Jewish Supremacism and the 'Trialectics' of Power — Left vs Right Dialectics in Current America is mostly bogus — Jews and White Liberals are like Adults and Children — Jewish Exploitation of Universalism vs White Liberal Devotion to Universalism(as manipulated by Jewish Tribal Supremacism)

In current political discussions, the talk of the 'left' and the 'right' misses the crucial point. What we have is less dialectics of the so-called Left and the Right as the 'trialectics' of 'left' and 'right' with both being manipulated by a third force that chooses to remain invisible. And this power is essentially though not entirely Jewish. Let's ponder the forest than the trees. Consider the trajectory of mainstream politics in America over several decades. The main conflict wasn't so much about a genuine right-vs-left-struggle but about Jews owning and using both sides to serve the Third Power that is Zionist-Globalist. Rahm Emanuel claims to be 'leftist' or a 'liberal', but he served in the IDF to not only defend Israeli nationalis but to enforce Zionist Imperialist hegemony over Palestinians. The NYT columnist David Brooks excoriates Trumpian nationalism, but his son, who is apparently steeped in Jewish identity and Zionist consciousness, served in the IDF just like Rahm Emanuel and other American Jews who'd rather sign up for the Israeli military than for the US military(which is apparently only for dimwit white goyim stupid enough to fight, kill, and die in Wars for Israel. Those who cling to real power know tribal blood counts for more than ideological ink.

After all, both Liberal Jewish Elites and Neo-Conservatives have been totally pro-Israel and favor Jews over Palestinians. Why such pro-nationalist(and even pro-imperialist and pro-supremacist) Zionist zeal on Middle East issues on both the 'left' and 'right'? Just ask yourself. Why did virtually every Congressman sign the AIPAC-enforced pledge to serve Zionism, Israel, and Jewishness uber alles?
If indeed nationalism and ethno-centricism are 'rightist' whereas GLOBALIST ELITES are supposed to be 'leftist'(anti-nationalist), then why are most elites in big business & the Deep State so pro-Israel regardless of their professed ideologies? Why don't the so-called 'leftist globalists' denounce the tribal/nationalist influence of AIPAC? Where does one see the globalist elites(who are said to be 'leftist') in Hollywood, Las Vegas, Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and Big Oil siding with helpless Palestinians against powerful ethno-imperialist Zionists? Where do you see them denouncing Jewish Identity as the source of tribal supremacism? And if Google and Twitter are really into equal justice for all sides and about caring for the underdog, why do they all the Zionist-supremacist ADL to monitor 'hatred' on their platforms and networks? ADL is a totally pro-Zionist organization that supports the defaming of whites(as subhuman cattle) and defends the Zionist-Imperialist Occupation of West Bank & terrorism against Gazans. ADL also never mentions Nakba, the grim fact that Israel was created by massive ethnic cleansing of Palestinians(regarded as subhuman by Jewish Power). ADL never condemns the Zionist-instigated US Wars for Israel on the Muslim World that hatefully and ruthlessly destroyed millions of lives. It never denounces Donald Trump's one-sided insensitivity in favoring Zionists over Palestinians. Imagine that. Jews say Trump is 'literally Hitler', but they fully support Trump's most Hitlerian agenda: The favoring of Zionist supremacists over Palestinians who are treated like Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto by the Nazis.

If Google and Twitter are indeed truly 'leftist', shouldn't they hire members of the BDS Movement to monitor Zionist supremacist hatred and chauvinism that define and dominate so much of American media, academia, and goverment? Shouldn't Paypal and other supposedly 'leftist' businesses deny service to individuals associated with ADL or any such group that supports the ongoing hateful & supremacist Zionist Occupation of West Bank? Shouldn't Paypal and other such companies deny service to members of the CIA and Pentagon who've been engaged in murderous US neo-imperialism that destroyed many nations and peoples with bombs, invasions, support for terrorists(especially in Syria), and sanctions?

Well, well, isn't this a curious kind of 'leftism' that happens to be so jingoist("US is an exceptional nation"), 'racist'(Zionists uber Palestinians and Jews uber gentiles), supremacist(black men deserve to colonize white wombs since white men are inferior cuck dorks), and replacist-genocidal(white people should lose their own homelands to waves of foreign colonizers), and of course, totally hypocritical? Their agenda seems to be Diversity via coercive 'inclusion'(which amounts to invasion) and demographic imperialism for every nation EXCEPT Israel that, despite its closed walls and Jewish-Only policy, is showered with $4 billion annually in 'aid', given a free pass to spy on the US, and allowed to lobby Congress not as a foreign entity but virtually as an American one.

So, let's try to be clear and honest about True American Politics for once. It is NOT about the dialectics of left vs right but about the 'trialectics' of Jewish globalist-supremacists controlling and manipulating the so-called 'left' and so-called 'right' to serve their own interests. When you see puppets fighting each other, don't lose yourself in the dialectics of Puppet A vs Puppet B but focus on the master who is pulling the strings of both.

If indeed these corporations are really into 'leftism', why do they go along with the anti-BDS program(that is usually associated with grass-roots leftism, there are increasing numbers of people on the true Right who also sympathize with the plight of Palestinians, not least because Jews now treat white people as the NEW or OTHER Palestinians to conquer and destroy)? Jewish oligarchs and their agents use bribery and threats to coerce all politicians and all States to violate the US Constitution(especially the principle of Freedom of Speech) by criminalizing BDS. Now, imagine white ultra-rightists in the 80s using their influence to criminalize any boycott or sanction of South Africa that then practiced Apartheid. The Left would have blown a fuse and railed against such violation of the American principles of Free Speech and Right of Assembly. But there's almost total silence about the criminalization of BDS among the Establishment 'Left'(though there are Alt-Left figures like Philip Weiss and Jimmy Dore who do raise the issue). For the most part, there are murmurs and gripes in some corners of the Left, but there is no mass concerted effort to call attention to this despicable violation of the First Amendment and Freedom of Conscience. Clearly, we live in a nation where cities can ban Chick Fil-A for supporting Real Marriage, but companies and individuals are to be destroyed if they even think of supporting the boycott of Zionist Occupation of West Bank and its apartheid policies.

Well, well, so much for 'leftism' and its dominance over America. (More often than not, those who rant about the power of the 'left' are too afraid to mention the JEW behind it, as well behind the approved 'right'. While Paul Joseph Watson and Black Pigeon Speaks make good videos on many topics, their babbling about the 'left' willfully overlooks the Jewish Power behind it. The current dominant power is more about the ethno-identity of Jews than about any consistent ideology.)
American Power can be boiled down to machinations of Jewish Supremacism over White Cuck Collaborators, decadents & degenerates(usually associated with Globo-Homomania), and members of Diversity, whose contentious groups are united only by their hatred against Whitey as encouraged by the Jews. What is really of the essence is that all the key decisions are made by Jews and their favorite proxies, the homos. Asians may be rising in rank, but they are servile drones without agency or will, thereby destined to do the bidding of Jews with stronger personalities. Most yellows just follow the White Cuck-collaborators who obey Jews and homos. Such is the hierarchy of US power, but it masquerades as 'leftist' in order to conceal the ethno-monopoly and ethno-supremacism of Jewish globalists.

The fact is Jews can destroy anyone with their control of high tech, Wall Street, and media. What are Google and Facebook but Jewish monopolies? And even non-Jewish oligarchs go along with Jews because they (1) have been molded by Jew-dominate academia & media (2) rely on Jew-run Wall Street for finance and (3) fear the Jew-run media for bad press that can prove to be fatal. In summary, via direct and indirect monopoly of high-tech, Jewish-American supremacists(who work closely with Zionist Israeli Jews who slaughter Palestinian women and children) get to rig who is or isn't platformed. Through Wall Street, they can decide who shall be funded or defunded. Through media, they can decide who is to be anointed and who is to be excommunicated. Just by having the ADL or SPLC smear an individual or company as 'racist', 'antisemitic', or 'homophobic', the J-Power can bring down anything or anyone. Those are now the talismanic words with the power to make or break careers.

If US corporations are truly 'leftist'(as we are constantly told), why didn't they denounce US imperialism in the Middle East? Seriously, does Starbucks really care about Muslim 'refugees'? Why didn't its Jewish owners denounce Obama and Hillary for turning Muslims into refugees in the first place with a destructive foreign policy that targeted Libya and Syria at the behest of Jewish ethno-supremacists? Surely, the heads of Starbucks are smart and well-informed. They are no dummies. They must know what really happened in the Middle East & North Africa and why. So, why did they frame their 'progressivism' in terms of caring-about-Muslim-refugees than of denouncing-US-imperialism-that-forced-Muslims-into-refugee-status? It's because the so-called 'progressives' at Starbucks are really venal Zionist-Imperialists who support the ethno-supremacist policy of pushing Wars for Israel and globalist bankers.

There was a CEO bitch at the Campbell Soup Company who claimed to be appalled by 'murder' and 'racism' of 'white supremacism'? Oh really? According to such scum, evil was embodied by only one side at Charlottesville? As for the 'murder', that is just a Jewish Canard(like the myth that Leo Frank was innocent of the crime he most likely did commit). The fat whore Heather Heyer died of a heart-attack, and James Fields panicked after being attacked by antifa and BLM mobs(who were allowed to run loose by the Jewish mayor and his black police chief with full approval from higher powers). Also, BLM is a hate-filled black movement based on the lie that innocent blacks are being murdered all over the country by white supremacist cops. Now, what does Campbell Soup have to say about Zionist occupation of West Bank or Zionist-supremacist Wars for Israel that murdered 100,000s of people in the Middle East? Or, Billy Boy Clinton's sanctions on Iraq that killed countless innocent children?

The CEO bitch at Campbell Soup, Denise Morrison, is a real piece of shit. She may earnestly believe in the BS she routinely spouts because she most probably attended some elite college and underwent PC indoctrination, but even that doesn't get to the heart of the matter. After all, if she is truly and sincerely anti-nationalist and 'anti-racist', her corporate policy should be to cut all ties between Campbell and the Jewish-Supremacist Israel that continues to illegally occupy West Bank. Then, it seems likely that the Real Reason she condemned the white patriots at Charlottesville was because White National Liberation is tantamount to White Emancipation, which means whites shall no longer serve Jewish ethno-supremacist globalist imperialism. She is a white-whore-cuck shill who serves Jewish supremacism by smearing white liberation as 'white supremacism'.

In fact, the Alt Right(at least the anti-Spencerian faction) is more likely to be anti-imperialist in their anti-war stance and support of national rights of all peoples & cultures. Venal Globalists subvert national sovereignty all over the world by opening the West to the Rest. Tempted with easier material life in the West, formerly nationalist non-whites abandon their own nations and come to the West to become 'New Americans', 'New Canadians', or 'New Englishmen'. Thus, Jews kill two birds with one stone. White national sovereignty is destroyed but so is that of non-whites who, instead of guarding and building their own nations, just want to run off to the West for short-cut material improvement. They become Puerto-Ricanized. Puerto Ricans lost all sense of national pride and independence because they got hooked to the drug of US largess. Their only 'identity' is bitching for more benefits and freebies, as is the case with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Since begging is humiliating, Puertos now do their begging in the form of demands. It's like a dog barking loud to hide its shame that it depends on the master for food.

Puerto Ricans have no identity left but as leeches of Anglo-America. Since parasitism is ignoble, the leeches pretend that their endless blood-sucking is a 'human right' or about compassion. If Latin Americans are truly proud of their peoples and cultures, why don't they ever improve their own lot? Why do they run to Anglo-American-made US and demand handouts? Incredibly, the entire world is being Puerto-Ricanized while all white nations, even in Europe, are being 'Americanized'.

If leftism is about equality, diversity, and proportionality of power/influence, why doesn't anyone in these firms complain that Jews are vastly over-represented in the upper echelons of power, wealth, and connection? What happened to Disparate Impact? If these elites really care about diversity and fair representation, then their main ire should be directed at the over-representation of Jews who are only 2% of US population but have near or outright monopoly in many sectors of the economy and are favored over other groups such as Palestinians, Russians, Syrians, and Iranians. AirBnB, Google, and Facebook are owned by Jews, and they are tied closely with Jew-dominated Wall Street that that colludes with Media owned by yet more Tribesmen. And they fund operations like SPLC and ADL that pull every trick in the book to lend moral sheen to Jewish-centrism. Both organizations push Jewish/Zionist interests in the name of fighting 'hate', all the while ensuring that US foreign policy will go on hating any nation/people targeted by Jewish globalists and Zionist imperialists. The mere resolve NOT to serve hateful Jewish supremacism is denounced as 'hate' in the Current Year. And all these corporations work with the Deep State that colludes with politicians whose strings are pulled by Jews. And even GOP cuck-Congressmen are funded by the likes of Sheldon Adelson.

Dialectics of Left vs Right in Current American Politics? That's total BS, as ludicrous as the Russia Collusion Hoax and Jussie Smollett 'hate hoax'(meant as anti-white defamation with full backing of venal Jews and homos). The real Power Game in the West is about the 'Trialectics' of Jewish Power as the Third Force manipulating bogus 'left' and bogus 'right' to make both sides serve Jewish supremacism.
This is why class politics, once a venerable theme among progressives, is dead on the Left. The new globo-homo 'left' is a decadent freakshow about 50 genders and babytalk about 'inclusion'(a formula that is guaranteed to destroy ANY civilization as no nation can long survive without an identity, history, and territory to define and defend... which is why Jews push 'inclusion'-invasion on goy nations but never on Israel that only includes Jewish immigrants and excludes everyone else; indeed, what would have been the point of founding Israel as a Jewish State IF tons of non-Jews could arrive and settle?). Jews push gentile diversity because it means disunity among gentiles. Also, homomania-as-the-core-of-new-'leftism' is a huge boon to the rich since homos are vain and cater to the privileged, especially Jews. So, such 'leftisms' are merely tools of Jewish Supremacism.
The general rule is that Jews will support any 'universalist' agenda for as long as it's useful to their power and hegemony. For Jews, universalism, like everything else, is a handy prop than a holy principle. Indeed, Jews even fashioned their God that way. Though YAHWEH is said to be the one and only God, the universal cosmic principle for all times and places, His purpose seems to consist mainly of serving Jews. So much of the chaos and confusion of our times stems from the fact that Jewish 'Liberals' mold universalism to serve their Tribalism, whereas white liberals make an effort to surrender every last vestige of their tribalism in service to Universalism. If indeed universal truths do exist, they should be eternal, consistent, and logical than flippant, random, and contradictory. Do Jews believe in Free Speech or Not? It all depends on "Is it good for Jews?" Jews don't want to follow in the footsteps of Wasp Principles and lose their power like Anglo-American suckers did by trusting the weasly Jews. As things stand, Whites seek to earnestly serve a universalism that is utterly at the whims of Jewish ethnocentrism. It's no wonder so many white liberals have been driven half-crazy, not unlike Job before God whose sense of justice seems to defy moral sense. While white liberals prostrate themselves before the said Universal Truth, Jews rig the game to alter the Universal Code yet again, all according to their whims of God Complex. Jewish 'liberals' and white liberals are like adults and children. To get what they want, crafty adults will often alter and reinterpret the rules without much in the way of scruples. In contrast, children, in their eagerness to win the affection and approval of adults, will make an earnest effort to live up to the Golden Rule as laid down by adults... except that the rules keep changing. (In time, children will begin to wonder, "If the rules are so 'golden', how can they be changed so readily?") Of course, children eventually grow up and realize how the jaded adult world really operates, but incredibly enough, it seems white liberals remain childlike forever in their sincere devotion to Jewish Liberal Wisdom despite the fact that Jews change the goalposts ever so often to serve their newest set of tribal-supremacist agendas.
As for the 'new right', ever since the Jewish Neocon takeover of American Conservatism Inc. it's been all about lowering tax rates for the rich and praising Israel, Israel, and Israel while cursing any hope of white consciousness that longs for emancipation from the madness of Jewish Supremacism. White conservatives may be less childlike than white liberals in that they're acting more out of fear and opportunism than naivete and misplaced idealism, but it also means they are more craven and cowardly.

Psychology of Social Justice Warmongers — The Addiction to the Hunt — The Predatory Nature of Mankind — Positive Identity of Jews, No-Identity of Whites, & Controlled Identities of Non-Whites — Ways of Empire in Suppressing Subject Peoples

People like peace and order. But as humanity evolved from hunters and warriors, there is also the side of us that exults in violence, craves the hunt, and thrills over the kill. And like hunger, it can never be satiated out of existence. Just like hunger returns, the hunting instinct returns... which is why hunters eagerly await the next hunting season. It's like sports fans soon forget about the trophy won the year before and look forward to the new season. And as horrible as war is, we are drawn to stories of men in combat. One of the foundational literature of Western Civilization is The Iliad, a poetic paean to war and glory. Even so-called Anti-War Movies draw in the audience with their explosions and mayhem that are as riveting as repulsive. APOCALYPSE NOW was presented as an anti-war statement by Francis Ford Coppola, but it was written by pro-war John Milius. Despite Coppola's best efforts at moralism, what came across most powerfully was the epic scope of war, its rapturous reveling in domination and destruction. The most famous scene in the film, the helicopter raid on a Viet Cong village, closed with Colonel's Kilgore's lamenting sigh that "Some day this war will end." Apparently, he's having such a great time that he wants it to go on indefinitely even though a side of him surely knows that war is hell. In the movie PATTON, George C. Scott as the great general admits that he loves war. It is the presence of death that makes one feel most alive, most intensely engaged with the world. The sentiment is surely understandable to those who risk their lives by mountain-climbing or jumping off cliffs with wing-suits. For them, merely being alive is boring. It's just sitting around with a pair of lungs that suck air in and out. They feel truly alive only when they dare death. In HURT LOCKER, the bomb-defusing expert feels bored at home and seems to want to return to battle in the final scene.


Regardless of one's ideology, there is inner drive within human nature that longs for the hunt, the fight, the struggle. It makes life exciting. Why do people go to drama or movies? Because storytelling is about conflict, the battle, the mutual-hunt between various forces deemed 'us' and 'them', 'good' vs 'evil'. We've all been told that the most important element of plays, novels, and cinema is 'conflict'. In that sense, all movies are 'war movies' though the conflict is usually resolved in rooms, streets, and halls of power than in the battlefields. But then, even men-in-combat are little more than pawns of men in quiet spaces, like the War Room in DR. STRANGELOVE or the palatial quarters where generals plot in PATHS OF GLORY. Jews dwell on mental combat; the goy pawns die in metal combat, shooting bullets and getting torn apart by shrapnel.
As Jews control the US, they control the world. Not only do Jews control the goy cuck puppets who direct foreign policy, but Jews decide which nations have access to the vast US goy market. Even though US is mostly goy, it is Jews who decide whom the American goyim can sell to and buy from. Jews have control over our purchasing power. Goyim don't decide whom Jews can do business with, but the vice verse is all too true. Jews do as they please, goyim do to appease... the World Jewry. If any nation is deemed threatening or displeasing to Jews or Israel, ALL of Goy America is directed against it by sanctions, encirclement, or threats of wars devised by Jewish puppet-masters. And as US puppet-allies depend on the US for economic and military support, they too must comply with Jewish demands. Jews not only control the media and finance but get to decide the economic choices of American goyim. If Jews say America can't do business with Russia or Iran, all goyim are made to comply as US policies are decided by goy cuck-whore-politicians of the globo-homo-shlomo Jewish supremacist overlords.

And yet, on some level, many goyim get their thrills in world conflicts cooked up by Jews. They are too craven, stupid, ignorant, and/or dumb to decide on their own as to what is good or bad for their own people or the world. They crave action but lack agency and vision. It's like dogs don't decide what and where to hunt. They are just eager to hunt ANYTHING, and as long as the master lets them hunt, they are happy whether they are running down rabbits, raccoon, badgers, foxes, or wild pigs. The master decides what is to be hunted, and when and where. He has agency and vision. Dogs just care for action and are satisfied as long as SOMETHING is to be hunted. Jew-Goy relations are much the same. Jews have a grand vision of the world. They know what they are all about and what they want. They see themselves as a proud ancient Tribe with Covenant with God or History; they see the world in terms of "Is it good for us Jews and our power?" Jews are more than 'identitarian'. They are 'covenantarian', a far more potent consciousness for it associates identity with history and destiny. Any tribe can have an identity, but it'd be just another identity among many others; an identity could be nothing special; every individual has an identity, but most of them mean nothing to the world; they are not world-shakers. In contrast, being a 'covenantarian' means your identity is special and has a unique place in the world by the blessings of God or design of history.
Now, as Jews are small in number, they naturally need OTHER peoples to serve the Tribe, and it means goy servants must have no identities or, at best, controlled identities. Because white servility to Jews is most crucial to Jewish Global Hegemony, the Jewish Agenda says whites are to have No Identity. Whites are to be 'Nodentitarians' or 'Zerodentitarians'. No-Identity or Zero-Identity for whites. After all, if whites do have identity, they are likely to become white-centric and try to make the world revolve around white interests(as in the past when the Jewish minority had to serve white elites and white nations/powers; there was a time when Jews served European kings and American Wasp elites). To make whites revolve around Jewish Power, white identity must be turned into 'nodentity'. But since humans crave an identity, whites without identity will still seek one to serve, and this is where Jews make deracinated & disoriented whites serve Zionism, Jewish pride, and Jewish holiness. Jews want whites to become like Charlie Kirk. If you want to visualize the essence of Jewish-White relationship in the Current Era, consider Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk side by side.

As for non-whites, Jews allow controlled identities. Jews don't want blacks, yellows, browns, and Muslims to have core identities, or autonomous identities independent of PC dogma. Take the identity of Palestinian-Americans for instance. If their identity were like that of Jews or current Hungarians, Palestinians would emphasize Palestinian nationhood(rooted in a particular history and territory), Palestinian power, and Palestinian future(especially by resisting Zionist supremacism). Such an identity could compete with Jewish identity, especially troubling as Israel was created by wiping Palestine off the map. Jews would rather have Palestinian-American identity be defined in terms of grievance toward white 'racism' and 'Islamophobia'(despite the fact that Zionist Hollywood did more than any institution or industry to spread anti-Muslim tropes). Political Correctness is, of course, a game of Grievance Envy where various non-white groups claim to be bigger victims of whites or at least on the better terms with blacks and homos, two groups that, along with Jews, are favored above all others by the Jew-run media. Thus, Palestinian-ness becomes a negative-identity than a positive one. It's an identity of opposition to Evil Whitey than an independent identity that has value regardless of its relation to white folks. Instead of thinking, "I am first and foremost a Palestinian with deep history and national aspirations in the Middle East", the controlled identity of Palestinian-Americans becomes, "I'm first and foremost a victim of White Power & Privilege, therefore defined mainly by my commitment, in alliance with other non-whites, against Evil Whitey." Thus, Palestinian-Americanism becomes a matter of virtue-signaling about 'white racism'. Instead of focusing on what is essential for Palestinian survival and revival, Palestinian-Americans come to focus on forming alliances with non-Palestinians against the Evil Right or 'white supremacism'. And this alliance effectively dilutes and weakens Palestinian consciousness by directing the emphasis of Palestinian politics toward an identification-of-shared-grievance with blacks, yellows, browns, and etc.(against Evil Whitey of course), with whom Palestinians have nothing in common except for the Jewish canard that all non-white groups are oppressed by Evil Whitey in the West. Jews would rather have Palestinian consciousness be generic as just another voice in the anti-white PC mantra than remain distinct & autonomous in calling out Jewish Power for having wiped Palestine off the map and stealing the remaining land from Palestinians in West Bank. BDS Movement that represents the true national interest of Palestinian Identity is to be suppressed. As far as Jews are concerned, Palestinians can have negative identity as anti-white Palestinian-Americans but NO IDENTITY as Palestinians longing for Lost Palestine, i.e. Palestinian Identity can hate whites but not love Palestine. Only Jews are to have a real identity in the US. Whites are to have No Identity, and non-whites are to have Controlled Identities that are essentially negative-identities as they have 'worth' ONLY IN OPPOSITION to whiteness(as orchestrated by Jews).
After all, PC and multi-culturalism never remind non-whites such as Palestinians to cling to their history and culture; rather, non-whites are urged to identify themselves in opposition to whiteness.

Ultimately, the rule of America is that whites and non-whites must, above all, serve Jews and homos. Imperialists have always had problems with the politics of identity because Other peoples with their own identities are less likely to serve the power of the dominant people, the imperial hegemon. Empires could be tolerant and let other identities & cultures survive but only in loyalty & service to the Core Power of the Empire. In some cases, the Imperial Power Dynamics took on a game theory logic of its own. Though the empire expanded from a core ethnic group, the main purpose went FROM the use of power to make the World serve the Core TO ensuring that everything(even the core) be sacrificed to expand the imperial power. There was the danger that the Imperial-power-for-imperial-power's-sake could become the main obsession of the empire. Thus, it no longer mattered if the original Core Group maintained grip on power or not; even if members of OTHER groups gained dominance, it was acceptable as long as the empire continued and expanded. The Roman Empire became like this. The surviving Byzantium or Eastern Roman Empire was mostly ruled by non-Romans. And the US has also become like this. It went FROM an Anglo-American empire that brought over non-Anglos to serve Anglo-American Power TO a World Empire where it no longer mattered which group was dominant AS LONG AS the world was turned into Pax Americana as envisioned by the enthusiasts of the American Century(or American Millennium as the case may be). If not for Jewish Power, the US might indeed have turned into a World Empire without a Core Group at its center. But the decline of Wasp Power wasn't followed up by the rise of colorblind elites but by Jewish-Supremacist takeover; as a result, the US as lone-superpower is now about making the world serve the Jews uber alles. Still, it is interesting how the American Empire went from mainly serving the power and glory of one racial-ethnic group(the Anglos) to serving those of another. Instead of the Anglo-American Empire falling apart like the Western Roman Empire, its reins were handed over to nouveau overlord Jews, much like Roman power eventually went over to non-Romans in the Byzantine or Eastern Roman Empire. But just as the meaning of 'Roman' became meaningless as non-Romans became New Romans, the meaning of 'American' has become meaningless except as access to riches and power, either as lords or servants.

There are various cultural strategies employed by the empire to suppress, control, or manipulate the identities of subject peoples. The empire can paradoxically pose as a 'liberating' agent for the subject people. This is especially useful when the subject people happen to be caught between two or more empires. Then, Empire A can claim to defend the rights and freedom of the subject people from Empires B and C. Or Empire A, B, or C can claim to have liberated the subject people from their own tyrant. It's like the US justified its invasion of Iraq on grounds that Iraqis had to be 'liberated' from tyrant Saddam Hussein. Same rationale was proffered in the destruction of Gaddafi's rule in Libya.
If the empire has much cultural capital, it may entice its subject peoples with the fancy benefits of remaining within the imperial tent. The French Empire was advantaged in this regard as there was much that was glorious about French arts, culture, food, & wine. Use cuisines-and-sticks than mere carrots-and-sticks to seduce the subject peoples into compliance. Use the fist but also the feast. Consider the sheer effect of French cuisine in BABETTE'S FEAST.
Or, the empire can degrade the culture of its subject people into something small and humdrum. Ottoman Turks allowed Greeks to keep their culture, but it had to be humble than proud. Greeks could have their folklore, food, and dance, but they couldn't unite to politicize Greek culture as a national identity. Japanese went further and decided to erase Koreanness by forcing Koreans to take on Japanese names and speak Japanese as if they, as fellow a Yamato people, must forget they were ever Korean. Another imperial strategy is Mass Migration and Diversity. By moving peoples all around, the empire can undermine and weaken the connection between a people/culture and their ancestral soil. Stalin was an expert at this, moving entire populations from all around to replace tribal consciousness with ideological uniformity and his cult of personality.

In the US, Jews use many time-tested Imperial methods to weaken white power. Like Japanese in Korea, they wage war on White Identity and say it never existed. Or, if it really did exist, it was 'racist' & evil and have no reason to exist further. It was so wrong for British and French histories to have been almost entirely white. So 'racist'! Such historical injustices must be rectified with mass-immigration & mass-promotion of non-whites and by retro-fitting the past whereby the great white heroes and historical figures are re-imagined as non-whites, especially blacks.
Jews use 'restaurants' to entice whites into surrendering their nations. Let the foreign hordes with their cooking pots to create the melting pot. So what if you lose your nation? You will have 'better food'? And make white nations 'include' tons of non-whites to boost Diversity, now a Magic Word that has so many idiots believing that Diversity is a magic panacea for everything when, by and large, less diverse nations are much better off than diverse ones around the world, the only exceptions being homogeneous black nations like Haiti and those in Sub-Saharan Africa. Granted, just like Turks tolerated humble Greek culture, Jews do tolerate humble whiteness like the Amish who have NO chance of power or influence.
In a way, the Jewish Empire is more problematic than goy empires of old. At the very least, White Imperialists were willing to embrace non-white subjects as 'fellow Christians'. Communist Imperialists(like Russians for example) of one nationality were willing to accept communists of other nations as fellow comrades. And white Americans came around to a compromise, whereby both White Americans and Non-White Americans would primarily be 'American' and meet in the middle as 'fellow countrymen'. Furthermore, there were British and French Imperialists who were willing to regard non-white subjects as Fellow British or Fellow Frenchmen.
In contrast, Jews are NOT willing to regard non-Jews as New Jews or Fellow Tribesmen. And yet, they want total control over other peoples. As brutal as imperialism often was, there was still a generosity of spirit in Christian Imperialists willing to regard the conquered as fellow Christians. Or in the cases of the British and French imperialists willing to accept loyal non-white subjects as 'British' or 'French'. Or in the Japanese acceptance of Koreans as 'Japanese' even though Koreans weren't give a choice in the matter. But Jewish Imperialists don't regard their subject peoples as Fellow Jews, and the only time they invoke the meme of 'fellow white people' is to berate white goyim about 'white privilege' when, if anything, it's the Jews who got the most power and privilege. Jews are totally stingy with their own identity. Israel is for Jews only, and Jewishness is a closed club. And yet, the Jewish-American Empire expects non-Jews to serve Jewish glory unconditionally and wholeheartedly, indeed like the faithful are supposed to serve God. On some level, Jews surely sense this is a tall order that reeks of hypocrisy as well as tribal supremacism.

And this is why Jews have promoted Globo-Homomania as the main proxy of Jewish Hegemonic Power. While only Jews can be Jews, there are homos in every nation and group, and those homos can serve as agents of Jewish Global Power. Jews know that homos in every nation feel some degree of alienation from their core culture and tend to be vain & narcissistic in their nihilistic self-aggrandizement, therefore willing to betray their own people, nation, and culture for their own 'pride' as neo-aristos. Jews also know that homos have special talents and tend to be more driven, making them more successful than on average, like the homo guy in NO WAY OUT who always has a facial expression like he sucked cock in the washroom a minute before. And homo collaborators around the world know there are rich rewards for sucking up to Jews. Consider Palestinian homos and trannies who work with Israel because Jews finance the celebration of globo-homo. Homos of all stripes are so diva-like that they will even sacrifice their own nation & people for catwalks at fashion shows and the attention of paparazzi.

Anyway, what can be said about the human nature that thirsts for the hunt? When American Indians were forbidden to hunt and turned into farmers, many of them no longer felt alive. In BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES, the men are glad to be back home but realize they are 'nobodies' back in civilian society. War was hellish but they were heroes and tough guys. But in the world of peace, they are clerks and salesmen selling sodapop to teenyboppers. It's like retired boxers often hanker for life in the ring because, as brutal as it was, it made them feel most alive as warriors who held nothing back to the cheers of the masses.
Even though Oliver Stone's trilogy of Vietnam films are considered to be Anti-War, the fact that he revisited the subject repeatedly suggests that he felt most alive in war. Besides, his SALVADOR is less anti-war than pro-revolution, a form of war against the existing order. And his works such as ANY GIVEN SUNDAY and ALEXANDER leave little doubt that he is as obsessed with the Hunter Nature of Man as Patton was. And it's telling that George Lucas, who considers himself a Political Liberal, made his mark on Movie History with the series STAR WARS, which is about nonstop warmongering in outer-space. And for all their rhetorical denunciations of 'fascism', all those Hollywood Jews now rake in most profits from movies that exult in mega-violence carried out by cool superheroes and supervillains, both of whom revel in what could easily be characterized as 'fascist tropes'. And for all the association of blacks with 'social justice', the dominant black expression is Rap Music that is all about the thug-hunter and neo-jungle-warrior obsessed with guns, fighting, murdering, and raping. And even though Jews tend to loathe traditional military culture of America, they sure love to sign up for the Israeli Military and gun down Palestinians. Jews also denounce the Gun Culture of America but have no problems with gun-ownership in Israel because it means the Jewish majority population are armed against Palestinians.

Serving in the US military is for White Goy Suckers who aren't allowed to fight in the name of European-American Identity. Jews, such as David Brooks' son, join the ISRAELI Military, and they explicitly serve Jewish Identity & Interests. No problem with Jewish militarism and Jewish gun ownership.

Just because the hunt is over doesn't mean that the hunter-instinct is gone and done with. Just because the war is over doesn't meant that the warrior-instinct is over. Granted, there is no single human nature. Human nature is both individual and social. It is both aggressive and defensive. It is both self-interested and selfless. Every man can be greedy and generous. Some people have more of a certain nature than another, but few people are entirely one thing or another, which would be pathological. Some people are clearly more greedy than generous, while others are the reverse, but even greedy people can be remarkably generous, and even generous people can be overcome with greed.
Dogs have been bred to be far less aggressive than wolves, but wolf-nature is always there in the dog. Even the mildest dog can lurch into predatory mode and suddenly chase after rabbits. Cats and dogs may feel close to their masters/owners and appreciate the comfort of home, but they are also eager to go outdoors and run around in hunter-mode. Granted, as pets, they are allowed to act out their predatory instincts in ways that are acceptable to and approved by the human community. As such, we may think of them as 'good dogs', but they are still acting out their bloodthirsty wolf nature. Jews regard goyim as human dogs, and they've trained scum like Antifa to act out their hunter-instincts by going after 'nazis', which is just about any white person who says NO to cuckery to Jews. Even though the aggressive hunter-nature of Antifa dogs is being exploited by Jewish Power, they are too stupid to realize they've been led around on a leash and believe themselves to be devotees to the higher cause of justice. Antifa is essentially a sports club for weaklings like Washington D.C. is Hollywood for ugly people. The kind of people who join Antifa could never cut it as alpha males in athletics or get the best girls. So, they cover their faces and pretend to be tough guys at war with 'Nazis' when they aren't even smart enough to realize they're tools of the Establishment.

There seems to be a similarity between people characterized as warmongers and those who are called 'woke'; they could be called 'woke-mongers'. Both suffer from an addiction to the endless hunt, endless conflict, endless conquest. A warmonger hates peace even as he claims the next war is necessary for peace and order around the world. Even when wars end and their objectives have been met, warmongers must find new reasons to wage more wars, cold or hot. The military establishment seems to be full of them, the New Pattons who never say NO to prospects for new conflicts. It's their chance to go globo-hunting again around the world. Wars for them is an endless hunting season to bag new trophies. They are Game Theory Hunters. Granted, there are plenty of sane men in the military who understand the tragedy of war and regard war as an 'evil necessity' of the last resort. Still, many people who join the military tend to be the type with a penchant for aggression and destruction. Chickenhawks in civilian government can be even worse. At least military men feel pangs of conscience about needlessly expending the lives of their men.

But the hunter-instinct need not be restricted to use of lethal weaponry. Power manifests itself in myriad ways, and the Warmonger Mentality is alive and well in all fields. Just like there is no Final War for the warmonger who is always eager for more wars, there is no Final Progress for the Woke-mongers. They feel this obsessive need to find the New Evil and stamp it out. An extreme form of this was the Trotskyite Theory of the Permanent Revolution, whereupon there would be infinite new upheavals even after the triumph of communism. Mao Zedong unleashed the Cultural Revolution in 1966 on grounds that, without new campaigns and renewed vigilance, the reactionaries will regain power. But, such fanaticism often leads to a kind of cannibalism. After all, if all the bourgeoisie have been destroyed, whom should the new campaigns target? In communist nations, it often led to one bunch of communists accusing other bunch of communists of being the 'bourgeoisie'. Communists came to devour other communists, a bloodier replay of radicalism gone off the rail in the French Revolution. Worse, such blood-thirst fails to consider that, maybe just maybe, there is some value to the bourgeoisie in the development of modern economies, a fact that Karl Marx himself admitted in his observation that the industrial revolution was the product of the bourgeoisie. But then, fanaticism abhors complexity and ambiguity, insisting that history and the world be divided into Simple Good vs Simple Evil. Even Marx, for all his deep thinking, succumbed to the simplistic formulations of radicalism.

Some may argue that Woke-mongers or Wokesters are motivated more by ideology than by instinct, but this is doubtful. After all, if ideology premised on logic & principles matters most to Woke-mongers, why has 'progressive' thought been so malleable, illogical, contradictory, and childish especially since the end of the Cold War? It seems the new 'progressivism' is more about animal-like emotions of Outrage than cerebral understanding of reality and the world. The what and why of human events hardly matter to these Wokesters. And notice that they don't decide on their own as to the terms of their so-called progressivism. Rather, they are told what to be outraged about and then run after it like dogs after rabbits. The only 'agency' they have is in the tendency to be MORE outraged than the next person. So, if they are told that 'homophobia' is bad, they never question the validity of 'homophobia' as a concept but only go the extra mile to dig up another bone where others failed to. It's like the Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution never questioned Maoism itself. Instead, they only competed among themselves on who was more 'woke' on Maoism. It's so much like dog behavior. When made to chase after rabbits, they never ask why they should chase rabbits or why they shouldn't chase after other animals. They just compete among themselves to hunt down the most rabbits.

If there were a core logic or principles to current 'progressivism', it wouldn't be so easy to manipulate or alter. Indeed, old manifestations of progressivism did have some core logic or meaning to them. And the radical socialism of Marxism also had its core tenets. In contrast, current 'leftism', 'progressivism', or 'woke-ism' seems to have no rhyme or reason except What-the-Jews(and-their-Homo-Allies)-Want. So much of what goes by the name of 'leftism' has no relation to classic leftist principles or broadly defined goals. We are to believe that Wall-Street-funded-homos working for the Deep State to wage wars with the Pentagon against nations hated by super-rich Jews is about being 'woke'. The new 'leftism' is about Jewish-funded Antifa serving as the thug force of Wall Street and capitalist oligarchy to shut down peoples who dare voice opposition to globo-corporatism.

In a way, the instinct came to override ideology because we live in a post-literary and post-intellectual age. With the rise of Image Culture via Electronic-Idolatry, people's sense of the world are shaped more by celebrity, adulation, pageantry, and hype than by books, theories, and ideas. Specious is favored over the serious, the trivial
over the trenchant. Communists in the past had serious blind-spots, but they still knew what they stood for in terms of core ideology, and for sure, they were not about celebrating homo vanity backed by Wall Street and the Gaming Industry. Given their core principles, such was unthinkable. The same could be said of Christian Churches in a more serious and devout time. The very thought of desecrating churches with homo 'pride' flags would have been deemed sacrilegious, like the vandalizing of the Madonna statue in THE EXORCIST(though one could argue that William Friedkin's horror classic was really a desecration of Christianity under the guise of sanctimony). But beginning with the rise of youth-centrism and mania for pop culture(especially with TV in every room) in the late 50s, we ended up in a world where most people's idea of Good or Evil came to be determined by hysterics of fad and fashion. Without serious ideological or philosophical underpinning, the worldview of the majority is entirely at the whim of media-manipulators. Given the sign of the times, if THE EXORCIST were released today, people are likely to see the devil-possessed girl as 'woke' and 'empowered' like the many 'amazing' child trannies now promoted by the sick Jew-run media.

Another problem is that Jews went from ideology to identity. While identity was always a key factor among the Tribesmen, many Jews in the past never thought they would come to rule the US(esp as the sole superpower). As such, Jews thought they had a better chance at power, protection, and influence by championing certain universal ideas and principles. But as Israeli-Zionist Pride and the Holocaust came to define Jewishness, Jews came to favor identity over ideology. Also, as they grew in power and gain hegemony over the US, they began to think less in terms of "We-the-People against Wasp Privilege" than of "How do we Jews remain on top?" Granted, Jews continue to employ the Old Progressive Narrative of Non-Wasp Diversity united against the White Privilege of Wasps, and enough dummies still fall for the trick, but such has no resemblance to reality. Jews are no longer a bunch of Spartacuses leading the unwashed masses against Wasp Privilege. If anything, they are the 'New Wasps', the new ruling elites. Amusingly enough, the Wasp Elites have attached themselves to Jewish Power as total cucks like the Romneys and the Bushes. In the past, Jews were likely to side with the White Working Class(of all ethnic groups) against the Wasp elites, but today, they are more likely to work with cucky-wuck Wasp elites against the White Working/Middle Class who are demeaned as the 'deplorable' representatives of 'white supremacism'. (For one thing, white 'deplorables' are not 'white supremacist' in their thinking. Unfortunately if anything, too many of them are more likely to support the Jewish Supremacism of Zionists than think of their own people. Secondly, even if they were 'white supremacist', why should it matter when they have no power? Supremacism without power is like a palooka pretending to be the champion. Why should it bother anyone? Of course, what Jews really fear is not white-nationalism-as-the-latest-manifestation-of-white-supremacism but white nationalism as insistence on white national liberation from Jewish Supremacism that insists that white goyim serve as Janissary for the hegemony of World Jewry. What a strange world we live in when so many 'conservative' Christians practically worship Jews, the very people hellbent on desecrating Christianity with Homomania or Queertianity. Christian 'conservatives' are so reverential toward Jews that some are even coming around to waving the 'gay pride' flag as what conservatism and Christianity are all about.)

Because of vast demographic changes, the replacement of literary/ideological culture with an electronic/idolatrous culture, Jewish elites' refusal to admit their supremacist control of America(while pretending that the 'white privilege' of the 'deplorables' is the main threat to justice & peace), and general vulgarization of society, ours is a truly chaotic time in terms of reality vs perception. So much of what people think and 'know' is at odd with the truth and how things really are. But many seem not to mind, especially among the 'progressive' or 'social justice warrior' types because what they really after is not the truth and understanding but constant rushes of righteousness. They are all about feelings, with which they are satisfied in their convictions of right and wrong. (In the past, liberals were more likely to question the prevailing morality, the official dogma, or the social norm, whereas conservatives were more likely to accept it on habit or faith. In the present, conservatives are more likely to reflect on and resist what the Power commands as the Good. In a dominantly conservative order where most people stick with tradition, the liberals stand out as relative free thinkers who are willing to deviate from the established norm. But in a society where constant change has become the norm, the liberal-minded are likely to conform to the latest trends without thinking. As liberal pride is premised on enthusiasm for change, liberals face the danger of losing their critical faculty in their gushing adoration of the New. In contrast, the conservative, being less enthralled with the conceit of change as progress, is more likely to question the existing power and its agenda. In a way, liberal conformism in a liberal age is more dangerous than conservative conformism in a conservative age. While tradition can be foolish, it has the pedigree of deep history and experience over the ages. Thus, the core tenets of conservatism are often fundamentally sound. In contrast, liberalism's faith in change overlooks the fact that its truisms have yet to pass the test of time. So, if conservatives at least bet on what has been proven to work, liberals place their faith in new ideas in uncharted territories. Faith in experience is usually a better bet than faith in experimentation. Liberal experimentation is valuable ONLY IF done with caution as, after all, every new hypothesis in science or idea in technology is approached with caution, like wandering through a minefield. Furthermore, while one can be a true conservative in a ultra-conservative world, one cannot be a true liberal in an ultra-liberal world. If the essence of liberalism is critical thought, skepticism, and acceptance of controversy, such cannot survive in an ultra-liberal order where liberals are expected to forgo their individuality and critical acumen in favor of conformist commitment to the cause of change for change's sake. This is why Norman Mailer said freedom is truly endangered when even liberals give up freedom for dogma. If the great value of liberalism was the will to break out of the conservative shell in the name of freedom, what freedom is left when liberalism turns into a blind quasi-totalitarian commitment to change as decreed by Big Brother or Big Money?)
So, as long as the Social Justice Warmongering or NPI types are given something to feel outraged or angry about, they are content. It's like dogs are content as long as they are given something to bark at, something to chase after, something to bite and maul. Some on the militarist right are the same in their basic psychology. Men like John McCain and John Bolton don't really care about the What or the Why AS LONG AS they are given something to be outraged about, beat the drums of war, and flex their muscles as 'tough guys' or 'men of importance'.

If Jews were weak while the US were ruled by Arab-Americans, these cuck-dog white men would be barking for their Arab masters and beating the drums against Israel. While all people are capable of moral outrage and finding righteous emotional satisfaction, there are those who need to really understand what is going on and why. They want to feel righteous about WORTHY matters and causes in the Real World. They don't want to waste their passions on something as dumb and trashy as the Pussy March where a whole bunch of spoiled privileged brats played at being 'oppressed' because Monster Bitch Hillary, the favorite of the Deep State and War Department, failed to become president.
When the US was a more serious nation with men and women grounded in deeper creeds like Christianity or concerned with genuine intellectual ideas, they were less likely to be at the whims of fashion. Passion rooted in deep faiths or big ideas are less likely to bend to every new social trend that comes along. But religious roots have withered away. Cultural traditions and customs are almost non-existent. And the so-called End of History means that the Age of Ideas are over. All that is left for people to do is, "Don't Worry, Be Happy." But the so-called End of History didn't bring about the End of Human Nature that craves something to 'hunt' and something to feel excited over, be it politics or pop culture(though the two are increasingly difficult to tell apart). But without religion, roots, or deep ideas, what are people supposed to get all excited about? What great cause can they believe in? What noble value can they defend in a world defined by vapid consumerism? Well, the Jewish Power decided that the deracinated and 'devaluated' population can be manipulated by propaganda, pop culture, and advertising into moral outrages over just about anything. As most Americans have no Core Values or Essential Understanding of anything, their 'truth' is whatever happens to be hot at the moment. As unthinking dogs, their idea of Good or Bad is about turning their ears to the latest signals from central command and seeking the approval of like-minded drones. Since most of them are dogs and sheeple, few have the agency to decide what is Good or Bad on their own. They are like TVs with antennas that can pick up signals but cannot produce autonomous programs. The 'programs' are concocted and controlled by the mavens of mass media, entertainment, and state propaganda, and needless to say, the most important contingent of this power is Jewish and Homo.
The current Wokies are so stupid that they are utterly unawares of the contradictions of all the nonsense they spout. And this is true of Wokies in elite institutions as well as in lower ones. Elite institutions have plenty of people with intelligence, but high IQ is useless without emotional maturity and core virtues such as courage and integrity. Being emotional children, even high-IQ Wokies are easily swayed by the passion of the moment without questioning. They just love the FEEL of being swept along on the waves of righteous indignation and preening self-regard. Granted, righteousness can be as vexing as comforting. If one is outraged 24/7, he or she will have to pay an emotional toll, no matter how justified he or she may feel. Furthermore, self-righteousness can easily turn into a pissing contest of who is MORE righteous. Also, as righteousness is now so wedded to identity, white wokies must try ever so harder to be 'righteous' because whiteness is blamed for just about anything. But black wokies can become frustrated too. On the one hand, the official dogma says blacks are noblest and coolest... but the reality says blacks lag behind other groups in so many fields. How is it that intrinsically cooler and nobler blacks are less accomplished than other races in everything but sports and pop music? This discrepancy drives many blacks crazy. Also, black males are far more prized by pop culture than black women are, a reason as to why so many black women are 'angry'. Also, the so-called 'intersectionality' tends to lead to political gridlock than unity. After all, what happens to an intersection when cars come from all directions? The traffic drastically slows down. There could even be crashes. Indeed, 'intersectionality' has to be one of the dumbest ideas in politics as the identities, values, and leanings of the various ethnic, cultural, and sexual groups have little or nothing in common. PC says we must respect Islam and Globo-Homo both. It says we must be feminist but also support tranny men beating women in sports. It says Jews and Muslims are united against Evil Whitey, but in fact, Jews are eager as ever to make Evil Whitey destroy Muslim lands while whispering into Muslim ears that Jews and Muslims must work together to destroy white Europe and white America. We are told that race is just a myth, a social construct, but it is the so-called Liberal Media that disseminate so much of 'racist' or 'progracist' propaganda whereby the various races have been pigeonholed into familiar stereotypes. Consider the black-male-white-female pairing in popular culture. It's not about colorblindness but based on the perception/proposition that black males, as the top males, are most deserving of white women as the most desirable females.
Also, PC's clampdown on free/honest speech has less to do with attempts to eradicate 'racism' and supremacism than to conceal them as practiced by the globalist elites. After all, even honest 'bigoted' speech is more revealing of the truth and in waking people up to reality. For example, suppose someone in the Deep State said, "We admire Jews as the high-IQ superior race, and we will serve Zionist power to bash and destroy all those dumb worthless 'Muzzie' Arabs, a bunch of subhuman camel jockeys." That would be nasty stuff, but it would expose what US foreign policy is really about. And then, the American people might wake up and stop supporting Zionist hegemonism around the world. In order for the Jewish-controlled Deep State to make the American foreign policy palatable, it pretends that the US respects Muslims and that American power is a fair arbiter to all sides in the Middle East and North Africa. Of course, that is a fiction. US foreign policy IS Jewish-Zionist-supremacist, but that fact has to be covered up to justify Wars for Israel against Muslims. And in order to mask the Jewish Supremacist nature of supporting Israel over Palestinians, the US must pretend that pro-Israeli policies are not about Jewish supremacism but about protecting poor poor Jews from 'another holocaust' at the hands of 'Anti-Semites'.
Likewise, the anti-black policy of urban gentrification is most effective when anti-black rhetoric is suppressed. To DO the anti-black thing, one must suppress anti-black speech lest people realize what is REALLY happening. For instance, suppose gentrifiers spoke HONESTLY about their agenda. They'd say something like, "Too many blacks act like crazy niggers. They commit too much crime and mess up entire neighborhoods. Blacks are the biggest destroyers of cities. Just look at Detroit or Baltimore or any place where blacks gained the upperhand. To make urban living amenable to affluent whites, Jews, and Asians, there must be ways to drive urban blacks out of many parts of the city. And there must be ways to lock up many black males because, out in the streets, they have a tendency to act like louts and thugs." That would be honest speech, but it would also give the game away. White/Jewish gentrifiers would no longer be able to conceal their true agenda, and blacks would wake up and realize what is really being done to them. So, in order to gentrify and drive the problematic blacks out — the Black Nakba or Blakba — , the Power must suppress free/honest speech that spills the beans and gives the game away. Speak BS and Carry out the Plan, a more effective way than 'Speak Softly and Carry a Big Stick'.

Anyway, the so-called Social Justice Warriors might as well be called Social Justice Warmongers. Just like warmongers feel stifled and constricted in peace time and crave more wars to feel truly alive, social-justice-warmongers can never feel at ease because they feel alive only when AT WAR against some evil. As most Social Justice Warmongers are pretty dumb, stupid, or insipid, they are incapable of assessing what is really wrong with the world. Thus, like dogs, they are vulnerable to manipulation by those who hold the whip-hand in media, academia, and deep state. Incapable of seeing with their own eyes or hearing with their own ears, they need to be told what to be outraged about, what to bark at, and what to bite in the ankle. Thus, they have far more in common with the likes of John Bolton and John McCain than they would ever realize. McCain, Bolton, and the Social Justice Warmongers crave the hunt, the fight, the crusade. But being feeble-minded, they have no way of surveying the world and seeing what is really wrong with it. Rather, they depend on their Masters to tell them what to growl about. And in both cases, the Masters are Jews. Jews order the likes of McCain and Bolton to wage Wars for Israel. "White dog, go attack Muslims and Russians." And Jews order Social Justice Warmongers to bark and bite at white identity and white pride. In a way, both sets of dogs are complementary in service to Jewish interests. After all, in order for Jews to make whites suppress their own identity & interests to serve Jewish Power, white identity must be disparaged and vilified. Thus, the likes of Bolton and McCain(and Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney) have been well-trained and groomed to never do anything that is in the interest of white people. By fanning anti-white rage among the Progs, Jews effectively castrate white identity. Then, without an identity and interests of their own, whites have no choice but to be dogs to another identity and its sets of interests, and of course, it is Jewish and Zionist. Yes, the world spins around the axis of Jewish supremacist neurosis, and white goy warmongers and Social Justice Warmongers are two sides of the same shekel.

Let's Remember that Adolf Hitler was an Immigration-Invasion Enthusiast in More Ways than One

When Globalists are confronted with nationalists who argue for autonomy, sovereignty, and security, they often invoke Nazism and 'racism' to insult, shame, and intimidate patriots into silence, moral defensiveness, and apologetics. For example, when Hungary and Poland(and several other Eastern Europeans nations) refused the offer of countless African and Arab migrant-marauders, they were accused of being like the Nazis. Ironically, Angela Merkel of Germany herself berated those nations for drudging up negative ideological attitudes of the Bad Ole Days. And of course, the Jewish-controlled globo-homo-shlomo World Media praised Merkel as the true 'leader of the free world'. You see, if you neglect the needs of your own nation, compromise the safety of your own people, and enforce policies that essentially nullify national sovereignty, you're the darling of the Globalist Elites. But if you dare to defend your own nation from invasion(cultural, demographic, or political), then you're reactionary(or just plain evil) and standing in the way of truth and progress. And you will even be compared with Hitler and the Nazis(as Jewish Power has a way of invoking Adolf and his henchmen at every opportunity).

Granted, the problem of nations like Germany(and Sweden, France, UK, and etc) isn't just a matter of bad cuck-collaborationist leaders but the dire effect of the combination of moral narcissism, ideological(and 'spiritual') earnestness, cultural conformism, feminism, Holocaustianity as new religion, Homomania as new cult, Afromania as new idolatry, and Jewish mental colonization of goyim. After all, if War Guilt is the reason for the demise of national consciousness in Germany, how does one account for similar(or even higher) levels of cuckery in nations that were either victims of or victors over Nazi Germany? Or were neutral. UK should be proud of its role in defeating Nazi Germany. Sweden and other Scandinavian nations were neutral or were occupied by Germany. But in some ways, UK and Sweden are even worse off than Germany in many respects.
Part of the reason is that the agenda of Holocaustianity has been to paint ALL white nations with WWII guilt. According to this logic, all Europeans were directly or indirectly guilty of the Shoah. If Germany was directly guilty, some nations were indirectly guilty for (1) having collaborated with Germany (2) done business with Germany (3) not having done enough to defeat Germany sooner than later — Jews think gentiles should be happy to sacrifice their own sons to save Jewish sons because... Jews are eager to sacrifice their own sons to save goy sons? LOL — (4) having harbored similar 'antisemitic' sentiments and biases as the Germans even if they ended up fighting the Nazis. As Holocaust memorials and catechisms spread from one European nation to another, every European nation was made to share in the guilt.
Furthermore, the Jewish takeover of the US, eventually to become the sole superpower after the Cold War, meant that Europe went from a political colony of Anglo-America to that of Jewish-America. At the very least, Europeans could openly criticize Anglo-America because so-called Wasps weren't seen as a holy people. They were respected, admired, feared, and even resented as a powerful people, but it was understood that Anglos in UK and US were fair game to honest criticism. But when Jews took over the US, it became difficult for Europeans to criticize the new masters because Holocaustianity elevated Jews to the state of holiness. Being anti-American when the US was ruled by Anglo-Americans was one thing, but it was a far more sensitive matter to voice opposition to a US ruled by Jews and their cuck-puppets like George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

But there were other factors as well as to why Europeans, especially in Western Europe, got more cucky-wucked. One had to do with a combination of moral narcissism, ideological earnestness(or purism), and cultural conformism. This was especially true in Northern Protestant nations that had developed a more thoroughgoing culture of conscience and goodwill. Thus, Northern Protestants came to take special pride in being GOOD. Of course, 'good' is a broad term and open to change and revision. Most people are not independent thinkers and rely on OTHERS to supply them with the terms of Goodness. In the post-religious age, many turned to Marxism or some such ideology for answers. But with the fall of communism and rise of Jewish supremacist power, the Good came to be defined mainly by Jews. Jews not only had the money, influence, and connections but were basked and shielded with the glow of Holocaustianity. Just by being Jewish, one could say anything in front of a European audience and be treated like the sage of the age, a modern day prophet(and even messiah). How else did a third-rate huckster like Barbara Specter get so far spreading her Jewish supremacist filth in Sweden?

Being more earnest and conformist, Northern Europeans of Protestant background took the Good more seriously. Being Good became the cornerstone of their pride, and so, they became slavishly loyal to whatever was presented to them as Good. Generally, people who tend to be earnest and conformist tend not to be independent thinkers or free spirits. They want to latch onto something deemed as good and holy. Incapable of thought or vision on their own, they need Others to supply the vision of the good. For most of European history since the Middle Ages, the vision of Good was supplied by Jesus and other Jews who'd laid the foundations of Christianity. In the post-Christian era, it was the vision of the atheist Jew Karl Marx. After the fall of communism, it was the vision of globo-homo Jews who presented themselves as the neo-christs of the Shoah who died for the sins of white goyim and deserve to be worshiped. Since Jews are holy, whatever they push must be holy too. So, if Jews say mass-immigration-invasion, Afromania, and Globo-Homomania are sacred, so many Good people just go along.
Now, one may argue that Europeans, being white folks, are not conformist but individualist, but it's all a matter of degrees. Europeans are less individualistic than Americans, and furthermore, Western freedom wasn't based on anarchy and chaos but on order and discipline, i.e. in order for intelligent or imaginative people to do their thing and make a difference, they needed the support of a well-run social system where most people were mindful of their place in the larger society and carried out their duties with sobriety and conscience. Thus, white freedom was never like black freedom. Black freedom is about humping and jumping and hollering and walloping and acting like jungle savages. It is freedom at a crude and low level, like that of apes. It is the freedom of groins and asses, which is why blacks everywhere like to celebrate by shaking their butts and bumping-and-grinding. In contrast, white freedom is about the heart and mind, and for it to thrive, the lower freedoms must be suppressed. Obviously, it'd be difficult to maintain a society of scientists, doctors, engineers, and the like if young people, instead of studying in school and obeying rules to mature into responsible adults, act like Negroes & chimpanzees and indulge in the freedom of jungle savagery. If you want the freedom to be a doctor, you need the discipline to make it through medical school. Paradoxically, higher freedoms require restraints upon lower freedoms. One needs less partying and more studying(conforming to the ideal of education) if one is to get a medical degree and be prized as a doctor. So, white freedom is built upon white order, discipline, and conformism(to the respected and acknowledged norms of excellence, propriety, and competence). But this conformist streak can also lead to an urge to be agreeable in the eyes of the Order and not make trouble. In the modern world defined by fads and fashions(and with loss of roots, customs, and traditions), the idea of the Good can change almost overnight. Whenever the elites change their attitudes on a whim, they could use the power of media and academia to spread the New Good into every corner of society. How else did something as crazy as Homomania and Tranny-lunacy spread so fast? There is also the power of celebrity and entertainment. Just associate the 'gay pride flag' with advertising, famous stars, and TV shows, and millions of morons will be nodding along. As goy elites suck up to Jewish elites, the process of mass control is pretty simple. Jews decide what is Good. Then, goy elites, as collaborators, comply and obey the Jews. Together, the Jewish and goy elites spread the New Good to the masses, so many of whom just follow along unthinkingly as most people are incapable of independent thought or critical inquiry.
Now, Jews know that it's better to control and rule a people through moral righteousness than through fear alone. Humans are emotionally closer to dogs than to cats. Cats are naturally disobedient and defiant. They understand fear but not obedience. In contrast, dogs not only understand fear but seek satisfaction in emotions of outrage. Dogs love to bark at everything and work as a pack to hunt and tear things apart. But they also crave the approval of the master. While a dog-owner can use fear alone to make a dog do things, it's far more effective to make the dogs do things with enthusiasm, as if their own emotions are invested in the task at hand. So, even if the dog is really being made to hunt for the master, it is made to feel that it's a partner in the adventure. Dogs naturally love to hunt, but they also naturally want to feel 'justified' and 'approved' by the alpha superior. So, when the dog hunts for the master, it is not only acting naturally as a predator but seeking absolution as a 'good dog'. Its pack instinct craves approval. Its self-worth is indistinguishable from group approval. When a cat hunts, it is only for itself(though some cats may bring their kills to their owners out of generosity). When a dog hunts, there is more at stake than mere hunger or want of play. It seeks approval and confirmation from the master of the pack. Thus, it is emotionally far more invested in the hunt. There is a crude sense of 'righteous' and 'outrage mob' mentality. The prey isn't merely for the killing but for killing with special gusto and enthusiasm. If Jews were to just order goyim to obey and follow orders, goyim would grow resentful, rather like sullen cats. But if Jews manipulate goy minds like a master toys with his dog's mind, the goyim can be made to feel that their obedient service to Jews is a matter of righteousness and moral outrage. Just like a dog cannot distinguish between its own will and its master's will, a Jew-controlled goy is made to believe that his 'moral outrage' and righteousness is the same as that of the Holy Jew. When a dog kills the prey and has it taken away by the master, the dog doesn't feel that it has been used and exploited. It doesn't feel that its kill has been stolen from it. Rather, it feels 'justified' and 'righteous' in having done something deemed GOOD by the master. It feels tremendous satisfaction in being a Good Dog. Its goodness before the master becomes the main reward. So, even though it's been used, it feels self-worth and self-satisfaction in having been a Good dog that did something to please the master who represents not only power but the Team Spirit. The Jew-Goy relationship is much the same. The Good Goy has been trained to believe that the greatest satisfaction in life is to be Good in the eyes of the Holy Superior. Since Jews, Negroes, and Homos have been elevated to god-status, the Good White Goy feels that the highest good is doing whatever to appease and please Jews, blacks, & homos and doing whatever to bark & bite at whatever/whomever is deemed the enemy of the Three Holies of Jews, Negroes, and Homos. (The doglike nature of man can be seen in Christianity. In the end, the power of Christianity rests not in Jesus having been a decent fellow but the Perfect Man, the Son of God. His Godliness ensures the sanctity of His Goodness. In the film MERRY CHRISTMAS MR. LAWRENCE, why does it matter so much that Jack Celliers[played by David Bowie] is the agent of Goodness and nobility? Because he is seen as the superior man. When a perceived inferior man is good, he is just seen as weak, wussy, or pathetic. It is only when a perceived superior chooses the good that the good become The Good, something worthy of admiration and respect. The power of Christianity rests on the faith that the Great has chosen the Good. The Son of God chose to be Good and died for the sins of man. Just like a lowly serf was more likely to be moved by a friendly gesture by a prince than by another lowly serf, mankind is most impressed when the perceived superior descends to his level. But why would the godly superior come down to ground? Because he's not just about naked power but about the Good. In Nagisa Oshima's film, Jack Celliers is perceived by Captain Yonoi as a superior man — indeed, Celliers has been highly regarded from by peers from childhood — , but Celliers takes the side of the suffering victims, and it is that fact that affects Yonoi's heart. In the end, it wasn't goodness per se but goodness-chosen-by-the-god-man that moved Yonoi to the point where he came to regard mankind differently.)

Because Jews used the media, academia, and state power to elevate themselves to neo-god status, as if they're a bunch of neo-christs who died for the sins of White Christian Europe, white peoples on both sides of the Atlantic have come to see Jews as god-men, the Holy Men, the saint-christ-messiahs. And Jews elevated Homos and Negroes to godly level as well.
But of course, reality suggests otherwise. So many Jews are lowlife weasels, gangsters, and hucksters. So many blacks are thugs, brutes, and lunatics. And so many homos and trannies are decadents, degenerates, freaks, sickos, and nihilists. If people come to regard reality as reality, they'd see the Real Jew, the Real Negro, and Real Homo. But because most people rely on mass media, mass entertainment, and mass education for their vision of the world, their minds are molded by endless celebrations and/or commemorations of Holocaust, Homomania, Magic Negro Cult(via MLK & Mandela worship and reverence of TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD as the Negro-Testament better than the New Testament), and etc. And there is cult worship of the Statue of Liberty as an icon of Immigration-Sanctimony while forgetting the fact that mass-immigrations have led to imperialism and even wholesale genocides around the world.
Ironically, the Three Peoples worshiped most by the world as quasi-holy are the most problematic. For all the Magic Negro myth, what are blacks mainly known for culturally, politically, and socially? Culturally, blackness has degenerated into Rap thuggery and 'twerking'. Politically, blacks are the most corrupt and incompetent around the world, both in Africa and America. Socially, they are notorious for high levels of crime and dysfunctions. But we are supposed to worship blacks as sacred victims and redeemers. But one wonders if all this pro-Negro sympathy owes more to pity for their historical victimhood or to awe of their current domination of sports & pop music, especially as globo-technology has spread Rap and black sports all over the world. Consider how even immigrants from nations without blacks know so much about black rappers and basketball players. As for black Africans headed to Europe, they've heard of white female sex tourists who come to the Dark Continent for jungle fever. And on their computers and smartphones, these black Africans no longer watch relatively tame stuff like BAYWATCH but Jewish-controlled pornography that tell the world that white women now belong to black men while white men are a bunch of cucks. Joe-Buckery has gone global. In MIDNIGHT COWBOY, Joe Buck has this idea that New York is filled with horny women who hanker for a Real Man from Texas. Tons of black Joe Bucks in Africa head for Europe in the belief that white women can't get no satisfaction from wussy white men and are eager for Negro men. BBC and British advertising now regularly feature the pairing of black man and white woman as the New Ideal, and this is becoming a feature of Hollywood movies as well. Needless to say, both BBC and Hollywood are run by globalist Jews. The way things are going, the future of France and UK will be Midnight Mandingo.

Anyway, on the subject of mass-migration and mass-immigration, nothing could be further from the truth than the notion that Hitler and the Nazis were all about closed borders and restrictions to immigration. Hitler's favorite nation was Great Britain, the center of the world empire that was created by endless adventure, invasions, conquests, and colonization of other lands. The British Empire was one of the biggest destroyers of walls. The British invaded India and huge swaths of Africa. They conquered Australia. They battered down Chinese walls and forced China to open to Western Imperialist powers. And UK, along with US, forced Japan to open up to the world. Hitler never denounced this aspect of British Imperialism. If anything, he admired the British for using force of arms, trade, and diplomacy to take control of one-fourth of the world. Rather than denouncing British power of movement and military might, Hitler praised the British and sought an alliance with them as the migratory masters of the world. (Of course, Jews also wanted partnership with the British as co-masters of the world. Jews feared that the Anglos might abandon the Jews and go with their racial brethren, the Germans, but the Anglos decided to side with the Jews as the Other Master Race. If Jewish Supremacists and Nazi Germans had one thing in common, it was admiration for Anglo/American conquest and domination of the world. Germans wanted partnership with Anglos, and Jews wanted marriage with the Anglos and Anglo-Americans. As Jews were more adept at infiltrating other peoples, they got closer to Anglo ears. Also, Jews controlled media in UK and US, giving them a huge advantage over Germans. Finally, the fact that a German nation existed made the British feel more of a threat from the Germans. In contrast, as powerful as the Jews were, they were without a nation of their own, and the Brits thought the Jews would never gain dominance in Anglo nations or the US. They thought wrong as Jewish Supremacism eventually took control of US, UK, and Canada; and today, World Politics is mainly about US, UK, and puppet EU doing the bidding of Jews as the Master Race.) Just as Jews admired the creation of new Anglo-made nations by invasion, imperialism, conquest, wars, and mass-immigration, Germans like Hitler were similarly impressed. Neither Jewish Supremacists nor Nazi Germans were bothered in the least by the fact that imperialism and mass-immigration of Anglos and other white immigrants led to the 'genocide' of the native population in both North America and South America. They cheered for the victors, the winners, the creators of New Nations. Jews didn't weep for dead American Indians. If anything, they joined in the White Conquest of the Americas. Super-rich Jews financed much of Western Imperialism. And lower Jews served as merchants, selling guns and ammos to the White Man to kill the Red Man with. Jews fully took part in the 'genocide' of the American Indians. And many German immigrants also joined with Anglos in the conquest of America and the destruction of the American Indian tribes. When Hitler was a young boy, he loved reading Western novels by Karl May. And he loved American Western movies produced by Hollywood Jews. Jews and Germans were agreed that Anglo-American conquest of the West was awesome. Just like Jews went on and on about how America is great as a Nation of Immigrants, Hitler felt likewise. He admired how Anglo and other white settlers, adventurers, and immigrants came to the New World, vanquished the indigenous folks, and created an imperial-nation, a nation that was an empire unto itself with vast spaces and resources.

So, contrary to current PC, Hitler was pro-immigrationist when it came to American History. He agreed with Jews that the native savages had to be swept aside to make way for the adventurers, pioneers, settlers, and vast numbers of immigrants. Even though Jews were more nervous about white racial thinking, they favored white nations in their doings and dealings. After all, one of the reasons why European Jews chose the US over other nations as the favored immigration-destination was because it was dominantly white(unlike Latin American nations that were mostly disdained by Jews). If we judge Jews by what they've done as oppose to what they've said, they favored whiteness uber alles. If Otto von Bismarck was essentially a German nationalist whose vision was to create a unified Germany that was sufficiently powerful and independent, Hitler's vision was infinitely more far-reaching. Like Kaiser Wilhelm before him, he thought in global terms. No, he didn't want to conquer the whole world, but he wanted Germany to have an empire of its own and be allied with the British Empire that had control of over a quarter of the world. If possible, Hitler wanted an alliance with Anglo-Americans as well, but he regarded this as unlikely as Jewish power was far more extensive in the US and because he thought the black problem would lead to America's ruination. Hitler was wrong about lots of things, but he was right about some things, namely about the dangers posed to the West by Jews and blacks as Jews could outwit whites and as blacks could out-muscle whites. In a way, it's understandable why Anglos and Anglo-Americans sided with Jews. There was something self-deceptive about the Anglo character. Though world conquerors and imperialists, they were vain enough to convince themselves that their power was all about spreading enlightenment, reason, goodness, progress, freedom, and justice. They committed their share of horrors but wanted to hog the honors. The problem with the Germans, somewhat in WWI but especially in WWII, was they were too blunt about the nature of the game, i.e. it's all about the Power. It's like gangsters want to come across as respectable, like Don Vito Corleone of THE GODFATHER. They don't want to be associated with someone like Tommy(Joe Pesci) in GOODFELLAS even though they are all crooks and killers. Hitler was too eager and excitable, too much like Tommy, and the Anglos with their preening vanity or righteous demeanor, couldn't stomach his ideology and movement. It was too 'pornographic' in terms of power. They wanted to do imperialism while pretending to have loftier aims. Jews understood Anglo psychology much better and knew which buttons to press to flatter the Anglos into thinking they were for 'justice' and 'peace' than war and domination. We see this with current US and UK. They are still playing the imperialist game but with nonstop rhetorical BS about how they're all about 'liberal values', 'peace', and 'democracy'. They now play the game under the auspices of Jewish supremacism, but the self-deception and duplicity remain the same. Of course, it's worse now than in the past because Jewish Power that pulls the strings remain hidden even if out in the open. Jews are especially dishonest as they are the most powerful people on Earth with supremacist aims but in pathological denial of their power & influence and never tiring of accusing OTHERS of supremacism. Jews wiped Palestine off the map but accuse Palestinians of plotting to wipe Israel off the map. Israel has lots of illegal nukes, but it accuses Iran of being a rogue nuclear state even though Iran has no nukes. Jews use their power to force all Americans to support Zionist imperialism and Judeo-centric supremacism, but Jews accuse whites who are skeptical of Jewish Power of 'white supremacism'. Jews are a very vile people. Though Jews would have us believe that Nazi Germans and Jewish globalists are polar opposites, they actually have more in common. They ended up as super-enemies in the 20th century not so much as opposites but as neck-and-neck competitors. It's like two boxers pummel each other in the ring because they have so much in common. They both want to beat the other feller and win the championship belt. Nazi Germany vs Jewish Empire was not about supremacism vs egalitarianism but about German supremacism vs Jewish supremacism. The difference is that Jews, like Anglos and Anglo-Americans, mastered the art of deceit by masking their supremacism with lofty talk of 'universal values'.

There's all this dumb talk of how Trump's anti-immigration stance is like Hitlerism. We are told that the 'plight' of migrants and illegal immigrants are like that of Jews during World War II. According to such logic, national walls = Nazism. But nothing could be further from the truth. During World War II, Jews were safest in nations with strong walls against Nazi Germany. After all, French Jews were endangered AFTER Germany breached French walls and conquered France. Any European nation that maintained its walls or barriers against German aggression was safe not only for its citizens but for Jews. The Nazi War Machine was a wall-smasher. Even though many Poles loathed Jews, the mass killing of Polish Jews happened AFTER Germany broke through Polish walls and defenses. National walls against Nazi aggression was the ONLY thing keeping many Jews safe and alive in Europe.

But the truest sign that Hitler was an immigration-enthusiast was his Lebensraum plan in the East. Long before he took power, he dreamed of conquering vast areas of Russia and opening them up for German immigrants who'd take the land from the Slavs and build farmlands for the Fatherland. Hitler eyed Russia much like white pioneers, settlers, and immigrants eyed the Americas. It was for the taking. Just like European and Jewish immigrants moved westward, displaced the American Indians, and built a new order, Nazi victory over Russia would have ensured that millions of German immigrant-invaders would settle in the East. Slavs would have been replaced by the Germans, much like how the Palestinians came to be replaced by the Zionists looking for their own lebensraum, or Levinsraum.
Granted, the Nazi plan was many times crazier than the American or Australian plan. For one thing, the New World and the world down under were sparsely populated(relatively speaking) with savages, whereas Russia had lots of people with rich culture and history. So, if the conquest of America and Australia was both inevitable and even necessary(to make way for progress), the destruction of Russia would have been a crime much like the Mongol destruction of Persia. To be sure, had the Germans prevailed in the East, they wouldn't only have committed great evils but built great cities and an impressive new order as part of a great German Empire. Unlike Mongols or Vikings who knew how to destroy and pillage but not build, the modern Germans would have been great builders as well as great destroyers, much like the Roman Empire. Still, German victory and mass-immigration into Russia would have been one big tragic hell for the Slavs and a great moral stain on German history.

Anyway, don't let anyone fool you that Hitler was about anti-immigration. He admired the immigration-invasions of the Anglo-empire, and he planned to create his own version of European Union by destroying borders among nations(much like Napoleon had once done), and he had a super-plan of Nazi Manifest Destiny into Russia whereby the German 'Cowboys' would expel, enslave, and/or exterminate the Russian 'Indians'. His lebensraum plan was deeply immigration-invasionist.