Of late, some say there’s an internecine battle brewing within the American Right between Charlie Kirk camp and Nick Fuentes camp. In fact, the Kirk camp doesn’t stand for any kind of real right or real conservatism. Kirk is essentially a bought-and-paid-for shill, a shabbos goy of JSP or Jewish Supremacist Power. He is the ‘acceptable’ face of ‘conservatism’, toothless, gutless, and ball-less. His idea of ‘conservatism’ and ‘American values’ is forever malleable and mutable. It is whatever JSP says it is. This kind of Americanism has only one ‘bill of rights’, and it goes like this: Jews say ‘We win, you lose.’ Whatever the Jews want, they eventually get by any means necessary. Jews wanted open borders and got it. Jews wanted ‘free trade’ and got it. Jews wanted to rape the Russian economy in the 90s, and they got to do so. Jews wanted gambling to spread like a virus, and now it’s everywhere. Jews wanted pornography for children, and now there is easy access to porn by kids. Jews wanted ‘gay marriage’ and got it. Jews wanted Wars for Israel, and Middle East now lies in ruins.
Kirk stands for nothing but "I obey my Jewish masters." He is not a conservative but a con-servant of JSP. He is a CILO, or conservative-in-label-only. This is why the Kirk camp gets so triggered and antsy about the so-called ‘Groypers’(generally allied with Nicholas J. Fuentes) asking inconvenient questions. When confronted with tough questions by independent minds, the con-servants and cucks squirm like worm under a hot sun and demand what amounts to SJW-like ‘safe spaces’ from those courageous individuals who refuse to read from the preordained script. Anyway, what follows are some suggestions for ‘Groypers’ to consider in their formulation of questions in future TPUSA and other such cuckservative events.
1. When Big Banks faced financial doom in the 2008 crisis, they were bailed out by all taxpayers regardless of ideology. Right or Left, up or down, we all had to contribute taxes that bailed out Wall Street. Then, do Big Banks have the right to deny service to people based on creed or ideology? If they are bailed out by everyone, shouldn't they serve everyone?
2. Conservatives and Libertarians say private companies have the right to deny service to anyone. Does this apply even when companies are virtual monopolies and serve as de facto public space for all? Does Google, a virtual monopoly as Search Engine, have the right to rig results to favor Democrats and the Deep State over Populists and Republicans? If your answer is ‘yes’, should phone companies have the right to deny service based on creed or ideology?
Also, didn't companies like Google and Facebook become monopolies precisely because they started out by promising neutrality and fairness to all sides? After all, if Google or Facebook had declared their ideological biases from the outset and stated policies that would favor one political party over another, most conservatives would have rejected them and opted for another platform. But everyone, regardless of ideology, signed up to use Google and Facebook on the promise of fairness. So, when these companies now use their monopoly muscle to favor one side over another, it is a total breach of their terms of promise to us. They come up with ever-shifting 'terms of services', but it is they who violated the biggest term of all, that of fairness that attracted so many people to their sites on assurance of neutrality. If I gained market dominance in the ice cream industry by promising quality ice cream to everyone and then used my monopoly position to deny ice cream to certain groups, I would have violated the very principle that made me become the king of ice cream. After all, had I started my company by stating my intention of denying ice cream to certain groups, many people would never have bought ice cream from me, and my company would never have gained monopoly position. It seems Google and Facebook hustled us. They became monopolies by promising fairness to all sides, but once they had the muscle, they decided to favor one side over others. Big Tech companies treat us like Zionists treat Palestinians in Occupied West Bank where Jews get the best land and most water while Palestinians get far less or none at all.
3. When true conservatives and dissident rightists are deplatformed or denied service by monopolies, the reply of cuckservatives is, "They’re private companies, and they can do whatever they want." But if monopolies were to deny service to Zionists on grounds that Zionism is about the destruction of Palestinian nation and culture, would people like you and Charlie Kirk just shrug your shoulders and say private companies can do as they wish? I’d wager people like you will insist that the state must step in to make sure every private firm is open to business with Israel. If the private sector can do as it wishes, why do cuckservatives support state-sanctioned suppression of BDS that calls for justice for Palestinians who are living under apartheid conditions in West Bank and being mowed down by IDF death squads in Gaza? Why shouldn't private individuals and companies choose not to do business with Israel for the same reason that many chose not to do business with Apartheid South Africa in the 1980s? It's funny that cuckservatives defend the right of mega-corporations to sanction little people but never defend the right of private individuals and small businesses to reject business with Israel on account of its international crimes. There is a definite pattern here. Cuckservatism is about corporate domination over little individuals. Its position is monopoly companies can deny service to little individuals, but little individuals cannot say NO to business with the gangster state of Israel.
4. Mass Immigration of peoples from Europe into the New World led to what some call the ‘genocide’ of the American Indians. Also, mass-immigration of whites, blacks, and Asians led to the native people of Hawaii being reduced to a minority in their own ancestral homeland. Mass-immigration of Jews into Palestine led to the Nakba Pogroms that reduced Palestinians to a minority in Israel and an occupied people in West Bank, which continues to be colonized by caravans of Zionist invaders. And Serbs lost their historical homeland of Kosovo permanently to Albanians because of massive Muslim migration under Ottoman Rule. While it’s true that immigration led to rise of new civilizations, there is no doubt it also led to tragedies of natives and indigenous folks losing their land and culture to others. Thus, isn’t it about time to admit the connection between mass immigration, a form of demographic imperialism, with what is tantamount to ‘genocide’ in the long run? Just ask the Palestinians. By the way, since white people took the New World from the indigenous folks, they have a moral obligation to those native people but to peoples all over the world whose lands were NOT taken by whites. And if whites really care about the American Indians, the most tragic people of the New World, then they will stop mass-immigration and do their utmost to revive and restore American Indian communities.
5. We’ve been told by the Mass Media and Mass Education/Indoctrination that ‘Diversity Is Our Strength’? First, isn’t Diversity in the New World the product of imperialism, conquest, genocide, and slave trade? Native reds and browns were conquered by whites. That led to Diversity #1. Then, Latin whites, Anglos, and Jews brought over black African slaves. That led to Diversity #2. Then, white elites called on more mass-immigration to pan out and take all the lands from the native peoples. That was Diversity #3.
Second, if Diversity is a panacea for all problems and if it is no problem for the US to become a white-minority nation, then how come white-minority nations of Latin America with so much racial diversity are relative failures, and why are people in those nations running away from their own diversity to come to the US or Canada that are still majority white? Also, we are told that India is a very diverse place. If so, it must be a wonderful, magical place. And yet, it seems countless Indians want to flee from the Diversity in India and come to UK, US, Australia, and Canada that are white majority nations. What gives? It seems people in very diverse nations want to flee from the chaos of diversity and come to white majority nations that are, as yet, less corrupt and better-managed.
6. It’s been said that white people who want to maintain the racial and cultural integrity of their own nations are ‘white supremacists’. But why are they so characterized when they only want to preserve what is theirs and have no interest in ruling over other peoples? Aren’t the real ‘white supremacists’ all those non-whites who want to run away from their own people, culture, and nation to go live in white-majority nations? It seems those non-white immigrants prefer white people as rulers, neighbors, friends, associates, lovers, and mates OVER their own kind. If non-whites want to permanently flee their own peoples and cultures to come to live in white majority nations, don’t they prefer whites over their own kind? Thus, aren’t they the ‘white supremacists’ because they see whites as preferable and superior to their own kind and other non-white folks? After all, non-whites don’t want to move to non-white nations, especially black ones.
7. Jews in the academia and media bitch and whine about whites all the time. They even created something called ‘whiteness studies’. Most Jews are globalists and push for globo-homo, replacist immigration in goy nations, and vice industries such as gambling, pornography, and drugs. Jewish Hollywood routinely features whites as villains and evildoers, the ones to blame for all the problems of the world. If Jews feel this way about whites and if they insist that Diversity is so great, why have Jews historically followed after whites and chosen to live in white-majority nations? Who’s stopping Jews from moving to more diverse nations of Latin America or India? Why don’t Jews in white nations all move to black Africa or Muslim nations if they have so many issues with whites while claiming to just love non-whites? If Jews prefer non-whites and love immigration, how about they become immigrants to non-white nations. They can have the cake and eat it too. They get to be immigrants again and can forever live with non-whites than with baddy bad whites.
8. Jews often invoke the history of Europeans and Christianity to guilt-bait whites into a position of moral inferiority vis-a-vis Jews. Now, it’s true that Europeans and Christianity have had a blood history, but then, so have all other peoples. If whites must be reminded of their bloody history, isn’t it about time to remind Jews of their genocidal role in Bolshevik communism, their prominent role in the Atlantic Slave Trade(especially to Latin America), their financial funding of Western Imperialism, their selling of opium to the Chinese, their looting of the Russian economy in the 90s(that led to the rise of Putin who put an end to it), and their mass pogroms against the Palestinians that led to Nakba?
9. If people like you and Charlie Kirk believe in equal justice for all, how come you're so silent about how people like Arnon Milchan, who freely admitted that he spied and stole for Israel, can visit the US and walk freely without consequences? How come so many of the crooks pardoned by presidents have been Jewish ones? Think of Marc Rich and Jonathan Pollard. Think of the Jewish crook(who facilitated illegal immigration and exploited workers) pardoned by Trump. It seems Jews are above the law and have a license to steal and kill. Also, if people like you and Kirk believe in colorblind justice for all of humanity, why do you favor Zionist occupiers over Palestinian occupied in the West Bank? Palestinians lost the bulk of their homeland in the Nakba Pogroms of 1948, and Zionist caravans continue to steal land & water from Palestinians in the West Bank, but US politicians only praise and serve Israel.
10. If diversity is so important that we need Affirmative Action for less qualified blacks in higher education, why doesn’t anyone make the same case for sports? NBA and NFL are black-dominated even though blacks are 13% of US population. There are some whites but virtually no brown Mexicans, Asians, and Muslims. Sports are a national pastime and a hugely symbolic part of Americanism, and yet, there isn’t much diversity in sports. Should there be affirmative action for sports for the sake of 'diversity'? And do you think NBA and NFL teams will be better if they added more Asians, Hindus, Muslims, and Mexicans to the mix? After all, we are told ‘diversity is our strength.’
11. Charlie Kirk and others like him have said America is an idea. They say 'gay marriage' is American Ideal. Then, does that mean America was not America prior to the rise of globo-homo values? They say America is about freedom and democracy. Then, was America not 'America' when it had slavery? They say America is about respect for life. Then, was America not 'America' when American Indians were being wiped off the Great Plains to make way for endless waves of immigrant-invaders? Was America not 'America' when women didn't have the vote?
If the military were to take power in America tomorrow, would America no longer be 'America' because of demise of democracy? If so, what would America be? Isn't a nation what it is regardless of ideology, e.g. Russia was Russian prior to communism, during communism, and after communism. Likewise, America is America regardless of ideology or 'ideas' as long as its historic people make up its core populace.
Also, if America is about democracy and individual liberty, is any nation with democracy and individual liberty also 'America'? If America is an idea, then surely any people and place that practices the same ideas must also be 'America'. Mexican constitution is virtually identical to the US Constitution, and Mexico has democratic elections. So, is it also 'America'?
Finally, if America is an idea, then surely you know that ideas can go from place to place. People don't need to come to America to have American values and ideas since they can adopt and practice those ideas in their own nations. If someone invents a way to make fire, you don't need to stand where he is at to have the fire. You can learn the trick and make fire in your own place. So, if America is an idea, that idea can be adopted by any people anywhere around the world, and there is no need for all of them to come to America to enjoy 'American Ideas'. Ideas can come to you; you don't have to come to the place where the idea originated.
12. Can you repeat these historical truths? American Indians were wiped out by mass immigration. Blacks were once slaves in America. Jewish communists played a key role in Bolshevism that led to deaths of tens of millions of Christian Slavs. US aided Zionists in the Nakba pogroms that wiped Palestine off the map even though Palestinians did no harm to America.
13. Do you believe that American ideas and values are so outstanding that they should be adopted by all peoples around the world? Should they be the beacon of hope for all mankind? Does this include Israel? Should it also have 'gay marriage', deracination, and inclusive-invasive mass-immigration from all over the world?
14. People like you and Charlie Kirk say that we should support Israel because it tolerates and even celebrates homos and trannies. People like you say neighboring Muslim nations throw homos off roofs. But facts say otherwise. Israel is closely allied with Saudis that execute homosexuals. Also, Israel lent support to ISIS fighters in Syria who really do throw homos off roof-tops. Israel aided ISIS and Alqaeda against the Assad regime that is a tolerant, secular, and modernizing force in the Arab world. How do you square these contradictions?
15. Given that Jewish takeover of Palestine led to some of the biggest 'gay' & 'tranny' parades, orgies, and celebrations in the world, do you think Israel should now be called 'Sodom and Gomorrah'? Jews turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah. Is that something Christian Zionists should celebrate? Did Jews really need to retake the Holy Land because having mass homosexual orgies there is the spiritual and moral priority of Christian Zionists?
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?
What is the most important moral question for Americans, especially in regard to the Other, given the history of America? By 'the Other', of course we mean non-whites. After all, America has essentially been a white European, especially Anglo-American(and Celtic and Germanic), creation. For most of its history, it was founded by whites as a white nation. And why not? They risked sea voyages to the other side of the world and toiled day and night to tame the land for agriculture and built towns & cities. There's a saying, "Finders, Keepers", and white people did more than find the New World. They had the means, numbers, vision, and know-how to transform the wilderness into a bedrock of a great new civilization.
For all the non-whites and cucky-wuck whites who bitch and whine that American history has mostly been by whites and for whites, they need to ask why other peoples didn't bother to get up off their ass, build ships, sail across vast seas in search of new lands, and toil day-and-night to build a great nation out of the New World? As for Hispanic & Portuguese who settled what is called Latin America, why didn't they do as good a job as the Anglos of the US, Canada, and Australia?
But what is particularly bemusing is how the proggy-wogs gripe about how America was violently stolen from the native Indians(who were really Pre-Americans) by 'racist' whites but then whine about how these whites were reluctant to share the land with non-whites all around the world. But if it was wrong for whites to take the land from Indians, how would it have served the Indians any better if whites decided flood America with peoples from ALL OVER THE WORLD? Wouldn't Indians then lose their ancestral land not only to whites but to all peoples of the world? But then, proggy-wogs aren't known for logic or consistency. They are kind of duped morons or clever con-men(especially if they happen to be Jews) who say with a straight face, "I believe in free speech but not in 'hate speech'." (Of course, the Jews get to decide what 'hate speech' is. Apparently, Jews in Hollywood making all those anti-Russian and anti-Muslim movies is not 'hate'. But white people and Palestinians seeking liberation from Jewish supremacism is 'hate'.)
What we need is moral logic and consistency. Those who insist that Columbus Day should be renamed 'Indigenous Peoples Day' should acknowledge that mass-immigration has been synonymous with imperialism, conquest, ethnic cleansing, mass replacement, and 'genocide'. Also, Diversity has been the product of Imperialism. After all, as more immigrants and peoples from the Old World arrived in America, the more the Pre-American Indians lost their land and way of life. Arrival of people from the Old World led to spread of diseases to which millions of native Indians had no immunity, resulting in mass deaths. And mass-immigration meant westward movement of newly minted Americans whose proclaimed destiny was to replace the native Indians on their lands. In that context, the great tragedy of America has been immigration. Contrary to the official narrative, the 'original sin' of America was not slavery but eradication of the American Indians by conquest and mass-immigration-invasion. Some call this 'genocide', a problematic term given the different norms that motivated peoples back then. Still, what is true enough is that Indian Tribes who'd been on the land for tens of thousand of years were effectively wiped off most of the land in a century. Also, whereas blacks gained a tremendous amount as the result of the slavery experience, the American Indians lost just about everything. Consider that 300,000 to 400,000 blacks were brought to America, but their numbers exploded to over 40 million. And, having developed in proximity with whites, blacks had access to the most advanced people on Earth. Furthermore, when we consider where blacks had been and where they ended up, they are the people who gained THE MOST from coming in contact with whites. Most other groups already had advanced cultures or complex civilization prior to their contact with the West. Arabs, Persians, Hindus, Chinese, and etc. were all peoples of High Civilization. Even had they never come in contact with the Modern West, they would have inhabited impressive civilizations with complex arts, culture, religions, and philosophy. In contrast, black Africans were, by and large, the most backward peoples on Earth. They were primitive savages chucking spears at hippos and running like mothaf*****s when the mad hippo came running to stomp their jigger-jiving ass. Had black Africans not come in contact with the Modern West, most of them would still have no wheel, no written language, and no technology beyond bongo drums, spears, and primitive arrows.
Also, blacks not only gained materially but morally in more ways than one. Through the white man, Negroes got to know Christianity and Western Philosophy. Negroes learned of the principle of liberty and of the evil of slavery only under the tutelage of the White Man. And it was precisely because Anglo-Christian folks had betrayed their own moral principle by having enslaved another race that they went about elevating blacks to holy-victim status. So, not only did blacks learn higher morality and deep spirituality from whites but got to use the values inherent in them to judge whites, especially as so many whites got into the habit of showing off their superior 'virtue' by collecting 'white guilt' points. Furthermore, because the modern West was so thrilled with sports and sexualized pop culture, especially with the rise of electronica, the people who excelled most in sports prowess and sexual displays were bound to receive the most adulation. It was the blacks. So, no people gained as much from their contact with whites. Blacks went from zero to hero only on the backs of white achievements, management, and imagination.
Therefore, the notion of slavery as the 'original sin' of America is bogus. Indeed, such sentiment is only more proof that, if anything, blacks gained so much from whites. They are like the 'favorite race' in US and EU. Blacks were enslaved by whites but also liberated from their own savagery. (Furthermore, not only did blacks get to colonize the New World along with whites but they got to keep their own African lands. Today, black Africa is almost entirely black.) The fact that their suffering is held in greater esteem than the suffering of American Indians speaks volumes about how whites ultimately did so much for blacks but so little for the Indians.
By all rights, the 'original sin' of America would be the 'genocide' of the Indians. Unlike blacks who thrived and multiplied under white rule and in proximity to white achievements, Americans Indians were pushed into reservations to rot as wretched huddled masses. Also, while black numbers exploded in the US, Indian numbers collapsed. In time, American Indians were able to multiply their numbers again, but today, they live in among the most depressed communities in the US. Also, whereas blacks in America & Africa(and now even in Europe) can take pride in the blackness of black Africa as the Cradle of the Niggaz, American Indians have no place to call their own. The core of their homeland has been invaded and taken over by peoples from the Old World. They are truly strangers in their own land. So, given these facts that cannot be refuted, the greatest tragedy of American History was the demise and erasure of American Indian communities and cultures.
Of course, there was triumph along with tragedy. Had the white man not arrived in the New World, North America would still be the land of savages and wild animals. Some people might argue that this would have been better, and there is something to be said for such sentiment. The loss of nature was indeed tragic wherever humanity went. Even primitive folks did plenty of damage to nature. Archaeologists now credit the extinction of countless species of animals in the Americas and Australia to the spread of primitive humans tens of thousands of years ago. But modernity accelerated the destruction and exploitation of nature exponentially, and maybe, it would have been better if the New World had only belonged to nature or only to nature and its 'indigenous' folks(who arrived from what is now Asia tens of thousands of years ago). But what is done is done, and it's true enough that America became a great modern nation due to the ability and achievements of European folks, especially the Anglos followed by Celtics and Germanics. There was triumph and tragedy in the making of America.
But given the tragic dimensions of American History, the Most Important Moral Question is "To whom do White Americans owe the most in terms of historical redress and moral consideration?" To answer this isn't difficult. We only need to consider what was the greatest tragedy of American History. There is no question that the biggest tragedy and 'crime' of American History was the 'genocide' of the Red Savages by Pale Face. Furthermore, even other whites and non-whites from the Old World collaborated with Anglo whites in the destruction of the Indians. Spanish Conquistadors invaded Indian lands from the south. Geronimo not only fought the US Cavalry but the Mexicans, a bunch of Mestizos led by white Hispanics. Upon emancipation, blacks didn't return to Africa, their homeland, but stuck around with whites, and many became cowboys and took part in shooting Indians dead. And Chinese worked on railroads that only accelerated the final stages of Manifest Destiny. American Indians were set upon by 'honkeys', 'niggers', 'spicks', 'chinks', 'kikes', and all those damned new immigrants from the Old World.
If America had been taken from the World, one could make a legitimate argument that people all around the world have a right to retake it via immigration. It'd be like the Right of Return. Indeed, suppose peoples of ALL RACES had been in the US, but White Europeans arrived and drove them to other parts of the world while hogging most of America for themselves. Then, mass-immigration of non-whites into the US could be a moral imperative based on historical wrongs. But, in fact, America was not taken by white Europeans from the world. It was taken from native folks who came to be known as the American Indians or the Red Man. Therefore, white Americans have NO moral obligation to open up America, the nation that they founded and built, to all the world. North America was not taken from Asians, Arabs, Muslims, Africans, Hindus, Turks, and etc. It wasn't taken from brown natives south of the border of what came to be USA. One could argue SW territories were taken from Mexico, but then the Mexicans themselves were laying claim to lands that were inhabited by various American Indian tribes who felt no connection or allegiance to the Mexican state and society.
America was not created by taking land and resources from all the world. It was created by white folks who arrived upon vast territories that were still overwhelmingly wild and natural(at least by Old World and Meso-American standards). And if the land was taken from anyone, it was from Red Savages. If any people were historically wronged, it was the Indians. Not because Indians were angelic saints — just like Europeans, pagan and Christians alike, fought each other countless times over 1,000s of years, so did the American Indians who also belonged to various warring tribes — but because they had a deep connection to the land. Suppose a people more powerful and numerous than the Europeans arrived in Europe 3,000 yrs ago. Suppose they found various pagan European tribes warring against each other over land, women, & stuff, and suppose they overwhelmed the relatively primitive and backward Europeans and took the land. (Btw, keep in mind that Europeans were warring against each other well into the 20th century, with World War I and World War II killing up to 65 to 70 million people.) Their conquest of Europe would have been by the general rule of history where might-is-right. Still, if the hypothetical conquerors had some moral sense and conscience, they would have, at the very least, acknowledged that the vanquished Europeans do have special connection to the land on which they'd lived and died for many eons. Likewise, even if we acknowledge that White Europeans won out over the American Indians by the general rule of history, one would have to be churlish to deny that the American Indians have the most meaningful and deepest connection and attachment to the land. And to the extent that they lost their ancestral homeland forever — something that cannot be said for Asians, Arabs, Hindus, Africans, and weaker Europeans(such as Greeks under Ottomans or Lithuanians under Russians) who eventually reclaimed their homelands from imperialist domination — , it is by no means far-fetched to argue that the American Indians are the most tragic people in the world. (Of course, given the advantages they gained by living under whites, it was far from a total loss. Surely, American Indians would be worse off if America had been conquered by another race of people.)
With that in mind, one must ask, "What is the MOST IMPORTANT Moral Question of America given the history of its founding and development?" At whose expense was the great nation of America created? The answer is beyond obvious. It was at the expense of the American Indians. And that means, if the US has any moral obligation, it is to the American Indians and their communities. Meanwhile, the US has NO moral obligation to anyone else. Was the American land taken from Iranians, Kurds, Turks, Chinese, Japanese, Senegalese, Hindus, Kazakhs, Egyptians, Libyans, Syrians, Jews, etc.? Emphatically NO. Also, did all peoples play an equal role in the founding and development of America? Do a mental experiment. While there are Burmese-Americans who are probably good decent people, would America not exist if not a single Burmese set foot on the New Land? Of course not. Even if not a single Burmese(or, for that matter, a single Kurd, Hindu, Korean, Assyrian, Moroccan, Filipino, or etc) ever set foot on this land, America would still be America. But if the Europeans, especially Anglos-Germanics-Celts, had never arrived on the land, there would be NO America. Then, those who bitch about the 'racism' of American History in having excluded non-white immigrants are full of baloney. As the rightful discovers, founders, and developers of the great new nation, the founding & leading stock had EVERY RIGHT to decide immigration policy to create the kind of the nation that they favored. If the Chinese had discovered North America first, would they not have favored immigration of their own kind?
The moral dilemma of America's creation has mainly to do with four entities: American Indians, Negroes, white victims of Negroes, and nature. Even though American Indians lost the land for the reason why all defeated folks lost their lands all throughout history — they were outfought and outnumbered — , the tragedy of their loss is undeniable as they'd been living and dying on the land for not only centuries or millenniums but for tens of thousands of years. American Indian connection to the lands of North America is comparable to European connection to Europe and Asian connection to Asia. They lived here for eons. Another people who deserve special recognition is the Negroes who were brought over as slaves. As they didn't choose to be here and were exploited to develop the economy, blacks of slave ancestry deserve special recognition. However, because blacks are naturally 'craaaaaazy', thuggish, and demented, they've been acting wild and nutty since liberation. As such, they've victimized countless whites with robbery, rape, assault, murder, and etc. Therefore, just as America must address the historical wrongs done to blacks by whites, it must also address biological threat blacks pose to whites. By bringing blacks over the US, American History not only wronged the blacks but wronged many future whites who'd be victimized by tougher and more aggressive blacks. Just like Harriet Tubman and the underground railway sought to free blacks from slavery, the phenomenon of White Flight(and Jew Flew) was a kind of exodus for whites from Black Blight and Fight. Whites were running from Biological Slavery under the Thug Supremacism of blacks. (Jews bitch about white 'racism', but they also ran from blacks. And when black violence got way out of control in the 90s, Jews got themselves Billy Boy Clinton and Rudy Giuliani to get tough on crime and lock up record number of blacks behind bars to bring down crime.) Finally, there is the matter of nature, the fauna and flora of the Americas. One of the dire consequences of creating a great modern nation was the destruction of so much nature. Many animals went extinct, and they are lost forever. For that reason, America has an obligation to preserve as much natural lands as possible. And that means, NO MORE IMMIGRATION. If there are towns in America that are emptying of people, then the proper thing is to restore the land back to nature. We can never have too much nature.
Given the facts of history, any fair-minded person would agree with the sentiment that the greatest tragedy of America has been the destruction and demise of the American Indian culture and communities. Indeed, it would be most obnoxious for a people other than the American Indians to hog the stage & microphone and act as if the primary obligation, duty, and responsibility is to serve them. After all, Jews get very antsy if people other than themselves claim the mantle of 'victims of the Holocaust'. Even though Jews acknowledge that Nazi Germans killed millions of non-Jews(and even as part of the campaign that came to be known as 'Shoah' or 'Holocaust'), they insist(and rightfully so) that the Shoah was mainly about the targeting of Jews for mass destruction. So, even though many Poles and other Slavs were killed in World War II(and even under similar conditions as faced by Jews), Jews do have a special claim to Shoah. Every people have their own tragic narrative associated with certain lands. Then, the 'genocide' of the American Indians is a tragedy unique to American History. Because they were the native folks of North America and were vanquished(and even vanished from most of the lands) in what became the United States, the main moral narrative of American History should be about, "What was done to the Indians in the past and what must be done for them in the future?" Even blacks, with their slave narrative, cannot compete with the American Indians whose very homeland was taken from under their feet. Also, while blacks were allowed to live and thrive next to whites — even with Segregation — , American Indians were relocated en masse and settled in reservations that were usually the least productive lands.
Given the fact of American History, only the most obnoxious, arrogant, megalomaniacal, putrid, lowdown, disgusting, filthy, shameless, and scummy people would occupy the throne of Ultimate Victim-hood, Ultimate Claim-hood, and Reparation-hood within the American Context. Can anyone imagine Chinese saying that the main duty of America is to remember all the Chinese victims of Japanese & European imperialism and Maoist communism? Therefore, the D.C. Mall must have a Chinese-Tragedy Museum, all the students must be taught about the Nanking Massacre & other horrors of modern Chinese History, all politicians must say China is the closest and greatest ally of the US, and we must allow endless Chinese immigration to redress historical wrongs? While we can acknowledge the tragedy of modern Chinese History, why should the US go out of its way to 'do right' by the Chinese? Was the US taken from the Chinese? Whatever bad shit happened to the Chinese, it happened OVER THERE, and the US was no more responsible for the mess than other nations like European powers, Japan, Russia, and etc. And yet, we have Jews acting as if they have a special claim on American History, American Morality, and American Responsibility. But why? Did white Christians take America from the Jews(like the Romans took Jerusalem from the Chosen?) Did Jews suffer a great tragedy in America? If anything, Jewish merchants sold guns, ammos, and supplies to white expansionists who took land from the Indians. Also, Jews in the South handled much of the finances of the slave economy. The truth is Jews collaborated with whites in the destruction of the Indians and enslavement of the blacks in America. (Jews were also the main sellers of opium to the Chinese, which is why Jewish historians and their shills are now trying to minimize the assessment of harm done to the Chinese by narcotics. Jews were also leading communists in the Bolshevik Revolution that led to the deaths of millions of Slavs.) As for the Holocaust, it happened in Europe, and it was carried out by Germans who went mad largely because Jews drove them crazy with support for radical communism in the East and Weimar degeneracy in the West. Thus, what is known as Shoah or the Holocaust should really be called the Counter-Holocaust, or holocaust carried out by goyim driven to madness by Jewish Bolshevik holocaust of countless Christians in the East. Just like every action leads to a reaction, a holocaust can lead to a counter-holocaust. Even though Jews were on the side of Allies in WWII whereas Japanese were with the Axis, both groups ended up facing counter-holocausts. Jewish radical madness led to so much hatred against the Tribe that it led to the triumph of an ideology as nutty as Nazism. Similarly, so much craziness by the Japanese led to crazy-mad violence against them, the massive destruction of cities like Tokyo, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki. If we call Shoah the 'Counter-Holocaust', we will understand history much better. While Shoah was evil and crazy, it didn't just happen out of the blue for no reason. It was a deranged reaction to much deranged actions by Jews. If we call it 'Counter-Holocaust', people will begin to ask 'In counter to what?' and then we can explain how much bad Jewish behavior led to rise of 'antisemitism' that finally took the insane form of Nazism. When people are driven to anger and desperation, they become blinded by and consumed with hatred. Why are so many Palestinians angry as hell about the Jews? Some of their hatred may be deranged and even genocidal toward Jews, but why do they feel that way? It's because Jews wiped Palestine off the map and have been treating Palestinians as subhuman trash. If Americans were riled up by Pearl Harbor to attack Japan and kill millions, imagine how the Palestinians feel who were robbed of their homeland? Of course, what was done to Palestinians was far worse. While the US, along with Japan and other powers, had done much to create much of the tensions in the Pacific that led to outbreak of war, the Palestinians had done NOTHING to no one, but the great powers, US-UK-USSR, all conspired to support the Jews in their 'genocide' of the native Arab population.
How dare Jews make themselves the Central People of America? The land was not taken from Jews. And the people who were most responsible for the creation of America were the Anglos and Germanics, not Jews. When it comes to the politics of victim-hood, Jews worked with the cowboys to wipe out the Indians. Jews worked with white slavers to import Africans, and Jews in the South owned slaves and opposed Emancipation. If there was a genocide or 'holocaust' in North America, it was to the American Indians by whites(with support of Jews, blacks, Mexicans, and even yellows who built railroads). By all rights, the Holocaust Museum in the Mall should really be about the American Indians, and Jews should fess up about their own role in the demise of the Indians. But Jews act like they morally and spiritually own America. At least the nutty Mormons cooked up some bogus history about how their ilk have some special connection to the New Land. Jews readily admit they have no deep ancestral roots in America but still claim that America really belongs to them most. Sure, Jews say America is for everyone but then insist that EVERYONE all get behind Jews, support Israel, and worship the Holocaust(as if the Jewish Tragedy should take precedence in the hearts of all races and groups). Since Jews can't claim America by deep ancestry(which belongs to American Indians), tragic experience(that belongs to blacks who toiled as slaves), or vision-founding-creation(that belongs to Anglos and Germanics), they've cooked up the notion of the 'proposition nation' where America is to be defined mainly by 'what it could be' that what it has been or what it is. Since Jews control the media and have spun an Emma-Lazarusean yarn about America as a nation-of-tomorrow(to be defined by endless immigration-invasion by New Peoples) and present themselves as the most iconic and eternal immigrant-group, especially in mythic association with Ellis Island that replaced Plymouth Rock, a mentality took root in the American Mind that the main obligation of all Americans is to honor, worship, & serve Jews and do as they command. Also, as Jews have quasi-spiritualized the Shoah or the Counter-Holocaust, it is no longer limited to the history of WWII and the bloodlands of Central and Eastern Europe. It is regarded as a cosmic thing, like the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ is supposed to be to all peoples in all the world. At least Jesus cared for all of humanity. In contrast, even as Jews have universalized Shoah-Worship for goyim, all they feel for goyim is contempt, often murderous in kind, as when all these Yinonist-Zionists cackle with hideous glee about all the Arabs and Muslims who've been massacred in these Wars for Israel, which might as well be called Mass-Murders for Israel.
Why are Jews so obnoxious? Part of it could be their haggly-waggly and verbally-excessive character. After all, is it just a coincidence that another group that is as often as obnoxious as the Jews are Hindus who are also verbally excessive? As if to follow in the footsteps of Jews and even go one step further, a most foul Dotkin Suketu Mehta(or Suckasstoo Meathead) has written a book called "An Immigrant's Manifesto". Even though America was taken from American Indians and not from Asian Indians, this worthless Asian-Indian Hindu says America has a moral obligation to open its gates to hundreds of millions of his Dotkin kind or Dotkind. It's like Albert Brooks in LOST IN AMERICA. He has this crazy notion that all of America should somehow put out to him and offer him flowers wherever he goes. (Latin American whites are another scummy group when it comes to making Moral Demands on America. They posture as 'people of color' when, in fact, they were the First White Europeans to conquer the New World, spread disease, wipe out tens of millions, 'rape' countless native women, and lord over the brown Meso-Americans as virtual slaves and peons. Now, if Latin American whites acknowledged their part in the tragic dimensions of New World history while also claiming considerable achievements & improvements, it would be understandable. After all, Hispanic whites were not the only great conquering peoples in history[and they did bring an end to human sacrifice and other barbarisms of the natives], and we can't judge the past with today's values, even though, what with all the pro-migration-invasion rhetoric of globalism, one wonders if today's values are any different. What is unforgivable about Latin American whites is they conveniently overlook their essential role in the conquest of the New World and furthermore pretend that the mixing of white and brown was some kind of happy union, a love-fest among the races. Furthermore, their cretinous selves claim to be 'people of color' and dump all blame for New World tragedies on 'gringo' or 'yanqui'. As such, they are as dirty and lowlife as the Jewsters and Dotkins.) 'Verbality' is necessary for power, but with some peoples, it's gotten out of hand. Jews and Hindus are so busy yapping and listening to themselves go on and on and on that they've come believe in their own baloney or curry.
In contrast, the American Indians, who have most to complain about, go unheard because they are deficient in 'verbality'. It's like the 'big dumb Indian', aka Chief Broom, in ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST. He isn't really deaf & dumb but acts it out of a sense of defeatism and resignation. It's interesting that just about the only word Indians are known for is 'How'. Indians need to start talking. They need to drop Broom-ism and learn a thing or two from Jewsters and Dotkins(and of course, the ghastly 'groids', another people who 'talk too much' as Run-DMC noted). If Jewsters, Dotkins, and 'groids' need to shut up a bit, the Indians need to speak up more and loudly. They need to put forth a great chief who will assemble all the Indian Nations in the Washington Mall and give a speech called "I have a vision", one that demands no more immigration-invasion as mass-immigration led to the 'genocide' of the Red Savages hunting gophers for stew.
The truth is as follows. Spiritually, the lands of North America belongs more to the Native Pre-Americans or American Indians than to any other people. They were here for tens of thousands of years before the American colonies and the rise of the United States as a great nation. In terms of territoriality and ancestry, this was Red Man's land for eons. Even if the various Red Tribes fought and slaughtered one another, they were all members of the same race... just like even though the various European tribes and kingdoms bashed one another across the eons, white folks have a special connection to Europe. Therefore, the spiritual connection of Indians and the Land must be respected. Also, because the eradication of Indian communities(and even extermination of Indian folks in some cases) was necessary in the creation of America, the Indian Holocaust must be the central Moral Narrative of American history and politics. And since it was European Conquest followed by waves of mass-immigration that led to the Indians losing ALL their Lands, Americans must address the dark and tragic side of Immigration. Emma Lazarus the Judeo-centric Jew only cared about her Tribe. As embarking to America would be great for her kind, she didn't care one bit about the American Indians who were reduced to poor, wretched, huddled masses rotting away in Reservations. But then, Zionist Jews didn't care that Palestinians would be expelled from their lands either. Jews only care about themselves and disregard goyim as subhuman. Worse, unlike Anglo Christians who felt some degree of sympathy and even admiration for the American Indians who put up a noble fight to defend their lands and culture, Jews feel nothing for the Indians. Sure, Jews pretended to care for the Indians in the counterculture 60s but only as metaphors for Jews. Thus, for awhile, Jews sought to draw comparisons between what Anglos did to Indians and what Nazi Germans did to Jews. Never mind that Jewish merchants took part in the conquest of the Wild West. And never mind that Jews decided to play cowboy with the Palestinians as Indians. And after the Cold War, Jews even went into Judeo-Nazi mode to use the US as its cavalry to ride roughshod all over the Arab-Muslim World.
Most obnoxiously, Jews have laid claim to America as their spiritual home. By making the US out to be a 'nation of immigrants', Jews are effectively saying Pre-American History(of the Indians) and American History(of whites who built a new nation) mean NOTHING. All that matters is what JEWS say America should be. According to Jews, America should be a land where all goyim must be compelled to praise Jews, worship the Counter-Holocaust, support Israel, and obey the Yinon-ist program of hating and slaughtering whatever & whomever Jews order us to hate and kill. "Kill for Jews" might as well be the new motto of Americanism. Jews pretend to care for blacks, but this is just a ruse to use 'white guilt' about the 'Magic Negro' to paralyze white pride and unity, thereby rendering whites easier to manipulate emotionally to do as the Jews as Holy-Holocaust-People demand. If Jews really care about blacks, why do they push for mass-immigration-invasion to replace blacks, along with whites, from many communities, especially fancy ones inhabited by Jews?
American Indians need to drop the Broom-ism and learn to talk. For too long, Indians had others do the talking for them, like when Neil Young sang songs like 'Pocohontas' or when Jim Jarmusch made DEAD MAN. In FARGO, the Indian doesn't talk much, but he gets awful angry. Indians must work on that anger and learn to talk. Indians have the war dance and rain dance. They need to perfect the Talk Dance, and learn to speak loud and clear about how America is spiritually their land. Therefore, the biggest moral imperative of the US must be an end to all immigration-invasion and a sincere effort to revive Indian communities. Indeed, how disgusting that Jews and their cuck-libertarians decided to redress the tragedy of Indian communities by offering casinos, most of which are run by Jews who take much of the profit. Imagine Europeans telling Jews, "Ah, forget about the Shoah. Let's just put some casinos where Nazi concentration camps were, and let's have a good time." That would be pretty repulsive, but that was the deal that the Indians got, like in CASINO JACK about the foul Jew Jack Abramoff.
Finally, American Indians need to understand that white race-ism was a double-edged sword. In their drive to turn the New World into an extension of European Civilization, white race-ist expansionism led to the demise of American Indian communities. And yet, white race-ism also protected the New World from the Non-White world that was even more numerous in people. Thus, even as white race-ism took the land from the Indians, it also protected that land from further invasion by all the world. Given the tragic history between whites and Indians, a non-white people, it's understandable why some Indians decided to form alliances with other non-whites against whites, but what do these non-whites want? They want endless immigration-invasion from all the world, and that means American Indians will have lost their land not only to whites(who felt some conscience and respect for the Indians) but to all the peoples from all the world, many of whom are utterly without conscience, honor, decency, and shame. Take Suketu Mehta, or Suckasstoo Meathead. I mean, how demented must one be to be a Hindu making a moral claim on America, a land that was not taken from his people and wasn't founded and built by his kind.
Furthermore, can anyone with integrity say with utmost sincerity that America has improved with Jews as the ruling elites? For Anglos, morality meant 'improving ourselves', 'facing up to our wrongs', and reforming society for the good of all. It was about judging not only others but themselves. With Jews, morality is simply acting as if they're pure as snow, the fount of all truth & wisdom, always blaming OTHERS for all problems, and refusing to admit Jews also have a dark side to their history. Also, even as Jews seek to protect their own kind from deracination and total degeneracy, they push such on their enemies. Some may argue that Jewish embrace of globo-homo-mania is a form of degeneracy, but the fact is most Jews don't really get high on their own supply. Globo-homo is to Jews what cocaine is for the pusher. Jews wield it as a weapon to undermine goy communities than to really indulge in 'gay' worship.
Anyway, American Indians need to realize that white race-ism was the last best defense of America from further invasion. As long as whites remained in race-ist mode, American Indians could rest assured that their ancestral-spiritual land would, at the very least, not be invaded by ALL THE WORLD. It was the fading of white race-ism that flung American gates to all the peoples of world, to tens of millions of Hindus, Africans, Asians, Latin American whites(aka Conquis), and Meso-Americans who have no claim on the Americas north of the Mexican border. Without race-ism, a people and land are doomed. Just ask the Jews who guard Israel with race-ism. As bad as Jewish race-ism may be in the eyes of Palestinians, it would be worse if Jews lost their race-ism and opened up Israel to ALL THE WORLD. Then, Palestinians will have lost their land not only to Jews but to Africans, Hindus, Chinese, Turks, and etc, etc.
**If America is all about an 'idea' & 'proposition' and not about soil, roots, and history, then how come there are special reservations set aside for American Indians? Isn't it because they have roots in the soil and deep memory of existence on the land? If America is purely about proposition, Americanism should not tolerate special recognition for American Indians' ties to the soil and the particularity of their history. If such is recognized for Indians, why is it not recognized for whites who were most crucial in American nation's founding and most instrumental in its development? If the Indians' deep historical connection to the land overrides mere considerations of 'universal values' and 'propositions', then the white man's founding and creative relation to the American soil also merits special recognition.**
In current political discussions, the talk of the 'left' and the 'right' misses the crucial point. What we have is less dialectics of the so-called Left and the Right as the 'trialectics' of 'left' and 'right' with both being manipulated by a third force that chooses to remain invisible. And this power is essentially though not entirely Jewish. Let's ponder the forest than the trees. Consider the trajectory of mainstream politics in America over several decades. The main conflict wasn't so much about a genuine right-vs-left-struggle but about Jews owning and using both sides to serve the Third Power that is Zionist-Globalist. Rahm Emanuel claims to be 'leftist' or a 'liberal', but he served in the IDF to not only defend Israeli nationalis but to enforce Zionist Imperialist hegemony over Palestinians. The NYT columnist David Brooks excoriates Trumpian nationalism, but his son, who is apparently steeped in Jewish identity and Zionist consciousness, served in the IDF just like Rahm Emanuel and other American Jews who'd rather sign up for the Israeli military than for the US military(which is apparently only for dimwit white goyim stupid enough to fight, kill, and die in Wars for Israel. Those who cling to real power know tribal blood counts for more than ideological ink.
After all, both Liberal Jewish Elites and Neo-Conservatives have been totally pro-Israel and favor Jews over Palestinians. Why such pro-nationalist(and even pro-imperialist and pro-supremacist) Zionist zeal on Middle East issues on both the 'left' and 'right'? Just ask yourself. Why did virtually every Congressman sign the AIPAC-enforced pledge to serve Zionism, Israel, and Jewishness uber alles?
If indeed nationalism and ethno-centricism are 'rightist' whereas GLOBALIST ELITES are supposed to be 'leftist'(anti-nationalist), then why are most elites in big business & the Deep State so pro-Israel regardless of their professed ideologies? Why don't the so-called 'leftist globalists' denounce the tribal/nationalist influence of AIPAC? Where does one see the globalist elites(who are said to be 'leftist') in Hollywood, Las Vegas, Silicon Valley, Wall Street, and Big Oil siding with helpless Palestinians against powerful ethno-imperialist Zionists? Where do you see them denouncing Jewish Identity as the source of tribal supremacism? And if Google and Twitter are really into equal justice for all sides and about caring for the underdog, why do they all the Zionist-supremacist ADL to monitor 'hatred' on their platforms and networks? ADL is a totally pro-Zionist organization that supports the defaming of whites(as subhuman cattle) and defends the Zionist-Imperialist Occupation of West Bank & terrorism against Gazans. ADL also never mentions Nakba, the grim fact that Israel was created by massive ethnic cleansing of Palestinians(regarded as subhuman by Jewish Power). ADL never condemns the Zionist-instigated US Wars for Israel on the Muslim World that hatefully and ruthlessly destroyed millions of lives. It never denounces Donald Trump's one-sided insensitivity in favoring Zionists over Palestinians. Imagine that. Jews say Trump is 'literally Hitler', but they fully support Trump's most Hitlerian agenda: The favoring of Zionist supremacists over Palestinians who are treated like Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto by the Nazis.
If Google and Twitter are indeed truly 'leftist', shouldn't they hire members of the BDS Movement to monitor Zionist supremacist hatred and chauvinism that define and dominate so much of American media, academia, and goverment? Shouldn't Paypal and other supposedly 'leftist' businesses deny service to individuals associated with ADL or any such group that supports the ongoing hateful & supremacist Zionist Occupation of West Bank? Shouldn't Paypal and other such companies deny service to members of the CIA and Pentagon who've been engaged in murderous US neo-imperialism that destroyed many nations and peoples with bombs, invasions, support for terrorists(especially in Syria), and sanctions?
Well, well, isn't this a curious kind of 'leftism' that happens to be so jingoist("US is an exceptional nation"), 'racist'(Zionists uber Palestinians and Jews uber gentiles), supremacist(black men deserve to colonize white wombs since white men are inferior cuck dorks), and replacist-genocidal(white people should lose their own homelands to waves of foreign colonizers), and of course, totally hypocritical? Their agenda seems to be Diversity via coercive 'inclusion'(which amounts to invasion) and demographic imperialism for every nation EXCEPT Israel that, despite its closed walls and Jewish-Only policy, is showered with $4 billion annually in 'aid', given a free pass to spy on the US, and allowed to lobby Congress not as a foreign entity but virtually as an American one.
So, let's try to be clear and honest about True American Politics for once. It is NOT about the dialectics of left vs right but about the 'trialectics' of Jewish globalist-supremacists controlling and manipulating the so-called 'left' and so-called 'right' to serve their own interests. When you see puppets fighting each other, don't lose yourself in the dialectics of Puppet A vs Puppet B but focus on the master who is pulling the strings of both.
If indeed these corporations are really into 'leftism', why do they go along with the anti-BDS program(that is usually associated with grass-roots leftism, there are increasing numbers of people on the true Right who also sympathize with the plight of Palestinians, not least because Jews now treat white people as the NEW or OTHER Palestinians to conquer and destroy)? Jewish oligarchs and their agents use bribery and threats to coerce all politicians and all States to violate the US Constitution(especially the principle of Freedom of Speech) by criminalizing BDS. Now, imagine white ultra-rightists in the 80s using their influence to criminalize any boycott or sanction of South Africa that then practiced Apartheid. The Left would have blown a fuse and railed against such violation of the American principles of Free Speech and Right of Assembly. But there's almost total silence about the criminalization of BDS among the Establishment 'Left'(though there are Alt-Left figures like Philip Weiss and Jimmy Dore who do raise the issue). For the most part, there are murmurs and gripes in some corners of the Left, but there is no mass concerted effort to call attention to this despicable violation of the First Amendment and Freedom of Conscience. Clearly, we live in a nation where cities can ban Chick Fil-A for supporting Real Marriage, but companies and individuals are to be destroyed if they even think of supporting the boycott of Zionist Occupation of West Bank and its apartheid policies.
Well, well, so much for 'leftism' and its dominance over America. (More often than not, those who rant about the power of the 'left' are too afraid to mention the JEW behind it, as well behind the approved 'right'. While Paul Joseph Watson and Black Pigeon Speaks make good videos on many topics, their babbling about the 'left' willfully overlooks the Jewish Power behind it. The current dominant power is more about the ethno-identity of Jews than about any consistent ideology.)
American Power can be boiled down to machinations of Jewish Supremacism over White Cuck Collaborators, decadents & degenerates(usually associated with Globo-Homomania), and members of Diversity, whose contentious groups are united only by their hatred against Whitey as encouraged by the Jews. What is really of the essence is that all the key decisions are made by Jews and their favorite proxies, the homos. Asians may be rising in rank, but they are servile drones without agency or will, thereby destined to do the bidding of Jews with stronger personalities. Most yellows just follow the White Cuck-collaborators who obey Jews and homos. Such is the hierarchy of US power, but it masquerades as 'leftist' in order to conceal the ethno-monopoly and ethno-supremacism of Jewish globalists.
The fact is Jews can destroy anyone with their control of high tech, Wall Street, and media. What are Google and Facebook but Jewish monopolies? And even non-Jewish oligarchs go along with Jews because they (1) have been molded by Jew-dominate academia & media (2) rely on Jew-run Wall Street for finance and (3) fear the Jew-run media for bad press that can prove to be fatal. In summary, via direct and indirect monopoly of high-tech, Jewish-American supremacists(who work closely with Zionist Israeli Jews who slaughter Palestinian women and children) get to rig who is or isn't platformed. Through Wall Street, they can decide who shall be funded or defunded. Through media, they can decide who is to be anointed and who is to be excommunicated. Just by having the ADL or SPLC smear an individual or company as 'racist', 'antisemitic', or 'homophobic', the J-Power can bring down anything or anyone. Those are now the talismanic words with the power to make or break careers.
If US corporations are truly 'leftist'(as we are constantly told), why didn't they denounce US imperialism in the Middle East? Seriously, does Starbucks really care about Muslim 'refugees'? Why didn't its Jewish owners denounce Obama and Hillary for turning Muslims into refugees in the first place with a destructive foreign policy that targeted Libya and Syria at the behest of Jewish ethno-supremacists? Surely, the heads of Starbucks are smart and well-informed. They are no dummies. They must know what really happened in the Middle East & North Africa and why. So, why did they frame their 'progressivism' in terms of caring-about-Muslim-refugees than of denouncing-US-imperialism-that-forced-Muslims-into-refugee-status? It's because the so-called 'progressives' at Starbucks are really venal Zionist-Imperialists who support the ethno-supremacist policy of pushing Wars for Israel and globalist bankers.
There was a CEO bitch at the Campbell Soup Company who claimed to be appalled by 'murder' and 'racism' of 'white supremacism'? Oh really? According to such scum, evil was embodied by only one side at Charlottesville? As for the 'murder', that is just a Jewish Canard(like the myth that Leo Frank was innocent of the crime he most likely did commit). The fat whore Heather Heyer died of a heart-attack, and James Fields panicked after being attacked by antifa and BLM mobs(who were allowed to run loose by the Jewish mayor and his black police chief with full approval from higher powers). Also, BLM is a hate-filled black movement based on the lie that innocent blacks are being murdered all over the country by white supremacist cops. Now, what does Campbell Soup have to say about Zionist occupation of West Bank or Zionist-supremacist Wars for Israel that murdered 100,000s of people in the Middle East? Or, Billy Boy Clinton's sanctions on Iraq that killed countless innocent children?
The CEO bitch at Campbell Soup, Denise Morrison, is a real piece of shit. She may earnestly believe in the BS she routinely spouts because she most probably attended some elite college and underwent PC indoctrination, but even that doesn't get to the heart of the matter. After all, if she is truly and sincerely anti-nationalist and 'anti-racist', her corporate policy should be to cut all ties between Campbell and the Jewish-Supremacist Israel that continues to illegally occupy West Bank. Then, it seems likely that the Real Reason she condemned the white patriots at Charlottesville was because White National Liberation is tantamount to White Emancipation, which means whites shall no longer serve Jewish ethno-supremacist globalist imperialism. She is a white-whore-cuck shill who serves Jewish supremacism by smearing white liberation as 'white supremacism'.
In fact, the Alt Right(at least the anti-Spencerian faction) is more likely to be anti-imperialist in their anti-war stance and support of national rights of all peoples & cultures. Venal Globalists subvert national sovereignty all over the world by opening the West to the Rest. Tempted with easier material life in the West, formerly nationalist non-whites abandon their own nations and come to the West to become 'New Americans', 'New Canadians', or 'New Englishmen'. Thus, Jews kill two birds with one stone. White national sovereignty is destroyed but so is that of non-whites who, instead of guarding and building their own nations, just want to run off to the West for short-cut material improvement. They become Puerto-Ricanized. Puerto Ricans lost all sense of national pride and independence because they got hooked to the drug of US largess. Their only 'identity' is bitching for more benefits and freebies, as is the case with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Since begging is humiliating, Puertos now do their begging in the form of demands. It's like a dog barking loud to hide its shame that it depends on the master for food.
Puerto Ricans have no identity left but as leeches of Anglo-America. Since parasitism is ignoble, the leeches pretend that their endless blood-sucking is a 'human right' or about compassion. If Latin Americans are truly proud of their peoples and cultures, why don't they ever improve their own lot? Why do they run to Anglo-American-made US and demand handouts? Incredibly, the entire world is being Puerto-Ricanized while all white nations, even in Europe, are being 'Americanized'.
If leftism is about equality, diversity, and proportionality of power/influence, why doesn't anyone in these firms complain that Jews are vastly over-represented in the upper echelons of power, wealth, and connection? What happened to Disparate Impact? If these elites really care about diversity and fair representation, then their main ire should be directed at the over-representation of Jews who are only 2% of US population but have near or outright monopoly in many sectors of the economy and are favored over other groups such as Palestinians, Russians, Syrians, and Iranians. AirBnB, Google, and Facebook are owned by Jews, and they are tied closely with Jew-dominated Wall Street that that colludes with Media owned by yet more Tribesmen. And they fund operations like SPLC and ADL that pull every trick in the book to lend moral sheen to Jewish-centrism. Both organizations push Jewish/Zionist interests in the name of fighting 'hate', all the while ensuring that US foreign policy will go on hating any nation/people targeted by Jewish globalists and Zionist imperialists. The mere resolve NOT to serve hateful Jewish supremacism is denounced as 'hate' in the Current Year. And all these corporations work with the Deep State that colludes with politicians whose strings are pulled by Jews. And even GOP cuck-Congressmen are funded by the likes of Sheldon Adelson.
Dialectics of Left vs Right in Current American Politics? That's total BS, as ludicrous as the Russia Collusion Hoax and Jussie Smollett 'hate hoax'(meant as anti-white defamation with full backing of venal Jews and homos). The real Power Game in the West is about the 'Trialectics' of Jewish Power as the Third Force manipulating bogus 'left' and bogus 'right' to make both sides serve Jewish supremacism.
This is why class politics, once a venerable theme among progressives, is dead on the Left. The new globo-homo 'left' is a decadent freakshow about 50 genders and babytalk about 'inclusion'(a formula that is guaranteed to destroy ANY civilization as no nation can long survive without an identity, history, and territory to define and defend... which is why Jews push 'inclusion'-invasion on goy nations but never on Israel that only includes Jewish immigrants and excludes everyone else; indeed, what would have been the point of founding Israel as a Jewish State IF tons of non-Jews could arrive and settle?). Jews push gentile diversity because it means disunity among gentiles. Also, homomania-as-the-core-of-new-'leftism' is a huge boon to the rich since homos are vain and cater to the privileged, especially Jews. So, such 'leftisms' are merely tools of Jewish Supremacism.
The general rule is that Jews will support any 'universalist' agenda for as long as it's useful to their power and hegemony. For Jews, universalism, like everything else, is a handy prop than a holy principle. Indeed, Jews even fashioned their God that way. Though YAHWEH is said to be the one and only God, the universal cosmic principle for all times and places, His purpose seems to consist mainly of serving Jews. So much of the chaos and confusion of our times stems from the fact that Jewish 'Liberals' mold universalism to serve their Tribalism, whereas white liberals make an effort to surrender every last vestige of their tribalism in service to Universalism. If indeed universal truths do exist, they should be eternal, consistent, and logical than flippant, random, and contradictory. Do Jews believe in Free Speech or Not? It all depends on "Is it good for Jews?" Jews don't want to follow in the footsteps of Wasp Principles and lose their power like Anglo-American suckers did by trusting the weasly Jews. As things stand, Whites seek to earnestly serve a universalism that is utterly at the whims of Jewish ethnocentrism. It's no wonder so many white liberals have been driven half-crazy, not unlike Job before God whose sense of justice seems to defy moral sense. While white liberals prostrate themselves before the said Universal Truth, Jews rig the game to alter the Universal Code yet again, all according to their whims of God Complex. Jewish 'liberals' and white liberals are like adults and children. To get what they want, crafty adults will often alter and reinterpret the rules without much in the way of scruples. In contrast, children, in their eagerness to win the affection and approval of adults, will make an earnest effort to live up to the Golden Rule as laid down by adults... except that the rules keep changing. (In time, children will begin to wonder, "If the rules are so 'golden', how can they be changed so readily?") Of course, children eventually grow up and realize how the jaded adult world really operates, but incredibly enough, it seems white liberals remain childlike forever in their sincere devotion to Jewish Liberal Wisdom despite the fact that Jews change the goalposts ever so often to serve their newest set of tribal-supremacist agendas.
As for the 'new right', ever since the Jewish Neocon takeover of American Conservatism Inc. it's been all about lowering tax rates for the rich and praising Israel, Israel, and Israel while cursing any hope of white consciousness that longs for emancipation from the madness of Jewish Supremacism. White conservatives may be less childlike than white liberals in that they're acting more out of fear and opportunism than naivete and misplaced idealism, but it also means they are more craven and cowardly.
