Do Jews have a 'Psychistorical' Identification with Muslim Warriors as Modern Day Zealots? — Three Kinds of Power-Consciousness — Why Afghan War cannot be compared with Vietnam War — Futility of Liberalism when National Attempts at Liberty & Democracy are subverted by Jewish Globalist 'Liberal Intervention'

https://dailystormer.su/the-taliban-is-to-the-2020s-right-what-the-north-vietnamese-were-to-the-1960s-left/

I wonder if on some subconscious or 'psychistorical' level, Jews are happy to see the Taliban win. On the conscious level, of course many Jews are upset. After all, they are the New Pharaohs, the New Romans. Jews rule over the white race that manages the globalist empire dominated by the Tribe(and homos as proxies). So, naturally this side of Jewishness wants more power and control over the world. It will look upon the retreat as a setback... though I'm sure many Jews came to the realization that Afghanistan-as-base-for-regional-influence was overblown, indeed a liability than an asset, or a flat tire than a springboard. Russia, Iran, China, Pakistan, and other -Stans managed pretty well to contain US power. Besides, US influence is more confusing to deal with in our day. In the past, it was well-understood that American Authority was mostly white and Christian. Today, US power is Jewish and globo-homo(and Jews have done everything to shame and hollow out white/Christian America), but Jews won't admit their power and outsized influence and instead maintain the charade that US, as an 'exceptional' nation, stands for the universal aspirations of all peoples. So, you have a Jewish-centric US foreign policy that claims to speak for the world. None of this makes any sense to those on the ground, especially in a profoundly Islamic country like Afghanistan. US ventures in Afghanistan are like time travel into another era. Afghanistan stands for recalcitrant medievalism or something even more backward — indeed, plenty of ancient civilizations were more sophisticated and advanced than much of Afghan society today — , whereas US stands for futurism that has gone very wrong — with all the money and might, what Americans value most are Jewish supremacism, homo vanity, tranny nuttery, black thuggery, and an ass tattoo; a world of gluttony and sluttony pretending to be a beacon of light unto the world; yeah, the lights of Las Vegas.

At any rate, even though Jews are the New Romans, their historical narrative had them as the underdogs, the guerrillas, the David(against Goliath), the Zealots, and etc. So, even as Jewish elites worked with and financed the great European and American empires, something in Jewishness also rooted for the rebels and the resistance(which may partly explain the Jewish pro-Confederacy stance). Jews regarded the Castroites and Viet Cong as the New Zealots resisting the US as the New Roman Empire. And even though Israel had overwhelming advantage in the Six Day War, the Jewish Narrative had the beleaguered Neo-Israelites fighting the New Pharaoh Nasser against all odds.
So, perhaps even modern secular 'liberal' Jews are, on some 'psychistorical' level, identifying with Muslim radicals and fundamentalists who resisted the US as the New Rome(even though Jews are the new overlords). Despite all the Jewish vs Muslim animus, the fact is the ragtag Muslim 'terrorists' and Jihadists are rather like the Jewish Zealots of the Ancient World. Jews, more than most people, resisted the Romans, and today, the biggest resisters against the New Rome are the Muslims. (The other mighty resisters against the Roman Empire were the Germanics. In a way, one could argue that Old Rome was destroyed by the double whammy of Jewish or Judeo-derived spiritual power and Germanic physical power. Christianity wiped away paganism, and Germanic barbarians sacked Rome. No wonder the biggest tensions flared up in Europe when Jewish Semites and Germanic Aryans came into co-existence in heightened acceleration of modernity. The two peoples most responsible for the demise of Old Rome and the rise of New Europe. Jews know about the power of the Aryans and went about using all their means — moral, ideological, sensual, demographic — to neuter Aryan power.)

Of course, it's good for Jewish Power that arch-Muslim nations tend to remain backward, therefore less of a threat to modern Israel. No wonder US Jews and Israel have been chummier with theocratic Saudis than with Arab modernizers like Gaddafi, Saddam Hussein, and Assad. For all the Neocon BS about how the West should spread secular 'liberal' values in the Middle East, Jews have generally supported the most extreme Muslim radicals against secular modernizers in the Middle East and North Africa. Jews prefer the Arabs to be Muslim and Weak than Modern and Strong. Jews especially hate Iran because it managed to be Modern, Muslim, and Strong. An Islamic order is harder to penetrate with subversive globalist anti-values, yet reactionary Islam holds it back from progress and advancement. When a nation goes Modern, it is far easier to subvert from the outside. Secular Turkey came under considerable influence of Globo-Homo. But could a nation choose modernity and make progress while upholding Muslim values to fend off Western globo-homo degeneracy? Erdogan's Islamic Turkey has been moving in this direction. And Iran is Islamic and advanced in nuclear technology. This is why Jews hate Iran and are now working to destroy Turkey.

NEOCONS RAMP UP REGIME CHANGE EFFORTS IN TURKEY

Paradoxically, the biggest enemy of liberalism around the world is Western 'liberal interventionism'(directed by Jews). Something like National Liberalism would be a good thing. Suppose post-communist Russia embarked on its own path of freedom and liberty to decide what is good for the country. Unfortunately, whenever a nation moves from authoritarianism to freedom, Jewish-US empire uses NGO's and free markets to penetrate and take over institutions(through bribery) and the media(for degenerate propaganda purposes). The kind of liberty that comes to be favored is treachery among the national elites(as they become addicted to bribes from the US empire) and degenerate hedonism among the masses, especially the youth(as the media under Jewish control spew out little but Afromania, Jungle Fever, Hollywood trash, and globo-homo sickness). So, instead of the hope of National Liberalism, the result is Global Tyranny. Against Global Tyranny, the only remedy is National Autocracy. The problem with 'Western Liberalism' is it won't tolerate any other kind of liberalism. Only its conception of 'democracy' is acceptable. If another nation chooses a unique path through its own democracy, it is condemned by the Jewish-run media as 'anti-democratic'. So, Jews decry Viktor Orban of Hungary as an 'autocrat' even as they use whore politicians and bureaucrats to persecute American patriots and violate the rights of someone like Nick Fuentes. And of course, Israel is hailed as a great democracy even though its policies are many times more ultra-right than that of Hungary or the rather cucky Poland.

The Taliban remains the overwhelming and obvious power, due to the massive support they have from the population.

No, most Afghanis are indifferent. They tolerate and accept the Taliban because it's the only viable power around... in the absence of Americans. Most people are like Zhivago(minus the poeticism) than Strelnikov. They just want to live than change the world or grab power. Same goes for most Afghanis.

This is an interesting account by someone who served in the war.

AFGHANISTAN - A RETROSPECTIVE (MYTH20C - EP220) - PART I
AFGHANISTAN - A RETROSPECTIVE (MYTH20C - EP220) - PART II

According to the lying Jew media and Jew Pentagon, Osama was killed a decade ago... since then, “the mission” (as it is falsely called) has clearly been related to explicitly liberal, leftist goals. The latest and current narrative is that the troops are defending women’s rights, and generally trying to turn the country into a degenerate cesspit of feminism and faggotry.

True, the deep state and media sometimes babble about "women's rights" and the like, but the actual government that the US supported has been pretty hardline Islamist, if only to win the hearts and minds of the people. And US knew it would be crazy to push something like globo-homo in a place like Afghanistan. Likewise, US doesn't insist on globohomo among the Saudis. Globo-homo is for the cucked, deracinated, apathetic, soulless, and/or confused political colonies of the Jewish-run US empire: EU of course but also large swaths of Latin America and parts of East Asia — unlike Muslims and Hindus with a powerful spiritual tradition, East Asians tend to be ideological(due to Confucian influence), and that means they are more attuned to social ideas than spiritual truths. Also, the two spiritual systems in the Far East, Buddhism and Taoism, are passive and hardly amount to effective resistance. But Hindus have a powerful sense of the sacred and profane, which is why McDonalds will not sell beef burgers in India. And Muslims have a powerful sense of holy and unholy... unlike the shallow Mormons whose piety is customary and lack spiritual depth. Look how easily Mormons folded to globo-homo for More Money. So, given the nature of Afghan society, the US didn't push much 'woke' stuff, which is reserved mostly for white cucks and yellow dogs, the two people most receptive to Jewish Power. The US did educate some Afghani girls, and the globo-media promoted this as "women's rights", but the Afghan regime was as Islamist as the one in Saudi Arabia.

As for bung-donging boys, it seems Afghan Muslims have a local custom of doing that all on their own. Indeed, the practice is so deeply entrenched among Afghanis that US troops were ordered NOT to interfere in the barbaric custom. It goes to show you don't need globo-homo to be into bung-donging. It's like all them straight black guy who bung-dong white 'bitches' in prison.

There are three kinds of power-obsession, and they apply to Afghanistan as well.

There are the power-mad who want power for themselves. "Muh power" is their motto. They got to feel the power in their hands. They want to boss around others. Jews and blacks are this way. They got to feeeeeeeel the power. No Afghan leader in recent memory has mustered the kind of zealous will to truly unite the country and mold it into something new. No Afghan Napoleon, not even an Afghan Ataturk. Afghanistan hasn't been just a graveyard of foreign empires but of domestic political ambition. It never seems to come together. In politics, Afghanis are self-defeating as well as defeating of foreigners. When Taliban was in power prior to 9/11 and when it takes power again, the common theme will be status quo based on mutual understanding among various clans than the at-long-last unity of the nation under a great khan or mogul.

There are the mad-for-power who want to be near the powerful. They want to feel its radiance like the planets the heat of the sun. They want to serve and be approved by the power. They want to work for the boss. Dogs are like this. Dogs revere humans as the master, the source of power. White cucks are like dogs of Jews. They got to heeeeeeeel to the power of Zion. Take Chris Wray of FBI. He has a powerful position, but he's not about leadership but following orders. He appreciates that he gets to rub shoulders with powerful people and do their bidding. As Jews are his masters, he goes after 'white supremacists' who are actually whites who dare to call out on Jewish supremacism. Afghani puppet regime is made up of mad-for-power cucks, the Chris Wrays of their world. They were awestruck by US power and contented as long as Boss Uncle Sam gave them money and the orders.

There are the power-eternal who are enthralled with power as an abstract principle, spiritual or scientific. They aren't egocentric about power. They don't need to feel the power or be boss. Nor do they feel giddy with joy only as toadies to power. Rather, they see power as a kind of destiny, and their wish is to be in tune with it. For the spiritualists, the ultimate power is God and the destiny of man is God's will. This is power beyond any man's ambition. Also, mankind, even the greatest prophets, can glimpse and divine only a sliver of this power. Still, the proper thing is to be in tune with the cosmic will of God or the gods.
But power-eternals also exist in the scientific community. Take the nut-job Michio Kaku who is utterly cuckoo about power. And yet, he doesn't seem power-mad. He himself doesn't have to be the boss or have lots of money or have an army of servants washing his feet. But he isn't mad-for-power in the toady way either. Apparently, no power in our world, no matter how rich or fearsome, measures up to his vision of the ultimate power, which is nothing less than man's destiny to 'become the gods' by means of science/technology. Kaku feels that man has within him the god-gene that can unlock many more secrets of the cosmos and that will eventually catapult mankind into levels of power unfathomable to us who are still in the primitive stage of development(by cosmic standards). Kaku knows that he will die long before the dream is realized, but that's okay because he feels pride in having played a role, however small, in mankind's path to god-hood. So, he too is a kind of power-eternalist. The one advantage of the Taliban is it has a kind of power-eternal view of things. Taliban folks don't measure time in terms of impatient Western progress. They believe the foreigners will eventually depart and be forgotten because only Allah is the arbiter of what is true and just... and Allah hates Infidels who will be destroyed in time.

Most political orders are about power-mad egotists and mad-for-power toadies. US is about pushy power-mad Jews and mad-for-power toady white cucks. Granted, Jews can play the toady-role if they must as they have a long experience of sucking up to kings and noblemen of Europe who valued Jewish financial services. Jews hated playing toady to filthy goyim(especially the Christian kind as there is nothing Jews loathe more than the New Faith, which they see as theft of their own) and strategized to eventually take over as the bosses who would push the filthy goyim around.
But then, Jews also have the power-eternalist element in their cultural DNA, the sense of Grand History and the Ultimate Destiny founded upon the Covenant between God and the Jews. This eternal element of Jewish psyche balances out the petty power-madness. This is the difference between someone like Andrew Cuomo and the Jews. Cuomo the Italian-American prick can't conceive of power beyond others licking his boots. He has the mentality of a cheap mafia hood. While powerful Jews are no less loathsome, they have a grander sense of power beyond 'muh power'. Even secular Jews who don't believe in God believe in some kind of Grand History where Jews are destined to play a key or The Key role.

There is nothing monstrous about the Taliban.

They did destroy the Buddha statues. They did prohibit music. They have a puritanical streak, which is no good. In a way, Islam and Puritanical Christianity have something in common with Leftism. They are radically purist and tend to see the world in Manichean terms of Good vs Evil. The pagans were more tolerant of how the world really is. Paganism was more realist. According to the Greeks, their gods were good and bad, just like humans. According to Christianity and Islam, there is only one God, and He is totally good and at war with totally evil Satan. So, this divides the world neatly into holy vs unholy. Even though modern leftism developed as a secular movement at war with religion, it inherited the radical purism. Good Progress vs Evil Reaction. Smite the Old to create the New. So, even though Muslims and 'woke' nuts have little in common in terms of agenda, they are much alike in their emotional psychology.

Compare this to articles in 1974 about capitalist South Vietnam fearing the impending destruction of the free market at the hands of Ho Chi Minh and his henchmen. It is precisely the same narrative – but the reverse.

Vietnam War and Afghan War are not even remotely comparable. For one thing, the US was stationed in only half of Vietnam. The Northern part was totally ruled by the Vietnamese. In contrast, US occupied all of Afghanistan. It was tougher to fight in the jungle than in the mountains. True, Afghan mountain ranges make for tough combat, especially in the old days of the British Empire, but with air superiority the US had effective control of the entire country. Also, if Soviet airplanes and helicopters were targeted by stinger missiles, the US aircraft were mostly untouched... except when Afghans got lucky with a few bazookas.
The Vietnam Conflict was a real war until the US left. It was bloody and horrific. In contrast, the so-called Afghan War effectively wound down in 2002, so much so that US shifted its war aims to Iraq(and other countries if possible). So, since 2002, it's been an Afghan Occupation than Afghan War. In 20 yrs, US lost 2,500 soldiers. That's about 125 per year, and most of the deaths happened in the first few yrs. So, calling this "America's longest war" is a joke.

Also, unlike the Viet Cong and NVA that were formidable foes to the last day of America's withdrawal in 1973, the Taliban just waited for the Americans to leave. US wasn't pushed out by too many casualties or unpopularity of the war at home. While plenty of people protested the Iraq War, no one protested the Afghan Invasion, and when have you seen an anti-war protest about Afghanistan? US finally decided to leave because either the Occupation was becoming pointless, the regime has military plans elsewhere(maybe against Iran or China), or because the Democrats are afraid of Trumpists stealing the anti-war thunder. After all, what was most incredible about Trump's campaign in 2016 was the Anti-Neocon-War-ism, notwithstanding his very neocon-ish saber rattling at Iran.

Now, what is startling is the rapid advances of the Taliban and the sheer haplessness of the Afghan government and its military. But then, maybe it's not so surprising since the US hardly installed a real government or built a real military. The bane of installing a real government is it might have its own ideas and agendas. US wanted a pliable puppet, but the problem is puppets are usually weak. Diem of South Vietnam turned out to be more independent, and the CIA took him out. The total puppet government that followed had NO legitimacy and support whatsoever(wherever Diem did have some respect and support).
But then, the current US is plagued by the same problem, that of legitimacy. Jews rule the US and recruit shabbos goy puppets, and this accounts as to why US politicians are so weak, so pathetic, so ridiculous, and without respect. George W. Bush was a neocon puppet. Jeb Bush was even more pathetic, if that's even believable. Mitt Romney is a total cuck. Paul Ryan, what a joke. Many libby-dibs supported Obama as The Difference, but he was just a House Negro of globo-homo Jews. Many conzos supported Trump as The Difference(and he was truly hated by the Establishment), but he folded to Deep State demands and took it up his arse from the Jews just the same.
Jews insist on goy puppet weaklings but also want US democracy to have legitimacy around the world. But how can a puppet-regime be legitimate? Look at Biden. No one voted FOR Biden, just like almost no one voted FOR Hillary. They just voted against Trump as the worse evil. And with Trump's presidency having turned into one big farce, who but the biggest Maga-tards can believe in the Donald again? At most, people might vote Trump AGAINST the Democrats. As Darren Beattie of Revolver News has said, the American Regime lost its legitimacy. Most conzos look upon Republican politicians as 'RINOS', and most libby-dibs look upon Democrat politicians as sell-outs.
But unlike Afghanistan, the US is without a Taliban-like majority who are waiting in the wings to take over when the time is ripe. Too many Americans, especially the libby-dibs, are 'Telebans' whose idea of reality comes from the Jewish-controlled Tube. No wonder what is most sacred to them is BLM and globo-homo and they would never unite with other whites against the real power of Jewish Supremacism. But then, where are white patriots in the South to defend Robert E. Lee monuments? Great majority of white conzos support jungle fever and 'gay marriage'. They are just another version of the 'Teleban', which means they are mind-controlled by Jewish globalists.

The supposedly diabolical mission of the Taliban is to restore the basic order of nature in the lands of their race.

Pagans were closer to the nature of things. Greek mythology is perhaps the greatest and most poetic mapping of the human psyche. Islam and especially Christianity condemn too much that is natural and instinctual as sinful or satanic. Paganism can slide into sensual overload, but puritanism can harden into repression. Ethno-race-ist Paganism + Patriarchy is the best combination. It allows for female beauty and expression but under control of social norms and morality.

There is nothing monstrous about the Taliban. They are not a CIA-backed group like ISIS, so they are not drowning people in cages or engaging in cannibalism.

The big hypocrisy. The very Western bleeding hearts all weepy-poo about the 'women and daughters' in Afghanistan were utterly silent about Obama/Hillary regime's support of ISIS and other terrorist groups in Iraq and Syria in yet more Wars for Israel. Assad's Syria has been a modern Arab state, but the Jewish-controlled West recruited Muslim nihilists to wreak havoc and enforce Sharia law all over. It goes to show that the Western commentariat fall into two groups: Idiots who really swallow the BS narrative about "muh women's rights" and the opportunists who decry Islamism when it undermines Imperial aims but support it when it aids and abets the goals of globalist-imperialism.

Jane Fonda went to Vietnam to support the North Vietnamese, despite the fact that they were as likely to gang-rape the bitch as they were to welcome her. The North Vietnamese did not fetishize negroes, nor were they going to legalize anal sex. Their primitive conception of communism amounted to “yankee go home.” Basically, the leftists who supported the North Vietnamese were pretty much just traitors and scoundrels, who claimed that the Viet Cong shared their values as an excuse to attack America.

Don't be silly. Why would they have raped a propaganda tool? Also, back in the 60s, even most Liberals regarded homosexuality as a sin or sickness. Hollywood regularly featured villains as homo or crypto-homo. Homos were either villains or objects of mockery. There was no globo-homo back then, at least not outwardly. The most liberal politician could have been ousted by revelations of buggery.
Also, back then, even most liberals believed in nationalism. So, they supported Cuban nationalism, Vietnamese nationalism, and etc. They figured non-white nations had just as much right to be independent as white nations. The big idea back then was post-imperialist universal nationalism. Today, there is neo-imperialist globalism that is about universal anti-nationalism. Globalism says ALL nations(except Israel) should reject the bond between race and land, welcome mass migration, celebrate 'diversity', and forsake sovereignty... and make way for the Triumvirate of Jews as Holy Holocausters, Blacks as Noble Negroes, and Homos as Magic Fairies.

In retrospect, the Leftists of the 60s were more right than wrong, at least on foreign policy. And the Right also came to realize this. Charles DeGaulle ended the Algerian War, and Nixon finally ended the Vietnam War.

Personally, what I can't stand about the Taliban is aesthetics. I don't mind the rags on Arabs. It sort of looks dashing on them camel jockeys in LAWRENCE OF ARABIA. 'Raghead' look is okay. But the 'towel-head' look of the Afghans? They look like they got giant donuts on their heads. It just looks stupid. Also, rag-on-head makes good sense. It protects the head from the burning sun. But the heavier head gear among Afghans must increase temperature, and that's no good for the brains. No wonder Afghanis are so dumb with cooked brains.

Everywhere on earth, the US military flies the rainbow flag, which is the symbol of pederasty.

No, it's the Jewish Victory Flag. It means, "We Jews buttfuc*ed this country and own it as our bitch." Globo-homo among homos is about 'gays' boofing each other in the ass. Globo-homo among nations means "Jewish Power made us squeal like a pig." Trump's presidency was essentially Ned Beatty in THE DELIVERANCE going 'weeeeee, weeeeee' while Sheldon 'Nuke Iran' Adelson humped him hard. 'Weeeeeeeeee.'

Frankly, as we can see in the rearview mirror, the North Vietnamese were not exactly bluepilled. But the Taliban is redpilled hard.

Back in the 60s, even most Democrats were not 'blue-pilled'. It is why Richard Nixon won a landslide in 1972. Many Democrats were appalled by the counterculture elements in their midst. A lot of Liberal Commentators from that era would not come across as hardline conservatives by today's standards.

This isn't really a victory for the Taliban. One could argue that the Viet Cong and NVA won the war because, despite horrible casualties and failure to win any major battle against the US, they fought hard to the very end of US departure. In contrast, the Taliban just hunkered down and accepted the Occupation. They hardly did any fighting and are now coming out of the woodworks because US is leaving. It's rather like rats and rain taking over a house once the people moved out.
Of course, the Taliban is winning against government troops, but the US was never serious about creating a military. It's been said a trillion or two was spent on Afghanistan, but this is misleading. No, the money was spent on the Military Industrial Complex. Most of the money was spent on US firms and institutions. They pretended to do stuff in Afghanistan but spent most of the money on themselves(while local politicians got some crumbs in the form of bribes).

What Israel and Palestine reveal about Jewish Power Relation with the Goy World — Why Goyim must support 'Israel' while opposing Israel — Why Goyim must reject 'Palestine' while supporting Palestine — Why White Conservatives who Ideologically Oppose the Jewish Agenda feel obligated to Idolatrously Obsess over Jewishness & Israel

What can we learn from the subject of Israel-Palestine? Jews believe they are a special and unique people with a real identity. They believe a part of the world is deeply meaningful to them. The soil in the Holy Land isn't just any dirt or sand but sacred for the Jews on historical and spiritual grounds. So, Jewish identity matters. Jewish spirituality matters. Jewish territoriality matters. Those considerations are the founding principles of Israel. Call it Zionism, Jewish Nationalism, Jewish Identity Politics, Judeo-Fascism, or whatever. Jews believe they are for real in terms of who and where they are.
But this consideration certainly does NOT extend to Palestinians. Golda Meir said Palestinian identity is fake. Palestinians are just people or goyim who think they have an identity but don't. (Some blacks take cues from Jews and speak of 'people who think they are white'.) As such, Palestinians are underserving of nationhood as their identity is said to be fake, or even if real, infinitely inferior to the Jewish one. Much better for Palestinians to serve Jews or be replaced by Jews. Since Palestinians don't deserve nationhood, why should they deserve any land, especially one that is sacred and holy to Jews. (In truth, Palestinians have been on that land as long as the Jews have and thus have equal historical claim, but then, the Jewish Narrative dominates and has the backing of the powerful West. In the end, the Narrative and Power decide. Just ask the American Indians. Whatever claim they have to America doesn't matter. Manifest Destiny was one hell of an effective Narrative, and whites had the power to take and keep it.)

This means there can be no equality between Jews and Palestinians. Indeed, behind closed doors Jews are surely laughing their asses silly at the notion of equality between their awesome selves and those third-rate towel-headed 'raggers'. Of course, many Jews and US politicians say they support the 'two-state solution', but it is only to feign fairness, dodge the bigger issue, and dismiss the matter(with the impression that they are working toward achieving the said goal). The talk of Two-State Solution is a cover, not a conviction. It's like perfume to hide the stink. In reality, Jews have almost totally erased Palestinians as a people, culture, cause, and issue. And the US has been totally complicit in this great crime. Indeed, it's worth asking, do white elites have any agency left? Whether Republican or Democratic, white elites are mostly hapless and craven cucks who look over their shoulders to see WHAT THE JEWS WANT. So, Palestinians might as well be invisible subhumans in American eyes. But because epic hypocrisy is what America is about, there's the disgusting spectacle of Jews and white cucks claiming to support the 'two-state solution' to deflect from the fact that Zionists are totally erasing Palestine with the full support of White America.

Most Americans don't want to bother about the Palestinians, not least because the Pallies are a small population of 'losers' with little money and no power. Why should Americans care about such people? In a way, this is understandable. After all, the world is full of peoples and 'nations' like the Palestinians. They can be found in Africa, Asia, Latin America, and even in the West — I mean, who cares about 'white trash'? People like the Palestinians can be found anywhere. The world is full of them: A people of mostly modest and mediocre ability.
And yet, Palestinians should matter a great deal because the Jewish treatment of them reveal so much about the Jewish mindset and their grand plan. It matters to the whole world, especially the West, because Jews are the most powerful people and the basis of this power is their control of the West. How Jews regard and treat the Palestinians tells us so much about how they regard all goyim. Therefore, any bunch of goyim who ignore the plight of Palestinians as having no bearing on their own kind are foolish. Those who see the Israel-Palestinian Conflict as purely a Jewish-and-Arab thing with no relevance to themselves are seriously deluded. Not only have Jews quelled the Palestinians with the support of the West(thereby making the West culpable in the tragedy) but Jews rule over the peoples of the West whom they regard as little more than White Palestinians. If Jews didn't have control of the West, the Israel-Palestinian issue could be regarded as 'THEIR problem, not ours'. Perhaps tragic and unfortunate but unrelated to concerns of Western Folks. But the very people who have power of the Palestinians also have power over the West. If Jews regard Palestinians as subhuman goyim, what are the chances they think any more highly of other goyim such as whites? (And even if Jews do regard whites higher in value than the Palestinians, it will only mean greater hostility toward white identity and interests. After all, a man will work harder to own and gain control over a strong white horse than a weak brown one. Whereas Palestinians merely need to be quelled and silenced, whites are to be trained to obey and serve Jews at every turn.)
Also, recent events in the Middle East and North Africa have shown that Jews are in imperialist than nationalist mode. If Jews were in nationalist mode, Zionism would have been a limited imperialism, i.e. Jews taking land from Palestinians, forging a Jewish nation, and being content with a place to call homeland. But just like Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Imperialists weren't satisfied with Germany and had dreams of 'lebensraum' in the East, Jews have dreams of Greater Israel. They intend to cause more havoc all across the Middle East and don't care how many goyim die as long as the violence leads to more Jewish power and control across MENA. If Jews see the Arab World that way, what are the chances they see the White World any differently? And yet, so many craven Arabs(especially the vile Saudis and stupid Egyptians) actually cooperate with Jews, and of course, at this point, the white race might as well be called the Cuckasian race. Whites are now to Jews what Filipinos have been to Americans. A bunch of dogs.

At any rate, every people must make a choice. Do they want to be 'Israel' or 'Palestine'? Do they see their own nation as 'Israel' or 'Palestine'? Here, 'Israel' isn't Israel the nation but the national idea that one's own people are unique, special, rich in culture & history, and deserve to protect & preserve their homeland or motherland. That's how Jews see Israel. It's a sacred nation for a special/unique people. In contrast, Jews see Palestine as expendable, even downright disposable. From the Jewish perspective, Palestine exists for Jews to conquer and control. It has no other purpose. It's like ranchers don't consider the grazing ground as the land belonging to cattle. No, both the ground and cattle belong to the ranchers. Likewise, the notion of autonomy and agency among Palestinians is totally anathema to the Jewish Mind. Palestine existed only to be taken by Jews and to be made into Israel. It has meaning as Israel but no meaning as Palestine. Also, Palestinians exist to serve Jews or make way for Jews. They must either work for Jews or must be eliminated for Jewish settlement. Jews haven't yet decided on outright genocide, but Jewish indifference to the countless dead in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and Libya suggests Jews are capable of being a bunch of Himmlers in their own right. There are Jews in Israeli government who've made eliminationist noises in regard to Palestinians, but even the 'liberal' side of the Zionist argument has always been dubious. After all, Israel was founded on the erasure of Palestine when dominant Zionists were on the 'left'. But Zionism was only as leftist as German National Socialism. As an ideology of the Jewish Volk, it emphasized the needs of Jewish workers as well as the Jewish wealthy. But, from the very outset, it eschewed universalism in favor of particularism.

For awhile, it seemed the Jews, having been burned by Nazi horrors in WWII, would have learned the lesson and maintained Zionism as a nationalism(built on limited imperialism) than convert it into a grand imperial plan, but time has shown that Zionists are a bunch of Nazionists. But then, the core conviction of both National Socialism and Zionism was tragically premised on the belief in racial supremacism. Germans thought 'Aryans' were the best and the rightful rulers of the world, and Jews feel that Judeo-Semites are the superior tribe and must rule over all the others. Jewish bitch about 'antisemitism', but the bigger danger in the world is supremacist Semitism, or Ultra-Semitism. When nationalism is based on supremacism, it can easily metastasize into imperialism.
Jews morally benefitted as victims of 'Aryan' supremacism, but the dirty secret is one bunch of supremacists were victimized by another. Currently, Jews are in total supremacist mode and moving the pieces on the chessboard to destroy the goy world. And this is why Palestine matters. From the Jewish perspective, 'Israel' means a people, culture, history, and territory worth defending. In contrast, 'Palestine' means a people, culture, history, and territory that have no intrinsic value and exist mainly as globalist commodity for Jews to manipulate, take over, and control.
So, one of the most important question among goy folks is HOW DO I SEE MY OWN PEOPLE OR NATION? Do I see it as 'Israel' or as 'Palestine'? If you see your own people as 'Israel', you believe in the uniqueness, specialness, and preciousness of your kind; you believe they have an inheritance worth protecting and preserving, something that is irreplaceable and priceless, something that collectively belongs to all within the group, something one cannot put a price tag on. You see your nation as Jews see Israel. In contrast, if you see your people as 'Palestine', you believe your people aren't special and unique; they are just people like any other and replaceable. Everything about your people is a 'social construct' and can be(and should be) deconstructed by globo-homo agents, and everything is for sale. In other words, you regard your own people as Jews regard Palestine.
Jews love Israel and despise Palestine, but Jews are most offended when goy folks around the world see their nation as 'Israel' than 'Palestine'. Jews want all goy nations to be 'Palestines', people and land that exist only to be subjugated and controlled by Jews via the gods and cash they control.

Take Poland. Any Pole who loves Poland and holds it dear and sacred(much like how Jews feel about Israel) is denigrated by Jews as a 'racist', 'far right extremist', 'xenophobe', 'white supremacist', and etc. So, Poland must not be 'Israel' to the Poles. It must be 'Palestine' for Jews to penetrate, subvert, take over, and control. (As so many Poles are craven cucks who cave and cater to the Top Power, there is no shortage of collaborators among them. They will gladly sell their nation down the river just like certain Palestinians did when Zionists initially arrived with lots of cash to throw around. For these weasel Poles, their country isn't Poland but 'Polastine'. Jews favor these Poles whose First Emotion is about status and privilege in the New World Order than defense of their motherland. These status-hungry Poles swoon at the feet of rich Jews while sneering at their own masses as 'white trash'. Their self-worth derives more from winning approval from Jews who despise 'dumb polacks' than maintaining solidarity with fellow Poles. If anything, they feel especially virtuous when disparaging their fellow countrymen as being insufficiently aligned with the Jewish 'Western' agenda.)

The great irony is that Jews hate Palestinians because most Palestinians see Palestine as 'Israel' than 'Palestine'. Palestinians see Palestine as their sacred homeland, their true nation, their inheritance and their right. They don't see Palestine in terms of nickels and dimes, thirty pieces of silver. They don't celebrate the Great Replacement or 'muh diversity' caused by massive Jewish immigration. Ideally, they want their nation back, just like the Viets wanted Vietnam back from the French and like the Hindus wanted India back from the British. Jews want Palestinians to see Palestine as 'Palestine' than as 'Israel'. But Palestinians insist on seeing Palestine as sacred and meaningful as Jews see Israel. For Palestinians, Palestine is 'Our Israel'. But in the monomaniacal Jewish Mind, there is only one true nation, just like there is only one true God. Jews long ago came into nationhood while claiming their God is the only true God and all other gods are false. Jews likewise feel that their identity, history, and territory are the only true tribe & nationhood and all else are false. No wonder Jews push globohomo tranny-business designed to confuse the minds of goyim. If dumb goyim can be made to believe man is 'woman' and woman is 'man', it means their minds can be goy-toyed by Jews.

This is why goyim must support 'Israel' than Israel. 'Israel' is to believe that your own people, nation, history, and territory are special, unique, precious, and sacred. They must be defended. They are not commodities that are for sale to the highest bidder or trickiest shyster. 'Israel' means universal nationalism, i.e. every nation is unique in its own way and worth defending on those grounds.
In contrast, Israel is the neo-imperialist center of Jewish Power, and its globalist agenda is to turn all the goy world into one big 'Palestine', something to be conquered/controlled by Jews in myriad ways, be they military, monetary, political, and/or cultural. The current power of Israel is against 'Israel', the idea that every people have a sacred homeland and deep history of their own. Israel insists that all goy peoples and nations become 'Palestine', which is what Jewish supremacist power has done to Palestine: Goy Land turned into property and plaything for the Jews to do with as they please.

Why does Israel have Replenishment Immigration(that is restricted to fellow Jews)while Jews push Replacement Immigration on others? Why does Israel have a healthy birthrate while goy birthrates are cratering in the First World, West and East? Israel is surely divided among European Jews, Middle Eastern Jews, North African Jews, and even some black Jews, but they are united by a proud tribal identity with the full backing of the state. Such boosts the morale of the Israelis, but Jews discourage and even disparage it among goy nations on the basis that it's 'far right' and 'extremist' and 'hateful'. Also, Jews have healthy birthrates because the mere fact of Jewishness has value in Israel. It doesn't matter if you're rich, middle, or poor. You mean something simply because you're Jewish in the Jewish homeland. But in goy nations affected by modernity's war on tribalism and nationalism, there is no such pride. The only pride allowed is individual success and materialism. So, if you are one of the haves, you got the pride of privilege, but if you're one of the have-nots or have-lesses, you're just a 'loser', 'deplorable', or worse. In the US, white elites look down on poor whites as 'white trash' who are replaceable with brown peons or should be eliminated via opioids peddled by Jews. How the world has turned with Jewish peddlers becoming Jewish meddlers.

If white goyim regarded their own worlds as 'Israel', they would see, feel, and act differently than they are currently doing under the spell of Jewish Power. They would try to keep their nations white. They would feel a sense of brotherhood and sisterhood with all whites, rich or poor. It'd be the positive side of National Socialism and its emphasis on the volk. As all white lives would have value, white parents wouldn't mind having kids who don't make it to the top. Even if the kid grows up to be a truck driver or plumber, his real value would be in his racial identity and cultural inheritance than his money or property. Jews know the advantage of such mindset, and so, they use their control of media and academia to persuade goyim that it's wrong for them to think, feel, and act like that. (The Mindset is for Jews alone.) No, goyim must just be atomized individuals with no sense of tribe, history, and territory.

But, here's the real zinger that points to Jewish perfidy. Jews then say the goyim, atomized and deracinated, must totally support Jewish identity, Jewish history, and Jewish territory. Talk about a bait-and-switch. It's totally vile and dirty, but Jews don't see it that way. From the Jewish POV, it's morally justified in the way that 'Aryan' supremacy made total moral sense to Adolf Hitler. In Hitler's mind, if indeed the Aryans are the superior folks, it's only right that they should dominate the world. After all, humans rule over animals. Likewise, Jews feel it's only right that inferior goyim must serve the Jews. Of course, the difference is whereas Hitler and the Nazis were blatant about their racial chauvinism, Jews conceal theirs under the cover of 'leftism' and PC. Jews concocted a way of pushing Zionist supremacism behind the screen of 'equity'. You have Jew-pets like Kamala Harris yapping about 'equity' while doing little else but sucking up to Zionist supremacism, which has 'passover' privilege in the West.

So many white 'conservatives' support Israel, but they should really be supporting 'Israel'. Again, Israel is the actual Jewish Nation that believes Jews and only Jews are deserving of identity, history, and territory while all goy folks, like the Palestinians, must be subjugated, manipulated, and controlled. In contrast, 'Israel' is the ideal of universal nationalism that says every people/nation is precious, valuable, and meaningful. Hungary as 'Israel' is the sacred homeland for the Hungarians. Hungary as 'Palestine' is just globo-homo property for Jews to penetrate, subvert, purchase, and mess up. In the 1990s, Russia became one big 'Palestine' for Jews to conquer and control, and the Tribe ran off with gazillions in assets while so many Russians ended up in dire straits, much like what Palestinians are facing. Though Vladimir Putin has been far from ideal, there was something about his moderate nationalism that said Russia is the 'Israel' for Russian folks. As such, it is not a plaything or mere property for Jews to control and manipulate. Also, Russian people have an identity and history that are deep and inseparably wedded to Russian territory as motherland. Jews seethed with hatred at the idea of Russia as 'Israel' for the Russians. They insisted it be 'Palestine' for Jews to conquer and control. Jews don't see Russia as a sacred motherland for the Russians but as a shikse whore for Jewish lust and greed. No wonder Jews want Red Square to turn into Pink Square where the proxies of Jews, the homos and trannies, are to desecrate and take over as the new face of Russia.

When white 'conservatives' support Israel, they are in effect saying Jews are the only people with a true identity, history, and territory whereas all the rest should just surrender what makes them unique & special and turn their nations into mere marketplaces in the globo-homo world controlled by Jews. (That is exactly the message of Charlie Kirk, the worthless cuck-boy messenger of Neocons.) The Jewish dream is to turn all of the West into one big West Bank. And Jews now have control over Japan and many other goy nations as most elites around the world take their cues from Jewish-controlled academia and media. Japan too will become 'Palestine'. In the past, Japanese regarded their nation as an 'Israel'. But then, the First Emotion among East Asians is servile loyalty to the top authority and status-neuroticism than an embracing sense of tribe and volk. Indeed, Japanese are among those who don't need the Jews to spread prostitution and pornography as the Japanese are glad to turn their national daughters and sisters into whores and skanks.

White Conservatives must be careful about which ISRAEL they are supporting. Is it Israel or 'Israel'? Israel is the globo-homo Jewish supremacist metropole that says only Jews are special and that goyim are expendable. 'Israel' is the universal-nationalist idea that all nations/peoples are special and that they have a right & duty to safeguard and ensure the survival of their own nations, narratives, and natures. 'Israel' allows nationalism for Jews and goyim alike. In contrast, Israel means nationalism is only for Jews, and because it's a supremacist notion, Jewish nationalism turns invariably into imperialism of domination over goyim as 'more palestinians'. The idea of 'Israel' applies to all the world. In contrast, the agenda of Israel says all the world belongs to Jews as one big 'Palestine' for Jews to conquer and control.

Especially stupid and immoral are white people who support Israel and ignore/mock the plight of Palestinians. Both white 'liberals' and white 'conservatives' are total idiots in this regard. For white 'liberals', it is a betrayal of their oft-touted commitment to equality and fairness. If indeed they care so much about equal justice for all groups and especially favor the underdog, why do they stand behind Jews, the most powerful people on Earth? Why do they only feign a modicum of sympathy for the Palestinians while offering nothing substantial to solve the Middle East crisis? Why do they 'take the knee' in honor of imaginary murders of blacks at the hands of 'racist' cops while colluding with Jewish Power to destroy entire regions of the Middle East and North Africa, leading to death and destruction for countless Arabs? White 'liberal' support of Israel has led to complete corruption of Liberalism. Under the Jewish lead, to be liberal doesn't mean equal justice for all. While Jewish 'liberals' berate whites for 'white privilege', it isn't to make whites equal with others but to browbeat them into submission to Jewish Supremacism. It's total bait-and-switch, and to the extent that white 'liberals' go along with this, they are fakers and frauds. They are status-conscious careerists who suck up to Jews, the richest and holiest(by idolatry controlled by Jews) people on Earth. Jews give them money, or they must suck up to Jews to make money and get ahead.

Arguably, white 'conservatives' who support Israel are even worse. As for white 'dissident rightists' who are partial to Jewish Power(and pray for the conversion of the Jews to HBD), they are a hopeless bunch. First, it's not a case of Jews choosing between alliance with 'white racists' AND commitment to 'equity' & diversity even though Jews frame it that way. It's really about Jews choosing between equality with whites(or gentlemanly partnership with them) AND supremacy for Jews(and total white submission to Jewish Power). Jews are now so obsessed with their power that they cannot conceive of power-sharing with whites or any other goyim. All this nonsense about 'equity' and 'diversity' is just a ploy used by Jews to beat on whites. After all, if Jews are truly committed to 'diversity', they would call for Replacement Immigration in Israel and, furthermore, call upon Americans to be equally fair toward Jews and Palestinians.

Why do white 'conservatives' suck up to Jews when it's obvious that most Jews are 'liberal', anti-white, anti-Christian, anti-conservative(except when it comes to conserving Jewish identity & power), anti-Constitution, anti-guns, anti-just-about-everything-white-conservatives-support? Ideologically, white 'conservatives' are often at the polar opposite of what most Jews promote, but their Idolatry of Jewishness is even more outlandish and extravagant than among white 'liberals'. Paradoxically, 'conservative' ideological animus to the Jewish Agenda has made 'conservatives' even more idolatrous of Jewish Identity. It'd be as if, precisely because Bob disagreed on most matters with Bill, he praised and celebrated Bill and Bill-ness even more. Because Bob is ideologically opposed to Bob, he is idolatrously obeisant to him. Would it make any sense? No, that is unless Bill has special status in the social order that Bob and Bill inhabit. If that social order says Bob is only to be judged by what he thinks, says, and does WHEREAS Bill is special simply for what he IS, then Bob is obliged to have special affection and admiration for Bill REGARDLESS. But, Bob's disagreement with Bill creates tensions and crisis. It leads to neurosis in Bob because he finds himself ideologically at odds with Bill who is regarded by society as very special, even holy. If Bill didn't have this aura about him, Bob could freely disagree with him and even disparage him as a fool, crook, or vermin. But if Bill has princely shine about him, Bob would be filled with self-doubt and anxiety as he finds himself in disagreement with a man of superior status and special adulation. If Bob sticks to his ideological guns, he will remain at odds with Bill, but that implies there's something wrong with him because he's earned the opprobrium of Bill, who is special, even holy. So, how can Bob compensate for this divergence between Bill's sanctity and his own views that offend Bill? If Bill is so good and special, how come Bob ideologically disagrees with him?

Of course, the sane thing would be to knock Bill off the pedestal, but suppose that would be difficult, indeed near impossible, because Bill's people control most of media, academia, entertainment, and the state, all of which extol the specialness of Bill. Then, the only way for Bob to 'redeem' himself for the ideological fallout with Bill is to go overboard in his idolatrous hallelujahs to Bill's glory. Then, it's no wonder we have the weird spectacle of Jews being the main force behind gun-banning, censorship of conservatives & whites, mockery of Christianity, the Great Replacement, and etc. while nonstop adulation of Jews & Israel emanates from the white 'conservative' side.
Indeed, Jews are now so holy that even dissident rightist types go out of their way to mention that a CERTAIN JEW may be in partial agreement with their views. In other words, a single Jew partly agreeing with your position is more a cause for celebration than a thousand or even a million of your own kind agreeing with you. It's like having a celebrity eat in your restaurant is a greater honor than having a million regular joes come and go. Benediction from one Jew counts for more than consensus among many others of your kind... even though MOST Jews are totally against your views and cause.
It's so pathetic. We saw this with Donald Trump. Jews slapped him, pulled his hair, punched him, pulled his pants down, kicked his guts, paddled his buns, grabbed his nuts, beat his dick with a stick, put clown make-up on his face, shoved a gerbil up his ass, and etc... and all we got from him was 'MUH ISRAEL, MUH ISRAEL, MUH ISRAEL.' And even though Jewish Power rigged the election in Joe Biden's favor and blocked all paths to honest inquiry(and even though Biden is a mere tool of the Jews), all we get from 'conservatives' and GOP is "Biden threw Israel under the bus and is chummy with Iran." What a pathetic bunch. This is what happens when white 'conservatives' support Israel than 'Israel'. If you support Israel, your people and nation become 'Palestine'. In contrast, if you support Palestine, your people and nation can be 'Israel' on the basis of Universal Nationalism.

PROTOCOLS OF ZION, ANTI-SEMITISM DEFINITION PUSHED AT UN, & MOSSAD CONSERVATIVE MEDIA | KMN LIVE

How the World went from Universal Nationalism to Universal Imperialism - The Hidden Empire of Judea - The Lost Chance after the End of the Cold War - Donald Trump’s Betrayal

Nationalism is the best defense against imperialism.

Nationalism means minding one's own business. It means having national sovereignty and respecting the sovereignty of other nations.

Imperialism, in contrast, means trampling on the rights and independence of other nations.

If Nazism or National Socialism had remained in nationalist mode, it couldn’t have done much harm. But it went into imperialist mode and violated & trampled on the rights of self-determination and self-rule among other nations.

Initially, Japan modernized for nationalist reasons. Threatened by British and American imperialism, it emulated Western science & technology to defend the homeland.
But it went from nationalism to imperialism upon the realization that the great powers were conquering and dividing the world among themselves. In order for Japan to be compete and command the respect of other great powers, it felt a need for an empire of its own.
Furthermore, UK and US, two imperialist powers, welcomed Japan into the imperialist club as counterbalance to expanding Russia and uncertain China.

Prior to the emergence of modern nationalism, the world had been divided among empires with little regard for established borders. Indeed, it had been so since time immemorial. Power and might decided the boundaries and limits of power. So, Persians conquered and laid claim to huge swaths of territory, even areas inhabited mostly by non-Persians. Same with the Romans, the Mongols, the Russians, the Ottomans, and Western European empires. There was no Rule or Ideal in the world that insisted on a Basic Right of security, ownership, independence, and self-rule. Jews did have the concept of the Covenant and Holy Land(promised to them by God), but this 'right' meant nothing to the greater empires that dwarfed the Jews.

Security could only be assured by might. There was no universal ideal or international law agreed upon by all the peoples of the world. And no global institution existed to enforce higher principles. For most of history, peoples were too busy conquering, defending, adventuring, or discovering to think in terms of universal political morality for the whole world. If a kingdom or state was sufficiently powerful and ambitious, it could very well embark on invasions and control of more territory. It was about grabbing more and more..

But then, there was the rise of modern nationalism in Britain, France, US, then followed by Germany, Italy, and Japan. Modern nationalism was a noble development insofar as it obligated the national elites to represent, serve, and defend the national people AND ignited the nascent idea that a nation had a RIGHT to land, security, and independence. Nationalism made national autonomy a right in terms of ideals and principles. Indeed, the main theme of the American Revolution was the idea of the colonists right to break away from the British Empire and establish a free and independent nation-as-republic.

However, due to the long legacy of imperialism(stretching back to beginning of history itself) and backwardness around the world, modern nationalism inherited the ambition for empire-building. This led to a contradiction. Even as nationalism defended the homeland from other nations and empires, it sought to expand its own imperial base. So, Japanese nationalism went from defending Core Japan to conquering and claiming other lands that were non-Japanese. Earlier, the British had gone from forming a secure Island Kingdom to conquering other territories that would eventually constitute a gigantic world empire. Though a nation born of independence from the British Empire, the US went from creating a new nation out of the wilderness in the New World to searching overseas for imperial domination, especially after the defeat of the Spanish Empire.

Western Imperialist expansion seemed only natural because most of the non-West was also in the imperial mode of constant invasions and counter-invasions. They lacked the nationalist ideal of (1) elites-and-peoples bound by historical and cultural covenant(which would have made foreign invasion more difficult) and (2) the political principle of the rightness of national autonomy and self-determination. Their political philosophy was essentially might-is-right. When the Brits invaded the territories of what came to be known as ‘India’, they merely usurped dominance from the Muslim Mughals.

But WWI and especially WWII dealt a serious blow to the imperialist model. Nazi imperialism and Japanese imperialism were not only defeated at huge cost but denounced as the epitome of evil. Also, it wasn’t long before almost all Third World folks demanded their own national independence, waged wars of liberation, and eventually expelled the European imperialists(sometimes with moral support from the US or the material support of the Soviets). And the Vietnamese fought a long hard battle to drive the US from what had once been ‘Indochina’.

So, with the end of WWII, there was the gold standard of Universal Nationalism. The new consensus was that EVERY people deserve to have a safe and secure homeland. Such ideal had been expounded by Woodrow Wilson after WWI, but it didn’t go far because the Great European powers weren’t about to abandon their empires, without which they couldn’t be great powers because their homelands were limited in territory, resources, and population.
And as the West set the template, Japan was determined to have an empire too. This all came crashing down after the horrors of WWII in which Europeans themselves suffered the ignominy of imperialist domination and rule under Nazi Germany.

Due to the Imperialist Legacy, the modern nationalism developed as nationalism + imperialism for some nations. If some European nations were content to remain and defend their own territories, others had embarked on imperial ventures long before the rise of nationalism. Thus, the French nationalism inherited the French empire and valued it as a source of prestige and power. This was a system of 'Nationalism for me, but not for thee'. The modern British and French were proud nationalists at home but sought to suppress and crush nationalist consciousness in their subject peoples.

But with the eventual fall of empires following WWII, the new template was "Nationalism for me and for thee." Let each and every nation, big or small, or powerful or weak, rich or poor, be free and independent. And this was to be a moral right. In the New Order, the richest, biggest, and most powerful nation had no right to conquer and claim a small, weak and poor nation. At the very least, even the biggest nation and smallest nation were equal in the area of the universal right of national self-determination. After all, there was a reason why the world body of international law came to be known as United Nations than United Empires.

In the post-WWII era, many progressives and liberals were supportive of the national liberation struggles of Vietnam, Algeria, and Cuba for independence and autonomy. And when Soviet tanks rolled into Czechoslovakia, even leftists denounced it as a communist form of imperialism.

Still, US and USSR remained as the two great empires. Of course, neither admitted that its version of world order was imperialistic. Soviets insisted their world order was about the brotherhood of man under communist ideology. And the US claimed to serve as the defender of the Free World.
And if their apologists did detect elements of imperialism in the US or Soviet world order, they argued it was different from Bad Old Imperialism. It was imperialism-as-necessary-evil against either Communist Tyranny or Capitalist Exploitation. So, even if Pax Americana was an empire, it was a noble containment strategy against the insatiable fanaticism of communism. Or, the Soviet empire was necessary to lend support to peoples around the world seeking independence from the exploitative greed of Western capitalism. At any rate, the assumption was the imperialism-as-necessary-evil would no longer be necessary IF the Evil Empire(communist or capitalist) finally vanished from the world.

Eventually, the Cold War did end with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of nations no longer under the Soviet-Russian yoke: Lithuania, Estonia, Georgia, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and etc. It appeared that universal nationalism came to prevail over Soviet Imperialism. Russians now ruled over Russia, not over other peoples who had their national autonomy.

With the end of the Cold War, many hoped that the US empire would wind down too. After all, US-as-empire had been justified on grounds of containing and, if possible, rolling back the Soviet empire. With no more Soviet Empire, what need would there be for the US empire?

Maybe just maybe, the US empire could have come to an end, and America would have returned to nationalist mode: US minds its own business, and other nations mind their own business, and, as good neighbors, all nations trade with one another, share ideas, and communicate. Fences make good neighbors. Also, bridges among nations are supposed to transport ideas and goods, not allow one people to mass-invade and colonize other nations.

But three things happened that kept the US in the imperial game.


1. The US got filled with hubris of End of History. Having won the Cold War, the American elites thought the American Way was the only way. In terms of political philosophy, mass culture, economic theory, and military prowess, the idea was that America, as an ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ nation, has the right to ‘lead’ and ‘defend’ the world. "If you're not with us, you're against us." My way or the highway.

2. The West’s cult of mass immigration as not only an economic good but a moral imperative resulted in an all-out mass invasion of white nations by the Third World. This had a profound impact on world consciousness as non-whites, who’d previously demanded and fought for nationalism and independence, came to devalue nationalism in favor of a new kind of imperialism. As non-whites figured it is so much easier to have a good life by moving to the West than by working as patriots to reform and develop their own nations, they effectively became champions of demographic imperialism and mass-colonization.

And if, like Fareed Zakaria or Nikki Haley, they gained elite positions in the West, they became cheerleaders for globo-imperialist warmongering against non-white peoples. After WWII, peoples in the Third World sympathized with one another in what they regarded as a common struggle against White Imperialism. But in the Age of Globalist Empire, non-whites who rose up the ranks in the West function as servitors of the Zionist-controlled Empire against non-white nations. Having been groomed & appropriated by the West(that serves the Empire of Zion) and flush with status & privilege, the likes of Haley and Zakaria are more than happy to cheer on the bombing of nations like Libya, Syria, Iraq, and etc.

As for the EU, by some estimates Brussels is already one-third Muslim and is expected to become majority non-white in a few decades. As non-whites settled in the West, they identified neither with their nations-or-origin or with white Westerners. Many came to exist in an ideological limbo of globalism, a kind of Universal Imperialism. Take Francis Fukuyama, the man who declared the triumph of ‘liberal democracy’ as the End of History. He's no longer Japanese in any meaningful sense, but he's not part of the White West either. He resides in the lala-land-of-the-mind called Endofhistoria. And Amy Chua feels as a member of what she calls the 'supergroup'.

**Perhaps, one reason why former imperialist Western nations became so pro-immigration was their subconscious desire to justify past imperialism. After all, imperialism once spread diversity around the world(especially permanently in Latin America), and the anti-imperialist impetus was essentially anti-diversity. Algerians and Vietnam eventually rejected and resisted the Diversity of European colonizers, just like Palestinians did everything they could to stem the flow of Invasive Diversity of Zionist colonizers. And Tibetans certainly aren’t happy about mass-migratory Diversity of Han Chinese who keep flooding into Tibet. Anyway, by welcoming demographic imperialism from non-white nations, former white imperialist nations could be subconsciously defending their past imperialist record of having imposed Diversity on subject territories that couldn’t say NO to well-armed European colonizers and their collaborators... like Hindus who followed in the heels of British Imperialists into Africa and Southeast Asia. Diversity = imperialism. Homogeneity = nationalism.**

3. Another reason why the US empire grew only bigger was because Jews became the new ruling elites of America. Why did this matter? Because Jewish power is essentially and intrinsically imperialist. As Jews are a minority elite in the US, they don't identify with most Americans who are seen as dumb and filthy goyim, an untermensch. Jews regard themselves as superior to goyim and mainly identify with other Jews in other nations. So, from the perspective of Jewish supremacists, gentile nationalism is regarded as independence and autonomy from Jewish Hegemony, just like the British Imperialists regarded the nascent nationalism among the American colonialists as a threat to British Imperialist hegemony. Jews fear and loathe gentile nationalism as an hindrance to Jewish globalist networking for Jewish supremacist hegemony. After all, if a gentile folk put their own people and culture first and foremost, their nation would take precedence over Israel and Jewish interests.

Jews are like the British imperialists who feared the rise of nationalist consciousness in Third World nations. After all, British elites didn't feel an affinity with the native majority in any of the subject domains. Their affinity was with the Mother Country and to the network of British Imperialists and colonizers all over the world. British Imperial power could sustain itself around the world only by making the subject peoples mainly 'identify' with British Imperial prestige than with local national concerns.

Kenyan nationalism meant Kenyans asserting authority against the British rulers. It meant Kenyans should defend and serve their black identity in their own nation than the global ambitions of the British imperialists. Indian nationalism meant the brown people of the subcontinent demanding self-rule & self-determination and, furthermore, asking the Brits to leave. As Gandhi said:


If the British were about the ‘Nationalism for me but not for thee’(or imperialist-nationalism), Gandhi was about universal nationalism, or ‘Nationalism for me and for thee’. British imperialists feared such an attitude because it would meant the end of the Empire of Albion. After all, if every non-white domain(or Ireland for that matter) of British Empire insisted on its own autonomy, how could British hegemony be sustained?

Today, Jews feel and act like the British imperialists. Most Jews don't feel a shared sense of identity, history, or destiny with gentile nationals in US, Canada, Poland, France, UK, and etc. To Jewish minorities(elites or otherwise) in such nations, most of the people are just seen as replaceable and interchangeable filthy goy untermensch. To sustain Jewish supremacism, Jews suppress goy nationalism. Consider how David Brooks and William Kristol are obsessed with keeping Israel as a Jewish ethno-state BUT they’d love to see whites in Europe, US, and Canada reduced to minorities in their lands of their ancestry or epic founding. And hideous Jewish supremacists like Max Boot and Jennifer Rubin think gentiles exist to fight Wars for Israel. To Jews, gentiles are little more than cattle. Jews look upon gentiles like pigs look upon other barn creatures in George Orwell’s ANIMAL FARM.

Jews now practice Imperialist Nationalism of ‘Nationalism for me but not for thee’. So, Jews say all Western nations must support Israel as a JEWISH STATE but also say white gentile nations must abandon nationalism(even one that says ‘for me and for thee’) because gentiles exist to serve Jewish power first and foremost. Jews don’t want gentile nationalism to come between Jewish Supremacism and White Submissivism. Also, Jews push for Mass Invasion(aka ‘immigration’) to turn the native white majority populations into minorities in their own nations. That way, Jews can control the native majority by guilt-baiting them with accusations of 'racism' for being insufficiently ‘welcoming’ of non-white mass invaders and leeches. And as the nation grows ever more diverse, Jewish Imperial elites hope to play divide-and-rule by pitting non-whites against whites, whites against non-whites, non-whites against non-whites(as they are racially diverse), and whites against whites(as they’re ideologically divided).

This is why Jews fear being ‘gandhi-ed’ out of the West. Indeed, what would happen if white folks woke up and told the Jewish supremacist-imperialists, "It’s time you left"? What if whites decided on mass civil disobedience against Jewish Power? Say NO to Wars for Zion. Goycott Jewish Hollywood, Goycott Jewish media, Goycott Jewish-run businesses that are hostile to whites, Goycott Jewish Casinos. No to Zion. That would surely make the Jews shit. As Hindus(against Brits), blacks(against Segregation), and National Socialists(against Jews) proved, boycotting businesses can be very effective. Palestinians are leading the way with BDS. of course, Jews use Economic Warfare all the time. Consider how Jews use the West to sanction Iran and Russia.

As it stands, Jewish imperialism is far more insidious and dangerous than British imperialism. At the very least, British Imperialism, like the French or Spanish kind, was OUT IN THE OPEN. It wasn’t denied. If anything, the British made a big deal of it 24/7. Brits were singing anthems about how Britain rules one third of the globe. So, there was NO DOUBT as to who was in power in the British Empire.

In contrast, Judea is an Hidden Empire. Even though the biggest power in the world is Jewish Global Network — most of US politicians, academics, media people, etc are agents or shills of Zion — , Jewish power uses gentile nations as fronts to carry out its dastardly deeds. So, even though the Power of Zion was behind the recent Syrian attacks, we've been led to believe US, UK, and France done it! Jewish supremacists are craven but cunning a**holes who use their vast capital to manipulate, bribe, and threaten OTHERS to do the fighting and killing.

It was very different in the Age of British Empire. Everyone knew the British were in command of using their proxies and subjects to further British Imperial interest. So, even when Brits recruited and ordered Indian, African, and Arab troops to fight in wars, no one would have thought India, Kenya, or Arabia were leading the charge. Everyone would have known that those non-white forces were only doing the bidding of the British.
But, because the Empire of Judea is a Hidden Empire, so many people fall for the charade that 'liberal democratic' Western nations are deciding to wage these Wars for Human Rights which are really Wars for the Hidden Empire of Zion. UK and France are essentially vassal nations of the US that is a vassal state of the Empire of Judea.

The problem with Donald Trump isn't nationalism. If the US had gone into nationalist mode after the Cold War, the world would be a safer and better place. All of a sudden, the Soviet Union was gone, and Russia was no longer a threat and wanted political and economic cooperation with the world. And if Anglo-Americans had still ruled America, maybe something could have been worked out. But Jews were rapidly gaining elite dominance in the US in the 80s and 90s. And Jewish attitude toward Russians was hardly different from their attitude toward white Americans: Both are mere cattle, replaceable and interchangeable. To Judeo-Nazis, white Russians and white Americans are filthy goyim, or untermensch. So, the hope of Russia’s transition from communism to a market economy was lost. Jewish globalists took hold of the reins of ‘reform’ in Russia and economically plundered the nation in the 1990s. Also, Billy Boy Clinton, a shill of Jewish globalists, pushed NATO right up to Russian borders.
Jews figured, "Don’t let a crisis go to waste." Jews exploited the End of the Cold War for their own nefarious agendas. Instead of having the US empire subside with the end of the Soviet empire, Jews took advantage of America-as-sole-superpower to consolidate control over EU and Russia. Thus, European nations soon became mere vassal-states in the coming decades. Also, clever Jews manipulated the vanity of warriors like John McCain and ‘thinkers’ like Samantha Powers into believing that they, as redemptive gentile leaders of the ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ nation, deserved the right of Enlightened Empire Building to remake the whole world in their image.

Of course, Jewish directed the power of the US mostly toward Jewish-Supremacist agendas, which is why most of US aggression has been directed at the Middle East and North Africa. Consider how Jewish power directed the US to use sanctions, invasions, and even support to Jihadi terrorists to undermine stability in the Middle East, all for the supremacist interests of Israeli hegemony.

Trump ran on nationalism that promised to end or severely limit US ventures overseas. US was the imperialist destroyer in Iraq, Libya, Syria(where CIA aided Alqaeda, the very people who did 9/11), and recruited Neo-Nazi elements to pull off a coup in Ukraine.
Trump sounded good during the campaign, but the Deep State now circles him like sharks and force his hand to do the bidding of the Empire of Judea instead of focusing on the problems of Americans. (Globalist ‘humanitarians’ say the rich and powerful US shouldn’t be so greedy & self-absorbed and instead must help other nations. But their idea of ‘humanitarian’ intervention mostly comes down to destroying nations hated by Jews. And the bulk of US foreign aid is more money for Israel to keep on crushing Palestinians and destabilizing the Middle East with threats and attacks.)

Jews hate the idea of American nationalism because it means the goy sheeple of the US will no longer go baaaaah and support Wars for Zion. Furthermore, the theme of American Nationalism would be, "American leaders must do what is good for MOST American people(most of whom are not Jewish)." Jews hate the notion because Jews feel zero affinity with gentile Americans. Jews want the bulk of American energy to be channeled toward serving globalist hegemony of Jewish Power. The mentality of Jews isn’t much different from that of a king. King expects the people to serve him, not vice versa. The Jewish 2% expects the gentile 98% to serve them, not vice versa.

The world needs universal nationalism. Nationalism for Me and for Thee.
But as long as Jewish power rules the West, it is becoming ever more difficult. Jews fear gentile nationalism because it undermines the neo-imperial globalist Jewish hegemony of the US.
To better understand the Jewish mindset as a microcosm, consider the Israel-Palestine conflict. How nice it’d be if Jews went for ‘Nationalism for Me and for Thee’ with their Palestinian neighbors. Jews would have Israel as their homeland, and Palestinians would have West Bank as their homeland. But nope, Jewish power summons the support of the West to crush Palestinian nationalism while maximizing their own nationalism with massive walls and military violence. It is a form of Imperialist Nationalism: ‘Nationalism for Me but not for Thee.’ So unjust.

‘Nationalism for Me but for Thee’ is like the logic of American Slavery, which was ‘Freedom for Me but not for Thee.’ Abolitionists began to ask, if white folks should be free, why not blacks too?
Likewise, if Israel has a right to be free and independent as a Jewish state, why doesn't Hungary have a right to be free and independent as a Hungarian nation? Jews call upon the West to praise and support Zionist nationalism but then pressure the EU to sanction and destroy Hungary for having chosen national survival and self-determination.

We know why things are so. It's because Jews seek to maximize their own tribal power, they seek to weaken the ethno-national power of all other peoples so that they will serve Jewish globalist hegemony.

Anyway, how depressing that Trump, who ran on nationalism and an end to globo-imperialism of US interference, has now been pressured by the Deep State Zionists and Military Industrial Complex to cook up BS about 'chemical attacks' to sabotage Syria's rightful nationalism.
US now illegally occupies much of Syria. US accuses Russia of meddling in elections and harboring aggressive global ambitions when, in fact, Jewish-controlled US is the #1 meddler in other national elections and the invader & destroyer of Iraq & Libya and an enabler of terrorists in Syria and Ukraine. When will this madness ever end?

Anyway, the overall arc of history.

1. Imperialism. The mighty dominate and rule over all others. Might is right.

2. National Imperialism. The right of one's own nation to be safe and secure from invasions but no such rights recognized for other peoples. Example: Japan defended itself from other empires but tried to take over China. ‘Nationalism for me but not for thee.’

3. Universal Nationalism. The right of each nation/people/culture to be free and independent. Nationalism for all peoples of the world as the core basis for international cooperation. It is the Template that emerged from the ashes of WWII and the end of empires. ‘Nationalism for me and for thee’.

4. Universal Imperialism. The right of great powers to militarily, financially, and culturally invade and transform other nations: Drop bombs, take over banks, bribe politicians, and spread Homomania as the new crusading faith. In turn, the the great powers must welcome vast demographic invasions by rest of the world. ‘Imperialism for me and for thee.’
We see this dynamics playing out between EU and Middle East. EU supports the Zionist-US invasions of the Middle East and then welcomes millions of Muslim 'refugees' displaced by those invasions. EU becomes demographically invaded in turn.