Murder of Linda Frickey by Black Criminals and What It Reveals about the Lack of Racial Immunity for Self-Preservation & Resistance against Existential Dangers — Defeating a Nation, People, or Culture by Robbing It of the Will to Resist

Vincent James on this horrible news: WHITE GRANDMOTHER HAS ARM LITERALLY RIPPED OFF BY BLACK TEENS, MEDIA IS SILENT - The Red Elephants - Vincent James
James focuses on the reluctance of the media, especially national media, to either report the news or discuss its racial dynamics. Of course, if a bunch of white teenagers had done this to an old black woman, it'd be world news spread by Jewish-run media, and Biden would made several speeches about it, and Twitter would be lit up with a zillion comments on 'racism'. Indeed, Jussie Smollett's obvious 'hate hoax' got 1000x more sympathetic attention than this horrific news story, which is all too characteristic of the nature and extent of crime in the US. Not only are the Jewish-run media remaining mostly silent about this news story but the FBI, under the control of JAB(Jews-around-Biden), decided not to publicize crime statistics, of course for ONE REASON: Black crime, already and always so high, went through the roof as the result of the fantasy of BLM that led to the 'defunding' of the police. What is truly amazing in all this is the general white silence and wimpery. Worse, so many white dummies or whummies(even highly 'educated' ones, but then that is precisely the problem as education today = indoctrination = communion into 'woke' PC) still chant the BLM slogan or put up BLM signs on their windows and front lawns, as if doing so imbues them with spiritual righteousness — apparently, for post-religious Jaberals, their spiritual void has to be filled by SOMETHING, and when it's not the 'rainbow' sodomy, it's the myth of St. George Floyd(though, of late, Ukraine is the new crusade, but I don't see that lasting too long). However, even those who haven't fallen for the BS of BLM and Floyd Fantasy dare not speak the naked truth about blacks and crime. Even those who blame BLM for the rise in crime and deaths dare not talk about how crime is linked to blacks due to evolution and genetics. And even though blacks feel ZERO sympathy for the nonblack victims of black crime and thuggery, even anti-BLM voices frame their arguments in terms of lamentation for increased black deaths. Imagine a war in which the men of Army A are rejoicing over the deaths of men of enemy Army B, but Army B pleads to end the war because, boo hoo hoo, too many men in Army A are dying as well. Never mind their own men, for whom Army A feels zero sympathy. It goes to show that being right isn't the same as feeling righteous. Ones who are factually wrong but righteous in passion often dominate those who are factually right but defensive, apologetic, and gutless in emotion. On the eve of the Bolshevik takeover of Russia, a free market economist with better statistics and arguments would have been useless against true-believing Bolshevik fanatics. Maybe Bolshevik economic theory was based on false stats and wrong notions, but their adherents were extremely righteous in their conviction and willing to kill/die for their beliefs. So, in the absence of social and political order, the most strong-willed and impassioned were likely to come out on top.

All the correct statistics and the rightness in assessing reality are on the side of anti-BLM people. They are right in their knowledge that blacks commit the most crime, blacks routinely kill blacks, blacks also kill lots of non-blacks, and that white police 'genocide' of blacks is a total fantasy, despite the general 'liberal' belief that 10,000 blacks are killed annually by the police. They are also right in pointing out that increased police presence significantly reduce black deaths. But that's about being right, not about being righteous. It doesn't challenge the prevailing idolatry in the West that blacks are somehow sacred, that their bodies are special, their souls are nobler, and etc. Indeed, even anti-BLM voices often make their arguments in service to Negrolatry, i.e. they argue against BLM to save sacred black bodies that have been killed in larger numbers due to BLM policies. Righteousness can be founded on rightness in facts and reality but not necessarily, as facts often get in the way in the way of a narrative of heroes and villains, saints and sinners. More often than not, righteousness is divorced from rightness because emotions and spirituality often don't comport with facts and reality. It's like romance doesn't always choose the right or better person based on objective criteria. No wonder women fall for dangerous but dashing men, and men fall for femme fatales. Righteousness can be sentimental, or it can be furious, even murderous. Often, it starts as a gentle glow but then burns hot and threatens to set the world on fire. Consider how Christianity began as sympathy for Jesus the Good Man but turned into a worldwide crusade that destroyed countless pagan temples and persecuted so many as witches and heretics(and also led to countless sectarian violence). And, consider THE PLANET OF THE APES series, especially ESCAPE FROM THE PLANET OF THE APES where the apes in the first movie find themselves transported to an earlier time on Earth when humans still ruled. A man figures out what happened and realizes that the presence of the talking apes could begin to fulfill the prophecy whereby apekind eventually supersedes mankind as the masters of the planet. So, based on his calculations in regards to the future, the talking apes must either be killed or, at the very least, sterilized. But the movie audience, presumably all human, is likely to side with the apes despite the knowledge that the talking apes' presence threatens the future of mankind. Why would the audience feel this way? Because even though the correct 'math' is on the side of the man who sees the need to kill or sterilize the apes, the heart of the audience feels for the apes. They don't want to see the madonna ape and her baby be killed by Neo-Herod man. The movie ends with the baby ape going 'mama, mama'. So, 'mama' wins over 'math' because it feels more righteous even though the right thing to do, in order to secure mankind's future, is to kill or sterilize the apes. If the righteousness in ESCAPE FROM THE PLANET OF THE APES was on the level of sentiment, it turns into inflamed passion in CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES, the hero of which is the ape-baby grown into the messianic Ape Avenger. (Of course, the religious-conservative orangutan elder was also right in THE PLANET OF THE APES as to the danger posed by humans to the ape world. Still, he was better-positioned than his human counterpart in ESCAPE because the ape world was tribal, traditional, and communal in their antipathy toward humans, whereas the thinking/talking apes in ESCAPE arrive in a liberal human order that, especially in the post-WWII and Cold War atmosphere, goes out of its way to be enlightened, tolerant, and compassionate. Thus, if the orangutan elder served the general will of the ape order, the human 'villain' in ESCAPE must act on his own against public sentiment.) Even when factually wrong, the righteous possess the drive to assert their will and go on the attack. Jussie Smollett pulled the insane 'hate hoax' because of his sense of righteousness. Being black, there's obviously more natural egotism, but our culture instills blacks with angry righteousness via academia, media, and official pronouncements. Indeed, the Civil Rights Movement narrative now counts for more than all other events in US history, and MLK is deemed greater than all great white historical figures combined; his only rivals are Harriet Tubman and George Floyd. For the righteous, it doesn't matter if something is factually correct or incorrect. What matters is they are on the 'right side of history', on the side of angels, and/or war with the demonic(as currently defined). So, stuff like facts are secondary to the cause, the agenda, the crusade. If facts are inconvenient, ignore them. If lies are useful, use them. As righteousness trumps all, reality exists to serve one's sacral vision of the world. It's like biology is a mere inconvenience to a tranny who insists he's a woman. As globo-homo has been sacralized, the homo or tranny's feelings are next-to-godliness, and reality must take a backseat to the passion of globo-homo. Likewise, no matter how many 'hate hoaxes' are exposed for what they are, the phenomenon continues because they aren't about facts but the faith of Negrolatry, Globo-Homo, or Jew-Worship. So, even when the latest 'hate hoax' is factually shown to have been the work of some lowlife Negro, Homo, or Jew, what matters is that it was for a good cause, to push the holy narrative, just like the Catholic Church, knowing full well that miracle sightings were bogus, pretended otherwise to keep the flock faithful. Such mentality now affects the entire media, even academia. Not that journalists and scholars aren't interested in facts and details, but they believe that the holiest of the holies are Negrolatry, Globo-Homo, and Jew-Worship, and therefore, even falsehoods that prop up the idolatry and narrative are preferable to facts that belie them. But then, there's another trick, that of 'prestige'. The establishment media and academia posture as being rational and factual by abusing their brand to dismiss any inconvenient fact, data, or idea/theory as 'discredited', thus persuading the less knowledgeable that certain things have been rejected by SCIENCE. New York Times uses its prestige to repeat over and over that Charles Murray's Bell Curve theory has been 'discredited' but without showing any scientific proof. For many people, official prestige is enough to sway them. (By the way, Murray is a perfect example of the weakness of rightness in the face of impassioned righteousness, like at Middlebury College. He may be right about lots of facts, but he's bloodless and passionless about his knowledge. At times, he's even defensive and lamenting, like Robert D. Putman who wrote BOWLING ALONE. Both scholars operate on the basis of, "I wish it wasn't true, but it is." It's impossible to be righteous with the right data with such wussy attitude. If rightness is to prevail, it must also be righteous and grow a pair.)

As a matter of factuality, BLM is a lie, which means policies based on it are nonsensical, and as such, they can only do harm as reality is willfully misunderstood and mishandled. It's like misdiagnosis in medicine can be harmful, even fatal. Imagine a lung cancer patient being ordered to smoke more as a cure. (Just think of what the lies about Covid-19 did to the world.) Despite all the lies, so many people in the US still chant BLM slogans and even put up BLM signs. They are saying and living the lie, but they do it anyway because they feel righteous. In contrast, even though anti-BLM people are on firm ground as far as reality is concerned, they are anxious or afraid to speak the truth. A few may defend the police and even put up support-the-police signs, but virtually NO ONE in the US puts up signs saying BLACKS MURDER BLACKS, BLACKS RAPE WHITES, BLACKS ATTACK NON-BLACKS, etc., all of which are infinitely truer about reality than the fantasy of BLM. Furthermore, any sane person should know by now that BLM policies led to even more black deaths, but BLM still remains the righteous position whereas critics of BLM are still apologetic about the truth. 'Black Lives Matter' is like China's 'Great Leap Forward', which was actually a great leap backward. More black lives were killed as the result of BLM, but such facts are secondary to the righteous rage of 'social justice' where blacks are saints and whites are demons. But white people weren't always this way. They used to be rationally race-ist and have a far more realistic assessment of group differences. Sure, there was also more bigotry of the stupid sort, the gratuitous nastiness of a**holes, but there was also a good deal of common sense, as well as a sure sense of white worth, white pride, European heritage, and historical meaning, all of which kept whites believing that they were of a race, culture, and civilization worth preserving and defending, even expanding. Fast forward to today, and many whites feel as though they're diseased with a 'sinful' and 'racist' identity that must be expunged somehow. There are still many whites feel otherwise, but even many of them lack the guts to stand up and speak up for their race. Furthermore, despite their lack of white self-loathing, they tend to give special consideration to Jews and blacks over their own kind, as if they feel they must prove they are not 'racist'. It's like Donald Trump relied heavily on white support but was always yammering about how his policies are so great for Jews and blacks. All of this is a powerful demonstration of the effect of undermining resistance in a people. It's like a person with severely compromised immunity can fall seriously ill or even die from a mild disease. A healthy person's body fends off all sorts of germs, even the nastiest ones, but an unhealthy person can succumb to even the common cold or mild case of flu. For him, it could be totally debilitating or even fatal.

Jews understand this very well. One way to destroy a powerful system is to assemble a powerful counter-force and go on the attack. All throughout history, a powerful domain was defeated by an even more powerful domain. In World War II, it took the combined might of UK, US, and USSR to destroy the powerful Nazi Germany, which had been unified into a powerful industrial fighting force. It's like it takes a powerful boxer or wrestler to defeat another powerful boxer or wrestler. To amass a powerful force and hurl it against another powerful force is no easy feat. It's like it's nearly impossible to fell a tree with one blow. So, what did people do through the ages? They took an ax and slowly chipped away at the tree. Then, when enough of the tree was chopped away at the base, it would fall from its own weight. Just leave it up to gravity. Indeed, no matter how big and powerful someone is, anyone(even a child or old lady) could beat him if he was debilitated by drugs or disease. It's like naturalists in the field can work on bears, lions, rhinos, and other dangerous animals once they'd been tranquilized. White America used to be united and powerful. What made it so? Racial consciousness, historical sense, pride of achievement, sense of community, and spiritual conviction(that its faith was the best one). There was no chance that Jews or any people could bring down such a power. Politically, economically, technologically, and militarily, the White West was the most powerful entity, invincible as a united force. Nothing even came close. Yet, even if it couldn't be beaten from the outside, it could be weakened from the inside. Anti-whites could enter into institutions and rewrite the laws. They could enter the academia & media and alter the narratives and idols/icons. They could use entertainment and leisure to make the white masses prioritize hedonism and decadence over morality, family, community, and nation. They could take over medicine and promote all sorts of drugs on which people become dependent. They could use education and communication to instill whites with feelings of 'guilt' and 'sin'. Information and Media could also be used to promote non-white, anti-white, Judeo-centric, Afro-centric, and/or homocentric idols/icons and narratives over pro-white, normative, and Eurocentric ones. Also, language and terminology could be used to turn certain words into incantations and truisms that were to be accepted as 'self-evident' than debated. "Diversity is our strength, diversity is our strength..." or "black lives matter, black lives matter", "white supremacism! white supremacism!" "Migrants Welcome, Migrants Welcome", ad infinitum.

Over time, despite still being the dominant majority in the West, despite having suffered no military invasions, despite continuing to hold lots of wealth, and despite having lots of people with talent, the White World came to be near-fatally weakened on the tribal, racial, communal, moral, spiritual, and national level. Forget about European pride when you've been told that a recently arrived Arab or African is just as 'European' as a European(if not more so) with ancestry going back 10,000s of yrs. Never mind racial unity when 'racism' is the greatest sin, and 'white racism' is the worst of all 'racisms', especially against blacks even when blacks act like thugs and louts. Forget about community when individualism is all that matters; your hedonism and pleasure matter more than family and society. Besides, if a community must be formed, it has to be around stuff like globo-homo or BLM as any theme with the slightest hint of being pro-white, genuinely Christian, or truly European is anathema in the Current Year. And what is morality when right-or-wrong is a matter of mindlessly praising and serving Jews, blacks, and homos? And forget about spirituality in a world where churches fly the homo flag or care more for the Negrolatry of George Floyd than about God and Jesus. With the White World degraded to such level, forget about nationalism. What nation is left to save or defend? It's been said the US defeated the Soviet Union without firing a single shot in the Cold War. World War III was averted but US nevertheless won over the communist system. Actually, this isn't really true. Soviet Union defeated itself because communism wasn't a workable system in the long run. Even if there had been no Cold War and even if the US and USSR had just ignored one another, USSR would have lost anyway(even without US hostility) because the economic system was too confused and inefficient, and without incentives. Soviet Union defeated itself, but the US took the credit. Imagine if someone you hate drinks himself to death, but you take credit of having beaten him. In contrast, the defeat or the fall of the White World is truly amazing. Unlike the USSR that practiced a deeply flawed economic system, white people in Europe, Canada, and the US had everything, most of them right. They had freedom and democracy, they had capitalism, they had social safety nets(a bit of socialism), they had national identity and pride, and lots of other things that make society work. And yet, whites have become increasingly defenseless against problems and challenges that should have been obvious to the naked eye and could have been handled with a bit of good sense. The fate of the Soviet Union was the failure of failure, whereas the fate of the White West is the failure of success, i.e. people with so many good ideas and systems failing to secure and strengthen them and instead, meekly and weakly, letting themselves to be nudged, prodded, pushed, and attacked with ever more ridiculous demands.

The White West was the most powerful force in the world. So powerful that even after WWI, it dominated the world. And even after WWII, the white-dominant US was the biggest power in the world by far. (And even the Soviet Union was white.) There was no force that could challenge or defeat it. And yet, its mechanism of self-preservation and resistance grew ever more compromised from the inside. Instead of being defeated outright in the physical/material/military sense, its inner sense of worth, confidence, meaning, and value came to be eroded over time... until there was a critical mass of whites who called for the outright destruction of whiteness and whites who were too spineless to stand up and say NO. In a way, what happened to Russians and White West during and after the Cold War is like the mirror opposite. During the Cold War, the America-led West grew richer and more abundant and developed the most powerful military. In contrast, the Soviets with a far smaller economy strained to keep up militarily and couldn't even fill up store shelves with basic items. By every metric of material success, the American-led West beat the Soviet Union by a mile. But, despite all such gains in the West, there was a ceaseless decline in patriotism, national identity, cultural heritage, civilizational confidence, communal unity, and racial sense. White Americans had more, ate more, and had more fun, but they increasingly became defensive about their identity lest they give offense as 'racists'. In contrast, while material conditions worsened in Russia under late communism and then truly hit rock bottom in the 1990s, Russians never felt there was anything wrong with being Russian, that Russians were burdened with special 'historical guilt', or that they were soul-sick for their ethnicity or nationality. Even when material conditions were at their worst in Russia, Russians didn't feel bad about their history, country, culture, and identity.

In the end, who wins out? A rich man who hates himself or a poor man who likes himself? Such a rich man, for all his wealth, begins to work against himself, whereas the poor man, despite his poverty, works for himself, to build himself up. In the long run, a man robbed of his soul is worse off than a man robbed of his possessions. It's even worse if the man robbed of his soul is told that hating himself is the highest good, or the new soulfulness. White Californians had it so good. In the same period, Russians had it so bad. But today, Russia is asserting its national will and taking back historical parts of Ukraine. In contrast, white Californians, over several decades, have been unwilling, thus unable, to do anything to stop their decline and demise even though there has been no military invasion of California. While Russians were doing something about the globalist oligarchs, White Californians let Jewish oligarchs take over everything and demand and dictate as if the Golden State was their fiefdom. While Russia reasserted control of its borderlands, white Californians, once over 80% of the population, have been reduced to 35% and keep on losing. While Russia said NO to globo-homo, white Californians are always at the mercy of whatever fads and fashions pushed by Jews, indeed as if they have no minds or souls of their own. When the Cold War ended, white Californians had so much more than the impoverished Russians. But whereas Russians never felt bad for being Russian, so many White Californians had no ethnic pride or racial sense of pride left. They lost their sense of self-preservation and resistance because Jews gained the key into the control centers of the West and reprogrammed the White Mind via the academia and media with negative feelings about 'white guilt', 'racism', 'homophobia', and etc. (While the Soviet Union was also 'anti-racist', the policy didn't come at the expense of Russian-ness, which was not insulted and excoriated as being uniquely guilty. Jews pulled that number first on Germans, then Anglos, and then rest of Western Europe.) And this poison is the new white identity or anti-identity all over the West, from US to Canada to Australia to EU. Indeed, one reason why current Europeans hate Russians(and Hungarians) with such virulence is that their new identity is one of self-negation. A German believes it's wrong for a true German, a white German, to feel pride of identity. No, 'German-ness' has value only in association to 'diversity'. If a black African becomes a 'German citizen', then and only then does German identity have value. For true/white Germans, German-ness is a burden, a curse stained with Holocaust Guilt. Only when outsiders become 'New Germans' does German-ness gain value as newcomers(especially if non-white) are without Holocaust Guilt. But it's not just the Germans. Almost all Western Europeans now feel and think this way. Their national anti-identity is one of self-negation-and-abnegation, of welcoming the non-European world to take over as the New Europe.

Then, it's hardly surprising that such people would be terribly triggered by Russians who affirm their national identity and heritage and culture. How dare they? Don't Russians know that 'good whites' work to undermine their own national identity, national borders, national heritage? It's become customary in Europe to feature black actors in historical roles of Europeans. Whiteness is BAD and is made GOOD only through self-negation and cucking to others. When such mentality dominates the 'rules-based order' of the West, of course Russia proudly asserting its position and projecting its power to secure its existence and future is deeply offensive. Don't be like those barbarians! Be like the British, Irish, or White Californians whose highest notion of good is winning approval from Jews. So, Jews were very smart. They knew that the White West was mighty and impossible to defeat and take over militarily, but it could be rendered defenseless if its resistance mechanism were altered from within. Jews didn't have to fire a shot. Just get the key and worm inside to the inner workings of white institutions and media that control the thoughts and feelings of the white masses, especially true in the era of electronic media where virtually everyone's mind is tuned to the wavelength of those who monopolize key media centers. Then, why should anyone be surprised about the sickening silence surrounding the horrific murder of Linda Frickey? She's white, and whiteness is bad. Don't resist against black savagery! That's 'racist'! Gee, maybe those blacks(called 'teens') did us a favor by ridding the world of some of this shitty 'whiteness', of which Linda Frickey was a part. What a world we live in. White American cowards who don't lift a finger to protect their own from black savages and illegal invaders get all triggered over Russia finally pushing back against Jewish use of NATO as battering ram against Russia. Death Of The Jewish Pencil - Brother Nathanael

How Jewish Bagel Brains Came to Own Irish Potatoheads — How Jews Manipulated the Mis-Alignment of Self-Preservation and Self-Righteousness in Irish Politics, Values, and Spirituality.

There are two ways of responding to the world around us, two ways of feeling about who we are and how we relate to others, near and far. They define much of our lives as a constant struggle and/or exertion(and even excitement). One is about self-preservation and the other is about self-justification(that can easily turn into self-righteousness). Most ideal is when self-preservation is aligned with self-justification. Most dangerous is when self-justification comes to malign self-preservation. Consider Body and Soul(or Spirit). Consider Health and Sensation. Though the soul/spirit is an extension of the body, excessive indulgence of the body or excessive purification of the spirit can lead to misalignment of the two. A person who prioritizes only the needs of the body will neglect the spirit, and a person who seeks spiritual perfection will neglect the body. The narcissism of the body will conflate physical beauty with sanctity itself. The purist strains of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity have led to problematic, even pathological, rejection of the needs of the body. And even though sensations exist to preserve life and health — hunger makes us eat, cold leads us to warmth, pain alerts us to seek relief, sexual desire leads to birth of new life to perpetuate the species, etc — , they can take on a life of their own and deviate from their original/main purpose. Normally, pain and strain alert us that something is wrong, and pleasure assures us that health has been restored. Hunger is a kind of strain/pain and makes the organism seek out food that provides pleasure and ensures its preservation. But what if the organism overly fixates on pleasure of eating and keeps eating beyond what is necessary for health and preservation? Consider all the fatsos who keep eating and eating when they don’t need all that food. They’ve fallen into the Pleasure Trap where pleasure no longer serves its primary purpose of preservation but exists for its own sake. We see such behavior with sex, drugs, and leisure of all kinds. These kinds of pleasures aren’t correctives to Pain Alarms that something is wrong but sensations that demand more and more stimulation, titillation, and scintillation for an organism that has become addicted to excessive jolts of intense pleasure. This is most problematic with drugs such as crack, meth, and heroin. Pleasure offered by such drugs do NOTHING for preservation of health of the organism, but it is sought out by the organism that finds itself increasingly divorced from reality. It’s like the 1980s commercial of the monkey that became so addicted to cocaine that it neglected everything else to get more highs from the drug... even unto death. Same could be said of pleasures offered by vice industries such as gambling and prostitution, real-life or electronic(aka video-pornography).


Ideally, body and soul are united in purpose. Though body and soul are different, they must be complementary, like negative and positive charges of electricity. Likewise, pleasure associated with eating should primarily be associated with needs of health. When hungry, people should seek out good food and consume essential calories and nutrients. While a bit of junk food snacks like cookies and ice cream are okay in small amounts, they should be avoided as main course or staple diet. (Consider that much of the obesity and diabetes problem in the West has to do with people constantly munching on snacks of all kinds away from the meal table.) Even healthy activity such as exercise must be in sound coordination with the needs and limits of the body. Consider all the people who end up with chronic aches(or even debilitating injuries) because they pushed their bodies too hard in search of pathological narcissism or egotistical glory. Unless one is a professional athlete or adventurer, one should never push too hard. No sense in pushing oneself to become tougher and stronger only to end up crippled or dead.

The same rule applies to self-preservation and self-justification. They must be balanced and aligned with one another. One must serve the other with an understanding that they aren't synonymous. Just as it’s wrong to conflate self-preservation with self-justification, it’s wrong to risk self-preservation for sake of self-justification(morphed into self-righteousness). Nazi German soldiers fought to preserve themselves in Russia, and to that extent, they were working in the mode of self-preservation. But were they in the right to invade and terrorize another nation? At least on Russian soil, didn’t Russians have the priority of self-preservation against the German invaders. Thus, Russian self-preservation was aligned with Russian self-justification whereas, by normal standards of universal nationalism, German presence in Russia was not justified. Of course, there were Nazi radicals who argued that Germans had the racial right to invade and conquer Slavic territories since ‘Aryans’ are the superior and more deserving race. To be sure, it’s been a common justification all through the ages. For example, Latinos and Anglos certainly felt justified in conquering and taking the New World from the natives who were seen as savage, primitive, backward, inferior, or satanic(especially with the massive human sacrifices in South America and Mexico). Nazi Germans felt likewise justified in their invasion of Russia to create lebensraum for the Teutonic ubermensch. Humans certainly feel this way about animals and nature in general. Human races the world over have wiped out entire floras and faunas to create safer and securer habitats for themselves as the premium and more deserving species. And the West says the Jews were justified in carrying out Nakba Pogroms against lowly Arab Palestinians who were colonized, conquered, and expelled from their ancient homeland.
Still, while mankind has always been invasive, the defenders of blood & soil were always more justified in protection of homeland from invaders. And in cases where invaders did take over and put down roots, they went into defensive mode to protect their acquired territory from further invasion. And after many years passed, the descendants of the invaders came to regard the land they were born on as their homeland of blood and soil. History has always been complicated in this respect. Invaders become defenders, and defenders can become expansive and invade territories defended by others. History of imperialism has been like a football game where the only meaningful boundary is the latest scrimmage line. That said, the persistence of homeland often survived despite the anarchy of borders. For instance, even under Roman Imperial rule, the Jews regarded Jerusalem as their sacred city. And even after Poland was effectively wiped off the map, most Poles between Prussia/Germany and Russia had a general sense of their heritage and territory, which is why it was relatively easy to reconstitute Poland once Russian and German empires fell in World War I. And despite the vastness of the Soviet Empire, various ethnic groups maintained a sense of territorial integrity that emerged into full-fledged nationhood once USSR came to an end.

A people are most justified when their sense of self-preservation is paired with a powerful sense of self-justification. Indeed, such a people tend to be the fiercest fighters with the highest morale and determination. Take the Vietnamese under Ho Chi Minh. They believed in Vietnam as their motherland to take back from foreigners, be they French or Americans, and this sense of national self-preservation(or self-restoration) was almost synonymous with their sense of self-justification. They felt 100% justified in fighting for defense of their homeland. Justification = Preservation. They felt this so powerfully that they were willing to fight the French and then the Americans against all odds and despite losses of millions of lives. The Irish too were a fierce people at one time because their sense of self-preservation was one with their self-justification. They believed in national liberation and independence of Ireland from British Imperial rule. Their sense of nationhood was justification enough. Their sense of national memory & territoriality was powerfully wedded to their sense of political morality, historical necessity, and ideological commitment. Ireland for the Irish, the Irish for Ireland. Thus, despite the great military advantage of the British Empire, the greatest in the world at the time, the Irish independence struggle remained a major thorn on its side.
And of course, the reason why Jewish Power and Israel/Zionism are so mighty has to do with the complementary relation between Jewish self-preservation and Jewish self-justification. Jews don’t need to invoke GDP numbers or variety of -isms(and catchphrases and mantras about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’) to justify the existence of Israel. The fact that it is the homeland of the Jews is justification enough for Jewish national self-preservation. Jews don’t need to ideologically defend their identity and territory. The mere fact of preserving Jewishness and Jewish homeland is more than sufficient. Then, it’s no wonder that Israel is so powerful and confident. (Granted, Israel was created by destroying Palestine. Indeed, Jewish-European imperialism kicked into gear just when Christo-European imperialism was beginning to recede from the Third World following the end of WWII, but Jews do have ancient roots in the land, the holiness of which wouldn’t make sense apart from Jewish ethno-spiritual narratives.) In a way, Israelis today feel as Irish did a century ago. Or, as the Vietnamese did as they struggled against the French & Americans. Algerians and Cubans also had a unity of self-preservation and self-justification in their struggles against imperialism/colonialism, respectively, of the French and Anglo-Jewish-Italo-Americans. And both Algerians and Cubans prevailed.

Still, it seems national identities have been fading all over the world, that is except for Jewish Identity. Part of the reason is Jewish Globalist agenda of weakening goy identities to make it harder for various goyim to unite into particular nationalities against Jewish globalist-imperialism. After all, even though Jews prize Israel as their sacred homeland, they also operate in neo-imperialist mode and derive most of their wealth and power from manipulating and exploiting goyim. Jews seek to flood the entire goy world with mass global migration while Israel alone remains afloat like Noah’s Ark in a mixed sea of miscegenationist confusion that shall engulf all goyim like the Sea of Reeds crashed upon Pharaoh’s chariots. Jews keep the crown and the rest of us drown. But, there is another reason for the fading of goy national identities. Many goyim around the world have artificial constructed identities, and ironically enough, their sense of nationality wouldn’t exist if not for European imperialism. After all, what is an ‘Indian’ or ‘Indonesian’? How did some Arabs end up as ‘Syrians’ while others ended up as ‘Saudis’ or ‘Iraqis’? How did some Kurds become ‘Iraqis’ while others became ‘Turks’, ‘Iranians’, or ‘Syrians’? While Arabs and Kurds pre-existed the coming of European Imperialism, they ended up in nation-states that resulted from often arbitrary lines drawn on the sand by the imperialists. To be sure, the line in the sand in the Middle East wasn’t certain even prior to European Imperialism.

What is the crucial difference between Israel and Ireland today? In Israel, there is virtual synthesis of Self-Preservation and Self-Justification whereas in Ireland the passion of Self-Justification has come unglued from Self-Preservation. There was a time when nothing was more just, necessary, and sacred in Irish hearts and minds than the independence and self-preservation of Irish people, land, and culture. But the great majority of Irish no longer feel that way. Indeed, many feel that the notion of Irish Self-Preservation is offensive, immoral, ‘racist’, ‘xenophobic’, and even downright evil. Their primary sense of Self-Justification comes from raving about Globo-Homomania, celebrating Diversity, welcoming ‘immigrants’(who are really invader-colonizers), Afro-worship(as Irish women got jungle fever, Irish men worship black athletes, and all Irish regard black music as the highest and deepest expression of soulful truth), and Jew-worship. (Many Irish still tend to be pro-Palestinian as legacy of past struggles when IRA and PLO were allies, but their anti-Zionist stance is ironically the consequence of their mindless Jew Worship. The Irish are so morally awed by Jews as the greatest victims of all time — the holy holocaust people — that it bothers their sensitivities to see wonderful Jews acting like a bunch of bullies against a powerless people such as Palestinians. Indeed, many Europeans have similar views. They are so committed to worshiping Jews as a holy people, the new christs who died for the sins of white folks, that they simply can’t digest the fact that powerful Jews in US and Israel are acting rather like Nazis.)

Because of the divergence between self-preservation and self-justification, the Irish are now a very schizo people. At the gut level, all organisms(which includes humans) instinctively want to secure their existence and ensure their continuance. So, even among Irish progs, there is some buried organismic want for survival. This side of them, no matter how repressed, is present in their drives and passion. But as Irish self-preservation has been ideologically and ‘idologically’ pathologized as ‘racist’, ‘far-right’, ‘exclusive’, and ‘xenophobic’, the majority of Irish now feel ashamed to harbor such nationalist passions. But because the feeling is there(as it’s natural), the Irish go out of their way to condemn it with even greater fury. If society deems something as sinful and if this sinful something happens to be ineradicable(as all natural feelings are no matter how repressed), extra measures must be taken to attack and condemn it day in and day out. It’s like the vilification of sexuality led to especially hysterical attempts to suppress natural passions in the witch-hunts of the Middle Ages. And communist societies had to be endlessly vigilant and alarmist about ‘greed’ precisely because self-interest is a permanent feature of human nature, even in the so-called New Man of Marxism-Leninism. Repressive hyper-virtue that runs against nature wants to be rid of all temptations and anything that reminds them of temptations. Then, it’s no wonder that campaigns against nationalism are so hysterical, relentless, fervent, and dogmatic. (Granted, human nature comprise opposites. Just as nationalism is natural, so is internationalism. Human nature is both naturally conservative and liberal, both cautious & wary and open & exploratory. Though the term ‘xenophobia’ is thrown around a lot, it should really apply only to societies where the order hysterically tries to suppress the natural inclination of humans to be curious, adventurous, and open to new experiences. North Korea would truly be a xenophobic nation. It is the mirror opposite of current Ireland. If North Korea ruthlessly suppresses the natural tendency of a people to look beyond their own domain, New Ireland fervently suppresses the natural tendency of a people to protect and preserve their own domain. Both are out of balance.) When people are pressured to do what goes against their nature, they must be drummed with constant reminders that the inquisition or purging is most necessary, desirable, and justified. Take the ritual of Seppuku in Japan, aka Harakiri. Suicide goes against organismic nature since life wants to live. People dread not only death but the pain involved. So, if samurai listened to their nature, they would have run like a mothafuc*a if expected to rip open their bellies. In order to counter such natural reaction, Japanese society devised an elaborate rules of duty and redemption whereby one’s honor could be restored ONLY BY MEANS of ritual suicide. To make the unnatural seem most natural and necessary(if circumstances demanded it), samurai from a young age were conditioned and tasked with an outlook that reminded them day in and day out that it was glorious to die an honorable death and that they must have absolutely no fear of it. The unnatural was made palatable through poetics and spirituality.

There is this sense in the death of Jesus as well. According to Christian mythology, the human side of Jesus feared pain and torture of Crucifixion as any man would. It went against human nature for Jesus not to be like a Negro and run like a mothafuc*a. More human/natural would have been for Jesus to go with the ‘last temptation’ of Martin Scorsese’s film. So, why was Jesus willing to surrender His body to such agony, humiliation, and death? He spun a myth about Himself whereby self-justification demanded His body be sacrificed for the redemption/salvation of mankind. A powerful sense of mission for humanity. And there was the matter of His massive Jewish ego. Still, He agonized all night, even panicking at moments and bewailing God for having putting Him in a bad situation. Finally, He was able to go through with the plan because His sense of self-justification overpowered His sense of self-preservation. His spiritual sense convinced Him that His physical demise would open a way for spiritual resurrection and everlasting glory. He needed an elaborate mythology of spiritual justification to overpower the physical demand for self-preservation.
And something similar happens in wars too. Every soldier knows he could get killed or horribly wounded in battle, and a part of his human nature tells him to take flight than fight, especially if the war happens to be imperialist in nature and has nothing to do with national defense or survival. (No wonder so many Americans were demoralized in Vietnam. Why did they need to fight rice-eaters to protect the American Way? While most didn't desert, few felt eagerness to put their lives on the line for the sake of foreigners.) Still, most soldiers pick up their guns and charge into battle because there is also the fear of court-martial and/or contempt as a coward(and being killed by the other side of course). As humans are social animals sensitive to how others feel about them, their natural fear in one area could be overcome by natural fear of social opprobrium or legal sanction(that could even lead to execution. e.g. Soviet troops who retreated in WWII were summarily shot by commissars — more honorable to be killed a hero by the Germans than killed a coward by one’s own side).

In a similar way, there is a natural Irish will to survive. It wants to preserve the people, culture, and land of Ireland for the Irish. But the elite Irish powers-that-be, especially the media and academia that take cues from the US as the metropole of the Empire of Judea, have inculcated generations of Irish children that the highest goods are Diversity(created by mass-immigration), Homomania, Afromania, and Jew-Worship. Now, some degree of cosmopolitanism is good and natural — as humans are naturally expansive as they’re naturally defensive — , but current Political Correctness goes far beyond a healthy balance of nationalism and internationalism. Rather, it calls for total eradication of traditional nationalism in favor of turning one’s own nation into an interchangeable bloc in the World of Glob, world where globalism runs rampant like the broomsticks in SORCERER'S APPRENTICE with Mickey Mouse. As current globalism is utterly radical and crazy, the natural response among the Irish should be for More Nationalism and efforts at Self-Preservation. But this is proving difficult and even near-impossible as the ‘Poz’ has utterly disconnected Irish sense of Self-Justification from Self-Preservation. So, if past Irish felt most justified in struggling for preservation, they now feel most justified in working against it. And precisely because the current National Suicide(or Irish Harakiri) goes against human nature, the delusional Irish must make an especially rabid effort to convince themselves that it’s ALL FOR THE GOOD to turn Ireland into New Africa-India-Arabia. (It's like whites cheer with artificially heightened enthusiasm for the Great Replacement to drown out their natural fears that it will turn out to be disastrous as the 'evil racists' have warned. Or, it's like gamblers get especially excited as they place big bets to suppress the very natural fear that they will lose everything. Consider Julie Hagerty's delirium in LOST IN AMERICA as she hangs all her hopes on '22'. It's like the globalist whites are collectively betting and shouting for '22' while the odds are totally against them. Crash-22 here it comes.)

Just like a samurai on the eve of Seppuku mustered all his energy to convince himself he felt no fear and welcomed this most honorable death, the Irish are forcing themselves to believe they’re having the grandest time in utterly transforming their nation into the Third World. This is all very ironic considering that Ireland was once one of the poorest nations in Europe, indeed its own little bit of ‘third world’. Irish had to work extra hard to turn poor Ireland into a genuine First World Nation, but they now seem hellbent on turning it literally into a Third World nation by importing tons of blacks, Hindus, and Muslims at the behest of globalist intellectual elites who take their cues from Jews. And yet, it all makes sense in a way. Due to centuries of deprivation and backwardness, the Irish had always felt an inferiority complex vis-a-vis the most advanced nations of Europe, and once they really began to make money, they(like the Spaniards) went out of their way to prove that they are just as intellectually, culturally, and politically advanced as the most modernized nations. So, a mindset developed whereby status-seeking Irish elites came to crave, above all, the approval of the elites of nations like Germany, Sweden, France, Canada, the US, and even UK, its old enemy. If Irish Celtics and British Anglos now have one thing in common, it’s that they are both neo-colonial subjects of the Empire of Judea and, as such, desire nothing more than to win the approval of Jewish overlords and super-elites who rule the world. So, if Jews say Globo-Homo and Diversity are the highest goods for white goy nations, both Anglo and Celtic cuck-elites are eager to prove that they are more ‘pozzed’ than the other. It’s a race among dogs before the Jewish Master.
But then, the Irish mindset was always compromised as the Irish were both the biggest victims and biggest beneficiaries of Anglo Imperialism. They were the first victims of British expansionism and often treated harshly, not least because the British were appalled by all the drinking, wife-beating, and brawling among the ‘micks’. But, no non-Anglo people benefited for as long and as much as the Irish in sharing the spoils of Anglo imperialism. Wherever Anglos went, the Irish followed along as soldiers, traders, adventurers, and pillagers. The Irish sure gained a tremendous deal from the US, essentially the product of Anglo Imperialism and Colonization. So, the Irish were both tough resisters against and happy collaborators with the worldwide Anglo Empire. Then, maybe it’s not so difficult to understand why UK and Ireland are going down at the same time in the same manner for the same reasons. The Irish and Anglos have been more joined at the hip than any Irish or Briton would like to admit.

Any nation of people, culture, memory, and territory must have unity of self-preservation and self-justification if it is to secure any long-term survival strategy. It is simply not possible for a people to preserve themselves as a nation IF their main sense of self-justification is at odds with the demands of self-preservation. The danger could be spiritual, ideological, or ‘idological’. While spirituality lends deeper/higher meaning to a people, it can also divorce them from worldly demands of survival. Consider all the Hindu yogis who dropped out of society to beg for alms while they stuck needles into their noses and arses. If one takes Buddhism to its logical conclusion, he should cut all his ties, duties, & attachments and just meditate to reach Nirvana. This is why Buddhist societies that survived restricted the scope of Buddhist influence or somehow managed to associate Buddhism with tribalism, like the Tibetans. Likewise, if Christians decided to become spiritual purists and live by every letter of Jesus, they will end up dead like the hero-priest in Roland Joffe’s THE MISSION. Without spirituality, life becomes too mundane, but excessive spirituality can lead to loss of reality. This is why Judaism is favorable in many ways to Christianity. Its universalist spiritual content is balanced by the tribal element of the Covenant, and its moral concerns are tempered by demands of the real world is understood not to be a place for saints. Judaism is about conviction and commitment but not about sainthood that came with Christianity. It is moralistic but not sanctimonious, the element that makes Christianity insufferable at times in its holier-than-thou piousness.

Of course, even as Jews feared the power of Christianity, they closely examined its psycho-spiritual anatomy for its Achilles Heel and found it. Jews realized how they could own and manipulate the Guilt Complex of Christianity for their own ends. Manipulating the nerve centers of Christian Guilt was as effective as toying with erogenous zones as a means to gain sensory control over goyim. Is it any wonder that Jews are both masters of Holocaustianity and Pornography? Jews understood that there is a kind of spiritual-erogenous or ‘spirogenous’ zone within Christian Psychology, not least because Christianity, far more than Judaism and certainly more than Paganism, was repressive about sexual matters, what with the Catholic Church even saying you will burn in purgatory if you masturbate. So, sexually repressed Christians had to transfer their repressed sensual passions over to the the spiritual realm, and this explains why so many churches developed services where people go into fits of rapture that are like spiritual orgasms. Rapturous Christian bliss results from friction of guilt and redemption. The faithful arrive at church and feel as sinners who need saving. To be washed of their sins for the week, they holler and shake their bodies to be rid of the Devil, and they feel joy when the angels shower them with God’s glory. It’s about connecting with God, but it doesn’t work without the element of guilt, the sense that one’s body is filled with Devilish temptations.
Likewise, sexuality gains its power from friction of shame and release. If all people were naked all the time and could have sex with anyone anywhere anytime, sex would be nothing special. It’d be about as interesting as eating a bag of potato chips. But even in a libertine society, there is the fear of rejection, shame of reputation, suspicion of betrayal, and the reality of exclusion, especially by the most desirable members of society. So, when an average person finally arrives at a sexual union of sufficient quality, the sense of release is far greater than if sex were so easy all the time for all people. Jews understand the usefulness of controlling the ‘spirogenous’ and erogenous zones, and that’s why they pushed for Globo-Homo and Pornificaition of society. Via Globo-Homo, they’ve replaced inherently ‘antisemitic’ Christianity with Queertianity where one feels redeemed and most justified for having washed oneself of ‘homophobia’ and ‘transophobia’. Also Homomania is far easier than Christianity because it makes no arduous demands for sanctity other than waving the ‘gay’ flag and regarding trannies as new angels. And via pornography(and pornification of society in general), Jews gained direct control of erogenous zones of countless goyim. Also, by peddling stuff about incest and the like, Jews charge sexuality with that potent combination of shame and release. While pornography has been made readily available(even to young ones), it still maintains the aura of being forbidden fruit filled with dark themes of humiliation, incest, and miscegenation.

This is where the neo-spiritual meets the ‘idological’ where idolatry eclipses ideology. Idols can be either beneficial or harmful to the self-preservation of a people. Ideally, the idols of a people will feature heroic or vaunted members of the tribe. Greeks had Achilles as their hero. And Greek Olympics were limited to Greeks who became champions among the Greeks. When white people have white champions who become the basis for white idols, idolatry can become a potent symbol for the nation. But if, say, black idols replace white idols in a white nation, it will undermine self-preservation as white people will come to admire and even worship blacks as their heroes, champions, and top studs. It will lead to cuckery among white men and spread jungle fever among white women, and THIS is precisely what is happening all over the West under the hegemony of Jews who regard blackness as their surrogate body conjoined to the Jewish head. Jews could outwit whites but couldn’t beat them physically to win top trophy of manhood, but Jews could use blacks to beat down white manhood. Thus, whiteness could be both outwitted and out-muscled by a combination of Jewish brains and black brawn.
We’ve been told endlessly that blacks need BLACK role models in prestigious areas because people identify with their own kind. If this is true of blacks, it must be no less true of whites. When white idols are replaced with black ones, it leads to white demoralization and white death, which has now reached near-genocidal levels in the West. In order for whites to feel self-justification in the name of self-preservation, they must write their own ideology that rejects the mindless mantras of ‘Diversity’ handed down by Jews as would-be-overlords. Whites must have their own idols in a world of their own that excludes other races, especially blacks who can beat up white men in sports and streets in an integrated social order. Just like human physical pride can exist only apart from wild animals — as humans are no match for wild boars, bears, tigers, rhinos, hippos, crocodiles, etc in physical confrontations — , white pride of manhood can ONLY EXIST apart from blackness that will defeat and humiliate white men because black men got longer limbs, harder muscles, faster reflexes, and bigger dongs. The world is truly diverse in that there are different races with different attributes and advantages. And every race should be wary of other races that pose a potential threat to them. This mania for Diversity is leading to a world of Universal Imperialism where every people, even the imperialists, are being drowned in non-stop floods of invasion, confusion, and alienation. But then, it all happened before with the Romans long long ago. The greatest conquerors the world had ever seen were overwhelmed by those they conquered, and in time, the empire was about every people conquering and being conquered by every other people until finally it all fell apart. If Jews get their wish, all nationalisms will be washed away EXCEPT for their own as the Noah’s Ark nationalism of all eternity. The US used to be a nation where white imperialists conquered others and then demanded that newcomers assimilate into Anglo-Americanism or accept its authority. There was once a sense of who the real masters and owners of America were. But now, non-whites come to America to lose their identities and heritages along with white American cucks who’ve lost all sense of identity, roots, and heritage. Indeed, their only concern regarding nationalism is "Muh Israel". What did Nancy Pelosi say? Even if the walls of Congress come tumbling down, the US will always be there for Israel! How pathetic can you get?