Just like the bogus miracle sightings of the Catholic Church(and the miracle healings of Pentecostals) were fabricated by the faithful themselves, Fake Noose sightings are perpetrated by blacks, cucked whites, or Jews(who are also responsible for most swastika vandalism on Jewish property). Just like Christians rationalized bogus ‘miracles’ in the name of bolstering faith in the Almighty, blacks and other ‘victim’ groups feel justified in their frauds and hoaxes for the sake of Social Justice in honor of the Tri-Idolatry of Jews, blacks, and homos. Long before any of this happened, Spielberg was rather prescient with his movie antics about what Jewish Power really had in store for white goyim.</span></p><div class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 5px auto; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; width: 685px; z-index: 1;"><img class="" height="263" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV9f-H5iXJ03TMgLEGjGgWqaQmeCa_H9oVXsoZvloMWfjh2NCsEDEt3FK80FxSyUXMUYvEQwCefrwytfO_1jN7FIsvv2XnduI9wQhA3RC6igF1_3aYN_KzDE2LBZbbyov1ijU1PCxcRkqQmkRdH1QFLQ2FU6BCaSW53VclPepbPaYiGPn98xLAnqAGiQ/w640-h263/vlcsnap-202220220729_145108%20dong%20rope%20and%20balls.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /><p class="wp-caption-text" style="border: 0px; color: grey; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 3px 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sheeeeeeeiiit, Ryan’s gots his balls back!!</strong></em>�</p></div><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="264" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkQkdtYpji0YrwhIawB9LZ-KbVo7YzOfTIe6VMU8vMqPKUkFPDuc1THObc2N390NM3oda1tJ2a9qZG1vzM-1h0tu3oiEfPjg1xnX53KLQkVCw1WT04yQJMlwUrL7n1u64dg0V_qmI17N2Mk3vMIEzNVRulcslbHbW9944ZJTU93cvv4ZHhCjCqrtA0Sw/w640-h264/vlcsnap-tug%20a%20rope%20or%20tug%20a%20dong%20-%20on%20the%20same%20team%20but%20pull%20in%20different%20directions%20-%20clever%20jewish%20trick%20-%20make%20em%20feel%20working%20together%20but%20set%20em%20apart.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_154" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">First, despite the lack of any overt hostility, husband Steve clearly isn’t thrilled to have a Negro about the house. There is no camaraderie between them. But then, the whole point of the suburbs was to get away from Negroes, who are okay on TV(as football players) but could be troublesome in real life, turning the neighborhood into da hood. Ryan’s race sticks out further because Marty the white guy quit. Now, Ryan is a good guy and eager to help. But, it’s unlikely that his race is irrelevant, especially given three of Spielberg’s serious movies dealt with Negro or Negro-related themes: <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Color Purple</b>, <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amistad</b>, and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Lincoln</b>; and the voice of conscience in the opening of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A.I.</b> is that of a black woman, ROTFL. As Spielberg didn’t grow up around Negroes — the bullies of his childhood were ‘dumb polack’ types — , he wasn’t disabused of the illusion of the Noble or Magic Negro. Thus, blackness is more a symbol than a reality for Spielberg(and people like Stephen King).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_155" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="306"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ryan is given a definite role in the girl’s rescue. He’s told by Tangina to mark two (tennis) balls and handed a rope, rather curtly by Steve. One possible significance of the balls and rope involves the Lynching Narrative. Supposedly, wholly innocent blacks were charged of rape or murdered and hanged from trees. Sometimes, they were castrated or ‘nutted’. Thus, the white family could be haunted not only by the proxies of Holocaust Vengeance but Lynching Vengeance. (Given the Holocaust consumed millions of lives whereas only a few thousand blacks were lynched over a century, often for actual crimes, why would Jews want to elevate a minor tragedy nearly on par with a major one? Weren’t the Great Famine in Ukraine, Japanese atrocities in China, oligarchic death squads in Guatemala, US bombing in Laos, and Cambodia under Khmer Rouge more comparable to the Shoah? But then, this isn’t about true morality but political weaponization of morality. The Great Famine is inconvenient for Jews because Bolshie Tribesmen played a key role. And just forget about the Palestinian Nakba. No, it has to be all this hand-wringing about blacks for the simple reason that Jewish Supremacist Power relies on the cult of ‘white guilt’ that binds white goyim to a morally inferior position. So, some black criminals who met vigilante justice deserve more attention than millions of Christian Slavs who were starved to gruesome death in Ukraine. Nothing has changed, of course. The life of George Floyd matters a thousand times more than the lives of all the Arabs, men, women, and children, killed in Wars for Israel. Jews know that whites have close to zero agency in conscience and depend almost entirely on official or approved channels of news and opinion. So, white morality is lighting candles for Anne Frank and George Floyd.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_156" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When Tangina takes the balls(marked ‘1’ and ‘2’ by Ryan himself) and tosses one after the other into the closet, they reappear at the ‘target’, the identified spot on the living room ceiling where Ryan stands waiting. As hypothesized by Tangina, the balls drop from the ‘target’ one by one. Excited, Ryan goes ‘ghetto’ in lingo. He be all thrilled and shit to be gittin’ his balls back. “Kiss my ass!”, he hollers. It’s like the viral video of the black news reporter who be flippin’ when a fly done pop into his mouth. Ryan’s like ‘muh balls!’</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ui-hJ_DZ_jc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Reporter turns ghetto in 3 seconds" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_157" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Apart from the lynching allusion, the balls could signify that the weird happenings, far from merely involving spirits, has something to do with sexuality. Even though Tangina’s ideas are quasi-Christian in character, the balls suggest a lurking Jewish element. The highest ideals of Christianity are abstractly spiritual. The purest thing you could do is forgo sex and family, reject the demands of the flesh, and detach your soul from the body. There is nothing wrong with celibacy; indeed, it is preferable, as Jesus Himself chose Heavenly grace over earthly desires(even in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Last Temptation of Christ</b> when push came to shove). Indeed, a strain of Christianity views sex, even sex within marriage, as a kind of fallenness, a betrayal of the spirit. Christianity castrates the flesh from the spirit. In contrast, Judaism, though highly moralistic about sexuality, puts family and reproduction at its core. The New Testament is about the final revelation, a handbook on how to rise above the grinding cycles of history and enter into eternal Heaven. In contrast, Torah is a story of generations, of fathers and sons, about the Jewish bloodline. So, while a Christian who loses his balls can still find comfort in the dream of Heaven, a Jew without balls is indeed a pitiful creature.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_158" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After Ryan grabs the balls in the living room, Tangina instructs Steve to toss one end of the rope into the closet, whereby it drops out of the ‘target’ for Ryan to immediately pull on. The plan seems to be, while Ryan and Steve hold the rope taut at opposite ends, Tangina will enter the closet bound to the rope in search of Carol Anne. Perhaps, she can find Carol Anne wandering in the ‘spectral light’ and find an escape hatch through the ‘target’ in the ceiling, or something. But Diane interjects and insists she must be the one to go.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_159" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Here, Spielberg gets naughty again, albeit in a clever way. The rope is given additional significance as a dong symbol, especially as it follows the two BALLS. Yes, the dong-rope. Even though Steve and Ryan are on the same team, it’s as if they’re in a tug-of-war or tug-a-dong competition. Ryan pulls the white woman Diane and her white daughter in his direction while Steve pulls in the opposite direction. Also, when Tangina tells Ryan to ‘take up the slack’ and tighten the rope, it sounds like Beavis-Boner-Hour. The rope goes from ‘flaccid’ to stiff, like an erection. So, what looks like Ebony-and-Ivory teamwork on the surface has the vibes of black-vs-white sexual conflict underneath. And when the rope is jerked away from Steve after a giant skull bulges out of the doorway, it’s like a massive ejaculation, anticipated by the baldo-beardo’s ‘cumming’ beer cans and Robbie’s breaking glass ‘cumming’ milk all over Dana. It’s Spielberg being a very ‘naughty boy’, like the kid in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Shining</b>.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_160" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But before Steve loses his grip on the rope, something odd comes over Tangina. So far, she was in control of things, combining spiritual prowess with strategic mastery. But for all her powers, she seems to fall under the spell of the Light and begins to mutter how all must enter the Light. Steve senses something wrong. After all, the plan was to draw Carol Anne toward the Light and then snatch her away before it consumes her. So, why is Tangina reversing herself on the Light? Is she under some kind of trance and lost control of herself? Desperate, Steve takes matters into his own hands and pulls on the rope, and it is only then that Tangina regains her senses and warns Steve to stop, that it’s too early to pull Diane(and hopefully Carol Anne) out of the closet.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiQvy4Mb0jqcJiBCRkmLInDGmv-e6U531KwvJDs32kdJzn1z3Tr57joxRnt5dX1in_ak9_KI5NPXWdkOykW7prBVk959IlielZLP9wn_tKfAKKFlqK-pDuSuxBoi1jCPTutaj02UgeytWZ1a4ExHuyMpzPvZILrAPgN1PdApMPfQJZS4Ji5hReTHtY9uA/w640-h266/vlcsnap-2022-%20slack%20to%20tighten%20or%20erection,%20rope%20also%20signify%20lynching%20-%20well%20hung%20-%20amistad%20and%20lincoln%20and%20color%20purple.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_161" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="137"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just then, a giant skull appears at the doorway and hollers at Steve, who is totally horror-struck, whereupon the rope is ripped away from his hands. Obviously, things didn’t exactly go according to plan. Still, it seems to have done something as Diane, with Carol Anne in her arms, appears in the plasmic light in the ‘target’ area and then falls the full distance from the ceiling to the floor in an unconscious state. Steve rushes downstairs and yells ‘NO’ to Ryan who’s trying to touch Diane and Carol Anne. The righteous Negro is trying to help, but Steve reacts almost violently, as if HE should be the first one to touch Diane and his daughter. Ryan does help Steve carry mother and daughter to the bathroom where they are placed inside the baptismal tub.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_162" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Diane returned with the girl, but are they alive? The image of mother and daughter in the bathtub is meant to strike a chord with Christians, especially the Born-Again Pentecostal variety. It’s as if modern-day consumerist Americans who lived mainly for material comfort underwent a profoundly transformative experience and were ‘saved’. Indeed, it’s as if mother and daughter were literally born again. Diane traversed the sphere of the Light, found Carol Anne, and was ‘spiritually’ revitalized with her daughter. And unlike in patriarchal-hierarchical Judaism where age matters a good deal, there’s a childlike quality about Christianity where the purity of faith, regardless of age or station, is what matters most. So, while Judaism puts the father/parent and the rabbi over children and students, Christianity(especially the less intellectual variety) encourages adults to reconnect with the innocence of childhood. One might say it has an infantilizing effect. Indeed, Diane and Carol Anne in the bathtub look like a big baby and a little baby.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="264" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgb-_IYESwHld0nPuiIPfhOJd7YhdO3w3NkP_EN7cwjOOs3Se8-jGU_XF4Hzqj5msS6LSO8nKJA0Wb8huVj2cfrMFbUAjYRkD3x7uX50BQBgo1O2dsZQ1JotZnAVIZpKFHImIi694AeRz4ZVKQOLltQy7A6-GwINkm_tAdqSaIhhNr9FIqww7Gu6esebw/w640-h264/vlcsnap-2022-08-he%20can't%20hold%20on%20any%20longer%20ejaculation.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_163" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Well, all’s well that ends well, and as both mother and daughter regain their senses, it seems the problem has been solved, with no little help from Dr. Lesh, Ryan, and especially Tangina, who poses for the camera with the pride of victory. They are so happy with Carol Anne’s return that they overlook the incongruities. For starters, it didn’t go according to plan. For a while, Tangina lost her senses, and the panic-stricken Steve yanked on the rope prematurely. And Diane and Carol Anne emerged in catatonic state and could have suffered serious damage from the impact of hitting the floor. Besides, if it was all about the Light and lost spirits, why are Diane and Carol Anne(as well as the tennis balls and the rope) covered in jelly-like slime? To be born-again is a spiritual transformation, a cleansing of the soul, especially among the Evangelicals. But with all the goo on their faces and bodies, Diane and Carol seem rather ‘gorn again’. (The Catholics have a strange ritual with Communion where they believe to partake of the flesh and blood of Christ. Jews, with their fixation on reproduction and generational continuity, are more about cum-union, which may explain Spielberg’s naughty allusions to ejaculations throughout the movie.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_164" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="81"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Too often when there’s a problem, we want the fix without the hassle of figuring out the causes. It’s why we leave it up to doctors, mechanics, and professionals. It costs money but saves us the headache. And once the problem seems solved well enough, we put it behind us rather than think about it. Plenty of people just banged on TVs set for better signals and were content with the desired results and thought no more of it.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_165" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However, many apparent solutions are, at best, cosmetic and fail to address the deeper issues. People often treat their health this way. When feeling sick, they take some pills and, if the pain goes away, don’t think about it. It’s no wonder quacks and snake-oils abound everywhere with their promise of quick fixes. Most people ponder deeper only when the problem is no longer manageable. This certainly applies to conservatism in the 1980s. So many people breathed a sigh of relief that the boomers finally seemed to have matured and that the crazy 60s and 70s were behind them. America was back with patriotism, enterprise, and confidence. Well, what has happened since? American Conservatism(as well as American Liberalism) failed because it refused to address the Jewish Question. In years to come, Jews would not only push the Weimarization of the West but the New Authoritarianism whereby principles like ‘free speech’ became the providence of Jews to do as they please, thereby undermining the very foundation of real liberalism. Today, ‘democracy’ means whatever outcome demanded by Jews. So, if a coup installed a new regime in Ukraine, that’s ‘democratic’, but if a solid majority elected Viktor Orban, that’s ‘authoritarian’. ‘Tolerance’ has come to mean compulsory celebration of globo-homo degeneracy and BLM ideology; consider the number of people fired or ‘canceled’ for refusing the BLM narrative or rejecting the tranny notions of ‘gender’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjDuCyT3L8E2iwy3Wx2kbYv80D2UrQGL6qPwFs0p7n2faFn2RZroRm9ZvnwtU_r2Kj6Q8TgTeFKnaNA1qx9h6rLnaOJ0tVFUXHOVJNlWJl1mTDEYwZ8k4QXGQftiKMlxF2dXx8AgbLR0aJfYXKjLUUWfTJsNGFkDDTWA58w3ObJQL0G_nvumbxkR1jhIA/w640-h262/vlcsnap-notion%20of%20born%20again%20in%20christianity.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_166" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="111"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, everyone, from the family to the academic Dr. Lesh to the clairvoyant Tangina, prefers to believe the problem has been solved. It’s all back to normal, and there’s no need to look back. Tangina beams with pride as she poses for Ryan’s adoring camera: “This house is clean”, she says. And even the rationalist Dr. Lesh seems deeply moved, as if she herself went through a conversion toward faith. She has that blessed look on her face so iconic in Spielbergmania, a kind of pornography of tearful bliss and glowing innocence or pop-culturalization of Christian passion and iconography. (John Hughes took another tact with <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Weird Science</strong>.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7sk6RJGqpeZerMxeA8LFQdh92yVgkgZjHzHUcDykTOmPOirCFH7FsSHRPslJx2HAangGD25H60mnW7Blh_JohCfoxxA-eGgu3rXm6fH5bNidMaWGklI8cBcJoBE21IwBcpNUW5T6OhpNdBHOSrso0wt5nIxlwylBq1dw_Lj4QfiPh6XkbrNcTW2NwDw/w640-h262/vlcsnap-she%20thinks%20the%20house%20is%20now%20clean,%20redeemed%20but%20no,%20it's%20still%20cursed%20cuz%20the%20dead%20are%20there..jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_167" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="183"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Next scene shows the family in the process of packing their belongings. A moving truck is parked right outside the house. All seems well again, with the family having grown a bit wiser perhaps. Was Tangina’s hypothesis correct, after all? Is the house really ‘cleaned’? It seems so, but why was their house affected by the spirits? There’s no real clue or explanation as yet. Still, they got their daughter back, the spooky stuff seems to have ended. One thing for sure, given what they’ve been through, they sure don’t want to live there anymore. Dana notices some gray slivers on her mother’s hair, and maybe it’s an homage to The Bride of Frankenstein(or if Spielberg was feeling especially goofy, to Susan Sontag, as if to suggest this particular movie is his most ‘intellectual’ and ‘subversive’). Robbie helps out too but dons a lampshade on his head, a possible allusion to the Holocaust with its horror stories of Jews turned into articles of furniture and a premonition of what’s about to be revealed that night.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="361" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjzpFL8giV4Vej9fBAesY12ntQHR8k8Rz8gV1qgM_MU9SM0Z7VFVloO-6jXoUQhLcJAbGn9gYsLChLyBDmE832AzNhVszOp83vHIEsAOT-IgC2sbFBAaDIXOf_4ylBh2LluI_2ACnHBaPg7xRXJ-T6QL4ogNLZOaV_OX6WRVp85ORr3_aYUMuDuUf7gfQ/w640-h361/83b.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_168" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="225"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Diane tells Steve that Carol Anne remembers nothing of what happened, and maybe that’s for the better. They don’t seem particularly keen on dwelling on the matter either. The family plans to move out before the night is out, but Steve has to spend some hours at the office with his boss to discuss matters. Dana plans to visit her friends, and Diane reminds her to return on time so that they can drive to a Holiday Inn on I-74, whereupon Dana pensively says, “Yeah, I remember that place”, somewhat to Diane’s surprise. Does it mean Dana went there with boyfriends? Or, is it something else? Did the family move frequently before Steve finally settled down to a stable career? Was the family ‘hippie’ going ‘yuppie’ or ‘subuppie’? If Dana is 16 yrs old in 1982, it means she was born in 1966. And if Diane is 32 yrs old, it means she was 16 when she gave birth to Dana. And the fact that she still smokes marijuana suggests Steve and she had a kind of a wild youth. We also learn that Carol Anne was born IN the house. For a time, it was fashionable among Counterculture types to have babies at home, especially in the bathtub filled with water, which is where Diane and Carol Anne find themselves after escaping from the other dimension.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_169" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All those details may explain Steve and Diane’s permissiveness as parents(and why Dana stays out so much) and why Steve took umbrage at the notion that HE is the disciplinarian in the house, as if that’s a BAD thing; he retorted that he never spanked any of the kids. Theirs isn’t exactly Bad-News-Bears parenting but a lot looser than the new breed of elite-centric parenting of hovering over the kids to make sure they get straight A’s and enter the BEST schools.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_170" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Insofar as <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> is about amnesia(personal and historical), how fitting that its main characters are boomers come into adulthood. Indeed, if space aliens were dropped in the middle of America in the 1980s, they’d hardly realize the country had gone through cataclysmic social and cultural transformations in the Sixties and Seventies. The 80s were sold as the return to 50s stability, minus the repression and hang-ups erased during the years of upheaval. In other words, the best of both worlds, back to stability but liberated.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_171" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="34"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But in the rush to settle down and/or rebuild following the hectic crises-laden period from mid-60s to the late 70s, many Americans chose to forget or ignore certain inconvenient truths of history.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_172" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Oliver Stone certainly hit back later in the decade with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Platoon </b>and <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Wall Street</b>. Spike Lee’s <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Do the Right Thing</b> reminded America of the racial problems that the Eighties(when the <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Cosby Show</i></b> was the favored face of Black America) failed to resolve. Of course, Spielberg was a prime candidate among the peddlers of amnesia, the man who, along with George Lucas among others, contributed to the death knell of New Hollywood’s personal film-making in favor of summer blockbusters and popcorn movies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_173" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, in his own way, Spielberg was intensely personal, far more so than Lucas, and a closer inspection of his cinema shows that he was indeed concerned, even obsessed, with generational, cultural, historical, and even spiritual issues, albeit in a pop-esoteric mode. Indeed, Spielberg would join the ranks of Oliver Stone and Spike Lee with his Rub-the-White-Man’s-Nose-In-History with <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b>. (Whereas some criticized <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Color Purple</b> for being too Disneyesque and/or David-Lean-like and making the abusive black male the face of brutality, no one could mistake the starkly b/w <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b> as anything but a full-blown assault on European Evil. With all the money and means Spielberg had amassed in the industry, he had the means to do just about anything he wanted. It’s telling that <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Schindler’s List</b> came out the same year as <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jurassic Park</b>, one of his best works. In his Holocaust movie, Spielberg focuses on a little orphaned Jewish girl walking amidst the corpses and who is later spotted among the dead. Then, we can surmise the significance of the abduction by the ‘beast’ in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>. It could be the rage of Jewish Vengeance saying, “You white goyim murdered our children, so we will take yours and make you feel the pain.”)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhd46UdlVxqPtKizrklDdFiOiScNck8ayYM7II1LI1Ot6F_-gvrlolXT2BDd5JaolJd4zSah8tX1IRwsQyWDGBpyuGybztC9j1P0xGIVEqnbCmda8IWinVUI2HRh-uku3vfPE0lDek-8llXIb_mMpZNdTacjWkX1oMbwFI0HD0rw8-1ckmfIWsgFER9Dg/w640-h260/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h44m19s383.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_174" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the remaining hours in the house, Diane decides to take a bath, the final baptismal comfort in what had been their home for several years. For some reason, Robbie and Carol Anne are put to bed even though the family intends to leave as soon as Steve returns. While the tub is filling with water, Diane sits with her kids who argue over toys. Both the boy’s truck and the girl’s doll are broken in two. The doll seems ‘decapitated’, reminiscent of the younger son in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</b> smashing a female doll for some reason. It could be Spielberg’s way of saying that the mind is often disjointed from the body of truth. Toy models of the human form and the machine lay mangled on the bed, setting the scene up for what’s to come next.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_175" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After a nice bath, Diane lies in bed and relaxes to kill a few hours. Meanwhile, Robbie tries to sleep but once again finds the jester-clown-doll a menacing presence in the dark. Worse, it suddenly goes missing from the chair. Then suddenly, all hell breaks loose. The doll ambushes Robbie from behind and begins to strangle him and drag him under the bed. Meanwhile, the paranormal forces are back with a vengeance and do a number on Diane.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_176" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="171"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Spielberg gets naughty once more, indeed Ron-Jeremic as the spooks pull her shirt up and seem to grab for her pooter(or cooter). It’s like something out of the horror movie <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Entity</b>(a favorite of Martin Scorsese) where a woman is raped by some invisible force, surely a perverse twist on Mary being impregnated by God. It’s as if Diane is being attacked by something akin to Harvey Weinstein’s unloosed id. Then, gravity goes haywire, and Diane is hurled to the ceiling, as if up is down, down is up. At least earlier, the gravity went from ceiling-to-floor, allowing for Diane and Carol Anne to fall back to reality. But nothing seems certain now. Worse, the supernatural forces, instead of mainly targeting particular areas of the house, have now taken over the whole thing like a bull in a china shop. The family thought the madness was over, but the spooks are only getting started, hellbent on revealing the Truth as to why they’re so furious.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="262" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhN9HKSPAvcbQ_31dARzq1iQSA9yqqjnw9uh9YqQTnuz2EcyQdChyQ_NpyL-gPIp6sGoCxZAZA6Sq8y_z_XSWJ_HPfXIxIWSknpbtYR18nO4exa_oeMEjpjilPwZTTOYiKONTpp8_OObjJI_KM6VkLaycTZ024kH7cwWEI5i8MVlJ3ojjg9Ahe0JO_QLQ/w640-h262/vlcsnap-2022-08%20goes%20ron%20jeremic.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_177" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the Tangina phase of the narrative evoked Christo-Mythology, the denouement goes fully into Judeo-Sexual-Vengeance mode. Contra the Christian spiritual view where the soul seeks liberation from the flesh, the Jewish view of soul is generational, therefore profoundly sexual. Then, it makes sense that the vengeful spirit strikes out with a fury that is monstrously sexual. Not only does it grab at Diane’s snatch but gets really wild in Robbie and Carol Anne’s bedroom. Lucky for Robbie, he managed to outmuscle the jester-doll and destroy it by pulling out its stuffing, but he ain’t seen nothing yet as the closet, which had been the portal of the Christo-mythic light in the earlier sequence, becomes one big angry Jewish Vengeance-Vagina.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_178" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, it might as well be Andrea Dworkin’s big fat hungry beaver, especially as the room gets very vaginally pink. If the Christian soul is supposed to pass from Earth to Heaven, the Jewish Soul is supposed to pass from body to body down the generations. But, all those Jews killed in the Shoah were denied the chance to pass down their seed. As the buried-and-forgotten in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> likely symbolize the Jewish Dead in World War II, their ultimate form of revenge takes on sexual overtones. The closet turns into a gigantic Jewish Vagina that seeks revenge by trying to suck in the goy kids Robbie and Carol Anne.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZa5H9JhspvJAkwSOFeMCwgRdfHIGcA4SvyHMARRjxAw7kcuQfH5pmxrYSPxF5QeRL4nr3dc1iNrG-l0UmEyW_1h53S3_nsRd8BsQPK4pdlVdxELREad-fFSUXVSZaU7Gk6dTcf79GCFJE5i82hLekfoOczk-JSyLYkWSXlL4Y6fUlFOFIrm_uelzJxg/w640-h266/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h47m26s584.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_179" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Meanwhile, Diane finally regains her equilibrium and tries to save her children, but the spooks conspire to keep her at bay. Outside, she calls for help but slips into the swimming pool that now fill up with corpses as coffins break out of the ground. She is pulled up from the pool by the next-door neighbor who, however, is unwilling or too afraid to do more, especially as his wife forbid him to do so. (If Ben is meant to be Jewish, his reluctance to help could mean Jews are about looking out for other Jews, not risking their lives for goyim, which would be Dumb Polack shit. “Goyim ain’t your blood.”) Back in the house and having made it upstairs, she finds the hallway turning ‘psychedelic’ and elongating as she runs toward her children’s room. It’s like she’s running inside a dong growing long. It’s almost as if she’s running inside Ron Jeremy’s dong growing stiff.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh4Qy2hbPlcWDTaYvGRWYbd1b6vvOhVXQLO1tHCurUxLnG9Yqe7g4r5GAsBdJ1wZX_7EnpxuEyzqe54kXVTJgivLyaJhOG-aUy1vyXe4CGE9EYwk7cXgL5hh-lSqjcfHal4qMun2zPkDcJKJujKDBItpgR1yuM_vA7ZzSgw8t0_Ni0ft035nieesNIS6w/w640-h260/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h49m40s124.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_180" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">She picks up speed and finally reaches the door, only to find Robbie and Carol Anne holding on for dear life as Andrea Dworkin’s big fat pooter has become like the ravenous plant in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Little Shop of Horrors</b>. Diane just barely manages to pull them into the hallway, but more troubles lie ahead. No matter where she runs, coffins bust out of the floor.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="243" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhEw72gEXtGqR1zgRPzZYcAeLo4LNemQ8jtiT4OLzSHqwHhBw-YL7bCXHZr2Xm-jSel7C1J2_10lU79Dj1voCuF5RPbxFdoFP3qDwomf7pOo8n1NOLj3NOi8WCjGjTCD-0JwXhzX8wsQJvo8Db4VqdPqfM-fQuvN9g6WEls8QrkXwdI-TGq8KvAjmbPtg/w640-h243/vlcsnap-2022%20little%20shop%20of%20horrors.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzeKIbJACBi1EbA2hCY0JSwQzkoUrxxpbDutT2CyDQRftoFEuwK0NJN2jJjNleBYdEsYIJ4xy__y43-Brt_R5atnGRoH6tWMOdyeGuW5QZnY4JHzGDZCLaJdQxH8rRkmwT-5ZzJp4_pgdk8Ce-H8GOUeQaxbn43-wCT_OxBgLInAQNZWzl8NDfmYueEw/w457-h640/AndreaDworkin1986.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="457" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_181" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="148"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">No more Christo-mythology about the Light and soul-cleansing. Diane and her kids are confronted with what Spielberg and fellow Jews consider to be the biggest power of the cosmos: Jewish Covenant, Jewish Sexual Rage, and Jewish Historical Vengeance all rolled into one. The Covenant says Jewish blood is sacred, and Jewish souls have passed through the ages through Jewish blood and semen. To the extent that the murdered Jews failed to pass down the seed and produce children, they are smoldering with boundless rage. If Christianity is ultimately about the possibility of forgiveness and redemption, Jewishness is ultimately about survival and revenge(and total demolition of the enemy). Just as Jews are right to be eternally enraged about the Holocaust, the corpses tearing through the house are, in the movie’s conclusion, justified in their wrath. In the end, they are not the bad guys, not the ‘beast’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_182" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="34"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The real villain is the greedy developer who defiled those bodies by (1) converting a cemetery into a residential development and (2) failing to dig up the coffins to be relocated to a proper burial ground.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_183" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, Steve arrives just then, driven home by Mr. Teague himself. As he sees dead bodies all around, he puts 2 and 2 together and figures out why all the shit’s been happening. Teague only told half the story earlier on the hilltop. The tombstones were moved but not the bodies, whose angry souls have been haunting the Freeling family. As such, what they’d experienced was more like a haunting than mere willy-nilly visits by poltergeists. In that sense, the movie is deceptively mistitled. Dr. Lesh explained that hauntings involve the dead and considerably more serious than short-term visitations by poltergeists. One thing for sure, Spielberg and fellow Jews intend the West to be Holo-Haunted forever. (Or maybe the term ‘Poltergeist’ was used because it sounds Germanic, and guess who carried out the Shoah?)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_184" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dana arrives just then and screams in abject terror, a very Spielbergian over-the-top moment. She is pulled into the car, and the Freelings drive away(a moment added with grandeur in the ending of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jurassic Park</b>). Behind them, pandemonium continues around the house, with water hydrants bursting and cars being overturned. Mr. Teague stands before the house aghast and bewildered. Before the house collapses unto itself, it blasts flames, state-of-the-art brimstone-and-fire, one of which strikes Teague like a bull’s eye. It recalls the climax in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raiders of the Lost Ark</b> when the Judaic Avenging Angels turn the Germans and the Nazi-sympathizing French archaeologist into melted cheese before reducing them to dust to be sucked by a vacuum cleaner in the sky. But unlike the Evil Nazis who are destroyed without mercy, Teague suffers no fatal wounds. Still, he’s shaken to his core. He stands there frazzled, and more importantly, ashamed for what he’d done.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="264" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEheJC9Hq3Ra3lIhlRYLK_hKlt47UsvDSjgXTV-vszc61Q4K9PbghIsan7KAJ8mW6AkDyjM-qweexeTVgy0cL3y2NqnnSQxJnHYLEO2fUgs0rP0V3s3vkF3TqNEFj4RR4QMJL_1hxK-5BbaQiALgRq3LxFnngST2HfbpDgwznvYaonhpgBf7mOSaYFw6PA/w640-h264/vlcsnap-2022-08%20-%20raiders%20of%20ark%20-%20jewish%20ghosts%20attacked%20nazis%20but%20haunts%20US%20too%20as%20real%20culprit%20is%20all%20of%20christendom.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_185" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s perhaps Spielberg’s way of saying that White Americans don’t quite deserve the fate of Germany, which is absolute destruction, but being part of the Christian West(that persecuted Jews), they need to be constantly reminded of the skeletons in their closet; they must haunted forever to be spared the total wrath of the Jews. (But then, as the Jewish definition of ‘nazi’ is now so fluid, white Americans could be as condemned as the Germans, especially with the MAGA movement in 2016.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_186" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For many goyim in the US, the American mythos is about the New Beginning, washed of Old World sins. America is to Europe what Christianity is to Judaism. But, Jews, a people apart, never partook of this view of America as a christening of history. Jews prized America for its freedom and opportunities, a place where they could really make it big without being hampered by Old World biases, but their tribal connections and roots remained far more powerful than any ideological commitment to the Constitution or amnesiac plunge into consumerism. Of course, Jews often invoked the Constitution, but it was for the birds, to fool goyim into accepting the Jewish Agenda as being in tune with America’s founding principles. But, it was all just a shell game. Jews insist whites must reject racial identity and unity to better serve America’s universalist principles but, in the same breath, insist it’s as American as apple pie(and bagel-and-lox) to praise Jews uber alles and support Zion against whatever nations and peoples that Jewish Power happens to hate.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_187" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="180"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, the ending of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> could be explained as just a staple of the horror genre. While most horror movies do end with a clear resolution, a good number spring a twist at the end, a final jolt for the audience. Given the audience expects to be frightened, they don’t feel betrayed by these endings(even if unhappy, with evil winning in the end); it’s also good for sequels as The Evil still lurks. Consider the ending of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Burnt Offerings</b>, a shocking reversal just when the family, having regained its wits, is about to depart from the wicked mansion. Or the ending of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Ward</b>(by John Carpenter), one of those expected-unexpected. But, the twist is integral to the meaning of <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b>, where the final revelation is less a conventional twist than a straightening out of what really animates the heart(and pud/poon) of the Jewish Soul, fueled by eternal anxiety and vengeance, a prayer to God to destroy, or at least mercilessly punish, all those who’ve murdered Jews(or stole their lunch money at school).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_188" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As the ashamed Teague seems grateful that he’s still alive, the house collapses like a house of cards and vanishes into a black hole, leaving only an eerie light. Unlike the Christian soul that leaves the tangible world behind as it passes into the afterlife, the Jewish Soul has earthly claims, like the idea of the Promised Land. So, whereas the Freelings, for all their nostalgia about the house, can drive away, the souls of the buried bodies(as proxies of wronged Jewish souls through the ages) must reclaim their sacred burial ground and everything on it. Notice how Jews not only ‘took back’ the Holy Land from the Arabs but have done everything to recover stolen Jewish property during World War II. Indeed, they’ve gone further and used every trick in the book to squeeze everything out of Germans, Europeans, and even Americans who must pay yearly tribute to Israel and expend huge military budgets for the sake of the Zionic Empire.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="261" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2-VhGj6MIF3KCHNhM11NcY3wabjlSGSJRV4xdMBpHpCt2XAuSEO-D7X1W-Sp8H0NsIF5q4XWSGIQqy986VzGSJopVZLOH7fju90sneAXsNNASOdIShG_O-1uN9HRDbzMu1eISGc11QUlm-tGQfP_LR-Mbp13zWaKTwk-O8bgEM-LLNHc0gLUnfUPw0g/w640-h261/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-%20not%20enough%20to%20go%20to%20light.%20must%20take%20property%20with%20it.%20christianity%20is%20about%20separtion%20of%20self%20from%20body.%20jew%20take%20body.%20holy%20land.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_189" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Freelings drive into the night in the rain. They feel sullen(and sullied) but also what they hadn’t felt for some time: genuine sense of relief. Never mind Dr. Lesh’s paranormal ‘science’ and Tangina’s mumbo-jumbo about the Spectral Light. The REAL cause for all the troubles was the defiled corpses underneath the house. The rain reminds us of the Janet Leigh character’s driving to the Bates Motel in <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Psycho</b>. A suggestion perhaps that it is over but not really over, i.e. the White West’s facing up to its sins is only the beginning, not the end.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_190" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="93"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Since the time when <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Poltergeist</b> came out, Jewish Power has pushed all forms of Political Correctness and finally bared its full anti-white face with ‘woke’ tri-idolatry of Jews, homos, and blacks that is designed to break the white race in body, mind, and soul. Give an inch, and Jewish Power takes a mile. Give a mile, and Jewish Power takes a light year. It is why the West is under the hauntings of Sorosian sorcery, and there’s no doubt that Spielberg, a committed Zionist-Globalist Democrat, has long harbored similar neurosis and hatred.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_191" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In Spielberg’s case, it’s all the more disturbing. While Soros is clearly vile and unhinged, one could still understand how a man whose childhood was so terribly scarred by the Nazi Occupation and Shoah could be driven to such hatred and vengeance. There’s no way he can forgive the West for what it did to his family and tribe, especially as his mental mode is Jewish, not Christian. Judaism is about vengeance, not forgiveness, at least in regards to goyim. (Forgiveness is reserved only for fellow Jews.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="338" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiIl6WPtyHGw3vEdHOfWZ-ZhY0Xs0CqKrStuSYEzLUbbRECWWkLZxGaNlfxqdBR_522jDvYaJCaZBnYDVs3-Xuar_VfPM5xvTq7IjmrzgpOrFw9fKHHvNEgvcZTzm7lLzL6Xxt8mZOBJKkkCmw6JVAjKRidAZTMZiQbG4sUa6BJMkabndXfTRukzgtk_A/w640-h338/soros%20pol.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_192" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Spielberg grew up in America after the Nazis were utterly destroyed in Europe. True, he was bullied as a child by Dumb Polack types, but he also made friends with them; besides, many more white kids were bullied by black kids. Overall, his childhood was hardly a living hell, especially the kind white kids experienced when integrated with ghastly Negro kids. But that may explain it. If Soros hates white Christians/Gentiles because he spent his childhood years in the worst of all possible worlds, Spielberg’s resentments are the product of his rather sheltered childhood. If the child Spielberg had seen more of life(like Howard Stern who vividly remembers how blacks ruined his neighborhood), he might have realized that ‘Dumb Polacks’ aren’t the biggest baddies in the world. But people generally judge things in the context of personal experience, and the ‘dumb polack’ Christian types were the worst tormentors for kid Spielberg.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_193" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, something similar explains the discrepancy between black rage and white ‘woke’ rage. Blacks are full of ignorance when it comes to history, but their rage is the product of ‘survival’ in the jungle of their own making. Many blacks grow up in dangerous places that foster animosity and hatred, except that blacks prefer to blame whites(who lend an ear) than fellow blacks(who throw a punch). So, the source of black rage is real enough, even if the blame is directed at whitey.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_194" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the ‘woke’ and Antifa types, who live in mostly white communities, aren’t distressed over matters of ‘survival’. Rather, because their communities are relatively safe(though considerably degraded since the riots of 2020), their politicized rage operates within the context of the Narrative sustained through indoctrination(aka education), propaganda(aka news media), and celebrity worship(aka popular culture). Especially as their lives are shallow and empty, they crave some kind of purpose and meaning, which is offered to them in the form of ‘social justice’ predicated on the notion that ‘white supremacists’ and ‘neo-nazis’ are hanging nooses everywhere, hunting down angelic homos, and about to make Donald Trump the Hitler-for-Life. Blacks are faced with real black problems(that could get them killed) but blame whitey, and ‘woke’ whites are obsessed with fake problems(of looming ‘white supremacy’) and fantasize about blacks as saint-savior-warriors against injustice.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_195" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="206"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Steven Spielberg was never part of anything like the Weather Underground or some such radical group — given his generation and its politics, he would have seemed almost ‘conservative’ at least by comparison — , he was never disabused of the notion of the Magic Negro because he knew blackness mainly through movies and TV shows where blacks were usually harmless, kindly, wise, or ‘cool’. Seared in his psyche is the image of ‘dumb polack’ kids as the biggest jerks, the distant cousins of the Nazis. Unless manipulated and steered by Jews in the ‘correct’ direction, these barbarian goyim could easily go from allies to enemies, or from dogs to wolves. After all, Germany went from one of the more Jewish-friendly countries into the most anti-Jewish one. (Of course, Jews would understand better why the Germans went nuts if they themselves looked in the mirror once in a while and questioned what they did to make Germans so angry, but Jews aren’t much into self-reflection when it comes to goyim. Jews think, “we’re right, they’re wrong” and “we win, they lose”. The number of Jews who felt any remorse about what they did to Russia in the 1990s can be counted on one hand.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="266" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfBGO8gy7tZ4boSN4NfJYY7Snyyqa_K3VEIlKQ-sYwysMQo3NkA04ehpm2wzM-NTtOsKHW_A9qUb2I3S00Pzh_KfDkVjzzT4Zi5XQ9mJbDcEF1FwzX_unGEFYm52SACeLuquZ57gjoP2UV5gv-Qh9xJdD4mDY4f4SiM-U7nFZO7ttuqCafS1qjGgz1VQ/w640-h266/vlcsnap-2022-08-01-17h59m20s905.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_196" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The movie ends with the Freelings entering a room at the Holiday Inn. Soon after, the door flings open with Steve pushing the TV set out of the room. It’s a funny moment, and it seems they learned the lesson. But is it the right lesson? After all, the TV merely served as a medium in their house. It was really the vengeful spirits who were behind the horror. So, as long as the vengeful Jewish Spirit has taken over America, the Freelings and all other goyim will never get away from the haunting as Jews control the electronic media, the ghost machine. Indeed, as the camera pulls back, lights are reflected on the windows of the hotel like a pair of watching eyes.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="268" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPrmn81xysaekTAyqyNXQzmWbhu6xewovu_awubaK-QxuSgAbGPE3PVpNrHjT2LDNfhnu6y62f9h0krM_a8qqSaX3-cxIljGJB_CCehB6ZeKPCtx2ShsdxLoodJPpx8O9JFbxiODeWktbbdl2DgXn7zXg9PI4pt2DiiSh-KAeLjq6WwNgjqWBpCBmOTw/w640-h268/vlcsnap-2022-08%20two%20eyes%20still%20look.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-41920008045215821912022-12-07T17:32:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:06.190-08:00When Bob Dylan Went Electric, the Beatles Went Acoustic with Rubber Soul in the Landmark Year of 1965<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/112/399/099/original/5c6ec5ada1679171.jpeg" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="160"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong>, the Beatles proved their durability as a band capable of growth and change, thereby cementing their position as one of the most(if not the most) consequential acts of the remaining Sixties. It was a significant achievement because they’d burst upon the scene and rode the waves for a couple of years. However, such exuberance(or mania) could not be sustained. Sprinters don’t run the mile, and even the biggest explosions fade away.<br />Not that their first impression was limited to teenybopper pandemonium, though it seemed so at the time when many adults(and Rock n Roll purists) dismissed the whole thing as more fad than fab. Beatlemania was so over-the-top and unprecedented — not even the hysterics surrounding Elvis Presley came close — , so delirious and bordering on deranged, that many just assumed that sober minds would ultimately prevail and the Beatles would be seen for what they truly are, a passing fashion(or flu season).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="198"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On some level, Beatles must have sensed it as well. Ringo once said his long-term plan was to cash in on what he expected to be short-lived stardom and open up a string of hair salons. And even though John, Paul, and George were elated by their sudden rise to fame, they couldn’t help but notice the fans came to the concerts not so much to hear the music but themselves scream, leading Beatles to play in a ever more perfunctory manner on the assumption that no one, the band included, could hear the music amidst the cicada-like shrieking of young girls(and some boys) — later, when the Beatles played to a somewhat subdued audience in Japan and actually heard themselves play, they realized how much their performance quality had slipped. Still, despite the noise of the crowd, Beatlemania happened in the first place because Lennon and McCartney invented a new kind of sound that refined the Rock n Roll into something faster yet mellower. The result was louder but more pleasant, more about revelry than rebellion. It rolled like thunder and coddled like a lullaby. They’d arrived at the Coca-Cola of Pop. Sharp and soothing.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But the sudden success posed a problem. Wouldn’t such a rave act exhaust the fuel sooner than later, or to put it in a more vulgar way, didn’t it blow the wad too early? It was as if they began atop the climax, the highest peak of any rollercoaster, but what would happen at the bottom rail? Would they just be replaced by new idols as the detractors predicted or would they somehow defy the odds and keep the momentum going? As the title of one of their albums implied, the secret to survival was to offer ‘something new’ at every turn, in a way a pop cultural reflection of Western Progress’s precept of ‘evolve or go extinct’, which non-Western civilizations found out the hard way in confrontation with the ever advancing West in the fields of science, technology, and organization.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H42Ou13za30?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Hold Me Tight (Remastered 2009)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Irrelevance and extinction would indeed be the fate of most of the British Invasion acts, even some first-rate ones like, for example, the Dave Clark Five. DC5 were almost as fabulous as the Beatles in their initial outing. If anything, they could be even more rambunctious, and their best songs had a similar mix of melody and madness. The difference was DC5 had nothing to go on but the original formula and faded once the fashions and attitudes changed.<br />When the teenyboppers of 1963/1964 later turned onto Rock as personal expression or even art, Dave Clark Five was just a blur in the rearview mirror, a reminder of their younger days. (Besides, the new batch of teenyboppers had the Monkees and the like.) As remarkable as the Beatles were from 1962(when they hit upon the magic formula with “Please Please Me”) to 1964, their later fate might have been like the Herman’s Hermits’ but for the fact that they demonstrated, decisively and resolutely, with Rubber Soul that they were capable of change and growth, and determined to lead.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/23EWrWSGbk4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Any Way You Want It Dave Clark Five ORIGINAL MONAURAL Sound HiQ Hybrid JARichardsFilm 720p" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">From late 1963 all throughout 1964, Beatles were such a dominant force that the future direction of pop music was up in the air. The attention was focused on the Now, as Beatlemania seemed the biggest phenom in pop culture history. Just about the only competition, in quality and inspiration, comprised the Beach Boys and Motown. The Rolling Stones hadn’t yet made their mark. Bob Dylan was still a folkie, and the notion of Folk Rock would have been ludicrous, as Dylan discovered the hard way soon enough when the Folkies clung to the Culture War formulation of Folk vs Rock. And many of the great acts of the late 60s had yet to emerge or take shape.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="292"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It was in 1965, possibly the greatest year in Rock/Pop, that music culture finally began to materialize into something of significance and meaning to the Boomers, as it was transformed from entertainment to the artform of the generation. The Beatles of 62-64, unique and fresh as they were, still embodied the iron rule of popular music, the primacy of pleasing the fans. Their first #1 hit “Please Please Me” said as much. It’s about pleasing the other to be pleased in turn. Beatle-Mania was a back-and-forth dynamic between the band so eager to please the crowd(to orgasmic raptures) and the crowd so happy to please the Beatles in turn. For all their talent and inspiration, Lennon and McCartney knew the Mania was the hungry dragon that had to constantly fed. And in concerts, the roar of mania drowned out the music. So, all said and done, the mop-top version of the Beatles constituted feeders of popular appetites, the biggest fast-food franchise in pop music, rather than artists in the truest sense. Initially, they strode atop the mania, but it soon engulfed them, sometimes in terrifying ways, like in Philippines when the hysteria turned from love to hate. Despite their frozen smiles on the tour, they came to resent the mania(and its manipulators) and, incredibly for a band that came to fame with frenzied fans, quit the concert circuit altogether in 1966. Beatles may have been bigger than Jesus, but the Mania became bigger than the Beatles, and it’s no wonder Lennon jumped at the opportunity to withdraw into his acid trips. And McCartney’s perfectionist vanity grew tired of the amateurism on concerts and favored the studio where his skills could be honed as instrumentalist and arranger alongside George Martin.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/to-RVV_3anw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Byrds - I'll Feel A Whole Lot Better (Audio)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, 1965 was when, in the cooling climate of the post-Beatles-Big-Bang, a new star cluster of music began to coalesce, generating a new kind of heat, one that the Beatles couldn’t help but notice, if only to remain in the game. In that year, Stones staked their claim to the throne with “Satisfaction” and “Get Off Of My Cloud”, setting off the great Rock rivalry with the Beatles. Bob Dylan ‘went electric’ and dropped “Like a Rolling Stone” like a bomb, Byrds perfected Folk Rock with their rendition of “Mr. Tambourine Man”, The Who radicalized Rock with “My Generation”, Paul Simon came into his own with “Sounds of Silence”, Brian Wilson unveiled a new sophistication with “California Girls”, and Motown got even better. Henceforth, one had a pretty good sense of where the music was headed for the rest of the decade. It was going to be a fierce(but also friendly)contest of wills, egos, and personalities. By 1965, the promising acts, formed or on the verge of forming, had a strong sense of what they were and were capable of. But not in 1964 when Pop Music was still reverberating around Beatlemania, the only question being, when will it end and then what?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even in 1964, however, John Lennon and Paul McCartney, sensing their immense potential, were eager to move in new directions. (As different as the duo were from Bob Dylan, what they all had in common was the conviction of having ‘it’, something that set them apart from the others, a sense of destiny.) But how would ‘it’ be manifest? Among the early signs was McCartney’s pensive “Things We Said Today”. Now, let it be said that the Beatles weren’t about meaning, and nothing they did, even at their most artful, had much in the way of depth, true of 99% of Rock music. The difference was in the thunderous power on the one hand(owing to blues roots & electricity) and the poetry of emotions on the other(especially by way of folk idioms and pop techniques). Even Dylan’s sophisticated use of lyrics was more to paint moods and impressions than to convey meaning, something that went over the heads of folkie-centric fans who demanded sermons and instructions.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As the decade progressed, musicians found ways to rock harder, culminating in Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin, before Heavy Metal turned it into a cartoon. But, there was also a motion toward interiority, songs adrift in private dreams than pandering to familiar boy-meets-girl sentiments. Generic pop emotions of love and heartache gave way to something akin to monologues of unresolved feelings and unrequited dreams. Most songs either addressed the object of one’s love interest or the third person, the collective mind of the listeners, but the new sensibility had the singer musing to himself, often forlorn and oblivious to the world. Consider “Sad Memory” by Buffalo Springfield or “Everybody’s Been Burned” by the Byrds. Or “Fotheringay” by Fairport Convention and “Ruby Tuesday” by Rolling Stone. Or “Fool on the Hill” by the Beatles.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/r7Li0SP7EOU?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Sad Memory" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/I7Uh8933Jvs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The Byrds - Everybody's Been Burned" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-TeDmYqyfCk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Fotheringay" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="185"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The art of ballad is about the fine-tuning of moods, like the craft of turning a diamond in the rough into a brilliant gem. With songs like “Things We Said Today”(and partly “All My Loving” prior), McCartney strove for something subtler though within the perimeters of a pop song. (When McCartney later actually tried to SAY something in “She’s Leaving Home”, he fell flat on his face. All he needed was the ingenuity of peeling away another layer of emotions to reveal something fine and as yet unseen.) Even the loud Beatles songs began to develop in structure, like “When I Get Home” and “Anytime At All”.<br />Fairly or not, Lennon got the credit for initiating the change in direction, in part under the influence of Bob Dylan. “You’ve Got to Hide Your Love Away” and especially “I’m a Loser”(on UK release <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Beatles for Sale</strong> and US release <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Beatles 65</strong>) have been lauded as Lennon’s early attempts to evolve as a song-writer. Dylan’s introduction of marijuana surely contributed to the altered approach to music: Less twist-and-shout and more think-and-doubt.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With the release of <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Beatles for Sale</strong>(and its US variation <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Beatles 65</strong>), the high-strung energy was still there but under a cloud. It sounded more desperate than confident. The early spontaneity was missing, and the forays in new directions were hesitant and halfcocked(more trepidation than experimentation), though “I Feel Fine” was a real breakthrough. The Beatles were offering more of what had made them popular in the first place but stuffed with half-hearted imperative for change. So, “No Reply” and “I’ll Be Back” are denser in their emotions, bitter or yearning. As such, the Beatles at this moment sounded like a Janus-like hybrid band facing backward and forward.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="194"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Same was true of their next album Help!, though the Beatles clearly jumped the hurdle with an undeniable knack for reconstruing the basic elements of their sound into amazing new melodies. In one respect, <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Help!</strong> is their best album, that is if judged by the number of great songs. Many great albums hardly contain a great song, and their high estimation rests on a string of very good songs. Or they have one or two great songs and some very good ones. Incredibly, <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Help!</strong> has three great instant classics: The title song, Yesterday(which will last forever), and Ticket to Ride, maybe their greatest rocker. Arguably, the Beatles that recorded <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Help!</strong> embodied the perfect balance between the earlier spontaneity and the new mastery, and the three aforementioned songs are amazing in every way. Also, the other songs on <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Help!</strong> range from good to very good, especially “Another Girl”, “You’re Going to Lose that Girl”, and “Night Before”. I also like George Harrison’s “I Need You”. (Of course, we mean the British version as the U.S. version lacks “Yesterday” and few other songs, replaced with a bunch of instrumentals from the movie.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/EMBYNWr5R_U?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Another Girl (Remastered 2009)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On the other hand, <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Help!</strong> sounds like a random collection of songs rather than an album in the organic sense, as the format came to be valued in Rock Culture. Rock Album is akin to a photo album. The songs are best threaded together by a theme, attitude, or vision(or ‘concept’ in more ambitious projects). Photo albums tend to be categorized similarly: The wedding album, school trip album, family album, friend album, nature hike album, and etc. <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Help!</strong>, outstanding as it is, comes across as a jumble of songs packaged for a movie soundtrack. As such, it lacked the resonance that their next album <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong> delivered in spades. (One thing for sure, Sixties popular music would have been profoundly different had the Beatles never existed, but it would progressed more or less the same had the Beatles perished in a plane crash after <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong>.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="133"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong>, it was as if the Beatles wanted to prove they had something more than youthful inspiration, a genuine musical talent independent of stardom, i.e. they were more than a cultural phenomenon whose success relied solely on fan mania. Thus, it is sort of like the Beatles Unplugged, as if to say, “We’re in a silent room and the electricity is off. Just listen to what we can do with the basic elements of music.” Not something to dance to or scream about but to sit down and listen to. While electric guitar is used at times, most of the songs are acoustic(and even the electric ones could do nearly as well without). As a chamber piece, it was an album to ponder than pound in the ears.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="93"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There was bound to be some confusion because of the album’s title and the two versions of some significant difference. The title implies the Beatles as the players of white soul, a plastic version of the real thing. But, while the Beatles drew inspiration from rhythm-and-blues and Rock-n-Roll(and black Girl Groups and Motown), most of the songs on <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong> belong in another category. Only “Drive My Car”(missing on the U.S. version) and “The Word” have anything soulful about them, and the rest are ballads or standard pop melodies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The bigger issue is the question as to which version is more authoritative(and better), the British version or the U.S. version? Quantitatively, the British version has more songs, especially “Drive My Car”(never my favorite but a very good song) and “Nowhere Man” that rings with Lennon’s customary brilliance. It also has George Harrison’s “If I Needed Someone”, a pretty good song. Those songs(and the lackluster “What Goes On”) are missing on the U.S. version that instead has “I’ve Just Seen a Face” and “It’s Only Love”, originally on the British version of Help! Most people would agree “Drive My Car” and “Nowhere Man” are superior to “I’ve Just Seen a Face” and “It’s Only Love”, and it would have hurt the U.S. version none to include “If I Needed Someone”.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="107"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, from the consideration of the Rock Album as an organic unity, the U.S. version works better. “I’ve Just Seen a Face” and “It’s Only Love” are perfect fits with the other songs on the U.S. version of <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong>, indeed far more so than on the album <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Help!</strong> It’s as if they found their real home on the subsequent American album. In contrast, “Drive My Car” sticks out like a sore thumb and would have done better on an earlier album. “Nowhere Man” would have been better suited for the next album <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Revolver</strong> with songs like “Tax Man” and “Yellow Submarine”.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Y_V6y1ZCg_8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="581"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, the U.S. version of <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong> has only one great song(possibly two, with “In My Life”). It is “Norwegian Wood” where John Lennon, calm and reflective, recalls a chance affair that lingered in memory for reasons he can’t quite fathom. Perhaps, it was his answer to McCartney’s “Yesterday”. Or maybe he quit being consciously Dylanesque and just let go, waiting for an inner voice that, under the right mood and turn of mind, would emerge of its own accord.<br />Its narrative seems to intimate the creative process of the song itself, i.e. he stumbled upon unfamiliar feelings, which became the basis of the song that emerged from a mysterious place. A song he couldn’t have found by looking but one that had to find its way to him. In the tale, he entered a woman’s adobe, they did whatever they were supposed to do, but in the morning, she had to ‘work’, and he to vacate the room and sleep in the bathtub(while the bedroom was taken up with another man perhaps, which makes us wonder what her line of ‘work’ is). He woke up later to find her gone, and he found himself alone and placed a log in the fireplace. Who is this woman, and why does she affect him so? And, is the protagonist meant to be John Lennon himself or a fictional character in a mini-story? If meant to be Lennon himself, perhaps what he noticed most was her independence, a life according to her own rules(in proto-Swinging-London style). John Lennon was a Beatle at whose feet so many girls would have prostrated themselves. And his wife Cynthia was ever so tame and loyal. But, the song describes a woman who was indifferent to his fame and fortune. He was just another acquaintance, lover, or client. And she’s such a carefree busybody that she exited the place with him still sleeping in the bath. It’s not the woman per se but something about her that his mind can’t quite let grasp. Perhaps, an easygoing egotism to match his. He could have any bird in the world, but this one bird had flown. Thus, it is a rather odd love song if it indeed one. Whereas “Yesterday” is clearly about a man thinking of a woman, “Norwegian Wood” is about feelings evoked by a woman despite the lack of any real bond between them. About what might have been(and never will be) than what once was. It’s not about the feelings for a woman but the responses stirred by her qualities, both easy and elusive, indeed elusive precisely because so accessible, to any man of her choosing. The man in the song isn’t in love with the woman and could just walk away. And she does her own thing and isn’t bound to him or anyone. Is she a free spirit or a self-centered bitch? Either way, she has her own wings, coming and going as she pleases, rather like him. Could they be kindred spirits… except, if the man is really meant to be John himself, he is bound to Cynthia Lennon, a woman he never cared for and married only out of a sense of duty(as she became pregnant with his child). Perhaps, the song offers a clue as to why Lennon was so taken with Yoko Ono later. She had a mind and will all her own.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="136"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In “Norwegian Wood”, gone is the self-pitying strain of “I’m a Loser” and the ingratiating vibes of “You’ve Got to Hide Your Away”(as if to prove he can do something more than boy-love-girl songs). It’s as if Lennon finally tapped into the inner poet as guide to his next phase of creativity.<br />It is perhaps Lennon’s finest ballad, equaled only by “Watching the Wheels” on his last album <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Double Fantasy</strong>. It has the delicacy of “Yesterday” but with a shade of perversity. McCartney’s song is about the pain of something had but lost, whereas Lennon’s song is about the haze of something not worth having but beguiling just the same; you can have her body but not her spirit. It is one of Lennon’s handful of sublime achievements.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="194"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Among Lennon’s other songs on the album, “In My Life” is exceptionally good, and its nostalgia would later come to bloom with “Strawberry Fields Forever”. As for “The Word”, “It’s Only Love”, “Girl”, and “Run for Your Life”, they’re all solid tunes and add to album’s consistency. George Harrison’s lone contribution on the U.S. album, “Think for Yourself”, is one of his best. Though harder-edged than the other songs, it shares their sense of interiority, i.e. the song is more like an angst-ridden monologue of feelings tied up in knots. While none of McCartney’s songs counts as great, they are first-rate across the board, sustaining a high level of creativity and craftsmanship. Especially notable are “You Won’t See Me” and “I’m Looking Through You”. (Of course, it needs to be said a lot of Beatles songs got attention, sometimes undue, simply because they were by the Fab Four. “Michelle” is good but far inferior to any number of French chansons that inspired it. And while “Girl” is nice with its Greek touch, why not go for the real Greek stuff that has more flavor?)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gH6i9JAdJrQ?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="I'm Looking Through You (Remastered 2009)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="52"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For the first time, the songs sound detached from and even indifferent to the phenomenon of Beatlemania, as if composed on a sabbatical, far removed from the constant buzz of fandom. And even though most songs involve romance, they’re about women than girls, about feelings borne of experience than adolescent expectation.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong>, the Beatles crossed the hurdle. They had within them something that would last beyond the initial spring of Beatlemania with its mobs of shrieking teenyboppers. Away from the spotlight, with minimal electric input, looking inward than outward, they proved to themselves and the world that they were here to stay, at least as long as they were willing to explore the fuller range of their talent. It was the moment the Beatles decisively diverged from the fate of the Dave Clark Five. For better or worse, it also started the process by which the Beatles would give up touring altogether the following year.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the Beatles went ‘acoustic’ with <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong> to show that they were more than a Rock n Roll act from Britain, Bob Dylan had something similar to prove, albeit in reverse order, and it would be hugely controversial, dogging him for several years. Whereas the gaggles of Beatlemanical teeny-boppers uncritically accepted the gentler, maturing Beatles(and would themselves grow into new attitudes), the folkie fans of Bob Dylan had an almost messianic attachment to him as the spokesman of his generation, the poet-prophet of the age, the chosen one who would bear the torch passed to him from Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, when Dylan decided to ‘go electric’, it wasn’t regarded merely as a new direction but an outrage, an act of betrayal. It was like Harvey Keitel’s Judas berating Willem Dafoe’s Jesus in THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST for having reneged on his mission on Earth. Indeed, for the next two years, ex-fans would attend his concerts just to boo and jeer him and the Band(led by Robbie Robertson) — the sheer level of derangement has been downplayed over the years by leftist boomers who didn’t want to admit what a priggish and humorless bunch of ideologues they once were.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the Beatles wanted to prove they could make music without the noise, Dylan wanted to prove he could rock with the rest, and that called for amplification, or Dylan plugged. Folkie purists denigrated Dylan for ‘selling out’ to become a pop star, but they missed the mark. While Dylan clearly craved Rock stardom, he was striving for art than pop in music. Indeed, most Dylan songs that hit the charts(usually as cover versions)were composed during his folkie period: “Blowin’ in the Wind” and “Don’t Think Twice, It’s Alright” by Peter, Paul, and Mary, “It Ain’t Me Babe” by the Turtles, “All I Really Want to Do” by Sonny & Cher, and the like. Furthermore, the Byrds, the premier interpreters of Dylan songs, mostly covered the songs from his folkie period. And even though “Mr. Tambourine Man” was released on Dylan’s partly electric album <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bringing It All Back Home</strong>, Dylan’s version was acoustic and within the folkie idiom.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5-ZmD3sCFcE?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Bob Dylan - Queen Jane Approximately (Official Audio)" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, the whole Dylan-goes-electric controversy was rather misconstrued by the diehard folkie purists. It was actually less about folk purity vs pop commercialism than about folk dogma vs personal art. Apart from “Like a Rolling Stone”, hardly a song on <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Highway 61 Revisited</strong> had much commercial viability. Songs like “Queen Jane Approximately”, “Just like Tom Thumb’s Blues”, “Ballad of a Thin Man”, and especially “Desolation Row” were unlike anything recorded in Rock and Pop. The surreal songs on <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blonde on Blonde</strong> were even less suited for Billboard charts, though “Rainy Day Woman #2” became a kind of novelty hit.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="223"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In retrospect, <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rubber Soul</strong> is a remarkable album and a pivotal work for the Beatles, but it was Dylan who really turned the Rock world upside down with his monumental masterpiece(that incredibly was topped by an even greater work the following year). And of course, there was the Stones with “Satisfaction”, though it was only with <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Aftermath</strong> in 1966 that they finally mastered the art of the Rock Album as unified expression. Dylan went electric not to fill up concerts but to use the added charge to break through new avenues of expression. Folkie reins weren’t enough; he needed the electric whip to get his chariot going. And he went so very so far very fast, so much so that he veered from riding off the cliff and pulled back(like the game of ‘chicken’ in REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE), withdrawing into family life and releasing the acoustic <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">John Wesley Harding</strong> in the final days of 1967. Though acoustic, it has more in common with his two electric predecessors than with his folkie output. It too is defined by artistic aspiration, an egoism that was anathema to folkie purists despite the absence of commercialism. For many leftist folkies with the Popular Front mentality, art should be social and relevant, not dwell on personal life, let alone psychology, which was deemed self-indulgent or ‘bourgeois’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="450" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/112/399/992/original/eacde94d19e95f6a.webp" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="618" /></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-1139466400580862922022-12-07T17:29:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:06.424-08:001996 Edition of Roger Ebert’s Video Companion - Titles Under 'A'<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="437" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/112/158/032/original/4b098c3bcaf00a77.png" style="border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="578" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="41"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I came upon the 1996 Edition of Roger Ebert’s Video Companion, probably something I picked up at a Library Used Book Sale years ago. Here are the comments on the movies I’ve seen. We start with the entries under A.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="14"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Titles in <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">bold</strong> letters: Seen by Me; otherwise, not seen or only partly seen</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Numbers in parenthesis: Star Ratings by Roger Ebert</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Numbers in brackets: My Ratings</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">About Last Night </b>(4) [2½] – 1986</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given the general state of movies, critics tend to overrate anything halfway decent. David Mamet’s play <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sexual Perversity in Chicago</i> is a distillation of attitudes, suitable for the stage centered on dialogue. No wonder then the ‘adaptation’ is more developed(or filled-in) in terms of narrative and personality. But Edward Zwick didn’t so much flesh out thinly conceived characters as graft Mametics onto the Romance formula of love-at-first-sight, tenderness, heartache, and reconciliation. Demi Moore and Rob Lowe, then in their physical prime, are lightweight but have a certain appeal.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7I708EZ-hBo?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="About Last Night... 1986 Trailer HD | Rob Lowe | Demi Moore | Jim Belushi" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Absence of Malice (3) – 1981</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Accidental Tourist (4) – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="37"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Only caught parts of <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Accidental Tourist</i><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">, </i></b>one of those ‘intelligent’ and ‘sensitive’ works catering mainly to the female audience. Based on an Anne Tyler novel and directed by boomer forger of ‘respectability’ and ‘meaning’, Lawrence Kasdan.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Accompanist</b> (3½)[3] – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="20"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I vaguely remember watching this upon release. One of those respectable European Art House films. Good but not very memorable.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Accused (3) – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="27"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Message Movies aren’t my thing, and I stayed clear of this one. It certainly made Jodie Foster transition from a ‘child star’ to an adult actress.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ace Ventura: Pet Detective (1) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="7"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jim Carrey, funny guy but unbearably obnoxious.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Addams Family (2) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Addams Family Values (3) – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="55"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One of the direst trends in the 1990s was the rush to adapt long-forgotten TV shows into movies. But why? That stuff was made for the small screen for a reason: it wasn’t good enough for the big screen. Never saw <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Addams Family</i> on TV and don’t care to see the movie versions.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Adjuster (3) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="55"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Before Atom Egoyan degraded into a second rate sensationalist(and third-rate propagandist for whatever is trendily PC), he was one of the quirkiest figures on the Art House scene, comparable to fellow Canadian David Cronenberg. The Adjuster, which I have yet to watch, was made when he was still at the top of his game.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Adventures of Baron Munchausen</b> (3)[2] – 1989</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="105"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Within his limited but real talents, Terry Gilliam might have made a decent filmmaker, but his oversized ambition to be the next Welles and Fellini(and dozen other masters) led him to delusional projects of increasing monstrosity. Gilliam’s failures are more the products of overweening infantilism than overreaching imagination, thereby lacking in even the nobility of failure. What for Welles was a metaphor(cinema as a train set) has been a literal truth for Gilliam. Cinema is just one big toyhouse. He hankers to be regarded as a misunderstood visionary, even a genius. He’s really a big baby whose childish antics grew tiresome.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn (3) – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert (2½) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="46"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Adventures of Priscilla</i> was remade, if my memory serves me correctly, into <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar!</i> Both were made when the idea of transvestism ranged from amusing to ridiculous, something to chuckle about rather than buckle under. How times have changed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After Hours</b> (4) [3½] – 1985</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="251"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Despite <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Raging Bull</i>’<i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">s</i> burst out of the starting gate, the 80s were generally not a good period for Martin Scorsese. <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The King of Comedy</i> was estimable, at the very least provocative, but many found it too dark for comedy and/or too light for psycho-drama(about a lunatic, the likes of whom nearly killed Andy Warhol and really killed John Lennon). Still, the film was onto something about the porous boundaries between the real and the unreal in a celebrity-saturated culture where famous stars enter into the lives of millions through the TV set, indeed as if every star is a family member and everyone is a star, or at least a friend of one. In this climate, what is real and unreal? (Today, we can’t even tell what a woman is, and the Zelensky spectacle makes Rupert Pupkin seem downright somber in comparison.) Scorsese had more success with <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After Hours</i>, also a blend of humor and horror, because it is simpler on the responses. We know when to laugh, when to shudder. Besides, the neuroses and pathologies on display are relatively kid-stuff, even self-congratulatory(as in “Aren’t we New Yorkers so lovably off-the-wall crazy?”, i.e., the denizens of a city too batty to fall asleep). Thus, it never gets under the skin like <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The King of Comedy</i> does. Based on a thesis by a film-student, it’s lightweight Scorsese, more a sparring session than a full engagement in the ring. But nice moves and fancy footwork.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yEKOx9OHEz8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="After Hours (1985) - Stuck Doing This Scene (1/9) | Movieclips" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After the Rehearsal (4) – 1984</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="24"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still haven’t caught up with this Ingmar Bergman film. But then, he did name <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Fanny and Alexander</i> as his final work(as director).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Against All Odds</b> (3)[3] – 1984</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="52"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Act One is one long Mexican travelogue, and Act Two gets lost in a convoluted plot with a double-or-maybe-triple-cross. But then, Phil Collins’ title song(titanic power ballad) plays with the end titles, and the movie doesn’t seem so bad after all on second thought. What a difference a song makes.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PwyYxjU3mXQ?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Against All Odds, 1984, Phil Collins,4K Upscaling & HQ sound" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Age of Innocence</b> (4)[4] – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">1993 was one of the best years in film, and Scorsese’s contribution added to his stellar record for the whole decade(with <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Goodfellas</i>, <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Casino</i>, and <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Kundun; </i>even parts of <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bringing Out the Dead</i>). Comparable to Orson Welles’ <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Magnificent Ambersons</i>, it was Scorsese’s directorial venture into uncharted territory in terms of style and tone. Though Scorsese’s perspective is that of an enchanted outsider(contra Luchino Visconti with <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Leopard</i>), what an eye for detail and keenness of duration(of reality as felt in another time and place). Its fatal flaw is Michelle Pfeiffer in the role of Countess Olenska, whose coquettish demeanor had me wondering what exactly about her got the fella’s head spinning. She is even less exciting than Winona Ryder’s character as a socialite dullard.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe age="" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" innocence="" of="" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/oigqJ91YM24?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" the="" title="Martin Scorsese interview on " width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Airplane!</b> (3)[4] – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If you have a lot of darts, some will hit the bull’s eye. Zucker Brothers and Jim Abrams had a big sack of darts and threw them all(and then the sack and kitchen sink to boot) until the dart board crashed through the other side of the wall. The sheer level of insanity from start to finish is perhaps the most amazing since the Marx Brothers’ <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Duck Soup</i>, or at least Woody Allen’s <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Take the Money and Run</i>. Utterly infantile but inspired.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/FNkpIDBtC2c?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Airplane! (6/10) Movie CLIP - Get a Hold of Yourself! (1980) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Airport (2) – 1970</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Airport 75 (2½) – 1975</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="44"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Airport</i>(or was it <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Earthquake</i>?) may have set off the disaster movie craze of the 1970s. Mostly a worthless(and wasteful) genre(though <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Cassandra Crossing</i> and <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Towering Inferno</i> are okay), but it did inspire <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Airplane!</i>(and the overlooked <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Big Bus</i>, which came out earlier).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Aladdin (3) – 1993</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alex in Wonderland</b> (4)[2] – 1971</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Federico Fellini on the set of <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">8½</i> had seven and half movies under his belt and international renown as an ‘auteur’. When Paul Mazursky embarked on a similarly semi-autobiographical <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alex in Wonderland</i>, he’d completed one short and one feature film. In other words, he hadn’t paid his dues to even ponder the crisis of creative exhaustion, let alone his place in the film firmament.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alice</b> (3) [2½] – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Featherweight Woody Allen pic made on a whim.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="6"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alice Doesn’t Live Here Anymore</b> (4)[3]</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="57"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Woman’s Film done raw, short on sentimentality and heavy on vulgarity. As a piece of New Hollywood realism, it surely owes a thing or two to John Cassavetes. I’d rather have Joan Crawford or <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Bad News Bears</i>. (Pet peeve: People getting sloppy with food.) The TV spin-off was more fun: “Kiss my grits.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Aliens</b> (3½) [2½] – 1986</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="24"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">James Cameron’s sequel to <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alien</i> is essentially Rambo-In-Outerspace. Not bad for a shoot-em-up but ultimately no less deadening than Stallone’s bonehead outing.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alien3 </b>(1½) [3½] – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="53"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A much underappreciated <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alien</i> sequel, the only one I care for in the entire series. Its theme is as fittingly demented as the visuals and further explores the relative condition of alien-ness. David Fincher’s mastery stands far above the rest, all the more impressive as top directors were involved in the franchise.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hmF_IO6Aiag?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Alien 3 (3/5) Movie CLIP - Just Do What You Do (1992) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Alive (2½) – 1993</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All Dogs Go to Heaven (3) – 1989</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All of Me (3½) – 1984</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All the President’s Men</b> (3½) [3½] – 1976</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Oliver Stone claims to have been riveted by Alan Pakula’s film of Woodward-and-Bernstein as Holmes-and-Watson hot on the trail of the Watergate Scandal, that is until he learned most of it is hogwash. Being ignorant of the details surrounding Watergate, I can only comment on the film-making, which is terrific. A worthy addition to the Paranoid Cinema of the time, albeit with the advantage of being based on actual events. It’d be nice to believe the film offer a glimpse into a moment in history when journalism mattered and made a difference(as opposed to now with the total corporatization of big media), but Pat Buchanan has suggested that Watergate itself was a deep state coup, in which Washington Post played a less than principled role.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All the Right Moves</b> (3)[3] – 1983</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Released in the same year as <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Risky Business</i>(which made Tom Cruise a household name), <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All the Right Moves</i> is a lesser work but features the newly minted star expanding his persona and working hard at it. Already, he sensed he could not rest on his laurels and had to fight for every inch. Not much of a role but Cruise gives it his all, good training for bigger challenges down the road, such as <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Born on the 4th of July</i>. The energy(and earnestness) on display here came to define his entire career.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iOKk79bzSdM?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="All the Right Moves | #TBT Trailer | 20th Century FOX" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="6"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All the Vermeers in New York (3) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Altered States</b> (3½) [2½] – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="58"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What might Stanley Kubrick, or even David Cronenberg, have done with <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Altered States</i>? Such promising material about psychedelics and anthropology(which merged in the Sixties), but in the hands of Ken Russell, just batshit crazy. Nancy Reagan was far more economical: “Just Say No to Drugs”. (Like Milos Forman’s <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hair</i>, it was a film out of time.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Always</b> (2)[3] – 1989</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Minor Spielberg but nice. As the story goes, Spielberg and Richard Dreyfus discovered to their surprise that their favorite movie happens to be the same: <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Guy Named Joe</i>. As remakes go, it’s on par with Warren Beatty’s <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Heaven Can Wait</i>(based on <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Here Comes Mr. Jordan</i>). At the very least, a worthy valentine to what Holly Hunter once possessed in spades as an actress, so full of spunk and sparkle… that is until she skanked herself out in the rancid <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Piano</i> by the flaky Jane Campion.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZBnwhmm8j8E?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Always (1989) Teaser Trailer" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amadeus</b> (4)[3] – 1984</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s much that is wondrous about Milos Forman’s adaptation, but all said and done, it goes for the lowest common denominator in its pop conception of Mozart(and classical music in general). By the evidence of this film, Mozart was the greatest composer of his era(and maybe of all time) because he had a knack for catchy melodies and coy improvisation. It’s been said in the pop music industry that nothing is harder than composing a catchy tune, the essence of hit songs. But surely there’s more to classical music than conjuring instantly infectious melodies; Mozart was more than the Neil Sedaka of his age.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="152"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To be fair, the film draws a distinction between the brilliant but frivolous Mozart, capable of cranking out any number of pleasant ditties, and the dark & tragic Mozart haunted by deeper passions. But Tom Hulce isn’t up to the task, what with his Mozart mostly registering as a missing member of the Monkees. And, his performance is as overshadowed by F. Murray Abraham’s(hammy as it is) as Salieri’s music is by Mozart’s. Possibly the biggest flaw of the film is to diminish Mozart’s peers as a bunch of poseurs and mediocrities. Obviously meant to highlight Mozart as a giant among dwarfs, it actually diminishes him as well: He comes across not so much as The Champ among champions but the good over the bad. How better it would have been if Salieri was given his due as an excellent composer but Mozart was even greater.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amarcord</b> (4)[3] – 1974</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="133"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Following his crowning achievement with <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">8½</i>, Fellini wandered into the wilderness of boundless self-indulgence. Characters, plot, themes, and other conventions of storytelling became peripheral, secondary to his dreams and whimsy. So, it was with a sigh of relief that the critical community received(and over-valued) <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amarcord</i> as a kind of return to form, with some semblance of a plot with peoples and places. Still, the juice was gone, and <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amarcord</i> is at best a piece of dried fruit. The sets look more like artifice than artifacts of memory. The characters don’t rise above caricatures. Sadly, with the possible exception of <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And the Ship Sails On</i>, it was Fellini’s last notable work. It also proved to be a respite than a return as he reverted to his bad habits on the subsequent works.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KKnjaXFqFDc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Amarcord (1973): La Neve e il Pavone" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Amateur (2½) – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Dream (4) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Gigolo</b> (3½)[3] – 1980</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To better appreciate the role of the director and cinema as a cooperative art, consider the problems of <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Gigolo</i>. Though Paul Schader was a competent director, he was not a great one. (Also true of John Milius.) Consider what Scorsese was able to do with Schrader’s screenplays. Had Scorsese or a film-maker of comparable talent directed <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Gigolo</i>, there would have ensued a back-and-forth dialectic between writer and director as mutual corrective and inspiration. <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Gigolo</i> is all Schrader(as Neon Bresson) with his blinders on and succumbs to his narrow obsessions, much like Sam Peckinpah’s <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia</i>. At the very least, it made Richard Gere a movie star.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Graffiti</b> (4) [3½]</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="168"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A landmark New Hollywood film(for commercial than artistic reasons) that harked back to the early 60s before the shit really hit the fan. In light of George Lucas’s trajectory with the success of <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</i>, there’s been the question of what might have been had he stuck with personal film-making, the kind that led to <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THX-1138</i> and <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Graffiti</i> and was preparing for <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Apocalypse Now? </i>Given Lucas’s choice of the ‘dark side’ of power and fortune, <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Graffiti</i> has gathered a certain mythic poignancy of a dream betrayed, not unlike Ben Kenobi’s tragic sense regarding Annikin. Upon closer inspection, <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Graffiti</i>, like <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THX-1138</i>, is better with machines than mankind(and in this sense a logical precursor to <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</i>). It is also spotty and uneven, especially in the pacing, though ultimately the boyish qualities of charm(Paul LeMat), menace(Harrison Ford), and yearning(Richard Dreyfus) pull it through. Despite its ‘radical’ New Hollywood credentials, it coasts on nostalgia and yearning for lost innocence.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/z2OoxzYqgNY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="American Graffiti (7/10) Movie CLIP - Must Be Your Mama's Car (1973) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Me (3½) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="6"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">An American Tale: Fievel Goes West (2½) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">An American Werewolf in London</b> (2) [2½] – 1981</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="57"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If old horror movies done in earnest to frighten later came to seem tame and even unintentionally funny, <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">An American Werewolf in London</i> goes full throttle on state-of-the-art gore but for laughs, which makes it a singularly queasy experience. The ‘American’ werewolf is unmistakably Jewish, and maybe it’s an allegory about anxieties surrounding relations with shikses.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">An Angel at My Table (4) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="12"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Jane Campion film I most certainly do not want to see.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Angel Heart</b> (3½)[3] – 1987</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In many respects, just awful with its porny penchant for style for style’s sake, a hallmark of Alan Parker, one of the most shameless sensationalists in movie history. Parker griped the critics were insufficiently appreciative because their literary bias blinded them to the power of visual expression, but fireworks are not to be mistaken for the fire. (Equally hyperbolic Adriane Lyne did better with similar material in <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jacob’s Ladder</i>.) Still, a mood of diabolism sustained throughout the film is not easily shaken off. It must have gotten something right to linger in the dark corridors of the mind.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0iKzekw3xn8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Angel Heart | Official Trailer 4K Restoration | Starring Mickey Rourke and Robert De Niro" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Angels in the Outfield (2) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Angie (2½) – 1994</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Annie (3) – 1982</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Annie Hall</b> (3½)[3] – 1977</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="148"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The timing couldn’t have been better for Allen and NY culture. By 1977 New Hollywood had petered out, and the big ‘auteurs’ seemed to be treading water, sidelined by movies like <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jaws</i> and <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rocky</i>(and, of course, the big movies of 1977, <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Star Wars</i> and <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Close Encounters</i>) or undone by excessive habits(often involving cocaine and worse). Allen was always admired for his wit and even intellect(something he disparaged), but he’d opted for the role of comedian, even clown, well into the mid-70s. But just when the personal element seemed to be fading from American Film, Allen stepped up to the plate in the role of “America’s Bergman”. <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Annie Hall</i> was showered with accolades and awards, more for what it signified than what it delivered. In retrospect, it seems rather thin. Still, Allen’s mature turn did yield some real treasures in years to come.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/WYY9Epog0rs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Annie Hall (7/12) Movie CLIP - I Can't Believe This Family (1977) HD" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another 48 Hours (2) – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="16"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I rather enjoyed <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">48 Hours</i> by master director Walter Hill but not enough to catch the sequel.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another Woman</b> (4)[2] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="27"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Woody Allen’s somber piece on cold reserved WASPs is one of his most ‘Bergmanesque’ works. It is also insufferable. Some have noted similarities with <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Wild Strawberries</i>.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Antonia and Jane (3) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_91" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Apocalypse Now</b> (4)[4] – 1979</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_92" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="64"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Only the first hour is truly great, and the rest drifts and meanders(and stalls at times to make obligatory antiwar statements) before finally settling upon the most anticlimactic of conclusions. Still, the first hour is absolutely stunning, among the very best on celluloid, and there are just enough memorable moments in the rest to make this one of Coppola’s most towering achievements.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_93" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Apollo 13 (4) – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_94" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="28"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I hear this is pretty good, but rah-rah feel-good movies aren’t my thing. And I don’t like Tom Hanks in serious roles, and Opie is dopey.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_95" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Apprenticeship of Duddy Kravitz (3) – 1974</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_96" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Arachnophobia (3) – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_97" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Aria </b>(3)[2] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_98" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="56"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Aria </i>was pure gimmick masquerading as a cultural event. Big-name directors were handed fat checks to make short films based on arias — music videos for connoisseurs? A wholly cynical enterprise for both parties, promoters and creators alike. That said, Franc Roddam’s music video of Liebstod(Richard Wagner) shot in Las Vegas packs quite a punch.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/d0HtuFG9arY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Aria 1987 Trailer" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_99" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ariel </b>(3)[4] – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_100" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="25"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s been so long since I’ve seen this film by Aki Kaurismaki, Finland’s most famous director. I recall it being quite good.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_101" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Arizona Dream</b> (3)[2] – 1995</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_102" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Emir Kusterica was one of the greatest directors in the 80s and 90s, but his Serbo-Croantics don’t translate well into Americana. Unlike the versatile and impersonal Ang Lee, a man for all senses and sensibilities, Kusterica is steeped in a peculiar worldview bordering on cosmology, drawn from the culture of his people and the urban folklore of gypsies. To Kusterica, Arizona might as well be Mars, and to Arizonans, he might as well be a Martian.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_103" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Arthur</b> (3½) [2½] – 1981</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_104" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="19"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mildly amusing Dudley Moore comedy. John Gielgud steals the show as Moore speaks mostly drunken gibberish to Liza Minnelli.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_105" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At Close Range (3½) – 1986</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_106" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At Play in the Fields of the Lord (3½) – 1991</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_107" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At the Max (4) – 1992</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_108" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Au Revoir Les Enfants</b> (4)[4] – 1988</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_109" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s something disingenuous, even a bit sickly, about Louis Malle’s film about the Occupation period. It’s clearly meant as an act of atonement, or impossibility thereof, given history cannot be undone, especially where death is involved. There are three layers of guilt here. France as a nation in collaboration with the Germans. Malle’s privileged childhood even during years of hardship for many. And the private sense of guilt that, on some subliminal level, he betrayed the Jewish boy who became his friend. A secret Malle had to get off his chest. Like Ingmar Bergman’s <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Faithless</i>(directed by Liv Ullmann), the contrition reeks of self-congratulation, i.e. “Look how courageously and, of course, artistically I’m revealing myself to have been a real shit.” Still, beautifully done and undeniably heartbreaking.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/qIaTVS7iQQk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Louis Malle’s Au revoir les enfants - In cinemas 30 Jan | BFI release" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_110" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Autumn Sonata</b> (4) [3½] – 1978</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_111" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bergman’s return to bourgeois chamber drama after prolonged entanglements with clinical psycho-drama(<i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Face to Face </i>and the like), political statement(<i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Serpent’s Egg</i>), and social relevance(<i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Scenes from a Marriage</i>). A sign that he finally got it(whatever it was) out of his system and made peace with the basic pathos of life. No use getting all neurotic over life’s problems that are never resolved. As a film about parent and child, it presages the great post-directorial screenplays about his own parents.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_112" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Avalon</b> (3½)[3] – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_113" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="202"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Barry Levinson sold himself and the audience short. What made <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Diner</i> so special was its cultural specificity, as the viewer is made to rub shoulders with the local Jews and Catholics of the community. It has the pungency and verve of real ethnic America. <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Avalon</i> is even more culture specific as it tells the story of two generations of Jewish Americans, from immigrant to son to grandson, but it’s awash in the glow of generic Americana. Levinson transposed the golden boy mythologizing of <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Natural</i> onto his Jewish forebears, making them the Golden Jews. It’s about how Jews became Americans through Thanksgiving and the like. The problem is they don’t seem very Jewish to begin with. What’s the point of becoming American if you are already Americanish right off the boat? The Golden Jew aspect is accentuated by some very ‘Aryan’ types cast in lead roles. Does Aidan Quinn even remotely look or sound Jewish? It’s a sanitized portrait of Jewishness. Even the family squabbles seem by-the-numbers, oy-vey as oh-boy. But, it’s obviously a labor of love and offers food for thought on Americanism as a blessing but also a curse that inevitably leads to amnesia.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8vWKJbQT06o?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Avalon - I Came To Baltimore On The 4th Of July" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_114" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Awakenings</b> (4) [2½] – 1990</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_115" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="76"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A most fascinating subject material, but the treatment goes from feely-good to feely-sad without anything resembling complexity or ambiguity. Penny Marshall directed. She should have stuck with projects like <i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Big</i>(with Tom Hanks in his best role). It would have worked better if Marshall just laid out the incredible facts and attended less to how we should feel at any given moment. When the material is hot, just serve it cold. The heat is already there.</span></p>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-47944950317803962892022-12-07T17:26:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:06.676-08:00What Do Francis Fukuyama’s Blind-Spot and Mike Pompeo’s Wink-Wink Have in Common? Cognizance of the Jewish Factor in Western Power<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="426" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/500/822/original/681b070a49f4e512.jpg" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="476" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/500/828/original/a2b94398d99ff340.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" trigger="948" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Francis Fukuyama has become a butt of jokes and punching bag for many commentators, it is understandable why he arrived at such a thesis. And it should be noted what he meant by ‘history’. He didn’t mean history as most of us understand it: political back and forth, big events, triumphs and tragedies. He meant the grand struggle of ideas in the Hegelian sense. As such, a better title would have been The End of Ideology.<br />Ideology aside, the rise of modernity had vastly undermined the power of the church and traditions. The rise of mass politics meant there was no return to monarchy and aristocracy. What came to define the modern era was the conflict of ideologies, especially after the remnants of the Old Order were finally swept away in the West, especially in Kaiserian Germany and Tsarist Russia(and it would end in Japan as well following its defeat in World War II).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the wake of the demise of old power structures, there was the contest of ideologies, the most spectacular being Fascism vs Communism, especially in the war between Nazi Germany and the Stalinist Soviet Empire. With World War II destroying the various forms of fascism and severely wounding communism(with horrendous human cost), it was a golden opportunity for the Capitalist West to seize the moment, especially as its biggest behemoth, the United States, was untouched by war, had boundless natural resources, and a giant talent pool to draw from(not least emigres from the ruins of Europe). The US also benefited from the collapse of European Imperialism in the Third World. As the British, French, and others were about to recede from their overseas empires, matters were arranged so that the spoils would go to the US as the ‘benevolent’ hegemon over the new world order.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One wonders how history might have panned out if things had gone somewhat differently. Suppose Russia, like Italy and Turkey, had gone quasi-fascist after World War I. And suppose Germany followed in the fascist path soon after than following the prolonged Weimar Period that radicalized German politics to bitter extremes. Suppose history had come down to a contest between a fascist union of Russia and Germany against the West. Which side would have won the War of Ideas? Or, suppose war had been averted between National Socialist Germany and the Soviet Union in 1941 and suppose Germany continued to access Russian raw materials while Stalin, becoming more pragmatic, ditched hardcore communism in favor of mixed economics on the fascist model.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, communism lost the economic and material war with the West DESPITE the vast amounts of manpower and raw materials because its command structures went against the laws of efficiency; there was also the problem of incentives, or lack thereof. Because the Communist World lost in peacetime to the Capitalist West despite availability of manpower and materials, one could argue it lost the ‘ideological’ war, or History as Fukuyama defines it.<br />If two sides have equal amounts of manpower and materials and if the side utilizing capitalism decisively outperforms the side practicing communism, one could say the capitalist model emerged as victor. But such logic cannot be applied to ‘fascist’ German-Italy-Japan because they were vastly outmanned by the Allies that also had a tremendous resource advantage. (There was also the problem of historical lag, i.e. all three countries were later to industrialize. As such Japan and Italy were, at best, semi-industrial, while Germany, though fully industrialized, was absent of an empire and control of sea lanes that might have secured access to essential materials.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/773/original/1a878b0aadb98499.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="628" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="245"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Therefore, capitalism vs fascism or communism vs fascism in the 20th century is without the essential Control Group, or the ‘all things being equal’ factor. Of course, one could argue that fascism, being inherently rash, aggressive, impatient, warlike, and centered around a demagogic figure, was destined for reckless policies and self-ruination. But some may argue that the fascist powers were squeezed into desperate straits with little elbow space. (Besides, the problem wasn’t so much the arrogance and recklessness as the powers that the fascist regimes went up against. Whereas Anglo-British and Anglo-American Histories were also full of rashness and/or adventurism, the Anglos usually went up against third-rate powers. So, Anglos crushed them or, even upon failing in their objectives, remained untouched at home, i.e. the US withdrawals from Vietnam or Afghanistan weren’t followed by Third World juggernaut invading and wreaking vengeance on the US. In contrast, Germany and Japan got embroiled in wars with powers that could not only turn the tide but invade their homelands and decapitate the regimes. At any rate, one doesn’t need to be a fascist to get involved in rash unwinnable wars. Napoleon proved it, and so did the Confederacy. So did all the kings & noblemen and democratic parliaments in the buildup to World War I. And Chiang Kai-Shek’s decision to meet the Japanese challenge would be his doom, no less than for the militarist government in Japan upon taking on the US.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="327"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Could the Liberal West have won History(as Fukuyama defines it) without the United States with its vast natural resources? Also, did American power really owe to Liberal Democracy? If so, why was the other big winner in the second half of the 19th century autocratic Germany? And why didn’t the spread of ‘liberal democracy’ translate into economic growth and military power in many parts of the world, including Southern and Eastern Europe?<br />As Fukuyama himself acknowledged, democracy and elections alone don’t make for a productive and/or functional modern society. There has to be effective harnessing of ability, rule of law, property rights, social trust & cohesion, sense of shared/common purpose, and the like. But then, does a society have to be ‘liberal’ or ‘democratic’ to encourage talent, enforce a system of laws, guarantee rights of property, and operate within a culture of trust? Pre-liberal Northern-Germanic societies and Singapore suggest otherwise. (It seems the ‘national character’ and cultural traits that pushed Northern Europe and its colonies to high achievement predated the institutionalization of Liberal Democracy, the success of which grew out of those features that had been developed under an hierarchical order of discipline, hard work, sense of duty, and honor, i.e. whatever individual initiative that came to thrive later via liberalization owed to the existence of an Order maintained by something more than ‘muh freedom’ and laws on paper. The secret of success was less freedom per se than freedom within and from an Order that held it all together. Though Order alone represses the necessary freedom that allows for innovation and experimentation, freedom needs to operate within a structure, much like the loose flesh that depends on the bones that hold the body together. Without the vertebrae, we are mere slugs. In this sense, all successful liberal democracies grew out of sub-fascist foundations. British, Germanics, and Japanese were especially disciplined, orderly, and hierarchical before loosening up in the modern era.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="129"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pre-democratic Modern Japan made great strides, which could also be said of post-communist China(though still under CCP rule). Of course, it could be argued, even though illiberal orders proved they could select and implement the best ideas of the liberal order, they are less likely to be the originators of new ideas and innovations. While various peoples have shown themselves capable of succeeding in the American Way, only an adventurous people such as the Europeans, Anglos in this case, possessed the foresight and fortitude to embark on a great journey and create something out of nothing. Followers can do as well as the leaders, but without leaders, they are no followers, whereas even without followers, leaders forge ahead. It’s the difference between the pathfinder and the path-user.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Thus, the liberal outlook certainly had advantages over the autocratic. It was<br />open to new possibilities and new worlds and, furthermore, more willing to tap into the talent pool of individuals. Indeed, the competition between the Spanish and the British, while demonstrating that a conservative power can also be adventurous, proved decisively that an order that encourages individual talent gains over one where the sovereign lays claim to everything and favors men based mainly on blood or loyalty.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="271"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, how many people got to(or were fit to) practice the rights of individualism in Britain? How truly liberal was the British Order? It’s worth noting the meanings of ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’ are always contextual in time and place. So, even though Britain was more liberal than most of Europe, it remained conservative and communal(than individualist) in many respects, and the true power of Britain derived not only from liberalism or individualism but its concert with other values, habits, and tendencies. On its rise to power, British Society was a liberal hierarchy steeped in racial individualism. It was more open to innovation but also mindful of heritage and tradition.<br />And even though things loosened up in the newly found American Nation, most of its history and rise to greatness owed to a system of Racial Liberal Patriarchal Democracy. It was free relative to Europe, much of which was still under monarchical and aristocratic rule, but its politics was dominated by East Coast elites and Southern gentry, and the West came under the control of big ranchers and railroads. Individuals had more leeway and opportunities, but the relative freedom of opportunity(and unrestrained ‘greed’) led to oligarchs far richer than any king or nobleman in Europe.<br />Furthermore, freedom operated within a racial hierarchy, making the US a Race-ist Democracy for most of its history(and today, it is just another kind of Racial Democracy that, instead of favoring Anglos and whites, favors Jews and blacks, along with homos, meaning that the much-loathed white males must be trannies or take it up the ass to possess any innate decency).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="629" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/770/original/63b5eccbff5e99f0.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The New Narrative argues that, yes, US History was far from perfect, but it has either overcome its ‘racist’ sins(the favored ‘conservative’ line) or trying so very hard to overcome them(the ‘liberal’ line), and that makes America an ‘exceptional’ country. It all sounds optimistic or hopeful, but despite the undeniably darker aspects of America’s Racial Democracy, didn’t it ever occur to such voices that America drew its strengths and advantages not only from ‘liberal constitutional’ principles but its racial consciousness and cultural prejudices? For example, would a truly White Racial Democracy have allowed blacks to turn Detroit(or Baltimore or any big city) into what it is today? Had the US remained a White Racial Democracy, would it be pathetically cucking before something like the George Floyd Riots of 2020? And with past cultural convictions(and prejudices, often moral in nature), would the US have allowed the degeneracy of globo-homo and other trashy expressions to fester, spread the rot, and define the meaning of ‘Western Values’?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Especially since the Sixties, American History(along with the Western Narrative) has been written to argue only one point: The founding principles were wonderful, BUT whites implemented them only incrementally(and we still have a long way to go); still, whatever good came out of the American Experiment owes entirely to the principles of universality and liberalism(and to NOTHING else); now, that the West is committed to fully realizing its principles, the future can only be better for all.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="220"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such logic would have validity if indeed the only reason for Western/American success was liberalism, especially modern-day Liberalism, but what if the West’s success owed to other factors as well? In other words, even though liberalism was certainly essential to modern progress, its success owed to a balancing act with other forces, some of which were anti-liberal or immutable(at least by standards of our experience of time).<br />Have things become better overall with the so-called ‘emancipation’ of women? It’s one thing to allow more freedom for women, but what happens when so many men lose their jobs as a result? What happens to family formation and family culture? The real secret to Western Success was a balancing of liberal and conservative tendencies. Once the balance is cast aside in the delusion that all the successes owed to ‘liberal values’ and/or further liberalization(and what is meant by ‘conservative values’ in the US is just classical liberal values), then the only conclusion is all future success/progress is incumbent on expansion of liberalism and nothing else. It views history as a simple slide that goes from A to Z than a see-saw or swing of balancing forces. But then, is the so-called ‘Liberal Democratic Order’ really liberal or democratic or becoming more so… or less so?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="214"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, just exactly how liberal is a society where people are deathly afraid to discuss certain issues out of fear of being destroyed as modern-day witches, either fired by institutions/corporations or set upon by Antifa thugs who are given legal protection by the elites? For example, I’m sure plenty of people sense on some level that American ‘racism’ in the past did some good. Broadly defined, ‘racism’ can mean just about any racial hierarchy or system of prestige/privilege. Well, didn’t it do some good for Anglo-Americans to maintain their dominance over other white groups, the ethnics? Anglos had the working formula, and other groups gained much by emulating the Anglos as the rightful leaders and elites of the US. As for rubbing out the native Indians, no doubt tragic, but how could anything new be built on land where Red Savages ran around screaming with tomahawks? And even though anti-black prejudice was especially strong, it had the salutary effect of subduing the wild energies of the most savage and potentially destructive race on Earth, ones who even drove chimpanzees and gorillas crazy in the Dark Continent. Indeed, what has happened to many urban centers as the result of the emancipation or unleashing of savage black aggression? They became urban jungles.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="208"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Also, keep in mind that liberalism isn’t necessarily ‘anti-racist’. Capital ‘L’-Liberalism has come to mean a set of do-goody dogma, but true liberalism, as an open-minded inquiry into the nature of reality, can arrive at race-ist conclusions. The Abolitionists, for example, were driven by illiberal spiritualist view of the races that focused on Negro souls than on Negro bodies(that would kick whitey’ass, but then, the Negro soul also turned out to be different from the white soul in being more funky and wild-ass ‘twerking’ crazy; just like ‘bad’ means something different to blacks, so does ‘soul’, more a sensual than spiritual concept among the Negroes). It was the 19th century Progressives who were open-minded about reality and, based on available evidence, believed in racial differences and drew the rational conclusion that Western Civilization couldn’t survive the rise of out-of-control jungle-jivery on the part of blacks, which is why great women like Margaret Sanger came along and said something must be done about colored birth rates. Sadly today, ‘liberalism’ just means naive do-goody faith in Noble Negroes and Holy Homos, along with mouth-foaming vitriolic hatred for ‘racists’ and ‘homophobes’, which could be anyone at variance with the Current Year programming pushed by Jewish Power.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/765/original/f911262a6227e0cc.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="495" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Oddly enough, the abating of ‘racism’ after World War II owed to the White Dominant factor in America’s Racial Democracy. Because whites were so powerful and confident, nonwhites(and ethnic whites) acted under the pressure to show that they could be just as good, capable, and worthy as white folks, especially the Anglo-American stock. It was one reason behind the illusion that all racial differences could be overcome. “Look, the Negroes are trying to be respectable and talking middle class values” — Gee, maybe most Negroes will aspire to be like the idealized Sidney Poitier movie characters. Without white ‘racism’, such pressures would have been absent, and blacks would have reverted to their jungle nature long ago.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It was once blacks gained total equality(and more) and burned with black pride that the full reversion to their true nature(no longer inhibited by ‘being a credit to their race’) began, and the results are gangsta rap music, George-Floyd-as-saint, and big ‘twerking’ black butt. With whiteness no longer as the generic civilizational standard, the nonwhites(and even whites into ‘white guilt’, ‘flight from white’ and/or jungle fever/faith) feel less compelled to strive toward the ‘universals’ as defined by the West, resulting in the racial and/or cultural reversions among various groups, most notably among blacks who, among human races, stand apart in their innate destructiveness(of civilizational norms).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The pressures of ‘racism’ or Racial Democracy motivated the ‘anti-racists’ to substantiate the claim that race is only skin-deep and that any group could be just as capable and civilizational as white folks. Paradoxically, to prove ‘racism’ wrong, the ‘anti-racists’ accepted the White or Western Standards as superior, albeit with the twist that ANY racial or ethnic group could aspire to and achieve the same results if given the chance. Today, when ‘whiteness’ and even Enlightenment Values are called into question or cursed out as mere variations of ‘racism’ or ‘white supremacism’, there’s hardly any pressure on nonwhites to conform to Western Standards of progress, which had been the yardstick of modern universalism; besides, what remains of ‘Western Values’ is essentially celebrating ‘kink’ with homos & trannies and ‘twerking’ to jungle fever. The argument went from, “Blacks can be just as punctual as whites and it’s ‘racist’ to say blacks have an innately different nature” to “Punctuality is a White/Western ‘racist’ idea and blacks have a ‘right’ to function according to their own natural clock of sheeeeeeiiiit and daaaaaaaang.” Jungle Time.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, whites deserve much of the blame as they themselves have degraded the meaning of Western Civilization to a handful of childish slogans or catch-phrases like ‘love is love’, ‘diversity is a strength’, ‘inclusion this, inclusion that’, and etc. Just about 50% of what passes for ‘Western Values’ today is mindless celebration of and reverence toward homos and trannies, with even pedos gaining backdoor entrance into the temple. Anyway, ‘anti-racism’ has, ironically enough, made racial differences all the more evident because nonwhites, especially blacks, are no longer pressured to live up to Western Civilizational modes. In the 1990s, many Westerners expressed disapproval, even bordering on disgust, at Lee Kwan Yew’s Singaporean argument that Asians have their own way of doing things, and therefore the East shouldn’t be expected to emulate the West in all things. But now, whenever blacks(goaded by Jews) reject some aspect of Westernism as ‘racist’ and insist on doing their own ‘thang’, weak whites(or ‘wheaklings’) just tremble in the knees, grovel at the Negro’s stinky feet and plead for the privilege of washing and kissing them.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="480" src="https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/clashofcivilization-140527100018-phpapp02-thumbnail-4.jpg?cb=1401184861" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Fukuyama, as a student and admirer of Samuel Huntington, has surely been well-aware of the cultural factor in civilizational achievement but, given the ‘gods’ of our age, dares not touch upon racial matters. All things being equal, why have some races been more adept at innovation while others have been more adept at applying complex ideas? Same could be said of sports. While athletics requires training and discipline — consider how even the mighty Mike Tyson-gone-lazy lost to Buster Douglas — , why are some races better with the same training and equipment?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="70"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even if, theoretically speaking, all races could learn the civilizational formula and make considerable progress, who can deny there are group-genetic factors that account for variances in achievement? East Asian IQ and temperament were likely instrumental in catching up to Western Modernity, but then, emotional traits more suited for conformity and consensus had suppressed a pioneering spirit, a feature of the West that ignited flames from the sparks of individuality.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="145"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On the other hand, given that only a handful of individuals have any real talent or vision, the secret to Western Success was a combination of increased individuality for the bold and talented but hierarchy, discipline, and teamwork for the rest. This Anglo Model that welded individuality above and teamwork below was well-illustrated in WHITE SQUALL(directed by Ridley Scott). As George C. Scott in the role of Patton said, individualism isn’t what the military is about, even though Patton prided himself as a superior individual and leader deserving of greater leeway in the conduct of the war. Still, what distinguished the West from Germany-Italy-Japan(and from the Soviet Union in the Cold War) was the ideology of individual liberty of expression and choice, allowing for more defiance of authority and social norms, enabling the rise of consumer-driven youth culture in the post-war period.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/2T6WvayGd64?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="White Squall 1996 Trailer | Jeff Bridges | Caroline Goodall" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="166"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, even though Fukuyama’s End of History thesis now seems hopelessly optimistic, it is understandable how he could have drawn such a conclusion(and won over enough adherents for the Idea to gain traction) given the circumstances of his youth. Fukuyama, born in 1952, came of age when the US was still led by an Anglo-American or WASP elite. He was born into what was essentially a Racial Democracy, and he surely heard stories of Japanese-Americans during World War II. America in theory was about liberty, equality, and opportunity regardless of creed and color, but its practice(and its general attitude among the dominant white majority) was very much at odds with its professed ideals(and that was perfectly fine with most White Americans of both parties). The Civil Rights Act passed when Fukuyama was twelve years old, and even with an America committed to racial equality and color-blind justice, the power well into the Reagan-Bush Era was very much with the WASP elites.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="155"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, even though the End of History thesis was mainly premised on the triumph of Liberal Democracy over fascism(in World War II) and then over communism(in the Cold War), it was also about the battle between Racial Democracy vs Liberal Democracy within the West, especially the US.<br />Well into Fukuyama’s adult years, he lived in a Racial Democracy inching and then lurching toward Liberal Democracy. When he was born, the US was still clearly a white-centric country, as well as a very Christian one. Harry Truman integrated the US military, but he personally despised blacks(and nonwhite races), and Dixiecrats still wielded considerable power. American Immigration laws favored Europeans before the insane 1965 act. Even after the tumultuous landmark decade of the Sixties, many people assumed that white dominance would remain one way or another, i.e. more nonwhites would join the system but under the helm of continued white prestige and dominance.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, throughout his lifetime, Fukuyama surely sensed seismic tremors just beneath the surface, not least because whites weren’t merely making a few concessions here and there to placate restless minorities but committing(or yielding) themselves to fundamental changes that would have profound implications for the future of America. Fukuyama witnessed the incredible change of America, which even to the time of his childhood had been clearly white-dominant and ‘racist’, to what seemed like the land of colorblind ideal where individuality, equality(of opportunity aka meritocracy for all), and liberty trumped all considerations of white power, culture, tradition, and/or interests.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It seemed the ideals of Liberal Democracy were in conflict not only with communist totalitarianism but the racial and cultural biases that had always undergirded American History. Given the Americanist triumph following World War II, the main themes of US could have gone two ways, racial or anti-racial(or maybe post-racial). After all, the war in the Pacific had largely been a race war, what with the US media characterizing the Japanese as rat-like slant-eyed buck-toothed vermin that should be wiped off the face of the planet. As Charles Lindbergh argued, the US hatred for the Japanese was hardly different from the German hostility toward Jews(and he didn’t mean this as criticism but support). And even though the Germans were white(and not as hated as the Japanese, though that changed in the post-war years with endless propaganda about the Holocaust, whereby ‘Aryan’ became one of the dirtiest terms), they too were depicted as somehow different from other whites, especially Anglos — Germanics were thick-skulled Teutons, perhaps part-Neanderthal.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="217"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, the US triumph in World War II could have been racialized in favor of Anglo/White supremacy. But for whatever set of reasons, the opposite would be the case. Perhaps, it owed to the tensions between the US and UK in the postwar climate. Brits wanted to maintain their imperial dominance, but the US was eyeing to take over and had to appeal to the world with something more uplifting than Old World imperialism.<br />Then, even if the US did want to emphasize the element of race, it had to be ‘white’ than Anglo, especially as so various ethnic groups had been part of the war effort and were essential in the Cold War. Also, there was the matter of self-perception, the conceit of Americans that their views were more tolerant and egalitarian than those of the Old World. American Christian Missionaries in China, for example, had often expressed contempt for British racial attitudes toward the Chinamen; they liked to believe that they, as Americans, were somehow different. And when Winston Churchill, regarding FDR as a fellow member of Anglo brethren, spoke candidly on racial matters, he was met with disdain. I paraphrase, but Churchill was reported to have said something like, “Hey, Franklin, how about them niggers and wogs?” and was met with stone-cold silence.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="92"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, FDR and his progressive Anglo-American cohort had a soft spot for Josef Stalin because the Soviet Union was perceived to be against the racial bigotry of Old World Europe. This is all very curious since FDR was not above exploiting ‘Anti-Jap’ sentiments, but perhaps, he justified such prejudices on grounds that they would fuel American support for the war to destroy the racial-supremacist empires of Germany and Japan — use lesser-evil-racism against bigger-evil-racism — , and besides, the anti-Japanese propaganda was balanced by pro-Chinese propaganda, so it wasn’t necessarily anti-Asian but only anti-bad-Asian.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="431" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/761/original/a666bdaa08372b11.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />Another key element to the de-racialization of American politics was the Cold War where the US had to vie with the Soviet Union for the hearts and minds of the Third World. As it came down to the Capitalist West and Communist East competing for peoples of Asia, Africa, Middle East, and Latin America, the Racial Democratic model wouldn’t have been so appealing. (One wonders how Western History might have panned out without the Soviet challenge in the Cold War. At least in foreign policy, the US became far more arrogant and nihilistic after the Cold War as the lone superpower.) Possibly of the greatest importance, the de-racialization(followed by re-racialization favoring Jews and blacks uber alles) owed to the rise of Jewish Power that used media control to conflate all forms of white ‘racism’ with the Holocaust and to the rise of blacks in sports and popular music, what with black musicians and the likes of Muhammad Ali becoming the face of America to much of the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, what had once seemed set in stone, the power of White Racial Democracy, was eroding fast in the post-war years and crumbled in the Sixties with anti-war protests, youth culture & consumerism, and social unrest, much of it related to race relations(mostly black). Even the women’s politics took on a different tone. If earlier feminism appreciated the West’s vanguard role in the rights of women and argued that white women deserved parity with white men in various areas, the new feminism instilled female minds with the notion that women constitute an identity independent of men and, furthermore, white women should regard themselves as the fellow-oppressed, along with the people-of-color, of the White Male-Dominated or Patriarchal System. So, with white patriarchy oppressing white women and white ‘racism’ oppressing nonwhites, and it was high time for both white women and nonwhites to unite in the struggle against White Men. Of course, Jews played a key role in reframing feminism thus.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, because Fukuyama witnessed a seeming fixture of American Politics, the White-WASP-dominated Racial Democracy, yielding to the rise of an apparently colorblind Liberal Democracy(that, incredibly enough, even changed America’s immigration and citizenship laws), he could be forgiven for believing that the power of Liberal Democracy was so powerful and persuasive that it not only defeated fascism and eclipsing communism but transforming the West itself from race-based National Democracies into fully Liberal Ones where what mattered most was individuality, liberty, meritocracy(aka equality of opportunity), and the like.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="197"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the power of Liberal Democracy is so powerful, defeating all forms of totalitarianism and then upending the deep-rooted system of racial hierarchy even in Western Democracies, it must indeed be the right stuff to bring about the End of History, meaning the End of History of Ideas, or End of Ideology. Here was finally the ideology that was powerful enough, persuasive enough, and inspiring enough to sweep away all forms of iron-fisted tyranny abroad but also the velvet-gloved forms of inequality in the West itself. (And ironically, the appeal of liberal ideology was its anti-ideological or a-ideological character, i.e. instead of enforcing a narrow dogma on everyone, it allowed for differences in creed and politics, favoring a culture of tolerance where different groups got along at least on the level of individuals co-existing and competing on the basis of agreed-upon rules of equal opportunity and meritocracy. Liberalism favored talent and individuality over tenet and orthodoxy. Deng Xiaoping characterized the essence of liberal reforms in Red China when he said, what does it matter if the cat is white or black as long as it catches the mice? Under Mao, it had been Red over Expert.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A man born into a white-dominated Racial Democracy observing its profound changes in half a lifetime into a full-blown Liberal Democracy(committed to equal justice for all) is likely to be in awe of this transformational power, especially if it happens in the mightiest and richest country on Earth. After World War II, White Americans were far and away the most prosperous and most powerful people on Earth, but they, of their own volition, chose to rid the system of elements of Racial Democracy and march toward new horizons of Liberal Democracy, whereupon the US Constitution went from a half-measure to a full-measure.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="535" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/755/original/fa0008ab5ebc19a2.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Fukuyama watched something huge happening during his lifetime, but he had a blind spot and failed to register what was REALLY going on. While the US did transition, at least for a time, from a White Racial Democracy to more-or-less a colorblind Liberal Democracy, it was a way station than the final destination, which was a New Racial Democracy where Jews would be dominant(along with their key allies Blacks and Homos). Because Fukuyama grew up in a WASP-dominated White-Christian Order, his scrutiny was focused on White Power and White Privilege. Of course, he knew about Jewish Power and black rage(and homo agitation as well), but he regarded them as part of the overall and multi-faceted ‘liberal’ challenge to white power and privilege.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews, blacks, homos, along with many non-white groups or non-Wasp ethnic whites, were clamoring for a fairer share of the pie that had always been dominated by WASPs throughout US history. Unlike hardcore anti-white voices, Fukuyama appreciated the Anglo-role in the creation and development of America but believed the US had failed to fully implement its founding ideals or core principles. When lions rule the jungle and other animals challenge the supremacy, one is likely to see the non-lions as levelers of jungle politics, not would-be champions once the reign of lions comes to an end.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, there are two kinds of challengers, ones who challenge supremacy to end it once and for all AND those who challenge the existing supremacy to take over as the new supremacy. Jews(and blacks and homos) were likely to be dissatisfied with mere equality-for-all given their inner-natures and impulses, and this factor was the big blind spot that made Fukuyama fumble on the End of History thesis.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="73"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, it’s possible that had the US been absent of Jews and blacks, its history might have culminated more or less in something along Fukuyama’s big idea. But, it wasn’t going to happen with Jews and blacks(and homos weaponized by Jews) with their predilections for ethnocentrism egotism where they just got to be the center of attention-affection-adoration. Jewish Power was most decisive because of its zeal, depth, and reach.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Liberal Democracy means freedom, and freedom means good behavior but also protection from bad behavior. The mafia, once nearly crushed by Mussolini, made a comeback under US-enforced liberal democracy. Post-war ‘liberal democratic’ Japan came to be ruled by a merchant mafia. Hong Kong is mafia driven. Individualism under liberal democracy atomizes; therefore, those who organize gain more power, like with Organized Crime. And despite their penchant for individualism and egotism, Jews with their Covenant-mentality and reliance on world-wide networks have often organized. Thus, the very freedom afforded by liberal democracy enabled tribal Jews to gain ever more and more and more, doing away with even anti-monopoly protections. In 2020 they acted in concert, pulling all manner of gangster tricks across institutions and industries. The current Deep State takes orders from bosses who are appointed by whore politicians of Jewish overlords.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="395" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/750/original/13ae5d59c97e2c1e.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="234"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Liberal Democracy remains more-or-less ‘liberal’ and ‘democratic’ if most people(especially near power) tend to be even-tempered, fair-minded, moderate, mentally stable… which applied to most Japanese-Americans and Anglo-German-American types. But already, Italian-Americans proved how a minority group could cause a lot of trouble by favoring ethno-gangsterism above the law, as portrayed in GOODFELLAS by Nicholas Pileggi and Martin Scorsese. Irish were problematic too, what with their Machine Politics. But over time, Irish melded into generic White Americanism, and the Italian Community split into two groups: Those who stuck with organized crime were eventually snuffed out as the federal government, with the help of the courts, conceived more effective ways to put the bosses behind bars. As for the other Italian community, it sought higher education as a way out of clannish mentality and joined with the law enforcement to clamp down on the Bad Italians. In the based-on-true-events story laid out in PRINCE OF THE CITY, it is admirable that many on the side of the law were Italian-Americans. (Blacks were always going to be problematic but hardly seemed a threat to elite institutions as Affirmative Action came down to tokenism. At most, they were used as props and symbols by institutions and corporations to show that they are on the right side of History.) The Italian problem was thorny but could be overcome, not least with the input of reformed or redemptive Italian-Americans.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="61"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews were a different matter. Alone among the ethnic groups, they were smarter than the Anglos. They had the nastiness of Italians but with brains. Also, whereas Italians were often stupidly slaughtering one another, Jews were better adept at creating and expanding Jewish networks. Indeed, a Jewish communist, a Jewish capitalist, and a Jewish gangster got along better than two ‘goombas’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/avWn9OAFfyQ?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Sidney Lumet's Prince of the City" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="156"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Probably, the influence of Catholicism among Italians created a clearer sense of right vs wrong as a matter of principle and personal integrity. Even though Catholicism has always been corrupt(essentially a pedophile cult), it has also been a conveyer of Christian ideas of purification, redemption, atonement, and making peace with God(and with Jesus who loves all peoples). Then, it’s no wonder that the most striking contrast in PRINCE OF THE CITY is between the Italian-American Danny Ciello and the Jewish-American Gus Levy. Ciello is overcome with Catholicist guilt and seeks redemption, whereas Levy harbors no such feelings. To Levy, it’s just pussy-shit; everyone steals, everyone is corrupt, so why shouldn’t cops; and besides, despite his compromises, he’s also done sterling work as a cop; there’s no such thing as purity or perfection in this world, and it’s laughable that the corrupt government should be charging cops of corruption.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In Ciello’s Catholicist view, there is good and bad. Italian-Americans can choose to be on the side of angels or the side of devils. In Levy’s Jewishist view, everything is a mix of good and bad, not good vs bad, and what matters above all is the team you belong to. Sure, his police unit did some questionable things, but so do all units of government, and so, the game is about circling the wagons and not being fooled that others are the good guys with the moral high-ground.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ciello’s Catholicist worldview is also evident in the works of Martin Scorsese where the ‘hero’, like Charlie(Harvey Keitel) in MEAN STREETS, is torn between gangster-tribalism and some semblance of sanctity, and furthermore, torn between official Catholicism(with all its compromises & betrayals) and true Christianity where one’s soul must struggle in the streets to find the way to Christ. Such a sense of self-struggle is hardly found in the personal films of Jewish writer-directors who may deal with matters of neurosis(anxiety and doubt) but hardly with the inner moral struggle. When Jews tell morality tales, it’s usually about goyim having to come to terms with THEIR historical ‘sins’, mostly in regard to Jews and blacks. It’s almost never about Jews having to face the same questions. One of the few exceptions is CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS(but then only half-way) by Woody Allen where an affluent and well-respected Jewish eye-doctor confronts his inner-demons over a murder he contracted through his Jewish gangster brother. But upon realizing the cloud of suspicion has lifted from him, his conscience(or lack thereof) returns to peace. It suggests his moral or spiritual crisis was really about the fear of being caught, of losing his social status.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uZQ5qKpUk08?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Crimes and Misdemeanors" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Woody Allen’s view of the character is ambiguous. On the one hand, he seems a soulless hypocrite, but on the other, it’s as if he finally ‘burst his cherry’ and found his inner-gangster. It’s a very revealing moment in American Culture for delineating the difference between White Christian mentality and Jewish Tribal mentality. While there were plenty of lowlife Italian hoodlums and scumbags, those Italians who strove to be good tended to drew a clear line between themselves and the Bad Italians. Ultimately, they sided with the Anglo-American Rule of Law against the lowlife ‘greaseballs'(who, by the way, were too stupid to rise above criminality, whereas many Jewish hoodlums were able to go ‘legit’). And this was also true of Anglo-Americans who finally came to draw a line between good whites committed to racial equality(as guaranteed in the U.S. Constitution) and the bad whites, the ‘racists’, who continued to tell ‘nigger’ jokes about fried chicken and watermelon(though not without reason).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="188"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, a similar distinction between Good Jews and Bad Jews never materialized, just like the left vs right divide among Jews was never as strong as among goyim. To this day, Mainstream Jews have yet to admit Leo Frank was a rapist-murderer or that Israel was created through terrorism and racial supremacist ideology that made Arabs out to be camel-piss-drinking morons(which admittedly qualifies as half-truth). So, unlike Good Italians who rejected Italian gangsterism, the ‘Good Jews’ merely institutionalized Jewish criminality so that crooked instruments and vice industries could be refashioned into neo-virtue industries under Jewish Control. (Take Bernie Madoff for example. His investment firm’s performance was unheard of in the industry, and alarm bells should have gone off; surely many Jews knew he was up to no good, but as long as he was making rich Jews even richer, they looked the other way and, if anything, applied pressure on government to look the other way. And when the pyramid finally collapsed, Jews made themselves out to be primary victims of Bad Bernie even they’d enabled his fraud for so long to stuff their pockets.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And unlike Good Whites who rejected ‘racism’ and ‘white supremacism’, ‘Good Jews’ not only worked with Zionist Jewish Supremacists but peddled influence to ensure that Americans of all stripes would support Zionist tyranny and endless Wars for Zion that came to destroy countless lives in the 21st century. In the Sixties, especially among the Jewish boomer generation, there were idealists who agitated for social justice and equality for all, and the post-Cold-War history of the world might have been different if these Jews, like the Good Whites and Good Italians, opted for universal justice than for Zionic neo-tribalism that came to define the trajectory of the 21st century.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, the troubling signs were always there as Jewish Leftists weren’t as critical of the Jewish community as goy leftists were of their own. Or, perhaps, disillusionment had more far-reaching consequences for Jews, many of whom had been radical true believers, fully imbibed of the Marxist dogma of class solidarity and the Boasian concept of race as just a social construct. These Jews came to realize that Proletariat aren’t natural revolutionaries and that, contrary to Boasian constructs, races were indeed different, as in ‘goyim sure are dumb’. Of course, Jews kept such realizations private because ‘anti-racism’ was their Ace Card in perpetuating ‘white guilt’ to gain control of white hearts-and-minds, but if we assess what Jews DO as opposed to what they SAY, the Zionic Agenda is based on Jewish Supremacism over goyim, and the reason why Jews especially use blackness against whites is because whites are likely to cuck and wilt before the Negro(as the real superior race) who can whup whitey’s ass. Take the American South where the last vestiges of Confederate Culture are being wiped out by College Football where Negroes dominate the field and hump white girls while cucky-wuck southern white boys cheer and shriek like a bunch of homo-pansies. Welcome to Cuckfederacy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="215"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="466" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/747/original/323689c4aadaf09c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />Fukuyama missed or ignored the Jewish Factor in the New America. In his vision of Liberal Democracy, the rules-based systems are controlled and maintained by people of even temperament and commitment to principles. With such demographics, most people would NOT try to exploit the system for tribal purposes, kinship alliances, and gangster tactics. Imagine a Sweden that is 100% Swedish and uncontaminated by Politically Correct Ideology. Such might indeed qualify as Fukuyama’s ideal of End of History Liberal Democracy. (But then, the very success and stability of their national model may have led the naive and well-meaning Swedes to fall for the Diversity Fix peddled by Jews posing as the Holy Holocaust Race. Then, it suggests the Trust Culture of a Liberal Democracy must not be extended to foreigners and outsiders who, concealing their hostile intent, may manipulate good-will into guilt-complex to subvert the system and take over.) Ultimately, the freedom of the ever-liberalizing West was too tempting for Jews to choose the humdrum option of fair play and getting along. Why just be part of the lame and dumb goyim? Why not take over and have idiot goyim do your bidding since your kind is smarter and possesses more will(and wit) to power? If you got the bigger balls, play the bigger game.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Fukuyama should have focused less on ideology and more on national or ethnic character. America might have been founded and made by Protestant Work Ethic, but it was taken over by Jewish Game Ethnic, the nature of which can be glimpsed in David Mamet films. Samuel Huntington was keener on the subject of ethnos and cultural differences in history, and one of his last major publications was THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS. But, just like Fukuyama shriveled into Fukyomama at the feet of Jewish Power, Huntington wilted into Cuntington before the same thing. His book divides the world into several major cultural spheres, and in the post-Cold-War era, one of the major divisions was deemed to be between ‘Western’ and ‘Islamic’, an idea useful to the Neocons goading the West into wars against Arabs and/or Muslims at loggerheads with Zion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, was Huntington really correct? After all, the clash between the US and the Middle East often had nothing to do with religion or even cultural values/expectations. Even though Iran became virulently anti-American following the Revolution(though plenty of Iranian Liberals had also taken part against the Shah, a US shill), the West, increasingly under the control of Jews, was generally at war with Arab modernizers and, if anything, allied with arch or radical Muslim forces. US was close to Saudi Arabia ruled by a theocratic monarchy and supported Muslim radicals in Afghanistan against a secular regime. The US targeted secular tyrant Saddam Hussein, the bane of Islamic Iran. Later under Obama, the US recruited ISIS and other Islamic terrorists in a war against Assad whose secular regime was tolerant of Christians and other minorities. Many Palestinian crushed by Zionist Jews were actually Christian or Westernized. The US invasion of Iraq emboldened Muslim clerics and fighters, eradicating most of the Christian population, who’d been protected by Saddam Hussein.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="371" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/741/original/bcfc211477e384c7.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="102"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, what Huntington prophesied as Clash of Civilizations between the West and the Muslim World had little to do with religion(unless Neoconservatism is considered a variant of Judaism), and more often than not, the West sided with radical Muslim lunatics against SECULAR Arab regimes. And this was because Jews feared modernizing Arab/Muslim forces more than medievalist or anarcho-terrorist ones that would keep the Middle East in the ‘sand age’. Islamic Iran notwithstanding, some of the most compliant and craven regimes in the Middle East have been quasi-theocratic, whereas secularizers like Nasser and Gaddafi have been most defiant of Western Power.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, the real Clash of Civilizations in matters of foreign policy was between the Nationalists vs Imperialists, and Western Imperialism after the Cold War was almost completely controlled by Jews. Huntington, perhaps fearful of Jews, chose not to harp on the real cultural, psychological, and historical differences between Whites/Christians and Jews, but it was the Jewish Factor that led to the renewed wars in the Middle East(and the blowbacks, often welcomed by Jews to justify even more wars).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the past, the Christian-Islam Wars were the product of two great universalizing empires vying for dominance, but in the Modern Era, the West decisively won over the Arab and/or Muslim World. The lingering(and sometimes mounting) tensions weren’t about Christendom vs ‘Islamo-Fascism’ but the result of Zionist influence using the Western Military against the Muslim World(and using Muslim immigrants-migrants-‘refugees’ against European nations). Indeed, why has North Korea been lumped in with Iran, Iraq, Libya, and etc.? It’s unlikely there’s a single Muslim in North Korea, but it too has been defiant and has developed nukes and has diplomatic ties with Iran. In other words, its existence displeases Jews.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For Huntington to lump White/Christian West and Jewish West together into one entity is deeply misleading. Throughout history, it wasn’t just the Anti-Semites but Jews themselves who insisted on separateness. Consider when Cynthia Ozick took umbrage at the notion of Franz Kafka as a German writer(than a Jewish one) and idea that his works can be understood apart from his profound Jewishness. And certain Jewish reviewers of THE GERMAN GENIUS by Peter Watson took exception to the idea that Sigmund Freud and Albert Einstein should be included among German thinkers and scientists.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Jews became embedded into the White/Christian world(and as Jews were limited in number), there was no White-Christian clash with Jews on the scale of the wars with Arab-Muslims and Turkic-Muslims, BUT there was certainly a Friction of Civilizations between Whites/Christians and Jews/Semites, and it was largely this tension that led to the Bolshevik Revolution(where Jews gained) and National Socialism(where Jews lost). (With Italian Fascism, Jews initially gained but eventually lost when Il Duce went with Der Fuhrer.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS was released in 1996, perhaps Huntington’s lapse could be overlooked. After all, the West had yet to experience the full brunt of what Jewish Power had in store. The 90s were still a time when Bill Clinton of all people reaffirmed, into law no less, that marriage is between a man and a woman. And open homosexuality was banned in the military, still regarded as a bastion of conservative nationalism. (And even many liberals were appalled by the L.A. Riots and supported Bill Clinton’s get-tough-on-crime measures.) So, one could be forgiven for assuming that, despite serious ideological divisions as well as ethnic tensions, there was a united entity called the West that included liberals and conservatives, Jews and Gentiles.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="589" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/732/original/2cf5fb261df0fa93.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="188"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But especially since the Obama presidency, Jewish Power showed its true face, and its grand design is for all white populations in the countries of the West to be reduced to minorities, for white wombs to be colonized by black seed, for white guys to be defined as ‘cis-gender’ wussy-pussy cucks, for globo-homo or queertianity to replace traditional spirituality, for children to be cultivated into the idolatry of tranny nuttery, for blacks to be idolized as divine, and for ideology to be infantilized into the pablum of ‘diversity, inclusion, equity’, which could mean just about anything depending on who has the power. (Notice ‘inclusion’ means inviting drag queens to elementary schools but not inducting Palestinian-Americans into the editorial departments of NYT and WAPO. Notice examples of ‘racism’ are about evil whites but never about what Zionists do to Palestinians or about how Jews robbed black athletes and entertainers blind. No matter how universalist the ideology, the choice of examples determine the hierarchy of who/whom. So, the big lesson on racial violence is illustrated by the Emmett Till narrative, not the stories of countless victims of black thuggery.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="199"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While tolerance of deviance and radicalism has long been a hallmark of Western Values, the elevation of and compulsory reverence for a set of idols and narratives go against everything the West has stood for since at least the Enlightenment. Thus, the most profound Clash(or schism) of Civilizations was within the West itself, with Jewish Power doing its utmost to redefine the West and rejigger its narratives to serve the supremacist interests of Zion. Just how does an official month-long celebration of homo-fecal-penetration and tranny-penis-cutting do Western Civilization proud? It’s often been asked, “How did Germans, the best educated people in the world, fall for Hitler and National Socialism?” Well, at least Germans had the great depression as excuse, but what’s the excuse among white Americans and Europeans, deemed the most educated and most prosperous peoples of all time? How did such a people fall for the biggest lies and succumb to Jewish pressure to turn the entire West into an empire of lies where ‘men can have babies’ and George Floyd is consecrated a saint(based on the utter baloney of BLM, really meant to perpetuate ‘white guilt’ to morally paralyze white dummy-whummies into obeisance?)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="220"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Europe today certainly has problems resulting from tensions between Europeans and Muslims(whose mass-migrations were facilitated by Jewish groups or forced by Zionist-led wars), but should we really bemoan the Muslim threat to ‘Western Values’, which now amount to BLM Negrolatry, Diversity-Mantra to bring about White Nakba, Jungle Fever(& Jungle Faith of BLM where blacks are always saints despite their thuggery and criminality), pathetic white cucking before Zion despite its collusion with the likes of George Soros, mindless adoration of homo butt-bang-boys & tranny perverts, the looming normalization of pedophiles(now called MAPs), and status-worship uber alles among so-called ‘upscale’ voters whose entire worldviews are shaped by expensive ‘woke’ education and whatever garbage they catch on TV? And forget about liberal values of free speech, tolerance of dissident views, and openness to controversy because Jewish Power of late has decided, like the Vatican of Old, that certain issues are ‘settled’(to their liking of course), and we should just shut up, agree, and obey. That’s what ‘having a conversation’ now means in the West. A bunch of blacks and homos/trannies doing the bidding of Jewish Power and spouting all the well-rehearsed nonsense while ‘upscale’ whites and wanna-be’s listen aptly and nod their heads like obedient dogs… while Jews feel even more contempt for dumb dumb goyim.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/727/original/7d638b75ed837064.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="526" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="61"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, Fukuyama hoped that the sheer prestige and historical momentum of Liberal Democracy(and Rule of Law) would reshape the attitudes, values, and habits of all ethnic groups. Just as the once-snotty and dominant Anglo-Americans grew to be more tolerant and fair-minded, the ethnic minorities seemed to be meeting the WASPs halfway and committing to the proper modes of Liberal Democracy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, Fukuyama failed to appreciate the true nature of Jewish Psychology. The difficulty posed by Jewishness partly owes to culture, especially as Jewishness, unlike Christian-ness, has no regard for universal justice, one where others judge Jews just as Jews judge others(instead of what now prevails, where Jews judge others who, however, must never judge Jews, as that would be ‘anti-semitic’). Jewish Worldview is universalist only in the sense that the Jewish God is the only real God; it doesn’t say anything about God loving all peoples equally. If Christians believe God is equally loving of all those who’ve embraced the Christian Faith, Jews believe in a special Covenant whereby THEY have been chosen to rule over spiritually inferior goyim.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, Jewishness is also genetic because it takes a certain kind of doggedly stubborn personality to maintain the practice of tribal loyalty. Just think. If most Jews were like Dan Quayle or Lindsey Graham, how long could their culture last? Quayle is a weakling, and Graham is just a whore. Just like Amish Culture affects genetics — the less committed tend to leave the community, leaving behind those with more tenacity-genes, resulting in a culture bound by those with similar genes of perseverance and resilience — , Jewish Culture did the same. The less loyal Jews left the community and melded into goy communities of pagans, Christians, Muslims, and etc. Over many generations, those remaining within the Jewish Community had hardcore tribal personalities, and yet, unlike the Amish with their single-minded separateness, Jews also developed adaptive personalities as their survival and prosperity relied on doing business with goyim. So, the Jewish Personality became, at once, highly insular/exclusive and highly fluid/adaptive, a mental petri dish of serious split-personality neurosis. This is why, unlike the one-note Amish, polyphonic Jews can seem both very conservative and very liberal.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Since his sudden fame as a young academic, Fukuyama has had to revise his ideas, rather like Andrew Sarris with his ‘Auteur Theory’. But unlike Sarris who revised his ideas freely, Fukuyama had to ignore the 800 lb gorilla or two ton elephant in the room, which is Jewish Power. In the end, Jews-as-BUGS(busy urban globalist semites) did not meet Anglos-as-WASPS halfway and arrive at the Great American/Western Compromise of Liberal Democracy and Rule of Law. Instead, it was as if the lifelong, indeed history-long, dream of Jews was to take over the great goy empire and rule as shadow pharaohs and caesars, manipulating goy shills like George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden(and yes, Trump too, because, when push came to shove, he dropped his pants like the rest and took it up the arse).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, Liberal Democracy as the End of History was doomed in the long run for a variety of reasons, but it was doomed almost immediately because Jews, as the new elites, embarked on a supremacist path. What Fukuyama regarded as the final victory of the Liberal Democratic World Order with the collapse of the Soviet Union distracted sound minds from what was happening within the Western Order. Jews were taking over and for keeps, to dominate and compel the West, from US to Canada to Australia to Japan to EU, to do the bidding of the Jewish Will. While the fall of the Soviet Union was plain to see for all the world, the equally(or even more) momentous fall of the Liberal Democratic Order at the hands of Jewish Supremacists went unnoticed, and even if noticed by some, undiscussed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Unlike the death of the Soviet Union, the murder of Liberal Democracy happened behind the curtains while the outward processes continued as business-as-usual with party politics and elections. But, the real priority of both political parties was appeasing Zion. As governments filled up with whores of Jewish Power, the top appointees of deep state departments became either cuck-collaborators or Jews themselves. Jews pulled off one of the biggest political heists in history, but it happened in a Silent Revolution where the murder of true liberalism was hush-hushed, whereupon History became a competition among courtiers of various political factions to curry favors with Jews like George Soros, Sheldon Adelson, and any number of Jewish billionaires. And even if the likes of Mark Zuckerberg and Michael Bloomberg lacked the popular appeal to win presidencies, it didn’t matter as goy politicians were their whores eager to expose any orifice for a buck.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="450" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/499/721/original/2fb2da8bf1128881.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Fukuyama had revised his theory in light of what really happened, the degradation of liberal democratic norms and possibilities under Jewish Supremacist gangsterism, he could have maintained a modicum of integrity. After all, it is human to err. Besides, Fukuyama was a relatively young scholar upon gaining fame(or notoriety). But against all evidence, he chose not to name the role of Jewish Power in corrupting not only the West but Russia as well. Whatever chance Russia had for embarking on the Liberal Democratic path was squandered when Jewish globo-gangsterism looted the country.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Fukuyama chose ‘respectable’ careerism over personal courage and missed his chance to be something more than the Lance Ito of Political Science. And this chickenshit Fukuyama is better characterized as Fukyomama. No chance he will ever come clean and admit Jewish Power did most to undermine the promising Liberal Democratic consensus as a check on all powers, Gentile and Jewish. What had been an understandable blind spot for Fukuyama became a willful blindfold for Fukyomama the lowlife yellow rat.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Fukyomama is a thoroughly deracinated character in most respects, he has remained Japanese in his psychology, as Japanese genes were selected for blind obedience to higher authority. He certainly knows the truth about Jewish Power, but when faced with the choice of scholarly duties or servile obligations, he opted for the latter. (Not that the average Anglo mentality is so different. Despite the profound cultural changes in modern day Britain, the Anglo-servant mentality, the kind evinced in REMAINS OF THE DAY, is very much alive. All said and done, the Anglo Mind is always in search for a master or guv’nor.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One reason for the cuckery is careerist and economic as loss of position will mean reduced status and income. Pissing off Jewish Power is one sure way to be railroaded out of the institutions and have one’s reputation be dragged through the mud. But even if his professional career could have survived the apostasy, there would have been the emotional factor of the master-servant relationship. Fukyomama, like so many similarly oriented goyim, seems emotionally bound to Jews as the rightful masters. Despite his fallout with Charles Krauthammer, the fact is he has continued to serve as the spokesman and promoter of Jewish-supremacist globalism(much like Michio Kaku), not least against Russia and China.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">He’s been critical of certain aspects of globalism but mainly to correct them and make globalism more palatable. In this, he’s in the same league as the elephant-headed cuck Charles Murray, whose criticism of Political Correctness and Wokeness isn’t to defend and preserve the white race but to better facilitate an understanding of racial differences so that the Diversity Agenda can continue apace. Still, one senses that both men feel somewhat compromised and regretful that they cannot say more given current sacraments and taboos. But, because they are scholars whose highest ideals must be truth and integrity, their compromises must be deemed moral and intellectual failings.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="599" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/500/688/original/6548d415b94c39b3.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />Such doesn’t apply to Michael Pompeo, whose entire life has been a careerism of seeking power, serving power, and using power. So, if the Jewish Question may well have been a blind spot for Fukuyama in what seemed like a WASP-dominated society, that’s hardly the case with Pompeo whose only aspiration is to remain in the corridors of power and throw his weight around. He was a born company man. Everyone in the halls of power knows about Jewish Influence, and Pompeo’s only interest is to curry favor with the Jews to maximize his niche in the system.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, for him, it’s a case of wink-wink than any kind of blind spot(or cowardly blindfold). His recent speech was specially designed to win plaudits from Jewish Power. If Pompeo were a true patriot, he would call out on Jewish Power as the cancer eating away at the core foundations of what made America ‘America’. He would rally the country to unite against Jewish Supremacism and its evil agenda. He would expose Jewish Power as the force behind the globo-homo-ization of the military, the BLM pogroms on whites, the sponsor of Antifa thuggery, and the instigator of useless wars(except to Zion) after the end of the Cold War when peace was at hand for all mankind.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While the US sought to remain the sole superpower with the ‘End of History’, it wouldn’t have gotten mired in the Middle East without Zionic pressures. And what ruined the possibility of good US-Russian relations? Jews exploited Russian weakness to rape and plunder the economy and increasingly eyed Ukraine as a Jewish Gangster Paradise. Weak-White and Wasp appeasement to Jewish Supremacist appetites led to current crises that could totally spiral out of control, especially as Jews enjoy the blood-sport spectacle of goyim-slaughtering-goyim. But if Pompeo spoke the truth, he would be cast into the wilderness, and then, his struggle as a true patriot would be a long uphill one. A Company Man all his life, it’s just not in him to play Spartacus.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="163"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, given his political leanings and cultural values, Pompeo must be distraught with what has happened to the US under Jewish Supremacist Power. The US military is now a bastion of globo-homo and tranny degeneracy. It now teaches CRT at West Point, where Pompeo attended with honors. The national capital was set ablaze by Antifa, BLM, and Democratic mobs with the blessing and protection of the Jewish Power Network in deep state, courts, media, and police(that only do as told)? Unlike urban unrest and riots in the past, the 2020 mayhem was similar to Mao’s Cultural Revolution, an orchestrated attack on his political rivals. If the terrible riots in the 60s caught even the Democrats by surprise, the riots of 2020 had all the hallmarks of the ‘color revolution’ that Jewish-funded NGO’s and the deep state have perfected over the years. It’s evident that these scumbags will even attack the so-called Liberal West to maximize their power and destroy their enemies.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/500/730/original/0a85aff73d480e19.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="515" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Surely, Pompeo knows all this. How could he not when he was in D.C. when the Jewish elites and the Democrats(and plenty of RINOS) all colluded to turn the last year of the Trump presidency into one fiery hell? Pompeo knows but he’s so afraid of and servile to Zion that he just goes wink-wink to Jewish Power and proposes a deal whereby Jews are to re-evaluate the role of whites in the grand design. Pompeo doesn’t dare identify Jewish Power as the real enemy of the West, which it certainly is, but tries to temper the Jewish War on Whites by promising to be even bigger cucks in future Wars for Zionic Supremacy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="187"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Pompeo is a cultural conservative, he should be siding with Russia(and even China) against the now degenerate West where all the top institutions and industries celebrate black thuggery as saintliness and globo-homo degeneracy as the new spirituality. But he sucks up to Jews and endorses their Grand Narrative that Ukraine represents ‘liberal democracy’ against autocratic Russia. And Pompeo throws Taiwan into the mix with the wink-wink hint that Jews have much to gain from the vilification of China. That way, childish Americans are distracted from Jewish Evil OVER HERE and blame all problems on Chinese Evil OVER THERE. And to really sweeten his cuckery to the Jews, he includes Israel among the shining democracies that must be defended. Nothing about the plight of Palestinians, nothing about Israel having 200 nukes with technology stolen from the US, nothing about Israel aiding ISIS terrorism in Syria, nothing about Israel as the new Sodom and Gomorrah(with its endless homo celebration, which would indicate Christian Zionists are de facto Christian Sodomists), nothing about Jonathan Pollard(big hero in Israel), nothing about Jewish-Zionist subversion of US national security, and etc.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="198"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, Pompeo’s speech had nothing real to do with liberal democracy, national security, cultural sanity, Western Values, or any kind of morality or integrity. It was just a whoring out to Jewish Power. It was all wink-wink pleading and begging, which could be summed up as: “I know you Jews love to pull down our pants and fuc* us in the ass and reduce us into wussy boys groveling at the feet of homos and Negroes., and I know it tickles your bones that the once mighty white race has been reduced to the current state, BUT please don’t hurt us too badly because we are still useful in foreign affairs. Only a strong and proud White America can take it to Big Bad Russia, mindlessly support Israel-Israel-Israel(as BDS is mostly a progressive phenomenon), and blame China, like Tucker Carlson does all the time. So, I understand you Jews need to whip us once awhile to keep us in our place lest we get uppity like Trump, but don’t whip us too bad and let us play House Honkey because we, more than any other group, can deliver what you desire in foreign policy.”</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=700,quality=100,fit=scale-down/system/media_attachments/files/111/500/795/original/6099cad70a407021.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="486" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whenever whites act ‘tough’ these days, it’s as dogs and not as men. A dog may be full of bark and bite but always at the behest of its master and never against him. White men in US and EU have been stripped and whipped demographically, culturally, economically, sexually, and politically, what with even the US military, long a sanctum of patriotic/conservative honor. Yet, Pompeo sweeps all this under the rug and offers himself(and white cuck support in general) to the Grand Jewish Strategy. It’s like a black slave in the Deep South pleading with his master, “Massuh, please don’t sell me down the river. I’s will work harder to pick mo’ cotton and carry mo’ bales to fatten massuh’s pockets against dem other plantations.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In 2020, Jewish Power tore White America a new arsehole, and all we get from Trump is, “You Jews need me to defend Israel from the anti-Zionist Squad that took over the Democratic Party(ROTFL)” and from Pompeo, we get, “Don’t whip us too bad and leave us some crumbs, at least in foreign policy, because Jewish Supremacist agenda abroad cannot succeed without the White Will to Fight.” Instead of grabbing for the whip in the Jewish Supremacist hand, Pompeo’s plea is simply to be whipped a bit less.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="133"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In TEN COMMANDMENTS, there are two Moses. Before the Great Moses who finally leads his people out of Egypt, there was the Nicer Moses who pleaded with the Pharaoh to feed the slaves better because they’ll work even harder and build more for the Pharaoh’s glory. The Nicer Moses isn’t anti-slavery and totally okay with the Egyptian system of tyranny… as long as it treats the slaves somewhat better to make them work harder. Likewise, Pompeo doesn’t propose White Liberation or the deliverance of whites from Jewish Supremacism. Instead, he pleads with Jewish neo-pharaohs and neo-caesars not to lash and bash whites too badly because whites would dearly love to serve the Jews even more if the Jews tried a little bit of tenderness(like the Otis Redding song).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pwhL8_Qrapk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="The City of Sethi's Glory - The Ten Commandments 1956" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="37"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The usual ‘conservative’ or ‘conzo’ argument against the cultural degradation of the US military goes like this: “With such a military, how do we fight our enemies, such as Russia, China, Iran, or fill in the blanks.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="81"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Did it ever occur to these conzo-wonzos that the very forces that have so degraded American military culture to the current degenerate state ARE the real enemy? If John is cutting off your balls, do you say, “Without my balls, how do you expect me to fight our enemy, Bob?” Gee, moron, maybe John is the enemy because he is cutting off your balls! Why would you want to fight Bob for John when John is your primary degrader and tormenter?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But such is the mental state of white weaklings or Wheaks who act on the a priori assumption that Jews are sacred, noble, and always right… even when they are in the process of lopping off your nuts. If a bunch of Jewish gangsters stripped Pompeo naked and put him in a clown suit, burned his house and car, and made a bunch of Negro thugs rape his wife and daughter(if he has one), all he would do is, wink-wink, suggest to the Jews that they shouldn’t go too far with the humiliation because, boy oh boy, he is so eager to do all he can to make the Jewish gangsters even richer and more powerful. That’s Pompeo-ism, utterly cucked, phony, vile, and disgusting.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="32"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With so-called conservatives cucking to Jewish Power in such manner, imagine the kind of white super-cucks that infest the Democratic Party. Can anything be saved in the West as Jewish Gangster Paradise?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1PEsRn9L8Ns?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Goodbye Boris. Mike Pompeo's Ukraine doctrine w/Gonzalo Lira (Live)" width="500"></iframe></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-80915780086682927742022-12-07T17:22:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:06.923-08:00Russia and China in the Scales of Modern History and the Uncertain Future<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="294" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj-w5tKIL1ZRRYUDwkxGI5LaNz7gdUpZy3U9CETBzF7QpKXvyaU4CVB8rxHtaQg3LfidGx3MFA1qIbiYf9J-rDt8i_EMR-HEGpJ9TrR0UZny-QKwstMm4_6dQ9-tE3SbnMxUetaNisn49n9WUNd8kqkAOR5x0eQoFlVSIhVhwB7pOrOjUtmIPTlAU0qAg/w640-h294/chess%20russia.png" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="361" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhCJ3HBSGfAeYdTJwgfQYU2Z9mu5E_PhnnnawMOEi_hJRb2Bg6iTSu9E_IP4_0hlvrmkHEC5ehxq8x-UcBWVyIUC4D2GrEu_JXnBLaDK3TSiFlKR4jIWKv1aaAHZa7NbocGT2vom4bfRBJ6etJAZglhuUBJbxHFS64zZneKfiTp59PbJSuVCmpupJso9A/w640-h361/1_o0AFlENIOv3CKy_0pvQvPw.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia and China are in the news lately for obvious reasons. During the Cold War, Russia, as the core of the Soviet Union, posed the greatest challenge to US hegemony(or the greatest threat to the Free World, depending on one’s perspective). And China, though backward, represented leadership in the Third World’s challenge to both US capitalism and Soviet Revisionism. But beginning with Nixon’s meeting with Mao and culminating with new policies under Jimmy Carter and Deng Xiaoping, China moved into the US orbit, at least geo-politically. Both would cooperate against Soviet influence and even jointly aid remnants of the Khmer Rouge against Vietnamese occupation of Cambodia. And both, especially as allies of Pakistan, were eager to see Soviet Union fail in Afghanistan. And then, following the reforms and peace treaties(between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev), the Warsaw Pact dissolved and Eastern European nations ran into the arms of the West, and the Soviet system was soon to collapse, leaving the US as the undisputed and unchallenged superpower not only militarily and economically but culturally and morally.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, at the time of these momentous events, Western Europe was still recognizably overwhelmingly European and felt no shame about its ethnic or racial composition. Most people couldn’t imagine the likelihood of ‘gay marriage’ and Christianity degenerating into an idolatry of homo anus to lick, black feet to wash, and Jewish ass to kiss. If anything, Eastern Europeans who finally broke free of communist shackles probably felt liberated from the ‘Oriental Despotic’ yoke of the ‘mongoloid’ Russkies. At the time, they had no way of knowing that the New Western Values would be about ‘Diversity’, the Great Replacement(or White Nakba), cuckery, globo-homo, Negrolatry, and abandonment of civil liberties & individual freedoms to appease Jewish Power gone supremacist mad.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This was around the time when Francis Fukuyama proclaimed the End of History in an intellectual essay. Though now remembered mostly as a Neocon flunky(though he did infuriate Neocons when he disavowed the Iraq debacle), he probably didn’t write in flunky mode when the Berlin Wall came tumbling down, not least because Neocons had yet consolidated their power over American Conservatism and revealed their true face as ruthless Jewish Supremacists, whereupon free thinker(albeit a naive one) Fukuyama essentially became the flunky ‘Fukyomama’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At the time of the Berlin Wall’s fall, the US was truly at its height. The only nation touted as a potential challenger was Japan, one of the most dynamic economies of the Eighties that seemed to be dominating not only autos and electronics but computers. But even if the Japanese economy had overcome its looming problems and continued to grow apace, it was far too geo-politically limited to become a dominant world player.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="209"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for China, the hopeful view among the American elites was that it would be taken over by Hong Kong than vice versa, not least because Chinese students were so awed by all-things-western in the Eighties. Indeed, it was incredible that, just around the time the Soviet system was on its last legs, the Chinese government was met with the greatest challenge to its authority since the establishment of CCP rule. In one decade, countless Chinese educated youth marched for ‘democracy’ and freedom, not unlike what happened in South Korea in the 1980s that led to the transition from military rule to electoral politics. Even though the Tiananmen protests eventually came to naught, the momentum seemed to be on the side of the protesters(and surely the next waves of social unrest would sweep the CCP into the dustbin of history). Though the insurrection failed, future attempts would likely succeed, as democratic systems eventually won out in South Korea, Philippines, and Taiwan. Many believed the CCP regime was living on borrowed time, awaiting its doom when a burgeoning Chinese middle class, better educated and westernized, made greater demands for freedom and basic rights. CCP regime would have to adapt and fundamentally transform itself or be resigned to eventual extinction.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="359" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgHyLxZI275m5dgrvD0_5I3OBrsfZpaF3QtGY5dSkB57l9gw2VMp9-KyYR5vLHj1xxwKYdr4vkSMPkmLlEORgWSTMnRzmjM9kAuL-XMihCxdUrYkbl_wUPlV14XjnUNIG7uQLElfISElIoGDq8pq2AvV2U7LQVLggdysotuTk9XLrZFFB26iXKI3vecLA/w640-h359/end%20of%20history%20fuku.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The succession of capable but colorless technocratic leaders in China suggested such a trend. But more astute observers noticed that the regime, far from preparing for eventual surrender to the End-of-History model, was formulating a new kind of nationalism that would be inseparable from CCP rule, thereby lending the Party legitimacy and longevity way beyond ideology and economic results. (Surely, if a regime’s support relies wholly on economics, it will vanish in hard times. A spouse who married only for money will opt out when the money is gone. In contrast, a marriage based on values of love and loyalty will see it through the thick and thin. There is also the factor of respect for authority, i.e. during uncertain times, people look to a strong hand. Force as expression of resolve and conviction packs more power than than force as sign of fear and desperation, as was the case with the Shah of Iran.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="153"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There was also the Singaporean model. And from a longer historical perspective, the success of Hong Kong didn’t owe to democracy. For all its economic libertinism, its politics was essentially British imperialist autocracy. And was Japan really a democracy(in the Western multi-party sense), or was it conceived(or rigged) from the beginning to be a ‘conservative’ one-party system remaining reliably obeisant to US hegemony? (The Cold War led to a sudden reversal of fortune whereby the merchant-conservative elements and even some ‘war criminals’ were favored over the Japanese Left, initially sought out by American occupiers as reliably staunch anti-militarists. Also, the electoral system was devised to favor rural areas, giving the Liberal Democratic Party a considerable advantage, which, however, has been fading with the emptying out of rural areas in a sterile and barren where people, taking after anime and video-game characters, have lost an organic sense of humanness and nationhood.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="82"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And even though the rise of democratic politics in places like Taiwan, South Korea, and Philippines initially suggested at People Power and Nationalism, not least because the former dictatorships had been accused of serving as puppets of US neo-imperialism, it eventually dawned on astute observers, not least among the elites of China, that the advent of democracy, far from making the smaller East Asian nations more sovereign, made them even more servile and compliant to the Globalist Order dominated by the US.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Firstly, democracies are really directed by money power than people power. Profiteers will sell their nations and people down the river for more ‘muh profits’. Worse, being hollow of soul, they crave status as substitute for deep meaning, meaning they(and their bratty kids) tend to hop on the bandwagon of any trend or fashion to be with the in-crowd. Look how fast globo-homo spread among white elites in US and EU, and look how it caught on so effortlessly among the soulless elites of Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, and etc.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="148"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So-called ‘democracy’, far from representing the will of the people, came to serve as an instrument of globalist hegemony centered in NY, LA, DC, SF, London, and Tel Aviv. (Besides, what exactly is the Will of the People when the mass mind is so easily swayed by public education or official indoctrination, mass media, and entertainment or pop culture, increasingly heavily ideologized as Psy-Pop?) The all-too-predictable reactions of the globalist elites to events in Ukraine and Hungary give the game away, i.e. ‘democracy’ for them is less a principle or ideal than an instrument of power and control. Even though Viktor Orban was democratically elected by a solid majority, he is derided as an ‘autocrat’, whereas the current regime in Ukraine that was installed by a US-instigated coup that toppled a democratically elected government is praised as a ‘democracy’ that the ‘free world’ must unite to defend.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjWk-4hpwr7A-Yl5Ruar-2Ty2O2R-qqUIcsmZHzB8Gn1eD2tbb_3ZbA8fTGTRDdeYRVG7gj6Sp_XfoExzVxC_TyVZt-Pv49LRyEWC2GwCOVAw2gii02C-pHD5XNMG9D-t3hB0SR0JBkSk-_J2HVUtBtmYx8N_Jy3ZN8bXaocPNXudyb0u4F8EZnUrrpuA/w397-h640/history%20fuku.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="397" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="245"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So-called ‘free press’ is deemed essential to democracy, but the mass media in US, EU, and East Asia are controlled by a handful of conglomerates. Recent events show the media are less about transparency than manipulation of news for ethnic interests and officially sanctioned idolatry. (In the US, there is also the problem of ethno-monopoly as Jews control nearly all the media and Big Tech, directly or indirectly.) Thus, even national will is distorted and corrupted by disingenuous propaganda. In many cases, the elites don’t have to forcibly enforce the globalist agenda because the gullible masses are easily buttered and buggered up with something like globo-homo agenda via TV shows, commercials, and pop music. Evidence sadly suggests that only a handful of people around the world have any capacity for mental autonomy or cultural curiosity, and most of what passes as ‘values’ in the Free World is whatever filth emanating from the urban centers of the US, typically worthless as vapid entertainment, but then the West has given up on highbrow art, serious thought, maturity, liberty, and even tolerance & free speech. So-called ‘tolerance’ for homosexuality really amounts to submission to compulsory homo-celebration. And ‘anti-racism’ essentially means blacks are above the law as the idolatrous pets controlled by Jews. It means you must favor and praise blacks even if they turn cities into new Detroits and Baltimores. And of course, ‘antisemitism’ these days includes any noticing of the corruption and abuses of Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Surely, even Francis Fukuyama in his private thoughts must know that so-called Liberal Democracy is in serious trouble, in no small part due to the rise of quasi-spiritual taboos that made free speech and discourse of controversial topics very difficult in the West, which is like a doctor forbidden to diagnose certain diseases. What good is a liberal democracy that cannot address issues pertaining to the biggest power in the West, which is Jewish? What use is a liberal democracy that cannot name the biggest endangerment to the day-to-day well-being of many in the West, which would be black thuggery? What use is a liberal democracy when one cannot freely discuss the corrosive influence of homos and trannies on culture and values? What use is a liberal democracy that mandates that everyone mindlessly chant the slogan ‘diversity is our strength’ and smears as ‘far right’ or ‘xenophobic’ any skepticism of mass immigration of foreigners whose presence fundamentally alters the national character, ethnic and cultural.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="69"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A true liberal democracy should always favor the integrity of freedom and courage over taboos of submission, but the neo-sacraments related to ‘racism’, ‘antisemitism’, and ‘homophobia’ have made it virtually impossible to speak candidly of the ills of the West. Worse, the West even exports these taboos onto other parts of the world, as if ‘white guilt'(as formulated by Jews) should be the mono-standard for all the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="152"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Jewish Factor is key to understanding the nature of ‘white guilt’ in the Current Year. After all, given white/western domination over much of the world in the modern era, whites could theoretically be made to feel guilty just about anything. Whites could be guilt-baited for what they did to Philippines and Vietnam. Or what was done to Guatemala and, more recently, to the Arab World, not least the Palestinians. But notice that US embassies around the world aren’t flying ‘We are Sorry for Vietnam’ or ‘Vietnamese Lives Matter’ banners. Nor are they flying Palestinian-Lives-Matter banners. Or white-guilt banners about the century of humiliation forced on China. Or white-guilt banners about what the Anglos did to India or the Australian Aborigines. Or, even about the American Indians, the most tragic people of US History by far. No, the official propaganda of the US is mostly about Holocaustianity, BLM, and Globo-Homo.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, this phenom called ‘white guilt’ is not the product of genuine conscience and moral agency. It’s not a case of whites, as free individuals, remembering their dark aspects of their past and atoning for what they deem to be ‘historical sins’. Rather, it’s about whites taking mental and emotional cues from Jews as to what to feel ‘guilty’ about. And that’s why most whites in US, Canada, and EU feel zero sympathy for what the Jewish-led West did to Syria, Libya, or Yemen but have conniptions about George Floyd and want to wash Negro feet, that is when they aren’t lighting candles to Anne Frank while ‘twerking’ their ass to the latest globo-homo tranny-wanny craze.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhDnukk2HBr8emG311038LHhW5v6lT-XE9HqmDz6b--bUhPZghjp2oYlWc55Xcm51jtMdoOgu25AX1HD1KNNeaD-wEkoveVPIcTvU8ejULdFj97ScqzuSVUzGyI9p_8qNxrFBbe8W7CQOSJKov3tVUVp3u_leLIB9Aa3dqqlRtsFP9JTTnFzXmNHrsCrw/w469-h640/toot%20nut.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="469" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In other words, White Morality, as officially preached by G.A.E(Global-American Empire) is bogus bunk. It boils down to the rule of “Jewish Masters say, white goyim obey”. With the ascendancy of Jewish Power, whites with moral autonomy were purged in favor of whites with moral dependency. Whites with moral autonomy see the world in their own way and draw their own conclusions. Jimmy Carter has some of this(more than most politicians) as he could clearly see the injustice of what has been done to Palestinians in West Bank. But such whites have been purged from most institutions and industries. Not only do Jews and their minions do most of the hiring and firing but they exert a wide range of legal and financial pressures on entities they don’t directly control. And so, most white elites today are moral dependents who reliably look over their shoulder to see if it’s okay with Jews.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Russia and China didn’t exist, History would be game over. Not with Fukuyama’s triumph of Free Market Liberal Democracy but with Jewish supremacist gangsterism with blacks as the holy thug and homos as the magic fairy. The only civilization that might, at least in the long run, stand apart might be India with its rich history/heritage, huge population, and considerable land mass. But Hindu power would be a local matter as Hindu-ness isn’t for export. Besides, Asian-Indians who’ve gained global prominence did so as agents, compradors, and collaborators of the Western Empire. In the US, Hindus serve Jews. Hindus did challenge Jewish Power in South Africa and had their asses handed to them by Jews with far greater firepower.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for the white race, it is now a total disgrace. Anglos are almost invariably Anglo-cucks to Jews in US, Canada, Australia, and UK. Ireland is now just mini-Britain with the same globo-homo and Negrolatry nuttery. Germans have accepted eventual ethnic suicide as Holocaustianity and eternal-German-guilt are their religions. Scandinavians are soulless and sterile, resigned to seeing their nations overrun by Diversity. Italians, Greeks, and Spaniards are too confused, corrupt, and craven to get their act together. Half of Eastern Europe are totally servile to the richer West, and nationalist elements there simply don’t have the power and depth to resist the Jewish-run Western Influence for long.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="60"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Japan and smaller East Asian nations, much like white nations, are soulless and sterile. They’ve been severed spiritually and culturally from their roots. They live in IKEA-land of empty consumerism, and their status-obsessed elites imitate whatever is trendy in the West as the metropole. Latin America is as hopeless as ever. Middle East will never get its act together.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Some surmise the future of the West(at least in Europe) may be Islamic due to mass immigration and spiritual conviction among Muslims, but Arab birthrates aren’t what they used to be, and many children of Islam in the West turn to BLM and globo-homo; their main idea of culture is rap music and waving homo flags. If any race is likely to take over Europe, it’s black Africans who have super high-birthrates in their home countries and are near-worshiped by whites as badass rappers, athletes, and studs. Also, Jewish-promoted BLM makes blacks holy in ways Arabs will never be, and that means it’d be ‘racist’ for whites to say NO MORE to black African immigration(though they are still allowed to grumble about the influence of Islam). Still, as blacks are lower in IQ and act like jive-ass buffoons, they won’t be coming up with the next big ideas. They will merely be used as tool of Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="136"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, a future without Russia and China is really the End of History, with Jewish supremacist gangsterism ruling the world. Whites have fully accepted their roles as cuck-dogs of Jews. Blacks will serve as muscle for Jews and intimidate white males into wussydom and colonize white wombs. Arabs will remain divided and hopeless, and Latin America will continue as the backyard of the US. And Japan and small East Asian nations will imitate the West like monkeys and dogs. India might withstand the Jewish-dominated world order but never challenge it. It will collaborate with Jews and, at best, prevent India from completing coming under Western Influence, like the pathetic Japan of late. Iran on its own would be doomed. Jewish gangster supremacism as the End of History would eventually prevail upon the isolated and strangulated Iran.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="564" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_WJN_BlAqPg55RLFZOetopyEXpuvoBs_driQbjR-KaFDu3LFxpUcTqOBOzvH-RqkaJO1tRKTkS6uCNcCUHvj3KTJrqftThVk56mgscSJ4OiwHCcQbSwW8vPKVNA2joWbm6DMdBgwFwPjpT8hby3fT0VkDxDBDrOvTDBajyzsHnFYTSG55RVmt2v71vg/w640-h564/jewish%20gang.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="239"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But there is China and Russia, and they do have a chance of not only withstanding the End of History but pushing back, possibly inspiring and emboldening others to do likewise. Jewish Power obviously can’t hates this reality, while whites, as cucky-wucks, naturally parrot the Jewish Line. Paleo-Conservatives like Pat Buchanan are of two minds. As they grew up cheering for US power(that was synonymous with white Christian might), they’ve been habituated to root for Americanism at every turn and have a knee-jerk animus against any rival power. On the other hand, they must know the US is now the satanic G.A.E.(global American empire), which stands for Jewish Supremacism, Negrolatry, Homo-celebration, the Great Replacement(or White Nakba), and pathetic white cuckery. Because people like Pat Buchanan spent entire lifetimes defending the position of what they deemed to be “God’s Country”, they have difficulty adjusting to the new reality. In contrast, young arch-conservatives like Nick Fuentes have no qualms about rooting for Russia-China against the US as they grew up in an America gone to pots of moral degeneracy, white cuckery, and cultural retardation. For all of Buchanan’s argument in favor of ‘republic, not an empire’, he came of age when America’s prestige was bound to its role as the Good Empire against the Evil Empire of the Soviet Union. Thus, the Cold War mentality still informs much of his worldview.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia and China can withstand the End of History(or Beginning of Idolatry) for several reasons. The most obvious is the land mass and population. Russians, though dwarfed by the Chinese demographics, is the largest of any European nation, and Russia has plenty of space to grow the population if natalism were to take off. China is the most populous country and one of the largest countries. China and Russia alone constitute a world unto their own. And both populations are reasonably talented. Russians, though perennial underachievers, have surprised the world time and time again in military and space technology and possess vast amounts of raw resources and then some. Mainland China has been johnny-come-lately to modernity and industrialism due to any number of reasons but has grown rapidly since the reforms in the 1980s.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="257"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia and China together on a map look formidable, especially if in alliance. Yet, looks can be deceiving. Despite their rich heritages and great power status through long stretches of history, both were also known for weakness and vulnerability, not least due to the unruliness of the vast territories. Before Russians got control of Siberia, southern Muslim territories, and parts of Eastern Europe, they were vulnerable to attack from all sides. And for long periods of Chinese history, much of what is recognized as China wasn’t even under Chinese control. In these areas, barbarian hordes could amass to strike at the heart of Chinese civilization. The rise of advanced technology finally sealed the advantage in favor of civilizations, but it was another story throughout pre-modern history. In a world of swords, arrows, spears, and axes, barbarians could fight just as well, or even better as every male member was trained for combat and pillage whereas most folks in civilization were peasants, craftsmen, or traders. The only ways pre-modern civilizations could defend themselves from barbarian attacks were strength in numbers, walled defenses, and organization. But in times of crises, order broke down and created a vacuum for barbarian invaders to fill. (Their differing responses to the barbarian/foreign threats are rather telling of their respective national characters: The Chinese doubled down on civilizational projects, like building massive walls, whereas Russians out-barbarized the barbarians, i.e. attacked and fought even harder, but then Russians were later to come to civilization and retained more of a culture of virility.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, it’s not surprising that the great land masses between Russia and China were often sources of dread and sorrow than pride and glory, seen more as curse than blessing; indeed for the longest time, the vast expanses were claimed by neither side and existed as frontiers of the uncharted. Of course, today, any Russian or Chinese perusing a world map will feel pride in their territorial claims. Gone are the days when barbarian hordes descended from the vast unknown like swarms of locusts.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="525" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmBcrge0wjJUOk5OfRMSvVIptj6q1d9zH_6E5owQ_z2_YpbLrHDS1y2FOtKdHcsUxM6rVVCXTKznFV7zVZQ0dgyK5JqDICtTJtD1HM1fI-mKxrB_hHFEUufiqVY69SW13EfKpab9Y2OPHLtiZTA26W7fNOUW-IAgtxhjE_WOw4zvYJZ6gVA0CJyYyW1g/w640-h525/china%20covid.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" />One shared trauma of China and Russia has to do with the Mongol invasions. Though some in Russia/Europe have tended to conflate the Mongols and Chinese as one(as both are part of the East Asiatic race), Chinese dreaded the barbarian horsemen so adept at archery. In times of dynastic decay or political tumult in China, Mongols took advantage and once even managed to conquer all of China(and expand its borders). Incredibly, the Mongols even crossed Siberia and invaded Russia, even reaching parts of Poland. If not for the land mass and population of Russia to serve as shock absorber, who knows how the Mongols might altered the history of Europe. They might have outdone the Huns who even sacked Rome on occasion.<br />Prior to industrialization, it was no mean feat for any civilization to maintain control over vast areas. With transport and communication based solely on foot and hooves, stationing large numbers in far flung areas was prohibitively expensive, and besides, the sheer distance might even embolden the local commander to break free and set up his own kingdom.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But the dynamic changed with the advent of modern technology, a total winner for civilizations. With something like modern technology, the Romans would have crushed the barbarians completely, and Rome never would have been sacked. (To be sure, much of the Modern West is now being invaded by black savages and Third World semi-barbarians, but this is due to the loss of civilizational pride and racial will. The Modern West has the material power to hold back the hordes many times over but lacks the will as its soul has been colonized by Jewish globalist virus that reviles as ‘racist’ any desire among whites for self-preservation.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="220"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Historically speaking, it’s easy to overrate the power of the Anglos, Chinese, and Russians based on geography alone. One might think they gained great swathes of territory because they were so tough. In truth, Russia is vast because it expanded mostly into empty territory, especially Siberia. When Russians were up against the populated western territories, it struggled to hold its own. Likewise, much of China still remains sparsely populated because the vast lands are barely fit for habitation. China didn’t so much conquer those areas as claim them as there were hardly anyone to say otherwise. Anglos were surely the luckiest people in history as they stumbled upon entire continents in the Americas and Australia underpopulated with pushover savages. Such easy pickings. North America turned out to be the most fertile land mass in the world with excellent climate and unimaginable amounts of natural resources(and lots of natural beauty). In contrast, when Anglos gained mastery over places like India, they could rule but not keep forever. Too many Hindus, who were also immune to Old World diseases and quick learners with a deep history of their own. If Brits had played it right, they could have colonized and kept vast swaths of Africa, but by then their birthrates had cratered and their imperial conviction called into doubt.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of the three peoples, clearly the Anglos were the most dynamic, adventurous, industrious, and innovative. Still, Anglo power owed in large part to the fortune of having come upon vast amounts of prime real estate. They struck the gold mine of history, and there was no way men with tomahawks or boomerangs in the Americas and Australia were going to keep the Anglos at bay.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="185"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anglo power was great but not invincible, though Anglo character + American material wealth almost made Anglo-Americans nearly invincible, at least for a time. For most of British History, Anglos played defense against Continental Europe and then the delicate game of balance-of-powers. Anglos preferred easier pickings away from Continental affairs. Oceans, once mastered, were open territories for discovery and trade, and non-European lands were targeted for their relative emptiness and/or backwardness, though in many cases Europeans voyaged to distant lands not to conquer and subdue but to admire, learn, and trade; in time their enterprise and curiosity expanded their knowledge to grow in strength, enabling them to defeat the mightiest non-Western civilizations with relative ease. It was less trouble to take over some part of Africa, Asia, or Oceania than become overly entangled in European affairs, especially as certain Continental powers were the equal of Britain.<br />There were relatively weaker European states that Britain could have dominated; but just as Britain sought alliances to prevent the preeminence of any single European power, Europeans sought alliances to keep Britain from gaining a foothold on the Continent.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="60"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">British Empire was vast but hardly cohesive as slivers of British elites ruled over diverse bunch of nonwhites. As such, much of the energy of the empire was expended on keeping control, which turned into a game of whack-a-mole once the various subject populations, taking inspiration from European nationalism and race-ism, demanded independence and autonomy based on native racial pride.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="468" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiMFtlIO9FIE1ozIGye_lPgdQgixSqzXp0v1kjuyijHg27uPBN1VVbQw2rKg41AzEeFZHtg2fDaexVvbz5RDIHzlOmej9NxxejwLFRIJiOf0jStUgevBHNLvUZbe9qhVy290wjQCTl8P1SFlZLetOGUOWoYYeRrYJcRdhG2qDbPdfRcsBEF6IEnSmm7ww/w640-h468/us%20hypo.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, there was the United States. A cohesive empire-sized nation-state, its white population felt as citizens and patriots than as subjects. The American Civil War notwithstanding, the US government didn’t need to expend(or waste) inordinate amount of energy to keep the system together, and White America based on the Anglo-American template grew to great power, eventually expanding overseas. Unlike Britain that couldn’t hope to conquer or control the European Continent, the US could(and controls Europe to this day). To be sure, World War II and the implosion of Germany as the premier Continental power was key to US hegemony. And the threat of the Soviet Union made Europeans grudgingly compliant to US military presence, and then, over the years, the elites and masses in Europe, like those in Japan, just became accustomed to US power as integral to the way of the world. (And when Anglo-Americans lost out to Jews in the US, the whole thing fell onto the lap of Zion.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In some ways, the 21st century is more normal from a broader historical perspective because of the global arraignment of power. China was the core civilization of East Asia over millennia. Though never a world power, it was a great power. (Mongols did however use China as the springboard for world power, but it failed to last.) Throughout history, China proved to have great absorptive qualities. Mongols and later Manchus who conquered China were ‘assimilated’, and Mongolia’s independence from China only happened because of Soviet influence. Invading China was, in the long run, like food invading the stomach. The invading force got digested.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="102"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, Mongols and Manchus were relatively backward and could only be impressed with Chinese civilization, much like the Germanic Barbarians who sacked Rome but then adopted its legacy as their own. But the dynamics changed in the 19th century when, for the first time, China was invaded and subjugated by peoples more advanced(and, more importantly, continually advancing at an ever faster rate). And it wasn’t just one bunch of invaders but several, with industrial Japan joining the imperialist club, though the multiplicity of invaders prevented an outright takeover by a single power, as the Manchus had achieved centuries earlier.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="111"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Unlike in the past with barbarian invaders, Chinese couldn’t just run out the clock and rely on time to serve as enzyme on the invaders. History was moving fast, and there was a real chance that China could be shattered into pieces like Humpty Dumpty, never to be put together again. Mere patience and resilience weren’t going to save China this time. Things had to change fundamentally, and Chinese had to swallow their pride(of conceit as the ‘Middle Kingdom’) and learn from the ‘foreign devils’. It was the only hope of recuperating from the shameful role of the ‘Sick Man of Asia’, kicked around even by Japanese ‘dwarfs’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the first half of the 20th century, China’s attempt to get its act together was met with one obstacle after another(internal and external), and then came the horrors of Japanese invasion. And then, the communists came to power, and it seemed as though Modern China finally stood up… except Mao had nutty ideas and brought upon more horrors(during peacetime). While Red China gained a measure of respect in the world, it remained an economic basket case and hopelessly behind in technology. It was only after Mao’s death and the reforms under Deng that China finally began to get things right, more or less, and then the economy took off. In the 70s, its economy was smaller than that of Canada, but it is now considered the second biggest economy in the world(though in per capita terms still behind many nations). In the 21st century, China has returned to the historical norm as a great power, something the Chinese had been striving to regain since the mid-19th century when things could only get much worse before getting better.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgtajiQinYg2luz1Rp0TcEeEixfjnBNAJk5UROH-choPHBMi3H9_whbfDAB-2L3u_MLBYWKcvv_KNIQ-WmvL2cDviTS7BVXmE6GaDUOrqqeqOguxGUqmkTK2YZc857bHpRsf-lZxeWd1DS9qH4bUni5ju1GEVIUcUdCZCCNkM9dp1Oe6eqCaRwbVh5GEA/w561-h640/pizza.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="561" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="192"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia too has regained its normal place in the world in the 21st century. Traditionally, Russia has been the more conservative power in Europe, more grounded in earth, spirituality, and community. Though part of Europe, it was also a world unto itself. Janus-like, its one-half looked to the temporality of the West as model while the other half drew inspiration from the Siberian East of eternal nature. And if Western Europe’s main influence was the Roman Empire and the neo-paganism of the Renaissance, Russia’s main cultural influence was Christian Byzantine(which more successful suppressed the classical pagan past). The pagan element in Russian culture comes from folklore, reverence for nature, and sense of earth and primal elements. This aspect of Russia kept it relatively backward vis-a-vis the West but also more stable and ‘soulful’ in certain respects. But all hell broke loose with the debacle of World War I that led to the Bolshevik Revolution that, overnight, turned Russia from the conservative reservoir of Europe into the cauldron of Revolution. It was as if the world was turned upside down. Russia went from the brake to the accelerator of History.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Revolution resulted in both awesome achievements and catastrophic calamities, until its fire eventually burned out and the system collapsed from bureaucratic inertia and lack of individual initiative. And then, it seemed as though Russia was finished, and indeed its fate would have been dire if it continued to be headed by globalist flunkies like Boris Yeltsin. But, if the Soviet Union ultimately failed in most things, it did succeed in developing a talented deep state that outlived the system and formed the basis of the nationalist revival by means of byzantine intrigue, which continues to this day.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Today, Russia has taken up the mantle of traditionalism, though given the sheer craziness of the current West, it doesn’t take too much to be deemed ‘conservative’ or even ‘far right’. If you believe Hungarians should preserve their own nation, acknowledge Christianity’s centrality in European spirituality, and/or oppose ‘gay marriage’, you are deemed ‘extreme’ by standards of the nutty Jewish-controlled West. (But then, the supposedly anti-nationalist West is totally zealous in its support for Jewish tribalism, Jewish nationalism, and even Jewish supremacism, aka the Wars for Israel and neo-apartheid in West Bank. On the one hand, the West undermines Ukrainian nationalism by spreading globo-homo and Negrolatry, but on the other hand, it arms and supports the most ultra-nationalist Sub-Nazi types in Ukraine against Russia. It goes to show that current ‘Western Values’ are premised on little more than “Will it appease the Jews?” The very people who harp about ‘Nazis’ and ‘white supremacists’ will support Naziesque elements if it serves Jewish interests, among which anti-Russia agenda is near the top.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Today’s Russia is hardly conservative by traditional standards but is deemed ‘ultra-conservative’ for the mere fact that it doesn’t celebrate homo fecal-penetration as one of the seven wonders of the world. All things are relative, and relative to the current West, Russia has reverted to its traditional position as the conservative anchor of Europe. With the rise of India as well, 21st century is indeed heading toward a return to historical normality where great civilizations once again take their ‘rightful’ places in the world. (Iran or Persia, as a key ally of Russia and China, may also grow more prominent as a regional hegemon despite the hostility of the West.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="107"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The past few centuries were historically abnormal because Western Europeans(who also colonized the Americas and gained from its vast riches) catapulted past all other civilizations. They outpaced the rest of humanity to such a degree that, for a time, history became a matter of the “West and the Rest”. It didn’t matter if Hindus, Muslims, and Chinese had great civilizations and heritages of their own. In time, they also got conquered and subjugated, along with the primitive folks and savage races. Whether you were an ass-naked Bushmen in South Africa or a learned Brahmin in India, you both had to bow down to British Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="186"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The great civilizations had low regard for savages and barbarians, but as The Rest dominated by the West, both the civilized and the uncivilized outside Europe and North America came under Western Imperialism, and for a time in the 20th century there was a sense of solidarity among the peoples of ‘color’, like at the Bandung Conference under Sukarno. (Incredibly, the concept of the Third World even came to include Latin America despite its having come into existence as part of European Empire-building. But lagging behind North America & Europe and with huge mixed-raced & non-white populations, it too often came to be regarded as part of the Rest than the West.) But this was a historical anomaly, and among the Rest, some peoples were of more advanced cultures and better poised to make progress and emulate the West than other peoples for reasons ranging from geographic to cultural to genetic. And fast-forward to today, China and India have made far more progress than Africa. China is an industrial powerhouse, and tech-savvy & financial-minded Hindus are not just spreading out across Africa but Europe and America.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpE_q9gXn27K-g3pJ8aHqGQa0bIR0qz-wKsfx19_laeAa92EDFX8ZK255ryGtVwYpYnGCgrzsjrfSqG7RtRi9ugq0oRHczDiok1qG3x2mcnX3rvvvSYXRTLDV12Mavq20MvgxHf7FCWJucMGM4U0xyUkXhTLwvwgVwafdd9wE4vYObrKjdpTjboIPCRw/w634-h640/bandera.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="634" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the 20th Century, there were certain striking parallels between Russia and China, as well as stark contrasts. The most obvious similarities were in the sizes of their land mass, their relative backwardness, their titanic struggles with smaller but better organized nations, and their experience of communism. But early in the 20th century, the two civilizations confronted one another as rivals, even enemies. Russia was a co-imperialist aggressor against China along with the Western Powers and the US(that affected a certain neutrality, if only to grab its share from the ravenous Europeans and increasingly the Japanese as well). Indeed, at the turn of the century, China had most to fear from Russia. Whereas the great Western Powers came by boat and occupied coastal areas, Russia descended from above and had already taken a huge chunk of the Manchu-Han empire. To this day, the reason why Manchuria is denied access to the Pacific owes to Russian redrawing of the map, so as to link up with Korea. Later in the century, Japan would become China’s greatest threat, but no power was dreaded more than Imperial Russia by China, at least prior to the Russian Revolution. (Later, it was fear of Soviet Russia that made Mao rethink China’s relations with the US.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To an extent, the Chinese hoped that other ‘foreign devils’ would check Russian advances(that wrested Mongolia away from China and eyed the Northwest territories as well, a good chunk of which had already been bitten off). Who knows how China’s relations with Russia and the West might have panned out if World War I didn’t happen, but it happened, and it hastened the downfall of the Tsarist system, followed by the collapse of the short-lived Provisional Government and the rise of the Bolsheviks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For the Chinese, it was a great fortune as the Bolshevik Regime staked its moral claim as a revolutionary force at war with capitalist exploitation, of which imperialism was a larger symptom. Though the Bolsheviks continued to act like imperialists, they were ideologically at odds with the capitalist imperialists, who were also colored by a racial view of the world where nonwhites were deemed more or less inferior to the white race.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Suddenly, the empire that China had feared the most and lost the most territory to became the biggest inspiration for national renewal, social revolution, and resistance against the Western Imperialists and Japan, then rather friendly with the Europeans and Americans(who saw utility in Japan’s role against China and Russia). Though the KMT regime that ruled(or represented) China until 1949 turned staunchly anti-Soviet(though its founder Sun Yat-sen looked favorably upon the Soviet model), the Chinese Communist movement survived near-extinction during the Long March. Though the communist remnants in Yenan seemed hopelessly marginalized, they had the protection of the Soviet Union as the ruling KMT regime had yet to consolidate control over all of Chinese territory(just like Assad of Syria has tenuous control over his country, much of which is still occupied by US, Turkey, and their proxies).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">More significantly perhaps, the dreamy-eyed sympathy of leftist Western intellectuals who, especially in the Depression years, came to espouse Marxism, if only because the other rising force at the time of crisis was fascism. Chinese communists played on this sympathy for all it was worth, presenting themselves as well-meaning social reformers than radical hotheads. They certainly did a number on Edgar Snow who wrote RED STAR OVER CHINA, comparable to John Reed’s TEN DAYS THAT SHOOK THE WORLD that dramatized the Bolshevik Revolution for Western intellectuals and artists.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As an irony of history, despite Chinese Communists’ stance against imperialism, they relied on imperialism to come to power. The Chinese, like the Ancient Romans, believed in the strategy of making barbarians fight barbarians. And lucky for Mao, the rivalry among imperialist powers(and between Imperial Japan and the KMT regime that bore the brunt of Japanese advances) created the paths for the eventual CCP victory. Bolshevik Russia’s influence(anti-imperialist in rhetoric but neo-imperialist in practice) provided sanctuary for Mao’s forces from KMT’s attacks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But more significantly, imperialist Japan destroyed KMT dominance in China, and then Japan militarism was destroyed by the US and USSR, empires in their own right, leaving a giant power vacuum in China for the CCP to fill within a few years. It was one of the great ironies of history. Mao could form the most independent and sovereign Chinese state in the second half of the 20th century because imperialist powers created the conditions that favored a movement like Mao’s, which stood back from the general melee and then swooped in for the kill just when all the other powers were either defeated, exhausted, or disinterested.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgnGyVELyWRnrup45dQ5NqcO3wZB0zkkUScf_CpPnCI2scau8s7VWE2lCLN3s0fwMHQx8z0GuAp4dgHIFdxqPaSKcusYZQrttON0LBaNsfXUoA7yHcEzESnVzLMRMZGmmH1e2qKDmRQfwVPIXsBteO_iJ-5zo4O2zAIrzH9auTP0LYP4yznL2F_1wcFLw/w583-h640/alina.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="583" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If, in the first stage of imperialism, the various European powers, Russia, Japan, and the US came to a mutual understanding to carve up China like a cake, the fallout between Japan and the West turned the whole Pacific area into one big struggle for hegemony between Japan and the West(and to a lesser extent Russia, which would have its hands full with the German invasion). CCP had much to gain from this clash of empires if the cards were played right, and it sure did.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="343"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s often been said by Mao sympathizers that the reason why the communists eventually prevailed is because they appealed to the peasantry whereas KMT power and support were concentrated in cities. After all, China was overwhelmingly agricultural at the time. But it is false. Through most of history, most people were rural folks, but power always rested on who conquered and/or controlled cities. All throughout Chinese history, power was held in the cities. While the countryside had many more people, they were ill-informed, without political consciousness, and only aware of village interests. Even Mao as a young man(born to a farmer) didn’t know of the Empress Dowager’s death until several years later. When the Bolsheviks won the Civil War, the great majority of Russians were farming folks, not city folks, but the Reds defeated the Whites because they held the cities.<br />Cities are crucial because it’s where the power is concentrated, where masses are organized, where communication is most effective, where people are most likely to gain political consciousness. In the end, the CCP won the Civil War by taking over cities. Of course, Chinese communists recruited many troops from the peasantry, but the reason for KMT’s demise owed to erosion of its authority due to Japan’s invasion, without which the CCP had no chance of taking power even if it had recruited more hicks to take up arms. Likewise, while the Viet Cong did an effective job of tormenting the Saigon regime and US troops, they couldn’t take over the country. The final push from urban-centered forces in Hanoi ultimately united the south with the north. Some may point to Fidel Castro’s ragtag guerrilla army that took over Cuba, but the real problem for the Batista regime wasn’t the lack of sufficient manpower and materials in urban areas to repel the guerrillas. What it lacked crucially was the support, respect, and morale among the urbanites, many of whom were more than happy to see the US puppet regime toppled and exiled.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One striking similarity between Russia and China in the 20th century was the relative backwardness vis-a-vis highly anxious and ambitious smaller powers. Had World War I been purely between Germany and Russia, Germany would have won handily. Though disadvantaged in population, land mass, and resources, Germany was far more industrialized, better-organized, and more effectively ruled than Russia, then semi-industrialized and shapeless in authority and control. In World War I, both Russia and Germany lost for different reasons. Russia lost to Germany and then Germany lost to the combined forces of France, UK, and US.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="216"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In late 19th century, German elite opinion regarding Russia was divided between constructive & peaceful cooperation AND aggression & conquest of Russian empire’s western territories to secure Germany’s future as a great power. There was even a racial element to such a view. Just like John Wayne said the backward American Indians didn’t deserve to have America for themselves, Germans believed they could do more with the Russian land & resources than the slovenly Slavs — after all, the Tsarist ruling elites and many of the industrialists and traders who’d done much to develop Russia were Germans or German-in-origin. (Today, Jews feel as the rightful owners of Russia and are busy hatching plans to ‘decolonize’ Russia, a euphemism for dividing-and-conquering Russia as a colony of Jewish supremacism, much like the Anglosphere World.) Just like Anglos believed they were more deserving of North America and Australia than the backward natives who’d forever subsisted at the savage level — they felt likewise about Mexicans who failed to develop what would eventually become the Southwest territories of the United States — , there was a strain of German thought with imperial-colonialist designs on the East(and of course, Russians felt the same way about the backward and sparsely populated indigenous folks of Siberia and Alaska, once Russian territory).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="105"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There have been three competing ideas on geographic ownership or entitlement. One says the people who happen to live on the land are the rightful owners. This notion gained legitimacy especially with the rise of agriculture and settled societies, a departure from the ways of nomadic-primitive peoples who were constantly at war over turf, much like territoriality among wolves or lions. The notion persisted even in defeat to greater powers. When savage/primitive tribes fight for turf, the winning side takes total possession in a zero-sum struggle, that is until it is beaten and/or expelled by another tribe or just moves onto greener pastures.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgA24e0Y3epmypgfjR9v13GPG5vwpoEJwVOLLRUx6abphaehESO9BcCMpdpqyXmmRg2Jc-x5HJI6fG-15u8ZJf6eEVPRO885WB1DE59axTFjXMhQ_vQ88xtflRKw8IqALiA1ajZufU79tFSNg3E61FmN4mE7PdL7iw6PmNokHMLKtLPKxsDl3qjhRJNDQ/w468-h640/ukraine%20gay.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="468" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, under an imperial system of civilizations, even the victorious power could acknowledge the special unity of culture and territory of the conquered peoples. So, even though the Romans defeated the Greeks and enforced their will on the political and military level, they nevertheless acknowledged a certain ownership right among the Greeks. Despite Roman hegemony, Hellas was still Greek in history, ancestry, and culture. Romans also acknowledged this of Syria and Palestine, much like the British, even as conquerors over India and Egypt, respected the historical, ancestral, and cultural claims of the natives.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such notion differs from the simple might-is-right view of territoriality where the land simply belongs to whomever is most powerful; even as the imperial or hegemonic power insists on enforcing its demands(of administration, taxation, stationing or recruiting troops), it doesn’t deny the deeper cultural link between the land and the core native population. (It was more complicated with Jews because their claim to Land was via Heaven, i.e. it wasn’t merely the land of their ancestors or the land below their feet but specially promised to them by God Himself. Thus, even after eons of exile and diaspora, they were always homeward bound, like Paul Simon, toward Zion.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="83"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The third concept of territoriality is somewhat similar to the might-is-right outlook among savage-warrior tribes but with a civilizational twist. Whereas mere pride of victory was sufficient for the savage tribe in the landgrab, an advanced civilization may ‘morally’ justify its conquest and total takeover on the basis of its superior ability and knowledge to do more with the land, resulting in achievements that may benefit a larger share of mankind. Such mindset resulted from the clash of advanced civilization and primitive folks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, whereas the Western approach to the Middle East, India, and China was one of hegemony, somewhat similar to Roman rule over Egypt and Judea, the Anglo drive into North America and Australia was predicated on total takeover. The native peoples were deemed too sparse, primitive, and backward to merit rightful ownership of their native lands. Russians felt much the same way about the Eskimo-like primitives across vast Siberia. Whereas Russians only ruled over Latvians, Poles, Georgians, and the like, they grabbed most of Siberia simply as more Russian territory.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In some cases, the native folks would simply be absorbed into the conquering culture. Or they might be limited to protected zones(or ‘reservations’ as they came to be called in the US). Or, it could be settled with genocide. At any rate, unlike the case of the stronger savages beating the weaker savages and calling it a day, the conquering civilization sought moral justifications for its actions. It could be argued, for example, if not for the Anglo colonization of North America, it would be a vast wilderness with aimless half-naked savages stuck in the stone age. Still, it comes with a bad taste because civilization made progress via ruthless violence.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Anglos had no roots in the American Soil, the justification became largely spiritual(God’s country, the new Eden), ideological(an experiment in liberty and democracy), and/or economic(more opportunity for wealth). Arguably, the greatest historical ‘crime’ in the past 500 yrs happened in North America because entire tribal cultures were effectively erased and driven to extinction. In contrast, the natives of South America remained demographically significant as pure-bloods or mestizos. And the Russians were never so thorough in dealing with the native folks in Siberia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, the people who may have committed the ‘greatest historical crime’ also achieved the most and created a new order that much of the world came to respect, emulate, and wanted to become a part of(via immigration). Perhaps, it explains the nature of Anglo neurosis, a strange combination of both fulsome pride and excess guilt, especially as it continued to serve as a template for Anglo-America’s policies regarding the Other, ranging across new variations of Cowboys-and-Indians in East Asia, Southeast Asia, Middle East, and North Africa. Still, the ruthless invader & destroyer of millions were wrapped in the rhetoric of ‘democracy’ and ‘rules-based order’. In a perverse paradox of history, America’s greatest moral(or moralistic) claim is inseparable from its greatest ‘crime’ because the creation of the ‘greatest nation in the world’ required a territorial blank slate. With Indians out of the way, Anglos were far less hampered than the Spanish in Latin America.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="249"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/6710951177960789123#" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/6710951177960789123#"><img border="0" class="aligncenter" height="374" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWOpe4J9kfdMM2LhOY7jpXoBlGv6t1dfD_ZVJ4bvCJIPHcZG8qHJ7n2wlAiXe3a4TVY6v8UrK2Mv1TX-S-rFB065957ocxUgjApVq5lkDJCpudNIyiBFmLJebrVyUcfXYlpKFdpZfkw39aUOGt-UoFK5Gg8cs3Y6-Kgz3Edvz_vuLJNF5utP5ygYsOSQ/w640-h374/russo_japanese_war1904_1905_by_andreasilva60_datobf9-fullview.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a> What Germans and Japanese had in common in contrast to, respectively, the Russians and the Chinese was better organization, superior work ethic, and higher civic conscientiousness(not to be confused with personal conscience). It’s no wonder Germans became so adept at military matters and engineering. And it’s no wonder that Japan overtook China as the main supplier of tea to the West; its quality control was notably superior to that of the Chinese. Even today, people think of Germans as thoroughgoing, Japanese as diligent, Russians as slovenly, and Chinese as sloppy.<br />In the challenge of modernity, Germans made great strides in the 19th century, rapidly overtaking the French and then surpassing British industry. Russians lagged behind, and besides, much of its economy was actually managed by Germans. And in the East, Japan was the first to westernize/modernize whereas China hopelessly failed to meet the challenge. No wonder that there were certain elements in both Germany and Japan who felt it was a kind of cosmic injustice that inferior Slavs or Chinese should have so much land that should really belong to the superior peoples with more will and ability. (To the Germans, Slavs were a relatively backward people, almost half-barbarian, whereas to the Japanese, Chinese had decayed from too much ancientness.) In other words, their feelings were rather akin to Anglo view of American Indian savages having ‘too much’ land(or all those good-for-nothing ‘beaners’ sitting on the Southwest territories but doing precious little with it).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such arrogance was a rather odd among the Japanese because they were a relative late-comer to civilization in East Asia. Chinese history is understood to be around 3,500 yrs old, whereas Japanese history dates back to 1,200 yrs, if that. Chinese civilization was the cultural sun that radiated its glory and wisdom to the lesser ones: Vietnam, Thailand, Mongolia, Korea, and Japan. Even if there never was a Japan, core East Asian culture would exist. China, the main land mass of East Asia, was the most foundational civilization in that part of the world, so much so that Asian culture north and east of India is almost inconceivable without it.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Matters are reversed in Europe. Russia, gigantic as it is, has been mostly peripheral to much of European history, which began in Greece, western Anatolia, and southern Italy, and then spread upwards toward Germania and Britain. In other words, despite Russia’s great land mass(and contribution to late European culture with literature, music, and arts), it hasn’t been essential to what most people consider to be ‘European’. Even if Russia had never existed, the core of Western Culture would have come into existence and thrived just the same. (However, one could argue that vast Russia served as a bulwark against Mongol invasions that otherwise might have overwhelmed the Europeans, who might have met the fates of the Persians and Iraqis. In the present, Russia remains the last major white nation that has proven resistant to Jewish Supremacist Hegemony with Zion, Globo-Homo, and BLM as the holy trinity. Its role as bulwark has once again been revived.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="71"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If one tendency has been to characterize Russia as backward, another has been to characterize it as fundamentally different(for better or worse), almost as if it’s of another planet, a point of agreement between ‘Russophiles’ and ‘Russophobes’. (No wonder films like SOLARIS and HARD TO BE A GOD have resonated with those fascinated and perplexed by Slavosphere, which could feel like an alternate Earth than another part of Earth.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Arguably, Russia is the only great European civilization formed equally of two streams: Byzantine/Eastern and Renaissance/Western. Despite the inexorable decline of the Byzantine Empire and its ultimate demise, its influence was profound upon Russia that breathed new life into the ancient spirituality and tradition. So much of Russian spirituality, temperament, and outlook has been shaped by the Byzantines, for good and ill. Byzantine spirituality persisted in parts of Southeastern Europe, but these societies were under the Ottoman, if not the Austrian/Catholic, yoke. None of them were consequential, except for Black Swan events, like when a Serbian radical shot the Archduke Ferdinand.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Russia did grow into a great civilization in its own right. But if the Byzantine influence imbued Russia with a certain spiritual hues, it failed to provide the dynamism and individuality that ignited Western Europe since the Renaissance and paved the way to the Enlightenment, which eventually arrived in Russia as well, sometimes in watered down form, in other instances in more radicalized manifestations(especially as extreme variants of anarchism and communism deemed necessary to compensate for Russia’s backwardness and tyranny).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">From the Western perspective, the Russia has been the great laggard, slower to adopt the new norms of the more progressive West. Serfdom existed well into mid-19th century in Russia. Yet, from the Eastern perspective, slavishly looking to the West as the superior model was foolish, i.e. if Russia to be truly free and independent, it must find its own ways than mindlessly ape the West as the paragon of progress and virtue. Russia should drop the inferiority complex(that so defines the Polish wanna-be-west identity) and appreciate itself as different than backward, a civilization steeped in deep ‘soul’ than animated by restless ‘spirit’. You can’t blame a bear for not being as trainable as a dog.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="46"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then came the great reversal in the 20th century when the characteristically conservative Russia bypassed Marx’s laws of history and went straight from a ‘semi-feudalism’ to communism in one single superman-like leap and captured the imagination of the world as the vanguard of revolution.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="361" src="https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/mapping-community/images/6/65/Ww1_map.gif/revision/latest?cb=20140625141302" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, there were as continuities as anomalies, and it was duly noted that the Soviet Union was in certain respects a continuation of authoritarianism(albeit in a more ruthless form) with roots in Oriental Despotism. In other words, Josef Stalin was really a new Tsar, and even the fact of his being non-Russian was in keeping with the centuries-old tradition of Tsars being Germanic than Russian. On the one hand, in terms of ideology and rhetoric, Soviet Russia sounded like the most radically-conceived civilization in the 20th century, leapfrogging from the laggard to the vanguard of Europe, yet in actual practice, something of Old Russia remained in the manner of rule and social outlook. (Besides, as Bolshevik Russia was at best semi-industrial, its priority was less leading the modern world than catching up to it. Most Third World modernizers, upon closer inspection of the capitalist West and communist Russia, tended to lean toward the former because they realized that, for all the Soviet propaganda about development and progress, the West had comfortably pulled ahead by most metrics of modernity.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="200"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A series of tensions in the 19th century led to the epic clashes between Germany and Russia & between Japan and China. First, there was the world-shaking reverberations of Western Imperialism, essentially Anglo(and Anglo-American) and French. Spain and Portugal had once carved out huge empires as well, but became declined in power and dynamism in Europe(which goes to show having empires didn’t necessarily translate into strength, also true of the Ottomans). In contrast, the Anglos and French surged ahead, breaking new records in world hegemony. Germans, so full of talent, lagged behind for various reasons. They were later to unify into nationhood that could consolidate all the energies toward certain objectives.<br />Still, Austrians had their own diverse empire and expended their diminishing energy trying to keep it all together. If a united people of shared identity can act as one, an empire of diverse people loses a lot of energy just to prevent the crazy quilt from coming apart at the seams. By the time Germany finally united under Prussian leadership, the world had been mostly carved up and claimed. Germany could only go for crumbs(and lost even those following the defeat in the Great War).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, there was the problem of pride. Germany came into unity and power at a time when great powers were defined by the size of their empires(or empire-sized national territories). Great Britain and France had global empires. US was an empire-sized country. Main Russia alone was an empire-sized country but had, in addition, imperial hegemony over much of Eastern Europe and Central Asia(and once claimed Alaska too). If united Germany had been a nation of middling people, it might have been content with the status quo of the world. But Germans were well-aware of their ability and potential. They regarded themselves as a race destined for great things, and a great people deserve an empire, or it seemed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="61"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As most of the world was already taken by the other empires, some Germans began to think their only hope of empire was to move eastward and take land from Russia. Less aggressive minds hoped for a growing German-Russian economic ties and cooperation, which indeed had been in development until the Great War drove a fatal wedge between the two civilizations.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, Germans wanted Russian lands out of simple acquisitiveness. Russians have ‘too much’ of it, so shouldn’t Germans take a chunk for themselves, especially in the murky territories of Ukraine? But, it also had to do with a growing sense among Germans that the Slavs were less deserving for being less capable, and the reasons could be racial. German idea went from the nationalist ‘blood and soil’ to imperialist ‘blood upon soil’, or those with better blood are more deserving of the soils of others, i.e. German toil on the land would be many times more productive.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="163"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With the rise of ‘scientific racism’ and ‘Aryanism’, more Germans viewed the Slavic East through the prism of imperialism. Such Germans hoped for better relations and happy cooperation with the Anglos, whom they regarded as racially equal if not better(but, ironically, Brits had a tendency to view Germans as half-domesticated Teutons who hadn’t fully arrived at civilization and rationality; they were deemed barbarians with modern technology, making them more dangerous than civilized folks with advanced machines or barbarians with crude weaponry. Though the Britons were even more barbaric than the Germanic tribes in the times of the Roman conquests, the Franco-Romance influence on British culture, language, and manners smoothed out the ‘rough’ Germanic edges, spurring the Brits to see themselves as apart from the Germanics, their closest ethno-linguistic cousins.) World War I, followed by Bolshevik Revolution and National Socialist ascension in Germany, pushed these ideas to further extremes, especially with the Jewish factor as agent behind both communism and financial capitalism.<img class="aligncenter" height="360" src="https://cdni.rbth.com/rbthmedia/images/2020.11/article/5faada3685600a08ae0807d9.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the most titanic struggle in 20th Century Europe was between Germans and Russo-Slavs, in Asia it was between China and Japan. The modern Japanese mind could only be neurotic. Japanese culture was uniquely weird to begin with as it had developed as a fusion of Heian court elegance and spartan samurai ardor. Also, as a military-ruled society, it was less ideologically dogmatic than China and Korea. The order tolerated various spiritualities and philosophies as long as they didn’t threaten the political order, which may explain why Japan retained more of its primitive animistic culture(Shintoism) alongside infusions of Buddhism and Confucianism. (It had also been rather receptive to Christianity UNTIL the ruling elites realized the main loyalty of samurai converts may be to the Vatican than to their daimyos. Thus, Christianity was seen as a political threat to the militarist order.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="152"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The coming of Western Modernity made the Japanese especially neurotic. Initially, Japan reluctantly modernized as a self-defense mechanism: The paradoxical formula of learning from foreigners to keep the foreigners out. At this stage, Japan lamented the state of China and could hardly conceive of aggressing upon it. Japan simply wanted to avoid a similar fate. But the success of modernization earned Japan fulsome praise from the West. The very ‘gaijin’ threat against Japan became something of a partner, even ally. Growing in confidence, Japan wanted to be a member of this club of great white powers and even began to internalize white consciousness and attitudes, at one time even debating as to whether Japanese should adopt a European language. This put Japan in an odd situation. As honorary whites, they began to think of the Chinese as ‘chinks’, but being a bunch of slanty-eyed buggers themselves, resented being thought of as ‘Japs’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="195"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Like Germany, Japan realized that most of the world had already been taken(and in World War I, Germany would lose its few holdings in Africa and Asia, of which Japan was given only crumbs despite having joined in the war against Germany). If imperialism became a bad word after World War II, empire was still a matter of prestige at the beginning of the 20th century. The greatest fortune was to have an empire-sized country, like the US and Russia. (Brazil and China were empire-sized, but Brazil had hopelessly fallen behind, and China was in tatters with Manchu imperial decline and countless socio-economic woes. Russia, though a great power, was poorly organized, politically inept under a foolish Tsar, and relatively backward in industry.)<br />If a nation wasn’t empire-sized, its great power status owed to far-flung imperial possessions(and control of trade routes), especially peoples of other races deemed inferior in development, culture/spirituality/morality, or blood. (Austro-Hungarian and Russian Empires differed from Western European Empires in ruling over mostly other white folks, some deemed as or even more advanced.) The biggest prize of Britain was India. And France treasured Indochina and Algeria especially.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Japan, as an island nation, was a natural sea power, but the seas belonged to the Anglos(UK and US). Even most of Asia had already been taken and, in the case of China, was beginning the epic process of regaining sovereignty one step at a time. South Asia and Southeast Asia had already been taken by European powers. As long as the West dominated Eastern Pacific, Japan’s only hope was to take Taiwan, Korea, and a big chunk of Manchuria, opened up to Japanese encroachment following the Russo-Japanese War.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="154"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But several conditions made even this unfeasible in the long run. China, once written off as the ‘Sick Man of Asia’, began to coalesce into a recognizable power under the KMT. Also, the Western Powers that had been predatory against China began to embark on a more conciliatory approach as they regarded the KMT as a regime they could do business with: Restore a degree of sovereignty to China but maintain Western privileges in coastal cities and have Chinese youths lean toward the West culturally and intellectually. Also, the influence of Christian missionaries in China and rise of Western Leftists(who became prominent in Liberal Media) tilted the elite and public opinion in the West in favor of China against Japan, increasingly seen as belligerent. So, while Americans might see Chinese in the US as a bunch of ‘stupid chinks’, Chinese abroad might be regarded as noble ‘Chinamen’ struggling against the increasingly nasty ‘Japs’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="130"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There were attempts by Japan to justify their encroachments on Korea, Manchuria, Taiwan, and parts of Northern China as counterweight to Western Imperialism, but it was the West that later championed Chinese nationalism against Japanese Imperialism, conveniently overlooking the fact that it had began the Imperial Project in China to begin with. Psycho-politically, Japan was walking a tightrope, at once identifying with white imperialists in the aggression against Asia and identifying with ‘fellow Asians’ against Western aggression. Something had to give sooner or later. In our time, the US supports ‘moderate rebels'(euphemism of radical Islamic terrorists) to undermine regimes such as Assad’s in Syria while justifying its intervention in the Middle East as a War on Terror. US is completely neurotic(or even psychotic) under Jewish Supremacist influence.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="328" src="https://sinojapanesewar.com/manchuriahorse2.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="163"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Japanese government and politics, evenly split between diplomatic civilian rule and adventurist military power before the militarist takeover, were torn apart by trying to accommodate Western interests, rein in Japanese forces in Manchuria that grew even more ravenous, and arrive at a compromise whereby the KMT would accept Japan’s rule over Manchuria and Taiwan. Japanese military called for more conquest while the civilians called for caution. Japanese masses didn’t want all-out war but were overcome with patriotic pride by reports of Japanese victories.<br />At the same time, the KMT found it ever more difficult to compromise due to increasing Japanese demands and mounting pressure from the communists(as the patriotic alternative), the outraged public, and international machinations. If militarist pressure prevailed over civilian authority and drove Japan to all-out war, the militarist regime in China relented under mass civilian pressure to meet the challenge; apparently, the Chinese masses seriously underestimated the ability of the ‘Japanese dwarves’ to wreak havoc on China.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In all this mess, Japanese neurosis went through the roof. Japan had entered the imperial game as an ‘honorary white’ partner of the West, but competing interests caused a rift between them, and then, Japan appealed to Asians as fellow yellow brethren against the Imperialist West. In other words, Japan wasn’t invading China and the rest Asia but merely liberating or shielding them from Western Imperialism so as to create one big happy co-prosperity sphere where Asian folks, freed from Western prejudice and exploitation, could live and trade in peace. But too many bridges had been burned by Japan for most Asians to buy such an offer, especially true of the Chinese who bore the brunt of Japanese horrors(though Taiwanese had it rather sweet under the Japanese and resented the KMT takeover more).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="210"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There were interesting parallels between Germany vs Russia and Japan vs China. In both cases, it was quality vs quantity. Pound for pound, the German and the Japanese soldier were respectively better than the Russian soldier and Chinese soldier. But quantity has a power all its own.<br />Granted, the discrepancy between Germany and Russia(especially by the outbreak of World War II when Russian industry had surpassed the German in scale) was nothing like that between Japan and China. Though Japan was less industrialized than Germany in World War II, it was many times more advanced than China, still in a mostly agricultural state of development and utterly dependent on foreign arms shipments and supplies. And despite massive US aid to the Soviet Union, it’s generally agreed that the Soviets produced the bulk of the weaponry that overwhelmed the Wehrmacht. In contrast, all that the Chinese could hope for in the war with Japan was a prolonged stalemate whereby Japanese forces be bogged down until being finished off by bigger powers, which ended up being the US and USSR. Still, the fact that so much of the Japanese war machine was mired all across China(and Southeast Asia) made it easier for the superior US military to defeat Japan.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="216"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">World War II was most devastating to Soviet Russia and Red China(at least among the major nations) but also most advantageous in political and ‘narrative’ terms. Despite huge losses in life and devastations of cities & towns, the Soviet juggernaut not only regained lost territory but, in making it all the way to Berlin, swallowed up all of Eastern Europe, which, until the end of the Cold War, was part of the Soviet Empire. If not for Nazi Germany’s invasion of Russia and subsequent defeat, Soviet Union would not have been the OTHER superpower in the second half of the 20th century.<br />As for the CCP, it only came to power because of the impact of Japan’s invasion of China and then its subsequent defeat to the US. If Stalin fought the Germans to preserve an existing system, Mao, for all his rhetoric about national unity against the Japanese, was eyeing opportunities availed by Japan’s destruction of the existing system, that of KMT dominance. In that sense, Mao’s movement was the most spectacular beneficiary of World War II. Even without WWII, the US would have been a great world power. And WWII only added territory and vassals to the Soviet Union. In contrast, CCP rule came into existence only through WWII.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="220"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And even though the Cold War pitted the Capitalist West vs the Communist East, the Western-dominated postwar narrative conceded a certain recognition of communism’s role in defeating Fascism, Nazism, and Japanese Militarism, deemed the worst things that ever happened to mankind. So, from the Western perspective, communism was bad but still not as bad as fascism, and furthermore, during WWII, the Capitalist West and Communist East fought side by side against the far greater evil. From the Russian perspective, WWII or the Great Patriotic War was even more significant as the Soviets had sacrificed most to defeat the Germans(and also did most to finish off Japan in Northern China). And as communist elements had led many of the Resistance movements in Europe under German Occupation, they played significant roles in politics and intellectual/cultural life even in Western Europe. And as influential Jewish-Americans were heavily represented in radical, leftist, and/or communist movements, they too helped push the line that communism, for all its flaws and crimes, was infinitely superior to Hitlerism and even McCarthyism — indeed, for the longest time, most American Liberals believed the Red Scare was a far graver threat to the American Way of Life than communist subversion, concerns about which was routinely dismissed as ‘hysteria’ and ‘scare-mongering’ in books, articles, PBS documentaries, and movies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, Jews are now less likely to make too much of bad ole McCarthy since their forms of repression and persecution are far more extensive than the so-called ‘McCarthyite Witch-hunts’, and furthermore, they are now the ones who are leading the hysteria about Russia-Russia-Russia, cooking up fantasies like Russia-Collusion Hoax and the notion that revanchist Russia is trying to reconstitute the old Soviet Empire when, in fact, it’s the Jews who cannot abide by any nation being sovereign to G.A.E, or Global-American-Empire that worships Negro Thugs, Homo Anus, and Jewish Exceptionalism.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="444" src="https://miro.medium.com/max/1200/1*g6ykuYw1Ztjsh88faTCrzA.jpeg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="192"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, even during the darkest years of the Cold War, the Communist World got some relief from the Western-dominated narrative that vilified fascism above all, the prestige of communists as noble leaders of the Resistance, the prominence of Marxist theorists in the West, and the rising Jewish power’s greater antipathy to conservatism/rightism than to communism; when it came to Vietnam and Latin America, the Western Liberal press was often openly sympathetic to Marxist guerrillas or rebels than to regimes characterized as lackeys of US imperialism or far-right oligarchic. It’s been said Fidel Castro’s revolution was aided to considerable extent by the reporting of Herbert Matthews of the New York Times. Members of the Frankfurt School and men like Richard Hofstadter, though no fans of Stalinism, believed that the bigger threat to the Liberal Order was not communism(which was Over There) but latent forms of ur-fascism bubbling under the surface in the ‘authoritarian personality’ of American Conservatism. Some even began to argue that the Stalinist form of repression and American ‘authoritarian personality’ were two sides of the same coin, or the two Joes, Stalin and McCarthy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It is then no wonder that in the Sixties the Western radicals increasingly lost interest in the Soviet Union, seen as grey and dull, and looked to Third World revolutionaries as the true freedom-fighters who had yet to be compartmentalized by the mechanics of modern managerial society. Third World fighters had the Tarzan element; they were in the jungles and the bush, expression of nature itself as kind of neo-Rousseau-ism. These were the glory days of Vietnam, Cuba, and China(especially in France where Maoism became chic among a certain segment of leftism). But the biggest fortune for CCP came, astoundingly enough, from right-wing Richard Nixon whose career was built on anti-communism. Mao’s reckless break with the Soviet Union paid off and the US media was full of glowing praises of Mao’s China in the aftermath of Nixon’s visit to China.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="205"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Soviet Union and China having been on the ‘right side of history’ in World War II sure paid big dividends, especially as Hitler became the iconic face of Evil and the Holocaust the greatest horror of all time and for all eternity… though, of late, Jewish Power, so eager to destroy Russia, has been working with Sub-Nazi elements in Ukraine even while decrying anything even mildly pro-white as ‘Nazi’ or ‘white supremacist’ in the West. There is also growing antipathy to China, if only as distraction from the reality of Jewish Supremacist domination of the West(and beyond). Given these developments, Japan and Germany are once again turning into challenges against, respectively, China and Russia. While it’s true that the US rehabilitated many Japanese ‘war criminals’ as the Cold War began and welcomed Japan into the community of Free Nations, China was hardly a major power in the 20th century. At most, it was too big to conquer. In reality, it didn’t even have the means to invade Taiwan. Therefore, there was no need for an outsized Japanese military, especially as the postwar Narrative held that Japan must forever renounce war for its unspeakable crimes in World War II, not least against China.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_91" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="205"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But now, China is a great power if not a superpower, and its military is growing. It is fully capable of taking Taiwan back by force and has the means to sink US aircraft carriers if war broke out. Therefore, the postwar narrative about Evil Imperial Japan is hardly heard anymore, and Japan is being goaded to join more alliances and increase its military, with even talks of obtaining nuclear weapons. How are the Japanese playing this? Are they content to be flunky running dogs of the US, one ruled by Jews? (If the Japanese lost to Anglo-Americans in WWII, both peoples are now in the same situation as the cuck-maggots of Jews. Japanese women became whores of the US, and now, under Jewish rule, white women are whores to blacks while white men have been reduced to ‘Jap’-like cucks who lost their women to US G.I.’s.) Or, are Japanese using the anti-China card as justification to build up their power to eventually break free from American Power? Unlikely as the Japanese lack the imagination to look that far ahead. (One thing for sure, Poland is using the anti-Russian card to take a chunk of Ukraine as what had once been Poland.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_92" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="810"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the 1980s, Japan-bashing was a favorite sport in the US, but the China Hysteria has made Japan more valuable to the US, which also pressures South Korea to bury the hatchet and make up with Japan because the real enemy is Big Bad China, and the South Koreans may take the bait as those brain-deaders, being mental slaves of the West, can’t think of anything higher than globo-homo: “China bad because it no like K-pop gayboys.”<br />Still, if Japan built up its strength in the first half of the 20th century as a sovereign power, its increasing militarism in the present is as a proxy of the Jewish globo-homo empire. It’s minion-militarism, and the same goes for Germany, for which the anti-Russian hysteria is a sort of respite from the usual narrative about Germany being the worst nation ever because of the Holocaust and Anne Frank. With Russia as the Evil Power, Germany can once again speak confidently and with belligerence, though just like Japan, as a proxy and cuck-puppet than a sovereign power. Japan and Germany are dogs but dogs that are allowed to bark loudly still feel better than ones made to feel ‘guilty’ all the time. Anti-Russianness is now worse than during the Cold War when leftist ideology was a real thing in the West. Even though most leftist Western intellectuals came to regard Soviet Union’s form of communism as a historical and moral failure, they nevertheless valued communism challenge to the excesses and flaws of the capitalist order. Thus, despite their anti-Soviet-ism, there was a residual sympathy for the ideology that created and animated Soviet society. With the Soviet Union gone, there is only Russian civilization, culture, and tradition, and the West has little feeling for those, especially as it abandoned ideology in favor of idolatry of Jews, Negroes, and Homos. As Russia displeases the sacred Jews, it must be pretty rotten. As Russia doesn’t worship Negroes(though it isn’t hostile to blacks or blackness), it isn’t properly enlightened(or ‘endarkened’). And it refuses to bend over to homos & trannies, it must be the Evil Empire as what is ‘more evolved’ and more blessed than using a rainbow-colored homo anus and offering one’s kids to drag queens and frankenstein doctors(many of them Jewish) who would cut off their genitals?<br />For some time, Germans were morally subordinate to both the West and East. They felt apologetic for abandoning ‘liberal democracy’ for fascism and igniting World War II; and of course, the biggest crime of all time, the Holocaust of the Holy Jews. But Germans also felt apologetic to what they’d done to Eastern Europe and Russia, killing millions of Polacks and Russians. But with all this Anti-Russian hysteria mandated by Jewish Supremacist Power, Germans are now able to give a middle finger to Russia and de-emphasize their crimes against Poland as both Germany and Poland are now part of the ‘liberal world order’ against Big Bad Russia. So, Germans, who’ve been professing for so long that they’d purged themselves of ethnic prejudices are now speaking and behaving as if Russians are beastly for reasons of Blut and Kultur as such hatred are now egged on by their masters, the Jews who, in all their supremacist dementedness, are now working with Sub-Nazi elements in Ukraine to destabilize Russia. Imagine that. Under Jewish Supremacist Hegemony, the morally reconstructed Germany is now avidly supporting Naziesque elements in Ukraine against Russia even though one of the objectives of Operation Barbarossa was to eradicate millions of Russo-Slavs to make way for the superior race of ‘Aryans’. Not that this change in German attitude does anything for German identity or nationalism; Germans, fatally cucked, are still committed to racial and cultural suicide to appease the Jews, BUT, finally they are allowed to HATE, shake their fists, and target a group based on ethnicity. Germans still can’t be pro-German, but they can be anti-Russian, just like White Degeneratists in the West aren’t allowed to be pro-white but can be aggressively and proudly ‘anti-white-supremacist’ and ‘anti-racist’. Even dogs and slaves don’t always want to be servile. Aggression is a part of animal/human nature, the warrior spirit thing. So, just like the minions of George Orwell’s 1984 aren’t only forced to obey but given an outlet for their repressed aggression by hollering at ‘Goldstein’, Germans and American White Degeneratists have given their respective outlets to vent their spleen. Germans, always cucked and browbeaten, finally get to howl at Russia, and White Degeneratists are allowed to feel warrior pride in screaming about ‘racism’, ‘white supremacism’, ‘homophobia’, ‘transphobia’, and etc. Of course, Jews are toying with the dummies, but Jews are smart, white goyim are dumb, like what Dark Helmut said of Lone Star. Jews triumph because whites are dumb.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/AQunC9jniqw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Evil Will Always Triumph, Because Good Is Dumb - Dark Helmet" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_93" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="222"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Under Jewish Power, the once-mighty Anglos are now on the same plane as Mexicans, Filipinos, Hawaiians, South Koreans, Colombians, Panamanians, and etc. Or, actually it’s even worse because self-loathing ‘white guilt’ is key to Jewish control of whites, which is Jews especially target whites for dehumanization. While Wars for Israel have killed plenty of Arabs and Muslims, white populations in US, Canada, Australia, and EU have been soul-murdered into pathetic cuckery like one never would have believed possible. It used to be Anglos as apex rulers over the others, but now, they are just another group living at the feet of Jewish Supremacism. And even much of the Dissident Right is about competing with others to win Pokemon points as the top flunky of Jews, rather like rivalry between House Negroes and Field Niggers. Blacks, Asians, Latinos & Browns, and various white camps all competing to be favored as ‘House Negroes’ of the Jews. No matter how much Jews shame, insult, and humiliate whites, all we get from even white ‘conservatives’ and ‘rightists’ is, “We love Israel more and Jews are bigger than Jesus, so please oh please choose us to be your top dog or whore because we whites have been completely purged of ‘antisemitism’ whereas the OTHER groups aren’t so sensitive about Jewish matters.” So pathetically cucky- wucky.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_94" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="228"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The most natural pairing would be a robust Germany and proud Russia as the two nations are so complementary. Germans with their work ethic & knowhow and Russians with their vast resources. But the opportunist was lost with World War I, and then the bloodiest war in European History happened between Germany and Russia. Since the end of the war, despite economic successes, Germany has failed to regain sovereignty and fated to pass away from history. It’s so weak of ethnic interests and political will that it let the Anglo-Zionist World subvert and destroy the modest attempt between Angela Merkel and Vladimir Putin to increase trade in energy and goods.<br />In retrospect, the conflict between Pan-Germanism and Pan-Slavicism proved to be one of the most tragic in European History. The local business between Austrians and Serbians embroiled the larger Germanic and Slavic worlds to go head to head and unleash the furies that came to define so much of the 20th century in all its radical horrors. Just think how history might have been different if something like Pan-German-Slavicism had been achieved. But that’s all water under the bridge, just like the hope of Sino-Japanese cooperation, fatally undermined when Japan chose to join the Imperialist Club against China, alienating both China and other imperialist powers that found Japan to be over-ambitious at the expense of others.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_95" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, both Germans and Russians are European folks, and Chinese and Japanese are East Asian folks. But Germans and Japanese are totally defeated and cucked populations with no will of their own and locked in the ‘Western’ camp. Their fates are all the worse because Anglos have joined them in their cuckiness and spinelessness. Germans, Japanese, and Anglos are now pretty much on the same plane as cuck-dogs of Jews, which makes things far worse.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="399" src="https://static.timesofisrael.com/www/uploads/2019/08/AP_4408291559-e1566537431455.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_96" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After all, for all their adventurousness and hegemonic tendencies through modern history, Anglos had a sense of limits and a modicum of respect for the other. In war they could be utterly ruthless but in peace, somewhat magnanimous with a live-and-let-live attitude. So, after turning Japan and Germany into ashes and then into ‘democracies’, Anglos didn’t intervene in what the Germans or Japanese thought or did, nor did they insist on an Anglo-American solution to everything. For instance, if Christmas became a thing in mostly non-Christian Japan, it was because Japanese thought it might be fun to ‘larp’ with a bucket of KFC.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_97" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="61"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anglo-America didn’t pressure Germany and Japan to embrace ‘diversity’ and the like. Rather, it was the Jews who made the Anglosphere swallow such loads of BS and then used US power to spread the craziness to all parts of the West and the Cuck-East, which is why there is globo-homo garbage in just about every European country and Cuck-East nations.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_98" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="237"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anglos may have regarded themselves better than the rest but weren’t hellbent on turning everything Anglonic, and preferred the mode of tolerance with the Other. In contrast, Jews feel contempt for goyim and insist that all the world feel, think, and do as Jews order them to. Just consider: Anglo-American Christians have been far less insistent on spreading their brand of faith to Russia and Japan than Jews have been on trying to shove globo-homo up the arse of every nation. American Evangelicals may want all the world to accept JESUS, but they aren’t losing sleep oer their brand of faith failing to make inroads into Russia and Japan, but Jews get all antsy and furious about ANY targeted nation saying NO to celebrating bung-donging and tranny-penis-cutting. I don’t recall Evangelicals flipping out over Japan remaining Shinto-Buddhist or Russia remaining Orthodox than embracing Hillbilly-Hallelujah-Faith, but Jews have been spitting mad and seething with venom about Russia saying NO to allowing toots and trannies, along with Pussy Riot skanks, to desecrate the hallowed ground of Red Square where Russians remember and honor the defense of the Motherland. One thing for sure, Western Europe under the thumb of Anglo-dominated US was a far saner place than it is today when it cowers before Jews who insist on sticking a globo-homo dildo into the ass of every white guy and a Negro dong in every white vagina.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_99" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anglo-America had a history of ‘isolationism’ as well as ‘interventionism’, but the balance has been broken with Jewish Power insisting on the US sticking its nose and dong into every affair around the world. It’s also worth remembering, Anglo-American interventionism, colored by Christian ethos, had an element of Justice for All. While American Christian Missionaries in China could be construed as ‘cultural imperialists’, they spread the Gospel so that the converts could be saved and as loved by God and Jesus as the proselytizers themselves, i.e. once the conversion took place, a Chinese soul was just as redeemed as a white soul. Christianity does wage war on other cultures, but conversion renders all Christians equal on the spiritual plane, and this was the basis of the Black Civil Rights Movement.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjCj029LjawxneLWslkIODaTfPRLpP1KuLNTZZ01l4EG0MkD6bAa_ArVItgOpWSf92Dpk4QI2ew5lOigW6XFCiiw1DDn0rd5AYplz_d26Kxr8pXAmE7LWqA3Bq56PK4pzSTXUUEYUG3ow7ghJ4A5yWlTxmRp6PYbAl57BUIC8PyxOql6eRxDy-c7mZ4w/s600/s-l1600.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_100" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the Judaic mindset views the world in terms of the Chosen vs the lowly goyim, and this means there is no chance of equal justice for Jews and goyim in a Jewish-controlled order. Just ask the Palestinians. It accounts as to why the West under Jewish rule is especially dangerous. Even when Western Imperialism was colored by sense of racial supremacism, there was nevertheless a Christian sense that all peoples could equally be saved and loved by God, i.e. whites could be superior in mind and body but not in heart and soul.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_101" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="113"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the very foundation of Jewish identity and worldview is premised on the cosmo-spiritual conviction that the God of All the Universe and All of Time favors Jews uber alles, meaning that goyim exist only to serve Jews. Thus, Jewish Supremacism isn’t only of the blood but of the spirit. Granted, the most powerful Jews aren’t particularly religious, but their historical mindset has passed down to the modern era. How else can one explain the likes of Victoria Nuland, Wendy Sherman, Anthony Blinken, and David Frum? Whether such Jews pose as ‘liberals’ or ‘conservatives’, it’s essentially a ploy to expand Jewish ethnic interests on the cosmic interpretation of Chosenness.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_102" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="70"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All parts of the West, including Japan, are now so caught in the claws of Jewish Supremacism that their sovereignty is close to irretrievable. So, there won’t be any meaningful German-Russian or Chinese-Japanese cooperation. For all the trade between China and Japan, it’s quite clear Japanese have chosen whoredom for the indefinite future(or it has been chosen for them). Germany is in an even more pathetic state.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_103" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And that means the only consequential partnership must be between Russia and China, which is as unnatural as natural. On the unnatural side, they are of different races and very different cultures, just about the only commonality being some of the similarities brought about under Mongol rule. Even though China and Russia have a long border around Manchuria, few Russians live in East Siberia. During the Soviet Era when Kazakhstan was part of the Russian Empire, the borders between China and ‘Russia’ were considerable. Also true when Mongolia was part of the Chinese Empire. But due to the Soviet-induced independence of Mongolia and the founding of Kazakhstan as an independent state, the common border areas between China and Russia have been greatly reduced, perhaps lessening tensions. Still, with modern travel and communication, the vast areas of ‘wasteland’ no longer need to separate the two civilizations as had been the case through most of history. Also, those ‘wastelands’, full of natural resources, could yield tremendous amounts of material via Sino-Russian cooperation in skill and technology.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_104" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, the developing ‘alliance’ between China and Russia is natural as they’re giant neighbors with much to gain from trade and cooperation. But it’s also been hastened by external factors, especially the hostility of the Jewish-controlled West that is feverishly employing NATO and Cuck-East to maintain ‘Western’ hegemony. The Jewish-controlled West hoped to back both countries up against the wall, but they were backed into one another and now watch each other’s backs, like in a Western barroom brawl. If Kissinger did his best to divide the two giants, the current Jews have done everything to push them together. Current Jews figure, “Identify Russia as part of the Orient, thus un-European, thereby unworthy of any meaningful ties with the ‘Liberal West’.” More than the combined strength of Russia and China, what Jews fear most is that the current ‘conservative’ national resurgence in Russia might infect or inspire white folks in the West, now the hegemonic domain of Jewish Supremacy.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="475" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjkzNwEP7_WW_nOZV-5P3ZV3-_K7A0vLKDcBhabGxNXAM44r-zIL643SEwOCr_S982K0GM9WNw_8wct8CHypKanD7-X8J4PhsWbylFpibkQU0go5AR09zzRQDZpTT9eHE7ixX5SiFnL8_5-4jM683fyYMGX76i5yWUzWH2gLQxQwturA2ZK0y-dtvoueg/w640-h475/mao%20son.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_105" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="242"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ideally, Russia and China would like to work closely but too closely. While it’s mutually beneficial for both to be friendly terms, they can’t help but be wary neighbors because of their troubled history(which may once again be points of contention and flare into future conflicts) and cultural differences. (On the other hand, the fact that the two cultures are so different may be better for relations as they needn’t worry about the ‘narcissism of small differences’, a problem plaguing various Slavic peoples, e.g. Russia vs Ukraine vs Poland. Racially and culturally, Russia is far closer to the rest of Europe, and that is why Europeans react more viscerally to Russia’s rejection of ‘Western’ norms than to the Chinese rejection of them, i.e. that such a racially and culturally similar people could diverge so much from ‘European Values’, which now amounts to cucking-to-Jewish-Power, is an affront to them. The European Core prides itself as the happiest appeasers of the awesome and holy Jews, and this pride-of-shame cannot abide by Russia’s willful defiance of Jewish Narratives and Idols; indeed, how dare they, as Greta Thunberg might chortle. In contrast, Russia and China in their profound differences understand they must adopt a live-and-let-live attitude and not expect the other to conform to the norms of the one, which actually was a problem when both nations were doctrinairely communist and vied to be beacon of True Communism.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_106" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Until recently, good working relations between Russia and China have failed to materialize for one reason or another. For most of history, with vast distances between them, each could ignore the other. Even when Russia began its expansion into Siberia, China mostly overlooked the development as the northern areas were considered cold and useless wastelands, unfit even for Mongol barbarians; so, who cares if Russians move into them?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_107" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mongol rule did once bring China and Russia into a single empire, but neither civilization had any choice in the matter; they were confederated only under tyranny. The postwar communist era opened the door for close cooperation, but Stalin treated Mao shabbily, and then Mao treated Khrushchev shabbily, and the two giants went from vowing eternal brotherhood to decrying the other as the worst of all evils, even leading to violent skirmishes in borderlands. The bad blood began to drain with Deng Xiaoping’s pragmatism and Mikhail Gorbachev’s less ideological approach to world affairs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_108" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But in the 1990s, China experienced rapid growth while post-Soviet Russia spiraled into the abyss, leading some to argue that the CCP had done right to maintain power(because the end of communist rule in Russia didn’t lead to democracy and prosperity but anarchy and gangsterism). Not only the Chinese ruling elites but even Western observers opined that Deng had taken the more sensible path, i.e. reform economics before politics.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_109" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However, after two decades of the Putin Era, the Soviet-Russian Way had its advantages as well, the greatest of which is a historical honesty that is missing in China. With the monopoly of communist rule gone forever, Russia today is remarkably honest about its place in the 20th century, acknowledging Soviet horrors but also its great achievements. In the long run, a future built on truth has a sounder foundation. Furthermore, even as Russia admits to its historical ‘crimes’, it hasn’t allowed non-Russians or Jews to take total control of the Narrative to emasculate Russianness into pathetic wussy-ass cuckery, which is the sad case of the current West. In contrast, while the political dominance of the CCP has provided stability and continuity, China stands on False History that has yet to face up to Mao’s great crimes against his own people.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_110" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sino-Soviet Rift seemed a great lost opportunity for Russia and China while a golden opportunity for the West to exploit the division, which came to fruition with Nixon’s recognition of the Beijing regime as the rightful claimant of all China, even Taiwan. The rift when it happened was especially damaging to China, then under the devastation of the Great Leap Forward, a misnomer if there ever was one. If Stalin sacrificed agricultural productivity for heavy industry in his forced-collectivization campaigns, Mao incredibly managed to wreck both.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_111" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Following the split, Mao was confronted with two enemies, the US and USSR. And despite Red China’s rhetorical appeal to the Third World, it was too poor to offer much in the way of aid except for second-rate knockoffs of the AK-47. Yet, inadvertently, the rift laid the groundworks for the US-China rapprochement that would have a profound impact in years to come. Besides, had the Sino-Soviet not occurred, China might have continued as a JUNIOR partner of the Soviet Union than forge ahead with genuine sense of national sovereignty. Following the clean break, China was going to be no one’s little brother, and despite its backwardness and poverty, opened diplomatic ties with the US in 1972 from what Zhou En-Lai called a ‘position of strength’. The break with the Soviet Union led to much anxiety but also the confidence that China could go it alone and chart its own destiny. And when China and Russia once again met for negotiations in the late 1980s, it was as equals. Mao’s break made such attitude possible.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="427" src="https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/BN-NV369_bkrvCU_M_20160503104656.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_112" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Arguably of greater importance, the rift, along with the insane Cultural Revolution, did much to undermine the bureaucratic apparatus of the CCP, thereby(and once again inadvertently) paving the way for the rise of market systems across China in the relative absence of statist obstructions. Despite his own Stalinist tendencies, Mao refused to model his governance on the Soviet managerial model, and this was especially true following the Sino-Soviet Rift. Mao’s rule was disastrous, but one silver lining was that all the chaos in foreign policy and internal politics made it impossible to establish the kind of iron-clad bureaucratic structures that came to govern the Soviet Union.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_113" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Mao pushed his agenda in the name of an even more purist form of communism, the end-result from the ensuing anarchy and confusion was the breakdown of central control over much of the country, which gave the peasants in the latter half of the Seventies to quietly embark on ‘reforms’ of their own, which were later adopted by the desperate Deng regime as a nation-wide policy. Move toward market economics wasn’t necessarily top-down but bottom-top-down, meaning the government got word of peasants doing their own thing and increasing economic activity and decided not to quash but encourage it for the entire nation. The Cultural Revolution was a calamity but had the positive unintended consequence of loosening governmental or bureaucratic grip over much of China. Also, while no one dared to say it openly, many Chinese just about had enough of hardcore communism and wanted Maoism to serve only as a unifying cult or symbol. Indeed, even the members of the Red Guard got burned by being sent off to the countryside, some for several years separated from family and friends, and so, the Lost Generation of firebrand radicalism became, in their later years, rather somber and pragmatic, less trusting of authority and all-consuming passions.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_114" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="197"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mao was a titanic figure with a seismic impact on Chinese History, but the long-term effects were almost the diametric opposites of what he’d intended(and that was a good thing). In one respect, however, one might argue a variant of Maoism won out over other forms of Leftism that emphasized order, discipline, and dogma. Even Stalin, less intellectual than Trotsky, ruled with an iron-fist and kept things under wraps. In contrast, Maoism failed to develop a coherent theory apart from guerrilla-warfare-as-metaphor and was mostly about The Feeling. If all prior communist movements had strictly controlled youth cultures and activities, Mao unleashed the fury of youth, even on the communist bureaucracy in a let-history-sort-it-out manner.<br />Thus, the Cultural Revolution was unprecedented in communist history. It was one thing to use the secret police to purge one’s enemies, as Stalin had done, but quite another to risk all-out social mayhem to attack one’s rivals and as social experiment. Though such strains of Maoism have been stamped out in China, the so-called ‘Woke Left’ in the West resembles certain aspects of Maoism in its anti-intellectualism, exultation in mayhem, mass derangement, and favor of delirium over discipline.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_115" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To be sure, ‘wokeness’ has nothing to do with Maoism and, if anything, is the tool of Jewish super-capitalists, but in its politics of derangement syndrome, the emotional content is closer to Maoism than Marxism-Leninism(or Stalinism). Communism was always dogmatic, but it was also an intellectual exercise with big ideas and grand theories, but Maoism reduced it all down to slogans, chants, and passion. The idolatry of Mao mattered more than ideology of Marx in China. Likewise, ideology is gone from so-called ‘leftism’ in the Current West, and it’s essentially an idolatry of Jew-Worship, Negro-Faith, and Homo-Revelry. In that sense, an aspect of Maoism may have proven to be the most long-lasting and resilient form of radicalism. You don’t need to read or think, must scream and holler. Easy to do for any idiot on TikTok.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="477" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjS99fhMEFsN3NtCk_6oKTrPIbCX79SELMtSmEAzEfRsjEoQdNiRdhDBiaptWnXNohN_TEM8EdieCfF9n40bt65LDG6VuABLR5G-bsyQhaWE1OuMk9YWu-3vNlFjCZXZPYkjnOsxGoVeUDKbC_6C4SFzxeK1aY3dZI075nFXmilVUfiKik-gKtaNN-wjA/s600/pedro0.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="578" /></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-25455395983689223842022-12-07T17:16:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:07.165-08:00What If... Al Gore Had Taken the Presidency in 2000? 9/11 and Iraq War and the Trajectory of the 21st Century<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjpO_4m8l26krbiTLbSe5jnyL0Sb8_CIRAdmqNB7A9_x1QJowtMJzzqAZV5nutPPa7cj0AGsDNU-UDXsYBoNFPm7jK4Lw46_L1j97yPa_DH3f9spoISQhABJL7RRaa4W4TnGrH0BX-5Y8FcxbQ1IQG1pSE4koIz8gklch8m3yPOEQv56upfcdmz6MapTA/w640-h426/al%20gore%20george%20w%20bush.jpg" style="border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="116"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Certain moments in US history were inevitabilities, like the 1984 Presidential Election when Ronald Reagan was expected to thump Walter Mondale. Certain races were very close, like Gerald Ford vs Jimmy Carter, but the result was accepted and uncontested. The 2000 election was, in contrast, marred by controversy. Al Gore won the popular vote but lost Florida by a hair’s breadth. He contested the results, and it went all the way to the Supreme Court that decided 5 to 4 in Bush’s favor. Republicans were relieved but knew a dark cloud of suspicion would loom over the presidency. (Of course, Democrats in 2020, despite far more compromised circumstances, maintained that electoral fraud is just a myth, a conspiracy theory.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="52"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, the 2000 election could easily have been Gore’s if not for the ‘chads’, confused elderly Jews voting for Pat Buchanan by mistake, and Ralph Nader(which goes to show that no good deed goes unpunished in American Politics where idealism for Third Party candidates always favors the bigger enemy).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the 21st century had been mostly stable and marked by few crises, it wouldn’t matter much who really won in 2000, but the first two decades have been among the most contentious and consequential both at home and abroad. The dot.com crash that closed the 1990s was a bad way to start the new millennium, but who would have thought 2001 would see the biggest attack on the US, the lone superpower thought to be unchallenged in the world?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Since 9/11, the US has continually been at war in the Middle East, and the ‘End of History’ didn’t lead to the triumph of Western Liberal Democracy but the transformation of the West into an illiberal and degenerate Jewish gangster paradise(that props up the homo-ass, tranny’s fake vagina, and the Negro’s stinky feet, to be washed by guilt-ridden white hands, as the holiest relics of the New Order), making it less likely for much of the world to admire, respect, and emulate the West.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Those who’d criticized Francis Fukuyama’s End of History triumphalism as overly optimistic, even Panglossian, especially in regards to China and Russia, were either disingenuous or foolish. A key reason for the rise of men like Viktor Orban has less to do with resistance against liberalism than the betrayal of true liberalism in the West itself, indeed in utter debasement to Jewish gangsterism, globohomo degeneracy, and Negro thuggery as the three pillars of the New Cult. A truly secular and liberal society shouldn’t be promoting idols(especially degenerate and/or false ones), be hamstrung by taboos, and/or be repressive of dissenting views, but that’s where the current West is at.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="51"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the World chose tyranny over liberty, that would be most unfortunate, but when the only choice is between Jugromo(Jewish-Negro-Homo) tyranny and national autocracy(that allows for some sovereignty as bulwark against ‘moralized’ degeneracy that now so pervades the West), of course any sane people will opt for the latter.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="196"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Actually, the current ‘Western’ threat is worse than degenerate; it is satanic because it has sacralized degeneracy into holiness, so much so that cuck-christian churches, lacking in spiritual vigor and moral conviction, feel they must seek justification or redemption via the higher holies, such as the homo’s fecal orifice, tranny’s putrid fake ‘vagina’, and Negro’s stinky feet. There is a hierarchy to everything, and the Old Religions are now deemed inferior in sanctity, meaning, depth, and beauty to the new idols. If in the past homos and blacks felt they must humble themselves before God and Jesus(just like normal white Christians did), they now feel that the churches and temples of all religions must bow down at their feet. It’s a matter of who/whom. Who must serve whom, who must revolve around whom, who must revere whom. No longer must Negroes and homos check their megalomania and narcissism at the church door to feel the grace of God and Jesus because they now feel, goaded by Christianity-hating Jews, that they are bigger than god and jesus. (John Lennon sure was onto something when he said “Beatles are bigger than Jesus.”)</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjlMqTZiwXhBwhdkMozZ5w2BgU7tFHUG2hTmXzQE7fk06DxRUb-S84aGikDIUX-AbBug7KE_Cf2_sa2wspmR2uPxnj3ab5YJTEs_-r7-tocrysQOp3VxUrtNxiNiF6noHlBaaLJBylYYRkqKrSU90ZkqHfN49Ia5Q2CYAnQh2lOXASRPe1qo3kPXfVfrA/w574-h640/excl.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="574" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="196"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">During the Cold War, there was much about the West that was sordid and distasteful, but such weren’t lionized as matters of pride and prestige. Rather, it was argued that the West, in choosing liberty, had no choice but to tolerate much that wasn’t ideal as the price of freedom. It’s like modern industry causes pollution but as the price of productivity than a matter of pride. (And even reform China understood this, as when Deng Xiaoping said some flies will enter when you open the window. Few pests are worth the price of fresh air and sunshine.)<br />But in our time, degeneracy isn’t something to be tolerated in a free society but to be promoted, hyped, and even mandated as objects of adoration, reverence, and worship. It went from tolerance of vulgarity as the price of freedom to celebration of vice as the highest value of ‘democracy’. ‘Demon-cracy’ is more like it. It’s like satan worshiped as god. Given what has become of the demon-infested West, we can only hope that much of the World does everything in its power to keep this filth at bay, this Anality of Evil.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Over the years, more people have grown cynical about politics and the law, focusing instead on the ‘deep state’(or the ‘swamp’ or the ‘beast’) than on official organs of the government. The machinations of the ‘deep state’ have become more visible over the years, especially during the Trump presidency when the dirty tricks became more hysterical and blatant, so full of spite and arrogance.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ideally, any deep state apparatus would prefer to smoothly operate in the dark; it would rather not show its hand. But when Trump characterized the establishment as the ‘swamp’, many in the Deep State took it personally and circled the wagons as a matter of professional pride. And when they discovered their gangster tactics were being lauded and lionized by Big Media, their attitude went from one of nervous trepidation to boastful pride. They began to feel as ‘made men’ who can get away with anything as Jewish Supremacists, Democrats, and Cuck-Republicans control just about everything that matters.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though most Deep Staters are Democratic or globalist(and despised George W. Bush), it was well-understood during his presidency that Establishment GOP would never ever challenge the Deep State but rather call on its services and ‘expertise’ to keep the empire running and expanding. And as Jews took over the institutions and industries that matter most(and they also control the gods and the sacraments of the New Order), it was understood that the ultimate purpose of the Deep State and the US government is to appease and indulge the Jews and their Sorosian vision of globalism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="69"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, Donald Trump’s rhetoric in 2016 was mostly bluster, and he didn’t really mean to attack the Deep State or derail the neo-imperialist globalist plan, i.e. he was just playing the populist card with the crowd, a kind of Reality-TV politics. Well, it seems MAGA folks and the Deep State have one thing in common: They took Trump’s words seriously, if only on the emotional level.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Instead of sticking with the usual GOP talking points(about ‘lower taxes’ and the like), Trump kept hammering on issues that had a real triggering effect on the Deep State(and of course the Jews who are allergic to pitchfork passions, rather like Leo Frank). In effect, Trump’s criticism of foreign policy in war and trade was, except for fealty to Israel and swipes at Iran, a scathing indictment of the Deep State’s management of world affairs since the end of the Cold War. Even if Trump was exaggerating for political expediency, it became a matter of pride for members of the Deep State to teach him a lesson, not least because the rise of homos among their ranks made the Club bitchier and more hissy. And of course, the megalomaniacal Jewish elements and the snotty Wasp elements in the Deep State wanted to teach him a lesson as well, leading to the triple whammy of Covid hysteria, George Floyd riots, and Election rigging on an industrial scale.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEir4lp7lBPC74Yc1-PQ_taNfyDUJ2LAy9lOSHw7m3DKS88LcEQmzt30Yh3_SBGyBoNhntZNpRDjpah-dO1vzEsdXbGFW2jX4TE0L2sVcy98p4US117mub13ZP0v45QjH1WTySlXnU01Hbno8Tli_-aM-9RqrD79mOlH15kFs3vU7mIvgqhb-fmPa7c5uA/w494-h640/freak.webp" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="494" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In our time, paradoxically enough, extreme cynicism co-exists side by side with extreme sincerity. It makes sense because, in order for extremely cynical people to have things go their way, extremely naive people must fall for their BS. It’s like a Televangelist Crook needs an army of suckers. For a man as cynical as Donald Trump to stir up the crowd, he needed suckers hoping for a savior. And in order for Jewish Supremacists to hold onto their power, there must be suckers who believe the greatest threat to ‘our democracy’ is ‘nazis’ and ‘white supremacists’. And in order for the elites to keep their wealth and privileges, it sure helps to convince a lot of ‘well-educated’ fools that there is nothing higher than Sodomania, which is to the ‘sophristicates’ what Beatlemania was to the teeny-boppers in the Sixties. The fuc*ers need the suckers, and the more the fuc*ers fuc*, the more the suckers must suck.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Thus, we have both increasing cynicism and sincerity in our politics. Take the Covid-Mania, pushed by the most cynical power-mongers in the world, and so many people took the bait. Or the nonsensical cult of George Floyd. Jewish supremacists and the Democratic Party exploited his death for political gain, but there was no shortage of idiots to revere the dead moron as a saint(and would love to wash his feet and suck his you-know-what if he were alive or incarnated in the form of a thug-angel).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="137"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, even the minions fall into two categories, those who believe themselves to be wink-wink-in-the-know and those who swallow the BS whole hog. Many so-called ‘progressives’ know stuff like Covid Hysteria and Floyd Circus were overhyped and politically exploited, BUT they believed them to be useful and ‘necessary’ narratives for the higher good or for power’s sake. Even if they themselves have hardly any power or privilege on the personal level, the meaning of their lives derives from being ‘team-players’ on the right side of history or power. It’s like many globalists know the simpleminded Ukraine Narrative is largely bogus, but they either worship Globo-Homo or believe Jews-and-homos to be the rightful rulers of the world, and therefore ANYTHING is justified to undermine Neo-Traditionalist Russia that refuses to bend over to the Jewish-Homo Pud.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="48"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though most ‘well-educated’ globalists are nowhere near the power, they flatter themselves to be in-the-game by the virtue of their ‘education’ and partiality to stuff like NPR and The New Yorker that cater to the ‘better’ or ‘fancier’ kind of people. (Oh, we are so very impressed!)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for the true-believing suckers(aka NPCs), they are so dumb that they can be made to swallow just about anything. For dummies, what matters most is having something to feel enraged or righteous about. It’s all about the feeling, and new doses of faddish hysterics keep them feeling up-and-down as justice-junkies. Incapable of logic and lacking in integrity, they usually bend with the prevailing wind in the manner of “Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s no wonder so much of current ‘democratic’ politics is symbolic than substantive. As both parties have either lost or betrayed their traditional economic base and/or ideological principles, politics has become a game of distractions whereby people’s emotions are enraptured or made ecstatic over triviality or nonsense. Thomas Frank wrote a book called “What’s the Matter with Kansas?” that queried why so many lower-income conservatives vote for the GOP that, beholden to the power of big money, didn’t have their economic interests in mind, but similar questions could be asked along the lines of “What’s the Matter with Massachusetts?” when the Democratic Party mostly abandoned the Working Class and liberalism-as-principle and now caters to Big Money, once associated with the GOP.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="316"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Snubbed by Big Money in preference for the New Democrats, one would think the GOP would seek greener pastures elsewhere, but the Party elites, rightly or wrongly, view most of the Republican base as dullards, mediocrities, and fools lacking the talent and energy to run modern politics. So, they long for the return of Big Money to the GOP camp, which is turning out to be a hopeless double whammy: Big Money doesn’t want to be associated with ‘conservatism’(regarded as either retrograde or craven and second-rate people), and GOP’s cucking to Big Money is proving to be as pointless as its dream of winning over Jews, the ultimate prize bull. At the same time, GOP establishment angers the base that feels neglected and treated with contempt by Party leaders who really only care about themselves. Wealth, power, influence, and prestige were more spread out geographically in the American Past. Christian Churches were powerful in their own right, Labor Unions mattered, ethnic blocs held their own, every region had its local hegemony, and there was the balance of the city and the small town. But free trade destroyed Big Labor, Old Religions lost their prestige, ethnic groups melded into a bland thing called ‘whiteness’, generations of small-towners moved to the city, electronic mass media homogenized culture all across ‘the fruited plains’, the rise of shameless vice turned the culture into an open sewage, and PC indoctrination(followed by ‘wokeness’) made all the ‘educated’ folks chant the same mantras & worship the same gods, especially the ‘rainbow’-colored homo anus. The end result is the hyper-concentration of most of the power, wealth, influence, and prestige in key Jewish-heavy urban areas, the only places that matter. On that note, it’s understandable why GOP only looks to Big Money and the donor class. There is nothing else left of any substance in the game of power.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="621" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgmnOlEyccqDLHUNjPVYWX8nquF2Syim6GWT8PKdRxfHs-vz-jtt3CJ7joEkF4hfLRSLWvOgLRK6ONO6fHFmypIfW9GGcH4kZqfrcjq4nXu5WxEbzRY890Dph1oyB6h1l9sfFH7VB4cqmw25NBBlksOnY6wQPc4pE9ZXiXaGZOktZiOOhg0vXjtkcSx1g/w640-h621/scum%20cuck.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One would think Democrats would be happy, and of course, the power-democrats and Jewish supremacists are thankful for the Great Triangulation brought about by Slick Willy, or Bill Clinton. Tricky(Dick Nixon) and Slicky(Billy Boy Clinton) proved to be highly consequential presidents through the art/science of ‘triangulation’. Tricky, along with Henry Kissinger, cast aside ideological consistency and broke the ice with Red China against Red Russia, laying the groundwork for the massive geo-political realignments in years to come. If Truman ‘lost China’, Nixon started the process of ‘winning’ it to use against the Soviet Union. It angered many staunch anti-communists who insisted the US stand by Taiwan, but Nixon and Kissinger opted for ‘realogy’ over ideology.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Slick Willy Clinton’s biggest achievement was at home, but it also involved triangulation, fatally undermining the GOP by leading the Democratic Party to betray the working class(like Nixon sidestepped Taiwan) and forging an alliance with Big Money and Free Trade. Drop the traditional Democratic Party base(as a bunch of ‘losers’) and go with the real money and the ‘winners’, especially as the rising boomer capitalists were more ‘liberal’ than their historical antecedents.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the cases of both Tricky and Slicky, there was much confusion as so many Liberals were convinced that Nixon was a rigid anti-communist and so many Conservatives were convinced that Clinton was a hardcore 60s radical. It’s somewhat fitting that Clinton gave a heartfelt eulogy at Nixon’s funeral as they shared a savvy streak, and furthermore, their grand designs involved China, first as a key factor in the Cold War and later in ‘free trade’ globalism(that undermined the working class Democratic base and enriched the urban elites).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="71"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However, all that money and power were bound to have a deleterious impact on Democratic Party politics and Liberal principles. The Party of the People turned into the Party of the elites & court-freaks and lost were the liberal principles of rule of law, free speech, critical thinking & rationalism, and civil liberties, all in favor of the ‘gods’, or idols and icons, favored by Jewish Supremacists for their own benefit.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With no real principles or idealism left, the Democratic Party appeals to its voters(most of whom are not doing so great) with symbolism and conceit of being ‘progressive’ or ‘woke’. A saner and more mature population would see right through it, but generations of Americans were weaned on Pop Culture and addicted to Celebrity Cult as their main social compass and signposts, and the results are truly appalling. So, just like the GOP once exploited the have-lesses with the symbolism about ‘family values’, the Democratic Party exploits its counterpart with the conceit of being more ‘progressive’, which is to weep over George Floyd myth & BLM lies, that is when not cheering for Globo-Homo celebration of the rainbow-colored bung as the ultimate culmination of human civilization. Yes, Jews are smart and goyim are dumb, and Jews toy with the goy.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="335" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi11h0TJdwQyFrdbMjcVTpG2Wy9KWySYdQnbnI41H2YVRWWnFWiOcp36gHk3BvmMDsA9n0Tv5mGUX8Gr1-TAkb2y2Ha22rp7GltCZUSyOtPcul8_c2g3OlkNhB_tQL6D6uPwXFlpdca-WBIZlOTeg2GU6zfii2DXn2uWsCIDpKOuHLLEoELFeRPOW92_Q/w640-h335/retro-bush-vs-gore-facebookJumbo.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, how might history have been different if Al Gore been president in 2000? The American Presidency, despite its limitations, still represents the most powerful position in the world. The office matters if not always the man. We would like to believe the president’s limited power owes to the Constitution and an elegant system of checks-and-balances, but the fact that a true Constitutionalist like Ron Paul remained at the margins of Washington Politics suggests otherwise. Presidential power is checked more by the Deep State(or the Beast), special interests, entrenched institutions, oligarchs & big money, and the ‘gods’(angels & demons that enforce the sacraments and taboos of society). Just consider the treatment of Antifa & BLM rioters and 1/6 protesters. Where is the legal consistency?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, if the President’s agenda happens to be aligned with that of the most powerful institutions and groups(that also, via media and academia, shape the minds of the elites and the masses), he may indeed consider himself very powerful. It’d be like sailing with the winds or rowing down the river. If the President doesn’t particularly care for the Agenda but goes along nonetheless, he would be a weak figure. But what if he genuinely agrees with it and goes along. Is he being powerful or merely in tune with the power?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="280"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The president is like a hamster in a maze. Despite his freedom of movement, he can only move along the walls of the maze; those who place the walls guide the movement, much like the TV executives over the character in TRUMAN SHOW. The walls could be legal obstructions, deep state machinations, media pressure, mass rage(fueled by the media of course), elite disapproval, and the ‘gods’(or what are deemed ‘holy’ by society, e.g. conservative politicians dare not step on the third rail of the Globo-Homo issue because Jewish power in media and lawfare has convinced so many people, especially among the elites, that few things are as emblematic of what the West is about as the cult-worship of Globo-Homo; indeed, many people today are aghast that anyone would oppose ‘gay marriage’, which goes to show the kind of satanic inversion that Jewish Power has brought about in the West, so full of weak-souled and weak-willed whites and other goyim).<br />So, those who get to erect the walls and arrange the maze have more power than any hamster-leader scurrying about inside it. For all his ‘freedom of movement’ and ‘individual agency’, he has no choice but to navigate within the set pattern, much like Jack Torrance is manipulated by ‘higher’ powers in THE SHINING. Donald Trump was one big fat hamster who liked to do things his own way, but he had no control over the walls within the Washington Maze. He spoke of building walls to keep the illegals out, but walls were erected around him by the deep state, the swamp, the beast. These were invisible walls but severely limited what he could order and execute.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="427" src="https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fb/df/ff/fbdfff112c95da658cbf169500e80b54.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given such limitations of the presidency, could Al Gore really have made a difference? Surely, not all US presidents were puppets, or at least total puppets, like George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Joe Biden. It surely made some difference that JFK won in 1960 and that Nixon won in 1968. Reagan was certainly different from Carter.<br />Still, their presidencies were all examples of maneuvering within walls set up, maintained, and shifted by other powers. Sometimes, a certain cause or agenda is derailed because a politician fails to win. Other times, it is hastened precisely because the winner who opposes it is discredited, severely damaging, fairly or unfairly, not only his own reputation but policies and agendas associated with him. George W. Bush most certainly did great harm to Conservatism with his ineptitude and stupidity, especially where the younger generation was concerned.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="316"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In economic policies and trends, Al Gore’s presidency wouldn’t have been much different from Bush’s. Indeed, throughout the 90s, it was Bill Clinton who completed the elite-preferred transformation of the US economy into a thoroughly globalized one based on ‘free trade’ formulations, and Al Gore was right by his side, siding even with Republicans against a maverick like Ross Perot. Even as far back as 1992, it seems there were far fewer differences between George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton on matters of economics.<br />Most likely, the fix was in, and Democratic elites and politicians knew the last vestiges of the New Deal(and its idea of National Economy) would be scrapped for good. But given the traditional Democratic base of Big Labor, some Party members had to make noise about opposing ‘free trade’ to protect American jobs and the like. But it was understood that the great majority of Republican votes and some Democratic votes would be sufficient to bring about the transformation. Once the victory was assured behind closed doors, enough Democrats could vote against it(as a futile gesture) for the sake of plausible deniability, i.e. even though Democratic elites wanted it just as much as the Republican ones, they could point their finger and say ‘GOP really done it’. The only candidate who might have changed the course of US history in 1992 was Ross Perot, but his erratic behavior, triggered by what he called ‘Republican dirty tricks’, and the perennial weakness of Third Party politics doomed him at the polls. And by 2000, globalism was such a done deal that there was hardly any difference between George W. Bush and Al Gore. Indeed, if Pat Buchanan’s proto-populism and Ralph Nader’s anti-corporatism struck a chord with certain segments of the American public, it was because the contest might as well have been between George Gore and Al Bush.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The real big question, that is if Al Gore had gained the presidency in 2000, comes down to “Would 9/11 have happened?” The first obvious question is, “Would Al Gore’s team have been more vigilant against such attacks?” Post-9/11, some commentators, even among Liberals, placed some blame on Bill Clinton for not having been sufficiently aggressive against terrorism. Based on such an assumption, one could argue Al Gore wouldn’t have been any different than his predecessor. Or maybe not. Perhaps, less distracted(with stuff like the Lewinsky Scandal), his mind would have been more on the ball.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The question becomes more complicated on the suspicion that the Bush regime had something to do with 9/11, directly or indirectly. If so, then Al Gore’s presidency would have greatly reduced the chance of 9/11, that is unless it too would have included individuals, many of them arch-Zionists, in contact with the conspirators.<br />After all, there had been plenty of war game scenarios during Bill Clinton’s administration on possible invasions and regime change operations in Iraq and other Middle East states. As we’ve observed over the years, there isn’t much difference between Jewish Neocons and Jewish Neolibs as both camps are first and foremost all about “Is it good for Jews?” and “Is it great for Israel?” Madeleine Albright would have been perfectly at home with Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle, and Neocon stooge John McCain was 99% aligned with Jewish Democrats on foreign policy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At this point, even though 9/11 attacks were carried out by Muslim terrorists, it’s incontestable that Israeli operatives knew something was up and that key figures in the US intelligence willfully obstructed necessary measures that might have exposed and prevented the attacks. Did the conspiracy move into action upon the presidency of George W. Bush or had it been in the works for some time during the Clinton years. Of course, we’re talking of rogue elements, and neither Clinton nor Bush most probably had any hand in it, not because they are decent men but the idea would have been too crazy and outrageous even to imagine. (Come of think of it, the ultimate ‘failure of imagination’ was to overlook the depth of Jewish Supremacist evil and what it is willing to do for more power.) Yet, when the attack happened, Clinton and Bush were surely asking themselves, “What REALLY happened?” Work long enough in politics, and you hear things and you know things. Muslim Terrorists did it, but who paved the way? Given what Clinton and Bush know about politics and power, they surely suspected the Jewish Hand, but they also knew they couldn’t say anything about it. If Jewish Power in the Sixties was such that no one dared to seek the truth on USS Liberty, imagine what it was in 2001. Difference between a 4 month tiger cub and a full grown one.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If I had to guess, the plan was in the works by ‘rogue’ elements — but then, roguish behavior by Jews or those amenable to Jewish interests have been the New Normal in US government, what with Jonathan Pollard now living in Israel and giving a big fat middle finger to Gentile America that sheepishly looks away in utter humiliation — during Clinton’s administration, and it would have been carried out whether Bush or Gore was in the White House. To make the attack happen, Jewish supremacist elements merely needed to snoop on the terrorists and nudge-nudge them(in Cass Sunstein fashion) toward fulfilling their goal. And the conspirators didn’t need Bush and hardcore Neocons in the White House as US intelligence agencies had already been filled with Zionists and goy-cuck-collaborators at every level. One bunch of conspirators nudge-nudge and guide the terrorists toward the Big Day, and other bunch of conspirators sabotage the intelligence from within so that the operation will progress without much hindrance from vigilant, principled, and patriotic officers.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, if I had to wager, 9/11 would have happened regardless of who became president in 2000. But, what of the reactions and consequences? Like Bush, Al Gore would most certainly have invaded Afghanistan, especially as the Jewish-controlled Media immediately blasted 24/7, “OSAMA BIN LADEN DONE IT! HE’S THE ONE! HE’S HIDING IN AFGHANISTAN!” And just like most Democrats supported the Afghan War, most Republicans would have gotten behind Gore against Afghanistan because the whole country called for revenge. (The whole Afghan-Osama thing seems to have been pre-scripted and ready-to-go as it was all over the news right after the attacks.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="129"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The big question is whether the Iraq War would have happened with Gore at the helm, and I think yes. It was more likely with Dubya as commander-in-chief, but again, Jewish Neolibs and Jewish Neocons are two sides of the same coin. (During the Clinton Years, Madeleine Albright was hankering for more wars, and it was elements in the US military that restrained her.) Furthermore, the goyim in both parties are equally obeisant to whatever Jews want to push next. The inner circle during the Clinton Years was already discussing various options on Iraq, and several scenarios involved invasion and regime-change. And the fact that so many Democrats supported the Iraq War(despite all the obvious lies) is proof enough that Jewish powerbrokers in both parties wanted the war.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="240"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For sure, much of the so-called ‘liberal media’ also got behind Bush and willfully peddled the lies of the regime. While the men around Gore might have been a bit less hawkish(though Democrats have become more hawkish over the years than the biggest hawks during the Cold War), they also would have been ardent Zionists and looking to maximize the opportunities made possible by 9/11 for the sake of Israeli and Jewish-supremacist hegemonic interests, i.e. ‘Never let a crisis go to waste’. (Indeed, so-called ‘anti-war’ Obama who took the presidency in 2008 ended up expanding wars in the Middle East, totally destroying Libya and wrecking much of Syria. He also did the bidding of Jews to cause havoc in Yemen and Ukraine. It goes to show Obama’s anti-Iraq-War stance as Senator wasn’t principled but tactical. Surely, Jewish advisors were playing good cop and bad cop with the goyim. Hillary and many others were advised to be pro-war, whereas Obama was advised to be anti-war, so that, were the war to go badly, he could step in as the sensible person in the room. He also posed as a critic of capitalism, especially timely following the 2008 financial meltdown, but what did he do once in office? Bail out Wall Street and expand the wars in the Middle East. He was nothing but a toy goy of the Jews, and Al Gore as president wouldn’t have been any different.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="9"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://rumble.com/v16qfq1-stew-peters-show-extended-1-on-1-interview-with-q-and-a-the-orchestration-o.html" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://rumble.com/v16qfq1-stew-peters-show-extended-1-on-1-interview-with-q-and-a-the-orchestration-o.html">https://rumble.com/v16qfq1-stew-peters-show-extended-1-on-1-interview-with-q-and-a-the-orchestration-o.html</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Would the Iraq War have turned into a mess under Gore? Almost certainly, just like neither Kennedy, Johnson, or Nixon could fix the mess in Vietnam. However, the media might have gone somewhat softer on Gore for obvious partisan reasons. Remember that the Jewish elites both wanted to use Bush II and abuse him. Stoke his ‘Churchillian’ vanity and encourage him to invade Iraq and make sure Hussein’s regime is ground into dust but also make sure that he doesn’t succeed too much as it will advantage the GOP and its ‘Christo-fascist’ base. Make Bush II destroy the Arabs but then destroy Bush II as an incompetent. And if the war goes truly badly, pretend that the Jewish ‘Liberal’ media were misled by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the like.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="222"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For the Jewish war-mongers, Gore would have been more useful for the Iraq War. There were massive protests in the US and EU, but they were less anti-war than anti-Bush, especially as so many so-called ‘liberals’ and ‘progressives’ were convinced that Bush II was a Christo-Fascist effecting the theocratic takeover of government. The attitude and behavior of the same crowd during the Obama years exposed how phony their anti-war stance was. Wars were okay if Obama the black guy or The One did it. And during the Trump years, the very same people were hostile toward Trump for trying to make peace with North Korea, withdraw from Syria, and end the war in Afghanistan. Unlike the Sixties anti-war protestors who objected to both Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon’s conducts of the war in Vietnam-Cambodia, the new ‘progressive’ movement is totally opportunistic and partisan, lacking in principles and ethical consistency. The big lesson for the so-called Liberals since 1968 was “never choose principle over power because power decides everything”. Principled Liberals and Radicals in 68 caused havoc for the Democrats, leading to Richard Nixon’s victory. So, the wink-wink understanding is to go into Anti-War mode only when it hurts the Republicans, but then, Trumpism made it less likely that American Conservatives will be mindlessly supporting any future war(unless the US is attacked).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="264"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A Gore-led war in Iraq would likely have caused less furor in the US and EU. Globalists certainly gave Obama a pass in his wars(and even supported them), and they were more than willing to hand the presidency to Hillary Clinton, arguably even more war-mongering(for Jewish interests) than George W. Bush. This is why the Deep State or Creep State prefers Democratic leaders whose ‘progressive’ sheen serves to deflect criticism and opposition from the most vocal, organized, militant, and/or hysterical elements of the West.<br />Even when conservatives oppose a war, they usually don’t protest or make trouble(and always ‘support the troops’), whereas the so-called ‘left’ often goes batshit crazy, especially in big cities where they dominate. So, a war led by a Republican president could be problematic for the warmongers in the Creep State as it’s more likely to trigger and agitate the ‘radical’ types. But if the war is presided over by a Democrat, ‘anti-war’ voices are likely to self-mute, especially as the US military has been remade into a crusading force of BLM Negrolatry and the glories of Globo-Homo ‘Pride’(or Poo-Ride); the current US military has become for the Proglodytes what the Western Imperialist forces were to the Christians with their “Onward Christian Soldiers” mentality, and it accounts for much of the animus against Russia among the ‘globniks’, a people so deracinated, de-moralized, and despiritualized that they think a drag queen twerking in front of their kids is akin to a secular angel(and worth forcing on other nations at the point of a bayonet).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, had Gore gone into Iraq, the end-result would have been much the same, a total fiasco. Of course, the opposition from the Neocon-infested GOP would have been about Gore not being tough enough than about the foolishness, not to mention the immorality, of the war in the first place. Anti-war position became semi-legitimate among Republicans only with the rise of Donald Trump, and it’s no wonder Neocons hated him so much as their principal(or sole) purpose for the GOP was to serve as the hawkish hammer of Zionist globalist policy. That said, the war might not have affected Gore’s chance at re-election in 2004 as it’s been noted that the Iraq War, for all its setbacks, might have secured Bush a second term because Americans generally don’t like to change leaders during wartime.</span></p><div class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px auto; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; width: 593px; z-index: 1;"><img height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-Frw4xrhTQE5LG8GpXZ9AhPdDQFpMCqZebqy3tmtmNMm8XiJlj8OXQDE4H2jpvtLmzbRNowWyfcNIBu2SkJKZiEDvtBAyebKgwq-NoCVc0-mcYtzzp5nDPjWs7-NZvptoVKkoXwynWC0tC6OgTy1mhDlL0eliwOAI5HBdyFtHsYqPMf_5XWcm0g8V4A/w640-h480/abu%20grahib.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /><p class="wp-caption-text" style="border: 0px; color: grey; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 3px 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Looks like the US military was already into Globo-Homo Depravity at Abu Grahib, Force the Arabs to get all homo and tooty. </strong></em>�</p></div><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="199"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, Gore would have been less likely to venture into Iraq, and one wonders how history might have played out if the US avoided what many at the time called the biggest foreign policy blunder in American history. Hussein regime would have continued to serve as a bulwark between Syria and Iran, the nation that especially benefited from Hussein’s removal and the ascendancy of Shiites in Iraq, whereupon Iraq came to serve as a bridge between Iran and Syria. No doubt this factor made the Neolib Zionists surrounding Obama escalate tensions in the Middle East, leading to the ravages by ISIS and ‘moderate rebels’ armed by US and its proxy allies. If there had been no Iraq War, there might have been no Syria War, and World Jewry might be a bit less panic-stricken about Iran as the rising counter-hegemon to Israel. And whereas Israel has working relations with Arab countries purely on the basis of mutual interests(as there’s no love lost between Jews and Arabs), Iran’s relations with Shia Arabs in Iraq and Syrians seem to be genuine, based on something more than political calculations. That is precisely what Jews fear most about Iran.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">From a certain angle, one could argue that the Iraq War was spectacularly successful for the Jews. Iraq to this day remains fractured and divided, led by weak governments. Despite its close relations with Iran, it is still under the thumb of the US military. Also, even though regime change failed in Syria, the country is in ruins, a total wreck, and Iran paid dearly in lives and material to support their ally, especially difficult given the sanctions regimen by the JeWest. It’s been said it will take decades for Syria to recover. And as part of ‘Arab Spring’, the West managed to destroy Libya as well and steal its gold and oil.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On the other hand, the Syrian War drew Iran and Syria closer and even came to involve Russia that finally realized it could not trust the West, which is run by Jewish supremacists and spineless white weaklings. It was the true dawning of Russia’s iron resolve to defy the West beyond its own national borders. And the conduct of US and NATO foreign policy alerted China that the West is totally ruled by pathological gangsters of the Zionic Tribe. And even US allies, proxies, and partners felt burned by the Syrian affair. They’d joined in the war against Assad with assurance of regime change from Washington, but when Russia moved to save Syria, the West didn’t go all in. As a result, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and UAE ended up with eggs on their faces. With the Assad regime having survived, they must somehow come to terms with it and shamefacedly hide or minimize their role in one of the most despicable behaviors by Arabs-Turks-Muslims.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, had Gore won re-election in 2004, Obama(or Hillary for that matter) certainly wouldn’t have been president in 2008, at which point the US economy would have been in deep recession as the result of the bursting of the housing bubble, which was baked into the pie of US economics as both political parties had gone all-in on the optimism of the ‘ownership society’. And if Gore had gone into Iraq, the war would have been as bad for him at the end of his two terms as it was for Bush in his final years. And Hurricane Katrina fiasco would have happened just the same, though it’s possible Gore’s administration might have reacted somewhat more competently(and the Democratic-dominated media would have covered for him, just like they covered for the ‘mostly peaceful protests’ that wrecked cities in 2020).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="283"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With Gore and Democrats being blamed for so much bad stuff in 2008, the Republicans most likely would have taken the White House. John the bomb-bomb-Iran McCain could have been president, and GOP dominance might have slowed down the march of Globo-Homo. On the other hand, GOP is cucked to Jewish Power, and the iron rule of American Politics is “Don’t Make the Jewish Elites Angry”, and there would have been no real pushback against garbage like ‘gay marriage’ because most Republicans shake in their boots and wet their pants at the mere thought of Jewish displeasure. Jews sent out a message loud and clear to all politicians, “This ‘gay’ stuff is OUR baby, and we will be very very upset with anyone who opposes it.” So, instead of pro-homo vs anti-homo forces, it was pro-homo and muted silence. When ‘gay marriage’ became law of the land, not a single Republican denounced it as infamy, let alone infamy made possible by Jewish supremacist globalists. Sensible people back then knew what a disaster it would be, and look around now where ‘pride’ is now synonymous with homosexuality and where sodomy & tranny-genital mutilation are the greatest wonders of the West. When something as fundamentally important as marriage was debased and corrupted to appease the sick vanity of homos and greed of Jewish Supremacists, it was bound to lead to more horrors. And now, US institutions are controlled by the Drag Cartel. Just like garbage loans were sold as AAA derivates around the world and sunk the global economy, ‘gay’ garbage is packaged as the New Normal in morality & spirituality and poisoning souls everywhere. But deracinated whites are pathetically weak of heart and mind.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1G0tfb8ZefA?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" title="Peter Schiff mocked by Mike Norman and Ben Stein for correctly predicting the housing crash" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">George W. Bush’s presidency was especially damaging to the American Right because the man was so stupid, inept, and buffoonish. He couldn’t even string simple words together into sentences as if he was brain-damaged or something. The key Millennial demographic turned anti-right in large part due to Bush’s presidency though there are other key factors as well, especially the increasing politicization of just about everything, from sitcoms to TV commercials to kindergarten classrooms. If you couldn’t get away from the Stalin Cult in the Soviet Union of the 1930s and 40s(and if National Socialist symbols were everywhere under Hitler’s reign), you increasingly couldn’t get away from Jewish-Supremacist-proxy-messaging, especially about holy homos and sacred blacks. Even a freaking cereal box might be telling your kids to celebrate sodomy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, when the faces of leadership of the American Right were that of a dufus like George W. Bush and a total scumbag like Dick Cheney, the younger generation was going to sour on Conservatism, and its utter failure in war, crisis, and economy paved the way for the Hope Campaign of Obama, aka The One. Of course, objectively speaking, Obama’s reign has been even more disastrous. In foreign policy, wars spread like wildfire in the Middle East, Ukraine was subverted from one horror to the next, and China & Russia began the serious process of consolidation against the increasingly cuckoo US.<br />Domestically, the government under Obama went all-in on globo-homo and paved the way to the current utter collapse of morality, culture, and basic sanity. Besides, what does Obama himself represent? ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. The fact that all those white people made such a man ‘the most powerful man in the world’ goes to show how worthlessly cucky-wucked the West has become, what with 80% of Europeans cheering him on as the Savior.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, Obama started the ruinous trend of endless money-printing instead of taking serious measures to suck out the poison from the economy. But then, he was nothing but a pet monkey of Jewish oligarchs who also put Globo-Homo on steroids, leading to the total degradation of US culture and values. To shore up his black brotha cred after ho-de-do-ing to Jews and Homos, the stupid fool pushed BLM that, along with Antifa, became a festering wound on the US.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Under Bill Clinton, Jewish Boomers finalized the process of taking over the US. Under George W. Bush, Jewish Neocons had their turn at the wheel to steer the US as the gigantic Aircraft Carrier for Israel. Under Obama, Jews gained absolute power not only as the dominant partner but total master over goyim, and they lost all restraints in pushing their gross and putrid agenda.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If there was one silver lining to Bush II’s disastrous presidency, which did so much to discredit the Right, it was to awaken a new kind of populist conservatism(the kind that Patrick Buchanan had campaigned for) that emphasized the working class & middle class and resented being used as cannon fodder for Jews, most of whom(Republican or Democratic) are globalists and Israel-Firsters with utter contempt for masses of white goyim. It led to the rise of Donald Trump who ran a rather inspired campaign but unfortunately proved to be unserious or clueless about the forces arrayed against him, especially as he drew from the very Swamp to fill up his administration.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="29"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, I don’t believe a Gore Presidency would have made much difference in the overall trajectory of the US leading the world to the precipice of global disaster.</span></p><div class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px auto; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline; width: 594px; z-index: 1;"><img class="" height="592" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhAZAyQH-CQOaBThDk7gI8ugQeElU5C6hcDKM30IF0eDabUMAdwAv-_RDvQwSmg0ErXabUmSZuO96T5Ip6hR6pjtImNO-qQhnW4wfC3Ne7JuBsYSUfWI5l4MoPN5RQXntGSRDWH6uZ7U0cGKksydY4JOn6fpB0pRo8DnqNr5YPbE3rGVjcxJX4bmydGzA/w640-h592/hillary.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /><p class="wp-caption-text" style="border: 0px; color: grey; font-family: inherit; font-size: 12px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 3px 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Well, I suppose it could have been even worse.</strong></em>�</p></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-51517686797180989072022-12-07T17:11:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:07.412-08:00Of Cockraine and Whindus. Goy Cocks Fighting in Ukraine and Whites as Hindus of the Jewish Empire<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="601" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0kYgLdAo4Kb267IKpkcidbTEpGwtmim41me4i6HX7uYHsYUM84qtjrjBn3tRdlyJHKUCCsm3ql09iZdtzQpQ-1pNmD9OhxhNm9TAPbSEu-DFikEZx77Otz8rDBo7tbZS5xkEhM26B0Wff_wt075KAfwy10oOvHJKQbd7MUOOnKNmGiKoBsm5g6E9hgw/w640-h601/header.png" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="233"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Do cockfighters care about the cocks? No, they only care about the game, the betting and winning. They don’t care about dead cocks because that’s what cockfighting is about, training male chickens to fight to kill or die. If your cock dies, you don’t grieve and think it’s the end of the world. It’s a game where you your cock will eventually fall to a tougher one. Then, you get some more cocks and re-enter the game. Cocks do all the killing and dying. Even the ones that win only get some food and water, but then their view of life is limited to chickendom. Being dumb animals, they have no concept of life but to follow their instincts, which is easily manipulated by humans who know that cocks will naturally fight if pitted against one another. It’s the cockfighter who wins the money while cocks either die or get hurt, as even the winning cock suffers some injuries. But then, are young soldiers all that different? They are willing to kill people they don’t know or lose their limbs and even die in wars just for cheapie medals on their chest and flag-waving paeans to serving-one’s-country, even if it means engaging in overseas wars far away that have nothing to do with national interests but only serve the global agenda of Jewish supremacist tribalists.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="375" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjJuRZRAMHaeWjE-2Qw7WkgKIq5T5vx40YxehvDZcUhFA_z7Njo5HR-hlTeV2F2ih-m_ayb9ffAKlly6bpQD6PlDwR9ukWxcQk00HSDi5oS82DUuFhnuGd0hDqBux_PZrMADu3cnemr8VqvyXXG-xHdQtROKBn009fJpfZqPN3KDYLKMpdpggLe0rLEwg/w640-h375/goyim%20dumb%20cock.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="201"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If goy cucks are sapheads who sheepishly serve at the feet of Jewish Supremacist power, goy cocks are full of fight but aren’t too bright. They love posturing tough with guns & grenades and copters & missiles but can’t see beyond the rah-rah Rambo-like mentality of ‘serving your country’ and ‘kicking ass’ in the name of ‘beer and country’. They don’t ask, at least not to any meaningful degree, “Who really controls my country?” and “Are the elites serving essential national interests or some nefarious agenda of a dark cabal?” They certainly have physical courage in fields strewn with bullets and bombs, but they are feeble upstairs. (On the other hand, some of the stupidest and most brain-twisted idiots are the ‘highly-educated’ and ‘well-read’, not because they’re low-IQ but because, in their deference to elitism and conceit on status, uncritically trust and absorb the prejudices packaged as ‘perspectives’ from dominant institutions controlled by Jewish supremacists, globalist-imperialists, and the military-industrial-complex. But, who are they to question the narratives when they’re tied up with the sanctimony of ‘Western Democratic’ Globohomo, Negrolatry, and endless incantations of diversity-equity-inclusion? Elite white-bread are white-read, or well-read in accordance to the Sorosian agenda.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One might even say the cocks, for all their physical courage, are mental cowards because they, like the samurai in feudal times, mindlessly obey all directives from above. Their hierarchical ‘conservative’ mentality predisposes them to serve authority, respect superiors, and follow orders. So, even if the political order is decadent or degenerate(and denigrate genuine conservative and traditional values), your average conzo soldier is bound to say ‘yes sir’ because his simpleminded honor is about taking orders and carrying out one’s duties without question in TOP GUN fashion. In other words, they aren’t all that different from critters in dog-fighting or cockfighting. Fighting Cocks are fierce but are still chicken, and whites are total chickens, or ‘whickens’, before Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, all soldiers the world over follow orders. If every soldier defied his superiors and raised endless questions, no military could function. Precisely because the military(and indeed the state in general) in any system is about the people more or less going along with the agenda from above, it is of crucial importance that the leaders are responsible men rooted in sound view of reality and motivated by genuine national interests. When the US was preparing for the Iraq War, surely many in government(and even the military) were skeptical about the plan, but they went along and did their part because it was their job to do so. As the saying goes, fish rots from the head. Even good men end up serving evil when the top is infested with rot.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="69"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The US and the ‘Collective West’(as extension of US hegemony) aren’t led by sound people and motivated by national interests(or even by genuine universalist principles, misguided and naively optimistic as they may be). In the so-called West, only Israel operates on the basis of genuine national interests, though the ultra-nationalism inherent in Zionism has been pathologized into neo-imperialist Yinonism(or the ideology of the Yinon Plan).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="571" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhE4ySjefEMHPIO0CabQg7PR_1hMR8BlxD9B-X1-Kmj6Y0xu30_vPcIQanhN6YxBgC3fbqf-FGgtYyauu07wF6jfSoWQZfy-wbvrWDzjDEieCVjJsJJXxWf3--NgaDCojpkT2LzRSp4ck-g93sjS3k7OTkuiyjbwJGjwK8wodt8LYC1gKbb0nZ4tTgL7w/w640-h571/halfway%20there.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="312"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Arguably, Hungary and Poland, halfway part of the ‘Collective West’, are still in nationalist mode. Unlike Israel, Hungary practices genuine nationalism that respects other nations on the basis of mutual recognition and reciprocity. Still, Hungary’s situation is precarious because the EU and NATO, as puppets of the Jewish-run US, have their knives out for Orban’s vision of Hungary, even as they profusely praise and fund Israel(despite Jews being the richest people in the world). As for Poland(the land of self-loathing Slavic suck-ups), if it must choose between nationalism and approval from globalist superpower, it leans toward the latter. In the current Ukrainian crisis, Poland has been in lockstep with the Jewish-run US and went so far as to stab Hungary in the back even though it knew with absolute clarity of the ‘Western’ provocations that led to the Russian invasion. Unlike Hungarians who are content to be left alone and leave others alone, Poles suffer from a massive inferiority-superiority complex as they’d once been a central power in Europe but lost it all and found themselves at the mercy of bigger powers. It’s a chicken in hawk’s clothing. Given that Poland’s tragedies were often the result of being caught between two or more great powers, one would think it would opt for neutrality in any conflict, but it has thrown its lot fully with the US that is controlled by Jews who despise Dumb Polacks, but they clever and savvy Jews know how to manipulate Polish national neurosis: “You Poles are Western Slavs, more advanced and sophisticated, not like those boorish hot-blooded Russian Slavs who only know vodka and dancing with bears.” Perhaps, Poles hope that the West will be more tolerant of Poland’s nationalism if Poland serves the globalist project in Ukraine. Or, it could be Poland’s revanchist feelings about Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another factor is every nation/people want to seem tough by having some Other to hate on. Given the power dynamics, the reviled Other usually isn’t the dominant threat or existing tyranny but the approved scapegoat or punching bag. In George Orwell’s 1984, the people are oppressed by ‘Big Brother’ and would gain much to speak out against ‘him’, but no one dares to because ‘Big Brother’ power can crush them like ants. They are cowards under ‘Big Brother’, but people have a psychological need to feel tough and courageous. So, the system directs their rage at ‘Goldstein’ as a therapeutic outlet(as well as for ideological unity).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XvGmOZ5T6_Y?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If peoples in the Collective West were truly tough and honest, they would be denouncing the US above all as the main instigator of wars and gangsterism around the world. Furthermore, they would point to Jewish Supremacists as the demented authors of ‘Western’ policy. But, most Americans are beholden to and/or afraid of Jewish Power. As craven cowards at the feet of Zion, they seek toughness points by saber-rattling at China over Taiwan(or Uighurs) or sticking their chests out at hot-blooded Russia-Russia-Russia. The likes of Mitt Romney and Lindsey Graham, so castrated and obsequious at the feet of Jews, bark like mad dogs at Big Bad Russia and Evil Putin(as ‘Goldstein’). They’re silent about Jewish use of Antifa and BLM to terrorize American cities and the Jewish use of Biden’s administration to effectively destroy US borders, but they howl about the sanctity of Ukraine, which is really Jewish Gangster Paradise, what Cuba was once to the Jewish mafia and the CIA before the Castroite Revolution. Romney might as well be Senator Geary in THE GODFATHER PART 2.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="152"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And of course, there are weaklings who frown upon Russia’s actions because they’re so eager to show that they themselves are not ‘violent’ and ‘aggressive’, as the Jews and the so-called ‘left’ have often depicted ‘white supremacists’, ‘white nationalists’, ‘racists’, and MAGA crowd to be. Having internalized the Jewish accusation that the White Right is all about militancy, the weaklings are so eager to prove otherwise and get triggered by any sight of a white majority country finally pushing back against the Jewish Agenda. The weaklings fear that Russia’s actions have proven Jewish accusations correct, i.e. ‘white nationalism’, of which Russian Nationalism is supposedly a part, is potentially aggressive and warlike, and therefore must be suppressed lest it explode into violence like Russia in Ukraine. Don’t these weaklings know that, when push comes to shove, it’s only force that decides the outcome when all else fails?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="378" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTSnNO1YOBmXTkvCnl2DjK3oIAmd3CxAUu4RU5LVXoXhQAaiiVX8F7J9PrmVadIQ8h1ZOjtg5IkeBsg-iFnVJt7hc1Vkv2yKWa1ZpWqmgVIx2Nfpy0r9QtJ7Qi0QJeoTRSHdpGBynGz51nK_88dOJ2pShc5wAd_Wc9nLrP7xfq2Uwglj5zfPgxWKFHCA/w640-h378/whindu%20cucks.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="260"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Eucks(EU cucks) are hardly different from the whucks(white cucks) in the US. With Holocaustianity and other Jewish-enforced cults(such as Negrolatry and Globo-Homo) as their new sanctities, their leaders and brainwashed masses dare not name the Real Threat to national defense and preservation. NATO is useless because Russia poses no threat to Europe(unless it is provoked, which Jews have been doing since the end of the Soviet Union). If anything, membership in NATO and EU is a far bigger threat because it keeps European nations under the wing of the Jewish-controlled US, the grand plan for the EU being endless immigration from the Third World(especially black Africa), globo-homo degeneracy, craven cuckery to Jewish gangsterism, Negrolatry & Jungle Fever, and cutting economic ties to Russia with essential raw materials of great benefit to Europe. If Europeans had some integrity and courage, they would bury the hatchet with Russia while rejecting Jewish supremacist hegemonism, which is what US power has essentially devolved into, but then the current ‘democratic’ order is about the Rule of Money, and super-rich Jews can easily buy off the white-whore-elites to do their bidding, much like Jews financed BLM to be anti-white but never anti-Zionist. White whores and black whores, they both take the money and don’t care as long as they got theirs — it seems David Mamet was right about most goyim, i.e. for all their posturing as ‘patriots’, ‘liberals’, ‘conservatives’, or ideologues of various stripes, there’s an offer they can’t refuse in the form of bribery or blackmail.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="222"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Militarily, financially, culturally, and ‘spiritually’, the Brits and Continentals have become so subordinate to Jewish-run US power that they dare not see and state the obvious, i.e. Jewish Supremacism is the biggest threat to their well-being and ethnic survival. But, it sure doesn’t feel good to own up to one’s cravenness. Just like a dog cowering before a big dog nearby regains a bit of self-esteem by barking at a dog far away, the EU dog that rolls over for the big US dog(that, in turn, rolls before the Jewish Master) barks at the Big Bad Russian Bear, not because the EU is within the reach of Russia’s claws but safely distanced from them. In a spectacular case of misdirection, membership in NATO sustains the illusion that EU cuck-nation-states are still tough and firmly resolved against ‘existential’ threats. What an irony of history. Eastern European states were once under Soviet tyranny but maintained the myth of unity against the non-existent Western military threat, which became a reality for Russia only after the Cold War when Jews took over as the new US elites and absorbed former Warsaw Pact nations into an alliance against Russia as the all-purpose bogeyman(when EU is really being destroyed by Jewish-spearheaded agendas like the Great Replacement, Diversity-mongering, Eternal Holocaust Guilt, and neo-Weimarization).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="214" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi1CccyP8i4m16-O7uv-OXpuJ9-DbImbcd_RJJ1S3DxMi3qAxSf6KUU_cpDr03Ne0AHqwVOYZvMrJQETm5sM8pZAYv98cdTZ6BYTJw72D2qMgYcuWt-P5gePEZhdjGs3K9sf6f2-TnWUoohwncuQ0clFXAywjqifcD1XbmzmYETHJQnijIJo4v7oJ4OYg/w640-h214/zion%20ukraine.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">EU is really fearful of Jewish Power and the US, not Russia, but, worse, the fear is loaded with worship of Jews as the neo-jesuses of Holocaustianity. When Anglos ruled the US, Europeans might fear American power but could mouth anti-American slogans because they didn’t worship Anglo-Americans, and similarly, for all their fear of the Soviet Union, Eastern Europeans during the Cold War didn’t behold Russians as a special or holy people; in contrast, Jews have become objects of near-worship on both sides of the Atlantic. A German or Italian during the Cold War could badmouth ‘yankees’ to loud cheers, and Poles and Hungarians under the Iron Curtain could make derogatory remarks about Russians to the delight of fellow countrymen, but no one dares to say anything even mildly critical of the holy-schmoly Jews, especially a dangerous state of affairs as Jewish supremacists control the US as the lone superpower and are hellbent in making goyim kill goyim for their tribal self-aggrandizement.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="322"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">EU takes a tough-seeming stance toward Russia because of zero consequences. If anything, there are treats and prizes to be had for good doggy behavior before the Jewish master, and it’s worth noting that psychology, than mere material rewards, factors into all this because status-anxious elites don’t live on bread alone but a sense of virtue that has been made synonymous with appeasement of and approval from Jews, so much so that Western goy elites will sacrifice a good deal of material advantages for emotional capital accrued from the Jewish hand petting their good-doggy heads. (However, the recent crises are making some Europeans think twice as to whether Russian power and influence are really so inconsequential while Jewish-controlled US power is so absolute and invincible. Still, what is good for the nation is secondary to the collaborationist elites whose main priority is position and privilege in the status quo, much like the communist elites of Warsaw Pact nation served the Soviet Union to the very end for their own narrow interests.) Likewise, Japan is a bitch-whore of the US but dares not speak up against it. Instead, it huffs-n-puffs itself up by flicking the middle finger at China and Russia, or getting into tiffs with that other bitch-whore South Korea, while neither dares to stand against in any substantive way against Jewish-controlled US influence that spreads the same civilization-destroying rot in all the goy world — yet, the sheer chutzpah of the likes of George Soros saying Russian victory will mean the ‘end of civilization’, because the foundations of civilization are apparently tranny-mania, slut pride, jungle fever, anti-white vitriol, and the Great Replacement; it’s like a quack warning someone of lung cancer upon quitting smoking. Of course, if the EU and Japan were under Russian control, they’d roll over for the Kremlin while making nasty noises about the West, which was indeed the case with the Warsaw Pact nations.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a class="spa" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/E7Uh4-0tjDY/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/E7Uh4-0tjDY/">END of Western Civilization, WWIII and George Soros</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/E7Uh4-0tjDY/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/E7Uh4-0tjDY/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/E7Uh4-0tjDY/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, the reason why Jews call for ‘World War III’ is because they see themselves as the cockfighters using goyim as cocks to tear one another apart. If there ever was a chance that a large number of Jews would become embroiled directly in the conflagration, Jews would not be for ‘World War III’. No cockfighter wants to be a cock himself and be pecked into bloody oblivion by other cocks. But what does he care as long as he gets to play god over the cocks? The blood sport is entertaining and profitable for all involved. Even in the Middle East where Israel is located, notice Jews involve the US, and most of the soldiers doing the killing and dying are the goyim. The IDF exists to defend Israel or to crush easy opponents. All the heavy-lifting and dying are left to the US and NATO coalition of goy cucks. Jews are the master, American goyim are the alpha dog, and rest of NATO is beta dog or below.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, what is meant by ‘World War III’? It’s mostly hyperbole and has little chance of becoming reality, a worthy sequel to WWII. One thing for sure, it will NOT escalate into a nuclear exchange as that will certainly affect Jews as well. The last thing Jews want is for New York and Los Angeles to be reduced to ashes. By ‘WWIII’, it means the US and NATO expanding and prolonging the conflict WITHIN Ukraine. Sure, US soldiers and European NATO soldiers may die if things escalate, along with a good number of Russians(and many more Ukrainians), but Jews don’t care. The cocks in the bloody pit will be goyim. It will be the goyim, and Jews don’t care about dead Russians, Ukrainians, Germans, Poles, Czechs, French, and, yes, Anglos.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s been said Jews hate Russia, but it has less to do with Russian-ness per se than its relative sovereignty and independence. When Russia came under Bolshevik authority(substantially Jewish in the first phase), many Jews around the world were friendly toward Russia. Many Jews in the US spied for the Soviet Union, even sending atomic secrets. Harry Dexter White was mindful of ‘Russian’ interests in mind back then, a time when your average Jew felt more hatred and resentment toward Anglos who seemed to patch up things with the Germans following WWII. But now that Anglos have totally cucked to Jews, they are treated as good doggies, whereas the Russians, with their autonomous sense of historical narrative and national interests, are intolerable to Jewish supremacism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Trump phenomenon offered a glimpse as to the character of the Jewish political psychology. It feels the most hatred for goyim + independence, just like a pimp cannot accept a hooker going her own way. Why do Jews hate Iran more than Saudi Arabia? Both nations are steeped in religion and tradition. Because Iran has been far more sovereign, defiant of what-Jews-want, whereas Saudis have long been the lackeys of the US. But of late, even Saudi Arabia may come under the crosshairs because it is finally showing signs of defiance to the US world order. The Syrian and Ukrainian conflicts have amply illustrated that Jews can be less hostile toward even the most extremist groups, such as ISIS terrorists and Ukro-Sub-Nazis, IF their actions complement the Jewish Grand Plan, aka “Is it good for Jews?”, the only calculus of value to Jewish Supremacism. Almost certainly, Zionists manipulated and guided Alqaeda elements to carry out the 9/11 attacks, and then, in the name of fighting Alqaeda, directed US military power against the Taliban to control of Afghanistan and against Hussein to conquer Iraq. Alqaeda was the main excuse but not the main target of US wars, and if anything, the ‘West’ under Obama & Hillary, tools of Jewish Supremacists, reanimated it to destroy Libya and Syria(but most of the Jewish-controlled MSM looks the other way in the Empire of Jewish Lies and Goy suckers & cowards).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/5886189670458781685#" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/5886189670458781685#"><img border="0" class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiI812uT9VNz4kaSDvq_NM-yh-sQvBa6Ihq3u5yS4CPOX6Tsy4rfihdEinDQ8dQWDxA-Argf_82Qyw2D96jmBIyiZCOXT0BGn0BbEWrz-RvIXmVjNLvk_0amEs8MPBdhfNhe7lfehA7tLqNZip8gS4p9iBZka1TuECJR_UILBZoQQ6PzTWXJ--5qlicmg/w640-h640/space%20invaders.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Trump populism energized many white Americans to rally for their own racial and class interests. How did Jews react to all this? With utter shock and horror. Not because these MAGA ‘deplorables’ are really Neo-Nazis but simply because they represent WGTOW or Whites-Going-Their-Own-Way, rather like Russia away from Jewish-led homo-globalism. It drove Jews crazy to hear white cocks singing, “We ain’t gonna work on Maggie’s Farm no more”. How would a cockfighter feel if the cocks decided to stop fighting for his benefit?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews hated MAGA as much as they hated Russia and, if anything, conflated the two as one phenomenon(along with Brexit, which eventually proved as hollow as Trumpism). Jewish Power, which cares not one iota for traditional America and autonomous US national interests, portrayed Trump and MAGA as traitors against ‘America’, with cucks like Mitt Romney nodding along — apparently, border security is akin to Nazism while Antifa street terror is the moral equivalent of US soldiers landing on Normandy.<br />So, what exactly is this ‘America’ that we should be loyal to? A colony of Jewish Supremacism, the highest values of which are Negrolatry of thugs, Globo-Homo celebration, Tranny-Wanny monstrosity, completely broken borders, debasement of elections, total ethnic domination of finance-academia-media, and endless pieties about the Holocaust when, in truth, Jewish Supremacism is like the New Nazi power around the world, even openly aligned with Nazi-variants in Ukraine.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="215"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, what do Putin’s Russia and MAGAmerica have in common? The former is explicitly about national sovereignty and the latter implicitly so, which may translate over time into potential defiance of whatever-Jews-want. Jews want all goyim to be like Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham, Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Rich Lowry, David French, and the like. Even supporting Israel isn’t enough IF one’s position hints at the restoration of national sovereignty for one’s own people. Russia has had good working relations with Israel but is still reviled by World Jewry. Trump took it up the arse, dong and fist, from Netanyahu, but Jews still hated him for stoking nationalism in the US(and for urging European nations to follow suit and chart their own destinies independent of NATO). Hungary is pro-Israel but in the Jewish crosshairs for subversion and regime change. Why? Jews demand, want, and expect everything to go their way; they see the entire world as a chess game of ‘Zionists’ and ‘Palestinians’, or ‘Jews win, goyim lose’. They have the mono-god-complex, i.e. their power is the only true power while all other powers are false powers. Jews exist to rule as the god-race, and goyim must first and foremost serve Jews or be crushed and humiliated like the Palestinians.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="557" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgEFkB6yT8WgNeP2lctVadLT6vXpdkgY4zI67lBZSM1Xf74aD77BZbPUEcQFVc7ui00yzHjUCIUQW2pp2Ad2nU1HZd2vEJEqgp1tpCENFTb_m2X_W4Vy8LTGONHJFqHrlblkc1CG1pnvbcbAx0w23zm_IiNRKfbgAlBdm7H_l0HKQr7tsLYBdsN0TA7Dg/w640-h557/full%20circle.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="212"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whites need to understand that nationalism is best served by pan-race-ism(or pan-ethnicism). (Race-ism defined as, “Ism means belief, and race + ism means belief in the reality of race and racial differences, hence the need for racial consciousness.”) Pan-race-ism allows for a better understanding and mutual respect among peoples of the same race(or related ethnicities). Based upon such racial mutuality, they can respect their differences, what makes each group unique, as well as their similarities. Before the EU degenerated into the farce it is today, with the creation of ‘Afrope’(Africa-as-penis fused with Europe-as-vagina) as its ultimate plan, it was a pan-race-ist enterprise that acknowledged that all Europeans were of the same race(with minor differences) and shared histories & cultures(with variations of course). So, instead of Europeans slaughtering one another in more wars, why not learn to live together on the basis of mutual respect as the peoples of the same race on the same continent? The project wasn’t to dissolve European nations but to unite them in constructive and meaningful ways, and mutual race-ism was the strongest glue in all this. After all, Spain is closer to North Africa than to Sweden, but Latins and Germanics have long been regarded as fellow Europeans of the white race.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="55"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And Asia also has much to gain from a pan-race-ism where all would acknowledge a certain common bond based on blood and culture. Acknowledge national sovereignties and ethnic differences but also work in the knowledge of shared Asian-ness. And there are organizations for black pan-African mutuality and understanding, and again, race plays a major role.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, the Jewish Advantage owes to pan-race-ism. Over many centuries, Jews spread out all over the world and mixed and assimilated with various peoples, and Jews in different lands spoke different languages and became ‘Polish Jews’, ‘Russian Jews’, ‘German Jews’, ‘French Jews’, ‘Hungarian Jews’, ‘Greek Jews’, ‘Persian Jews’, ‘Yemenese Jews’, ‘Mexican Jews’, ‘Argentinian Jews’, ‘American Jews’, and etc. Despite these differences, there was enough of a Pan-Jewishism that prevented excessive animus among the various tribes and, moreover, facilitated their global networking, culminating in their global power today. And it is this pan-Jewish internationalism that provides crucial support for Zionism and Jewish nationalism in Israel, which goes to show that nationalism in concert with world power has far more leeway and leverage than a nationalism that is isolated and without global networks. Jews all over the world cooperate in supporting Jewishness and Jewish Power.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEidXf6E8n7EzsM5lxDZGJEzgOhzMOxtfrQ7tnvoX_WPMtoooj56zHXBWsnS_VilgNGcmM45CT_AugWWJICBqDVfWJo9I0GE7JHba-EWy6dHV5Kl0bGi89jXpo0W1j5XTAio-SIrWzFTvqLGoV0nzOmj0vH3fEbA31eRp1peNR8Yv0OfOrsq-r7QZgiEmw/w625-h640/hear%20me%20out.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="625" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, imagine the kind of power white people would have around the world IF their various nationalisms were interconnected via pan-white race-ism. So, instead of seeing the world in terms of ethno-nationalism vs white race-ism, the best way forward is to secure the various ethno-nationalisms on the white-race-ist foundation of shared blood and common threads. Pan-Race-ism is an essential bedrock for ethno-nationalism. In the end, Nazism failed because it rejected Pan-Race-ism in favor of Teutonic supremacism. Instead of respecting Slavs as part of the European folks/race, it went into Neo-Spartanist mode of Master Folks ruling over Helot Folks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Despite Cold War tensions, the two decades from the end of World War II to around mid-60s were the golden age of Pan-Race-ist Nationalism in the West. Not only did the Cold War remain cold(or peaceful) but both camps, capitalist Western Europe(and US & Canada) and communist Eastern Europe, recognized in theory and considerable practice the sovereignty and inviolability of the nation-state. The US was militarily dominant in Western Europe, but the uniqueness and independence of each nation were respected. And even though Soviets dominated, militarily and politically, most of Eastern Europe, they respected the national integrity of the communist member states, i.e. Poland as the land of Poles, Hungary the land of Hungarians, Czechoslovakia for the Czechs & Slovaks, and etc. Besides, the communists were too occupied trying to keep people in to ever worry about hordes of non-European foreigners. It was a time of ever increasing individuality and liberty, more prosperity and opportunity. And the West, having shed most of its overseas empires, was finally cleansed of the moral burden that comes with ruling over foreigners.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="88"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though overt ‘racism’ of the supremacist kind was increasingly out of fashion, there was nothing wrong with European identity and pride. And it was wonderful to be white in America. And Jews hadn’t yet gained dominant power, and Holocaustianity as the new official cult of the West hadn’t yet taken hold. After the hellish tragedies of World War I and World War II and despite Cold War tensions, it seemed as if the white race had finally arrived at a pan-race-ist culture of mutual respect.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Also, the remapping of Europe after World War II along more homogenous lines and the abandonment of the imperial project meant less cause for contention — and all Europeans shared the same tragic sense of defeat, either under Axis or Allied power. A fuller appreciation of the new status quo would have been great for the future of the West. But several developments happened. The Black time bomb finally went off in the US, and race problems became ever more toxic there. Then, whites lost their minds in the US & Canada and went for open borders. The gates of near-paradisiacal domains flung open to the Third World. Meanwhile, the insipid and radical strains of post-war ideology infected the younger generation that exploded in the insane ‘revolutions’ of 1968 that, for example, tore France apart for no good reason at all. And black factor in pop culture spread Jungle Fever and cuckery.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="113"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Unfortunately, in the absence of pan-white-race-ism, there is no resistance and counterweight to pan-Jewish tribalism that stretches across continents. Whether Jews are ‘right-wing’ or ‘left-wing’, they have a wink-wink understanding with fellow Jews. So, even as ‘rightist’ Jews attack the ‘left’ and ‘globalism’, they will not name the Jewish Power and, if anything, viciously attack anyone who does. Likewise, even as ‘leftist’ or ‘liberal’ Jews denounce the ‘far right’, ‘supremacism’, and ‘extremism’, they(like the New York Times) are careful to tip-toe around the fact of Jewish ultra-rightism and ultra-nationalism emanating from Zion and Jewish cooperation with ultra-radical ISIS Jihadis(and remnants and mutations of Alqaeda) and Sub-Nazi cults & battalions in Ukraine.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="622" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjdCDMtd21IAxEweUrFHHMSvg9zeBNZJ2kz6Up7XsAu753diVw_tudgn5nLn05tmHDQVJzbug3zPa6FOLLVPQnmGZL4n-1CE5sn0oi6yeh_yDpD9TBK0L0b29t2tmrx2JRZz_45VOPeQJW09D5dg0Y0id4LZo2MgavmSbyRmG-kzCOKAXjoM4Lxqa4yNQ/w640-h622/zelenazis.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, but for a smallish segment of race-realist or race-conscious whites scattered across the West, most whites not only lack a sense of pan-white-race-ism but are downright hostile to any notion of whiteness except as something to blame, shame, and defame. Even whites who oppose ‘white guilt’ try to justify their racial identity by associating it with friendly feelings toward blacks(despite black violence against whites) and reverence of Jews(despite Jews pulling the strings of the anti-white agenda); it is why the likes of Douglas Murray are totally worthless. “I’m not ashamed to be white because I’m so totally and absolutely against ‘racism’ and uphold ‘Western’ standards of excellence and meritocracy that welcome any number of nonwhites to Britain as long as they play by the rules.” What a homo-cuck.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="209"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Thus, lacking a deep sense of racial roots, whites have fragmented along ideological or idolatrous lines. Many blacks may be ill-educated and averse to books, but they need not think too hard since the mere fact of being black justifies their existence — X Kendi’s schtick is, “I BE black, so gimme more”, which complements the mindset of Jews who, though intellectual and very well-read, also enjoy justification-by-mere-being, i.e. they are holy merely for being Jewish. Jews are great for being Jewish, blacks are great for being black, but whites are ‘guilty’ for being white; then, no wonder whites seek redemption by rituals of BELIEVING, and the sacraments(such as support Zion over Palestine and turn a blind eye to or morally justify black violence) are, of course, decided by Jews(and blacks & homos) as whites are denied autonomy and agency. Absence of agency can lead to two conclusions: (1) no matter what wrongs you commit, it’s never your fault because you’re at the mercy of ‘systemic racism’ or something or other, always a helpless victim (2) no matter what good you do, it’s always your fault because the system perpetuates supremacism in your favor, therefore even your goodness is just an extension of that ‘privilege’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing that would be beneficial to whites is to use ‘race-ism’ and ‘race-ist’ in positive contexts. ‘Racism’ is usually invoked in cases of school shootings, Fed-sponsored KKK antics, Nazi wars of annihilation(though most of the victims were whites), vandalism, ‘hate crimes’, and etc., but it should be associated with all the great things as well. To the extent that there was a racial factor to Western achievements, the various fields of arts, science, philosophy, spirituality, and etc. should be admired through the prism of race-ism. Besides, why not when the ‘wokesters’ are now saying Math is ‘racist’, Classical Music is ‘racist’, Shakespeare’s works are ‘racist’, Western science is ‘racist’, Western medicine is ‘racist’, and etc? Alright, alright, we agree. All such good things are ‘race-ist’. And ending slavery was race-ist too because whites did it on grounds that they, as the most advanced race, had the moral obligation to end the practice all over the world. There was an element of racial pride in such moral crusades. The Great Race-ist Crusade to End Slavery among the non-white feudalists, barbarians, and savages.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ideologically, there is the split between ‘conservatives’ and ‘liberals’, both sides accusing the other side of being ‘racist’ or ‘the real racists’. Or, many whites have staked their claim to ‘virtue’ and/or ‘spiritual’ uplift on account of their idols. So-called ‘liberal’ and ‘leftist’ whites think they are oh-so-wonderfully redemptive because they can’t conceive of anything holier than George Floyd and some tranny with his dick cut off. And so-called ‘conservatives’, despite being bashed and insulted by Jews 24/7, think they are so very wonderful because they stand with Israel. In either case, whites try to justify themselves by association with some Other. Do blacks justify their worth by saying, “Hey, our sense of worth is associated with our support of Eskimos?”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It got downright comic with Donald Trump accusing Democratic Jews of being ‘antisemitic’ because they don’t love Israel as much as his cucked-ass-self does. MAGA maggots’ devotion to Zion is total and absolute despite supposedly misguided Jews(the great majority of whom are Democrats) striking hot pokers up their arse. If the Jesus’ shtick was an unwavering compassion and love for humanity despite being whupped and crucified by it, the ‘conservative’ position is an undying love for Jews despite all the slings and arrows hurled at them by the Tribe. “They know not what they do.” But, it’s really a conceit because most ‘conservatives’ are really motivated by the desire to win over Jewish power and wealth. It’s not about compassion for powerless Jews but prostration before powerful Jews.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNYKHOjSUs8GySCfmpVdmyrnSd1qVQFsxuLZMt5BjVJDcghpwiWZYjDXfKJ_AopVtHm-oMJs0L9r_N36ylNxUiJABY7NjPiYv0jcVp4iUsOB6caYUevSvHNTD-WMY_J71zxPnFtlOqDNbkQzr6VbA5XPzM9wiYxSgcXjrWlvVpFfZrdu7hcGZHrKFDQw/w569-h640/wyatt%20reed.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="569" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What Jews fear most about Russia, MAGA, and national populism in general is the emergence of pan-white-race-ism, by inference if not by intention. It’s obvious Putin’s Russia has no desire to lead or unite the white world. At best, Russia wants good relations with the West, as well as with East Asia and the Global South. Also, as Putin and his Soviet-era generation were weaned on national myths arising from the Great Patriotic War, they are as invested ideologically in ‘anti-racism’ and denunciation of racial supremacism associated with Nazism. And the Cold War was, to a large extent, the White West and White East competing for the hearts and minds for the nonwhite world, a game of which side is less ‘racist’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given post-war consensus in the West has made explicit white pride almost synonymous with ‘racism’, Russia doesn’t want to make a big thing about race. As for most MAGA folks and Trump, they know and care nothing about Russia and, at best, seek cordial relations rather than another ‘cold war’. But Jews are paranoid mind-readers and sniff out the implications of Russia’s place in the world and rise of populism, essentially white, in the US and EU. Even if Russia isn’t racially motivated, it is nevertheless a white majority country and a huge and independent one at that. Unlike the US, Anglosphere, and the EU, it isn’t led by cuck goyim who do the bidding of their Jewish masters. It is also vast and full of natural resources, capable of weathering the slings and arrows of World Jewry.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Also, Russia is about national pride based on roots, culture, history, and achievements. If anything, Russian nationalists may feel historical grievances about what Jewish Bolsheviks did to their civilization. And there’s immense pride in the sacrifices during World War II. If Nazism is the greatest evil the world has ever known, Russians can claim not only to have been its biggest victims(as the Soviet Union lost the greatest number of lives by far, though a good many of them were non-Russians) but the biggest victors over it. There’s nothing comparable to ‘white guilt’ in Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anti-Slavicism, especially among Anglo-Brits, was once comparable to Antisemitism. It’s worth noting Jews heavily contributed to the negative image of Russians in the West, at least prior to the Bolshevik Revolution — while Jewish animus against Tsarist Russia was understandable given the discrimination and pogroms, the Anti-Russian ‘tropes’ pushed by Jews were as over-the-top and virulent as Anti-Semitic ones, and in our time, Anti-Russian vitriol, called ‘Russophobia’ by some, is beyond belief; it’s as if the hostile energies once invested against Jews in the West have been channeled against Russians, to the delight of Jews who apparently have nothing against antisemitic-like feelings AS LONG AS they’re directed at peoples hated by them.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="240"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For both Anglos(and Germans) and Jews, the Russians were the lesser whites ‘unfairly’ blessed with too much land & resources and should somehow be made subordinate to the West. If antisemitism is now one of the, if not the, biggest taboo in the West, Anti-Russo-Slavicism is very much in vogue and has reached levels comparable to National Socialism’s Culture War on Jewish influence and achievements. Western ‘Canceling’ Russia in the 21st century is a variation of National Socialism’s all-out war on everything Jewish but allowed and encouraged because the current West, under total Jewish Control, operates on the mode of “Is it great for Jewish Power?”<br />Just as Jews, who’d once decried McCarthyism as the greatest violation of American civil liberties, now enforce far more stringent and extensive forms of persecution and censorship of dissident voices, they are now working with Sub-Nazi elements in Ukraine despite having tirelessly condemned Nazism as the one ideology/movement that could never ever be tolerated or rehabilitated — It suits Jewish supremacism to see Ukro-Slavs(who fancy themselves as superior ‘Aryans’) and Russo-Slavs slaughtering each other. According to the Jewish Theory of Political Relativity, the only principle is “Jews feel like it”. Just look how Victoria Nuland spews nothing but lies, but in her mind, she is always speaking the truth even when she’s lying because she’s serving Jewish supremacist power, the only real truth to people like her.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="556" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_KKZqKMlg7PB4--CjOVfkrKss36lAuZLlgXANr1GE5CYpTgse02NCS0OLBv6ywMsM3P1T2iw5Ux29d3tVpL4v4h0zgX-J7WUniAJ3Ihi2wgj-7pLHHJ1VfIwgQuuGuqWdMuYBHmdtkWKMC4uezBGRFqjm0Z_nh23WvsYIhdX19R3PQ6QYDWjbHM84Aw/w640-h556/homodomor.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The current Ukraine conflict is rather like how the US, with considerable Jewish influence, encouraged Saddam Hussein to provoke a war with Iran that lasted ten years and took over a million lives. What do Americans and Jews care about all those dead Muslims? ‘Dead Muslims’ matter only in China’s treatment of the Uighurs when, in fact, the West has done far worse in the Middle East and North Africa.<br />Besides, if Russia took a hard line in Chechnya and if China is taking no chances in Xinjiang, it is precisely because the West has routinely used intelligence, subversion, and covert operations to foment trouble in those parts of the world. Neither Russia nor China can allow a live-and-let-live attitude in certain parts of their domain because the Jewish-controlled US uses every trick in the book to create problems there. Russia wasn’t sufficiently vigilant, and the Jewish-run West got the Right Sector to topple the government in Ukraine. Assad was asleep at the wheel, and the Jewish-led West armed a whole lot of radical Muslims to tear Syria apart.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="231"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though there is no direct link between Russians and MAGA populism, Jews fear that increasing numbers of whites in the West may look to Russia for inspiration, especially in the age of the internet and free flow of information. Besides, populism today isn’t like that of yesteryear when it was usually associated with dirt poor farmers and working class folks who were ill-informed, barely educated, and semi-literate(or even illiterate). Populism has come a long way from the Huey Long era. In the ALL THE KING’S MEN, the hicks would be grateful for the most basic services and protections from the government.<br />In our time, even people without M.A or Ph.D or any college education can find news and information on the internet and learn all kinds of stuff. Arguably, Joe Schmoe living in a small town has more access to information from all over the world than the staff at the New York Times and Washington Post before the internet. Of course, many populist-oriented folks use<br />information badly and fall for a lot of ‘fake news’ and stuff like Q-Anonsense, but then, the educated elites haven’t done themselves proud either by falling for Russia Collusion Hoax, the BLM cult, Globo-Homo degeneracy, Covid nuttery, and whatever nonsense the Jewish-controlled media complex hypes at the moment for no other reason or purpose than serving Jewish Supremacism.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="202" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg90FH8G-As0CYXckqx2AnYfOw5DyVvVhAsIUZ4N0qnpRrbG5Km6Nd-txwutYK_raMNThxGfOWDvV_jJmJuLutPGaKh8-SvMrwTiria1Y9BzC15BmrbkUTEfPEDp8HQ2HEmQlBoixyNoSm1Mo_EW84GTC6MPEU_C9d2qu2a21Q2Ww_4mhBhDlrJ5QaUNA/w640-h202/SODOMERICA.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="348"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, populism today is far smarter and better informed than its past incarnations. Also, as Tucker Carlson argued, populist passions are symptoms of a society grown sick under a corrupt elite. Naturally, the people look to the elites for leadership, guidance, and truth(or at least the half-truth). Populism begins to stir when the people begin feeling that the elites are corrupt, craven, clueless, uncaring, decadent, degenerate, demented, and/or unresponsive to their needs. Politicians were always a bunch of whores and sleazebags, but the idea of shared National Interest and Principled Progress have been ditched in favor of mindless idolization of Zionism and Jews(and their favorite allies, the Homos/Trannies and Blacks). Today’s so-called ‘conservatives’ conserve nothing and only suck up to Jewish Power, and today’s ‘liberals’ are anti-liberal, always in obeisance to what Jews demand — when they say ‘hate speech’ is not Free Speech, they aren’t talking about Zionism that led to the ‘genocide’ of Palestinians, Neocon warmongering that have destroyed entire countries, BLM lies that led to burning cities & pogroms, Jewish war on whiteness(as a kind of ‘cancer’), Globo-Homo’s hatred of sexual norms/truths, or the mindless anti-Russian hysteria. (Jewish War on ‘hetero-normativity’ is quite revealing. It’s posed as a problem, even an injustice, but hetero IS normal. From the Jewish perspective, normality recognized as normative for most people is unacceptable and must be deconstructed and pathologized. No wonder we live in a world where ‘woman’ can have a penis, and a ‘man’ can have a baby.) With their minds totally owned by Jews, today’s so-called ‘liberals’ are into the mob-violence of ‘punch a Nazi’ in the US and ‘fund the Nazi’ in Ukraine. In other words, always bark according to Jewish commands. And, for all their clamor for ‘social justice’, they are mostly silent about Neo-McCarthyite suppression of Palestinian voices and the BDS movement. And as higher education has been taken over by ‘woke’ dogma, facts and logic must take back seat to idolatry and narratives, mostly in favor of Jews, homos/trannies, and blacks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="162"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the so-called ‘people of color’(who aren’t black) have any place in this new order, their duty is to suck up to Jews, idolize blacks, celebrate globo-homo, and blame it all on whitey(or Russia or China). People who used to sympathize with Galileo(in the controversy with the Catholic Church) are now for the cathedralization or Vaticanization of truth or knowledge, with the ‘experts’(or ‘experverts’) deciding for us what is ‘acceptable’ information or ‘disinformation’. Incredibly, so-called ‘liberals’ relinquished any real claim on Free Speech, which is now with the Populist Right than with any other group. To them, ‘truth’ is merely a matter of ‘trust the science’, with ‘science’ being whatever the Jewish Deep State deems to be conveniently ‘true’ in the current year, month, week, day, or hour. Or they go for pat formulations like ‘love is love’, meaning that there is no biological or moral difference between real sex involving proper organs and homo fecal penetration.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="602" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqlAcApKn12aZub2VwjPjwiyUVyATwFpv0iXTGHKIhAWks9olgCjMF4M15-EkATsbU87ZIVVt6E9RDyhyZsH9kD__FPODcDf32Oslf7vIj0cwRyOCHXwY8ijqGmcIvt2Glt52kG1YhS83mxbAdhFuKWcRr9CCNa3bgdqa_9J8NZUC2RGm41CciKMml5Q/w640-h602/maggot.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though the vast majority of Americans are under the Jewish supremacist spell(and retardedly support the ‘Ukrainian’ side when, in fact, current Ukraine is totally a puppet state of globalist Jews who stoop so low as to work with sub-Nazi types for political expediency), there are signs that a good number of Americans(and Europeans) are waking up to the dangers and sheer lunacy of globalism, a strange brew of universalist goy cuckery and Jewish tribal supremacism with blacks and homos as proxies. Despite his lifelong Germanophilia and anti-Slavic bias, Pat Buchanan began to notice during the Putin years that Russia of all places was becoming the bastion of traditional European values, relatively speaking of course. The popular online personality Steve Turley has noted the rise of the ‘civilizational states’ rooted in heritage and history at odds with the globalist world order that seeks to sever all roots.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="14"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/midoUX5Bolk/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/midoUX5Bolk/">STEVE TURLEY – A NEW WORLD IS RISING FROM THE ASHES OF UKRAINE</a><br /><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/midoUX5Bolk/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/midoUX5Bolk/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/midoUX5Bolk/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">From his perspective, Putin is the good, or at least the better, guy when the West’s agenda is aligned with likes of George Soros whose mindfuc*ery goes so far as to encourage little boys to have their nuts cut off and to smear countless Trump supporters as ‘domestic terrorists’, which would also include parents who object to their children being indoctrinated with porny propaganda and anti-white CRT cooked up by Jewish ‘scholars’ and their dimwit goy minions.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="113"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">According to the globalists, it boils down to ‘liberal democracy’ versus ‘autocracy’, but ‘liberal democracy’ is defined by product rather than by process. Outcome matters, not the principle. So, a nation like Hungary can hold fair elections and elect a man like Viktor Orban who wants to preserve Hungarian folk and culture, but that is ‘autocracy’, simply because it’s not the desired outcome. But if nasty and vicious Jews like Victoria Nuland and their cuck goy flunkies like John McCain & Lindsay Graham work behind the scenes to pull off a coup in Ukraine with the aid of Right Sector and sub-nazi elements, that is ‘democracy’ because it was the desired outcome.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="129"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, the process mean NOTHING to the Jewish globalist supremacist. No matter how democratic the process, it isn’t ‘democracy’ if the outcome isn’t what Jews want. But, no matter how undemocratic the process, it is ‘democracy’ if it is what Jews want. Consider how Jewish power responded to Donald Trump’s election in 2016. Some were even urging the deep state and the military to do everything possible to remove him. And the hyper-fraudulent 2020 election, made all the worse by Covid-hysteria, proved beyond a doubt that Jewish Power is pure gangsterism and tribal supremacism, and totally without honor as it rants about ‘muh democracy’ while rigging elections right and left Third World style. The danger wasn’t the US slipping into a banana republic but a bagel one.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Or, consider the Jewish efforts to monopolize all information. Even their biggest lies are sold as Real News whereas anything that counters them is construed as ‘fake news’ or ‘disinformation’. Jewish globalists say it’s a wild, crazy conspiracy theory to ponder the Great Replacement, all the while openly celebrating the demise of White America due to mass immigration of nonwhites orchestrated by the Tribe. This is so obvious, but even now, most American ‘conservatives’ are spineless and gutless cucks of Jewish Power. Given most whites are sheeple & followers and given that most white leaders are castrated cucks to Jews, this shouldn’t be surprising.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="452" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVz89R278td46KyxANQ5EgrXQDzLFft4RlSxIWVwQErQ-jUsUFewC787sY3pnOpylrDSiATMY3rAn-UC0RSYweZ-Z9NtkaahwUeDS4es3p8qafxKgo7I_PfmL6EXvX8QRfGn0IjpU87INd7ZCKTD-Nm_arpWJ10wBvcORU5OWq3Htoy0mp-8tnZ-nrhg/w640-h452/whindhus%20A.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, there is Russia, which stands as a self-sufficient power that insists on its own path and perspectives. If the Collective West is Jugromo-centric(or Jewish-Negro-Homo-centric), Russia is Russo-centric, which is intolerable for Jews. And in our internet age, more white eyes are opening to the Russian Way despite Russia having no plan to lead the white world or proselytize its model as the correct one for the West. Russia has mainly sought diplomatic and business ties, unwilling to engage in a culture war, i.e. live-and-let-live attitude of let the West do its own thing and Russia its own, but this is unacceptable to Jews who are hellbent on spreading Jugromo-centrism around the world, especially white countries.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, when whites in the West have nothing to turn to for meaningful leadership, they are beginning to recognize Russia as an inspiration. What both Jews and their hated white enemies recognize is Russia may be the last white holdout, even bastion, of white sovereignty. And increasing numbers of Americans are considering the Orthodox Faith when the Catholic Church has become a den of pedophile globalists led a flaky pope, Mainline Church is globo-homo central, and Evangelicalism has degenerated into ‘Muh Israel’ retardation. This is why Jews want to destroy Russia and, if unable, turn it into such a pariah that it will seem ‘treasonous’ for anyone to be sympathetic with Russia’s ‘civilizational’ path.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="175"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It seems Jews are trying to stay ahead of the game. Instead of allowing time to warm relations, if only in spirit of mutuality, patriotic Russians and patriotic Americans(and white patriots the world over), Jews are hard at work preempting such an alliance of the heart and mind by vilifying Russia as the Evil Other. So, everything Russia(or Hungary) stands for is ‘far right’ and ‘extreme’, such as respect for tradition and religion(one that isn’t debased into worship of George Floyd, Harvey Milk, and ‘Muh Israel’), centrality of family life, reality of the sexes, national sovereignty, and healthy norms. All such are now deemed ‘extreme’ and ‘far right’, and what Official America now stands for is tranny-wanny nuttery, globo-homo revelry, Negromania, open/broken borders, slut pride, and whatever-else-Jews-want(even to the point where science must bend the rules of biology to prop up the notion of man-as-’woman’). The real extreme is now promoted as the New Normal whereas the healthy and natural normal is reviled as ‘far right’ and ‘extremism’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj8Yk5ysoy0JZ_zP0rYhQQ8uwiUQHVQCp7x3ylwOeGI38KkgsB_pyw8mn0z5iilc2rndhpdH0pGxarO68zjiK2naMTzkye-PPhQE9TBJnueHqjtmAiHWBAk5nEGqOZS8LdoQUDJFInIcjXHanj5ugHJhJs2fdpxbaVOjoyLIMdtDU05xuT0VmJSZ7fE_Q/w531-h640/poo-ride%20flag.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="531" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, to better understand the psychology of white cuck support of Ukraine(which has no sovereignty and is really a puppet-colony of the Jewish Empire), it’s useful to remember the control the British had over their nonwhites subjects all over the world. Take India for example, the Jewel in the Crown, the most prized possession due to its huge population, reasonably talented native elites, rich history & culture, and huge land mass with strategic location for the naval-oriented British. Before the rise of Indian nationalism and Hindu political consciousness(which was anti-Muslim before it became anti-British, not least because the Brits exploited the divisions between Hindus and Muslims, sometimes favoring Hindus over Muslims and vice versa), Hindus had no agency. They were dazzled by British power and ability. The Brits seemed magical, almost superhuman. The British overlords were feared, even resented and hated at times, but also admired and revered.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, as Hindus had long been under the Muslim Mughal Empire, coming under new foreign domination wasn’t anything new. Indeed, many Hindus(and even some Muslims) preferred British rule that brought many advances and opportunities(and for the most part respected Hindu cultures and traditions — some historians even believe that, if not for the British, all of India would likely have been Islamized). And, what later became Hindu and Indian nationalism couldn’t have been possible without the model of Western nationalism, not least because there never was an organic Indian national identity(comparable to that of the Japanese for example). For nationalism to work, be it autocratic or democratic, the ruling elites must claim to represent, lead, and serve their own people. In this sense, true nationalism only emerged with the French Revolution and the American Revolution.<br />Traditionally, in the West and the non-West alike, the people were seen as subjects of the rulers. They served their lords, not vice versa, and the Hindu world was no different. For Hinduism to work as nationalism, it had to, at least in part, overcome its caste divisions and create a sense of bond than bondage, a united people and culture working as one for the common good.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="155"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It was only in the late 19th century that there were truly consequential stirrings of Indian nationalism. Until then, most Hindus were either too poor and ignorant to know about the world, and those who were prosperous and/or educated enough to know were spellbound by British prestige. Therefore, few harbored any notion of Indian interest or Hindu agency — besides, the Hindu worldview tended to be passive and anti-agency, i.e. things happen as they do because the cosmos wills it so, and there’s nothing that can be done about it. So enthralled were the Hindus with awesome British power(displayed with pomp and circumstances as if cosmic karma was on its side) that British destiny defined and dictated Indian destiny. British Policy was Indian policy, British Loves were Indian loves, British Hatreds were Indian hatreds. Brits recruited and trained Indians to fight, and the most prized were the Sikhs, akin to their Janissaries.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhlW6tHl8fgZP-SEl6m6CCBfiwdDsVOwEPGr-KAsKjHrrJvSlA2SQyEtlxic5EYNFaWu0EIzi_WReA9ozAWZ31WFNOiWK8X6dinC20ZS_1F7MjU93hsXMOhxorehTWzEnhrdMUlRzR9VbxeFoF3LJgKPxTL8fZbsc6HJTpIR_kthsTVYeM2cZhEXTAMZQ/w573-h640/whindus%20B.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="573" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="138"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The British ruled not only with material carrots and sticks but with iconography, narrative, and ‘values’. Education under British rule convinced many Hindu elites that the British had a right to rule because they were so great and awesome, almost divine and magical. So, if the British needed Indians to fight in Africa, the Indians did so. If the British needed Indians to support Queen and Country against Germany, the Indians did so, despite the fact that Indians had no reason to be anti-German. After all, Germany had no designs on India, and it was the British, not the Krauts, who were ruling over Indians, sometimes with an iron fist. Yet, until the rise of Hindu nationalism and Indian Independence Movement, the de rigueur attitude among Hindu elites was to just go along without asking too many questions.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But how times have changed! Recently, the Collective West sanctioned Russia like no country has ever been sanctioned before. And the West expected India to comply and join in the anti-Russian hate-fest, but India said, “No, thanks”. India acted on the basis of its own national interest and autonomy. It refused to be pushed around by the West. Also, many in India noticed the obvious hypocrisy. The US has been invading and destroying country after country, but most of the West didn’t condemn the actions or call for sanctions against the US. Furthermore, these invasions were truly unprovoked, essentially the work of Jewish ‘neocons’ who see the world as a grand chess game for Jewish Supremacy. In contrast, Russia was provoked relentlessly until it finally chose war, but so many in the West are acting so ‘outraged’ by all those Russo-Slavs with their boiling blood. The current West is ridiculous.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="209"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, is it any more ridiculous or really all that different from the mentality of Hindus under British Rule? Why did Hindus so dutifully support and join in the fights that were all about British Imperial ambitions and had nothing to do with Indian interests? Even as late as World War II, Winston Churchill had the most contemptuous view of Indians as dirty ‘wogs’. If anything, the Hindus, despite their inferior position, collaborated with the British to crush other subjects of the British Empire. (To be sure, despite inferiority to the British, they appreciated their relative superiority over other subjects deemed even more inferior. They were superiors among the inferiors, and of course, such bargain is what white ‘conservatives’ and even dissident right types like Jared Taylor and John Derbyshire dream about, i.e. they are willing to accept Jews as superiors IF Jews were to favor them as superiors among the goy inferiors.) The obvious thing would have been for all nonwhite subjects of European Imperialists to wake up and realize they have something in common: They needed to struggle for liberation from foreign rule. On the other hand, many native individuals felt more liberated under foreign European rule than under domestic rule that was relatively more tyrannical.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Therefore, national liberation had meaning in terms of justice only on the European nationalist model, one where the leaders and the people are bonded as One People. If the imperialists were expelled only to revive the old indigenous tyranny, the natives would once again be helots and peons, even if under their own kind.<br />Indeed, one reason why so much of the world came under European rule was because the local elites were too occupied keeping the masses down to harness their true potential; naturally in such order, the masses were too hunkered down, obeying orders, and doing as told to ever think outside the box of blind duty and think in national terms. Western Imperialism most likely would have lasted much longer but for the fact that it spread European-style nationalism to the natives, something which the nonwhites eventually came to appreciate and use it for their own purposes. Nonwhites initially thought that the white masses in the Metropole were much like themselves, subjects of the empire, but they realized there was a sense of bond and mutuality between white elites and white masses, the heart of nationalism.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhvO34Eo1hmJ4bqOeEtK-xxEDwV833LM4a1H6ESjiM36tguz87Hw4cm4I94gb7Y1rKOLYFOiUUb1GURqnCosVTPQ6dEflvfVDOuJx_ECGQ0FH9OMBkTzIMQS2NL4gZ9K6gnXJno5RfRgAGMtbolivH2ZvXENwMeAIRFOurIpS0SiPdEqfDHMPbt-KZ7Cw/w613-h640/whindu%20c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="613" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, here we are in the Current Year. Today, Hindus have their own viable and sovereign nationalism. They have cultural and political agency and think & act according to what they deem to be in their interests and integral to what they are. Also, they worship their own gods, both spiritual and secular(the men who struggled for Indian Independence). They don’t need Jews telling them to place BLM above the heroes of India. (In contrast, the so-called West, on both sides of the Atlantic and even Down Under, has been led to place Negrolatry above whiteness; Europeans have been made to believe there is nothing meaningfully white about European history, culture, and identity. Hindu temples in India aren’t festooned with globo-homo symbolism like christian churches in the so-called West, which goes to show a lot of so-called ‘Christians’ are little more than soul-slaves of Jews, but then why are whites worshiping some dead Jew as the Son of God? Because the lacked the vision to dream up their own God.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hindus today aren’t like the Hindus of old who eagerly collaborated with the British. Back then, it wasn’t too difficult for the Brits to win over the Hindus due to the Muslim Factor and Caste System. As long as Hindus regarded Brits as the new, the other, and preferred imperialists over the Muslim Mughals, the Empire was seen favorably.<br />Also, given the profound caste divisions among Hindus, the Hindu spiritual and/or economic elites felt little sense of camaraderie with the lower castes and were more than willing to collaborate with the British who seemed like the karmic lords of the universe. It was only later when Hindu elites educated abroad learned of the power of nationalism(as the core foundation of European World Power, i.e. British Empire grew out of British National Unity), attained a fuller appreciation of their own great histories(largely due to Western archaeology that recovered lost time), and came to resent Western social-political barriers against even the most qualified nonwhites(who’d done everything to play by white rules) that they began to forge a nationalism of their own, which wasn’t easy for Hindus because of deep-rooted caste divisions, but men like Gandhi and Nehru deftly managed to balance old and new.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="48"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At the social level, caste system still operates in myriad ways in India(and among Indians abroad, like in Silicon Valley), but politically speaking, Hinduism emphasizes unity, solidarity, and pride among all Hindus regardless of caste, and without such mindset, the Indian Independence Movement couldn’t have succeeded.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="205"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, it is no wonder that Jews are pushing a neo-caste mentality on the West, which is why ‘leftism’ is a complete mischaracterization of the Jewish Agenda. Jews are not out for equality or ‘equity’, which only really applies to blacks(in areas where they’re deficient), and that’s because Jews promote blacks as the sacred cows of the West. This isn’t about racial equality but black superiority, along with Jewish and homo superiority, uber alles. BLM isn’t about equal justice for blacks but blacks-being-above-the-law. In the US, blacks kill blacks and lots of non-blacks as well, BUT we are to pretend that blacks are especially being targeted by ‘racists’. Hardly anything is said about black atrocities and horrors against whites, ‘Latinos’, Asians(especially Chinese-Americans), and etc. Black crime and thuggery become issues ONLY WHEN directed at Jews or homos, which reveals how justice operates in the West. A game of who/whom. It is a caste-oriented justice where violence is deemed worse when done to certain ‘protected’ groups. Why are certain groups ‘protected’ while others are not? Why does the US turn a blind eye to Zionist tyranny over Palestinians and Israel’s wars on Arab nations? Because Jews are ‘protected’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such ‘protections’ give the false impression that certain groups are especially weak and vulnerable and therefore require special recognition, but Jews are the most powerful people on Earth who’ve raped entire economies and killed millions in the 21st century with wars, sanctions, and drugs(especially opiods). And blacks are the biggest thugs and criminals in the US, and of course, the biggest threats to themselves as they often murder one another. And why aren’t homos held accountable for their sicko degenerate orgiastic behavior, the vector of various diseases?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews push the neo-caste system because they want white elites, the most crucial collaborationist element in Jewish Power, to aspire to higher-caste prestige by worshiping the gods-controlled-by-Jews. Otherwise, white elites might, like the nationalist Hindus in the early 20th century, begin to see themselves as leaders of the white community. (Even implicit signs of this, as in the MAGA movement, are deeply triggering to Jewish Supremacists who want whites to remain in servile mental mode.) So, white elite minds have been instilled with the neo-cosmology of gods and demons controlled by Jews. ‘Racism’, aka ‘white supremacism’(which comprises anything positively white), is the worst of all possible demons, whereas Jews, blacks, and homos constitute the holy trinity.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, if a white person is eager for status, privilege, and esteem, he or she will decry the stain of whiteness and sever ties with the white masses or any notion of white identity or white interests. If white power is demonic, then whiteness itself must be sick. Therefore, the only way a white person can possess value, especially apart from those irredeemable white ‘racists’, is by kneeling at the altars of Harvey Milk, George Floyd, and Jonathan Pollard. Via their tributes to the gods controlled by Jews, aspiring whites feel themselves to be of a higher caste.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="534" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYbjqcxNiPAxKWOrtYrgyCWkxjvQlTJQcfSk2uCq2zsKhgR1eu97EvFXKfvoxLh9al-FPq3vNLnBVjOpi8uZhw0O3c9t_RsAmaPONjnGkfgj9LeIO1tAHMy7q46VqajJmMHbctAQXpvMziWXBjGYt1HiibLCtlAY9xemT_5EQjI-2Z5m90HbAO2srwrQ/w640-h534/whindu%20d.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Caste system in India was sustained on the basis of fear of contamination. Higher castes feared being contaminated by lower elements, and at the very bottom were the Dalit caste of ‘Untouchables’. It was one of the reasons why Islam made such rapid gains in India, not least among the lower elements. As followers of the Prophet, they were equal to any Muslim. A rich elite Muslim, at least in theory, regarded even poor Muslims as brothers under the sun. It was the basis of Muslim success in war and conversion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the lower caste Hindu’s dharma or duty was simply to stay in his place and do his duties, and if the caste was rock bottom, as among the untouchables, it was akin to spiritual leprosy, and the other castes took all the troubles to avoid contact with such ‘unclean’ folks. Brahmin especially loathed contact with such lowly beings, but from the karmic cosmological perspective of Hinduism centered on reincarnation, it was deemed just. The soul in an ‘untouchable’ had either been demoted from a higher caste body for some infraction or had been promoted from an animal body. Either way, in order for it to be elevated in the caste hierarchy in the next life, its holder had to accept his place in THIS LIFE and do what was expected of him. If an ‘untouchable’ rejects his cosmic sentence and gains riches & social success, he may have it good in THIS LIFE, but the soul within his body will be further demoted in the NEXT LIFE.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tgSm7IFugFk?start=620&feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A caste system need not be spiritually based. It could be a matter of race, lineage, or military force. The Russian caste system prior to the abolition of serfdom wasn’t spiritually based, and it’s been customary throughout history for invading people to subjugate the conquered; Spanish under the Moors and Palestinians under the Zionists fall into the category of ‘second class citizens’, and for much of US history, blacks constituted a separate and lower caste, though not necessarily written into the law.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, spirituality is useful in ‘morally’ validating a caste system whereby inequality is said to be ordained by cosmic design. In other words, the privileged castes are compelled to enforce the system not out of greed or self-interest but in dutiful deference to divine authority. In other words, they have gods on their side.<br />And, this explains why Jews have ‘spiritualized’ secular liberalism into a neo-theology of gods and demons. Under this cosmology, blacks are saints, heroes, and judges. Jews are prophets and the brains of the universe. Homos are angels and fairies. Jews, blacks, and homos don’t need to prove their worth since they are holy by design(or identity).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, whites must work extra-hard at attaining spiritual ‘wokemon’ points because they’re stained with ‘whiteness’, the source of the worst evils, such as ‘racism’ and ‘white supremacism’, which must be relegated to the ‘untouchable’ ghetto of the Deplorables lest the ‘good whites’ be contaminated. And to constantly cleanse and purify themselves, whites must seek out gurus(usually Jewish, black, or homo) who instruct them on the rituals involving ‘white fragility’, ‘white supremacism’, ‘racism’, ‘antisemitism’, ‘diversity-inclusion-equity’, MLK Worship, George Floyd remembrance(and the proper ways to wash stinky Negro feet), Karen-ism, and etc.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One reason why many ‘woke’ whites took to getting ‘jabbed’ is the Covid Hysteria resonated with their view of the world as a struggle between ‘contamination’ and purification. They associated Covid-19 with Trumpism(while Trump tried to associate it with China), and jabs & masks were to cleanse themselves of the MAGA germ. And now, Russia is the big ‘contaminant’ in the world that dares to profane the holy values of the West, such as Jungle Fever, Negrolatry, Globo-Homo, Tranny-Wanny, Pussy Riot, Cult of Zelensky, and Total & Absolute Submission to Jews. Even some on the Dissident Right are denouncing Russia, and I guarantee this has everything to do with their cuck-maggoty cravenness before Jews, blacks, and homos who are the real destroyers of the West. Afraid to call out on the real villains who rule over them, they act ‘real tough’ by barking at faraway Russia. It’s like a dog cowers before a mean dog nearby but barks at a big dog in the distance.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglQlrga_XX6lAL98lqLb7VyF2_W38hxMXm4eR9MwMKrOn485G-L8DGZIK1CdP_c8GHwylgS7aLRVPMDXZSm1LODXeIGwV-CzY_W7pt_rTi3VdkZyjQflbshViX0MMd2hSx-zmX5uYmktqFxdUMUmeqShJ5SxgM3CtgFOfOm5D44s-4Sy5mKIvbxEolgw/w640-h480/whindu%20e.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Western whites are now like the Hindus of old under the British Empire. They are without agency and always look towards Jews for guidance and approval in political, economic, cultural, and military affairs. Whatever Jews say, it’s the only way. That’s pretty much all one needs to know about Ukraine. Most people in the West, especially the US, know little about Russia and can’t tell a Russian from a Ukrainian in ethnicity, language, culture, or history.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="190"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, why are they suddenly so rabidly pro-Ukrainian and frothing at mouth about Evil Russia? The same dynamic that made Hindus take the side of their imperialist overlord against his enemies. Hindus had no reason to be anti-German, but they supported the British war effort in World War I, just like black African soldiers served their French imperialist overlords in Indochina. Whites are now to Jews what Koreans were to the Japanese and then to the Americans: Bitches and whores. Under Japanese rule, Koreans took part in the invasion of China. As a US satellite, South Korea took part in the American destruction of Vietnam and Iraq. Mere dogs of empire without agency. Of course, there were rewards for the collaboration, and it’s no different for whites who roll over for Jews. One thing for sure, while Jews value white talent + submission, they will always favor white mediocrity + white submission to white talent + white agency(especially one that is critical of Jews and Israel). It’s no wonder fools like John Bolton and John McCain got as far as they did despite their lack of any talent or character.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj2Taoj5_2EozN5bsMeTBMS8YDpxXuSJg9v5yjvbTy6F_9TiOadD0LhK3hFApp3DZDrvHYlMqBhmGF-5iYOBJt5dIppP5n90ud1TuLWGOlNdsFSYTKjXvsl7WAepJebZIWH4b0Rc-6qI5gKW0jZj7fGdCmkEvN8ZG713Mek15lHEtF8_EHDR0Wnt3rdYQ/w514-h640/homo%20militarists.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="514" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="196"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">History sure works in mysterious ways. The once-lowly Hindus, who lacked agency and followed in the footsteps of the British Empire, repeating its talking points, fighting its wars, carrying its water, and bearing its symbols(of Queen and Country far far away), are now at the center of a sovereign nation with its own sense of identity, history, and destiny. So, when the Jewish-run West called on the world to sanction and hate on Russia, India refused to do so. Long ago when they were under British Rule, Hindus just nodded along to British commands. Today, India gauges its likes and dislikes in accordance to what-is-good-for-India, rather like how Jews think in terms of “Is it good for the Jews?” (Of course, Hindus in the West, either out of careerist opportunism or ‘woke’ brainwashing, march to the Jewish Supremacist tune, mostly against white goyim.) Jews and Hindus, even in contention, have something in common that is missing among whites: sovereignty, autonomy, and agency. In other words, Hindus have the power to disagree with the Jews who rule the West, an option denied to Western white goyim who must always look over their shoulders for Jewish approval.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="233"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Not only have Russia been ‘canceled’ and Russian individuals robbed(like Jewish culture and property by the National Socialists) in the Jewish-run West but any white goy(or conscientious Jew for that matter) who’s dissented from the official narrative, especially by naming the Jewish Role, has also been ‘canceled’, indeed many times worse than red-sympathizing dissidents and radicals during the so-called McCarthy Era.<br />It is about time the term ‘McCarthyism’ should be retired because the new censorship(or censchwarzship) and ‘cancel culture’ are almost entirely directed by Jews, once among the the prime suspects during the ‘Red Scare’. Besides, whereas McCarthyism was a phase that came and went(and had little institutional power), Jewish supremacist tentacles twist into every corner of the West with no end in sight and no pushback, as even those most reviled by Jewish Power never ever mention the power of Jews. Current West isn’t totalitarian but is certainly ‘tentaclitarian’. (Incredibly, whereas the Trump-Russia Collusion thing was a complete fabrication, Jewish role in Soviet espionage and communist subversion were very real. But in the Jewish-run US, the men who pursued actual Jewish communist spies were the bad guys of history while the liars and frauds who perpetrated the Russia-Collusion Hoax, which also destroyed careers and derailed a presidency, are showered with accolades and the power to suppress ‘disinformation’. Talk about a fox, or weasel, in the henhouse.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="482" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVEkgplXybonn_C_04SlAu1r7F8-oCX9lsP9Dw7d71qM9pa_gWNw_QzaSoX5OqHoV-CV6my0-69rt0C0jgrKbU6o-5cDK3wjiPowXktJezzrmReaMYnrC0UAQJG9IYHDqv6rkV5dk23ORbky1Q_Hv2F-RKuNjicpHRMHUlHr8eOii83LBjbIsCPYvFHQ/w640-h482/jewish%20crooks%20made%20men.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">White Race is now a total disgrace, a bunch of Whindus or Dotbreads(dot-headed white breads). On the Ukraine issue, just think ‘whindu’, and everything falls into place. It’s so elementary. As if being a bunch of whummies(white dummies) isn’t bad enough, they’ve reconciled themselves to whindu status. It’s even worse because Jews are a lot cleverer than the Brits of old. Whereas British power(and glory) was out front as the victorious and triumphant conquering might over India, Jewish Supremacist Power(the greatest that ever existed, at least upon gaining mastery over the Anglo-Germanics reduced to cuck-hood) remains in the shadows as the political discourse is usually about ‘American Power’, the ‘West’, the ‘Left’, the ‘woke’, ‘diversity-equity-inclusion’, ‘gay pride’, ‘BLM’, ‘democracy vs autocracy’, ‘Russian interference in US elections’, ‘China buying up America’, ‘Clash of Civilizations’(when the biggest real clash is between Jewish Supremacism vs Goy Autonomy), and etc. But trace the puppet strings on each of these issues, and all threads leads to Jewish Supremacism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For example, notice that ‘equity’ never addresses the vastly disproportionate influence of Jews in institutions and industries. And ‘inclusion’ doesn’t mention the Zionist-supremacist suppression of BDS in ‘blue’ and ‘red’ states alike. And ‘diversity’ hardly addresses the ‘problem’ of under- or zero representation of many groups in the NBA or NFL or the dominance of homos in areas like fashion and style — incredibly, industries catering to women often have more homo toots than women, but then, what is a real woman these days when the powers-that-be(Jewish, of course) strong-armed and brain-twisted every major institution into accepting a hairy tranny with penis and balls as a ‘woman’? Jewish minority uber goy majority, tranny fake-women minority uber real women majority.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Eons ago, the proto-Anglos and the Germanics fell under Roman rule(and later the Russo-Slavs came under Mongol rule) but then gradually emerged as the dominant powers in the world. The Romans are long gone, never to return again, but the Jews, one of the few ancient peoples/cultures to persist to the present, have become the new lords over whites, most crucially the Anglos and the Germanics, the most capable goy groups in the last 150 years.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"> </p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="543" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgaboRoU6fv9ueW5UAXgE_tXOBqCqBBBCBnxKCDyZuvDJ7s91UoswjPCY_AyhanCnpr6AN6U7pU7h0e88X9vDiM5WkWPNEYFApKQjuNI-8qfPdnOtFrH6wokulddyB39_1IlZHScvIFDFpqWgKt-a58FxTrpMDROTMnDR4Kj34ppFjKg6OUI5crzXVOjw/w640-h543/whindu%20f.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="218"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And, just like the Early Christians(mostly Jewish in origin) conquered the Roman Empire spiritually, secular Zionist Jews conquered the Anglos and Germans quasi-spiritually with Holocaustianity, Negrolatry, and Globo-Homo as the new trinity. The Early Christians didn’t need to militarily conquer Rome. Just capture its soul, and the empire’s military might was in the service of Jesus, a Jew Himself, as the Son of God.<br />Likewise, capture the hearts and minds of Anglos and Germanics with the Tri-Idolatry of Jews, homos, & blacks, and guess what? The Western Empire led by the US as the lone superpower is doing the bidding of Jews as the gurus of all wisdom. And Jewish Power is especially a difficult nut to crack because it controls all sources of power. Unlike Gentile Europe where political power(monarchy), military power(aristocracy), economic power(burgeoning bourgeoisie), spiritual power(church), managerial power(bureaucracy), and intellectual power(scholars and philosophers) served as checks and balances, Jewish Supremacists in our time control the puppet presidents, military-industrial complex, law firms & courts, academia & media, finance-property-tech-entertainment, the deep state, and the spiritual institutions, whereby so-called Mainline churches push globo-homo & Negrolatry while Evangelicals push little else but “Muh Israel” and “Jews are the Chosen, and we must lick their boots or God will kick our butts.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, the Occam’s Razor on Ukraine is quite simple. Whites are Whindus, and lacking agency and autonomy their likes and dislikes are simply a matter of copying whatever the Jews do, just like Hindus of old under British Rule outsourced authority and prestige to the Brits. Indian perspective was always aligned with that of the Brits who commanded the loyalty of the indigenous elites. If Brits were anti-French, Indians were anti-French. If Brits hated Germans or Russians, Indians did too. And if the Empire called on the Indians to serve as managers, merchants, or soldiers in far-flung places, Hindus took up the offer as duty or opportunity. Brits cleverly flattered the top collaborators as almost as good as the White Man, just like Jewish organizations shower prizes and awards on white goyim who most dutifully play along. Britain was the mind, India was the body. Britain was the master, India was the dog… that is until the Indian Independence Movement said NO MORE to all that.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Though Jews use Diversity against whites, the rise of Indian Nationalism showed how diversity could be overcome against a COMMON enemy. Brits had relied on India’s vast diversity to play divide-and-rule among the locals, but Gandhi and Nehru’s movement managed to unite various groups against the British Empire as the oppressor of all Indians. If Jewish Power were to be named, diverse goyim in the US could also unite against Zion as the real top dog of the West. No wonder Jews turn the West’s attention against Russia, Iran, Syria, China, and any other nation with some measure of independence from the Zionic empire. And ‘conservative’ Jews cleverly direct White Populist and Conservative rage at ‘the left’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="74"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">No wonder Jews are so adamant about no one naming The Real Power, distracting people with nonsense about Russian interference, Chinese threat, Iran as sponsor of terrorism, autocrat Viktor Orban, Assad the ‘butcher’, and even Venezuela. One thing for sure, Indian Nationalism wouldn’t have worked without naming the British Power. Likewise, Jews will continue to exploit ever-growing diversity against goyim unless their power is named and exposed as the real mover and shaker.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="568" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgOaudgo07I3--DPUB9panMEHDzlqWRLbV_FbTQS4b0dyJrWVlqFvauFWpcGcovjt6Mh-40GaaTv-jykT6cjkawdmTDASPUqBm1RMJB5xUrRFnIfq0ruy3AumJablIcV2WocaxApsu8gL1iH5gu-jbGxOhVCxAf_CgJGF3c5-zB38Oorf1JPKTSs9jIWA/w640-h568/whindu%20g.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sadly, even many on the so-called Dissident Right seek not liberation from Jewish Power but to its favored bitch status, like Indian Hindus and Indian Muslims, prior to the Independence Movement, vied for top dog position under the British Empire. “O Master Jew, favor us white dogs over those nonwhite dogs, and we will serve you so faithfully, far more than any bunch of nonwhite dogs would.” So utterly pathetic. Whites in the West have no Gandhi, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, or even Nasser or Sukarno. They have a bunch of Diems and Batistas.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="116"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To the casual or outside observer, however, the West is ruled by whites and ‘Christians’ because Jews remain in the shadows, even if so obvious. Just look at Joe Biden’s administration, and it’s as if Jews lost all inhibitions about grabbing just about everything. But you better not notice because noticing is a thought crime. No wonder they scream so much about ‘white supremacism’ to keep the public focused on the threat from Evil Whites lest people finally notice it’s the Jews at the helm. In a way, Joe Biden is the perfect embodiment of the state of white politics that is brain-dead and soul-dead in utter cuckery to Jews. What a Whindu.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/5886189670458781685#" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/5886189670458781685#"><img border="0" class="aligncenter" height="576" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhsGmkBkYriFdlAp0O_0zNm5W-wSrfObT2POu1MR0vEW_Y1P2ps8xZQXNX6qLjD_AdDyH4OV3StIcMx8mGkCFKuOWkwABFdvj5Vj6fJAOn2KBAtG2pigbNMhMYq837hrA7QGmddPUZEYQ1m68OasxzpbcMrlmKAz8v_W6sN-hTvEmGr2X_dUrNw_ineWA/w640-h576/viol.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-87700013571657078892022-12-07T17:03:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:07.660-08:00Some Notes on Country Music<p> <a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjCW3T8Bd0HKtL1bdl2CdnNDA2lnoz8rIcPQboZjG44vKuv9xo2gsphSL-cJMndLlPers9_7cTU-aT_pt3j9dH7_DIc8zcddbCEYieixWECyXgTkKM3BbZXJG96KeVz6V72RMQEbcjLPKjLXuTTyOd87M_zusahm8yT_1Sw2v-jxHDAKBqdYolkAbc1g/s1280/honkytonkangels.jpg" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjCW3T8Bd0HKtL1bdl2CdnNDA2lnoz8rIcPQboZjG44vKuv9xo2gsphSL-cJMndLlPers9_7cTU-aT_pt3j9dH7_DIc8zcddbCEYieixWECyXgTkKM3BbZXJG96KeVz6V72RMQEbcjLPKjLXuTTyOd87M_zusahm8yT_1Sw2v-jxHDAKBqdYolkAbc1g/s1280/honkytonkangels.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" class="" height="352" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhjCW3T8Bd0HKtL1bdl2CdnNDA2lnoz8rIcPQboZjG44vKuv9xo2gsphSL-cJMndLlPers9_7cTU-aT_pt3j9dH7_DIc8zcddbCEYieixWECyXgTkKM3BbZXJG96KeVz6V72RMQEbcjLPKjLXuTTyOd87M_zusahm8yT_1Sw2v-jxHDAKBqdYolkAbc1g/s600/honkytonkangels.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="626" /></a></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3cQNkIrg-Tk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Driving around rural and small town America, Christian talk and Country Music fill the airwaves. In my entire record collection, I have maybe two bona fide Country albums, a greatest hits collection of Hank Williams and one by Dolly Parton. My interest in Williams was by way of Rock Music as he was a key influence on early Rock n Roll. And Dolly Parton’s album got high marks in the Rolling Stone Record Guide. I might have listened to Williams album once and Parton’s album a few times. And, I’m not counting the works of Bob Dylan & the Band, the Byrds, the Flying Burrito Brothers, the Rolling Stones, Creedence Clearwater Revival, Grateful Dead, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Bob Seger, Crosby-Stills-and-Nash, and many others who drew inspiration from Country Music(or even played it straight). The fact remains the Country Music community never embraced those acts as part of its own, though the relations between Nashville and the Rock community was generally respectful, at least at the professional level.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Though the inertia of Country Music has never been my thing — even Country Rock is best when country-inflected than full-blown country, which is why Dylans’ NASHVILLE SKYLINE is rather lightweight apart from “Lay Lady Lay” — , it’s not a bad way to pass the time when you have nothing else to do, which is usually the case when you’re driving for hours on end through rural areas. The scenery is nice, and the Country Music, at the very least, is generally unobtrusive, much like Mexican music(which I prefer to Punk, Heavy Metal, Rap, and Grunge). You can listen to it or ignore it, and it doesn’t make much difference either way, even to the singer as a ‘country boy can survive’. Granted, rural isn’t to be confused with natural. Despite the proximity, rurality is nature tamed and rendered accessible. You can take it easy out in the country but not in nature, best represented by Classical Music of the Romantic Period.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Last year, two Country songs played regularly on the radio as I drove across Tennessee. Neither is great but hit the mark and remained with me. One is an easy-going feel-good song, an affirmation of family and community. It’s called “We Didn’t Have Much” by Justin Moore. The other, Blake Shelton’s “God’s Country” is Biblical in tone, a testament about man’s ties to his roots and land and duty to God above. And, duty to country, meaning both the soil beneath one’s feet and the flag of one’s tribe. It feels righteous and judgmental, harking back to basics from the distractions of modernity. Even though most of the political, economic, and cultural power is concentrated in the city, it’s telling that the synonym for nation is ‘country’, implying that a true nation is about land and roots(or blood and soil) than about ideas and fashions aired in cafes and clubs.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZJeOYBuuoJ4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZEWGyyLiqY4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="46"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">These songs aren’t exactly my cup of tea(or swill of moonshine or glass of beer), but the hokum has the feel of sincerity and heart. It sure beats Country music gone ‘hipster'(or hickster), like this silly song about having a beer with Jesus.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/dphMriny1Js?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="180"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Growing up, no one in my circle, or any other circle for that matter, showed any sign of interest in Country Music. And even my minimal interest was ‘academic’, an acknowledgement of the roots of Rock and Pop, the only music that mattered for most of us. And by ‘Country’, I mean real Country Music(not stuff like the Eagles), though some may contest that what goes by Country is essentially an urban distillation of twang by Nashville, much like Hollywood Americana isn’t real Americana.<br />Given that generations of Americans have been born and raised in cities and nearby suburbs, the great majority don’t even have country roots to speak of. Also, whereas the great majority of early Anglo, Germanic, and Irish immigrants first settled on farms and then moved to the cities, the later immigrant groups settled in cities around heavy industry and the service sector. As their country roots were entirely in the Old World, they lacked a connection to the American Heartland that old stock white Americans(and blacks) maintained over generations, even in cities.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Besides, for various reasons, Country Music is associated with West Virginia, the South, and the West(with its related cowboy music, leading to ‘Country and Western’, though ‘country’ connotes remaining on the land and putting down roots, like Southern whites who could trace their ancestry on the ground they standing, whereas ‘western’ implies restless wanderlust, the life of the nomad as searcher or exile). Country Music always had a moral component, but its charm and appeal owes to a certain looseness, being a country slacker than a city slicker. Twang can’t be too ‘anal’. Yet, despite the natural(and even a bit vulgar) side to Country(once even set against urban bourgeois repression), it’s Christian elements prevent it from going over the cliff into full-blown pagan barbarism, which later came with Heavy Metal, the favored music of rural kids who just about had enough of Jesus talk(though there are also Metal Jesus bands). The anarcho-chastity contradiction of Country, its appreciation of spontaneity(uninhibited by excessive learning and ‘culture’) and anxiety about coarseness, was perfectly illustrated in the first radio interview scene in COAL MINER’S DAUGHTER.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6ay30rHMqZs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="67"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Paradoxically, it is this very ‘innocence’ that makes rural and small-town girls so easy to prey on by the increasingly depraved and sexualized industry. Whether the authority is moral or immoral, simple childlike minds have fewer defenses against its manipulations. Similarly, the male counterparts make ideal cannon fodder for the War Industry and Neocons. Make country girls shake the ass and make country boys wave the flag.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="246"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Country Music as a brand isn’t synonymous with rural music. New England Folk Tradition is relatively prim, sung with head held high and controlled breath, closer to the English ballad tradition. Besides, the religions up north were less colorful than Baptist denominations in the South with a higher proportion of hillbillies, bumpkins, hicks, and the like, the sort of people with lower class backgrounds in the Old World. The hierarchy inherent in the system maintained by the Southern gentry also meant more stringent class divisions between high culture and low culture, and Country arose from the latter. People who liked to take their time and were never in no hurry. Still, Country culture is intertwined with work and getting things done, even if not at breakneck pace, because farm work sure ain’t easy. It’s what distinguishes Country culture from Hippie culture that pined for the country and nature(as if they were interchangeable) and had little idea as to how much work country-living entailed; for starters, you have to grow your own food, which doesn’t fall from the sky or sit on supermarket shelves. Hippies, raised mostly in cities and suburbs, had this notion that nature, sprinkled with a bit of good vibes, would produce all that one needed. Most hippie communes depended on food brought from the outside than grown on the land. It was hard to grow much when too many were stoned, talking with trees, or diddling one another.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YRbGP2F2oBg?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Country Music couldn’t have developed in a world of New England ‘Grammar Nazis’ and sticklers for detail as drawl could only have thrived in a world of relative linguistic laxness and ‘creativity’, making it sound more ‘ignorant and stupid’ but also more ‘colorful’, like Southern cooking. This also goes for Cajun French Hillbillies in the Louisiana bayou, like in the film SOUTHERN COMFORT. Even though whites in the North also developed different ‘dialects’, especially among the Italians, the greater centralization of education and media reach led to greater standardization. Indeed, Canadian whites and Northern American whites sound more alike than do the latter and Southern whites.<br />Rurality alone doesn’t make for ‘Country’. It’s no wonder it didn’t emerge from Mormons and the Amish. Mormons, ever status conscious, were eager to emulate their ‘betters’, the respectable and educated folks, and the Amish have always been wary of fun and good times.<br />Country Music isn’t tolerant on themes but is so on form and expression. God is truth but you need not be too ‘dignified’ in showing your love and devotion. It’s less embarrassed about being ignorant, down-to-earth, and even a bit vulgar as long as one hits the proper thematic notes. Amish folks could farm for a thousand years but never warm to someone like Dolly Parton, Loretta Lynn, or Tammy Wynette sharing their stories and feelings with an open heart.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="154"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And if the North embarked on rapid industrialization, the South remained agricultural with more of its rural and small town cultures intact. Though Folk Music Movement in the late 50s and early 60s drew influence from all across America, the themes were often intertwined with issues of labor, struggle, and social justice. A key difference between the North and South, roughly speaking at least, was the rural traditions transitioned into urban idioms in the North whereas rurality clung to Southern music. But then, northern folk styles were less ‘musical’, more about making a point than making noise. Compare “The Battle Cry of Freedom” by a Massachusetts composer to “I’m a Good Ole Rebel(or should it be Revel)”. Compare Neil Young’s preening “Southern Man” with Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Sweet Home Alabama”. Puritanical censure vs down-to-earth celebration. Interesting that the looser and more freewheeling style of the South developed in proximity to slavery.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lQ8JIa98kAw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="598"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Unfortunately, much of what came to be Country Music was sanitized into Family Music, much like Disney bowdlerized the darker and juicier elements of Fairy Tales to make it kid-friendly, thereby smoothing the edges of authentic folk idioms in the South. Then, no wonder that Country Music had to wait for Rockers to pump some blood back into it.<br />It’s also telling that some of the finest songs about small town or rural folks aren’t Country. Take Bruce Springsteen’s “The River”, the themes of which touch on issues familiar to rural and small town folks: Economic uncertainty, making do with less, a sense of being left behind. Yet, “The River” isn’t Country because of the stark element of angst and bitterness, with nothing to fall back on but the memory of youth, whereas Country is for all ages and in honor of the dead as well as the living. Though “The River” begins with a son doing like his father done, there’s little sense of connection or gratitude, just a grim sense of being caught in a socio-economic trap with no way out. One feels chained than rooted. Having a Union card simply means a steady job at best(and also implies class struggle along the lines of the documentary HARLAN COUNTRY U.S.A), but even that’s threatened by looming economic changes. The man has no sense of roots, family, or community. The only part of town with any meaning for him is a stretch of river as solace, which however is private, his alone. It’s a place of nostalgia, bittersweet in recalling what once was but also reminding of what was lost.<br />A genuine country song could list the same troubles but with a sense of refuge in community, tradition, and God & Country. So, even with facing tough times ahead, a man would feel whole, a part of a folk than a bundle of emotions wound up tight and haunted by betrayal. A Country song would offer some honey; it’d be tough but tough love. There would be room for grace and comfort along with anxiety and sadness. But Springsteen’s tale pares it down to dark and depressing. To be sure, it is a great song, a work of art, which can’t be said of most Country Songs, even good ones. Dark and brooding, it has the courage to stare into the abyss of alienation in a community gone stale. (Still, one wonders if it was Springsteen’s penetrating empathy or knack for soulful kitsch. Even as a faker, the Boss was a master forger at portraying the lonely side of Americana. A song in somewhat similar vein on the same album is “Point Blank”, but that’s pure soap. For wider appeal, Springsteen let in more sunshine in BORN IN THE U.S.A., wrapped in Reaganesque patriotism despite his partisan hackery for the Democratic Party. The later album THE GHOST OF TOM JOAD returned to darker themes, but the personal element was gone, along with shades of psychology, and what remained was humorless Peter-Seegerian secular sermonizing, this time in favor of open borders that have done much to undercut blue collar America, the concerns of which, as it turns out, was secondary to hobnobbing and globe-trotting with the globo-billionaire jet-set crowd as far Boss was concerned. Despite all his real talents and artistry, he proved to be industrial hype than working class hero. Since the 90s, he’s been playing blue-collar music for yuppies, the only people who can afford his ticket prices.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_Jw8P7gHxzI?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="193"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Though more industrialized than the South by several magnitudes, the majority of people in the North were also country folks through most of the 19th century. But due to rapid transformation from agrarian to industrial economy, elements of rural culture either quickly adapted to urban settings or were abandoned altogether. Much simply faded away, known only to musicologists, ethnologists, and cultists. Also, due to mass immigration that had much greater impact on the North than the South, Anglo folk traditions merged with those of various ethnic groups. One tendency was to meld the diverse styles into one, but another was to reject the particularities of each in favor of a generic pop style(as ‘consensus’) that would serve as a cultural unifier of Melting Pot America. Another unifying element, paradoxically enough, was the ‘Jazz Singer’ effect whereupon whites of various backgrounds gravitated toward black-inflected music, e.g. the rival ethnic gangsters in THE COTTON CLUB(directed by Francis Ford Coppola) who frequent a musical venue of tap-dancing Negroes. Minstrel shows also united various white groups in black face. How do you tell a Jew from an Irishman from an Anglo in black face?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="63"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Essentially, rural culture in the North has faded and now exists mostly as museum pieces or cultural curiosities(usually as quaint reminders of some interest to outsiders), like a cultural center with exhibitions or dance troupe for the visitors, not much different from what American Indians do for tourists. But it’s not a living culture or a ‘vibrant’ part of national expression.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="129"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, it’s often the case that rural and small town folks even in the North look to Country Music(with southern hillbilly roots) as an expression of their cultural character than dig into their own ethnic pasts with their distinct themes and expressions. (And a Northern or West Coast urbanite is more likely to show interest in southern black blues, like with the Steve Buscemi character in GHOST WORLD, than regain knowledge and appreciation for their own distinct ethnic roots.) Whereas Northern folks either abandoned their rural culture(as irrelevant, simple-minded, or embarrassing) or profoundly adapted it to urbanity though distillation(to the point where the rural roots were hardly discernible), the element of rurality remained with Southern folks even when they caught up with industrialization and modernity.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ub88RPZnHQM?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="244"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, it’s hardly surprising that a rural type in Wisconsin, Ohio, or New York is more likely to identify with Nashville music than with, say, Scandinavian or German musical roots. Among Southerners, even urbanized ones, rurality came to be regarded as more than a historical phase or economic status. It became woven into the very culture of the South regardless of one’s social place. (In a similar way, even though rural life is mostly associated with grinding poverty and hardship in Northern Europe, something gratefully overcome and relegated to the past, it has richer cultural associations in Southern Europe, with tropes about cheese & wine-making and sunbaked hills. It’s telling that even though Vito Corleone dies in the megapolis of New York in THE GODFATHER, it is in a garden that could be an Edenic microcosm of Old Sicily; and Francis Ford Coppola went from film-making to wine-making as his main passion. Similarly, part of the appeal of Jewish Aliyah to Israel is cultural and historical, one where the past co-exists with modernity. The South exerts a similar appeal to whites in the North and West. Until recently(before its total collapse in 2020), it was the one part of White America that, despite transformation into modernity however belatedly, still retained its sense of heritage. It’s also why Jews were so committed to impugning Southern Heritage because they want whites severed from any sense of roots, which apparently only Jews deserve.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Several reasons accounted for white southern culture becoming more distinct than one up north. (This is also why the Confederate Flag has gained a certain currency among Northern Folks, spreading even to some parts Europe. When Lynyrd Skynyrd sings about the ‘Southland’, it’s more than an economic community of union members of Bruce Springsteen or the small town nostalgia of John Mellencamp. It’s deeper than political or personal; it’s cultural and historical, so peculiar and pungent in the southern-themed songs of The Band, especially “The Night They Drove Ole Dixie Down.”) The pilgrim-ish culture that emanated out of New England tended to be colorless, bloodless, and moralistic. Them folks not only spoke but sang properly(if they sang at all, usually limited to hymns), making for a less musical culture. It’s like the British later drew inspiration from the Negroes because their own clipped cultural norms were fenced within manners and proprieties. Imitating the Negro, they could let things slip and slide and get loose.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="113"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Besides, a cultural bargain was necessary between the Anglos and the vast numbers of Germanic and non-Anglo immigrants. Both sides had to surrender a certain degree of cultural distinctness to merge into a ‘more perfect union’. In contrast, Southern white culture fermented in its own love/hate interpretation of America. As James Baldwin wrote, white Southerners, especially after the Civil War, developed a dual identity: A proud victorious one as part of the USA, the biggest, richest, and most powerful country in the world, and a sore victimological one as a people betrayed and defeated by them Yankees. Irish were similar as both participants/profiteers and the conquered/colonized by the British Empire.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For a long time, some observers characterized the South as hopelessly mired in backwardness and nostalgia, unable to grow or move forward, but it also implied the present was haunted by the past, which added an element of mysticism to the culture — no wonder so much of great American literature, popular and serious(Mark Twain to Margaret Mitchell and William Faulkner) is associated with the South —, much like Latin America, with its ‘magic realism’ where time is psychological and subjective than historical and objective. No wonder then the evil husband in VERTIGO uses a Latin trope of ‘Carlotta’ to draw Scotty(James Stewart) into the web.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As newly arrived European immigrants arrived in the Northeast and spread out mainly through the Midwest to the West, the White South was less impacted by demographic transformations — the biggest change prior to post-60s mass immigration was the great black migration OUT of the South — , that is until recently when the South too became inundated with browns and yellows who’ve tipped much of the region in favor of the Democrats, made worse by the newly minted Southern elites being the products of the same globalist Ivy League education(and of course anti-white Jewish Influence). Southern Whites used to stand firm against the black threat and foreign/radical elements, but they dare not go against anything protected or promoted by Jews and, like Lindsey Graham, prefer to bark at Russia, which is now more the bastion of tradition, what the White South used to stand for. Yes, care more about Ukraine(and ‘Muh Israel’) while hiding one’s head in the sand as BLM and Antifa scum desecrate Southern heritage and monuments.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="145"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">White Southern music had less reason to be self-righteous and priggish because white Southerners were worried about them Negroes. After all, the moralism that ended racial discrimination made Southern Whites vulnerable to waves of black violence, no longer able to be restrained the old way. White Southern music was more about being home and feeling good than doing ‘good’ and feeling self-righteous. There was a lot of talk about God but as a figure of fear and force for tradition than an agent of social reform and salvation. The message was more about moral restraint than moral crusade, more about piety than equality, though given the backwardness of the South, many white rural white folks, the hicks, supported the Democratic Party and its more egalitarian and pro-labor agendas as long as they didn’t interfere with the racial eco-system built up after the Civil War.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="136"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And unlike Northern white folk music, white southern music had to be consciously white because the larger presence of blacks in the South. In the overwhelmingly white North, whiteness was simply a given, not something that needed identification and demarcation. In the South, anxiety about the Negroes(and their rambunctious rhythms) informed the development of white music uneasy with musical miscegenation(though, Country Music was influenced by black music, and black Rock-n-Rollers like Chuck Berry took a thing or two from Country rhythms). If Rock n Roll arose from the South as a form of musical miscegenation, with Berry duckwalking to country licks and Elvis shaking to black rhythm, Country Music marked the borders between white culture and black culture(though there were black country singers, and Nashville got increasingly more rhythmic as time went on).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/tH5BCGvJdmU?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="113"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, Country Music had its bad boy camp, the honky-tonk wing, with roots in folk songs of rebels and outlaws, especially following the defeat of the Confederacy. But, as Country Music came to commercial viability as decent music for good white Christian folks, the edge was smoothed, and even the bad boys of Country were more like bad ole boys, or good boys playing a bit bad. Still, the success and survival of Country could not have rested on Family Values alone. If so, polka music too would have been a great success across America. Country music offered just enough leeway for individuality, personality, and maverick posturing to give it some flavor.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PMtzDt1hXHo?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Though Country and Western often merged in their shared mythos of the outdoors, the ‛country‛ element proved to be more resilient. Even though rural society has long been eclipsed culturally and demographically, heritage and tradition have more generic value than adventure and movement. The cowboy theme was exciting as long as the Wild West lasted, which wasn’t for long. Western spirit developed as a moment in time, whereas ‘country’ sentiment is timeless. You can have ‘country’ without doing anything and just staying put, whereas ‘western’ material feeds on motion and drama. Country is about down-to-earth values of rural folks who don’t mind keeping it simple and loose(or a heartful reminder to any urbanite who pines for the cornfields and haystacks as the place where his folks, indeed all folks, came from).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mexican music has a similarly lasting appeal(and limitation). It has changed far less than other musical genres/styles over the years and failed to generate interest among the fashionistas and/or the ‘cool’ crowd, but that’s precisely the recipe for its longevity. It offers a sense of assurance, familiarity, and continuity. It’s like the scene in BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S where the salesman at the haute jewelry store remarks about the toy from the Crackerjack box, “That’s nice to know… It gives one a feeling of solidarity, almost of continuity with the past, that sort of thing.” Holly Golightly(Audrey Hepburn) herself was a country girl who took flight for the bright lights, but her sentimentality about her brother and ultimate wish to find the right man to take care of her suggests she isn’t as independent as she lets out.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rVFi-yeTe5g?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QSkID3PXu0k?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="240"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing about current Mexican music(which I sometimes hear on the road) is its remarkable similarity to what it was ten, twenty, or thirty years ago. It doesn’t strive to be original, outstanding, or awesome, and that is precisely the appeal for those who seek in music a sense of ‘home’. While plenty of modern Mexicans are into all sorts of music, from heavy metal to rap to techno to whatnot, they’ve also maintained a musical village of their own, and its lack of global import guarantees a certain insularity — unlike certain genres of Black Music(and even American Country to some extent), there’s been far less ‘appropriation’ of Mexican music by non-Mexicans, except as comical effect.<br />Mexicans, not a very literary people, can always find a piece of ‘home’ wherever they are with their music. There certainly are lots of ‘Mexican’-language radio stations all across America, even in areas where the prevailing culture, demographic or popular, is overwhelmingly un-Mexican. Most Americans probably regard it as the stuff that lawn-mowers and dish-washers(and plenty of illegals) listen to in their free time. Despite being uprooted far from their country of origin, the sense-of-home may be bigger among Mexicans in the US than among whites with no similar sense of ‘home music’; they know House Music, which appeals to the young(and young-at-heart), whereas ‘home music’ is intergenerational in appeal, like the old-time Westerns on TV.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Likewise, Country is like a log that burns slow but for a long time, as opposed to the funeral pyres of Rock music that grabs at the moment. Greatness and/or excitement on the level of, say, the Doors “Light My Fire” is hard to sustain, whereas the generally accepted mediocrity of Country Music can be to its advantage, a Christian acceptance of nobodies than an infatuation with the great somebody. Whereas people in Country Music take pride in their humble roots and place with common folks(and often sing about it), Rock musicians replace biography with mythology, as if they were created by the gods. Some Country Music stars are huge, but the soul of Country puts them on the same plane as the fans; indeed, not forgetting where you came from is at the very heart of Country, whereas Rock stardom is about standing atop the pedestal above the masses who are less fans than worshipers.<br />Rock devotees are eager for the next great song or next great act, but Country fans rarely anticipate greatness and rather appreciate their music’s sense of cultural boundary, a world to call their own oblivious to the whims of fashion and the pressures of the dog-eat-dog world. In a way, one might say it’s more like baseball, rarely exciting and without awesome athletics but something one can take in as a pastime than merely a spectacle.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="224"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And Rock is often outrageous or over-the-top, like a storm or tidal wave, it’s not something one can take in stride, like fishing on a boat with friends or family in a pond or lake. Steadiness is intrinsic to Country. Dolly Parton has been a perfect embodiment of Nashville but also something more. Though one of the biggest stars of the industry, she’s the real thing than a fabrication, like so many stars, pop and country, over the years. And even though none of her songs count as great, almost all of them are solid and enjoyable. Though generally mocked as the big-boobed lady among the sophistos and urbanites, her cheerful affability is irresistible. It isn’t often that talent and personality come in one package, and Parton is one of the fortunate few. And even though some of her songs are a bit racy, they flirt with than flounder in the issues. Usually, there’s an element of regret and pathos, like in Tammy Wynette’s song “D.I.V.O.R.C.E”, more about lamentation than liberation. And immorality is often a roundabout morality to teach a lesson for the one who initiated the trouble. So, Wynette’s “Your Good Girl’s Gonna Go Bad” is as much about setting a man straight as about a woman going crooked.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NNEh4i7WlkA?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MLeUN3TEUrs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="265"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dolly Parton and Tammy Wynette make an interesting pair. Wynette was the natural aristocrat of Country, just by physiognomy alone. The queen of the castle made of haystacks. Dolly Parton, for all her fame-and-fortune(and worldliness that came with it), always had about her the earthiness of a peasant girl, as if she couldn’t help saying what came naturally, with just enough manners(and wits) to keep it safe and proper, if not exactly wholesome(especially as plenty of fans were as fixated on her rack as on her act). In movies like 9 to 5 and THE BEST LITTLE WHOREHOUSE IN TEXAS, Hollywood tried to turn her into a hayseed Marilyn Monroe(or Mae West or Judy Holliday), but her core persona was such that it just wasn’t in her to be anything more than a Country Girl. Still, her hairdo and makeup were so over-the-top, approaching a camp vision of Country, that it makes one wonder. Was she genuinely simpleminded to believe it was so very glamorous or was it a conscious exaggeration of a country girl’s idea of beauty, playing up the ‘innocence’ as a schtick, even a shameless display of pride against all the well-bred women with ‘finer’ taste? Let them laugh at her behind her back because she doesn’t care and doesn’t mind being what she is: Nouveau Riche Country Star who came from poverty. Like Don King showing off his blings. Maybe she was savvier than she let on, with a sensibility in some ways similar to the post-modernism of Andy Warhol , Michael Jackson, and madonna.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Wynette and Parton had similar socio-economic backgrounds, but their divergent developments as cultural icons demonstrate the power of personality and its relations to physical attributes. One senses Parton was born into an ideal environment, whereas Wynette was born into the wrong one, with her career serving as a subconscious way of rectifying the ‘unjust’ circumstances by infusing Country with poise and regality generally unknown to the genre. Incidentally, she is the only Country star I really care for. Later, there was Emmylou Harris, but at one of her concerts she nagged on the kind of folks who use the word ‘nigger’, and I had no use for her since. What’s the point of being a redneck if you can’t even say the n-word? It’s like telling rapper he can’t say ‘faggot’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On the downside, Country’s longevity owed to a certain complacency, a lack of urgency and rather low expectations, which doesn’t do much for creativity. (Blues, though formally limited, dealt with grittier emotions, adding to its power and depth. Jazz, passive/aggressive in its flashy elusiveness, was bound to grow in slick sophistication. Pop thrives on novelty, the hit parade, and Rock was open to all ideas. In contrast, Country was too self-contented and self-contained to lurch forward unless dragged like a mule, but then, it wouldn’t have been Country if it had committed to ‘progress’.) Under such circumstances, it generally lacked the edge and daring of other musical forms.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, one could say Blues is a kind of Black Country Music as it’s also steeped in rural origins(and never lost it), what with Negroes sitting around blowing a worn harmonica and strumming a broken guitar, lamenting about picking cotton all day while da honkey done sit around sipping lemonade.<br />Despite its rustic and humble origins, it soon left its mark on urban culture in the way that Country did not. Once white country folks became urban denizens, many of them became embarrassed to be associated with Hee Haw music, whereas many urban Negroes stuck with the Blues and related forms. Furthermore, many whites(and Jews), especially sophisticates, who wouldn’t be caught dead with Country Music, became fascinated with the Blues, not least in Great Britain.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Blues, though clearly seedier than Country, share some similarities. Though Bluesmen often flaunted their bad boy creds like a badge, regret and pathos clung to the music. Both Country and Blues are informed by the fear of God. Much of Country Music is God-fearing, and even the blasphemous in the Blues carries the Mark of Cain, i.e. it is aware of its fallenness and the heavy price down the line of the Faustian bargain: “I done gots my bucket of chicken but Devil’s gonna burn my ass in hell.”<br />For reasons that may be historical and/or racial, Blues music lacks the complacency of Country, lending it greater appeal to the urbanites who relish the element of challenge. There’s an element of struggle, within and without, the stuff of tears of rage than mere sentiment. Perhaps, this owed to black history of slavery and racial discrimination(and being called ‘nigger’ by ‘crackers’), whereby Negro sensibility got packed with its share of angst, which came in handy as musical coal.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On the other hand, the black musical form that comes closest to Country in feel is Reggae, and it too has an air of complacency, but it caught on even more among many white sophistos and hipsters, even serving as the basis of some of the biggest hits for Sting(and the Police) and Men-at-Work. Then, perhaps there’s a musical quality to black raciality that is appealing to whites. (Granted, Country and Reggae are complacent about different things. The former is sure of its creed, the latter of its weed.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="176"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s rather odd that, despite rural whites and rural blacks being socio-economically closer to one another than either group to wealthy white urbanites and sophisticates, the latter developed a closer cultural affinity for blacks whose musical expression, especially in Blues-Jazz-Reggae(and Afro-Pop in Europe), serves as status markers for the ‘educated’ class. Take the movie BLUES BROTHERS with John Belushi and Dan Ackroyd. There’s a scene where the band does a gig at a Country Bar but, upbraided by the local-yokels, shifts from rhythm-n-blues to country-n-western. The thing is whereas black music(and community) is treated with sympathy and respect, the white clientele and Country culture are mainly spoofed and ridiculed(though not too nastily as in our ‘woke’ era), also partly true of NASHVILLE by Robert Altman. (The Nazis are the top villains in the movie, but if any people had a powerful musical culture, it was the Germans… before the ignominious fall. By the way, where’s the lie in the statement, “The Jew is using the black as muscle against you.”)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RdR6MN2jKYs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZTT1qUswYL0?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-64222431802965496272022-12-07T16:55:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:07.901-08:00Putin and Hitler in the Failure of 'Liberal' Imagination, Problems of Revisionism, Zelensky and Woody Allen's Zelig, or Zeliginsky<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="350" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiP9jNnoG8oOrHtg61T2LT1ZgbG4zanoDzE_PAt_2dk6IZhIvsqNtH8Tef0rQ7oga9dsWDB9pvIaSvq7B3eKMKoghxkLBS3JoKFrp9bvrK27hp_cjKwbCLo3cttrUqNR9zraZZIbwUaVqU_dAfTwktEpPGfLe7f-UbbT5yZEhCZSCHIaOmyGpnlpEqR0Q/w640-h350/Zelig%20e%20Hitler.jpg" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="163"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s customary in media and political discourse to label just about anything as ‘nazi’ and anyone as ‘Hitler’. Of course, those with more influence and reach(based on money and the misconceived notion of prestige money can buy) have more sway in their various hitlerantics and nazisteria. ‘Hitler’ and ‘Nazi’ have become metaphors in the art of political demonology, used by all sides as the mud of choice. If opposing sides in battle once invoked “God on our side”, adversaries today are more likely to cry “Hitler on their side”. No wonder then the so-called West is fighting Putin the Putler, and Russian ‘special operations’ in Ukraine are about ‘De-Nazification’. While Vladimir Putin is correct about sub-nazi elements in Ukraine, surely he knows the real power is with Jewish globalist supremacists. Even as Russia struggles to wrest itself free from (((Western))) control, it resorts to the established tropes of discourse: The Hunt for Nazis everywhere, as if everyone is a Simon Wiesenthal.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="394"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given Russia’s titanic role in World War II and decisive crushing of Nazi Germany(and its wild exaggerations about what happened at Auschwitz — during the Cold War when Poland was under Soviet Occupation, the official victim count was four million), its great national myth is one of eternal heroism against evil fascists and Nazis, the mass-murderers of innocent Jews as well as noble Russians. So, in keeping with Russia’s self-image as Nazi-dragon-slayer and to win Western hearts and minds, Putin spoke of smoking out the ‘nazis’ from their cubbyholes while saying nothing of the Jewish Hand behind the recent mess in Ukraine. (Not that this has earned Russia any favors from most in the Jewish-controlled West. The highest ‘good’ among Jews is “Is it good for Jewish Power”, i.e. “Never Again” translates in practice as “Always More Power”. So, while Jews are all for people screaming against ‘nazis’ in service to Jewish-favored agendas, nothing aggrieves them more than when Anti-Nazism is used as justification for agendas that counter Jewish Supremacist interests. Just like the Jewish God is a very jealous God, Jews are very jealous about the Nazi thing, which is to be used only in service to Jewish Power. No matter how sincere, idealistic, or courageous one is in his Anti-Nazism, he will be disfavored, even hated, if his position is deemed hostile to Jewish interests. In the current conflict, Putin declared war on ‘Nazis’ in Ukraine who just happen to be useful to Jewish Power, and this is intolerable because Jewish Supremacism > Fighting Nazis. If favoring Nazis is advantageous to Jewish Supremacist interests, Jews will be pro-nazi, as in current Ukraine. So, Anti-Nazism is like Free Speech and Terrorism as far as Jewish Supremacists are concerned. For all their talk of defending free speech and dreading Islamic terrorism, Jews attack free speech that undermines Jewish Power and support terrorism that is useful to Israel. From a purely realpolitik view of things, this should be obvious, but given all the ink Jews have spilled on the pure evil of Nazism, it is rather jarring to observe them take side, even blatantly, with Nazi-like elements in Ukraine. As far as Jewish Power is concerned, Russia is the prize whale while Ukro-Nazism is merely a pesky shark of no global consequence and, in the meantime, useful to set loose on Russians.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Russians are smart(and have a pair of cojones), they should make a big stink of their experience in the 1990s, which if aired could have epic consequences on the World Stage. After all, a nation can be exploited and plundered, in effect utterly devastated, without war. It happened to Weimar Germany. It happened to the American Middle Class in recent years, with the top 1% having more wealth than the entire middle class. But Russia in the 1990s was a true gangster paradise, a hell on earth, and without war, at least in the conventional sense with tanks and bombs. It was led by think tanks and the weapons of finance. The economy was raped, the masses driven to destitution, the political process utterly corrupted, and the media used as propaganda tool of Jewish globalists with zero concern for the Russian folks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The fact that Russia managed to rebound at least halfway from that period of economic blitzkrieg should serve as basis for a great historical narrative, somewhat comparable to the Great Patriotic War when Russia finally managed to push back against the German juggernaut. In both cases, the motherland was nearly reduced to slave or whore. Had Germans prevailed in World War II, Russians would have been reduced to helots. Had Jews prevailed, Russians would have been reduced to a race of soul-slaves, already the case with Anglos and Western European cucksters whose entire lives revolve around the ‘rules-based order’ of “Jews say, goyim obey”.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As the struggle against Germany became the stuff of collective memory, a galvanizing myth, the struggle against the Jewish Rape of Russia should is also deserving of proper recognition and remembrance. An official holiday, day of prayer, and/or teachable lesson about how the nation was nearly conquered by a bunch of decrepit globalists who look upon Russian folks as untermensch. Russia should commemorate the defense of motherland not only from Napoleon and especially Hitler but from Jewish Globalists.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s no need to denigrate all Jews in the remembrance of the Rape of Russia, no more than the Great Patriotic War obliges condemnation of everything German. No need to be like Jews who condemn Germans for all eternity for Holocaust Guilt. Ironically, Jews decry the logic of ‘antisemitism’ that blames all Jews for all time for what some Jews did(or might have done), but they apply that very logic on Germans who are deemed BORN GUILTY(and also on White Americans, stained forever with the guilt of ‘racism’ and ‘Jim Crow’ upon birth, furthermore regardless of the fact that many more white Americans have no roots in the Deep South and/or arrived as immigrants after the Civil War). Russia needs more National Narratives, especially ones based on truth. Rape of Russia really did happen(and will happen again if Russians lose their vigilance), and the top villains were Jews. Sadly, in the Empire of Lies, the biggest narratives are based on frauds such as BLM that would have us believe that blacks are being mass-murdered by white cops.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="420" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-Qxvk4bv4_3XH5WURHpUZK9TcKri0p3HOzMveoXuFR9PFCvp3j3Z4vQcGJMZ9zx7ihL7JYDH0oxltbAE6JlAFGQ-dpZVyTFvBOcu-oprJsqr2W__LXdwOTxyWCCUKzZNM1xY38VvjDi8YQ7pDqapPN7ULxi8NZaWB0-Ce240N-aOjSkNIlXo3skDe2g/w640-h420/flag.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The reason why so many in the West are shocked, yes shocked, by recent events is they’ve no prior knowledge of pro-Russian Narratives. Narratives matter because they provide context, rightly or wrongly. Our response to stimuli operates on the same principle, i.e. as the mind cannot process everything all at once, new stimuli are placed within recalls of familiar impressions. Thus, we are able to focus on what is new or different within a sense of continuity. Same goes for history. Consider the moral mileage Jews got out of the Holocaust Narrative on the Israel-Palestinian issue. Because so many people in the West were made familiar with the Jewish Narrative(whereas ignorant of the Palestinian one), they were likely to see the creation of Israel(or the eradication of Palestine) as ‘Jewish refugees fleeing from antisemitism and seeking a safe haven, a nation of their own’ than as the destruction of Palestine by Jewish immigrant-invaders who’d long been planning to colonize and takeover, indeed as early as the late 19th century.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="220"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When Jews commit acts of violence, the Narrative reinforces the view that Jews are merely reacting in kind to unwarranted terrorism by the Arabs — notice MUNICH by Tony Kushner & Steven Spielberg frames the violence between Jews and Arabs within the narrative of Arabs initiating the slaughter at the 1972 Olympics than Jews destroying Palestine in 1948. Given the Jewish control of dominant narratives, Arab violence is usually regarded as ‘terrorism’ by most Americans who are unfamiliar with the Nakba. Indeed, recent events in Syria would have been inconceivable without Jewish Exceptionalist control over the minds of the West. (When Jews pontificate about ‘American Exceptionalism’, they really mean all Americans must regard Jews and Israel as exceptionally awesome in every way. If indeed American Exceptionalism is about equal justice for all, people would be calling for equal treatment of Jews and Palestinians as a matter of US foreign policy.) Given the power of narratives, it’s too bad Russians didn’t forge a powerful(and inspiring) chronicle of its resurrection from near-death in the 1990s. In its eagerness for acceptance into the Western ‘rules-based order’ and abject fear of Jewish Power, Russia chose not to ruffle the feathers with a powerful narrative on the dark side of Jewish globalism, thereby missing an opportunity to project a powerful resistance-and-revival narrative for international consumption.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="617" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjI_DJnQisYM3ZCCYXd35kV3s4jx5cSpUwe49fO_iFxfG-296VNqjMzuZ_TVspic689w31eDFbIWjPq0xrCD9YQ5-3AQnBBUE16HjPS3DGeWD1-RPtfa3Lsz3SybEVs6_9Inr3tpmJvnBS3AFVJheKUU6abyLHZ82zZS3eyL-wNTa-I4Yw0M5o37SK1ww/w640-h617/rape%20of%20russia.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="228"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Likewise, Ukrainians, no less eager for Western approval, have been mostly silent(at least on the international stage) on the role of Jewish Bolsheviks in the Great Famine(and how World Jewry acted in concert to hide the great horror, as was certainly the case with the New York Times, whose Walter Duranty won the Nobel Prize for willfully false reporting). If the Rape of Russia had been made one of the central narratives, brought up over and over as part of the World Discourse, more people would have understood the true origins of the Ukrainian Crisis: Another case of Jews exploiting and manipulating divisions among Slavs to gain power over them. While wars are most often memorialized for obvious reasons, great events that inspire and shape the future need not be wars. After all, while most American Narratives are centered around wars — Revolutionary War, Civil War, World War II, aka ‘The Good War’, and etc. — , one could argue that the Civil Rights Movement has come to loom larger than all of them combined. Likewise, a Resurrection Narrative could be spun to make Russian folks(and indeed the world community) appreciate the transformation and partial revival since the hellish 1990s despite the ceaseless adversity and antagonism from abroad, especially the US that, since the end of the Cold War, truly became an Evil Empire of deceit and hubris.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="323"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But because Russians officially remained silent(at least before the World Community) about what had happened in the 1990s and tied none of it to Jewish Globalism, most people in the West lack the proper context as to why tensions in the region grew to where they are at now, i.e. Jews never gave up trying to subvert and take over Russia like they’d done already with the Anglsophere and EU. (One thing for sure, if a bunch of goyim entered Israel or New York and bled dry the Jewish community, Jews would never stop talking about it. Notice Jews never stopped talking about pogroms despite their revenge 1000x over against Russians and the Orthodox Church in the Bolshevik Era. And Jews never shut up about the McCarthy Era and ‘Red Scare’ despite having done far worse in blacklisting and destroying countless others, like BDS movement. Russian stoicism about the 1990s may be admirable on some level, but the sad fact is the complainers get heard whereas stone-faced stoics never do. What did American Indians ever get by being like the ‘Big Dumb Indian’ in ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST? Jewish Globalists are inveterate & shameless liars and must be hammered with the truth. Never let Jews get away with any lie. The current policy of the West is driven more by Jewish lies than anything resembling truth. Most importantly, the lies must not only be called out but be associated with Jewish Power as the source-culprit.) Putin and those around him may be decent managers, but they’ve lacked the balls to say it like it really is. If things continue this way, Russia needs a coup d’etat whereby Pavel Craig Robertsky the Terrible is put in power to purge the nation of all dumbshitsky globalists and traitors, to be replaced by robust leadership. Putin may have done some good things, but the Russian folks deserve better.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="130"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given recent events, actual vs reported, one can’t help but notice the discrepancy between truth and propaganda. If someone fifty years from now were to randomly peruse the current media-scape, endless lies could mislead him into believing the Russian Menace was behind Trump’s 2016 election and was the sole reason for the war in Ukraine. Given all the lies that fed misperceptions that led to wars and tragedies in the 20th century, one would think humanity would have evolved toward something saner, but no. In the current climate of Jew Worship, Globohomo-mania, Diversity fetish, BLM lunacies, Russyteria, and the like, no use expecting a people who can’t even define ‘woman’ to process and understand anything resembling the truth. Honesty and integrity have effectively been expurgated in the West.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="344" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimBbhUSGrywB40cmGW24T7TosghQcZIpETrUveSbOW-iNDoPGrkDSPdMvoMQBOzQLXDYnYLPcQUUuettSHeG14ESmIY8WKmPayWgKbnV51bZ8T8Bqcwf3D2d9kRWktC8EVfiUEUfLh-fstjpVI0O4RzL3Eb4Tu-dLbi1tJQXq9_1C7t260mXhBOHVgaw/w640-h344/wlm.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="398"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The general quality of journalism appears to have been degraded since the 1970s. This may seem odd given the professionalization of the field, with many more journalists with academic credentials than in the past. Part of the reason owes to the shift in tone. As culture became more infantilized and shameless, the general tenor of the media(and the academia) got trashier. Colleges now teach courses on crude or deviant subjects(often dumbed down in consideration of ‘minorities’ or fetishized for the freaks or queers), and many journalists are products of such education and culture; even if they stick to conventional fields of study under sound professors, they are affected by prevailing attitudes and ‘values’. While leftist ideologies(always prevalent in journalism) could be wrong-headed, they imbued adherents with a degree of logic and principles. But with the fading of leftist ideology in favor of neo-idolatry(mainly of homos and blacks), the media became quasi-theocratic in tone. (The mendacity of popular culture made things worse. For those on the ground, such as policemen who deal with scummy elements night and day, it’s common knowledge more blacks end up in jail because they commit more crime. And those who know blacks up close understand there are differences among races other than skin color. But such reality isn’t represented in entertainment that not only overlooks the truths of black criminality and pathology but portrays blacks as nobler-hearted defenders of justice against evil, usually embodied by white males as the dragon to slay — in reality, white men defend their women from black thugs, but in popular culture noble black men defend white damsels from evil white males, therefore gaining the sexual favors of white girls; such is Jewish Social Logic mandated across movies and TV shows. Notion of racial equality between blacks and non-blacks is a thing of the past as blacks are now deemed worthier than non-blacks in every way, i.e. ‘racism’ now means failing to acknowledge the sanctity of blacks, how they deserve to be above the law. Given popular impression of reality relies more on entertainment than the news, which is hardly better, no wonder many Americans were suckered into supporting BLM. They didn’t see George Floyd as typical of his kind, a black career thug, and instead grafted the idolatry of the Noble Negro or Awesome Black on the fool overdosed on Fentanyl.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">No less important, liberalism lost out to Jewish tribalism among Jews and goyim alike. When Jews were ascendant and faced with censoriousness from conservative forces, they appreciated the value of liberalism and its defense of liberties, free speech, and tolerance: Let all sides say their say, let the chips fall where they may. In the free speech atmosphere of the 1970s, a controversial figure like David Duke could be invited to give speeches and debate the student body. Such is now unthinkable, what with a milquetoast figure like Charles Murray almost getting mauled at an elite college.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Why did liberalism fail? One reason was Jews became more fixated on control than liberty as they gained in power. As long as Anglo-Americans were at the top, Jews could pose as adversarial underdogs despite all their wealth and networks. But as top dogs(with Wasps as their lapdogs), they became the natural target of those speaking-truth-to-power, and so, free speech became a liability, whereupon Jewish Power disingenuously pushed for censorship of ‘hate speech’ in the name of protecting vulnerable groups from ‘white supremacists’ when, in truth, it was to silence criticism of Jews as the new ruling elites. If Jews are about protecting the weak from the powerful, why have they targeted the BDS movement more than anything? Last I checked, Palestinians are among the poorest and weakest people on Earth oppressed and terrorized by Israel, the regional superpower showered with endless favors and billions from the US.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish War on Free Speech went bareknuckle after 2016 when it was agreed that free and open debate on the internet tipped the balance in favor of Donald Trump. So, Jewish Power, despite calling itself ‘liberal’, went all in to control, suppress, and block certain personalities and kinds of speech(even from accredited professionals). The very people who’d been endlessly bitching about evil Joe McCarthy went totally hysterical about Russia-Russia-Russia. If McCarthy was at least half-right, the Russysterics were totally wrong and, worse, knew it but lied just the same; but then, this is a country where Joe Biden’s obvious corruption in Ukraine was shielded, whereas Trump was impeached for prying into it.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="10"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Power is almost always about ‘whose side’ than ‘what truth’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The demise of liberalism also owes to the rise of Political Correctness that eventually metastasized into the monstrous cancer that is now called ‘wokeness’. If PC got its start by trying to discourage certain kinds of speech, the goal of ‘wokeness’ is to compel people to mouth the same slogans(because… ‘silence is violence’). If PC was about being ‘nice’ so as not to offend, ‘wokeness’ is about being rude as part of the offensive.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="44"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Thus, the culture of academia went from the defense of free speech and appreciation of controversy to the insistence on speech codes and then institutionalization of consensus whereby all must agree that certain things are good while others are bad, without question or debate.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhBFyM_jiu4ZTRrVTiRmXXDDUKogJeIG7ci98TjMDc1D73QGkfCrL9TO8gk9dknYRVEt1-Ennc99Kl8KSIC-cYfoUWE_zRaxtJWXMlWCa5eDQxFT628-hyoC3WTh_AAjWbAVobVn0pn0rNyHZoaJbrWOPn2JQ3w_frmR0zvsJ4lEXUujH6PyRVQOg82ow/w517-h640/lies%20of%20media.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="517" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And don’t expect to find any principle in the vanguard of the Tridolatry of Ziogromo(Zionism-Negro-Homo). If you were to chant the mantras about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’, you better not ask why Biden’s administration is disproportionately Jewish(to say the least) and why powerful institutions/industries make no effort to ‘include’ the concerns of Palestinians. Why no promotion of PLM or Palestinian Lives Matter and why no Hollywood movies about Nakba and Jewish Globalist Rape of Russia?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, while you’re urged to chant ‘woke’ mantras, you better not probe as to their consistency in application and/or critique, like “If concentration of power and privilege among one group at the expense of others is bad, why do we tolerate so much accumulation of wealth and control among Jews, and why does US foreign policy pretend as if Palestinian and Syrian victims don’t exist?” While the Jewish-controlled media have turned a blind eye to real victims of the Syrian War, they commend all Americans to get worked up over fake ‘victims’ choreographed by globo-propaganda.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="129"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given this is the cultural climate in which Millennials grew up, is anyone surprised that they make up many of most infantile, insane, and/or insipid journalists? Because they were acculturated in a world of constant moral panic — “Look, a ‘racist’, the KKK at Oberlin, white frat rape at UVA, a ‘homophobe’, a ‘transphobe’, #MeToo and ‘Muh Pussy Hat’, ‘Blacks Lives Matter’(cuz white cops are murdering millions of blacks every year!!), “Putin’s puppet”(because Rachel Maddow says there’s a Russian under every bed), “my pronouns”, and etc. — , their emotions outrun their rational faculties, which are cluttered with PC gobbledygook at any rate. The stupidest and most shallow members of society deem themselves the most conscientious because they’ve learned to EMOTE rapturously about the correct idols.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such thinking extends to so-called ‘conservatives’ like Amy Coney Barrett. This silly twad not only adopted a black child — “I’m not racist because I got a black kid” — but apparently wept over George Floyd. Did she ever shed a tear, even a crocodile one, over all the peoples killed by the US empire and Israel in Palestine, Syria, Libya, or Donbass? Did she ever get all mushy about the countless victims of black thugs and criminals? Of course not. But her stupid self turned crybaby over George Floyd who almost certainly died of drug overdose.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="235"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another reason for the degradation of culture owes to the fusion of commercialism and agitprop. While stories have often been used for political ends in art and popular culture, there was a clear dividing line between the serious and the unserious. In other words, while a serious TV series like ROOTS addressed the issue of slavery and racial oppression, no one expected anything grave, serious, meaningful, or enlightening from random TV commercials, magazine ads, Archie Comic books, and the like. As for childhood, it was about innocence and having fun and learning basic skills. It was deemed the last refuge of scoundrels to politicize kids who don’t know any better, indeed can be made to believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy — such ‘brainwashing’ was associated with Nazi Germany, Communism, or Jesus Freaks. But over the years, even stupid kiddie cartoons and dumb ads are heavily laden with message and agenda. And sex education, once controversial even for middle schoolers, has not only permeated down to the pre-school level but push porny instructions that would have appalled adults not so long ago. And ‘woke’ parents weaponize their kids into foul-mouthed brats giving the middle finger and dropping F-bombs on Youtube videos; and if some adopt black babies as ‘virtue symbols’, others dream of turning their kid tranny(with drugs and surgery) to show off one’s magic ‘rainbow’ child to their equally deluded peers.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="87"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Millennials were the first generation to grow up under this regimen(and its many times worse for ‘zoomers’, 40% of whom consider themselves LGBTQXYZ), and this accounts for their inability to distinguish between serious and unserious because even the most trivial and frivolous cultural product is now loaded with the ‘message’. Hardly surprising then that the White House would recruit TikTokers to serve as ‘influencers’ on Ukraine. The fusion of silly and serious, resulting in the ‘sillious’ mentality, affects journalism too, which is now full of simpering dolts.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The demise of true liberalism has led to the rise of neo-idolatry, which makes critical thinking virtually impossible. Free/critical thinking in the skeptical-secularist sense is difficult when socio-political taboos dictate silence on certain matters, and indeed, there was a time when Liberalism, represented by groups like ACLU and the rationalist tradition, made this very point. But precisely because liberalism is a principle than a conviction, it tends to bend under pressure of concentrated passion, especially if the passion strikes a chord with liberal sentiment. Liberalism successfully fended off challenges from impassioned Evangelicals and the like because such folks were regarded as arch-conservative and anti-liberal. In contrast, liberal principles were weakened by partiality to certain causes(and even felt guilty and apologetic when it failed to throw its full weight, in the name of fairness or objectivity, on the side of the Good against the Bad).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEih29CymnMcwLQLYBVotfFLi_6UwEe-_0NonqfxEKSWxqS14jPSp136kUpgA_dzh5TjeoxAA4TO2dnQbH8P-Addg6ra3nvUT-UUFd6Y2fpvVJ6oZrk0ZAzSDydxiP_-vtwcFlKzqTJ_QU_oe75JWRVGBrGt0VjV3PPIUfRnDRdJE4BhSY3JXV83SNBNvA/w529-h640/deep%20jew%20.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="529" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="183"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Liberalism, centered on civil liberties, individual freedom, and tolerance, championed the rights of blacks, homosexuals, and other minorities/deviants of society who were denied basic rights. In doing so, it overlooked the danger of tyranny rising from within its own ranks. Accustomed to regarding blacks and homos(and the like) as marginalized minorities denied basic human rights, Liberalism was blind to the anti-liberal strains within black politics and homo sensibility. In truth, blacks weren’t content with equal rights under the law and craved favoritism, adulation, and idolatry; and homos, by their very nature, were prone to be vain, narcissistic, bitchy, hissy, and demanding. They weren’t satisfied with the same basic rights as everyone else and soon enough insisted on being favored, celebrated, and promoted uber alles. Homo-Promo is intrinsic to Globo-Homo. In other words, even as homos and trannies demanded full rights and total freedom to express themselves any way they wished, they wanted their critics and opponents to be silenced and suppressed on grounds that the “debate has been settled, that’s that, and you better agree or be ‘canceled’.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="232"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Liberalism was fully aware of the dangers of conservative authoritarianism, majoritarianism, religious traditionalism, and etc., as they’d been the historical enemies of liberalism. But, Liberalism didn’t imagine that the marginalized elements of society, whom it protected and championed, could grow to such power as to undermine the principles of liberalism itself. Liberalism failed to understand the ‘radical will’ of certain groups and agendas. While most groups and interests are content with basic equality and parity — Greek-Americans, Polish-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Russian-Americans, Iranian-Americans, and etc. aren’t demanding any special privileges and are satisfied with basic rights — , certain groups, ideas, and causes are inherently aggressive, expansive, and/or virulent. It’s like not all organisms are alike. There’s a difference between growing a rose in your house and letting loose a certain strain of bacteria. Rose will remain in the pot, whereas the bacteria will spread all over and infect everything. Among mammals, rodents pose a special threat. Liberalism was right about the dangers of Christianity(and Islam) as it has been, by nature, a highly aggressive and conversionary religion seeking to take over all souls around the world. But, Liberalism apparently forgot that Christianity too had once been a marginalized and suppressed movement. Once Christians were protected by the Roman authorities, they were no longer content to freely practice their Faith and set about converting everyone and destroying all other faiths.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="249"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While blackness and homosexuality aren’t creeds, ideologies, or religions, black nature is more aggressive than most racial natures, and homosexuality is characterized by penchant for fussy-wussy bitchy-witchy hissy-wissiness. Liberalism was correct as principle to champion the basic rights of blacks and homos but asleep at the wheel or weak in the knees when those groups began to make demands that overstepped the bounds of liberalism, i.e. they wanted their egos stoked and their opponents, enemies, and critics silenced. At that point, Liberalism should have sternly reprimanded blacks and homos that they too must abide by liberal principles but failed to do so, out of either sentimentality, fear, or corruption. As more and more concessions were made to blacks and homos, they became idolized, and once something gains sacral status, it enters the realm of taboo and is beyond rational discourse. Try to discuss, in the most level-headed and rational way, the problem of black crime and George Floyd’s life as a career criminal, and the result is the ‘wokesters’ will be triggered and throw tantrums. Try to make an objective case as to why homo fecal-penetration doesn’t qualify as real sex, and the result is the globo-homo community will foam at the mouth and do everything in their power to have you ‘canceled’. Liberalism, which started with the proposition that marginalized groups should be allowed to speak and be heard, ended up with the position that those groups should silence voices they don’t like.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="201"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Some might argue that this is the natural life cycle of liberalism, but others would argue that it didn’t have to be this way. Liberalism could have stood by its guns and demanded that all groups be allowed to say their say without being ‘canceled’ by the powers-that-be(in the name of ‘protected’ groups). So, why did liberalism end up betraying itself? The Jewish Factor was most instrumental. Jews, like blacks and homos, have a tendency toward egotism, collective passion, vanity, megalomania, avarice, and aggression. They too aren’t satisfied with ‘enough’, the stuff of basic rights. Many Jews are insatiable and want to have more, indeed they feel they deserve more as the Chosen People, the smarter people, the pushier people. Or as the uniquely victimized people who deserve reparations forever from all the world. If liberalism especially indulged blacks and homos, it was in large measure due to its having fallen into Jewish control, a fatal outcome for liberalism. After all, in the over-indulgence of blacks and homos, there remains the implication that liberalism can be redirected back to its principled roots, just like a parent can stop spoiling his children if he so makes up his mind.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, once liberalism fell into Jewish hands, it simply became an instrument of Tribal Supremacist Agenda. (There are outliers to be sure. Glenn Greenwald is Jewish AND Homosexual but genuinely committed to liberal freedoms and civil liberties.) Of course, Jews played up their own history of marginalization, discrimination, and even extermination(under the Nazis) to justify their Kafkaesque abuses of liberalism. Jews had long experienced hostility and come under suspicion from the Christian Majority, and there were anti-semitic laws and the like. Naturally, Jews-as-minorities gravitated to liberalism as a guarantor of their basic rights, and liberalism regarded Jews with a measure of sympathy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, like blacks and homos, Jews wanted so much more than equality or parity. They wanted power, then total power, and control, then total control. So, even as they squeezed liberalism for all it was worth to defend their own liberties, freedom, and reputation, they increasingly perverted and distorted it to deny the same rights and freedoms to other groups deemed hostile, critical, or threatening(even if only potentially) to Jews. Jews argued that, as precious as free speech is, some groups are under such threat of dehumanization and violence that they need special protection from the majority. (Never mind that, as examples of British Imperial rule over Indian, Turkic rule across the Ottoman Empire, and Anglo-Boer-Jewish rule over blacks in South Africa amply demonstrate, minorities have often been the oppressors of majorities throughout history.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="199" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnSxzbNeuMDVCRTOQSm3PduwbzGNAeiiSSmbolGVuWq9OulHf4U2_cROfK7W5M9rBvDSEKxY6EdSFsaciVdhheNTmSttJmOjwVzrTnPMKAnSFCwDd0yjaK37MjaM3Rf_y76ZgSQXosOMFoTEar7q9ObsEiDB0DUsYmDWjd4CZ8V6eKQ_XmbRIf7ba5UQ/w640-h199/boots.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="171"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Jews grew in power and took over as the new ruling elites of the West, their twist on Liberal Logic was more a means to shield supremacist power on top from challenge from below than to protect weak groups on the bottom from violence from the top or the unruly majority. Today, liberalism is essentially dead or has been rendered ineffective as certain groups are now so idolized and certain narratives so sacralized that it’s virtually impossible to speak honestly and rationally about them lest one be ‘canceled’ many times worse than in the days of HUAC and Joe McCarthy, but then, Jews are perfectly fine with this because, whereas many Jewish radicals were persecuted during the ‘Red Scare’, it’s the Jews who now call the shots on who gets destroyed. It’s like Jews don’t care about ethnic oppression as long as Jews get to do it to Palestinians; it’s wrong if it’s ‘anti-semitic’ but perfectly fine when ‘anti-Arabic’ at the hands of Zionists.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One cannot speak the truth about BLM without getting ‘canceled’. Charles Murray laments that even the National Review refused to review his book on race, blacks, and crime. And, if it’s mandatory to celebrate and revere certain groups and narratives, it’s no less mandatory to hate and revile others, especially ‘whiteness’ and Russia(and increasingly China). Whiteness is bad, period, just like blackness is good, period. It’s wrong to say there’s good whiteness and bad whiteness; no, whiteness itself is bad and must go. And anti-Russia nuttery is now such that it isn’t enough to hate Putin and the current Russian folks. One must also rebuke and ‘cancel’ past Russian greats in arts, literature, science, and technology. Yuri Gagarin has been ‘canceled’. Funny that he was okay, someone to be honored, when the Soviet Union, the system responsible for mass killings and totalitarian tyranny, was around, but he is to be posthumously canceled because current Russia isn’t onboard with Jewish supremo-globo-homo.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="116"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The nature of such lunacy comes into focus only if we take into account the Jewish control and perversion of ‘liberalism’. The contradictions of Jewish Liberalism have long been problematic as it was at once committed to liberalizing Western Society and strengthening Jewish consciousness. Why would a people who do most to liberalize a society insist on the most stringent form of tribalism(and supremacism)? It comes down to the question of “principle or instrument?” It’s like there are sincere Christians who live the Christian Life and those who merely use the Faith to gain influence. Same goes for liberalism or any other creed. Some stick by principles while others cynically exploit it for advantage.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When Jews were ascendant and benefited from liberties and rights, they appreciated the value of liberalism. Certain Jews in groups like ACLU really seemed committed to liberal principles. But, there were also the (Leo)Straussians and (Herbert)Marcusians for whom any ideal or principle was merely a tool of power and control. Over time, the stated ideologies of the Straussians and Marcusians faded, and both sides converged into the neo-con/neo-lib Jewish Supremacist worldview that today invokes notions such as ‘liberal democracy’, ‘free enterprise’, and ‘human rights’, along with diversity-inclusion-equity, in the most cynical way. Jews corrupt and manipulate the tenets of universal liberalism to serve Jewish tribal supremacism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="219"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However, the reason for this requires some explanation. It’s not a simple case of universalism vs particularism or integrity of ideals vs tribal loyalty. Whereas most tribal loyalties are about blood, kinfolk, ethnicity, or nationality, Jewishness amounts to something more. It is a fusion of tribalism with spirituality; it is a meditated form of tribal identity, much like Brahminism is about the unity of caste with the cosmic way. Thus, if modern secular cosmopolitanism renders basic tribalism as crude, primitive, and atavistic, it doesn’t have the same impact on Jewishness that isn’t only about blood but spiritual vision and fusion of historical narrative and moral laws. Thus, Jews regard Jewishness not merely as a matter of blood bond or flag-waving but a way of mentally organizing and interpreting mankind and history; it constitutes a worldview. So, Jews don’t feel they are betraying higher principles in favor of tribal power. They believe that the thing they’re most loyal to, Jewishness, is the highest principle of all time, based on the Covenant, if not with God(whom most Jews no longer believe in), then with biology, history, and destiny, i.e. among all the human groups, Jews are most godlike and thereby ideally positioned to push humanity to the new frontier, as Yuval Harari has said.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/lkQtpSMXssPv/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/lkQtpSMXssPv/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/lkQtpSMXssPv/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Or, perhaps Jewish elites and goy peers believe liberalism is too precious to be wasted on the people. Like aristocratic monopoly on weaponry, perhaps liberalist thinkers now believe true liberalism is suited only for the elites who know how to weight and handle complex, difficult, and thorny issues, whereas the less intelligent, temperate, and educated are likely to misuse freedom and misinterpret data, losing sight of the bigger picture. Furthermore, mass liberalism, even if intelligently utilized, can be problematic in fostering endless debates and divisions that prevent consensus necessary to push an agenda. Therefore, true liberalism ideally should be reserved for the inner-circle, or so the elites seem to believe.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, it is precisely why Project Veritas has infuriated so many elite liberals who speak differently in private than in their professional or official capacity. In private, they resemble true liberals open to consideration from all angles, even in criticism of their own side, whereas they present a different face to the public, that of Corporate Liberalism. Within their inner sanctum, they practice controversial-liberalism, the true kind, but push consensus-liberalism out in the open, which is dumbed down and doctrinaire, mainly purposed to rally the less intelligent and informed minions who deem themselves uh-duh ‘progressive’. For those in the inner circle, there is a degree of independent liberalism, but the masses must do with Guided Liberalism, premised on the notion that they’re too dumb to think and make sense of the world for themselves and therefore must be nudged to adopt the Official Line of the Current Year.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="111"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s as if elite liberals gave up on the Enlightenment Ideal that most people, with proper education and cultivation, could be more-or-less equal in intelligence, knowledge, logic, critical thought, and civic sense. After over a century of mass education and mass communication, many more people have been educated but the mass by and large remain childish, gullible, and idiotic. Such realization feeds the conceit that true liberalism should only be for those with the proper faculties of rationality, skepticism, judiciousness, and criticality, as well as a good dose of cynicism grounded in realism. (It remains a conceit because the elites are deluded that THEY know better, especially to rule us.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">History has shown that intelligence, rationalism, skepticism, curiosity, empathy, and objectivity cannot be inculcated on the mass level even with lavishly funded public education. Yet, because the modern world is founded on promises of democracy and equality, the people must nevertheless be persuaded that they are indeed living in the Free World, and this requires many layers of deception. The end result is the several tiers of liberalism. There is true liberalism, still practiced behind closed doors among insiders and initiates. Then, there is professional liberalism, the kind one finds in the pages of the New York Times. It is crafted to sound intelligent and critical but really functions to maintain the Overton Window of acceptable discourse, beyond which dissident or opposing ideas are impugned as ‘discredited’ or ‘debunked'(mostly on the basis of circular logic among people who agree with one another, or “I said what he said, and he said what I said, and that makes it true.”) As a true liberal within the inner circle, someone like David Reich can be more forthright about race and group differences but, when speaking with the NYT and the like, must spin the findings as being in accordance with official dogma… even when they really aren’t at the scientific level.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/5285654473847338737#" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/4428943424158854473/5285654473847338737#"><img border="0" class="aligncenter" height="440" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgsIH3JmYkJURcSmpML0BZo1kH-N_oXa4sEX75P5_R3l3hNiw7I9266S7HZtd-Q7zcVtpLGgcucAX4WIJMy9VHJHvH6twff1TYFmM4rwyxkDFixgXkqBJ6hOKgH54XadWO-30iJSoKIdNp4grZqyMAN93VwQiNBhg2ezXwwkU0cp4lwKChRxy7E9kEMnA/w640-h440/ann%20c.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a> Professional Liberalism isn’t true liberalism as it’s more about shaping opinions and reinforcing truisms but has hallmarks of true liberalism in its upper-middlebrow engagement with the arts, culture, history, and science. And then, there is Mass Liberalism that has nothing to do with true liberalism. It is on the childish level of Sesame Streets and amounts to little more than mouthing platitudes and shouting slogans disseminated through TV news, celebrities, cultural commissars, and politicians, e.g. exhortations to ‘trust the science’ among those who know little or nothing about science or endless chants of ‘Black Lives Matter’ among those who know nothing about blacks, genetics, and crime. Such goes by the label of ‘liberalism’ because it adheres to the agenda favored by so-called Liberal Elites, but there is nothing liberal in the thinking process or tone of discussion as there’s no room for heterodoxy. You either bark along like dogs or are barked at into submission.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="254"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s worth noting, just because elite liberals practice true liberalism behind closed doors, it doesn’t mean they are committed to truth and integrity based on honest discussion and critical examination of the facts. The case of NYT editor Matthew Rosenberg, whose private conversations were exposed by Project Veritas, should leave no doubt as to elite liberal mentality. Rosenberg privately admitted that the 1/6 event was hardly a big deal and, yes, FBI informants were all over the place. In the mode of true liberalism, he was more than willing to speak the truth in what he deemed to be private space. But, he stood by the official line at the NYT and publicly insisted FBI was not involved and that it was indeed AN INSURRECTION, almost the end of the Republic! So, when elite liberals practice true liberalism among themselves, it’s more a matter of privilege than principle. They value their own space in which they practice free speech and discuss matters candidly, but their priority is power, and if the lie serves their agenda, they go with the lie every time. It’s sort of like the levels of freedom in George Orwell’s 1984. Wherever Winston Smith goes, there is Big Brother’s eyes following him, with nary a place without Big Brother’s near-omnipotent gaze. But, Winston Smith realizes that in the office of O’Brien(member of the Inner Party), the tele-screen with Big Brother need not always be on. O’Brien has the privilege of turning it off.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="7"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hitler, Putin, and Zelensky, a False Start</b></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="562"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given recent events in Ukraine and the (((Western))) news coverage, Putin’s characterization of the West as an ’empire of lies’ rings true. Not that Russia is a fount of truth, but its vision of Russian interests and limitations functions within a semblance of reality and sanity, recognizable to anyone whose mind hasn’t been rotted by the Empire of Lies. Russia has a sense of its own place in the world and navigates the global waters on those terms. It is not seeking hegemony, not even over Eastern Europe which the Soviet Empire relinquished at the end of the Cold War. Russia, like any sovereign nation, has its own interests, and as a major regional power, is mindful of its sphere of influence. Russia has been upfront about its basic needs and interests, seeking to resolve them through negotiation. For example, Russia is fine with neighboring nations(like Georgia and Ukraine, among others) dealing with the West AS LONG AS they do not conspire with the West to endanger Russian security. The problem is legitimate Russian interests will be addressed ONLY IF the West shows Russia a modicum of respect, but the West is unwilling for various reasons. One reason is Jews hate Russia and also control the West. Another reason is people are naturally contemptuous and have an urge to superior to something other, just like they’re naturally spiritual and need to worship something even as secularists. As negative feelings about Jews, blacks & non-whites, immigrants, homos, and members of the EU have been made taboo, who can the Europeans freely hate and feel superior to without censure? The favorite target used to be Big Fat Stupid Ugly Americans, but as America is now about globo-homo and BLM(and even had a black president), Anti-Americanism isn’t what it used to be across Europe, which has been turning into Euramerica, at any rate. Well, there is RUSSIA. So, all the old Western prejudices about Russia serve as safety valve for pent-up need to feel superior to the Other. White-America-as-all-around-scapegoat or ‘whiteness’ serves a similar function in the US, e.g. blacks attack Asians, but Asians blame ‘white supremacism’. Therefore, Russia has become like Rodney Dangerfield: It gets no respect, and the West has simply been unwilling to work in good faith with something it doesn’t respect. The Western attitude toward Russia is somewhat akin to globalist feelings about MAGA Deplorables. Russia and Deplorables are just barely tolerable as well-heeled helots, never as people with sovereignty of identity and interests. Of course, the deepest source for both hatreds is Jewish. Russia is a vast country with a good-sized population, but its global interests are modest, even too modest, whereas Jews are a majority only in tiny Israel and tiny minorities in all other countries, BUT Jewish ambitions are boundless in greed and lunacy. To get a sense of current world affairs, imagine if the kid in Wes Anderson’s RUSHMORE got control of Western institutions and industries. He’d operate on the basis of god-complex, i.e. the world must accommodate itself to his fantasies than he should accommodate himself to world’s realities. Perhaps, Jews in politics are especially crazy because they couldn’t cut it in the truly brainy fields of science, math, medicine, and the like, therefore compensating with an extra dose of Tough Jew antics.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/peKJZyIrnQA?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/6_2C8Engmbk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Having experienced the hellish 90s on the meat-hooks of Globalism and then targeted as the all-around villain by the Collective West, especially since the Maidan Coup of 2014, Russia has sensibly learned not to trust the West but been unwilling to name the Jewish Power behind the anti-Russian hysteria that replaced the Cold War with the Scold War, or War of Narratives, for which the Western arsenal is many times that of the USSR, though the bombshells of fake news have been so excessive that much of the ‘Global South’ has tuned out the Western Narrative on the Ukraine issue.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="81"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If there’s a fundamental untruth eating away at Russia, it’s the fear and anxiety about naming the Jewish Power, the real culprit behind the West-Gone-Mad. That aside, however, the Russian state and interests are rational and reasonable. Same could be said of China. Even more than Russia, China’s media are controlled, and censorship is rife. Still, in terms of what China is and expects of the world, there’s a good deal of truth in Chinese foreign policy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="382"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the (((West))) or Schwest is an empire of lies because it’s really about Jewish supremacist gangsterism relying on smoke-and-mirror proxies and fulminating about ‘liberal democracy’, ‘human rights’, ‘equity’, ‘inclusion’, etc., none of which Jews care about — just ask the Palestinians. Even calls for ‘gay rights’ are bogus. They give the false impression that West wants all nations around the world to accept that some people are born homo and should be left alone in their private lives. Instead, ‘gay rights’ amounts to quasi-spiritual Gay Rites whereby homosexuality is to be mass-fetishized, sacralized, and celebrated as the new catholicism. It’s not a matter of tolerance of deviance but promotion and institutionalization of deviance as the highest value. It serves as proxy of Jewish Power that seeks to subvert the moral confidence of all goy societies. It’s also a way to harness restless globo-homo energies toward serving Jewish interests via collaboration. It’s also to inculcate goy minds with the notion of minority uber majority. So, this ‘gay rights’ thing is really about ‘gay might’, the empowering of homos to shove their collective fist up the world’s arse. It amounts to the figurative sodomy of nation after nation. Surely, there’s a difference between tolerating homos to be homo in their own space and letting them bugger your buns. By ‘gay rights’, globalists demand that all nations not only tolerate homos but let homos bugger their arses. Russia allows homos to be homo, but it comes nowhere near easing the demands of Jews and their cuck-minions, for whom the only acceptable deal is the unconditional surrender of “We bend over, and you bugger us.” All nations must enforce homo-promo in government, schools(down to the elementary level), advertising, entertainment, and etc. Disney(or Jizzney) is now globo-homo agit-prop industry, hair-breadth away from promoting full-blown pedophilia. And homos love this because their vanity, like Jewish power-lust, is insatiable. Homos used to plead, “let us be free to do our thing” but now say, “bend over and take it up your ass… otherwise, you’re a homophobe denying our humanity and ‘visibility’.” (Why would anyone want to be ‘visible’ as the guy who takes it up the arse? How the values of the West have changed, mostly for the worse.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="335"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">‘Liberal Democracy’, as promoted by the Schwest, is no less bogus. However democratic the electoral process is in a particular nation, it’s deemed ‘autocratic’ if results go against the Jewish globo-homo hegemonic interests. On the other hand, if a puppet regime amenable to the Schwest is installed by the CIA, what a beacon of freedom it is! Individuals like John Mearsheimer are more honest than most, but even they dare not speak the whole truth. This so-called Western expansionism isn’t about ‘liberalism’ or ‘democracy’ at all. It’s really about Jewish Supremacist control. If indeed genuine liberal democrats spearheaded a movement to democratize the world in their image, we could fault them for naivete, foolishness, and moral pride, but AT THE VERY LEAST, we could still credit them with good will and idealism, misguided as it may be. It’s like Christian Missionaries in the movie HAWAII(directed by George Roy Hill based on James Michener’s novel) may be delusional, but they are sincere in their calling and dedication. So, if the so-called ‘liberal democratic’ Western order was at least sincere in its ‘rules-based’ idealism, there would be some good will in its international policy. But, whole thing’s a sham because the real animating force behind the Schwest is supremacism of strong-willed Jews and the ‘submissivism’ of cowered Anglos(so impressed with Jewish intelligence, personality, and ‘prophetism’). Jewish fingerprints are all over the ‘Western’ blueprint. Whatever other interests are involved — military-industrial complex, oil industry, mineral industry, globo-homo missionaries or mission-fairies, feminist ideologues, and etc. — are secondary or subordinate to Jewish interests. If Jews prize or protect something, it isn’t to be touched; if Jews hate something, it is to put on the chopping block. The so-called Military-Industrial-Complex follows than leads Jewish Power. While it is perpetually on the lookout for conflicts and war-profiteering, it targets for destruction/plunder only with the go-ahead from the Jews, much like dogs, though natural hunter-predators, will only go after prey chosen by the master.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="542" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhz-QmFp7NbBVZXNfXSG8HTO_zUjjOn_-kw1DNBL_BvvbdMDpxiim-I9Ky3Jv1cmH1hYjsFv8DV0mc3K0PWnf97C_tOX-qmXmc-sk08JOFqCbtNBtrUa8om1cCU7S1zPI_QEIbp_mywNsIGZyI9cE0g6zIxDcKaKAebLg8W7Ri_OlV1MTKC8lvnrpXdEQ/w640-h542/goy%20musk.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="137"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia is for Russia, China is for China, Iran is for Iran, and India is for India. Each constitutes a truth in terms of territory and interest. In contrast, the meaning of the ‘West’ is amorphous, hardly limited to the actual North-West of Europe and America as it tries to define all the world, East, North, and South as well. Besides, it’s a total lie that the West is for ‘Western Values’. Much of what passes for ‘Western Values’, as spun by Jewish Supremacism, has no resemblance to Western history and culture — in the Current Year, ‘Western Values’ are about whites in Europe worshiping black Africans, homos, & Jews and welcoming demographic replacement as the final culmination of European destiny, all the while reiterating that Israel must forever be an ethno-state for Jews and Jews alone.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="156"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The West is now the Schwest or JeWest and exists to obey and cater to every Jewish demands. All those anti-Russian hawks among Democrats and Republicans wail and scream for one reason only: To be noticed and rewarded by their Jewish Masters. For the cowed and browbeaten, the only way to retain a semblance of self-respect is by barking loudest at whatever is allowed, thus appearing tough. A dog has no pride before its master as it must fetch and roll over as ordered. So naturally, it goes into hyper-aggression when permitted to bark or bite at something as, finally, its wolfy fangs can fulfill its purpose. But as the dog always requires the permission of its master, it lacks true pride, one of freedom and agency. Likewise, in the Empire of Lies that is the Schwest, all these Anglo-Cucks who growl at Russia are not fooling anybody who can see. They are just barking dogs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="300"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of great significance is what the decline of white power and prestige has done to the world’s perception of the West. For most of modern history, the Rest regarded the West with fear and envy but also respect and admiration as the land of proud and united White Christian Folks. There was no denying the West’s greatness and power grounded not only on material-technological prowess but spiritual, political, cultural, organizational, and moral advantages. Even if the Rest found Western moralism to be hypocritical at times, it was nevertheless impressed by the moral pride of whites in their God, civilization, history, and culture. Whites had control of their narratives and icons. The great gangsters in THE GODFATHER hate but also respect one another, like the rival lords in KAGEMUSHA(by Akira Kurosawa). Michael Corleone and Hyman Roth plot against one another as formidable foes deserving of respect. In contrast, when Senator Geary drops his guard and falls into a trap, he isn’t deserving of respect. At a minimum, the Rest respected the West as the culmination of white achievement and confidence. But today, many around the world feel no such respect, especially whites are so lacking in self-respect. In some ways, Western Pride(verging on hubris) is bigger than ever but justified on the basis of expurgating whiteness, i.e. the whole world should aspire to follow in the catwalk of ‘Western Values’ because they’re about Jew-Worship, Globo-Homo, Negro-reverence, and purging Evil Whiteness. West and Whiteness used to be synonymous, but the pride of one is now inversely proportional to the shame of the other. The more whiteness is thrashed with the BLM whip, more the West is justified in the eyes of the world… or such is the logic pushed by the likes of George Soros.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="170"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Most probably, all the world leaders know Jews really control the West and that whites have been reduced to a race of Senator Gearys. Just look at the likes of Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, John Brennan, James Comey, Ben Sasse, and etc. Or take Joe Biden, a total joke. For eight years, clown George W. Bush was president. And whites were foaming at the mouth, wetting their pants, and fainting right and left over Barack Obama, the product of a black guy humping a white woman. White men are a bunch of cucky-wuck maggots by the looks of advertising, Hollywood movies, TV shows, pop music, political oratory, and etc. BLM thugs burn down cities, but whites put up BLM signs. Trump came along and stoked a bit of white populist pride, but nearly all the white elites served their Jewish supremacist masters in the plot to bring down the Orange Man. It’s almost as if whites have grown so accustomed to revering Jews, celebrating homos, and idolizing</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="349"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And it’s no different in UK and Canada. The Australian Covid Policy proved that Anglos now operate in accordance to “Jews say, goyim obey.” When the non-white world watches this dumpster fire, what’s going on inside their minds in regards to the white race and the West? There are all these whites in the Collective West shaking their fists at Putin and acting tough, but who are they fooling? It’s plain as day they make such noises to win plaudits from their Jewish masters. Anglo-cuck Mitt Romney or Anglo-cuck Richard Spencer, what’s the difference anymore? Both are variations of Senator Geary, what with their faces squeezed in between the ass-cheeks of Jewish Supremacism. Why have whites been so helpless to stop the demographic invasion; worse, who so welcoming of their own replacement? Why is the entire West adopting blackness as the official new face of the West? Why are white men cucking to Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs? How come white men, even so-called ‘conservatives’, lack the spine to oppose globo-homo and even tranny nuttery whereby guys-pretending-to-be-girls beat females in women’s sports? (It’s almost as if white men, having been beaten by black men in the most popular sports, find themselves pussified and reduced to beating women much like how black men beat white men; if white men can no longer be the best men, they can at least be the best women.) Within the larger context of profound transformations within the West, white Americans and Europeans acting tough against Russia is really a sign of weakness. It is less directed against Russia than meant to win approval from Jews, their masters. It’s not free men shaking their fists but dogs barking for their master(and expecting pets on the head and doggy treats). It is also a club of cowards triggered by a ‘rogue’ white nation that refuses to cower before Jewish Globalism. They collectively act ‘tough’ to destroy a genuinely tough power because its example puts them to shame as a bunch of doglike cowards incapable of anything without the go-ahead from the Jews.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="340" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiYMawyw0JUfBp0kvx9sCt22c-tm8vkHUEaJDo-jLUnH0JjFRdRqENgNVvTjmlunDzQ-7QAtzSq8hrbXEGVl5_B4Tn8Kxr72-8yk2T6kD-UHQqywNcLnYUZuxLxNnykiWn_Sa4eyk6yuDiOLNPU0oZwJwpWG-96P6MabI2Jzbecuff6ZAErpqm6fNBeIA/w640-h340/hitch.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="459"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, what are the consequences of White Debasement on the world stage? The Rest, long accustomed to regarding white prestige and Western power as synonymous, now sees the white race, especially the Anglos, as a bunch of cuck-maggots who lick Jewish boots, kiss homo ass, and suck Negro dong. As a result, the West seems unmoored, lacking in clear hierarchy and chain-of-command. Of course, elites in the Rest know that Jews rule the West, but Jews hide behind the whites. (Jewish Power has promoted black idolatry, even to the point where blackness is now akin to Western neo-spirituality, but for all their visibility blacks are not the ones calling the shots on the world stage. Obama, for example, merely did the bidding of his Jewish masters. Because Jews hate Russia, black ‘leaders’ also mouth anti-Russky diatribes.) If Jews were to take the throne like the great Persian Kings of Old and declared, “We rule the West, and all of you better kiss our ass or be destroyed”, then the world would better understand current Western dynamics. But Jews, for all their power and wealth, are anxious not to be recognized as those calling the shots in the West. If Jews openly accepted the role of Masters of the Universe, their identity and interests would naturally come under scrutiny(as was the case with WASP power when Anglos ruled America). So, Jews would rather pull the strings or pretend they’re just ‘Americans’ working in service of ‘liberal democracy’, ‘human rights’, and ‘muh freedom’. Even as they make up 70% of Joe Biden’s administration, they remain hush-hush about their Jewishness(and its policy implications) and try to persuade the world that they are operating within the ‘rules-based order’, a weak argument as the US is a premier globo-gangster state, but it’s one of those offers you can’t refuse, as Jews will call out their ‘Luca Brasi’ or ‘Al Neri’ to destroy anyone calling out or deviating from the bogus narrative. (In the Empire of Lies, Jewish mendacity — Russia Collusion Hoax, Covid Hysteria, Hunter Biden’s Laptop from Hell, BLM moral panic, etc. — has more bearing on reality than all the truths in the world, not least because your average American’s worldview is almost entirely molded by Jewish monopoly media.) Current US policy would finally make sense ONLY IF Jews came to the fore and admitted, yeah, it’s all about us and our tribal power. While Jews are immensely giddy of their power at the private level, they fear going public with the pride because goyim would begin to openly Jewish Power and pry into its abuses — such would no longer be ‘Anti-Semitic’ since Jews would have openly admitted to their dominance and control of the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whites no longer get any respect as a kennel of Senator-Gearys who fetch and roll over for Jews. However, Jewish Power projection is often confused, muddled, and ineffective because Jews can never admit to what it’s really about. Jews either use goy proxies(who are often not up to the job) and/or project their power as promotion of ‘democracy’, ‘human rights’, ‘free enterprise’, and the like, but the implementation invariably fails in principle because the goal-posts are changed ever so often. ‘Democracy’ has come to mean nations around the world submitting to the likes of George Soros. No matter how democratic the process, it’s deemed ‘anti-democratic’ if Jewish demands aren’t appeased.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="459"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">White Westerners, now cowed and cucked before Jews, homos, and Negroes, get no respect from the Rest nor from nonwhites in the West. Indeed, the fact that WHITES are always blamed even when the culprits are Jews(as when Jews do bad, they are simply whitewashed as people with ‘white privilege’) or blacks(as when Asians blame ‘white supremacism’ for all the black-on-Asian violence). Whites are always scapegoated for whatever is wrong. When nonwhites in the West are indoctrinated and encouraged by the Jewish-run academia, media, and the state to blame everything on whites, how can there be any respect for whiteness, especially when one bunch of whites, the so-called ‘progressives’, bend over to homos and wash Negro feet with tears streaming down their eyes while another bunch of whites, the so-called ‘conservatives’, bleat about how ‘liberals’ are the ‘real racists’, do nothing to stop the desecration of white heritage, cower before homos, and praise Jews to high heaven? Indeed, the white brand is now so toxic(despite the continual appeal to jungle fever and grooming gangs) that the so-called ‘West’ tries to legitimize its power projection around the world on grounds of BLM or ‘diversity’ or ‘inclusion’. Indeed, one main strategy is to argue that the Chinese are the ‘real racists’ because China is still about Chinese power(and, furthermore, appreciates the value of whiteness and white history/culture), whereas ‘woke’ whites in the West, in abnegation of racial identity and interests, seek world hegemony not to impose the White West over the Rest but to remake the West in the image of the Rest, so that the West and Rest shall merge into a seamless whole(though the metropole shall remain in D.C. and NY); apparently, even though the West and the East may never meet, the West and the Rest shall meld into one. As the New Empire or Universal Empire isn’t about one people over other peoples but about all peoples sharing in World Domination, empire is now sold as empowerment for all. The whole idea would be ridiculous even if true or in earnest, but of course, it isn’t. BLM isn’t about equal respect for all but about idolatry of blackness for all the others. Also, homos and trannies are elevated uber alles — when will they have month-long Hindu pride parades in the West, or a month devoted to Arab identity and interests? BLM and Globo-Homo are essentially the tools of Jews as the real new masters of the empire. For all the talk of ‘inclusion’, don’t expect to be included in the club if you wave the BDS flag or propose Yasir Arafat be placed on the same firmament alongside Nelson Mandela. It’s all just a sham.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="15"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All the contradictions only feed into schizophrenia of the West in relation to the Rest?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="217"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Traditionally, for as long as anyone could remember, the power of the West was understood to rest upon a ‘Eurocentric’ view of the world, with nonwhites scrambling to emulate and catch up with the West, especially the Anglo-Germanic world. Even now, whites have immense wealth and are numerically dominant in many elite institutions/industries but minus the pride of identity and unity. If anything, whiteness is something that even the richest and most privileged whites must feel apologetic about, as if it’s more a racial sin/stain, an inborn disease, than a racial identity/heritage. It implies that, for all their wealth and stake in the system, whites cannot act in white interests, let alone white power. Therefore, white money and talent must ultimately be in service to something else, something ‘higher’, namely ‘diversity’, ‘inclusion’, and ‘equity’, but in reality, white input is re-laundered to serve Jewish Supremacist interests. Just look at Biden’s Cabinet. And despite Kamala Harris’ yammering about ‘equity’, she sucks up to Jews and doesn’t even acknowledge Palestinians as a people. But, with Jews refusing to show their head as the true face of power, the West now seems like the emperor with nothing above his neck. White head has been chopped off but the Jewish head hides beneath the collar.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="6"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hitler, Putin, and Zelensky, For Real</b></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="74"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Two fallacies have been haunting the Narrative, one that is pervasive in the (((Western))) media and the other that tempts the dissident/alternative spaces. According to the Official Story, there is always the New Hitler, and Putin or ‘Putler’ being the latest incarnation, and his actions are seen through the prism of the events that led up to World War II. So, over and over, there are ‘New Munichs’ and latest reiterations of ‘appeasement’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The idea of ‘Germany’ has also been used this way. So, the rise of China in the 21st century is compared with the rise of Germany in the 19th century(to demonstrate the timeless lesson of the Thucydides Trap) despite the greater differences than similarities. (Even more deranged is the conceit of projecting American perspectives onto others, as if every rising power aspires to be the New Lone Superpower. It’s also imbecile because if another nation has no right to be a superpower, the same should apply to the US, but then, rules don’t apply to the ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ nation.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="431"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While certain figures since World War II bear some resemblance to Hitler, calling someone the ‘new hitler’ or something the ‘new nazi’ is usually a matter of political expediency than an attempt at understanding. After all, isn’t it rather odd that Israel is hardly compared to National Socialist Germany even though its guiding ideology has striking similarities with Hitler’s order? And the Yinon Plan has elements of the German dream of ‘lebensraum’ in the East. But as the West is controlled by Jews, forget the irony of Zionist perspectives overlapping in with the Nazi Worldview. Besides, Israel is a democracy(!!), the only one in the Middle East, we are told. Never mind it is not a ‘liberal democracy’ that forsakes blood-and-soil ethno-nationalism in favor of deracinated individualism and replacement citizenship. Israel is, in fact, a national democracy where the elections are geared to protect, preserve, and strengthen the Jewish State, just like Iran is an Islamic Democracy, which is to say, regardless of electoral outcomes, the core essence of the Iranian regime is to uphold Islamic values as the defining culture of Iran. In Israel and Iran, individuals can indulge in various freedoms, but personal liberties are not the defining feature of the core civilization. As individuals, you may do your thing(within limits), but as a collective, there is the unifying theme of ethnicity and/or spirituality. (The moral tragedy of Zionism is it went from national democracy to imperial democracy whereby the Jewish Global Network renders all other democracies around the world useless, drained of sovereignty and national themes. For example, European democracies cannot defend national integrity or ethnic pride and must welcome the Great Replacement while, at the same time, being obliged to praise Jews & Israel and pledge to defend Israel’s right to be a Jewish State to the last breath. Under Imperial Democracy, only one people have national sovereignty for themselves, and they use global hegemony to render all other democracies bloodless and subservient. One would think that the US, as the lone superpower, would be at the center of this Imperial Democracy, but truth is otherwise as the overwhelming goy majority of America play a secondary role to Jewish Power. White goyim are the majority of Americans, but their racial identity and interests are taboo. Is it because the newly formulated US favors no particular race or culture in the spirit of ‘inclusion’? Then, why the profuse emphasis on Jewish identity, Jewish interests, Jewish preciousness, Jewish specialness, Jewish holiness, and Zionism, especially at the expense of Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, Iran, and Russia?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-Lh0XpLIiYX60-dFkisFC9gdmy1HGbPa1IPL3qel2yUIG91fLCi7sNvpFqORzFSWKzmyW_gCRjR4FyVn6sz1iWOy34DuAz6FDTHReKf2A1kM_dU_h6gRLYBb9dZAv_-zBOtfEYDTA5J_-XcPObhEARWs6f28jm4wU144Zs_1uokaa21VJv6Ii7WlbZw/w422-h640/s-l600.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="422" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="138"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If branding anyone disfavored by the EOJ(or Empire of Judea) as the ‘New Hitler’ is ridiculous, it is also misleading to assume the real Hitler may have been the polar opposite of the public image. While the cartoon villain Hitler as a raving baboon wanting to conquer the world is total fantasy, we would be fooling ourselves with the revisionism that Adolf Hitler was essentially a rational character who, acting on purely legitimate interests, fell into a trap set by powers far more pernicious than his regime and thus was forced into drastic measures that led to World War II. While there is a degree of validity to such argument, it is far from the whole truth, and one thing for sure, just as Putin isn’t a Russian Hitler, Hitler wasn’t an Austrian/German Putin.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="245"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a perversely ironic way, the best way to understand(and appreciate) Hitler isn’t to compare him with Putin(and other ‘New Hitlers’) but with Jewish Power, as both had no sense of limits. While it’s silly to say “Hitler wanted to conquer the world”, his interests weren’t limited to Germany or sphere-of-influence politics but towards a worldview rooted in racial theory and grand vision of destiny. When every crisis involving Hitler on the leadup to World War II is analyzed alone or in proximity to nearby events, one could argue in favor of Hitler’s rationality, but there’s no doubt he was inflamed by deeper passion, which is why he couldn’t let things alone and kept pushing for more, finally leading to a huge win-or-lose-all gamble. If any single politician today is most like Hitler, it’s Erdogan of Turkey whose foreign policy is guided by an inflated sense of Neo-Ottoman-ism, which led him to interfere in just about every conflict — Syria, Libya, Gaza, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, internal European affairs, etc.— , thereby drawing ire from all sides, especially as he usually bets on the wrong horse, like in the debacle in Syria. Unlike Ataturk who was focused on Turkish national interests, Erdogan sees himself as the head of the neo-Islamic Ottomanic revival. Hitler was similar, which set him apart from Otto von Bismarck who, for all his tempestuousness, had a fixed goal of Germany’s place in the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="250"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another characteristic of Hitler makes him closer to Jewish Power. For all of Erdogan’s hegemonic dreams, it’s really a cultural and spiritual vision. He wants the Muslim world to look to Turkey as the spiritual center, and it certainly isn’t about Turkish racial supremacism. In contrast, Jewish Power and National Socialism are deeply rooted in a sense of racial/ethnic supremacy. Of course, Jews have generally kept this a secret, but actions speak louder than words, and Jewish actions in the modern world clearly indicate their policy is rooted in a powerful sense of blood, history, and destiny. Likewise, Hitler didn’t merely regard himself as a European leader working to secure German interests. His animating ideology was profoundly racial, a hegemonic worldview that bound his understanding of the past with the future, the 1000 Yr Reich that would ultimately be the center of World Civilization. While racial views similar to his own existed in other parts of the West, they were usually tempered with the rhetoric of humanism, Christianity, Enlightenment Ideals, progress, and rights of man. So, even though Anglos were also highly racial(or racially supremacist) in their worldview, they weren’t so brazenly ‘pornographic’ about it. They would act on racial supremacist impulses, like in wiping out the American Indians or Australian Aborigines, but then justify it on grounds of spreading civilization and Christian values or shining the light of progress as part of White Man’s Burden: Imperialism as white man carrying the cross.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="23"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">They sought to persuade their nonwhite subjects and even themselves that it was all for the good, whereby the whole world would benefit.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="310"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Hitler stripped away the ‘Athenian’ illusions and sentimentalities and propounded a nakedly neo-Spartan worldview of the higher races in conflict with the lesser ones. In a way, Hitler seemed extreme and deranged, which was true enough at times, but one reason he upset the other ‘gentler’ imperialists was in unmasking a certain truth about Western Imperialism. For all the talk of progress and civilization, didn’t Anglos take the New World by wiping out the natives as the lesser race? Didn’t Anglos use ruthless means to quell rebellions and uprisings all over the world to maintain the empire? Of course, Hitler pointed to such ruthless realities not to condemn but to praise the Anglos, but it wasn’t the kind of thing Anglos wanted to hear in their anxiousness to have the cake and eat it too: Use ruthless means to establish Anglo supremacy while persuading their subjects, as well as themselves, that it was all for the progress for humanity. In a way, the moral dynamics of the Anglo Imperial Enterprise relied on this fragile balance of raw power and tidy principle. Great Britain crushed and ruled over much of the world, which generated good deal of racial and martial pride, but a haute Christian nation of ladies and gentlemen would have found it vulgar and uncouth to over-indulge in tribal pride and military prowess. So, Brits were assured that it wasn’t only about conquest but aiding the rest of humanity one way or another. And even as the Brits were often ruthless in putting down unrest among the ‘darkies’, they made overtures to win over the local elites who were promised with riches if they collaborated. As powerful as Britain was, the empire was ruled by a thin layer of British administrators over vast numbers of locals of ‘wogs’, ‘niggers’, ‘chinks’, and the like.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In their heart of hearts, Jews have been closer to Nazi Germans in their deep-rooted racial consciousness and supremacism, but they’ve been adept like the Anglos in putting forth a charade about ‘liberal values’ and ‘progress’. When finally push came to shove and Anglos had to choose between power and principles, they opted for the latter, whereas Jews chose power. But then, as Jews gained power over Anglos, even Anglo principles were betrayed as Anglos came to favor Jewish Power uber alles — for all neo-WASP fulminations about China’s ‘neo-racism’ or Putler of Russia, they blindly go along with Zionist destruction of Palestinians & Arabs and sign checks to the racial supremacism of BLM because Jews demand it.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHF1V7190YptsFQqqE7iN31a72r6wtC7MinFnmYSPxM-1LDU_obJclZQW0SkMhqSgN8uglubDmiT6NUjLJX3KQ8b-m9HSQ0dVKFOunPB07XCdAYP7UvHte-QtYxr2OtVKb2LSxsK6urLnfNNvimCrd-D-4RILGeVhH4Pg2ncy2YM4ffusM6dBYrWVGag/w451-h640/download-71-1.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="451" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="133"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, even though any action can be spun as ‘rational’ or ‘reactive’ within a limited time frame, similarly irrational patterns emerge in the actions of Hitler and Jewish Power over a wider span of events. While it’s true that anti-German forces were driving Hitler into newer crises, he too was instigating or inflaming them as his vision was fueled by a historic sense of destiny. Jewish Chutzpah and Nazi Angst, much like Japanese Imperialism, owed to the discrepancy between self-image and geographic possession, the surest foundation of power. Chinese and Russians, with their huge land mass, are more likely to feel secure and important on their own. In contrast, German sense of greatness was frustrated by its limited land mass and access to resources. It served as the basis of lebensraum ideology.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="107"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, had the Anglos been more yielding to German(or German-American)identity and interests in the New World, things might have been different. But with World War I, Anglos totally stifled German expression of identity and interests in the US, whereby German-Americans essentially became another bunch of Wasps(assimilating into Anglosphere), and it was the other ethnics, the Irish especially and then the Jews, who became the partners, as well as challengers, of Anglo power. In World War I, German-Americans fought and killed their German brethren fighting for the Fatherland, and no amount of overtures by Hitler could convince the Anglos to sue for peace and understanding.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While it’s true that Anglo Anti-Germanism(as well as Anti-Russianism) heightened tensions in Europe, Anglos weren’t entirely without cause as there was an extreme and irrational side to the Germanic character, evident not only in politics but in arts and culture. British culture disdained emotions getting the better of the mind(at least prior to the rise of Beatlemania and spread of Negrophilia & Globo-Homo through the British sphere), and Germans seemed like a bunch of ‘white ni**ers’, or worse, ‘white ni**ers with engineering degrees’, or semi-barbarians who could make bombs. There’s a reason why fascist-like movements went nowhere in Britain, whereas the masses were spellbound by Hitler’s demagoguery. As culturally opposed as the Weimar period and the National Socialist period were, they had one common feature: German tendency toward extremes. Weimar Germany was degeneracy pushed beyond anything seen in Europe, and National Socialism was antisepticism(which became almost synonymous with antisemitism because Weimar Germany was about near-total German surrender to Jewish power) pushed to the limits. Of course, Germans in relatively rational state of mind were wonderful to work with, much like the polite and conscientious Japanese, but when Germans fell into extremes, their craziness, like Japanese craziness, seemed of another magnitude of nuttery.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="299"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">True, Anglos were often hardly better than liars, cheats, pirates, and thieves, but they could also play the gentleman, and what matters most to a gentleman is reputation. The word and the handshake aren’t to be taken lightly. Then, it is no wonder that Hitler’s violation of Neville Chamberlain’s trust was so damaging to German-British relations. Chamberlain, as the honorable representative of Britain, put his reputation on the line when he conceded to Germany’s takeover of Czech territory in exchange for peace. Respect matters in politics, and politicians, especially in electoral democracies, rely on public opinion for their reputation. So, Hitler’s next move not only made Chamberlain look like a fool but a weakling and a dupe. leaving no one Hitler could work with in good faith in Britain. Of course, Hitler could have saved himself the trouble if he hadn’t moved on Czechia at all. Until then, he’d moved only to retake control of German territories, unite fellow Germans, and protect the overwhelming German majorities, especially in Sudetenland. Hitler should have left Czech alone and moved on Danzig, and he could have done this by instigating a proto-color-revolution there as most people of the city, Germans, would have demanded unification with Germany. Even anti-Hitler and anti-German voices would have had a hard time convincing the world that Germany was committing a crime by taking Danzig from Polish control, especially when most people of Danzig wanted to be part of Germany. But Hitler moved on the Czechs, the first indication that German ambition went beyond consolidation of German territories and peoples. Some called for war just then, but Chamberlain put his reputation on the line by offering a peace deal. Hitler signed on the dotted line and then tossed the agreement away.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="444"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, things might have been different if Hitler moved only on Danzig but instead, he decided to destroy all of Poland, with the Soviet Union as junior partner-in-crime. While Germany had legitimate gripes against Poland, the invasion, in concert with the Soviet Union, was disproportionate beyond measure. In 2014, following the Jewish-led CIA coup in Ukraine, Russia took Crimea, which was overwhelmingly Russian and pro-unification. The West called it the ‘invasion of Crimea’, but the very people of Crimea were with Russia, and there was nothing the world could do about it. Likewise, had Germany taken only Danzig, the great powers would have been at a loss as to their next move. It’s doubtful that UK and France would have declared war on Germany over Danzig(and there would have been little Poland could have done to regain control). But Hitler conceived of a bold and crazy plan to destroy all of Poland, and in doing so, made German and Soviet forces face off against one another(as uneasy partners), as Poland-as-buffer no longer existed. Some argue UK and France were hypocritical in declaring war on Germany but not on USSR, but it was rational as realpolitik(just as the war guarantee they’d given to Poland certainly was not). Declaring war on both empires would only have brought them closer. Also, Germany was obviously regarded as the closer threat/challenge to the West given the geography. Furthermore, it was clear that Germany, not the Soviet Union, came up with the plan and initiated the pact. Despite the problem with Danzig, Hitler had a good thing going with the neutrality of Poland IF his ultimate objective had been national security. Polish neutrality between Germany and USSR meant both behemoths had a sizable buffer against the other. Poland-as-German-ally would have endangered the USSR, forcing it into hostile stance, and Poland-as-Soviet-ally(unthinkable given ideological differences and historical memory) would have endangered Germany. Poles understood this, which is why they rebuffed Germany’s overture for an alliance, in which case Poland would have drawn the ire of the Soviet Union. Also, Poles rightfully feared that Germany, with far greater industrial might, might treat Poland less as an ally than a satrapy. Apart from the Danzig issue, Poland’s insistence on neutrality was utterly rational and responsible. Furthermore, despite the intransigence on Danzig being wrong, it wasn’t entirely unfounded from a psycho-political point of view, i.e. Poles correctly assessed Hitler as a man who would regard any concession as weakness or vulnerability, emboldening him to press with further demands. In other words, the dynamics of Hitlerism was like Jewish Power — give an inch, take a mile.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="113"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given recent transformations in the West, it’s obvious that Jewish Power cannot be appeased. Give an inch and it takes a mile and then demands more and more. Just consider the globohomo and tranny issue, how it went from individual liberty for homos/queens to the Conversion Cult of grooming even kindergartens into Pedomania. You’d think given the rise, indeed triumph, of Jewish Power in the West, Jews would be satisfied with their immense wealth, power, and privilege. But no, they have designs on Ukraine, Russia, and the world. Reportedly, George Soros once regarded China as part of his ‘empire’ but now denounces it for not playing along with his agenda.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, whatever ‘reasonable’ mask Hitler wore in any given negotiation, just underneath was his megalomania and radically aggressive worldview, which he’d spelled out in MEIN KAMPF. Given the limitations of German power, of course Hitler had to shake hands and come to terms with other powers. But as he grew in strength, which fueled his volatile and restless ego, he grew bolder, more impatient and adventurous, especially as he was bored with day to day affairs. It’s been said by some biographers that Hitler was fundamentally lazy, that he tuned out the day-to-day running of the state. In other words, he wasn’t like Stalin, Putin, Zhou En-Lai, and Deng Xiaoping who were immersed in the minutiae of state management. Rather, he was a dreamer and visionary like Mao Zedong who was uninterested in details and fixated on the big picture, the grand plan.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On their rises to power and consolidation of control, both Hitler and Mao had to be pragmatic, realistic, and tactical. Indeed, they were at their best when their power was far from absolute and therefore had to operate within the realm of possibility. But once they gained sufficient power as the unquestioned master of the realm, their ambitions became ever perilously closer to outpacing reality. One thing for sure, if Mao had died in 1957, China would not have undergone the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. And had Hitler died in 1939, World War II probably would not have happened, even with Western provocations. Joachim Fest’s damning biography argues Hitler would have gone down as one of Germany’s greatest leaders under such a scenario.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="73"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As reckless as Hitler’s actions were, they were also bold, imaginative, and inspired, indeed operatic. None of that can be said for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, which was long time in the making. Putin finally acted as it was obvious that the West, controlled by pathological Jewish supremacists, were never going to come to any agreement or compromise. In other words, Putin played the game until he was forced to act.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Hitler relished playing with fire. Just as he was provoked, he provoked others. And Wotan-like, he took pride in outsmarting and outmaneuvering others. The difference between Putin and Hitler is the former sees himself as the leader and guardian of the Russian nation and interests, whereas Hitler had a sense of greatness and destiny beyond the German nation and interests. This is where he was different from Bismarck who saw himself as a servant of the German nation. Hitler regarded himself as the master of Germany, a godlike figure chosen by history, someone on par with Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon. Serious early setbacks might have tempered his megalomania. But there was success upon success. Economic revival, massive support for his leadership, alliance with Italy, regaining control of Rhineland, taking Sudetenland, Anschluss with Austria, crushing of Poland, and finally easy victory over France, which really went to his head. And in the first months of Operation Barbarossa, it seemed a done deal, and Hitler was already conversing privately about his big plans for Russia.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiTcAgJHr-mhHmzleO00ZF-jX4naGaDstxGapsWgGKc0Mp3V5XJz_pPo7BWLVZ_EpWgTWWtl-XGdTjC5L4cPJDN6vyNEIaXrGu4wnZ_bKokpGWJX7pnUgMjJlw8EtGnNZkXxOOhniucKD5vCF32BMXxY0NQsj7FCh6zj7DlEc1Pgk8c5zfo1uacgKU98g/w479-h640/hitler%20paris.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="479" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even people without much innate egotism can develop an inflated sense of worth when things go their way. During the dot.com bubble era, countless ordinary Americans regarded themselves as financial wizards and thought their portfolios would go up forever. Why not, as whatever high-tech stock they bet on was going through the roof? If that’s the case with ordinary folks, imagine what happens when a natural megalomaniac believes everything to be going according to The Plan.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, even as we need to reconsider the complexity of events that led to WWII, we mustn’t lose sight of Hitler’s essential character. There was indeed a kind of mad genius to his inner self. A kind of demonic spirit propelling him forward. Personality matters. The reason why Hitler continues to fascinate is only partly due to his utility as the cartoon villain of history, the perennial evil incarnate, the secular equivalent of Satan. It’s also because he was truly one of the most unique figures in history. As John Lukacs said, Stalin was essentially a modern and totalistic embodiment of tyranny known throughout history. He was a master of power, not a visionary or dreamer. Like many of his generation, he turned to radical politics and later gained absolute mastery via control of bureaucracy. He understood the machinations of power. Though Putin isn’t a monster like Stalin, his path to power is also rather unremarkable. His maneuvers were masterly at times but in the tradition of statecraft. He’s an apt student of history and politics.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="74"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, there was no one quite like Hitler. Even Napoleon’s power seems normal in comparison. After all, Napoleon was a military man, and in times of political crisis and chaos it hasn’t been unusual for the military to take control. In contrast, Hitler’s formative years were as an artist and bohemian whose imagination was aroused by Richard Wagner’s operas, which, more than any ideology, shaped his worldview in mythological terms.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The 20th century figure resembles him most(despite striking differences of course) is Mao Zedong who, for all his commitment to Marxism-Leninism, was by nature a dreamer whose formative influences were the legends of godlike kings and romantic rebel-bandits. A pragmatic and rational person doesn’t come up with something like the Great Leap Forward. Though sometimes compared with Stalin’s forced collectivization in the 1930s, Mao’s plan was more comparable to Hitler’s reckless invasion of Russia. Stalin’s collectivization was costly in lives but coldly calibrated to result in massive industrial growth, thus justifying its cost-benefit analysis in the most brutal terms. It was ruthlessly rational and forced upon many parts of the Soviet Union. In contrast, the Great Leap Forward was a leap of faith based on wishful imagination, and it hardly needed coercion as the masses of Chinese were culturally submissive and, furthermore, brainwashed into ideological fervor. It proved to be an utter disaster like Germany’s invasion of Russia but, as China did it to itself, didn’t result in a defeat to a foreign power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s been various explanations for Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union, his boldest, most awesome, and disastrous move. Neo-Nazi types, who hardly matter in the respectable discourse, say Hitler was trying to take out Jewish Bolshevism in defense of Western Civilization. Most historians argue Hitler was trying to fulfill his lifelong dream of lebensraum and Greater Germania. John Lukacs and a number of revisionists argue that, by taking the Soviet Union out of the equation, Hitler hoped to convince Great Britain(and greater Anglosphere, including the US) that it simply had to come to terms with Germany. On its face, the argument seems absurd as the Soviet Union was a far greater challenge to Germany than the UK, an island nation separated from the Continent with no hope of invading Germany; in contrast, were Germany to fail against the Soviet Union, it could be crushed and engulfed by the Soviet counter-offensive, which is what indeed happened.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="206"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But perhaps, psychology played a role, as Hitler admired the Anglos while loathing the Russian Slavs. Ideally, he wanted Anglos as world partners and Russians as defeated helots. Or, as certain historians, like Adam Tooze and Brendan Simms argued, Hitler was obsessed with American power, especially given his experience in World War I when an almost certain victory was snatched from Germany by American entry into the war with its seemingly limitless manpower and resources. So, it could be argued, even though the US wasn’t at war with Germany, Hitler feared Anglo-America would once again come to the aid of UK, and the united Anglo power would overwhelm Germany. Therefore, the ONLY way to persuade the Anglo/American power to accept German mastery over Europe was by decisively defeating Russia. While the Soviet Union was the more immediate and direct challenge for Germany, the combined power of the British Empire and the US would pose the far greater threat in the long run. Besides, if Germany had some chance of defeating USSR, it had no chance of defeating UK-US-alliance in a long drawn-out struggle. Hitler was deeply scarred and haunted by World War I, where Germany beat Russia but was ultimately defeated by the US.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another revisionist view, almost unanimously rejected in the West, but gaining in favorability(if only as theory or speculation), not least for its utility as neo-Anti-Russian narrative, is that, yes, Hitler was a low-life scumsucker and skunk, BUT he was forced to preemptively attack the Soviet Union because Stalin had been planning to invade Germany first. (Just like Jews find ‘Ukro-Nazis’ useful against Russia, this revisionist camp, though far from exonerating Hitler, at least makes Stalin and the Soviet Union/Russia equal in evil and mendacity. Here’s this demonic monster Hitler, but, evil as he was, his hand was forced by Stalin who had plans to conquer not only Germany but all of Europe. Or, “Stalin was the real Hitler, or More Hitler than Hitler.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="193"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But even if it’s true that Stalin planned to attack first, it’d be misconstrued to regard Hitler’s invasion as merely a ‘defensive’ response. Rather, Hitler took advantage in the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ mode and embarked on his lifelong dream of lebensraum, an idea that, to be sure, had been floating around in German elite circles even before Hitler was born. Just like Jewish Power used the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait as an excuse to crush Saddam Hussein and later used the ‘War on Terror’(following 9/11) to implement the long-brewing Yinon Plan, Hitler wasn’t merely mitigating the threat posed by the Soviet Union but pouncing on the crisis to fulfill his radical racial imperialist dream. Indeed, Hitler had spelled it all out in his memoirs as to his ultimate goals. And if the ‘Table Talks’ are authentic, Hitler obviously had extensive plans for what he would do with the Russian people and lands. In this, he was fundamentally different from Putin. So, just as it’s ridiculous to say Putin is the ‘New Hitler’, it would be foolhardy to assume that Hitler was the ‘Then Putin’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgwF0CcDepHK9rSDaW3vN2swNiKTqApNZUrCssGEINrgmc8KYOI-ad2Z4pC9iTpbc1az7jCY7klAD8uk3Z86Y9h3ksXoHojJ1EBpnuyKvbGhyOksrjgNbAbmCA9y8ypU5lBPIJEVl3nhpLAqUMgjNQ82fn1VEyjkzcOnkxJNX45s9e0GmIr8SUkgQrpfw/w640-h426/zhukov.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="335"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Hitler was certainly driven by something other than national security and interests given his powerful obsessions. Personality matters, a matter of distinction between Omar Bradley and George Patton in the famous movie. Bradley, a soldier’s soldier, does what he must but has no love for war. In contrast, Patton loves war as the ultimate expression of heroic virtues. If Patton had his way, WWII would have directly led to WWIII with the Soviet Union, at least according to the movie. Hitler had a grandiose view of history and his place in it. Though trained in fine art, he was also a consummate actor, like Charlie Chaplin. He could be charming and conciliatory, even deferential. Benito Mussolini was won over by Hitler’s show of respect. He could come across as diplomatic and understanding, which is why Neville Chamberlain bit the bullet and cut a deal. But Hitler regarded most of it as performance or theater. In THE GODFATHER, Tom Hagen is a cold rational operative. He’s about ‘business’ and advises Sonny, on purely rational grounds, to settle with the Tataglias despite the attempt on his father’s life. On the surface, Michael can also play it cool and rational, or ‘business’ uber alles, but he is fueled by deep passion and won’t be satisfied until the enemies have been wiped out. Hyman Roth is the same way as he knows how to hold a grudge. Hitler had deep-seated vengeful feelings about Jews. If everything worked according to plan, his idea of magnanimity was sending Jews to Siberia. If Germany was doomed, he was set on taking full revenge and dooming the Jews as well. If triumphant US could drop two nukes on Japan on its last legs, it’s hardly surprising Nazi Germany, facing eventual defeat, would go all in to punish Jews in the worst possible way as they were held responsible not only for the Weimar Period and the Bolshevik Revolution but in having turned the Anglo world against Germany.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Portrait of an Artist as a World Leader. That was Hitler. The arts are the least rational endeavor of man and perhaps most dangerous when their creative/destructive energies are projected onto the real world. Good thing Sam Peckinpah(of THE WILD BUNCH), Francis Ford Coppola( of APOCALYPSE NOW), and Michael Cimino(of HEAVEN’S GATE infamy) stuck to arts & entertainment — even truer of Rock stars. Real world requires calculation than creativity. Hitler, having failed in his creative pursuit, discovered he had talent for political calculation, but all said and done, the animating spirit behind his ultimate dream was the power of myth than the limits of reality.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="208"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Psychology matters more with some individuals than others. With Putin, psychology is irrelevant as his view of Russia and the World is rather conventional. It’s been portrayed as ‘extreme’ by the Jewish-controlled Western Media that would have us believe Putin the madman is trying to restore the Soviet Empire. (If anyone needs a shrink, it’s the Western Jews, but never mind as most of psychiatry only made things worse.) Putin has no grand vision of Russian destiny and nurses no mega-global ambitions. He’s proud of his Russian heritage & nation and feels Russia, as a major power, has an important role to play in regional affairs. Putin is obviously angry(even very angry) about recent events in regards to the ‘empire of lies’, but his psychology isn’t driven by personal demons. He was trained to be a lawyer and thinks like a lawyer. He’s more like Tom Hagen for Russia, which is why some observers, like Pavel Craig Robertsky, feel he simply lacks the stuff to be a wartime consiglieri and go all the way. But as recent events has shown, Putin can lay low, fix his targets, and strike when necessary. He could play at war, and it’s not all ‘business’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="426" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiZskrs3X01rX5k0y6Hp1PSQKz2FtdXQM-kKLxIEH4wWGq3R4K1melxJSOdTk_1Z2AxyHDfaIGxczN4cusTwacKmNMPX6kh9BPQBDAE92tucTrVx-ZqAMT1zLr29T1vfZ7gdRnyF-QcSq8r_Ks9mnGj4dqiWMevjO9egY1JiGVDQ_1mbvwPN4bDQgV3fw/w640-h426/angela-merkel-vladimir-putin.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_91" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="71"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With Hitler, psychology totally matters as he was one of the unlikeliest leaders of European history, or any history for that matter. In normal times, a man like that comes nowhere near power. It is in times of great duress that a radical force can seize power, as happened in Russia with the Bolsheviks, but even they gained dominance by the conventional tools of power politics: organization, machinations, conspiracies, and etc.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_92" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="448"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">By such metrics, Hitler was hardly more skilled than other members of National Socialism. What shot him to the top was spellbinding charisma and oratorical prowess of a modern-day sorcerer. His passions intoxicated the masses who, after years of economic havoc and social decay, hoped for a deliverer, a prophet, maybe a god. Even more than the flamboyant Mussolini, he turned politics in theater, history in the stuff of myth. Even those more intelligent, knowledgeable, experienced, and judicious than him were enraptured and ‘converted’(much like Anglo ‘liberal democratic’ rationality is helpless before the black magic of Afromania and Jungle Fever). Also, Hitler’s charisma wasn’t just playacting. He wasn’t merely a performative actor but prophetic author of his own kind of madness that was as enticing as frightening, or enticing precisely because it was so frightening at a time when Germany seemed like one big horror show of decline, poverty, and humiliation. In NIBELUNGEN and PARSIFAL, the order of the gods or kings is mired in a state of paralysis, and it takes a bold outsider to shake things up and bring about the new dawn. Hitler regarded himself in Wagnerian terms, much like today’s young ones tend to see the world through the prism of STAR WARS or STAR TREK(or one of those superhero fantasies or THE MATRIX, or 007 movies in Richie Spencer’s case). It is why Hitler is actually diminished in History if analyzed only rationally, as if forced into fatal decisions under pressure from bigger powers. To fully appreciate him, we must give the devil his due. It won’t do to pretend his story is like the Animals song with the lyrics, <em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">“I’m just a soul whose intentions are good, Oh Lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood.”</em> The real Hitlerian psychology is closer to the Who song that goes, <em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">“No one knows what it’s like to be the bad man, to be the sad man </em><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">behind blue eyes. No one knows what it’s like to be hated, to be fated to telling only lies. But my dreams, they aren’t as empty as my conscience seems to be. I have hours, only lonely, </em><em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">my love is vengeance that’s never free.</em>” Or the David Bowie song “Quicksand” that goes, <em style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">“I’m the twisted name on Garbo’s eyes, living proof of Churchill’s lies, I’m destiny. I’m torn between the light and dark where others see their targets, divine symmetry. Should I kiss the viper’s fang or herald loud the death of Man. I’m sinking in the quicksand of my thought. And I ain’t got the power anymore.”</em></span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/IC6uXVGVnq0?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_93" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="92"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Psychology is also key to understanding men like T. E. Lawrence and Che Guevara. How does one explain Lawrence’s egomaniacal fusion of Greek Hero and Biblical chieftain? And why wasn’t Guevara content to preside over the Cuban revolution at Castro’s side? Castro had a big ego but also a sense of reality and limitations. For Guevara sky was the limit, and it was moon-or-bust. His envisioned the revolution engulfing all of Latin America, culminating in the downfall of America itself. He was a born dreamer(as well as maniac).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_94" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="69"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Will to Power operates like Work Ethic. A man has to work, even work hard, to make ends meet, but that, in and of itself, isn’t a sign of work ethic but work necessity. True work ethic is when someone doesn’t have to work to live but nevertheless immerses himself in some task in the belief that a person must be productive and contribute something to society.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_95" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a similar vein, those who feel wronged or unrepresented feel a need to gain some power to secure their place in the world. They must struggle for power, but it isn’t necessarily a Will to Power. Once sufficient security and representation are attained, they accept their place in the world. Their struggle had fixed goals and wasn’t necessarily an obsession with power itself. In contrast, those with Will to Power are never content with enough power, security, and/or opportunity. They must have more, then more, then more… like with the Max character in ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA. Hitler and Guevara weren’t greedy for money but had insatiable appetite for power to remake the world in their image.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_96" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Psychology matters with demonic personalities, for whom enough is never enough. In GOODFELLAS and CASINO, Joe Pesci’s characters are not just run-of-the-mill hoodlums. They got more coal in their steam engines. Whether it’s the business world, gangster world, or the political world, some people are content to belong and stick with the norm, whereas others just can’t help testing the limits and pushing for more to see who has the biggest balls; it’s like James Dean’s character playing ‘chicken’ in REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_97" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="53"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s what set Mao Zedong apart from men like Liu Shao-Chi and Deng Xiaoping. Psychology hardly mattered with men like Liu and Deng, essentially managers ruling over bureaucrats(or technocrats) to get the job done. In contrast, Mao was megalomaniacal by nature, and psychology, more than ideology, drove him to the end.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_98" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="285"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">We would be selling Hitler short if we characterized him merely as a well-meaning actor who lost control of events as the big powers conspired to bring him down. He was a figure like no other, and his significance on the world stage, in all its awesome and terrifying dimensions, cannot be understood apart from the demons that possessed him, in the same way that those, who’d characterized Mao as essentially a humble ‘agrarian reformer’(as many China Hands sympathetic to Chinese Communism referred to him) whose modest goals were to resist Japanese imperialism and improve the lot of Chinese peasants, failed to understand his grandiose vision of things. Putin doesn’t compare himself with the great Tsars of Russian history. His model is someone like Pyotr Stolypin, a diligent manager laboring to balance the contentious forces in the order. In contrast, Hitler measured himself against the great conquerors of history, and Mao regarded himself as the Red Emperor(though with false humility he could tell the likes of Edgar Snow that he was merely a ‘teacher, a school teacher at that’). A stable and functional system is usually closed to such men who live by the credo of Frank Sinatra’s “I Did It My Way”. Indeed, it’s rather surprising(and fortunate, though some may disagree) that a man like Putin managed to gain control of Russia after the 1990s, an opportune time for radicals, visionaries, and maniacs to seize the moment. Given that Russia came under the control of men who favor stability and diplomacy, why did things go so wrong between Russia and the West? I know it sounds like a broken record by now, but it was the Jews.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="406" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiqrRhxEFBxVXu95Z-bRE6w8rZRS31r7pCLI54iAP4sfd-ObPdYmV9uB-p5VAuxIez4YD3LQmaxphRA0LLb_Ep8aabnd_-wjT4Xz3zf2bFlGRqy6MdVCEISg7zwtmaa6uWDpnv2_2VJkkMBYCd1TZ1JCIPY5sNPDYAiuWNjK7jENyjp1tPb58_8D-ppIA/w640-h406/mao.webp" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_99" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The so-called ‘liberal west’ or the ‘rules-based international/democratic order’ is anything but. For all intents and purposes, it is a Jewish-Supremacist empire, and many Jews are Zio-Hitlerian in their megalo-ethnic view of the world. They aim to take over every goy society, fill it up with diversity(to play divide and conquer), plant globo-homo victory flags, install pawns(financial, ideological, and/or idolatrous), spread degeneracy, threaten with terror and destruction, all of which they did in Ukraine until Russia just about had enough of the lunacy. But, demon-possessed Jewish Supremacism goes unnamed and even unidentified because Anglos, who ceded power to the Jews, are such lame, craven, and despicable cucks to Jewish Power. Anglo elites bleating about Evil Bad Russia is simply to gain more good-doggy points from the Jewish masters. “Look, me good dog, another biscuit please.” How utterly pathetic. Because Anglo elites, still coasting on prestige of legacy, play along with the charade of ‘liberal democracy’ and ‘rules-based order’, enough white dummies are fooled that the World is divided between ‘democratic orders’ and ‘autocracies’ when the real division is between Jewish Supremacist Hegemony and sovereign nations.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_100" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="354"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If most sovereign states are not(or cannot afford to be) democratic, it is because true democracy has been perverted by the Jewish-supremacist deep state that exploits freedom in any nation to corrupt politicians(with bribes), convert status-anxious elites(to whatever degeneracy is fashionable in the West), gain media control, promote civil unrest(via agitation by agent provocateurs that can turn into ‘color revolutions’), and burden with debt. What kind of a ‘democratic’ or ‘rules-based order’ is it when the lesser member-states are made to bow to the will of the imperium, conform to the same ‘values’(as dictated by Jewish Power), follow the same fashions, agree on the same narratives, worship the same secular idols/gods, and enforce the same policies? Are the lesser member states allowed any agency or autonomy? Recently, Hungarians overwhelmingly re-elected Viktor Orban, and the so-called Democratic West targets it for destruction. What is the point of democracy if a nation is to be destroyed for voting against Sorosian globalism and loss of sovereignty, for defending health and sanity against the perversion of the globo-homo agenda? The so-called ‘rules-based order’ makes an “offer you can’t refuse”: Adhere to the DC and NY line, like the lesser communist states had to parrot and implement the Moscow Line. What’s the point of democracy when all the peoples in the so-called ‘free world’ are relentlessly berated to feel, think, and act alike(or be sanctioned to oblivion or color-revolution-ed)? If the Jewish-controlled West allowed democracies in other nations to develop of their own accord, the world might be full of national democracies embodying both freedom and sovereignty. But wherever a bit of freedom and openness expands in some part of the world, it isn’t long before the Jewish-controlled US deep state comes trundling along with bags of money, influence-peddling, false values, and dirty tricks to corrupt the budding democracy into yet another satrapy of the sicko West. In these times, sovereign nations are forced into partial autocratism because their openness is taken advantage by the George Soroses of the world who work in cahoots with the Jewish-controlled US empire.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_101" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="229"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, Jews are more problematic than Germans of the National Socialist period who mainly longed for normality and stability — they looked to extraordinarily abnormal Hitler because extreme times call for extreme figures — , whereas a large number of Jews vape on neuroticism as the favored norm, as during the Weimar Period that many Jews even now regard with fondness, which explains why Jews used all their power and influence to turn the US into Weimerica; different groups have different norms, and one main source of woes around the world is the assumption that the norm of one group prevails among others, e.g. expecting black Africans to act like Swedes, and another source of woes is fixating on the positive or alluring quality of the group norm while overlooking the problematic aspects, e.g. admiring Jewish wit while overlooking Jewish personality’s boundless capacity for hostility. Most Germans didn’t want wars and more gambles with history. For them, the man of the hour was Hitler who possessed the power of will and vision at a time when most German elites seemed confused, timid, craven, and/or uninspired, lacking the boldness and determination to restore social order and national pride. Unfortunately, Hitler had bigger plans, just like Alexander the Great kept pushing forward despite his men feeling they’d conquered ‘enough’, a word missing in Alexander’s vocabulary.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_102" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="196"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The ensuing economic recovery following the Nazi downfall showed that most Germans didn’t ask for much more than a decent life. Without political pathology at the top, most Germans are sane and sound. Not so among Jews. Pathological tendencies appear to be more common among Jews. Indeed, what is remarkable about the Jewish War on Palestinians/Arabs, Iran, Russia, Christianity, the entire white race, and now even China is that degree of venom glistening on Jewish fangs. Remove the crazy Jews on top, and there are many more batches of Jewish gremlins waiting in the wings to take their place. Jews in the media, academia, government, entertainment, and various other fields share in the bottomless contempt or hatred for just about anything. Just look at the deranged look on Victoria Nuland’s face, and the unnerving fact is she isn’t some outlier but an archetype(following in the footsteps of the equally deranged Madeleine Albright). It would appear lots of Anglos are similarly deranged in their anti-Russian animus, but they are dogs doing the bidding of their master. The minute Jews say, “Let’s be friends with Russia”, and the Anglos will follow along.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_103" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Nazism could be destroyed along with the regime, Jewish craziness will percolate upward from the bottom even when removed at the top. In THE WIZARD OF OZ, things returned to normal once the Wicked Witch met her demise. But what if the town is full of wicked witches? Get rid of one and another just takes her place. What is amazing, indeed astounding, is the sheer number of crazy Jews at every level of institutions and industries who share in the diabolical hatreds of the top Jews. Germans were spellbound by Hitler but regressed to normality once he was gone. But, rid the world of Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland, and there’s a ten-mile-long line of Jews just itching to fill their shoes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_104" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="214"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One would assume that for every Jew who thinks one way, there’s another who thinks another way. Then, how is it that for every Stephen Cohen(who correctly argued Putin is a man the West can do business with), there are fifty Robert Kagans for whom any compromise with Russia is out of the question as the only acceptable outcome is, “Jews Win, Russians lose”? (Ronald Reagan “We win, they lose” quip was merely ideological as he harbored no animus against Russians per se. But for Jews it’s a matter of ethnic domination by the Chosen over the Cattle.) There’s a gnawing rodent-like nature to Jewish personality that simply won’t give up. It’s like the guy in THE HEARTBREAK KID(by Elaine May) who simply won’t accept NO to his quest for the golden shikse, just like Roy(Richard Dreyfuss) in THE CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND must find his way to touch the space aliens. And even though Tony Montana in the SCARFACE remake isn’t Jewish, something of Stone’s half-Jewish nature seems to have rubbed off on him. Montana says, “This town’s like a big fat pussy just waiting to get fuc*ed.” He’s like a gangster heartbreak kid, or ball-busting kid.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/TKpXTy-sCxg?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_105" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="80"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Jewish view of Russia is essentially Montanaean. Jews see Russia as one big pussy just waiting to be fuc*ed. Why not, as the Anglo World has been turned into one big anus pummeled day in and day out by the big fat Jewish pud? What is Anglosphere but a ‘bacha bazi’ of Jewish Power? Afghan perverts have their jollies with young boys, and Jewish Globalists do so with White America, one big gaping hole of a Bacha BaZion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_106" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="222"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It explains Anglo hysterics about Russia’s saying NO to being bacha-bazized by Jewish Power. Russia’s forceful NO exposes the shameful and fallen state of the Anglo World. Anglos would feel less humiliated if the whole world succumbed to their position vis-a-vis the Jews. Imagine some pervert butt-rapes a bunch of boys who come to accept their ‘bitch’ status. At the very least, they are equal in their humiliation. But then, suppose one boy says NO and won’t bend over despite all the threats and violence(and even manages to land some blows on the pervert). The courageous thing would be for the other boys to cheer on the defiant boy, but what if they’re resigned to their servitude to the point where they’re unnerved by any show of resistance? It is like how cops, though ideologically right-leaning, beat up conservative protesters even harder for exposing the craven obey-the-orders operation of the police that usually does the bidding of the ‘liberal’ power elites. Anglos used to rule the world, but they now bear witness to lowly Russian Slavs standing up to Jewish Supremacist power while they themselves, from UK to Australia to Canada to US, line up, face the wall, bend over, pull down their pants, and wait their turn to be buggered yet again by Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_107" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Jewish War on Russia parallels the Jewish War on Reality(the ultimate source of Jewish Power) as Russia refuses to bend the knee to the decree that the Neo-Talmudic Word trumps the Actual World. If Jews say a green ball is purple, we must see purple. It used to be that Liberal Democracies were committed to reason & truth(and only tolerated deviance & weirdness), whereas dictatorships and autocracies suppressed facts and distorted logic, as if reality itself toed the party line — if millions were starving in Ukraine but Stalin said bumper harvests ensured everyone was eating well, everyone was eating well.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_108" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="243"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, the so-called ‘liberal democracies’, now totally under Jewish Control, are about the tyranny of deviance and perversion than their tolerance. Indeed, Russia and China(and even Islamic-ruled Iran) now seem relatively sane and grounded in truth vis-a-vis the West, not because they’re committed to principles of liberty, reason, and facts-at-any-cost but simply because they have a basic grounding in reality, like, for example, a man wearing a wig is NOT a woman or that sodomy isn’t some ‘rainbow’ magic that should be celebrated, especially among children. Just like a one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind, the mere fact of calling a spade a spade makes one sane in a crazy world of Jewish-hegemonic globo-homo-ism. Indeed, even Russia in the bad old days of communism had a firmer grounding in reality than the current West. Despite its philosophical flaws, Marxism-Leninism was grounded in concern for the proletariat, the very people doing the heavy lifting of economic production. When Marxism failed to deliver, communist states fudged on data. Still, communism’s war on reality wasn’t as total(and arbitrary) as the current war on reality waged by Jews. Communist states didn’t say homo fecal-penetration was biologically or morally equivalent to real sex between men and women. They didn’t believe young children should be ‘instructed’ with porny comic books. Communist states didn’t say a man could be a ‘woman with male genitals’, a ludicrous notion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_109" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="420"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, the current West isn’t only making such ludicrous claims but mandating that all of us agree… or else be ‘canceled’. Instead of tolerance for weirdos, the weird MUST BE accepted as the New Normal. The source of his lunacy is Jewish Power, and it actually has less to do with homos and trannies than the Will to Mold Reality as the Jews please. Jews not only want dominance in reality but domination over reality, i.e. the godlike Jewish Word shapes the World. Suppose there is a tree before a Jew and a goy. The tree is real. Now, suppose the Jew gains control of tree. So, the Jew takes the biggest fruits from the tree while goy gets the smaller ones. Still, the fact of the tree’s existence is a truth higher than the Jewish control of the tree. The Jew may control the tree, but even he has to accept the reality of the tree. And even though the goy knows the Jew gets the first picks, he too knows the tree is real, and therefore, there is a reality higher than the Jew. But suppose the Jew wants the power OVER reality, i.e. being the lord IN reality is no longer sufficient for the Jew who now wants to be lord OF reality. Even objective reality must bend his will. So, suppose the Jew says the tree is now a flower, and the goy MUST agree it is so, or else. Thus, the Jew doesn’t merely have power over the goy but the power to mold the goy’s perception of reality itself. It’s what George Orwell demonstrated with the notion of 2 + 2 = 5 in 1984. ‘Big Brother’ has godlike power over reality itself. It isn’t enough that Jews have power over us IN reality as that would imply reality exists as a fact independent of their wishes. Therefore, if Jews are to have total control over us, they must have power over reality itself, mold it as they please, and demand that we agree with their anti-essential and anti-obvious assertions — women are more than half the population, yet Jewish Power has managed to press upon all Western elites(and some Easter ones) that trannies, a tiny sliver even within the LGBTQXYZ community, are the ultimate authority of what constitutes womanhood. Liberalism is gone, replaced by Delusionalism, or maybe similar to the literary genre of Magic Realism, what prevails is Magic Liberalism, one based on fantasies of the Narrative than facts of reality.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_110" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="329"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, if the Jewish Mandate insists there’s no such thing as a core German people because non-Germans can gain German citizenship, it must be true, no less than the notion that a guy with pud-and-balls can be a ‘woman’. But then, if Jews state that they constitute a unique people, and Israel must preserve the core identity and demography of their kind, that must also be true. Never mind logic or consistency. ‘Reality’ is always as Jews say. This way, we can no longer point to reality or appeal to logic to counter the Jewish narrative/script as ‘reality is always as Jews say’, like ‘science’ has been ever so ‘fluid’ under Jewish-controlled Covidian cult(and the stuff about ‘race being a social construct’). Whatever Jewish Power says in the Current Hour is the truth, that is unless it says something else — ‘Trust the Science’ really means ‘Trust the Jews(or Schwience)’. Whether something is potentially true or mere ‘disinformation’ is simply a matter of what the New York Times says(and its minion media outlets parrot). If a black African marauding into Europe is just as much a ‘Frenchman’ or ‘German’ as the native folks with roots reaching back thousands of years(and evolutionary past going back tens of thousands of years), then of course a man with penis and balls is a ‘woman’ if Jews say so. We are told the great thing about ‘liberal democracy’ is it rejects ethno-nationalism… but all ‘liberal democracies’ around the world must pledge to support and favor not only Jewish identity and Jewish nationalism in Israel but Jewish hegemony over the globe. It’s a Zeligish view of the world. What goes by the name of American Exceptionalism amounts to white goyim denouncing ethno-nationalism as the worst possible thing for whites and the best possible thing for Jews; indeed, it’s so great for Jews that mere ethno-nationalism is inadequate for awesome Jewish Pride and must be expanded into ethno-supremacism.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="553" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhuYwqlrNCF-rAhVJ48JFW-kQyRZQM8MeTQNQazw3__WViiqMqZDiakYLQjEscVd6fv2JGRRpg815Qm4-tfG6jf09dfEQOUeMXlc9fdp_TW1qMuj9SW_ajHnGh7QofG_ct8zjQYNXp3plrUiWYV_5BuOijTLTS8SjnOQl49qTRRuJkoa5BnoF5wOE-SIQ/w640-h553/zelen.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_111" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Zelensky is a perfect avatar, so symptomatic of Jewish Power as the cancer of our times. He might as well be called Zeliginsky as he’s adept at morphing into whatever in regards to the setting and audience — you’d think a second-rate Peter Sellers is the head(or hand, foot, knee, abdomen, penis, ass, etc) of Ukraine. One thing for sure, Putin stands for Russia. Hitler stood for German/Aryan power. That much was never in doubt. But, while Jewish Power is clearly for Jewish influence and hegemony, Jews dare not admit it out of fear that the goyim may wake up, realize what’s going on, and become critical of Jewish Power(as the real hand behind the major events and crises). So, Jewish Supremacism plays differently from the run-of-the mill ethnic, national, and/or imperial interests. It is laundered through various facades and charades in a never ending spin operation. So, even though nations like Russia, China, Iran, India, and others discuss matters of universal or international relevance, they also make clear the particularity of their vantage points.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_112" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, even though Jewish Power works to further tribal supremacism, it pretends otherwise, hiding behind legalese and bogus rhetoric when its actual behavior reeks of decrepitude and hypocrisy. Consequently, Jewish-controlled US is the most threatening and coercive power in the world yet also the most opaque and contradictory because it is never honest about its character and agenda. Jewish-controlled American Power is like the barber in the Monty Python skit who really wants to be a lumberjack, or the most eccentric sort, a tranny lumberjack, but is afraid to blurt it out. Then, no wonder Putin called the US and West in general(as the mini-me of the US) the ‘Empire of Lies’, though he also enabled the Lie by failing to name the Jewish Power behind it all. He named the ‘nazis’ but not the Cabal that recruited them as muscle — it certainly wasn’t for their minds.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_113" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="146"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews have come full circle, even jumping the shark, by siding with quasi-nazi-types(of all people, but then, they’ve also come to represent the vanguard of Neo-McCarthyism(despite having denounced the Senator from Wisconsin as the worst figure in US history) without any pushback from academia, media, and the state, all of which are controlled ideologically and/or financially by Jewish supremacists and their puppets. Thus, Censchwarzship only grows in severity and reach, silencing ever more voices, unlike McCarthyism that was soon brought down by a partnership of both parties, forever disgraced and eventually disavowed even by the likes of William F. Buckley. Back then, American Liberalism developed in defense of civil liberties against the likes of Joe McCarthy but, as ascendant Jews became addicted to supremacism, has degenerated into a full support of blacklisting, silencing, and even de-banking individuals on the basis of ideology.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_114" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="352"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish political perversions are truly through the roof. Though Jewish Power used 9/11 as rationale for War on Terror against Arab/Muslim states targeted by Israel, they turned it into War with Terror Israel and World Jewry decided to hit Libya and Syria next — within ten years, the mission to destroy Alqaeda turned into mission to arm Alqaeda. It’s batshit crazy, but that’s where we are at, and there’s no hope until people finally start to name the Jewish Power. Baldy legal expert Robert Barnes blames the Wasp elites as the perennial Deep State baddies when, in fact, such ilk are now little more than cuck-functionaries of Jewish Power. Despite the dark side of Wasp history, it once did produce men like George Kennan whose influence on US foreign policy erred on the side of patience and judiciousness. Anglo-American animus against Russia during the Cold War was ideological than ethnic, whereas it is almost entirely ethnic in the post-ideological age among Jews, a people still fuming(or pretending to) over the barring of their grandfathers from Country Clubs. There was once some degree of ‘racial’ unease among Anglos and Germanics toward Slavs, but it faded once ‘racism’ became the biggest ‘sin’ in the West, rendering the US-USSR conflict into one of political systems than bloodlines(though the recent fervor bordering on ecstasy of ‘Russophobia’ suggests ‘racist’ feelings, being innate to human nature, are gratefully running wild against an approved target, especially as it is white). During the Cold War, many Jews, then on the Left, sided with Russia out of ideological affinity despite ethnic tensions, but once the secular god of Marxism failed, soon followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union, only ethnic feelings remained in Jewish hearts, arrogant and scornful, even vengeful(as the USSR had sided with Arab nations against Israel and suppressed Jewish ‘liberals’, actually ethno-wolves in globo-clothing). Furthermore, some of the more diehard Jewish leftists may have felt it wasn’t socialism that failed the Russians but Russians who failed socialism. End result would have been ethnic disdain among the remaining Jewish Leftists as well.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_115" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given recent events, at least since the end of the Cold War, we can perhaps appreciate the role of communism in the 20th century. One merely needs to look at how the US, as the lone superpower, has acted on the world stage in the absence of countervailing forces. We’ve witnessed the return of naked imperialism, especially in the Middle East. One could argue this was the direct result of Jewish takeover of the US. As the main source of Jewish Power has been global-networking than deep loyalty to any single goy nation, Jewish elites eschewed modest nationalism and ‘humble foreign policy’ as the post-Cold-War consensus in favor of squeezing the New World Order for all it was worth.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_116" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, had the Soviet Union persisted as the Formidable Other, what would have been America’s course of action? With Soviet Power still occupying Eastern Europe, the Western military alliance would have had a less free hand elsewhere. (In a way, Cold Warriors dreaded the Cold War end more than its continuance. As either shills of the military-industrial complex or careerists whose positions depended on superpower rivalry, they had no qualms about exaggerating the Soviet threat. The unintended salutary effect of such exaggerations was the greater caution in foreign policy lest either superpower trigger another land war in Europe and even a nuclear exchange.) At the very least, Soviet overtures to the Third World pushed the West not only into an arms race but a heart race, one where the West rebranded itself as anti-imperialist and pro-liberation/independence for all peoples.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="439" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiJhdLEFrsI_FNY8YE9MzFb7qnfcdg708lONalTIpPMRTHvP1-kk-nKzWxcp_HZ0ldDMnLwMlmOv5FzMzQOIUtEuIBG_vxbTAbrQ25f9OdIpyfeIMlQFuVg4NQYjShfSDGRlF6ZP2Wv5toEVqioiGEkeHNE9RN6CS6awjpXP1osQaowXe7jac5fNIuF1A/w640-h439/stone.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_117" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However, soon after the end of the Cold War, US and NATO became brazenly neo-imperialist, acting less like a triumphant world cop than a gangster finally showing his true face. Imperialism had been hidden away than expunged from the Western agenda, only to burst out of the closet like the homos beginning in the Clinton 90s(though the first Gulf War was a harbinger of things to come).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_118" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="228"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At least with Afghanistan and even Iraq, the US had 9/11 had excuse as either revenge or preemption. The madness however continued after Bush II with Obama administration’s gangster tactics in Libya(in which mini-me European members of NATO participated, as being part of such super-duper alliance makes even the dinkiest European nation feel important as a member of The Club) and Syria. Worse, there was hardly any pushback from media(and academia), apparently totally taken over by ethno-regulatory or ethno-editorial capture. The West has obviously gone insane, geo-politically as well as culturally and spiritually. During the Cold War, the West made a big deal of its free press and free speech to counter the Soviet empire of censorship and conformity, but the Cold War’s end, especially with Jews-as-the-new-elites, made free and open public debate/dissent less useful to the regime. (A window of opportunity for free speech opened with the internet and social media, contributing to Trump’s win in 2016 and surges of white populism, whereupon the powers-that-be declared open season Free Speech. On the other hand, the increasing pornification of society is enough to keep many people fooled that ‘free speech’ is alive and well in the West. They believe ‘sexual licentiousness = freedom’ and ‘sexual modesty = repression’, failing to understand that anarcho-tyranny could be using debauchery to debilitate moral and dignified opposition to the regime.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_119" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="346"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One wonders if the West would have become so degenerate and decadent had the Soviet/Communist persisted as a looming threat, as well as the official command center of International Leftism. (The fact that the USSR was leftist posed a thematic threat to the West. Given trajectory of modernity, leftism with its cult of change, progress, and social justice had a decisive advantage over rightism in the global imagination. After all, the American Revolution and the French Revolution, two world-shaking events in modern history, both defined themselves against the Old Way. And even after the French Revolution fell to the forces of Reaction, Western History marched onward driven by leftist and liberal energies, though often unappreciated at the time, the rightist remnants provided the stability and continuity necessary for the changes. Minus the challenge of Soviet Union and Communism, the West could have presented itself as the leading leftist force in the world but was forced into a de fault ‘rightist’ position vis-a-vis the communist order committed to radical leftism, anti-imperialism, and world liberation. Because of leftism’s allure, the majority of educated and intellectual classes in US and Western Europe leaned leftward. Even when anti-communist, they felt that rightism was somehow worse or a bigger threat because, at the very least, radical leftism was for the good things albeit in a bad way whereas rightism was just blind bigotry and dogmatic intransigence against necessary change and progress. Therefore, it was the dream of Western Power Elites to own the leftist brand as their own to brandish themselves as the torchbearers of progress and justice. Thus, the end of the Cold War was regarded not so much as a defeat of leftism but an opportunity for Western elites to refashion leftism in ways that best served their own power, and the end result has been ideology replaced with idolatry, mainly of Jews and their main allies, homos and Negroes.) During the Cold War, the West had to hold a manly bulwark against a formidable rival, and something like overt globo-homo degeneracy would have defeated the purpose.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_120" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="196"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And, even though communism racked up a criminal history all its own(unprecedented in some respects), it also served as a moral crusade against capitalist exploitation and Western Imperialism, with the salutary effect of compelling the West to enact reforms and clean up its image, especially in the Third World. It went away with the fall of communism. Western capitalism became ever more brazen and gutted the national working classes, leading to the present moment where the top 1% has more wealth than the entire middle class. Given the rise of ‘wokeness’, one might think the West has turned far-left, especially given the unrelenting moral pressure on the white-majority. In other words, the West prides itself as at total war with ‘racism’ in the name of ‘equity’ and ‘social justice’. Thus, the West seems capable of genuflection and redemption without the challenge of communism. But upon closer inspection, ‘wokeness’ is really a furtherance of Jewish Supremacism as, far from being a proponent of equality for all, it plays favorites with the races, with some being more-equal-than-others. ‘Wokeness’ is certainly muted about the Zionist tyranny over Palestinians, US mass-killings in Syria & Iraq, and black terror against non-blacks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_121" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just like some bio-labs formulate ethno-specific germs, ‘wokeness’ is race-specific in its targeting, i.e. some races can never do wrong, some can never do right. It favors the virulence of globo-homo that, via the neo-vatican of the media, has been elevated to the holiest of the holies among the ‘educated’ classes. ‘Wokeness’ is a perversely brilliant move by Jews to make neo-imperialism palatable to the both the Western elites(whose highest value derives from ‘rainbow’ sodomy and catchphrases like ‘diversity is our strength’ & ‘black lives matter’) and nonwhites(as new recruits as servitors of the empire, therefore traitors against their own kind, like Fareed Zakaria the Muslim who beats the war drums against Muslim countries — indeed, consider how easily the empire was able to morally launder its crimes through Obama, the ‘first black president’, also labeled the ‘first gay president’).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_122" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="33"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And, so-called ‘progressives’ were okay with continued US presence in Afghanistan because there were ‘gay rights’ lessons for Afghan girls. And besides, bombs can’t be that bad if consecrated with BLM signs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_123" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="305"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">No wonder then the new imperial design is to portray US as the empire of ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ against China as the ethnocentric nation-state and Russia as the civilization of Christian revival. Contra ‘racist’ China ruled by Han people, the lone superpower takes special pride in the self-abnegating white majority extolling Negrolatry and Gay Rites as the highest truths. One may argue that most non-Westerners(outside Black Africa) may not be won over by this. Why should Hindus look kindly upon an empire that favors blacks uber alles? But, apart from Black Magic serving as global moral currency(like the US dollar), the appeal may not be so much the ascension of the Negro as the descension of the Whitey because whiteness has been for so long synonymous with world imperialism for the last several centuries. Thus, blackness serves as a trope even for non-blacks, much like Japan’s victory in the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, the first time a non-white nation bested a white nation in the Industrial Age. When whiteness has so long been dominant around the world, anything that beats and humiliates it, physically or morally, can be a cause for celebration in the non-white world. Likewise, Vietnam War was more than about the Vietnamese. It symbolized for much of the world the struggle against the Imperialist West, the latest manifestation of which was deemed to be capitalist US. Of course, blackness is more complicated as it’s largely the cultural export of the American Empire. For example, something like Rap music can be seen as a rebellion against ‘racist’ White America but also as a cultural arsenal of American ugliness, vulgarity, and arrogance. One might draw parallels between the brutality of the US military and the thuggery of gangsta rappers, both of which rest on bad attitude toward the Other(fuc*az).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjSbET8Ym1KTh-a2Kn6WsTCywGiu1_wdVL3zlBxnZjJU0v6f6l588jtfR52sGL4XWM8q--77XIfQp0TWHzVbwWKzDh1GDJbkMUxFvUTKU7VEk0wvWq8GZGtBOZ7PKH7SPH0YO2naDwZQLFa-mRKnVCdH905XLXWVy0FiypRxw3I3oalYKHIx59Py_kOrA/s600/russop.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_124" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="1139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whatever positive effects that communism had on the 20th century in applying moral pressure on capitalism, ideologically combating imperialism, checking the power of the US, and ironically serving as a culturally conservative force for nationalism & traditionalism(as lack of capitalist dynamics prevented the rise of fad-and-fashion culture on par with the West), thus preventing it from becoming the hubris-laden sole arbiter of right and wrong around the world, it was bound to fail in the long run because it couldn’t economically sustain itself for long(and besides, Russia held out as long as it did because of its vast size and abundant natural resources). So, if the US was bound to win the Cold War sooner or later, future power competition may turn out differently. Though fascism was defeated militarily in World War II, thereby leading to the fallacy that it lost out ideologically, it could serve as the basis for power greater than what goes by the name of ‘liberal democracy’. Also, the power of ‘liberal democracy’ has been exaggerated because Anglos happened to take possession of the best lands on earth that had been sparsely populated by primitives. Without the US and its vast resources and living space for an increased population, would ‘liberal democracy’ have really won out in the 20th century? Just like communism benefited greatly because it happened to take over resource-rich Russia, ‘liberal democracy’ became exaggerated in worth as formula for power because of America’s immense natural wealth that could be exploited by sufficient enterprise and organization. The problem with ‘liberal democracy’ is that a certain group, with a mix of talent and cunning, can take over the system and not only control elite institutions and industries but manipulate them to favor a new set of gods, which in the West became Jew-worship, Negrolatry, and Globohomo. Also, instead of using the power to uphold principles, the Power can act like gangsters and employ lawfare as it chooses. The result becomes tribal oligarchic gangsterism, which is what the US is today. Still, given the will and talent of the ruling Jewish elites, America’s vast size & resources, huge manpower, financial control, media control, and the like, the US is still uniquely positioned to dominate much of the world. Still, it faces a challenge because the rivals are no longer communist. While communism was effective in consolidating power and unity in Russia and China during the Cold War, its long-term economic prospects were dire. Soviet economy began its long decline in the 1970s, and Maoism kept China as a mostly agricultural economy, not even a productive one at that, well into the 1970s. But since the 1980s, both abandoned classical Marxism. In Russia, the shock of wild-west gangster-capitalism in the sudden aftermath of the collapse of the state meant globalist leeches could bleed the country dry. In contrast, the state remained strong in China and stage-managed the transformation from communism to limited capitalism. In time, Russia also regained political stability, and both systems now use capitalism as the economic basis of national power. Thus, unlike their communist past, they are on far firmer material grounds for either resisting, standing up, or even challenging the West. Also, as neither Russia nor China is a ‘liberal democracy’, it’s much more difficult for the likes of George Soros to gain control of all institutions and industries that matter. One could argue Russia and especially China are more repressive than the West(which, however, is getting more repressive by the day), but given the political and cultural fate of the West under the so-called ‘liberal democratic’ order, it’s not necessarily a bad thing, especially as so-called ‘liberal democracy’ has allowed itself to become consumed by tribal supremacism, cultural degeneracy, sexual(or ‘gender’) lunacy, censoriousness(which nullifies the claim of liberality), and mindless idolatry(that undermines secular reason). It now seems ‘liberal democracy’, though a good idea, had an Achilles Heel that could be targeted to bring it down, all the while continuing to use the label as ideological cover. Even though many people are loathe to use the term, it’s coming down to a test of national fascism(Russia and China) versus tribal imperialism(the West under Jewish control). Both sides are creative in their own way. Fascism, unlike communism or reactionary traditionalism, was open to experimenting with various combinations of leftism and rightism to arrive at what works. If in the past, communist Russia and China couldn’t utilize the power of capitalism for ideological reasons, such inhibitions are gone as they’re driven more by nationalism than ideological dogma. Also, in emphasizing the national interest, they can control and rein in capitalism and its detrimental cultural effects, pretty dire in the US, Europe, and Jatako(Japan-Taiwan-South-Korea). Russia and China would rather not call it ‘fascist’, a term associated with their great enemies in World War II, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. But many in the West also prefer not to call it ‘fascism’ because it would give the lie to the notion that fascism lost out ideologically, when it only lost militarily. Granted, one could argue that fascism drove Hitler to World War II, but the far more aggressive world powers were ‘liberal capitalist’; after all, Anglos and the French had already gobbled up much of the world before the term ‘fascism’ was muttered for the first time. But because the Grand Narrative says that Liberal Democracy beat out all other ideologies, especially fascism and communism, in the 20th century, it won the War of History of Ideas. Whereas communism really did lose ideologically(as the Cold War never became a hot war between US and USSR), it’s simply not true that fascism lost ideologically to capitalism. If World War II could have been avoided, and especially if the Soviet Union moved from the communist model to a more fascist one, there’s no telling which side would have prevailed in the long run. (While the communist order had a hard time accepting full-blown capitalism, as it would mean the implosion of state power, it could accommodate the transition to fascism whereby market economy would be allowed while allowing the existing political power structure to remain intact, which was the case in China, and something which Putin has struggled to restore in Russia as, in the absence of such central authority, the nation could be ravaged from all sides by globalist sharks and the people, from elites to the masses, could be corrupted with endless temptations.) If WWII could have been avoided, would Germany have done better under its fascist or National Socialist system? East German communism didn’t pan out in the long run. Germany as a ‘liberal democracy’ did make good use of capitalism but became a culturally hollow and soulless place, one of sterility and decadence.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/P1CyPjQQTAM?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_125" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, on the matter the fluid nature of Jewish Power and how Zelensky is almost its perfect embodiment. His cult grew out of his role as entertainer, actor, comedian, song-and-dance man, globohomo clown, and impresario. Slavs, apparently as dumb as goyim everywhere, fell for his TV persona where he played a righteous underdog who stood up to the corrupt power structure and prevailed in Capraesque fashion. Mr. Zelensky Goes to Kiev(or Kyiv). (Can anyone imagine a bunch of clever goyim pulling something like this on Jews in Israel or NY? Jews would see through the BS and sound the alarm, as well as have a good laugh at the expense of the goyim of course, but goyim are almost ‘innocent’ in their gullibility. But then, whereas Jews invented their own God, goyim ‘stole’ or was sold the spiritual vision of the Jews and became Christians or Muslims. As nasty as Jews are, one wonders if it’s only right for them to rule over goyim who are so dumb and/or weak.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_126" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="43"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Here’s Zelensky, a jester, doing his shtick on a show funded by Zionist-globalist oligarchs, and he becomes the Great Slavic Hope of Ukraine, even though his mission is to colonize Slavic hearts-and-minds with fantasies cooked up by Jewish media monopoly(or psycho-labs).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_127" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just like Woody Allen’s character in ZELIG, Zelensky or Zeligensky’s gimmick is to morph into just about anything in the moment. Near the end of ZELIG, we even see Woody Allen’s gumby-like character become a Nazi in one of the most ROTFL moments in movie history. While there were ideological similarities and even strategic links between National Socialism and Zionism before World War II, who would have thought Jewish Power would so brazenly end up in the same bed with Nazi-like elements? Ukraine, what a surreal place, an artificial national construct ruled by Jewish oligarchs(with backing of Zio-centric and European puppets) and defended(and expanded) by Sub-Nazi types.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_128" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="94"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At first sight, this Zionist-Nazi alliance makes no sense considering how much Hitler hated the Jews and how Jews made ‘nazi’ the secular synonym of Evil. Paradoxically however, the antagonism between Jewish Power and National Socialism owed to their similarities along supremacist lines. Universalism might work if a set of principles were to be accepted equally by all the peoples of the world. Particularism might work if all peoples not only insisted upon their own uniqueness but acknowledged that of other peoples as well, whereby they respect the varying narratives, cultures, values, and geographies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_129" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="283"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, when a particularist agenda seeks hegemony over others, it is tribalism on a universal scale with serious contradictions. And Nazism and Zionism were alike in this sense. At their cores, both were defined by tribal uniqueness so extreme as to foster a coldly contemptuous supremacist worldview. Feeling superior, it seemed only right that they should lord over others as helots or cattle. Even though Western Imperialism in general had supremacist tendencies(like many other imperialisms since the dawn of time), it was ameliorated by Christian piety and/or Enlightenment ideals. Nazism was short on such sentiments, and Jewishness merely exploited universalist ideas to advance Jewish supremacist interests. (21st Century events indicate, whereas Nazi Germans didn’t seek control of the entire world, Jewish Power is indeed fixed on world domination. Germans wanted equal or even junior partnership with the Anglos, whereas Jews insist on Anglos serving as their dogs and horses. George Soros, as the notorious face of Jewish Will, hasn’t been content with control of Anglosphere, dominance over the EU, and financial plunder of Asian nations. His current rage against Russia and China owes to being thwarted from controlling them as well. He sought to remake the Soviet Empire into the Soros Empire and once boasted about China falling into his hands. The fact that he isn’t only allowed but enabled by Western powers to throw his weight around wherever he goes speaks volumes about the nature of Jewish Power. As far as the Jewish Globo-Mafia is concerned, Soros is a ‘made man’, and he can do as he wishes and no one better stand in his way. His likes and dislikes are so aligned with current (((Western))) Policy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_130" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="224"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Things have only gotten worse and will get even worse given the rules of elite selection in the West. To rise or remain high as a Jew, you must be a nasty vicious tribal-supremacist, someone like Victoria Nuland and Stinkin’ Blinken. If you’re a Jew with a conscience or integrity, you’ll end up like Norman Finkelstein, pushed to the margins. As for goyim, their password for elite entry is ‘Cuck-Hard’. In other words, a Jew must have a master-race will-to-power mentality and a massive pair of balls chugging with bile to make it, whereas a goy must have a servant-race will-to-cower mentality and be castrated. It is why Arabists are nowhere to be found in the US government. Goyim aren’t allowed to be judicious and fair-minded; they must be 100% servile to Jews and Zionism. Imagine someone like George Kennan having influence on foreign policy today. Anyone who even dares to challenge the Jewish Supremacist narrative will be branded a ‘Russian stooge’, and there’s nothing that can be done about it because, whereas Joe McCarthy was a lone gun eventually brought down by the Real Power, Jewish Blacklisting has been institutionalized at every level of government, academia, media, entertainment, and the courts. Mechanism of elite selection has had huge repercussions, and the result is vicious Jewish Masters and servile Anglo Dogs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_131" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="204"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Zelenksy or Zeligensky can be anything to any side. To the British, he’s said to be ‘Churchillian’. To Americans, he pontificates about MLK and 9/11. To the Germans, predictably he plays the Holocaust Card. Before the Israeli Knesset, he pretends Ukrainians and Jews were always best-friends-over and allies against the eternal common foe, the Russkies. And in private meetings with Ukrainian Sub-Nazis, he surely plays the ultra-nationalist card. Houdini-like, he shape-shifts to worm through tight spots. Not only is he a man of many faces but of many places. He could be in Kiev, but he might be in Poland or some other safe country. And even as he calls on NATO to escalate the conflict into full-blown World War III, he makes conciliatory gestures toward Russia, as if on the verge of breakthroughs satisfactory to both sides. A Man for All Reasons. Of course, his only real concern involves fellow Jews and tribal power. Surely, his feelings about Slavs(as cannon fodder) are similar to the Woody Allen character’s observation of soldiers on the battlefield in LOVE AND DEATH, his counterpart to Kubrick’s BARRY LYNDON. Though ostensibly a satire of war, the tone is derisive of the sheep-like stupidity of goyim.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yuKZkBR_AWI?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_132" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">ZELIG was Allen’s most intellectually oriented film up to that time, one that recruited big names in literature and philosophy to lend the ‘mockumentary’ the illusion of gravitas. Allan Bloom mentioned it in THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND as an instruction on the dangers of relativism, which became a buzzword among American Conservatives for the next two decades, as if the rise of increasingly shrill Political Correctness had much to do with something so nuanced.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_133" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="83"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A more valid critique of ZELIG would address its essential dishonesty. As Woody Allen would have it, the problem of Jewishness has been the lack of ego, agency, and purpose. So, Zelig, having no soul or core identity of his own, metamorphoses into whatever he happens to be nearby. Around blacks, he turns blacky. Around Wasps, he turns waspy. And most outrageously, around Nazis, he turns Nazi. (What about when he’s around Wasps, blacks, Poles, Chinese, and etc. at the same time?)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_134" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="56"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Zelig is thus presented as essentially a passive figure. His uncertain identity is resigned to the environment around him. It’s been said of Peter Sellers that he lost his true sense of self as he got so used to mimicking others; or maybe it was the product of having no core identity to begin with.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_135" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="83"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, this is misleading because, despite Zelig’s malleable octopus-like qualities, he always reverts back to his Zeligish self. He doesn’t permanently turn into the Other but merely mimics it. So, there is a powerfully resilient Zeligish core, just like the creature in John Carpenter’s THE THING, despite taking on various forms, has a core design and agenda, also true of the T-1000 in TERMINATOR 2, which, despite the ability to morph into any shape, is on a mission to destroy humankind.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_136" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Zelig were truly passive, he would fully assimilate into the Other, but, octopus-like, he’s always restored to his Zelig-self. Zelig has an amazing ability but isn’t fully cognizant of what’s happening, as if it’s being done to him than him doing it. But, can this be said for Jewishness through the ages, i.e. Jews were ‘innocent’ of their knack for adaptability? Perhaps, Allen’s idea of the confused and disoriented rootless Jew applies to a particular generation(s) in the modern era when Jews, upon Emancipation, did try to become one with the Other. Perhaps, such Jews did try to abandon Jewishness and merge with goyim but discovered they cannot because they’re animated by an innate force that sets them apart from various goy kind. Also, paradoxically, the very talent for mimicry made Jews less likely to assimilate, at least fully, because the game was too easy to play, like hitting the light switch on/off, thus rendering goy-toy cultures as something to caricature than sincerely embrace. In the end, Al Jolson was no Negro.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_137" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="269"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, sincerity didn’t necessarily pay off either. Jews who tried to be ‘good Germans’ ended up in Nazi concentration camps. And those who tried to be good comrades in the Soviet Union couldn’t bridge the gap between themselves and the witless Slavs. And even as Jews and Wasps did business together, the differences stuck out like a sore thumb; initially, the Wasps noticed even the assimilationist Jews as problematic, and later, Jews(as new elites) noticed the deferential Wasp brownnosers as problematic, craven and contemptible. In THE WOLF OF WALL STREET, Jordan Belfort and other Jews play at brokers at a Wasp-sounding company, but they are Jews through and through and proud of it, especially thrilled with their Zeligish ‘Waspy’ shtick. At any rate, their playing at faux-Wasps isn’t passive but totally aggressive and conscious. Allen’s film suggested Zeligery just happens without the Jew being aware of what’s happening, i.e. the process is beyond his control, whereas the Zeligery in THE WOLF OF WALL STREET is a conscious ploy, a strategy to defraud the suckers and dummies, most of them goyim. Allen would have us believe that Jews are hapless ‘victims’ of some unfathomable innate mechanism. So, don’t blame the Jew as the Jew can’t help it as he has no control over what comes over him. After all, Zelig morphs into the nearby Other involuntarily. If he’s around Chinese, he just turns Chinese, not because he wants to but because he can’t help it. But could Jews have survived 2,000 yrs in exile with such passivity and unawareness?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/OhpYWVvUPRU?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_138" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Oddly enough, Zelig’s passivity is also ultra-aggressive because the process is so total and effortless. He doesn’t meekly submit to the Other’s identity but almost ‘steals’ it, indeed like the creature in THE THING. But we are to believe that the character of Zelig has no idea of what is happening to him and why. If anything, he’s made out to be deserving of our sympathy, the care of a psychiatrist and the medical community. (Likewise, the virulently hostile and aggressive Jewish character played by Kevin Kline in SOPHIE’S CHOICE is ultimately made sympathetic, even tragic, because of his mental issues, which are, via the most convoluted logic, associated with what happened across the ocean in the Holocaust. And, let’s not forget the dirtbag Michael Cohen, the backstabbing lawyer of Donald Trump, had a uncle who ‘survived the Holocaust’, a fact that’s supposed to make Cohen somewhat redemptive in our eyes.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_139" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Orson Welles made THE TRIAL in sympathy for Jews(especially in light of what happened in World War II), he noted something about Kafka’s novel that went against the grain of literary scholarship. The general idea was that Joseph K. is merely a passive and clueless victim of the system, whereas Welles saw him as a feisty and strong-willed individual who resists to the last. (Welles didn’t cast a Jew but a homo, Anthony Perkins, and homos too are pretty passive/aggressive, which perhaps explains the almost telekinetic vibes between Jews and homos.) He isn’t merely pushed but pushes back. And if the novel is read psychologically and the trial is a metaphor for K’s self-tormenting psychology, one might even argue that K’s sense of persecution is double-edged, i.e. it’s not only an expression of being wronged by the world but of an hidden will to possess the power to persecute the world as one pleases, much in the way that a character’s own paranoia consumes his very view of reality in the tales of Edgar Allan Poe. And today, Kafka’s works might as well be the manual of social and mind control for Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_140" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="54"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">We can’t help noticing a pattern here. What were once Jewish jokes turn into Jewish realities. When Jews joke, are they covering up their big plans with humor as palliative? Take Weird Al Yankovic’s “Amish Paradise”. Funny stuff, but Jewish Power really did turn Ukraine into Jewish Paradise(and hell for Slavs).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/lOfZLb33uCg?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_141" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="400"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Zelensky, with multiple personas, is a Zelig-like figure but with the key difference that he knows what he’s doing. He’s doing it for Jewish Power(and of course for his own big fat Jewish ego and privileges, as he will be showered with even more fame and fortune as an exile in the West, but then is it really exile when his real home isn’t Ukraine but worldwide Jewish Network? He will feel at home equally in Israel, Miami, NY, or London). Perhaps, Allen, having grown up in a world where Anglo-Americans still ruled and Jews cautioned one another not to rock the boat too much, felt compelled to present Zelig as more a figure of pity and amusement than strategy and power, just like we’re supposed to regard the Marx Brothers as harmless clowns despite their proto-anarcho-tyrannical attitude toward goyim, which can also be said of Sacha Cohen, the supposedly libertine satirist who calls on fellow Jews to tighten censchwarzship on the goyim(and then, there’s Howard Stern who, in solidarity with Jewish Big Pharma and Alan Dershowitz, is calling on forced ‘vaccinations’ on everyone). In ANYTHING ELSE, Woody Allen plays an older Jew advising a young, seemingly better-adjusted, Jew. His fear seems to be that young Jews, having grown up without ‘antisemitism’ and with prosperity, lack the historical anxiety that animates the tribal will, a fear shared by David Mamet. Allen need not have worried as today’s younger Jews are far nastier and more vicious than past Jews. Unlike older Jews who witnessed and experienced some degree of pushback and criticism from the goy community, younger Jews grew up in a world of total Jewish control and total goy cuckery at their feet. If older Jews knew the hunger for success and respect, younger Jews feel addicted to entitlement because they’ve grown up in a world where the Jewish Demand is the Goyishe Command. Also, as the culture has grown more shameless and obnoxious, Jewish arrogance and contempt are brazen beyond belief, totally in your face. They rig elections and brag about it. They bring US and Russia to the brink of World War III like it’s a grand bloodsport entertainment for Jewish Power. And Anglos, once their biggest rival, grovel at their feet and pledge their undying loyalty no matter what Jews do. It’s the Age of Bratowicz.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/abeGU_SENAs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_142" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Zelig’s Nazi act is unconscious or beyond his control, the likes of Victorian Nuland and Zelensky knew exactly what they’re doing when they allied with Sub-Nazi types in Ukraine. As much as Jews hate the Nazis, they will use whatever is most useful against the main enemy, which is Russia. Besides, as Ukrainians and Russians are both Slavs, some way must be found to drive a wedge between them. And the most radical and firebrand way to make Ukrainians hate Russians is by fostering a racial supremacist ideology whereby West Ukrainians are ‘Aryans’ whereas the Russians are something like untermensch.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_143" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="201"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Actually, Jews see both Ukrainians and Russians as dumb Slavs who should serve Jews, but for the time being, Jews stoke the flames of Ukro-Slavic-Supremacism against Russo-Slavicism. As radical types are most willing to fight, live or die, Jews find the Sub-Nazi radicals in Ukraine most useful, much like ISIS and Alqaeda became handy in the Middle East. (And in the US, they find Antifa and BLM effective as mindless attack dogs of Jewish Power against White Middle America. And Jews prize an alliance with homos whose power-lust is driven their higher levels of vanity, narcissism, and resentment.) That said, there are some parallels between supremo-Slavicism of the Ukrainian ultra-nationalists and supremo-Semitism of the Zionists. Just as Ukro-Slavs feel racially superior to Russo-Slavs, Judeo-Semites have a supremacist attitude toward Arab-Semites. When Jews complain about ‘antisemitism’, it only concerns negativity toward Jews. When it comes to hatred or violence against Arab Semites, Jews promote it and practice it to the hilt. And Jews exploit Islamic purity spirals to make one bunch of Arabs attack and kill another bunch of Muslims, among others hated by Jews. So, just like some Slavs are better than other Slavs, some Semites are better than other Semites.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_144" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Nuland and Zelensky’s flirtation with Nazism is essentially opportunistic and strategic, other Jews point to a deeper connection or at least a similarity between Jewishness and Teutonism. Consider their respective mythologies. Jewish religion is rife with stories of the angry God destroying entire cities and populations, even almost all of humanity. God thinks and acts big, does it for keeps. Even heretical outgrowth of Judaism, Christianity, culminates in the vision of the Second Coming and Armageddon, when Jesus shall return like General MacArthur and fulfill His ultimate prophecy of death and destruction. Germanic mythology also comes with apocalyptic vision, that of the warrior than of the prophet. Great warrior gods and great warrior heroes are doomed to fall in the final battle with the Giants and Wolves, resulting in Gotterdammerung, the inspiration for Wagner’s opera that inflamed the imagination of Hitler, who did bring about such in the real world. Jewish religion and Germanic mythology tend to see the world in absolute terms of creation and destruction. That said, one need not totally despair of the destruction because the world fire(or world flood) clears the way for a new beginning. It’s not only the end of the world but beginning of a new one, perhaps a better one.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_145" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="194"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Greeks, Romans, French, Spanish, and Anglos didn’t think in such a way. Neither did the Chinese and Russians. Chinese and Russians regarded themselves as tragic peoples with the numbers and strength to overcome great setbacks, but they weren’t filled with dreams of apocalypse and renewal. But such a mindset did affect Jewish and Germanic thinking, and perhaps it’s no accident that the two of the most disruptive historical events emerged from the friction of Jewish and Germanic modes of thought. Karl Marx the Jew read Hegel and cooked up his brand of communism that would turn the world upside down in the 20th century. Hitler and others were driven to radical fury by Jewish influence and dreamed of Wagnerian vision of renewal and winner-takes-all expansion. Big vision and deep passion mark both the Jews and the Teutons, even though Jews, being minorities in goy domains, kept their rages better hidden, though Jews in Israel, as masters of their own domain, often can’t help spilling the beans of what Jewishness is really about: Beat on the Goy, Beat on the Goy, Beat on the Goy with a baseball bat, oh yeah.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hjVbF62fSKk?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_146" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sometimes, the biggest enemies are most similar in some crucial way as their mutual hostility is borne of comparable power-lust and egotism. Though Germans after World War II were totally defeated in pride, will, and confidence, even the desire to survive, they were perhaps the most powerful-souled people apart from the Jews prior to that cataclysmic event. In the post-Holocaust World, we’ve been led to believe that nothing could be further away from Jewishness than Nazism, with Jewishness representing eternal victimization at the hands of supremacist goy ‘Aryans’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_147" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="537"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, the Jewish agenda and its supremacist tendencies betray similarities with Nazism, i.e. World War II was less about Nazi warmongers against Jewish peace-lovers than about one supremacism vs another supremacism. Though John Milius is regarded as an outlier, a ‘right-wing Jew’ with even Teutonic ‘fascist’ fetish — he wrote APOCALYPSE NOW and directed CONAN THE BARBARIAN — , perhaps he is far more representative of the hidden inner makeup of many Jews who claim to be ‘liberal’. (Indeed, Neocon foreign policy of endless wars and imperialism is like Milius-ism on steroids, the difference being Milius fancied himself a fellow warrior willing to join the battle, whereas Neocons are war nerds who push dumb goyim to do all the killing and dying.) When it comes to sheer bloodlust, Steven Spielberg is surely a master, as evident in RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Milius’ vision is like a combination of apocalyptic Biblical prophecy and all-out Gotterdammerung. And then, there’s Stanley Kubrick and DR. STRANGELOVE where machines, given to mechanical intercourse, eventually explode in the orgasm of nuclear rapture. In one way, the film is political satire, a warning of how crazy paranoid right-wing military men might blow up the world. Yet, the film is not all doom-and-gloom. Just like Jewish religion and Germanic mythology fear the destruction but are nevertheless enticed by the hope of a new beginning, DR. STRANGELOVE ends on a rather light note. Sure, the world may blow up in nuclear conflagration, but it’s also promises a new beginning, possibly one more congenial to the managerial elites. The elites can survive the doomsday in mineshafts and need only worry about the ‘mineshaft gap’. ‘Mineshaft’ can be punned into Mein Shaft(or My Penis), as the future will depend on elite men humping lots of gorgeous women to repopulate the Earth with the fusion of brains(men) and beauty(women chosen for their looks). So, all is not lost in the Gotterdammerung of a nuclear apocalypse. It offers an opportunity for the mother of all Great Resets. From “Now, I’ve become death, destroyer of worlds” to “Now, I’ve become life, maker of new worlds”. Indeed, the figure of Dr. Strangelove is most intriguing as he is ostensibly an ex-Nazi scientist but was modeled on Jewish scientists(and possibly even Henry Kissinger), but then, some of the most influential and paradigmatic Jewish figures in the 20th century were of Germanic origin and profoundly influenced by German culture, even if in opposition, just like it’s impossible to comprehend National Socialism without its oppositional energies to Jewishness. One is shaped as much by the enemy as by one’s allies, just like great boxers are defined by their toughest rivals who forced out the best in them. Given the perverse fusion of Nazi and Jewish elements in the invention of Dr. Strangelove, one could characterize him as a Jewzi. Perhaps prophetic as Jewish Power now is the most nazi-like force in the world. Besides, it is even allied with what some call the ‘real nazis’ of Ukraine. DR. STRANGELOVE was meant as satire, but like Kafka’s works, seems to have become a blueprint for Jewish Power strategy for tyranny, or Satiranny.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ybSzoLCCX-Y?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p></div></section></div><span id="_bottom" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><div class="nav-group" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; clear: both; color: #888888; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="nav-item leftside" style="border: 0px; float: left; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/why-does-transhumanism-promote-homomania-trans-gender-mania-and-freakdom-transhumanism-promotes-freakery-to-legitimize-frankenstein-science-but-the-end-result-will-be-aesthetic-convergence-than/" style="border: 0px; color: #1a374c; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">← Why Does Transhumanism Promote Homomani...</a></span><span class="nav-item rightside" style="border: 0px; float: right; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; text-align: right; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/slavocaust-past-and-present-or-the-aryan-and-semitic-war-on-slavic-peoples-and-cultures/" style="border: 0px; color: #1a374c; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Slavocaust, Past and Present, or the Ar... →</a></span> </div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-43704366216951368902022-12-07T16:45:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:08.156-08:00What Pee-Wee Hermans’s Big Adventure Reveals About the Jewish Mindset<p> </p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5IkLzTtelP-wmAZbtFZFUP3OPRB_t2-dBlJEUokP9bdqhX1NSDaSFr--Pwx-VJ86cFKyUwVQvrahku-vOtfLNIu4bGjqdNM5k0EyEzVBYR0D-dzY6NXUkl1GyL3ejp_6S3EKHPraP1VZr_NXhu5py-jl5f9QZhdKtTLlUd1_0GyH2u-P8b46y9t0Ocw/w427-h640/pee%20wee%20big%20adventure.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="427" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="315"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rock and Roll unleashed youth culture, and social critics fretted that the boomers(and subsequent generations) would never grow out of their teen years. This has indeed become a problem. But, there was another phenomenon, especially beginning in the 1980s, that fixated on childhood emotions. There was Steven Spielberg who made children’s movies for teens and adults(and for children too, of course). And there was Paul Reubens’ Pee Wee Herman who looked and acted like a five(at best seven) year old child snuggled inside an adult’s body(and brains, as he was pretty clever). Or more like a toy doll come to life. (If Pinocchio wanted to be a real boy, it’s as if Pee Wee wants to be a real toy.) If Elliott found the perfect friend or toy in E.T., the Tintin-haired Pee Wee was like a boy and a toy in one, almost a real-life Pixar character before the advent of CGI that made movies like TOY STORY possible. (Me, I’d rather have my own Terminator toy, like with the kid in JUDGMENT DAY.) Never mind adults failing to grow past teen emotions. Pee Wee mentality couldn’t grow past childish emotions. It was a disturbing departure from traditional children’s culture. When adults took their kids to Disneyland or a Disney movie, there was a clear distinction between children and adults(or parents). Grownups knew it wasn’t for them and just did it for the kids. But the Pee Wee phenomenon was different. As goofy and ‘cute’ as PEE WEE HERMAN’S BIG ADVENTURE is, it is rather perverse and disturbing in parts, indeed more suited for adults. But, is it proper for grownups to get their jollies by following the adventures of a perpetual man-child toy-boy, one who is blissfully, shamelessly, obnoxiously, and dementedly childlike, indeed enough to make Peter Pan blush?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="168"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Part of the appeal was surely nostalgia. While Pee Wee Herman was no one’s idea of the conservative archetype, he played on innocence as a fetish. In this, he shares something with Spielberg whose world shows few signs that the Counterculture even took place. The setting of JAWS is a tight-knit small town tourist community with nice middle class folks. CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND begins with the discovery of World War II fighter planes, and cultural references are to toys, THE TEN COMMANDMENTS, and a slightly more casual portrait of Fifties idyll of family life. Even though there are adults in EMPIRE OF THE SUN and JURASSIC PARK, Spielberg’s touch works most naturally with children. It’s as if Spielberg found a way to bottle the child’s sense of wonder inside a magic lamp. Even SCHINDLER’S LIST, horrific as it is, unfolds emotionally on the childhood level. Nazi atrocities are presented as crimes not only against a people but against innocence itself.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Counterculture promoted sexuality, drugs, cynicism, and obscenity(as gestures of rebellion and/or liberation), but Spielberg(and George Lucas) offered something nostalgic and reassuring. The Mexican village elder’s words in THE WILD BUNCH come to mind: “We all dream of being a child again…” And lucky for Lucas and Spielberg, their visions coincided with the Reaganite spirit of ‘Morning in America’. Neither Spielberg nor Lucas was a Republican, but their cultural references owed little to the Sixties, the spirit of which was revived with the ascent of Oliver Stone.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="448"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, Sylvester Stallone also profited from the cult of innocence beginning in mid-70s when people wanted to put the Vietnam War, race riots, and Watergate behind them. Even though ROCKY has a violent fight scene, it is a Cinderella story, a fairy tale for grownups. And even though RAMBO(aka FIRST BLOOD II) was almost pornographic in violence, it too played on the cartoonish innocence of American Patriotism, i.e. “We were the good guys and would have won… had we not been stabbed in the back by cynical politicians and dirty hippies who called us ‘baby killers’.”<br />And of course, there was Michael Jackson, by far the biggest musical act of the 80s, a real-life Peter Pan onstage. But then, Jackson’s whole career arc was rather an outlier at odds with Rock culture. Sixties youth culture was all about late teen years and early twenties. It had no use for childhood, a time when one’s under the thumb of parents and teachers; indeed, it was embarrassing to admit you had once been a clean-cut kid in those grammar school pictures. On the other hand, like Benjamin Braddock in THE GRADUATE, it dreaded full adulthood with its responsibilities and ‘plastics’. The Woodstock Ideal was being old enough for sex-and-drugs but young enough to still dream of the future.<br />It was in such a cultural climate that Jackson Five burst upon the scene. It was incredible, a child star rocking with the best in Rock and Soul. How could a child do it and do it so well, so convincingly? By 1983, Michael Jackson was a full-grown man, at least biologically. But emotionally, it was as if he never grew past ten, and once he built his own Ludwig-II-like dream palace, he seemed to be growing backwards. In another 80s cultural artifact, AMADEUS the movie, Tom Hulce’s Mozart was like an androgynous MTV star, infantile and ‘gay’-ish, though not homosexual like Boy George. Given Pee Wee’s perky affectations, one might assume Paul Reubens is homosexual, possibly even pedophilic, though he’s actually straight, like Neil Sedaka, another one who seems ‘gay’ but is actually straight, though who really knows? (Michael Jackson was accused of pedophilia, but perhaps he didn’t see it that way as he was emotionally a child himself, i.e. in his mind, it was essentially a child-and-child matter. In our age, when a man who feels as a woman is a ‘woman’, perhaps some may argue that a man who feels as a child is a ‘child’, therefore his pedophilic acts aren’t really pedophilic since he identifies as a child. Crazy, but we live in crazy times.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-uKqdWvZ6K8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="282"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One of the biggest hits of the 1990s was FORREST GUMP, about a dummy with a heart of gold who lives through the upheavals of the Sixties and Seventies but always retains a sense of innocence and cares more for a box of chocolates than a Rolling Stones album or a bag of weed. (Incidentally, Tom Hanks starred earlier in a movie called BIG where he plays a child who finds his soul transported inside an adult body. It is first-rate comedy though somewhat disturbing upon reflection. The kid in the man’s body develops a sexual relationship with a woman, which might qualify as a sexual crime.)<br />Quentin Tarantino, given his compunction for violence and curse words, would seem diametric to Forrest-Gumpism, and yet his shtick also comes with a tinge of innocence. Paradoxically, some of his works are so perverse and demented precisely because his childlike mentality fails to fully grasp their moral implications. It’s like children can be cruel due to an undeveloped sense of empathy and moral logic. They fail to see the wrong of tearing the wings off insects or throwing rocks at small animals, like the children in the beginning of THE WILD BUNCH who laugh at the sight of scorpions being tormented by ants and then set fire to them. Tarantino is high IQ with an encyclopedic knowledge of cinema(and popular culture in general), but he talks like he never grew past childhood. He talks about sex and dicks in the opening of RESERVOIR DOGS like boys do in the 5th grade. Terry Gilliam is another one, and first truly independent movie was TIME BANDITS, a dark children’s movie made for grownups.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="234"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Orson Welles once said of cinema, “It’s like the biggest electric train set any boy ever had.” With Pee Wee Herman(and Tim Burton, a perfect match in sensibility), the metaphor becomes literal as his cinema is one big toyland from beginning to end, top to bottom. It’s all seems so innocent yet also a bit perverse because there’s something grotesque about a full-grown man being so totally obsessed and immersed in childhood. It used to be adults catered to childhood sensibility in kiddie shows, like Art Linkletter and Captain Kangaroo. Or adults played the clown, a silly figure but still an adult, like Bozo.<br />In contrast, Pee Wee is an adult as a child, and there’s a sickly quality to the cuteness and hilarity. Its sensibility overlaps with the camp in ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW and the foul sewage of John Waters.<br />In some ways, Pee Wee Herman could be seen as more subversive precisely because his shtick wormed into the mainstream as fit-for-kids, as harmless stuff. (Not surprisingly, just like Michael Jackson, Paul Reubens was caught in a scandal of his own at a porno theater, especially inexplicable in the age of the VCR? Perhaps an exhibitionist streak?) Adam Sandler’s shtick was to play a more jock-like version of Pee Wee the perpetual child. Never grows up but beats up everyone or takes charge of every situation.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/GqCdZ_-RWVY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="15"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Wally George vs Jim Myers is like a caricature of MAGA Populism vs the Neocons.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/C_sntqchzyE?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="173"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Childhood is associated with innocence but also with terror, not only what the child fears but feels toward others. Good thing children are small and weak because the childish mind lacks empathy, is often demanding & impetuous, and feels the world should revolve around his or her wishes. Children often throw temper tantrums or bawl like it’s the end of the world if they don’t get what they want, be it ice cream or a toy. A TWILIGHT ZONE episode showed how dangerous things would be if children had power over adults. And one reason why blacks are so dangerous is they are more childlike but also bigger and stronger than whites. Take Mike Tyson, the dominant heavyweight boxer of the 1980s. He was built like Mighty Joe Young but had the mentality of a school yard child bully. Indeed, whites handle blacks as if the latter is a bunch of children who can beat them up. If children had power over us, it’d be the Village of the Damned.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QxTMbIxEj-E?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">No wonder some of the creepier tales involve a locale ruled by kids, like CHILDREN OF THE CORN where young ones have become spellbound into a crazy cult akin to Amish-or-Evangelicals-gone-mad. It was secular Stephen King’s jibe at Christian zealotry and religious puritanism, but, like Joyce Carol Oates, he seems to be just as fanatical in his quasi-spiritual faith in the Magic Negro or the healing power of fantasy. Of late, King has been rabid with something approaching religiosity about Covid-19 and Russo-Ukraine War. He has become the secular or neo-religious version of the Christian fanatics he has so often mocked. Talk about the lack of self-awareness.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="160"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Despite Paul Reubens’ real-life straight sexuality, his Pee Wee act foreboded the confluence of homo culture and pedophilia in American politics. (I wonder if Stanley Kubrick had Pee Wee Herman in mind for Alan Cummings’s role as hotel clerk in EYES WIDE SHUT.) Though the AIDS crisis and 9/11 served as dampers, the culture became increasingly ‘gay’ since the 1970s. Not only was it increasingly celebrated but came to be ‘spiritually’ consecrated. Jews did a judo-move on HIV and turned it to homo advantage in movies like PHILADELPHIA where dying of AIDS was equivalent to neo-sainthood. And in BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, the myth of the American West was turned into Homo on the Range, with two cowpokes buggering one another. Of course, there has always been homo cowboys, but the point of the movie was, “Sodomy is as American as Apple Pie”, the stuff of manly pride than something one should keep to oneself. When legend becomes ‘gay’, bugger the legend.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="234"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As if the world turning ‘gay’(and men turning into ‘women’) hasn’t been bad enough, there’s an increasing lurch toward pedomania. It’s a strange phenomenon where adults are increasingly infantilized while children are increasingly sexualized, even pornified. For many full grown adults, videogames and superhero movies(and other such blockbusters) have become their cultural staple. Universities are supposed to be places of intellectual curiosity and free debate, but PC and then ‘wokeness’ have turned many students into shrill emotional children. When Donald Trump was elected in 2016, some universities allowed students to skip class(as they were too distraught to attend class) or served them milk and cookies. Yes, college kids coddled like children whose pet hamster just died. Emotionally, many college students seem stuck in kindergarten level with their need for ‘safe spaces’ lest they be ‘triggered’ by bogeyman ideas(or KKK lurkings at colleges like Oberlin). Not only are comic book movies promoted and lauded as cultural events, but a movie about Joker(from Batman universe) counts as an ‘art film’. The fantasy Wakanda of BLACK PANTHER was discussed as if real, or at least a realistic vision of future Afrotopia. Childish pranks like ‘hate hoaxes’ have rocked community after community, and no one seems to learn anything as new ‘hate hoaxes’ keep popping up like mushrooms, as if America is trapped in some Groundhog Day or Truman Show universe.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="582" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiaCdn2Yc_uFzAwRlNtlKuVYjeQJUp1XgZBl4BBmgUERQ_ghhG1OQV8Fwo0guULmmf4OulyT5chDu7YJhEKc2yh-M_k53WHdrIa_G8rD9Gtp5CKi-Pwk9-F5d-1Gqy-MJfAPGb8tAJxfke8CEOpNqoeXUeoFo_5hcU-nL9qNZX97-QURhzNwt5EYDk8CQ/w640-h582/queer.png" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But just when the adult world is increasingly infantilized, children’s world is ever more sexualized. Globalist hysterics bitch and whine about Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” bill, willfully distorting its purpose which is to shield young children from sexual(especially homosexual and tranny-sexual) propaganda. Why such eagerness to introduce sexual matters, especially deviant and degenerate ones, to young children? One would assume that these ‘educators’(or ‘peducators’) regard children as sexual creatures ripe for grooming.<br />Now, if children are to be regarded as sexual creatures(who, from a tender age, can choose to have their hormones blocked or their genitalia altered in some grotesque way), it would imply they should be able to engage in sex, at least with one another. But if children can have sex with children, why not with adults too? Follow such crazy logic to its conclusion, and we end up with a pedomaniacal world.<br />Given these issues, what once seemed ‘innocent’ and cute about Pee Wee Herman in the 1980s should maybe give us pause. If adults can be seen as big children, the corollary is children can be seen as little adults, just another variation of ‘men can be women’ and ‘women can be men’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, PEE WEE HERMAN’S BIG ADVENTURE offers a glimpse into the nature of the Jewish mindset, though it may not have been conscious or intentional. For a more political Pee Wee Herman movie, there is BIG TOP PEE WEE, a box office failure that pretty much ended the movie franchise. It was clearly meant as an allegory of Jews leading mass immigration to subvert, overwhelm, and transform ‘racist’ US represented by small town white Americana. A circus troupe of various freaks of all colors come crashing into a virtually all-white community of ‘narrow-minded’ folks. The politics is blatant and in-your-face.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/MCkKihQrNA4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, one could easily overlook the ‘political’ subtext of PEE WEE HERMAN’S BIG ADVENTURE as it’s fast-paced and full of laughs. Paul Reubens’ energy level is amazing, even infectious, like among the biker gang that’s about to tear him to pieces but is won over by his sheer zaniness. In his own way, he’s as ‘wild’ as the bikers are and, furthermore, truly unique, therefore precious and worth sparing, even cheering for.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="268"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Despite the lack of an overt ‘political’ message, Pee Wee’s fixation on his special bike and the trouble he goes to(and the way he involves others) in retrieving it when stolen speaks volumes about a certain facet of the Jewish mentality. To Pee Wee, his Bike isn’t just any bike. All other bikes, fancy or basic, are merely properties. Some may be super-expensive but aren’t priceless, which he deems his own bike to be. The Bike is like a personal covenant with the toy god, or his personal Zion. Jews look upon all the world as one big real estate, something for Larry Fink of Blackrock to sop up. But Jews regard Israel as priceless. Jews involved the great powers to aid the Jews retrieve it as their own special homeland. Not even all the money in the world could persuade Jews to sell an inch of it to filthy goyim. The Covenant and Israel are to Jews and Zionists what the Bike is to Pee Wee. Indeed, the Jewish worldview is neatly encapsulated in the scene where fat spoiled Francis tries to buy the Bike from Pee Wee who is equally tickled and infuriated. The idea that he would sell his special Bike to some stupid fatty is a laugh riot. It is also insulting as it assumes Pee Wee would give up his most valuable possession for money. All the fools in IDIOCRACY ‘like money’, but Pee Wee has a sense of value that goes beyond the Benjamins. So, when it’s stolen, it’s the Lost Ark that must be recovered.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/xfeLsPRl3so?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="212"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s telling that Pee Wee’s front yard has a rocket(perhaps signifying Israel’s nuclear arsenal) and life-size models of farm animals, especially horses and cows, possibly suggesting that goyim are closer to animals than real humans that only the Chosen are. In their name-calling, Pee Wee dubs Francis a ‘monkey’, an animal. Pee Wee says he doesn’t make monkeys but trains them. It’s as if God created Jews as full humans but made goyim into something like half-man half-animal, creatures to be trained by Jews, not unlike the beast-men in THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU, which could serve as an allegory about Jewish control over goyim. None of this is to say Paul Reubens consciously thought all this out, but the creative subconscious feeds on one’s ethnic and cultural biases. Besides, the overall conception seems as much the work of Tim Burton(the forerunner of Edgar Wright) as Paul Reubens. Still, Jewish subconsciousness surely shaped the invention and narrative. (In the case of Steven Spielberg’s WAR HORSE, the big beast is clearly a metaphor for goyim. In the current Western Order, goyim are like trained monkeys, attack dogs, and war horses of Jews whose roles are of the pigs in George Orwell’s ANIMAL FARM.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="266"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pee Wee is at once ultra-freaky as an oddball and hyper-normal as a neatly dressed upright citizen in the community(who keeps his property and the grass clean and green, anticipating the middle class respectability of homos as a throwback to the 1950s ideal with a ‘gay’ twist). Something for everyone, like Barack Obama. Freaks and weirdos could identify with him, but conservatives might appreciate his sense of order.<br />Like David Lynch, Reubens’ Pee Wee is a ‘weirno’, or weird + normal, or someone who feels attached to normal things of familiarity and nostalgia but is nevertheless different in some strange way and doesn’t quite fit in. One might also say Tim Burton is like a toy house version of David Lynch, and one could connect the thematic dots from ERASERHEAD to PEE WEE’S BIG ADVENTURE to TWIN PEAKS to PEE WEE’S PLAYHOUSE to MARS ATTACK! Pee Wee revels in his difference but is also insistent on his normality, even ultra-normality. In our time, the freaks aren’t content with the freedom to be freaky but insist that they too are normal or constitute the New Normal, and furthermore, we must be compelled, even by the force of law, to accept and celebrate their freakiness as normal. So, Rachel Levine has been deemed ‘woman of the year’ by some elite institution, and we are supposed to keep a straight face and nod along as if nothing could be less controversial. Such conformism of the mind is suggested in the scene where Pee Wee comes upon a bunch of young boys in a bike shop.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7eTl05KHwFI?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">On one level, it’s just a nice moment between Pee Wee and ‘friends’. Pee Wee walks into the bike shop, and the kids greet him as a familiar face and then depart. Yet, something is a bit off. The kids look totally normal as white middle class archetypes. Also, in their dirt bike gear, they even look warrior-like, part of jock culture. So, why would they be so ‘cool’ and cordial with someone like Pee Wee, a full-grown man who acts like a child and talks like a dork?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One would expect these clean-cut All-American golden boys to make fun of Pee Wee, but they seem to find him alright, and, if anything, it’s Pee Wee who’s sort of annoyed with them. The scene is like a blueprint of how Jews desire goyim to feel and act. No matter how weird and nutty Jews may be, they want goyim to act as if all is fine, all is normal, and etc., just like ‘Jennifer’ Pritzker wants to be treated as if he’s a real ‘woman’, and there is NOTHING weird or funny about that. Jewish vanity is the new sanity. At the bike shop, Pee Wee picks up the horn, which could signify the Jewish will to monopolize the megaphone.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pee Wee is clearly Jewishy while the kids look ‘Aryanish’, and the camaraderie between them isn’t exactly natural. It’s as if the kids have been trained(like monkeys) to hold something back, to be on their best behavior in his presence. Pee Wee doesn’t get the ‘Eugene Treatment’ from them(or the harassment by local kids upon Albert Brooks in LOST IN AMERICA).</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Kkzm4nKW6Vw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4E_jCd4LZL8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To his utter shock and dismay, Pee Wee discovers his bike has been stolen and comes to surmise the culprit must be Francis, who happens to be taking a bath with toy battleships in a swimming-pool-sized tub. In rage, Pee Wee dives into the tub-pool and tussles with Francis. It could be an allusion to Moses splitting the sea, or maybe the attack on USS Liberty.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gwjAFSu_VKM?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="195"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What sets Pee Wee apart from comedians like Buster Keaton is a sense of ‘centrism’, i.e. his ego expects the whole world to revolve around him. Buster Keaton’s characters get caught up in lots of action, but they remain do-it-aloners, individuals. They don’t expect the world to come to their aid and instead scramble the best they can to keep their heads above water.<br />In contrast, as far as Pee Wee’s concerned, his troubles are the world’s troubles. His tragedy must be prioritized above all else. Indeed, it’s as if everyone in the community must care more about his Bike than their own. He is the sun ‘nerd’, they are the planets. In this, he’s different from Big Lebowski, aka the ‘dude’, who knows full well that the world doesn’t give a hoot about his problems, like when the Mexican-American policeman laughs in his face about the ‘leads’. It is only at the dogged insistence of Walter, a Dumb-Polack-type who tries so hard to think, feel, and act like a Jew, that Lebowski is persuaded to turn the Rug problem into a major issue with larger implications.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="218"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">An individualist sees his problem as his own, whereas a centrist believes his problem is the world’s problem, so the world must fix it. It’s like the young girl in the Coen Brothers’ version of TRUE GRIT who doesn’t merely plead for help but feels as if others should fight and die to put the world right for her. An individual, being a social creature(as all humans are), often works with others to achieve his goal but still understands that the world doesn’t revolve around him. If others lend support, it’s either a matter of contract or conscience(of free will and agency of personal choice). In contrast, the centrist’s emotions demand that the world agree and acquiesce to his or her interests and agenda. The likes of William Kristol and Victoria Nuland seem downright offended when goyim seem less willing to agree with them, praise them, and kill/die for their causes, which, for all the smoke-and-mirrors verbiage about ‘democracy’ and ‘freedom’, serve extremely narrow ethnocentric interests of Jewish Supremacism or Exceptionalism, which is often peddled as ‘American Exceptionalism’, which seems to exceptionally favor Jews over goyim and Zionists over Arabs/Muslims and whatever else that Jews favor around the world, like heartlessly using Ukraine as a proxy against Russia.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QoJrjjy0WeU?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the scene above, Pee Wee acts like Neocon types who feel that the goy world exists to obey and serve Jews. If Jews are angry about something, goyim must growl along. If Jews want something, it must be gotten for them by the goyim. If Jews hate something, goyim must share in the hatred. Currently, Russia is the main target of hate, so all of the West is barking mad at Evil Putin. And Jews and their Anglo-Cucks are growling at China, India, and other parts of the world that won’t bark along at Bad Bad Russia. It’s as if Jewish ego/ethnocentrism expects the world to be an emotional and physical extension of the Jewish psyche. So, if Jews feel something, the world must materialize it into reality. If Jews want Syria destroyed, the world must have it destroyed. Pee Wee is like a more aggressive and hyper version of the child-man played by Peter Sellers in BEING THERE who expects the world to be like TV according to the remote control. Push-button reality.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NYDrsCBxjVE?start=279&feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Anglos, once the most powerful people on Earth, became the most servile dogs of Jews, the Tribe now feels entitled to the same kind of servility from the whole world. No wonder the US government is so angry at India. Jewish has a master attitude toward Hindus: “We are the master, and Anglos fetch and roll over for us, so WHY DON’T YOU AS WELL?” And the Anglo have a dog attitude toward Hindus: “We grovel at the master’s feet, so WHY DON’T YOU AS WELL?” Dogs want other dogs to be equally obedient to the master. Pee Wee’s frustration with others lacking the requisite enthusiasm to recover the Bike is akin to Jewish-controlled America’s rage at parts of the world that won’t join in the hunt for the Russian Bear. Jews want all goyim to serve as dogs baiting the bear.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The scene below indicates that maybe Paul Reubens, not George Soros, has been the mastermind behind the formula of GloboHomo and BLM. The current anti-white agenda combines black thuggery with homo-tranny vanity. Even though the criminal isn’t black in the scene, what ensues is criminality and cross-dressing working together to get past the defense of white law-and-order. While Pee Wee dons a woman’s dress(looking like Olive Oyl), the criminal thug is disguised as a respectable citizen. Doesn’t that sound familiar? BLM and ‘Pride’ marching together.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/XC3yGH4nETQ?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="331"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">PEE WEE HERMAN’S BIG ADVENTURE has similarities with two other movies of the same year, 1985. Albert Brooks’ LOST IN AMERICA and Rob Reiner’s THE SURE THING are also road movies. The Pee Wee movie, like Brooks’ comedy, could be referencing EASY RIDER, though Pee Wee is strictly a cyclist rather than a biker. Paul Reubens’ persona is clearly Jewishy but isn’t pinned down, whereas Brooks wears his Jewish neuroticism on his sleeve. (In obsessiveness, Brooks draws on the energies of THE GRADUATE and THE HEARTBREAK KID and is rather different from the laid-back goyim of EASY RIDER.)<br />The difference is, whereas Pee Wee’s sights are set on a clear goal, something that matters to him most, Albert Brooks’ character chases after the end of the rainbow, the illusion of freedom in the middle of nowhere when the real treasure for Jews is in the city where all the wealth and talent are concentrated. The yokels in Scotland have their quaint charm in LOCAL HERO, but the real action is in the metropolis. No wonder then the Brooks character in LOST IN AMERICA finally regains his Jewish essence and heads straight to New York, where his ‘bike’(or Mercedes) is. Germans used to kill Jews, but with Jews owning the world, the well-heeled Krauts are eager to build and sell luxury cars to the Chosen.<br />As for THE SURE THING, the two lead characters played by John Cusack and Daphne Zuniga could be of any ethnicity, but Cusack’s brunette character is contrasted with his blond buddy and finally rebuffs the advances of a blonde babe. As for Zuniga’s character, she ultimately dumps her very Waspy and dull boyfriend, a dweebier version of Carl in THE GRADUATE and finds her true love in Cusack. It was directed by Rob Reiner who, during the Trump years, came out as a totally deranged super-Zionist Jewish Supremacist hater of MAGA ‘white trash’. (THE SURE THING is delightful, his best work.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CNbBS1wl32M?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="47"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, the most obvious Biblical reference is the scene where Pee Wee scrambles to save the animals in a burning pet shop. It’s clearly an allusion to Noah and his Ark, though it might have something to do with Holocaust too: Save them from the oven!</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ss9cgThLzT0?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Needless to say, Pee Wee triumphs in the end. Not only does fortune smile down on him and reunite him with his Bike but his story is made into a glamorous 007-like movie with tall Aryan-ish characters lending glamor to the legend of Pee Wee. If Charlton Heston played Moses and Ben-Hur, why shouldn’t James Brolin play Pee Wee?<br />What is politics in the Current West but goyim, white and black, acting out the roles conceived, scripted, and funded by Jews? George W. Bush, the tool of Neocons, and Barack Obama, the tool of Neolibs, with Neo- being synonymous with Zio-. American Politics is an experiment in Zio-Labs. It’s as if all of us are living in a Jewish movie. Jews who bitch about ‘conspiracy theories’ turned US politics under Donald Trump into one big spy movie about Putin’s regime as Spectre that rigged the election for his Siberian Candidate in the Donald. And Ukraine has been run by Zelensky, a Jewish comedian of all people, and the Ukrainian narrative on the war makes Spielberg’s 1941 seem downright sober. Just like everyone becomes part of the Pee-Wee-centric world in BIG ADVENTURE, it’s as if we’re all trapped in the world reduced to a toyland for Jews.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/cJOqz6CPxLY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-51502000260417608502022-12-07T16:42:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:08.394-08:00Elvis Comeback Special and the Rolling Stones Rock and Roll Circus in the Crazy Year of 1968<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="576" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiwY7vhJbf_9AWaipNOM6KEnQ24OWWaxAY9MlyGVKRAjfuROuw4ioU8VhB_ivUTeLRufsWn6kSDXTh3aC1oWz8Ged2ayPkHnjkzzVEEyymNC6DzIM6Upb-bOshgaLe_rcGRMcTIvnLQhQ4V78fAqRWbbXH4KYvJCzXvUuvO-WPS7N-_Qe9F0ZOlqkV63A=w640-h576" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="360" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgi-Km3Pr2QqxKPqcRHsaOgXfYk6siyHuaDVYoYauNQ3ck5OEmaPmaHj2ShSiIxadtpdu3pXjDrBA5SC8CYwa57VFroHTJnJuzTkducTBzZR-jHLXTPTYWw-miDrp4l-elDdmGx6fKpIQNoMsyDVDBoiCfPCKdJDB7RjRCmqTAGE0M9bxExRf1GHMUAuQ=w640-h360" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="209"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">1968, like 1848, was one of those landmark years in history. If certain years were momentous in a particular region, 1968 witnessed turmoil in many parts of the world. Some of these events were isolated while others were part of a seismic pattern. Just to name a few: The Tet Offensive that convinced the majority of Americans for the first time that the war in Vietnam was either unwinnable or not worth the price. Mexican Olympics that erupted in violent protests and brutal crackdown. It was also of the first time that athletes-as-individuals used the Olympic stage for political protest. The assassination of MLK led to mass riots and looting all across America. The killing of RFK who, perhaps, could have been president. Democratic Convention turned into a fiasco, leading many Americans, as the so-called ‘silent majority’, to ensure Richard Nixon’s triumphant return to politics. May 68 lunacy in France inspired many copycat protests around the world, all of them youth-centered and mixing genuine grievances with immature narcissism. The Warsaw Pact invaded Czechoslovakia to crush the Prague Spring, in effect erasing the last hope among Western leftist intellectuals that Eastern Bloc communism could liberalize. It was as if seismic stresses building up beneath the surface erupted in a series of powerful earthquakes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So many were caught off guard and, in that sense, events of 68 could be characterized as ‘black swans’. Why were so many taken by surprise? In a way, it may have been the first Prosperity Uprising. It wasn’t about bread, land, peace, and basic rights but ‘meaning’ and ‘authenticity’. No wonder the leftist Pier Paolo Pasolini sympathized with working class police than with ‘leftist’ demonstrators whom he identified as mostly pampered bourgeois kids causing a ruckus as rite-of-passage for role-playing radicals(who were never going to be members of the working class). While students had long been involved in politics since the rise of the modern university, classic leftism had students addressing serious issues of national development and/or social justice(the real kind).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Despite incantations of Marxist slogans and preponderance of Red flags, 68 youth protesters often found themselves at odds with the working class(that proved to be considerably more ‘patriotic’ and willing to fight wars, ‘bigoted’ in their wariness of blacks and immigrants, and ‘reactionary’ in their view of sexual roles & the like). When push came to shove(and there was a lot of shoving in every direction), it wasn’t so much the students leading or representing the workers but making demands(often confounding to the elders) with little relevance among blue collar folks(though the mounting death toll in the Vietnam War did make them sour on the Establishment and WWII-style patriotism). In a nutshell, it was Meathead vs Archie Bunker. Or, consider the bitterness between the blue collar immigrant father and the college-educated son in the Arthur Penn film FOUR FRIENDS.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kktCZJpS464?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="204"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At the very least, students in America were protesting for peace(as they could be shipped off to Vietnam once the college deferment ran out), but what was it all about in France? After all, Europeans never had it so good than after World War II. The great wars were over, the Soviets had no plans to invade the Wes, the old empires were gone, and Europeans could direct all their attention on rebuilding their nations and growing the economy. Though not as prosperous as white Americans, the average European enjoyed unprecedented prosperity, security, and opportunities as in the 1950s and especially the 60s, the go-go years of one boom after another. Besides, with youth culture in full swing, it seemed like the young ones were just having fun, fun, fun. As the world, even the advanced West, had never experienced such mass prosperity(aka the rise of the middle class), few were aware of the consequences of higher expectations generated by wealth distribution and the culture of impatience derived from inexperienced youth(who were prone to seeing world like a rock concert or TV show); neither Elvis-mania nor Beatlemania was political but it shaped the passion of youth-driven politics in yrs to come.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="161"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The year prior to 1968, in the Zeitgeist-defining Beatles album SGT. PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND, there was a clue of what was just around the corner. “She’s Leaving Home” was Paul McCartney’s schmaltzy attempt at Schubert Lieder, but it ends on a rather unsettling note. The girl left her loving and caring parents even though they did everything right because she just gotta have more FUN, apparently what life is all about. There were earlier distress signals in Bob Dylan’s “It’s All Over Now, Baby Blue” & “Ballad of a Thin Man” in 1965 and “For What It’s Worth” by Buffalo Springfield at the end of 1966. But, in 1967, the dream of flower power and summer of love distracted even the lotus-lulled youth and radical elements of the fault lines on the verge of breaking. It seemed as if the revolution could be meditated with a drop of acid and a little help of one’s friends.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Earlier generations had associated social unrest with real problems(even if they disagreed with the agendas). Economic depression, harsh working conditions, denial of basic rights, racial oppression, imperialism, and the like. Even if one rejected John Steinbeck’s socialism, there was no denying the real problems depicted in THE GRAPES OF WRATH? Whatever one thinks of Negroes, the Civil Rights Movement was fueled by genuine righteousness. Then, wonder so many older folks scratched their thinning heads at the sight of all these ingrates, especially college kids, who had it better than any previous generation but acted most wronged.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="160"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Granted, the tradition of privileged radicals/revolutionaries has a long pedigree. After all, the Founding Fathers weren’t yeomen farmers but the colonial aristocracy. And the great majority of French Revolutionaries were well-learned men of privileged backgrounds; some were of aristocratic lineage. Still, they were men in times of real problems, all too evident for anyone with eyes to see(and nose to smell). In the Russian Revolution, the radicals of privileged backgrounds rubbed shoulders with members of lower origin. And many had paid their dues by being disowned by their families and/or spending years in exile or prison.<br />Back then, the privileged were few and far between; and many educated types not only had difficulty finding roles worthy of their knowledge/credentials but were few steps above poverty themselves; the middle class was still relatively small in less developed nations, and the vast majority of the population were poor, members of the toiling underclass in farms or factories.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="185"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, by 1968, the Middle Class in US and Europe made up the bulk of the population, and even the working classes had it better than ever before(and many of their children could even attend college). Granted, the world, even the richest and most advanced countries, was hardly paradisiacal for most people, and it’s only natural for every generation to have something to gripe about, but the amount of rage in 1968 seemed completely disproportionate to the problems of youth. (Perhaps, the consumer/celebrity culture created the false impression among many that they deserved to have more and enjoy more, making them less appreciative of the substantial gains over the years. Even if you’re better off than your grandparents and parents, you’d feel miserable if you compared your lot with the lifestyles of movie stars, music idols, and the like. Today, so much of ‘woke leftism’ is about narcissism of being acknowledged as ‘beautiful’. It went from ‘black is beautiful’ to ‘my black ass is beautiful and you better agree’. And much of the looting is for luxury items and the like.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There was no doubt a ethno-racial factor, especially in the form of Jewish agitation and black rampage. Many of the leading radicals in US and Europe were Jewish, and Jews in media egged on much of the unrest, especially among blacks for whom violence became a way of life than merely a political expression; whereas whites reverted to calm after the radicalism burned out, black communities remained or became more violent following the Days of Rage — it’s like blacks were violent before BLM, during BLM, and will be after BLM, and it’s due to genetics, but the Jewish-controlled Narrative says it’s all the fault of whitey.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="108"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In terms of sheer violence, US became a hotbed for its large black population who were fueled not only by a sense of racial injustice but superiority: With Muhammad Ali and other blacks dominating boxing and sports, with black kids routinely beating up white kids in schools, and with scared whites taking flight from black blight, blacks began to see whites as chickenshit easy pickings. It was like King Kong mentality: Kong was subjugated by humans but could stomp them with gorillian fury if let loose. If American soldiers worried about Viet Cong in the jungles, white Americans began to fret about Black Kong of the urban jungle.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="309"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Canada and Australia, in contrast, had no such worries as their non-white(and black) populations were negligible. There were few nonwhites in Europe as well, but due to the imperialist legacy and the New Left’s fixation on Third World struggles as a liberating or inspirational force, there was much heated rhetoric on Neo-Imperialism, which apparently could be alleviated by favoring non-white immigrants over white natives, whereupon the Working Class, once the stalwart icons of revolution, gradually came to be shunted aside as part of the problem. (The New Left’s disenchantment with the white/native working class wasn’t that surprising, however. Though Big Labor was traditionally at odds with Big Capital, the labor unions often came to collude with Big Capital. Also, being less educated and more elementary in their emotions and responses, members of the working class were less likely to question authority and resist appeals to patriotism; they were also satisfied with less, the usual bread-and-circuses, which meant they were more-or-less content with the status quo if they got theirs. So, without asking questions, many of them, like the men in THE DEER HUNTER, did their ‘patriotic’ duty by being shipped over to Vietnam that had little to do with US national security. On the other hand, the elite college-educated boomers with their credentials came to accumulate great wealth & power, turning out worse than their elders in greed and egotism, especially as Rock culture flattered their shameless vanity and self-aggrandizement. Today, these ‘neo-liberal’ and ‘neo-conservative’ establishment types get upset when white working class folks aren’t so willing to fight in overseas wars. In the 60s, many educated boomers looked down on those serving in Vietnam as suckers and worse. Today, they kvetch about how today’s young working class whites don’t want to kill and die in Ukraine and the Middle East.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="419" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiHAhDkMF1N0lTkZJYg374iJqtZDT2zzkeSEGK2SFUXa5FPwipwhToaGvJOeG01NPQVRq6jVSIKICIHpbJ7xkyMneFTu9K0I6UApqm8Ns_PSyAB4etuNBeMwtO_6piqcrwvqly1sHO-Q9pcIDAV5qHrrvXoh2XZ9fe3mUxbYmHxfYUD75rZ2EjJENcwmg=w640-h419" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="211"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One would think Europeans, having few nonwhites and blacks, would have considered themselves fortunate to have been spared the racial strife in the US(and Latin America). Apparently, sufficient number of Europeans were afflicted with something like radical/racial envy. Just like some white youths in America wanted to ‘touch Indians’, European radicals and rockers(for whom black music was the most vital culture) wanted to ‘touch’ the Third World. It could be in letters, as with Jean-Paul Sartre’s paeans to the Wretched of the Earth and Che Guevara(who, though white, took up Third World causes in Africa and Latin America without much success but became a christ-figure of the revolution upon death). With the Holocaust Narrative gaining ever greater traction, certain German factions committed themselves to radicalism even crazier than that practiced by Jews. In some cases, they sought to out-Jew the Jews in political purism, ironically even to the point of sympathizing with Arabs against Zionists who were regarded as having betrayed their Jewishness by becoming the New Nazis. (In the current Russo-Ukraine War, we have Jews supporting the Sub-Nazis while Russia, accused of being ‘far right’, claims to be waging war on ‘nazis’. The long shadow of World War II still affects political action and discourse.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="214"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In popular culture, which became synonymous with personal expression in the Rock scene, 1968 was also significant as the Morning After the reveries of the so-called Summer of Love and Flower Power of 1967, a year culturally defined by THE GRADUATE and SGT. PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND album, hyped as the ultimate synthesis of pop and art. Yet, the utter fiasco of the TV special MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR warned of the fragility of the dream of “All You Need Is Love”. Maybe the Beatles were just really good pop stars and entertainers, not the heralds of the new age, let alone prophets.<br />However alluring, it was just an illusion, and the world needed more than Lennon’s ‘love’ and McCartney’s playhouse antics. Good vibrations couldn’t last — Brian Wilson was toast by 68 — , and bad vibes permeated the scene, with places like Haight-Asbury going to pot real fast. The Beatles album of 1968 was simply called THE BEATLES, aka “The White Album”. Finally, in their ‘orphaned’ state minus Brian Epstein, here was the Beatles without the candy wrapper, and it was a jumble of disunity. Some remarked the album was really about McCartney and the band, Lennon and the band, Harrison and the band, and Ringo pleading in the corner, “Don’t Pass Me By”.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Rock narrative generally holds the Rolling Stones were one step behind the Fab Four and even faltering in 1967 but finally managed to surpass the Beatles in 1968, the year of the Rude (Re)Awakening of Rock(n Roll). Of course, one could argue Stones were making more inspired music as early as 1965 with “Can’t Get No Satisfaction” and “Get Off My Cloud”. And in 1966, their “Paint It Black” and “Under My Thumb”(and even “Mother’s Little Helper”) were beyond anything on the Beatles album REVOLVER. And even though 1967 belonged to the Beatles, “Ruby Tuesday” was perhaps the finest ballad of the year.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But in 1968, fissures were showing in the Beatles Project, made worse by Yoko Ono the monkey-wench. As different as McCartney and Lennon were, their talents were complementary even as they increasingly composed apart. Even if a song was essentially composed by one, it was completed by the other in spirit of competition and camaraderie. When the Beatles first exploded on the scene, they were very tight, each member indispensable, as their image was nearly as crucial as their sound. Lose a Beatle, especially Lennon or McCartney, and it couldn’t work. It was as if each Beatle knew his exact place in the band, and even the ‘king mixer’, the ‘very clean grandfather of Paul’ in A HARD DAY’S NIGHT could mess up their chemistry. Indeed, even chemistry didn’t matter then as the band seemed a perfect compound, a joyous bundle of excess bliss to share with the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="145"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Other bands, in contrast, not only could weather the loss of a key member but grow stronger from it. The Byrds moved in new directions after losing the main songwriter Gene Clark. Roger Waters and Dave Gilmour more than filled Syd Barrett’s shoes. And in some ways, Stones’ second act in 1968 gathered steam with the fading of Brian Jones, one of the key founders and stylists(though not as composer). One might argue Jones’ penchant for experimentalism and florid eccentricity made others feel they’d veered too far from the raw nerves of their source music, something they had to return to; on the other hand, the success of the return owed to the sophistication honed in the artier period as the Stones in 68 not only rocked harder but presented something approaching a vision, even a worldview, though ‘philosophy’ is too strong a word.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="265"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Unlike the Beatles who burst upon the scene as a picture perfect model of success with hardly a loose end, bands like the Stones and Pink Floyd needed more time to form into unity(though, ironically, the Beatles grew increasingly divergent as Lennon and Harrison ditched the cheerfulness that McCartney valued as the hallmark of the band). The Stones that the world got to know(as a kind of staple) in the 1970s and 80s finally emerged in 68, and it took even longer for Pink Floyd to finally coalesce into the premier art rock band following the decline and departure of Syd Barrett.<br />Until 1968, the Stones, for all their unmistakable image and special qualities, was a band in search of itself. Henceforth, they were certain of what they were(and weren’t). In contrast, Beatles exploded on the scene in completeness, engineered to perfection as a sound machine to drive the masses of teenyboppers crazy. If the Stones, somewhat uncertain of themselves, meandered toward a unity, the Beatles increasingly became unsure of what they were, and this confusion would soon prove fatal after 1968. In retrospect, McCartney’s need to create the fantasy worlds of Sgt. Pepper and the Magical Mystery Tour as calls to unity seems indicative of the anxiety that the formula was wearing thin. And in the White Album, the fractures really showed, leading to further disarray in the following LET IT BE sessions. It was partly out of respect to George Martin that Paul McCartney and others put aside their differences one more time to create their swan song album ABBEY ROAD.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="138"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The socio-political mood of 1968 surely affected pop culture, which, however, had yet to be weaponized politically — today, it’s hard to distinguish popular culture from ‘woke’ politics(mostly centered on homos and negroes). Few movies of the late Sixties reflected the Vietnam War, and the most famous one that did, THE GREEN BERETS with John Wayne, harked back to WWII movie cliches — it might as well have been called ‘Jungles of Iwo Jima’. Political commitment was central to the Folk Movement, but it defined itself against popular/commercial culture, and one reason for Dylan’s departure was to bid farewell to obligatory didacticism — his going-electric was misconstrued by many folkies as ‘selling out’ when he was going personal; JOHN WESLEY HARDING eschewed electric instruments but continued in the personal vein and wasn’t a return to Folkie standards.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="427" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjnmIEJQM-S8mlXL8bPYT-DO4Cn7wC8DHvcGcAj12s_GxJk2hrqR6rEJzunse9SGRrjmxtPmfZfzAZFx10roNsLrxSZwvTKfgQZf4RZvePPL8ShaZ364NLEX2dEX_AONlI_MjGj248q8xdjqcbIEqFEbfD0apHGd7-bgR98_cktsCahi-HZ-b9CN2Rotw=w640-h427" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="263"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dylan more or less set the template, and it was generally deemed uncool to get too political — it was dumb to trust authority but stupid to believe in utopia. Better to be somewhat aloof, keep one’s distance, and remain above the fray. Especially for those who’d broken free of the confines of earnest and simpleminded(as well as disingenuous) Folk Movement, there was an instinctive sense that art and politics often didn’t go together. Above all, art must be free and personal than in service to some agenda or dogma. Don’t get fooled again.<br />It’s telling that David Crosby mostly annoyed other band members, not because they didn’t share his doubts about the US government, but because they, as musicians, were supposed to be about the muse. Even songs laden with messages tended to be broader and more universal, like “All You Need Is Love”. Instead of taking sides, be for all sides to calm down, smell the roses, and bask in the sunshine. Or, just rock n roll all night long and live for today. There were some acts that combined tough-minded social criticism with genuine personal expression, most notably Creedence Clearwater Revival with their sharp-tongued anti-war songs, but the main appeal of events like Woodstock was sex, drugs, and being ‘groovy’ than listening to Country Joe & Fish bitch about Vietnam(or Joan Baez drone on and on about her jailed husband). Country Joe got a lot of sing-a-long cheers, but it was the Who and Santana that really brought the house(or heaven) down.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="55"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, 1968 was such a pivotal year for radical politics and days-of-rage antics that the culture did get polarized in a more strident way. The battle lines were drawn, and in many quarters it was no longer enough to be for ‘love’ and ‘peace’, deemed noncommittal. Flower Power wasn’t enough as more called for firepower.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="64"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Bob Dylan, holed up in some rural part of the world, was relatively spared this pressure(though pilgrims and the like trespassed on his property), though the song “All Along the Watchtower” did reflect the apocalyptic mood of the times. (Bemusing to many, he would release the country album NASHVILLE SKYLINE the following year, playing it more mellow just when storm clouds were gathering.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="45"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Beatles, though far more publicly exposed than Bob Dylan, were also somewhat shielded from public pressure because they’d stopped touring in 1966. Most of their musical hours were spent cooped up in the studio with an intimate crew of professionals, friends, and favorite hangers-on.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, it was different with the Stones as they’d never stopped touring, perhaps the premier practitioners of the art at the time. Thus, the kind of pressure that had once fallen on Dylan(to serve as the spokesmen of the generation) fell on the Stones. Mick Jagger, with keen fashion sense, saw it as much as an opportunity as a burden. In the year of violence and commitment, the Stones could be stalwart emblems of the Zeitgeist.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, if the Stones took sides, they could come across as preachy and topical, undermining their image of cool nihilism and sneering indifference. (The agit-prop antics of Jefferson Airplane dated fast.) How could the Stones seem ‘radical’ while avoiding the pitfall of partisanship? Instead of attaching the Stones to a particular cause, why not invoke the Devil? This way, Stones could pose as mavericks and revelers giving a flaming middle finger to the Establishment(but also to just about everything else, thus maintaining their cred among those who regarded radicalism as the new church lady antics). What began as a mere game with Satanic Majesties Request could take on darker shades of terror and outrage. And even if Satan stood for evil, who was more radical than him? And how clever to play it cool with the lord of hell fire, just like blacks use ‘bad’ to mean ‘good’? It might strike a chord with certain radicals, especially the Camille Paglias of the time who preferred the Marquis(de Sade) over Marx.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="223"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After all, only a part of Sixties radicalism was to fight for justice and save the world. The other part, perhaps more enticing, was the promise of any-means-necessary to bring about the revolution, a mentality that could justify any amount of libidinous exultation in anarchy, destruction, and violence. As Jean-Paul Sartre posited in his play “The Devil and the Good Lord”, history can only move forward by the good learning to act bad against the worse. The helter-skelter energies unleashed by Rock inspired the young radicals of 68 to be downright ‘Nietzschean’ in their attitude toward the ‘struggle’. Even more than the characters of Dostoevsky’s THE DEVILS, they delighted in the vision of burning down the world in order to save it. No wonder Jean-Luc Godard, of THE WEEKEND notoriety(that called for mass murder of the bourgeoisie and proto-khmer-rouge-like destruction of civilization for Year Zero reset), collaborated with the Stones on the film ONE PLUS ONE(also released as SYMPATHY FOR THE DEVIL). Mick Jagger was nothing if not savvy and clever, and his deviltry(which was just an act) made for acceptable ‘politics’ and great music that finally unloosed the Stones from their doubts and uncertainties. They could have the cake and eat it too. They gained ‘street fighting’ cred with the radicals but kept a cool distance from partisan politics.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="424" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjTb_hRDJ1CSdYtAVsqaGGJi9F7P6Y1VJdiMFFRRjvYpxe7JuMA4Kw_wUm-8zMZjk6ltpZgVTa9xZS_Gd3-ceV5Y5SRM4lzN6ghyiCZfcan3XXMuNAXLQIUsT1D_WH3SroDp9fHfNQYTc20uSOC07zJWn6iSD4O0QjyA6GIELsHnDxQYrvyS2-PAxkBDg=w640-h424" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though the Rolling Stones probably drew inspiration from Federico Fellini for the circus motif and collaborated with Jean-Luc Godard in his then humorless and puritanical ‘Maoist’ phase, their closest cinematic counterpart was perhaps Luis Bunuel whose 1965 short film SIMON OF THE DESERT could almost be a direct inspiration for the Stone’s flirtation with the demonic. Stones, like Bunuel, was more ‘enfant terrible’ than childlike(like Fellini and the Beatles). And they were never so obsessively cerebral(and near-‘autistic’) like Godard who fell into a psychological rabbit hole(from which he never found his way out). Bunuel had a love/hate fascination with the Catholic Church, a mix of grudging respect and mocking revulsion. He rejected the faith but not the attraction for both the moralist(as the church was not without noble qualities and did much good work) and the satirist(who couldn’t resist spotting all the fraudulence and hypocrisies). He was like a boy dazzled by a magician’s tricks but irrepressibly driven by some mischievous urge(and sense of moral duty) to expose them. Even though he regarded the church as the whore to Power, there could be no whore without the Madonna. Profanity thrives on purity, like stain shows best on a clean sheet. Stain on stain is rather pointless. The church’s claim of spiritual purity made fun the game of pointing to its hypocrisy with devilish glee.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="63"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Nevertheless, Bunuel regarded his anti-clericalist mockery to be moral as part of a broader critique of power. His anarchism was a genuine ideology, a way to subvert, expose, and weaken all power structures so that people could be freer in thought and action. The Catholic Church may have regarded him as a heretic and blasphemer, but he had no interest in Devil Worship.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Stones(or Mick Jagger) flirted with dark forces in songs like “Sympathy for the Devil”. Also, their ‘anarchism’ was about attitude than philosophy. Choice of anarchy was a smart move for its association with leftism but also for its ambiguity to mean just about anything, appealing even to ‘rightist’ libertarian types, much like certain elements of the Punk community did later. Of course, Mick Jagger’s Satanism was only an act. What need for the Devil in a world without God? It’d be like rooting for a team without another to play against. Because satanism was just a game, Stones’ sensibility overlapped with that of Bunuel. On some level, it was a way to poke fun at bourgeois pieties while also flattering bourgeois aspirations toward modernity and bohemianism, as the bourgeoisie was Janus-like in looking both backward and forward, in striving for respectability while savoring irreverence. (In a similar vein, the Hell’s Angels, though often aligned with right-wing pro-war politics, had romantic appeal to the Left as rebels and mavericks.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="480" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhq4gStOCHqw9yfM41aAcgm-L4FsL4m02efYsmMYAyDYH_KQezqnsq7_s3gw_MXo-tcqufEehhXGHA-NtsSZvRf_9cSHehGGxbRSDvv-ajSD7SeByiXghl7vB0ue7eQXzOceGvjqc26ZJ4dcsPt6L2f2c_PuhOJLldRz-Z8jVmxLwmuUSj1H9Uhn9BDqQ=w640-h480" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="194"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Paradoxically however, perhaps the Stones’ put-on sardonic satanism was even more delightfully devilish precisely because of the wit and sophistication, an irreverence that leveled at the Devil himself. Devil in Hell might appreciate a good roast. The superior tend to be aloof, and it’s the dimwits who are simpleminded, which explains why the more blatantly satanic hard rock(and heavy metal) register as stupid and retarded. God or Devil, there’s an appreciation for superior qualities over inferior ones. (In a way, Christianity lent the Devil added luster because its new conception of God favored the simpleminded, the inferior and meek. While the Jewish God favored the good and righteous, He clearly favored the clever and superior over dumb and slow — David didn’t beat Goliath by turning the other cheek. Not so the Christian concept of God that favor the lamb among men, the Forrest Gumps and Simple Jacks. If there’s room for the superior in Jewish spiritual space, not so much in the Christian counterpart. Then, to get a taste of the superior in the Christosphere, there’s the Faustian temptation with the Devil who appreciates narcissism, vanity, and arrogance.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="304"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The inferior, being simpleminded, make for better acolytes and sycophants, but their doglike loyalty is dull, lacking in spark and agency. The problem faced by any institution is the search for both talent and loyalty, but the talented tend to see through the institutional BS whereas the the loyal tend to be dim of mind and creativity. It’s no wonder so many organizations and movements that begin with talent and inspiration grow mediocre in dogmatism and/or cravenness. (Often, the only reliable way to ensure the loyalty of the superior is to offer more rewards, whereby they tolerate the BS for more status and privilege, but then, there’s no telling what they might do with the power once they’ve gained enough of it.) The superior want to go their own way, which explains the love/hate thing between God and Lucifer whose treachery was the product of his superiority over the other angels who were less keen to think and act outside the box. The angel whose talents God prized most proved most disloyal.<br />Nothing newer, greater, or superior is possible without those individuals who can break free of the paradigm and see the world anew. As cursed as Adam and Eve came to be, there would have been no progress without the disobedience in regards to the Tree of Forbidden Knowledge; there would only have been perpetual obedience in the Edenic womb. Throughout the Bible, God prefers those with strong personalities(made more in His image), but such qualities tend to be defiant, even against the will of God. Every prophet is both a loyal servant and radical rebel who revises divinity in some way. And Jesus had to play the ‘devilish’ role(in Jewish eyes) to bear the seeds of a new religion as the new vision of divinity.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="224"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Mick Jagger, being non-religious, opted for an ‘intellectual’ riff on Satanism. A man of superior wit and talent, he not only acted the publicity agent and apologist of the Devil but the jester and mocker as well, and it isn’t always clear who or what is being skewered. Apparently, everyone, you and me, God and the Devil himself. And unlike the simpleminded tributes to the Devil, Jagger’s wily exposition has a quasi-moral dimension, portraying the Devil not merely as the Prince of Darkness but a figure of considerable empathy who understands and plays all sides. So, he was there with the communists who killed the Czar and his ministers; he was there with the Nazis in the bloodlands. He had a role in the death of Kennedy, but so did we, with enough blame to go around, which makes all of us both guilty and innocent. There’s a savoring of our temptation towards evil but also the intimation that Devil is a personification of our own wickedness, a humble servant who serves as a scapegoat for all our sins, much like the man who gives his heart to “Lady Jane”. The whole song and act are a remarkable jumble of defiance and deference, comedy and tragedy, romp and terror, what with Jagger strutting around like a freako-tarzan mutant, half-aristocrat and half-ape.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">1968 was certainly the year to play the game of devil as old certainties were collapsing without new ones to fill the void. This faustian sense of liberation could be exhilarating, even triumphant, but also troubling, with trepidation and dread hanging over the future. In 1967, Velvet Underground released a mostly unnoticed album with the song “Heroin” that conveyed both the highs and lows of the drug. And Jimi Hendrix’s “Purple Haze”, Zombies’ “Time of the Season”, and the Doors’ “Light My Fire”(and “The End”, later used effectively in APOCALYPSE NOW) weren’t quite in sync with the vibes of the Summer of Love. They portended something darker around the corner, the gloom after the bloom, the year of the plunge.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In 1968, Federico Fellini’s “Toby Dammit” segment(adapted from Edgar Allan Poe’s “Never Bet the Devil Your Head”) in SPIRTS OF THE DEAD trilogy perfectly captured the Zeitgeist. A theological tone permeated Bob Dylan’s album John Wesley Harding with songs like “I Dreamed I Saw St. Augustine” and “Ballad of Frankie Lee and Judas Priest”, a tale of soul for sale. If Lennon had sense, he’d realized Yoko was the demon-witch in his life. The Stones ignited with sulfuric alchemy with “Jumping Jack Flash”. And the Beatles’ “Helter Skelter” and “Happiness Is a Warm Gun”, Iron Butterfly’s “In-A-Gadda-Da-Vida”(a key inspiration for hard rock and heavy metal to come), Steppenwolf’s “Born to be Wild”, Big Brother and Holding Company’s “Piece of My Heart”, Dusty Springfield’s “Son of a Preacher Man”, Deep Purple’s “Hush”, and Hendrix’s “Voodoo Child” all added to the spirit of times.<br />Even Simon & Garfunkel’s “Mrs. Robinson” and Donovan’s “Hurdy Gurdy Man” were rather uncharacteristic in their cynicism and ambiguity. In counter-sentiment, as if to lament the fall and reaffirm the good, there were “While My Guitar Gently Weeps”, “The Weight”(by the Band), and “Stormy”(by Classics IV).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="74"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The social upheavals of 1968 took on a devilish glow because so much was motivated by egotism and narcissism than real need or basic justice. May 68 movement in Paris was sparked by sexual policy involving coeds. So much rage over trifles. And the black riots of the latter half of the Sixties were fueled less by frustration than celebratory rapture that it was time to whup the ‘honkeys’, rape the ‘bitches’, and loot the stores.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="168"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All that deviltry, especially at a time when youth no longer believed in God, made it all an orgiastic ritual. When Robert Johnson the bluesman met the Devil at the crossroads, he was a believer confronted with a matter of life and death; it was no game. It wasn’t merely a question of attitude, style, or outlook but of one’s very soul. To resist meant to remain with God, and to give into temptation meant eternal fame at the price of eternal damnation. Thus, there was gravitas to the decision, one that couldn’t be reversed or reset, as in a game. That element of conviction made the temptation more enticing but also more frightful. In contrast, it was just a game with Jagger whose dalliance with the Devil wasn’t at a crossroads but at a cafe, not to bargain for the soul but to exchange business cards. (The most devilish figure to enter the Stones’ world was surely Allen Klein, a crook among crooks.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Elvis, also being a believer, lived with a heavy heart. When designated as the “King of Rock n Roll”, he replied, “There’s but one king.” For all his money and fame, he believed in Jesus. And for all his compromises and betrayals, he considered himself a man of God committed to the righteous path. Given his faith, he could never come to terms with his Faustian stardom. Elvis sang furious Rock n Roll but also soulful white gospel, and the two sides of the man never resolved themselves and went on pretending one didn’t affect the other.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="352" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj_4Ga7m9gFAp2u3adSJhfpIdTEtx_lCHsqYqXJi5jBcgdZf6auT0thbDwrUL_WN-FzjRxENekR8rmkPQFM51rX3F-sY8GFPGnpQRmM_EJ-3rqVC5_yV-qB27mN22qdayBHj-Yp40Z_gGhXi3ftLjsXE11OMwkJX_hr9OOnPbrYCIiyGLxb1noEHEhhDQ=w640-h352" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="215"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, consider Mick Jagger’s mock-evangelical style as he sings “Sympathy for the Devil” in the Rock n Roll Circus. He imitates gospel preachers doing their tricks before their flock, but it’s about salivation than salvation, taunting and teasing with a bag of devilish delights. His delivery of “You Can’t Always Get What You Want”, with its mock appeal to moderation from a mouth watering for more, is truly one of a kind, especially when he toys with the lyrics and keeps blurting, “You can’t always get the MAN you want, honey” to a female fan. The sermon and the venom become one with Jagger. His mock-gospel rockers suggests at the behind-the-curtain dealings between god and devil, that’s all it’s all just two sides of the same coin(or groin). In contrast, when Elvis breaks into a Gospel after the Rock n Roll numbers, he’s fully into the spirit and for the duration feels saved by the light, indeed a million light years away from the devil-music of Rock n Roll. If there’s an angelic presence in THE ROLLING STONES ROCK N ROLL CIRCUS, it is the lovely Marianne Faithfull singing “Something Better”, but she looks rather dazed as if she smoked something off the Forbidden Tree.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JIg49PAM2CY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="207"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In THE ROLLING STONES ROCK N ROLL CIRCUS, John Lennon as special guest belts out “Yer Blues”, a pounding number. It’s one hell of a song but pales next to what Jagger and Stones pull off with “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” and “Sympathy for the Devil”. There’s more of an intriguing and involving aspect to Stones music owing to the ‘scramble’ element. Even though the Stones weren’t big on improvisation(compared to jam bands) and their songs were all-worked out, there was an air of unpredictability about them, as if the song is at a crossroads with every phrase. Jagger operated like a quarterback with several options, to throw, hand off, or run with the ball. It was as if the song might change halfway through depending on Jagger’s shift in mood(or an idea suddenly popping into his head); in this sense, Jagger was as much an actor(who must project an illusion of lived life) as a performer(whose routine is expected). Jagger makes the song accelerate, slow, lurch this way and that, make wild turns. At every moment, it feels alive, like an animal wandering free outside the cage. The Stones were not set in stone.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ef9QnZVpVd8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="134"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, there’s a polished and perfected, even immaculate, quality to Beatles songs. There’s a set course, like in the bobsled event, or an established routine, like in ice skating. So, even as the Beatles could be fast and loud, you knew what you were getting. You always expect “Paperback Writer” to sound like “Paperback Writer”. But even familiar Stones songs sound anew because of Jagger’s erratic energy and style, his eccentric passive/aggressive way of hyperventilating, alternately brooding and yowling, cajoling and demanding. Feminists who bitched about the misogyny simply didn’t get it. Jagger’s pleading for sympathy wouldn’t have had the same appeal without the abusiveness. His shtick was that of the charming rogue, the bad boy who can get on the good side of any woman.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The defining character of “Sympathy for the Devil” and “You Can’t Always Get What You Want” probably owes more to the black gospel than the blues because the preacher-man must constantly grapple for ways to engage and energize the gathering. And there’s this grasping-for-tricks in the Stones at their best.<br />As remarkable as “Yer Blues” is, the pattern once established hardly allows for variation. It follows a set path. Perhaps, John Lennon realized this very limitation, though Beatles had their own advantages beyond the Stones’ own limitations. Perhaps, Lennon’s most Stones-like song is “Instant Karma” that derives its power from tumultuous rhythm and sudden shifts of mood, like waves along a seashore.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another key difference was the Beatles were samplers whereas Stones were ’embodiers’. This is evident when we compare THE WHITE ALBUM with BEGGAR’S BANQUET. The Beatles album samples various styles, and there’s always a distance between the band and the song(with the exceptions of personal songs like “Julia”). Take “Rocky Raccoon” where Paul McCartney does a pale imitation of a hillbilly. The parodic intro further intrudes between McCartney and the song, a pity as the main body is rather nice in a corny way. Same goes for John Lennon’s “Hey Bungalow Bill”. And as first-rate as “Yer Blues” and “Helter Skelter” are, they come across as Lennon DOING the blues and McCartney DOING Hendrix.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="133"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, the element of ‘do’ vanishes when Jagger’s magic comes to life. He doesn’t do the blues or country but becomes it. The Beatles were like those impeccable British actors who can master the role but never quite become it, whereas Jagger’s approach had something of Method Acting where the performer becomes the performance. Nothing could be further from a Negro or a Hillbilly than Mick Jagger with his upper middle class background and enrollment in London School of Economics, but when he sings “No Expectations”(or “Wild Horses”) as a bluesy country number, it sounds real, as if he’d been living in the woods crooning at the moon half-drunk on moonshine. The distance dissolves, and he morphs into the music and the culture from which it sprung.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="192"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If the Stones’ anarcho-radical fulminations endeared them to some on the Left in 1968, the return of Elvis Presley paralleled the return of Richard Nixon on the national stage. Their falls and rises oddly coincided. Elvis was on top of the world in the late 50s as the one-and-only but then served in the army as one-of-the-many. But even if he could have avoided the military, he would have been left in the dust by the Beatles, Beach Boys, Dylan, and the new sensibility. Original Rock n Roll had become old hat, and some even dusted it off as a fad in the early 60s when Brill Building Pop and Folk Music captured the charts and/or the hearts.<br />Upon leaving the army, Elvis spent the next several years making forgettable Hollywood movies at the insistence of his manager Tom Parker. And yet, his movie career may have spared him the ignominy of being rendered irrelevant in the rapidly changing landscape of pop, something that the Beatles intuitively grasped, which accounts for their evolution in style. (In contrast, Dave Clark Five started out almost as strong but failed to change with the times.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="366" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg4yAFRxJN94sTJROFp7q3aKg_UcXKy2D8BsVk_0lAu51dSezFiL2fGhIPmxd3ZwK0wYVfzyT23_oAmhDeF-HnCB1SK8_yM_60hy1EZbHEpCXOq2lVubTY5PU19qV2HDaRisHaS6vrndvcVM48JAHW8MmWbkiZ3S6b2UeTXiXe34--k6sdMfDZBKeDkpg=w640-h366" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="202"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Prior to modernism and popular culture(later to fuse in Pop Art), an artistic style/expression may have had relevance for decades, even centuries or millennia. Ancient Egyptians and Persians were defined by aesthetic consistency over immensely long periods. Same could be said of Byzantine iconography. And even in the more dynamic Western Europe, a certain style might inspire artists for a century or more, at the very least several decades.<br />But, modernism’s avant-garde posturing and pop culture’s impatience for the ‘next big thing’ made it so that a certain style was fortunate to last a decade. Also, because of modern communication and democratic opportunities, any style was likely to be exhausted sooner than later due to mass/sudden participation. When the Beatles burst upon the scene, countless youths tried to be the Next Beatles; when psychedelia happened, everyone(even the Monkees and the Cowsills) got onboard. What seemed edgy and promising was overwhelmed by excess of input. In INSIDE LLEWYN DAVIS, the prospective folk singer treks from NY to Chicago only to realize he’s just one of the many with the same aspirations. Folk music was around forever, but the Folk Movement was exhausted in a few years.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, it was precisely because Elvis was absent from the music scene due to stints in the military and Hollywood that a comeback could be hyped as an event. As he’d been sidelined by other obligations, it could be argued he wasn’t beaten by the new acts. He wasn’t dethroned but had just been taking a break. And even though his style of music was passé in 1968, it was also refreshing and reassuring just for that reason. When everything was changing so fast, socially and culturally, his ‘classic Rock n Roll’ stood as a pillar of stability and certainty, more than a little ironic because, a mere decade before, he had outraged so many people as that ‘white ni**er’ doing lewd things with his pelvis and making girls shriek and wet their pants in orgasmic pandemonium.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="267"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">By 1968, he was the culturally conservative figure, even though some of the licentious set pieces in the Comeback TV special would have been unthinkable in the 50s, or even the early 60s. But then, it wasn’t entirely ironic as Elvis was always deeply conservative on some level, even when tearing up the stage as a young lad in the mid-50s. (One wonders what he would have been like had he been born five yrs later and in a less culturally conservative milieu. Would he have been like Jim Morrison?)<br />Indeed, it was this culturally conservative side of him that proved useful in making him palatable to the nation. Sure, he sang and danced like a ‘white ni**er’ — in some ways, his act even put off Negroes who found Rock n Roll low and vulgar, rather like a new minstrel show with white kids trying to act even more black than black — , but he called older folks ‘sir’ and ‘ma’am’ and loved his mother like a good ole southern boy. He might make your daughter shriek like a crazed slut but address you as ‘sir’. And yes, he sang gospels too and believed Jesus was bigger than Fats Domino and Hank Williams put together. In this, there was something similar to the packaging of Sidney Poitier and Elvis Presley. One side of Poitier played it angry and aggressive, like Marlon Brando. He could shout up a storm, but he also had to be presented as a Good Upright Negro, in some ways more white than white, or good enough to marry your daughter, egad.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KZ64T6gEdC4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While change is exciting, it can also be confusing and frightening, as if the world lost its center of gravity. And in 1968, Richard Nixon and Elvis Presley, different as they were, stood as the rock in a world of too much rolling. In terms of star power, the only politician of the Sixties with appeal comparable to Elvis was John F. Kennedy, but Presley, for all the cultural revolutions he set off, was no fan of radicalism. Indeed, in the ensuing years, he would become the counter-countercultural face of the anti-drug campaign, even visiting Nixon in the White House to offer his support. (According to Albert Goldman’s biography, Elvis didn’t consider himself a junkie because he took prescription drugs.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="60"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">How Nixon and Presley made a comeback in the same year is one of those great stories of American History. Of course, triumph was followed by tragedy. Nixon was immolated in the Watergate scandal and the deep state conspiracy to unseat him. Elvis’s drug use and paranoia grew finally caught up with him nearly a decade after his comeback.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="161"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, both loom in some ways as the most momentous figures in politics and culture, though not necessarily in a good way. Nixon’s foreign policy moves, especially with China, had tremendous long-term consequences, and the scandal that destroyed him is still the standard, fairly or unfairly, by which all later scandals have been compared.<br />Most troubling of all, what had once been deemed scandalous about Nixon has become the staple of how the entire system now operates under Jewish Power. Jews did most to discredit Nixon as an abuser of power, but their gangster antics now dwarf Nixon(and Joe McCarthy) by 1000x. As for Elvis, it’s difficult to think of a lone figure in pop culture that comes anywhere near his stature. Even though the Elvis-that-mattered was from mid-to-late fifties — to be sure, he had some stunning hits after 68, especially “Suspicious Minds”, maybe his best song, and “Kentucky Rain” — , there has simply never been anyone quite like him.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5aD5rgDpQqc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="195"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">THE ROLLING STONES ROCK N ROLL CIRCUS offers lots of talent, but the power derives from chemistry and teamwork. As talented as John Lennon was, his star power owed to being of the Fab Four. Also true of Mick Jagger, who would have been lost without the Stones. David Lee Roth was full of flamboyance in the 80s with songs like “Jump” but went limp after leaving Van Halen. The Who, Pink Floyd, CCR, the Clash, Led Zeppelin, Beach Boys, Byrds, and etc. were great acts but as bands. It’s hard to imagine any member of the aforementioned bands making much of a mark on his own. Bob Dylan and Michael Jackson were great lone acts, but Dylan had to elevate Rock to an art form(no mean feat) to make himself matter. And Jackson had to do a lot of dancing and fireworks on stage to be a star. There was Bruce Springsteen, but he needed the full blast of his outsized band to make it work. Jimi Hendrix without a guitar would have been lost. Jim Morrison might have been bigger but was too much of a lout spiraling out of control.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="631" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhBR3XK77nKAU1zRuaw4NVunzb0znMN1RR3Wf3NdoyE_r1OYYjfNe9iZEIbCyd4LuiYCwuYU4AZ5f55gwoRAFhIAv2yjb_022MN3oygutHtQa7MzYdvDGf7Vt6mKcQaK2vyo0MRStJU33_NFMLdD2kZwE1D4hbq18GqfIzbxUsQMQXAZzsqH9GLlndSYg=w640-h631" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, what is remarkable the ’68 ELVIS COMEBACK is the King need not do much to be a star. He could just strut on stage with a guitar and smile a little, say a little, and have a little fun, and he’s a star. His stardom seems effortless(though it did take a lot of effort). Since the 1950s, billions have been born, and yet, there’s been no one quite like Elvis, which suggests he wasn’t merely one of the million but one of the billion. Even though the Sixties Rockers were louder and more rambunctious, they seem like boys next to Elvis the Man. Indeed, it was one reason why Elvis couldn’t respect them, especially as the acts grew scruffier with the passing years(and by 1968, the unkempt look was in). One thing Elvis had in common with Frank Sinatra was the pride of looking good and proper, and he looks smashing in his comeback, whereas most of the acts in The Rock n Roll Circus look like they barely washed after crawling out of bed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="123"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Elvis Presley’s stardom has often been associated a remark by Sam Philips, “If I could find a white man who had the Negro sound and the Negro feel, I could make a billion dollars.” One might say Philips’ vision came true with Elvis, but it’s too reductionist as Elvis was much more than ‘white guy + sing black’. Elvis was much more than the sum of the parts of the ‘white + black’ formula; he was one of a kind. Though heavily promoted, he was a natural, and it simply wouldn’t have worked the same way with anyone else. (Even though WALK THE LINE is a biopic about Johnny Cash, Joaquin Phoenix’s performance seems as inspired by Elvis as by Cash.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="222"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Though of Anglo origin, Elvis looked rather ambiguous and even exotic in ethnicity. A sultry Latin perhaps, like Rudolph Valentino, Victor Mature(half-Italian), or Sal Mineo. Or earthy Slav or restless Gypsy. (There’s even some Jewish lineage, it’s been said.) When the blokes of the British Invasion poured into the US, they looked nothing like Elvis despite the common ethnicity. Like Cary Grant and Rock Hudson, Elvis tanned easily, rather atypical of the average Anglo or Northern European who burn than tan under the sun. He also had one hell of a name, so perfectly befitting one destined for legendary status.<br />He wasn’t merely handsome but uniquely so, which set him apart from the generic good-lookers. He had perhaps the most envious quality in a person: Winning personality, something to die for, to kill for, like in the John Knowles novel A SEPARATE PEACE where Phineas ends up dead as the result of an act of envy/resentment on the part of Gene, his best friend. Gene has no apparent reason or justification to cause harm to Phineas but for the fact that he just can’t get his hands on what makes Phineas so magnetic, non-conforming yet adored by authority. He breaks more rules than anybody but is most endearing to the faculty. Elvis had that very quality.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="216"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Stardom has many features, and a star in music is fortunate enough to have the looks, the moves, the voice, the charm, and a bit of humor. Most stars have one or maybe two of these qualities. Many fine singers lacked the looks. Some looked good but weren’t the best singers. Some could sing and do the moves but were short on charm. Elvis had it all, which made it seem so unfair. He could even be a bit self-deprecating because his stellar quality as a star was unquestionable. Few stars have the full package, and Elvis was one of them.<br />In this, he was similar to Muhammad Ali. There were other boxers in history who were as dominant and skilled, but it’s hard to think of another boxer with the qualities of a star. He not only possessed the moves in the ring and perhaps the best chin in heavyweight history but had the looks, the humor, and the personality. He could do things and get away it because HE did it. He could call Joe Frazier a ‘gorilla’ and have people in stitches. By any fair measure, his harassment of Sonny Liston prior to the fight was unethical and unsportsmanlike, to say the least, but it was funny because HE did it.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="359" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEirqkdehaAfme806rDGbIp-kwG8jTPzBCTA53QP_MFpZPUG345uVwZEiTk0VLb0BSre9BtMDGun6RTFtxX8OalZkazOSVoQo-Rs8Rbx8XCTfEKIK2Cr2T4gBlaMsomMTtDNOWuLd1gZfDAYIlKsAeKHTU-CARpT3ptUPzX0Lowi9q0jdmoSCSKDaYGYtw=w640-h359" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="78"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In one way, one might say the West survived 1968, especially the US with its race riots, anti-war protests, & assassinations, and France with its shocking May 68 lunacy that came out of nowhere. The system proved far more resilient than anyone assumed. And as the years passed, 68 seemed to become just another memory. (The Czech revolution failed too. Though anti-communist, therefore ostensibly anti-leftist, it was also a liberalist rebellion against the culturally conservative nationalism of the communist ruled state.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="116"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, in another way, 1968, far from being a moment of radical failure to bring about change — Nixon became president and Charles De Gaulle survived — , came to serve as the template for future power politics. Just like the Tet Offensive failed to take South Vietnam but served as a crucial lesson for the North to regroup and plan for long-term strategy, the Western radicals who failed in 68 would eventually get their college degrees and become entrenched in academia, media, and the state, forever altering the cultural and political tempo of the West. But, even they weren’t the biggest long-term beneficiaries of 68. The biggest winners who learned from 68 were the super-capitalists, globalists, Jews, and the deep state.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Any side can learn a trick or two from the enemy and turn it around. After World War II, the capitalist-imperialist West was challenged by insurgencies all around the world, but by the 1980s, the US had developed an effective counter-insurgency program by promoting its own insurgencies(even if astro-turfed). The US made Nicaragua bleed with the Contra ‘rebellion’, and the Soviets became mired in Afghanistan in what the US engineered as the New Vietnam. Jewish-controlled US got really good at this, especially in the Middle East and North Africa by aiding one bunch of Jihadis, radicals, and extremists to cause never-ending trouble for Arab/Muslim regimes deemed ‘hostile’ to the West. So, what had been used against the West could be reconfigured and used by the West.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="38"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Same seems to have happened with the 68 unrest. The powers-that-be carefully studied the politics of exuberance, anarchy, rage, immaturity, impatience, & nihilism and weaponized their understanding to push all manner of faux-radical movements and, of course, ‘color revolutions’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Authorities were taken aback by the events of 68. De Gaulle sought refuge in Germany. The Democratic Party elders couldn’t make heads or tails of the situation, and Hubert Humphrey seemed utterly flustered along with his peers. The police was also taken by surprise and easily provoked by protests and rampages far more vulgar, irreverent, and deranged than in previous times.<br />And yet, just as the establishment couldn’t make sense of things, neither could the radicals, rebels, and revelers seize the moment. May 68 in France encompassed a wide range of political views, from far-left Maoists to neo-Leninists to Third World romantics to sexual libertines to the traditional working class(until the French proletariat finally stood against the young radicals who seemed hell-bent on destruction for destruction’s sake). Unlike the Bolsheviks, Chinese communists, and Cuban revolutionaries(and the Civil Rights Movement with fixed goals and strategy), 68 was like a fire that burned out of control but also burned out fast. There were too many voices, too little discipline and focus. When the dust settled, the Establishment was still in control, if only because the radicals were so out-of-control.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="214"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, what if the Power could find ways to engineer such of ‘day of rage’ revolutions? In a way, it’d be like taking a page out of the fascist manual, which, in opposing radical leftism, nevertheless appropriated many of the methods and rhetoric of revolution to push against it in favor of corporatism?<br />In a similar way, could the Power learn from 68 and engineer/exploit(often via so-called NGO’s) insta-crises, mini-hysterias, and cartoon-revolutions to effect change? And, of course, the Power need not worry about street revelers taking power for themselves as they’d be animated by passion than organization. They’d be used like fire and smoke by Neanderthals to hunt the cave bear. In so-called ‘color revolutions’, the US instigates mass uprisings to bring down existing regimes and to install puppets waiting in the wings. The crowds are handed cookies to shake the system to the ground but not consulted as to who should be the new rulers. Of course, there is something about ‘democracy’ and ‘elections’, but all the candidates are those handpicked and funded by the empire. So-called ‘liberal democracy’ is just a game of Imperial Democracy where all the so-called democracies, even the one in the US, are filled with interchangeable members of the New World Order.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing 68 taught the powers-that-be is that people, especially those affected by pop culture and hedonism, could go crazy over the stupidest thing. True, there was genuine anti-war movement in the US in 68, but big part of the attraction was the thrill of rock-n-roll anarchy, especially with the Yippies added to the mix. And in key respects, May 68 in France was about spoiled middle class kids playing at being radicals, rather like Marie Antoinette playing at shepherdess. Not that these middle class students didn’t have legitimate issues — many were the first in their family to go to college — , but their sense of outrage seemed entirely disproportionate to their problems? What did Che Guevara and Mao have to do with conditions in France? Also, unlike the US then embroiled in Vietnam, France had given up its empire for good. So much of the outrage was too much too late.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="47"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, what lessons to be learned! So many people driven to such mania and lunacy over trifles and who-knows-what. And as Mao understood all too well during the Cultural Revolution(or Maomania) at its height, young dummies can be made to go crazy over just about anything.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="359" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiNCB-mMZoQe7pWS0Qs9fGqlKcWB32P_rshIvyCb7wD6BcZ9Mu-AJZ-BEcjMLSjg4cGUrJfV42hwU7BaH42K7-2Li9mE5QdJI55F7B1jKjYppraTNMdLrtYvteceKouLwwcW4gfM3P7cijaIUqmqjimr4VqpCdVxtLIYdrWDQ18lDxgpTbtl_UyCJvRsQ=w640-h359" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="185"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Since the rise of the boomers, so many social/cultural movements came to rely on mass-recruiting-and-inducing the young to get all riled up about certain issues(always chosen by the Power, especially Jewish). Thus, 68-ism has been turned into a formula of power, especially via social media. Just as the internet could be used by individuals to expose and criticize the Power, it could be used by the Power to spellbind, ‘hystericalize’, and mobilize the masses. Sometimes, the Power exploits real grievances, like in the Arab Spring. Who could deny the Arab masses had long-standing complaints about stagnant social orders and corrupt political systems? But, such rush of childish exuberance and anarchic nihilism was easily exploited by the West against certain regimes targeted for destruction. Notice the Western media overlooked protests in Saudi Arabia(and even helped the government crush them) whereas much bigger issue was made of the strife in places like Libya, where NATO exploited the crisis to bomb the nation to smithereens and take out Gaddaffi. The Power had the same plan for Syria but for the intervention of Russia and Iran.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Iranian Revolution, for all its problems and betrayals, was a true movement fired up by mass rage at the Shah regime installed by the US. In contrast, so-called ‘color revolutions’ exploit genuine disaffection in certain nations to create a sudden power vacuum to be filled with vassals chosen by Jews and globalists(or the keep the vacuum void of order and stability to prevent the nation from ever forming into a viable anti-imperial player again).<br />The Ukraine crisis of 2014 had elements of 68-ism. It was geared to hit the existing regime out of the blue. The masses were driven into frenzy by fake news and propaganda spread by social media controlled by Jews. Ukrainians with a thousand complaints entered the fray with hopes for a better future. But it was really a puppet play with the strings held by Jews. Once the pro-Russian government was toppled, the angry but disorganized Ukrainians had no say in the new government. Their rage and violence had been used, but the new government had already been groomed by the US State Department.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="194"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">2020 in the US had all the hallmarks of 1968 but with one crucial difference. If the Power in 68 was genuinely shaken and hoped to weather the storm, the events of 2020 were engineered by by the Power, namely the Jews(with their control of media, internet, academia) and the deep state. Antifa and BLM are Jewish-funded goon squads. The police were ordered to take the knee to the thugs and stand down while cities burned. (Kyle Rittenhouse was persecuted for trying to be a good citizen while the police did nothing to stop Kenosha from burning.) FBI and CIA also took the knee to BLM thugs. While cities were sacked and innocent people were attacked, city officials painted entire streets with BLM signs. FBI didn’t pursue BLM and Antifa thugs. Politicians egged on the thugs and louts. Those arrested were slapped on the wrist. Along with Covid, it was a power-move by the System to destroy Donald Trump and to intimidate populism into silence. You don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind blows, but what if you could control the weather itself? Such demonic force, it deserves no sympathy.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/rJztRnDxdM8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The 1990 Adrian Lyne movie JACOB’S LADDER(written by Bruce Joel Rubin as a kind of juiced-up THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE) touched on the theme of the Power appropriating an element of the Counterculture for its own purposes. (Lyne, along with countryman Alan Parker, made movies in the most sensationalistic and obnoxious manner, but the style works in this strange movie, somewhat similar to ANGEL HEART, one of Parker’s more intriguing works.) This hallucinatory tale of tormented psyche hints at a deep state experiment in 1968 to turn soldiers into more efficient killers. The plan was by blackmailing a hippie LSD-maker into concocting chemicals that break down man’s inhibitions against bloodshed. Apparently, the government felt too many men fought in defensive posture, prioritizing staying alive than killing the enemy. In unleashing their hunter-killer instinct, the men might be more willing to charge into the jungle to take on the Viet Cong. However, the experiment goes awry with unintended consequences when the soldiers turn against one another. Their killer instincts are riled up to such degree that they become downright demonic in their bloodlust and slaughter anyone, even one another.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="85"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, no such experiment was ever carried out by the US government, though the CIA did recruit chemists to administer certain substances on unsuspecting individuals(some of whom thought they’d gone mad and committed suicide). But, even if nothing so outlandish like the experiment in JACOB’S LADDER was ever carried out, the scenario serves as a useful metaphor for how the Power can take something associated with rebellion or sub-culture, turn it on its head, and use it for its own purposes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the late 60s, the state lost control of the narrative. Both the establishment wings of the Democratic Party and the GOP didn’t know what to make of the social unrest burgeoning everywhere over so many issues. But in a world remade by boomers who took over as the new establishment, so much of the social ‘unrest’ since the early 90s have been partly engineered and directed from the top. Just like the soldiers in JACOB’S LADDER are made crazy and end up slaughtering one another, we now see young NPC-like Americans hating and attacking fellow Americans. We see Slavs attacking Slavs in Ukraine(and of course, the scandals about bio-weapon labs).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When riots and protests broke out in the late 60s, many middle class people stood with authority to have order restored. The fact that Nixon won in 68 and then even bigger in 72 was sure indication that even many Democrat hoi polloi wanted a law-and-order candidate. When there’s so much craziness in the streets, one had no choice but to side with the Power. But in 2020, it was the Power that inflamed much of the ‘radical’ rage and directed it at decent law-abiding Americans. When the very institution of authority releases the furies upon the hapless populace whom it is supposed to serve and protect, what are the people to do? What historical juncture are we at?</span></p><div class="twitter-tweet twitter-tweet-rendered" style="border: 0px; display: flex; font: inherit; margin: 10px 0px; max-width: 500px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 500px;"><iframe allowfullscreen="true" allowtransparency="true" class="" data-tweet-id="1502162497062653955" frameborder="0" id="twitter-widget-0" scrolling="no" src="https://platform.twitter.com/embed/Tweet.html?dnt=true&embedId=twitter-widget-0&features=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%3D%3D&frame=false&hideCard=false&hideThread=false&id=1502162497062653955&lang=en&origin=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.unz.com%2Fjfreud%2Felvis-comeback-special-and-the-rolling-stones-rock-and-roll-circus-in-the-crazy-year-of-1968%2F&sessionId=fb420f9e3c7e16b7730f8cb2f0e8ea425c9b2c60&theme=light&widgetsVersion=a3525f077c700%3A1667415560940&width=500px" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; display: block; flex-grow: 1; font: inherit; height: 500px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; position: static; vertical-align: baseline; visibility: visible; width: 500px;" title="Twitter Tweet"></iframe><br /></div></div></section></div><span id="_bottom" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><div class="nav-group" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; clear: both; color: #888888; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="nav-item leftside" style="border: 0px; float: left; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"><br /></span></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-34000328349756315752022-12-07T16:38:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:08.642-08:00Appeasement Doesn't Work: Russia as Metaphor and Why Patriots Need to Stand with Russia Against Virulent Judeo-Nazism<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="531" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgfVDJnCrp0WSq8bH1D2z3yiQ_lVgFCm4060vaOezGB0v08yc6ZTU-zGAV4-_RmKJsnsKvR1yT6lRy4qCGd_6KEbV_gu2Bb2x20tdwaXHjcpeYHYzrUZSlngMyWVsQj01YzXex8hbnWbQcfYjGICxG0Z23iHVv5LOeKNn1FQF-GeWBTrUDoLYT3zT__pA=w640-h531" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Moral Outrage among politicians(and increasingly among journalists reduced to roles of propagandists for the BLM-LBGTQ deep state) makes for great comedy. Talk about moral blind spots, variation of “Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you.” Recent reports and analysis in the West about the Russo-Ukraine Conflict are so outlandish that they raise questions about narratives of past events as well. If they lie so brazenly today, what have they been saying about the past, then and now? One wonders about the official World War I narrative and perhaps Patrick J. Buchanan was more right than wrong about the outbreak of World War II than I’d assumed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Minus the context, the Russian invasion of Ukraine does sound pretty bad, and the image of Vlad the Impaler would seem valid. But given all that transpired since 2014 when Jewish Supremacist US interfered in Ukrainian affairs, fomented a coup(even by recruiting extremist Nazi-Sentimentalist elements, the far-right counterpart of Antifa used in the West), installed puppet governments, leeched the country dry, promoted cultural degeneracy, inflamed hatred among Slavs, and endlessly provoked Russia, all the while spitting on the Minsk Accord and constantly shelling the Donbass regions with their heavily Russian populations, only someone gone full-retard could possibly regard Russia as the wrongful aggressor.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="297"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Same is true of the Trucker Convoy in Canada. If, for no reason at all, a bunch of Truckers decided to descend on Ottawa and loudly honk horns and block bridges, it would indeed be criminal. But given the context of the New World Order where most so-called ‘leaders’ of Western ‘Democracies’ or the ‘Free World’ are craven cuck-collaborators of Jewish Exceptionalism that’s been using the Covid-hysteria to effect all sorts of lockdowns, mandatory ‘quaccines’, and economic destruction of the middle/working class, it was right for the Truckers to risk all and take drastic measures as protest.<br />When goy elites have chosen the path of globalist obedience than standing for genuine national interests, they no longer play by the rules, in which case the rules are dead and there is only the struggle for power. Boil the the agenda of the so-called ‘rules-based order’ down to its essentials, and it’s not about principles but insatiable practice of Jewish power-lust. Isn’t it telling how the Jewish Exceptionalist globalist power(and their worthless cuck minions) has reacted to both the Trucker Convoy and Russian liberation of Ukraine: Freezing bank accounts, seizing assets, sanctions, and etc. They fund and protect BLM, Antifa, and degenerate LGBTQ(and all sorts of anti-white, anti-nationalist, and anti-populist causes), but any time and any where there is a show of resistance, they do everything to take away livelihoods and destroy nations. Any goy on the side of Jewish Exceptionalism is a lowlife punk and traitor. Such scum say Putin’s problem is hubris, but this is pure projection as the aggressive megalomaniacal force in the world is Jewish Exceptionalist hubris, made much worse by years of Anglo cuckery and appeasement that indulged and encouraged the worst aspects of the Jewish character.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, such is the chorus of the ruling elites and wanna-be-elites of the West. Needless to say, they get their news, narratives, icons, and pointers from the Jewish Supremacist Media and State Department. While there are plenty of earnest true-believer-dummies who believe in the Good West vs the Evil East, others stick with the narrative despite knowing full well the context. For some, it’s a matter of status. Since all the ‘best kind of people’ in top positions say so, they go along if only to improve their rankings. US politicians rely on Jewish donations, that’s for sure. Some in the War Department love any tensions around the world to justify aggression and increased funding.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="247"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s also a therapeutic aspect to Russian-Bear-baiting in the West where the goy elites are such craven whores cowering at the feet of Jews and, by extension, of blacks and homos, the ‘protected’ and favored allies of Jews. No one wants to stare in the mirror and see a coward staring back. Just like it’s therapeutic for dogs to be allowed to hunt for rabbits and foxes to balance out the total submission to their master, Western goyim get their fill of ‘tough guy’ pride by being allowed to bark at certain targets, almost always chosen by Jews. It’s usually Russia, Syria, Iran, China, and sometimes Venezuela(for daring to have a working relation with Iran). Given how white goyim in the West, as total cuck-dogs of Jews, must take the knee to BLM thuggery and Globo-Homo degeneracy — even the US police and FBI join in the abasement — , they relish at any opportunity to seem tough by growling at FOREIGN enemies.<br />Certain hatreds are permitted, even partly encouraged. Others are compulsory. For instance, it’s permissible to piss on India or Pakistan but not encouraged. It’s permissible and somewhat encouraged to blame China. As for Russia, Iran, and Syria, it’s downright obligatory, just like virtually all politicians in NY, Chicago, LA, and San Francisco are expected to attend Globo-Homo ‘pride’ rallies. (In that regard, LGBTQ pageantry in the West plays the same role as Marxist-Leninist celebrations once did in Warsaw Pact nations.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj7B0modTUnAKQBrm_HXYVEJN-Tx4rNUBbiYUQJ_bwdMunpqVwRavxvV4WGjfwB654Mm8K8XOvrs_hg-2FMoG8OKGJj6X8fmBL7rRJ0DU9fjZ8iV2Q4Ou7nW7ENBmggaQU57dmbx7gHJRwGut5XhFAHEQmJIMlTmRaESa7Zb8dmYw1vimswoi6NUJ9Q3g=w640-h270" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="202"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At some point, Jewish weasels realized whites, especially Anglos, are essentially dog-like. They are very trainable, which explains why Anglos came to conquer and rule the world. Great Britain was one hell of an obedience school for empire, far more than Ancient Rome long before it. (Anglo individualism had meaning only among exceptional personalities, not among most Anglos whose true character was evident during the Covid-19 ‘pandemic’: utter doglike servility and conformism. For every Lawrence of Arabia or Jack Celliers of MERRY CHRISTMAS MR. LAWRENCE, there were a thousand Anglos who only said ‘sir’ and followed orders.) So, if Jews take control over the Anglo elites who ‘lead’ the Anglo masses, it’s a done deal for Jewish Power. And so, we have the current West, Jewish weasels over Anglo top dogs over Anglo bottom dogs and everyone else. As much of the world is still deeply impressed with the Anglo-made Modern World, largely due to legacy(though fading fast), even non-Anglos emulate the current Anglo-model, which happens to be cuckery to Jews. Anglos suck up to Jewish-concocted Globo-Homo, and so, Poles and Czechs do it too, as well as the satellite nations of East Asia and large swaths of Latin America.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If hating on Jewish-chosen targets is psychologically therapeutic to some, for others it’s a matter of neo-spiritual crusade. Surely, many in the Deep State know of the conditions and betrayals that led to the current crisis in Ukraine. They know Russia was baited again and again. Privately, they know Putin was forced to take drastic measures. But they still go along with the official narrative of Evil Russia due to neo-missionary zeal. As their secular faith revolves around Globo-Homo, Jew-worship, and BLM, they genuinely feel that the US(and its satellite West) is the New Vatican. Their holy trinity is about Jews, blacks, and homos, and therefore, the US must be the best of all possible worlds because it cucks hardest to the three sacred groups.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, even though Putin may be geo-politically justified in his actions, he is regarded as the ming-the-merciless-like ruler of the Evil Empire of ‘homophobia’ and resistance to cuck-absolutism before the Jews. And as Russia doesn’t have enough blacks, it can’t be as good as the US that, not only has lots of blacks, but reverentially washes stinky Negro feet and celebrates the Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs. If one wants to visualize the current state of white mentality, imagine a white guy ‘taking the knee’ before a giant black ass, then squeezing his head into the anus to be bobbed back and forth to the ‘twerking’ motion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Secularism proved hollow in the long run because humans are naturally spiritualist, and the modern post-religious West found new secular icons in the likes of MLK, George Floyd, Anne Frank, Harvey Milk, Matthew Shepherd(oh, what a name worthy of gayspel), and even Jonathan Pollard(especially among Jews). Just like Christian Missionaries knew of West’s imperialist aggression and plunder but nevertheless blessed and cheered them on for spreading the Faith, many among the Western elites do know the truth, i.e. that Russia was driven to exasperation, but support the ‘NATO’ agenda out of neo-missionary zeal. To them, Russia is a fallen place with its building of Christian Churches. Russia can be blessed only if gaggles of Pussy Riot hags enter churches and plant ‘gay pride’ victory flags and ‘twerk’ in front of Christian Icons and urinate all over. This is to be expected in a social order where even so-called ‘conservative’ pundits argue in favor of Drag Queen Story Hour funded by tax payer dollars.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="47"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for Jews, it’s a matter of self-worship, and it is most dangerous. At least, genuine Christians, Muslims, and religious Jews believe in a power greater than themselves, but secular Jews feel themselves to the lords of the universe, or at least the ‘unipolar’ world order.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="171"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The blind spot and the hypocrisy of the West are truly outrageous. At least Russia rightly considers Ukraine as an ‘existential’ matter. In contrast, the US invaded other nations for far less. US is still in Syria, illegally. Ronald Reagan sent troops to occupy Grenada, a tiny island that posed far hardly any threat to the US. And, if we brush off that invasion as a Cold War tit-for-tat, what about George H.W. Bush’s invasion of Panama? That was post-Cold War and to silence Manuel Noriega who had a lot of dirt on the Bush, CIA, and their criminal activities all over Latin America. I don’t recall the world calling on sanctions against the US. And, the one time George H.W. Bush and James Baker showed anything like a conscience and applied mild pressure on Israel to stop grabbing more of West Bank, the full force of Jewish Power went for their heads, even after they’d bent over backwards to appease Neocons in the Gulf War.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And speaking of invasions, is the official 9/11 narrative even correct? If Zionists were involved, even indirectly, it makes the attack on USS Liberty seem like child’s play. What were those Dancing Israelis about? Could those amateurish bunch of Muslim morons with box-cutters have pulled off a terrorist attack on such scale all on their own via intermittent communication with Osama Bin Laden reading the Koran in some cave in Afghanistan? Why was the official report as dubious as the Warren Commission(or Omission)? Why weren’t certain tantalizing leads, especially pointing to Zionists and Israel, not pursued to their logical end? If what some of us think of 9/11 is true, then it’s beyond outrage that the very group, Jews of course, who are doing most to fan the narrative of ‘UNPROVOKED Russian Invasion’, have been themselves the biggest attackers on the US.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg8GpAZEKMM148zhQ47so_3-b9orre7rBX1PCgr4RrZT1za11XEhlak-KUdaZuLtpi3l_p_ge-uDZvwVyyXnhJheIvPXClARHV3ssJ6bX9EZ3cn87wkxLJNlYFwQQi9vfvUCAGNE4N1pJAMhqvRCEPp1OINDXzsZKMom4LFhCbBR34UucqG-MNfoR-9OQ=w542-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="542" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The immensity of Jewish Power is evident even in Putin’s speech. Despite having taken the momentous decision for war, Putin still dares not name the Jewish Power that got him there. Is he afraid of offending and alienating Jews who are still powerful in the Russian State? More likely, he knows Jews control the gods in the West, and the ultimate taboo among Western Elites is any criticism of Jewish Power. Western elites bark madly about Ukraine and etc., but may eventually return to the table for further negotiations once the dust clears. But badmouthing Jews in the West is tantamount to badmouthing Muhammad in the Muslim World. It’s crossing the Rubicon whereby Putin isn’t merely ‘like Hitler’ but ‘is Hitler’ and must be utterly destroyed in what could spiral out of control into World War III.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If there’s a psychological red line in the sand among Western whites, especially the elites, it’s faith in Jews as Anne Franks and Holy Moses. It’s their quasi-religion. Therefore, even though Russia is taking actions against certain Naziesque elements, the bigger truth, that those elements were armed and emboldened by the Jewish-controlled West, goes unnamed. The Jew cries out in pain as it strikes Russia with a Nazi-Iron-Glove, but Russia names the ‘nazi’ glove but not the Jew. A truly pathetic state of affairs. In the end, it too is a kind of appeasement. Still, Putin’s bold move in Ukraine is a sign that the world cannot continue with the same old same old if any nation is to remain free or sovereign.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="241"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish Power is so effective because it has relied on infiltration than invasion, though there have been plenty of invasions as well at the behest of Jews. Jews in the Muslim world profited from Muslim invasions, and Jews in Europe did so from European invasions and colonization. Wherever the Anglos went, Jews went. But Jews weren’t content to serve merely as merchant hangers-on(like the Greeks and Armenian minorities or overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia). They sought to take over and control goy societies. As Jews themselves couldn’t outright invade and take over, they relied on infiltration, and the strategy came to the greatest fruition in the relatively more rules-based order of the Anglos who, for all their hypocrisy and betrayal of principles, were more prone to reform, self-criticism, and appreciation of excellence. With their high IQ and skilled honed in brainy fields, Jews were poised to reach ever higher. As racial-minded as the Anglos were, Jews realized racial identity was secondary to gentlemanly and ‘good sports’ pride of fair play and good form & manners among the Anglos. Thus, by exposing Anglo hypocrisy and failure to live up to their own rules, Jews could rise ever higher at the Anglo expense. Meanwhile, what mattered most to Jews was tribalism, and fortunately for them, tribalism need not compete with meritocracy as they were the Tribe with the highest IQ, most dogged personality, and the prophetic egotism of Big Ideas.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, Jews could rely on the rules-based order of the Anglos and rise ever higher, and if Anglos put up obstacles, shame them as ‘racist’ or ‘antisemitic’ hypocrites who betrayed their own principles of fair play. But Jews weren’t content to gain elite power and rub shoulders with the goy upper crust. To truly gain control over the West, they had to control the hearts and minds of the masses as well. For this, Jews needed to take over the academia and media. What begins in elite academia has trickle-down and overflow effect on rest of the educational system, down to kindergarten level. So, gender studies nuttery began at the top and now has tentacles even at the pre-school level with drag-queen story hours.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And the media, news and entertainment, especially in the electronic age, reach into every home and infiltrate the eyes and ears of the countless masses. In this way, Jewish influence is like fluoride in water. What’s the difference between rain water and tap water? Rain water is external, something you can avoid with a raincoat, umbrella, or staying indoors. In contrast, you ingest fluoride whenever you drink tap water. Russia, China, and Iran(and most of the world) is like rain water to the West. The West could be protected from their influence with a big umbrella. But Jewish Power is like control of the content and flow of tap water. Media control the flow of information, and whenever you turn on the TV or radio, whenever you go on social media(mostly controlled by Jewish monopolies and/or policed and pressured by Jewish supremacist groups), Jewish influence flows through your eyes and ears into your neurons.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="70"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Jews took over via infiltration due to the rules-based order of the Anglos, they do not play by the rules. Just ask the Palestinians. Or Syrians. Or the Iranians, whose Press TV was shut down in the West. Press TV had a minor presence in Western internet discourse, but it was taken down whereas any amount of insane and deranged Zionist propaganda get full play over and over.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As dirty, low-life, and scummy as the Anglos could be, the fact that they could be shamed by exposure of their hypocrisy suggests at some conscience. In contrast, Jewish Power tolerates no criticism and pulls the Holocaust alarm whenever someone pries into the dark side of Jewish Power. But then, one wonders if Anglos caved to Jews out of genuine conscience or shame of being exposed? After all, if Anglos gave up considerable power out of redemptive conscience, they would have called out on bad Jewish behavior. Instead, Anglos just became total Anglo Cucks to Jewish Supremacism. Where is the Anglo condemnation of Jewish abuses in big pharma and finance? Or condemnation of Zionist treatment of Palestinians? Or Anglo pushback against what is clearly insane Jewish-led foreign policy.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="381" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjwvJQKv4yX8QyMPmsC-OI4q0dT_HaRoYPkV5hjD0xKr8wrL1Kv6n_R6V4RfJiaOvWQnb2GYW_-OSaLk8ryiy7H1odDUSpo8qWhjzj2tG4TsEpZuV2o2eq4NOc-koKr0c5YHFQYYAdJbM3CqJ_RLePM1kkH4sEuQY1NHRuWpuJ4crpmyvh8RUgtn5Q-_Q=w640-h381" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="136"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the current order, you are a ‘traitor’ for not supporting the positions of the Empire of Judea. So, American Patriotism has boiled down to (1) agreeing with Jewish Power 100% (2) hating whomever and whatever Jews hate and (3) condemning anyone who isn’t on board with the official narrative. (In the buildup to the Iraq War, Neocon David Frum accused antiwar conservatives for their lack of patriotism!) A stupid kind of patriotism was premised on “My country right or WRONG” — just think of the wars that could have been avoided if the masses refused support ‘my country’, effectively the agenda of the ruling regime, even when it was wrong — , but the current ‘patriotism’ of the US is premised on “Muh Israel right or wrong”, ‘Israel’ in this case meaning not just the Jewish State but Zionic World Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="292"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Under the current sham-ideological regimen, true conscience isn’t possible because the only allowable, indeed mandatory, pseudo-conscience revolves around “Is it good for Jewish Supremacist Power?” So, if someone conscientiously points out that Assad in Syria has been combating deranged terrorist extremists funded, armed, and protected by US, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the like, just shut the hell up. But, if there’s any talk of US pulling out of Syria, the there’s a BIG STINK about how those poor poor Kurds must be protected. If you care about the people of Yemen or the Palestinians, do shut up, you loser traitor. But how virtuous of all these globalists and proglodytes to wail about those poor poor Ukrainians, a people who hardly registered on the radar until Jewish Supremacists found them useful against Russia — in the 1930s, World Jewry did everything to hide and deny the fact of the Great Famine because Jews were prominent in Bolshevism. (Given the scant attention most Americans pay to world affairs, they usually lack the proper context to understand the character of any conflict that makes the news cycle. For many Americans, 2014 is distant history, and they know nothing of the anti-Russian provocations and attacks on the Donbass. So, the only thing they see is Russia invading Ukraine for apparently no reason at all. And the pat reasons given by TV pundits in the Jewish monopoly media is that Putin is reconstituting the Old Soviet Union. US is the premier world power, but many Americans are among the most provincially minded people on Earth, as for most of them the US is the only world that matters, just like pop entertainment is the entirety of their culture and ideological fads constitute their sense of right-and-wrong.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="282"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the Stanley Kubrick/Terry Southern film DR. STRANGELOVE, General Jack D. Ripper is paranoid about the communist takeover of the water supply and regards fluoride as part of a Cold War conspiracy to turn American men into a bunch of sterile pansies. In truth, those who took over the information-water-supply of the US were not universal-egalitarian-communists but tribal-Jewish-supremacist-capitalists, and the current world crisis has to be understood in the context of the ongoing Jewish Supremacist Power play around the world. Many on the Right regard George Soros as some kind of ‘far leftist’, but nothing could be further from the truth. He is a Jewish Supremacist whose ultimate goal is to weaken and infiltrate all goy nations. What is often regarded as Jewish Liberalism/Leftism is really a weapon of Jewish ultra-rightism to destroy goy rightism. Soros’s Open Society has been devised to infiltrate and take over goy worlds. That way, outright military invasion isn’t necessary. Instead, gain entry into every society. Understand that most goyim have weak identities and will betray their own ethnicity, nation, and folk if handed a ladder of opportunity to join the globalist groove. And being shallow small-minded people, their silly minds could easily be converted to the new ideology-idolatry of Globo-Homo, Jew-Worship, and BLM, meant to be placed ABOVE the identity and interests of one’s own particular nation or ethnic group, of course unless it happens to be Jews in Israel and the world over(like AIPAC Zionists in the US). Look how the globalists worked on Ukraine to lionize Negro athletes(as new national heroes) and homosexuals. Sure, Jews used the idiot pea-brained Right Sector in Ukraine but only as muscle.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="327"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, it’s understandable why masses of Ukrainians took the globalist pro-EU bait. Given the endemic corruption and ineptness of series of governments, they naturally thought matters would improve if Ukraine looked to the richer and freer-seeming West. But notwithstanding the legitimacy of such grievances, Slavs(and any other goyim in the world) need to realize that they mustn’t let themselves be played by Jews who aren’t motivated by conscience, goodwill, or altruism but tribal supremacy and greed. Jews exploit real problems in goy lands not to heal to but bleed dry.<br />Just consider the fate of Russia in the 1990s. Jews led as ‘advisors’, and Russians, faced with seemingly insurmountable challenges of transitioning from a communist to a capitalist economy, welcomed them as wise-men, saviors, and miracle workers. So, what happened? They were plundered of legacy and posterity. Just like only a retarded Arab would rely on Jewish Power to solve Arab problems, only a dumb Slav would look to the likes of Victoria Nuland and Stinkin’ Blinken for good will and genuine advice. It’s no different in the US. What did the GOP get out of cucking to the Neocons who sucked the Party dry and went back to join the Democrats when the populist wing said no more wars. Slavs and Arabs do have real problems, much of them the product of their own failures, but they must fix them on their own, not rely on the weasel to fix the henhouse. The last thing they should do is trust Jews, ultra-rightists posing as ‘liberals’, to offer solutions. That’s like calling on firemen with gasoline in their hoses to come and put out the fire. Not that Jews aren’t capable of fixing problems. With their intelligence, experience, and skills, of course they could do a world of good if they tried. But, one look at goyim and they just see More Palestinians(as metaphor) to beat up and torment.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/6277136463395502185/4867465774007418096#" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/6277136463395502185/4867465774007418096#"><img border="0" class="aligncenter" height="357" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjcpLeFfywruNsj9Vjwdd0IYlwb6pFxR6pZNeJnPXZSRLXUZ4avuLqyGpmr2EiFvlikn3BSZ2MX91c3NmAaBKEZEAzkJ2bB6d3Skq7cSxaqdsVCTbI_5NTbN29jce5z8aGfihm0uhV_k5JIEKsYyzZZtOlx5l07IRRnCujJh2fqIVqpv5D-k52sxYWRIQ=w640-h357" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="189"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Jewish takeover-via-infiltration worked against Anglo power, why not against all the world? George Soros thinks that way. Keep playing on the status vanity and little minds of goyim, and you gain yet another slice of the world. And just focus on the elites and wanna-be elites as most people are dummies who fixated on bread-and-circus. It certainly worked like magic with many whore-elites of former Warsaw Pact nations that fell for the ‘cool’ factor of the West(though now being degraded by the ascension of the Ugly as the New Normal.) Soros and stooges like Klaus Schwab are really for Jewish Power, and this fact must be spelled out. In some ways, Putin naming the Jewish Power would probably deal a bigger blow to the globalist-world-order, aka ‘rules-based order'(with the main rule being ‘Jews say, goyim obey’ and ‘Jews lead, goyim follow’). While sanctions can cause great material damage to Russia, naming-the-Jewish-Power could deal a death blow to the Jewish-Supremacist-World-Order. Not immediately but, with Jewish Power on the table as a subject of discourse, a more honest assessment of world affairs can begin to change the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Only the truth can set us free, and it begins with naming the Jewish Power. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, for all his flaws, committed himself to doing just that when he wrote the book about Russians and Jews. It was his attempt to arrive at some kind of mutual understanding whereby Russians must face up to their wrongs against Jews and vice versa. But with the Anglo World so servile to and flattering of Jews, this is nearly impossible. Jews refuse to meet any side halfway; just ask the Palestinians and Iranians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="188"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, the Anglo-cuck-surrender to the Jews was probably one of the most momentous(albeit muted) happenings in history. Not only because it put Jews in command of the great Anglo-made world order but filled them with boundless confidence, arrogance, pride, and contempt for anything that refuses to bow down before the Jews, like the Anglos had done. Imagine the hottest babe in town put out to you. Then, you will take umbrage if lesser babes refuse you. You will be ranting like Woltz in THE GODFATHER who had the best asses in town and can’t afford to look ‘ridiculous’. Jews who conquered the Anglos, who conquered the world, simply cannot accept any other people or power saying NO to Jews. If the great Anglos are so servile to Jews, who the hell are lesser peoples to say No to Jews? The nerve of such people! Anglo surrender sure turned Jews into the most spoiled princeling brats in the world. “If I say suck on it, you better suck on it. Who are you to say no, you little worm?” Goyim must serve Jews who eat like effendi.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Anglos had chosen to share power with Jews on an equal basis, things might have turned out differently. Or, if Anglos handed power to Jews but then took on the role that Jews once played against WASP elites, it would have served as a check on Jewish Power. A case of tables turned: From Jews criticizing Anglo/American power to Anglo/Americans criticizing Jewish Power. But, because Jews came to power in the aura of Eternal Holocaust Victims, Jewish Power came to be virtually criticism-proof, and furthermore, unlike the old Anglo-American elites in the media, Jews in the media worked hand-in-glove with Jews in seats of power to ever expand and consolidate power that became supremacist.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="205"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There’s something about the nature of power that drives people crazy, like the magic ring in THE LORD OF THE RINGS. Take boxers. Some of them, as champions, are so full of themselves, contemptuously shaking their gloves at the whole world. They aren’t like that before they became champions, but prestige and pride go to their heads. In such cases, it’s only defeat and comeuppance that finally restore their humanity. Whether it’s Jake LaMotta of RAGING BULL fame or Mike Tyson, they regained a measure of humanity only after falling to the bottom and climbing back up not as the ‘badassest mofo’ but merely as humans. Germans and Japanese after World War II showed any people can be restored to sanity and balance. Then, Jews, currently in a state of supremacist mania, can be restored to humanity only via defeat, which need not be military. After all, the supremacist strains of Anglo-Americans weren’t defeated militarily but relented under moral pressure. For there to be moral pressure, people must speak the truth, and the only way to prevent the 21st century from going totally batshit crazy is to name the Jewish Power(minus the ‘Sieg Heil’) in a critical humanist manner.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="269"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Recently, someone came up with the clever moniker of Global American Empire, acronymic as GAE. Funny and useful as it is to mock the twisted ‘value’ system of the current globalist world order, it too obfuscates what is really at stake: proxies in service to Jewish Supremacism that commands the tower. But it’s almost as if an extreme case of stuttering(like in the movie FISH CALLED WANDA) afflicts anyone who dares to mutter, “Jews done it.” The world is in need of serious speech therapy. People can say “Jews”, “Done”, and “It” separately, but put the words together, and the tongue freezes, teeth go rigid, and the jaws lock. You get, “J-J-J-J-J-J-J… J-J-J-J-J-J…. J-J-J-J-J.” This truth-stutter must be overcome if we are to prevent further madness in the future. The first person of prominence who names the Jewish Power and holds it responsible for the globalist madness should win all the future Nobel Prizes for Peace. Imagine if Tucker Carlson took the first bullet and named the Jewish Power. Sure, he would be fired from all sides, but the issue would be out in the open. Imagine if Putin named the Jewish Power as the power behind the lowlife Naziesque thugs in Ukraine. Imagine if Xi or some top Chinese official said, “Jews no act good. World blow up if Jews no act better.” So much could change, but even most voices in alternative and dissident media will not mention that it’s the Jewish Supremacists who are pulling the strings for what are essentially tribal-hegemonic ends. And so, Jews shamelessly go on messing up the world.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/fSu5W0BtXG8?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="190"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For white cucky-wuck conzos who carp on Joe Biden for not being tough enough on Ukraine, why do they look to Ukraine when we got Ukrainism here in the US? “It’s a Ukraine’s gonna fall.” (As for all those calling for wars, especially Jews and globalist elites, I urge them to either join the military or urge their children to sign up. Henceforth, US foreign wars should be fought by those fanning the flames around the world. Jews, homos, trannies, and the likes of David French can put on military gear and face off against Iran, Russia, China, whatever. Leave us out of it because, any honest person should have already noticed, the West is occupied territory, one gigantic West Bank where white patriots are reduced to the state of Palestinians or Russian-speaking people all across Ukraine. How amusing that the very class of people who are most bloodthirsty for conflict are least likely to serve in the military. And when they do, it’s in the Israeli military, like David Brooks’ son and Rahm Emanuel. I wonder how many Palestinian women and children those lowlife scum slaughtered.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="92"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If white cuckservatives are so into affairs in Ukraine, where have they been? Everything that Jewish Supremacists have done in Ukraine, they’ve also done in the US(and West in general). Just like Jews encouraged Ukrainians to wage war on Russianness(as part of history and heritage of Ukraine), they’ve encouraged ‘woke’ whites, blacks, nonwhites, and militant groups(like Antifa) to wage war on large swaths of white culture, heritage, and history. Monuments have been toppled, statues desecrated, books burned, and people attacked, even a milquetoast figure like Charles Murray.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, the madness didn’t end with the formulation of good whites vs bad whites. No, Jewish-promoted CRT says whiteness itself must be erased as its very existence as a category is an affront to humanity. In a similar vein, even though Russian culture and history are integral though somewhat separate from Ukrainian history, Jews fanned Ukrainian hatred toward all things Russian. In the US, Jews have urged upon educated(or indoctrinated) whites to hate the ‘deplorable’ whites. Not merely disagree but hate and dehumanize. According to Merrick Garland, the ‘deplorables’ are hair-breadth away from being ‘domestic terrorists’. The American South has been so excoriated and its white elites so castrated that they don’t dare move a finger to save Robert E. Lee monuments and, if anything, vote to honor Ahmaud Arbery for perpetuity(while remaining mum about countless white victims of black crime and violence).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">George W. Bush disingenuously said of terrorists, “We must fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here.” Well, in the case of Ukraine, why the need to get involved there when we have ukraine-like situations all over the West? And given Jewish-chosen ‘leaders’ like Joe Biden and Justin Trudeau(and just about all others) act just like the Ukrainian puppets and wage war on decent white patriots, hasn’t the average conservative figured out by now that his situation is more like that of Russian-speakers in Ukraine and Russia itself? Seriously, would white conservatives prefer a leader like Vladimir Putin or Lindsey the pansy Graham(or Mitt the shit Romney, Paul the doll Ryan, Mitch the bitch McConnell, Adam the dumb-dumb Kinzinger, Liz the sleaze Cheney, or etc.)? And the US is now so morally and culturally decrepit, it’s come to the point where even a clown like Andrew Anglin is more credible as a moralist than the entire elite class of cucks, shills, dweebs, and degenerates.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="284"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And speaking of ‘color revolutions’, what was 2020 with all its coordinated censorship in media and social platforms and electoral stunts to ‘fortify’ the election? Again, if Americans want Ukraine, it is right over here. Just like there was Maidan madness in 2014, there were BLM riots and Antifa thuggery unleashed on America. IT HAPPENED RIGHT HERE! And there was coordination among the Jewish controlled media, banks, internet platforms, courts(that released Antifa and BLM thugs back into the streets), and the deep state with its Jewish masters, homo agents, and white cucks who light candles to the gods controlled by Jews. (And let’s not even get into the Covid lunacy and its various uses by the Power to control and manipulate.) After all the businesses burned, all the statues & monuments toppled/desecrated, all the voices ‘canceled’, all the heritage & cultural memory erased, and all the people beaten and brutalized, are we to believe there are still all these conservatives whose sense of rage is about Russia finally saying ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and taking bold moves? THAT’S WHAT WHITE PATRIOTIC AMERICA SHOULD HAVE DONE YEARS AGO AGAINST JEWISH SUPREMACIST MADNESS. Don’t these morons notice the pattern? That what Jews pulled off in Ukraine against Russian-speakers and Russia is akin to how they used ‘wokeness’ and various other anti-white vitriol in the US and the West?<br />Just look at the anti-white filth on US television. If non-Jews controlled media in Israel and ran countless commercials with Jewish women with Arab men, wouldn’t Jews get a little suspicious about what’s up? But, no matter how much Jewish Power taunts, humiliates, and insults whites and whiteness, whites continue to cuck to Jews.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The so-called ‘unipolar world order’ is Jew-nipolar, and whites are so cucked that they still grovel at the feet of Jews like Mel Brooks’ character of the servant in TWELVE CHAIRS. “That’s my master.” Whites are worthless candy-ass sidekicks of the Jewish Weasel as top dog. American Politics is really a competition as to which party sucks up to Jews more. Currently, cucks of both parties are competing in the game of “We hate Russia more”. And it doesn’t matter how much Jews slap them around. They crawl back to lick Jewish boots.<br />Take John McCain and Mitt Romney. In 2008, the Jewish-run media ran one of the nastiest campaigns against McCain. He’d been a loyal servant to Zion all his life, but Jews wanted Obama in. NYT that used to heap praise on McCain as the ‘maverick Republican'(in other words, one who betrays his own base) brought out their knives and carved him real good. But did McCain finally wake up? No, upon losing, he got on his hands and feet to kiss Obama’s toes and kiss Jewish ass.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mWFujuasmUo?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgSMXs70duO5HiZZqxDTdmbM_UGGwe80_0CxiRsX5Gn-VjsFGznTxO_6skIRevEmprljL-JaG2bjsAqen8n0jbOw1tgzpZu_TTgSB04X87-peXEBImBkP3iXDRtYs36NN070JxeKVH1HPeuCUT2pA4HTHJgLNhNCTiOSjhDAdpIPW4uldZ0AWc21I8k8w=w490-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="490" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="194"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Or take Mitt Romney. The Jews went all-ballistic on his ass. And when he lost and looked disheveled the next day, the likes of Bill Maher cracked jokes that he looked like a white guy who found out his wife had sex with a Negro. They rubbed salt into his wounds. They gloated and kicked him in the jaw while he was down. And who can forget the Newsweek cover with Obama as Negro-Napoleon destroying the last remnants of Old White America. This is Jewish mentality and attitude. This is how the great majority of Jews(and nearly all the Jewish elites in both parties) feel about White America. These Jews fixed the courts and legal tricks to ensure that most violent thugs and crazed mobs on their side(Antifa and BLM) walk free while anyone who fights back is either thrown behind bars. And then, think about all the censoring on Jewish monopoly platforms and search engines. Jews went way beyond McCarthyism in getting people fired or de-banked for ideology or political views, whereas Zionists whose agenda is the ‘genocide’ of the Palestinians get all the freedom and money to enforce their agenda.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At this point, white people might as well be retarded. They are increasingly treated like Palestinians in West Bank but they continue to support Jews and Israel instead of finally waking up to realize that THEY have become the White Palestinians faced with White Nakba. We have white dummies parroting the Jewish Supremacist monopoly media’s talking points about the ‘rules-based order’, ROTFL, which should be called “Jews-Rule as basis of order(and disorder)”. At this point, things are wackier than in Marx Brothers’ DUCK SOUP. It’s both funny and sad that so many people still fall for this garbage even after all they’ve been through under Jewish Supremacist Rule.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="137"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anglos in both US and UK have something to answer for because it was their nonstop appeasement of Jews since the end of WWII that led to this mad state of affairs. We are still constantly reminded of ‘Munich’. We’ve been told a million times about Rhineland, Sudetenland, and Anschluss. Neville Chamberlain’s name became synonymous with appeasement, just like Quisling with collaboration.<br />But let’s be clear. Anglo appeasement of Germans abruptly ended upon Germany’s invasion of Poland. Furthermore, Hitler’s moves prior to the takeover of Czech territory cannot be included within the ‘appeasement’ framework as he had legitimate reasons for gaining control over Rhineland, uniting with Austria(popular with Austrians), and demanding control over Sudetenland where the great majority were Germans(then being persecuted by Czechs, like Russians in the Donbass region).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="305"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It became appeasement only when Hitler moved beyond Germanic territory, but UK appeased him only once. Winston Churchill has been hailed as the man who finally stood up to Hitler, but this narrative is as false as true. While Churchill did commit Britain to fight to the end, was he driven by principles or just another kind of appeasement? When faced with financial problems, who bailed him out? The Jews, who effectively came to own him. So, Churchill’s refusal to appease the Germans any further was really just another form of appeasement, this time to Jewish Power(and it turned out badly for the British Empire), and it came to serve as the template for all future Anglo-British/American dealing with Jews: Appease, appease, appease. Appeasement of Jews and self-abasement before all things Jewish. Indeed, nothing is more obnoxiously disingenuous than all these Anglos in US and UK cluck-clucking about Putin’s actions. Putin finally acted because Anglos never took a meaningful stand against Jewish Power(growing ever crazier) over the years. If Anglos had put up a dam against Jewish Exceptionalist craziness, the Zionic sewer wouldn’t have overflowed to Ukraine. Putin took action because Anglos neglected to against Jewish-Power-Gone-Crazy, but these Anglo cowards are now bitching about someone finally taking a stand. What have they done over the years? Did they ever say NO to Jewish demands? But, it’s even worse. Anglos not only failed to sandbag the Jewish Supremacist sewage but helped irrigate it all around the world. They’ve been the biggest quisling-collaborators of Jewish-Nazi or Jewzi perfidy and have about as much moral credibility as the Vichy Regime. The real crime is Anglo aiding-and-abetting in the global agenda of the likes of George Soros and Victoria Nuland, just a stupider and younger version of the loathsome Madeleine Albright.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="386"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Following World War II, with Jewish Power ever increasing and with the Holocaust as the new religion of the West, the effects of these appeasement made Jewish Power ever more evil and obnoxious. Fast forward to today, and it’s batshit crazier than Hitler’s pathology. Let us name some of the long list of appeasements. Let Zionists destroy Palestine and cast out the Arabs there, a people who’d done no harm to UK or US. Let Jews carry out terrorist attacks and blame it on Arabs. Let Jews steal US nuclear secrets. Let Jews make Joe McCarthy the total villain while making Jewish spies and traitors out to be innocent saint-like victims of the Red Scare and anti-communist ‘hysteria’. Let Jews stir up blacks against whites. Let Israel attack USS Liberty, spin lies, and get away with it. Let Jews take total control of US media. Let Jews legalize filmed pornography, which is really prostitution. Let Jews spread gambling all over and corrupt communities and steal money. Let Jews drive out the Arabists from US foreign policy. (Despite the label ‘Arabist’, the so-called members of the faction weren’t totally for Arabs against Israel but for a more balanced approach for both sides. In contrast, the Zionists are for US totally supporting Israel at the expense of Palestinians and Arabs. Appeasing the likes of William Kristol in purging all Arabists from the GOP was pathetic and shameful on the part of American Conservatism, and what did conservatives get out of it? Useless wars, countless Arabs dead, and Jews still making more demands and getting all hissy when conservatives aren’t so keen on Wars for Israel anymore.) De-regulation of financial markets, protection of Jewish corporate monopolies, suppression of BDS(by the same Jews who did everything to sanction South Africa in the 1980s), increasing censorship, denial of financial services based on ideology, mass white death by Jewish-sold opiates, Covid-madness, BLM riots, CRT anti-whiteness, desecration of white heritage/monuments, destruction of US borders, Zionist role in 9/11, release of Jonathan Pollard, pardoning of so many Jewish crooks by puppet-presidents, the coverup of Jeffrey Epstein’s murder, ‘Gay Marriage’, tranny nuttery, Russia Collusion Hoax, Assad gassing hoax, countless ‘hate hoaxes’ to smear whites as ‘nazis’, Israel’s support of ISIS, and the list goes on and on.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="510" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEiNhOyOlVGBAI_ogDRBTgk6kYK7cRgtsSu2mB2n_q3tIAxTD3v_IHoaeRFlPl0ynxeTz6Mt0FaqHXEXMsSI8ybraExC3_H2A-1l6no8dnP94PcQNQhLC1gvZAH5hbGqvD0zjwo7mxqpLEqypQhHiwjpuKDFObB3bvCcyfdOK7bN1D0ADfOWGno8cyHM3g=w640-h510" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="210"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, we are to keep appeasing this insane Jewish Power on the basis of ‘muh democracy’ or ‘rules-based order’? These Jews are insane. They made US wage Wars for Israel to smash Libya and Syria. This led to the massive refugee crisis, but even as Israel erected walls, Jews ‘morally’ pressured the West to take in all these refugees and many more migrants exploiting the crisis. Imagine that. Jewish Power spreads wars and turns people into refugees. Jews cackle with joy at the sight of these uprooted homeless masses but then pretend to be humanitarians by… get this… forcing WHITE-majority nations to take in these folks. How lower can you get? And yet, all these whites in the US and EU who’ve been so insulted, degraded, and dehumanized by Jewish Power are parroting Jewish lies about Ukraine and barking like stupid dogs about ‘rules’ and ‘democracy’. Whuck-whummies. What’s up with them? Are they just stupid or retarded? Are they hoping that if they appease Jews just ONE MORE TIME, Jews will finally make nice with them? Or do they feel that if Jewish hostility is aimed at Russia(or China and Iran), it will abuse whites less? Whatever the reason, they are a bunch of cucks and cowards.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It takes two to tango, and the Anglo appeasement-dance with the Jews has turned into a disgusting global ‘twerking’ of humanity, in effect the Palestinianization of the World. The once proud West is now just one big West Bank where whites increasingly find themselves prisoners, literally or culturally or demographically or mentally. ‘Woke’ whites are essentially mind-prisoners who’ve been robbed of identity and pride. But even ‘anti-woke’ whites who resist stuff like Jewish-concocted CRT often support Jewish supremacist aggressions in foreign lands. If they don’t like Jews being anti-white toward them, why do they support Jewish anti-Arab-ism, anti-Iran-ism, or anti-Russian-ism? Apparently, these whites are okay with Jewish viciousness as long as it isn’t directed at whites(though plenty of ‘woke’ mentally colonized whites most welcome the aggression directed at their own race).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="144"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, if they support and encourage Jewish hostility toward other goyim, who’s to say it won’t boomerang on their white arses? Actually, it’s been some time since the chicken came home to roost in the West. Just look all around, and what Jews did to the Palestinians now serves as template for what they’re doing to whites. And yet, the mealy-mouthed whuck-whummy-whitards are still playing dog to Jewish Supremacism. Bitches bitchin’ about Putin while taking it up their arses from Jewish Supremacists. These white bitches or ‘whitches’ did nothing to defend or preserve the memory of the great Robert E. Lee, a general revered in both the North and South before Jews took control of the Narrative, but they are throwing hissy fits about Ukraine. Cowards at home but barking at the world. Anglos as dogs should be called Doglos.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="86"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At some point, isn’t it time to say enough is enough with the freaking appeasement? There’s a reason why there are signs, “Do Not Feed the Animals”. Animal appetite has no limits if indulged. Animals just want more and demand more. This is why parents must enforce proper eating habits because children indulged with junk food will cry for more cookies and ice cream(even as they turn all fatty). Anglos had the means to control Jewish appetites, but they kept appeasing and appeasing.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="244"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To be sure, it wasn’t exactly like a parent-child relationship or even necessarily a master-dog relationship. Rather, white elites sold themselves out to Jews for money and the gibs. They were bought. They handed over the keys to Jews because they got rewarded lavishly. It’s the same now as then. The likes of the Clintons and Bidens may preach about ‘equity’ and the sacrifices white people must make to redress past historical wrongs, but they and their children are well-taken care and lavishly rewarded by Jews for their total cuck-collaboration. (It’s no wonder Malcolm X said White Liberals are the worst. They virtue-signal about their conscience, but the attitude is borne of privilege and sheltered naivete. And when things go wrong, they are the first to bolt to safe spaces, not least because they are the best-educated, best-connected, and most affluent. It’s no different now than in the 1960s, with all these so-called ‘liberals’ and ‘progressives’ signaling most about ‘equity’ and ‘justice’ while hogging elite privileges and institutional power that shelter them from what’s really happening on the ground. Same goes for so-called Jewish Liberals and Leftists. As loathsome as Neocon Zionists are, they are at least more honest in their brazen Zionism, whereas Jewish Liberals support the same thing but in the smoke-bomb haze of ‘fair-mindedness’. In truth, there isn’t a shred of difference between Chuck Schumer and Richard Perle on Jewish Power and Middle East affairs.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews had the stick but also lots of carrots to pass around. They could buy off the goy elites. This was no less true in Russia of the 1990s. Why did so many Russian elites allow Jews to economically ravage the country? Because, even as the masses of Russians were in dire straits, they and their closed ones were taken care of. Most elite types, usually status-obsessed, can easily be bought off. So, even though Anglo and white elites had something to fear from Jews, they also had a lot to gain for themselves simply by caving to Jewish demands. In time, the ‘rules-based order’ resulted in the de facto law of, “If Jews want it, they get it.” Maybe not immediately but eventually. Two steps forward, one step back, two steps forward, one step back. And so, we ended up with something as profoundly vile as ‘gay marriage’, a real bunker-buster of civilization simply because globo-homo became a proxy weapon of Jews to degenerate and deracinate goy populations.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjNfBSqrDh3AeJ1lEYf5xTXGpQEducZa8Hcw9cMxd2LY_AC6k-HdlOjsWAx4hb7N2OIhrxjEpKMs69vvVOUz1p2R2PGyFeFel7oHxbBJRJ0yRnYB3oUbBq1wLwqzVyS5naWO2Bd1rmmUKhD4VSqIlyPJrtZl7XhIyM8xU-xvcy1_wO4zQT0qGiJgQ1gPg=w512-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="512" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="93"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This is why Russia matters as a metaphor. There is literal Russia the nation but also ‘Russia’ as metaphor for any part of the white world that finally has the gall to say NO to the Judeo-Nazi or Jewzi World Order. Even though all the West is under the power of Jewish Exceptionalism, the Russian-metaphorical elements are like partisan resistance during World War II who simply didn’t cave and kept on fighting the Germans. In the end, the ‘Red Dawn’ scenario isn’t about Americans resisting foreign military invasion but Jewish-supremacist-globalist infiltration.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="71"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the Napoleonic era, Russia stood for rightist-nationalist resistance to French Revolutionary Imperialism. In Hitlerian times, Russia stood for leftist-nationalist resistance to Nazi Military Invasion. When all the world seemed taken over and the history of man come to an end(with either French or German hegemony), the Russian resistance finally tipped the balance and turned the tide, leading to the fall of the French Empire and later the German Empire.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="58"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One might argue that Russia in 1917 fell into the hands of Jewish and other Bolsheviks, but even communism eventually came to be absorbed into Russian nationalism. After the fall of communism, Russia was especially vulnerable because, in the sudden power vacuum, new elements could fill the void. A state of anarchy favored the shock-doctrine ‘capitalist’ pirates and sharks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="76"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yet, paradoxically, the lack of reliable legal authority and enforcement mechanisms also proved to be the savior of Russia. In an out-of-control gangster state, globalist sharks could take over and plunder, but the nationalists could also fight back and play equally dirty. The seasoned veterans of the KGB knew the art of gangster politics. Thus, Jews were quicker to take over Russia in the absence of Rule of Law but also quicker to lose absolute power.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, it took longer for Jews to take over in the US as they had to play by the rules(more than in other systems), but they became nearly invincible once they gained power because they controlled all the levers of power and means of ‘lawfare’. Even though Jewish elites act like gangsters in the West, they are protected by entrenched institutional power that is geared to punitively destroy anyone or any group that dares to call out on Jewish malfeasance. Just ask Abby Martin had to expend so much time and energy just to practice free speech in the US. In many American institutions and industries, one has to sign a loyalty pledge to ISRAEL to have any say(that must comport with Jewish demands). That’s how Jews define ‘patriotism’. Mindless obeisance to Zionism and Jewish Megalomania even at the expense of Constitutional guarantees.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="315"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia cucked to Jewish Power in the 1990s, perhaps in the belief that the US was still under control of Anglo/Americans. Even though Anglo-America has done more than its share of harm upon humanity, it has also shown itself to be capable of some conscience and fairness, goodwill and magnanimity. US was very generous to Soviet Union in World War II. US ruthlessly defeated Germany and Japan but also helped rebuild their economies and put aside bad feelings.<br />Russia simply didn’t realize that, around the time the Cold War was winding down, boomer Jews were taking over the US, and these Jews were utterly uninhibited in their greed, lust, egotism, and tribal supremacism. (Or, maybe Russians knew Jews were in control of the West and would use their considerable intelligence and knowhow to help Russia… like Palestinians trusting Jewish immigrants who pledged not to replace Palestinians.) If such Jews had had control of US policy following the end of World War II, Germany and Japan would likely have been plundered and ravaged out of greed and/or revenge. It was because Anglo-Americans still ruled that the Morgenthau Plan wasn’t imposed on Germany.<br />But by the time the Cold War ended, the only interest of the Jewish-ruled US was to economically plunder Russia and place most assets in Jewish hands, carpetbaggery x 1000. If the Anglo way was to give-and-take, Jewish way was to take-and-take. Just ask the Palestinians. Back then, Russia seemed so lacking in will, unity, and direction that it seemed lost forever, and Jews around the world were gloating of their takeover of not only the US(that controls EU and Japan) but also Russia. It seemed so easy. And Jews figured Chinese elites would fall under the tutelage of Jewish Globalism and effectively serve as the manufacturing arm of the Jewish financial ‘free trade’ empire. It seemed a done deal.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="229"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But history didn’t turn out that way. Putin and his FSB cohorts, seasoned in gangsterism, had a few Aces up their sleeves. Also, for all their flaws, they still had some sense of patriotism and basic right-and-wrong independent of fads and fashions, which came to define Western so-called ‘liberalism’, which should now just be called ‘censorism’ or ‘obligatorism'(as it obligates everyone to bow down before BLM, Globo-Homo, and Jewish Exceptionalism).<br />In the appeasement-and-sell-out-oriented West, the so-called ‘rules-based order’ came to revolve around ‘Jews say, goyim obey’, and with the passing of the ‘greatest generation’ from seats of power, the new covenant of America became total cuckery to the worst elements of the Jewish Community. Truth was whatever Jews said it was. Is a fat hairy man with penis and balls a ‘woman’ if he says so? Yes, because Jews favor trannies over real women in the political hierarchy. Should those who reject gender pronouns like ‘they’ be financially penalized? Yes, says the NY government filled with puppets of Zion. (And it’s even crazier in Canada where supposed virtue is a matter of outdoing the US in US-originated fads like globo-homo and Negro-worship. “We Canadians are superior to Americans because we do American ‘wokism’ better than Americans.” What a bunch of retards. One thing for sure, both US Anglos and Canuck Anglos get their cues from Jews.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjMwqNXGw68iyutKHNphqKXcNIdK-2cSkQp92AND0KYLwyh6NmM7ojaPvSq5NPwn1SCPP0hyPT9RCMvoStlSQAwJnyY9Wl2QrqCRSuct0hMKntO9Ug-vj3VWDpA3fGm6XHBzWhrAjCNIHnqWlJ4nqHf703bifUPM-N3WFegSO4tqLy-yVqacbJLmdzlhw=w486-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="486" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Today in the West, no one even dares to question Jewish Power and name Jewish Power, let alone blame Jewish Power. Even Donald Trump, who infuriated Jews to no end because his 2016 presidential win went against the formula of ‘Jews say, goyim obey’, wasted most of his four yrs bending over to take it up the arse from Zionists and then kneeling down to suck what’s been up his arse. Even now, the man most reviled by Jews as ‘literally Hitler’ does little but suck up to Jews, even to the point of saying Congress SHOULD be controlled by Zionists. What does that say about the state of the so-called ‘rules-based order’? Yeah, Jews care so much about rules that they went about ‘fortifying’ the election, or changing the goalposts and slanting media coverage to an unprecedented degree to get the outcome they wanted. (Jewish idea of ‘rules’ was also in display in the re-election of Boris Yeltsin when the US intervened in so many ways to ensure that Yeltsin, with record low approval ratings, would be re-elected.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="212"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">According to Jewish punditry, you are a ‘traitor’ if you don’t submit to Jewish Power, if you don’t support Wars for Israel, if you don’t trust 100% what the Jewish-run media tell you(because, of course, all other information is ‘misinformation’ or ‘disinformation’ because Jews always tell the truth while Russians always lie, like in the case of ‘Russian-Trump Collusion’ theory), and refuse to hate what Jews hate. Jewish attitude toward goyim is incredibly insulting, like a master toward a dog. A dog is expected to obey, or otherwise, it’s ‘bad doggy’. When Jews call someone a ‘traitor’, it simply means ‘bad doggy’ for daring to disobey what Jews say. If Jews say, “Gay marriage is good”, you must roll over and bark in agreement. If Jews say, “Iran bad and Israel good”, you better agree because American Patriotism is about flattering Jews. If Jews say “any whiff of whiteness is white supremacism and domestic terrorism”, you better agree. If not, you’re surely a ‘Russian agent’ or a ‘nazi’, even though Jews are openly working with Naziesque elements in Ukraine. David Frum smeared all conservatives who opposed the Iraq War as ‘unpatriotic’. It’s like some lunatic saying, “If you don’t blow me, you are against god.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">How rich for Jews to be calling others ‘traitors’. Patriotism means devotion to one’s country and people. In the US, a country where 98% of people are goyim, how is it patriotic to favor Jews over the rest, especially when so much of Jewish Power is directed toward destruction of humanity via war, financial parasitism, drug use, and/or cultural degeneracy? Just ask the Palestinians and Syrians. What is so patriotic to favor Israel uber alles? What is so patriotic about both political parties totally sucking up to Jews, with Trump taking it up the arse from Netanyahu and with Nancy Pelosi pledging that, even if US goes kabooey, its priority will be serving Israel? What is so patriotic about goyim cucking to CRT, devised by Jews to insult, dehumanize, and degrade whites? What is so patriotic about letting BLM scum and Antifa lunatics run wild legal indulgence of the courts and police orders to stand down? What is so patriotic about covering up what really happened on 9/11? The nerve of these Jewish Supremacists. How viler can you get? And yet, there are plenty of whites, even conservatives, still lining up to kiss Zionist arse and cuck like a bunch of pathetic dogs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="16"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There are two memorable exchanges between the characters Pike and Dutch in movie THE WILD BUNCH:</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="36"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">1. Pike: “There was a man named Harrigan. Used to have a way of doin’ things. I made him change his ways. A hell of a lot of people, Dutch, just can’t stand to be wrong.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dutch: “Pride.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="15"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pike: “And they can’t forget it… that pride… being wrong. Or learn by it.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="12"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dutch: “How about us, Pike? You reckon we learned – being wrong, today?”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pike: “I sure hope to God we did.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="12"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">2. Pike: “What would you do in his place? He gave his word.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="8"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dutch: “He gave his word to a railroad.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="5"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pike: “It’s his word.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="13"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Dutch: “That ain’t what counts! It’s who you give it to!”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="33"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pride is a powerful motivating factor in human behavior. Just like many whites would rather die than be called ‘racist’, many people would rather die of pride than swallow it and face reality.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="161"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whites today only have false pride left as they’ve surrendered the right of legacy, prestige, and inheritance to Jews. Jews, via control of academia-media-state, control white history, white identity, and white culture. If Jews want to cast blacks in European or white roles, there’s nothing whites can do about it. If Jews say white lands are now open to the entire world, whites lack veto power. If Jews say white wombs exist to produce black/mulatto babies, white cuck men line up to cheer their own demise; by enthusiastically pretending to favor it, they cope with the fact of being powerless to stop it. White posterity is gone for good, and white (false) pride is based on pretending to agree with the Jewish Agenda(as if whites and Jews are always agreed 100%) or acting tough on the World Stage, of course always against targets chosen by Jews, as no white word or action is deemed valid without Jewish authorization.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="210"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If all whites have left is false pride, Jews have real pride as they control the West. But excessive pride can lead to megalomania and hubris, and that’s where Jews are at. Just like Hitler became more reckless with every victory that fueled his hubris and just like the US, with its aura of perfect winning record, couldn’t face the shame of ‘losing’ in Vietnam, Jews have gotten so used to winning and being appeased at every turn that they feel entitled to forever victory and domination. This ethno-pathology is the greatest source of troubles in the 21st century. Anglo false pride(as a coping mechanism) and Jewish excessive pride(as an uncaged beast) in tandem are causing the most harm to the world. Indeed, all of the recent troubles in the Middle East and Ukraine/Russia could have been avoided IF Anglos and white goyim in the West had stood up to Jews and had a long hard talk about right-and-wrong, about limits and basic decency. But who is the typical white ‘leader’ in the West today? Mitch McConnell, Nancy Pelosi, Emmanuel Macron, Lindsey Graham, Boris Johnson, and etc. If so-called maverick Donald Trump bends over and takes it up his arse, imagine what the others do.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjxGB8-lpWA_zkyhjKExPi2geeObW6IDiXJfYf7fmxhDUCVVc9QMwcR_gr7JVw_KCS8zcNrtJfIKg3A0q_J71Ozu-IXI4LumfyeX3gVGQoWpGX9cyvx5Kh71uAiQiov6-et1OOPASg4O2ZCRGHXzC6AaE3bv-IXhQtvwPJORANoPyBIYGKfMO8PPMAQHA=w591-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="591" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="235"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for true patriotism, it is merely giving one’s word or loyalty but a matter of whom you give it to. Government is not the country, especially when it’s so corrupt, contemptuous of the masses, and controlled by a nasty minority who prioritize their tribalist-supremacist agenda. The very idea of Jews calling others ‘traitors’ is downright laughable.<br />No, the real treason is favoring the agenda of Jewish globalists over national interests and the needs of the American people who are seen as cattle by the global cabal. Everything about the Jewish-controlled order is a lie. Just look at the broken borders and the shipping of illegals all across America. Some, like Tucker Carlson, argue it’s wrong for US to care about Ukrainian borders but ignore its own, but even this formulation is wrong. Russia didn’t violate Ukrainian borders, whereas the US did by interfering with its politics and installing a puppet government. After long eight years, Russia ran out of options and was forced into a counter-invasion to quell the insane globalist influence that operates as an alliance of Jewish oligarchy and Naziesque muscle. Putin, though hardly steller truth-teller himself, is right when he says the US is an empire of lies. US has become like what Mary McCarthy said of Lillian Hellman: “I said once in some interview that every word she writes is a lie, including ‘and’ and ‘the’.”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, if Putin really wants to be honest, he should name the Jewish Power behind the crisis(and other crises around the world, like in Syria, where Russia was compelled to step into the fray because, once again, Jewish viciousness was hellbent on destroying another part of the world, of course with the false-pride cheering section of Anglo cucks. In THE YEAR OF LIVING DANGEROUSLY, a character hung a message, “Sukarno, Feed Your People”. A message for Putin should be, “Putin, Name the Jew.” What the academia around the world needs are JEWSH POWER STUDIES departments.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"> </p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="302" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhyYpHOB-2LK8cWhNV1I2hx1WZbSLI0c6TZb-bTox1__0xrJdGUe4ym4umrlinnlYkgDUbJiL8e9MUyLix1gUK0wdpyrzkothFx4fGrttekAcMcoFsw-KZbQHRTDZCSAUp8lrKJTSmCslKdRc4XsYpqHQWlTxA7hTJc3UmCFAGQH_OVWXBQAcDuZV3cCg=w640-h302" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="168"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Words are as important as taking action, especially as Jews, with their control of global media, are badmouthing Putin as the greatest evil since Genghis Hitler. If an arsonist starts a fire, it’s not enough to heroically risk one’s life and limb to put it out. The arsonist must be named and called out, all the more so if the lowlife scumbag accuses YOU, the firefighter, of starting the fire. Refusal to speak the truth is a kind of moral crime. Indeed, what’s the problem with rising crime in the US? People discuss the crime but not the racial factor as it’s become taboo to Name the Negro. In the US, blacks kill blacks(and other races) but the spoken narrative is the fantastical BLM, or “innocent blacks are being genocided by ‘racists’.” In world affairs, Jewish Power uses the US, EU, and NATO to aggress against others, but all we hear is about ‘Assad the butcher’, ‘Russian aggression’, ‘Chinese aggression’, and ‘Iranian aggression’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given the centrality of the Holocaust in post-WWII narrative and the awesome power of Jews to destroy any reputation, it’s understandable why people dread broaching the topic of Jewish culpability. But, there is a way to Name the Jewish Power without Sieg Heil, and recent events offer a golden opportunity because it’s the Jews themselves who violated the sacred rules of Holocaustianity: “Never Again”. For the longest time, Jews declared the Nazis and their variants as the worse miscreants to ever walk the earth, yet they are now allied with Sub-Nazi or Nazi-sentimental elements in Ukraine, just like Jews who’ve been hollering about Islamic Terrorism have become the main supporters and allies of extreme Jihadi elements against Arab modernizers.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews have no right to scream ‘Nazi’ on the Ukraine issue because they, in all their arrogance and hubris, decided to hire Sub-Nazi elements in their virulent anti-Russian contempt, which isn’t unlike Hitler’s view of Slavs as a race of helots. Now, they own the crazy ‘Sieg Heil’ stain and are in no position to be preaching about ‘antisemitism’.<br />Furthermore, Russians have nothing to apologize for on the matter of the Holocaust because they lost even more lives than Jews in World War II and did most to defeat Germany. Besides, Jewish role in Bolshevism caused great harm to Russia(1000x more than pogroms against Jews), and Jews economically raped Russia in the 1990s. In his long speech, Putin discussed the history between Russia and Ukraine, but he didn’t discuss how the crisis grew out of Jewish control of the West. Just like the Yinon Plan has been to pit Muslims against Muslims and Arabs against Arabs, Jews are hellbent on setting Slavs against Slavs, even by stoking Naziesque fervor among some Ukrainians against Russians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="152"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Putin can play fireman and put out the fire in Ukraine, but if he won’t name the arsonist, there will be more fires to put out in the future. Why would the arsonist stop when his role never goes mentioned? As Merlin said in EXCALIBUR, only the truth shall suffice because lies murder some part of the world. The Jewish role in the current conflagration is so blatant and obvious. While many ignoramuses really don’t know, plenty of people know but lack the nerve to say it to take the leap and finally say it. It doesn’t take rocket science to notice, even in a cursory way, who controls Western institutions and dictates policies to torment so much of humanity(and without the slightest hint of contrition or remorse). The truth will be good for everyone, for Jews too as a fire burning out of control can destroy everyone.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7tch1CuMV9M?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="496"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic theories have been discredited as science — we have Jewish-backed Anthony Fauci to give us the Real Science these days — , there was something to his theory of repression: When people hold back their emotions & repress their memories(of disturbing incidents), they can go batshit crazy with hysteria and hallucinations. This can happen at the societal level. Take the black problem in the US. Blacks are the toughest, most thuggish and violent people by far, but Negrolatry forbids honest discussion of black problem as ‘racist’, and so we end up with hysteria about BLM and hallucinations about 1619 and how ‘systemic racism’ is the reason why blacks excel in basketball but not in calculus. It’s utterly ludicrous, but from a mass-clinical point of view, it makes sense because the truth is repressed. Blacks cause a lot of problems due to evolutionary origins, and these problems affect all Americans directly or indirectly. So, people obvious need answers, but an honest diagnosis of the problem isn’t possible because of the taboo about ‘racism’. And so, NYT and rest of media, the elite academia, and the government come up with ever more outlandish explanations for black failure in schools and thuggery in the streets.<br />Same goes for Jewish Power. Just look at the people around Joe Biden who really run the US, but we aren’t supposed to talk about Jewish Power. And we can’t talk about the Jewish mindset and attitude that set the tone for the Jewish agenda. All we are allowed is ‘Muh Holocaust’, ‘Muh Israel’, ‘Muh favorite Jew’, and etc.<br />However, so much of the problems in the US, EU, and the world can be traced back to Jews. But the collective repression of honest talk on Jewish Power has led to all sorts of hysteria and hallucinations among Jews and goyim alike. Jews see Hitler and Nazis everywhere, and the so-called ‘left’ and so-called ‘right’ call the other side ‘nazis’. Pundits yammer about how Israel, which has 300 nukes(enough to blow up the entire Middle East and then some), must be protected from Iran’s nukes that don’t even exist. There is utter silence as Jonathan Pollard flicks a middle finger at the US standing next to beaming Netanyahu in Israel. On the Ukraine matter, one side blames Russia-Russia-Russia(and China for backing Russia), and the other side blames the US, NATO, and EU, but no one will name the Jewish Power.<br />Then, it’s no wonder that there are so many fantasy narratives about what’s going on. Repress the truth, and people spin fables to explain what’s what. If this keeps up, someone might even dream up a scenario where Putin is Ibrahim X. Kendi in a bear costume who invaded Ukraine for ‘equity’ sake, rendering Babylon Bee superfluous in sheer nuttery: “Sheeeeeiiiit, I’s done takes Ukraine fo’ some gibs.” We need to stop mistaking the Jewish Brothel for the Jewish Hospital.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/0RhpR7ZRCEw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia has been appeasing Jews too. Partly because it was so weak and divided following the end of communism. For a time, Russia got infested with NGO’s(the kind funded by George Soros) and turned a blind eye to the antics of the Pussy Riot egged on and funded by globalist Jews. Jews cheered when Pussy Riot desecrated church services, and Russia only took half-measures. Of course, Jews invoke ‘free speech’ to justify such outrages, but these same Jews invoke and enforce ‘hate speech’ laws to silence and suppress anyone who insults Jews, homos, and specially ‘protected’ groups, always chosen by Jews(and needless to say, Palestinians and Syrians aren’t on the list).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Russia appeased when Bill Clinton, total tool of Jewish boomers, disregarded the pledge not to expand NATO. Russia appeased again when the Baltic states were added to NATO. Russia realized the Jewish-controlled West was utterly without honor. Russia appeased in 2014 when it sat helpless while vicious Jewish supremacists and their goy cucks interfered in Ukraine to the tune of five billion dollars to pull off a coup, leading to violence and many deaths. Germany approached Russia to build Nordstream 2, but after Russians fulfilled their end of the bargain, they were led around in circles as Germans, as cowardly cucks of the US, kept making ridiculous conditions.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="141"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, just when the entire West, from US to Canada to Australia to EU, was totally appeasing every Jewish demand — look at the spread of Globo-Homo across them all and even the spread of BLM riots into Europe — , Russia began to say No. No to Globo-Homo that would have toots and trannies prance around and desecrate Red Square, the hallowed sight of honoring patriotic tragic heroes and victims of Russian History. Jews hissed and seethed, but Russians stood firm.<br />This is why there are deeper implications to Jews invoking the Russia-Russia-Russia bogeyman in the West. It isn’t merely to besmirch Donald Trump, the patriots, or the ‘deplorables’ as stooges of some foreign power but to draw attention, if only subconsciously, to the parallels between the Russian Strategy and White Populist passion as yet to coalesce into a meaningful resistance movement.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This conflict is one of subterfuge and subconsciousness because so much that is crucial goes unspoken by both sides, either out of fear or ignorance. Jews know full well what they are after — Jewish Exceptionalist Global Hegemony — but dare not say it because the world will not accept brazen Jewish Supremacism. Thus, Jews must package their supremacism in the guises of ‘liberal democracy’, ‘spreading democracy’, ‘democracy vs autocracy’, ‘open society’, ‘the great reset’, ‘follow the science’, ‘climate change’, and etc. Pitch it to the world as anything but what it really is. Russia got suckered in the 1990s when Jews came with promises of ‘economic reform’ but just looted the economy for tribal aggrandizement.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="248"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If it’s subterfuge for Jews, the true nature of the struggle remains subconscious among the populists. Jews know it whereas white populists only sense it without clarity. On some level, they feel something is wrong, that Jewish Power is against them and that the Neocon faction of the GOP stinks to high heaven. As conditions worsen in America, white populists are forming an inchoate realization of who the real enemy is. But because populists tend to be less well-read and knowledgeable(and because they rely so much on stuff like Talk Radio and Evangelical Churches that are so slavish to ‘Muh Israel’), they lack a clear vision of what’s really up. They ride on emotions in the fog than carefully approaching what is hidden.<br />They were fired up by Donald Trump because of the implicit whiteness of his campaign — “finally someone speaking up for us” — but also swayed, as usual, with fulsome praise of all things Jewish and Israel. The result is a lot of confusion among the populist base, a growing inkling that the so-called enemy is largely made up of Jewish Capitalist Power in Big Tech and Deep State but then obfuscated and misdirected by the likes of Infowars, Breitbart, Gateway Pundit, OANN, Newsmax, and etc. that the real problem stems from ‘leftists’ and ‘communists, or China. Yet, on some level, the populists must sense that such formulation is tofu, not real meat. How long can soylent conservatism pass itself as the real thing?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgIK4Em6CtL9NlpUijAIHZfL5t76NJqhPFQGDFzW1ZXa6HTuWZNOF7EC4dQAIO3EuqHGlqxDm-pV99uGSzRmwHUhWivJKQvGGCSvUAomgxASDyzBf57hWQ6de-KLJy5VChBWZ9KSKtfAAb3QtowH3OBtXQ0ftLPRg9dFr1dPjN1Z-LcLMhPbVBn9HN3ig=w481-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="481" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="303"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews know that the two biggest bulwarks of resistance to their total victory is Russia and White Populism. Jews see China as a problem but don’t fear it like they do Russia for racial reasons. People who argue China is the bigger threat/rival than Russia to the US just don’t get it. Of course, in terms of GDP and population(and future military potential), China could be construed as a bigger challenge in years to come to USA as a whole, but the current US isn’t about American National Interests but Jewish Tribal Interests. China will always be the Other threat, an outside power. Jews know that Chinese/Asians in the West assimilate and serve the existing power. Asians lack the will and drive to take over as the ruling elites, and furthermore, even if they tried, the great non-Asian majority simply will not accept them. So, Chinese power will always be external as white people(and blacks & browns) across the political spectrum simply don’t identify with them or particularly idolize them.<br />In contrast, Jews count as white, or fellow whites. Many white Christians revere Jews as the Chosen, many secular whites admire Jews as incomparable geniuses, and all whites have been instilled with Holocaust guilt or conscience. Thus, Jewish Power has been acceptable and accepted as the new ruling elites of the West. Of course, it could have been happily-ever-after if Jews felt camaraderie toward whites and opted for conscientious leadership for the good of all Americans. Alas, Jews are filled with supremacist contempt for whites, simmer with historical resentment, and are racked with paranoia, not least because Jews know full well that many powerful Jews just can’t help themselves and have no limits to their abuse of power, thereby lending credence to future ‘antisemitism’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="346"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Therefore, Jews are unable to rule in a state of relaxed good will; they must be vigilant of any white stirrings of ‘antisemitism’ as Jewish power indulges Jewish greed. As Jews are tribal and circle the wagons, the corruption only gets worse and worse. So, to prevent any criticism or opposition to Jewish malfeasance, there must be more censorship, more ‘white guilt'(not only about Jews but blacks as well), more demographic diversity(so that whites will lose electoral power and the diverse goyim will be divided among themselves), more ‘wokeness’ to divide the ‘good’ whites from ‘bad’ whites, the deplorables.<br />Still, Jewish Power relies on white submission, the willingness to obey Jews without question, like Japanese samurai before their lord. And indeed, Jews have taken over the minds of most white elites who are totally cucked to globo-homo, diversity/inclusion, Negrolatry, and loyalty to Jews(as the mavens of what is still laughably called ‘liberal democracy’).<br />Also, Jews figured they’d pretty much neutralized white conservatism as well, as the GOP is run by the likes of Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, and Mitt Romney. Jews figured populists were without leaders and would just fade away in a morass of drug abuse or demographic eclipse. But Trump happened, and he was something that white populism latched onto and made into more than he really is. For Jews, this was a sign of danger, like the news of the birth of Jesus to King Herod — it had to be stuffed in the cradle.<br />And then, there is Russia. If Russia were non-white, it wouldn’t much matter because white populists tend not to identify with others who don’t look like them. But Russia is white and Christian, and therefore, what happens there could inspire whites around the world. And as Russia is vast and self-sufficient, it can’t be destroyed so easily by Jewish Power. It’s not another Libya, Syria, or Iraq. Also, Russian power has definite form and structure, unlike the blob-like white populism that has yet to take shape as a real force.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="535" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgCi3RPAYSP0AVX0NK-wfnPBMvSE8iGMbgvgzgPFaZ9ypDc45z9OBy-vDb0fqVNHLWxeU4HnLdh3k_pyu75CpzTY6OGhrJyk2ttRu_CtpCPHpmFvkhZwoiztg3ozveePpdIImmslI1ndtWIXIKeuhNyhukZyVkgDrISrAvSdhhHfs22sAc-Yg1J_D7gmQ=w640-h535" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Whereas white populism remains a confused and shapeless movement with uncertain leadership, organization, agenda, and future, Russia has taken shape in the Putin years into a definite civilization with a particular sense of history and heritage and its own vision of destiny. Whereas American populism is like the ragtag army led by the rebel leader in SPARTACUS, Russia is organized like New Rome with a definite hierarchy, ideological theme, and political direction.<br />Russian power and white populism are somewhat comparable to Soviet Union and ragtag Chinese communists in the 1930s. ‘Russian’ communists had state power whereas Chinese communists were outgunned and outmatched by the KMT. Today, literal Russia is independent with autonomous state power, whereas white nationalist-populism around the world, or Russia-as-Metaphor, remains in a state of disarray, disunity, and confusion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="195"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And of course, Jewish Power wants populism to remain in such state because, if gone Full-Putin, it could pose a real threat to Jewish Supremacism. That said, contrary to Jewish fears, Putin is hardly a fighter on the world stage. Unlike the rash Erdogan of Turkey who meddles everywhere, Putin prefers diplomacy over war and intervenes militarily as the last resort. After seeing the West’s betrayal in Libya, he finally felt compelled to intervene in Syria before Jewish Power let its ISIS proxies run amok. And he took a long time before he finally acted boldly in Ukraine. But then, to Jews, even the slightest sign of resistance to Jewish Supremacism is intolerable. No amount of Trump’s bending over to Zion made him acceptable to Jewish Power that just squeezed him for all he was worth and threw away the rest. And even “It’s Okay to be White” is ‘far right white supremacist extremism’ in Jewish eyes. Jewish masters just can’t stand whites being ‘uppity’ in any way, and they use Antifa and BLM overseers to whip whites and keep them on the plantation as servants, mercenaries, and mouthpieces of Zion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="111"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the 20th century, Russian Empire or Soviet Union was the center of World Revolution. As long as it stood strong, leftists and radicals could look to it for inspiration, support, and funding. Today, Russia stands as the symbol of world restoration. Of course, unlike the Soviet Union that, at times and in certain places, aggressively promoted and exported world revolution, the current Russian position is more along the lines of live-and-let-live. Even RT News mostly hires Western dissident leftists than cultural conservatives. As far as Russia is concerned, Russia should be Russia, China should be China, India should be India, and etc. Russian Orthodoxy is not for the whole world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, as a symbol of a great power that said NO to the Jewish-concocted-and-ordained globalist agenda, Russia stands as the possibility of fending off Jewish imperialism. In Akira Kurosawa’s SEVEN SAMURAI, the village elder recounts a time when one village in particular was spared the ravages of bandits because it had hired samurai. It is that memory that braces him decide on resistance than surrender to the bandits. People are less likely to resign themselves to fate if there’s an example to the contrary. That example, however rare, serves as inspiration and fires up the imagination.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, Russia was resurrected from the brink after its core industries and resources had been plundered by Jewish globalists with full support of Western Jews, who gave Khodorkovsky the Leo Frank treatment: a poor saintly Jew persecuted by evil ‘Anti-Semites’. Just when Russia was totally written off by the globalists, it gradually climbed back onto the world stage. And even though economically backward compared to Western Europe and still militarily dwarfed by the US, Russians as a people have more autonomous power and sovereignty because Putin, as their leader, has some(though still not enough) sense of Russian identity, heritage, pride, and destiny.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, white elites, both political and intellectual, in the West are utter wussy cucks to Jews. Not that Jews are sleeping well. Though Brexit(useless as it only increased non-white immigration) and Trump’s win proved to be hollow, they nevertheless took Jewish Power by surprise because its sense of entitlement simply cannot tolerate history moving in any other direction than that decreed by the Tribe. (No wonder Covid-19 was so useful for globalists to shut down the world and control the masses just when populism was on the rise. One thing for sure, while populism unleashes lot of energy, it is ultimately doomed unless it can coalesce around a vanguard to spearhead the movement and take over elite institutions. It’s like a campfire needs someone to tend it to keep burning long and hot into the night.)</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="334" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjdW-jgKyv2LaXFqt_9EPBjJUSDkCVVZm6ArEAPyEQJm5awMpfCbnNHN_CeSvjIEvDTAEt_ocL9r0n_jScq-Dfa3W6gOFf6lhdjBxF7wQAhQIphY8eUKT_Jjict7yrBfO8JfuxDgaHWmSQBq8yLz9yPvyuwQXDKHu1-fPk5B6bkTgOzJfefUr-KP5MDag=w640-h334" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">2022 can go down in history as a landmark year, much more so than 2015 when Russia bit the bullet and defied the Jewish-run West by entering the Syrian conflict. Even though Jews were spitting mad about Russia’s rescue operation, Syria was a sideshow, whereas Ukraine has historically been the penis of Europe that all sides used to f*** the other — consider WITH FIRE AND SWORD by Henryk Sienkiewicz. Of course, over the years, the Jewish-run media did all it could to portray Assad as the ‘butcher of Syria’ ruthlessly crushing the ‘moderate rebels’ fighting for freedom when, in fact, the bulk of the anti-regime forces were foreign Jihadis armed by US and its puppet allies like Saudi Arabia. Turkey, smelling the blood of Syria’s certain fall, swooped in like a vulture. Syria was saved from total ruin by Russian(and Iranian) intervention.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_91" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="238"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, as Jews control the media and as their power goes unmentioned, the world community never thanked Russia and condemned the Jewish-ruled West. And when Trump tried to pull out of Syria to allow Russia and Iran to finish the job of mopping up the Jihadis(shielded by US presence), he was blocked at every turn by Jewish Media(that were suddenly so concerned about ‘Muh Kurds’) and the scummy deep state that sadistically loves to play the world like a pawn.<br />In the end, with the election nearing, scumbag Trump sought to appease the Jews yet once again by having Soleimani murdered, but appeasement never works, and Jews once again rammed him in the arse and made him suck what had been up his bung.<br />Imagine that. Iran has a fragile economy due to endless sanctions but even so expended many men and resources to save an ally while the US, which has so much(with all-time world record in fatsos), steals oil from Syria and murdered a foreign leader for the ‘crime’ of saving Syria from terrorists. Yet, Iran is called the ‘biggest sponsor of terrorism’ and is sanctioned to its gills while Israel that supports ISIS and lobs bombs into Syria is showered with endless praise and billions in aid when it is the richest nation in the Middle East. This is demento world of INVERSION because people, INCLUDING PUTIN, dare not mention Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_92" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, in 2022, Putin put down the gauntlet and, in taking decisive actions against Ukraine, put an end to appeasing the Jews. Sure, all the piss-ant cucks and minions in the West are clucking their usual diatribes as they are, at this point, little more than dogs, whores, and pet-monkeys of Jews. The Zionist Yuval Noah Harari said people are ‘hackable animals’, and it’s sure true of Western goyim who lack agency, individuality, and autonomy. Their minds have been hacked and programmed by Jews to spout the usual nonsense, making even the brainwashed characters of THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE free-thinking by comparison. These idiots, who’ve been appeasing evil Jewish Supremacist Globalist-Imperialism at every turn to their own detriment and demise, think they are being so tough and ‘principled’ by standing up to Putin or Putler.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_93" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In 2022, Russia-as-Metaphor means end of appeasement of Jewish Supremacism(though it would be a lot cooler and more effective if Putin named the Jew than yammered about ‘De-Nazification’ as the Naziesque elements are mere thugs recruited by Jewish Power. Call it De-Zionification.) Of course, Russia has hell to pay for this as the Jews control the West and will order cuck-goy politicians and financiers to hit Russia as hard as possible. Paradoxically however, the more Russia is harmed thus, the stronger it can grow because it will be less dependent on the Jewish-controlled West. To be sanctioned is to be punished but it is also to be liberated because one must find more autonomous means of survival and strength.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_94" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="191"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Is it worth becoming so dependent on the West when its top values are adopting the Tri-Idolatry of Jew-worship, Negro-worship, and Homo-worship over national identity, integrity, and interest? The West has gone from the tolerance of to the tyranny of decadence/degeneracy. In the Sixties and Seventies, some worried that the increasingly hedonistic and libertine West would be eclipsed by the more disciplined and morally focused communist East. While the West was into youth culture, sex-drugs-rock-n-roll, and endless ‘liberations'(culminating in Stonewall homo riots), the communist East put up a united front as a serious power with adult themes and ideological unity. However, not only was communism economically untenable in the long run but decadence/degeneracy in the West was contained in sub-cultures and pop culture. It was for the kids(or teeny-boppers) and the freaks. It was assumed that kids would eventually grow up and put away childish things and that freaks would remain in their subcultural enclaves. And in the 1980s, many boomers had indeed grown up and taken on adult responsibilities, and it seemed like the Sixties were a distant memory. US didn’t turn into Woodstock Nation.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_95" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="123"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But over the years, elements of decadence and degeneracy not only seeped into the ‘values’ of elite domains but went from pleading for tolerance to insistence on tyranny. Also, what had been deemed deviant(or even demented) but permissible(in a liberal democracy) became the object of quasi-spiritual devotion among the elites. The highest institutions in the US cannot conceive of anything holier than homo-fecal-penetration and tranny-penis-cutting draped in ‘rainbow’ colors. The biggest industries in the US virtue-signal about BLM and hire worthless ‘diversity’ managers when cities have been much degraded by over-indulged black thugs and looters. And of course, there’s endless bloviation about holy Jews and the Holocaust when Jews have effectively become Jewzis, the new nazi-like force around the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_96" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="248"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Woodstock and Altamont excesses were about youthful excess, not elite conviction, but today, it’s almost as if the holy bible of the elites is none other than THE ROCKY HORROR PICTURE SHOW and PINK FLAMINGOS. When decadence/degeneracy goes from tolerance to tyranny, what is the long-term viability of civilization?<br />Using the analogy of the financial crisis of 2008, what happened to the world economy when good loans were mixed with bad loans? While there were always bad loans, they’d been kept separate from good loans, ones with AAA rating. But with financial de-regulation & innovations(allowing for more ‘creativity’), as well as calls for an ‘ownership society’, bad loans could be mixed with good ones and marketed all around the world in the form of ‘derivatives’. The rot spread far and wide, nearly sinking everything, and the US bailed itself out only because the dollar happens to be the world currency. Bad loans were always bad but limited in damage potential when kept separate from good ones.<br />Likewise, a feature of liberal democracy is to tolerate much that is weird, deviant, decadent, and even degenerate AS LONG AS such stuff is kept in their place. But what happens when it permeates serious institutions & major industries and takes on tyrannical power to compel everyone to submit to crazy notions of men becoming ‘women’ or how it’s great for young women to ‘peg’ their men(meaning women should put on dildo-strap-ons and bugger the male bungs)?</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="339" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjxtpu4cGWudvX6AgIOUmAMlhKDXUv96wWqiJgunei_L3o2MTZMw_dNwTjo0ejgrcuMIw_SASv4kc4puxtG2DJ6e25AMXiTdk2FACIqHiGjZP1Q6VinQuktYxbDfR93QS7PjJabQ1jNsrusoE2LgvD643Aicw8K-gYrbqpGZTg0_Bi_xqY-MV77PgWDig=w640-h339" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_97" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">How pathetic that even so-called patriotic types are bitching and whining about Russia. Finally, a nation says NO MORE to appeasement to Jewish Power, and they are kvetching about big bad wolf Putin. How the future would be brighter for the white race IF it had similarly said NO MORE to appeasement to Jewish Power. But did whites call out on USS Liberty? Israel’s theft of nuclear secrets? Jewish formulation of what would become CRT. Jewish use of media to spread globo-homo filth on the young ones? Israel’s brutal colonization of West Bank? Jewish economic rape of Russia? Neocon destruction of the Middle East? The endless insults at and defamation of White America? The horrors of 2020 when Jews went full-charles-manson on White America with race riots, covid-tyranny, and election rigging? No, these cucky-wucks appeased Jews at every turn.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_98" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="273"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But finally, Putin, who’d also been appeasing Jews at least halfway, says NO MORE to appeasement, and all these so-called ‘patriots’ are shrieking in horror. Imagine a herd of pigs that’s been preyed upon by wolves over the years. Whenever wolves arrive, pigs don’t fight back but just allow more of their kind to be killed and eaten. Finally, one tough pig uses its tusk to gore a wolf, but the other pigs, instead of cheering and emulating it, squeals in outrage and horror, as if to say, “you terrible pig, how dare you attack that noble wolf?”<br />But then, cowards hate courage because it exposes and shames their lack of nerves.<br />To be sure, cowardice(or resignation) provides a degree of psychological comfort. In the TV series ROOTS, Fiddler(Louis Gosset Jr.), though a lowly slave, has his niche in the order. It isn’t much but still something that provides him with a sense of place and belonging. Then, it’s no wonder he’s outraged upon discovering Kunta Kinte has broken out of his shackles and want to be free. It not only threatens Fiddler’s sense of order but exposes his resignation to inferiority. On the psychological level, so much of the ‘patriotic’ shrieking about big bad Putin is just that. When push comes to shove, a lot of so-called ‘patriots’ are resigned to their cuckdom and simply cannot wrap their minds around the fact that someone finally got uppity with the Jewish Massuh. They are used to their grits and chitlins. They are human mollusks without vertebrae, crawling at the feet of their Jewish Superiors.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_99" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This is the time to be for Russia. When Napoleon invaded Russia, Russians had nationalism and defense of motherland on their side, but the French had the better ideas. Russia then was backward and still had serfdom, whereas the French believed in the dignity of the common man. Back then, Russia was both right and wrong.<br />And in World War II, Russians were once again heroic in their defense of motherland, but the Soviet system was hardly better on the moral scale than Nazi Germany. Again, Russia was both right and wrong. Right to defend the nation but burdened with a tyrannical ideology.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_100" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="50"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But in the 21st century, Russia, though far from perfect, stands for sanity, morality, and reality, which isn’t difficult given that the Jewish-controlled West has gone completely nutter. In the conflict between the Jewish-ruled West and Russia, the West is wrong and wrong while Russia is right and right.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_101" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="76"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, it is also sounder than China that has yet to come to terms with its horrendous Maoist past. Though there’s validity to the argument that China handled transition from communism to market-economics better than Russia did, the continuance of CCP rule has meant that the Chinese, yet to face up to historical facts, stand on shakier grounds than Russia, which has acknowledged the genuine achievements of the Soviet period but also its great crimes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_102" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the long run, truth matters. If Germany stands on the falsehood of eternal historical guilt and if China stands on the falsehood of ideological innocence, Russia relatively stands on truth as it has overcome its Soviet Past by honoring its noble qualities while denouncing its excesses based on radical delusions. As for Jews, their falsehood about their own history is even more scandalous than that of the Chinese. The Jewish Narrative is simply, “We wonderful saintly Jews were always hated and attacked for NO REASON by irrational and demented ‘anti-semites’.” In other words, Jews were, are, and shall be always right no matter what they did or do, which can only result in tribal-nihilism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_103" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="162"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When Adam ‘shifty’ Schiff riffs on George W. Bush and says that we must fight Russians in Ukraine so we don’t have to fight them in America, the statement is at once nonsensical and totally makes sense. In the literal sense, we certainly won’t be fighting Russians over here(nor likely over there), but in the metaphorical sense, ‘Russia’ means the White America that is beginning to stir into the realization that Jewish Globalist Power is against them, especially as Biden’s administration is so totally and unmistakably Jewish and, furthermore, pushing blatantly anti-white, anti-Christian, and anti-goy-nationalist agendas & narratives. So, the likes of Schiff hope to crush the Russian nation by any means necessary to send a clear message to all whites around the world that the only acceptable fate for them is defeat, humiliation, and submission. With Russia finished as the last major sovereign white(and Christian) civilization, whites need to give up all hopes of being ‘uppity’.</span></p><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="626" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhE2Z5CCCZUjYA7aUZY_t5p8pthBe7cYHpTTLQm2HRN5Ogx3gh3BhQ9RGd5Z98m-Rn41yWFQaEL0XQKcHt001wsat47mfcg2sO5oeQdLwIAJBKO4ltaP9daypJedo04fTKylyH3dkXxyhQc7yBuNC9NHSm2pa_7rCj7TCLd5_uPCC6xkKSNcUqcbb2lsg=w640-h626" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p></div></section></div><span id="_bottom" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"></span><div class="nav-group" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; clear: both; color: #888888; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 15px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 5px 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><span class="nav-item leftside" style="border: 0px; float: left; font-family: inherit; font-size: 13px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 316.047px;"><a href="https://www.unz.com/jfreud/semi-open-thread-future-of-video-games-and-the-fusion-of-gaming-and-meta-universe/" style="border: 0px; color: #1a374c; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">← Semi-Open Thread: Future of Video Games...</a></span></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-60313857919968444482022-12-07T16:34:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:08.885-08:00Semi-Open Thread: Future of Video Games and the Fusion of Gaming and Meta-Universe<p> <span style="background-color: #f8f8f8; color: #222222; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant-caps: inherit; font-variant-ligatures: inherit; font-weight: inherit;">Here is the horrific new Metaverse ad if you haven't seen it, and I don't mean horrific because of Le Uncanny Puppet.�</span></p><blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-dnt="true" data-twitter-extracted-i1670459542392298476="true" data-width="500" style="background: rgb(248, 248, 248); border: 2px solid rgb(232, 232, 232); color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 1em 2em; padding: 0px 1em; quotes: none; vertical-align: baseline;"><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="30"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In lieu of any fulfillment or meaning in your real life, you can retreat into our digital mindscape where you can pretend to have it. <a href="https://t.co/LdapEsl6Aj" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">pic.twitter.com/LdapEsl6Aj</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="3"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">— <img alt="🔺" class="emoji" draggable="false" src="https://s.w.org/images/core/emoji/11/svg/1f53a.svg" style="background: none !important; border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; display: inline !important; font: inherit; height: 1em !important; margin: 0px 0.07em !important; padding: 0px !important; vertical-align: -0.1em !important; width: 1em !important;" />ʀᴇᴍɴᴀɴᴛ. (@remnantposting) <a href="https://twitter.com/remnantposting/status/1493020157106696194?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;">February 14, 2022</a></span></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">My view on videogames is much like Maude’s reaction to Harold’s penchant for visiting auto scrapyard for fun in the film HAROLD AND MAUDE. What’s the attraction? On occasion, I check youtube on the best videogames of the year, and despite advance in graphics and the like, they seem the same old same old, mostly about blasting everything to smithereens or hacking enemies with axes and swords with bloody abandon. But videogames are huge and, being so integral to high-tech, their implications are huger yet. The only videogame I really cared for and mastered was Flicky back in the 1980s, though Bobble Bubble was okay too.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/e8nxQ2YoLeg?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BuXOSBb4hQw?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Personal preferences, the likes and dislikes, are cause for blind-spots. Something could be fashionable and ‘happening’, but one could be utterly oblivious to it, especially in the internet age with availability of countless niche interests and subcultures. Still, some things are so big that they merit attention regardless of one’s personal feelings. One such subject is video games, surely one of the biggest beneficiaries of the computer age as it is essentially the most popular interface of advancing technology. While some things are enhanced or eclipsed by technology, the video game IS technology.<br />The video game industry is said to be much bigger than Hollywood. Indeed, the biggest movies these days are hardly distinguishable from video games. A kind of convergence has taken place, with videogames becoming more realistic and narrative-oriented while movies becoming more effect-driven and videogamey.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Everyone I know has video games, and many are immersed in the attendant culture of hype and anticipation. It used to be videogames were for kids, something one grew out of sooner than later, but over the years they’ve become a permanent fixture among adults as well. Video games are a key indicator of the state of culture from US to Japan to China to Europe and the rest of the world. Its importance is such that ‘culture warriors’ of ‘wokeness’ clawed into the industry to mandate ‘progressive’ themes while purging ‘problematic’ elements. That so much of the ‘culture war’ is fought in the arena of entertainment, gaming, advertising, and recreational activities suggests the prevailing view among the commissariat is ‘popular is political’. In our post-ideological age, power is about who controls the idols and icons than the ideas and principles.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="204"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Game Wars and so-called ‘Gamer-gate’ made for strange political dynamics. Given the attacks from the Politically Correct faction, it became de rigueur for many on the Right to defend the gaming community when, if anything, its gaggle of geeks have precious little to do with conservative values or cultural traditionalism or even simple maturity. They’re just hooked to mindless shooting at objects and ass-kicking hot-babes.<br />There was also the issue that too many creators and programmers in the gaming industry are men, especially ‘cis-gender’ white men(though I’m sure there are plenty of Asians as well). A convenient way for untalented female hacks and grifters to sound off on yet another manufactured hot-button issue in their roles as would-be reformers and ‘social justice warriors’. That such inane nonsense became a sensation in political circles and even intruded into mainstream debate now seems quaint in the aftermath of the George Floyd BLM riots and Covid nuttery that shut down economies wholesale and enforced all manner of social control mechanisms. Gamers defending ‘hot babes’ in their favorite games now seem utterly trivial when the Power, with deep state collusion across the board, purged the very president of the US from internet social platforms.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="269"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Some years back when Roger Ebert was alive, he stirred up a bit of controversy with a throwaway comment that videogames are not art(somewhat echoed later when Martin Scorsese opined that superhero blockbuster movies aren’t quite cinema). He was rebuked by many of his adoring fans who insisted videogames, or at least the best of them, do qualify as art. Perhaps, the opposing sides would have understood each other better with a clearer definition of art. Gamers seem to think art is anything that is engaging, immersive, or have narrative potential. Contra Ebert, they argued that videogames have grown in sophistication and even allow ‘characters’ to go on journeys, like in movies. And, video games now have graphics more advanced than some of the most renowned science fiction movies in the past. Still, it isn’t necessarily criticism, let alone a put-down, of videogames or any kind of game to say that they aren’t art. While videogames can involve creativity in design, or what is called artistry, they function differently than art, which is a finished product based on the artist’s vision, understanding, or worldview. The artistic process may be game-like in that the artist goes on an adventure of discovery(or self-discovery), but art is the conclusion or summation of his journey brought into creative focus. Thus, art exists to be inspected and interpreted. Art is about the artist creating something and the audience responding to it. And, even though the audience’s response is crucial in the appreciation and interpretation, the artist is always at the center of art. He is the creator.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, games are about players, not creators. Even the creator of a particular game provides possibilities for the players to fulfill on their own. The game-designer could be a man of brilliance, and players can play the game with finesse, but none of this is about art. Games are like sports. Dance, at least the choreographed kind, is physical art; sports are physical games. While videogames can be artistically designed, much like a chess set can be artfully crafted, the essence of the game is about the play, which has so many variables and possibilities; artistry is a mere backdrop in games. To play THE GODFATHER video game means anything is possible, nullifying any possibility of thematic consistency or unified meaning.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">None of this is to suggest art is superior to games, only that they’re different creatures animated by different logics. Writing a drama is art, playing scrabble is a game. Art shapes chaos and endless possibilities into a particular vision or narrative, whereas games, despite the primacy of rules, thrive on the chaotic anarchy of endless possibilities. Of course, certain works of art can be approached like a mind-game, sort of like the Mandala in Buddhism, but it’s still a matter of interpretation than interaction. No matter how one interprets a work of art in his or her own way, its form is a constant, whereas virtually every game play ends up differently from other plays. The difference between art and game would have been obvious at one time, but post-modernism’s ‘deconstruction’ of art and ‘intellectual’ engagement with popular entertainment were a recipe for confusion that followed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="194"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One of the interesting prospects(with profoundly dire consequences) seems to be the convergence of gaming culture and lived experience. While Mark Zuckerberg’s Metaverse isn’t exactly gaming, the concept owes much to the development of gaming technology. Increasingly, the distance between the player and the game has closed. Thus, the player doesn’t so much play the game as enter the game, become part of the game, is the game, in which case, he faces the danger of being played himself, like in David Cronenberg’s eXistenZ where the players can no longer tell reality apart from unreality. (One wonders if dystopian visions are really cautionary tales or fantasies of power in morality’s clothing. Franz Kafka’s novels might as well serve as the manual for Jewish Supremacist Power. And as Cronenberg outed himself as an ardent ultra-Zionist, perhaps eXistenZ is a mind-game on how to control goyim by trapping them in the Jewish Maze.) Zuckerberg markets Metaverse as a reality away from reality, or reality within reality, where people can interact in amazing ways of sights and sounds, associations, travel, purchases(for items real and virtual), and probably love too.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="375" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/HAdbdUt_h9M?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="130"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Technically, it isn’t gaming but operates on much the same principle, especially as virtual reality sphere invites people to try out things they wouldn’t dare in the real world. Risk-taking is a big part of video games one’s avatars get destroyed but never oneself. In cinematic reference, one might say the virtual-reality future is like the dream world in Chris Nolan’s INCEPTION. Its ‘psychomotional’ twist owes to the tragic fate of the dead wife: She became so immersed in the lucid dream world that she not only came to prefer it but mistook it for reality(and conversely came to regard the real world as a dream from which she had to awake). Something along those lines is suggested in the interview below: MILLENNIYULE 2021: HAPA PERSPECTIVE</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/TnxXeKTSOEgK/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/TnxXeKTSOEgK/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/TnxXeKTSOEgK/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="297"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Personally, I haven’t played a video game in eons and never used a virtual-reality headset, but the interviewee(who goes by ‘Hapa Perspective’) seems well-informed and well-versed in the technology. At any rate, he says the technology has gotten so good and real-looking(or maybe more real than real) that his immersion in virtual reality became total and, if anything, he felt as if detached from true ‘reality’ when he took off the set and returned to his mundane surroundings. Sounds like a drug high, one that makes everything seem more intense, but then, there have been reports that micro-dosing on certain drugs is commonplace in the high-tech sector.<br />It seems virtual reality is intensified in ways subtle and unsubtle to engage one’s senses to the fullest, possibly similar to effect of cocaine: a sense of being boosted. This sense of intensity could be cerebral and/or sensual, the looks, sounds, and even the ‘feel’ of things. One of the appeals of games is the mental engagement in an activity at once escapist and challenging. Most people’s minds and bodies are under-utilized in day-to-day business of living. So, people go to the gym or ride a bike to work the body. Most jobs hardly engage the mind much at all, at least in a truly challenging way. Most people aren’t in the scientific/mathematical, entrepreneurial, or creative fields that require the full use of brain power. They aren’t qualified for highly cerebral work, but their brains are nevertheless more capable than for the day-to-day exertions of routine work. Then, it’s understandable why people need to expend some of this excess energy, and games seem the natural outlet. The minds become more fully engaged but without the anxiety of failure and endangerment.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="185"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Technically, gaming means play, a recreational activity, but it can also be a way of living, even a philosophical outlook whereby one’s every thought, word, and move is calibrated on the basis of game theory. For some, it’s a way to feel more alive, a civilized return to the laws of the jungle where one is predator or prey. ‘Equality’ is for the suckers, the hoi polloi. Whether it’s the brutish thugs in GOODFELLAS, the casino mogul who lives by his wits in CASINO, or the financial hustler in THE WOLF OF WALL STREET, it’s about life as a non-stop game of predators and prey, winners and losers, the fuc*ers and the suckers. It’s the only way such people feel alive, even if or especially because their lives are sometimes at stake. Or, consider the cinema of David Mamet, a nonstop house-of-games where individuals are always on the lookout for the take, not only as a matter of gain but habit(and pride), as if the one’s wits must relentlessly be sharpened like the incisors of a rodent.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3IKbkjs8xd0?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="320"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One problem of the Deep State could be there are too many people with gamer-mentality or ‘gamentality'(alongside gay-mentality, of course). They are more competitive by nature and look to stir up trouble just to play or stay in the game. Crisis in some part of the world is to them like the scent of blood is to sharks. Or, they’re eager to create a crisis where there was none or hardly any just to ramp up the game, what makes them feel alive and worthy.<br />While only a few at the top(mostly Jewish Supremacists) make the pivotal decisions, the Deep State teems with those eager to play the game, much like athletes in the football field. Jewish Supremacist high-gamers play to gain more power for themselves, whereas the goy low-gamers play just to feel alive, adventurous, special, or ‘heroic’ in some way. Jews, as tribal-players, tend to be high-gamers as it’s not just about being on the winning side but about Jews Winning. In contrast, many goyim in the Deep State are merely team-players. Jews must make sure that Jews win, whereas the likes of Mike Pompeo serve Jews because Jews are on top, but they’d be playing for the Latter Day Saints if Mormons ruled America. Jewish maneuvers against Russia are to maximize Jewish Power, whereas goyim follow and play along because they’re grateful simply to be in the game. Of course, if Jews had swallowed Russia in the 1990s(like they did the US), there would be no ‘new cold war’ between US and Russia as both would be political colonies of the Empire of Judea flying globo-homo flags and kneeling at the BLM altar, like all the Anglo-Cucks in US, Canada, Australia, and UK. With Jewish Power ordering the US deep state to be nice to Russia, there wouldn’t be any drum-beating about invasions and wars. Jews lead, goyim follow.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="384"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">People with competitive personalities naturally have more of a gamer-view of the world. They tend to see the world/humanity in binary terms of winners and losers. Gamer-view comes more naturally to capitalism/individualism/nihilism/globalism than to humanism/socialism/nationalism(the anti-imperialist kind). (Communism, though about equality and the brotherhood of man, is very much into game-theory as its ultimate objective is to convert all the world. It’s about winning. Only after total victory will it give up on the game.) It isn’t difficult to spot people with gamer-outlook-on-life. Even in mundane situations, much of what they say and do is about gaining an edge, if only for egotistical or psychological edification, a sense of “I know more than you, or I’m smarter than you.” It seems such traits are more pronounced among Jews than among easier-going goyim. Notice how Jews are the drivers of tensions with Russia, whereas Russians would rather have all sides just calm down. The rodent-like mentality of Jewish Power ceaselessly gnaws away whereas the Russian bear wants to return to hibernation. Even goyim with game-mentality care more about the fun of play(even if it means losing), whereas Jews tend to be ruthless winners and sore losers(with a vengeful streak, indeed of Yahweh Himself). It’s like what is said of Ace Rothstein in CASINO. He wasn’t the type to bet just for fun. He had to see all the angles and calculate a winning strategy every time. He reduced chance to a minimum whereas the element of chance is what makes gambling fun for most people. Most people play just to play, whereas some play only to win. The latter rules over the former. It’s like most Americans take part in elections with the understanding that their preferred candidates might win or lose. Either way, they accept the outcome and get back to living. But Jews cannot tolerate losing. After the 2016 debacle with Donald Trump, they had to use whatever means by hook and by crook to ‘fortify’ the election in 2020. And Jews just can’t let Russia go. They must heighten tensions out of revenge(for having lost what isn’t even theirs) or the dream of ultimate takeover. After all, even a tireless rat can kill a slumbering bear.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Some people take umbrage at the notion that a movie is just a movie. They believe that the impact of cinema(and entertainment in general) is far profounder than its commercial purpose or fun element. Movies serve to normalize certain attitudes, endorse certain behaviors, encourage certain biases, and instill certain outlooks. A movie with Muslim terrorists may be shallow entertainment, but they do ingrain certain feelings about Arabs/Muslims that may be characterized as ‘Orientalist’, useful to Zionists when Israel wants to drag the US into another war against the ‘Muzzies’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In EYES WIDE SHUT, the couple learns that a dream is never just a dream. In a similar vein, it could be said a game is not just a game. (What seems like play among kittens is actually a honing of their fighting and hunting skills later in life.) In the simplest terms, the notion of game-isn’t-just-game explains why there are videogames with Nazis as the bad guys(to be shot at and blown up in endless ways), but no one dares to design a game where Zionists or IDF are the bad guys. A game called INTIFADA might go well in many parts of the world, but forget about Silicon Valley creating one.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="123"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But in more complicated ways, the gamer who plays the game is also played in ways he or she doesn’t even suspect. Consider the character of Jack Torrance in THE SHINING who nurtures dreams of being master of the castle with an eagle’s eye view of the maze, yet he too is a figure in a bigger maze, the one he is incapable of noticing or seeing through. He is a player who is being played. Win or lose, who owns and controls the game? People win and lose at casinos as players, but who is playing them? It’s the House that, in the end, plays them and rakes it all in because the odds are gamed in its favor.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="427" src="https://i.pinimg.com/originals/fb/df/ff/fbdfff112c95da658cbf169500e80b54.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Or, take the so-called democracy which is supposed to be Rule by the People, but the actual republican system of government means the vast majority of people are resigned to leaving matters up to their elected representatives who, however, are really controlled by donors and hemmed in by the media(owned by billionaires). It’s a rigged game than a ritual of liberty.<br />For many gamer-minded folks, politics absorbs much of their attention because of its sports-like qualities of win-and-lose, rise and fall, brilliant maneuvers and lucky breaks. Pat Buchanan’s autobiography RIGHT FROM THE BEGINNING details how he got hooked to the Washington D.C. culture of politics, something he came to relish like a blood-sport. Buchanan certainly developed a game-mentality early in life, especially through his father who introduced him to the writings of Westbrook Pegler and through old school Catholicism that pit the righteous against the wrong.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="181"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But politics in its official capacity seems less interesting than the power behind the scene, especially with the rise of Jewish Power. Even though athletes play for super-rich owners, they really do play the game. In the heat of competition, it is really up to them to win or lose. But politicians, more lackluster than ever, hardly make for an exciting spectacle these days — a book about the current period might be called PROFILES IN COWARDICE — , though the Donald Trump phenomenon certainly ruffled a lot of feathers as something finally came along to threaten the well-established arrangement among the allotted players, leading to derangement among so many. As things turned out, Trump was more bluster than bunker-buster, but his rousing up of populism, a variant of which recently shook Canada, came to be regarded as much bigger than the man himself. Even if the Deep State sees Trump per se as no big deal, a clown really, his playing with matches with populism offended the professionalist conceit of the managerial class and its cozy servility to the Jewish Supremacists above it.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="241"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As important as politics(or those who really control it) is, the fact remains a lot of people don’t pay much attention to political issues and races. Half the nation doesn’t vote, and those who do must wait four years for the next big election. So, the real control over the masses isn’t through politics and has to be through other means. With the fading of traditionalism and culture of community, just about the only remaining culture for many is entertainment, celebrity gossip, and various other diversions. No wonder then that so much of the ‘culture war’ has been waged in these fields. It’s come down to the control of idols, impacting even videogames.<br />Still, gamer-gate and related controversies seem like small potatoes compared to what the likes of Mark Zuckerberg have in mind. Metaverse would allow Zuck to game the masses in a manner that they don’t even realize what’s being done to them. That is real power. Facebook was a service, a platform. People joined and ‘friended’ people they knew personally or shared similar interests with. Facebook rigged news and search results, but otherwise, it left the interactions up to the users. There was a limit to which Facebook could manipulate and control its users. One became reliant on Zuckerberg’s service but not caught up in his web. And there was a clear distinction and distance between the user and the service.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Meta-verse is meant to envelope and absorb the user into the Zuckotopia. Sure, there will be the illusion of choice, a semblance of shaping one’s own space based on personal preferences, but the user will be swallowed into a world designed with the purpose of conjoining his mind to the hive. One’s choice will be limited to what is offered and what is allowed. This is true of any service, but this will be more than a mere service or product: it will be a ‘world’, one meant to be preferred over the real one.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="75"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the interview with Millennial Woes, Mr. Hapa Perspective says one of the first things he countered in the virtual world was Anne Frank iconography. Now, what does Anne Frank have to do with recreation, entertainment, or escapism? Nothing, of course, but it reveals something about the ulterior motive embedded in the commerce. Apart from the obvious greed for profits, there’s the obsession to convert and contain the masses within the Judeo-centric power agenda.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/w2oDgSDWdV4?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="249"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jewish Power has been doing this for as long as we can remember. Indeed, even over the many centuries of ‘Anti-Semitic’ Christianity, goyim were under the Jewish spell as their God, iconography, and narratives were drawn from Jewish Biblical texts. Unfortunately for Jews, European Christians were under heretical Jewish influence(that of Jesus and early Christians) against the core of Jewish community and tradition. This state of affairs finally ended with World War II whereupon Jews propped up ‘antisemitism’ as the gravest of all sins, something Christianity must answer for. Thus, Jews not only elevated the Holocaust as the new faith of the West but subverted the moral-spiritual prestige of Christianity and guilt-baited it into what it is today, a globo-homo BLM faith that preaches in favor of the Great Replacement.<br />Jews also shaped white minds with their control of History and Entertainment. With control over History Departments in academia and publishing, Jews have increasingly pushed a mono-narrative for both the elites and the masses. It’s mostly about ‘white guilt’ about blacks, Western guilt over the Holocaust, and the thought crime of ‘homophobia’. And Hollywood produced a slew of movies about Negro Nobility and how white ‘racists’ used to lynch and slaughter countless pure-as-snow innocent blacks. Under Jewish Power, US is a place where Emmett Till and George Floyd are bigger than jesus and where MLK is bigger than god. Also, Jews control advertising and bombard viewers with endless images of interracism favoring ACOWW(Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs) and globo-homo-tranny degeneracy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="217"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, people like Zuckerberg feel that such control over goyim hasn’t been enough. After all, Donald Trump managed to win in 2016 in a country where the white share of the population has been drastically reduced over the years. Quite possibly, Trump also won in 2020, but of course, Jews pulled all stops to ‘fortify’ the election. For all their manipulations over the dimwit goy masses, what if the tide is beginning to go in the other direction? Even among the younger generation, there is pushback against ‘wokeness’, though no one in the mainstream has yet to name the Jewish Power as the mastermind. On some level, Jews must realize that, for all their massive power and control over institutions and industries, they are fighting an uphill battle because so much of what they’re pushing is unnatural and abnormal as the so-called New Normal/Natural. Indeed, the reason for the relentless propagandizing is because most people will revert to natural norms if left to their own devices and leanings. Minus the brainwashing and propagandization, who believes “It’s Okay to be White” is tantamount to ‘white supremacism’ or that George Floyd was some kind of saint or that ‘Rachel’ Levine is really a ‘woman’? Or that homo fecal-penetration is grounds for marriage and association with the rainbow?</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4Ozte2GDeMM?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="156"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, it makes sense that Zuckerberg promotes the Metaverse where his control over the masses will be utterly pervasive and intrusive. And paradoxically, people will be less aware of the manipulation precisely because they are so totally immersed in it. It’s like one loses the sense of wetness when one is in the water where wetness is the overwhelming reality than a condition that interferes with dryness.<br />When one watches a TV commercial, however dazzling and enticing, it retains a separateness from you, the viewer. Commercial is something on TV whereas you are in reality; you can even walk away from the TV and do something else. But in the Metaverse, what is advertised, blatantly or subtly, becomes the very fabric of your newfound ‘reality’, and it’s constantly all around you. The distance between the viewer and the product has dissolved. It’s as if one has been sucked(or zucked) into the ad.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, when one considers that the Metaverse will be designed and programmed by Zionists and Zio-compliant ‘woke’ geeks, it certainly won’t be a neutral other-realm where one has agency to discover his own truths and meanings. Rather, even when you’re within what you believe to be your own space with your compatriots, it will be encapsulated within a larger environment designed to push a certain agenda and set of ‘values’ — imagine the flashing billboards within the Metaverse that will be flashing like a thousand Time Squares with ‘woke’ messaging concocted by Zionists who, of course, will suppress anything related to Israel’s dehumanization of Palestinians; it will be about Anne Frank and Emmett Till, and maybe shrines to George Floyd.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="63"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Also, think of the possibility of eavesdropping. Facebook has already served as a means by which the corporation and deep state gathered up tons of data on its users. Imagine the possibility with Metaverse where one is likely to be even less inhibited about one’s personal thoughts as virtual reality is accepted as new reality, even as one’s preferred ‘private space’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Technically, Metaverse experience wouldn’t be a game, but users will effectively be turned into duped players in the grand Jewish Power game. And being Anne-Franked, like Mr. Hapa Perspective was, will only be the beginning. In the movie INCEPTION, what matters in the end is who-is-in-whose-dream. If you’re unknowingly in someone else’s dream(mistaken as your own), you can be manipulated according to the whims of the other. It’s almost as if Zuckerberg created a literal version of this dream space. Countless millions are invited into his dream-universe which they mistake for their own ‘virtual reality’. They are to be exposed to manipulation by Zuckerberg and his Zio-‘woke’ crew of profiteering would-be-prophets.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/y0jZ3HCEc-Q?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="54"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It could be Zuckerberg has conceived of gaming on the grandest scale, not in the ordinary sense of playing videogames but in drawing masses around the world into his universe to be combed over for every last ounce of data and to be imprinted with sights and sounds amenable to the Judeo-centric globalist agenda.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, what is the righteous way? To reject the Metaverse or to create a counter-meta-verse free of globalist mind control? But is there much promise for mankind in being sucked into any kind of false reality(even free of Jewish supremacist influence)? Of course, one could argue it’s already been the case with churches, cinemas, radios, TV’s, and videogames that have captivated so many hearts and minds, so many fantasies and imaginations. Still, with those there has always been the reminding presence of reality, however diminished or peripheralized, between the audience and the product, whereas virtual reality competes not as an enhancement or partial escape from reality but as a substitute reality with claim of superiority in every way.</span></p>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-62340871731751335982022-12-07T16:31:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:09.143-08:00The Only Way to Understand the Ukrainian Crisis Is by Placing Jewish Supremacist Power at the Front and Center of the Discussion<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg_DdTu9znkKbtXapPoH5M44gig2-2QHaJmOHzkLLH8TGBLN4RwlXSodZs3JdexFRuXaTAuPT9Eo5G2AJm4yVsnJjP-b57plElzy5A6KB3YI8QWB1Rjz2YqExw-wPffLUnL1EmQgo94kJj3p4KUl8AsBm6oNERzWx6aOjv5rRYkQ2g4XzbkmNqo6T9I-Q=w574-h640" style="border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="574" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Russian-Ukrainian Crisis would be much better understood if people mentioned… guess what? Yes, Jewish Power or World Jewry. We speak of Russia, Ukraine, EU, US, UK, NATO, Biden Administration, ‘Neocons’, and so on, but the real movers and shakers are Jews because they directly control the US, the lone superpower, which in turn rules over EU(and Japan and the Asian Pussy Cats or Pussies).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When virtually all discussions of the crisis(even in alternative or dissident circles) fail to mention the Jews, it’s like talking about World War II without ever mentioning Adolf Hitler and the National Socialists. Could anyone understand World War II by just pointing to US, UK, Soviet Union, Germany, and etc.? No, it was a certain element in Germany, the National Socialist regime led by Hitler, that triggered the key events that led to all-out war. While Hitler couldn’t have brought about the calamity all by himself, the fact remains: No Hitler, No WWII.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="102"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The talk of Barack Obama and Joe Biden(among others) in relation to Ukraine doesn’t go very far. What were they in the key moment in 2014? Mere puppets of Jews. Bought-and-sold whores doing the bidding of their masters. They were actors, not the real players. Imagine discussing a movie as if the characters and story have an autonomy of their own while ignoring the roles of the screenwriter, director, and the producers. While one key virtue of democracies is the lack of an all-powerful ruler(who can turn tyrannical), the sure downside is most politicians are selected by the moneyed class</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To really understand what’s happening in Ukraine(in relation to Russia), it is essential that we focus on the power of World Jewry. World + Jewry because Jewish Power, though concentrated in the US, is a vast network with global reach from NY to DC to SF to London to Paris to Berlin to Warsaw to Tel Aviv to etc. Would events be playing out as they are IF Jews were not in control of the West?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="204"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If we ignore or fail to notice Jewish Power, EU would appear the puppet of the US, but addressing the Jewish element paints a more accurate picture that has both US and EU subservient to Global Jewish Hegemony. In other words, goy politicians in US are no less puppets than ones in Europe are. It’s not so much US directing EU as Jewish Power directing goyim in both US and EU. Does anyone really think Biden has more power than Emmanuel Macron or the shabbos goy nobodies in Italy, Germany, or Sweden? Why did European leaders mostly ignore Donald Trump despite his bluster and tough guy act? Because, all said and done, they knew he was bent over to be rammed in the arse by his Zionist masters. No matter how tough a prison ‘bitch’ acts, the fact remains he can’t say NO to being buggered by his masters. Goyim in US and EU are all in the same club: Take it up the arse from Jewish Power Club. That’s what globo-homo boils down to, and it is indeed a fitting symbol of an age when the name of the game is to turn ‘bitch’ to be bung-donged by Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="56"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The dissident narrative blames the Anglo-American capitalist model for the ruination of Russia in the 1990s, but didn’t it do wonders for post-war Germany and Japan? As well as for certain East Asian nations and China beginning in the 1980s. If the Anglo-American capitalist model is to blame, why has it worked in some places?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="266"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, one could argue that Russians were too lazy, drunk, and inept to take advantage of new opportunities upon the fall of communism. Or one could blame communism’s prolonged impact on Russia for having suppressed and discouraged individual initiative and enterprise, so much so that Russians clung to the iron blanket than actively took advantage of new freedoms in the 1990s. There’s surely some truth to that. But would Russia have turned out so badly in the 1990s had Jews not controlled the West’s ‘aid package’ for the post-Soviet economy? Or if Russians had realized right away what the Jews were really up to and taken strong measures in favor of a more nationalist-minded reforms? Compare Germany after WWI and after WWII. The problems faced by Germans post-WWI didn’t just come from the Versailles Treaty. Rather, so much of the new order fell into the hands of rapacious Jews who freely plundered the whole country financially and ravaged it culturally. In contrast, despite far greater devastations of World War II, Germany recovered rapidly because the economy was in German hands and, furthermore, outside advice came from Anglo-American than Jewish sources. A typical Anglo-American worldview back then was that of George Kennan: Build up American power around the world but look for live-and-let-live solutions with other peoples. In contrast, a typical Jewish worldview is that of Victoria Nuland, Richard Perle, Paul Singer, and George Soros: We Jews must have it all, therefore it’s our ‘chosen’ right to subvert, corrupt, and meddle as we please to turn the entire world into our ‘bitch’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="73"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, the triumphant US following WWII wasn’t ruled by Jews. And when China began their reforms in the 1980s, CCP was firmly in control and insisted on doing things its way, i.e. they would study the successful East Asian models, especially Singapore, and formulate their own policies of reform and experimentation. One thing for sure, they would not hand over the levers of power and control to foreigners.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Russia in the 1990s handed control over to foreigners, especially Jews. Handing the keys to foreigners was bad enough. But the leading figures were Jewish, and this proved crucial due to Jewish character and agenda, as well as their contempt for Slavs. Anglos have a long history of exploitation and brutality, but they’ve also shown they can be magnanimous, reformist, and honorable. While the British pulled dirty tricks to wrest Hong Kong from China, they did turn a pile of dirt into a great city and allowed Chinese to prosper within the zone. And UK invested a great deal in India. It wasn’t just about take but give. In contrast, Jewish Power comes down to take and take, with Jews having ever more and goyim having ever less. Also, unlike Anglos who’ve shown the possibility of reflection, remorse, and amends, Jews never admit wrong, never apologize, and never try to make up.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="317"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s been noted Germany has been far more contrite than Japan after World War II, but even Japan admitted it was the aggressor against other Asian nations in the events that led to the attack on Pearl Harbor and all the hell that followed. But, have Jews ever expressed misgivings or remorse about anything they’d done throughout history? Maybe Jews sometimes feel sorry for what they’d done to fellow Jews — one bunch of Jews didn’t do enough to help out another bunch of Jews — , but they’ve hardly shown any remorse over the consequences of their acts on goyim. (There are outliers like Philip Weiss and Norman Finkelstein but they’re the exceptions that prove the rule.) If Anglo Morality is often about whites genuflecting on what wrongs they(and their ancestors) may have committed, Jewish Morality is about Jews accusing OTHERS of having wronged Jews or others. It never occurs to Jews that THEY may have done wrong to others, or maybe Jews know but don’t care as goyim are regarded as subhuman cattle. So, Jews will go on and on about ‘antisemitism’ or, on the subject of blacks, always point to white goy ‘racism’ but hardly mention Jewish exploitation of blacks. It’s always about Emmett Till than, say, black victims of Jewish Power in South Africa, where Jews, Anglos, and Boers long conspired to exploit the manpower and resources of the region. And Jews may go on and on about British Imperialism against China without mentioning Jews were the main peddlers of opium to the Chinese. Even when it comes to Zionism, many American Jews lamely claim that Israel’s abuses are more the result of fanatical Christian Zionist support. In other words, American Jews are oh-so-wonderful and apply humanitarian pressures on Israel, but there’s little they can do because Christian Zionist fanatics encourage Israel to act badly.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="118"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It certainly doesn’t help that Jews are minorities in all countries(except Israel) and zelig-ishly launder all their tribal misdeeds as goy-national ones. So, even though Jews were the dominant sellers of opium in China, the blame falls on the ‘British’. Even though Jewish Power directed the US government to cook up lies about WMD to invade Iraq, the blame falls squarely on Bush, Cheney, and the State Department even though they signed onto war to appease Jewish Power. As for Russian economic fiasco in the 1990s, the official narrative blames Boris Yeltsin’s ineptitude even though the much bigger factor was Jewish exploitation of Yeltsin’s drunken stupor, ill health, and bumpkin ignorance of world affairs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="49"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s no longer tenable to launder the crimes of Jewish Power as ‘national’ abuses or blunders when national sovereignty is being eroded in favor of shabbos goyim doing the bidding of the likes of George Soros, Paul Singer, Wall Street crooks, and Washington D.C. gangsters of Zion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Imagine how better the Ukrainian Crisis would come into focus if, instead of treating it as a matter of contention among US, EU, Ukraine, and Russia, it was discussed as a Jewish Power play pitting shabbos goyim vs national goyim(like Putin). In THE GODFATHER PART 2, when Kay asks what happened with Pentangeli, Michael says, “It was between the brothers. I had nothing to do with it.” But in truth, he had everything to do with it. He used Pentangeli’s brother to silence Pentangeli, just like Hyman Roth played the Rosatos and Pentangeli to get at Michael. Likewise, Jewish Power will pretend it has nothing to do with Ukraine, Syria, or any other crisis, i.e. it’s really a matter among the goy nations, and Jews are merely sitting in an advisory capacity. But that’s utter BS as Jews are playing the role of puppet master with shabbos goy shills. The big tragedy is even Putin cannot spell this out. Why not?</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/t8cE3ZekgCY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Perhaps, calls against ‘antisemitism’ in the past were to protect vulnerable Jews. Today, it has only one meaning: Shut Up about Jewish Power. This black hole in the discourse has rendered ridiculous and absurd our understanding of foreign(and domestic) affairs. We are like Mick Jagger in GIMME SHELTER beseeching the crowd, “Brothers and Sisters, why are we fighting?” Yeah, Mick, never mind the concert was planned as a free-for-all, Hell’s Angels were recruited for security(and paid in free beer), half the crowd was zonked out on drugs, and the Stones were glorifying the Devil. Yeah, never mind all that. “Brothers and Sisters, why are we fighting?” LOL</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="303"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Likewise, nothing makes sense about the so-called ‘new cold war’ unless we put Jewish Power at front and center of the discussion. Ukraine is like the Rosato Brothers in THE GODFATHER PART 2. (Imagine trying to discuss the power dynamics in that movie without ever mentioning the role of Hyman Roth, or of Michael Corleone for that matter.) The current Ukrainian regime wouldn’t dare act this way toward Russia but for the fact that it’s backed up by the Jews who control US and EU. Some in dissident circles speak of the alliance of Jews and Neo-Nazis in Ukraine, but it misses the point. It is hardly a partnership of equals. Jews totally dominate, and the so-called ‘neo-nazis’ are mere muscle, the hitmen and bouncers. Also, naming the ‘neo-nazi’ element implies that Jewish Supremacism isn’t itself a moral disqualifier. No, the current policy must be tied to ‘neo-nazism’ to be discredited. But even if there were NO connection between Jews and ‘neo-nazis’, isn’t it enough that Jews are now acting like Nazis or worse to deserve our condemnation? Is Jewishness so holy that it can be criticized or condemned ONLY IN RELATION to some goy evil? It would suggest Jewishness per se is pristine and can never be wrong and can only be tainted by goy wrongs. It’s like the ‘mainstream conservative’ discourse about blacks in the US. Blacks are almost never blamed for their thuggery & criminality and only rebuked for choosing the Democrats with all the WRONG ideas. In other words, even when blacks destroy cities like Detroit, blackness isn’t at fault, only its having been misled by ‘socialist’ ideas of the Democratic Party. Likewise, never mind what Jewish Supremacism did to Ukraine. Just pretend that Jews misguidedly sided with the ‘neo-nazis’, the real bad guys.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There have been books about Hitler’s War, Stalin’s War, Churchill’s War, and etc. But what about the Jews’ War, or the Schwarz War? The failure to name(and blame) Jewish Power prevents the World from acting naturally. Unless Jewish supremacism is checked, global power dynamics will spin around the axis of Jewish megalomania than of humanity. It’s obvious that most European states would rather just do business with Russia. It’s also obvious that Russia has no desire to invade neighboring countries. Its hand was forced in Ukraine because of the Jew Coup via the Maidan Insurrection. And Jews could pull it off because they control the vast resources of the US and could count on the craven compliance of European governments. Many in the EU weren’t keen on what was happening, but Victoria Nuland, sort of like Madeleine Albright on steroids(or PMS 24/7), gave Europeans the middle finger because she’s one of those ‘made’ members of the Tribe.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="158"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">After all, what were Europeans going to do about it when EU is a satellite of the US controlled by Jews? Besides, Europeans since World War II have foolishly agreed to worship Jews and the Holocaust, which has instilled generations of Europeans and whites the world over with the faith in Jews as pure-as-snow Anne Franks mass-murdered by Nazis for no reason at all. Having spiritually elevated the Jewish Tribe to holiness, Europeans are now caught in a trap. They chose to worship Jews as sacred victims of the Nazis, the worst people that ever lived, but they now find Jews acting as badly or even worse than the Nazis. But they can’t face up to this because they deified Jewishness. Scum like Nuland know this about the white psyche. No matter how wretchedly she speaks or acts, the mere fact of her Jewishness has whites trembling at her feet as if she’s god or something.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="222"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Yes, Jews control the gods. Her arrogance isn’t merely the expression of American Power and Jewish Money but the perverse manifestation of Jewish Deification. She belongs to the Holy Tribe which is now worshiped by Europeans as the new christ. Christianity maintains Jesus the Perfect Man was terribly wronged and murdered but ascended to Heaven and attained/revealed full Godhood. Holocaustianity says Jews as the Perfect People were horribly wronged and mass-murdered but rose from the grave to offer benediction to those whites who atone and repent at the feet of Jews. One thing for sure, whatever the real Jesus may have been, Jews were never a Perfect People but a bunch of a–holes like the rest of humanity. But because the West is now into the idolatry of actual groups(mainly Jews, blacks, and homos), things are getting increasingly worse. In the past, all sides invoked God as being on their side and did terrible things in His name. Still, no one could know for sure whose side God was on as God was bigger than any one people. Furthermore, as God didn’t exist, He had no real impact on world affairs. God could neither save or destroy the world; it was up to the actual forces on Earth. Still, if one must worship, let it be God.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="365"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But what happens when an actual people are worshiped, either as individuals(Hitler, Stalin, Mao) or as groups(Jews, blacks, and homos)? It is far more dangerous to worship a group than an individual. After all, however bad a megalomaniac tyrant may be, he is just one person and won’t live forever. After Stalin died, Soviet Union could halfway become a normal country. But even after crazy Jews like Sheldon Adelson kick the bucket, the madness continues because the West goes on worshiping the Jews. And as Jews are deemed sacred and godlike, we must pretend they’re founts of wisdom, truth, justice, and meaning. Even when they lie, it’s the truth. Even when they spit, it’s holy water. Even when they abuse others, it’s justice. Just ask the Palestinians. Zionists crush Palestinians, and all we get from US politicians is ‘Muh Israel’. God is said to be all-powerful but doesn’t exist and has no impact on us. In contrast, Jews are a people with all the flaws(and virtues) of other peoples, but they are worshiped as holy and godlike, and this has real world impact because, unlike God, they really do exist in the World. No matter how much one prays for God to smite the wicked, nothing comes of it. But Jewish Power can really trample on your rights and start wars. Nothing is crazier than worshiping an actual group of people as perfect. Atheists like Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins have warned of the dangers of worshiping things that don’t exist, i.e. worldly decisions shouldn’t be based on irrational faiths. Still, at the very least, there is the assurance of there being no God or gods to actually mess things up no matter how much people pray or make offerings. In contrast, rooting for Jews as a Holy Tribe has real world consequences because Jews, who really do exist, do control goy puppets who manage real world affairs of the West. Atheists would do better to worry about man worshiping really-existing man than man worshiping non-existent God. A child idolizing a gangster is a bigger problem than a child dreaming of Santa Claus.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhPIdpUypnQopkVva4CA-m5dc9l2B0IRTMeNH9WMp2ZdhV0din3KvhHwao_9nTh5jsASc0ww5SNFajvW1pp8Uj-jET0-j2NsJpSmNEDD83gm576PQ8yedXMcW9-xqTHycrHGm13RATVGRN5i6tvYCaev9AeK8S098AmGaKIiq_JU_Sqcchw_Flh_Qhj4g=w535-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="535" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The consequences of Jewish control of the gods illuminate the uselessness of liberal democracy when secularization succumbs to sacralization. Whatever one thinks of so-called Liberal Democracy, it has its advantages but if and only if honest debate about power is not only allowed but encouraged. Unlike a theocracy where certain forms of authority and/or dogma are deemed sacrosanct, unquestionable, and settled, liberal democracy works on the premise of open and honest secular debate on all matters. Thus, liberal democracy may seem soulless, unmoored, confused, and chaotic at times(as it holds nothing as sacred), but the advantage is the Power must justify itself on real talent, achievement, and results. The Power simply cannot invoke God or gods or whatever to justify its right to rule.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="398"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The problem of Iranian Democracy is that, no matter who wins the election, the ultimate authority is with the Islamic clergy whose power is beyond debate. Though the West distinguishes itself from the Iranian Model by claiming to practice secular ‘liberal democracy’, what has happened over the years is less the separation of Church and State than the union of State with the quasi-religion of Tridolatry, or the tri-idolatry of Jews, blacks, and homos as the new trinity. (This makes the US neo-‘theomocracy’ worse than the Iranian kind, which has Allah and Muhammad as the highest holies. In contrast, the holiest of the holies in the US are Jewish gangsters, decadent homos, and Floydian blacks. Which would you rather revere and worship, Allah or Jewgromo Megalomania?) Jewish Power over the US, for instance, is striking similar to the hold that religious authorities have over Iran. No matter which side wins in Iran, it must bow down to the Muslim mullahs. Likewise, no matter who wins in the US, it comes down to ‘Muh Israel’, followed by ‘MLK is my god’ and ‘blessed be the holy homos’. Such obeisance is most dangerous in regard to Jews because they’re the ruling overlords of the US. A Liberal Democracy where one cannot even honestly discuss the Power is utterly worthless. It has betrayed its secular justification for power. Liberal Democracy comes with many problems, but its one saving grace is that all sides can name the power and openly discuss it. But Jews have used Holocaustianity and Zion-King Worship(enforced by SPLC, ADL, ACLU, AIPAC, J-Street, Jewish control of academia/media, and Jewish control of finance & all the hapless whore politicians) to render honest discussion of power impossible. In a way, it’s far worse than Iran. At least, there is a higher authority than even the mullahs: Muhammad and Allah. While the clerics claim to interpret and represent God, they don’t claim to be God. As such, even though they hold the ultimate authority in the political sphere, they too can be criticized to an extent as flawed and fallible human beings. In contrast, Jews(and blacks and homos) have become the highest holies in the West. There is no Jehovah, Jesus, Muhammad, or Allah above them. Angering blacks, pissing off homos, or upsetting Jews is a far graver ‘sin’ than blaspheming God in the West.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="210"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And as Jewish Power is so absolute, there is nowhere to turn to. For example, if you really dislike Christian Evangelicals, you can join the Democratic Party and put down the Christian dummies. Or, if you want to gripe about Muslims, you can join the GOP and whine about ‘terrorists'(even though US and Israel are really the biggest sponsors of Jihadi Terrorism against modernizing Muslim nations). You can join with the Democrats to howl about Russia-Russia-Russia, or you can join with the GOP to bleat about China-China-China. You can join with the Democrats(and RINOS) to blame it all on Whitey. You can join the GOP to gripe about immigrants, especially illegal ones. But no matter which way side you turn to, you can’t overturn the apple cart on ‘Muh Israel’ and ‘Holy Jews, let me kiss your arse’. Jews pulled down Donald Trump’s pants and bitch-raped his ass so many times, but all he says is ‘Muh Israel’. Even after Jews rigged the election in 2020 to oust him, all he says is how the ‘squad’ is taking over the Democratic Party(ROTFL) and denying Zionists total control of Congress, which the JEWS DESERVE TO HAVE according to the Don. What kind of pathetic country is this?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="76"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But the deafening silence about Jewish Power is global, even in countries where Jewish Power isn’t absolute(as in the US). Given how Jewish Media craps all over China, you’d think Chinese media would return the favor in kind. If Jewish Media bitch about the ‘genocide’ of Uighurs, Chinese Media could go on and on about the Zionist ‘genocide’ of Palestinians. But while Jews piss on Chinese, Chinese dare not point to Jewish Evil.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="216"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But the silence is even more shocking among Russians. After all, while Jewish Media and goy puppets badmouth China as a diversion — for now, Jews have no realistic goal of taking over China — , it’s obvious that Jews are hellbent on unraveling the entire Russian power structure and taking over. Jews see Slavs as low-IQ moronic cattle whose destiny is to serve Jewish overlords. To an extent, Jewish arrogance is understandable given that self-rule hasn’t been a strong suit among the Slavs. For the longest time, Russia was ruled by Mongols. After the Mongols were gone, it wasn’t long before Russia was ruled by non-Russian Tsars, mostly of Germanic origin; also Germans built up most of modern Russia prior to the Revolution. And then, Russia fell under Bolshevik Rule composed of various ethnicities. At the very top, the majority were non-Russian. In the post-Stalin era, ethnic Russians gained greater control, but their lethargy and ineptitude ran the system to the ground until it finally collapsed in the early 90s. And then, it was Boris Yeltsin, a drunken bumpkin whom Jews could easily toy with. So, naturally, Jews feel Russians are easy picking. Jews see Russkies as slave-minded rubes who deserve to be ruled by a strong hand, be it Mongol, Germanic elites, or Jews.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="310"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, Jewish animus has less to do with avarice for Russia than with anxiety over US and EU. Incredibly, Jews have taken over the entire West. Anglos, once a proud people and rulers of the mightiest empire, have become a bunch of Anglo-cucks or Anglucks, among the sorriest deracinated and neutered saps that ever lived. Just look at Anglos in UK, Canada, Australia, and US, and it’s downright embarrassing. So, if Jews could own and tame the Anglos, who the hell are the Russians to say No or Nyet to Jewish Power? If the great Anglos kiss Jewish ass, surely lowly Slavs should do likewise. (Jews are rather okay with Poles because they are useful as self-loathing Slavs who cater to the West and eagerly kiss Jewish butt. That’s what Catholicism does to Slavs.)<br />That said, Russian refusal to kiss Jewish butt is especially threatening to Jews because the #1 priority of Jewish Power isn’t to take over Russia(even though it very much wants to) but to keep the West under its thumb. In other words, even if Russia were to vanish into a black hole this very second, Jews could easily get over it. Sure, they’d miss out on the opportunity of taking over vast territories with unlimited resources and potential helots, but they would also feel reassured by the absence of a Great White Power standing as counter-example to the White West. Jews have convinced most whites in the West that the current Western Model is the best one, the only one, and there’s no other way, so don’t even think about it. History moves only in one direction, the ‘liberal democratic’ one as defined by Jews, which amounts to a neo-theocratic obligation among whites as happy-sappy cucky-wucks kneeling and praying at the altar of Sacred Semites, Holy Homos, and Noble Negroes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="150"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In the Jewish Mind, it’s totally intolerable and sacrilegious for anyone to ridicule Globo-Homo and BLM, but it’s totally great for Soros-funded Pussy Riot to disrupt services at Orthodox Churches and vandalize traditional Christian spaces. If Russia didn’t exist, there would be small dinky nations like Hungary saying NO to Soros-ism, but how long could they hold out? In contrast, Russia is vast and can weather Western efforts to sanction and subvert its economy. In the end, it was Russia that absorbed Napoleon’s blows and brought an end to his empire. And Russia was the graveyard of Hitler’s imperial ambitions. Of course, Jews can’t invade Russia outright themselves(or even get NATO goyim to do it for them). Most likely, Jews are bluffing about a major war between US and Russia. Jews know NATO won’t invade Russia and Russian won’t invade EU.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, why do Jews see Russia as a threat? Because Jews fear the rift between Western elitism(that totally cucks to Jews) and Western nationalist-populism may fester and grow. As long as the West is majority white, there’s always the chance, however small, that the goy white population may finally wake up, get sick of Jewish Power, and demand a return to white majority national sovereignty. Therefore, Jewish Power doesn’t feel totally secure UNLESS the West is made minority-white via mass immigration and race-mixing. That way, the diverse goyim will be too splintered and fragmented to form a solid mass of power. So, until then, Jewish Power must use cuck-elites and sufficiently ‘woke’ white minions to keep pushing the Great Replacement. (If Russia wasn’t white enough for Nazi Germany, it is too white for Jewish Supremacism.) Jews are committed to persuading whites that there’s no other way, and that the globo-homo-negro-shlomo momentum is unstoppable whether one supports or opposes it.</span></p><table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="background-color: white; border: 1px solid black; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; margin: 20px auto; max-width: 100%; overflow-y: scroll; padding: 1px; position: relative;"><tbody><tr style="padding: 2px;"><td style="border: 1px solid black; font-size: 13px; line-height: 1.4em; padding: 3px;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjoo9Qvu5BncAnPPbjHnR7_0bUMjcgV-fmxV2MbwqWEetLPt19uiT0L9qfTt6Bsl9Uuf3rofnpj3zgwFrQUBuDwnw6u8EqREfL6dyjQaYZOPeb4a0ORpGoU_qUUHOk5__qLmFGWBhORZRizKrCR8UVB_8t_DKOAwxKvcvUCEM-TX7wbLYqxI8WSkTh_iQ=s750" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjoo9Qvu5BncAnPPbjHnR7_0bUMjcgV-fmxV2MbwqWEetLPt19uiT0L9qfTt6Bsl9Uuf3rofnpj3zgwFrQUBuDwnw6u8EqREfL6dyjQaYZOPeb4a0ORpGoU_qUUHOk5__qLmFGWBhORZRizKrCR8UVB_8t_DKOAwxKvcvUCEM-TX7wbLYqxI8WSkTh_iQ=s750"><img border="0" height="462" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEjoo9Qvu5BncAnPPbjHnR7_0bUMjcgV-fmxV2MbwqWEetLPt19uiT0L9qfTt6Bsl9Uuf3rofnpj3zgwFrQUBuDwnw6u8EqREfL6dyjQaYZOPeb4a0ORpGoU_qUUHOk5__qLmFGWBhORZRizKrCR8UVB_8t_DKOAwxKvcvUCEM-TX7wbLYqxI8WSkTh_iQ=w640-h462" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></a></td></tr><tr style="padding: 2px;"><td class="tr-caption" style="border: 1px solid black; font-size: 13px; line-height: 1.4em; padding: 3px;"><i style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">By Vox Day</b></i></td></tr></tbody></table><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But there stands Russia with different values and outlook, and with something resembling national sovereignty. This is why the Jewish-run State Department goes to great lengths to attack the ‘traditionalism’ of the Russian regime. So, even if the West cannot militarily or economically destroy Russia, Jewish Power pushes the stark dichotomy of the world, history, and morality divided between the ‘liberal democratic’ West and ‘autocratic’ Russia(and Iran and China). Never mind the so-called ‘liberal democracy’ now means total loss of national sovereignty, goy elites serving World Jewry than their own peoples, idolizing Negroes as magical, and celebrating homo-fecal-penetration & tranny-penis-cutting. But for enough idiots, mere mantras and labels are enough to get them onboard. So, even though the West is no longer ‘liberal’ or ‘democratic’ — it is essentially ethno-oligarchic — , plenty of shallow and/or status-seeking white dummies or whummies the pride of being on the ‘right side of history’. Right, because canonizing the likes of George Floyd and getting all teary-eyed over Pete Buttigieg taking a dong up his ass are the highest values that the current ‘liberal democratic’ West has to offer.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="117"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, here is the great disappointment. While Russia doesn’t join in the Western submission to Jewish Supremacy, it nevertheless joins in the Western silence on Jewish Power. Russia will not bark on command by Jewish Power but won’t bark at Jewish Power either. Given that Jews use media to vilify Russian government, people, culture, history, and values, one would think Russia would return the favor in kind. If Jews(who control the West) endlessly go Russia-Russia-Russia, it’d be only natural for Russia to go Jew-Jew-Jew. If Jews are always Naming-the-Russians(even for things Russians didn’t do), why aren’t Russians naming the Jews, especially when Russians can point to so many Jewish abuses?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="165"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s as if Russia like the GOP vis-a-vis the Democrats? As we all know, the GOP is somewhat less submissive to the Jewish Agenda, which is why most Jews(who are Democrats) revile it constantly. However, despite its (limited)opposition to the Jewish Agenda, the GOP is no less deferential than the Democratic Party when it comes to Jews and Israel. Even as it defends the 2nd Amendment(and the NRA) to the utter dismay of Jewish Power, it remains reverential to Jews who seethe and spit on Republicans as subhuman cavemen. Even as Jews negatively associate gun violence with the Christian Right, American Conservatives never make a connection between anti-gun legislation and Jewish Power. Of course, many conservatives know of the connection on the personal level, but they dare not speak of it. So, even when Jews howl about all those bloody guns owned by Christo-Fascists, white conservatives are always careful not to name the Jew as the main enemy of gun rights.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If anything, white conservatives will roll out some Jewish guy representing the minority position among Jews and pretend patriotic Jews are standing with gun-loving patriots. Or white conservatives will repeat the bogus nonsense about how the Nazis banned guns, which is not only untrue but nonsensical as a defense of Jews; after all, even if Jews had been armed to the teeth in Hitler’s Germany, they would have been vastly outnumbered by Germans with guns. 1% with guns is no match for 99% with guns.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Jew Taboo sure makes people say dumb things. It’s like anyone who knows anything about Jewish Power knows that the great majority of Jews are behind the globo-homo and tranny-wanny agenda, but even most conservatives who oppose the agenda dare not name the Jewish Power and where it stands on the issue. Like the pro-gun folks, they roll out the odd Jew who, for whatever reason, opposes the agenda. Even when most Jews are pushing craziness, most people dare not call out on the connection between Jewish Power and the craziness. Instead, they desperately seek out some Jew who happens to agree with them and pretend he’s representative of the Jewish community.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="503"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, in an order where Jews have been sacralized, it’d be ‘Anti-Semitic’ to blame Jewish Power for anything or to even notice it has no regard for your sense of sanity and good will. So, you seek out some Jew who meets you halfway so you can boast, “With Jew on my side.” And more often than not, that particular Jew will not call out on the majority of Jews pushing the craziness. It’s as if, even for sane Jews, tribal solidarity trumps all else. Or, it suggests a con-game, whereby certain Jews pretend to be on your side to create the false impression that others may yet be ‘converted’. Overjoyed with having a holy Jew on your side, you dare not name the Jewish Power lest you offend your Jewish ally/friend. But can most Jews be won over to sanity and moderation? (Not that the majority of Jews are clinically insane, but Jews, who are so obsessed with power and control, must know that a world of sanity and fairness will limit Jewish Power, not least by noticing and calling out on Jewish abuses. In order for Jewish Power to be absolute, nothing must have higher claim on reality than Jewish will and power-lust do. It’s like the ‘logic’ of power George Orwell’s 1984. A world where 2 + 2 = 4 means there is a truth truer than the Power. For the Power to be absolute, 2 + 2 = 5 must be accepted as ‘true’ if the Power says so. That way, reality and truth have no meaning and value independent of the Power. Reality is what the Power says it is. Truth withers and bends to the will of the Power. And this is the logic of Jewish Power. Most Jews aren’t clinically insane, but they are obsessed with Jewish Power, and that means even unreality pushed by Jews must trump what seems real to the sane mind. It is one reason why Jews push tranny nuttery. Not because most Jews really believe that a man with penis and balls is a ‘woman’, but because it’s a test of Jewish Power to make goyim shut up and believe whatever Jewish Power insists is true.) If not, the Jewish ally has actually done more harm than good because your false hope prevented the naming of the problem lest the precious Jew’s feelings be hurt. This is why the only acceptable Jewish Ally is one who loudly calls out on Jewish Power as the main culprit behind ‘woke’ craziness. Jewish Allies who don’t call out on Jewish Power are worse than useless because they’re likely moles or plants whose hidden purpose is to mute an honest accounting of the Jewish Agenda. So delighted that a holy Jew has crossed over to your side, you fail to make a truthful assessment of what’s really happening and who’s making it happen. The litmus test must be whether the Jewish Ally admits that Jewish Power is behind the Plan or pretends otherwise.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="415"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Most likely, he or she will tell you, whatever the case may be, your first priority must be to support Israel! What the support for Israel has to do with gun rights, free speech, opposing mass immigration-invasion, moral defense against globo-homo, or countering financial de-platforming is anyone’s guess. Come to think of it, supporting Israel would only embolden the Jewish War on your people. After all, Israel and West Bank are a microcosm of what the Jewish Power is doing to whites in the West. Maybe deluded whites identify with WHITE Jews in Israel against BROWN Palestinians, but Jews see the whole world in terms of Jews vs goyim. Whites see white goyim and white Jews united against the browns, but Jews see white goyim and brown goyim as one and the same: Cattle to be controlled by Jews. So, from the Jewish perspective, whites are like Palestinians and, as such, exist to be suppressed, robbed of identity, and made to serve Jews. After all, everything in Israel and West Bank is geared in favor of Jews against Palestinians, and the same thing is happening in the West. Jews like Merrick Garland accuse white patriots of being ‘terrorists’ and use the deep state to hunt down white dissidents. Jews intend to take guns away from whites. Jews incite black violence against whites, just like Jews use ISIS to carry out violence in Syria. And just like Palestinians in West Bank are denied rights, water, and land, Jewish Power in increasingly using its monopoly to deny basic rights and services to whites. While Jews who support Zionist Wars and the ‘genocide’ of Palestinians have full access to all the services(and more), many white patriots have been de-banked simply for championing free speech and pissing off ADL. Just ask Andrew Torba of GAB. Zionist gangsters and thugs have full access to banks and Wall Street, but goofball Mike Lindell has been de-banked because he called foul on the 2020 election. Has anyone been de-banked for pushing the Russia Collusion Hoax? Also, given Israel turned the Holy Land into globo-homo Sodom and Gomorrah, how does supporting Israel jibe with being a cultural or social conservative? If white patriots are about defending their land, liberty, and rights from the agenda(pushed by Jews), supporting Israel is a weird way to go about it, especially given the modus operandi of the Jewish State is to dehumanize and disenfranchise Palestinians of basic rights on the very land of their ancestors.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="490"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With some white folks, there’s the sentimentality factor. Even as they despair of Jewish Power and Influence, they’ve been converted to Anne Frank Faith and have a Philosemitic soft spot for Jews. Despite all the evidence of Jewish hostility and perfidy, they still hold out for the hope that Jews shall finally see the light. They see Jews as somehow holier than whites. So, when a Jewish Ally comes their way, they are beside themselves with joy and dare not say or do anything that might offend Jewish sensibilities. They go on opposing the Jewish Agenda while praising Jewish Identity to high heaven, as if agenda and identity have no relation to one another. In truth, given the nature of Jewishness, a supremacist identity rooted in the Covenant, it’s hardly surprising that the Jewish agenda would be so hostile, devious, and subversive, laying the ground for total takeover. Does it make sense to separate the wolf’s identity from its behavior(as predator)? Wolf IS a predator. It’s like Nazi identity and Nazi agenda were one and the same. If not all Jews subscribe to the Jewish Agenda, it’s because they have qualms about the nature of their tribal identity. But any Jew who passionately embraces his identity will invariably act supremacist because subverting and ruling over goyim is part and parcel of what Jewish Identity is about. Jewishness isn’t merely an ethnicity, like Irish or German, but a mission of tribal power and domination. Jewishness combines identity with destiny. It’s like the difference between Italian and Roman. Italian just means someone from the Italian peninsula, but in the heyday of ancient glory, ‘Roman’ was inseparable from a sense of imperial ambition. To be ‘Roman’ came to mean something far greater than roots or residence in Rome. It came to mean someone invested in the empire and its expansion. Likewise, ‘American’ as a national identity is problematic because it became synonymous with insatiable ambition for more land, wealth, power, and self-righteousness. American-ness came to be linked with conquest, Manifest Destiny, expansive wars, endless growth, and the attempt to Americanize the world(or to world-ize America, which is now the case, but who can tell which is which as the world has been so Americanized). Americanism is an Imperial Identity, which makes it problematic on the national level. Combine Americanism and Jewish-ism, and we have a real problem. Despite the aggressive character of Americanism, at the very least, the ideal renders everyone who has adopted it as an equal, a ‘fellow American’. A drunken Irish-American and a dumb Polack-American are equals as Fellow Americans or American Citizens. In contrast, even as Jews have harnessed Americanism as a transformative global force, their mission is to rule over Americans and the Americanized world, not to be equal with them. The separatist/supremacist aspect of Jewish Identity prevents the Jewish Agenda from accepting goyim on equal terms.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEhHMHZKWAbQNtCAQwNLO5aIIracNzRdlKUnknJLoa0zcTMGBIute9aveoc8g7KkuXzlOQ-kDpmhdv1ZQjFpPK7yt_maBMGHn8iUQwEl9PgLS0JMZNDIoKX1xUYS0Ut5zvbxedPQOIj9ZpxB7CMtkFlLJ16in944VF3fhI6Y4op_3l_dFdCY6EDtbLZExw=w589-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="589" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For other whites, their reticence on the Jewish Question is more a matter of reality than sentimentality. Even if one is utterly cold-eyed(and cold-hearted about the Jews), there is the inescapable fact that the West is still the dominant force in the world and, furthermore, Jews not only control it financially and politically(with its brainwashed, bought, and/or blackmailed whores) but control its gods. Therefore, the highest gods of the West are determined by Jews, and it’s hazardous for anyone to blaspheme those gods. Needless to say, Jews placed themselves at the center of the New Trinity that also includes Homos and Blacks. If the West weren’t so dominant, it wouldn’t matter what its gods are. For example, no one cares about what gods the Eskimos or New Guinean primitives worship. But the gods of the West do matter because the best-connected, most highly trained, and most privileged members believe in them.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="223"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If people around the world are careful not to insult the Muslim World due to their reliance on oil and resources of the Middle East & North Africa(and out of fear of Muslim Jihadi retribution against infidel blasphemy), imagine how the world must feel about the gods of the far more powerful West. For all the conceit about secular ‘liberal democratic values’, the West has a new set of gods that are worshiped devoutly by its elite classes and status-seekers. For Western white folks, MLK and Mandela are now bigger than god and jesus. No one is ‘canceled’ for badmouthing God or Old Time Religion(though Judaism and Islam get a break, at least from whites and Christians) but insufficient reverence for Negrolatry will land you in hot water. And same goes for Queertianity. Indeed, for many Western secular-sacrosanct(or ‘seculosanct’) folks, the core justification for their anti-Russian hostility, now bordering on crusade, is Putin’s Evil Empire worships God & Jesus over Homos & Trannies. To the ‘seculosanct’ mind, even god and jesus exist to affirm and appease the vanity of wondrous toots and fruits. Oh my, the nerves of those backward cave-dwelling Russians to reject the cheers and chants of Globo-Homo! It’s as blasphemous to them as heathens-rejecting-Christ was to Western Christians when Jesus was their King of kings.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="228"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, however much blacks and homos may be revered in the West, they aren’t the ones with direct control over the most powerful institutions and industries. Jews got the real power. So, while Russia may still be tolerable to the West for its lack of enthusiasm for BLM and Globo-Homo, it would face serious(and I mean SERIOUS) repercussions if it were to openly name the Jewish Power. While Jews agitate Russia with Globo-Homo and seek to replace Russian Holies with BLM, they would completely lose their minds if Russia were to Name the Jew and waged counter-war on World Jewry. If you think the Jewish War on Russia is pretty intense now, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Putin naming the Jew would be tantamount to New Hitlerism in the eyes of the West, even triggering Jews toward pushing for World War III(and with the full support of Western goyim who worship Jewishness). In other words, Jews wouldn’t merely work to encircle and weaken Russia but do EVERYTHING in its arsenal to lay Russia to waste. As the Jewish Demand is the West’s Command, Russia still treads carefully where Jewishness is concerned, not least because Jews hold some very powerful positions within Russia itself — as too many Russians are drunk, dim-witted, and/or slovenly, Russia still relies heavily on non-Russian talents and know-how.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="500" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEgwLRclQmkpnAr5lTb4QNquPEQmeHE5Psock_VqyjKF47A8GSO31JuKR1_BGvk1IGQNGAINxukZx0o5rAiKGk6W70G8ZDTswMmwUzI3zQH8ECSBO-aWZ5PzWEN-E7V78qx-fxVnmF7SjclVnwHOA9A66vyEQei-lMlAT8nntckghIrFrLCUG44urzxSUA=w640-h500" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="197"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, this wasn’t always so. There was a time when France and Russia competed neck-and-neck as the most ‘Anti-Semitic’ nation in Europe, with Poles and Austrians being top-contenders. But after WWII that led to Europe’s demise and dependence on the US that came under Jewish Power that made Holocaustianity the new faith, the West became wholly servile to Jews in every conceivable way. Even if the West can tolerate Russia’s banning of ‘gay pride’ parades and lack of passion for BLM, it would go into total crusade-mode if there was even the slightest hint that Russia is taking on the Jews. So, even as Putin doesn’t suck up to the likes of George Soros and US Jews, he has to make a show of being Jew-friendly, meaning he dares not name-the-Jewish-Power that is behind the anti-Russian campaign. Putin knows that Naming-the-Jew would be the Western equivalent of Mocking-the-Prophet in the Muslim World. One thing for sure, it goes to show that the secularism proved a sham because it merely substituted traditional gods with new ones selected by the Power. And these new gods stink to high heaven. George Floyd and Harvey Milk indeed.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="214"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, imagine if Putin had a giant pair of balls and bit the bullet, damned the torpedoes, and spilled the beans on the pernicious role of Jewish Power in global politics, culture, and finance. As Russia has built a partnership with China, Iran, and other nations over the years as bulwark against the US and EU, it may be worth it for Putin to take the plunge, especially as vile Jewish Power shows no sign of letting up. Besides, Jewish animus against Russia is less about ancestral angst than current power-lust. Some argue that the likes of Victoria Nuland are fired up by what Russians did to Jews long ago, but that’s bogus. If it’s about revenge, surely Jews know they got even and then some with the Bolshevik Revolution that killed millions of Christian Slavs and destroyed 50,000 churches. If anything, there was worldwide Jewish support for Soviet Union. It was almost as if Jews forgot their ancient hatreds and came to love Russia. And in the 1990s, Jews hardly exhibited anti-Russian sentiments as Russia was their bitch-whore to rape and exploit. Jewish Rage flared up when Putin began to make his moves against the Jewish oligarchs, said “No Thanks” to Globo-Homo, and lent support(however limited) to Iran & Syria.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="263"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Jews in the past were bitter about Jewish merchants being roughed up by Cossacks and Jewish religion badmouthed by the Russian Orthodox Church, Jews today with their sense of supremacist entitlement simply cannot tolerate ANYTHING that stands in the way of total Jewish Control. Indeed, consider Jewish attitude toward White America. Unlike in Europe, Jews didn’t face much in the way of overt ‘antisemitism’ in the US. And among the whites, Anglo-Americans or Wasps were most helpful toward Jews. Jews gained so much in the White Christian environment of America, and yet, there’s no lack of virulent Jewish hatred against White America. But why? Did White Americans act like Cossacks and plunder Jewish businesses and rape Jewish women? (Black violence against Jews was most pogrom-like in the US, but notice Jews suppress their negative vibes against blacks because the real key to their power is control over whites, not least with ‘guilt’ feelings about blacks.) No, White Americans didn’t routinely bash Jews. So, why the hatred? Because Jews are addicted to supremacism and gag at even the slightest whiff of white identity, pride, and agency. Isn’t it remarkable how the current Jewish Hatred for Russia is nearly identical with its hatred for the ‘Deplorables’? Donald Trump cucked to a large extent, but he swaggered like Foghorn Leghorn with a big pair of balls, and Jews were utterly triggered by this and pushed BLM riots and Covid-nuttery to take him out. 2020 was America’s own Maidan Mania and Regime Change, the Color or Challah Revolution baked by Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="137"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Those who point to History to explain Jewish hostility to Russia are missing(or evading) the point. If the animus is really historical, why were so many Jews supportive of Russia during the first half of the 20th century, indeed even against the capitalist US? While Jews have long memory and history matters a great deal to them, Jewish Emotions are more about the present and the future than the past. Consider that Jews had better relations with Arabs/Muslims than with Christian Europeans, but after WWII Jewish Zionists became murderously hateful toward Arabs. During Shah’s reign, Jews were rather favorably disposed toward Iran, but with the rise of the Islamic Regime with its staunch support for the Palestinians, Jews became pathologically anti-Iranian. Because Venezuela has sought better relations with Iran, Jews now hate that country.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEg8k1t06TWoXvHeKwLDusmNc3desDGvjVlILfuKb_STGAAXt89u8DA-QlIPyN10x6-HsNDXzk0nYHmb2JrQI203egS_BXfwtGL_0kg1bI6-J1Nusav731wbpZf15rrQS4vhzZGAbsM97c44nkD3xJWghCjpws2fxVMs1YriLXP00Ao-T8eiUHJqInkQ7g=w486-h640" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="486" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="335"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pointing to past history to explain current Jewish behavior toward Russia is a kind of sentimentality. Even as one disapproves of the Jewish attitude, there’s an element of sympathy for past Jewish suffering at the hands of Russians(which, by the way, is vastly exaggerated because most Jews lived in the Polish part of the Russian Empire, and many of the thugs involved in pogroms were a hodge-podge of Poles, Ukrainians, Russians, and others). It is a way of implying that Jews are the way they are due to deep scars of historic trauma. But that is foolish. In truth, Jews are animated against Russia because they are supremely arrogant with their tribal power and hegemony. They feel, “If we rule over the great Anglos, lowly Slavs have no reason not to kiss our arse.” Imagine you tamed a great horse and ride upon it but some third-rate donkey stubbornly refused to do as you command. Imagine you tamed a German Shepherd to obey your commands, but some mangy mutt won’t listen. In the Jewish Mind, it’s a great geographical injustice that the lowly Slavs should possess so much territory with vast resources. (It’s like how John Wayne felt about the American Indians. Them red savages were too backward and useless to have all that land, and so, the cowboys were right to take it.) Russians deserve to serve Jews, not be masters of their own land because Slavs suck, or so Jews feel. In this, Jewish view of Slavs isn’t much different from that of Hitler: natural-born Slavic helots must serve the superior race/tribe. So, let’s drop the pretense that the likes of William Kristol, Victoria Nuland, Stinkin’ Blinken, and Adam Schiff are motivated by historical trauma, as if still haunted by epigenetic nightmares of KKKossacks riding into Jewish ghettos and raping Jewish women and stealing liquor. No, their worldview is much like that of Der Fuhrer upon the defeat of France: “The world is our oyster”.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Failing to discuss Jewish Power is like describing a football match without ever mentioning the role of the quarterback on one of the teams. Or it’s like describing a boxing match without mentioning the identity of one of the fighters. Suppose a boxer is up against Rocky Marciano. Discussed are Marciano’s gloves, fists, arms, torso, legs, feet, and etc. BUT, for some reason, all those features aren’t linked to Marciano the person, the athlete. That’d be pretty absurd, wouldn’t it. Marciano’s physical attributes are being used to serve his ego as champion. They don’t exist independently of his personal pride. Same goes for current world affairs because discussion of Russia, US, EU, Canada, UK, NATO, Ukraine, and etc. simply doesn’t get to the essence of the real power acting as mover and shaker of events: Jewish Supremacist Power, or JSP, aka World Jewry.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="184"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just imagine how the world can change if the Jewish Power was named(and blamed, and given credit when it’s due). While Jews operate through US power, fact remains the current US policy has no bearing on Most American goyim who have no global ambition, no tribal arrogance, and no reason to hate Russia. Apart from some groups like Polish Americans, Lithuanian Americans, and Finnish-Americans with a historical gripe about Russia, most Americans have no reason to hate Russia or even care about it. Indeed, if not for Jews, most Americans would have no beef with Arabs and Iranians either. It’s telling that Japanese-Americans, who were ‘interned’ during World War II, are less bitter in their feelings toward White America. (If most Japanese-Americans are ‘liberal’ leaning on ‘woke’, it’s because they are suckass conformists who always go with the dominant narrative. No wonder Francis Fukuyama has his head up the Zionist ass and is always badmouthing Russia to be on the good side of his Jewish masters. Stupid yellow dog but then surrounded by white dogs who act the same way.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="154"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">US foreign policy is utterly Judeo-centric. America’s moral proselytization and wailings about Human Rights are catered to serve Jewish Power. So, we are made to weep about Kurds whenever it is to Zionist interests for US to intervene in Syria. Jews don’t care about Kurds, and neither do most Americans. But when Trump dangled the possibility of leaving Syria, Jewish Media ran with “But what about the Kurds?”, cynically employing the Kurdish Question to maintain Jewish-controlled US imperialism in the region. Of course, plenty of white dummies or whummies who knew little or nothing about the Kurds(and hardly gave any thought on the matter) joined the Jewish media chorus because their feeble hearts and minds are totally controlled by Jews. If US cares so much about human rights, how about occupying West Bank and protecting Palestinians from Zionist settler-invaders? Or how about using its muscle to return Golan Heights to Syria?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">How interesting that the politics of American sympathy always correlates with Jewish global interests. Jews insist on US military presence in Syria, and so, the Kurd Question enters the News Cycle whenever there’s talk of US leaving. And as Jews see Ukraine as the bridge for finally conquering and subjugating Russia, we are expected to care about those poor poor beleaguered Ukrainians. Meanwhile, never mind the near-genocidal conditions in Yemen brought upon by a key US ally Saudi Arabia, done with the full blessing of the Jewish-controlled State Department.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Putin has been a cautious and at times even a masterful leader. Most of the time, caution and moderation are ideal. But there are times for boldness, and Putin must step up to the plate and finally name the Jewish Power. Unless named, it will carry on the same way because it’s never blamed for anything. People blame the Bushes, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Trump, Pompeo, Bolton, John McCain, Pentagon, John Kerry, CIA, State Department, and etc. Some will name the Neocons or Neolibs. And key Jewish figures will be named as individuals. By now, many people have heard of Victoria Nuland on Tucker Carlson’s show. But it’s not enough to name Nuland as a mere individual because it lends the false impression that she’s just a nasty individual with personal issues. No, she’s part of a tribal power complex and ethno-supremacist agenda. She is an agent of the Tribe, not just an individual. She serves World Jewry, not the US or the so-called West or even herself. Same goes for Stinkin’ Blinken.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="247"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If Putin or some other prominent goy figure were to name the Jewish Power, he will get a lot of flak, but the cat will finally be out of the bag and future discourse will have to take it into account. It has to be done. Just think of how much the current events in Ukraine would come into focus by naming Jewish Power and its key role. We can have 20/20 vision on what is happening. But without naming Jewish Power, it’s all a blur where we are allowed only to read the big letters: US, EU, NATO, RUSS, UKR, etc. No, get a real pair of glasses and see what’s happening for what it really is. It’s Russia, with Iran and China, being harassed and threatened by Jewish Power through its myriad puppets — Western goy actors can’t even be regarded as allies of Jews as they’re utterly spineless at the feet of Jewish Power. The relation between Jewish elites and white goyim is essentially that of Master and Slave. Trump was a slave too but somewhat uppity, which displeased Jews a great deal. Jews are so powerful that the use Antifa and BLM as pogrom squads against White America. Jews use the law to protect to their goons. What were BLM riots in 2020 but a national pogrom instigated by Jews to terrify White America? But what did white goyim do? They took the knee and volunteered to wash stinky Negro feet.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="121"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At this point, if someone in dissident circles abstains from naming the Jewish Power in the Ukrainian Equation and just goes on blabbering about Joe Biden, US, UK, EU, NATO, ‘Neocons’, and etc., he should just give it up. Seeing more clearly than the MSM isn’t good enough. It isn’t enough to make out the general outline of the target. The bull’s eye must be spotted clearly and aimed with total precision. In MIDNIGHT RUN, there comes the moment when it must be said loud and clear, “Serrano’s got the disks, Serrano’s got the disks.” In our time, it is time for people to finally shout the obvious: “It’s the Jews, it’s the Jews.”</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/iMmwJiVJTw4?start=233&feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="302"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s an irony of ironies. We’ve been told so often World War II wasn’t averted because people failed to spell out the true nature of Hitler’s character and ambitions. It’s like what Clemenza says in THE GODFATHER: Hitler shouldn’t have been allowed to get away with ‘Munich’. In our time, US as the lone superpower is controlled by pathological Jewish Supremacists who are ramping tensions all over the world out of tribal megalomania. With their control of media, they misdirect people’s attention to the Russian ‘threat’, Chinese ‘threat’, Iranian ‘threat’, and etc. when it’s the Tribe that is pushing for unipolar Jewish global hegemony whereby no other power is allowed to have its own sphere of influence. So, we are supposed to prepare for war over Ukraine or Taiwan when there would be no problems in those parts of the world if Jewish Power wasn’t so hellbent on absolute control over the whole glob. The ‘Munich’ Moment in our time has been fomented by pathological Jewish Power that not only rails at Russia, China, Iran, Venezuela, Syria, and etc. but also at NATO members Poland and Hungary(for not bending over to George Soros) and at White American Patriots who want no more wars and oppose the Great Replacement — to the likes of Merrick Garland and countless Jewish elites, those whites are ‘terrorists’.<br />Hitler is long dead and Nazi Germany is ancient history. Current History is about pathological Jews, and it is they who must not be appeased in the Neo-Munich Moment. But how can there be any truth when no one dares to mention the biggest power in the world? ‘Biden Administration’? Really? At the very least, call it ‘Puppet Biden Administration’. Puppet to whom or what? Jewish supremacism, that’s what.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="404"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Naming the Jewish Power will not only save the world from World War III but enable a better understanding of the past. World War II didn’t happen out of the blue because one bad character, Adolf Hitler, duped a cowardly world. Yes, he was pathological and evil, but would he have become Der Fuhrer if Jewish Power hadn’t messed up Europe with communism, financial capitalism, and cultural degeneration? Furthermore, in retaliation against Hitler’s anti-Jewish policies, didn’t World Jewry recklessly stoke tensions that only drove Hitler crazier? (Jews had every right to loathe Hitler, but they had no right to embroil the whole world in their feud with Germany, which, by the way, Jews could have avoided with saner behavior during the Weimar years, later topped by their rapaciousness in Russia of the 90s. One would think that given Russia ended up with Putin than with Slavo-Hitler, Jews would feel relieved but Nope. Instead, they are once again playing with fire and stoking tensions beyond anything during the Cold War. And all over what? Ukrainian security? No, it’s about owning Ukraine as a Zionic bridgehead to subvert and destroy Russia. It’s just another ‘West Bank’ for Jews.) In World War II, many peoples were victims but also instigators. Jews were no different. And now, in the year of 2022, the only pathological power threatening the whole world is Jewish. In the late 1930s, there were several major players in the imperial game: US, UK, France, Soviet Union, Germany, Japan, Italy. Today, there is only one superpower, the US, which has dominion over EU and East Asian pussy nations. And US is controlled by pathological Jewish Supremacists. No well-informed person could believe current Russia and China have imperial ambitions. Russia was provoked into intervening in Ukraine due to the Jewish-led coup. And China has claimed Taiwan for centuries, and the island fell out of its orbit only because of Western/Japanese aggression against China. As for Iran, it has no nukes while Israel has lots. Also, it’s the Jewish Zionist crazies who made Trump tear up the Iran nuclear deal, and the Jews-around-Biden have done precious little to restart the deal. Given the insane Yinon Plan and Jewish-America’s murderous hostility toward Iran, would it be wrong for Iranians to acquire nukes at this point, if only for self-preservation against Jewish Supremacism that has reached Kurtzian levels(in APOCALYPSE NOW)?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="168"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">All those who complain that the world of the 1930s failed to speak out against Nazi Germany should listen to themselves and not repeat the same mistake. This time, it’s the Jewzis, not the Nazis, who threaten the world. People need to Name the Jewish Power that has gone bonkers. For many, the main lesson of WWII is Germans are eternally guilty and Jews are eternally holy, which is really stupid. But, if the lesson of WWII is that we should reject racial supremacism and that no people should dehumanize, then the notion of ‘eternal guilt’ and ‘eternal sanctity’ must be rejected as neo-supremacist. We need to realize Germans could be evil but also be good. And it also means Jews could be good but also be evil. No people possess some essential-eternal trait. Victimizer could become victimized, and the victimized could become victimizer. The main supremacist and victimizing force in the current world is Jewish, and it has to be named. Otherwise, just give it up.</span></p>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-59854691100034248512022-12-07T16:29:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:09.391-08:00Should Asians be the Preservers of Western Classical Music? Racial Souls and Music<p> <img class="aligncenter" height="640" src="https://www.mlive.com/resizer/3pWd21yOfmw98PRUjx8NQS-qwDo=/1280x0/smart/advancelocal-adapter-image-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com/image.mlive.com/home/mlive-media/width2048/img/kzgazette/entertainment/photo/k0421etcjpg-2ccac7ec8ca0d60c.jpg" style="border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="615" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_1" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="572"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">I recall a video on Youtube with Camille Paglia despairing the fading of the Western Tradition — as a champion of worthless skanks like madonna and other deracinating actors, she sure is one to talk! She spoke of how younger generations of students, for all their intelligence, are woefully ignorant of the Bible and pagan mythologies of Greece that informed and inspired so much of Western Art & Culture, indeed well into the 20th century. How is one to recognize the allusions in Western literature without a firm grounding in cultural canon?<br />She also lamented the fading of interest in Classical Music among young ones, going so far as to speculate it may survive as a living tradition only in East Asia. (Paglia wanted to have it both ways. She relished irreverence and fanned rebellion against tradition & order but also defended the latter for its richness in heritage and meaning. Besides, rebels can keep at rebellion only against existing authority. Paglia enjoyed the Sixties too much to relinquish the role of the eternal teenager, one who drives his/her parents crazy without ever wishing to murder them. Once authority fades, rebels find themselves as the new authority, and things can be much worse with the combination of the radical will and iron grip. Indeed, it was precisely why Bolsheviks as the New Boss were far more repressive and ruthless than the Old Order. Traditional Authority could be brutal and oppressive, but it was about maintaining the same old same old. Lacking the fiery spirit of revolution, it was like cold iron. In contrast, precisely because rebels and/or revolutionaries lacked institutional power, they relied on inspiration and passion, the stuff of fire. But what happens when the Old Order collapses and the rebels/revolutionaries take over as the New Boss? Result is the hot furnace of fire and iron. Paglia cheered on the anarchists against Church authority but also respected and even secretly revered that authority as a storage of a rich tradition, as well as a worthy foe. Indeed, the worth of any rebellion depends on the quality of the nemesis. It’s like climbing the highest mountain. The pride of conquest rests on the seemingly insurmountable task. Paglia’s attitude was to climb the mountain but keep it intact than blow it up. This is where she found herself at odds with many of her radical generation who were less interested in conquering the mountain than blowing it all up. They weren’t merely rebellious teenagers but had patricide in mind, along with the rape of mother. Jim Morrison and the Doors: “Father, I want to kill you, mother I want to f——–.” Paglia cheers on the Satanists to lay siege to the church but also wants the church to defend its hallowed ground. She’s rocks to “Sympathy for the Devil” from outside the walls but joins in the chorus of “Ave Maria” from within the walls. She’s all messed up like the Kundry character in Richard Wagner’s PARSIFAL. In contrast, Jewish Supremacists and ‘woke’ radicals call for total destruction. They root for Pussy Riot gangs and globo-homo subversives to vandalize and desecrate the inner sanctums of the church. Globo-Homo has been far more insidious because, unlike the blatant blasphemy of Pussy Riot, it feigns a pseudo-pietism that would have us believe Christian Love smiles down on ‘angelic’ tooters getting all fruity with each other’s bungholes.)</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><img alt="Camille Paglia Scowls at the Metropolitan Museum - The New ..." class="aligncenter" height="427" src="https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstatic01.nyt.com%2Fimages%2F2012%2F09%2F28%2Farts%2F28SUBCAMILLE%2F28SUBCAMILLE-jumbo.jpg%3Fquality%3D75%26auto%3Dwebp%26disable%3Dupscale&f=1&nofb=1" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="125"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, perhaps there is something to what Paglia said. Classical Music in the future may be better preserved in places like Japan and China than in the US, even Europe. Given the decline of interest in Classical Music among Westerners in general, the obvious solution would be to get more young whites interested in Classical Music as not merely great music but a rich cultural heritage. Instead, the top priority isn’t too-many-yellows and not-enough-whites but where-are-the-Negroes? As if whites losing their musical heritage to yellows isn’t bad enough, the call is for them to lose it to blacks as well. But then, as blacks have been sacralized, many whites surely feel everything is ennobled or consecrated by its association with blacks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="200"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But blackity-black or yellowy-mellow, the truth is the Classical Tradition arose in the West among the whitity-whites. It is essentially European, with some contributions by American composers(but then, what is America but an extension of European Civilization)? Besides, why a need for more blacks in Classical Music when they have their own musical forms, some of them remarkable and inspired in their own right? Whatever blacks are deficient in, musical expression(along with sports) isn’t one of them. But given that the new cult/quasi-religion among whites is the Tri-Idolatry(or Tridolatry) of Jews, homos, and blacks, whites do fret about the Black-Lack wherever blacks fail to excel and/or show much interest. (Yes, it’s ‘racist’ white folks’ fault that not enough blacks are into Haydn and Brahms.) If blackness is sacred, or ‘blacred’, then black holiness must shine its radiance(or cast its cool shadow) over everything. If something is absent of or insufficient in blackness, it is deemed unblessed, unhallowed, or unredeemed. So, it doesn’t matter how great it is for what it is. It is excoriated for its Black-Lack, or B-Lack. It’s like everything has to have blactose, the sugar of vibrancy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="102"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Classical Music is one of the greatest achievements of mankind, and one of the unique contributions of Western Civilization, all the more remarkable because, despite its particular origins, it is perhaps the most universal form of music in its reach and breadth, i.e. its emotions/passions can be felt directly and personally across cultures; the emotions come across as those of Man than of Hindu, Muslim, Turk, Chinese, or Irishman(who’d rather be singing ‘Danny Boy’ instead anyway). Perhaps, this owes to the combination of Christian universalism and Hellenic tradition where the notion of Man became independent of cultural markers.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, even as all the world can appreciate and gain inspiration from it, Classical Music Tradition hardly requires the input of non-Europeans for validation or legitimacy. If there’s an all-white blues band, perhaps one may wonder why there isn’t a Negro in it. B-Lack can be an issue. But what need is there for blacks in Classical Music? If blacks show interest and want to play the music, okay, but what does the form gain simply by having Negroes?<br />Classical Music has no Negro origins and reached its apotheosis purely as European music. Arguably, the only notable non-European contribution to Classical tradition came from Jews, but these were Europeanized Jews who themselves were steeped in the heritage through semi-assimilation genetically and culturally.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="51"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But even as whites wish for more blacks in Classical Music, the reality is it has attracted countless Asians, especially the yellows. Some may argue that even if whites were to abandon the tradition, there will be Asians to keep it alive. But is this a good idea? I think not.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Ju9XIEw55fc?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, what happens in Asia is immaterial. If Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and China want to have their classical music schools and orchestras, that’s their business. But what happens in the West should be the business of whites, the core of Western folks. Classical Music is Western Tradition. For the most part, the Classical idiom has failed to produce great new works. In terms of originality, it is irrelevant and survives mainly as movie scores.<br />One may argue that the form has been exhausted by past greats who explored virtually all the possibilities of structure and expression(which is also true of Jazz and possibly Rock as well). All art-forms eventually run dry. Then, Classical Music is museum music, something to be cherished and preserved as part of the Western canon and heritage. Modernism’s emphasis on novelty and shock has made people forget the other purpose of art and culture. Ultimately, a civilization is more about inheritance than inspiration. After all, even if Western arts and culture had stopped progressing after 1600, there would have been an immense treasure trove of accumulated masterpieces. Similar claim could have been made 1600 yrs earlier as the pagan Greeks and Romans had already achieved so much.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, if Classical Music is one of the great treasures of Western Civilization that needs preserving, then it does matter WHO preserves it. It should be up to Western folks to do it. It should be their duty, obligation, and responsibility as well as joy, blessing, and honor(as how many peoples have been bequeathed with such greatness?). It shouldn’t be up to Asians, just like it isn’t the role of non-Jews to keep alive the Jewish tradition. You can’t expect another family to bring flowers to the graves of your forebears.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, a distinction must be made between preservation and inspiration. It’s fair game for any people to take inspiration from the Classical Tradition and forge their own music. It’s like white folks took from black Blues and created their own styles of Rock. But when it comes to the preservation of core Blues, it should be up to blacks. White folks can learn to play it, gain inspiration from it, and fashion their own stuff out of it, like the Rolling Stones and Led Zeppelin. But core Blues is black, and it’s only right that the carriers of the torch should be men like Otis Rush. No matter how well a white guy may sing and play the blues, it seems almost like a parody for him to do it straight, as if he really is a Negro than merely drawing water from the Negro well. Unless he makes it his own through inspiration, he should just give it up. Leave it up to the Negroes to preserve the core idiom.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZNk5zohPhsA?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sadly, too many Negroes now only care about rappity-rap, leaving it up to non-blacks to care for their musical heritage. But then, whites are doing the same to Classical Music, too often leaving it up to Asians. Just like core Blues expresses something unique deeply embedded in the Negro soul, Western Classical Music flowed from the deep wells of the European soul. Just like anyone can learn to play the blues, anyone can learn to play Classical music. But outward mimicry doesn’t get to the deeper well from which the expression sprang. When a white man plays the blues, he shares in the outward buzz of being Negro-like but remains a stranger to the dark recesses of the black soul, the inner-racial zone of ‘Sheeeeeeiiiiit’ from which the bluesy energy sprung.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QeDgOUoDTsY?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="126"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Likewise, Europeans, especially Germanics, have a collective soul unlike any other from which greatest expressions of the Classical Tradition swelled and erupted. This isn’t to suggest one kind of soul is better than others but to acknowledge the uniqueness of racial personalities and souls. Consider the link between Jewish Soul and Jewish Humor.<br />Of course, there would have been no Blues music without white influence as black Blues arose in the American South through contact with white music, but white music had to be sucked into the black hole of the black soul to re-emerge as the big bang of ‘sheeeeeiiiit’. No blacks, no blues. When white American style mixes with Mexicans, it produces something quite else. Whatever it is, it isn’t the Blues.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/T6wetejGqh0?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="182"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just like blacks took from white music to make the Blues, Germanics took from Italians to make their form of Classical Music and Opera that were darker and more powerful. But again, the Italian forms of music had to enter the German soul to re-emerge in the form of Beethoven, Brahms, and Wagner. Of course, most Germans, like most blacks, had little in the way of originality as geniuses are few and far between among all groups. Still, Germanics were fortunate that those among them with the greatest natural gift for music got to express the soul and spirit of their people(like what Andrei Tarkovsky did for the Russian Soul through film art). If the Germanics didn’t have a Homer to do justice to their mythology in words, they certainly had Wagner to compensate in music. It goes to show that it’s not enough for a people to have a unique collective tribal soul. Fullness is realized only when geniuses among them arise to give the expression it deserves with inspiration drawn from elements within and outside the culture.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="188"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Personally, the sight of all those Asians serving as preservers(or ‘preservitors’) of Western Classical Music seems all wrong. It’s not only wrong for the West but for Asians themselves. It’s one thing for Asians to take inspiration from Western Music and create their own interesting variations(like Toru Takemitsu) but quite another to do it so straight and faithfully with a cultural form which isn’t their own. They seem like a bunch of lame, imitative, and uninspired robots. I don’t care how well some Chinese guy plays Classical Piano. I don’t care how well Yo MaMa plays the cello. Or how well some Korean woman is a wizard with a violin or some Japanese guy is so adept with an oboe. They are lamely preserving the tradition of another people. Surely, they have their own traditions to preserve, like Noh Theater. Let Japanese preserve Noh Theater, and let whites preserve Classical Music. Again, it’s primarily a matter of preservation. When it comes to inspiration and creativity, anyone may borrow from anyone or anything as long as he makes it his own.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It seems most East Asians in Classical Music aren’t drawn to it out of passion and love. Rather, as illustrated in Amy Chua’s BATTLE HYMN OF THE PUSSY MOTHER, it seems the product of shallow status-obsessed Asian parents who want to show off their kids as entrants into respectable society by playing high-brow music for rich, privileged, and educated snobs. So, it’s not like most Asian instrumentalists pursued classical music out of personal passion. Rather, they were raised like trained monkeys to pursue whatever’s deemed proper and respectable.<br />True creativity is suppressed in favor of programmatic repetition to play the notes perfectly(even though maybe the Asian personality, being naturally obedient and conformist, is amenable to this). So, even as Asians master the outward expression of Classical Music, they fail to access the inner well of creativity that made the music possible in the first place. It’d be like some Asian memorizing Greek plays by rote and reciting them perfectly without genuine understanding of the personalities and individualities that created them to begin with.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="154"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Granted, most people of all races are not original or creative, and the purpose of cultural preservation is to learn, master, and keep than to be creative. It’s about keeping the flame than igniting new fires. But again, if the purpose is preservation, it should be performed by the descendants/inheritors of those who created the culture. Is it wrong for Greeks to maintain the Parthenon or for the Chinese to upkeep the architectural features of the Forbidden City? Is it wrong for black Africans to keep with the bongo drum tradition? Or for American Indians to carry on with the Rain Dance? (Did it ever work?) True, the West became vast and expansive in ways that no other civilization did, but Classical Music is steeped in European history, culture, arts, and spirituality. Non-Europeans should draw inspiration from it, not merely imitate it or take on the burden(and blessing) of preserving it.</span></p><p style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/7rBCWbhQuRs?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="157"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, what about Classical Music in East Asia itself? Japan and China have major orchestras. And Japan even produced world-class conductors. In one way, it’s their business, and it shouldn’t matter to the West. Still, I find something ridiculous about the whole idea. Long ago, some Japanese conductor toured the West — no, it wasn’t Seiji Ozawa — as a specialist in the music of Gustav Mahler. He conducted an American orchestra and was well-received. Okay, I understand he really loved the music and became a master in the field. But why? It’s one thing for Japanese to admire Western Classical Music, but why adopt it as something so intrinsic to Japanese cultural life? Not only does it carry the odor of cultural theft but cultural self-denial, as if Japanese are so deficient in a culture of their own that they must borrow a foreign culture wholesale, unaltered and to be imitated note for note.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="111"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Besides, given the sheer imitativeness of the East, it is fast adopting ‘wokeness’ and lose interest in Classical Music as the expression of White Maledom. Asians imitate whiteness, and Japan imported Jungle Fever big time from the West, and Taiwan has ‘gay marriage’. Whites now worship Negroes, and so goes Japan, which even hosts countless African men to live with Japanese families, leading to you-know-what. Just look at their national teams in the Summer Olympics. So, as the West falls, so will the East(at least the part within the Western sphere of control and influence), which, as such, cannot be relied upon as the last bastion of the Western Heritage.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, that isn’t how Japanese culture developed through history. Japanese drew from Chinese and Indian sources in architecture, music, spirituality, philosophy, sculpture, and craft, but they always made the borrowings their own with unique tastes and touches. And even though Japanese cinema drew heavily from Hollywood, Soviet montage, and German cinema, it produced giants like Kenji Mizoguchi, Akira Kurosawa, and Shohei Imamura who did their own thing. Japanese also took Western pop music and did interesting things, like the pop hit “Sukiyaki”, which actually isn’t about beef boiled in soy sauce.<br />But when it comes to classical music, Japanese, like other East Asians, have taken the Western Classical Tradition wholesale, learning and playing the music note by note. They’ve adopted the music not as a point of inspiration but a matter of preservation. But it isn’t theirs to preserve.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It is duty and honor of Western Folks to preserve… but then, whites today are so colonized by Jewish Power that the running theme of the Current Year is the Black-Lack. Never mind the tragedy of not enough white kids showing interest in this great tradition. The big question among the elites is WHERE ARE THE MAGIC NEGROES to play the violins, cellos, clarinets, tubas, trombones, and etc.? It’s as if everything whites ever created was ultimately to be served to blacks, surrendered to blacks, or to be redeemed by blacks. It went from “Hey Hey Ho Ho Western Culture Gots to Go” to “Hey Hey Ho Ho Western Culture Gots to Go Negro”. Of course, the Negroes have a simple reason for their lack of interest in classical music or nuclear physics: We be too busy rappin’, stealin’, cheatin’, shootin’, sniffin’, and actin’ crazy while you dumbass white folks wash our feet and suck our d—s.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="4"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What a dumbass world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Btw, would it be a good idea to have something like a video series on Classical Music? Ken Burns did one on Jazz, and it reignited interest in the musical genre among many young ones who never paid attention to anything outside the latest pop music. Of course, there are documentaries(available on youtube) on various great composers of Classical Music, but most of them are inferior and disconnected from one another in theme and narrative. Such a project would be worth funding by cultural conservatives with deep pockets who profess to care about the Western Heritage. A unified video series on the whole arc of Western Classical Musical tradition, from within Church walls to the great halls of the modern era.</span></p>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3989063804565017995.post-18814858254962576952022-12-07T16:27:00.000-08:002022-12-09T10:58:09.633-08:00Jesus a Palestinian? or Palestine as Christ? How the Palestinian Fire May Heal and Save the World<p> <img class=" wp-image-508906 aligncenter" height="640" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Palestine-Jesus-230x300.jpg" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="491" /></p><div class="entry" id="contents-holder" style="background-color: white; border: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: Georgia, Times, serif; font-size: 16px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-variant-numeric: inherit; line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px; overflow: hidden; padding: 0px 0px 10px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><section class="open" level="1" pos="1" style="background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; border: none; float: left; font: inherit; margin: 0px; max-width: 100%; min-width: 100%; padding: 0px; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><div class="section-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><p style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/b0_n1eGsZtE?feature=oembed" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="500"></iframe></p><p class="container" id="p_1_2" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" trigger="1108" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A controversy made the US news some years back. It was about whether Jesus was a Palestinian or not, and the arguments got rather amusing. Jews, who hate Jesus(and wish He’d never existed) and despise Christianity above all religions, suddenly got very possessive of Him. He was a Mizrai Jew, not a Palestinian Jew, they insisted. Jews can’t conceive of anything worse than their own kind converting to Christianity — for many Jews, it’s worse than death, more unfathomable than the Holocaust. When Jews go secular or take up Buddhism, they are still regarded as members of the Tribe. But Jews who convert to Christianity are beyond the pale. So, why not let the Palestinians, a people Jews hate almost as much as Jesus, have Mr. Christ for themselves? But that cannot be allowed. One reason is, despite their boundless hatred for Jesus, He is one of the greatest figures in history and theology, and there is prickly pride in the knowledge that all those saphead goyim revere as God some hippie Jew rejected by fellow tribesmen as a loser. As newly minted Christians, goyim persecuted Jews as Christ-killers, but they were nevertheless under the magic spell of a Jew.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_3" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="180"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The other reason, probably more important, is Jesus still matters a great deal to white folks around the world; therefore, if Jesus were to be associated with Palestinian Identity, white and/or Christian sympathies may shift from Jews(as the Chosen and/or the Holochrist folks) to Palestinians. Whiteness must be emphasized in this equation because not all Christians are crazy about Jews or Israel. Arab Christians don’t subscribe to the notion that Jews are the Chosen with special claim to the Holy Land. (Given that Jews turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah with massive globo-homo parades, a Christian who supports Israel should be labeled a Christian-Sodomist than a Christian Zionist. Even non-religious people should be offended by what Zionists have done to the land so rich in historical and spiritual significance; it’s like turning a holy temple into a ‘gay’ bathhouse. After all, even an infidel is offended by pork thrown into a mosque and even a non-Christian(at least if not Jewish) is offended by Antifa-like Pussy Riot antics inside a Russian Orthodox Church.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_4" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a way, the globo-homo stuff in Israel is a smart move. Jews know Evangelical Christians are DUMB and can easily be swayed into believing God blesses those who bless Israel. Chrummies, or Christian dummies, are too moronic to connect the dots and trace their decline to Jewish ascendancy. Jews feel assured that chrummies will blindly support Israel no matter what. The real problem is with so-called secular ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ whites. They are post-Christian and can’t be swayed by simple God-talk. Their proggy conceit has them craving new meanings from narratives and agendas; they want to feel ahead of the curve, or ‘more evolved’ than others, or fashion uber tradition. Of late, Globo-Homo has become a big thing for them, even of ‘spiritual’ import, i.e. they are so full of love, tolerance, and inclusion whereas the ‘homophobes’, often fueled by religious bigotry, are blind to the ‘rainbow’ wonders of dongs entering bungs or dongs morphing into poons. Jews know the old time religious angle is a hard-sell for such libby-did white dummies or whummies. There’s even the danger of white progs taking up the BDS banner because the GOP has become synonymous with hardline Zionism and hatred against Palestinians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_5" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="70"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, having embraced globo-homo cult as their neo-religion, white progs revere Israel as the homo-place-to-be, not unlike the pitch of Las-Vegas-as-the-Christmas-place-to-be in Albert Brooks’ LOST IN AMERICA. It worked like magic because nothing, with the possible exception of the adoration of George Floyd, is more sacred to libby-dibs than globo-homo; therefore, they are willing to turn a blind eye to Zionist tyranny over Palestinians because ‘gay pride’ > Palestinian justice.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_6" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="135"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, Jews got the support of both Evangelical chrummies who idolize Jew as pious Chosen folks and libby-dib whummies who cheer on Israel as the premier ‘gay’ disco-mecca of the world. The use of globo-homo issue as moral cover is called ‘pink-washing’, and it illustrates the sickness of our times where something is deemed sacred on account of its association with sodomy and tranny genital-mutilation. Sadly, even many Palestinians have jumped on this bandwagon because they too have been colonized by Jewish-conceived ‘wokeness’ or understand the idolatrous nature of Western morality whereby value derives from association than inherent merit, i.e. just like religious folks claim to have God on their side, modern morality is about which side has the blessing of sacralized groups, namely Jews-homos-blacks who function as spiritual-common-currency in the Western-hegemonized world order.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_7" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="176"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American ‘morality’ for both ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’ is less about who is right or wrong in the conflict between Jews and Palestinians than about which political party has the blessing of holy Jews. Neither Republicans nor Democrats care as to whether Jews and Israel are doing right or wrong because their idolatrous mindset assumes Jews to be always right and noble on account of the Chosen People myth and/or the Holocaust Narrative.<br />Therefore, it’s never about either political party judging Jewish political behavior but about being favorably judged by Jewish Power as the almighty and ultimate arbiter of right-and-wrong in America, the World, and the whole cosmos. As Palestinians have no chance of gaining Jewish blessing, they reach out to homo and black communities to impress the white progs, who also worship homos and blacks alongside Jews, but this is a doomed strategy because homos, apart from few dissidents, are totally allied with Jews in the globalist enterprise. As for self-aggrandizing blacks, most will go with the money that flows from the Jewish fountain.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_8" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="83"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This article — <a href="https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-689639" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; font-weight: bold; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-689639">https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-689639</a> — speaks of Palestinian envy for all things Jewish, but the same charge could be leveled at all goy Christians or Muslims. What are most Christians but goyim who adopted the Jewish God as their own? And what is Islam but an Arab appropriation of Jewish narratives and Christian myths? Granted, going further back, one could argue that Jews ‘enviously stole’ the ideas and myths of neighboring pagan tribes in the creation of their own religion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_9" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And speaking of envy, Jews are top contenders as well. True, Jews have been the objects of goy envy, not least for their money-making acumen, intellectual achievements, and spiritual power, but Jewish History is replete with coutnless examples of enviously eyeing goyim and lusting after what’s theirs. Indeed, why else would Jews enviously seek to gain control over goy nations instead of just letting them be in the spirit of live-and-let-live?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_10" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sometimes, the enviousness can be downright neurotic, e.g. Jews prizing Aryans as especially attractive, the gold standard of beauty, but also putting them down as ‘shikses’ whose beauty-as-false-god must be destroyed by race-mixing. Jews have long prized the profit-potential of blacks as singers and athletes — among the main gripes of Louis Farrakhan — but privately referred to blacks as ‘schvartzes’ and even ‘ni**ers’. Jews today bitterly envy the plight of Palestinians because their own claim to victimhood is slipping(which is why we must be reminded constantly of the Holy Holocaust)while the tragedy of Palestinians, especially in Gaza, is beginning to resemble Jewish conditions in the Warsaw Ghetto.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_11" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="179"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Problematic are the multiple meanings of ‘Palestinian’. It has ethnic but also historical and territorial meaning. A Mexican-American is legally an American citizen, therefore an American, but he may choose not to identify as such(a goddamned gringo or yanqui) and instead declare himself a proud Mexican. Amnesty would turn lots of illegals into ‘Americans’, but patriots would reject that they are. When European Jews began their migration into Palestine in the late 19th century, they identified as ‘Palestinian'(even if disingenuously to allay the fears of the native population), and the Jewish newspapers back then had names like ‘The Palestinian Times’. Such murky definition of ‘Palestine’ allows for all manner of interpretation. If anyone who lives or has lived in the Palestinian territory counts as ‘Palestinian’, then all current Jews living there would count as ‘Palestinian’. And Jesus and His Disciples could also be counted among the ‘Palestinians’. But then, so would the Romans, Ottomans, and the British as occupiers of Palestine. Of course, current Palestinians living in Israel count as ‘Arab Israelis’, which complicates matters even further.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_12" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="159"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">For this reason, the most meaningful definition of ‘Palestinian’ is ethnic, not geographic. Saying Jews who lived in Palestine were ‘Palestinians’ would be as absurd as saying Philistines who lived in Judea(another name for roughly the same territory) were ‘Jews’. Consider the problems of geographism in EU where anyone who gains entry may count as ‘European’, effectively demeaning the racial roots of European-ness that go back tens of thousands of years. By rules of globalism and the Great Reset, a nonwhite stepping into European soil has the same claim to European-ness as a white European with ancestral roots going back perhaps 40,000 years. Worse, Jewish-controlled media in Europe now colonize even the European past by featuring nonwhites, especially blacks, in white historical roles. Such is the madness of globalism, at least for goyim, as it never ever questions the deep roots of identity and territoriality among Jews who are allowed pass-over privileges against globalism’s deracinating and dispossessing agendas.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_13" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, the Palestinians got it backward. Instead of positing that Jesus was a Palestinian, they’d be better off proposing Palestine as the new jesus. Can an entire people be thus sacralized? It sure happened for Jews as Holo-christs crucified by ‘antisemitic’ Christian Europe. The cult of Shoah has resurrected Jewishness as the holiest theme in the West, supplanting Christianity that, if anything, has been delegitimized as either craven collaborator of or ineffective weakling against Nazi power.<br />In part, the demographic Great Replacement logically follows from the spiritual-moral great replacement whereupon the narrative went from “Jews killed Christ” to “Christians killed Jews”. (If Christians failed to convert most Jews over nearly 2,000 yrs, Jews easily converted most whites to the new faith of Holocaustianity. Indeed, even most diehard Christians today put Jews and Israel above God and Jesus. Your average Christian Republican will favor Zionists who arm ISIS and spread globo-homo over Arab Christians who’ve kept the flame alive for 1,500 years against all odds in a sea of Islam.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_14" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even an IDF soldier bashing the skull of a Palestinian boy is deemed part of the divine Anne Frank tribe — whatever Jews do is justified within the framework of ‘Never Again’, despite Palestinians having had nothing to do with Jewish tragedies in the 20th century and Jewish Power coming to resemble the Nazis. ‘Never Again’ turned into ‘Again but against Goyim’.<br />When IDF soldiers shoot Palestinian women in Gaza, US government sees poor helpless Jews defending themselves against Arab Nazis. It’s as if every Jew has been issued an Anne Frank card of instant moral absolution. Likewise, all blacks have been sacralized on account of ‘muh slavery’. Even George Floyd the lowlife junkie has been canonized as the latest Negro Saint, perhaps ingesting fentanyl in heaven alongside Gentle Giant Michael Brown smoking pot-laced blunts he lifted from a convenience store. It’s as if all blacks, even worthless crazy thugs and looters, are black-christs before whom we must kneel to suck their toes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_15" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="155"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, blacks are especially valuable to Jews, and not only to guilt-bait whites. It’s also because, during the Cold War, Palestinians were allied with the ANC in South Africa whereas Israel was the closest ally of the Apartheid regime. For most of their political careers, the likes of Mandela and Desmond Tutu were bosom buddies with Yasser Arafat while condemning ‘racist’ Israel. Lest anyone open up that can of worms, Jews have gone the extra mile to bribe, flatter, and threaten blacks to stick with Jews. Whatever sympathy blacks may have for Palestinians, they are above all about ‘gots to have me'(not that white goyim are any better), which translates into most blacks taking 30 pieces of silver from Jews than doing what’s right. Cornel West may be wrong on lots of issues but deserves respect for refusing the silver and calling out on the House Negroes who failed to do likewise.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_16" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="97"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, it all gets very complicated in the game of Tug-A-Gro(‘gro’ being Negro). In 2020, Jewish Power fanned BLM riots to shore up black support for the Democratic Party, but Palestinians also waved the BLM flag, tying their struggle with the black cause in the US. Jews and Palestinians found themselves on the same side(BLM-mania) but for very different reasons. Jews used BLM against whites, and Palestinians tried to use it against Zionism. But as Jews held the purse-strings, blacks did the bidding of Jews and, if anything, looted and burned down countless Arab-owned stores.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_17" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="376"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One thing for sure, no politician, institution, or city street promoted the message, “Palestinian Lives Matter”. Because of American History of racial discrimination against blacks and the persistent problems of black poverty and underachievement, there’s a tendency to associate black ‘struggle’ with anti-American and anti-Zionist struggles around the world, but it is based on a false narrative. Blacks haven’t been oppressed for quite some time in the US and, if anything, are lionized like no other group except for Jews and homos. Contrary to libby-dib moral outrage that 10,000 innocent blacks are gunned down every year by ‘racist’ white cops, truth is precious few unarmed blacks are killed thus and almost invariably for violently resisting arrest. If a Jihadi gains instant access to 77 virgins in heaven upon blowing himself up, even the lousiest black thug gains instant sainthood upon being killed by cops.<br />In fact, blacks are top criminals(or ‘crimperialists’), the #1 victimizers of other races and other blacks in the US. But, due to Jewish control of global media and their endless commemorations of Emmett Till(now with competition from Fentanyl Floyd), the World is still under the spell that WHITES or ‘white supremacists’ go around lynching innocent Negroes. (While it’s true that organized whites once ganged up against blacks, usually thugs or criminals, the very necessity of such group-behavior suggests at white fear and anxiety than white supremacy. Whites had to act as a team because, one-on-one, they were no match for tougher and more muscular blacks. It’s like the only chance wolves have against bears or cougars is as a pack or team because a single wolf is no match for bear or cougar. But, once white unity based on identity and loyalty became taboo in the US, whites could no longer organize against blacks, which meant the confrontations came down to white individual vs black individual, which usually advantaged the tougher blacks. Worse, as blacks were allowed to organize along racial lines, they not only beat up whites on the individual level but on the organized mob level. But all of this goes ignored because Jewish Power, the dominant force in the US, has as its top priority the subjugation of whites, not least by ‘white guilt’ about blacks.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_18" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="237"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Panic about ‘white racism'(especially against Holy Blacks as the ‘iconic’ race) is what the Jews want, and it’s also why they hide their own power and shout down anyone who notices it as an ‘Anti-Semite’. The truth would make people the world over realize Jewish Supremacists rule America and, if anything, use blacks and homos as their allies, agents, thugs, and/or commissars.<br />All said and done, Jewish Power relies on the submission and obeisance of whites, e.g. if Jews want some Arab country to be smashed, they need white generals, managers, and soldiers to obediently carry out the mission. If whites were to wake up and stand with Palestinians and challenge Jewish Power, profound changes are possible, and that is what Jews fear most. But as long as white dummies or whummies keep with their roles as saps, cucks, puppets, and soul-slaves of Jews, they will just keep taking it up the arse.<br />Worse, as the visible enforcers and executioners of the Jewish Supremacist will, the world will see THEM as the Power in America. (It’s like the current administration is infested with Jewish Supremacists and globo-terrorists, but it goes by the name of “Biden’s regime”, as if that senile ice-cream-slurping fool has any say on policy matters.) Instead of showing any gratitude for white subservience, Jews just signal to the world, “Look, it’s the WHITES who are doing it!”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_19" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508907 aligncenter" height="361" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/maxresdefault-1-300x169.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_20" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="198"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Anyway, if all Jews or all blacks can be sacralized, then so can all Palestinians. Even if Jesus wasn’t a Palestinian, Palestinians can be the new jesus, or ‘Palechristinians’. Nakba can be viewed as the Second Crucifixion, and Murdered Palestine can stand as the symbol for the World, the dream of its resurrection representing the hope of all mankind living under Jewish Supremacist tyranny in one way or another. Jewish-controlled US, as lone superpower, rules, threatens, or destroys the world, and Palestine has been at the epicenter of what Jewish Evil is capable of. The Nakba narrative and template(as what was done to the Palestinians now serves as blueprint against whites in the West and other goyim as well) also undermine the Shoah Narrative as the ultimate lesson Jews took from World War II was not to join with humanity against supremacism but to hoist their own supremacist flag, often masked with globo-homo and BLM symbolism, in every country. Jews are now caught in a moral trap where they feel a need to scream ‘nazi, nazi, nazi'(when not ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’) ever more loudly to hide the fact of their super-nazi-like dominance over the world.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_21" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Palestine-as-jesus or Palestine-as-christ iconography is especially useful, as well as urgently necessary, because Jewish Power is pushing for White Nakba, and if things continue as desired by the likes of George Soros, Ben Shapiro, Jennifer Rubin, Chuck Schumer, Rachel Levine, Merrick Garland, Rob Reiner, Sarah Silverman, Steven Spielberg, and etc., white folks will end up as the New Palestinians in their own ancestral homelands, which Jews regard merely as real estate to buy and sell than as racial-cultural inheritance of goyim. Look how Hollywood Jews take delight in the total eclipse of whites in California. Look how Jewish globalists celebrate the Great Replacement in London, Paris, Amsterdam, Malmo, and Brussels. Look how Jews decry Poland and Hungary’s efforts to preserve their lands and cultures. Before White Nakba, there was the original Palestinian Nakba, the template for the grand design for the world. New York Times certainly push it on Japan.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_22" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="114"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So much of the Jewish global agenda can be understood with a close examination of what was done to Palestine. Palestinians, even more than the Russians of the rabid Bolshevik period and Germans during the degenerate Weimar period, were the first complete victims of what Jewish Power is capable of. Always look to the first crime for clues to future crimes. Before other Christians came under the sword and met their martyrdom, Jesus got it first. Christianity eventually triumphed and why? Because Early Christians never forgot what happened to Jesus and kept the flame alive. In time, the Gospel spread and more people were won over to the Faith, even among the Roman elites.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_23" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a similar way, Palestine can become the universal symbol for all the goyim crying out to be free from Jewish Supremacism that is baked into the cake of New Americanism emanating from the US as lone superpower. All peoples faced with cultural degeneration(from Jewish-promoted globo-homo) and demographic doom(from Jewish-promoted anti-natalism, diversity worship, and great replacement) could learn a thing or two from Palestinians who were the first victims of the Grand Jewish Design following World War II. As their own crucifixions loom in the future, goyim the world over should look to the destruction of Palestine as the first overt symptom of Jewish Power as the cancer of modernity.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_24" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="252"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another factor makes the fate of Palestine resemble that of Jesus. Even though the Shoah has become central to 20th century victimology, what happened to Jews was akin to what befell Germans, Japanese, Italians, and Russians(and to a lesser extent to Anglos and French). Jews played with fire and got burned. While there is no moral justification for the killing of millions of Jews, it was an insane backlash against the real evils of Jewish Power. Likewise, while no sane person could justify the mass rape of German women or the incineration of Japanese babies by nukes, Germans and Japanese got smashed because their leaders played with fire and too many of them went along. This is even true of what happened to Russians as Stalin’s regime gambled just like Hitler’s regime. Stalin, a devil himself, made a pact with the devil in Hitler. While most Russians had no say in any of this, it’s generally been the case that the masses also get consumed in the conflagration set by their leaders. If too many high-powered Jews hadn’t done vile things in the interwar period as either finance-capitalist gangsters or radical communist fanatics, there would have been far less likelihood of someone like Adolf Hitler coming to power. World Jewry constituted a great power, and many innocent Jews got burned as the result of vile machinations of Jewish elites, just like plenty of Germans, Japanese, and Russians suffered as the result of reckless policies of their leaders.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_25" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, Palestinians were destroyed for no reason at all. They were a totally powerless people who posed no threat to anyone. They had no role in global imperialism, communism, fascism, World War I, World War II, and all the other destructive events and movements in the 20th century. They were just a people in a tiny corner of the world minding their own business. Yet, just because Zionists coveted their land, they had to be dehumanized and displaced. And it was done with the complicity of great powers that, following World War II, hypocritically preached to the world about human rights, especially in light of horrible atrocities committed by Axis Powers. Yet, when Jews chose to act like Judeo-Nazis, the Great Powers either lent their support or turned a blind eye.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_26" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="230"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It is especially in this sense that the destruction of the Palestinians was like the torture and crucifixion of Jesus. Jesus wasn’t some big shot who got a well-deserved comeuppance. He didn’t preach violence. He wasn’t out for world domination. He didn’t tell people to hate another bunch of people. And yet, He had to be destroyed because Jews saw Him as a threat. Plenty of people were killed in retaliation for their violence, ambition, terror, greed, and the like. The killers may have been hardly better or even worse, but the killed had it coming or sort of. In contrast, Jesus didn’t crave worldly power and didn’t preach violence to His flock. Yet, He was killed. Whatever one thinks of men like Julius Caesar, they had it coming as they were very much in the bloody game of power.<br />Palestinians, like Jesus, weren’t in the game. They were among the poorest and most powerless people on Earth. This isn’t to say they were saints and angels because, as individuals, many among them were surely lowlifes, skunks, idiots, and cutthroats like the rest of humanity. But on the global scale, they amounted to nothing and had no hand in 20th century tragedies. Yet, they had to be destroyed because Jews insisted on it and pressured the great powers to back them up.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_27" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="221"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In that sense, even though far fewer Palestinians died in the Nakba than Jews in Shoah(and Russians, Germans, and Japanese in WWII), theirs was a greater injustice within the context of power dynamics. Whereas other peoples got burned for playing with fire, Palestinians got torched for no reason at all but for the fact that they happened to live on the land that Jews coveted. Now, given Jewish historical and spiritual links to that land, it’s understandable why they wanted it for themselves. But Palestinians also have a history on that land that goes back as far as that of the Jews. Besides, Palestinians were accepting of some degree of Jewish immigration. When Jews trickled in and set up shops as mere neighbors, Palestinians didn’t mind so much. Alas, it was part of a long-term trick. It was when the Palestinians couldn’t help but realize the true nature of Zionism that they began to resist, but they were hopelessly outmatched as Jews had the backing not only of World Jewry but of the great goy powers. Also, Jews scripted the narrative via control of media and influence over Western leaders. So, even though Jews were the real masters of modern terrorism in Palestine, it was always the Arabs who were made out to be the murderous savages.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_28" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">According to post-World War II neo-theology and historiography, the Christian Narrative of Jewish Deicide was worse than fiction; it was libel against an innocent people who had little or nothing to do with the killing of Christ. It was the Romans who done it. The New Narrative said the early Christians, in order to gain favor with the Romans, exaggerated the role of Jews while more-or-less exonerating the Romans via Pilate as an reluctant figure pressured by the blood-thirsty Jewish Mob. Thus, Christianity holds that Jewish hands were stained not only with blood but bloodlust.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_29" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="51"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Of course, none of us know what really happened. There’s no way to resolve this issue without a Time Machine to take us back some 2000 yrs, though some scholars insist Jesus never existed and was really a figment of imagination, a patchwork of various pagan myths fused with Jewish ideas.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_30" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="187"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">That said, given Jewish behavior in regard to Palestine — assuming that Jewish character has remained consistent over the years — , it seems rather credible that Jews would have pressured the Romans into killing Jesus. (Likewise, Jewish behavior in the Post-WW II era lends credence to ‘antisemitism’ of earlier times. Jews insist that utterly irrational and baseless ‘antisemitism’ culminated in the Holocaust, but how likely is it that pre-WWII Jews behaved utterly unlike post-WWII Jews? Of course, Jews will insist they’ve done nothing wrong since the end of WWII. Yeah, just ask Russians of the 1990s, the Palestinians, and all those Arab/Muslim victims of Neocon wars. And consider 2020, the banner year of Jewish-promoted Covid nuttery and BLM lunacy.) There’s an uncanny similarity between the Jews-killed-Jesus Narrative and Jews-destroyed-Palestine Narrative. In both cases, Jews called on the authority and power of the dominant empire. Jews couldn’t have grabbed Palestine on their own. Jews needed to play games with the Ottoman Empire, the British Empire, Soviet Union, even National Socialist Germany, and finally the United States as the New Rome in the aftermath of World War II.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_31" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="658"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">By the end of the war, Jews had come damn near close to fully realizing the Zionist project. The wood and nails were ready and set to crucify Palestine. But for the final act, Jews needed the backing of the preeminent world power, either USSR or US. Jews pleaded with, cajoled, bribed, threatened, and bullied Harry S. Truman, a weak and unimaginative figurehead, into sealing the deal that would finally murder Palestine. Truman was like the New Pilate, and when push came to shove, he relented and let the Jews have their way. And just like that, Palestine was finished with the so-called partition designed to provoke a war that would give Jews the green light to carry out the Nakba. (Now, from a purely Machiavellian realpolitik viewpoint, the American policy might have been worthwhile IF Jews felt gratitude and good will towards the White American Christian Community. But not only did it turn out to be a great moral failure but a strategic mistake as well because the ultimate Jewish Plan was nothing less than White Nakba, to reduce whites in US, Canada, Australia, and EU to the status of the Occupied, or the New Palestinians. Look how the likes of Jennifer Rubin are cackling with hideous glee about how whites are doomed to be minorities, not unlike Palestinians in what became Israel. In a sick way, it’s a smart move by the Jews. After all, even if Romans acceded to Jewish demands to have Jesus killed, Judea was eventually smashed by the Empire that scattered Jews to the four corners of the world. Apparently, modern Jews figured that THEY themselves should take over as the New Romans this time and do to white people what was done to the Jews under the Romans, i.e. ironically, whites, like the Palestinians, are to end up like Ancient Jews while modern Jews would be like the Ancient Romans at their height — no wonder Mark Zuckerberg likes to roleplay as Augustus. In 1948, Anglo-America was the New Rome, and Jews had to plead and beg to get what they wanted. But by 1990, Jewish Power became the New Rome, albeit a stealthy one, in overdrive in dehumanizing, demoralizing, dispossessing, displacing, and dispersing whites folks all around the world. The way things are going, Europe will become majority black African, and many whites will undoubtedly flee to other places. Whites remaining in Europe will be white whores with jungle fever and white dorks with cold feet. And there will also be tons of other nonwhites from Middle East and Asia, and the once-all-white Europe will resemble some multicultural bazaar in North Africa. In aiding and abetting the Jewish-Zionist destruction of Palestine, White Christian American not only committed itself to moral failure but strategic catastrophe on the grandest scale. Did they believe in reciprocity between whites and Jews: “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine”? What they got was, “I scratched your back, and you buggered my butt!” Sadly, even faced with the grim reality, most whites remain in the dark because their supposed white ‘leaders’, who actually do know what has taken place, have been lavishly bought off — the Bushes, Clintons, Bidens, and etc. of the world don’t need to worry about their family wealth, privilege, and connections — and go on duping the white masses that Americanism is all about ‘Muh Israel’ and ‘scape-krauting’ the Germans for the Holocaust in which pure-as-snow Jews, all six million of them, got killed. As it turned out, MAGA-Man Donald Trump didn’t turn out any different; even after being tarred-and-feather and ass-raped by Jewish Power, he only whimpers about how it’s only fitting that the Jewish Lobby should have total control over Congress. At least when Romans kicked Jewish butt, Jews knew they were beat. In contrast, white masses are so duped by white cuck elites that they believe their duty is to kiss the Jewish foot that kicks them.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_32" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508908 aligncenter" height="480" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/jesus-made-in-palestine-300x225-300x225.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_33" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="322"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Pilate may have washed his hands of Jesus’s fate, but the Romans became complicit just the same. Even if driven by Jewish Rabbinical and mob fury, Romans served as executioners. Romans had the power and relented under Jewish pressure. Likewise, the US(and the West in general) has been complicit in the crucifixion of Palestine. It was the Western Empire, especially Great Britain, that led the way for the eventual destruction of Palestine. And it was the US that hammered in the final nails during Harry Truman’s administration. But why? What did Palestinians ever do to the West? Did they attack Europe? Did they threaten the US? Did they pose a danger to the world order? Were they responsible for the great atrocities in the 19th and 20th centuries? In the 19th century, the US wiped out entire indigenous populations and fomented a war with lazy backward Mexicans to grab territory. In the first half of the 20th century, Russia carried out communist atrocities, and Germany committed horrors against neighboring countries and Jews in World War II. Japanese aggression led to incalculable suffering in Asia. Palestinians had NOTHING to do with any of those ghastly horrors, but they ended up far worse than any of those people. Germany and Japan were smashed but allowed to recover and rebuild. Following WWII, US and Soviet Union became superpowers. And Jews, whose actions led to the rise of communism(fueled by Jewish radicalism) and National Socialism(in large part in reaction to Jewish perfidy), grew to great power and wealth in the latter part of the 20th century.<br />But Palestinians, who were responsible for no horrors in the 20th century, were wiped off the map by the Jews with the aid of Britain(for a time), Germany(for a time, as Zionists worked with Hitler to send more Jews to Palestine), Soviet Union(for a time), and the US(then and seemingly forever).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_34" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="178"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Injustice isn’t simply a matter of suffering but proportionality and culpability. For example, Germans and Japanese suffered a great deal in World War II, and their tragedies would rank among the greatest crimes ever had they been visited upon them gratuitously for no conceivable reason, like the horrors in the Book of Job. However, what they suffered in large measure was in retaliation to their own aggressions and atrocities. Even though Jews(and their cuck shills) don’t want to admit it, the Shoah was not unlike the horrors that befell the Japanese and Germans. Just like many innocent Germans and Japanese perished as the result of their elites’ malevolent policies, many innocent Jews bore the brunt of the backlash against vile actions of World Jewry(a great power in their own right) and the general acquiescence of the Jewish population. In contrast, Palestinians were wiped off the map for having done NOTHING. As such, in proportional terms, they were the biggest victims of the 20th century. A people who’d done NOTHING were robbed of EVERYTHING.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_35" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Are things all that different today? Have Jews learned the lessons of history like Germans, Japanese, Russians, and others did so at least in part? Jews committed terrible wrongs in Russia of the 1990s, but many upper-middle class and middle class Jews in academia and media mostly went along with the Jewish elite-driven agenda and narrative. How does the average Jew(who is above-average in education, income, and privilege by goy standards) feel about the Jewish-Zionist globalist elite’s warmongering and destruction of Arab/Muslim nations? Most of them just look the other way or fully support the vicious policies.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_36" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="162"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Take Bari Weiss, the supposed dissident intellectual of the Dark Web. She poses as a Little Jew dissed by the big shots at New York Times, but what is her poor little Jewess schtick? It’s to silence critics of Israel and to push the hardline on Jewish Power. To be generous, we may argue most Jews are simply ignorant of what’s going on because, like most idiot goyim, they are into video games and celebrity culture. But haven’t we been told that Jews are the most intelligent, informed, and educated people in the US and the whole world? Haven’t we been told that people with more education and privilege should be more cognizant and conscientious about how power is used? ‘Silence is violence’, we’ve been told many times by Jewish media and academia. Haven’t we been told of the Tikkun Olam mindset among Jews that is so concerned with human rights and the redemption of humanity?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_37" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="131"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If so, why are so many ‘little Jews’ so compliant with what are clearly the evil agendas of Big Jews? It’s been asked of the Germans, “How could the most educated and most cultured people in Europe support such a regime that brought about World War II and carried out the Holocaust?” In other words, the German people have no excuse because they were more advanced than most. (To their credit, Germans stuck with Weimar Democracy for fifteen hellish years of national humiliation and seemingly endless depression before they finally had enough, and even then, only one-third voted for Hitler.) Well, Jews are even more educated than the Germans ever were. Then, why have so many Little Jews been resigned to or supportive of the supremacist agenda of Jewish Power?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_38" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508910 aligncenter" height="465" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/pilate-truman-300x218.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_39" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="128"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sure, Jews yammer about how they’re opposed to ‘hate’, ostensibly the reason for their attempts to clamp down on ‘hate speech’ in the name of social justice or whatever. But in truth, Jews push ‘hate speech’ policies because they want to shield and carry on with their hateful ACTIONS. Jewish-controlled US foreign policy is a grocery list of murderous actions. US supports the Zionist destruction of Palestine. But if you criticize Zionism, you’re an ‘Anti-Semite’ guilty of ‘hate speech’. That’s how it works. By characterizing your criticism of Israel and Jewish Power as ‘hate speech’, the Power silences you and then, Jews can go on with their hateful actions against Palestinians without exposure and pushback. Or, consider the hateful actions against Syria, Iran, and Russia.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_40" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="228"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If you were to call out Jewish Power, then ADL and SPLC will sound the alarm on ‘Anti-Semitic Hate Speech’ and get you censored & de-platformed. And then, having silenced all criticism, Jewish power reverts to its hateful actions around the world via monopoly over US foreign policy. But then, Jewish Power pulls the same trick INSIDE the US. If any decent Christian florist or baker refuses to service satanic rituals like ‘gay wedding’, he or she will be slandered as ‘hateful’ and driven out of business.<br />In truth, what is more hateful than the globo-homo agenda that wages nihilistic war on normality and decency? After all, homos aren’t content to be left alone to do their own thing; they must make their agenda compulsory so that all of us must observe month-long celebrations of their deviancy and degeneracy. And globo-homo is part of Jewish Power’s world agenda. Homos within the Deep State work with Jewish Power to wage wars, subvert national economies, and spread cultural degeneracy. If you call out on these hateful actions, you will be the one accused of ‘hate speech’ because you dared to name the homo as partner-in-crime in globalist neo-hegemonism. If you ask a Jew, “Why are you hatefully murdering the Palestinians?”, the Power will accuse YOU of ‘hate speech’ for daring to notice the hateful actions of Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_41" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="167"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">And now, chickens have come home to roost for white Americans who mindlessly supported and blessed Jewish Power and Zionism. It was not so long ago when, in the aftermath of 9/11, Jewish Power, via control of government and media, called on All Americans as One Patriotic People to unite in the War on Terror because, if we didn’t fight them <b style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">over there</b>, we would have to fight them <strong style="border: 0px; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">over here</strong>.<br />Never mind the fishy circumstances around 9/11, and it wasn’t long before Jewish Power and its shills concocted ludicrous lies as rationale to invade Iraq, a nation that had NOTHING to do with 9/11. And then, with Barack Obama as their pet monkey, Jewish Power turned the so-called War on Terror into War with Terror against Libya and Syria. And all those ‘good anti-war liberals’ who had denounced George W. Bush as a no-good christo-fascist warmonger were either silent or supportive of this new policy that turned out to be even worse. Well, well, silence is violence.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_42" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="123"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, like in the story of the “Boy Who Cried Wolf”, more and more Americans began to notice that Jewish Power is full of baloney. Even many Republicans who’d supported the Iraq War felt lied to and manipulated; with eggs on their faces, a few even apologized to their constituents. So, when Donald Trump lumbered along and said NO MORE to Neocon Wars(though he went super-Neocon on Iran), many looked to him as a real leader, even a savior, and incredibly, it was the conservatives who were more likely to be anti-war and critical of the Pentagon(whereas Democrats and RINOS were egging on Trump to do more bombing & invading and also to ramp up tensions against Russia and China).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_43" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="160"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The Jewish Script was beginning to unravel, but did Jews self-reflect on any of this? No, all they cared about was their power and control, and they embarked on unprecedented levels of censorship and denied financial services based on ideology. The very people who’ve been bitching endlessly about the Red Scare and Joe McCarthy were now pushing the Russia Collusion Paranoia and withholding financial services to American citizens based on ideology — everyone, regardless of ideology, has to pay taxes to bail out banks but banks can deny you service based on your political views, though don’t expect any institution or industry to cut off Zionists and Neocons for the ‘genocide’ against Palestinians and destructive wars against Arabs/Muslims. If Joe McCarthy got some pushback because powerful institutions and industries even then were controlled by Liberals and Leftists, there has been no pushback against the Jewish power-grab because Jews control everything and everyone, including the whore-politicians of the GOP.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_44" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="234"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">You’d think some Republicans would probe into why Americans have been denied financial services based on ideology. Or why law firms have been pressured not to represent certain clients. By now, it should be obvious to all that Jewish hypocrisy knows no bounds. They very Jews who still rant about evil Joe McCarthy have NO PROBLEM with local governments(‘blue’ and ‘red’) shilling for Jewish Power to effectively criminalize BDS. The very Jews who called for boycott of Apartheid South Africa in the 80s(even as Israel was working with the Boer Republic) now pull strings to ensure Israel won’t face similar challenges even though Zionist crimes against Palestinians are 1000x worse than what white settlers did to blacks in South Africa. After all, the reason why whites needed apartheid was they’d allowed blacks to remain the demographic majority. In contrast, Jews expelled the vast majority of Palestinians in the Nakba pogroms to ensure Jewish demographic dominance in Israel proper(and the same game plan is being played in West Bank, which is being murdered with a thousand cuts). In West Bank where Jews are currently still in the minority, they practice their own kind of apartheid. But all these Jews, who pride themselves as ‘liberals’ and ‘progressives’, use their money and influence, as well as the fear factor and blackmail, to pressure goy shills to deny any voice to Palestinian-Americans.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_45" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It gives the lie to ‘Jewish Liberalism’ because, if Jews were truly liberal in principle, they would stand by the First Amendment regardless of tribal interests. It now seems Jewish support of civil liberties in the past was strategic than principled. It was really to amass power to be used to silence rivals, opponents, and critics, which include conscientious Jews who are smeared as ‘self-loathing Jews’. With their current dominance, Jews play every trick in the book to ensure all the goyim will grovel at their feet. The very Jews who recount for the umpteenth time the Hollywood Blacklist of the 1950s are utterly mum about Palestinian-American professionals who’ve been fired or demoted on account of refusing to pledge loyalty to Zionist ideology that has destroyed their people. Being bad is bad enough but to be so hypocritical as well… Apparently, many Jews don’t lose any sleep over this.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_46" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="177"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What was done to Palestinians is now being done to White Americans, especially to nationalists and populists. Malignant scumbag Merrick Garland sic the dogs on Americans who oppose CRT(Critical Race Theory), which isn’t really about racial justice but Jewish use of blacks to guilt-bait whites into shame and submission. If indeed CRT is about racial justice for all, why nothing about Zionist tyranny over Palestinians? And why nothing about black thuggery and terrorization of the weaker races? Is there anything in CRT that calls on blacks to shoulder responsibility for all the violence they’ve committed against whites and non-blacks? Of course not. CRT sanctifies black identity and narrative to burden whites with guilt and self-doubt, all the easier for Jews to steer rudderless white souls into serving Jews(and homos and blacks as allies of Jews). One thing for sure, CRT overlooks how mass immigration led to the ‘genocide’ of American Indians. But then, mass-immigration of nonwhites is part of the Jewish Plan to increase Diversity, which makes divide-and-rule over goyim so much easier.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_47" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="423"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">There was a time when Jews like Merrick Garland called on White Americans to support Israel against the Arabs(usually portrayed as terrorists by Jewish Hollywood). But now, his ilk is vilifying White Americans as ‘terrorists’ for pushing back on CRT that aims to dehumanize white people. White people assumed(and many of them still stupidly do) that whites and Jews are allies against them no good Ay-rabs, thus blinding themselves to reality. In truth, Jewish Power has been the biggest sponsor of terrorism(just like Jewish gangsters played as big if not bigger role than the Italians, who were usually depicted as gangsters in popular fiction). Israel plays backup to ISIS scum in Syria. Obama the puppet of Jews armed the so-called ‘moderate rebels’ who were really a bunch of foreign Jihadi scum sent into Syria to tear it apart. Iran, along with Russia, saved Syria from terrorists, but Jewish Power used clowns like Trump and Pelosi to blame Iran for the terrorism. Trump had Soleimani killed at the behest of Jewish Supremacists. Whatever Trump may have said on the campaign trail, he proved to be another big fat whore of Israel, but Jews still hated him for stirring up white political consciousness that, following his example, grew disrespectful of the gatekeeping GOP establishment. Though Trump was style than substance, his swagger encouraged white populists to show defiance and push back(and to never apologize). Not since Charles Lindbergh — Joe McCarthy and Richard Nixon were small potatoes by comparison — have Jews been so triggered. But if Jewish animus against Lindbergh was understandable as a survival instinct(as millions of Jews were endangered in Europe by Nazi Germany), Jewish animus against Trump was mostly about tribal megalomania as their main concern today isn’t survival but global hegemony, something Jewish Supremacists have grown accustomed to as their birthright and destiny. If the main Jewish worry in the 1940s was how many tribesmen might be killed by Nazi wrath, the main worry today is how many goyim might be spared the Zionist-Globalist wrath. Jews hate the idea of anyone standing in their war path(with goy mercenaries to fill up the body bags of course). In foreign policy, Jews hated Trump as an obstacle to Jewish Neocons and Neolibs going ‘full nazi’ on whomever they hated. In other words, Jews hate Trump not so much because he was ‘literally Hitler’ but because he blocked the total Hitlerization of Jewish Power. But with total puppet Biden in office, Judeo-Nazis are saber-rattling against Russia and China.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_48" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, not only was Trump caricatured into a Hitler-like figure but his followers were painted as ‘domestic terrorists’. It’s come to a point where the Jewish-controlled Deep State now regards half the nation as quasi-terrorist, somewhat akin to how Arabs were depicted in the 1980s and 1990s. In other words, White American nationalists and populists found themselves in the same camp with Hamas and Hezbollah.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_49" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="52"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Then, how can the healing begin? One way is by revisiting the Palestinian issue. It is by atonement on the part of whites, especially Americans, and the transference of sympathy(and favored iconography) from Jews to the Palestinians. There is no other way given the nature of Jewish Power in our times.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_50" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, how did the healing begin following the death of Jesus Christ? It was with the realization that an innocent person had been killed, and furthermore, people had been either complicit in the killing or too afraid to speak out — even Peter denied Jesus three times. Jesus didn’t strive for worldly power and, if anything, said “give unto Caesar what is his”. He wasn’t about greed. He didn’t call for mass uprisings and wars. He preached compassion and peace but got killed real bad. The mob, fueled by Rabbinical authorities, called for blood and jeered on the violence directed at an innocent(though, to be sure, we can understand why Jews would have regarded Jesus as a heretic of the worst kind given the theological controversy). The killing of Jesus wasn’t like the execution of a captured criminal or fallen tyrant. It was His innocence that later inspired others to atone, repent, and spread the faith. The healing began with the acknowledgement of Jesus’s innocence and the murderous fanaticism of Jewish authorities & the cold-bloodedness of Romans executioners who did what was deemed politically most expedient. For sin to be cleansed, it must first be acknowledged and atoned for. The ensuing rise of Christianity turned the world around.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_51" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508911 aligncenter" height="640" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/9780374161095-200x300.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="426" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_52" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="100"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Likewise, there can be no healing and no hope for white people unless they repent for their crimes against Palestinians. Harry Truman’s Pilate moment and the destruction of Palestine sealed the fate of the US and the West in general, morally and strategically. In a way, Truman was worse than Pilate who, at the very least, sought to absolve himself of the bloodletting. In contrast, even though Truman initially acted with reluctance(and resentment toward Jews who strong-armed him), his administration ultimately went all-in on behalf of Jews whose Zionist dream had always been Great Replacement of the Palestinians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_53" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="84"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It is through the realization of their complicity in the destruction of Palestine that whites can begin to understand the true nature of their bargain with the devil: Jews now intend to do to them what was done to Palestinians, i.e. Palestinian Nakba was mere dress rehearsal for White Nakba being implemented across the West by the likes of George Soros with full endorsement of New York Times, Harvard University, Hollywood, Wall Street, and the Deep State packed with servile dogs of Zion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_54" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="355"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews recruited whites to support Israel against Arab ‘terrorists’ but now label countless millions of white Americans as ‘domestic terrorists’. And why? Because whites dared to protest the rigged election of 2020 — the art of Jewish Regime Change went from Iraq to Libya to Ukraine and finally came back to the US; indeed, Jews in media happily gloated about how the cabal had ‘fortified’ the election. ‘Democracy’ has simply come to mean whatever-Jews-want. Then, it’s only natural that Jews would deem as ‘terrorists’ half the nation because it objected to the dubious election of 2020. Or, because sane people dare to push back against CRT and tranny-nuttery. Or, because patriots don’t want illegals to pour across the US border. To great many Jews, opposing illegal immigration is tantamount to repeating the Holocaust, even though what the opposition to unrestricted illegal crossings has to do with Nazi crimes is anyone’s guess; after all, if Nazis were guilty of anything, it was illegally trespassing across national borders. (Perhaps, Jews conflate the opposition to mass immigration, legal and illegal, with rejection of Jewish immigrants/refugees during World War II, but that would imply that all these countries from which immigrants originate are akin to Hitler’s regime, a most ludicrous notion. In fact, most of these migrants/immigrants are not members of beleaguered minorities but of the majority population. Also, given what Jewish immigrants have done to Palestine and historic white America, did it ever occur to the Tribe as to why goyim were reluctant to take in large numbers of Jews with their long record of subversion, radicalism, and other forms of unpleasantness? Now, Matthew Yglesias is calling for billion more immigrants so that the Tribe, as the neo-brahmin caste allied with Hindu collaborators, can rule over ever more diverse goy helots who official religion shall forever be mindless worship of Jews-blacks-homos. The likes of him have zero feelings about the European stock that founded this country with a unique cultural imprint. To Jews, whites are simply more goy cattle to own and control. Whatever gifts Jews may have, self-awareness has never been their strong suit.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_55" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="227"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Given most Jews are Democratic and given most Republican Jews are like Jennifer Rubin and Ben Shapiro invested in the Great Replacement or White Nakba, what hope is there for whites who continue to sidle up to Jewish Power in the ‘hail mary’-like hope that, golly gee whiz, maybe Jews will finally make nice IF whites, for the umpteenth time, reiterate their support for Israel’s destruction of remaining Palestinian territories and for Zionist war plans against Iran, as well as mindless vilification of Russia. The politics of Jewish demographics is as follows: 85% Democratic, 10% Neocon Republican(like Jennifer Rubin), and maybe 5% sympathetic to the interests of White Americans. And that 5% is utterly powerless and usually canceled like anyone else who opposes Jewish Power. Laura Loomer is an ardent Zionist, but she was censored for supporting Trumpian nationalism over globalism. Jewish Power is what it is. Therefore, even from a purely strategic viewpoint, there is no room for white agency because Jewish insistence on white submission simply cannot tolerate white identity & interests in the slightest. It’s not okay to be white, and on that point, the most ‘woke’ Jew is in full agreement with Jennifer Rubin and Chris Wallace. The ideal white male for Jewish Neocons is David French, a cuck-faced maggot who plays cheerleader to IDF death squads mowing down Palestinian women and children.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_56" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="143"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In a nutshell, the Jewish-White Alliance rests on the white misconception that Jewish feelings toward whites mirror white feelings toward Jews: sympathy, admiration, and positivity. In truth, Jews feel mostly fear, contempt, paranoia, and loathing in regard to whites(and who can blame them when so many whites are craven careerist cucks, idiot hillbillies, drunken ‘white trash’, and ‘dumb polacks’?) Now, if certain whites are perfectly content to take on inferior dog-like role vis-a-vis Jews, then the alliance is contractually valid. For sure, white cuckservatives, wimperals, and ‘Christian Zionist’ Evangelicals are more than happy to play the roles of sidekick, servant, and water-boy. But any proud white warrior who’d hoped for a roughly equal alliance of mutual respect needs to tear the contract as it’s as fraudulent as what Allen Klein tried to pull on the Rolling Stones and the Beatles.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_57" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="70"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The only way forward is with a new foundation, one that regards Palestine as the modern metaphorical jesus crucified by Jewish Power. Under the Zionist spell, white people see Jews as a sacred race of innocent Anne Franks, indeed to the point where they can’t tell Anne Frank from Leo Frank, who’s also been turned into a symbol of ‘innocent’ martyrdom despite ample evidence of the rape/murder.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_58" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As a result, whites cannot mentally process the fact that Israel was created by the destruction of an innocent people, the Palestinians. After all, if Jews are eternally an innocent people and if Jewishness is synonymous with holy victimhood, how could they have victimized or wronged another people? Then, it’s no wonder whites assume Palestinians got what they deserved, no less than Germans and Japanese in World War II. (Granted, Jewish victimology is effective precisely because it comes fused with Jewish ‘victorology’. Generally, people reserve their sympathy for wronged winners than wronged losers.) But what crime did Palestinians commit exactly, except for living on the land of their ancestors and wanting to keep it?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_59" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="183"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Sadly, the irrational and sacral assumption of eternal Jewish innocence blinds whites to the truth. To an objective mind, Man A attacking Man B is clearly the aggressor. But to a mind that assumes that Man A is eternally innocent, Man A could not have wronged Man B. Rather, Man B rudely happened to be standing in the way of noble Man A’s fist. So, Man B is to blame for having been knocked to the ground. Such is the dynamics of Narrative Logic, and Jews now employ it against White America with BLM. Like Jews, blacks are deemed eternally noble and innocent. So, if a black person acts violently, he did nothing wrong because blackness is deemed innately noble. If a black felon violently resists arrest and someone(felon, cop, or hapless bystander) gets killed, he mustn’t be blamed because blackness is a moral shield. By invoking ‘systemic racism’, even an obviously criminal act is rationalized as a form of resistance or understandable rage. The police officer in Ferguson who defended himself against Michael Brown found out the hard way.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_60" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="191"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Objective grasp of reality and true justice are impossible when we are led to assume certain peoples are innately noble and innocent simply on the basis of identity(defined by selective historiography); it is just another form of racial supremacism, evident in the West’s perspective on Jews and Palestinians. Holocaust Narrative isn’t merely a history lesson but a consecration of Jews as the eternal Anne Frank race(no matter what they do). Imagine fooling ourselves that Japanese everywhere and for all time are to be deemed angelic and innocent because of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We don’t believe that Russians are eternally noble because of the Siege of Leningrad or that Chinese are forever innocent because of the Nanking Massacre. But for some reason, Holocaust has been made eternally synonymous with Jewishness, which means Jewishness might as well be a license to steal and kill since it’s been canonized as holy regardless of Jewish behavior. Indeed, noticing bad Jewish behavior is to indulge in the secular sin of using an ‘Anti-Semitic trope’, akin to using the Lord’s name in vain. Jews, blacks, and homos, the canonical groups.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_61" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="109"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Since 2020, blacks have been running around beating, looting, and murdering, but no matter, as BLM and CRT assure us that blacks are always right and, if nonwhites got hurt, they probably had it coming. We must pretend black rampages are ‘mostly peaceful protests’ while any noticing of bad black behavior is ‘racist’. FBI statistics, artificial intelligence on criminal patterns, and SAT scores are also ‘racist’ for indicating black over-representation in criminality and under-representation in intellectual ability. Of course, the pathological ‘woke’ fantasies about blacks are inseparable from philosemitic fantasies of Jews as eternal saints because both the Anne Frank cult and George Floyd cult were concocted by Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_62" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="138"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This isn’t to deny the historical tragedies of Jews or blacks(though they seem to ignore the sufferings, past and present, of just about all other groups). All peoples have been winners and losers throughout history; they been both tyrants and the tyrannized. History moves on, however, and it’s ludicrous for a people to eternalize a moment in history as their defining identity. Imagine a super-rich person pegging himself as always poor because he was once poor or because his ancestors were poor. The problem isn’t with Jews remembering the Holocaust but invoking it as a constant reminder to morally launder even their worst behavior. If Jewish Power keep getting its way without pushback, 21st century is going to make the 20th century look like a picnic. For how long will this charade go on?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_63" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="236"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">We’re faced with a political paradox. Jews have made themselves out to be ‘powerless’ and ‘vulnerable’ precisely because they are so powerful. They control the narrative and iconography. While Jews weren’t the first and certainly not the only people who exploited victimology — American Revolutionaries certainly exaggerated the extent of British tyranny, if such even existed, over the New World colonies — , they seem unwilling to own up to the fact that they are the masters of the world and that entities like ‘US’ and ‘EU’ now have no meaning or purpose other than as malignant instruments of Jewish Power gone rabid and virulent. When Anglo-Americans or WASPS ruled, it was admitted by the elites and understood by all as to who held the power. But even with all their power and supremacist designs on the world, Jews would have us believe fragile and tender ‘liberal democracy’ is threatened by ‘white supremacists’. It’s like a billionaire accusing a working class person of ‘greed’. One thing for sure, powerful people who refuse to acknowledge their own power are unfit to rule. What has been said of Hitler is also true of Jewish Power. Appeasement never works, and anyone who wants to give another inch to Jews in the hope that “maybe just maybe, they will go easy and finally make nice” is a retard. Just ask the Palestinians if Jewish power lust has any self-restraining mechanism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_64" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As it stands, the white world comprises two kinds of people. Total cuck-slaves who’ve surrendered everything to Jews and are happy to be slaves. The Bushes, Clintons, Bidens, and Blairs of the world. Jews are their masters, a condition they’ve accepted in their roles as ‘house negroes’. Whatever Jews want, shabbos goyim labor to get for them. If the Tribe wants globo-homo in every corner of the world, its wish is their command. If Jews want the West inundated with nonwhites, of course it’s a great idea. Plenty of white ‘liberals’ and ‘conservatives’ fit this mold.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_65" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="203"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The other kind of whites is more hesitant, even defiant at times, but doesn’t represent freedom either. These whites too have accepted the terms of agreement rendering them subordinate to Jews. As Evangelicals, they might revere Jews as the Chosen, i.e. God blesses those whose who bless the Jews. As libertarians, they might admire Jews for reasons of wealth and privilege. As crypto-‘racists’, they may vicariously partake of Zionism as a form of surrogate supremacism as white power of any kind is taboo. As Philo-Semites, they might be entranced with Jewish achievements in arts and culture. As adherents of HBD(human bio-diversity), they may be in awe of high IQ Jews as ideal philosopher kings, hopefully with whites as their preferred sidekicks: Jewish sires and white squires. Charles Murray and Jared Taylor disagree on lots of things but are totally agreed on the template of whites as junior partners of superior Jews(with also the aura of moral superiority as historical victims of ‘antisemitism’). Neither has ever expressed any sympathy for Palestinians. HBD mentality has a hardon for IQ and tends to be anti-humanist in its dismissal of ‘losers’ and the ‘mediocre’. It too can be a form of nihilism.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_66" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="82"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As Jews are clearly smarter and more successful than Palestinians(by a factor of 1000), HBD community feels Jewish winners have the natural right to kick Palestinian ‘losers’ around as a bunch of worthless helots, the punching bag of history. Even though Charles Murray feigns sympathy for working class white folks, he’s no George Bailey(IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE) and shares with the likes of John Bolton and Michael Pompeo a simpering servility to the Neocons, the crowd at Commentary Magazine.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_67" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Following such moral logic — the smart can do as they wish to the dumb — , why shouldn’t Jews push the White Nakba agenda and reduce less intelligent whites to penury as the New Palestinians? HBD mentality is under the delusion that Jews harbor a certain sentimentality when it comes to whites. It’s like a dog in China hoping it won’t end up in the pot. Even a doomed dog cannot break free of the canine nature of obedience to superior humans, and HBD mentality is essentially dog-like towards Jews as the master race. So, even the slightest hint of pro-white attitude among Jews is grounds for ecstasy among HBD types. “Master loves me!”</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_68" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="83"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">So, HBD-types get all excited over Eric Zemmour of France even though his anti-Islam campaign is essentially Judeo-centric. He seems okay with the Great Replacement as long as newcomers partake of ‘French Culture’, which is a degenerate joke at this point. Also, for every Zemmour or Stephen Miller, there are 20 Jews with utmost hostility toward whites. But HBD sentimentality clings to hope of Jews as saviors. Indeed, if most HBD-ers had a choice between saving-the-white-race-by-offending-Jewish-feelings and losing-the-white-race-by-sparing-Jewish-feelings, they will opt for the latter.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_69" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="228"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Therefore, both kinds of whites are of the slave mentality. One kind has not only surrendered but is happy with its lot, somewhat understandable in their roles as favored ‘house negroes’. The other kind accepts Jews as masters but nevertheless longs for a degree of pride and autonomy. In other words, accept slavery in the hope of not being treated like a slave. But why would one not be treated as a slave if one has accepted slavery? John Derbyshire, for example, believes whites have no hope without winning over Jews. In other words, forget about white liberation, white autonomy, white independence. No, white future is inseparable from Jewish power; therefore, the most one can hope for is to convince Jewish Power not to kick whites around too much.<br />Thus, the conflict isn’t between white freedom and white slavery but between white slavery that kisses Jewish ass vs white slavery that begs not to be kicked in the butt. All said and done, both sides are a bunch of cucks. How low the Anglos have fallen. It turns out, for all the cult of individualism and liberty, Anglos are really about hierarchy and obedience, always in need of some top dog to serve. They need SOMEONE to dish out orders, and the most that Anglos can hope for is to be treated better by the Jewish Master.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_70" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508912 aligncenter" height="354" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/jesus-palestinian-672x372-300x166.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_71" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">One bunch of whites embraces unconditional slavery and another bunch of whites embraces conditional slavery. In a way, conditional slavery is worse because one who chooses slavery might as well go all the way. It’s like a whore who says “I’ll suck but won’t swallow.” To be free, one must totally reject slavery. True white freedom means deciding one’s own destiny regardless of what Jews feel, think, or want. The only sensitivity that matters is for whites to respect the freedoms of others as they expect their own freedom to be respected. Then, how odd and embarrassing that whites are most loyal to the very group that has done most to rob them of freedom.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_72" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="115"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Besides, why be sensitive to Jewish feelings when Jews are utterly oblivious to white feelings and, if anything, go out of their way to insult, mock, and condemn whites in the worst ways. What is this Congressional Gold Medal for Emmett Till about? It’s not about Till per se or about blacks in general. It’s essentially to rub the white nose in historical guilt complex, a denial of pride and heritage. When Jews pull such stunts, why don’t whites offer prizes to Palestinians and other victims of Jewish Evil? Or, how about posthumously to the victims of Jonathan Pollard as his treachery led to the executions of double agents in the USSR?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_73" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="155"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This is why whites lose. Jewish Power blows snot on the white face, but whites only think to lick and swallow the phlegm, which only encourages more arrogance and contempt among Jews. Jews control the gods, which is why the central political debate in the US has devolved into two sides yapping about “White Republicans are racists” and “White Democrats are the real racists.” Never mind there have been countless WHITE Emmett Tills brutalized by black savagery, especially since the Sixties. It never occurs to whites that Jewish treatment of Palestinians has been far worse than the Black American experience in the 20th century. It never occurs to whites to call out on what Zionist-Yinonist foreign policy has done to Arabs and Muslims of Middle East and North Africa. Whites of both stripes are utterly incapable of creating and controlling their own gods, which is why they bow to the grand narrative of Jewish Power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_74" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="255"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews have accused whites of ‘white supremacism’ a million times, but one hardly hears any accusation of Jewish Supremacism from whites. Jews even sensationalize black ‘hate hoaxes’ to push the ‘white supremacist’ narrative, but whites don’t point to the actual Zionist hate campaigns against Palestinians(and other Arabs, especially in Syria) as obvious proof of Jewish Supremacism. Jews operate a global network — American Jews feel closer to Jews in Israel and other parts of the world than to goy Americans — , but they have the temerity to blame Donald Trump and the MAGA movement of ‘treason’ for having ‘colluded’ with Russia, an allegation more surreal than Jussie Smollett’s story of being half-lynched while holding a submarine sandwich. Jews never get accused of their daily treasonous activities in favor of World Jewry against American interests, but they level accusations of treason against whites based on pure fantasy. According to Jews, the 2020 riots and mayhem, where BLM and Antifa were given free rein by the Democrats and the Deep State, were ‘mostly peaceful protests’, whereas the 1/6 protest with limited violence was an ‘insurrection’, maybe the greatest tragedy in US history.<br />While Jewish obnoxiousness must be called out, white cravenness is also to blame. A bully just gets bullier unless he is pushed back, but no one dares to push back against Jewish Power. The current climate is like someone accusing you of murder you didn’t commit while you dare not call the accuser out for murder he is committing right in front of your eyes.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_75" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508913 aligncenter" height="640" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Reverend-William-Barber-Jesus-Palestinian-Jew-DNC-2016-Mondoweiss-e1469803229598-283x300.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="603" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_76" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="208"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Besides, what is this talk of ‘treason’ when the current official globalist policy of the US is inherently treasonous and seditious? Open borders to illegal invaders, dehumanization of the white majority, legal protection for black thugs, slap on the wrist for Antifa degenerates, pardoning of the likes of Jonathan Pollard, and so much more. The current regime doesn’t serve majority American interests but minority Jewish global hegemonic interests. The white majority pledging loyalty to this regime would be like Hindus in Old India licking British boots as a show of patriotism. With complete takeover by the Empire of Judea, America is no more and so-called liberal democracy exists only as a shell. If American Jews conspire with World Jewry, whites should do likewise and link up with World Whitey or World Honkry. Even Trump who ran on AMERICA FIRST did little but serve ISRAEL FIRST. If anything, it’s too bad the MAGA movement did NOT collaborate with Russia and other pro-white forces around the world. If US Jews can work so closely with Israeli and Ukrainian Jews, why shouldn’t whites do likewise on an international scale? Are whites so terrified of what Jews may think and say? Then, they are soul-slaves yet to be liberated.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_77" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="91"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though Palestinians are in terrible straits of territorial loss and physical torment, they are in some respects better off than affluent whites in the West. They are mentally and spiritually free. They have no illusions of their situation, how it came about, and who did it. They know who their enemies are. They know it’s the Jews. They know whites in the West are pathetic, craven, and sappy cucks who grovel at the feet of Jews. Thus, Palestinians souls are free despite their bodies being stomped by the Zion-Boot.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_78" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In contrast, even the most affluent, comfy, and ‘well-educated’ whites in the West are soul-slaves in the Jewish Power Matrix. They lack autonomy of heart and mind to even realize they’ve been robbed of liberty and agency. But then, working class MAGA-tards are hardly better off when it comes to soul freedom. Their supposed nationalist hero Trump did precious little during his term but suck up to Zion whose idea of gratitude was to spread Covid hysteria to rig elections and fan BLM thuggery to intimidate whites, but I’m sure MAGA-tards will once again come out in droves to shout support for Trump every time he bleats about ‘Muh Israel’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_79" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just think. Palestinians got nothing but are soul-free, whereas whites got so much but are soul-enslaved. Imagine the possibility if the soul-freedom of Palestinians were to unite with the material-power of whites. Given that Palestinians are soul-free despite being body-crushed, there is a valuable lesson for whites: White healing and white liberation could begin by identifying with and learning from Palestinians. Thus, at the very least, whites can begin the rehab of breaking free of the addiction to Jewish Power, much like countless working class whites struggle every day to break free of the opioids pushed by the Sackler dynasty that cared not in the slightest for all the white dead. Then, like the Palestinians, whites can know who their real enemies are and what these people have in store for them.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_80" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="232"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However mighty you may be, you are fated to grow weaker and die if you fail to pinpoint the source of your woes. Even the strongest and healthiest man unaware of a malignant tumor will eventually succumb to cancer and die. In contrast, no matter how sick and debilitated you are, you can get on the road to recovery if the source of the disease is identified. Correct diagnosis is of the essence. In material terms, whites are currently infinitely better off than Palestinians, Arabs, and Iranians, but in the long run, they are doomed because they mistake their enemy as their dearest friend, even their master and god. Palestinians and Iranians know Jewish Power smears them as ‘terrorists’ and is out to get them. In contrast, whites are under the delusion that Jews are the best people in the world whose wisdom and advice must be heeded for whites to gain an ounce of redemption and a glimpse of heaven. Palestinians know all too well of the Zionist cancer that is out to destroy them, and they resist with all their strength, even if it’s just rocks in the hands of children. In contrast, white dummies or whummies look upon the metastasizing cancer of Jewish Power as the surest sign of health for Western Civilization. No wonder whites will go on losing out in territory, wealth, status, demography, and power.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_81" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="95"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">However, if whites were to break free of the delusion and begin to identify with Palestinians, they will finally see the cancer for what it is and seek out proper treatment. Whites must embark on an intifada of their own against the George Soroses & Paul Singers of the world and the whole spectrum of Jewish Power Complex. Some whites place their hopes on figures like Yoram Hazony, someone who denies nationalist rights for Palestinians, someone who reserves tribal ethno-nationalism only for Jews while pushing milquetoast ‘civic nationalism’ on whites. It’s a losing hand.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_82" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="149"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The winning hand says whites of all stripes have much to gain by identifying with Palestinians. First, by following the Palestinian lead, whites can be freed of the illusion of Jewish friendship. White Christians identifying with Palestinians will realize Jewish Power targets Christianity for destruction. Jewish Power doesn’t lose sleep over all those dead or maimed Christian-Americans soldiers of Middle East wars. Jews don’t care about the destruction of ancient Arab Christian communities in the wake of US invasions that, if anything, emboldened Islamic terrorist elements who’d been held at bay by secular Arab leaders. If anything, Jewish Power aided extreme Islamic elements in Syria hellbent on murdering every Syrian Christian protected by Assad. In the US, Jews have pushed the globo-homo-ization of churches. Every Mainline church clown who’s come under Jewish Influence ends up worshiping George Floyd and Harvey Milk over God and Jesus.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_83" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="92"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Now, it’s understandable why some Christians saw Jews as less of a threat than the Muslims. Historically speaking, whereas Jews lived under Christian power, Muslims not only conquered the Holy Land but made inroads into Europe, even ruling over Spain, Greece, and parts of the Balkans for centuries. Also, whereas Judaism was always limited to Jews, proselytizing Islam and Christianity battled one another for the souls of the world. Jews didn’t try to convert Christians and Muslims, whereas Christians and Muslims sought to convert the other to their own faith.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_84" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="216"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But modern Jews have been different from their more insular ancestors. While they too weren’t interested in turning goyim into New Jews, they were zealously committed to bending all goyim to Jewish supremacist will. Jews planned on global mastery through finance, gangsterism, power of academia & media, secular quasi-prophetism, addicting goyim to vice(gambling, sex industry, drugs), universal goy guilt for having failed to prevent the Holocaust, the cult of Jewish Genius, and buying off most of goy whore politicians, especially in Anglosphere and EU. Also, by using homos and blacks as key allies to spread Globo-Homo and Afromania, both funded and coordinated by Jews, as means to spread the gospel of minority-elite-worship: Every society should elevate homos uber alles for their creativity, and every society should revere blacks as top rappers, athletes, and studs. Thus, even though Jewishness was limited only to Jews, Jewish Influence was meant to conquer and ‘convert’ all the world to cuckery before Jewish Power. At the very least, every Christian convert was theoretically equal to all other Christians in the eyes of God, and same was true of all Muslim converts before Allah. In contrast, to be ‘converted’ to Jewish Influence meant your kind would be relegated to inferior status with Jews and their proxies as the main gods.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_85" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="122"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When White Christians in the US sided with Jewish Zionists against Christian Arabs/Palestinians, they effectively sold their souls to the Devil. Perhaps, in their vengeful minds the Zionist project was like a proxy Crusade to take back the Holy Land, but a good number of Palestinians were actually Christian, and if anything, it was the white Christians who were being used as proxies of Jews. Also, Muslims revere Jesus even if they don’t worship Him as God. In contrast, Jews hate Christianity even more than Islam and revile Jesus & the Apostles as the worst traitors in Jewish History for having transferred the Jewish God to the filthy goyim; Jews much prefer Jonathan Pollard who passed US secrets to Israel.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_86" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="206"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Also, contrary to Neo-Evangelical delusions, Christianity emerged in opposition to Judaism, thereby effectively nullifying the original Covenant. If indeed there was nothing wrong with Judaism, what need for Christianity? But Christian Zionists place Jews, Jewish feelings, and Jewish ambition above themselves, even above Jesus and Christian precepts. They are morons. And for all their Christian piety, they cackle with sadistic glee at Palestinian suffering and conflate Palestinian resistance to the Occupation in West Bank with black thug riots in the US. Intifada against Israeli tanks and invader-settlers is akin to blacks breaking windows and fleeing with Air Jordans in Christian Zionist eyes. Worse, they seem willfully blind to(or even supportive of) what Jews have done to the Holy Land, which is now a circus arena for globo-homo sodom-and-gomorrah debauchery. Christian sympathy for Jews who survived the horrors of World War II made sense given the Faith’s special concern for the weak and vulnerable. But over the years, Chri$tian$(especially in winner-takes-all America) have come to admire Jews for their power, money, and influence. So, even though super-powerful Jews have been crushing the weak and powerless Palestinians, Christian America plays whore to the Jewish pimp and kicks Palestinian women and children into the dirt.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_87" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="124"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just consider what Christian America would gain, morally and spiritually, by directing its sympathy toward Palestinians. One thing for sure, the Holy Land would be a lot holier if Arabs, Christian and Muslim, had maintained control over it. There would be no month-long globo-homo degeneracy out in the streets. And, the Holy Land wouldn’t be the source of seismic tremors threatening the entire region. It is precisely because Jews control Israel/Palestine that the West has been destabilizing Middle East and North Africa. An Arab-dominant Palestine would have no incentive to foment wars in service to demonic Jewish interests. Of course, it would have been even better if Jewish Power hadn’t been allowed absolute control over Anglosphere, but that’s another story.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_88" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="206"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">American Christians won’t be the only ones to gain by identifying with Palestinians. So will ‘based’ whites(or base-ists) who believe in the preservation of their race; yes, the so-called ‘racists’ according to Jewish-controlled academia/media. White racial consciousness and Palestinian ethnic consciousness have something in common in that both are targeted for deconstruction by Jewish Power. Jews say there’s no such thing as whiteness and, to the extent it exists, only serves evil. Likewise, many Jews deny the very concept of Palestinian as a mere historical construct.<br />If ‘Palestinian’ is a social construct, why not argue the same for ‘Jewishness’? After all, Jews and Arabs have much in common genetically. Furthermore, isn’t modern Israel also a social construct as it bears little resemblance to ancient Judea, which, by the way, was never all-Jewish. But don’t expect any logical consistency among Jews who twist any argument to their tribal ends. When Jewish Power impugns both white identity and Palestinian identity, isn’t it about time white ‘racists’ and Palestinian nationalists see eye to eye? Isn’t it foolish for people like Pat Condell and Jared Taylor to go on dreaming of some magical alliance with Jews by dumping on Arabs and Muslims?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_89" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="166"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">To an extent, the pro-Israeli stance among many whites is a racial as well as a cultural or spiritual issue. Denied racial identity and pride in their own homelands, many whites channel their repressed ‘racism’ toward supporting Europeanized Jews(who stand for Western Civilization and ersatz whiteness) against Palestinians/Arabs/Muslims who are seen as brown or the ‘other’. This is, of course, rather ironic since white Christian Europe and the modern ‘Aryan’ West regarded Jews as the ‘other’, even of another race entirely. The Shoah was predicated on Jews constituting a separate race with an innate urge to subvert and destroy goy orders(something Jewish behavior has been amply demonstrating in the past decades as if to prove the Nazis right). Also, at least 50% of Jews in Israel are from the Middle East and North Africa, and they look more like Arabs than Europeans. But just like what the kid says of ghosts in THE SIXTH SENSE, people will see what they want to see.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_90" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="98"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">White Liberals(and I mean real liberals who uphold liberty and tolerance than the fake mandatorian shillibs who shill for the Deep State) also have much to gain by identifying with Palestinians. If indeed liberals are committed to equal justice and constitutional protections, what are they doing sucking up to almighty Jewish Power that so often resorts to Kafkaesque tyranny? Jewish-dominated Democratic Party’s suppression of BDS is anti-liberty and anti-Constitutional. It also denies equal justice for Palestinians. How can white liberals sleep at night while aiding and abetting naked Jewish-Zionist violation of basic liberties and human rights?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_91" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">White conservatives will also gain by identifying with Palestinians, especially at a time when the vile gangstoid Merrick Garland targets them as ‘domestic terrorists’. And, just like Zionists aid ISIS terrorists to tear communities apart in Libya, Syria, and Iraq, Jewish Power in the US funds and protects BLM and Antifa thugs who rampage around destroying property and beating up patriots. When Jewish Power treats white conservatives like Israel treats Palestinians, what are conservatives doing sucking up to Jewish Power and turning their backs on the plight of Palestinians?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_92" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="205"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">None of this is to suggest Palestinians are angels. As individuals, they are no better or worse than the rest of humanity. And, many Palestinian terrorist acts were as counter-productive as cruel and vicious. The cold-blooded(or maybe hot-blooded) murder of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics in 1972 was one such incident(though US routinely retaliates with drone strikes that take out entire families and bystanders). On the other hand, did the Jewish-Palestinian conflict begin in 1972? MUNICH by Steven Spielberg and Tony Kushner would have the viewer believe it all began with Palestinian violence against Israeli athletes. In retaliation, we observe Israeli operatives acting as heroically as ruthlessly; there’s even the suggestion that Israelis have scruples and wouldn’t dare harm children — sure, just ask the Gazans on that issue. Thus, even though the Israelis act cold-bloodedly, their violence seems justified within the historical framework. But the conflict didn’t begin in 1972 but in 1948, which can further be traced back to the 19th century when Zionist project hatched a secret plan to erase Palestine from the map. But, weasels Spielberg and Kushner didn’t begin the story there because doing so would have justified Palestinian violence as retaliation against Jewish Imperialist destruction of Palestine.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_93" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508909 aligncenter" height="634" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/spiel-and-kush-300x297.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_94" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="79"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">In individual acts of violence, Palestinians have been as deranged and unhinged as the Jews — some of their attacks in the 1990s cannot be rationalized on any grounds, though the US that retaliated against Pearl Harbor by slaughtering millions of Japanese civilians is hardly one to judge. However, in the framework of larger history, Palestinian violence is clearly more justified than the Jewish kind because Zionism initiated plan to destroy Palestine and reduce the native Arab population into helots.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_95" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="163"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Some may argue that what was done is done, water under the bridge, and Palestinians must accept the new reality because Israel isn’t going to go away, just like American Indians had no choice but to make peace with White America and like Germans after World War II had to accept the loss of German territory to Poland. But, even this argument fails because Jews won’t allow Palestinians to keep even West Bank, which, despite being majority Palestinian, is being taken gobbled up by Jewish ‘settlers’ with total support of the US whose whore politicians are in pockets of Jewish donors and blackmailers. In other words, Nakba didn’t end in 1948. It continues in West Bank. And Zionism has turned into Yinonism of destabilizing and wrecking Arab/Muslims nations in MENA(Middle East and North Africa). Jews have also de facto declared White Nakba on the West. Given these dire developments, how can there be any peace with Jewish Supremacist power?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_96" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Palestinian suffering didn’t turn Palestinians into saints and angels; that much must be understood, and the world mustn’t make the same mistake as it did with Jews, blacks, and homos, though owing largely to Jewish control of media and Western governments. We must never assume a Palestinian individual is better than us simply for his identity, as is often the case with Jews, homos, and blacks.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_97" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="169"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Rather, the Palestinian Question should be treated as (1) a failed moral crisis on the global scale and (2) matter of symbolism and metaphor. Palestinians as individuals are not little jesuses or christs; however, Palestine as an ethnic, historical, cultural, and geographical entity has been kicked into the dirt, dragged through the mud, and crucified. And why? A people who had no hand in the great crimes of the 20th century were robbed of their land, dignity, and humanity by Zionists with the full backing of the greatest powers in the world. How can these powers preach about ‘human rights’ when they helped destroy an innocent people? At least the US had Pearl Harbor as reason for destroying Japan. What did Palestinians ever do to Americans or to the rest of the world? Furthermore, given Jewish Power’s virulent hatred for White America, how perverse is it for whites to unconditionally appease Jewish demands while spitting on Palestinians whose tragedy was mere prelude for what Jews have in store for whites?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_98" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Romans took part in the killing of Jesus but eventually came around to admitting wrong. Roman authority participated in the torture and killing of an innocent who, unlike the Zealots, didn’t call for violent uprising against the Empire. A man who preached universal love and peace. White Americans must realize their neo-Romanic role against Palestine as the jesus among nations/peoples. They took part in the crucifixion of Palestine; they aided and abetted in the Nakba.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_99" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="142"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Like the Romans, whites can come to a reckoning with what they’d been party to and embark on the righteous path, healing not only their souls but Palestinian bodies. By embracing Palestine as a symbol of resistance to Jewish Supremacism, the entire world may be inspired to strike at the tentacles of Jewish financial parasitism, imperialist wars, cultural degeneracy, and demographic transformation. Palestinians never stopped resisting despite their weakness in relation to Israel, which is not only the most powerful nation in the Middle East but has the backing of US, the lone superpower, and all its satellites. Even Russia and China more-or-less look the other way, cozying up to Israel while only giving lip-service to Palestinian rights. Same goes for most Arab countries. Only Iran has been a steadfast supporter of the Palestinians, even at great economic cost to itself.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_100" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="67"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Palestinian resistance against Jewish Supremacist nihilism can serve as a model for all peoples. Whites have no future if they accept roles as servants and dogs to Jewish Power. However, they may yet reverse course and save themselves if they shelter the Palestinian fire from the Zionist storm. Then, one day, it can spread into a World Fire that engulfs and destroys the ambitions of Jewish Supremacism.</span></p><div class="subscribe-button-holder" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 10px auto; padding: 0px; text-align: center; vertical-align: baseline;"><br /></div><p class="container" id="p_1_101" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="119"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It will be good for Jews too, as nothing is more sobering and humanizing than defeat, especially of evil that resides in the hearts of all men of all peoples. Norman Finkelstein argued that Zionism, in all its manifestations, has grown so toxic, blind, arrogant, and out-of-control that only serious setbacks or defeat can restore some semblance of reality and decency among Jews of US and Israel. When hubris takes over, the only solution is to slay the beast. Palestinian children have only rocks in their intifada, but if whites were to join the struggle against the Zionist Goliath, the world may yet be saved. It is the only path forward if Palestinians and Whites are to be free.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_102" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="83"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Indeed, white freedom is now inconceivable without Palestinian freedom — the two have been joined at the hip by historical circumstances — as both peoples are dehumanized by the same enemy. As long as whites endorse the Zionist project, they are emboldening Jews to be amoral. Then, why would amoral Jews who stomp on Palestinian faces be any nicer to white faces? If the events of 2020 didn’t offer 20/20 vision to whites as to the true nature of Jewish Power, whites are just plain dumb.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_103" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="213"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Just like Jews conflate their minority-elite supremacism with globo-homo hegemony, whites need to realize their aspirations and Palestinian aspirations are one and the same. The Palestinianization of white folks is now the grim reality engulfing the West. US now has a two-tier legal system. Jewish globalists who pushed Russia Collusion Hoax, spread Covid Hysteria, and fanned BLM flames are sitting pretty without repercussions, indeed with all the privileges in the world and more profits than ever. But Mike Lindell has been de-banked for calling out on election fraud. And even Donald Trump, the President of the US, was de-platformed by Big Tech with the backing of the Deep State, which protected all the corruptions of the Clintons and Bidens as stooges of Jewish Power.<br />In other words, unless whites totally submit to Zion, they are to be treated like Palestinians. And yet, all we get from the likes of Trump and Lindell is ‘Muh Israel’ and “Why do you Jews beat on me when I beat on Palestinians real good?” Just pathetic. Whites who embolden Jewish immorality against Palestinians are shocked, just SHOCKED, when it is turned against whites. It’s like some jerk egging on a thug beating up a child but then whining when the thug punches him in the face.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_104" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">If you’re a slave and witness the master beating another slave, will you attain freedom by siding with the master against the bloodied slave OR by siding with the bloodied slave against the master? Whites have been cucking to Jews for decades, and how have things turned out? The man currently in charge of the justice department is Merrick Garland who sees a ‘terrorist’ in any uppity white goy who says NO. What did Donald Trump get from Israel and American Jews after four years of taking the Zion-Dong up his bung? When will whites wake up and say enough is enough?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_105" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="53"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews regard whites as slaves, therefore the white dream of Jews-and-whites as partners-in-crime is a dumb illusion. The only path for white salvation and survival is by atoning for the white/Christian role in the great crime of Nakba. Only then can the white race be freed from bondage to the Judeo-Nazi Cabal.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_106" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="61"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Does anyone really think there is a future for the white race at the feet of the likes of Chuck Schumer, Jennifer Rubin, Rob Reiner, Jerry Nadler, William Kristol, Alan Dershowitz, Yoram Hazony, Ben Shapiro, Benjamin Netanyahu, Michael Bloomberg, Sergei Brin, Mark Zuckerberg, Barney Frank, Steven Spielberg, Tony Kushner, Sarah Silverman, Howard Stern, Elena Kagan, Victoria Nuland, Madeleine Albright, and etc.?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_107" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Needless to say, the obvious disadvantage of siding with Palestinians against Jews is the former got nothing while the latter got everything. From a purely strategic perspective, an alliance with Palestinians against Jews would go against the principles of realpolitik but if and only if Jews were supportive of whites, i.e. if most Jews were like Eric Zemmour than Paul Singer. But, given Jews are as hostile to whites as to Palestinians, any dream of a Jewish-White alliance is a pipedream.<br />In contrast, white alliance with Palestinians would not only be good moralpolitik(or idealpolitik) but good realpolitik because REALITY has Jewish Power denouncing the slightest sign of white identity as ‘white supremacist’, white pride as ‘nazi’, white awareness of Jewish power as ‘antisemitic’, and white desire for national autonomy as ‘unacceptable’ and ‘undemocratic’. According to Jewish Power, Hungary is intolerably ‘autocratic’ and ‘anti-democratic’ because the majority of its people oppose demographic replacement. In other words, the Jewish Plan insists on White Nakba.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_108" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="110"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This doesn’t mean Jews as individuals cannot join with whites, but they will remain as outliers because Jewish Power and the overwhelming majority within Jewish communities favor globalism and the Democratic Party(though GOP isn’t far behind in groveling before the Tribe). At any rate, Jews who join with whites mustn’t lay down conditions — American Conservatism appeased Jewish-dominated Neo-Conservatism, and how did that turn out?<br />While whites have a responsibility to reject supremacist tendencies of their own(as aggression and arrogance are coded into the human DNA), they must insist on the preservation of the white race regardless of the sensitivities of Jews or any other people.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_109" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="151"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">As for white Christians, they need to uphold the old time religion without apologetics to Jews. While certain aspects of Christianity may be offensive to Jews, such goes for any religion; surely there are passages in the Talmud that are shocking to goyim, but we don’t see Jews bleating and crying about it. Whites should accept friendly Jewish individuals as allies, not totems. There’s a tendency among whites, especially so-called conservatives, to prop up some token-totem black or Jew(or even homo) as a sacred shamanic figure or human banner. Take Candace Owens. Nothing she’s said hasn’t been said by countless white conservatives, the only difference being she is black, as if to imply a statement is truer simply for emerging from black(or Jewish or homo) lips. So, one black saying 2 + 2 = 4 one time has more value than a thousand whites having said it a thousand times.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_110" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="147"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Such assumptions are a depressing sign that even white ‘conservatives’ have internalized the gods chosen by the Jews. Why else would white ‘conservatives’ fall over each other to roll out the red carpet for the likes of Yoram Hazony? “A Jew, we have a precious Jew on our side!” It’s as if even whites on the political right feel whiteness is insufficient for validation and must rely on the stamp of approval from one of the sacred groups: Jews, blacks, and homos. Never mind Hazony-ism is only the latest reiteration of ethno-nationalism-for-Jews-only while whites are handed ‘civic nationalism’. Red meat for Jews, veggie burger for goyim. Oddly enough, so-called civic nationalism has value ONLY WHEN grounded in ethno-nationalism. In the past, non-Anglo whites and nonwhite minorities genuinely strove to assimilate into Anglo-America because it was taken for granted that American character was essentially of British origin.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_111" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="132"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Ideally, a people will want to ally with the friendly superior against the hostile superior. Or a people may appease the friendly superior against the inconvenient inferior. But, it works out ONLY IF the superior is friendly. The problem is the superior has a tendency to look upon inferiors as subjects than allies. This is where whites misconstrued their relations with Jewish Power. Whites were aware of the superior qualities of Jews, not least in finance, academics, and prophetic prowess. Whites had no reason to hate or hurt Palestinians, but Arab natives stood in the way as an obstacle to Jewish ambitions and as an inconvenience to whites currying favor with rapidly ascendant Jews. So, whites, in the hope of gaining Jews as allies, looked the other way while Jews destroyed Palestine.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_112" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="140"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But, Jews had no real desire to be friendly, let alone equal, with whites. For reasons of resentment(history of persecution), paranoia(far greater white numbers), envy(white looks especially), contempt(hostility toward Christianity), and arrogance(whites as a bunch of ‘dumb polacks’), Jews sought mastery over whites, not equal partnership. (By the way, how could it have been equal even if Jews opted for friendliness when 2% of the population would have the same prestige as the white goy majority? The idea was doomed at its very conception.) Even when whites went out on a limb to be especially supportive of the Tribe and Israel, Jews were hellbent on turning whites into minorities, infecting white souls with ‘guilt’, pushing jungle fever on white women & cuckery on white men, replacing Christianity with queertianity, and encouraging nonwhites to dump on whites.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_113" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="188"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even though whites gorged on philo-semitism, Jews refused to even take a sip of pro-white sentimentality. After all, the era of good feelings can vanish overnight. Germany, which had historically been among the kinder nations to Jews, became the most anti-Jewish, but then why? Jews are loathe to admit it, but they fear the revival of white ‘antisemitism’ due to Jewish penchant for scoundrelism, radicalism, subversion, and corruption. Besides, a kind of omerta(or ‘omerscha’) prevents even relatively good Jews from blowing the whistle on bad Jews. In order for good will to prevail between whites and Jews, both sides must settle on mutuality and reciprocity, but too many Jews are like Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff, Bernie Madoff, Jordan Belfort, and Jonathan Pollard. And when push comes to shove, even good Jews will back those bad Jews against good goyim. Jewish Tribalism disingenuously invokes universal justice to renege on their mutuality contract with White America. Apparently, White America has been too ‘sinful’ for Jews to honor the agreement, but then, whites better not say anything about the dark aspects of Jewish History lest they be delegitimized as ‘Anti-Semites’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_114" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="174"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">What better example than Jonathan Pollard to illustrate the problems of White-Jewish Alliance? He was surely one of the worst spies in US history, but Jewish Power had him sprung from jail, padded with a fat bank account, flown to Israel in a private jet, settled into a plush job, and giving a big fat middle finger to the US while standing next to Netanyahu no less. We can understand bad Jews trying to have Pollard freed, but good Jews did nothing to stop it. But then, even most so-called ‘liberal Jews’ choose tribal solidarity over any consideration for Palestinians who are on the verge of losing West Bank as well. These so-called ‘liberal’ Jews turn a blind eye to Israel’s support of ISIS against Syria. Given such attitude and behavior among too many Jews, what goes by the name of ‘antisemitism’ is, as often as not, rational and justified. The tragedy of National Socialism was it exploited this rational reaction to Jewish perfidy to push Germany’s own kind of supremacist madness.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_115" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="96"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">When the superior is hostile to your kind, the only option is to side with inferiors against it. Take the Cold War. US was locked in global conflict with Soviet Union as the other superpower. Given ideological differences and geopolitical disagreements, US and USSR could only be hostile superiors. So, what did the US do? It sided with inferior China that, in the seventies, was a basket-case nation in fear of the Soviet behemoth. So, despite tensions, the US grew nearer to inferior China against superior Soviet Union, and it made the Russians mad as hell.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_116" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="68"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">While the superior has a great advantage over the inferior, an alliance of various inferiors can restrain the superior, like the current alliance of Russia, China, and Iran against the Jewish-controlled US as the lone superpower with EU and Japan in its pocket. It’s like a bear can destroy any lone wolf but a pack of wolves makes a bear nervous and may even bring it down.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_117" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Furthermore, siding with the inferior can be morally advantageous IF the inferior is portrayed as the victim of the superior. This worked like magic for the Soviet Union in the Vietnam War: powerful imperialist US crushing the national aspirations of poor Vietnamese peasants. US later used the same trick against the USSR: freedom-loving Afghan resistance against the Evil Empire. Jews certainly played similar cards in American politics and culture. Jews used blacks, an inferior element in the US, against whites as the dominant element by pulling out the ‘racist’ card from their sleeve ever so often; it put White America on the ropes morally.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_118" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="103"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews also gained key advantages by claiming inferiority(or vulnerability as hapless Jews hounded by ‘antisemitism’ from the dawn of time) as a moral shield against criticism: Rich and powerful Jews donning the Anne Frank mask as the perennial get-out-of-jail pass. And even though Zionists enjoyed decisive advantage over Palestinians from the moment of Israel’s inception, Israel was always portrayed as the underdog on the verge of being wiped out by quasi-nazi Arabs; later, Jews willfully mistranslated the remarks by the Iranian president Ahmadinejad as meaning ‘wipe Israel off the map’ when he said the existing Israeli regime will pass from history.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_119" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="138"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Any honest assessment of reality leads to one conclusion. By now, it should be no-brainer that whites have so much more to gain by siding with Palestinians. Not only is an alliance with Jews a moral failure but a strategic failure as well because Jewish Power insists on being a Hostile Superior toward whites. Of course, Palestinians, as a pipsqueak inferior, don’t have much to bring to the bargaining table in terms of money, talent, skills, and connections. Still, they have great symbolic value as an innocent people horribly wronged by Jewish Power. The fate of Palestinians is a terrifying demonstration of what Jewish Power is capable of. And given that Jews across the political spectrum have chosen to ignore the worsening plight of the Palestinian people, the Myth of Jewish Morality is finally coming to light.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_120" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508915 aligncenter" height="640" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/9781517155780-200x300.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="427" /></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_121" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="187"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Even a so-called ‘liberal’ Jew is more offended by an “It’s Okay to be White” poster than Sheldon Adelson’s chilling remark that an atomic bomb should be dropped on Iran as a lesson; these secular Jews may not worship God but sure worship their own ethno-ego as the final arbiter of which peoples should be smitten or spared. Now and then, Jews, especially of ‘liberal’ pedigree, will make some fuss about ‘social justice’, but it’s mainly to distract us from Jewish Supremacist power(and its baleful impact on the world, not least to Palestinians) by getting people all worked up about Ukrainians(about to be invaded by Russians), Uighurs(about to be ‘genocided’ by Han Chinese), Kurds(about to be butchered by Syrians), and of course blacks(about to be mass-murdered by white ‘racist’ cops) & illegal invaders(about to be denied sanctuary and meet the fate of Jews in the Holocaust). Or, it’s all about how trannies represent the latest in human evolution, so go cancel some T.E.R.F who refuses to accept a man with balls as a ‘woman’.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_122" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="156"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Another advantage of siding with Palestinians(and Arabs in general) is that they will never gain the upper-hand over whites. The average Arab IQ is what? Somewhere around 90 or 95? The only worry for whites is the numbers, and while Arab/Muslim demography may be a problem in Europe, it isn’t in the US. Besides, the most vocal proponents of mass immigration in EU and the US have been Jewish. Neither Arabs nor Muslims will ever gain demographic dominance over the US. (Some say Islam becomes problematic when Muslims reach 10% of the population, but Islam will never take over North America. At any rate, it’s even truer that Jews become far more problematic with much lower numbers, at even below 1%. Just ask the Russians who survived the dark 1990s in a country where Jews comprised barely 1% of the population. Jews are less than 2% of the US, but look what they’ve done to the country.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_123" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="101"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">White alliance with Jews was always nerve-racking because of Jewish superiority: higher intelligence and stronger stomach for cunning and ruthlessness, aka chutzpah. Whites always crossed their fingers and hoped for the best with Jews, especially as Holocaustianity rendered as taboo any criticism of the Tribe(while Jews tirelessly pulled out every embarrassing skeletos from the white closet). But whites need have no such worries about Palestinians and Arab-Americans because those dummies couldn’t gain the upper-hand over whites even if they tried. Arabs are lower-IQ, divided, confused, and a rather silly people, like Peter O’Toole as T. E. Lawrence said.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_124" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="120"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It’s like the difference between whites living with blacks and whites living with browns. Whites living with blacks are understandably nervous because blacks are naturally more muscular and aggressive. So, in order for whites to be safe, blacks must be good. Blacks must be like the latter-day George Foreman who laughed heartily and cooked burgers for white folks on infomercials. But if blacks act like early Mike Tyson, whites are in big trouble.<br />In contrast, while there are some tough and nasty browns, most are shorter and smaller than whites. So, an average white guy has little to fear from even a brown baddie, that is unless the fool hooks up with a Mexican drug gang and goes loco.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_125" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="164"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">This is why it’s always a safer bet to ally with others who are on par with or inferior to your kind. They pose less of a threat. A coyote is better off allying with a badger than with a wolf or cougar. The problem is Americans are obsessed with winning, like George C. Scott as George Patton said. America will not ‘tolerate a loser’, and so, whites got to cheering for blacks as winners in sports and revering Jews as winners in brainy fields. Whites may have done so in the hope that black winners would be ‘nice’ toward whites like Joe Louis the ‘brown bomber’ or in the hope that Jewish winners would be endearing like Henny Youngman of ‘take my wife’ fame. Whites dreamed of Sidney Poitier but ended up with burning cities and Detroit. Whites dreamed of Neil Simon but ended up with the deep state shoved up their arse by the likes of Merrick Garland and Victoria Nuland.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_126" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="171"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Though pro-Palestinian voices are more prevalent among Western leftists, Western nationalists have the better argument in favor of the Palestinian cause. After all, Palestinians are seeking national liberation and autonomy. Furthermore, Palestine was wiped off the map as the result of mass immigration. The Western Left is confused and contradictory because it denounces the Zionist-Israeli encroachment on West Bank but, at the same time, calls for the Great Replacement or White Nakba in the West. In the Western leftist mind, it’s wrong for Jews to replace Palestinians in West Bank, but it’s wonderful for nonwhite hordes to replace whites in Europe, the homeland of the white race for many eons. (Race is most important because it predated civilization, culture, and history. No white race, no white whatever-else-that-followed. Race = life. Just as a person must first come into existence as life before adopting an ideology, there can be no white culture/history/civilization without there being the white race in the first place. White Race is the foundation of white-everything-else.)</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_127" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="106"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Take Jeremy Corbyn and Roger Waters, both on the Left. It’s good of them to speak up for Palestinians who are living under Zionist tyranny. Surely, they know of the Nakba and the current Occupation. Yet, Corbyn and Waters are for massive invasion of Europe by nonwhites. They call for tearing down all walls in the West. If being replaced was terrible for Palestinians, why is it wonderful for whites? The Western Left admires the Palestinian resistance against the Great Replacement but then demands that whites welcome and celebrate their own demographic demise in Europe, America, Australia, and Canada. The Western Left is totally schizo.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_128" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="99"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, much of the so-called Right in the West is also schizo, if only out of fear of Jewish Power. So, even though Hungarian and Polish nationalists must know that the grand Jewish Plan is White Nakba, they mouth the usual platitudes in support of Israel, Israel, Israel. Donald Trump and Tucker Carlson embody this right-schizo mindset. Trump sought to decrease illegal border crossings but fully endorsed the ongoing Zionist caravans into West Bank. Tucker Carlson praises Israel for its strict border policy without ever mentioning that such was denied to Palestinians who were replaced by Jewish invader-immigrants.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_129" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="65"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But then, the Palestinian diaspora is equally confused. Even though Palestinians lost their homeland to mass immigration(of Jews), in their role as immigrants in other countries(especially white majority ones) they support the agenda of great replacement, or White Nakba. Whites are faced with White Nakba but cheer on the Palestinian Nakba while Palestinians who suffered the Palestinian Nakba cheer on the White Nakba.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_130" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="90"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">These retardations must come to an end, and the only solution is an Honest Left-Right fusion that calls for universal nationalism and opposes any form of neo-imperialism, which, by the way, was the core political-moral template during the Cold War when both empires, US and USSR, championed national aspirations against the Other Empire. But with US as the lone superpower following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the new global formula has been New World Order, now even more insane with the likes of Klaus Schwab, Mr. Magoo gone mad.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_131" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="139"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">A white awakening and sympathy-alliance with Palestinians will be a real game-changer, one that will fundamentally transform the political-moral paradigm for all the world. Of course, it cannot begin with the white elites who have been bought-and-sold by the Zionic Cabal. Collaborators will collaborate, and they are simply in too deep with Jewish Power.<br />The awakening must begin at the margins with baby steps before taking giant ones. The great moral tragedy for Jews is in having exploited a great historical horror as moral cover to perpetrate great horrors of their own. It’s a recurring theme in history. Christians used the name of slain Christ to do the most unchristian things. Communists preached social justice as rationale to tyrannize and murder. National Socialists invoked German humiliation of the Weimar years to humiliate other nations and deny them autonomy.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_132" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="112"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">With Jews, the moral betrayal is especially contemptible because no historical event has been as sanctified as the Shoah. It was as if, through such an earth-shattering tragedy, Jews had attained knowledge and wisdom beyond those of any other people. But, it wasn’t long before Jewish Power milked the Holocaust as Holy Cow to silence all opposition, in the process becoming more abusive, arrogant, corrupt, and greedy. Twenty-two years into the 21st century, the world is on the precipice of World War III because Jewish Supremacist Hegemonism and its Anglo-Cuck minions simply cannot tolerate any nation, people, community, or movement that refuses to bend to the agendas and icons of Zion.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_133" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="104"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Once the paradigm begins to shift and white liberation from Jewish Supremacism dawns on the horizon, whites also need to form a holy alliance with the American Indians. Not for nothing have some Palestinians made the link between themselves and the so-called ‘Native Americans’. Both peoples were erased by mass migration/immigration/invasion. An alliance of whites and American Indians is most promising for both moral and strategic reasons. In moral terms, the greatest and most tragic casualties of American History were the Red Savages. Most nonwhites around the world regained independence from Western Imperialism, whereas the American Indians lost their ancestral lands forever.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_134" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="172"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Still, as the late Chief David Yeagley pointed out, it wouldn’t have been a total loss for the Red Man if whites hadn’t opened the gates to the world. As long as the US remained an overwhelmingly white majority nation with a White Narrative, Indians had a special place in US history and moral geography. The pride of white achievement in the New World was laced with tragic sense of what befell the natives. White Triumph was wedded to Indian Tragedy.<br />Therefore, apart from their own interests, whites felt obligated to prioritize the identity, history, and the needs of the American Indians above all else. With that in mind, the last thing the US should be doing is fling open the gates to all the world. If Indians losing their lands to whites was tragic enough, it would be doubly, triply, and quadruply tragic for remaining Indians to lose the land to all the world, not least to obnoxious Asian-Indians without an ounce of warrior pride and always talking funny.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_135" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="72"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The best moral argument against further mass immigration is to restore the pride and dignity of the Indians. Also, acknowledging American Indians as the most tragic figures in US history will knock Jews down a peg or two. Indeed, why is there so much stuff about the Holocaust in the US when it didn’t happen here? If any ‘genocide’ did take place on American soil, it was to the American Indians.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_136" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="153"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It was Jewish moral authority that made mass immigration into a MORAL issue. Just ask yourself. What moral justification does anyone around the world have in demanding entry into the US(or, for that matter, into Europe that now follows in the footsteps of America)? It was one thing for Asian-Indians to lay claim to India, Algerians to lay claim to Algeria, or for the Vietnamese to lay claim to Vietnam. After all, they were natives living under occupation by foreign powers. The ONLY non-white people with a MORAL claim to America are the American Indians. They alone have a compelling deep-rooted case of territoriality. (If Zionism carries any moral legitimacy, it’s because Jews do have historic roots in the Holy Land.) White Americans also have a moral case of ownership because, despite having taken land from Indians, they founded and built a civilization that couldn’t have come into existence otherwise.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_137" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="89"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">But why does the rest of the world have any MORAL claim on America? Such is the bogus ‘moral construct’ of Jewish Power that has America as some ‘propositional’ beacon/haven for all the ‘wretched around the world’, by which the likes of Emma Lazarus mainly meant fellow Jews. She sure didn’t care one iota about the red natives who were massacred or herded into reservations to subsist as wretched refuses ignored by the world. Besides, Jewish merchants took part in the ‘genocide’ of the tomahawk-wielding Red Savages.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_138" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="127"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Jews fashioned their tribal ambition into a moral imperative. While the Jewish desire to emigrate to America was understandable from a material perspective, it had no moral justification, indeed even less so than the project of Zionism as Jews had historical and spiritual roots in the Holy Land. If any people have a quasi-zionic claim to America, it’s the American Indians who’d lived on the land not only for centuries or millennia but for tens of millennia. For them, it wasn’t the New Land but the Old Land of their forebears. Jews sentimentalized their dream of America into a moral imperative and then projected this dream onto all wanna-be immigrants, especially nonwhite ones, as Jews planned on using Diversity to play divide-and-rule among goyim.</span></p><h1 class="page-title" id="video-title" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: 18px; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: 1.2em; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><a href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/9rNNHUCF6axX/" style="border: 0px; color: black; font-family: inherit; font-size: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; font-style: inherit; font-variant: inherit; line-height: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/9rNNHUCF6axX/">BROTHER NATHANAEL – UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS ‘ISRAEL’ SCANDAL 15 SEP 2015</a></h1><p class="container" id="p_1_139" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="2"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><iframe class="iframe-class" frameborder="0" height="350" scrolling="yes" src="https://www.bitchute.com/embed/9rNNHUCF6axX/" style="border-style: initial; border-width: 0px; font: inherit; height: 360px; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; width: 613.016px;" width="100%"></iframe> <a class="caption" href="https://www.bitchute.com/video/9rNNHUCF6axX/" style="border: 0px; color: #035da6; font-family: inherit; font-size: 14px; font-stretch: inherit; font-variant-caps: small-caps; font-variant-east-asian: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-weight: bold; line-height: 1em; margin: 0px 10px; padding: 0px; text-decoration-line: none; vertical-align: baseline;" target="_blank" title="https://www.bitchute.com/video/9rNNHUCF6axX/'">Video Link</a></span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_140" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="145"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">The moral imperative must be transferred back to the American Indians. But because Indians are too lazy, drunk, or hooked on TV, it’s up to whites to do the job for them. Well, why not? Blacks were too childish and disorganized to do anything on their own, so Jews stepped in and ran black organizations that later proved advantageous for Jewish control over blacks. Much of blackness was stage-managed by Jews. Then, whites must do it for the Indians and elevate Indian spokesmen, leaders, and politicians up the totem pole. It’s about time whites stopped with silly games like playing ‘pretendians’ and got down to the real business of being best friends with the Indians, like Lone Ranger and Tonto. It’s like Jews didn’t have to pretend to be black to lend support to blacks(and use them for Jewish interests).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_141" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="217"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Besides, if ‘white guilt’ is really a thing, what do whites have to be most guilty of? Most will agree that genocide is the worst possible crime, and as the ‘genocide’ of the American Indians resulted from endless waves of immigrant invasions from the Old World, the overriding moral imperative of 21st century America must be to end all immigration and pull all resources to revive American Indian communities.<br />And then, to associate the cause of American Indians with that of the Palestinians. As for the Holocaust, it happened in Europe and should be of no concern to Americans. Unlike the Nakba that was carried out with US backing, the Holocaust was an entirely a Nazi-German affair. US took part in the murder of Palestine, not the murder of Jews.<br />If Americans don’t lose sleep over millions of Ukrainians killed by Bolshevism or millions of Cambodians slaughtered by the Khmer Rouge, why should they prioritize the Jewish Holocaust as something of special significance to Americans? If Americans need to remember a genocide, it is of the American Indians. And if white Americans really want to atone for past history of racial discrimination, they need to address the issue of Jim Crowitz, apartheid, and Nakba over in Palestine, now Israel(that is fast gobbling up West Bank).</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_142" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="77"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">At any rate, there’s a strategic angle as well in the White-Indian Alliance. No matter how much whites sympathize with and gush over American Indians, the latter will never gain the upper-hand over whites because they simply don’t have the numbers, intelligence, cunning, skills, and the will. White-Indian alliance would be one where whites would forever remain dominant, whereas the White-Jewish alliance turned into Jews lording over whites reduced to the level of cucky-wuck dogs.</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_143" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="66"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">It all begins with a paradigm shift among whites on the Palestinian issue. Palestine as jesus, the first flicker that may catch on until it grows into a World Fire. Of course, it’s a long shot as most whites are dummies, but then, who ever gave Christianity a chance when its early adherents were being kicked around like a soccer ball between Jews and Romans?</span></p><p class="container" id="p_1_144" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0.7em 0.4em 0.7em 1em; padding: 0.3em; position: relative; vertical-align: baseline;" wcount="0"><span class="contents" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;"><img class=" wp-image-508914 aligncenter" height="452" src="https://www.unz.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Reuters-Stringer_006-300x212.jpg" style="border: 0px; font: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;" width="640" /></span></p></div></section></div>Andrea Crisishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15220385152596286940noreply@blogger.com0