Showing posts with label Nakba. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nakba. Show all posts

Monday, April 6, 2020

The What-If-Most-People Game: An Easy Way to Tell if YOUR IDEAS & VALUES are Sound and Valid for Most of Society

What would be the simplest way to test as to whose ideas, values, attitudes, and mindset are best or most ideal for society as a whole? One of the easiest way would be to theorize as to what society would be like IF most people think, feel, and do as YOU do. After all, while any society can tolerate, weather, and overcome some degree of bad behavior and destructive tendencies, NO society can last for long if too many people indulge in wrong kinds of behavior. So, a sane, sound, stable, and healthy kind of society is one where most people do what is good, right, responsible, and constructive.

For example, suppose there are two people: Bob and John. Bob doesn't use illicit drugs whereas John is into drugs. Now, which is better? Not using illicit drugs or using them? Bob says it's better to forsake drugs. John says it's better to use them. So, who is right? First, imagine a society where most people are like Bob and don't use illicit drugs. Then, imagine a society where most people are like John and use plenty of illicit drugs. I think most of us can agree that a society where most people don't use drugs functions better than one where most people indulge in drugs. Does anyone want to live in a society full of meth-heads, heroin addicts, and the like? Even most druggies will likely admit that they don't want to live a society run by druggies. Even as they argue for legalization of many drugs, they surely don't want engineers, managers, and other essential workers to be druggies.

Now, take gambling. Is gambling good or bad for society? Suppose Jerry doesn't gamble and finds it to be wrong. Suppose Billy thinks gambling is awesome. What would be better? A society of Jerrys or a society of Billies? Would it be better if most people don't gamble or do gamble? My guess is that even people into joys of gambling would agree it wouldn't be such a great idea to have a society where MOST people gamble. Gambling is not only a vice but mass theft by oligarchs(who in the US happen to be Jewish) from the middle class and working class(and even from senior citizens and poor folks who don't know any better and become addicted to the habit).

Or take prostitution. Suppose Sarah is against it while Skankura is for it. Who would be right? Would society be better if most women are NOT prostitutes? Or would society be better if most women are prostitutes. Even among proponents of legalization of 'sex work', can they honestly say that a society where most women are involved in the sex industry would be better than one where most women aren't? Would it be good for families if most mothers were hookers on the side? Would it be good for society if fathers raised their daughters to be slut-skank whores? Would it be a better society if your mother, sister, cousin, aunt, niece, and daughter were into stripping, porn, prostitution, or S&M for money? Seriously? While we can understand the logic of libertarians who argue for legalization of 'sex work' on grounds of individual choice and free enterprise, surely even most of them know full well that it would NOT be good for society if most women were skankass whores.
Now, take homosexuality and tranny-stuff. Granted, this has less relevance to reality since most homos were born that way and only a handful of kooks are trannies. The fact is most people will never be homo. Even with all the gender-confusion pushed by MSM and academia, most men and women are not going to declare themselves homo. Still, there is the PC notion that homosexuality and trans-genderism are just as valid as real-natural-normal sexuality. They insist that 'heteronormativity' is some kind of mentally sick social construct. They say 'gender is fluid' and anyone can declare himself or herself to be anything, and all these various 'genders' are equal in value and validity. Okay, that being their premise, suppose there is Cary and Nico. Cary is real-sexual and believes a society where most people are proudly real-sexual is best for society. In contrast, Nico is a homo and believes his fruitishness to be just as valid as real-sexuality, aka heterosexuality. Nico believes homo fecal penetration is just as valid and 'natural' as real-sexuality between men and women. So, who is right? Imagine Cary's Society where most people are straight real-sexuals where men and women procreate to produce kids. Then, imagine Nico's Society where most people are fruitkins who bugger each other in the ass or tranny freaks with their dicks and balls cut off and equipped with fake vaginas. Seriously, which society would be better? Which society has better chance of mental health, moral equilibrium, and chance for continuance & survival? Is it really true that all 'genders'(as social constructs) are equally valid? (Also, if 'gender' is a social construct, why does PC say homos are biologically born that way? Is there any consistency in the logic of so-called 'woke' folk?)

How about gluttony? Some argue for 'Body-Positivity' Movement. They say that being a fatty fatkin is glorious and a badge of pride(and lard of honor). But is it really good to eat like a pig and be grossly obese? Suppose Jack believes in eating moderately, exercising, and staying slim. He believes a good society is one where people watch what they eat and watch their weight. In contrast, Otis believes people should eat all they want and there's no shame in being a fatty fatso. So, which society would be better? A society of Jacks or a society of Otises? One where people eat healthy and stay slim, or one where people eat grossly like hippos and look like hippos as well? Again, the answer should be obvious. Then, one wonders why the media, via fashion magazines and the like, push the notion that Fat is Beautiful and just as okay as being slim and trim around the weight?

How about Open Borders? Would it be better for society for most people to oppose the Great Replacement or welcome it? Would it be better for Hungary if most Hungarians were against the Hungarian Nakba or if most Hungarians were for it? For those who are unfamiliar with the term 'Nakba', it was the national tragedy that befell Palestinians when they were colonized, expelled, and replaced on their native territory by European Zionist-Immigration-Imperialists. (As you all should know, Endless Immigration = Genocide or Nakba. If just a trickle of Jewish Immigrants had entered Palestine, Palestinians would still have owned their land and would have tolerated a small Jewish minority. But Jewish Immigration was endless and came to replace the Palestinians... just like endless non-white immigration turned whites in California into a minority. Endless immigration also turned native Hawaiians into a minority in their native ancestral islands.) Anyway, suppose there are two Hungarians. Viktor is opposed to the Hungarian Nakba. He says NO to Endless Immigration, or Replacement Immigration. He believes Hungary will fare best if MOST Hungarians agree with him. Against him is Miklos who sucks up to Jewish globalists like George Soros and welcomes Endless Immigration, one that is sure to lead to the Hungarian Nakba where the native folks are turned into a minority in their own ancestral lands by Africans, Arabs, Muslims, Asians, and others. Miklos wishes MOST folks would agree with him and welcome the Hungarian Nakba. Now, which Hungary will be better off? One where most people think like Viktor or one where most people think like Miklos? If most people think like Miklos, the fate of Hungary will be like the fate of Palestine where the native Palestinians were replaced by European Zionist-immigration-imperialist Jews.

How about Jew-Worship? Would it be better for society if most people said NO to Jew-Worship or if most people said YES to Jew-Worship? Suppose there are Kevin and Lindsey. Kevin thinks it is dangerous for goyim to mindlessly worship and obey Jews who, though smart and creative, tend to be cunning, hostile, vicious, nasty, contemptuous, and exploitative over 'dimwit goyim'. Kevin thinks society would do best if most goyim, while not going full-Nazi, remained wary and cautious about Jewish narratives, agenda, and power. Don't dehumanize Jews but don't deify them either.
In contrast, shabbos goy Lindsey says Jews are oh-so-wonderful-great-awesome-wise-holy-oustanding-and-etc. in every way and then some. Jews are the most sacred, most tragic, most tremendous race of noble folks that ever existed on the face of this planet(and maybe the entire cosmos). If Jews want it, we must give it. If Jews demand, we must fulfill. If Jews command, we must obey. Lindsey believes goy society will be best off if MOST goyim were committed in blind faith to serving, honoring, and appeasing Jews on grounds that what Jews want for themselves and for us must be the BEST thing.
Now, which society would fare better? One where most goyim are like Kevin and remain skeptical of Jewish claims and criticize Jewish abuses OR one where most goyim are like Lindsey and grovel at the feet of Jews as the god-race? Especially since the end of the Cold War, the US embarked on Lindsey-ism and look at the results. Have they been good? The Wars for Israel, bailouts of Jewish banksters, the pornification of mainstream culture, the spread of interracism-jungle-fever-and-ACOWW(Afro-Colonization of White Wombs), anti-white PC propaganda, feminist wedge between white men and white women, Christianity replaced with Globo-Homo Queertianity, White Nakba & Replacement Immigration, new 'cold war' with Russia, and etc.? Has Lindsey-ism been a blessing for America?

And we can go on and on with the game of What-If-Most-People. Given that the health of society depends on what MOST people do, a good society is one where most people do what's right while a bad society(soon to be no-society at all) is one where most people(or enough people) do what's wrong. Needless to say among those cognizant of HBD(human bio-diversity) truths, this isn't only a matter of morality but biology. Some races are more prone to do the wrong thing given their genetic inclinations. Blacks, having evolved to survive in a state of savagery, are hardwired to act against civilizational norms. So, freely left to their own devices, most(or too many) of them will act wrongly and turn once-fine cities like Detroit into hell-holes. White people are genetically hardwired to make more civilized choices while blacks are genetically hardwired to make more savage choices. Whites tend to Europeanize, blacks tend to Africanize. So, a healthy modern society is one where most people are white than black; indeed, blacks in the West can enjoy modernity ONLY BECAUSE they leech off whites; even black achievements under slavery in the Americas owed to white supervision as, after all, black slaves under black rule in black Africa wielded no great results. Though, hypothetically speaking, it's possible for a society made up mostly of black people to have righteous Negroes who act responsible and moral, real-world results invariably show that too-many-blacks lead to 'savagerization'. Likewise, while we can hypothetically imagine a society full of Japanese where most act like jive-ass jiggerish savages, the likelihood is that a society full of Japanese will act in a cooperative and stable manner.
Another factor to consider is that one mustn't confuse 'most' with 'all'. While society is best off if MOST people act in a certain way in accordance to certain values and norms, it wouldn't necessarily be good if ALL people or each-and-every-person acted that way. This is especially true in science and the arts. Certain talents and abilities are inseparable from certain neuroses and eccentric(and often troublesome) tendencies. Many great artists tend to be half-mad or nutty in some way. So, while it wouldn't be good for society if most people had the personalities of Beethoven, Richard Wagner, Brian Wilson, Bob Dylan, and John Lennon, creativity and artistry have benefited from the presence of a small minority of mavericks, rebels, outcasts, and eccentrics. Indeed, this is why homosexuality has been beneficial to civilization as a creative outlier. While homosexuality is biologically useless, morally troublesome, and culturally problematic, the 'gay' sensibility has a way of seeing things that has contributed greatly to the arts, design, and perspectives. So, just because society is best off if MOST people act such-and-such, it doesn't mean ALL people should be that way. Certain social rewards are inseparable from the problems that surround them. It's like there's no honey without the bee stings, there's no championship in boxing without getting hit many times. The good can be attained only through the bad.

Still, for MOST people, there are certain values and standards that are best for society-as-a-whole, and it is essential that the great majority of people adhere to certain values and attitudes. But in our sick, decadent, and degenerate order, such sane-majoritarianism is looked down upon. Fashion magazines push fatties as idols of beauty and health. Cities put on massive globo-homo parades and children are read to by trannies on the premise that 'gay is sacred'. The once-Christian West totally bows down to the demands of Jewish Supremacism as if Jews are deities than flawed humans. Once proudly white nations welcome the Great Replacement or White Nakba. Even though blacks are the most destructive race(by their genetics), the White West worships blacks as demigods and celebrates ACOWW. Even though drugs are harmful for the most part, they are pushed on everyone as soma, soma, soma. Gambling went from a vulgar vice to a 'moral' industry that provides 'reparations' to American Indians. Women get their values from shows like SEX AND THE CITY and GIRLS by Lena Dunham. Skankery has been made the New Normal by Disney run by Jews. Under Jewish Power, society is made to push MOST people to choose the Wrong over the Right. Apparently, Jews fear any notion of majoritarian morality because they are a minority-elite and, as such, fear majority values as threatening to Minority Privilege. So, Jews are hellbent on making the majority accept minority-deviance as the New Normal. This is a terrible thing for the West(and the Rest that still looks to the West to lead the world).

Tuesday, October 29, 2019

A Quiz for All People to Identify the Evil Supremacism that Rules the West and is Ruining the World

We've all heard of how globalism is about the spread of 'liberal democracy' and 'universal values' of freedom and 'human rights' around the world. But given the character of Western Policy(dominated by the US as the lone superpower), especially since the end of the Cold War, it should be obvious to all honest, observant, and principled individuals that a kind of SUPREMACISM governs the world. There's a saying, "Fish rots from the head", and given that the US is the lone super power governed by a satanic supremacist power, it is essential for us, indeed all of mankind, to identify and expose this supremacist power. To aid in this inquiry, we at the center of Andrean Studies have devised a useful quiz to aid participants in the understanding of this most demonic power. All are welcome to take the quiz and encourage friends and family members to do likewise.
1. Which group constitutes only 2% of the US population but hogs 45% of all wealth?

A. West Virginian Hillbillies
B. Vietnamese-Americans
C. Mormons
D. Jews
E. Mexicans

2. Which group is most hypocritical in pushing deracinated multi-culti globalism on the host nation while urging all its citizens to support the ultra-nationalism of ANOTHER nation, namely one that belongs to members of that group?

A. Russian-Americans
B. Iranian-Americans
C. Jewish-Americans
D. Italian-Americans
C. Syrian-Americans

3. Which group demands that we support IDF death squads of Zionism that mow down unarmed and innocent Palestinian men, women, and children whose dream is to return to their homeland, from which they were expelled in the great tragedy of Nakba?

A. David Duke and his followers
B. Pat Buchanan and his readers
C. Neo-Nazis
D. Amish
E. Jewish Zionists and Yinon-ists

4. Which group believes that it’s okay to ruthlessly sacrifice countless Arab lives for the sake of expanding and prolonging Israel’s hegemony over the Middle East? Consider the total lack of sympathy for the 100,000s of Arabs who were killed directly or indirectly in Wars for Israel.

A. Mexicans
B. Chinese
C. KKK
D. Star Wars fans
E. Jewish Globalists

5. Which group carried out Nakba against the Palestinians, thereby uprooting and displacing 600,000 to 700,000 people from what was then Palestine but now is Imperialist Israel? Hint: This group is now pushing for White Nakba by using non-white immigrant-invader hordes as proxies to reduce and replace white populations fated to become fading minorities in their own homelands of deep ancestry or discovery-and-founding, that is if the likes of George Soros can help it.

A. Texan Cowboys
B. Sioux Nation
C. Eskimos
D. Jewish bastards and bitches
E. Andrew Anglin and Co.

6. Which group worked with co-ethnics in Russia to rape, plunder, loot, and fleece the entire economy in the 90s, thus relegating countless Russians to overnight destitution and even death? In an instant, this group took control of over 50% of the Russian economy, grabbed virtually all media, and interfered in Russian politics with shameless abandon. (During the early years of the Cold War, this group was MOST RESPONSIBLE for spying on the US at the behest of Stalin, the killer of millions. Members of this group sent atomic secrets to the USSR, but this group now promulgates fake news hysteria about Trump-Putin Collusion.)

A. Lithuanians
B. Kenyans
C. Japanese
D. Gamers
E. Jewish globalist a**holes

7. Which group dominated organized crime in Russia & Ukraine and practiced white slavery on a massive scale by luring thousands of Slavic women to Israel to serve as sex slaves for Jewish and non-white men?

A. Iranians
B. Jewish punks
C. Bolivians
D. Hindus
E. Richard Spencer and his fanboys

8. Which group stole nuclear material from the US and sent it to Israel that developed nuclear weapons illegally? Which group is perfectly fine with Israel having nuclear weapons but uses American power to strangle Iran’s economy despite Iran having ZERO nukes?

A. Jewish scumbags
B. Elvis Impersonators
C. Proud Boys
D. Polish Catholics
E. Iowan Farmers

9. Which group effectively undermines free speech and free assembly in the US by funding Antifa goons who are unleashed on patriots & conservatives and then given ‘legal’ protection by law firms and courts?

A. Italian Catholics
B. Southern Baptists
C. Illegal Aliens
D. Jewish lowlifes
E. Hippies

10. Which group controls 95% of the media directly or indirectly and uses their monopoly to spread Fake News and Yinon-ist Propaganda that calls on the US to wage endless Wars for Israel?

A. The Right Stuff
B. Nick Fuentes and fans
C. Jewish Weasels
D. Quakers
E. Baltimore Negroes

11. Which group owns and controls most of Porn Industry and spreads anti-white misogyny by encouraging white girls to act like sluts and skanks whose purpose in life is to be cumbuckets and sex meat for black men?

A. Muslim-Americans
B. Chinese-Americans
C. Turkish-Americans
D. Fans of Michelle Malkin
E. Jewish Pigs

12. Which groups controls most of the Vice Industry of Gambling and builds Casinos all over the nation to dupe and fleece countless goyim into handing all their money to filthy moguls like Shelson Adelson?

A. Fans of Red Elephants
B. Jewish Snakes
C. Puerto Ricans
D. Dwarfs who watch Game of Thrones
E. Buddhist-Americans

13. Which group dominates Wall Street and used nefarious means, especially since the 1980s, to manipulate markets and exploit insider trading to rake in trillions for their own kind while impoverishing much of Middle America?

A. Armenian-Americans
B. Kevin MacDonald and writers for Occidental Observer
C. Oil Workers in Alaska
D. Jewish Vermin
E. The Homeless

14. To save big cities from crime, which group did most to expand prisons and lock up record number of blacks while accusing Southern Whites of bias against Negroes?

A. Cuban-Americans
B. Japanese-Americans
C. Greek-Americans
D. Deplorables
E. Jewish Crooks

15. Which group is most responsible for Hate Propaganda against Russians, Iranians, Syrians, Chinese, Palestinians, White Americans, Christians, and Conservatives, all of whom are routinely mocked by Hollywood and Mass Media as subhuman whose only purpose is to be defeated and subjugated to serve Globo-Homo supremacy? This group also spread opioid dependency that destroyed countless white working class lives. This group also dominated opium trade in China that wrecked millions of Chinese lives.

A. Palestinian-Americans
B. Jewish Motherf***ers
C. Hungarian-Americans
D. Czech-Americans
E. Beatlemaniacs

16. Which group promoted and profited from Gangsta Rap Music that spread Thug Supremacist Hatred all over the black community and encouraged black punks to blow each other away over turf, drugs, and bitchass ho’s?

A. Jewish C***suckers
B. The French
C. Serbians
D. Tibetan Buddhists
E. Burmese-Americans

17. Which group has done most to consecrate homo-fecal-penetration and tranny-penis-cutting as the noblest and holiest life-choices in the history of the world? Which group has done most to spread Globo-Homo supremacy and encourage hysteria & hatred against those who stand by morality, normality, and decency?

A. The Irish
B. Nicaraguans
C. Jewish Satanists
D. Indonesians
E. Somalians

18. Which group is doing its utmost to take guns away from white American patriots because it wants all firepower to be monopolized by the State that they control through obedient bureaucracy and bought-off politicians? Name the group that seeks firepower supremacy and monopoly by taking guns away from regular decent Americans.

A. Small-town folks of Oklahoma
B. South Dakota Republicans
C. Vile and Venal Jews
D. Andrew Torba and his crew at GAB
E. Anime fans

19. Which group can be characterized as the New Nazis for its promotion of wars in the Middle East that destroyed millions of lives and for its rabid & virulent hatred against Russia that risks tensions for another global war? This group also calls for Mass-Migration-Invasion into all nations EXCEPT Israel. This groups says all nations must open up to endless immigration-invasion while, at the same time, doing their utmost to support and defend the demographic integrity of Israel. Which group could be so shamelessly hypocritical?

A. Romanians
B. Finns
C. Hungarians
D. Insufferable Jews
E. Fatsos

20. Which people are the masters of Projection, blaming all their own wickedness and evilness on OTHER groups? Which group spews hatred at others while accusing others of ‘hate speech’? Which group uses women of other groups as sex meat while accusing others of misogyny? Which group hogs most power and privilege while bitching about ‘white privilege’? Which group says ‘nationalism for me but not for thee’? Which group acts like the New Nazis but then calls other peoples ‘nazis’ or ‘new hitlers’? Which people wiped off a whole nation off the map(Palestine) but bitch and whine(and lie) about how others are on the verge of wiping their ill-gotten nation off the map?

A. Chechens
B. Kurds
C. American Indians
D. Slovaks
E. It’s the Jews, stupid

So, having finished the quiz, which group do YOU think is infected with the most diabolical and dangerous kind of supremacism in the world?

Tuesday, June 12, 2018

Should Zionist Killers and Shills of World Jewry be called DEATH SQUADS? — The Power of Terminology — Waging War of Terminology on Jewish Globalist Supremacism

Zionist Death Squad?
A good example of media manipulation of mass perception is the term ‘death squad’. It was an oft-used term in the 1970s and 1980s, and it almost always applied to ‘right-wing’ regimes. So, we heard of ‘right-wing death squad’ over here, ‘right-wing death squad’ over there. But we almost never heard of ‘left-wing death squads’ even though there were plenty of them beginning with Bolshevik Terror. NKVD and communist henchmen terrorized entire villages and executed many people. Millions died under Stalin. Communist lynch-mobs were assembled by Red China to wage class war. Mass terror and killings were carried out by both the Right and Left in the Spanish Civil War. The most horrific leftist mass-killings were carried out by the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. And yet, ‘death squads’ only applied to ‘right-wing’ regimes(usually allied with the US in the Cold War) as far as the Media and Academia were concerned. Strange, isn’t it? (Back then, it was deemed okay for Liberals and Progressives to embarrass US neo-imperialist hegemony because Marxist ideology was still in vogue among intellectuals and elite power was still held by Wasps who were resented by Jews who were willing to push any narrative to discredit Anglo-American prestige. Today, with Jews as the ruling elites of US and EU, there is far less media condemnation of US hegemony that is now pretty synonymous with Jewish globo-homo domination. If anything, the Neo-Libs and Neocons in the Deep State seem most triggered when Trump threatens less aggression and more peace in US dealings with the world.)

Why were right-wing killers ‘death squads’ but left-wing killers weren’t designated as such? Was it because left-wing violence was motivated by a sense of justice even if horribly misguided or extreme? Thus, one could argue leftist violence was fueled by moral passion. In contrast, many right-wing regimes were perceived as concerned only with privilege, wealth, and power of reactionary elites. Thus, at least from the leftist perspective, right-wing killings were cold, heartless, and robotic. It was more like slaughtering animals. Right-wing elites recruited and trained killers to not think-and-feel but just follow orders and mow down any people who posed a challenge to the status quo of inequality and injustice. These killers were like the Terminator in the James Cameron movie. Mindless, programmed, and mechanical. In contrast, even if leftist killers often got out of hand, they were motivated by moral passion and sense of justice... or so the Left wanted to believe.
At least in the hotbeds of political violence in Latin America from the 1950s to the late 1980s, such a view was not without merit. Though the Castro-Guevara-Mao-inspired guerrillas, insurgents, and radicals adopted an extreme ideology and were all-too-willing to indulge in terror & sabotage, they recognized the fundamentally oppressive and corrupt socio-economic systems that had taken root all across Latin America. So, they wanted to make a difference. They identified the problem as stemming from a cynical alliance of parasitic oligarchs, military-men, Yanqui imperialists, and the Church(even though there were left-leaning schools of Catholicism that sympathized with the Marxists). If the Left was struggling for justice, the Right seemed to be standing for power. It was idealism vs cynicism. Leftists were willing to kill for a cause. Rightists were willing to kill for control. Leftist violence had a human face. Rightist violence was faceless. Or that was how the Left conceptualized the conflict. It’s like Sergei Eisenstein’s use of Facial Politics in BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN and ALEXANDER NEVSKY. Tsar’s troops that gun down protesters on the Odessa steps are faceless. They march lockstep like automatons and coldly gun down noble idealists with terrified faces. And in ALEXANDER NEVSKY, the faces of the Teutonic Knights are hidden behind helmets. In contrast, the visages of the patriotic Russian warriors are prominently featured. It’s like Mecha-Godzilla vs Godzilla.


The Left drove home the point that, even if its ideological comrades shed a lot of blood, their violence was generally more justifiable because it was based on a Theory of Justice that on that Greed-of-Power that supposedly animated the Right.

But when we look back on the 20th century, such conceit is difficult to sustain. While early communists may have been fired up by genuine idealism and commitment to justice, once in power the communists could be just as mechanical, brutal, and heartless in their mass slaughter of innocents. Violence that had been fueled by hunger for justice, shining idealism, and/or vengeful rage(against right-wing tyranny) became a mindless habit of destruction and terror to intimidate and control. This was especially true when the communists, after running out of class enemies to destroy, turned against fellow communists to be purged as ‘saboteurs’, ‘renegades’, or ‘capitalist-roaders’. It wasn’t long before politics in communist regimes came to be mainly about power and control, as George Orwell satirized in ANIMAL FARM. What is striking about the victims of Stalin and Mao was that they were so unnecessary. It was one thing for the Reds to have spilled a lot of blood during the Civil War and early campaigns. But the mass terror didn’t end and kept on expanding even against countless innocents who posed no threat to the regime. Indeed, most of Stalin and Mao’s victims were powerless peasants or fellow communists(who were purged and even executed in power struggles or out of sheer paranoia). Wherever communists came to power, there was a good chance of mass violence that became cold, mechanical, and ruthless. Even after their power was consolidated, certain communist regimes couldn’t get enough of more killing. It would not have been far-fetched to designate their killing machines as ‘death squads’. But they were hardly ever called any such.

The Western Media preferred to reserve ‘death squads’ only for right-wing regimes. It’s like the term ‘lynch-mob’ has been selectively used to especially vilify White Southerners even though the number of blacks lynched by white mobs over the century following the Civil War wasn’t that high. If anything, many more blacks die of lynching in any given year in black Africa than all the blacks were lynched in America. But the media almost never refer to the black African violence as being carried out by lynch-mobs. And black pack behavior in the US has led to many group-racial attacks on both whites and blacks. Blacks often run riot in packs and attack white people, sometimes resulting in fatalities. But the media never refer to such violence as lynch-mob attacks. And blacks often gang up on other blacks(especially of rival gangs or neighborhoods) and sometimes use extreme violence that leads to deaths. But again, the media don’t call them lynch-mobs.
Same is true of the term ‘pogrom’. 99% of the time in media usage, it is mob violence used against Jews. But similar mob violence against non-Jews is hardly called a ‘pogrom’. And when Jews use such violence against others, there is zero chance of it being called a pogrom. Nakba, the mass-expulsion of Palestinians from what was soon to become ‘Israel’, had all the hallmarks of a pogrom, but when have you ever seen the media designate the Palestinian Tragedy as ‘Nakba pogroms’? Indeed, the Jew-run media hardly ever use the term ‘Nakba’ in relation to events in 1948. And of course, even though Zionists were among the innovators of Modern Terrorism, the term is almost never used in relation to Jews and Zionists. So, when Israel used explosives to assassinate nuclear scientists in Iran, New York Times put ‘terrorist’ in quotes, as if it was just a subjective and biased opinion of the Iranian government. Of course, if the Iranian regime had used similar violence against a scientist or engineer in Israel, it would have been called pure and simple TERRORISM(and would have been cause for war). But then, Jews also cynically use terms such as ‘paranoia’, ‘conspiracy theory’, ‘racism’, ‘supremacism’, and ‘privilege’ to their tribal advantage. So, anyone who speculates about the Deep State and Jewish power is suffering from ‘paranoia’ and fueling ‘conspiracy theories’, but any globalist who pulls the fire-alarm about ‘Russia Hacking’ and Trump-as-Putin’s-puppet is supposedly ‘woke’. And for some reason or another, whites are ‘racist’ no matter what they do, but blacks and Jews are always ‘anti-racist’ no matter how nasty and hostile they act at the expense of other groups. (Jews, both prizing black alliance and fearing black rage, do their best to channel most of black rage at WHITEY away from Jewey even though Jewey has been at the forefront of using tough neo-liberal policies to cut down on black crime to revive globo-homo Jew-run cities.)
And the mere desire of white peoples/cultures to preserve themselves from the globalist onslaught of massive economic disruption, cultural degeneration, and demographic imperialism is denigrated as ‘white supremacist’ or ‘far right’. But Jewish globalists using their elite power to force Western nations to favor Jewish interests and Zionist tyranny over Palestinians is apparently not ‘supremacist’. And according to the PC logic of ‘privilege’, a poor white person working in a West Virginian coal mine has more advantages than Jewish oligarchs who rake in gazillions in ill-gotten profits in Hollywood, Las Vegas, and Wall Street.

Control of buttons on the Terminological Switchboard in academia, media, and the state means you can manipulate most minds. It’s like the power of RNA to regulate DNA. After all, why is it that so many suckers think ‘hate’ applies only to white patriots but never to Jews, blacks, homos, Mexicans, and etc.? Surely, everyone hates something, and all groups have their likes and dislikes, even strong hatreds. But when have you heard of Zionist attitudes toward Palestinians, Syrians, and Iranians designated as ‘hate’? We are told by Jew-run Hate News that Palestinian children are raised to hate Israeli Jews, and that may well be true for historical and social reasons. But Jew-run Hate News overlook the fact that Jewish kids are also raised to distrust and hate Palestinians, Christian Arabs, Persians, and Muslims-in-general(even though Jews will cynically ally with one bunch of Muslims against another bunch of Muslims). So, why is it ‘hate’ ONLY WHEN Palestinians feel antipathy toward Jews? Indeed, it’s difficult to think of a more hateful people than Jews in our globalized world. Jewish Power has expressed rabid and virulent hatred for white Americans, white Europeans(too many are ‘far right’ apparently), Russians, Iranians, Syrians, Palestinians, Christians, Chinese, and etc. Now, Jews are not the ONLY people filled with hate, but their hatreds are more extensive because they have such over-sized ambitions all around the world. For example, Greeks and Turks don’t much like each other for historical reasons. But that’s just hate between two nations. And Chinese and Vietnamese don’t much like each other either. But again, it’s about one nation vs another. India and Pakistan still have simmering resentments against one another. There are certain tribes in Nigeria that harbor mutually hostile feelings, but those hatreds are limited to the borders of Nigeria.
In contrast, Jewish globalist power extends its tentacles all over the world. (To be sure, nasty and clever Jews project their megalomania onto OTHERS and pretend that Putin and Russia, with the support of Iran, are about to swallow the world, LOL.) So, Jewish Power ends up hating all nations and peoples who dare to say NO to Jewish power in the way that some women said NO to Harvey Weinstein to no avail. Just like Weinstein’s sordid horniness, Jewish Power operates on the principle of ‘Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you’. So, even as Weinstein pressed himself on his female victims, he was acting like they were doing him wrong by saying NO to his ‘boing’-ish lust. Boo hoo, HE was the wronged party. Likewise, Jews go all around the world to peddle their brand of globalism, but if you say NO, they flip out and accuse you of being ‘far right’, ‘hateful’, and ‘not inclusive’. But because Jews control the Terms of Debate, they can get away with all their hatreds because their virulence is never called ‘hate’, whereas even the mere desire by whites to be left alone is smeared as ‘hateful’, ‘far right’, and ‘extreme’. But then, we are dealing with a people who call illegal invaders ‘dreamers’ and denounce American patriots who care about borders and Rule of Law as ‘nazis’. Never mind that Nazis were imperialists who had no respect for the borders of its neighbors. And never mind that Jews came to be hated in so many nations because they went from place to place without sense of roots, loyalty, and obligation to the host population. Too often, Jews acted like high-IQ gypsies. Imagine a Tribe made up of people with the personalities and attitudes of Sarah Silverman, Howard Stern, Harvey Weinstein, and Bill Maher. You don’t have to think much to realize why Jews came to be loathed in so many places. The problem with Jews is they were always pro-imperialist and piggy-backed on the aggressions of other peoples for opportunities to get theirs. So, Jews piggy-backed on British Imperialism to sell opium to the Chinese. Jews piggy-backed on Muslim invasion of Europe and served Arab conquerors to the detriment of Europeans. The main reason why Jews hated Russian Imperialism was because the Tsar limited Jews to the Pale of Settlement. Jews would have loved Russian Imperialism if they’d been given free rein to ply their trade all across the empire. (By the way, if Jews feel that the limiting Jews to the Pale of Settlement was so unjust, why do Zionists in Israel limit Arabs to the Palestine-of-Settlement in Gaza and West Bank? Why can’t those Arabs gain free movement and access to Israel that once used to be Palestine? Notice that Jews who bitch about how Russians had limited Jewish movement now have no problem with Zionists limiting Arab movement. Even though Palestinians in Gaza and West Bank who approach the Israeli borders are shot down like rabbits, Israelis act as if they have the right to invade or bomb neighboring territories of Lebanon and Syria.)

Anyway, we need to take the Power of Terminology seriously. After all, consider the term ‘terminology’ itself. It is related to the term ‘terminate’. The purpose of terminology is to terminate all competing interpretations and designations of reality by fixing a certain event, phenomenon, or conflict with a definitive term. Take a term like ‘witch’. A certain woman may be admired for her spiritual or magical powers in a pagan community, but Christians may decide she is simply a ‘witch’. That term terminates all competing meanings(that may be positive and admiring) and vilifies her as an agent of evil. Or consider the term ‘witch-hunt’. By designating the anti-communist investigations and purges of the late 40s and early 50s as ‘witch-hunts’, the Liberal Order and Jewish Power discredited the effort of conservatives as essentially paranoid. After all, witches, like Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy, doesn’t exist. Thus, if HUAC and men like Joe McCarthy were supposedly hunting-for-witches, they must have been delusional paranoids like the characters in Arthur Miller's THE CRUCIBLE. Thus, Liberals and Jews changed the Narrative from ‘US government teeming with Soviet spies, some of whom even sent Stalin the secret of the Bomb’ to ‘Crazy red-baiting right-wingers hunting for communist witches under the beds.’ Thus, a lot of Jewish radicals who should have been smoked out remained in institutions of media and the state. By toying with terminology via the power of media and academia, Jews dodged a bullet that could have really hit the bull’s eye of Jewish subversion.

Terminology is like the Terminator. Terminology is the monotheism of meaning. It purges and destroys all competing definitions that serve as basis for interpretations. It terminates anything and everything that stands in the way of the one and only meaning that serves The Narrative. Consider how Jews are so utterly unrelenting in their use of the terms ‘supremacism’, ‘hate’, and ‘privilege’ to portray White Autonomy as evil, evil, and evil. Jews know Jewish Supremacism cannot exist without White Submissivism to Jewish authority and sanctity. So, the Ziopoly(Zio-Monopoly) of Terminology commands and insists 24/7 that any white consciousness that longs for Freedom from Jewish Domination is about ‘supremacism’, ‘hate’, and ‘privilege’. And Jews do the same to Russia. Ever since Russia said ‘enough’ and ‘no more’ to Jewish-globalist financial rape, Jews have ‘weinsteined’ Russia with threats and defamation. Russia should join the #MeToo movement against Jewish Global Rape. After all, we now know that Weinstein employed a network of lawyers, rumor-mongers, defamers, and publicists to silence and destroy anyone who dared to blow the whistle than blow his willy. But then, the Deep Throat State works the same way. It hates whistle-blowers like Edward Snowden and loves willy-blowers who not only suck on the cock of power but gladly swallow as well.


It is about time that we go into #MeToo mode against the Terminological Monopoly of Jewish Supremacists who’ve been raping the English language to terminate all competing and corrective meanings that pose challenges to the narrow Jewish Globalist Worldview. What is most perverse about Jewish Globalism is there has never been a power so expansive and intrusive but also so petty and narrow. If Jews want to be nationalist or tribal and care mostly about Jewish affairs in Israel and some cities in which they are prominent, then fine. But, Jews aren’t content with just minding their own business. They want to rule the world and dictate their terms to all of humanity. But if a people want to play imperialist, there must be a spirit of give-and-take premised on the admittance of hegemonic power. After all, Roman imperialists, British imperialists, Ottoman imperialists, and Russian imperialists never denied that they had the supreme power over the their empires. They put themselves out there as the great rulers of others. But for that very reason, they were expected to be just, fair, and magnanimous. In exchange for the submission to their rule, they were obligated to show that their rule would be good for everyone in the imperial domain. When the US was led by Anglo-American elites, Pax Americana operated more or less along those lines, i.e. while the US empire would use ruthless means to maintain its power around the world, those who complied with the terms would be treated kindly and generously. It’s like Christianity. Historically, Christians(and Muslims too) were willing to use aggression and violence to conquer heathens. But once heathens accepted the Word of God, they too were to be accepted as fellow Christian brothers and sisters.

Thus, there are two morally feasible ways of existence. One way is to be nationalist, mind your own business, and leave other nations alone. Japan was like this for many centuries before the West forced it open. The other way is to seek world power and gain hegemony over others but also to give the others, the subject peoples, a chance to make something of themselves in the New Order. Thus, imperialism, though aggressive and brutal, partially justifies itself by allowing mutual give-and-take all over the world.
The problem with Jews is they want to have the cake and eat it too. They want World Power but pretend they got no power. They want to create a Neo-Imperial New World Order but one where the only real beneficiaries are Jews. Look what Jewish-dominated privatization did to Russia in the 1990s. It was little more than Jewish rape of Russia. Or take Jewish-led globalist policy in the Middle East. It has been total hell for several Arab nations just so Israel could benefit. And there is all this hate against Iran simply because Jews want Israel to be the One and Only dominant power in the Middle East. While all empires were self-serving and hypocritical, Jewish globalism has been utterly pathological in its willingness to sacrifice entire swaths of humanity just to serve the megalomania of Jews who seem to regard most of goyim as cattle. Jewish hypocrisy and obnoxiousness are fully on display when Jews denounce Hungary and Poland as ‘far right’ even as they demand that all white nations support Israel’s right to secure its borders and survival as a Jewish State. It’s all the more sickening because all those Arab ‘refugees’ have been unleashed by wars generated by Neocons who work for the interests of Israel. Furthermore, Israel had also directly aided ISIS death squads and carried out aerial attacks on Syria despite the fact that Syria never fired anything into Israel. So, Israel not only gets to have 300 illegal nukes but gets to wage wars on its neighbors, thereby setting off a ‘refugee’ crisis that uprooted millions of people. And yet, Hungary and Poland are the ‘far right’ evil nations for not taking in all those people uprooted by Wars for Israel while, at the same time, they are expected to show full support of Israel’s right to be a Jewish state. Jewish myopia is as deranged as that of King Leopold of Belgium whose only interest in the Congo was to rape it as much as possible. To Jews, the whole world is one big Congo for Jewish greed. Jews didn’t care about all those destitute Russians in the 1990s. Jews didn’t care about all those dead Arabs and Muslims in all those Wars for Israel. Jews didn't care about 100,000s of Iraqi women and children who may have perished due to US sanctions under Clinton. And Jews don’t care about all those whites in the US, EU, and Canada whose lives have been turned upside down by Third World mass invasion, loss of manufacturing jobs, opioid & other drug epidemics, pornification of mainstream culture(soul-destroying of young kids), addiction to gambling, slut-pride feminism, and Homomania as Satanic-Jewish-christianity(or SJC). Jews have used globalism to mess up the whole world just so they could take over the bodies and souls of everyone who comes under Jewish power one way or another: financial, pharmaceutical, quasi-spiritual(homomania), cultural(PC & porny pop culture), military(like all those Muslims killed by Wars for Israel), and etc.

Anyway, the time has come for us to use Terminological Firepower against the Jews. We need to fire them off like Katusha rockets in WWII. Relentless and ruthless. We need to take all the Jewish filth-rockets shot at white peoples, Palestinians, Russians, Iranians, and others and shoot them right back at Jews. ‘Death squads’? We need to call Zionists and the IDF ‘Jewish death squads’. Every time IDF soldiers gun down Palestinians in Gaza and every time Israeli jets rain down bombs to kill scores of Palestinian women and children, we need to use the term ‘death squad’ to characterize Zionist Power. As for what the Jews did to the Palestinians in 1948, it must be called ‘pogrom’. Whenever 1948 is mentioned, call the event ‘Nakba pogroms’. And whenever Israeli settlers and IDF work in tandem to terrorize, brutalize, and kill Palestinians in the West Bank, we need to paint them as ‘Jewish lynch mobs’. And we need to constantly invoke the terms ‘hate’ and ‘supremacism’ in reference to how Jewish Power operates around the world. And if Jews bitch on and on about the ‘far right’, call them as ‘Far Jew’ or ‘Far Tribe’.
We need our own Terminological Terminators against the Terminological Death Squads that Jewish Power has been employing against us. We need our own Letterman.

Wednesday, February 28, 2018

Why Philip Weiss’ Cure for the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is Worse than the Disease


Mondoweiss: The Never-Ending Crisis of Zionism by Philip Weiss

There are so many things wrong with the above article, I don’t know where to start.

Now, kudos to Philip Weiss’ sympathy for Palestinians. In US politics, Sympathy for Palestinians is virtually forbidden. No mainstream politician dares to express any sympathy for the plight of a people who are now in their 50th year of Occupation(and never mind Nakba, the mass campaign of pogroms that wiped Palestine off the map to make way for the creation of Israel). Virtually all US politicians(at federal, state, and local level) are into Israel First, Israel First, Israel First. Same goes for the mainstream 'right-wing' media and mainstream 'left-wing' media. They never utter the term Nakba, and most Americans never heard of it even though the US played the most instrumental role in the mass pogroms against Palestinians.

Though Weiss is often right in his diagnosis of symptoms, his proposed cure will only make compound the problem. (It's like Marx was a better appraiser of modern economics than its solver.) Indeed, Weiss' proposed solutions are not unlike the mindsets and fateful decisions that led to the current mess. Weiss fails to understand that he's a universalist-imperialist who, in condemning nationalism, unwittingly serves as yet another puppet of globalist-imperialist open-borders. He fails to realize and acknowledge that violation of nationalism has been the true curse of the 20th century.

The current mess with Palestinians began with and under imperialism. Much of the Middle East failed to develop into a viable political entities under the Ottoman Empire. And then, the British Empire allowed Zionists to ‘immigrate’ into Palestine and gradually, the dramatically, take over from Arabs. That was the origins of the disaster. It was made possible by imperialist suppression of local autonomy and independence. And of course, Israel is now backed by the US, itself no longer a sovereign national entity but a war-mongering(culturally or militarily) hegemon that invades other nations financially & militarily and is, in turn, invaded by other nations demographically.

Weiss says the current plight of Palestinians is like what Jews suffered 100 yrs ago, but that’s a complete misconception.
For one thing, Palestinians are in their own lands, from which they’ve been evicted or on which they are occupied. Jews in Europe, in contrast, were living in other people’s lands. The violent reactions against Jews in Europe were, in some respects, like Palestinian intifada against Zionists. This was made all the worse due to imperialism. After all, why did the worst outbreaks against Jews happen in Imperial Nations? Because so many ethnic groups felt occupied under Imperialist rule and came to regard Jews as collaborator agents of the empire. Any non-Austrian gentile who resented Austrian rule came to distrust Jews as the agents and middlemen serving the empire. Or, it could be the other way around. The ruling ethnic group could come to regard Jews as radical agitators riling up the other groups against the imperial status quo.

Despite certain degree of ambivalence and even hostility toward Jews, sovereign nation-states, in general, treated Jews much better: UK, France, Netherlands, Italy, Sweden, and etc. France was known for ‘notorious antisemitism’, but it didn’t have regular outbreaks of pogroms like in Eastern Europe where aspiring nationalism were suppressed by the empire, be it Germanic or Slavic. Granted, sometimes, Jews found the Imperial Order to their benefit. Diversity, as in Austro-Hungarian Empire, made it near-impossible for all gentiles to unite against Jews, as later were to happen in National Socialist Germany. The various gentile groups were too busy squabbling with each other to unite their forces against the Jews. But on the other hand, because so many groups felt so disenfranchised, occupied, and denied national sovereignty, they grew ever more bitter and came to scapegoat Jews as the source of problems. Imperialist Diversity weakens national unity among goyim, but it also intensifies their rage and bitterness, and that can provide dry wood for massive conflagration. And even though National Socialism was a severe case of nationalist antisemitism, the origins of Hitler’s rage were imperial(and he became most dangerous to Jews when he pivoted from German nationalism to German Imperialism). He grew up in the Austro-Hungarian Empire where ethnic tensions were intensifying due to Slavic and other hostilities. If he’d grown up in a secure Germanic nation, he might have regarded Jews as just a minority that should be tolerated. But he got radicalized in the Austro-Hungarian Empire where politics was hostile along ethnic lines because non-Austrians felt oppressed by Austro-Hungarian elite power. And since this bitterness was directed at ALL Austrians, even an ordinary civilian like Hitler could become ultra-ethnic in hostility. And WWI was the result of clash of empires, not of nations. Germans put pan-Germanicism above all else, and Russia pandered to Pan-Slavicism. And UK joined with France and Russia because it saw the rise of Germany as a threat to British Imperial Hegemony.

Hitler had a chance of making National Socialism work, but because he grew up under Imperial Mentality, his ambitions spilled across German borders and targeted Czech nation, then Poland, and then even USSR. That was his undoing. He wasn’t satisfied with German Nationalism. National Socialism turned into Imperial Racial Socialism for the ‘Aryans’.

But Jewish reaction to antisemitism also made the problem worse. It was right for powerful and influential Jews to do SOMETHING to help out their less fortunate brethren around the world. But what did Jacob Schiff’s support of ‘Russian’ Revolution lead to? A totalitarian terror state where millions of people were sent to Gulag and where 100,000s were summarily executed by secret police. Pogroms were terrible, but the casualties were in the thousands. In contrast, the Soviet Revolution, disproportionately led by Jews, killed millions and destroyed tens of thousands of churches. It even killed every member of Tsar’s family, kids included. This blooy radical behavior on the part of Jews led many European conservatives to side with Fascists and National Socialists as the lesser to two evils. And prior to WWII, that would have been the sane assessment because most of the mass horrors til then had been carried out by communists, many of whom were Jewish.

Weiss writes:

"The most brilliant Jew in the world, Franz Kafka came out of his office in Prague to see Jews being beaten and he went to Zionist meetings."

Here, Weiss sort of hints at how today’s problems are rooted in past reactions. Kafka obviously wasn’t the only Jew who reacted to events by showing interest in Zionism. Zionism was a strange hybrid. It was a reaction against both Imperialism and Nationalism. In some ways, Jews were jumping on the Nationalist Bandwagon. With each ethnic group demanding their own nation-state and sovereignty — further emboldened by Woodrow Wilson’s idea of national self-determination following WWI — , Jews figured they should demand their own nation too. But there was one problem. While Czechs, Slovaks, Serbs, Croatians, Poles, and etc could look at the soil beneath their feet and claim it as their ancestral homeland, Jews could make no such claim in Europe. So, they had to look elsewhere, and the most significant piece of real estate was the Holy Land from which the Jewish people and culture originated.

But even as Jews caught the spirit of gentile groups calling for their own homelands, they were also reacting against gentile nationalism. Had the Imperial system continued, Jews could have carried on as a nomadic or mercurial group serving as middlemen among various folks. But with the rise of nationalism, such ambiguous identity was becoming untenable. Gentile national identities could become hostile to Jewishness, and even this hostility had a duality. It loathed Jews as a stubborn ancient identity that refused to assimilate with gentiles and convert to Christianity, but it also loathed Jews as a mercurial hyper-modern zelig-like chameleons who could adapt to any place and time.

Anyway, because European Jews couldn’t claim any land in Europe as their own, they couldn’t just oppose imperialism. If Poles wanted Poland, all they had to do was oppose Russian and German imperialism. Once Russians and Germans were gone from Poland, it was Poland for the Polish.
In contrast, even with the fall of empires, Jews were still without a nation of their own in Europe. They had to claim their homeland elsewhere, and it turned out to be the Holy Land. And since Palestine was dominated by non-Jews, Jews needed the support of Imperialism to gain access to the land. Jews had trickled in during Ottoman times, but it was under British Imperialist rule that Jews began to enter in much bigger numbers. Jews were looking to create a nationalist state but with the help of imperialism. Thus, Israel was created in the most paradoxical manner. It was to establish Jewish national sovereignty, but it could only be done by using an imperialist power to deny national sovereignty to the natives.

This was all the more complicated because European Jews were both the most powerful and the least powerful people. They were least powerful because they were minorities in all territories and had no land to claim as their own. Serbs and Slovaks were far less successful than Jews financially and culturally, but they still could claim the soil under their feet as their homeland. They were rooted whereas Jews were rootless. This rootless was a huge disadvantage to Jews, but it was also why they’d grown so powerful. Unable to stake their wealth on rootedness to soil, Jewish wealth developed via networks. It was ‘cloud-wealth’, like Google offers cloud-computing. So, even if Jews got kicked out of a certain nation, they might still have wealth stored in international networks. Even if they lost their homes and personal properties, their bank accounts could be forwarded to London or Paris. In contrast, if a ‘dumb Polack’ lost his home and property, he really had nothing left. Jews had Cloud Wealth wheres gentile simpletons had Earth Wealth. To be sure, not all Jews had Cloud Wealth, and many in Eastern Europe were dirt-poor. But because the Jewish Network existed, even the poorer Eastern European cousins soon learned to take advantage of it.

This duality of Jews as the most powerful people(with financial stake in just about every European nation and kingdom) and least powerful people(as a folks without homeland) made things all the more complicated in relation to Zionism. On the one hand, it was weak Jews pleading for a homeland of their own. They were unfortunate unlike other European folks who could claim the land under their feet as theirs.
On the other hand, it was a case of powerful Jews manipulating and bribing the Great European Empires to do their bidding… like what God did for the Hebrews in their departure from Egypt. Open up the seas and let Jews enter the Promised Land. It was a replay of Exodus — and even called such by Leon Uris the novelist — because the ancient story itself is paradoxical. On the one hand, Hebrews are a weak people in flight from the powerful Egyptian Military. On the other hand, Jews have all-powerful God on their side, and the Egyptians have no chance.

Anyway, if Weiss’ point is that today’s Jews must act on behalf of Palestinians like past Jews did for Jews-suffering-pogroms in Eastern Europe, he should think again because those efforts 100 yrs ago backfired horribly. It led to the rise of communism and death of millions, and then the counter-reaction of rise of National Socialism that led to WWII. Looking back, Jews should have been more sober in their assessments and courses of action. Jews overreacted and falsely blamed the Russian Tsar for the pogroms. This led to worldwide Jewish support for communism, the horror unleashed by which was many times worse than pogroms. And didn’t Zionism(yet another scheme to help suffering Jews), which eventually reclaimed the Holy Land by humiliating Arabs and Muslims, lead to the current state of affairs? If Jews really wanted a land of their own, rich and powerful Jews should have pooled their resources together to buy some land in some empty part of the world. A land the size of Israel in Australia, Canada, or some other part willing to bargain with Judea. With the power of the Rothchilds in the UK, I’m sure something along those lines could have been arranged. But Jews wanted the Holy Land. And this entailed war and ethnic cleansing. Worse, it led to occupation and Zionist imperialism on Muslim nations. Zionist nationalists asked for the white horse than took the cuddly pig. It’s like the scene in VIVA ZAPATA where Brando’s character offers a Mex kid a piglet but the kid insists on Zapata's great white horse.

Jews could have asked for a nation in some inhabited part of the world, and then it would have been a peaceful piggy-wiggy nation. But they wanted the War Horse of the Holy Land, and they’ve been riding that horse and trampling all over international norms.

That said, what is done is done and can’t be reversed. Israel is here to stay. Still, Jews failed to do it right. Jews could have done two things. Call for peaceful co-existence with Arabs, but then this would have entailed NO MORE JEWISH IMMIGRATION. Arabs could have accepted a Jewish-Arab-inhabited Holy Land IF Jews would agree to end of immigration. But Jews wanted endless Right of Return to all Jews around the world to Palestine, and that was something Arabs could not accept.

So, the inevitable result was war. But Jews didn’t do this right. If a people are going to ethnically cleanse a people, they need to go all out. Kick them all out, like what Andrew Jackson did with the Indians. Instead, Jews expelled most but kept enough to cause lots of trouble. The Rule of History is, “If you are gonna do it(even if morally dubious), do it ‘right’ and go all the way, but if you feel it’s wrong or not worth doing, don’t do it at all.” It’s like US military involvement since end of WWII. It’s been confused, with US getting embroiled in a serious way but not enough to really finish the job. Look at the mess in Iraq. And before that, it was Vietnam. Kennedy was wise about Cuba. Once he decided against intervention following Bay of Pigs, he stuck to his guns and let Cuba be. It’s like Chechnya. Russians had two choices: Just let it go OR go in big and utterly crush the rebellion. Neither would have been ideal, politically or morally, but there are times in history when half-heartedness leads to more and bigger problems.

At any rate, if the purpose of Zionism was Jewish nationalism, Jews shot themselves in the foot by letting too many Arabs remain in Israel and then occupying West Bank. The ONLY sensible rationale for Israel’s conquest of West Bank in 1967 would have been to push the remaining Arabs in Israel into it. Instead, Jews colonized the land, and now Jews got Diversity Hell in both Israel and West Bank. Diversity leads to trouble.

Weiss writes:

"Peace Now urges separation: 'the occupation corrodes Israel and its image, and will continue until Israel extricates itself from the Palestinians.' Jewish separation from Palestinians is a delusion. It is like whites separating from blacks in the U.S. Israel is 20 percent non-Jewish; and it rules territories containing 5 million Palestinians; and though the world has resolved to 'extricate' the Jews from the Arabs for 70 years now, the communities are intertwined more than ever, as Israeli Jews flood the West Bank and build more and more Jewish-only colonies."

If separation is a delusion, how were Jews able to carry out Nakba in 1948 when Jews were the minority and far less powerful than they are today? The real delusion is that Peace can be arrived via Diversity. Weiss has a good heart about Palestinians but he’s being naive. Justifiably or not, Arabs are PISSED. If Jews were to go for one-state-solution and allow Arabs equal rights, it will be the end for Israel. Palestinians who outnumber Jews in West Bank will rise up and commit horrible acts of violence once Apartheid regimen is lifted. And if Arabs have equal rights in Israel, then it will mean Arabs should be allowed to immigrate to Israel as well. The Right of Return for Palestinian Diaspora will spell doom for Israel as a Jewish state.
If you want lasting peace, Peace Now is somewhat correct. Its only problem is it doesn’t go far enough. All Arabs in Israel should be pushed to West Bank and all Jews in West Bank should be repatriated to Israel. It may be politically impossible, but such is the ONLY lasting solution. It’s like the only sensible solution for South Africa was separation. Let whites be HERE and let blacks be THERE. Instead, the 'rainbow nation' turned into bloody nation. Palestinians have a right to be spitting mad at the Jews, and for that reason, any notion of long-lasting peace under Diversity is a delusion. Weiss’ is being willfully naive and hopeful to stoke his ego as the Good Jew denouncing Bad Jews. There can be no ‘good Jews’ or ‘bad Jews’ in the current situation. It’s between sensible Jews and delusional Jews, and Weiss is also delusional.

Weiss mentions blacks in America and says it’s delusional to call for separation between whites and blacks. Weiss may be right about that: Whites may be stuck with blacks. But then, how did this become the case? Because of Diversity created by Imperialism. The US could be black-free IF whites had not practiced the Atlantic Slave Trade under the auspices of European imperialism. (Granted, later British imperialism did some good things by banning the slave trade of the Spanish empire.)
Anyway, the biggest problem of the US — the ghastly blacks — is the result of imperialism.
Diversity complicates matters, usually negatively, down the road if not here-and-now.

Whites understood this about Indians, which is why Indians were expelled as whites expanded territories. Whites knew it’d be problematic to integrate with red savages getting drunk, scalping skulls, and hurling tomahawks. Also, Indians had a legit claim to this land since their forefathers had hunted bison and gophers on it. So, for there to be peace, whites had to drive out the Indians and create a white nation. Even Emma Lazarus understood this, which is why she supported Manifest Destiny. She wanted more whites and Jews to come to America and turn red savages into wretched huddled refuse in Reservations. “Better you than me.”

But if whites got rid of white-red diversity, they recklessly increased white-black diversity? Why? Because if whites confronted reds as warrior savages wielding tomahawks, whites brought blacks as slaves in chains. So, whites figured they’d always have power over the Negroids. With blacks, it was white masters ruling over black slaves or servants. But whites didn’t consider the future where blacks might be freed and then use their stronger muscles and bigger dongs to destroy white manhood and colonize white wombs. It goes to show Diversity ends in disaster one way or the other.

Anyway, even if Weiss is correct that Jews in Israel and whites in the US must make do with Diversity since we can’t turn back the clock, he(and others like him) is still foolish because he wants to INCREASE Diversity.
It’s one thing to argue that some nations became diverse due to certain accidents or events in history, and therefore, people in such nations must try to make the best of it. Okay, fair enough.
But why should any nation willfully INCREASE DIVERSITY when history shows time and time again that such conditions lead to more tensions, more divisions, more distrust, more corruption, more hostilities, more confusion, and etc?

After all, look at the US and EU. It’s not about ‘racism’ vs ‘anti-racism’ but about Paleo-racism vs Neo-racism. Conservatives are Paleo-racists who want white nations and white-majority nations to emphasize white identity, heritage, and power. Progressive Neo-racists, contrary to being for racial equality, are for the supremacism of Jews and blacks over other races and for whites to be attacked and blamed for everything. Look at the phenom of ACOWW or Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs being pushed by PC. It’s not about racial equality. It means that white women should reject white males as pathetic dorky cucks and surrender their wombs to the superior dongs and seeds of Negroids. Why does BBC series on the Fall of Troy feature Zeus and Achilles as blacks? Why are Christmas commercials showing white women going with Negroids? It’s not about racial equality but about how white women should go with black men as superior to white males. PC is just neo-racism with new configuration of superior races and inferior races.

Most people are either Paleo-racists or Neo-racists. Only a few are Tru-racists or Race-ists. The thing about Paleo-Racists and Neo-Racists is they deny their own racial biases and accuse OTHERS of ‘racism’ whereas Tru-Racists or Race-ists admit that everyone is consciously or subconsciously race-ist since it’s impossible not to see race and racial differences and their effects on society.

Even Weissism is a form of Neo-Racism because even if Weissism were to be implemented 100% in Israel-West-Bank, the result will be Jewish domination. Why? DNA. Ashkenazi Jews are much smarter than Arabs or People of Sand. Just consider. The US has tons of smart and capable Anglos and Germanics. But Jews beat them all. So, how are the Arab Sand People supposed to compete with Jews? Even if Israel were totally meritocratic and treated everyone in colorblind manner, Jews will totally dominate. It’s like blacks totally dominate sports cuz genetics in sports biologically discriminates against slower/weaker races. Israel would just go from Paleo-Racism that officially favors Jews over Palestinians to Neo-Racism where biology favors Jews over Palestinians.

For Palestinians to live in a nation of Arab dominance, it can’t have lots of smarter Jews. In a Weissian future Israel, the ONLY hope for Arabs would be the power of numbers and demography. Currently, Israel bans Muslim immigration, welcomes Jewish immigration, and pays special money to horny rabbinical students to have lots of babies. But under Weissism, there can’t be special Jewish privileges on immigration. And special money for Jewish breeders would go against the spirit of equal treatment under law. I mean, if horny Jewish rabbinical students should be funded to breed, why not for horny Islamic students?

In the end, Weissism is hardly different from Neo-conservatism. Weiss is a globalist-imperialist who ridicules national identities, national sovereignty, and national borders. He is for Europe being flooded by masses of Africans and Muslims, oblivious to the fact that the fate of Europeans will be like that of Palestinians who were flooded and destroyed by Jewish mass immigration.

Where Weissism is different from Neo-conservatism and most forms of Liberal Zionism is that he calls for the destruction of ALL nations, Israel included. I must admit there’s a refreshing aspect to such moral consistency in contrast to Neocons and Liberal Zionists who denounce identity and nationalism among goyim(in the name of spreading ‘liberal values’) but demand that goyim serve and support Israel as a Jewish state.

While moral consistency is better than moral hypocrisy, the core of Weissism is globalism, and that means no national rights, no national security, no national sovereignty for any people. Weiss seems to think that his values will lead to some Lennonite Imagined World, but it will have the opposite effect. It will turn all the world into the hellhole that is West Bank and Gaza.

Utopianism is imperialism of the mind. It is over-ambitious and deluded. What is real and realistic are peoples, cultures, heritages, and national borders. We need more of that.