Showing posts with label biological slavery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label biological slavery. Show all posts

Thursday, June 25, 2020

You are Free.. To Agree... Otherwise, You Must be Destroyed — How the Current Situation in the West is like the Anti-Rightist Movement following the Hundred Flowers Campaign in China — All said and done, the Real Power is Jewish Supremacism, and No Real Change is Possible UNLESS This Truth is Spoken


The current lunacy has often been compared with the Cultural Revolution, but in some ways, it is closer to the aftermath of the Hundred Flowers Campaign.

Consider the story in the video below:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/HTE6UasbzhU/


A company that claims to value Diversity of Views & Opinions fired the mother of the Atlanta police officer who was charged with murder of a black guy who resisted arrest with physical violence, snatched the taser from one of the officers, and fired it at them. What was her thought crime? She called it 'nonsense'. She was accused of creating a 'hostile work environment' and canned just like that. So, on the one hand, the company says its policy is about the diversity of views(or freedom of speech) but, in practice, will immediately remove anyone who deviates from the official program.
It sounds like those Jewish oligarchs and commissars at Big Tech, academia & media, law firms & courts, and government who say they are for Free Speech but will not tolerate 'hate speech'(to be subjectively and politically determined by their ilk). So, 'diversity of views' are respected but not when it is 'hostile', like a mother speaking up for her son who was obviously race-framed by the system. So, free speech is wonderful as long as it's not 'hateful', with 'hate' being defined mostly by Jews who apparently think BDS(or speech calling for justice for Palestinians) is 'hateful'. For sure, anti-BDS legislation has the backing of both parties.

Now, what happened in the aftermath of the Hundred Flowers Campaign? Nikita Khrushchev ushered in a new era of de-Stalinization, something the Chinese Communists were very critical of. They feared that criticism of Stalin's legacy would undermine their legitimacy. Still, Mao Zedong wasn't one to be outdone by Khrushchev and decided to have his own experimentation with freedom and go even further. So, he declared the Hundred Flowers Campaign. He urged all Chinese, high and low, to hold nothing back and speak their minds. Initially, most Chinese were hesitant as the first six years of communist rule had been pretty ruthless and repressive. People had either been cowed into fearful conformism or indoctrinated with party dogma. They were scaredy cats or rabid dogs.
When Mao called on the people in and out of government and in all walks of life to speak freely, most people were either hesitant or confused. So, the commissars were instructed to apply pressure on the people to speak up, to complain about something, to let things off their chest. It was as if people were forced to engage in free speech and speaking-truth-to-power. Gradually, one by one, people began to speak out. Then, the voices grew louder and bolder. The criticism went from personal things to local matters to problems at work to the failings of the communist party and then communism itself and finally the big kahuna, Mao himself. Still, people were speaking out ONLY BECAUSE Mao had started the Hundred Flowers Campaign. He was the one who ordered the Chinese people to take part in proto-Glasnost, and they did. They were told to be free in thought and speech, and they spoke their minds.
But when Mao had just about heard enough, he shut down the campaign and those who'd spoken up were rounded up and punished. The serious offenders who denounced the Party and Mao were executed. But even those who mildly rebuked the political system were denounced, fired from work, and sent to forced-labor camps. In the memoir SON OF THE REVOLUTION, Liang Heng told the story of his mother. When the campaign began, she was reluctant to say anything and told her boss that all was well. But her boss pressed upon her to voice some complaint in keeping with the spirit of the times. If Chairman Mao wanted people to speak freely, they should. So, finally and perhaps grudgingly, she made a minor criticism about some details at work. And everything seemed to be fine until Mao called an end to the campaign and ordered his commissars to punish those who had spoken against the Party. Suddenly, the very people who'd urged Liang's mother to speak up came down hard on her. Especially to save their own skins, they had to condemn the very people they'd encouraged to speak freely during the campaign. The new directive, the Anti-Rightist Campaign, was about gathering up all those who'd spoken 'hostile' words about the system and punishing them as class enemies. So, the woman was denounced and fired from the job. Worse, her craven husband divorced her and denounced her, and she was sent to the farms to 'learn from the people'.

So, what is the similarity between China of the Hundred-Flowers-and-Anti-Rightist-Campaigns and the US of today? Back in the mid-1950s, the Chinese were told to value freedom and speak freely... but, as it turned out, they were only free to agree with the dogma and narrative(and to hail Mao to high heaven). If they dared to speak freely against the system, dogma, or narrative, they were to be targeted for denunciation, firing, imprisonment, and even execution. You were free only to agree.


US and the West of today follow a similar logic. They're said to be 'liberal democracies' that value free speech, but that doesn't mean 'hate speech', and of course, ANYTHING can be construed as 'hate speech' by the Jewish Supremacists who rule as overlords. And so-called 'liberal' institutions of media and academia say they value diversity of views and opinions, but they will not tolerate words that create 'hostile' work environments. But what does this mean? It doesn't mean all forms of hostility or aggression are banned. Indeed, certain hostilities are encouraged, as with Facebook and Youtube Terms of Service that, while banning 'hostile views' against Jews, blacks, homos, and the like, are not only okay but encouraging of hostile views against whites, conservatives, true Christians, and nationalists. Diversity Programs encourage everyone, from children to adults, to harbor hostile feelings toward certain groups, especially straight white men, while berating whites to be ever so sensitive about not saying or doing anything that might, just might, offend certain favored groups, especially Jews, blacks, and homos. Whites are forced into fragility but then accused of 'white fragility' as well. Damned if you do, damned if you don't. (But all those whites who wonder why the Chinese acted so stupidly under Mao should look in the mirror because their behavior is just as irrational, stupid, craven, and retarded.)
Now, is this a victory of the Left over the Right? Is it a triumph of Liberalism over Conservatism? Many think so, especially as Tucker Carlson and others of Conservatism Inc. keep blaming the Left, Left, Left. But the real power behind all this is Jewish Tribal Supremacism. True Leftism died long ago. Not only did communism fall in the East but the American Left gave up on workers and cut a deal with super-capitalists of Big Tech, Wall Street, and Global 'free trade'. The triumph of Homo-Mania has NOTHING to do with true leftism. It's faux-leftism that destroyed Mayday in favor of Gayday with full backing of Super-Capital and neo-aristo globalism.
Also, if Antifa is truly communist or against the oligarchy, why does it pick fights mostly with the Dissident Right that has NO POWER in any industry and institution. In effect, Antifa has been valued by Jewish Capitalist Oligarchs as their Janissary force(who attack any sign of white identity or white pride as 'nazi'); Jews promote and protect Antifa thuggery to clamp down on uppity whites who seek White Liberation from the Jewish Supremacist Plantation. Antifa are mostly idiot whites trained and directed by venal Jewish tribalists to hate and attack white patriots. Jews use the goy dolts of Antifa for their own supremacist purposes but hoodwinked the idiots into believing they are fighting the coming of Neo-Nazism to the West.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZGLadMoIE8ft/



There is no true left anymore. And it's not a triumph of liberalism either. Liberalism is about individualism, liberty, and free speech. The current power hates individual conscience and free speech. It insists that we all bow our heads and go along to get along with the System dominated by Jewish globo-homo capitalists. Why would Jews approve of individual conscience when a truly free-thinking moralist will surely condemn Zionist tyranny over Palestinians? Jews use PC to dictate approved-morality(the kind that is useful to Jewish Power) on the masses. Sure, some of the current rhetoric has some faux-leftist window-dressing or sentimentalism about 'liberal democratic values'(as opposed to the 'autocratic' ways of Evil Putin and the like), but boiled down to essentials, the dominant power is Jewish Supremacist.
If leftism is about the little guy or the underdog and if indeed leftism is the dominant ideology in the US, the current power should be siding with Palestinians against Zionists. But where do you see that? Some may say BLM movement is leftist in supporting justice for blacks against powerful white 'racism' and 'white privilege', but it's really a form of black supremacism exploited by Jewish supremacism. Blacks act out in supremacist contempt toward the weaker races. They love to holler, intimidate, and do as they please. They don't really care about black lives, or else they'd stop murdering one another. BLM implies that blacks lives are superior to white lives, and that's why it's an unforgivable sin for any white to kill a black; it'd be like a slave killing the master, and blacks feel as the new master race. BLM isn't about remembrance of slavery and the dark past. Rather, it is a cultist-spiritualization of the past to elevate blacks from a people with a tragic history to new gods to be worshiped and ass-kissed by rest of humanity. It is the expression of black god-complex. It is also a form of black nihilism, i.e. blacks can use anything as an excuse to rob, loot, pillage, beat up people, murder whites, shoot police officers, and etc. Blacks can act like animals by pretending to be angels.
In truth, history changes, and blacks today are not what they were 100 yrs ago, just like China today isn't what it was 100 yrs ago. Basing current perception of blacks on past history is like seeing today's China through the prism of China-as-sick-man-of-Asia 100 yrs ago. It's like pretending history is static, rather weirdly ironic coming from progs who are always celebrating the acceleration of history and change. (For those who say blacks are mired in problems due to the legacy of slavery, why not argue blacks are mired in savagery due to the legacy of savagery? After all, blacks were slaves for only 200 yrs in America whereas they were savages for 100,000 yrs in Africa? Isn't the legacy of savagery and its genetic imprint a more determinant driver of black behavior than the meager 200 yrs of slavery, which, at the very least, elevated blacks from the stage of savagery? It's been a common theme among all human groups wherein slavery played a key role as civilizing agent. It was hardly unique to blacks.) And we know Jews aren't sincere in their concern for blacks because they have no qualms about oppressing and terrorizing Palestinians and using the US to wage Wars for Israel that have destroyed millions of lives. And speaking of hate campaigns, which group in Hollywood financed all those movies depicting Arabs/Muslims as nothing but subhuman terrorists? It sure wasn't the Eskimos.

Just like the Corleones in THE GODFATHER movies had a lot of buffers, Jews have a lot of buffers or fronts. Neocons used buffers like Dubya Bush, John McCain, and Mitt Romney. Globo-Homo Zionists had their pet monkey in Barack Obama. BLM is a tool used by Jews for the most cynical reasons. Jews incited BLM rage to turn blacks away from Donald Trump. Jews use BLM to bolster 'white guilt', the key element in keeping whites ashamed and subservient, thus obeisant to Jewish Supremacist Power. The scales will fall off many more eyes when they stop blaming the 'left' or 'liberals' and just name the Power that is Jewish Supremacist.

Though Soviet leaders and CCP bigshots acted like gangsters, they were still in service of an ideology. There is no ideology in the current madness in the West. As such, it's hard to discern any thematic consistency in all that is happening. Instead, we are to believe in the magic of Diversity. But Diversity of Peoples often leads to contention and conflict. Diversity of Ideas means commitment to free speech, but free speech also means speaking-truth-to-power, something Jewish supremacist elites cannot tolerate as they fear being called out(and blamed) as the True Rulers of the West, i.e. Jewish Privilege, not 'white privilege', is the determining force in US and EU.
Because Diversity of Peoples and Cultures leads to conflict, some kind of unity is sought by 'Idology'(or idolatry as ideology) of gods and devils. Since it'd be too confusing to emphasize the equal worth of every group, the trick is to make ALL groups unite in reverence to the Holy Three: Jews, blacks, and homos. That is one part of Intersectionality. Whether you're Mexican, Hindu, Chinese, Iranian, Muslim, Arab, Filipino, or etc, your identity doesn't have much intrinsic value, and therefore, you must rally around the 'gay pride' flag because homos are special, or 'more equal than others'. All unite under Globo-Homo... or BLM or Holocaust-Worship. The other side of Intersectionality is the common denunciation of the Enemy, the Devil, the Whitey. So, never mind the problems among all shades of blacks, browns, yellows, and etc. Where they should all 'intersect' is in demonizing and scapegoating Whitey as the source of all Evil, rather ironic since they all head to or cling to the white worlds(and run from their own peoples and cultures) for better material lives and more Rule of Law.

But behind all this is the Barzini-Hyman-Roth of Jewish Power. Jewish Supremacists are pulling the strings. And yes, the current discourse is uber-stupid because 'idology' is based on cult-worship of idolized groups and witch-hunting of demonized ones. One might say the current ideology is 'anti-racist', but if 'racism' means racial supremacism and demonization of certain groups based on skin color, then it is the reigning zeitgeist of the times. Of course, many are blind to this because whites have IN ESSENCE been associated with racial supremacism while blacks have been branded as eternal 'victims of racism'. But history changes, and the victims of yesterday can be oppressors of today and tomorrow. But under the illogic of current stupidity, even if blacks were to enslave whites and make 'honkeys' pick cotton under the whip, the narrative would drone on and on about the new reality as 'justice' because blacks, even as the new master race, have been tagged as the eternal victim race whereas whites, though the new slave race, has been tagged as the eternal 'racist' master race. Such is the idiocy that blinds people to Zionist tyranny over Palestinians. Because Jews have been tagged as the Eternal Victims of Antisemitism, even criticism of Jews acting like New Nazis toward a weak people like the Palestinians is deemed 'antisemitic' because Jews are righteous and holy no matter what they do. Even as they kill and terrorize as IDF goon squads, they are to be regarded as a bunch of Anne Franks.
But then, white people deserve blame for failing to speak the truth. As long as they don't name Jewish Power in all this, they are hopeless and deserve to lose and fall. Those who are incapable or unwilling to speak the truth deserve no sympathy. They are like cancer patients who refuse to admit they got cancer and seek proper treatment. Are they so fearful of charges of 'racism' and 'antisemitism'? Don't they know that history changes and is not static? Look at China and Japan today as opposed to how things were 100 yrs ago. Look at Roman Empire and Germanic Barbarians when the former was on top and when the latter was on top and sacked Rome. Look at Jews as early immigrants to Palestine that was overwhelmingly Arabic and compare them to Jews who totally dominate Israel/Palestine today. A small immigrant community became the dominant force in the territory.
Blacks were social slaves of whites, but they soon became biological masters over whites. Being more muscular and more aggressive, they began to kick white butt. Blacks complain of 'redlining', but whites suffered even more under black violence and criminality. White Flight was something that was forced on whites by black thuggery. Whites were forced to pay HIGHER PRICES for property values just to be safe and secure from black neo-savagery. If whites were guilty of redlining, blacks were guilty of front-lining, i.e. turning entire localities into front-lines of black war on white. Many whites didn't want to leave their ethnic communities in the cities. They had roots there. They left because of the black fist and oogity-behavior. But no one talks about the biological slavery of whites under black thuggery. White Flight was like Harriet-Tubmanism for whites. If blacks tried to flee to the north from social slavery in the South, whites tried to flee from biological slavery under black thuggery. And Jews are full of shit because Jew Flew was part of White Flight. And what brought down crime in places like NY in the 1990s and 2000s? Jews worked with Billy Boy Clinton to build neo-plantations of prison systems to incarcerate lots of black super-predators who were exploited for cheap labor.
https://www.bitchute.com/video/quWjkpyJBJw4/

Wednesday, May 9, 2018

The South in the American Civil War fought both FOR and AGAINST slavery — Manhood as Psychological Well-Being — Threat to Manhood by Other Manhoods



The Truer Narrative of the America Civil War must be…

The South fought both for and against slavery. How could that have been the case? It’s because there are more than one kind of slavery.

In the most obvious sense, the South fought to maintain the system of Social Slavery that kept the black race in bondage(though some blacks gained legal freedom). The agenda of the South was clearly unjust, especially given the founding principles of the American Republic. Many in the South invoked various rationales to justify slavery. Some invoked the Old Testament where even the laws of God allowed for owning people as chattel. Some argued slavery, though hardly ideal, was nevertheless an improvement for blacks who’d only known savagery(and crueler forms of slavery) in the Dark Continent. Others argued that slavery was just a phase that would gradually fade as the Southern economy grew and as blacks became more attuned to the demands of complex civilization. Whatever the merits of such arguments, the fact was slavery as an institution had been introduced to the New World out of greed. And given that the moral basis for America’s independence from the British Empire was liberty and freedom, the argument for slavery soured the spirit of American experiment.

One might argue that the ‘genocide’ of the American Indians was a graver 'sin', but in some ways, black slavery was less excusable. Regardless of whether the ‘genocide’ of Indians was worse or not, the fact was it was ‘necessary’(or a necessary evil). The American Enterprise simply couldn’t have happened without the removal of the native Indians from the ‘fruited plains’. In contrast, blacks were not necessary to create America. True, black labor was, for a time, hugely profitable for the white slave-owners whose economy was intricately linked with the North and Europe. But even without black slave labor, an expanding and developing America would have been possible with white immigration and reproduction. Canada and Australia developed without black labor. Though America would have been slower to develop in the early stages without slavery, its long-term prospects would have been much better. There would have been no horribly destructive Civil War.

Also, if blacks were a net economic gain in the first half of the American experience, they became a net loss thereafter. Also, fear of blacks distorted so much of white culture as well as black culture. If US had no blacks, such fears would never have materialized. Also, white manhood would have been secure and healthier as whites would have dominated all sports and wouldn’t have had to worry about black crime and jungle fever(and the attendant cuckery among white men reduced to 'white boys'). So, in the larger scale of things, the short-term greed of relying on black slave labor proved to be America’s biggest mistake and undoing... just like Europe now faces the greatest threat to its existence not from Muslims but from black Africans. (But people prefer to blame Islam and Muslims that aren’t deemed as sacred as blacks[and homos] in Western PC that is controlled by Jews.)

Also, it was bound to linger as a moral stain, paradoxically because most modern people are amnesiac. Now, if people's memories are so poor, wouldn’t they know less about the past and be less burdened with historical ‘guilt’? Yes, IF people know NOTHING about the past. Surely, if people today knew nothing of slavery, they couldn’t be made to feel ‘guilty’ about it. But, even as most people know little about the past, they know just enough from public education, TV, and movies to have a vague idea of what happened long ago. But because their knowledge is so thin, there is hardly an understanding of the past and its different sets of values and assumptions. Instead, the complex past has been reduced to a few sacred icons, pat slogans, and simple Manichean narratives. Therefore, people today find it inconceivable that those living in the past were just as sure of their ethos as current progs are of theirs. PC makes people of the Current Year feel that they are the ‘most evolved’ and their way is the only way. So, discovering that the past was a world racked with a host of ‘evils’ is shocking and triggering to them. It is no wonder that so many Current Year zealots are eager to tear down any monument that reeks of past 'evils'. Lacking empathy and imagination, Current Year progs believe that people in the past just should have known better and intuitively arrived at all the tenets of today's PC. Having morally failed to do so, the past must simply be expunged and eradicated from memory except as evil spirits summoned in annual rituals of scapegoating(or scapewhiting). In this sense, the sorry fact of American Progressivism is that people who claim to be most empathetic have no real empathy at all.

Indeed, they confuse empathy with selective favoritism of certain specially designated groups. True Empathy isn’t about feeling special affection or concern for groups favored by PC. Real empathy is about trying to understand different individuals, peoples, cultures, places, and times on their own terms(even if you disagree with or are appalled by those terms). PC is too judgmental to be empathetic. It is too busy screaming ‘racist’, ‘sexist’, ‘homophobic’, ‘transphobic’, ‘xenophobic’, and etc. to understand why different peoples in different times and places thought and acted differently. So, even as so-called Liberals claim to own empathy, they really have none. Their idea of ‘empathy’ simply means they have blind faith and special affection for three special groups sanctified by PC: Jews, blacks, and homos. Also, this special sympathy is based not on knowledge or understanding of actual Jews, blacks, and homos but on trite symbolisms of black sainthood, Jewish nobility of eternal suffering, and homo angelic fruitcakery.

The fact that Ta-Nehisi Coates(aka The Nasty Coates) has gotten so much mileage with white libby-diberals is because he gives them what they crave: Lots of Purple Prose about suppressed or denied black sanctity that deserves and needs the love of goody-good white people. He is Little Orphan Nehisi. Real empathy, in contrast, is the ability to probe and understand why another people(or people in the past) felt justified and validated in their ways and means so different from ours in the present. But today’s PC dolts are so full of themselves(and so addicted to the cult of ‘progress’ as measured by adherence to every new screeching fad) that they find it too difficult to even ponder the possibility as to why some people don’t believe in nonsense like ‘gay marriage’. And don’t try discussing logic and facts with such idiots.

PC is less about ideas and values than about ‘sacralized’ identities, or the Cult of Identity. So, if a certain group or identity has been deemed ‘noble’ or ‘sacred’, its demands must either be met or championed. The right-or-wrong is decided not by morality, facts, or reason but by the simple fact that some groups are ‘more equal than others’. So, even if blacks misbehave at Starbucks or act like stupid monkeys at a college graduation, the fault is not with their behavior but with those people(especially white) who treated blacks as they would have treated anyone else. By facts and logic, Starbucks’ policy is that people who occupy a table must order something. You can’t just loiter as non-buying customers. This rule applies equally to all individuals. So, if whites or non-blacks had acted like those idiot blacks, they would have been asked to leave. But apparently, such rules don’t apply to blacks because PC deems the Negroes to be sacred. So, it makes no sense discussing right-or-wrong since PC says blacks are right-no-matter-what and anyone who displeases blacks must be wrong. And the same goes for the Florida college graduation. The rules of the graduation require all students of all races to show respect and act with dignity appropriate for the ceremony. (They can party and celebrate afterwards.) The rules apply to all students equally. But such rules don’t apply to blacks because PC says blacks are right-no-matter-what. So, never mind principles and rules. If blacks feel like doing something, they have some special right or license to do so. If anyone is ‘wrong’, it is he or she who deigns to apply the same rules to blacks as to other groups. How dare he treat blacks like he would any other people? Doesn’t he know that blacks are always ‘right’ and that anyone who displeases them is automatically ‘wrong’?

And the same rule applies to Jews and Palestinians/Iranians. Whatever Jews do, it’s ‘right’. Jews can steal uranium from the US. Jews can shoot up USS Liberty. Jews can cook up lies to invade Iraq. Jews can kill bushels of Palestinians. All those actions are ‘right’ because Jews are right always. And Iran is always wrong no matter what it does. Even if Iran complies with the nuclear deal, the Jew-run US will find yet more excuses to declare it ‘wrong’. And of course, homos have always been right, even when they acted irresponsibly in spreading HIV all over in endless bath-house orgies. That is how PC really works. Its bogus ‘empathy’ is really about Emphasis of certain Favored Groups over all others. It should be called ‘emphasy’ than ‘empathy’.

Anyway, there was another side to the Civil War. While it’s true that the South was fighting to maintain slavery as a legal institution, in a profound way they were fighting against the prospect of biological slavery under blacks. White Southerners feared the specter of biological slavery that might result from black emancipation. Once blacks were freed and granted the same rights as whites, there was no guarantee that the two races would become equal and live side-by-side in harmony. Now, if blacks happened to be merely white people with black skin, co-existence might have been possible. Caste or no caste, the reason why India was able to exist as a civilization for so long was because darker-skinned Indians are not all that much different from light-skinned Indians in strength or temperament. Despite genetic separation by caste, your average lower-caste ‘dotkin’ isn’t likely to be all that different from a higher-caste ‘dotkin’. Indeed, to an outsider, most ‘dotkins’ of whatever caste look like other ‘dotkins’. But this was simply not the case between whites and blacks in the South(or in the North following the Great Migration). Blacks were not simply white people with darker skin. They were noticeably more muscular, rowdier, self-centered, egotistical, and more aggressive. Because of the fear and obedience instilled into them over several generations through means ranging from blatant to subtle, there was a chance that blacks might not immediately go jungle upon emancipation. But over time, as blacks would grow to realize that they are stronger, meaner, and more aggressive and that whites are anxious, fearful, and nervous, their attitude and behavior were bound to change drastically, and then the full reversion to Jungle would happen. The first great sign of this was Jack Johnson, the tough Negro who beat up all the white males and humped tons of white women. In one way, Johnson was a tough and resilient challenger against racial discrimination and white supremacy. But in another way, he was the template of the looming biological slavery of whites under black supremacy. Johnson-ism meant black guys would whup and humiliate white males who would be robbed of their manhood and therefore their womenfolk as well(just like bigger and taller white and black American soldiers robbed little Japanese guys of their manhood and womenfolk after their defeat in WWII. To this day, Japanese men have not recovered from their humiliation. They are a race of dogs.) As Black Pigeon Speaks argues, women have weak sense of tribal loyalty. They just go with the Power or the Winner:

And as white manhood would be humiliated by black manhood that dominates sports and street violence, there would come a time when white men would become the biological slave-cucks of blacks, and white women would lose respect for white men and surrender to jungle fever and accept ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. (Consider the blonde girl in the movie SPECTACULAR NOW who dumps her white boyfriend and goes with a big athletic Negro who later even physically threatens the 'pussy-ass white boy' who is reduced to giving him tips on how to make the white girl love him better. Total cuckery, but this is what the Jew-run Hollywood promotes to white kids as a moral-racial ideal.) Of course, do-goody naive white Liberals and cunning Jews(who sought the mental enslavement of the white race that was to be turned into cattle in service to Jewish supremacism) understood how these fears were a pediment to social change. If whites, especially the males, understood the full implications of black emancipation and racial integration, they would have realized the end-result would be biological slavery under tougher, stronger, and rowdier blacks. So, 'anti-racist' radicals sought to assuage white fears by presenting blacks as sexless noble Uncle Toms who were always falsely accused of raping white women. Or consider how the early interracial propaganda focused on white man and black woman when, in fact, the main threat was that white men would lose white women to black men.

Cunning Jews played it both ways, presenting blacks as both sexless angels who would never rape anyone AND sexy dancers whose performances would liberate white folks from puritanical repression. Even today, Jews play both tropes at once, and so many white people still fall for the nonsense. White kids are bombarded with both the (To Kill a)MOCKINGBIRD and the MANDINGO tropes about blacks. There is no rhyme or reason to any of this, but then, PC is less about right-and-wrong of ideas and facts than about the righteous sanctity of certain favored groups. Since PC deems that blacks are always right, the trope that makes blacks out to be sexless spiritual saints(as in GREEN MILE) is 'right' but so is the trope that says blacks are SO awesome as masterful big-donged muscled super-studs(or big-booty-shaking hot-mama skank-ass ho’s) that other races must sensually surrender to blackness and join in the jungle jive of vibrant liberation. PC warps moral logic. For this reason, PC is best understood as a neo-religion. After all, it is in religion that God is always right, even when He seems to do wrong. The idea is that God is so above us insignificant earthly creatures that He lives by a truth and logic far beyond us. It would be wrong for us to demand consistent logic from Him, as Job realized. Likewise, PC says it is futile for us to invoke reason, logic, and facts in relation to blacks, Jews, and homos. Doing so would be ‘racist’, ‘antisemitic’, or ‘homophobic’. We must honor, worship, and serve them on the basis of faith.

Anyway, there was no guarantee that the long-term result of ending socio-legal slavery in the South would result in racial equality and harmony. It could very well lead to white people becoming biologically enslaved to stronger, tougher, more aggressive, more muscular, and more dangerous blacks. This danger was bound to increase as America became more individualistic, hedonistic, and vulgar, not least due to black influences in music, comedy, and attitudes. If the US were a theocracy or strict ‘ideocracy’(one that metes out harsh punishment to those who act out of line, as in Cuba where blacks better behave or else), perhaps black aggression could have been held in check even upon emancipation. But as the US was a fast-changing democracy with increasing freedom and liberties in the pursuit of happiness, it was only a matter of time before blacks lost all their inhibitions and made ‘muh dick’ and 'muh fist' the central themes of their culture. And today, in the 21st century, we are living in a thoroughly pornfied culture when even kids watching Disney are really partaking of a form of kiddie porn.

Everything that D.W. Griffith prophesied in THE BIRTH OF A NATION came true. If that movie made many people uncomfortable in the past because it seemed like paranoid fantasy, it is bound to make people uncomfortable today because it now seems so factual. The movie said freedom is bound to turn too many blacks into uninhibited thugs and pimps, and guess what the main cultural expression of blacks is today? Rap music, the main message of which is ‘muh dick’ and ‘muh fist(or gun)’. And look at the state of black-run communities in Gary, Detroit, Baltimore, St. Louis, parts of Chicago, Newark, and etc. And the movie warned about naive white cuck-politicians and cunning light-skinned Negroes who shamelessly hustle suckers into buying into fantasy of racial harmony. D.W. Griffith’s THE BIRTH OF A NATION was a great prophetic work. What he warned eventually came to be. Blacks have reverted to jungle savagery. Their music is rap, their dance is ‘twerking’, and their culture is thuggery. And Pop Culture is now mostly about Jungle Fever. And not only in the US but in Canada and EU.

Anyway, the loss of manhood and cuckery is a form of slavery. The dark fact is white manhood cannot survive integration with harder-muscled, meaner-tempered, and bigger-donged Negroes. Eventually, white men will turn into ‘white boy’ cucks, and white women will go with Negroes and their wombs will be colonized to produce the likes of Colin Kaepernick whose anti-white virulence is less about Racial Injustice than sheer contempt for wussy-ass whitey. After all, his mother rejected the men of her own race and chose to have a child with a tough Negro. Even though his black father abandoned him and even though a nice white family went to the trouble of raising him, Kaepernick associated whiteness with wussy weakness and associated blackness with power and manhood. Blackness = studly power that conquers white vaginas and wombs. Whiteness = cucky weakness that raises a child of a black guy who humped a white woman and took off. Due to their wilder nature, blacks don’t much appreciate weakness, no matter how kindly and caring it is. They instinctively see it as ‘faggoty-ass’ and ‘lame’. So, all the love Kaepernick got from his adoptive white family hardly left a positive impression on him. He just wanted to get away from such wussy weakness and be accepted by the badass brothas.

When white people brought over a stronger and meaner race to be slaves in the US, they got caught in a Moral Trap. Socio-legal Slavery controlled blacks and kept their savagery in check, but it was unjust and sometimes cruel. But freeing the slaves meant eventual disaster for the white race because too many blacks happen to be built like Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis, and Jim Brown. And too many black women are crazy and loud 'biatches' whose antics in music and dance encourage the most savage and trashy behavior among women of all races. Abraham Lincoln sensed all this, which is why he said, “We have to free the ‘groids’ and then ship them back to Africa, because, if we don’t, they will kick our butts and hump our daughters.”

It is time to face the truth. The South was in a bind. True, they did fight to preserve ugly social slavery. But they were trying to prevent horrid biological slavery of white race being physically and sexually dominated by tougher and nastier Negroes.
Furthermore, it is about time we understood the importance of manhood. It's time to assess the harms of Toxic Cuckery. A society can’t be healthy unless its men feel manly pride and are respected by their womenfolk. Indeed, it’s often been said that one of the humiliating things about slavery was that black manhood was trampled upon. As black men had to shuck-and-jive before the massuh, who also might enjoy some fun with a chocolate-titted mama, they could not be full men. This was especially humiliating because black slaves knew they could kick the white boy’s ass if they were to face each other one-on-one. But whites had all the guns, and the laws were on their side. Blacks had to suffer the humiliation of being ordered around by white men who were weaker than them. So, in order for black men to gain the pride of manhood, they needed to be freed. So far so good. But the problem with black freedom was that black manhood now posed a serious threat to white manhood. Due to the BAMMAMA — blacks are more muscular and more aggressive — factor, legal equality between blacks and whites was bound to lead to biological supremacy of blacks over whitse. This meant blacks kicking white butts in sports, and this was a big deal in the modern world where so much of social, communal, national, and racial pride & prestige are invested in and expressed through sports. White male defeat to blacks in sports meant whites losing their iconic status as Real Men. Is it any wonder that so many white wombs get colonized by black men while so many white guys are turning into cucks and wussies?

Indeed, Antifa is like radical cuckery. These white boys are so invested in their own inferiority and submission at the feet of blacks that they get triggered by any white guy who says NO to such humiliation. To Antifa, the rightful place for whites in the West is as biological slaves to blacks who are deemed superior both morally(due to Slavery and Jim Crow narrative) and physically(as they easily kick white butt in sports and conquer white wombs). And yet, by beating up 'nazis' to protect blacks and other minorities, Antifa guys also feel as alphas, without whom blacks would presumably not be safe. So, Antifa guys both worship blacks as their superiors(in holy victimhood and badass style) and patronize blacks as their inferiors(or a powerless people in need of white knights to defend them).

Well, if black male psychology suffered so terribly during the slavery era because black men were denied full manhood and the respect of their women, the same logic applies to whites today. White society cannot be psychologically healthy unless white men have their manhood back. But this is impossible with racial integration because biological slavery will reduce white guys into cucky ‘white boys’ at the feet of tougher and meaner blacks as their eternal biological massuhs. And the fall of white manhood will mean the fall of the white race. White women will not respect ‘loser men’, which is what white men become when integrated with black males.
There are many reasons for the decline of the white male in America, especially among the working class, and one reason has to do with loss of manhood vis-a-vis blacks. Both Abraham Lincoln and D.W. Griffith were right. They both acknowledged the problems of slavery but also understood that freedom would lead to a new kind of slavery. It is too bad that whites in the South failed to come to terms with Honest Abe and settle on some grand plan to free the blacks and send them back to Africa where the Negroes could harass hippos but not white folks.