What if the Terms of Globalism could be determined by the National Folks than by the Greedy Elites? — Do Winged Monkeys favor Winged Monkeys of Other Tribes or Grounded Monkeys of their own Tribe? — Nationalism as Goldilocks Rule of Soundest Way of Governance and Consensus

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-mitt-romney-supports-the-status-quo-but-for-everyone-else-its-infuriating

In Tucker Carlson's monologue, he mentions Mitt Romney and his role at Bane Financial. Romney's job was to maximize the profits for the upper echelon by making the bottom fall out for the masses of lower-level workers. Globalism comes with a price. It has its sacrificial lambs. It's not win-win for everyone. Given the costs of globalism, why do the elites promote it? Don't they fear losing out? No, they don't. Why would they harbor such fears when it is THEY THEMSELVES who get to call the shots on how globalism shall transform and remake the world? They are obviously going to rig the project so that THEY get the lion's share of the globo-meat while everyone else gets bones and scraps ground into worthless sausage. So, when the globo-cow is slaughtered, the prime rib and filet mignon go to the likes of Romney and the bigger sharks whom he serves. They don't pay the costs of globalism. If anything, they reap the biggest rewards of globalism while everyone from middle class to below not only get less but bear most of the costs.

Now, would people like Romney support globalism if WE ORDINARY FOLKS got to rig the program in such a way that people like us reap most of the rewards while people like Romney have to bear most of the cost? Of course not.
Now, in a hypothetical world of noble-minded people, those with power & privilege would think in terms of the Common Good and arrange things so that the sacrifices are shared by all sectors of society(and rewards are shared likewise too). But the sort of people who rise to the top are generally not the most ethical and morally inspired. Things are even worse because the most powerful people, the Jewish elites, tend to see the goy masses as the potential enemy than fellow brethren.
But even white elites are also useless in a deracinated world that denigrates nationalism. Nationalism applies pressure on the elites to see fellow countrymen as national brethren. This is even truer if nationalism is combined with race-ism. There was an especially strong bond between white elites and white masses in past America & past Europe because both the elites and the masses were of the same race(and even ethnicity). Still, even as Americanism dropped race-ism, there was still nationalism to maintain the semblance of unity of American elites with American masses. But globalism did away with nationalism as well, and that means that the elites, as globo-homo 'citizens of the world', feel no special bond, affinity, or sense of obligation to the American People.
And history and heritage no longer matter. Who cares if your people have relatively deeper roots in America? Globalism says your kind is no more American than the latest immigrant-invaders who just got off the boat or plane. Indeed, the globo-homo elites even idealize people who haven't even left their own nations(for America) as More-American-than-American. So, if there are millions of Muslims, Africans, Asians, and Meso-Americans who dream of coming to the US, they are more deserving of the attention(and adoration) from the globo-homo elites than already-existing Americans are. Indeed, having roots in America makes you 'less American' according to the globo-homo formula. Especially if you're white, having historical roots in America means your blood is tainted with 'racism' and 'white supremacism'. So, your roots are not a point of pride but shame and guilt. So, your kind is even less deserving of status as American citizens than the newcomers who come 'guilt-free' as blank-slate Americans on whom the globo-homo script can be inscribed(and enshrined). (And yet, the call for the World to come to the US implies a supremacist mindset that the America is better than the rest of the world. Why else would globalists tell non-whites in Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Middle East to drop whatever they're doing and permanently depart from their own homelands, cultures, and peoples to become 'Americans' and start all over in the New World? It's a strange contradiction. On the one hand, the history of America is said to be evil and ugly. And yet, for some reason, all that evil and ugliness created such a great and wonderful nation[that is superior to all] that peoples all over the world should reject their own nations, peoples, and cultures to come to America to become New Americans.) Of course, historical guilt is dumped only on white goyim -- never mind that Jewish immigrants also took part in slave trade, benefited from 'white privilege', and participated in the 'genocide' of the Indians. Blacks and American Indians are allowed to feel moral pride on the basis of their roots in American History. But even that does little to protect them from endless waves of immigration-invasion. Blacks with American roots are not favored over new African immigrants whose ancestors had captured and sold blacks into bondage in the era of the Atlantic Slave Trade. And the Indians have NO SAY in whether further immigration-invasion is a good thing. Even as PC pretends to care about indigenous peoples and cultures, it totally ignores the fact that mass-immigration and ensuing Diversity did much to wipe out the indigenous peoples and cultures.
At this point in history, most Jewish-Americans have considerable roots in America that goes back at least 100 yrs or more. They too have become Historical-Americans, but the cultist nostalgia about Ellis Island forever tags Jews as 'Immigrant-Americans', indeed as if they 'spiritually' get off the boat every year as dreamy-eyed newcomers. Jews act as if fresh immigrant-invaders keeping alive the Jewish Dream of Immigration. (It's similar to how every new generation of Jews get to 'larp' as the eternal race of Holocaust Survivors.) Given the fact of established Jewish History in America, one would think that Jews would identify more with Historic America than with America Reinvented. But the truth is, during all their time in America, most Jews never connected with White Christian America. Jews learned the language, ate the foods, appreciated the arts, and traded with goyim, BUT they never bonded with goyim as fellow brethren. When Christians say 'Judeo-Christian', it is in the hope that Jews will consider Christians as fellow countrymen. When Jews say 'Judeo-Christian', it is to dupe naive white Christians into believing that "Israel is America's greatest ally" when, if anything, Jews themselves do not and will never regard white Christians as fellow brethren.

In the end, we must ask WHO gets to decide the terms of the New Policy or New Order? While, theoretically speaking, those who get to decide may be noble-minded, generous, & even self-sacrificing and mindful of the common good than the matter of "What's in it for me?", the chances are that those placed in positions to decide who-gets-what will favor themselves, their friends and relatives, and their social circles than anyone else.
Take any company that must restructure. Who gets to decide? The masses of low-level workers? No, those at the top get to decide. And invariably, the decisions favor the top executives and biggest shareholders than the masses of laborers and the little guys. Before anyone at the top loses his gig(often with super-lavish golden parachutes), thousands of workers(and their benefits and pensions) are sacrificed first. Globalism is like a sinking ship where the captain and upper crew are either the first ones to get on lifeboats or the last ones to go down with the ship. It's like DOWNFALL, the film about the last days of Hitler's regime. Hitler and his inner circle were the last to go down. To the very end, they were partying and dancing while millions of Germans had already perished or been raped.
Nassim Nicholas Taleb talks about the elites not having 'skin in the game', but even those with skin in the game get bled or burnt last. By the time they pay the price, the little guys have been wiped out already(and far more brutally).



Hypothetically, how would the elites react IF populists were to gain control of globalism and rig the terms to serve their own mass interests at the expense of the elites? Suppose the populists decide to replace the current elites with new elites from a global pool. Replace oligarchs like Adelson and Koch Brothers with more civic-minded business leaders. And replace the crooks and goons of the current Deep State with noble-minded managerial class from other nations. Furthermore, the crooks and goons are made to face the music and sent to prison or executed. The result might be a fairer and sounder nation ruled and governed by elites with some sense of decency. Such globalism might actually have mass-populist support. Of course, the current elites will do everything to oppose it. The reason why the current elites support globalism is they totally get to call the shots in how the game is played and who wins. Why would people like Tim Cook, Mark Zuckerberg, Sergei Brin, Koch Brothers, Warren Buffett, Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Jeff Bezos, Barack Obama, Michael Bloomberg, Paul Ryan, and etc. oppose globalism when THEIR KIND gets to write the rule-book of who gets to hold the most cards and reap the most rewards?

Suppose there is a pantry with lots of donuts, cookies, and candies in a school with a 100 kids. Suppose 5 kids are put in charge of the pantry, and they get to decide who gets what. They naturally favor themselves and their closest friends while leaving only crumbs and stale bread for the other kids. Would the 5 kid and their closest inner circle complain about the arrangement? They might if they're ethical, but most people aren't. And the kind of people who shoot for the top are animated by something more than intelligence and talent. They have insatiable greed, egotism, and status-obsession, like that terrible bitch Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos. Maybe Hillary Clinton had some ideals as a young woman, but by the time she entered politics, the ONLY thing that mattered was power, prestige, and privilege. And maybe Mitt Romney had a bit of ethical streak as a Mormon missionary, but he just turned into an egotistical and narcissistic pig. These vile elites dream of replacing existing Americans with New Americans, but they would think twice about the globalist project if it were about replacing the Existing Elites with New Elites. Alas, the hoi polloi don't get to choose the terms and overall direction of globalism. The elites do.

Elites have wings and fly around the world to make deals to fatten themselves ever more. Most people are grounded and lack the mercurial means of the globalists. Over time, those with wings identify more with others with wings than with their own kind. Imagine there are five species of monkeys. Suppose 5% of monkeys of each species begin to sprout wings and fly around. As time passes, will these winged monkeys identify more with winged monkeys of other species or with the wingless grounded monkeys of their own species? Ideally, the winged monkeys of one species should use their special ability to gain advantage for all the monkeys of the tribe. So, the winged monkeys of Tribe A will use their power of flight to serve the grounded monkeys of Tribe A, and winged monkeys of Tribe B will use their power of flight to serve the grounded monkeys of Tribe B. And indeed, winged Jewish monkeys think and feel this way. Though Jewish globo-elites have tremendous wing power, they will not collaborate with winged goy monkeys to harm or destroy grounded Jewish monkeys in Israel or elsewhere. Rich globalist Jews care even for lower-income Orthodox Jews. Liberal Globalist Jews care for Jewish nationalists in Israel, many of whom are not rich by any means.
Jews understand that there are two meanings of Justice. The legal definition that involves redress for individual wrongs or grievances. So, if Bob committed a wrong against Bill, then Justice demands that Bob offer recompense to Bill. There is this concept of justice in the Old Testament, especially in regard to intra-tribal matters. So, if a Jewish individual wrongs another, there must be compensation or punishment. Eye for an eye. But the Torah deals with a grander concept of justice, the idea that, on some basic level, a people must struggle and strive as one. While society cannot do everything for everyone, all members of the Tribe must be assured a meaningful place in society as fellow brethren(and sistren). This is why Moses tries to save every Jew from Egypt. He doesn't think in terms of rich Jews or poor Jews, privileged Jews or ordinary Jews, smart Jews or dumb Jews. At the basic level, ALL Jews deserve to be free and make it to the Promised Land as part of the Covenant. This grander concept of Justice doesn't mean freebies for lazy bums. All members must struggle and strive as individuals. But, they are still part of a racial and/or cultural community, and all members must make sure that everyone, even the lowest member, is assured the basic necessities that make for dignified existence.
Neo-Fascism and Humanism allow for such concept of justice, whereas globo-libertarianism says it must be about Me and never We. Jewish globalists push libertarian mindset onto goy elites but reject it for their own Tribe. Goy Libertarianism means goy elites should only think of themselves(as successful or lucky individuals) and throw their own racial brethren to the ditch. In contrast, Jewish commitment to Tribal Justice means that even the richest Jew should care about the lowest Jew. If there are suffering Jews in some part of the world, the rich and powerful Jews should try to do something for them.
Now, it's understandable why goy elites are drawn to individualism and globo-libertarianism. It means more profits for themselves since they never have to think about and be dragged down by the collective good of their own folks. White Libertarian elites have no qualms about raking in more profits by sacrificing the well-being of fellow whites. They are addicted to more money. Now, since Jewish elites also love More Money, shouldn't they throw the Jewish masses under the bus as well? Won't Jewish elites make even more money by thinking only of Me than of the We? This is less a problem with Jewish elites because there are far fewer Jews in the world than goyim. Russian elites, Chinese elites, Iranian elites, and etc. have many more people whose well-being they have to consider than Jewish elites do about Jewish masses. After all, the entire population of Jews around the world is less than 15 million. Also, as many Jews are higher-achieving than goyim, they are less in need of socio-economic support. 50% of Jews in the US make $100,000 or more. Finally, Jewish Power is such that they can make goyim foot the bill for Israel and Jewish interests.
At any rate, we saw what happens to a goy nation when its elites are goaded into Libertarian Me-than-We mode in the Russia of the 1990s. Jewish globalists persuaded drunken fools like Boris Yeltsin into just turning Russia into one big casino-economy. While tens of millions of Russians fell into destitution, the oligarchs were raking in all the dough. Of course, the Jewish oligarchs still cared for fellow Jews. Even as they plundered the Russian economy, they made sure to favor and take care of their tribal brethren. In contrast, Russian oligarchs were told to just shut their hearts and minds to the suffering Russian masses. Vladimir Putin reversed some of that but nearly not enough as Russia still remains an oligarchic gangster-state.

In the current state in most Advanced Nations, the winged elite monkeys mainly identify with the winged elite monkeys of other nations than with their own grounded monkey kind. Of course, the tribalist cries of the grounded monkeys are heard by the winged monkeys, but the fact is the latter would rather fly around with winged monkeys of other tribes than be bound to the 'loser' wingless monkeys of their own kind.
What is to be done to drown out the national cries of the grounded monkeys? This is where the Sea Monkeys enter the picture. Via endless migrations of grounded-monkeys across the seas all over the world, every monkey realm loses its original tribal integrity and becomes so diverse that the national cry(to winged monkeys above) gets drowned out by an increasingly confusing and contradictory babel of monkey shrieks. To be heard by winged monkeys, the grounded monkeys must cry ever louder and louder, but as their cries turn into a cacophony of clashing sounds, the diversified grounded monkeys end up screaming at one another than making intelligible sounds that reach the elite realm. So, while the diversified grounded monkeys bicker and scream at one another, the upper-realm of flying monkeys are feeling free and having the time of their lives. Of course, there is ONE special tree that is reserved for grounded Jewish monkeys only, and their cries are heard and addressed by all the winged monkeys.

Now, white globalist-libertarian elites will claim to be about the Greater We than about the Me. They will mask their radical Me-centric libertarianism with Proggy rhetoric about the Global We that transcends national borders. The gospel according to Bryan Caplan. These progo-globo elites will argue against nationalism as 'petty' and 'small'. They are oh-so-generous-and-compassionate that they care for ALL OF HUMANITY around the world. It's like globalist shill Emmanuel Macron derided 'nationalism' while redefining 'patriotism' as a form of globo-compassionate-imperialist consciousness. But such radical concept of the Mega-We fails on both the moral and pragmatic level.
On the moral level, it is often a cynical rationale by the globalist elites to neglect their obligations to their national folks. Their excuse for ignoring the well-being of the nation is that they are TOO BUSY caring about all the world. It's like a negligent parent who excuses his rotten behavior by insisting that he's too busy caring for ALL THE CHILDREN of the world when, in fact, he spends most of his time and money on self-indulgence. It's invocation of abstraction to justify extraction.
But EVEN IF globalists were genuinely idealistic in their dream of saving all the world, it just can't be done. Goldilocks rule sets in. History has shown, time and time again, that the nation-state is the most ideal unit for governance and collective action. Sure, nations need to trade with other nations and get along, but politics of shared purpose and governance work best within nation-states. After all, what's the point of having national leaders who neglect the national folks while busying themselves with the world affairs that either have little national relevance or do harm to the great majority of the national folk? What's the point of having national elites who tell you to your face that YOUR KIND should be replaced by New People and that your children must be brainwashed to embrace such racial suicide as the greatest good?
The recent Yellow Vest protests in France prove that globalism only misled the French elites to neglect the needs of their own French Folks while providing endless favors for Jewish globalists, Afro-Islamic invaders, and insane homo-narcissists. The radically grand concept of the Mega-We intrinsic to globalism has value only as greedy cynical ploy or Utopian fantasy. For people like the Koch Brothers and Tim Cook, globalism allows them to seek out the cheapest labor to maximize their profits. It also means accelerating brain-drain from non-white to white nations so that places like San Francisco and New York will have the nerd-drones to toil away in Tech companies. And for bleeding-heart types in Sweden and Norway who, in their childish naivete, really want to SAVE THE WORLD, the concept of Globo-Mega-We fills them with neo-messianic fervor. Of course, moral vanity is a kind of emotional greed, a tendency to hog righteousness as one's special virtue. In any case, it should be obvious by now that all of Sweden's endless efforts as a Moral Superpower has come to naught. It failed to improve any corner of Africa, and taking in all those African and Muslim 'refugees' has only turned many parts of Sweden into Third World ghettos. Also, isn't it arrogant and conceited for people of one nation to believe that they are so good, so wise, so caring, and so wonderful that their Love and Compassion can magically save the rest of humanity? If people of a nation really respect the peoples of other nations, why not let them figure things out and fix their own problems?

Meritocratic Fallacy — Choosing the Brightest doesn’t necessarily choose the Best — Problems of Symbolic Morality over Real Morality among the Powerful

In the most basic sense, meritocracy is the fairest and most effective way of selecting the most capable. This is most obvious in sports. The fastest runner is the fastest runner. Fastest swimmer is the fastest swimmer. The heaviest-lifter is the heaviest-lifter. We can’t argue with the results. But, we also know that the most capable are not necessarily the best in terms of morality and character. We know that many top athletes are scummy lowlifes. Who can forget the saga of OJ? Still, there is an idolatrous aspect to our nature that wants to believe that the most talented, most skilled, or most able is also the best in character. This is why most action movies have heroes who are not only the best-looking but the toughest. There is an idealized combination of attractiveness, ability, and morality. Good guys look good and are really the best. The handsome hero of SHANE really is the fastest gun in the West. Even so, we don’t expect too many athletes or some such to be paragons of morality and ethics. (But then, in our nihilistic age, many thug athletes and rappers are admired precisely because they spit on norms of morality and decency.)

But what about the elites in law, academia, government, enterprise, and media? Unlike athletes who merely need to prove their mettle in brute strength, people who succeed with their minds must gain knowledge, attend prestigious schools, and demonstrate worth on many levels of human relations. Because education is about the teaching of history, literature, science, ideas, and culture, we would like to believe that those who won by intellectual meritocracy are indeed the best kind of people. Not only the smartest but the wisest and most judicious. After all, they read so many books and gained so much knowledge. Unlike sports where brutal performance is all that counts, academics isn’t only about getting good grades but attaining higher and deeper understanding of many facets of truth. Or so we like to think.

Now, there are certain inbuilt virtues within meritocracy itself. Any serious student must have the simple virtues of effort, diligence, discipline, commitment, and stamina. Without such habits and attitudes, one cannot do well in school(unless one happens to be a super-genius). But simple virtues are just that. They are useful in the service of attaining certain goals, but they don’t reveal the higher truth or deeper meaning. After all, simple virtues can be in the service of an evil system. Dutiful and sober men can work hard to support the system. The men in the German film DAS BOOT are high in simple virtues. They are men of commitment and patriotism. But they ultimately serve an evil system.

Higher virtue arises from the question of "What kind of power am I serving?" The main character of LIVES OF OTHERS is a hard-worker and has simple virtues. But for most of his life, he never asked whether what he is doing is worth doing. He's been a ‘good soldier’ who followed orders and did his duties. He has simple virtues but is blind to the full moral implications of his work... until something alters the course of his life.

This is worth keeping in mind because there is no guarantee that those who study hard really care about anything but status, privilege, and power. They may read books, do homework, pass exams, go to good schools, get degrees, and get good jobs, BUT they may not have cared about truth, justice, or meaning. Education for them was just a means of gaining credentials to have the Good Life. They are like the vapid yuppies of AMERICAN PSYCHO(horrible movie).

Now, one may argue that the very process of education will change a person. Surely, no matter how cynical or materialistic one may be, wouldn't he be moved, inspired, and transformed by the great knowledge that he absorbs from literature, history, psychology, humanities, and maybe even some courses on philosophy?
True enough, but then, is there a lasting impact of education on most people? Consider Billy Boy Clinton and Hillary Clinton. Two high-IQ people who read many books and attended top colleges. Then, why are they so shallow, cynical, scummy, vile, stupid, trashy, hideous, insipid, and despicable? What did they really learn from all those books and all those courses? Despite their high intelligence and credentials, why are they so lacking in ethics, conscience, virtue, balance, wisdom, and basic sanity? We would like to believe that people so smart who went to top schools and learned from the best professors and read many more books than we did would be people of genuine worth. But it seems the ONLY thing they ever cared about was egotism, vanity, privilege, fortune, and fame.

So, what does that tell you? Meritocracy in academics may, more or less, choose the brightest but far from the best. In the 50s and 60s, there was the idea that the best-and-the-brightest were going to do wonderful things for America. But even as many such people were indeed the brightest, they were not the best(in character). Robert McNamara was the poster-child of the divergence of brightness and best-ness. And after the fiasco of the Vietnam War, he came to realize this and felt bad for the rest of his life. Well, at least he had a conscience about it. But look around today. So many people who have high IQ, went to best schools, got the credentials, and were chosen for high positions turn out to be total scum. And even after they destroy everything, there is no sign of conscience. Look at the intellectuals and officials around Billy Boy Clinton and George Dubious Bush. Look at the brightest bulbs around Obama who helped him destroy nations around the world.

Some of these people went to the best schools. They got credentials and prestige. And yet, they act like gangsters, sociopaths, degenerates, and monsters. And someone explain how any sane, sensible, and moral person can endorse something like Homomania? Indeed, consider that Jews have the highest IQ and got the most education. And yet they are the biggest proponents of degenerate Homomania that conflates homo fecal penetration and tranny pud-cutting with the ‘rainbow’ that is then associated with cookies, sodas, and churches. Did Jews gain so much knowledge to peddle that kind of nonsense?

It may be that some people of ability will gravitate toward power out of ideals. They hope to gain power to do what is good for the people and nation. But the system has a way of choosing the talented-and-vapid over the talented-and-valid.
After all, one thing that becomes apparent to anyone seeking power is that the path is compromised. Even as doors open to people of ability and talent, they must also kiss a lot of ass, compromise their principles, keep their mouths shut, spout platitudes, and learn to go along. Such are necessary in any social setting, but it either turns idealists into cynics or exiles. As cynics, they do gain power eventually but come to care for nothing but the power. As exiles from the corrupt system, they maintain their ideals or integrity but they gain no power.
Generally speaking, the system seeks talent-and-vanity than talent-and-integrity. Those with real integrity have a serious problem rising up the ladder of power because they must remain silent, tell lies, or dirty their hands. They must play the game and keep their mouths shut. The must accede to the 'omerta' not unlike in GOODFELLAS.

In contrast, those who are talented and mainly into power for vanity don’t care if they must make compromises and even embrace corruption. They just want to be among the Winners and Players. And this may account as to why so much of the Deep State has genuine deep talent but is so utterly shallow when it comes to ideals, ethics, scruples, and principles. The filtering effect of power tends to keep out those with integrity in favor of those who will say or do anything to gain power. So, we have a world of Samantha Powers, John Boltons, John Yoos, James Comeys, Donald Rumsfelds, Hillary Clintons, Dick Cheneys, Victoria Nulands, and other such scumbags who aren’t troubled in the least by all the mess they cause around the world. They just want to be with the Winners and play the game of power.

But actually it’s even worse than that. These lowlife scum and sleazebags are so full of themselves and think themselves noble, honorable, brilliant, and amazing. Those obsessed with privilege, status, and power tend to be narcissistic by nature. Also, they conflate meritocracy & credentials with morality & credence. Because they went to fancy schools and got fancy degrees and rubbed shoulders with 'respectable' peoples around the world, they think they are the best of the best. And because they often wield power above the law, they feel as if they’re imbued with divine powers of higher wisdom and understanding. So, while the rest of us should be judged by the law, they are above the law because they are so... special. Just like the hands of gods can’t be hampered by the laws of mortals, the power of the Deep State cannot be hamstrung by the banal laws of the hoi polloi, the ‘little people’. While such a view might be deemed as arrogant and corrupt, those in the Deep State believe it is their duty to be above the law because their role is SO VERY IMPORTANT. So, they tell themselves that they must bend and twist the law for a ‘higher loyalty’.
Also, there is the mostly compliant and complementary media that works with the Deep State. And there are think-tanks and the academia made up of pretty much the same kind of people, and they are all into "If you scratch my back, I will scratch your back." So, even though most people in the Deep State are really shallow, venal, and vile goons, there is a vast cottage industry to shower them with praises and prizes. Sometimes, it can be downright ridiculous, as when Obama awarded Joe Biden with the Medal of Freedom. Imagine that, the president giving the vice-president the award.
Perhaps, there might be more of a balance IF both parties were equally represented in the deeply entrenched institutions of Washington D.C., but the fact is the DC and the Deep State are now an almost entirely a one-party system where most people are into clone-think, worshiping the same icons and idols. Notice that Pompeo in the Senate questioning was asked about his views on ‘gay marriage’. Homomania is sacrosanct in all areas of the Deep State because the Jewish top dogs made it so. Because Homomania is considered sacred, it is easy for any sleazebag in the Deep State to signal that he too is part of the holy crowd. He needs only to wave the homo flag. Or spout off platitudes about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ or yammer something about how they are inspired by MLK and etc.

So, the system is rigged not only to favor the talented-and-unscrupulous but also to make the unscrupulous feel that they are moral paragons and agents on the side of angels. Without such manipulative psycho-mechanisms, members of the Deep State will just feel utter cynicism as gangsters, crooks, and liars. Such people cannot maintain morale for long.
So, the secret of the Deep State is to attract those without scruples but to make them feel that they are the most scrupulous. We see these traits in sleazebags like John Brennan and James Comey. Both are hollow men, empty suits when it comes to principles. They are pathological liars and crooks who will pull anything to serve the interest of the Deep State. BUT they sincerely believe themselves to be on the side of angels BECAUSE the system showers praise on those who stick with the Official Narrative and Sacred Cows of the Current Year.
People like Edward Snowden cannot go very far in the System because they have too much of a conscience. Comey may claim to have a ‘higher loyalty’, but it really means his loyalty is to the Deep State. In contrast, Snowden had a deeper loyalty to an idea of justice. He spilled the beans on the Deep State and, as such, paid a huge price. The system praises the Comeys and McCabes of the world while trying to destroy people like Julian Assange and Edward Snowden who see the need for transparency in the Deep State of the lone superpower that, since the Cold War, has grown ever more arrogant, aggressive, and demented.

It is the logic of power. Power wants those of ability who will serve the system loyally. Power wants technocrats and commissars than truth-seekers and idealists. But the Power also needs to maintain the morale(if not true morality) of its servants by making them feel that they are on the right side of history.
It was the same in communist nations. The system obviously wanted yes-men and sycophants who would never ask too many questions. But the goons also had to be convinced that they were the most virtuous because, without such conceit, they might just grow awfully cynical and operate only as gangsters. The system wants dogs that believe in the nobility of service to the master.

This isn’t easy to do because the Power(of whatever nation or ideology) is always corrupt, compromised, and dirty. It is very difficult to get close to power and keep one’s principles. It may be that idealists hope to gain power to do good, but by the time they’ve come close to power, they’ve become the dirty Power. Imagine a Broom that is to be used to clean up society. But to get to the Broom, one has to wade through all the filth. By the time one finally gets to the center to wield the broom, one is as dirty as the former holders of the broom. And there is the realization that the broom itself is so dirty that using it will only spread than clean the filth.
This is how the Boomer generation idealists all turned out. It’s a sad story really. Those who loathed Richard Nixon became worse than Nixon. And their main reason for going after Donald Trump, no saint himself, is because Trump, despite his own sleaziness and filth, poses a threat to the ways of the Deep State, for which Hillary was like the Queen Bee to protect and serve. To the Deep State drones, Trump is like a bear that messes up the Deep State honeycombs. Trump’s victory sent out a massive signal among the drones to bring back Hillary and kill Trump. So, he’s been stung from many sectors of the Deep State.

Because the Power is so corrupt and compromised, the most effective means by which it instills drones with a sense of righteousness and holiness is by promoting symbolic morality, which is so much easier than real morality. Symbolic morality is characterized by icons, idols, mantras, rites, and rituals.
It was always easier to be a symbolic Christian than a real Christian. A real Christian had to seriously regard the teachings of Jesus, examine one’s own failings, sincerely seek redemption, and seek personal salvation in the eyes of God. In contrast, a symbolic Christian merely needed to wear a Crucifix, hold a rosary, say a bunch of ‘Hail Mary’s, and attend certain services. Michael Corleone is no real Christian in THE GODFATHER, but he is a good symbolic Christian who donates generously to the Catholic Church and attends the ritual that makes him godfather to his sister’s child. Both the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church came to favor symbolic Christianity over real Christianity, which found new hope with Protestantism, which, however, also succumbed to new concoctions of rituals and symbolism... or just grew tired because how can spiritual movement define itself as a ‘protest’ forever when it’s become so deeply entrenched in the Order and the Power.

Anyway, symbolism means never having to say you’re sorry. So, never mind if you were one of the Teutonic Knights in Russia or Crusaders in the Holy Land. Never mind all the brutality and violence you carried out. Never mind all the un- or anti-Christian acts you’ve committed. As long as you stick to symbolic Christianity, you can tell yourself that you carried out the will of God. After all, your battle shield had a sign of the Cross. And before charging into battle, you knelt and held your sword like a Cross and prayed to God. You might have even sung a hymn with other warriors. And after sacking the city and raping women and killing children, you may have offered a prayer to God in a Church. Thus, by making the symbolic gestures, you can feel blessed and righteous in your violence. And you can conveniently forget that so much of what you did went against REAL CHRISTIAN teachings.
This is why symbolism is so appealing. Consider the studio executive in HAIL CAESAR! by the Coen Brothers.

In many ways, he acts like a gangster and henchman. He is ruthless, cunning, and not above using bribes and blackmail to keep people silent. He’s about making the system run smoothly as possible. And yet, he feels himself to be a good man. Why? He goes to Church and make confessions before a priest. Of course, it’s about trivial stuff like his failure to stop smoking, but the rituals makes him feel as a man of God.

The Deep State is secular but paves over its gangsterism, corruption, and venality with its own version of Symbolic Morality. Gee, the New and Improved FBI must be noble because its agents must make a pledge to the MLK statue. James Comey thinks himself a goody-good man because he compares himself to the attorney in TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD. And he must be a goody-good man because Obama, the historic black president, showered him with praise. It’s all symbolism. Never mind Obama the real guy is a sleazebag who shilled for Jews to bail out Wall Street and to destroy nations hated by Jews or Israel. He has magical aura because of the symbolism of being the ‘clean cut black guy’ and the ‘historic first black president’. So, never mind what he really is. Just fixate on what he symbolizes. He’s supposed to represent the fulfillment of the Dream that was cut short by the death of JFK, Malcolm X, RFK, and MLK. He’s supposed to be all those things, with a touch of Sidney Poitier-ness. In reality, what was Obama but a punk? As president, what was his idea of moral progress? Worship of homos and trannies. And what was his foreign policy? The destruction of nations at the behest of Judeo-Nazis.
We’ve heard the counterculture mythology many times that the Vietnam War and the Cold War could have been averted IF John F. Kennedy, MLK, and RFK had not been killed by the evil Deep State. How ironic that Obama, the fulfillment of the Dream, started a ‘new cold war’ with Russia, spread wars all over the Middle East, pulled off a coup in Ukraine, and became a compliant favorite of the Deep State. But never mind all that. Just focus on the symbolism.

The emptiness of symbolic morality can be seen in James Comey’s wife. She was a Hillary supporter and was so very angry over Hillary’s loss because she so badly wanted a ‘first woman president’. Again, it’s symbolic morality over real morality. Never mind what Hillary Clinton really did as Secretary of State. She acted like a gangster and did the bidding of the EOJ(the Empire of Judea) to destroy Libya and spread terror and war all over the Middle East. Millions of people had their lives destroyed as a result. Never mind her long history of corruption. Never mind her total lack of scruples. Never mind her arrogance, contempt, and vileness. The only thing that matters to Comey’s vapid, shallow, and disgusting wife is that Hillary would have been the ‘first woman president’. So, her symbolism trumps all other considerations.

This is how PC operates. It has no use for real morality or truth. Rather, it icon-izes or idolizes certain groups as magical, special, or deserving. So, if the military promotes a black woman to the rank of general, that must be good because of its symbolism. Never mind if she really deserved the title or if she, along with everyone else, is being used to fight immoral Wars for Israel. Or consider how we were supposed to praise Trump's decision to lob missiles into Syria in 2017 because a female naval officer was involved in the operation. PC symbolic morality. A feminist soldier pushed a button, so it must have been a blessed act.

Or, never mind how corrupt and sick the Deep State is. Hey, it appointed some holy homo to some important position. It is a game played by both sides. So, the vile GOP goes for the symbolic morality of being the best friend of Israel. Since Jews are supposedly the Holy Holocaust People and Israel is the Holy Land promised to Jews, the GOP is supposedly righteous and moral whenever it is associated with the symbolism of Jewishness. When morality shifts from a matter of personal responsibility and individual conscience to rites and rituals of symbolic signaling, society becomes as corrupt as when the Catholic Church was selling ‘indulgences’. Once sin was altered from a reality to a ‘symbol’, it could be bought and sold, like commodities in a stock market. (It is all the more dangerous today because the most powerful group in the US, the Jews, cannot be touched. In contrast, while past Wasp elites held much pride and prestige, they were not seen as holy, and therefore, it was fair game to notice their power and call foul on it. This had a restraining and reforming effect. But try to speak truth to Jews, blacks, and Homos. It'd be like sacrilege since they are the Holy Three.)

James Comey is a sleazebag but thinks himself so holy-shmoly because the ‘historic black president’ anointed him. And his wife thinks she’s such a noble person because she so passionately wanted a ‘first woman president’. Never mind that they are preening and privileged members of a vile, venal, mendacious, and murderous community that concocts policies to turn the world upside down at the behest of Judeo-Nazis and soulless corporations, the bottom line of which is more profits-at-any-cost. As long as they got the Proper Symbolism, they don't care. They think they own goody-goodness.

We have a pretty effective way of meritocracy. Despite the problems of Affirmative Action, for the most part the System does a pretty effective job of selecting and pooling the best in talent. But it has done an atrocious job of favoring the ethical-talented over unethical-talented. If anything, the Power tends to push away anyone with any integrity, honesty, and true morality based on facts. Political Correctness or PC has made this problem much worse. Though ostensibly an agent of justice, its dogmatic formula of predetermined Right and Wrong means that everyone just stick to the script, not unlike in Communist systems where people could not question the ‘scientific’ and ‘moral’ infallibility of Marxism-Leninism itself.
PC makes it very difficult for anyone in the academia, media, and government to speak honestly about Jewish Power, black pathology & crime, homo degeneracy, and female hysteria. PC morality is essentially symbolism-centered around icon-ized identities of holy victimhood. So, Jews are eternal victims of Holocaust. Blacks are sacred victims of slavery, and MLK is bigger than God and Jesus. Homos are angels, and if you say otherwise, you are a ‘homophobe’. And women, especially white women, are eternal victims of Evil White Men like Haven Monahan and must be protected from evil white men by... noble black man. ROTFL.

Reality is very different from the Sacro-Narrative and the Grand Delusion, but the power of symbolism can be such that it makes people hallucinate False Realities. Consider the symbolic power of the TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD narrative. America has changed so much since the 1950s, but we are still supposed to believe that redemptive white folks must do something to save poor helpless Negroes from the KKK lynchmob. While we live in the reality of the 21st century when so many white folks are suffering and being physically attacked by blacks, our sense of reality comes from Jewish-controlled TV and movies that define hyper-reality for us. Also, the False Reality of TV trespasses into our living room and smuggles PC symbolism into our brains while robbing us of our critical faculties, especially as TV shows rely as much on manipulative use of music and other visceral effects.

Thus, we have a world where meritocracy is rewarded ONLY IF it is without integrity. Consider journalism. What is the chance of anyone being hired IF he were to raise truly provocative questions about what is really going on? To work in journalism, one has to adhere to the PC rules of the Holy Three: Jews, Negroes, and Homos. (Women are holy ONLY IF they can be construed as victims of the Evil White Male, the Haven Monahans of the World.) The fact that David Reich had to close his book on DNA and racial differences with so much PC tripe goes to show that daring to speak the truth is like walking through a minefield. One wrong word, and you can be blown away and ruined forever.
This is really an immoral war on truth and liberty, but PC is seen as moral because of its symbolism. Once certain groups have been ‘sacralized’, facts and reason no longer matter. They are forever haloed in association with a certain event or condition in past history. So, Jews are Holocaust People no matter what they do. Even a black thug-rapist is a Holy Slave person. Even ‘hate hoaxes’ aren’t so bad IF in the service of spreading the message about the Holy Three. It’s like the Catholic Church wink-wink tolerated all those phony ‘miracles’ on grounds that they boosted hope among the faithful. 'Hate Hoaxes' might as well be called 'hate miracles'.

PC is really a form of virtue-vanity and, as such, is about empty calories. Indeed, fake virtue is worse than no virtue because it lulls us into thinking we do have virtue. But look at the modern world remade by the false virtue of PC. There is moral and cultural cancer all around resulting from the radical and mindless worship of everything Jewish, black, or homo OR with anything associated with nonsensical sanctimony about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’, which in reality, comes down to the crazy notion that all nations except Israel should welcome Invasion and Replacement by hordes of foreigners who come to leech off the wealth. Unless we can create a New Reality that combines meritocracy of ability with ‘ethicracy’ of truth and reason(backed up by courage and spine), there is no hope for the future.

American Domestic Policy Will Come to Resemble Foreign Policy as the Nation Becomes More Diverse under Globalism

A Globo-Nihilist World of Universal Gangsterism

It should be plainly obvious to anyone with even basic knowledge of world affairs that foreign policy tends to be far more cynical, craven, and criminal than domestic policy. This is almost universally the case. Granted, some tyrant who treats his own people like dirt will likely be more responsible in foreign policy simply because he can’t push other nations around like he can trample on his own people. Mugabe, while he was strongman of Zimbabwe, had very little regard for his own people who acted like dirt and were treated like dirt. Though Mugabe reeked of contempt for other nations as well, especially white ones, he couldn’t push them around like he could his own people. And of course, tyrants like Josef Stalin and Mao Zedong were more mindful when dealing with great powers than in dealing with their own people who were regarded as little more than sheep or cattle. But those are extreme cases of tyrants with immense power and totalitarian means to carry out any amount of atrocities and bloodbaths.

In most cases, the leaders and elites must be mindful or mindful enough of the people they rule, and this applies even to autocratic nations where the ruling class is not all-powerful and could be in serious trouble if they lose the support of the masses. This has especially been true since the near-universalization of the Enlightenment democratic principle that the leaders exist to serve the people than the people exist to serve the leaders. So, even autocrats must do more than merely give lip-service to this ideal. Otherwise, it could lead to the erosion of popular support or, lacking such enthusiasm, of the people’s willingness to submit. After all, even people who submit out of fear may continue to do so if they believe that the rulers are doing a good enough job.

So, in most nations around the world, the Rule is that the leaders must be especially mindful of the people they govern. Unless they can persuade the people that they care and are doing the best for the nation, they could lose the modern equivalent of the ‘divine right’ or ‘mandate from heaven’. In the modern world, the mandate comes from the people. And since all leaders are elected only by the people of the nation, they must be bound to their own nation. And even if they are autocrats, their justification for power is National Interest. So, the Cuban government, though non-democratic, claim to be watching out for the interest of the Cuban people. The government of the CCP in China claim to represent the Will of the Chinese People. Turkey’s Erdogan’s increasing autocratic grip is predicated on the notion that his regime needs extrajudicial powers in the present situation because foreign enemies and agents(possibly even the American ally) are out to undermine Turkish sovereignty. And for this reason, domestic politics can’t be as cynical, cutthroat, opportunistic, nihilistic, and gangsterish as foreign policy. On the outside, foreign relations may seem more civil and considerate. After all, it’s called diplomacy, and national leaders are expected to act statesmanlike on the world stage. So, even leaders of nations with cultures as different as the US and Saudi Arabia are cordial and well-mannered in their discussions and negotiations. In contrast, there is much bickering between the ‘left’ and ‘right’ in UK parliament and US Congress.

But in foreign relations, the veneer of mutual respect is just that: A veneer. Indeed, mutual good manners are necessary precisely because so many nations agree on so little in terms of historical narrative, culture, religion, social values, and national interest. So, it’s all a case of smiling while holding a knife behind their backs. It’s like the show of ‘respect’ in THE GODFATHER films. It’s just a way of doing business because there is nothing but ‘business’ among different nations. Josef Stalin surely found out the hard way when Adolf Hitler, who’d approached him with seeming respect, suddenly launched a surprise attack on the USSR. Hitler acted like Michael Corleone in the final act of THE GODFATHER. (Michael put the other big families at ease and then sprung an attack when they least expected it.) And Muammar Gaddafi also found out the hard way when the very Western leaders who’d been all smiles, handshakes, and pats on the back turned on him and crushed his regime. And when he was brutally lynched to death, there was Hillary Clinton cackling like the Wicked Witch of the West in THE WIZARD OF OZ.

So, foreign policy is never ever to be trusted. It is gangster politics of ever-shifting alliances predicated on the most nakedly brazen of political interests(mostly of the elites because most people of any nation have no stake in world affairs or world power). Consider how the US was all smiles and handshakes with Saddam Hussein when he was fighting Iran. Even when Hussein used poison gas and launched missiles on civilian targets in Iran, the US sent him arms while pretending to be neutral. Worse, the US, via Israel and other proxies, even sent arms to Iran to prolong the war between Iran and Iraq as long as possible. Foreign policy can be THIS cynical, nasty, and brutal. Later, after the Gulf War, the US decided to force sanctions in Iraq that led to the deaths of 100,000s of women and children by some accounts. Again, this sort of thing is easier done to another nation than to one’s own people. Indeed, it’s telling that George W. Bush got more flak for the supposed botch-up of the Hurricane Katrina disaster relief than for what he did to Iraq(including the grisly Abu Gharid episode) and neighboring nations. In the case of New Orleans, the main culprit was the weather and broken levees, but Bush was held accountable for something he had little control of. The disaster killed around 1,800 people, but it was a much bigger issue for Americans than Bush’s wars that killed 100,000s not only by US guns and bombs but by unleashing a civil war that Bush’s clownish regime hadn’t foreseen or prepared for.

So, what does that tell you? Because the US government and American elites aren’t accountable to the world, they can act with utmost impunity, mendacity, opportunism, cruelty, sadism, and total disregard. After all, people in nations destroyed by the US aren’t going to vote in US elections. They aren’t going to donate to US politicians. And as they don’t control the US media, their side of the story isn’t going to be told to the American public, most of whom, by the way, are indifferent to what’s happening around the world(despite their nation being a superpower that can make or break any nation) because they are mainly immersed in hedonism and narcissism. (Granted, most people are like that all over the world, and in that sense, Americans are no worse. However, Americans have greater responsibility to be knowledgeable because they elect leaders whose power can profoundly affect the lives of millions, even billions, of people around the world. If a people live in an inconsequential nation like Iceland or Finland, it doesn’t matter because their governments are NOT going to threaten, destroy, or invade other nations. But when the peoples of Germany and Japan failed in the 1930s to stop their governments from acting recklessly in foreign affairs, the result was catastrophe for the world and their own nations. And for this reason, Americans don’t have a choice. Given the power of the US to destroy the world, all Americans must feel compelled to know about what is happening around the world. It’s because so many Americans are ‘insouciant’[as Paul Craig Roberts calls them] that the Bush regime was able to hoodwink Americans to just go along with a war based on total lies. And it was also why most Obama voters hadn’t a clue as to what was really happening in Libya, Ukraine, Syria, & Yemen and with Russia.) If the US were a better nation, then the media, as the fourth estate, would do its role in informing Americans about what is really happening around the world, what kind of people have the most power and what kinds of agendas they are pushing, and what the tragic toll of all this amounts to, but the media are owned by the People of Power; so, why would the Power expose its dark truths to the People?

During the Cold War, there was more of a balance of power among the elites as there was no single consensus ‘truth’. Many on the Left genuinely believed in socialism, even communism. As such, they entered journalism to expose what they regarded as the rot and disease of capitalism and greed. And many Jews, fast rising in power and privilege, felt it was their calling as both tribesmen and idealists to speak truth to Wasp elite power. Jews regarded their opposition as both ‘good for the Jews’ and ‘good for All Americans’ since it is always good to knock the top dog down a few pegs.

Back in the 1960s, despite the eroding prestige of traditional institutions, they still exerted a large and heavy, even if increasingly ‘silent’, influence. The Catholic Church couldn’t be ignored. And as long as there were many people who’d grown up prior to the 60s, their formative experiences had made them culturally and morally more conservative, not least because the Great Depression and WWII had had a very sobering impact on many Americans of all races and classes. Also, the American South still clung to its own narrative, and this was represented in both the Democratic and Republican Parties. For a long time, the Democratic Party relied on Dixiecrat votes. And the Republicans, to make further gains, especially as immigrant-heavy and black-heavy big cities were so solidly Democratic, also reached out to the South. Even though the Civil Rights Movement was gaining the moral upperhand, the South had its own counter-narrative that went heard in many political circles.
And the mounting tensions from the Vietnam War led to the rise of anti-war voices and patriotic voices. So, there was no single narrative, no single truth, no absolute consensus. Back in the 1960s, the Liberals had genuine radical leftists on their side, and someone like Bill Buckley on the Right could even voice Segregationist sentiments. Some really thought the Soviet Union was a pretty good nation and represented the hope of mankind, at least in supporting Third World anti-imperialist causes that would have been lost without Soviet backing. And some others really thought that the Soviet Union posed the greatest menace to world and thought a far more muscular foreign policy was necessary to roll back communism and hopefully defeat it. And when the feminist movement exploded on the scene, there was a wide range of opinions pro- and con-. But over the years, most of the voices and values grew silent and faded away, leaving only one voice to speak for all in the name of End of History. Catholic power faded, what with even Catholic Americans caring more about Rock, drugs, and sex. Church teachings sounded lame and boring to them. Also, the Church was rocked by pedophile sex scandals, especially damaging because the Jewish media and law firms piled on to bleed the Church dry. As for the Mainline denominations, they became increasingly secular and decadent, and most people lost interest. Today, Mainline churches mostly stand empty and are run mostly be lesbians who apparently have nothing better to do than playact as ‘christians’.

Jewish faith has eroded too, but Jewish power grew stronger because Jewishness doesn’t need religious faith to carry on. It is essentially a blood identity, an ethnicity. So, even Jews who lost faith remained as proud Jews and worked with religious Jews to expand Jewish power. As for older people and their attitudes & values, they all faded as they grew old and died. Indeed, how many members of the Greatest Generation are still alive? Their values died with them because they never formed institutions or created new traditions to keep their morals and values alive. As time passed, Jews gained even more control of the media, and they pushed only one Narrative that favored Jews, blacks, and feminists, thereby putting their opponents on the moral defensive.
The opponents of Jews, blacks, and feminists suffered from two deficits. They weren’t as adept, clever, and crafty as Jews in formulating their counterattack. Also, even if they could, they didn’t have the material and financial means to do so because Jews and Liberals controlled most of the media. Furthermore, pushy Jews, via the TV shows ROOTS and THE HOLOCAUST, made blacks and Jews the holy peoples of the world, making it nearly impossible to be critical of them without being called names. Also, Jews employed the dirty trick of guilt-by-association. Though Jews denounced such tactics when used by Joseph McCarthy, they gleefully denounced peoples, institutions, and industries by exposing their ties to ‘unsavory’ groups. Jews used ADL, SPLC, and NAACP(though black, it was largely funded by Jews) to do the dirty work on this. So, while any bunch of Jews could hang out with radical leftists, real-life hoodlums, Zionist imperialists, and financial sharks, it became political & financial suicide for any white gentile to have even the most tenuous ties with ‘far-right’, ‘antisemitic’, or ‘racist’ individuals or organizations. And later, this was extended to ‘sexist’ and ‘homophobic’ figures. Because Jewish media made such a big stink about McCarthyism and Red Scare, it was bad form to point out that elite colleges and media had many leftist and even far-leftist types. It was even worse to point out that many of these leftists were Jewish or closely affiliated with powerful Jews. Such noticing was deemed ‘antisemitic’, ‘paranoid’, and ‘red-baiting’.

In contrast, Jews and their allies could blow the whistle on the even the flimsiest connection between white gentiles(especially white conservatives) and anyone with the slightest odor of ‘hate’. Remember how the media deemed it bad form to make a big deal out of Obama’s ties with Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright. However, the media went after Trump for being supported by David Duke even though Trump never met Duke. Trump was told to disavow a man he’d never avowed in the first place. In this climate, Jews and Liberals could maintain connections and alliances with the Left and even Far Left whereas American Conservatives and white gentiles couldn’t venture beyond Conservatism Inc. The Right has been so vilified that many Americans believe that even the moderate Right is worse than the farthest Left. And if young people at least were read about and were taught about the horrors of communism during the Cold War, most of that has gone down the memory hole because most college professors hardly touch on the evils committed by the radical left in the 20th century. This is why we have the "There is only one side" mentality at Charlottesville. The Alt Right cannot even exercise their basic Constitutional Rights, whereas Antifa lunatics can run wild, attack people, and destroy property, but still be tolerated by authorities that take orders from Jewish elites.
Through ideas and idols, the ‘left’ has thoroughly indoctrinated and ‘icontrinated’ the majority of Americans into believing that there is only one truth, and there is no room for debate or discussion. And yet, things are actually even more impoverished ideologically and morally because even the real Left has been effectively paralyzed. Even though there are still many Marxist and communist types in universities, they exert almost zero influence on culture and power. They either spend most of their time on ridiculous 50-gender issues OR fixate on trivial stuff like ‘body positivity’, ‘slut pride’, or ‘empowerment’ through pop culture.
The End of History, in gloating over the fall of communism and the false god of Marxism, left the Power with only one objective: Power. Francis Fukuyama’s Liberal Triumphalism meant a death knell not only to Communism and Fascism but to religion, tradition, community, culture, patriotism, family, national sovereignty, and etc. Granted, those values had already eroded so much by the fall of communism. But as long as the communist empire existed, many people in the West still felt invested in and bound together by some great cause and conviction: To defeat the Evil Empire, like Rocky defeated Ivan Drago in part IV. But when the Soviet Empire collapsed, there really was nothing standing but power and greed. Though Fukuyama declared Liberalism as champion, he couldn’t have been more wrong. As events would prove, the real winner of the Cold War was Jewish supremacism. By the end of the Cold War, Jews had taken over most top institutions and industries. Since most Jews claimed to be ‘liberal’, they could have favored liberal values over Jewish interests, but blood turned out to be more powerful than ink among Jews. Unlike Wasps who really went from racial mindset to an ideological and liberal one, Jews moved away from liberalism to neo-tribalism. Jews, who’d been proud of their defense of civil liberties(even for Neo-Nazis) through their support of the ACLU, lost interest in tolerance & free speech and increasingly pushed Political Correctness in media and academia. With every year, journalism had a tighter list of do’s and don’ts. And universities went from a breeding ground for dissent and debate to a place of consensus based on indoctrination and intimidation. Increasingly, more ideologically charged classes and sessions became Mandatory for all students. If the Right became morally and ideologically restricted and curtailed(to the point where Conservatives could only defend abstract principles like individual liberty and private property but couldn’t invoke any pride in whiteness or European heritage, even though, for some reason, it was mandatory for them to fervently support Jewish pride and Israel), the Left was ignored and treated as irrelevant. Even though Marxists were not defacto banned like the race-ists and fascists from media and academia, they were treated as irrelevant nuisance, and indeed they were just that.

Too many former leftist boomers had made too much money and got too powerful. They’d seen the failure of the communist model in the Soviet Union. They’d seen the rise of China under capitalism. So, there was only one game in town, and it was capitalism. But if capitalism of yesteryear was associated closely with nationalism and liberalism(and rule of law), the new globalist capitalism raised the stakes of power and profit much higher, and so, the new elites of the state and big business no longer had any concern for the nation or the people. The people themselves became a nuisance, an obstacle to more profits and power for themselves. And the Rule of Law just came to be seen as outdated ‘regulations’. So, Wall Street was deregulated to the point where financial system operated like a casino. And with loosening morality in an America growing ever more shameless and degenerate, the business of gambling, that had once been considered a vice that should be restricted to a few cities, spread all over America. The most blatant example of this new kind of capitalism was in Russia in the 90s. Despite erosion of values, institutions, and morals, there was sufficient checks and balances in the US to prevent something on the scale of what happened in Russia. But following the fall of the Soviet Empire when the old controls were gone but a new one yet to develop, the Jewish globalist capitalists swooped into Russia to game the system and loot as much of Russian national property as possible. It was surely the biggest looting in the world history. This was the real End of History, which was the Beginning of the Power. A future of gangsterism and tribalism.

In this game, only those with fanatical power-lust and tribal zeal will come out on top. Those who only care about money will not win big. Bill Gates is super-rich as an individual, but he belongs to nothing bigger than himself. As for tribes without power-lust, they will be nothing. Amish have a tight-knit community, but they mean nothing to the world. Mormons do care about power/wealth and group cohesion, but Mormon are nowhere near the ability of Jews, and they lack tribal pride. Whatever that had been tribal and racial about Mormonism is no more. It is now in evangelical mode, and it won’t be long before it takes in too many dummies and non-whites. Jews are identity-zealots and power-obsessives. The only people who are comparable in the world today are the Chinese.

Even though many white gentiles are rich and powerful as individuals, they lack collective power because PC instilled white minds to disdain any power organized around whiteness or European themes. So, Europeans are going about Africanizing European identity and heritage. This has gone furthest in Sweden and the UK where even historical figures are made into blacks in TV shows and movies.
It’s as if blacks have a special claim and right to European history, heritage, and heroes. It’s no longer enough for blacks to have their own history and heritage. Because Africans have no written history and no record of great achievements, they want to take over white histories, legends, and mythologies. And since white people have grown so admiring of blacks in sports & pop culture, they want to present white history to blacks as a gift. Also, because whiteness has been so impugned, whites find it difficult to take pride in white heroes of history. The ONLY way they can make white history ‘good’ again is by turning white heroes into black ones. It’s like Alexander Hamilton as a white male is, well, just a ‘dead white male’, one of those ‘bad guys’, the villains of history responsible for all that went wrong with mankind. But if you turn him and other Founding Fathers into rapping Negroes, they are suddenly ‘cool’, and white people are allowed to get all excited about them.

Anyway, foreign policy is dirty business. While it’s true that all politicians are weasels and even politics-at-home is usually sleazy and slimy, there are still limits to what politicians can do at home. No matter how much Obama hated white conservatives, he couldn’t do against them what he did to Libya, Ukraine, and Syria. And even though the Jewish-run ‘liberal’ media lie through their teeth about whites and conservatives, they can’t lie about Americans the way they can lie about foreign nations and foreign affairs. The media told a big lie about Trayvon Martin and Ferguson, BUT it was nothing like the lies they told about Libya, Ukraine, and Syria that led to the destruction of entire nations. Also, because enough Americans still do care about what happens IN America, there are voices to counter and correct the Narrative pushed by Jewish-run MSM. Also, despite Obama and Holder’s support of BLM and other lunatics, they wouldn’t dare push the violence like they pushed the violence in Libya and Ukraine. At the very least, the Obama regime wouldn’t have dared to send air strikes against white conservatives who oppose BLM. In contrast, the NATO gained control of air space in Libya and dropped endless bombs on Gaddafi until the rebels closed in on the capital, captured the dictator, and lynched him to death. The US could do stuff like that with other nations because US laws, rights, and protections don’t apply to other nations and foreign peoples.
If there are bad guys in the US, the government must follow proper procedures to pursue and arrest the culprits or suspects. But on foreign lands, the US government can just rely on some unverified intelligence to send drone strikes to blow up ‘terrorists’ and if lots of innocent people get killed in the bargain, so what?
So, all the restraints that apply in the US don’t apply in other nations. Even though the elites of America are lowlife scum and would love to rule with an iron fist, as long as American domestic politics is national and proscribed by Rule of Law, they can’t act in pure gangster-nihilist mode. They must follow the rule book. Also, as representatives and servants of the American People, they must demonstrate their loyalty and concern for the American people. Even if these elites look down on most Americans as worthless losers, they can’t be candid about their feelings and must always assure the American people that they have the interests, rights, and protections of American people at heart.

But what happens with increasing Diversity that makes America resemble the world than a distinct nation? We’ve seen how US foreign policy works in other nations. The Deep State will do just about anything and stoop to any level to gain an advantage over other nations. If it takes spying, drone strikes, subversion, invasion, torture, and etc, so be it. Around the world, the US is dealing with strangers. Since they are strangers, the US government owes them no due process and respect. Since they’re strangers, the US government doesn’t have to represent and protect them. The US government is free to do anything to gain the advantage against such strange peoples all over the world. Also, there doesn’t need to be and indeed there can’t be any consistency of rules, values, or methodology in dealing with all those strange peoples because they are all different from the US and from each other. So, the US makes up new rules and concocts new methods for dealing with each people. In contrast, in domestic politics and governance within a single particular nation, people do expect the government to be consistent, predictable, and principled in its affairs. In national politics, the government doesn’t see the people of the nation as strangers but fellow countrymen bound by blood, values, history, and/or principles.

But if the US becomes more diverse, then the varied and diverse Americans will begin to see each other as strangers. During the Great Depression and WWII, the US government was white and most Americans were white. So, the white government looked upon the white masses as fellow countrymen. And when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, all Americans from top to bottom understood what it meant to be attacked by ‘Japs’. Hoover, Roosevelt, Truman, and Eisenhower had one thing in common in feeling a common bond with the American people who were seen as fellow countrymen. Even though there was ethnic diversity, most non-Anglos had been educated to be good patriots on the Anglo-American model. There was the black problem, but as blacks made up 10% of the population and aspired to be accepted and respected by white society, they too could be seen as fellow Americans. And especially beginning with Truman, there was a concerted effort to do right by the Negroes.

Now, of course, there was lots of corruption in politics and business back then as well. Politics being politics and business being business, corruption will always be with us. But when the nation was more cohesive, the US domestic policy was indeed based on the nationalist and patriotic sense that the government must do right by the people. In other words, the US government must not treat fellow Americans in the way it might treat Iranians, Guatemalans, Cubans, Vietnamese, Mexicans, and etc. If the US government and multi-national corporations approach foreign nations and strange peoples as just pawns, puppets, markets, or rivals/enemies in a ceaseless global gangster turf war, it simply wouldn’t do to see American people that way. Whether citizens of America are on the left or on the right, the US government must treat them all as fellow Americans with same protections under the law. In contrast, no such rules apply to foreign nations. It’s like, if a Muslim-American admires Osama Bin Laden and hates the US, he still has all the access to US government services, enjoys all the basic rights and protections, and has the same voting rights as any other American. In contrast, if he held such views in the Middle East, he could end up dying in drone strike. Or, if he’s fighting an enemy of Israel, he could be armed and funded by the CIA to commit acts of terror.
In contrast, it would be scandalous for the FBI or CIA to directly fund Antifa groups to attack white conservatives and patriots. But the US unreservedly funded and aided Neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine to topple the government there.

If a government acts more responsibly and restrained on the national level and in domestic mode than on the global level in foreign policy mode, what happens when excessive Diversity makes a nation into just a smaller version of the world? Even if the US still continues as a nation-state, will it act like one when it resembles a mini-world than a self-contained nation?
And if leaders like Roosevelt and Eisenhower felt a direct and deep connection with most Americans as fellow countrymen, how do the current government and Deep State look upon most Americans? Despite all the hollow rhetoric about how ‘diversity is our strength’, the fact is white elites in Deep State don't feel any real deep connection with Muslims, Mexicans, Asians, Hindus, Arabs, and host of other non-white groups. (And when non-whites reach elite status, they not only fail to form a bond with whites but lose the bond to their own people. They turn into political zombies.) Instead of growing nearer non-whites, these white elite operatives will only grow further apart from white Americans. The official line says white elites are one with non-whites, but the fact is they feel and remain separate from non-whites except in the most superficial way(and this accounts as to why globalized Western culture gets more superficial since it is only on such level that diverse people can communicate and get along). It’s a full-time job for elites to feel as one with ONE people. It’s impossible to feel one with over a 100 ethnic groups in the US. But because white elites must make an effort to connect with non-whites, they must disconnect their bonds and loyalties to whites. The end result is nothing but cynicism and nihilism. Unable to connect or really care about non-whites and no longer connected to whites, the only thing left for these Deep State elites is "what’s in it for me?" They just become soulless careerists whose only obsession is status, position, and privilege. To keep the status and rise higher, they will say and do ANYTHING to get what’s theirs. Isn’t this what we see in a soulless careerist robot like James Comey? This also goes for Hillary Clinton. In the end, did she care about anything? Did she care about white people or the working class? Of course, that would have been anathema in New America. White leaders caring about white people? Why, that would be ‘nazi’ and ‘racist’. So, did she really care all about all those trannies, slut priders, Muslims, blacks, Mexicans, Hindus, Chinese, and etc., the kind of people with whom she has zero cultural connection or rapport? No, it was all just for show. Like Comey, she isn’t allowed to connect with whites and is unable to connect with non-whites. All she had left was self-serving careerism. Same with Theresa May and all the other cretins.

Diversity means no shared standards, values, meanings, or identities. That is why foreign policy is a game of gangsters. Since the rules, values, loyalties, norms, and the narrative of one nation are so different from those of other nations, the only way that nations can play the game is through distrust, cynicism, espionage, and dirty tricks more commonly associated with gangsters.

Indeed, when we compare the FBI and the CIA, why does the latter have more sinister connotations? FBI has skeletons in its closet too, but because it’s a domestic and national law enforcement organization, it must be careful not to deviate too far from the Rule of Law that protects the rights of all Americans. Americans care more about a wrong done to a US citizen by US government than a wrong done to 100,000 foreigners by the same government.

In contrast, the CIA has been involved in outright subversion, espionage, aid to terrorists, torture, spreading fake propaganda, meddling in foreign elections, bribery, and aiding Pentagon in the invasion of other nations.
Recent revelations about the FBI show how corrupt the agency can be, but the FBI has also played a prominent role in taking down organized crime in the US. In contrast, the CIA has been linked with organized criminals, terrorist, and even neo-Nazis in its nihilistic effort to do just about anything to spread the oligarchic hegemony of the US. As the US becomes more like the world, the rulers of the US will act more like CIA than the FBI in dealing with the American people. The people will no longer be seen a citizens and fellow countrymen but as pawns in a game. Consider the Carol Reed film THE THIRD MAN. When the nihilist American Harry Lime was in war-torn Austria, he didn't see the people there as his fellow countrymen. No, they were just units, pawns, or fleas. He felt no connection to them, and their lives didn’t matter to him. He acted only for himself and for money.

In the current America, the problem goes deeper than white elites no longer feeling a bond with white Americans and being unable to really connect with non-whites. There is a power above that of white elites, and of course, it’s the Jewish elites. Too many Jews are in arrogant, contemptuous, and hostile supremacist mode in relation to gentiles. Jews mainly identify with fellow Jews all over the world than with fellow Americans, most of whom are goyim. American Jews cared more about Soviet Jews than for fellow Americans who might be Catholic or Baptist. And once those Soviet Jews came to the US, they felt far closer to Jews in UK, France, and Israel than with fellow Americans who happen to be gentile.
Did Madeline Albright feel anything for the 500,000 Iraqi children that might have died as the result of US sanctions concocted by Zionists? No. Why not? Because the kids weren’t Jewish. As a thought experiment, let’s suppose Israel comes under the rule of someone as ‘evil’ as Saddam Hussein. Suppose the US calls out on this Jewish Hussein who is denounced as a 'new hitler'. Suppose the US calls for sanctions that might starve 100,000s of Jewish kids to death. Would Jews support such a policy in the name of getting rid of an evil dictator? No way. Jews care for fellow Jews. That, in and of itself, is good. A people should care for their own kind. Now, it’s possible for a people to love their own kind the most but still respect and care about other peoples. This quality is woefully missing from most Jews who will cause any amount of harm to others just so Jews can have it all. The sheer obnoxiousness and vileness of Jews as they’ve gained supreme power in the US and EU have so clearly illustrated why this thing called ‘antisemitism’ was so rife throughout history. Jews will tell any amount of lies and pull any number of dirty tricks to get their way. The likes of Max Boot and David Brooks are hardly different from Jennifer Rubin Erderly and Stephen Glass in their shameless and insane obsession to spin any story and invent any nonsense to push their agenda that, despite the bogus ‘universalist’ or ‘humanitarian’ rhetoric, really just comes down to, "Is it good for the Jews?"

With uber-elites such as that, with white elites serving them while being disconnected from white masses and unconnected to non-white masses, with white masses no longer represented and led by elites, and with so many non-whites splintered along racial, ethnic, religious, and other lines(and their children having trashy stupid pop culture as their only culture, Homomania as their only faith, and PC as their only rule book), the US will no longer resemble a nation but a mini-world or a mini-empire. Then, it is only natural that US politics will go from the mode of national policy to the mode of foreign policy. It will no longer be a case of elites seeing Americans as fellow countrymen but as a Glob-ful of strangers. And in a world of strangers, everyone will be out for the only thing that still matters: Status, Position, and Privilege.

Instead of Puerto Ricans becoming Americanized, Americans are becoming Puerto-Ricanized.

Nikolas Cruz Is Small Potatoes Compared to Big Time Sociopaths who Destroy Entire Nations

The Florida School shooting adds yet another bloodbath to the long and depressing tally of individuals going loco and randomly killing people. Many critics blame guns, but guns don’t kill people by themselves. Why has there been a spate of such killings since the Columbine incident? Some might argue that the media are to blame for ‘sensationalizing’ these murders with extensive coverage.
While most sane people care about their good name, the crazy ‘losers’ might crave fame and notoriety instead. While it’s natural for people to be liked and admired, what about those who have no such hope? The ones who are ugly, dumb, or just plain unappealing? If likable and talented people attract the right kind of attention, the unlikable and unappealing either get no attention or get the wrong kind of attention: Mockery, bullying, ridicule, rejection, contempt. Now, most people, even if disliked and ignored, learn to accept their lot in life. They find ways to cope and adapt, and in time, they even find people with whom they can form a community of friends and family.
However, certain people aren’t only disliked but troubled and demented due to traumatic child-rearing or genetic reasons. Granted, likable people can be crazy too. Ted Bundy is possibly the most famous case. He was a reasonably good-looking guy with smarts. He held a nice job and had no trouble meeting women. But he became a serial rapist-and-murderer. Still, sick people who are attractive or smart are less likely to end up like Nikolas Cruz. They have more of an incentive to live within bounds because they have something to lose. An attractive person may lose friends and lovers. A smart rich guy may lose his fortune and privilege. Thus, the attractive or smart people with sick souls do what is necessary to remain respectable and find more creative ways to indulge their sickness, like the Podesta brothers.
But if someone is crazy, ugly, and dumb, he has nothing to lose if he were to embark on a horrible act. If anything, they might finally gain the attention that had been missing all their lives.

Things are worse for troubled youth like Nicholas Cruz because there aren’t any moral norms anymore. What passes for right-and-wrong are PC posturing on current issues, gender issues, foreign policy, and historical narratives. Whatever meaning such subjects may have on the nation or the world, it means nothing to the personal life of a young boy. Children need a solid foundation in family life & community and a sense of culture that provides deeper meaning & sense of morality that is relevant to one’s personal existence. After all, ideology or political positions themselves do not secure a stable and meaningful existence for a child. Suppose a child is raised in a family with all the fashionable PC values. The adults that move in and out of the house are all for ‘gay marriage’, ‘trannies in the ladies room’, ‘new cold war with Russia’, ‘hating Trump’, ‘anti-racism’, ‘interracial sex’, and ‘climate change’ legislation. But suppose the adults don’t act like responsible parents or guardians, there’s no discipline(or if such exists, it’s brutal and arbitrary, thus only traumatizing the child) in the home, cultural experience is composed of watching trash on TV & playing ugly video games(and pornified music videos), and no teaching of fundamental right-and-wrongs when it comes to personal virtues such as honesty, propriety, dignity, and due diligence.
This rule applies to conservatives too. Even if the parents are ‘good Christians’ in ideas and values, if they fail to act like responsible adults in instilling their children with proper mindset and attitudes, the kids may grow up all wrong.
Now, generally speaking, conservative values & ideology are more useful in instilling the right kinds of values in children than liberal values & ideology are. This is because conservatism is more grounded in a culture of responsibility, duty, and discipline. Before kids can learn to be free, they need to be molded into young adults with core virtues. Liberalism has great value as a mode of open-mindedness, inquisitiveness, curiosity, and progress. Liberalism is more free-spirited than conservatism, and that can be a good thing. But unless freedom is grounded in respect, discipline, honor, and experience, it has a tendency to become aimless, decadent, and confused. It’s like an athlete isn’t going to get anywhere just by running like a crazy headless chicken no matter how fast or strong he is. He has to respect the coach, learn to take orders, cooperate with others, and train to gain the necessary skills. An athlete will eventually have to learn to be free and find his own footing in the sport, but he has to follow a path that leads gradually from obedience and discipline to ability and agency.
In the past, even American liberalism was grounded in conservative modes and values. Liberal Education didn’t mean you got to do whatever you wanted or blind yourself to everything except the latest fashionable dogma. Rather, you learned from professors with credentials and experience. You learned from the greatest thinkers, scientists, and artists in history. Even if you found the elders' teachings and methods less than ideal, you built upon their knowledge and appreciated their efforts in their time.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt is considered as the greatest liberal president of the 20th century, but he had many conservative concerns about the New Deal. He worried about the potentially negative impact welfare may have on families. It’s doubtful that he would have endorsed the Great Society programs of the 1960s that went about rewarding teenage girls for being pregnant out of wedlock. The New Deal was about lending support to families with solid moral values and to men who wanted to work. America back then had a great sense of shame. New Deal was about offering aid to men and women of virtue who’d fallen on hard times. It was not, as would be the case with Great Society and other programs that followed, the reckless abandonment of culture of responsibility and the soulless rewarding of bad behavior, especially among young black women.
A lot of ‘progressives’ tend to place all the burden of social betterment on rich people and the government — rich should pay more taxes and government should provide more programs — , but the ‘national character’ of a people matter in the outcomes. Indeed, it is THE most decisive factor in the success or failure of nations or communities. Why did Europeans do so much with Marshall Plan while no amount of foreign aid does anything for black Africa or Detroit? What happened to all the money poured into black communities all across America? Why do some nations that receive less foreign aid to better than those who received so much?
And even in Europe, why is there more bang for the government buck among Swedes than among Southern Italians? Despite the current demise of Sweden(entirely due to liberalism-gone-pathological), it was a nice nation for much of the 20th century because most Swedes had civic virtues of diligence, honesty, responsibility, and work ethic. And whatever the ideology, left or right, most Swedes knew how to keep order in the house through proper parenting. As such, most Swedes believed that one should work hard, pay taxes, and take only what is necessary and due from the government. So, there was a culture of give and take between the state and the people. But in Southern Italy, the sheer lack of national character means a lot of people are shameless about lying, cheating, stealing, and acting like the cast of characters in GOODFELLAS.
So, anyone who’d say something like "Southern Italy is backward because the government doesn’t provide the kind of services available in Sweden" is missing the point. Swedes have civic virtue that is taught in every home. (If anything, Sweden’s current problem of Diversity is the result of its virtue of trust & cooperation having been projected onto the whole world. Just because Swedes made a little paradise for themselves, they naively got to thinking that the Swedish model could save the world. And if Swedes failed in exporting their model to African nations, maybe Africans can be made Swedish-like via immigration. In the past, such naive idealism was tempered by rational race-ism that informed most Swedes, even those on the Left, that the races are different, and therefore, most Africans could never be made into nice Swedes. But the rise of PC ideology forbade such rational & sane thinking and replaced it with the reckless conviction that any bunch of African ‘groids’ could be turned into good Swedes. But then, there was another reason for the embrace of Diversity. If one reason was naively idealistic and pro-civilization — the hope of elevating lowly & primitive Africans to the status of advanced Europeans — , the other reason was primitivist. Even though or precisely because Sweden was so nice and orderly, many Swedes grew bored with modernity and civilization. They craved the heat of Afro-jungle boogie-woogie of Afro-pop and American black music. Especially Swedish women developed jungle fever and wanted to have sex with black men and welcome ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. So, the combination of naive idealism and lusty primitivism will destroy Sweden, a nation so far gone that it cannot be saved.)

Anyway, ideologies are about big things. Parenting is not about ideology or big ideas. Whether parents are communist, fascist, Jewish, Catholic, Mormon, Muslim, atheist, socialist, or whatever, there are fundamental rules that apply to ALL families in the proper rearing of children. Kids need love and affection. Kids need discipline and a basic sense of right and wrong, e.g. "Do not steal", "Don’t lie", "Don’t be discourteous", "Don’t kick the dog", "Don’t bully other kids", "love thy parents", and etc. And for kids to grow up with right values, parents have to be mature adults. But is that possible anymore? With the cult of everlasting youth, we have old people who still act like kids. It won’t be long before we have rappers who are 60 yrs old. We see tattoos and piercings among adults all over. What kind of message is that to kids, to grow up in a family where your own parents are marked with ugliness all over their bodies? In the past, the Church used to provide the family with a sense of community with other folks and sense of continuity with the past and tradition. But what are churches nowadays? Many have closed, some are Evangelical nuthouses whose main message is "Muh Israel" and "Nuke Iran" while Mainline churches are about little more than "Muh holy homo". And the Catholic Church is all about "Muh refugees" or "Muh Illegal Immigrants". It’s all about helping Other peoples but offer nothing to the rooted or existing community. It preserves nothing of tradition in terms of demographic & culture and only seeks to replace the existing faithful with waves of foreigners, immigrants, or illegals. If anything, Diversity made things much worse. Even in affluent communities, diversity tends to undermine a sense of togetherness. When American cities used to be divided along ethnic lines, the Irish in Irish town, Italians in Italian town, and Poles in Polish town had a sense of their own ethnic community. It’s like how Mike Royko used to remember how people in his neighborhood, many of them of shared ethnicity, would to all come out and celebrate Fourth of July together. Especially damaging was feminism because, even in a world of Diversity, there can be the core foundation of family within the home at least. Even if a Pole marries an Italian, there is at least the family, father and mother to raise the child. And for a child, nothing is more important than the unity of man and woman as his parents who are committed to one another and to their children. So, even in a world of ethnic and racial strangers, a child can feel whole and part of an organic unit if he has father and mother. But feminism drove a wedge between this most essential of unions. It encouraged too many women to see men as The Enemy or filled women with the idea that they can raise children alone without the men who should just come and go into their lives as ‘boyfriends’. This had a totally toxic impact on society, but most critics, even conservatives, are loathe to say this because the demented feminist-dominant ideology deems such sane views as ‘misogynist’.

Also, the rise of electronic media meant the erasure of community in many parts of America. In the past, if people in a local community needed the news, they got together in the town square to chat. Or they gathered together at rallies or meetings. It’s like how people act in MEET JOHN DOE and IT’S A WONDERFUL LIFE. But with the rise of TV and electronic media, people can just sit home and get all the news and information. Now, it wouldn’t be so bad if every locality had more autonomy over its own media. But in fact, most of what is beamed to every community, big or small, in the US, is controlled by a handful of conglomerates, all of which are owned and/or controlled by Jewish globalists whose idea of the highest virtue is Homomania.
Worse, the increasing crassness and vulgarity of American culture has made Americans far more shameless. In the 70s, a talk show was something like Phil Donahue. But by the 80s, it was turning into something like Oprah and Jerry Springer. Both were corrosive in their own way. Oprah went from just another talkshow host to an object of worship. This shameless and self-aggrandizing fat black woman was supposed to represent all our hopes and dreams. It was one thing to enjoy Oprah as a TV personality, but it was obscene to elevate her to Magic Negress. Millions of Americans looked to Oprah to be told what to read, whom to vote for, what issues to care about, when to laugh, and when to weep, that is when she wasn’t doing what was she was best at: Interviewing vapid celebrities in love with their own vanity. Being fat, gross, and stupid, Oprah had no discernible talent of her own, but that was the hook with the audience. Most Americans are now fat, gross, and stupid, but they are obsessed with celebrity. When they look at Oprah, they see someone unseemly like themselves — fat, gross, and stupid — dillydallying with famous actors, singers, and athletes. Through Oprah, they also feel connected to the world of celebrity. Also, the fact that she’s ugly, black, and female means that her success is proof of the redemptive power of America. There was a time when someone like Oprah would have been a fat black mammy with kerchief on her head suckling some white kids on her big chocolate titties, but now, here she is with many billions of dollars. Only in America. Though Oprah is stupid, she’s been savvy enough to milk white tears of guilt and joy for all its worth(rather like Obama), with the help of Jews, of course.

And then, there was Jerry Springer and Maury Povich. If Oprah-ism was about elevation of a fat, gross, and stupid black woman as holy Magic Negress, what Springer and Povich did was reduce working class whites and blacks to the state of animals and savages. Now, there were always dumb, stupid, retarded, and trashy people in America. But American society had frowned upon such behavior.
The idea was that such people should watch BONANZA, THE WALTONS, BRADY BUNCH, and LITTLE HOUSE ON THE PRAIRIE and learn to be halfway decent. So, even if they had trashy tendencies, they shouldn’t wallow in them. They should be ashamed of their ways and at least try to raise their kids right so that the kids won’t end up like their stupid parents. But shows like Jerry Springer(in mainly targeting ‘white trash’) and Maury Povich(in mainly targeting ‘black trash’) sensationalized bad behavior into a shameless gladiatorial sport. Soon, entire families watched garbage like that together, and American turned into Amerika. Such shamelessness paved the way to the culture of EXTREMES. So, there were all these shows on TV that featured ‘extreme’ this, ‘extreme’ that, extreme anything. And then, there arose extreme sports where fighters do ugly things to one another. And then, even women were allowed into the sports, and they were bashing each other’s faces like demented chimpanzees.

Now, someone like Nikolas Cruz was born with an unfortunate set of genes. He looks goofy and was probably born funny-in-the-head. But if such a kid had grown up in a more traditional America with stronger sense of right-and-wrong, a sense of family and community, and a culture of shame-and-restraint, there would have been less chance of him turning out like this.
Of course, we can’t just blame the larger culture. Ultimately, Cruz has to face up to what he did as an individual and pay the price. But, our culture is really messed up. Now, I’m not saying all of us should be blamed. Oftentimes, those who blame themselves for what others did are virtue-signaling. Not all Americans played a role in degrading this country into a cultural and moral shithole. It is THOSE people who deserve most of the blame. The controllers of media. The radicals who spread poisonous ideas through the academia. Those who promoted drug culture and loose sex. Those who spread gambling and the idea that anything is justified by profits.

Be that as it may, Nikolas Cruz could only attack one school and destroy the lives of several people. As Hyman Roth said of Pantangeli in THE GODFATHER PART 2 , Cruz is ‘small potatoes’. https://youtu.be/UL6BdiaGaJ8?t=5m20s

What Cruz did is horrible and unforgivable, but it tore up only a local community. He was arrested, and he will have to face the music. He will likely receive the death penalty, surely something he deserves unless it can be proven that he’s seriously mentally ill.

Now, let’s move from small potato Cruz(who will soon fade from the news cycle) to the BIG POTATOES. Let’s look at neo-imperialist US that has destroyed not just random lives but entire nations. Yes, the national elites who condemn and bemoan what happened in Florida seem to be completely blind to their far greater crimes and bloodbaths all over the world.
So, why is the US so pathologically hypocritical and oblivious to what is plainly obvious, i.e. the US has been the main source of Evil around the world since the end of the Cold War?
It’s because the elites(especially the Zionist-globalists) are rabid with power-lust, paranoia, megalomania, resentment & vengeful angst, and contempt for the hoi polloi(both in the US and abroad); they spread lies through the worthless fake news media and engineer falsehoods in collusion with Deep State. Remember CIA and ‘slam dunk’ about Hussein’s WMD? The hubris, the arrogance, the sheer lack of concern for lives, and etc. The vile elites don’t care about American soldiers traumatized in wars and don’t care for the countless people who died, were maimed, or mentally destroyed in the Muslim World. With the elites acting like that, was anyone really surprised when Abu Gharib happened? From top to bottom, Americans have gotten used to the nihilist notion that they are above the law. You see, truth is just an ‘essentialist’ inconvenience. With creativity of spin and terminology, anyone can be made into a ‘New Hitler’ with WMD. And if Nikolas Cruz will be executed or spend the rest of his life behind bars, the globalist sociopaths who used lies to destroy entire nations, peoples, and cultures will do the what villains do in Akira Kuroawa's BAD SLEEP WELL. Hillary and Obama will not be brought to justice for what they did to Libya, Ukraine, and/or Syria. Hillary the mass murderer almost got to be president. Obama got a $60 million book deal. And all the Neocon Jewish globalists who goaded dumb George W. Bush into war in Iraq on false pretext are still not only free but rich and ensconced in seats of power and influence. And the movers and shakers that colluded with the Deep State to spread lies that led to Wars for Israel and New Cold War with Russia still control the media and spread lies all over. As for AIPAC goons who pressure the US to support Zionist imperialism in West Bank, they are invited to the biggest galas and showered with cash by oligarchs like Sheldon Adelson whose genius idea is that the US should drop a nuke on Iran, a nation without any nukes. As for Colin Powell who did his little act before the UN to push for Iraq War, he is still a respected statesman. When he had the chance to choose between integrity/courage and status/opportunism, he opted for the latter. In the end, his position in government mattered more than his moral compass, if he ever had any.

It isn't far-fetched to say that the Deep State, Media, Academia, and elite institutions are filled with more intelligent versions of Nikolas Cruz. They aren’t the types to stupidly go around shooting people, but then, they have bigger fish to fry: To take down entire nations and destroy millions of lives through death, disease, or trauma, and all based on lies to feed the insatiable hunger of this monster called globalism. The US, despite calling Putin a 'new hitler', wasn't averse to recruiting Neo-Nazis to bring down the regime in Ukraine. It shamelessly cooks up lies(like meth) to sustain a new Cold War with Russia, needlessly increasing tensions that may lead to an unnecessary war. (Unnecessary to sane sane people. But then, Deep State psychopaths don’t play by normal rules of decency, reciprocity, and limits. They play for power and more power, and for them, people around the world count for little more than humanity-as-‘fleas’ that Harry Lime sees up in the Ferris Wheel in THE THIRD MAN.) What other kinds of nastiness give the Deep State a hard on? Oh yeah, the taking down of Gaddafi and turning Libya into a total clusterfuc*. I recall Hillary laughing like a hyena at the lynching of Gaddafi. As for pathological egotist-narcissist Obama, he just shrugged his shoulders, smiled, and said , “Oops, my bad.” Destroying an entire nation was just a ‘mistake’, you see. And let’s not forget how the Deep State gave aid to terrorists and Jihadis to tear Syria apart in yet another great bloodbath of the 21st century, once again brought to you by the US and its allies. Priceless ancient treasures destroyed forever, and 400,000 people killed, and millions more uprooted. But who cares? The only concern among the elites in US media, academia, and Deep State is, “Is it good for Israel?” and "Is it good for US position in the Middle East?"

In status-centric globalist America where the elites no longer feel a national-humanist bond with the people, all that matters is their insatiable nihilist craving for power and position. To them, the whole world is just a violent video-game, the difference being that while gamers play in a world of fantasy, the Deep State plays in a world of reality with real people, millions of whom end up being killed, maimed, or soul-destroyed.

The Deep State scum are like the psychopath yuppie in AMERICAN PSYCHO. Sure, they talk the PC talk about ‘equality’ and ‘human rights’, but it’s all just smoke screen for their power games. These elites are so eager to be insiders and members of the Club that they will say or do anything to get in and stay in. Whether it’s Samantha Powers or John Bolton or Nikki Haley or John Yoo or any other bunch of scum-suckers, they are all a bunch of status-obsessed sociopaths whose only compass is whether the needle is pointing to Power.

And if you long for moral values and spiritual meaning in these times, just go worship the holy homo and make sure to convince yourself that Bruce Jenner is a ‘woman’. Ah, ‘rainbow’ in your eyes. It’s all lies upon lies.
As for you Negroes, never mind that you’re losing out due to globalism, mass immigration, and gentrification. Just watch the bling-movie BLACK PANTHER, make Jewish Hollywood even richer, and distract yourselves with the fantasy of Wakanda, sheeeeiiit. The elites find creative ways to push you out of cities while directing your gaze at bling heaven on the big screen for distraction. But then, what is the culture of blacks? Rap thuggery and ‘twerking’.

Fish rots from the head. We know from the bogus ‘Russiagate’ affair that the whole media complex and deep state are utterly corrupt and will go to any length to subvert Rule of Law and democracy. We know from Charlottesville that the Power will trample on the most fundamental American liberties to silence dissident voices. A completely legal assembly protected by the Constitution was shut down by the Power simply because it didn’t like the message. But the media, which are just part of the Deep State, just ran with the official narrative pushed by the Power.

US is now an empire of lies. Lies about the wonders of homosexuality and tranny nonsense, lies about BLM, lies about Russia as new ‘nazi nation’, lies about War on Terror(because it’s the US that’s actually allied with terrorists to wreck nations like Syria), lies about Iran, and etc. US has gotten so evil and demented that even a nutball regime of North Korea sometimes sounds rational in comparison.

We need a new nationalism, a real nationalism. The people of America and other nations need to come together and demand that the elites serve, lead, and guide the people. It must be a People Nationalism. A nation exists for the leaders to represent and serve the People. But the current elites of the US give the middle finger to Middle America and call for its replacement by endless tides of foreigners bribed with gibs. David Brooks, Max Boot, and Jennifer Rubin would never go on a killing spree like Nikolas Cruz, but if the likes of them get their way, Real America will have been murdered for good. You don’t have to actually kill people to kill a nation. Sufficient demographic changes will bury and erase a nation-that-had-been and replace it with something else. Jews didn’t kill a lot of Palestinians in the Nakba of 1948. There was no genocide in the sense of what happened in Ukraine or WWII. But Palestine as a nation was effectively murdered by massive demographic transformation. Israel was born because Palestine was murdered. And today, the Zionist-globalists are hellbent on murdering White, European, and Western nations via massive-invasion-immigration. Cruz shot up a school and killed 17 people. Jewish-Globalists plan to bulldoze White America & White Europe and replace them with Third World masses as their divide-and-rule helots. Cruz is indeed small potatoes.

In our time, is National Renewal even possible with the kind of leaders and elites we have whose soulless minds were molded by decades of degeneracy, decadence, and pseudo-intellectual PC garbage that reduces morality and ideology into empty slogans about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ that can be twisted to mean just about ANYTHING? Too many Jewish elites are fueled by animus, hatred, contempt, and vengeful emotions vis-a-vis Muslims and white gentiles, though Jews are also working to destroy Japan by pressuring it to take in more ‘refugees’(even though Israel takes in none). For too many Jews, everything they don’t like in the world is boiled down to hysteria about Pogroms or WWII all over again, so much so that they are blind to the fact that their kind now constitute the New Power that is acting like the Russian imperialists and German warmongers of old.

Now, I’m not saying that if we have good elites and a culture of truth, there won’t be sickos like Nick Cruz. But he would be the exception in such a social order.
Why are there now so many instances of sociopaths like him acting as if they are above the law? One key reason is our culture is one of nihilism from the very top. The fact that Harvey Weinstein was able to get away with so much gross behavior while rubbing shoulders with the most powerful people in the world should tell you what kind of nation we are living in.

Granted, fish rots from the gut as well as from the head. The most corrupting gut-rot force in America has been blacks. Naturally savage and prone to psychopathy, they’ve given us a culture not of the mind and heart but of the fist, genitals, and butts. In the current year, the symbiotic alliance between elites minds and black butts have degraded culture beyond moral recognition not only in the US but around the world.

Lies have always been a part of America as in any other society. But now, lies have been institutionalized as the New Truth. Americans are so poisoned by lies that they are blind even to the ugliness of homo fecal penetration. Instead, they support massive homo parades, drape churches with homo colors, support ‘gay marriage’, and believe bakers ought to be destroyed for having moral courage. This is a sick sick society.

Libertarian types will say ‘homomania’ doesn’t kill people, but it murders something far more essential: Truth. Homomania murders the truth because it not only tells lies but canonizes lies as the holy truth. If the norm of a society is to murder truth in this manner, then the cancer of lies will grow and poison all of society.

It’s like what Merlin said: