After all, anarcho-tyranny doesn’t mean total breakdown of order but selective use of ‘anarchy’ by the tyranny that directs the wild energies.
Take the Cultural Revolution in China. At first look, it may have looked like total mayhem and anarchy, but there was a guiding iron hand behind it: Mao Zedong and the Gang of Four. The Red Guards attacked Old Culture and ‘capitalist roaders’ targeted by Mao. They didn’t attack Mao and the Gang of Four.
So, it’s not enough to say ‘anarcho-tyranny’. One must ask, WHAT is the tyrannical force that is directing the ‘anarchy’? To whom/what are US ‘leaders’ of both parties beholden to?
How come there is so much moral outrage over Fentanyl Floyd and a handful of black thugs killed by police every year but total silence about the countless dead Arabs, Muslims, and etc. slaughtered by US military men who are hailed as ‘heroes’ by both parties? US police are boy scouts compared to the US military, the Murder Inc. around the world — not because US soldiers are evil by nature but because their violence is orchestrated by vile and venal globalist elites.
Notice there are no murals about PALESTINIAN LIVES MATTER. There is no outrage about how blacks rob, rape, assault, and murder, often white victims.
Instead, there's the Antifa allowed to run riot to beat up patriots like Michelle Malkin, and there's BLM to keep whites paralyzed with fear & ‘guilt’ and thus subservient to the Other(that holds the power).
So, what is this power? Unless Malkin and others are willing to loudly name and blame Jewish Power, this madness will never abate. Just calling out ‘anarcho-tyranny’ is like calling out WAR during World War II without naming Germans and Japanese as the main instigators.
What we’re witnessing is Jewish-supremacist-orchestrated anarcho-tyranny. It’s better labeled Zionarcho-Tyranny or Anarkosher-Tyranny. Jewish Power uses PC education and Pop Culture to spread anti-white hatred. This way, the ire of Diversity is directed against whites than on Jewish Power, and furthermore, many whites become burdened with ‘guilt’ and feel that the ONLY way whites can be righteous is by hunting down imaginary ‘nazis’ and screaming ‘racism’ 24/7. Jewish-controlled media are certainly spreading anti-white propaganda more murderous than anti-Jewish propaganda spread by National Socialists in the 1930s. Jews are trying not only to instill guilt among whites but to strike fear into their hearts. Jews are telling whites, "We've spread anti-white hatred so much among blacks, non-whites, and brainwashed self-loathing whites that you white goyim better obey us... or we will unleash violence against you and your children."
Also, don’t be ashamed of hate speech. Hate can be liberating. A slave must hate his master to seek freedom. A slave who only speaks love for his master will remain a slave. It is when he feels and speaks hatred about the master that he begins the path to freedom. When Jewish masters say that whites-as-cucks must only speak loving words to Jews-as-their-masters, it's a formula for white enslavement. White Liberation from the shekel-shackle begins with defiant hate speech against the Jewish Master Class. Did Poles love the Nazi invaders? Did Hungarians love the Soviet occupiers? Did Algerians and Vietnamese love the French colonizers? Did socialists love the exploitative capitalist oligarchs? No, they felt hatred, and it was hate that was liberating and led to resolve & action. White Liberation requires white hatred for Jewish supremacism. Just like Jews have a right to feel hatred about anti-Jewish oppressors, whites have every right to hate Zionarcho-Tyranny or AnarKosher Tyranny.
Now, Jewish Supremacists will say whites are not oppressed but the oppressors. Historically, a case can be made for this, but history is never static. It’s like the Romans, once conquerors over the Germanic tribes, became conquered by them. It’s like Mongols were once rulers over Russians, but later the Soviets dominated Mongolia. Muslims conquered large swaths of Europe and were once the oppressors but later they were conquered and oppressed by the Technological West. Latin Americans feel oppressed by Gringos, but Latin American societies are about the oppression of browns by mestizos and oppression of mestizos by blancos, generally speaking. Jews are now in the supremacist master race position over goyim. As they are such terrible masters and elites, they must be hated if whites and goyim are to find liberation. Palestinians sure hate Zionist oppressors, and why shouldn’t they? For the oppressed, hate speech is the most potent kind of free speech. It speaks truth to power. Moses sure spoke a lot of anti-Egyptian hatred in TEN COMMANDMENTS when he said, “Let my people go.” We need white moseses filled with righteous and liberating hatred.
Oppression is relative. Those who oppress can also be oppressed. French oppressed the Vietnamese who historically oppressed the Cambodians. During the Nazi Occupation, the French oppressors were oppressed by the Germans. Europeans oppressed the Manchu ruling class that was oppressing the Chinese. It’s like a bully can be bullied by a bigger bully.
So, while it’s true that whites are in a oppressive position vis-a-vis certain peoples, they are also in the oppressed situation vis-a-vis Jewish Supremacists. It’s like Asian Indians had an oppressive caste system but were oppressed by the British. Oppressors can also be oppressed.
So, whites need to stop oppressing whomever they are oppressing but also end the oppression over them by Jewish supremacists. As long as there is no white liberation, whites will be stained with oppression over others at the behest of Jewish supremacists. It’s because whites are such pathetic cucks to Jews that they serve as Janissary oppressors over Arabs and Palestinians who are seen by Jews as less-than-human. Jewish Supremacists oppress whites into oppressing Palestinians who never did any harm to whites.
Mentioning Anarcho-Tyranny without mentioning Jewish Power is like mentioning Brown Shirts without mentioning Hitler & Nazis or like mentioning the Janissary without mentioning the Ottoman power behind it. Or, it’s like mentioning the Sikhs without mentioning British Imperialists who employed them as the warrior wing.
Michael Tracy should have said, "I will say Black Lives Matter IF you say Palestinian Lives Matter and End Zionist Genocide of Palestinians."
We must name the source of the 'anarcho' violence. Jewish capitalists fund and direct ‘Marxist’ goons to attack white patriots who dare to gather. At Charlottesville, white nationalists did NOTHING WRONG but were shut down and exposed to violent mobs of Antifa goons and black thugs who had the protection of the police. Following Fentanyl Floyd’s death, Antifa and BLM mobs have been on the rampage but with total support of Deep State Power and with hardly any condemnation from Republicans who are ALL pathetic puppets of Jewish Donor Class. Antifa scum gets away with lots of crap because they are protected by the Power just like Jewish 'settlers' are in West Bank. The 'settlers' can terrorize Palestinians, but if Palestinians touch one hair on the Jewish Settlers, the IDF comes after the Palestinians, and Israeli courts almost always favor the Jews. Jews perfected lawfare over Palestinians.
In a way, white Americans are now reaping what they sowed when they allowed Jews to get away with murder in the creation of Israel. Most Americans didn’t think much of it, but it sent a message to Jews and whites that Jews are above the law… because of whatever, such as ‘muh holocaust’. By aiding and abetting the total destruction of the innocent Palestinians, white leaders/people set the template that (1) Jews get whatever they demand (2) Jewish lives are more precious than non-Jewish lives (3) Jews live by a different set of standards (4) Jews can do ANYTHING to goyim.
Of course, whites didn’t realize the full boomerang implication of this because it was Jewish terror directed against Arabs. But once Jews were emboldened with such attitude and power, they could then eventually direct it against OTHER peoples as well. And whites couldn’t say NO because they’d agreed to the New Template that said Jews are holy and above human standards and must be treated like gods.
So, here we are today. There is now the insane phenomenon of White Nakba. Jews encourage blacks, Diversity mobs, and white Janissary or Antifanissary to attack any sign of white identity, patriotism, or resistance. Any notion of white territory, white race, white history, white pride, white heritage, white unity, and etc. must be expunged. Whites must open their nations to Diversity, obey Jews, worship blacks, and celebrate homos. White lands are no longer white lands. White wombs are no longer for white seeds. White history for others to pilfer and appropriate. Whites must not 'steal' from other cultures, but non-whites have the 'human right' to take all they can from whites.
When Jews made demands about Palestine back in the 1940s, American Power should have been firm and sent a strong message to Jews that their identity and interests will not be favored over others, especially the Palestinians who never did any harm to the US or the West. In other words, while Jews shall be treated fairly, they shall not be favored over others just because Jews demand it be so. Jews will abide by the same principles governing all nations and peoples.
But whites relented under Jewish Pressure, and the perverse covenant between Jews-as-god and whites-as-cucks became “Jews demand, whites serve.” It began with whites helping Jews destroy Arabs and Muslims, but now, the Jewish agenda of White Nakba targets the entire West. But how can whites say no when the terms of relation with Jews is “Jews are holy, and all their demands must be served.” (Of course, Jews maintain their supremacism by BIG stick and BIG carrots. If you go against Jews, you will be totally crushed and destroyed. But if you cuck to Jews like Paul Ryan and Lindsey Graham, you shall be rewarded most handsomely. The choice is between starvation and feast, and most white elites go for the grand buffet. If the choice were between little stick and BIG carrots, more whites will be less fearful and defy Jews. Or if the choice were between BIG stick and little carrots, more whites might choose not to cuck because the reward isn't worth it. But when it's heaven if you cuck but hell if you don't, most white elites go for 'heaven'.)
In a way, things will be worse for whites than for Palestinians. At least, Palestinians never bought into the Zionist lie and knew they were going to lose everything under Jewish Power. Even in physical defeat, Palestinians still retained soulful pride as an identity. Jews failed to make Palestinian hate Palestinian-ness. In contrast, Jews are not only destroying whites physically but making whites feel disgusted over their own whiteness. We have ‘conservative’ Rich Lowry cucking to Jewish Power and cheering the destruction of Confederate heroes.
Well, at least there is a kind of poetic justice to this. Whites cheered on Jewish Terror and jeered at Palestinian plight. They cackled with hideous glee at the Palestinian tragedy while sucking up to Zionist gangsters. Well, how does it feel that the same is being done to whites? It’s like the refrain in the Bob Dylan song, "Like a Rolling Stone".
How does it feel?
How does it feel?
To be on your own
With no direction home
A complete unknown
Like a rolling stone?
By the way, why back the blue? Police in the US are like police everywhere. Mere attack dogs of the Power. Under Hitler, German police did the bidding of Nazis. Then, under Soviet domination, the very people who’d served the Nazis served the commies.
US political process is about white cucks taking orders from Jewish supremacists. So, if cops are ordered to stand down and let Antifa thugs(the Janissary of Jews) attack white patriots like Michelle Malkin, cops aren’t going to do anything about it. Malkin the Filipino is hopelessly romantic about White America. White America is now, from top to bottom, totally enslaved by Jewish Power and enthralled with mindless Negro Worship.
So, it's no surprise that Michelle Malkin and Gang got Charlottesvilled in Denver, and the police did nothing to protect them, and if anything, was complicit in the violence. US police and US laws are now totally controlled by Jewish supremacists. Just like US military goes and murders Arabs and Muslims left and right because it's all about following orders, the US police is no different. If the Power orders the police to stand down and let the mob attack patriots, the police won't do anything. Malkin must drop her faith in White America and the police, the dogs of the Power.
Finally, Anarcho-Tyranny need not be anti-white. If white supremacists controlled the US, they could use anarcho-tyranny against the Left. What was Kristallnacht but German supremacist anarcho-tyranny against Jews in Germany? Right-wing regimes in Central America allowed ‘death squads’ to carry out anarcho-tyranny on the indigenous populations. Rape, rob, and terrorize them into submission. In China, Mao used anarcho-tyranny to attack his rivals, the ‘capitalist roaders’. In South Vietnam, mercenary troops served as anarcho-tyrannists over villages suspected of harboring Viet Cong guerrillas. In Ancient Greece, Spartan youths routinely went on rampages to terrorize and frighten the helot population to keep them in line. So, anarcho-tyranny is a tool, not a particular ideology. As Shane said, a gun is only as good as the man using it. If someone is beaten with a hammer, you don’t blame the hammer but the man who used the hammer. Anarcho-Tyranny in the US is the hammer of Jewish capitalists.
So, it’s not enough to say ‘anarcho-tyranny’. It’s too fuzzy and vague. We need 20/20 vision and must see with clarity who/what is pulling the strings of anarcho-tyranny in the US and West, and it is Jewish Power that provides protection and lawfare for Antifa. It’s AnarKosher-Tyranny.
Notice how these 'leftist' types have no sense of honor. They use violence and terror against the 'system' but cry like a baby the moment they get hurt and even lie about it. A real man fights and licks his wounds. These 'leftists' use ugly violence but play 'innocent victim' the instant they get hurt. And contrary to fighting the 'system', they are enabled by the Deep State as part of coup attempt Trump. But don't expect dummies to realize they are tools.
As for faux-communist larpers like Antifa, they’re just grungy spoiled brats without elite prospects getting some thrills as 'radicals' because they can’t make it as studs and athletes. And they are funded and protected by Jewish capitalists who use them as Janissary against white patriots. German conservatives used anti-communist Nazis against Jewish Power, and Jewish Power uses ‘anti-fascist’ communists against the prospect of White Power. This has led to the odd phenomenon of capitalists supporting communists against fascism. It’s odd because fascism was willing to work with capitalism whereas communism sought to destroy it. But for Jewish Minority Power, white ‘communists’ are more reliably anti-white than white fascists, and, furthermore, Jewish Power altered the terms of Leftism into being more about globo-homo and idolatry of certain groups(blacks, Jews, and homos) than about class struggle and hate-the-rich. So, even if Antifa may be anti-rich, their primary animus against 'nazis' means that Jewish capitalists can goad them into attacking 'white supremacists'(even fantastical ones, as so many Antifa morons are on drugs) than ever getting around to attacking capitalists. In Israel, Jewish capitalists side with Jewish fascists because fascism in the Zionist context is pro-Jewish. But as fascism in white nations tend to be pro-white and even anti-Jewish, Jewish capitalist must form a symbiotic alliance with the 'communists'.
"Will Jews eventually figure out that promoting antiwhite hate is not good for the Jews?
Much hinges upon that question."
So, the future depends on the Jewish decision/agency, not the white one.
Why not ask instead, “Will whites eventually figure out that Jewish Power is hostile and not good for whites?” And then, act accordingly on the basis of that undeniable fact.
Why must the future depend on Jewish realization than on white realization? Why should it be a matter of Jews realizing they should stop hating on whites than whites realizing they should hate Jews if Jews hate whites? If Jews hate whites(as is abundantly clear by all signs), shouldn’t whites return the favor? It'd only be natural, that is if whites have pride and dignity.
The Jewish-White Question or JWQ prioritizes Jewish consciousness & interests over white ones. In other words, the implication is Jews should stop hating whites ONLY or MAINLY BECAUSE it’s not good for Jews. Never mind what it means for whites.
There is a better way: If something is bad for whites, whites should take action and fight back REGARDLESS of what it means for Jews, especially if Jews are leading the anti-white charge.
When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, did white Americans ask, “Will Japanese realize that being anti-American isn’t good for them?” and pray for the Japanese to change their minds? No, Americans didn’t care what the Japanese thought and fought back. When Germany invaded Russia, did Russians think, “Hmm, will Germans realize that attacking Russia isn’t good for Germans?” and just hope for German change of heart?
Why should whites care about Jews when Jews not only NOT care about whites but are downright hostile to them? It’s more ridiculous than the ‘conservative’ case against Affirmative Action, i.e. it is bad because it hurts blacks. What about what it does to whites? Why must white interests always take the backseat to those of Jews and blacks and now others, such as ‘Dreamers’?
At this point, it’s about time whites realized that Jewish Power is hostile to them. Not all Jews are, and there are Jews like David Cole who want whites and Jews to bury the hatchet and get along, and kudos to them, but they don’t have the Power, no more than pacifist Japanese during WWII. It is about time that whites realized that Jewish Power(the only thing that matters) is virulently anti-white, and therefore, whites must stop caring about Jews.
If Jewish Power cared about whites, whites should care about Jews. It'd be give-and-take. But when it’s all take-and-take among Jews, whites would be stupid to care about what Jews think or whether it’s good for Jews or not. Your average Jew-of-Power has an attitude closer to that of Rob Reiner or Sarah Silverman than that of David Cole or even Dave Rubin. National Review came to the defense of Matt Yglesias, and his reaction was “Ewwwwwww, get away from me!!”
Do Jews plead with whites, “Don’t do such and such because it’s bad for you white folks”? No, they are hellbent on making sure whites do stuff that is bad for whites. Notice how all those Jews who signed the pro-‘free speech’ petition got involved ONLY BECAUSE their own kind was coming under pressure from the rage mob. They didn’t care one bit about all those ‘conservatives’ who'd gotten doxed and destroyed.
Ben Shapiro and Bari Weiss whine about the dangers of identity politics and ‘tribalism’ without any self-awareness. Or maybe they know and are just being devious cretins.
In fact, what is known as Identity Politics began with Jews. Contrary to popular belief, so-called identity politics isn’t so about tribalism as idolatry of certain groups. As such, it is more dangerous than tribalism that, at the very least, allows equal rights of identity & interests for each and every group. Tribalism is as old as the hills: My people, my culture, my heritage. If US were truly tribal and if each group prioritized its own interests, it wouldn’t be so bad. There would be a kind of balance. Indeed, imagine how fairer things would be if whites were tribal and cared about white interests and didn’t always intervene in favor of Jewish interests over Palestinian ones. In other words, whites would approach Jews and Palestinians on the basis of 'what is good for whites', sometimes favoring Jews over Palestinians and sometimes the other way around. But the Identity Politics of Jewish Idolatry means whites must be knee-jerk in their mindless support of Jews and Israel no matter what. It's great for Jews but bad for whites and terrible for Palestinians. The problem is whites are into the Identity Politics of idolizing Jews.
Identity Politics boils down to the demand that all other groups should revere, favor, serve, and idolize a certain group or groups over all else. Thus, it’s not even a fair kind of tribalism where each group gets to favor its own kind. Rather, one or few groups hog all the praise, adulation, and support. Instead of all groups being planetary in its gravitational pull, most groups must revolve around the greater identity gravitational force of key solar groups. Jews occupy the place of the sun and chose homos and blacks as main allies. All other groups are mere planets that must revolve around the Identity Politics of Jews, blacks, & homos. Notice there is nothing about PALESTINIAN LIVES MATTER even though the US war machine is far more racially hostile to Arabs than to blacks, a people actually adulated by US media and culture.
Jewish power is immense not only because of riches and institutional power but because other groups, especially majority whites, bend to its will. After all, Wasps once had great wealth and institutional domination but lacked the kind of power Jews have now because they were open to criticism and didn't demand Wasp-Worship. They were dominant but not holy idols for other groups to mindlessly revere and obey.
Even the emphasis on the Anglo-American Narrative was a compromise with non-Anglo groups. While non-Anglos would learn of Anglo-American achievements and respect Anglo-American giants and heroes, Anglo-Americans would in turn broaden the definition of ‘American’ to accommodate non-Anglos. Thus, Anglos and non-Anglos would merge into the big tent identity called ‘American’.
In contrast, Jews demand that all groups bow down to Jewishness, but Jewish Identity remains stingily particular and distinct, even downright exclusive. How can there be any compromise with such people? Sarah Silverman said Jews hate nationalism because it did harm to Jews. But if Jews had dropped their own ‘nationalism’ of separate identity long ago, they would have just merged and dissolved with other populations, the sea of common humanity, and then, there would have been no Jew-Goy tensions. So, what did she really mean? She meant all goyim must give up their nationalism so that Jewish nationalism alone can thrive and grow stronger. Compromise is impossible with such people.
Compromise means either all groups drop their nationalism or all groups keep their nationalism. But the Jewish Way is for Jews to keep their nationalism while goyim must lose theirs. It’s ‘heads I win, tails you lose’. It is supremacism, pure and simple. Also, mindless worship of Jews as Eternal-Holocaust-People has led to race-nihilism or the nihilism of power. As long as Jewish Essentialism is forever about the Shoah, everything they do, no matter how rotten, is justified or forgivable on grounds that they are the Holy Holocaust Tribe. So, even when Jews do grave harm unto others, whites cheer on the Forever Good Jews while turning a blind eye to their victims. Because Jews are the Holy Holocaust People, they can crush Palestinians, and if Palestinians resist, they are the 'nazis' and 'Anti-Semites'. Likewise, because blacks are Noble Negroes forever identified with American Slavery, even their violent rages are always justified, and never mind all the non-black victims of black thuggery and lunacy. It's Jews and blacks uber alles. Sympathy for Jews and blacks may have begun as moralism but it's since degenerated into nihilism... just like too many religious folks came to believe that all their aggressions and violence were justified as long as in the name of God, Jesus, Allah, or Muhammad. It's even more dangerous when people begin to worship other humans as godlike. Moral consideration for Jews went from denouncing white/goy supremacism to justifying Jewish supremacism, but as long as Jewish Power is cloaked in the banner of combating goy supremacism, its own supremacism remains camouflaged.
It’s time for Divorce between whites and Jews. Whites should think in terms of the Bob Dylan song: "
You say you disturb me And you don’t deserve me But you know sometimes you lie You say you’re shakin' And you’re always achin' But you know how hard you try Sometimes it gets so hard to care It can’t be this way everywhere And I’m gonna let you pass Yes, and I’ll go last Then time will tell who has fell And who’s been left behind When you go your way and I go mine
The so-called Left yammers on and on about 'white privilege' while many on the 'right' deny it exists. It's more accurate to say White Privilege does exist but as a function of White Submission than of White Supremacism. After all, if indeed the entirety of white race had a solid supremacist position over all other races, there would be no need for White Privilege. Who needs privilege when you got supremacist power over others? Even though White Supremacism is racially defined, it is at least universalist within the white race, i.e. all whites, smart or dumb, rich or poor, share in their superiority & supremacy over or security & safety from other peoples, groups, and races. So, even though some whites would be socially and/or economically privileged over other whites, ALL whites would be universal in their superiority over or security from other races. There would be no White Privilege because ALL whites would share in the dominance. It would be universalist within the particularity of the white race.
The term 'privilege' connotes something more than domination or shared power/position. It implies 'exceptionality' limited to a few. Thus, if something is broadly shared by the entire population, it doesn't qualify as privilege EVEN IF another group is broadly kept in a subservient position. So, if society is made up 50/50 of People A and People B and if ALL members of People A have superiority over all members of People B, it can be called Power but not Privilege. Power unites, Privilege divides. Power for People A would unite all of them, from rich to poor. In contrast, Privilege for People A would mean only select members of the group would enjoy special advantages or exemptions from burdens shared by the rest. If indeed People A had Power over People B, privilege would matter more among People B as some of them would seek favors that would advantage them over most of their kind who must keep within the subservient position.
In the American South, a white man, no matter how poor, could not be enslaved. This fact united him with other whites. Rich or poor, whites could not be slaves. This was not a privilege but the power of rights that applied to all whites. In contrast, privilege mattered a great deal to blacks because any black could be enslaved. So, for a black man to be a free man, that was a matter of privilege. Without such privilege, he was like all the other 'ni**ers'. And there was a privilege system even among the black slaves: the House Negroes and the Field Ni**ers. While both groups were slaves, the former got access to the massuh's house, ate better, enjoyed more petty freedoms, and got more access to good stuff. Because, by and large, blacks had a subservient position to whites in the American South, privilege was a very important thing for blacks as individuals. Since they could not gain power, freedom(as a right), and full spectrum of rights as a People, they could only hope to gain advantages as individuals of privilege. Such privileges exempted them from the lot faced by most of their kind.
Fast Forward to today, and we can argue that White Privilege is indeed a real phenomenon but not in the way that 'left'(as controlled by Jewish Supremacists) would have us believe. According to the Official Narrative, ALL whites enjoy this thing called 'white privilege'. But if something is universal among whites, it's not a privilege but a power. But where do you see any such? Whites are divided as 'liberals' and 'conservatives'. Denied the identity of race/heritage/culture, whites seek meaning only through ideology of 'libertarian individualist conservatism' vs 'radical collectivist progressivism' OR idolatry(or 'idology' as fusion of ideology and idolatry) for the Holy Three of Jews, Negroes, and Homos. White elites disdain the white hoi polloi, and increasingly the white masses hate the white elites.
Also, the Official Dogma of New Jewish-ruled America says that Whiteness is at best problematic and at worst downright evil. Whiteness is the Mark of Cain, a human stain, and the original sin of creation(not unlike Nation of Islam's theory about how whites were grafted from the black race). Whites must feel guilt, whites must atone, whites must feel shame, whites must surrender their lands, whites must surrender their jobs & wealth, whites must kneel & sob, white wombs must be sexually colonized by blacks, white soldiers must fight, kill, and die for Jewish Supremacist crusades, and etc. In other words, whites must live for the Other, not for their own kind. White Power is evil. White Unity is cursed. White Identity is wicked. White Anything is suspect.
Then, there is nothing to unite whites together. There is no intra-universality among whites that binds them together against the Other. Indeed, whites must especially cuck and apologize because they still happen to be the richest people in the world, mostly the result of past White Evil, Greed, Rottenness, and Wickedness. And of course, White 'liberals' and progs are onboard with such worldview, not least because they were raised by the 2 PC's: Pop Culture and Political Correctness dominated by Jews — over the years, Pop Culture and Advertising have become overly politicized by capitalist elites trained by 'cultural marxists' in colleges who spread the notion of 'cultural hegemony'; as these elites no longer believe in communism, they use the capitalist means of marketing to spread the 'idology' of Jew-worship, homo-worship, Negro-worship, and Diversity Cult. (Some radicals and blacks say 'white liberalism' is also a form of white supremacism, and there is a kernel of truth in the claim in that 'white liberalism' could only arise from a state of white supremacism. It was the supremacist position of whites that made some whites drop their guard, grow more generous & conscientious, be less tribal & warlike, and be more critical of their own kind. They could risk such magnanimity because they took white power, security, wealth, and well-being for granted, even as a permanent state of being. Indeed, is it any wonder that some of the biggest virtue-signaling 'white liberal' types tend to live in nice areas with plenty of money and security? If a whole bunch of black savages were coming to rape and pillage them, they would change their tune sooner than later. So, even as 'white liberalism' denounces white supremacism, it exists only as a product of white domination over other races. Whites gained such power and success that a large portion of them could drop their natural guard, ignore their tribal instincts, and put on do-goody airs toward the Other that was seen as helpless children. It's like humans in a state of nature do not feel generous toward animals that are seen as rivals; it was only when modern man gained absolute supremacist dominion over the natural world that humans began to wax poetic about fauna and flora as something that needs protection. Environmentalism is the product of human supremacism over nature. Living in the state of nature, mankind's main worry would be to survive other animals than to help them survive the impact of humans.)
Because whiteness is now so degraded and demeaned, there is no advantage to white identity, white unity, and white continuity as building blocks for white power. In the American West, all whites united to fight the Indians and conquer/settle the lands. In 19th century South Africa, whites of all kinds banded together against blacks. (Back then, whites easily made up 50% of the sparsely populated region.) It was about White Power, not white privilege. All whites of different stripes and backgrounds were united in their identity and purpose. Even though they created social orders in which whites had advantages and rights over others, the rules applied universally to all whites. Whites didn't need privilege because they insisted on the unity of power. It's much the same among Jews in Israel and West Bank. Jews don't need special privileges because they got the power. ALL Jews are favored over ALL Arabs. If anything, it is the Arabs who rely on special privileges(granted by Jewish Supremacists) if they are to avoid the fate of most Palestinians. It's like some Chinese and Hindus collaborated with the British Imperialists for special privileges. Whereas all whites belonged to the dominant race and had their rights secured under the Imperial Law, Hindus and Chinese needed special privileges to enjoy better positions in the Order.
Given the current reality where whiteness is as reviled as Jewishness was in National Socialist Germany, whites better rely on privileges to have it so good. Whereas blackness, Jewishness, and homo-ness are innately holy according to the New Order, whiteness is fake, vile, venal, ugly, hideous, and evil. As whiteness sucks so bad, it can hardly be used as an organizing principle, unifying force, matter of dignity, or point of pride. In other words, 'white' is the 'new ni**er'. Since being white is a great moral, historical, political, social, and spiritual disadvantage, it makes no sense to aspire toward White Power that might unite all whites as one race with shared destiny. In other words, there can be no intra-universal truth to whiteness. The ONLY THING all whites must share is guilt and shame about whiteness. When it comes to celebration, it must be about homos; when it comes to awe & fever, it must be for blacks; when it comes to reverence & obedience, it must be for Jews.
In such an Order where whiteness is just a ticket to hell, white individuals need privileges more than ever as exemptions from collective punishment. White Privilege is like buying indulgences, once a common practice in the Catholic Church. So, in that sense, we do live in a world of White Privilege. This privilege doesn't apply to all whites as privilege can never be universal, not even intra-universal. Privilege always applies to select individuals or a small inner-group, not to an entire population, even if it is generally advantaged over another population. For example, there were dirt-poor white farmers in the American South who were materially worse off than House Negroes on big plantations. The advantage they had over blacks was not a matter of privilege but power.
Back then, white power mattered. Today, nothing is excoriated more than the notion of whiteness + power or whiteness + identity. It's NOT okay to be white. When power is disallowed, privilege is the only game in town. If your people have been condemned as a whole, then forget about Power. Just seek privilege as a white individual, or as an individual virtue-signaler who is eager to secure one's privilege by ho-de-do-ing that you are working oh-so-very-hard to expunge yourself of the evils of 'racism' and 'white supremacism'.
Then, it's no surprise that today's white elites are all about privilege, not power. When it comes to power, they recognize Jewishness, blackness, and homo-ness as the only identities/qualities deserving of it. Whiteness deserves no power, and white lands and white wombs must surrender to the Other. Still, white individuals want success and money, and since they can no longer rely on White Power, they must go for White Privilege, an advantage that, far from applying to all whites, applies ONLY TO those whites who can afford to pay indulgences to the 'woke' extortion industries. So, all those multi-national corporations, including Chick-Fil-A(now more like Dic*-Fill-Ass), go out of their way to appease the Wokextortionists or Woktortionists to gain favor as good House Honkeys or Corpo-Cucks. Jeff Bezos and Jack Dorsey are super-duper-rich, but they don't have white power. Just white privilege. Of course, they don't care as long as they got theirs and the approval of their 'moral superiors' made up of Jews, blacks, and homos. They are happy honkucks.
Still, the crucial point is what they got is privilege, not power. They got privilege by cuck-collaborating with the real power of Jews, blacks, and homos. This state of affairs illustrates how power isn't just about money but about prestige. A House Negro could be far better off than some Po' White Trash, but the latter was a free man who could take his freedom for granted. No matter how poor and 'trashy' he may be, he couldn't be enslaved by the richest white plantation owner. But even the fanciest House Negro eating well and living in the Massuh's Mansion could lose his privileges overnight and be sent to pick cotton. So, even when the House Negro is materially well-off, he wasn't free and actually had less power than even the lowest Po' White Trash. In a way, the likes of Tim Cook and Bill Gates understand this. They are mega-rich and got more money than they could ever hope to spend, but they got no power because they are white. They can pour tons of money into various ventures and causes but never for the power of their race. If anything, to keep their privileges, they must pour vast sums into causes that do harm to whites while expanding the power of Jews, Negroes, and Homos.
So, we are indeed living in the Age of White Privilege. When Power is banned, all you can strive for is privilege.
One man's treason is another man's reason and vice versa.
Was Southern Secession an act of treason? Yes, if you regard the American Union as inviolable and indivisible. No, if you believe in states' rights, including the right to secede. It all depends on the very premise, the foundational basis, of one's worldview or national view. One could say US was created out of treason against the Mother Country. Or one can say it was founded on liberty and independence from Father Tyranny, like with Zeus' rebellion against his own father Cronus.
Also, if US is so against treason, why encourage it around the world? US has collaborator agents in every country and encourages(and even bribes) them to serve US interests than their own national interests. US remains in Afghanistan by propping up a puppet regime that many Afghans regard as treasonous.
Also, looking back on US history, was Manifest Destiny a treasonous act? If US values and ideals are about equal respect for all peoples and cultures, then Manifest Destiny violated such principles by expanding westward and committing 'genocide' on the native folks. Was US conquest of the SW Territories treasonous? After all, if US was founded on terms of national independence and sovereignty, did it not violate the sovereignty of Mexico by provoking and waging war and taking so much territory?
Of course, one can make counter-arguments and say that the vision of America has been to spread liberty and expand progress. So, if US took more land and grew bigger in order to spread more freedom and development, it was all worth it and very pro-American.
So, on the matter of the Confederacy, one can make a case for treason or against treason. Depending on the premise, either argument is valid, or invalid. It's like a conscientious objector can be regarded as a traitor/coward or a hero/saint depending on one's views. And then, there are matters of dual or higher loyalty. Muhammad Ali considered himself an American but also a BLACK American and a black Muslim. As such, he had a loyalty higher than that to what he perceived as White America. He didn't serve in Vietnam because he saw it as a white man's war. In a way, one could say he was treasonous, but in another way, he was being true to his higher loyalties, i.e. had he served in the war, he would have been treasonous to Allah(as conceived by Nation of Islam).
Personally, treason is most despicable when it's mostly about personal gain, opportunism, and vanity. If you turn against your own people for thirty pieces of silver, you are scum. Or if you switch loyalties to the other side simply because it seems 'cooler' and more prestigious to with the richer/greater power, then you're hollow and lack a core. On the other hand, what may seem treasonous and are indeed so from the traditional perspective may be necessary reforms. Any great social upheaval or revolution is an act of treason against the past, resulting in much crisis and agony. But it allows the birth of an improved or new order that may well benefit the great majority. Rise of Modern Turkey was an act of treason against the traditional Ottoman order, but it was time for much needed changes. But such treason, as with the American Revolution against the British Monarchy, was fueled by much idealism and vision, therefore isn't despicable like treason for mere opportunism. (Besides, one could argue arch-conservatism is also an act of treason. If the role of the ruling class is to govern well and improve the lives of its subjects, then its absolute refusal to adopt superior means and greater justice could be construed as an act of treason against their obligation to rule well and fairly.)
There are obvious examples of treason, but many are subtle, ambiguous, and/or even subconscious. Take mass immigration to the West. Most non-whites don't consider it as treasonous. And even the ruling elites of many non-white nations encourage their own kind to emigrate. Maybe, it's due to surplus population, gaining greater economic access to and influence over the metropole, hope for remittances from the immigrant community, and etc. This kind of immigration isn't regarded as treasonous because emigrants from nation A aren't specifically going to the US or EU to do harm to their country of origin. For example, Turks aren't going to Germany or US to join some institution to do harm to Turkey. And yet, immigration is a kind of treason in the sense that immigrants are abandoning their own nations, pledging allegiance to another nation, forgetting their own identities & cultures, and mixing with other races to dangerous levels of deracination.
Furthermore, given the imperial nature of the US-EU empire under Jewish Power, there is always the chance(and not a slight one) that the empire will target, sanction, destroy, and even invade your nation of origin. Indeed, what are Iranians to do when the US is causing great harm to Iran? Some Iranian-Americans in the US military will have to drop bombs on their own people if it comes to war. Even Iranian-American civilians must pay taxes that go to support Jewish supremacist war on Iran. What are Russian-Americans to do when the US, under Jewish control, is relentless in its hate campaigns against Russia? What are Chinese in America to do if a war breaks out between US and China?
Look to the past, and what did German-Americans end up doing in World War I? They were recruited to kill fellow Germans. (In the case of World War II, it made good sense for German-Americans to fight for the US because Germany declared war, but US entry into WWI was on bogus grounds to serve global bankers. But German-Americans had to fight and kill their own ethno-brethren. [Jews understand this aspect of American History, i.e. it tends to push treasonous views on immigrants to wage war on their own kind in the Old World, e.g. German-Americans vs Germans and Japanese-Americans vs Japanese. And that is why Jews are adamant about remaining JEWISH-Americans than Jewish-AMERICANS, and that is also why Jews use media power and political influence to drum all politicians and all Americans with the notion that "Israel is America's greatest ally", i.e. Zion is synonymous with America.] Also, German-Americans were such craven cowards that, instead of pushing back against vile anti-German campaign in the US during WWI, they did all they could to Anglo-Americanize themselves. In some ways, Jews were more admirable in their resistance to such pressures following World War II when many Jews were under suspicion of sympathizing with World Communism. Jews were wrong to support communism but right to guard Jewish identity from American Power. The fate of German-Americans and Swedish-Americans should be a powerful lesson about what happens to a people when they lose a strong sense of who they are and where they came from. Of course, the deracination disease has struck not only German-Americans and Swedish-Americans but Germans in Germany and Swedes in Sweden. The fate is Milwaukee, Madison, and Minneapolis. Once wonderful places, now either crime-fested cities or 'woke' tardopolises into globo-homo-mania.)
Thus, the story of mass immigration to the US has been a kind of treason. Immigration can only lead to ambivalent feelings about identity. After all, Mexicans have contradictory views of Mexican-Americans. In some ways, they are fellow Mexicanos, fellow Tacoan brethren. Many Mexicans even see Mexican-American immigration, legal and illegal, as a kind of Reconquista. But in another way, Mexicans feel that Mexican-Americans who speak only Ingles, serve in the US military, and work as Cuckez agents of Gringo Nation are traitors. One reason why so many Mexicans didn't warm up to Jeb Bush despite his being so pro-Mexican and having a Mexican wife was that the couple looked so much like a symbol of US domination over Mexico. Big Gringo Man and Tiny Brown Woman. What Jeb regarded as his warmth and affection for Mexico was seen by Mexicans as domination and condescension. So, while many white Americans considered Jeb Bush as a symbol of treason — globalist selling White America to brown future — , many Mexicans saw Jeb's wife as the kind of typical Mexican female in Hollywood movies with a gringo man or hubber.
So, the charge of 'treason' is never a sure thing as anything can be deemed treasonous simply by moving the goal posts or altering the coding of core principles. The current war on Confederacy is essentially part of the Jewish War on White. Just like Jews say whiteness is not intrinsic to being French or British or Dutch or Swedish or whatever, they say any form of defiant white identity is evil and wrong. Jews used BLM to not only topple Confederate but British statues. Neocons are especially invested in destroying the Confederate legacy because they operate in the GOP. As GOP relies so heavily on the Deep South, it has become de facto the Neo-Confederate Party, or the Neocon-Federate Party. But that means Neocons in the GOP are associated with Southern 'racists', and that means people can connect Neocons & Zionism with White Southern Redneck 'racism'.
This is all very ironic because Jews, both Neocons and Liberal Zionists, totally support Israeli tyranny over Palestinians, turn a blind eye to IDF death squads mowing down Palestinian women & children, and support apartheid as practice in West Bank. Also, these 'progressive' Jews work well with theocratic Saudis and ISIS types. (They even work well with quasi-Neo-Nazis in Ukraine, though to be sure, 'neo-nazism' in Ukraine has a somewhat more positive pedigree for its resistance against Stalinism during World War II.)
The rule of American Politics is, "If Jews want it, they get it." Not only do Jews push for it but, once the word is out that Jews want it, goy politicos of either party dare not push back against Jews. So, both parties are totally for suppressing BDS. Both are for more billions to Israel and more sanctions on Iran and Syria. Both are now for globo-homo-mania. Both are for Negrolatry, what with Trump rhapsodizing about Fentanyl 'groid' Floyd smiling down upon us from heaven. (More likely, angels have their knees on his neck before casting his ghastly negro self down to hell.) If Jews want it, they get it. Jews got the power, and the Power decides. Sure, because the US is a democracy, Jews don't get everything right away, but they eventually get it as they get to push while no one pushes back. If one side pushes while other side doesn't push back, the pusher eventually wins even if it takes time. It's simple law of physics. If a car is on neutral and if someone pushes from the rear while no one pushes from the front, the car will eventually move in one direction. Jews made sure there will be no counter-push to their pushiness.
As for the GOP, the attack on Confederacy is both troubling and relieving. It may lead to anger in the White South, but as the GOP is the Party of Lincoln, it's always been inconvenient for it to rely on so many Neo-Confederate votes. But then, the Culture War against the White South has been so relentless and overwhelming that even many white southerners are now finally dropping their 'shameful' heritage that insults the new cult of Negrolatry. Lynyrd Skynyrd consented to stop using Confed flags at their concerts. NASCAR now follows suit. Walmart began in the South, but Confed flags have been OUT since the church shooting some yrs ago. Dixie Chicks are now just Chicks. While Antifa and BLM thugs ravage memorials and statues, most white Southerners remain on the plantation of cuckery and do nothing.
Also, white Southern elites were trained in places like Harvard and Yale and other 'liberal' colleges. As such, they are little more than mental cucks of Jews and globalists. Besides, the current Southern elite attitudes are, to an extent, in line with traditional ones. The values and agendas are different but the attitudes are much the same. In the past, the Southern elites looked down on 'white trash'. Many of them favored House Negroes over poor white farmers. Today, southern white elites virtue-signal by saying, "WE GOOD REPENTANT southern whites are NOT like those lowlife redneck vermin who still wave Stars & Bars and revere Stonewall Jackson. We suck Negro dong, kiss Jewish ass, and bend over to globo-homo power." Same old elitist attitude in different dress. But even white southern masses are changing. Their religion is football dominated by blacks who thump white guys and hump white girls. In integrated schools, many white guys got beaten up by black guys and cuck to blackness as in their pathetic roles as worthless 'whiggers'. And as rap music is big among white southern boys, they imitate blacks and no longer resist jungle-feverization of white women. They are finished. And there is mass immigration of yellows and browns who mostly vote Democratic. The South is really over. Same with Texas, now a land of cuckboys than cowboys.
In the end, while anything can be accused of treason, the sting of accusation sticks ONLY WHEN made by those in power. If the British had won, Benedict Arnold would have been honored as a patriot who served the crown while Washington and Jefferson would have been hanged as traitors. But the Revolutionaries won, and Washington became the Father of the American Republic whereas Benedict Arnold, at least in US history, became synonymous with 'traitor'.
So, 'treason' is one of those power-words. It gains full meaning only if made with the power to back up the accusation with penalty. In a way, all of today's deep state elites are treasonous. US elites don't serve the US. They are globalists whose main loyalties are to the oligarchic matrix of Jewish supremacist power, multi-national corporations, imperialist military-industrial-complex, the cult of Negrolatry, and globo-homo-mania as the new messianic neo-religion of the West. The Russia Collusion Hoax was one of the greatest acts of treason in US history, but it was presented as the ultimate patriotism against Donald Trump, the treasonous puppet of evil Vladimir Putin or Putler. So many people in the Deep State should be sent to prison or even executed for their plot against Trump who came to the presidency by fair election — if it was unfair, the wronged side was Trump and his supporters, but Trump still managed to eke out a win. But notice the Deep State spins a different tale, and it has the power to protect 'made' people. Just like Wall Street scum never faced justice after the 2008 fiasco, virtually everyone involved in Russia Collusion Hoax will be protected and continue to control America.
Men like David Patraeus are traitors. They don't defend or serve America. They serve Jewish supremacist imperialists and work for the kind of power that encourages Christian churches to drape themselves with 'gay pride' colors. In aiding and abetting Zionist 'genocide' of Palestinians and Wars for Israel(that target Muslims and Arabs), these men are actually even violating the principles of 'anti-racism' that they claim to represent. They say US must redeem its 'racist' past, but they have a strange way of going about it by aiding Zionist 'racist' terror against Palestinians, Arabs, and Iranians. So, 'treason' isn't about truth or justice. It's about who has the power, who gets to decide the political premise and 'moral' foundation, and who has the means to not only accuse others of treason but to use the power of institutions to make the charges stick.
In current US and EU, the highest 'loyalty' and greatest 'patriotism' are about cucking to Jewish supremacism, worshiping globo-homo queertianity, and kissing the black ass as magical. If you defy such notion, then you're treasonous. But then, being accused of 'treason' by vile Jewish supremacists and globalist cucks should be a honor. One should NOT be loyal to such evil powers. Today, the weasel globalist-generals who serve a globo-homo-ized US military that is used to promote Jewish Supremacism and Jungle Fever/Faith dare charge the great Robert E. Lee, a loyal son of his beloved Viriginia, of treason. With Jews, You Lose. Whites were fated to lose everything when they ceded their power and authority to Jews.
A commenter asked in reply to the Patrick J. Buchanan article:
"I still don’t get how all this happened… Whites aren’t dumb or weak… Where did it all go wrong?"
'Dumb' and 'weak' are relative terms. In relation to whom and what?
If Jews never came to the US, whites would still be on top and would be setting the narrative and agenda. Sure, there would be liberal whites, but they would be in balance with conservative whites. Both liberalism and conservatism have value, and one provided reform and novelty while the other provided stability and continuity, sense of heritage and roots. But Jews came along and used their power to tip the scale in favor of Liberalism. Thus, white liberalism came to be severed from white conservatism. (American History went from reconciliation and mutual respect between Northern whites and Southern whites following the Civil War to such condemnation of white identity & the American South that even white Southerners now do nothing to defend their heritage from feral blacks and PC radicals egged on by Jews who, at the same time, demand that white Southerners support Jim Crowitz in the West Bank. Dixie Chicks just calling themselves Chicks is typical of total Southern cuckery to Jews and the mob.) Liberalism without roots finds itself adrift. Liberals may bitch about conservatism, but liberalism without conservatism is like trees severed from roots. After all, liberalism is an outlook, and it needs a vantage point, i.e. it has to be liberal on a conservative foundation. Liberalism is like the sails on a boat, which would be like conservatism. Without the boat, the sails are useless. Or liberalism is like wings on a plane.Without the main body, the wings are useless.
Therefore, when white liberalism was severed from white conservatism, it had to serve another root-foundation, and this is where Jews made it serve Jewish Power aided and abetted by Jungle Fever/Faith & eventually Globo-Homo. As for white conservatism, it faced difficult times because Jews and their white liberal cucks said whiteness is problematic, then bad, then evil. So, white conservatism could no longer preserve white pride. For white conservatism to be viable, it had to drop the 'white' and just be conservative. Conservative about what? For some, conservatism merely meant conserving wealth(property values) or, paradoxically, the engine for change. (Consider David French whose idea of 'conservatism' is preserving the social forces that led to drag-queen story hour. In other words, American Conservatism = Conservation of forces that bring about the most rapid change.) But conservatism must conserve something other than 'muh money'. If whiteness is no longer worth preserving because of 'white guilt', then white conservatism, having dropped the 'white', had to serve another identity and culture, and again Jews made whites serve Jewish identity that was deemed noble because of Holy Holocaust Cult and its great heritage. If white liberals became subservient to Jews mainly on the basis of Jewish victim-hood, white conservatives became reverent of Jews mainly on the basis of Jewish heritage — Paul Johnson, one of the premier cuckservatives of the Cold War era, often made the case that Judaism is essentially conservative and so, Jews will eventually come around to the political right; the fool overlooked the fact that Jewish 'conservatism' is about maximizing Jewish Power by any means necessary, even by pushing deracinating liberalism on whites, which explains why so-called Neocons worked with Jewish Liberals to undermine white identity and pride. The Neo-Con-Federacy alliance didn't last long. White Southerners supported Zionists, but Zionists took a big dump on white 'racism', just like Apartheid South African support of Zionism didn't prevent most Jews from reviling white-ruled South Africa as the worst thing possible. At any rate, adopting Jewish Identity as the main theme of American Conservatism was bound to be devastating to white conservatism because the main villains of the Shoah were 'white supremacists'(though, to be sure, Nazi Germans were 'Aryanists' whose greatest crimes were against other whites, especially Slavs and Jews, if counted as 'white'). Jewish victim-narrative essentially blames whites and Christians for everything.
Now, Jews could pull this off because they are smarter than whites by one standard deviation. But what about Episcopalians whose IQs are comparable to Jews? Their religion was weak, they were more about class & privilege than blood-spirituality(or ethno-religious identity of Jews), and over time, their values just became bloodlessly following the latest fashion among trendy elites. Also, Jews have stronger and pushier personalities than Episcopalians who would rather lose a fight against feisty Jews than get down and dirty. Jews were especially effective in subverting white power because of their passive/aggressive nature. If Jews were ONLY aggressive, whites would have told them to screw off. But Jews would approach whites with sappy eyes and plead for sympathy for Anne Frank and 'muh holocaust'; and whites, out of Christian magnanimity and conscience, ceded to Jews the notion that the Holocaust was the greatest evil in world history and therefore ANY negative aspersion about Jews is 'antisemitic', therefore akin to Nazism. Whites thought they were being nice to poor pitiful Jews, but Jews were planting a moral trap underneath the white ass, especially as the history of 'antisemitism' was mainly a white European/Christian thing. Once that premise was accepted as part of Official White Morality, it meant that Jews could dump on whites all they want but whites better not dump on Jews in kind because it'd be so awful and hurt the feelings of those poor pitiful boo-boo-baby Jews. Fast-forward to today, and NYT & other Jewish-run media dump on whites endlessly but whites dare not say anything back in kind to Jews. Jews dredge up all the dark past about white history, but whites dare not do the same about Jews. If anything, both white 'liberals' and 'conservatives' compete with one another on who is more pro-Jewish. Jews kick white ass, but whites are eager to kiss Jewish ass. Kick-Ass-Kiss-Ass is the dynamics between Jews and whites. And of course, to consolidate white cuckery and submission, Jews also pushed the Noble Negro cult to guilt-bait whites for all eternity. So, Jewish-run NYT and other media outlets feature black and yellow bitches dumping on white women as abettors of white male terrorism against blacks, but white men say nothing about how countless white women had been robbed, beaten, raped, or murdered by blacks. Tally up the numbers of white women robbed, beaten, raped, or murdered by blacks, and it far dwarfs the number of black thugs lynched by white mobs in a hundred years. But white men, 'lib' and 'con', are a bunch of maggoty wussy boys.
But then, there's another reason white men don't defend white women. Too many white women, being mental clay in Jewish hands, are into white self-loathing and anti-white hysteria as virtue-signaling. Indeed, consider how most of these 'Karens' who are denounced by Ugabundas and Skankishas happen to be urban 'liberal' proggy bitches. To many on the dissident right, there is a certain schadenfreude in watching these insipid whores get their just desserts, a taste of their own medicine. These deracinated slutty lowlife white traitor bitches watch TV shows and movies where white female characters go with Negro men and where white men are presented as creeps or dorks, and their worldview conforms to Jewish Hollywood propaganda. But when they are confronted with black thuggery and vileness, the first thing they do is CALL THE WHITE POLICE. Now, one may ask why did their parents raise such insipid kids? Because white parenting, especially beginning with the boomers, was 'anti-racist', but a people are finished without race-ism. Jews are race-conscious and gain in power. Blacks mess up everything but still gain in power because they are race-conscious. Whites lose and lose because they lost their race-ism. As boomer parents think there is nothing worse than 'racism', they raised their kids to worship Fartin Poother Bling. And these kids grew up to madonna the muddy skank and rap music and sexting each other photos of Negro dongs. And all they heard in schools is 'white racism', 'white supremacism', 'evil of antisemitism', 'evil of homophobia', and etc. But on some subconscious level, they grew up feeling uncomfortable because it's not natural to hate your own kind. It's no wonder the 'gay' stuff spread like wildfire among whites, even with 'conservatives', because it's like the last expression of 'whiteness'. And it's no wonder that blacks eventually caught onto this and are insisting on making June the month of Homeys than Homos. Sheeeeeeiiiit, Juneteenth be da thang.
BLM and LGBT marching together is funny as hell because, despite the outward show of solidarity, they are expressions of opposing trends. BLM is about blacks doing as they please with roughhouse reparations of looting and burning, whereas Globo-Homo is about gentrification and yuppie-regeneration of the 'inner-city', code-word for parts of the town plagued with black crime and violence. Granted, there is a connection between blackness and homo-ness as plenty of white 'gay' buns crave black dongs — the butt-cucks — , but generally speaking, homo community caters to high-earners and the fancy-pants crowd than to hood rats.
Now, the 'weak' part. Again, it's relative. Without Jews and blacks, whites would be on top of the world in the West. Mentally, whites are strong against all groups except Jews. Some may say yellows have IQ comparable or even slightly higher than whites, but the difference isn't all that notable. Also, as yellows happen to be docile and dog-like, they are incapable of gaining power and authority as a minority. Chinese are successful minorities in Southeast Asia but in a precarious than prestigious position — it's no wonder Chinese would rather settle in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the US where they face less animus and violence from the majority. If recently yellows are berating at and bitching about whiteness, it's only because they are dutiful and servile dogs of the prevailing ideology set by elite Jews. They are following orders as good little boys and girls.
So, only Jews could make whites seem 'weak' of mind. Jews have noticeably higher IQ, strong identity rooted in blood & spirituality, and pushy personalities, along with sneaky passive/aggressive strategy. The only other people who make whites look weak are, of course, the Negroes, especially as American Culture is mainly about pop music and sports. Rock music has black roots, but moreover, blatantly black rap overtook rock as the most popular musical form, and what is rap about the thuggish cult of black aggression? Also, Americans worship sports, and who dominate? Blacks do. NFL culture is rather odd in its current configuration, and it's no wonder that it is in a state of crisis. Most players are black, and the game is getting even blacker. These black guys rose up the ranks by thumping white guys in high school and college, and they hump tons of white women. BUT, the majority of the fans are white males, and many white male fans of football happen to be 'conservative'. So, you have a game that is mostly about Democratic black guys dominating the field and humping white women that is cheered on largely by white males, the majority of whom are 'conservative'. White male 'conservatives' have 'evolved' to the 'anti-racist' position along the lines of, "Look, we cheer for you awesome black guys, and you whupped our pathetic white butts and you can hump my wife and marry my daughter, but please oh please, show some respect to the red, white, & blue and stand during the national anthem." That's Rush Limbaugh 'conservatism'. But black players feel differently. They feel, "Sheeeeeeeiiiiit, we be badass mofos who be da kangs of dis here sports, and we done whup fa**oty white boys and hump white girls, and dem white boys in da stands just a bunch of punkass pussies who be begging fo' our autographs while dey's girlfriends be lustin' after our dic*s." Yep, that is how black players see the game, and why not? Suppose Germans were taken as slaves to Japan, and suppose they came to dominate the sports by beating up scrawny yellow Japanese men and were humping the yellow girls. Would these Teutonic giants feel any respect for yellow dorks begging for their autographs? Would they pay respect to the Japanese anthem and identity for long? No, they would be feeling, "We be Vikangz".
For better or worse, sports is at least 1/2 of American culture and identity. So, who dominates sports comes to shape the image of America. Without blacks, whites would dominate sports in the US, and the racial-national perception would be very different. Indeed, look at the harm done to French identity and pride as the result of black domination. Sure, the white French pretend they are all beyond race and that Frenchness has no color, but blacks notice color. They know they are kicking white French ass and France is being Africanized.
Now, one may argue that white people as a unity are more powerful than any other. After all, white imperialists took over all of Africa at one time. British fleet defeated China in two Opium Wars. Spanish took over all of what is now Latin America. This is true, but white power depends on unity of identity, and that means race-ism. Without white race-ism, there can be no white unity. Then, whites can only compete as individuals, and then they will lose mentally to Jews with higher IQ & nimbler verbal skills and lose to blacks who are more muscular and athletic. This is why 'anti-racism' is the most fatal thing to happen to whites. But with white unity, whites could easily push back against Jewish Power. And whites as a unity can kick black ass. In the movie ZULU, each black warrior is more muscular and faster than whites, but whites work as a disciplined team and mow down the savanna bunners with awesome race-ist efficiency. This is why only race-ism can save the white race or any race. This is why any white person who uses the term 'racist' as epithet is part of the problem and hardly better than fools who yammer "Democrats are the real racists."
Ultimately, the great tragedy of American History is that American Indians didn't have the personality and wiliness of Asian Indians. American Indians were a stoned-faced stone-age people who put up a fight against men with guns and wagons, then later trains. They had no hope of military victory. They fought bravely and have been honored as such, but their defeat was a foregone conclusion, and following their surrender, they just remained on Reservations and lived on bacon, tobacco, and firewater. They were 'dumb' like the big 'Injun' in ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST.
But imagine if American Indians were more like Asian Indians. After a few setbacks with fighting the white men, they would have put down the bows & arrows and try to deal with whites with words & wit. After all, white folks were far less likely to shoot a people who are always talking and balking than shooting off arrows or hurling tomahawks. Through incessant talk, the hindu-like American Indians might have wore down the white men on the matter of immigration. A compromise might have been reached where white Christian immigration is okay to a certain point, but come on, let's leave something for the Indians. And then, the hindu-like American Indians might even have convinced whites to send the blacks back to Africa on account of America being the land of the Indians, not of the Africans who have their own gigantic continent to themselves. Hindu-like American Indians might have argued incessantly, "Look, you white people come here and take so much. But, you built stuff and we Indians benefit too. But why did you bring all those blacks? It's bad enough we lost this land to you whites but should we lose it to blacks as well?" And hindu-like American Indians might have gotten better deals from whites with contracts. The real American Indians just trusted the white man, smoked the peace pipe, and went back to their teepees... only to discover that Pale Face was just fooling them. But hindu-like American Indians surely would have pressed upon whites to keep the word. "Look, we remember you people buying Manhattan with bead necklace. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me, and no shame on me this time."
In DELIRIOUS, Eddie Murphy says you got to SING to get the girls. In SEVEN BEAUTIES, Pasqualino says, "More you pee, more you live." In our world, the more you talk, the more power you got. Even when they try to silence you, you have to keep talking and talking and talking. You have to join the conversation but not on their terms because PC is all about them talking while your side only listens or chants along or barks according to orders.
It's been observed by some that whites are like the NEW American Indians. Then, the lesson whites must learn from the fate of American Indians is that whites must act like Asian Indians to survive. American History could have been very different if American Indians fought less and talked more. Indeed, one reason why white folks in the South lent a certain ear to blacks was because the Negroes were always talking, like Jim in HUCKLEBERRY FINN. It's like the white massuh played by Chuck Connors in ROOTS has a fondness for Chicken George who always be talking. Frederick Douglas was full of talk, and of course, Fartin' Poother Bling was nothing without talk. And, you don't even need a boombox voice. Gandhi sounded like a geek, but he talked and talked and drove the British nuts like Groucho Marx with the Wasp characters.
It's incredible that Jews of all people hold such a vaunted MORAL position in the American Narrative. After all, if any people experienced something like 'genocide' and destruction on American soil, it was the American Indians, all the more tragic because they have roots here going back eons, tens of thousands of years. And yet, there is the Jewish Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. than one commemorating the 'American Holocaust' of the Red Man. And even though mass immigration did in the Indians, the Statue of Liberty as symbol of immigration is so highly prized and celebrated. Also, the US has been nothing but a blessing for Jews. They didn't face the kind of discrimination they did in the Old World, and furthermore, Jews took part in slavery/slave trade and sold supplies to whites who rubbed out the Indians. So, Jews took part in the 'American Holocaust'. And yet, Jews hold the high moral ground in America. Why? They never stopped talking. In the end, talk determines 'truth'. If Bob did wrong to John, but if Bob does all the talking while John sulks and sits in the corner, everyone will go with Bob's word. He sets the narrative. It's like the scene in GOODFELLAS where Martin Scorsese's mother tells a joke about a man who never says anything.
How did Christianity became a great religion? The Early Christians faced persecution, but they never stopped talking and eventually caught the ears of some powerful and influential folks. In the end, it wasn't a case of "meek shall inherit the Earth" but "speak shall inherit the Earth". And this is why white Americans, as they face a demise similar to that of the American Indians, must not make the same mistake. Instead of being like the noble but 'dumb' Indian in ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST, they must be like Asian-Indians who never shut up. They must be like Babu(of THE SIMPSONS) or Ben Kingsley as Gandhi who's always talking and talking, even when he's sent to jail time and time again. To reiterate this point, white Americans should speak with a Hindu accent. Doing so will remind them that, unless they keep gabbing like Hindus, they will end up like the Red Man.
Whites should start with the topic of creating the white leagues in sports on the basis that white athletic inferiority needs is own space from blacks who make it virtually impossible for any other race to play, especially certain positions. So, let blacks have NBA and NFL, but let there be the white leagues. And why not? Blacks got their own chess tournaments as they can't compete with Jews. Now, the Powers-that-be will say NO, but whites should still keep talking and never drop the issue and should re-package it in so many ways. After all, the US has said NO to reparations-for-blacks so many times, but it's still on the menu because blacks never stop talking about it. (Whites should demand Realization among blacks. Realization over reparations. What would this Realization be? That, even though blacks got less than whites in the US, they got so much from contact with whites than they would have on their own if left alone in their own savagery of bongo drums and chucking spears at hippos. Sure, the argument of the Realization would be condemned as 'racist', but one must never stop talking. Even if the other side says NO, you keep making your case and drive home the point. It's like even a brick wall eventually breaks if you keep picking at it. In those prison movies, inmates eventually make a hole with a spoon. Why? They never give up picking at the wall. Words wear down the opposition only if you must keep on talking.) If whites give up on certain issues and stop talking, they lose. Even if there are setbacks, one must keep talking. Like 'gay marriage' for instance. Don't just accept it as 'the law of the land' but keep talking against it. Chip away at it bit by bit by bit. If the power of words made the Roman Empire eventually succumb to Christianity, the religion of pesty Jewish heretics, it can do wonders for whites in the long run but only if they keep talking. If the idea of White Leagues is rejected and banned, should whites give up on the idea? No, they should keep pushing for it with new arguments. Did homos and Jews give up on 'gay marriage' when the courts initially said NO? No, they pushed on. Meanwhile, American cuckservatives began to say NOTHING in opposition. When one side talks while the other side remains mute, the talkers win. So-called 'culture war' was really a game of Culture Words, and Jews and the 'left' talked more. In contrast, the 'conservatives' said close to nothing or took orders from Jews and merely said, "Muh Israel" and "Democrats are the real racists", thereby undermining the need for race-ism among whites.
Say the word and you will be free. There's a song by the Bangles, "Walk like an Egyptian", but the real lesson is "Talk like an Asian-Indian". And use their dotty accent to always remind yourself that if you don't keep talking, you will end up like the American Indians. In a way, it's ironic that American Conservatism is in such sad state despite having dominated Talk Radio. They sure did a lot of talking... but about what? 'Muh Israel', inanities about 'Feminazis', cheerleading for more Middle East Wars, Russia-bashing, Chicom-bashing, and 'Democrats are the real racists'. In other words, total BS and nothing about real issues, real truths, and real needs. White folks need to speak the truth of HBD in hindu accent. Talk truth, not nonsense.
