Why We Cannot Expect Jews to Tell Us the TRUTH — Jews Talk to Us like Adults Talk to Children — We Need to Grow Up and Stop Acting like Children before Jews-as-Adults

When adults and children talk, do we expect adults to always speak the truth? No. Even as adults press upon children to speak truthfully to adults, they don’t feel obligated to always speak truthfully with children. Of course, decent adults try to be as truthful as possible, but they believe, with good reason, that children are intellectually and emotionally unprepared to deal with certain truths. The mind of a child that can believe in Santa Claus can be led to believe in just about anything. While lying-to-children as a policy isn't good, expecting children to handle the truth like adults would be foolish. And so, there are certain truths that we don’t share with children. And if children ask inconvenient questions, we resort to half-truths or explanations(or even concoct lies) that we feel to be appropriate given the circumstances. Only gradually do children mature into adults in their emotions and sophistication, and it takes time for children to grow into young adults who can handle more truth. It’s been that way forever among humans all around the world.

But the adult-children dynamics often exist even among adults or between groups of adults. Some groups feel more intelligent, more knowing, and more deserving of power/influence. They believe they know and understand more. Therefore, while they themselves can ‘handle the truth’, they believe other groups cannot. Such group dynamics can be along educational, class, racial, religious, or ethnic lines. Obviously, those who attended and/or work for elite institutions feel they are smarter, more capable, and more deserving to know More Truth. In contrast, the less intelligent, less informed, and less sophisticated are deemed undeserving of the raw and unfiltered truth. They must be fed the official news processed by the so-called ‘mainstream media’ which is an industrial complex of the Deep State and oligarchic corporations. So much of state documents are redacted and kept secret. And Big Media are as much about hiding, twisting, or spinning the news as ferreting them out. New York Times and such publications may sometimes go the extra mile to expose secrets that the government wants suppressed, but more often than not, they work with the Power to decide what the people should or shouldn’t be told. Furthermore, even when the Big Media expose inconvenient secrets, they do so less for the public good or for truth-for-truth’s-sake than as a power game. When MSM broke the Watergate scandal, it was working with elements of the Deep State to oust Richard Nixon. And when the MSM pushed the Russia-Russia-Russia Hysteria, or Russysteria, to unseat Donald Trump, it was in collusion with the globalist Deep State that deems nationalism too petty for an empire like the US. So, the so-called Fourth Estate is less in service to the people than to the elites. Even when MSM spills the truth for the people to see and hear, it is less to inform the people and raise their political consciousness than to manipulate mass opinions so that one elite faction can undermine another elite faction. It's about using mass opinion to boost one elite faction against others.

People in the MSM believe they must be the gatekeepers of truth, facts, and opinions. They believe there are too many lies, falsehoods, fabrications, and ‘conspiracy theories’ in the alternative newsphere and online opinion world. And they are right about all the cranks, charlatans, looneys, and nutjobs on the internet spreading half-truths, false rumors, and fake news. And yet, it’s downright hilarious for MSM to sit atop the high horse when it’s been guilty of the same thing on a much bigger and more consequential scale. While liberal democracies offer more venues and outlets for news than totalitarian systems do, they are essentially ruled by oligarchies that are more concerned with power, prestige, and privilege than with truth, honesty, and integrity.
Elites have always regarded themselves as better and more deserving than the masses. They’ve seen themselves as the ‘adults in the room’ and sneered at the masses as ones who ‘cannot handle the truth’. Still, even such snobbery could be fused with genuine idealism, i.e. elites must strive to know more, understand more, and responsibly craft news & opinions for the good of the people. They may be vain and conceited but also sincere in their goodwill toward the people. Such is usually the case when the adult-children dichotomy among adults is only along class-lines. The higher classes with better education feel they should know more and have more power to do what is good for the lower classes, the hoi polloi. Such class dynamics plays out in the US, Russia, China, Iran, France, and etc. The US elites in NY, DC, and LA think they should tell us what to think and how to feel. The CCP believe it knows what is good for the Chinese people. The Russian government controls the news and narrative for the national interest. The leaders of Iran and France think they know best and suppress certain truths while highlighting or even exaggerating others.

But when class snobbery combines with racial supremacism, the adult-children dichotomy among adults becomes more problematic. Consider the Deep South where white elites considered blacks to be not only economic and cultural but racial inferiors. They believed the problem wasn’t merely that blacks had less education(if any) and knowledge but that blacks were innately less capable of thinking like adults. Blacks were regarded as childlike and naturally animal-primal in their emotions and thought-processes. As such, blacks could be told some truth but not all the truth. Blacks would not be able to process them, handle them. Besides, as blacks were bigger, stronger, and more aggressive, giving them the same rights and freedoms of white folks could be very dangerous. As history showed, a lot of white fears and anxieties about free blacks with equal rights proved to be valid. Biologically, it’s true that blacks are less inhibited, less rational, more impulsive, and wilder. As such, blacks aren’t capable of handling the truth in the same way as whites. (That said, the main problem was that white elites were not honest among themselves about the threat posed by blacks. Abraham Lincoln was candid about the black problem in private and hoped for a permanent separation of the races by means of repatriation or creation of a black republic. If white elites had spoken the truth about blacks to each other loud-and-clear and spread the same message to the white masses, the race problem could have been brought to an end. Imagine if white elites had spread the following message far-and-wide-and-loud-and-clear: "Blacks evolved to be more muscular, more aggressive, bigger-donged, and more psychopathic. Without separation, some may call for racial integration one of these days, and then blacks will destroy white manhood and conquer white women, and that will turn white guys into a bunch of 'faggot-maggots' and that will be the end of the white race. Also, as an idol is worth a million individuals in prestige & fame and as idols in America will be determined by athletic feats and musical prowess, blacks will likely take over as idols, and white boys and girls will effectively grow up worshiping Negroes as demigods." If white elites had spoken such truths, most whites would surely have agreed for radical measures to bring about racial separation when the US was still a virile and healthy race-ist nation.) Now, if blacks were smaller and weaker — like Gary Coleman or Emmanuel Lewis — , one might speak the whole truth to them and let it sink in. But as blacks are tougher, louder, and stronger, white folks are now scared half to death to say anything that might trigger blacks into flipping out. Still, even if white folks had good reasons to maintain an adult-children dynamics between themselves and blacks, many of their lies were self-serving. Worse, it’s often the case that those who lie to control others often come to half-believe in those lies for emotional comfort. The 'white lie' can become the official myth.

In the current US, Jews and Goyim are like whites and blacks in the Deep South prior to the Civil Rights Movement. Just like white elites in the South felt they deserved to rule because they were better educated, more cultivated, and more civilized, many Jews feel they should rule because they are more intelligent, more engaged, more informed, and wiser. So, Southern white elites were like the adults, and blacks(and ‘white trash’) were like the children(or chillun). Southern white elites were privy to certain truths whereas the blacks(and ‘white trash’) were fed simple narratives and fairytale-like myths... though in their vanity and self-aggrandizement, many Southern elites came to believe in the myth that the peddled to the masses — besides, most of the elites are too busy making money and leave it up to OTHERS to define the truth; as the cultural elites mostly write books for the public and as the children of the elites also read these books, they too come under the same kind of manipulation, the kind that prints legend as fact.
The childlike masses weren’t deemed as deserving of knowledge and privilege rightfully reserved for ‘adults in the room’ who know what is in the best interest for all of society. It’s like what parents say to each other, they keep from the children. It’s like the Movie Rating that forbids kids from watching R-rated movies without an adult guardian. It’s like special archives that are accessible only for those with credentials. The rest of us must rely on MSM and public libraries. Even the internet doesn’t allow access to state secrets and the like. Furthermore, monopolies like Google manipulate algorithms to favor Jewish-controlled 'mainstream news' over alternative sources that dare speak truth to power. Jews are like the Southern white elites in feeling that they know best and deserve special access to knowledge denied to most people. The rest of us, being childlike and insufficient in knowledge, should be controlled. We need to be told what to believe and how to feel. After all, Jews are the ‘adults in the room’ while we are ‘children in the romper room’. Jews feel that unless we are kept in the romper room with toys, we might go romper stomper.

But then, there is a Catch-22 kind of logic to Jewish Power over us. Jews say, because we don’t know enough, we must be kept from knowing too much. But if we don’t know enough, shouldn’t we be encouraged to know more so that we will be deserving to know the full truth one day? If a child must be kept from the truth because his mind isn’t ready for it yet, then shouldn’t he be intellectually and emotionally prepared so that he will be ready one day? Then, the same logic would apply to adult goyim. If too many adult goyim are currently too ill-informed and childlike to handle truth and nothing but the truth, then shouldn’t they be prepared and informed so that they will be more knowledgeable and understanding to handle the truth? And yet, the Jewish Paradox sets in that denies such possibility for growth among goyim. Jews say, because we don’t know enough, we must not be allowed to know more that may prepare us to know the full truth. Instead of urging us to know more to ultimately gain the truth, Jews say that because we don’t know enough, we should know even less. Indeed, our knowledge should be limited to what the Jewish-controlled MSM, entertainment, academia, and Deep State deem as 'acceptable'. For Jews, it's not a matter of truth vs falsehood but 'acceptable' vs 'unacceptable', with their ilk deciding what is acceptable or not. In a way, the way Jews see goyim is worse than how adults see children. At the very least, adults expect children to eventually grow up and handle the truth. In contrast, Jews want us to remain stupid children forever, all the better to control us emotionally and ideologically. Jews do not want us to think independently or attain autonomy of mind. Jews don’t want us to find and explore our own truth. They are to decide what is ‘extreme’ or ‘hateful’.

Now, if Jews were at least sincere in their commitment to justice and truth, their concerns would be more understandable. If Jews were truly moral and decent, I can understand why they would be concerned about young, impressionable, gullible, and immature people falling under the sway of stupid Neo-Nazi or white-supremacist nonsense that one does indeed encounter on the internet. While I’m for freedom of speech and free exchange of ideas, many young people have fallen under bad influence as the result of propaganda from both left and right. Whether one turns into a skinhead or an antifa goon, obviously such a person isn’t thinking. He is intellectually decrepit and emotionally crippled. But, in fact, even as Jews feign concern for justice and truth, they themselves are arch-tribal-supremacists and full of hateful extremism. Also, they not only oppose white supremacism or goy extremism but seek to suppress any healthy sign of white/goy consciousness lest it seek independence and liberation from Jewish Supremacism.
In this, Jews are like the white elites of the Old South. Even as the white elites made noise about how they needed to control the power, truth, and narrative to maintain a just and stable order over black savages and ‘white trash’, they were trying to keep it all for themselves. They wanted permanent privilege on both racial and class grounds. They not only felt that blacks and ‘white trash’ weren’t, as yet, ready for full power and truth but sought to maintain the existing power structure as long as possible. The lower elements deserved to know less because they knew less. Hardly an effort was made to urge the lower elements to know more so that they could know even more and eventually rise up the ladder. And yet, the white elites weren’t merely cunning and deceptive. Many of them came to believe in their own myths because it made them feel better. People justify power with myth, and then, if they aren’t careful, come to believe in the myth. It’s like getting high on one’s own supply.
Especially pertaining to blacks, the white elites in the South felt that the differences weren’t merely a matter of education and cultivation but race and blood. Even though some of them did mouth platitudes about blacks gradually rising up to higher civilizational standards, they mostly wished that blacks would always remain ‘children’ vis-a-vis the white ‘adults’ who knew what was in the best interest of the Negroes. Now, history has proven that blacks do indeed do better in societies ruled by whites who are more intelligent and even-tempered; black-run societies have gone to pots. And yet, such social dynamics, even if based on some degree of truth, was bound to be untenable in the long run because it demeaned black pride and contradicted American principles. While it seems factual that childlike blacks do fare better under whites in the role of ‘adults’, what people would want to believe that they are best off serving as obedient ‘children’ under the guidance of another race? This was especially tough for blacks to swallow since they are a very physical people who judge worth mainly in terms of who-can-whup-whose-ass? Because blacks ‘think’ so viscerally, they have a hard time accepting the fact that ‘faggoty-ass white boys’ are better than them in anything. Now, if white race were tougher, bigger, and stronger than blacks, then blacks would have less problem accepting the white race as the master race because black psycho-hierarchy gauges worth in terms of ass-whupping prowess. Indeed, the main sense of racial injustice among blacks isn’t so much that they were enslaved by whites. It’s that they were enslaved by a weaker and wussier race. As such, blacks feel that THEY should have been the master race over the whites: THEY should have been kicking white boys’ ass and humping white women. (In contrast, the short brown people of Latin America have been willing to regard the white Conquistador elites as the rightful rulers for being bigger and taller. The Aryan invaders of India also didn't have to worry about the physical threat because the Dravidians whom they conquered weren't bigger or stronger. Furthermore, the Aryans manipulated Hindu religion to 'sacralize' themselves as the more sacred class/race. By spiritualizing their power over the darker native folks, they made it a crime against the cosmos to challenge the existing social order. In a way, Jews see eye-to-eye with the Hindus because they are trying to create a caste system in the US with themselves as the Holiest Race based on the combination of Covenant myth and Shoah cult. Jews push a kind of 'Meritokarma' that would have us believe that Jews, with their superior intelligence and wisdom, deserve to be at the very top. And as many elite and wanna-be-elite Americans are obsessed about IQ and status — despite their bogus PC noises to the otherwise — , they do look upon Jews as the super-brahmin caste. Yet, not all Americans feel that way. White Nationalists, for instance, are more into aesthetics and beauty. While they believe Jews may be smarter, they believe whites are more attractive. And they believe that the white race has a right to preserve its beauty in white lands; as such, those most invested in the preservation of the white race and white beauty are most deserving to rule. This is why Jews see white beauty as something they must own, control, and commoditize. It must be turned from a racial preserve of the white race to a globalist product to be sold around the world by Jews.)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/1FfpORiyo39H/

While Jews may be smarter than white goyim, the Jewish-white dynamics is very different from the white-black dynamics. While we can understand how the adult-children dynamics between whites and blacks was deeply offensive and hurtful to blacks(especially as it deemed whites to be racially more advanced than blacks), there is no denying that, without whites, blacks wouldn't have modern civilization, or much of civilization of any kind. Without whites, most blacks would be nothing but Jafro-Jivers chucking spears at hippos and running like mofos from lions or gorillas when not beating on bongo drums and shaking their booties. In contrast, despite higher Jewish intelligence and tremendous Jewish achievements, history has shown that whites can do just fine without Jews, indeed even better.
Paradoxically, higher Jewish achievements can be WORSE for white societies. Why? Because even though Jews use their high IQ for advancements in various fields, especially science, medicine, and technology, they use the profits not for the general good of the nation but to boost and reinforce Jewish Supremacism, and this entails the mental and emotional enslavement of the goy population. Jews will push any agenda or product, regardless of how harmful it may be to the general goy public, to strengthen themselves by weakening the Other. Take ACOWW or Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs for instance. Why are Jews using media, academia, entertainment, and advertising to push interracism, especially the kind where white wombs are to be colonized by black seed? It’s to demolish white male pride and white unity. Jews seek to turn the goyim into mulatto-mestizo who are so confused in identity that they won’t be able to unite against Jewish supremacist power. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that Jews will use their high IQ only for noble ends, such as finding cures for horrible diseases or exploring deeper philosophical truths. A lot of Jews are smart but shallow, and all they care about is money, money, money, and like gangsters and crooks, they will use ANY MEANS at their disposal to rake in more cash... like Jordan Belfort and his fellow Jewish pranksters who were the basis for the film THE WOLF OF WALL STREET. Of course, Hollywood being Jewish, Martin Scorsese took care to de-Jewify the story somewhat, but it’s pretty obvious what it’s all about.

In some ways, Jews are justified in feeling like ‘adults’ over white goy ‘children’. Even though the differences between Jews and white goyim aren’t as stark as the differences between the white race and the black race — Jews are Caucasian like the Arabs and, like the Europeans, a people with a deep history of civilization and achievements — , Jews(at least the Ashkenazi ones) are thought to be smarter than whites on average(and indeed even by one standard deviation). Also, Jewish personality is wilier and more cunning, crafty, clever, sneaky, and shifty. As such, Jews are more prone to be in the mind-game mode than whites are. Whites, especially those of Northern European stock, tend to be more obedient and simplistic in personality. In some ways, Jewish personality is to white personality what white personality is to East Asian personality. Jewish personality is more passive-aggressive, more multi-faceted. In a way, Jews had to develop such shifty Zeligish personality because they had to wear many masks. As a people who came to prominence with both prophecy and profiteering amongst various goy groups, Jews could never be just one thing. It’s like a salesman or a politician needs to have more of an adaptive personality than a farmer or truck driver. They must be chameleon-like; they must play different roles. Because Jews are more adept with a multi-faceted personality than white goyim are, they tend to look upon whites as overly earnest, trusting, or simple-minded. In other words, whites can be made simplemindedly antisemitic or simplemindedly philo-semitic. Whites can be made to go ‘full retard’ as either ‘nazis’ or ‘shabbos goyim’. Same is true of children. Children can be made to believe anything. They can be taught to be 100% Nazi or 100% Commie. Young ones can be made to believe in God or not believe in God. They can be made to believe in Santa or the Tooth Fairy. The Jewish Mind thinks strategically at all times and never lowers the guard. And it’s always looking for soft spots through which to thrust the blade. Jewish Mind is one with Jewish Pride, and this makes Jews defiant. So, it’s not easy for whites to convince or persuade Jews. Even when whites are correct and well-meaning in their interaction with Jews, the latter thinks, “What is the white goy REALLY after?” The Jew wonders, “Is the white goy trying to push his ‘truth’ onto me to control me?” And if the Jew realizes that the white goy is both correct in his truth and well-meaning in his sharing of the truth, he wonders, “Why is the white goy being SO DUMB and sharing this truth with me when I can remold and manipulate it against him?” The Jew is always asking questions, whereas the goy is not, at least not in relation to Jews.

In a way, the Jew-Goy dynamics is natural because it’s generally true that when a smart person is with a less-smart person, the former is more inquisitive whereas the latter is more trusting. The smarter person tries to figure out the ‘dummy’, whereas the less-smart person feels so flattered to be in the presence of the ‘genius’ that he gets all oh-goshy. Indeed, we see such uh-shucks-oh-goshiness among so many white goyim in the presence of Jews. Consider Charles Murray who wets his pants in the presence of Jewish Genius. Even Jared Taylor, though insulted, defamed, and excommunicated by Jews from social platforms and financial services, is always sucking up to Jews, deferring to them, and banning any criticism of Jewish Power & Israel on his site American Renaissance. The combination of higher IQ and wilier personality makes Jews feel more ‘adult’ in the presence of white goyim who seem less smart and less complex in emotional terms.
But of course, there is the added element of spiritual mythology and/or Holocaustianity. Among simpleminded Evangelicals, Jews are the original Chosen, the holy People of the Book. There was a time when Christianity said Jews killed Jesus and etc., but the New Narrative blamed it all on the Romans, and most Christian pastors are the biggest cucks of Jews in the world. For the secular goyim, there is the neo-spiritual faith in the Holy Holocaust that would have us believe no people suffered as much as the Jews and for NO GOOD REASON at all because, apparently according to the new historiography, Jews were pure-as-snow innocents all throughout history, and it was ALWAYS the goyim’s fault when Jews were met with explosions of violence. Jewish rationale is rather paradoxical. On the one hand, Jews denounce the superstitiousness of goyim who were prone to BLAME THE JEW. And yet, we are to believe that all those goyim in all those places all throughout history just lost their minds and went totally cuckoo in the presence of totally innocent Jews. So, who’s being superstitious? The real superstition is the Jewish Lie that Jews were always innocent and Goyim were always in the wrong. It’s statistically impossible that all throughout history, in all the outbreaks of violence between Jews and non-Jews, it was the Jews who were always innocent and it was the goyim who were always guilty. Unless Jews are a godlike people, there’s no way Jews were that good.

Unfortunately, Jews tend to fall into two categories. What both have in common is self-worship but in different ways. One group believes that Jews are indeed pure-as-snow and always right and so goody-good, and therefore, it really must have been the fault of goyim. These Jews believe that the Tribe is indeed holy because its members are indeed morally superior to the rest of humanity. Such Jews are Moral Supremacists. They do believe in morality but are blind to Jewish immorality toward goyim and only see the ‘evil’ of hostile goy reactions to Jewish bad behavior. Even though they call for Jewish unity in pride and prestige — all Jews deserve to share in the achievements of great and good Jews — , they are the first ones to say that the behavior of bad Jews do not reflect on the Jewish community as a whole. So, when Jews act good, all Jews deserve to share in the pride of goodness. But when Jews act bad, it is ‘evil’ and ‘antisemitic’ to notice certain patterns that pertain to the Jewish community in general. Still, the moral supremacist Jews do believe in some kind of code of ethics. In contrast, the other kind of Jews, the Nihilist Supremacists, believe Jews are superior just because. In other words, Jews are better, superior, and more deserving simply because they are Jews, the ultimate Tribesmen. Jews are right even when they do wrong because... they are Jews. So, it doesn’t matter if Jews do good or Jews do bad. As Jews, they can do as they please to lord over goyim and exploit them. They have the mentality not unlike that of the hoodlums in GOODFELLAS. They regard themselves as the Made Men, and the Covenant gives them license to act as the World Mafia.

While it’s inconceivable to imagine a social order in which all people are equally deserving of power and truth — even if such were offered to everyone, too many people will reject power and truth in favor of escapism and comforting myths — , we must nevertheless strive for a society where most people are adult-like and demand to know more and handle more responsibility. People must never be mindlessly trusting of the Power, and this goes for US, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, and etc. There are no philosopher kings or wise-men among the ruling elites. Power has its own logic: Self-perpetuation by any means. Societies cannot do without concentrations of power, wealth, and influence, but the people must still insist on knowing more and ask tough questions. They must support a system of education, cultivation, and communication where people are encouraged to be more mature, rational, factual, and inquisitive. They need to be on the side of critical thinking, the will and courage to speak truth to power, or at least ask truth of power.
Jews know this is a threat to them. Why would they want people to think critically when, in the Current System, they are positioned as the ‘adults in the room’ while the goyim are relegated to ‘kindergarten’ status? Why would they want us to feel, think, and speak as adults when they prefer us to remain like children or cattle? This is why Jews push PC on schools at an early age. By pushing ‘anti-racism’, Jews seek to suppress white racial consciousness and identity. By pushing hysteria about ‘antisemitism’, Jews seek to suppress the truth that the main supremacist ideology of the West is Zionist tyranny over Palestinians, Wars for Israel, and nihilistic Jewish gangsterism throughout government & the economy. Jews are so clever. They pretend to be ‘anti-racist’ by denouncing ‘racism’ but then shield Jewish ‘racism’ or racial supremacism by invoking ‘antisemitism’ to suppress criticism of Jewish monstrosity against Palestinians, Arabs, and Muslims. And of course, Jews push globo-homo to kids as early as possible in schools. Jews would have us ‘children’ believe that Homo-Mania is all about Human Rights and Justice, but it’s really about inculcating children with mindless worship of Minority Supremacism. After all, kids aren’t merely taught that homos are born that way and do odd ‘sexual’ things. They are taught that homos and trannies are the holy ‘rainbow’ people who deserve extra love and adoration. By making goyim worship homos as eternal minorities, Jews are trying to condition all goy minds to favor the minority-elite over the majority-norm. Sadly, the fact that SO MANY goyim have fallen for this shtick and even take their kids to libraries for reading sessions from trannies goes to show there is some truth to the notion of Jews as ‘adults’ and goyim as ‘children’. Adults lead, children follow. Jews lead, goyim follow.

But this is a habit goyim must break free of. Goyim must not be like Charlie Kirk the worthless cuck for whom ‘conservatism’ happens to be whatever Jews say it is. Kirk is more dog than human. He barks and rolls over accordingly. If Jews say NO WHITE IDENTITY, then Kirk says NO WHITE IDENTITY. If Jews say WHITES MUST SERVE JEWISH IDENTITY, then Kirks concurs and says WHITES MUST SERVE JEWISH IDENTITY. If Jews say ‘GAY MARRIAGE’ IS A CONSERVATIVE VALUE AND ‘LADY MAGA’ EPITOMIZES CONSERVATISM, then Charlie Cuck says the same. He really is a child. It could be he’s just an opportunist who says whatever to get a leg up in a Jewish-controlled system, but his childlike cuck-self really seems to believe in the ever-morphing ‘truth’ peddled by Jews who’ve taken control of Conservatism Inc. For such fools, truth is not a matter of what but of who. Truth is whatever said by Jews. So, if Jews say A is true, A is true. If Jews say B is true, then B is true. All that matters is WHO says it. If Jews say it, it must be true.
While not a genius, Kirk doesn’t seem like a retard either. So, why is he such a ‘child’, why is he such a dog? It’s because he has the emotions of an eight-year old who is so eager to please the ‘adults in the room’. Charlie Kirk the Cuck looks upon Jews as the holy ‘adult’ race and regards himself and fellow goyim as ‘children’ who must defer to the ‘grown-ups in the room and gain their approval’. It’s all so pathetic.

One of the most important projects among white goyim must be to create a culture of adulthood. There is a reason why adults are adults and children are children, but there is no good reason for a bunch of adults to remain childlike at the feet of other adults. It smacks of Oriental Despotism or Jerry-Springer-ism. Individualism used to be a means by which Western Man(and Woman) stood out and up from the herd and learned to think, feel, and act on his own. But over time, with the rise of Youth Culture and Pop Culture, individualism came to be degraded into mindless addiction to sensory overlord via electronica that promote impulsive behavior as being ‘liberated’. But liberated from what? Rational self-control, critical thought, skepticism, and restraint? It’s like a car being 'liberated' of its brakes. It will eventually go off the cliff. A truly free mind has control over both accelerator and brakes. Use of individualism to rise above the herd, gain self-autonomy, and question the Power is noble, but individualism to self-indulge in drugs, sex, and lunacy at the expense of responsibility is no freedom at all. It is enslavement of the mind to the senses, but such is the kind of individualism pushed by Jews who control most media, entertainment, casinos, and drug industries.
In the end, Americans mustn’t rely on Trumpism because its brand of populism ultimately infantilizes the populace with mindless slogans such as MAGA. That’s for the kids. The real adults should ask Trump, “If you’re so much about freedom and American nationalism, why do you keep sucking up to Jews who hate you and have done most to spread globalism all over the world?” Though Ann Coulter has a long way to go, she was adult enough to ask tough questions of Trumpism once Trump became president. He promised the Wall. So, where is it? And Michelle Malkin, though childish in many ways, took it upon herself to be more principled and truthful in challenging the bogus lies of Conservatism Inc with Charlie Kirks of the world as its fronts. Adults must ask tough questions, not just chant slogans like childish tards at Trump-Chump rallies. In the crazy present, while adults are urged to become more infantile and childlike, children like Greta Thunberg are elevated to guru status. Jews rule, and they want adults to be stupid 'children' and hand the mike to children who can be manipulated and mind-controlled. After all, what mind of her own does Thunberg really have? She believes whatever was told her by her parents who got all their worldview from the Jewish-run globalist media. In the Jew-controlled world, illegal is legal, and legal is illegal; sin is virtue, and virtue is sin; and adults are children, and children are adults. And even though Jews are the most powerful and most murderous force in the world, we are told we must look upon Jews as helpless victims in need of protection. But if you're a true adult, go ask the Palestinians about the true nature of Jewish Power. And if Jews treat Palestinians that way, why would they treat you any better?

In a way, goyim in elite circles and Deep State almost consider themselves as ersatz Jews. Though they consider themselves not as 'good, wise, and intelligent' as the super-Jews, the holy race of geniuses and Shoah tragedy, they nevertheless see themselves as good enough to have attended elite schools and reached upper ranks of power where they get to rub shoulders with the super-Jews. Deep State is utterly Philo-Semitic in this manner. Because they worship Jews and feel flattered to be working with and under Jews, there is a kind of super-adult-and-adult dynamics between Jews and elite goyim. Jews are super-adults and elite goyim are adults. And the rest of us are mere 'children' who must be managed by goy elite 'adults' who defer to Jewish 'super-adults'.
Because goy elites have access to the inner circles of power, they know the truth of Jewish Power and Perfidy. And yet, as they were instilled with Jew-Worship from cradle, they can't think rationally about the Jews(and blacks and homos, two other groups Jews have 'christened' or 'anti-christened' as especially holy). Also, those who are most eager to reach the top are less interested in truth, honesty, courage, and integrity than status, privilege, and power. Social climbers are really vain narcissists and nihilists at heart. They may flatter themselves that they want power and/or wealth for the higher/larger good, but it's mostly a self-justifying myth. Also, just like adults are often as foolish as children and believe in stupid things, there is no guarantee that the 'adults in the room', the so-called well-educated elites will favor truth, reason, and integrity over lies, cults, and mendacity. Most members of the elites won't dare say something true or do something courageous IF it means loss of status and reputation among peers, most of whom are vain social-climbers and status-preeners. This has always been the case with all peoples in all places at all times. So, even though it is generally true that the better-educated are more deserving to rule than the less-educated are, it's not a case of the good-and-wise ruling over the bad-and-dumb. Rather, it's fools with more education ruling over fools with less education. And for that reason, the elite justification for the suppression of truth is more often self-serving than for the common good.

The Significance of Nicholas J. Fuentes, or Nick Fuentes as a Metaphor

Of late, Nick Fuentes has been in the news due to the controversy stirred up by his allies, associates, and fans who constitute what is often referred to as the 'Groyper Army'. At events hosted by Conservatism Inc. such as TPUSA, members of the Groyper 'movement'(if it could be called that) have shown up in force to lob questions ranging from 'inconvenient' to taboo. Most of these questions are related to Con Inc.'s Israel-First-Position, virtual surrender to Globo-Homomania, betrayal of Christian values & tradition, and avid support for Mass Immigration(as long as it is Legal even though most immigrants are not only non-white but overwhelmingly lean toward Democrats as either the anti-white or pro-immigrant party). All those questions add up to the Bigger Question of what exactly is so-called American Conservatism conserving when its main loyalty happens to be to a foreign nation(and to a powerful minority that happens to be the main instigator of anti-white propaganda), its modus operandi is pitiful surrender to every social/cultural fashions pushed by decadent Global Capital, and its position is to welcome the very demographic trends that are not only decimating Republican districts across America but degrading the values that conservative white Americans have stood for.
At the very least, the Palestinians have always resisted Zionism and didn't welcome Nakba that wiped Palestine off the map. Palestinians lost, but like the American Indians, they at least have the pride of having put up a fight — and to this day, Palestinians continue to resist the invasion into West Bank by Zionist Caravans whose ultimate agenda is to take all of West Bank(and then expand into neighboring Arab territories). In contrast, the white race has become a total disgrace. There are now two main camps. The white globalists who see whiteness as the ultimate stain on humanity and seek redemption by browning white nations demographically and browning white people genetically. Some in Con Inc. claim to be 'nationalist', but it is what is called 'civic nationalism' which almost makes no sense since most modern democracies have more-or-less similar-sounding values.

For example, all modern societies are agreed that tolerance is a good thing, but the bigger question should be Tolerance By Whom? After all, in an overwhelmingly Muslim society, tolerance is toward non-Muslims, and in a Jewish state like Israel, tolerance is toward non-Jews. So, even if both domains were to agree that Tolerance is good, each nevertheless holds steadfast to the necessity that their society must be mostly Muslim or Jewish. Tolerance doesn't mean that all things are equal in society. It means that the most powerful and dominant group should be tolerant to those fewer in numbers and lesser in power. Thus, a Western Nation can protect and preserve its need to remain a white nation while, at the same time, showing tolerance to non-white minorities. Likewise, straight people who make up the overwhelming majority can tolerate homos and other sexual deviants.
But at some point in Western History, the concept of Tolerance turned insidious. Instead of the principle of the powerful/dominant group tolerating the less numerous/powerful groups, it turned into a case of the minority group being regarded as just as essential to society or even more so than the people who've always composed the overwhelming majority. It turned cancerous. Consider the human immune system. The human body tolerates a lot of germs and toxins because we can't live in a perfect world. We've all learn to live and even interact with bacteria, virus, and etc. (Indeed, there are some bacteria that are beneficial to us.) But there is a limit to this. Even if we've learned to co-exist with germs and alien elements, they are not the same as our essential selves. Our skin has lots of germs, but the germs are not our skin. Our guts have even more germs, but the germs are not the intestines. It's like there are Christians in Muslim Iran, but they are not the essential core elements of the nation. They can be(and should be) tolerated and treated kindly, but if Iran were to dispense with Islam as the defining faith, then non-Muslims would have equal claim to the nation, and that could lead to a wholesale transformation of society.
From its founding to its creation to its core development, there is no question that America was an extension of European(especially Anglo-Germanic) Civilization in terms of people, culture, and ideas. America developed that way, but due to the fact that the land was taken from native Reds and that many black Africans were imported for slave labor, White America had to learn to tolerate the presence of non-whites and to treat them better. This was tolerance in the proper meaning of the word. But over time, this meaning began to lose out, especially because of the arrival of Jews who, with superior wits and stronger will, became the new elites and because of the ascent of blacks in sports and violence. Usually, the majority has power over the minority in almost all respects. But Jews, though only 2% of the population, managed to gain economic and intellectual dominance over the white majority population. As the ruling elites, mere tolerance was no longer sufficient for Jews. Jews were no longer content with being a tolerated and well-treated minority, as they are in places like Russia and Hungary. They became accustomed to power & domination and demanded Obedience from the white majority population. In effect, Jews went from a minority in need of protection to a minority in want of supremacy. Jews in the US are today more like British overlords in Old Bombay or Old Hong Kong than ghetto Jews in shtetls of the Russian Empire. Tolerance is no longer enough for them, and if anything, they will NOT TOLERATE any voice that dares to dissent from what they themselves prescribe(and indeed decree) to the goy population whom they regard as a subject people.
As for blacks, they were no longer content with tolerance(and even guarantee of equal rights) once they began to dominate whites in sports and sex. A primitive-souled people, blacks judge worth mainly by who-can-whump-whose-butt and who-can-hump-whose-ass. As they became the lords of NFL, NBA, and boxing, blacks came to look down on the white majority population as either a bunch of 'faggoty-ass-white-boys' to intimidate & beat up OR skanky white bitchass ho's whose wombs must be colonized by black seed. As such, blacks, like Jews, no longer care for tolerance or even parity with whites. They are convinced that THEY, as the superior race, have the right to rule over all others. In that, both have something in common with Richard Spencer who think he(or his kind) is entitled to rule.

In our world, the meaning of Tolerance has been turned on its head. Instead of the dominant majority tolerating(and even protecting) weaker minorities, we have a case of dominant Jewish minority(with their homo allies) showing zero tolerance toward non-Jews(especially whites) who won't kowtow before Globo-Homo-Shlomo power. It went from "We must tolerate 'gays' for what they are" to "You will be destroyed if you express negative views about sodomy, refuse to bake a 'gay wedding cake', or speak truth to Jewish Supremacist Power(JSP)." But then, we live in a world where neo-imperialism is the most powerful force — not least because the Empire of Judea controls the US as the 'lone superpower', the battleship among nations — , and that means the majority power of every subject nation(and that includes the US as Americans are now subject peoples of Jewish supremacist globalists) must take a backseat to the demands of World Jewry and its proxy globo-homo agents. This is why Jews seek to suppress or destroy nationalism in all nations EXCEPT in Israel, though, to be sure, Jews will exploit one kind of nationalism(even ultra-nationalism) if it happens to be opposed to what they deem to be the bigger enemy, e.g. the Jewish Supremacist Power's support of Ukrainian ultra-nationalists against Russia, the nation Jews hate most at the moment, not because Russia is ruled by evil tyrants but because it said NO to globo-homo that is the proxy force and quasi-spiritual crusade of World Jewry.

Anyway, what is the true significance of Nick Fuentes? By 'significance', I mean something larger than Fuentes himself who, like anyone else, has pros and cons. Fuentes is too inexperienced and 'green' to qualify as the leader of anything, though, to be sure, in the age of the internet, old rules no longer apply, for good or ill. Without the internet, there's no way someone so young and 'heretical' as Fuentes could have gained so much popularity(and notoriety). For him to have amounted to something in the movement, he would have had to pay his dues and gradually work up the hierarchy. In the pre-internet age, someone so young could not have risen to prominence so fast... unless, like Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk, big money were behind him to build him up as a Teen Idol of Conservatism Inc. Teen Idols of the early 60s were mostly Italian-American pop stars groomed by the industry to make the rebellious and raucous culture of Rock N Roll more palatable to Middle America. Ben Shapiro is like Paul Anka, and Charlie Kirk is like Fabian. But then comes Nick Fuentes with the irreverent, rebellious, and cantankerous demeanor of the often abrasive Bob Dylan. And yet, he has some of the spirited and happy high-energy of the Beatles. Most likely, Fuentes hasn't gone about carefully crafting a persona for himself like Richard Spencer who, very possibly, practiced in front of a mirror as a preppy Neo-Kiplingite mix of Darth Vader, 007, Tom Buchanan, and Batman. In contrast, Fuentes seems almost utterly lacking in self-consciousness, which can be refreshing but also prone to infantile tantrums. His combination of feisty antics and laughing mockery certainly makes for a pretty entertaining show, fun and amusing in the way Camille Paglia when she first exploded on the scene. Also, his allergy to degeneracy and drugs has prevented him from going over the deep end like Milo with sexual matters and Spencer & co. with alcohol and/or drugs. And his comic side seems to have had an easing effect on his considerable ego, also abated by what seems to be sincere faith in Catholicism. In contrast, certain neo-paganists like Spencer tend to fall into the foolish habit of self-worship as if they're Zarathustra 201 because they read some Nietzsche and watched BATMAN movies too many times.

For a person his age, Fuentes seem to be very well-read and erudite about political and historical matters(though he falls way short in the realm of art & culture as he thinks current cinema is the best of all cinema because of 'muh special effects', considers JOKER to some kind of masterpiece, and prefers the dreadful Kanye West to just about any other musical act), especially when we consider that so many young people today, even those in Ivy League schools, tend not to be serious readers. Though Fuentes has read some books by deep thinkers, his aspiration isn't intellectual or philosophical, let alone prophetic. Rather, he's like a young Pat Buchanan who, from a young age, relished politics as a bloodsport. His forte is political analysis but with a candidness generally missing in establishment media, official narrative, and the 'conop', or controlled opposition, of Conservatism Inc. And it is here that we can glean the significance of Nick Fuentes and what he stands for. Whatever may become of Fuentes, who faces serious drawbacks as holds key advantages, he stands for something in the Moment, something rare all across the political spectrum. Among people in mainstream academia and media, there are surely many people who know as much and much more than Fuentes. And privately, they probably see the truth of much of what he is saying, but the fact is they will lose their positions and status if they were to go off the reservation. As in the old Soviet Union, it doesn't matter how many bright, intelligent, and knowledgeable people there may be. Many people in the upper echelons of Soviet institutions knew the truth beyond official dogma, but they kept mum and mouthed the same platitudes because their position and privileges meant more to them; there was also the real fear of something far worse than ostracism: Possible exile and, in some cases, execution. Much the same can be said of the current West. There are no gulags, but people with so much in terms of wealth, connections, privilege, and status can lose them all IF they were to mouth 'inconvenient' truths. And this is what the mavens of the establishment find so frustrating about People-like-Nick-Fuentes or PLN. It's not that PLN knows more than they do. If anything, due to their connections, they know lots of things that most of us don't know. But they can only say so much because if they don't go by the playbook of JSP(Jewish Supremacist Power), they will be subtly or not-so-subtly disfavored and even destroyed.
Also, most people who are on par with Fuentes in terms of wit, intelligence, and energy tend to favor social success and status-climbing uber alles. Privately, they may well know that the MSM is full of shit and that elite institutions are marked by hypocrisy & corruption, but they do not want to jeopardize their chances of making it, especially as opportunities are dwindling for straight whites, especially those even slightly suspected of being 'conservative'. Thus, with most such people, courage and conviction take the backseat to the willingness to be co-opted. "If you can't beat them, join them." For this reason, Fuentes is a rare breed indeed. He truly went against the grain of most people like himself.
And then, there are individuals with plenty of courage and boldness. They share with Fuentes the willingness to put their names and faces online and speak their minds. Such courage is all very good except for the fact that such personality types tend to be reckless, shameless, outlandish(& outrageous), and/or crazy. The most famous example, of course, is none other than Alex Jones. Some say Jones is just 'conop'(controlled opposition), but whatever he is, he's really been out there, shouting his 'truths' and berating people for being sheeple. His boldness has been refreshing, but he's also a very kooky character who's gone out to discredit himself with ridiculous rumors and hysterical exaggerations. There are also many mini-alex-jones or wanna-be-alex-jones all over Youtube and the internet. You can credit them with courage and conviction, but they often say crazy things or tend to act retarded, like Owen Benjamin of the Man-didn't-land-on-the-Moon school. Who can forget Paul Nehlen, the once 'normie' candidate who just went crazy when he came upon the JQ. Patrick Little went off the cliff even more dramatically. They couldn't be faulted for courage, but something in the air has tended to destine "Courage + JQ = Nuttery". Fuentes sanely disavowed Nehlen-gone-nuts and smelled a skunk in Patrick Little from day one. And there is Richard Spencer. Spencer isn't a dabbler of crazy conspiracy theories and nutball narratives, but his shameless ego works like alcohol on his brains. Though there are layers within him that are capable of sound analysis, careful reasoning, and intelligent insight, his core/essence is raving egomania, vapid vanity, preening narcissism, and selfishness, all of which inflated his (lack of a)soul with pathetic delusions of grandeur. His lament seems to be, "Why doesn't the world love, admire, and worship me like I love, admire, and worship myself?" Because you're a fool, Richie Rich. To be sure, the first real blowup between Spencer and Fuentes resulted from the latter misconstruing, willfully or not, Spencer's remark about pornography and pedophiles — Spencer was NOT advocating legalization of child porn — , but Spencer has shown, time and time again, a self-destructive tendency toward deranged reactions as if it's a cosmic betrayal if his coterie doesn't see eye-to-eye on things. The fact that Fuentes spotted this character flaw before most of Spencer's associates and strategically distanced himself from Spencer and his circle now seems to be to his credit.

Anyway, in a sense, Fuentes is a rare breed. Generally, sane, sober, and intelligent individuals tend to be cowards, indeed craven ones at that, who will sacrifice integrity and honor for their slice of the System's Pie. At the other end, bold, courageous, and daring individuals tend to be reckless, shameless, and even not quite right in the head. (Then, there are sane and smart dissident members who do possess courage and integrity but aren't politically interested in the bloodsports of everyday politics. They prefer ideas, analysis, and deep criticism over politics as spectator sports. This is why men like John Derbyshire, though long involved in political analysis, have hardly been at the center of attention, though Derbyshire got some unwanted notoriety when he wrote an article that pointed out that young whites[and Asians] have far more to fear from blacks than the other way around. Unlike most such people, Fuentes relishes being part of the public debate and has shown up at even at events where he's been partially or wholly banned. This combination of sanity & smarts, courage & integrity, and passion for politics-as-spectacle is truly rare in our political culture, especially on the American Right as its members face many more taboos than those on the so-called 'left'. Whereas globalism disdains communism and far-left rhetoric, it doesn't feel threatened by the(at least after the end of the Cold War), whereas it still considers any emergence of nationalism, especially among whites, as the biggest problem. Awakening of white identity could mean white elites and white masses must be one people, thus implying white elites must prioritize representing and leading their white masses than serving the globo-homo Jewish-Zionist masters.) Fuentes has been nimble in navigating through the narrow pathway between the Scylla of craven careerism(where success depends on being a cuck-servant of JSP or Jewish Supremacist Power) and Charybdis of reckless courage(that has sent so many bolder members of society off the cliff). Now, this isn't to suggest that Fuentes possesses the brilliance of Odysseus who couldn't have it back home if not for his wits, and he surely has plenty of time to implode into craven careerism or explode with crackpot courage, but since 2016, it's difficult to think of another personality who was associated with the Alt Right, justly or not, who found that difficult but plausible balance between mainstream appeal and 'shitlord' edginess. This 'navigational' ability is exactly what was missing with Richard Spencer, but then, perhaps the Real Spencer would have emerged sooner or later because, at his core, he is a deranged egotist, whereas Fuentes seems to be a genuine Catholic Conservative with racial-historical consciousness(which makes him closest to Patrick J. Buchanan). Spencer sincerely believes he is some awesome Pop Nietzschean hero, the rightful master of the universe, whereas Fuentes seems to truly believe in God and higher powers/values that are beyond the reach of any single individual. Now, Spencer's nuttery would have been more palatable(with even a dash of awesomeness) if his sense of destiny was fueled by some genuine mad passion, the kind that makes for heroes and prophets in times of crisis. But one can't help feeling that his megalomania is little more than the manifestation of his bratty upbringing where his spoiled self was the center of mommy and daddy's affection and showered with all the toys. It's this sense of entitlement that makes him so insufferable. He says the untermensch of the world should look up at his face and see the master, the one to kneel and bow down to.

Now, it's true that white people, especially the Anglos, did gain awesome power in the last several centuries and dominance over much of the world. Indeed, many non-whites and Jews did look up to a face not unlike his as the countenance of the ruling race. But the crucial difference is that Anglo-whites didn't gain such power and prestige by bratty 'entitlementality'. They didn't go around hissing and ranting about how awesome they are. No, they were serious and sober people with work ethic and conviction who made great sacrifices to, often with their own lives, to create a new order at home and abroad. Nothing was handed to them on a silver platter. If Anglos of the past had Spencer's attitude of entitlement — "I should own the world as my oyster... just because..." — , they wouldn't have achieved much of anything. They believed in industry, dedication, sobriety, and teamwork. There was a time when I rather respected Spencer because I believed he did give up much to follow his vision. After all, given his looks and smarts, he could have gone far in Conservatism Inc. if he'd just played along. He could have been another Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan, or even more. But he pursued a far more difficult path that required courage and conviction, and it seemed Spencer had something that most of his peers did not. But year after year, it became more apparent that Spencer lacked focus, consistency, commitment, honor — the way he shut down Alternative Right site without notifying Colin Liddell and Andy Nowicki was disgraceful — , and worst of all, a sense of judgment, choosing to work with second-raters like Alex Kurtagic. Instead of staking his reputation on one thing and seeing it through completion, he would go from this project to that to another, just leaving a lot of debris and flotsam along the way(and leaving his associates and partners more than a little betrayed). Spencer seems, at once, manically ambitious and pathologically lazy, and the two characteristics fed into each other. If Spencer were a gold-miner, he would be dreaming only of the mother lode and throwing fits if none were found. When reality doesn't measure up to his entitled sense of expectation, Spencer is totally lost and goes off on another of his wild sheep chases. If he had a sense of pacing and stamina, he could have gradually built up the Alt Right as an intellectual and ideological movement with balance of caution and daring, but his projects never amounted to anything. His golden opportunity — potential mother lode of political fortune — was when the Hillary Camp decided to smear Donald Trump with the 'Alt Right' label, a truly stupid move as most Americans had never heard of the 'alternative right'. It was then that the media needed a 'bad boy' spokesman for the Alt Right, and they settled on Spencer. If Spencer had fully appreciated this as good fortune, a chance of a lifetime that comes but once, he would have appreciated it and handled it with care to grow a movement. But being an egomaniac, he convinced himself that the media were all over him because he is so brilliant, awesome, and irresistible. He began to think that he would be a media darling no matter what he did, and that's when he began to throw away the golden nugget that fell into his hands. It's difficult to think of another person in the last 25 yrs who used his political fortune so unwisely and tragically.

One hopes Fuentes will not make the same mistake, and in his favor, despite his own kind of egotism, he has a sense of humor about himself(as well as a sense of limitations), which Spencer has been sorely lacking. Indeed, it's likely that Spencer still doesn't get that no one that matters takes him seriously. Everyone sees him as a sad joke. Spencer could have used his bohemian streak effectively(as we are living in the age of the hipster), but the loutish side(or core) of him won out. Due to the rather straight-and-square qualities of Fuentes — even his fandom for Kanye West is conformity to cultural norms of his generation — , he is culturally far less interesting than Spencer and the more imaginative figures on the Alt Right, but bohemianism is less suited for politics that generally favors the habits of consistency and steadiness. No wonder Sam Peckinpah made it in cinema, not in politics.

Considering the significance of Nick Fuentes as a rarity who represents both All-American Flavors and a Taste for Dissent, he might be useful as a metaphor or a meme. So, what is Fuentes as a metaphor? What kind of American, Conservative, or Youth does he stand for? It is a political consciousness of defiance, independence, and individuality(and of course contradictions). Oddly enough, even though Fuentes isn't an arch-individualist of the libertarian school, the kind that the likes of Charlie Kirk claim to be, he has a strong individual sense of self that won't be cowed by the Libertarian Machine of Conservatism Inc. that, despite claims of individual freedom and conscience, demands that EVERYONE get behind the globo-homo program, welcome mass-immigration-invasion(along with Great Replacement and 'Erasism' or erasure of white identity), mindlessly support Israel, and support state-sponsored suppression of the BDS movement. Something is strange here. Conservative-communitarian Nick Fuentes is far more likely to speak his mind and offer up genuine dissent whereas all those so-called freedom-and-liberty loving 'libertarian-conservatives' are deathly afraid of the Power & Big Money and always looking over their shoulders at what their sponsors and patrons might think.

If American politics has taught us anything, especially since the end of the Cold War and the ascendancy of Jews as the new ruling elites, it is that we simply cannot rely on 'leaders', 'experts', and 'managers' to decide truth and falsehood for us. We must all be more engaged, not least because the US is the lone superpower whether we like it or not. Even if we choose to be apathetic and not care about other nations, the fact is our taxes are being used to commit horrible crimes around the world. The psychopathic Deep State and the neo-imperialist US military destroy other nations, peoples,and cultures. Indeed, what the Deep State is now doing to America was honed to perfection abroad in so many coups, acts of subversion, terrorism, misinformation campaigns, and invasions. While the CIA, Pentagon, and the military-industrial complex were carrying out such crimes all over the world, most Americans were disengaged and apathetic, which was all to the advantage of the Deep State as so much of its actions did little but serve the interests of Jewish supremacists, war profiteers, and homosexual psychos. And in exploiting and exploding entire parts of the world, the Deep State learned countless tricks, all of which are now being used against Americans. Therefore, all the Americans who used to say, "Just leave me alone" or "I don't care about other people around the world" were utterly misguided. While Americans are not obliged to fix the world's problems, they should at least be aware of the crimes committed by its own government and deep state apparatus in other parts of the world since they are funded by US tax-payers and further their aims via the US military as lethal-invasive force. All those Americans who said, "I don't care about the Palestinians" are now waking up to find out that what Americans had blindly enabled Jews to do to the Palestinians, it is now being done by JSP(Jewish Supremacist Power) against white Americans and white Europeans in what could only be called the White Nakba. What goes around comes around. Americans unthinkingly supported the Zionist destruction of Palestinians(or chose to ignore it as 'not my business'), but it only emboldened Jews to stage an encore on a much grander scale against all of the white world. Due to their higher IQ and ambitious nature, Jews were destined to be powerful in the US, but the current state of Jewish Supremacist domination is, to a large extent, the result of so many whites having chosen to be asleep at the wheel while Jews were plotting to take over the US and use it as their private aircraft carrier and super-gangster-bank to dominate all the world. Obnoxious Jews would never have grown so powerful IF more white people had been engaged in politics(or what-is-being-done-with-your-tax-dollars-and-by-whom-and-why) and stood up to the cancerous growth of JSP(Jewish Supremacist Power), but the opportunity was lost, and American Politics has degenerated into a dog-and-pony show of both parties fetching and rolling over for Jewish Supremacist Power.

In a nation as big as the US, one would like to think there would be more young people like Fuentes, but they are relatively rare. This is especially odd considering that Americans like to take pride in themselves as free-thinkers, dissenters, rebels, mavericks, and rugged individualists. Then, why is there such conformity and consensus of thought among both Democrats and Republicans? Reality seems to suggest that the American Self-Image is mostly a myth. While it may be true that Americans are more direct in manners and forthright in emotions, they are no freer in thought and ideas than any other people. Reality says Americans are sheeple like the rest of humanity, and it's rare to find a wolf who dares to howl out the truth(or for the truth). Of course, it's true that there are many more people like Fuentes who've chosen to remain anonymous and/or silent due to fear of ostracism or to natural timidity, but it seems like MOST people, 'left' or 'right', are content to go along with the consensus, if only for the fact that most people have 'social' personalities that are, above all, sensitive to public perception of them. Thus, they fear to rock the boat and risk being shunned. We can see such tendencies beginning with children. This is why brazen dissenters and truth-tellers tend to be rather asocial, if not anti-social, i.e. they are impervious to peer pressure and un-peeved by public opinion. While those who speak their minds often tend to spout lies, nonsense, or craziness, the will to speak freely regardless of risk is a surer way to the truth than speaking to earn pokemon points of political correctness(be it 'right' or 'left') is.

A free-thinker or free-speaker may be wrong(even terribly so), but the main thrust of his expression is to honestly convey what is truly in his heart and mind. In contrast, while a correct-thinker could speak the truth(if indeed the Official Narrative happens to be true), his main impetus is to seek approval. Thus, even when a free-thinker is speaking falsely, he is motivated by a will for truth, whereas even when a correct-thinker is speaking truthfully, he is incentivized by want of acceptance. If A is true while B is false, the free-thinker who says B is nevertheless sincere in his conviction that what he says is true, whereas the correct-thinker who says A is, above all, less concerned with truth than with confirmation from superiors and peers. This is why all organizations favor correct-thinkers over free-thinkers. Whether on the Right or the Left, the truth-speakers are more difficult to handle or tame.
By Fuentes' own account, he was once approached by Conservatism Inc. but was kicked out the minute he displayed distressing signs of non-conformity, especially where Israel was concerned. And it seems Spencer and others on the Alt Right wanted to shape Fuentes into a good soldier for the movement, but again, Fuentes was too free-spirited to be a mere 'Tom Hagen' type(in THE GODFATHER). Because Fuentes has a strong personality, he tends to stand his own ground and brush away any strings others have tried to tie to his limbs. But the downside of a strong personality, as evinced in Camille Paglia, is the stubborn pride that refuses to admit wrong. That said, Fuentes was quick to disavow Nehlen gone nuts and changed his mind on Donald Trump following the State of the Union speech when the Orange Man said he is for Massive Legal Immigration. So, despite problems of pride, Fuentes hasn't been so rigid and has been flexible enough to modulate his views on key players and current events.
Also, his 'optics' seems to be a genuine outflow of his core convictions. After all, the matter of 'optics' is a double-edged sword. Good 'optics' is admirable as sincere outer manifestation of one's core values and manners, but it is disingenuous and contemptible as a veil over an agenda that is crazy or extreme. Saul Alinsky stood for the second kind of 'optics' as he advised social radicals to dress up as normal middle class folks. In the end, whatever 'optics' tokens Richard Spencer may have had was lost when it became clear that he is a nihilist than a moralist at the core. With someone like Spencer, 'optics' can only be a cover over a stinkpot.

We need more PLN(or People-like-Nick-Fuentes) because the contradictions of the current Power Structure and current Official Narrative are too great. When things get too crazy, we need more free-thinkers than correct-thinkers. It's like the boy was most indispensable in the story "Emperor Has No Clothes" because mass delusion had taken hold of everyone from top to bottom. Someone had to say the obvious, i.e. that the lord was made a fool. The fact of the matter is the US and the West are currently ruled by JSP or Jewish-Supremacist-Power. This is so obvious, but almost no one who matters in media, academia, or government dares say anything. Fuentes' critics may argue that he talks 'obsessively' about Jews, but it's really a counter-obsession to the Real Obsession from top to bottom in US media and politics that does little but sing paeans and hosannas to Jews and Israel. Not only are most of media and much of academia dominated by Jews but we are bombarded day in and day out about how wonderful Jews are, how Israel is our 'closest' and 'greatest' ally, how Jews are the most tragic eternal Holy Holocaust people, how all of humanity must apologize to Jews for Shoah(and whatever else Jews gripe about), and how 'antisemitic' it is to notice negative aspects of Jewish power and influence. According to the Power, the US Congress making an ass of itself by giving Netanyahu 6 million standing ovations is not being obsessed with Jews; US politicians making pilgrimages to Israel and pledging to support Zionists uber alles is not being obsessed with Jews; members of both parties appearing at AIPAC conferences and hailing Israel to high heaven is not being obsessed with Israel; favoring Jews for special pardons by governors and presidents is not being obsessed with Jews. Oh no, it's only normal and natural for us to think of Jews all the time AS LONG AS we have happy-feely and worshipful attitudes about Jews. But if you dare to question the gushing worship of all-things-Jewish and ask some inconvenient questions about the JQ, then YOU are deemed to be 'obsessed' with Jews and/or Israel.

Arguably, Fuentes' main contribution to the Real Conservative Movement has been (1) the willingness to address the JQ in a forthright and satirical(necessary due to increasing censorship) manner and (2) keep away from the derangement syndrome that all-too-often has befallen on those who became woke to the truth of Jewish Power. Fuentes sensibly understands, "Just because Jewish supremacism is bad doesn't mean that Nazism was good." Shooting the rat doesn't mean you must shoot your foot. Talking honestly about Jews shouldn't turn you 14/88, but this tendency has been problematic in the Alt Right. Perhaps, it's because the human mind abhors a vacuum; it craves certainty. So, when young ones realize that the Jewish-controlled worldview is seriously wrong, they feel disoriented & confused and reach for strong medicine that sets the world straight, and this is when some of them go 14/88 because it offers a simple and compelling explanation of the All-Evil-Jew. Too many people simply cannot handle complexity and ambiguity. It's like, if an organism is forced out of one shelter and feels exposed to a hostile world, it will scramble for the nearest shelter. Too many goyim who were liberated from the Official Narrative suddenly feel homeless or rudderless and seek out a simple/powerful explanation as to why the world is as it is. Why is it that Fuentes has been immune to this danger? Part of the reason seems to be self-confidence that he can figure things out for himself than having to rely on some radical Grand Theory to explain the Jews. Thus, he could be critical of Jewish Power without the 14/88 baggage that is really for the Tards. Granted, some have accused Fuentes of being a 'Holocaust Denier', especially on account of his sardonic answer to the question about Cookie Monster baking 6 million cookies, but his irony-laden playful response suggested savvy that, mongoose-like, knew how to cavort with current climate of political correctness. Though it came close to being 'dangerous' and even offensive, the real implication was that we aren't supposed to question any aspect of the Shoah Narrative and just swallow the official narrative whole hog. Instead of just denouncing the caller as a 'neo-nazi' or earnestly going the 'denier' route, Fuentes tiptoed around both, something Ramzpaul is also very good at.

Anyway, Nick Fuentes is a useful metaphor or role-meme for all the young people out there(and not just conservatives) who want to speak their minds freely and without fear. Unless one is retarded, autistic, or specious, there is no way any honest person cannot be aware of the stupefying contradictions that define American Life. Just how is it that Jews, the most powerful people in America(and by extension the world) still act like they are members of a victim group? How is that Jews, the most privileged people, berate white endlessly for 'white privilege'? How is it that Jews who pushed Wars for Israel that destroyed millions of Muslim lives in the Middle East and North Africa posture as defenders of helpless Muslims against 'Islamophobic' bigots in the US? Was it rednecks who made all those Hollywood movies with Muslims as little else but terrorists? How is it that Jews who've done so much to lock up tons of blacks(to bring down urban crime) and used gentrification to push blacks out of cities pretend to be the most compassionate friends of blacks while accusing whites and policemen for all the problems faced by blacks, especially when most blacks are killed by other blacks? How is it that Israel that stole nuclear material from the US and has 300 nukes is showered with money and praise while Iran, a nation that has no nukes, is sanctioned endlessly? How is it that Israel and Zionists who(in cahoots with Saudi Arabia) lent support to ISIS and Alqaeda terrorists in Syria get to accuse Syria and Iran as sponsors of terrorism? Just how did homosexuality and tranny business become the holiest things in the US? Just how did a 'secular' movement of the 'gay agenda' turn into a quasi-spiritual one that seeks to place globo-homo symbols in all churches? And of course, anyone who knows anything knows it was the Jews who funded globo-homo madness as their proxy. And considering that blacks are the most aggressive, dangerous, and thuggish group in America that commits the most crime against non-whites of all colors, how is it that blacks are forever portrayed as pure-as-snow victims? And exactly why do we need a 'new cold war' with Russia, a nation with 1/20th of the economy of the US? And if race is just a myth and social construct, how come so much of media, entertainment, and sports are rife with all sorts of blatant racial stereotypes DESPITE the fact that all such outlets are controlled by Jews who claim to be 'liberal'?

The rational, curious, and inquiring minds want to know. The whole purpose of education is to inspire curiosity, sharpen our critical skills, train us to be analytical, teach us to be skeptical & reject matters of blind faith, and to ask tough questions. And at least in the context of current politics, that is precisely what the PLN(or People-like-Nick-Fuentes) stands for. Whatever his faults and shortcomings, Fuentes has been out there asking the tough questions about the real nature of power and privilege in America. Whether one agrees or disagrees with his basic values or tenets, he's been tirelessly asking tough questions and demanding answers day in and day out. It used to be the case that Liberals were once known for criticality, free inquiry, skepticism, and harboring contrarian views, but that was then, this is now. Jews, the most dominant faction among Liberals, now got the power, and they no longer believe it's salient for people to be curious, critical, and inquiring. Why, such people might confront the truth about Jewish History and demand answers about Jewish Power. Therefore, over the years, Jewish Liberals went from defending free speech and encouraging controversy to pushing indoctrination, blind faith, consensus, and conformism. How many times have we heard Jews say, "The debate is over, we won, you lost, shut up, and kneel!"?

Though Fuentes isn't alone in asking the tough questions and commenting on the true nature of power with scales removed from one's eyes, he's arguably been most successful in conveying his message and building himself into an online personality. And he seems to be emboldening many others of his generation with the notion that "It's Okay to Ask Honest Questions." After all, what is the point of living in a democracy and enjoying liberty & rights IF one must always remain herd-like within the reservation of permitted narrative? In a way, all of us are like in a TRUMAN SHOW(with Jim Carrey and directed by Peter Weir). In the movie, Truman has been brought up to believe that he's a happy citizen in the freest society in the world. He can do anything he wants... or so he's been led to believe. But it turns out that the 'free world' comes with all sorts of controls, contrivances, and manipulations. And when Truman begins to doubt the world around him and decides to go off the reservation, he is blocked at every turn by a series of 'accidents' or 'incidents' that he realizes can't be coincidental. In so many ways, our so-called democracy is like that. We are told we are free and that free speech is a right protected by the Constitution, but whenever anyone mutters anything that is 'triggering', he is threatened, silenced, defamed, and/or deplatformed. But when Jews say far more controversial or offensive things about non-Jews, especially whites, it's perfectly okay or even admirable as far the Power is concerned. We are told about the importance of American freedoms and the bad ole days of Joe McCarthy, but if you're a Palestinian-American who supports BDS, a movement for justice for Palestinians, you will be fired and/or blacklisted in half the states by none other than the government. We are told that US is about colorblind justice, but Jews, blacks, and homos seem to be above the law as so many of them are virtually allowed to do as they please. So many white-collar Jewish crooks got off the hook, and so many black street thugs get away with so much. We are told American universities are places for free thought and open discussion, but if you put those principles into practice and try to have an honest discussion about race, Jews, blacks, and/or homos, the school administrators and police will sit back and let antifa thugs and brainwashed PC students use violence and hysteria to shut you down. US democracy was never perfect and always full of hypocrisy, but it is now worse than ever because the new elites are Jews who, unlike the old Wasp elites, sorely lack the capacity for self-awareness and the virtue of self-criticism. Whether it's a Jewish 'liberal' or Jewish 'conservative', it all boils down to "Is it good for the Jews?" With such Jews controlling both political parties, nearly all media and academia, and so much of finance, American democracy has degenerated into something like an 'octocracy'. With Jewish monopoly domination over so many institutions and industries, so much of the so-called 'opposing factions' are essentially the various tentacles of the same octopus. GOP and Democratic Party are merely two tentacles of the Zioctopus. This is why Jews don't care if states turn 'blue' or 'red'. Whether GOP wins or Democrats win, the priority of both is to serve the Jewish Master.

Against this, PLN(or People-like-Nick-Fuentes) have decided to speak the plain truth. They may not always be right, but they really begin from the premise that, "I want to see reality as it really is, and I want to speak the truth as I really feel it." Even with the hideous Jews at Youtube trying to alter the Terms of Service to restrict free-and-honest speech about the Power — Jews at Youtube seem to follow the control manual out of TRUMAN SHOW — , Fuentes and others like him have managed to do all they can to speak truth to power, candidly and without going over the edge like Spencer, Nehlen, and the rest. Who knows what tomorrow will bring, but for now, Fuentes and Groypers represent a good beginning and deserve credit for being one of the few sane and honest voices out there in a political climate and culture so controlled by the fixers and riggers of the official 'left' and 'right'.

15 Questions for the Groypers to Gribbit at the Cuckservatives or Con-servants that make up the So-Called ‘American Right’

Of late, some say there’s an internecine battle brewing within the American Right between Charlie Kirk camp and Nick Fuentes camp. In fact, the Kirk camp doesn’t stand for any kind of real right or real conservatism. Kirk is essentially a bought-and-paid-for shill, a shabbos goy of JSP or Jewish Supremacist Power. He is the ‘acceptable’ face of ‘conservatism’, toothless, gutless, and ball-less. His idea of ‘conservatism’ and ‘American values’ is forever malleable and mutable. It is whatever JSP says it is. This kind of Americanism has only one ‘bill of rights’, and it goes like this: Jews say ‘We win, you lose.’ Whatever the Jews want, they eventually get by any means necessary. Jews wanted open borders and got it. Jews wanted ‘free trade’ and got it. Jews wanted to rape the Russian economy in the 90s, and they got to do so. Jews wanted gambling to spread like a virus, and now it’s everywhere. Jews wanted pornography for children, and now there is easy access to porn by kids. Jews wanted ‘gay marriage’ and got it. Jews wanted Wars for Israel, and Middle East now lies in ruins.
Kirk stands for nothing but "I obey my Jewish masters." He is not a conservative but a con-servant of JSP. He is a CILO, or conservative-in-label-only. This is why the Kirk camp gets so triggered and antsy about the so-called ‘Groypers’(generally allied with Nicholas J. Fuentes) asking inconvenient questions. When confronted with tough questions by independent minds, the con-servants and cucks squirm like worm under a hot sun and demand what amounts to SJW-like ‘safe spaces’ from those courageous individuals who refuse to read from the preordained script. Anyway, what follows are some suggestions for ‘Groypers’ to consider in their formulation of questions in future TPUSA and other such cuckservative events.

1. When Big Banks faced financial doom in the 2008 crisis, they were bailed out by all taxpayers regardless of ideology. Right or Left, up or down, we all had to contribute taxes that bailed out Wall Street. Then, do Big Banks have the right to deny service to people based on creed or ideology? If they are bailed out by everyone, shouldn't they serve everyone?

2. Conservatives and Libertarians say private companies have the right to deny service to anyone. Does this apply even when companies are virtual monopolies and serve as de facto public space for all? Does Google, a virtual monopoly as Search Engine, have the right to rig results to favor Democrats and the Deep State over Populists and Republicans? If your answer is ‘yes’, should phone companies have the right to deny service based on creed or ideology?

Also, didn't companies like Google and Facebook become monopolies precisely because they started out by promising neutrality and fairness to all sides? After all, if Google or Facebook had declared their ideological biases from the outset and stated policies that would favor one political party over another, most conservatives would have rejected them and opted for another platform. But everyone, regardless of ideology, signed up to use Google and Facebook on the promise of fairness. So, when these companies now use their monopoly muscle to favor one side over another, it is a total breach of their terms of promise to us. They come up with ever-shifting 'terms of services', but it is they who violated the biggest term of all, that of fairness that attracted so many people to their sites on assurance of neutrality. If I gained market dominance in the ice cream industry by promising quality ice cream to everyone and then used my monopoly position to deny ice cream to certain groups, I would have violated the very principle that made me become the king of ice cream. After all, had I started my company by stating my intention of denying ice cream to certain groups, many people would never have bought ice cream from me, and my company would never have gained monopoly position. It seems Google and Facebook hustled us. They became monopolies by promising fairness to all sides, but once they had the muscle, they decided to favor one side over others. Big Tech companies treat us like Zionists treat Palestinians in Occupied West Bank where Jews get the best land and most water while Palestinians get far less or none at all.

3. When true conservatives and dissident rightists are deplatformed or denied service by monopolies, the reply of cuckservatives is, "They’re private companies, and they can do whatever they want." But if monopolies were to deny service to Zionists on grounds that Zionism is about the destruction of Palestinian nation and culture, would people like you and Charlie Kirk just shrug your shoulders and say private companies can do as they wish? I’d wager people like you will insist that the state must step in to make sure every private firm is open to business with Israel. If the private sector can do as it wishes, why do cuckservatives support state-sanctioned suppression of BDS that calls for justice for Palestinians who are living under apartheid conditions in West Bank and being mowed down by IDF death squads in Gaza? Why shouldn't private individuals and companies choose not to do business with Israel for the same reason that many chose not to do business with Apartheid South Africa in the 1980s? It's funny that cuckservatives defend the right of mega-corporations to sanction little people but never defend the right of private individuals and small businesses to reject business with Israel on account of its international crimes. There is a definite pattern here. Cuckservatism is about corporate domination over little individuals. Its position is monopoly companies can deny service to little individuals, but little individuals cannot say NO to business with the gangster state of Israel.

4. Mass Immigration of peoples from Europe into the New World led to what some call the ‘genocide’ of the American Indians. Also, mass-immigration of whites, blacks, and Asians led to the native people of Hawaii being reduced to a minority in their own ancestral homeland. Mass-immigration of Jews into Palestine led to the Nakba Pogroms that reduced Palestinians to a minority in Israel and an occupied people in West Bank, which continues to be colonized by caravans of Zionist invaders. And Serbs lost their historical homeland of Kosovo permanently to Albanians because of massive Muslim migration under Ottoman Rule. While it’s true that immigration led to rise of new civilizations, there is no doubt it also led to tragedies of natives and indigenous folks losing their land and culture to others. Thus, isn’t it about time to admit the connection between mass immigration, a form of demographic imperialism, with what is tantamount to ‘genocide’ in the long run? Just ask the Palestinians. By the way, since white people took the New World from the indigenous folks, they have a moral obligation to those native people but to peoples all over the world whose lands were NOT taken by whites. And if whites really care about the American Indians, the most tragic people of the New World, then they will stop mass-immigration and do their utmost to revive and restore American Indian communities.

5. We’ve been told by the Mass Media and Mass Education/Indoctrination that ‘Diversity Is Our Strength’? First, isn’t Diversity in the New World the product of imperialism, conquest, genocide, and slave trade? Native reds and browns were conquered by whites. That led to Diversity #1. Then, Latin whites, Anglos, and Jews brought over black African slaves. That led to Diversity #2. Then, white elites called on more mass-immigration to pan out and take all the lands from the native peoples. That was Diversity #3.
Second, if Diversity is a panacea for all problems and if it is no problem for the US to become a white-minority nation, then how come white-minority nations of Latin America with so much racial diversity are relative failures, and why are people in those nations running away from their own diversity to come to the US or Canada that are still majority white? Also, we are told that India is a very diverse place. If so, it must be a wonderful, magical place. And yet, it seems countless Indians want to flee from the Diversity in India and come to UK, US, Australia, and Canada that are white majority nations. What gives? It seems people in very diverse nations want to flee from the chaos of diversity and come to white majority nations that are, as yet, less corrupt and better-managed.

6. It’s been said that white people who want to maintain the racial and cultural integrity of their own nations are ‘white supremacists’. But why are they so characterized when they only want to preserve what is theirs and have no interest in ruling over other peoples? Aren’t the real ‘white supremacists’ all those non-whites who want to run away from their own people, culture, and nation to go live in white-majority nations? It seems those non-white immigrants prefer white people as rulers, neighbors, friends, associates, lovers, and mates OVER their own kind. If non-whites want to permanently flee their own peoples and cultures to come to live in white majority nations, don’t they prefer whites over their own kind? Thus, aren’t they the ‘white supremacists’ because they see whites as preferable and superior to their own kind and other non-white folks? After all, non-whites don’t want to move to non-white nations, especially black ones.

7. Jews in the academia and media bitch and whine about whites all the time. They even created something called ‘whiteness studies’. Most Jews are globalists and push for globo-homo, replacist immigration in goy nations, and vice industries such as gambling, pornography, and drugs. Jewish Hollywood routinely features whites as villains and evildoers, the ones to blame for all the problems of the world. If Jews feel this way about whites and if they insist that Diversity is so great, why have Jews historically followed after whites and chosen to live in white-majority nations? Who’s stopping Jews from moving to more diverse nations of Latin America or India? Why don’t Jews in white nations all move to black Africa or Muslim nations if they have so many issues with whites while claiming to just love non-whites? If Jews prefer non-whites and love immigration, how about they become immigrants to non-white nations. They can have the cake and eat it too. They get to be immigrants again and can forever live with non-whites than with baddy bad whites.

8. Jews often invoke the history of Europeans and Christianity to guilt-bait whites into a position of moral inferiority vis-a-vis Jews. Now, it’s true that Europeans and Christianity have had a blood history, but then, so have all other peoples. If whites must be reminded of their bloody history, isn’t it about time to remind Jews of their genocidal role in Bolshevik communism, their prominent role in the Atlantic Slave Trade(especially to Latin America), their financial funding of Western Imperialism, their selling of opium to the Chinese, their looting of the Russian economy in the 90s(that led to the rise of Putin who put an end to it), and their mass pogroms against the Palestinians that led to Nakba?

9. If people like you and Charlie Kirk believe in equal justice for all, how come you're so silent about how people like Arnon Milchan, who freely admitted that he spied and stole for Israel, can visit the US and walk freely without consequences? How come so many of the crooks pardoned by presidents have been Jewish ones? Think of Marc Rich and Jonathan Pollard. Think of the Jewish crook(who facilitated illegal immigration and exploited workers) pardoned by Trump. It seems Jews are above the law and have a license to steal and kill. Also, if people like you and Kirk believe in colorblind justice for all of humanity, why do you favor Zionist occupiers over Palestinian occupied in the West Bank? Palestinians lost the bulk of their homeland in the Nakba Pogroms of 1948, and Zionist caravans continue to steal land & water from Palestinians in the West Bank, but US politicians only praise and serve Israel.

10. If diversity is so important that we need Affirmative Action for less qualified blacks in higher education, why doesn’t anyone make the same case for sports? NBA and NFL are black-dominated even though blacks are 13% of US population. There are some whites but virtually no brown Mexicans, Asians, and Muslims. Sports are a national pastime and a hugely symbolic part of Americanism, and yet, there isn’t much diversity in sports. Should there be affirmative action for sports for the sake of 'diversity'? And do you think NBA and NFL teams will be better if they added more Asians, Hindus, Muslims, and Mexicans to the mix? After all, we are told ‘diversity is our strength.’

11. Charlie Kirk and others like him have said America is an idea. They say 'gay marriage' is American Ideal. Then, does that mean America was not America prior to the rise of globo-homo values? They say America is about freedom and democracy. Then, was America not 'America' when it had slavery? They say America is about respect for life. Then, was America not 'America' when American Indians were being wiped off the Great Plains to make way for endless waves of immigrant-invaders? Was America not 'America' when women didn't have the vote?
If the military were to take power in America tomorrow, would America no longer be 'America' because of demise of democracy? If so, what would America be? Isn't a nation what it is regardless of ideology, e.g. Russia was Russian prior to communism, during communism, and after communism. Likewise, America is America regardless of ideology or 'ideas' as long as its historic people make up its core populace.

Also, if America is about democracy and individual liberty, is any nation with democracy and individual liberty also 'America'? If America is an idea, then surely any people and place that practices the same ideas must also be 'America'. Mexican constitution is virtually identical to the US Constitution, and Mexico has democratic elections. So, is it also 'America'?

Finally, if America is an idea, then surely you know that ideas can go from place to place. People don't need to come to America to have American values and ideas since they can adopt and practice those ideas in their own nations. If someone invents a way to make fire, you don't need to stand where he is at to have the fire. You can learn the trick and make fire in your own place. So, if America is an idea, that idea can be adopted by any people anywhere around the world, and there is no need for all of them to come to America to enjoy 'American Ideas'. Ideas can come to you; you don't have to come to the place where the idea originated.

12. Can you repeat these historical truths? American Indians were wiped out by mass immigration. Blacks were once slaves in America. Jewish communists played a key role in Bolshevism that led to deaths of tens of millions of Christian Slavs. US aided Zionists in the Nakba pogroms that wiped Palestine off the map even though Palestinians did no harm to America.

13. Do you believe that American ideas and values are so outstanding that they should be adopted by all peoples around the world? Should they be the beacon of hope for all mankind? Does this include Israel? Should it also have 'gay marriage', deracination, and inclusive-invasive mass-immigration from all over the world?

14. People like you and Charlie Kirk say that we should support Israel because it tolerates and even celebrates homos and trannies. People like you say neighboring Muslim nations throw homos off roofs. But facts say otherwise. Israel is closely allied with Saudis that execute homosexuals. Also, Israel lent support to ISIS fighters in Syria who really do throw homos off roof-tops. Israel aided ISIS and Alqaeda against the Assad regime that is a tolerant, secular, and modernizing force in the Arab world. How do you square these contradictions?

15. Given that Jewish takeover of Palestine led to some of the biggest 'gay' & 'tranny' parades, orgies, and celebrations in the world, do you think Israel should now be called 'Sodom and Gomorrah'? Jews turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah. Is that something Christian Zionists should celebrate? Did Jews really need to retake the Holy Land because having mass homosexual orgies there is the spiritual and moral priority of Christian Zionists?