Response to James Lawrence's Nonsensical Piece of Misdirection on the Real Problems of Jewish Power: "AN ANTIDOTE TO THE JEWPILL (PART 2: ANTICHRISTIANITY)"

https://affirmativeright.blogspot.com/2021/12/an-antidote-to-jewpill-part-2.html

Why would anyone bother to argue with E. Michael Jones' political theology? It is absurd because Jones conflates spirituality with rationalism, i.e. Jesus represents objective truths of the universe. The looniness is right there. If people want to accept religion as faith, prophecy, or imagination, that's fine. But anyone who claims religion = reason has no understanding of either.

Jones is useful to our side because, in his shotgun approach to Jewish Power, he sometimes hits the right targets. Same with Rick Wiles of TruNews. Even Neo-Nazis are useful in this regard. It's like radical leftists got so much of history wrong, but their anti-Americanism and anti-capitalism sometimes hit the right targets, the rottenness of the US empire and globalist-capitalism that needs to be exposed.
Otherwise however, there's no point in addressing E. Michael Jones' worldview. He's essentially a Paleo-Catholic crank who can't tell logos apart from bogus. But then, this 'James Lawrence' sounds rather too much like Nathan Cofnas larping as a 'Christian'. But whereas E. Michael Jones is clearly and sincerely nutty, there's something weasely and disingenuous about Lawrence's piece. It reads like misdirection that boils down to "Don't blame the Jews. Goyim started it, and Jews just followed, rather haplessly."

In Europe, it was the French revolution that emancipated the Jews, not the Jews who unleashed the revolution. In America, it was the Progressive and New Deal movements that raised them into the governing elite, and set the stage for everything that MacDonald describes in The Culture of Critique. Even Zionism, contrary to popular belief on the Dissident Right, was a 19th-century Protestant religious obsession (called ‘restorationism’) before it was taken up by Jewish nationalists like Emma Lazarus and Theodore Herzl.

First of all, only a moron rightist believes that everything revolutionary is bad and caused by Jews. Only a moron rightist thinks that everything leftist is wrong and that everything right is somehow noble. True, there are moron-rightists who still dream of monarchs & aristocracy and feel triggered by anything that hints of 'revolution'. In a way, such position has more to do with the likes of Bill Buckley — National Review ran countless articles on how the French Revolution was a dress rehearsal for 20th century radicalism, not only communism but Fascism — than with Alt-Right or the New Right, many of whom see the value of socialism and the positive role that revolution and social reforms played in the development of the Modern West. After all, what distinguished the West from the Rest? West accepted and even accelerated changes, revolutions in so many areas. This dichotomy also applies to the Christian West and Christian East, especially Byzantium. While the former grew and grew, the latter declined and fell under the Ottoman Muslims. If Christian logos is a sure formula of truth and power, why did Byzantium fail? It was far more 'theocratic' than the Christian West that broke free of Medievalism and gained much from neo-paganism of the Renaissance. What really made the Modern West was the fusion of neo-paganism(that sparked creativity in the arts and Hellenistic approach to logic and science) and Christian prophecy. The 'problem'(if it is a problem) with paganism is it lacks a unified vision of the universe and the future. According to paganism, there are many gods, therefore there is no single direction to history but a contest of competing forces, like with the gods in THE ILIAD. In contrast, Christian monotheism says there is one force, God, that leads history to fulfill a certain prophecy. Thus, the Christian mindset is more committed to a linear theory of progress. Now, Christianity alone could mean Byzantine enervation or Medieval ascetism that hardly moves history forward. But when fused with neo-pagan creativity and spark, the combination could open new horizons.

Anyway, only a fool would argue that the revolutionary spirit was necessarily bad for the West. If anything, it is what made the West, relative to the far more conservative Rest(and Byzantium). Pro-Western people don't have a problem with revolution per se. Rather, the problem has been with impatient radicalism rooted in the cult of rationalism. (Radicalism isn't content with organic pace of change and seeks to bring about utopia in single leaps. Granted, change and progress aren't necessarily organic. Rather, they must be encouraged and pushed. It's like plants need sun and nutrients to grow. Children need to be pressured by parents to study. Coaches must drive athletes hard. Inertia is often the natural state of things. Leftism in sane doses can prod society to move a bit faster, hastening the pace of change. There are limits, of course. A child can learn only so much in a week, and an athlete can improve his ability only so much in a season. Leftism sometimes pushes good ideas too fast, but it is truly fatal when it blindly pushes bad ideas as the answer, like with communism.) While the emergence of rationalism was a great thing for the West(especially in science, technology, medicine, etc), it also led to the hubris that mankind could figure everything out and know, based on 'science', what must be done. The result was Marxism(with its supposed 'scientific materialism') and, more recently, Covid Nuttery.
Science is of immense value, but it also spawned 'scientism', the conceit that one's worldview or ideology is foolproof for being based on 'science'. Such Iron Rationalism actually undermines real rationalism. This usually applies to the human sciences. At one time, the 'scientistic' element favored the 'scientific racists' who were so sure of their theories of race. Today, the 'scientistic' element favors the 'scientific anti-racists' who, based on incomplete evidence or willful self-delusion, insist that race is just a social construct. In both cases, true science is clouded by 'scientism' that really amounts to misuse of science for what are ideological purposes. ('Scientific Anti-Racism' will be far more harmful to the West as it will argue that 500 million black African immigrants won't make any difference to Europe because people are just people. 'Scientific Racism' led Europeans to mistreat or murder some peoples or groups, but 'Scientific Anti-Racism' can only lead to wholesale murder of Europe.)

Maybe some extreme Anti-Jewite or ultra-rightist believes every revolutionary movement was bad(and that we should be living in the Middle Ages) or that Jews were the key players in all these events. But that's mostly a red herring because it misses the essence of the current criticism of Jewish Power among today's white nationalists or white-centrists, most of whom don't care what happened 500 yrs ago, let alone 1000 or 2000 yrs.
Of utmost importance is what is happening NOW, and who can deny that Jewish Supremacism rules the West? Furthermore, who can deny that, what Jews push onto white goyim doesn't apply to Jews themselves. If indeed ideology controls the Jews, they would judge themselves by the same yardstick with which they judge whites. But they don't. A case in point. If the ideology of 'anti-racism' is indeed dominant in the West, Jews would not only be bashing whites for past discrimination against blacks but for white support of Jewish tyranny over the Palestinians. But the very Jews who decry white treatment of blacks insist and demand that whites support whatever Israel does to Palestinians(and Arabs in outlying territories). But 'James Lawrence' is rather like Nathan Cofnas on this issue. He'd rather sweep it under the rug while yammering about some Christian theological controversy from 1000 yrs ago. Like who cares about that crap? Maybe E. Michael Jones cares, but even most people who value Jones' criticism of Jewish Power don't care to read his books or lend any credence to his notion that Logos = Worshiping Jesus. I'd argue that most white nationalists or white-centrists are, at heart, neo-pagan, and good for them!

Also, what do we mean by Jews in the historical sense? Your average Jew throughout history didn't amount to much. The real movers and shakers were elite Jews, often the bankers and others with close ties with European elites. These individuals were most certainly manipulating events for Jewish interests. FDR, for example, had the overwhelming support of Elite Jewry. It's true that Jews were absorbing lots of ideas and attitudes from Anglo-Protestants and even following their lead, but it's also true that Jews were playing a prominent role in steering Anglos toward certain goals, like war with Germany. Sometimes, Anglo and Jewish interests overlapped, but more than any other group, Jews steered events in the interests of their tribal interest. Who can deny this? Jews were pro-Soviet at one time because Jews played a key role in the Russian Revolution and because Soviet Union fought Hitler's Germany. After the war, many Jews spied for the Soviet Union. But as the Soviet Union turned more pro-Arab and anti-Israel, even so-called 'leftist' Jews grew hostile to communism, and Neocons joined and even came to lead the anti-communist crusade in the 1980s. Who doesn't see a tribal angle to this?
And if ideology matters so much to Jews, how come all those 'liberal Jews' don't condemn ultra-rightist Israel? Why are they silent about Jewish oligarchs allied with Naziesque forces in Ukraine? If they're such good 'secular liberals', why do they turn a blind eye to Israel's support of ultra-religious ISIS and other crazy Jihadists working against secular Assad of Syria? Never mind what happened 500 or 1000 yrs ago. Why can't 'James Lawrence' address the world today? Why is he misdirecting our focus from the obvious truths in the here-and-now to some mumbo jumbo theological debates centuries ago?

Alas, this theory contradicts the central dogma of white nationalism: that racial self-interest is primary, and truths, doctrines and ideas are secondary. WNs want to live in a dark fever-dream, where every race except the white one is strategising for its self-interest under a cynical veil of ideals – and we need only become paranoid enough to perceive the hidden strategies, and deceptive enough to conceal our own self-interest in the same way. They do not want to live in the light of consciousness, where ideals really motivate individuals, and solidify the cohesion of groups – because in this reality, their own dream is reduced to a narrow and paltry ideal, a cult of biological race.

What a lying piece of turd. White Nationalists don't say racial self-interest IS primary. They know it from White Decline all around. If racial self-interest were primary, whites wouldn't be in this mess. What they say is that racial self-interest MUST BE primary. In other words, it can't be taken for granted and must be embraced as a consciousness. They say identity must dictate ideology, not vice versa. Why? History shows time and again that identity has greater resilience and longevity than ideas or ideology or whatever. Any people who forget this are fated to fade away and die.
Also, white-centrists don't believe in some 'dark fever dream' where whites must conceal their own self-interests. No, they are for exposing the Jewish self-interest and for OPENLY and HONESTLY exhorting and exercising white self-interest.

Being pro-identity doesn't mean one is anti-ideological. Rather, it means ideology must complement identity. History bears this out. Every religion came to be a tool of power, of a people or an order. Thus, Catholic kingdoms fought other Catholic kingdoms. One Arab tribe, though Muslim, fought another Arab tribe, also Muslim. Russia and China were both communist, but Russian communism served Russia, Chinese communism served China. Russian history is a clear case of identity outlasting ideology, i.e. Russia was Russia before communism, during communism, and after communism. Any people, culture, or civilization can weather the rise and fall of ideologies or political systems AS LONG AS the people remain intact. It is when the people are replaced that it's really game over. The fall of Imperial Tsarist system wasn't the end of Russia. The fall of communism wasn't the end of Russia either. But if Russians were to be replaced by another people, it'd be the end of Russia regardless of ideology. This is why 'muh democracy' is so dumb. "Gee, I don't care if white nations become 90% non-white as long as it still has free markets and elections."

 
The course of current Western History goes to show that racial self-interest doesn't come naturally or first-and-foremost among a people. A people can be brainwashed to welcome their own destruction in the name of false gods of ideology. Or a people can be conditioned to believe their purpose is to serve another people. The lower castes in India were made to feel this way about members of higher caste. In the past, blacks in the South were made to believe their lot was to serve whites because, on their own, they'd just be crazy dumb ni**ers. It's like dogs can be trained to favor the interests of the master over their own dog-hood.
But any people that wants to survive into the future better put race/identity before ideology or make ideology bend to identity. China adopted universal communism but molded it to serve the Chinese people. Iran practices universal Islam, but this doesn't mean it rejects Iranian national interest. Nicaragua practices democracy, but it's a national democracy than one that bends to the US globalist world order.

According to 'James Lawrence', the cult of biological race is a 'paltry ideal'. The white race, or any race, is the product of 100,000s or at least 10,000s of yrs of evolution. White race was forged by survival through all sorts of climates and terrains. It came into existence even before white civilization. Before there was white culture/society, there was the white race. In other words, race came before all else. What we call 'history' is maybe 5,000 yrs, or at most 6,000 yrs. 'History' and high civilization came to Northern Europe much later. Perhaps, Northern European history is 1,500 or 1,200 yrs, much shorter than Egypt's, Persia's, India's, and China's. Long before the rise of European civilization, there was the European race forged by struggle in ice and fire over many eons. This is a rich biological heritage that has value regardless of ideology. After all, a European's primary value is his European being, not whether he's a 'Christian', 'atheist', 'anarchist', 'socialist', 'capitalist', 'libertarian', and etc. This isn't to discount the importance of ideas but to state the obvious: being precedes believing. So, the most valuable ideology is one that places Being before Believing. European race came into existence long before Christianity or any other idea-system. And yet, for 'James Lawrence'(a larping version of Nathan Cofnas?), white consciousness of rich and deep racial history is a 'paltry ideal'. Maybe 'Lawrence' feels this way because he happens to be a paltry specimen of the white race: an ugly stupid dork idiot.

Now, it's true that one can read too much into the supposed Jewish Plan. It can get rather silly, like with Adam Green's theory that Jews cooked up Christianity and spread it to goyim to gain power over them. Green, like E. Michael Jones, is useful as a critic of Jewish Power because he sometimes hits the right targets. But the grand conspiracy theory of Christianity is just ludicrous.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/Hbt65YdfHwSi/

https://www.bitchute.com/video/bAsucAXXFbZM/

According to Green, Jews turned goyim into Christian Anti-Semites who oppressed Jews so that Jews could, 2000 yrs later, guilt-bait goyim into serving Jews. ROTFL and LOL rolled into one. It'd be like saying blacks cooked up the slave trade so that blacks could one day guilt-bait whites into kissing black ass. And maybe Japan actually planned to lose WWII to become an ally of the US and gain access to US markets.

This is where grand-theorizing can easily jump the shark. Now, there is a kernel of truth to Adam Green's view. Jews are big thinkers and tend to be more strategic than other races. Jewish personality can be glimpsed in Isaac Asimov's FOUNDATION series where some Big Mind prophesies future events and sees what the normal mind doesn't see. Stanley Kubrick's films were also conceived on the Big Think principle. Jews have been obsessed with chess, a game of strategy where the winner is usually the one who computes more moves ahead. Now, some might argue this is merely the result of higher intelligence, but intelligence isn't necessarily interested in Big Ideas or grand concepts. Anglos have been an intelligent people but their mental skills were focused on empiricism, things that could be observed, collected, and studied. Plenty of very smart people are narrowly focused on a single topic or task. Intelligence per se doesn't strive for the grand theory of everything or the grand prophecy of what will be(or what must be). In other words, most intelligent economists weren't like Karl Marx with a grand theory of history, one who tried to tie together all the past with all the future, the science with the theory of justice. So, the Jewish mindset isn't merely the product of high intelligence. Rather, it's part of the Jewish prophetic tradition(which is more accurate than the 'revolutionary spirit'). Now, what came first in a chicken-or-egg way? Jewish personality or Jewish prophecy? Was there something in Jewish personality that favored propheticism? Or did the culture of propheticism favor those Jews who claimed to be farther-seeing and more profounder in reach? I don't know.

Now, does this mean that Jews long ago looked into the future and brought about events that led to the 20th century? No. While Jews are more strategic and farther-seeing than most peoples, no people(however intelligent or strong-willed) can look into the future and plan events that happen centuries, let alone millennia, later. Kubrick's films are about 'perfect plans' that always fail due to some unforeseen X-factor. There are lots of X-factors and/or black swans in history. Karl Marx based his prophecy on economic trends in his time. He failed to see how those trends would change with new developments in science and technology. Also, he underestimated the element of individual will and the power of the irrational. Furthermore, prophecies tend to undermine themselves because they not only serve as vision of the future but alarm that wakes the enemy. Marxist prophecy forced capitalists to wake up and amend their ways and make compromises with moderate socialists lest growing unrest and radicalism lead to real revolution. Thus, most prophecies are self-defeating by alerting the enemy to what's up ahead unless something is done(to suppress the movement or to win over the moderate voices within it).

Jewish History cannot be understood apart from goy history as most of it is about Jews co-existing with the far more numerous and powerful goyim. Thus, Jews lacked the autonomy that the Persians, Hindus, and Chinese had. Persians had their dominant space. Hindus had their own cosmologically ordered society. Chinese had their own Middle Kingdom. In contrast, Jews had to exist alongside goyim, and this meant they could never practice the kind of centrism of the great goy powers.
Now, if Jews were simply aiming to assimilate and do business, this would have been no big deal. Plenty of minority cultures assimilated and became part of larger cultures. Most of the tribes mentioned in the Bible no longer exist. They became part of Persian folks, Arab folks, Turkic folks, European-Christian folks, and etc. It could have been the same with Jews but for the fact that they came up with the most powerful religious concept and the idea of the Covenant that set themselves apart from goyim. So, even as goyim were more numerous and more powerful, Jews held this conviction that, ethno-spiritually at least, they were the best because of the Covenant with the one true God.

But because Jews insisted on serving their own JEWISH interests despite lacking a secure world of their own, they had to be more esoteric, clever, shadowy, and devious in their thinking and approach. They had to latch onto goy systems, values, fashions, and trends while somehow manipulating them to favor Jewish interests. Of course, Jews themselves were profoundly impacted by these goy values and systems(though, with something like Christianity, one could debate til the cows come home as to whether it's 'semitic' or 'aryan' because it's 'semitic' as foundation but 'aryan' as edifice). But no matter how much Jews adopted goy ways and ideas, they eventually made them serve Jewish identity because the very foundation of Jewishness is the ethno-spiritual Covenant; this core concept of Jewishness is so essential that it even defines secular Jews.

In contrast, Christianity is about weakening one's tribal identity in favor of universal values. To become a better Christian, you favor fellow Christians of all color over your own kind on the basis of blood. However, to be a good Jew means to stick with the Covenant and to believe in the fusion of spirit and blood, the Jewish blood. Thus, even if Jews and white Christians adopt the same 'universal' values, they eventually go separate ways. White Christians try to make themselves less white and more universal because the core principle of Christianity is to unite all of humanity as brethren under Jesus. In contrast, given the nature of Judaism, Jews use the same 'liberal' or 'universal' ideals to serve Jewish identity and interests because the core function of Judaism is preservation of the race on account of its sacred blood.

Look at Jewish Liberals and Wasps Liberals from the New Deal era. After WWII, with each passing year, white liberals became less race-centric, less tribal, and less nationalist, whereas Jewish liberals became more race-centric, more tribal, and more nationalist(even to the point of supremacism). If the power of ideology is paramount, white liberals and Jewish liberals would have ended up the same way. But today, white liberals denounce Hungary for trying to preserve itself while Jewish 'liberals' not only support ultra-right Israel but work with neocon Jews to make sure ALL US POLITICIANS totally support Israel while kicking Palestinians into the dirt. What do Jewish 'conservatives' in the US and Jewish 'conservatives' in UK have in common? Do they care about the preservation of the white race or Christian heritage in either country? No, it all comes down to "Is it good for Jewish Power?" The fact that there is far less animus between Jewish 'left' and Jewish 'right' than between white 'left' and white 'right' goes to show that Jews put identity before ideology, whereas whites put ideology before identity, a fatal development. Now, one could argue that the relative tribal unity among Jews stems from the anxiety of minority status, but it's the same in Israel where Jews are the solid majority.

There are two reasons why Jewish Identity is easier to utilize as the basis of political conviction. Jewish ethnicity has been sacralized via the Covenant. So, according to Judaism, Jewish pride isn't based on tribal arrogance alone but on the very word of God. In contrast, there's nothing in Christianity that bestows specialness on the white race. Thus, while white Christians could feel the glow of sanctity as Christians(though not so much anymore because Jews associated the history of Christianity with 'antisemitism', 'racism', and cultural repression), they can feel no such merely as whites. In contrast, the mere fact of being Jewish means God is watching over you. He chose your kind. (This is why the only solution for whites is to forge their own covenant with the power of the universe. White blood must be sacralized, but this requires the emergence of white prophecy. Christianity, in contrast, means that your blood is hopelessly tainted with sin and can only be cleansed with infusion of Jesus's blood. Covenant binds. Goy way was to divide goyim into aristocrats and subjects. Elites and peons. Because white elites looked down on white peons, Jews could manipulate the division by aiding the goy elites in the exploitation of goy masses. In contrast, the Jewish Covenant says even the blood of the lowliest Jew is equal to that of the richest Jew in the eyes of God. One good thing about National Socialism was it valued every German as part of the national volk.)

The other reason why Jewish Identity is politically justified is ironically due to Christian morality and its emphasis on victimology as basis of virtue. Jews ran with the Holocaust Narrative and made themselves to be the biggest victims in history... at the hands of the Christian West no less. (Some will say the Nazis were neo-pagan, but Jews argue that the entire history of Antisemitism, beginning with the Christian kind, led to the horror in WWII.) Thus, Holocaustianity guilt-baits white Christians with a twist on Christian morality. Jews are suddenly the new jesuses crucified by White Gentiles/Christians as the New Romans.
This guilt-consciousness has been the Achilles Heel of Christianity, at least IF non-Christians were to gain control of the Narrative. In contrast, Muslims are immune to such psycho-emotional manipulation because Muhammad told his followers to do some Jihad, kick butt, never apologize, and convert infidels(or kill them if they get in the way). You don't see Muslims groveling before Jews or bending down to wash stinky Negro feet. Islam can be plenty repressive and dogmatic but it's not sanctimonious like Christianity with 'turn the other cheek' spiel. Muhammad told his followers to kick the other (ass) cheek of the enemy, not turn the other cheek for the enemy to slap. Of course, Christians hardly turned the other cheek and preferred to wage war and kill lots of people, but this could eventually be used to guilt-bait Christian conscience IF the enemy were to gain control of the Narrative. And Jews gained control over the Narrative, which is why the New Western or Schwestern Values are based on a litany of white historical sins, especially to Jews and blacks(as Jews don't want whites to feel sorry for what they did to Arabs and Palestinians).

Now, it's true that what we call Jewish Power is the result of interaction of Jews and goyim. It's like Jews in Italy were different from Jews in France were different from Jews in Britain were different from Jews in Russia were different from Jews in Brazil were different from Jews in America from Jews in Iran and so on. If the Anglo World never existed, Jews would not be ruling the world. Anglos were super-ambitious and highly talented as world conquerors, and Jews rode on that white horse to world power. Also, even though certain Jewish elites had considerable influence throughout Western history, it's only recently that Jews gained anything like supreme power via the Anglos, especially Anglo-Americans who, at some point, decided to get on all fours and play white horsey to the Jewish rider.
So, Jewish worldview always changed and adapted in accordance to shifting historical landscapes. It's not as if a cabal of Jews in the 12th century were planning the Bolshevik revolution of the 20th century or globo-homo parades of the 21st century. Still, whatever Jews were faced with through history, there has been a running thread of bending and twisting things to serve Jewish interests, not least by suppressing criticism of Jews while amplifying criticism of their rivals or enemies.

 
Take Hollywood. One could say Jews didn't invent motion pictures. Jews weren't the first to start the movie business. But once they gained dominance in the industry, they were mindful to make it Jewish-friendly. Of course, Jews had to make compromises. In the early 20th century when Christians and moralists(and anti-Jewish elements) had lots of power, Jews had to agree to stuff like the Hayes Code and appease the Catholic Church. Jews were also mindful not to offend the American South. Still, Jews made sure Hollywood made lots of anti-German movies in the 1930s. And Jews in Hollywood did everything to blacken Joe McCarthy's name because HUAC at one time forced Jewish Hollywood to blacklist certain Jewish writers and directors. And Hollywood also made stuff like EXODUS while not making a single pro-Palestinian movie. So, while, in one way, Hollywood is just another American Capitalist success story, it's also been a Judeo-centric enterprise. Who can deny that Jewish control had a profound impact on how so many Americans(and global audiences) came to see the world? Via Hollywood movies, countless people around the world came to see Islam as synonymous with terrorism. Via Hollywood movies, countless Europeans came to regard white Americans as mindless gun-toting 'racists' who lynch blacks at the drop of a hat.

In a way, Jews are too smart for ideology or fashion trends even as they pretend to go along or get swept up for awhile. In the Sixties, Jews and goyim alike took part in the Counterculture. But whereas many simpleminded white goyim gave themselves fully to the hippie culture and the like, many Jews soon realized how silly it was. And there was too much money to be made than rolling in the hay, wearing flowers in your hair, and searching for Indians to touch. Better to organize rock concerts and rake in the profits than wear tie-dyes and waste your days as a 'deadhead'. Be like David Geffen.

Jewish intelligence can't help but seeing goyim as dumb. Suppose someone with 100 IQ found himself among those with 80 IQ. Would he want to take orders from the dummies? Would he consider them as his equal? He might pretend to because he's outnumbered. It'd sure be dumb for the 100 IQ guy to say to the 80 IQ crowd, "You guys sure are dumb. I'm smarter, I deserve to rule, so do as I say or kiss my ass!" Even dummies will take offense and kick his ass. So, what should he do? He pretends to be for 'equality' and act in interest of the common good while slyly gaining power over them. He may also guilt-bait the 80 IQ crowd by saying they are 'privileged' over the 60 IQ crowd even though he, with 100 IQ, is the most privileged among them all.

Higher IQ simply wants to rule over lower IQ. It's just human nature. It's like blacks, being tougher, want to be the alpha race over others. Blacks will not say it but feel it just the same. Indeed, blacks would be far less anti-white IF whites were equally tough. Suppose whites were just as good at fighting and sports. Suppose NBA and NFL were majority white and blacks made up only 13% of the players. Blacks would actually respect whites and have far less problem with whites having lots of good stuff. But blacks, being obsessed with fighting and sports, look upon whites as inferior wussy fa**oty race of slow white boys. Whites are inferior, so why they gots more than blacks? This infuriates blacks who believe they, as the alpha race, should rule. Jews feel the same way but on the basis of higher intelligence.

But it's not just about brawn or brains. After all, there are big tough guys who are mellow in temperament. And there are smart people who are nice and kind. So, their superiority doesn't make them especially nasty or hostile. But blacks are naturally oogity-boogity due to evolution alongside hippos, hyenas, and lions. They be nasty. And Jews are naturally pushy-wushy due to reasons of evolutions stemming from rabbinical and merchant competition. Thus, there are lots of Jews with personalities of Albert Brooks, Alan Dershowitz, Sarah Silverman, and Howard Stern. No wonder then that black brawn consciousness often leads to jive-ass thuggery, and Jewish brain consciousness often leads to sneering contempt, so evident among the likes of Chuck Schumer, Jerry Nadler, Adam Schiff, Jennifer Rubin, Rob Reiner(meathead), John Podhoretz, and etc.

This is why Jews and blacks sort of see eye to eye. Being advantaged in different areas, they often fear or resent the other, but they also take pride in having extra juice for causing havoc for the rest of us. Terms of Jew-Black Alliance goes as follows: "Jews will use all their might to browbeat and guilt-bait whites into elevating blacks as the gods and idols of the New US, and blacks in turn will dump on whites and 'white supremacism' but will not call out on Jews and Zionist tyranny over Palestinians."
But then, Jews get away with such anti-white crap because whites worship Jews as either the Chosen(Christian Zionists), Holy Holocaust People, Endearing Comedians, or High IQ Geniuses. Indeed, even HBD-sphere is worshipful of Jews. Why does Jared Taylor remain silent about the very people who've done most to de-platform him? It's because he's so enthralled with Jewish Greatness. People like Taylor and John Derbyshire are not hoping for equal partnership with Jews. Rather, they are willing to be servants and sidekicks of Jews in return for Jewish tolerance of white interests. "We white goyim will serve you superior Jews, the true master race, IF you Jews permit our white interests." But why would Jews agree to that? If Jews are the master race, it's only fitting for Jews to serve their own interests, not allow white interests. Now, what if some whites argue that Jewish interests and white interests are totally aligned... like the notion of Judeo-Christian? But Jews are not stupid. They know Christianity began as an anti-Jewish religion. Also, Jews and Europeans had a long troubled history, and all of sudden, Jews and whites are Best-Friends-Forever? No way. Besides, even if whites turned over a new leaf and are sworn to be nice to Jews henceforth, Jews know it's only a matter of time before 'antisemitism' resurfaces. Why? Because bad Jewish behavior will get out of control again. Jews know this. There are good Jews who prefer to play fair and decent, but there are also bad Jews who use every dirty trick in the book. The problem is, given the nature of Jewish Identity, if good Jews had to choose between good goyim and bad Jews, they will go with the latter. It's just a tribal thing. And so, bad Jews go unchecked and give Jews a bad name, and this leads to 'antisemitism'. Good Jews may not want bad Jews to act so badly, but they just can't make themselves side with good goyim against bad Jews. So, Jews have decided to destroy every last vestige of white identity and unity because, then, there won't be any white resistance no matter how badly the bad Jews act and how much the good Jews cover for bad Jews. (Of course, if good Jews aid bad Jews, they too become bad Jews.) Besides, good Jews figure, as nasty as bad Jews are, they(the bad ones) got bigger cojones to do what good Jews wouldn't dare do. Thus, sometimes, it's the bad Jews who really make things happen, from which even good Jews can profit... like the spread of gambling and Zionic scramble for world domination.

 
It's like good Anglos often relied on the ambition and adventurousness of bad Anglos to gain more territory and loot. But whereas whites reached a point where good ones called out on bad ones, good Jews dare not call out on bad Jews. Same with blacks. There are some good blacks, but in the name of 'brotherhood', they stick together and the good ones don't call out on bad ones... which makes black behavior worse, which can lead to more 'racism'. Even though good whites are far more likely to call out on bad whites, there's a limit to white conscience(as it lacks agency). In their worship of Jews and blacks, good whites dare not call out on bad Jews or bad blacks. Why, that'd be 'antisemitic' or 'racist'. It's a vile and vicious cycle of moral blindness and hypocrisy that the West has fallen into.

THE END OF TWITTER?, MAXWELL FIX IS IN, HANUKKAH CELEBRATION, JEWS SAY SANTA IS TOO WHITE - Know More News - Adam Green

Some Observations on Jewsteronomy — What are the relations between Jewish Power Elites and Ordinary Jewish Masses — Jews compared to Japanese — To Own and to be Owned

Notes in Reply to GGAllin's comments on the Saker's ruminations on Russians and Jews:

https://www.unz.com/tsaker/our-fundamental-disagreement-about-wwii-hitler-jews-and-race/#comment-3706681

Since I began earning over $20/hour late in life, I’m not nearly a billionaire. Have little to no influence other than if I write something in an online forum or Tweets. It’s weird to read about “me” as an existential threat, but it’s interesting to grasp the context, of past harms done by “my people” who I pretty much don’t know any other than immediate siblings. It makes more sense than “irrational hate”.

It's not about YOU per se, though an average Jew, with an income of nearly 100,000, does make more than $20 an hour. The fact is powerful Jews will likely look down you as a 'dumb Jew'. That said, rich Jews do care about lesser Jews more than rich whites care about lesser whites, and that's something. We goyim don't see YOU, an individual, as an 'existential threat'. Indeed, if all or most Jews were like you, whites and Jews would likely get along. Most people want to peacefully co-exist with others, even folks of different ethnicity, in a sound and stable system. Even under Nazi rule, most German individuals were like you. They were not fire-breathing Nazi monsters. They were working stiffs who got up every morning, went to work, returned home to family, and relaxed, then did the same the next day. But Germany was then under Hitler's rule, and Hitler could be batshit crazy. National Socialist elites guided Germanic energies towards dark ends. In a typical socio-political order, most individuals are powerless and end up serving the agenda of the rulers. So, even anti-Nazi Germans ended up working and paying taxes to support Nazism. And most Jewish individuals end up supporting Jewish Power. One reason is relative powerlessness of the masses(who are like herds of cattle without control of levers and steering wheel of power), but the other reason is most people, with free will and left to their own devices, will choose their own side(as the devil they know or feel familiar with) over the other side. Even as they know their cabal of elites are plenty flawed and even rotten, they figure its rule is preferable to being conquered and/or controlled by the other side. Even Jewish Israelis who are deeply critical of Zionist rule would rather be ruled by Jewish elites than by Arab overlords. And this is why many Jewish individuals continue to support Jewish power. Furthermore, even as they know much of it is rotten, they nevertheless feel a pride of power — the incredible fact of Jews as 2% of America controlling the greatest power in the world — and a paranoia for the Other, the potential new pogromites or 'nazis', if goyim were to regain elite power. Indeed, this is why Germans and Japanese also supported their regimes to the very end in WWII. What if the conquering Russians kill or rape all Germans? What if victorious Americans wipe out all Japanese?

Also, even though a single German was like most other 'ordinary individual' around the world, there was a certain tendency within Germanic Teutonism to push things too far. It's like one straw on a camel's back is nothing, but enough of them will break its back. Even though Nazism and its horrors were not inevitable and could have been avoided(without defeat in WWI and the ensuing economic depression), there was still something powerful and irrational in German national character that, under certain circumstances, could cast a dark shadow over the world. It's like one little flame is nothing, but if you combine the flames together, it can form into ag massive pyre that can burn down a forest.
Same was true of Japan during WWII. Your average Japanese guy was a nice person. But there was something extreme and insane in Japanese national character that, under certain circumstances, could unleash a hellish kind of madness. It's like there is the sane side of Yonoi in MERRY CHRISTMAS MR LAWRENCE but also the obsessive side driven by dark national mythos.
Same with Negroes. One Negro isn't much of a problem(though, to be sure, problem enough), but too many Negroes leads to a critical mass or critical badass of jivery, criminality, and madness.

If a single Jew was dropped into any goy community, he would likely just get along. Much the same if just a few were dropped. But with sufficient numbers, Jews tend to go into Judeo-centric solar mode: They feel goyim must revolve around them than vice versa. They alter the gravitational dynamics between Jews and goyim. Though much smaller in number, the Jewish Covenant-mentality and pride-of-intellect provide Jews with a super-gravity-pack that can warp the relativity of political power.
Even as a minority, they feel like they own the place and should set the agenda and tell others what to do. Look at Jewish behavior under early Bolshevism. Look at Jewish behavior in 'capitalist' Russia of the 1990s. Granted, Jewish chutzpah wouldn't be so effective if not for goy goopery. Jewish culture taught Jews to be resilient and tenacious, even at the genetic level via selective mating that favored merchants and scholars. In contrast, Russian Orthodox culture and agro-centrism bred a race of people who were passive, witless, and expended most of their energies on useless diversions like swilling vodka, wrestling with bears, and dancing in such manner to blow the knees. While Jews were singing with their minds, Russians were dancing with their bodies. Guess which side gained advantage over the other?



So, while it's inconceivable that a tiny number of Russians could ever gain control over a vast majority Jewish population, even a small number of Jews could gain power over Russians. It's like a horse can't own a man, but a man can own a horse and ride it. Indeed, Jews even gained power over Anglos, the mightiest people that ever lived, so they naturally could so easily toy with Russians. Yet, there is a certain paradox here when we consider Jews-and-Anglos and Jews-and-Slavs. How strange that, in the end, Jewish power over Anglos was more total than power over Russians(or Italians). Why would this be if Russians and Greasers have been far less impressive and competent than the Anglos? This is where corruption and lack of scruples are almost an advantage for the goyim. Anglos, being more committed to Rule of Law, meritocracy, and fair play, were bound to be more sensitive to charges of hypocrisy and dirty tricks. Also, Anglos came to revere Rule of Law as a cornerstone of their might. So, Jews could exploit Anglo Ethos and Rule of Law to gain total power over Anglos on legal and ethical grounds. But among Russkies and Greasers, legality counts for less than machinations of power. So, despite being less impressive than Anglos, Russkies have been more adept at wresting power back from the Jews by dirty means(but then Jews also used dirty means to gain power over Russians).

Even though an average Jew is just an ordinary person, doesn't he share the values and worldview of powerful globo-homo Jews? After all, Jews, more than any other people, support globo-homo. Jews, more than most white groups, support Diversity. If all powerful/rich Jews were to die of some disease today, and if they were replaced by average Jews as new elites, would things really be all that different? I think not. Look at Max Boot, Julia Ioffe, and the Vindman Brothers. They came to the US with little or nothing. They began as ordinary Jews. But once they gained elite positions, they've been working with rest of World Jewry to mess things up for white goyim. A new batch of Jewish elites would likely push for mass immigration, great replacement, White Nakba, wars for Israel, cold war on Russia, hate-war on Iran, promotion of 'white guilt', total blind support for Israel, and etc. Now, YOU yourself may be an atypical Jew of a more pro-white and 'conservative' bent. But most ORDINARY Jews voted for Obama and Hillary. Most Jews hate Trump, and even most of those on his side are merely using him to serve Zionism 200% than merely 100%. Alan Dershowitz hasn't any good will toward Trump and Deplorables. He's such a fanatical Zionist that he figures Trump is more useful to the Israeli agenda.

Since middle school, I grew up in a suburb with many Jews, and most of them were nice people. As individuals, I'd say they were generally better, or preferable(and conscientious on the personal level), than most other groups, such as Scotch-Irish hillbillies, 'dumb Polacks', messy Mexicans, haggly Hindus, trashy Irish, doglike yellows, and of course, the ghastly Negroes. As individuals they are nice people, but over the years I've learned most of them are for globalism, great replacement of white goyim, exploiting collective 'white guilt', pushing jungle fever, and the like. Also, their hypocrisy on political matters amazes me. Most are staunch Zionist nationalists, but they denigrate nationalist feeling among goyim. They incessantly yammer about 'white guilt' about blacks but expect whites to support Zionist tyranny over Palestinians. They go on and on about Shoah but never face up to Jewish role in 20th century historical 'crimes'. And they push globo-homo. Most voted for Obama and think pushing jungle fever on white women is the greatest thing while they talk about Arabs and Palestinians as near-animals who should be pushed out of Greater Israel. I know this from personal conversations. So, even though a Jewish individual can be a nice person, associate, or friend, his political attitudes, combined with those of other Jews, signal danger to the well-being of goyim. I mean, isn't there something truly rotten in how Jews, the most privileged and powerful(and over-represented people in elite circles), berate whites for 'white privilege'? Isn't it lowdown for Jews to say Americanism is about colorblindness but then insisting ALL Americans must support Zionist-Israelis over Palestinians and Iranians? If the US must be a colorblind nation and fair broker among all peoples, why this supremacist outlook that favors Jews uber alles?

Even though your average person, Jew or otherwise, is different from members of the elite, the fact is elite outlooks don't come from nowhere. Often, they spring from the national character of the people. After all, Jews didn't land on American shores as elites. Many of them came with little or nothing. So, most members of today's Jewish elites have humble origins and rose from the bottom. So, that means their elite attitudes are, to a large extent, an expression of something intrinsic to Jewishness. Same with blacks. If all elite blacks were to die this moment and be replaced by ordinary blacks, the result would be much the same because black jiggity-ness has roots in core blackness. Blacks who write for the New York Times just offer a fancier and more haute version of, "Yo, I want all the blings and shit."

I never read the Talmud.

I believe you, but you don't have to read the thing to be affected by it. Talmudic attitudes and outlook have seeped into so much of Jewish life that, even without having read it, many Jews live it in so many Jews(and this true of secular as well as religious Jews). It's like most communists never read Das Kapital but its ideas defined so much of communist life. And plenty of Christians, incredible as it may sound, never read all(or any) of the New Testament, not least because so many goyim were illiterate over the ages. But its tenets still colored many aspects of their lives.

In a way, the problem now is less with Jews than with goyim. Instead of trying to make Jews be like goyim, we should try to make goyim be like Jews. Why should Jews want to be like goyim when so many goyim are so stupid and pathetic? Arabs can't get their act together. Japanese have tentacle porn as culture. Russians are lazy drunkards. Mexicans are garbage-tossing tards. Even the once great Germans and Anglos are castrated cucks. So, why should Jews try to be like them? No, we should all strive to be like Jews. Now, this isn't easy because most goyim don't have Jewish intelligence. But they can still emulate the next most potent thing about Jews: Chutzpah and covenant. Whites must think like Sean Connery in UNTOUCHABLES, written by Jewish David Mamet no less. If the enemy brings a knife to a fight, you bring a gun. If they push, you push back harder.



The problem is goyim hasn't been pushing back against Jews. When Jews push, goyim must push back. Also, Jews got the Covenant that says they have a special contract with the ultimate power. The problem with Christianity and Islam is their versions of the 'covenant' are too bland and broad, shared with too large a population. I mean how can whites preserve their unique identity and power if their Christo-Covenant must be shared with Negroes, yellows, browns, and etc? No, just like Jews have a JEWISH covenant, whites must have a WHITE covenant, and this will require a white man of prophetic power who communes with the ultimate power and then brings this truth to his people. (Imagine what Hitler might have been capable of if he'd spoken for all whites, Germanics and Slavs and Latins and even pro-white Jews, instead of just for the Nordics and 'Aryans'.) He must be a river to his people. But do whites have a prophetic soul? Maybe the Germans once did. After all, unlike Greeks and Romans who lacked the Big Picture and emphasized individualism — on grounds that after you died, you just ended up in Hades and that was that — , Germanic mythology had a grand vision of fate and destiny whereby all the great warriors of Valhalla would unite once again to fight the final battle. It was such bigness of vision that made impassioned Germans the greatest musical composers. And it's no wonder that Richard Wagner and Nietzsche were both Germans. And it was Jews in Germanosphere who developed the most powerful ideas, even if dangerous. Could French or Italian culture have produced a Marx? (Also, it was the German quasi-prophet Martin Luther who altered the history of Christianity with a defiant vision of his own.) Jews have long had prophetic power, but this was magnified under Germanic influence. Granted, the problem with Germanic prophecy was its excessive doom-and-gloom, a fatalistic nihilism that unsurprisingly led to the hyper-Wagnerian excesses of Hitler. The awesome side of Hitler couldn't have been possible if he were moderate, but a bit of moderation could have saved National Socialism from itself.

Now, goyim can't be smart like Jews just because they want to be. But even the un-smart can work on chutzpah and covenant. After all, even the idiot Arabs produced a great prophet in the figure of Muhammad. White folks need a White Muhammad who attains the covenant for his people. As Meat Loaf said, two out of three ain't bad. Blacks are proof that chutzpah goes a long way(and homos are proof of the power of Poopchutespah). Even though blacks don't make much sense, they always push back when they are criticized. Jews easily run roughshod over apologetic whites, but even a bunch of angry Jews can't make Al Sharpton budge because the wildass Negro hollers back. And look how Ace Rothstein is frozen with fear when Nicky Santoro uses greaser-chutzpah on him. Anglos were never up for that kind of push-back. This is why Jews run circles around Anglo-types in Marx Brothers movies. But imagine what would happen if Groucho and Chico tried to do a number on Nicky Santoro or Tommy(in GOODFELLAS). If Anglo elites had talked to Jews like Nicky does with Ace Rothstein, they'd still have the power. But they had to keep their 'dignity' at all costs. Now, dignity, or true dignity, is about standing your ground with integrity and pushing back against BS. It's not about staying 'clean' by the art of 'reputation'. For Anglos, 'dignity' really means haute status, and that's why they focus on perception than conviction. So, if the New Normal says globo-homo is the New Dignity, Anglos immediately go along with that to maintain their conceit of 'dignity'. They regard 'dignity' as dress and gown than body and soul. Look how Charles Murray the bald-headed cuck-fool supported 'gay marriage' when it became the fashionable thing among elites. In contrast, even though blacks are dumber and poorer than whites, they hold their own against Jews because they push back and possess a special sense of black covenant called FOABP, or Fear of a Black Planet to scare 'honkeys' with, though one might call it POTA or Planet of the Africans.




There are two kinds of people in the world. Owners and the owned. Masters and Slaves. Masters own, slaves are owned. When we consider the Jewish Worldview, it is to be owners of the world. But before you own others, you must own yourself. You must see yourself as special, not a commodity to be traded. And your people must treat others of the tribe as fellow owners. Jews developed this sense via the Covenant that said even the lowest humble Jew was equally precious in the eyes of God the Almighty who didn't favor some Jew simply because he was richer than others. Thus, every Jew, even a lowly Jew, felt that he owned himself as a human. He wasn't owned by others. The only power that owns him is God. In contrast, goy orders were made of masters and slaves. Masters owned the slaves, the minions, the rabble who had no autonomous self-worth. (Also, the elites felt as owners ONLY IF they retained political/military power over the minions. Without worldly power, they felt as worthless.) So, only the elites felt as owners whereas the masses felt as the owned. This was Russia under the Tsars. The Tsar was the master, albeit supposedly a benevolent patriarch, over the masses of Russians who were deemed childlike and cattle-like. Most Russians felt owned by the Tsar and the nobility, and this mentality lingered even after serfdom was abolished. It is then hardly surprising that a single Jew in Russia had 100x the confidence and will-power of an average Russian. Communism didn't help matters. Though it spoke of liberation, Russians just became owned by the Iron State ruled by the likes of Lenin and Stalin as new master-owners.

In contrast to Russia/USSR, the US imbued its citizens with the sense of ownership. And yet, even this couldn't stand up to Jewish power because Anglo-American concept of ownership was centered on individuality, dry letter of the law, property rights, and opportunity. In other words, it was bound to lead to atomization and the Coming Apart along class lines. Also, the excessive emphasis on property rights meant that consumers obsessed with commodities could themselves become human commodities whose only value is economic or GDP-related. No wonder we hear stuff like, "Great Replacement is okay as long as economic activity goes up." Also, excessive materialist-individualism meant that rich Americans would feel as winners or uber-masters, while poorer Americans would feel as abject 'losers' or servant-class.
If whites had a Jewishy concept of ownership that was essentially tribal, cultural, historical, and spiritual, they would be in a much better shape. For one thing, they would be united as a people on grounds that all whites, regardless of class, would be considered as brethren within the white family with shared destiny. Such a rich cultural sense of ownership would mean that even a poor white owns something of great historical-spiritual value, something that cannot be priced with dollars. But the soulless materialist concept of ownership in the US means that the haves feel like masters(as long as they keep on 'having') while have-nots feel like slaves or 'losers'. It's like what Kurt Vonnegut said.

Jews are owners twofold in the US. As the wealthiest group, they own so much of America. But as Covenant-ists, they feel that they own themselves. They are their own people with a deep and rich history. Indeed, even when Jewish immigrants arrived on American soil with little or nothing, they still felt that they owned themselves, not by goyim no matter how richer the goyim may have been. You see this in the Bible too. Even when Hebrews are held captive by more powerful groups, Jews feel they own their own souls. If any Being owns them, it's God and only Him. This is in stark contrast to the Japanese Way where nearly everyone felt he was owned by someone higher. The essence of Japanese-ness was to serve. To serve the master than be a master. And besides, even being a master meant one had to serve a higher master with absolute devotion. 'Bushi', the term for samurai, means 'to serve'. So, when we compare Jews and Japanese in the US, the difference couldn't be starker. Jews feel they own themselves(and even feel that they should own the silly inferior goyim). But Japanese-Americans are happy to be owned by the dominant power. Look at Francis Fukuyama, that worthless spineless cuck-servant before the Jewish globo-homo masters. He's like the Japanese after World War II who groveled at the feet of General MacArthur as the New Shogun. Of course, it was right for Japan to surrender as they couldn't continue with the war effort, but did they have to grovel before the power that had so utterly crushed them? Even if Israel were to face defeat and be conquered by the Other, Jews won't grovel. They will smile, shake hands, and pretend to go along, but they will not surrender their sense of ownership to the Other. Indeed, even after Exile in Roman Times, Jews never lost their sense of spiritual ownership of the Holy Land. That is the difference between Jews and Japanese. This is why, even though Israel is a much smaller nation than Japan, it is getting stronger while Japan is dying. Even as Jews spread globalization to goy nations to destroy them, they maintain total Jewish ownership of Jewish homeland, Jewish bodies, and Jewish history. In contrast, the hapless Japanese cucks, in total obeisance to their globalist overlords, are committing massive harakiri, also true of other East Asian nations with the possible exception of China. Japanese surrendered their Narrative to the West, and Japanese regard their women as sex toys as pornography is a big feature of their 'culture'. It's a nation of plastic toys than soulful humans.

White people used to feel as owners in America. They owned their bodies and souls. They owned their narratives, icons & idols, and the land. They conquered it, they claimed it, they built it, and they kept it. They sometimes owned other peoples, especially the blacks as slaves, but the idea of white folks being owned by the Other, or White Slavery, was anathema to white pride and dignity. And this was due to White Race-ism, the greatest thing in American history. White Race-ism was the glue, the bond, and a kind of emotional sub-covenant that held white folks together.
But the over-emphasis on individualism, materialism, and universalism eventually frayed this sense of white unity of ownership of body, soul, and land. Individualism led to atomization, an excessive focus on me-as-winner than we-as-owners. So, if a white individualist could betray his own kind and cut a deal to make money, he did just that. So many whites became a bunch of Mitt Romneys. Materialism meant that the essence of life was to buy stuff. So, one's value was tied to consumer goods and services. That meant one had no value unless attached to some hedonistic-economic activity. In other words, if electricity were to go out, a white person would have no value, no reason to live. And all this talk of universalism meant that white bodies, white lands, white wealth, and even white history could be owned by others. So, we got jungle fever and Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs. We have white-built sports taken over by blacks who now reign as heroes and idols of whites; this means whites are owned by black demigods in fantasy, recreation, and entertainment. Whites used to protect their heroes from the Other. So, white sports kept out blacks, the tougher race. But individualism and universalism undermined white race-ism and paved the way for black supremacism. This has been crucial because the most impressionable things in peoples memories are the peak moments of thrill. People ignore or forget most things in their daily lives and remember only the most exciting moments. It's like we look at peaks of mountains than at slopes or valleys. As blacks took over the peaks of sports, pop music, and sexualized culture, most whites conflate blackness with peak thrills of life. Whites don't even own their heroes. As the demigod heroes are of the Other, it's like blacks own the sensations of whites. And as black entertainers and athletes are owned by Jewish moguls, it's like Jews own whites two-fold. They own the blacks who own the whites-as-hapless-cucky-wucks.
With the fading of white race-ism, whites can no longer claim ownership of white lands, even in Europe. Whites are not owners but mere commodities. White lands can be claimed by anyone, and white people can be declared obsolete or 'antique' and replaced by new people as new cattle, new pets, or new furniture. The rise of pornification of society means whites have gone from owners to the owned. Look at Miley Cyrus and other creatures of Jewish-run Disney, now a shikse-whore-factory. They are not humans but commodities, sex dolls. And white people accept this because they don't even own their minds. Indeed, white minds are now mere extensions of Jewish-owned electronic media. If Jews say 'gay marriage is holy', white minds hooked to Jewish-owned TV nod along. Even the white religion of Christianity has been owned and altered by Jews into worship of Globo-Homo as so many churches now are essentially about worship of Sodomy and tranny-penis-cutting than anything else. (But then, the fact that whites had been converted in such huge numbers to Christianity, a religion originating from the Other, suggests whites are easily owned. Incapable of creating a prophetic vision of their own, they surrendered their souls to a Jew as Son of God.)

Now, imagine Arabs in Israel controlling prostitution & pornography and using Jewish women as sex meat for Arab men, Palestinian men, and Negro men. Jews would be outraged that another group is treating Jewish women as objects to be owned and exploited. They would see it as Arabs treating Jews like commodities. But Jews apparently see nothing wrong with treating whites that way. Worse, if whites a hundred years ago would have been shocked and offended by Jews using whites in such manner, white cuck-maggots of today are sheepishly resigned to the fate of existing to be owned, bought/sold, and ordered around by Jewish Power. Even Donald Trump, who'd been harassed by Jewish Power from day one, is totally owned by Jews and do their bidding, like killing Soleimani, a proud man who is NOT owned by Jews. (And of course, young white men in the US military don't fight to defend America as a nation they own. No, they are mere mercenary goons owned by Jewish Power that sends them to slaughter Arabs and Muslims for the glory of Zion that owns almost all US politicians who are worthless toadies.) Indeed, it seems as if owned white fools like Trump and John McCain are envious of goyim who are not owned. No wonder McCain barked so loudly at Vladimir Putin. No wonder Trump took out Soleimani, a painful reminder to cuck-dogs like The Donald that indeed a goy can be his own master and not be owned by Jewish supremacists.
Under Sorosian Jewish Supremacism, a white man in Europe who says his nation belongs to his own people is now a 'far rightist', but at the same time, all European elites are expected to say Israel belongs to Jews and Jews only. So, Jews are to be admired and supported as Owners whereas whites must resign themselves to Owned status. Indeed, it's gotten to the point where whites can't even own their own history as justification for owning their lands. Under Jewish control, white narratives are being taken away from white hands and rewritten by Jews, white cuck-scribes, and blacks into a 'Diversity' narrative. In other words, Swedes have no ownership of historical narrative to buttress territorial ownership of their land because... uh... the Vikings were black and shit. Right, and because some European merchants visited China and India, those Asian lands belong just as much to whites as to yellows and browns. Can you imagine anyone in China or India falling for that bull? But then, Japan seems falling for it as it's just a cuck-wussy colony of the US that is a cuck-wussy colony of the Empire of Judea.