Some Observations on Jewsteronomy — What are the relations between Jewish Power Elites and Ordinary Jewish Masses — Jews compared to Japanese — To Own and to be Owned

Notes in Reply to GGAllin's comments on the Saker's ruminations on Russians and Jews:

https://www.unz.com/tsaker/our-fundamental-disagreement-about-wwii-hitler-jews-and-race/#comment-3706681

Since I began earning over $20/hour late in life, I’m not nearly a billionaire. Have little to no influence other than if I write something in an online forum or Tweets. It’s weird to read about “me” as an existential threat, but it’s interesting to grasp the context, of past harms done by “my people” who I pretty much don’t know any other than immediate siblings. It makes more sense than “irrational hate”.

It's not about YOU per se, though an average Jew, with an income of nearly 100,000, does make more than $20 an hour. The fact is powerful Jews will likely look down you as a 'dumb Jew'. That said, rich Jews do care about lesser Jews more than rich whites care about lesser whites, and that's something. We goyim don't see YOU, an individual, as an 'existential threat'. Indeed, if all or most Jews were like you, whites and Jews would likely get along. Most people want to peacefully co-exist with others, even folks of different ethnicity, in a sound and stable system. Even under Nazi rule, most German individuals were like you. They were not fire-breathing Nazi monsters. They were working stiffs who got up every morning, went to work, returned home to family, and relaxed, then did the same the next day. But Germany was then under Hitler's rule, and Hitler could be batshit crazy. National Socialist elites guided Germanic energies towards dark ends. In a typical socio-political order, most individuals are powerless and end up serving the agenda of the rulers. So, even anti-Nazi Germans ended up working and paying taxes to support Nazism. And most Jewish individuals end up supporting Jewish Power. One reason is relative powerlessness of the masses(who are like herds of cattle without control of levers and steering wheel of power), but the other reason is most people, with free will and left to their own devices, will choose their own side(as the devil they know or feel familiar with) over the other side. Even as they know their cabal of elites are plenty flawed and even rotten, they figure its rule is preferable to being conquered and/or controlled by the other side. Even Jewish Israelis who are deeply critical of Zionist rule would rather be ruled by Jewish elites than by Arab overlords. And this is why many Jewish individuals continue to support Jewish power. Furthermore, even as they know much of it is rotten, they nevertheless feel a pride of power — the incredible fact of Jews as 2% of America controlling the greatest power in the world — and a paranoia for the Other, the potential new pogromites or 'nazis', if goyim were to regain elite power. Indeed, this is why Germans and Japanese also supported their regimes to the very end in WWII. What if the conquering Russians kill or rape all Germans? What if victorious Americans wipe out all Japanese?

Also, even though a single German was like most other 'ordinary individual' around the world, there was a certain tendency within Germanic Teutonism to push things too far. It's like one straw on a camel's back is nothing, but enough of them will break its back. Even though Nazism and its horrors were not inevitable and could have been avoided(without defeat in WWI and the ensuing economic depression), there was still something powerful and irrational in German national character that, under certain circumstances, could cast a dark shadow over the world. It's like one little flame is nothing, but if you combine the flames together, it can form into ag massive pyre that can burn down a forest.
Same was true of Japan during WWII. Your average Japanese guy was a nice person. But there was something extreme and insane in Japanese national character that, under certain circumstances, could unleash a hellish kind of madness. It's like there is the sane side of Yonoi in MERRY CHRISTMAS MR LAWRENCE but also the obsessive side driven by dark national mythos.
Same with Negroes. One Negro isn't much of a problem(though, to be sure, problem enough), but too many Negroes leads to a critical mass or critical badass of jivery, criminality, and madness.

If a single Jew was dropped into any goy community, he would likely just get along. Much the same if just a few were dropped. But with sufficient numbers, Jews tend to go into Judeo-centric solar mode: They feel goyim must revolve around them than vice versa. They alter the gravitational dynamics between Jews and goyim. Though much smaller in number, the Jewish Covenant-mentality and pride-of-intellect provide Jews with a super-gravity-pack that can warp the relativity of political power.
Even as a minority, they feel like they own the place and should set the agenda and tell others what to do. Look at Jewish behavior under early Bolshevism. Look at Jewish behavior in 'capitalist' Russia of the 1990s. Granted, Jewish chutzpah wouldn't be so effective if not for goy goopery. Jewish culture taught Jews to be resilient and tenacious, even at the genetic level via selective mating that favored merchants and scholars. In contrast, Russian Orthodox culture and agro-centrism bred a race of people who were passive, witless, and expended most of their energies on useless diversions like swilling vodka, wrestling with bears, and dancing in such manner to blow the knees. While Jews were singing with their minds, Russians were dancing with their bodies. Guess which side gained advantage over the other?



So, while it's inconceivable that a tiny number of Russians could ever gain control over a vast majority Jewish population, even a small number of Jews could gain power over Russians. It's like a horse can't own a man, but a man can own a horse and ride it. Indeed, Jews even gained power over Anglos, the mightiest people that ever lived, so they naturally could so easily toy with Russians. Yet, there is a certain paradox here when we consider Jews-and-Anglos and Jews-and-Slavs. How strange that, in the end, Jewish power over Anglos was more total than power over Russians(or Italians). Why would this be if Russians and Greasers have been far less impressive and competent than the Anglos? This is where corruption and lack of scruples are almost an advantage for the goyim. Anglos, being more committed to Rule of Law, meritocracy, and fair play, were bound to be more sensitive to charges of hypocrisy and dirty tricks. Also, Anglos came to revere Rule of Law as a cornerstone of their might. So, Jews could exploit Anglo Ethos and Rule of Law to gain total power over Anglos on legal and ethical grounds. But among Russkies and Greasers, legality counts for less than machinations of power. So, despite being less impressive than Anglos, Russkies have been more adept at wresting power back from the Jews by dirty means(but then Jews also used dirty means to gain power over Russians).

Even though an average Jew is just an ordinary person, doesn't he share the values and worldview of powerful globo-homo Jews? After all, Jews, more than any other people, support globo-homo. Jews, more than most white groups, support Diversity. If all powerful/rich Jews were to die of some disease today, and if they were replaced by average Jews as new elites, would things really be all that different? I think not. Look at Max Boot, Julia Ioffe, and the Vindman Brothers. They came to the US with little or nothing. They began as ordinary Jews. But once they gained elite positions, they've been working with rest of World Jewry to mess things up for white goyim. A new batch of Jewish elites would likely push for mass immigration, great replacement, White Nakba, wars for Israel, cold war on Russia, hate-war on Iran, promotion of 'white guilt', total blind support for Israel, and etc. Now, YOU yourself may be an atypical Jew of a more pro-white and 'conservative' bent. But most ORDINARY Jews voted for Obama and Hillary. Most Jews hate Trump, and even most of those on his side are merely using him to serve Zionism 200% than merely 100%. Alan Dershowitz hasn't any good will toward Trump and Deplorables. He's such a fanatical Zionist that he figures Trump is more useful to the Israeli agenda.

Since middle school, I grew up in a suburb with many Jews, and most of them were nice people. As individuals, I'd say they were generally better, or preferable(and conscientious on the personal level), than most other groups, such as Scotch-Irish hillbillies, 'dumb Polacks', messy Mexicans, haggly Hindus, trashy Irish, doglike yellows, and of course, the ghastly Negroes. As individuals they are nice people, but over the years I've learned most of them are for globalism, great replacement of white goyim, exploiting collective 'white guilt', pushing jungle fever, and the like. Also, their hypocrisy on political matters amazes me. Most are staunch Zionist nationalists, but they denigrate nationalist feeling among goyim. They incessantly yammer about 'white guilt' about blacks but expect whites to support Zionist tyranny over Palestinians. They go on and on about Shoah but never face up to Jewish role in 20th century historical 'crimes'. And they push globo-homo. Most voted for Obama and think pushing jungle fever on white women is the greatest thing while they talk about Arabs and Palestinians as near-animals who should be pushed out of Greater Israel. I know this from personal conversations. So, even though a Jewish individual can be a nice person, associate, or friend, his political attitudes, combined with those of other Jews, signal danger to the well-being of goyim. I mean, isn't there something truly rotten in how Jews, the most privileged and powerful(and over-represented people in elite circles), berate whites for 'white privilege'? Isn't it lowdown for Jews to say Americanism is about colorblindness but then insisting ALL Americans must support Zionist-Israelis over Palestinians and Iranians? If the US must be a colorblind nation and fair broker among all peoples, why this supremacist outlook that favors Jews uber alles?

Even though your average person, Jew or otherwise, is different from members of the elite, the fact is elite outlooks don't come from nowhere. Often, they spring from the national character of the people. After all, Jews didn't land on American shores as elites. Many of them came with little or nothing. So, most members of today's Jewish elites have humble origins and rose from the bottom. So, that means their elite attitudes are, to a large extent, an expression of something intrinsic to Jewishness. Same with blacks. If all elite blacks were to die this moment and be replaced by ordinary blacks, the result would be much the same because black jiggity-ness has roots in core blackness. Blacks who write for the New York Times just offer a fancier and more haute version of, "Yo, I want all the blings and shit."

I never read the Talmud.

I believe you, but you don't have to read the thing to be affected by it. Talmudic attitudes and outlook have seeped into so much of Jewish life that, even without having read it, many Jews live it in so many Jews(and this true of secular as well as religious Jews). It's like most communists never read Das Kapital but its ideas defined so much of communist life. And plenty of Christians, incredible as it may sound, never read all(or any) of the New Testament, not least because so many goyim were illiterate over the ages. But its tenets still colored many aspects of their lives.

In a way, the problem now is less with Jews than with goyim. Instead of trying to make Jews be like goyim, we should try to make goyim be like Jews. Why should Jews want to be like goyim when so many goyim are so stupid and pathetic? Arabs can't get their act together. Japanese have tentacle porn as culture. Russians are lazy drunkards. Mexicans are garbage-tossing tards. Even the once great Germans and Anglos are castrated cucks. So, why should Jews try to be like them? No, we should all strive to be like Jews. Now, this isn't easy because most goyim don't have Jewish intelligence. But they can still emulate the next most potent thing about Jews: Chutzpah and covenant. Whites must think like Sean Connery in UNTOUCHABLES, written by Jewish David Mamet no less. If the enemy brings a knife to a fight, you bring a gun. If they push, you push back harder.



The problem is goyim hasn't been pushing back against Jews. When Jews push, goyim must push back. Also, Jews got the Covenant that says they have a special contract with the ultimate power. The problem with Christianity and Islam is their versions of the 'covenant' are too bland and broad, shared with too large a population. I mean how can whites preserve their unique identity and power if their Christo-Covenant must be shared with Negroes, yellows, browns, and etc? No, just like Jews have a JEWISH covenant, whites must have a WHITE covenant, and this will require a white man of prophetic power who communes with the ultimate power and then brings this truth to his people. (Imagine what Hitler might have been capable of if he'd spoken for all whites, Germanics and Slavs and Latins and even pro-white Jews, instead of just for the Nordics and 'Aryans'.) He must be a river to his people. But do whites have a prophetic soul? Maybe the Germans once did. After all, unlike Greeks and Romans who lacked the Big Picture and emphasized individualism — on grounds that after you died, you just ended up in Hades and that was that — , Germanic mythology had a grand vision of fate and destiny whereby all the great warriors of Valhalla would unite once again to fight the final battle. It was such bigness of vision that made impassioned Germans the greatest musical composers. And it's no wonder that Richard Wagner and Nietzsche were both Germans. And it was Jews in Germanosphere who developed the most powerful ideas, even if dangerous. Could French or Italian culture have produced a Marx? (Also, it was the German quasi-prophet Martin Luther who altered the history of Christianity with a defiant vision of his own.) Jews have long had prophetic power, but this was magnified under Germanic influence. Granted, the problem with Germanic prophecy was its excessive doom-and-gloom, a fatalistic nihilism that unsurprisingly led to the hyper-Wagnerian excesses of Hitler. The awesome side of Hitler couldn't have been possible if he were moderate, but a bit of moderation could have saved National Socialism from itself.

Now, goyim can't be smart like Jews just because they want to be. But even the un-smart can work on chutzpah and covenant. After all, even the idiot Arabs produced a great prophet in the figure of Muhammad. White folks need a White Muhammad who attains the covenant for his people. As Meat Loaf said, two out of three ain't bad. Blacks are proof that chutzpah goes a long way(and homos are proof of the power of Poopchutespah). Even though blacks don't make much sense, they always push back when they are criticized. Jews easily run roughshod over apologetic whites, but even a bunch of angry Jews can't make Al Sharpton budge because the wildass Negro hollers back. And look how Ace Rothstein is frozen with fear when Nicky Santoro uses greaser-chutzpah on him. Anglos were never up for that kind of push-back. This is why Jews run circles around Anglo-types in Marx Brothers movies. But imagine what would happen if Groucho and Chico tried to do a number on Nicky Santoro or Tommy(in GOODFELLAS). If Anglo elites had talked to Jews like Nicky does with Ace Rothstein, they'd still have the power. But they had to keep their 'dignity' at all costs. Now, dignity, or true dignity, is about standing your ground with integrity and pushing back against BS. It's not about staying 'clean' by the art of 'reputation'. For Anglos, 'dignity' really means haute status, and that's why they focus on perception than conviction. So, if the New Normal says globo-homo is the New Dignity, Anglos immediately go along with that to maintain their conceit of 'dignity'. They regard 'dignity' as dress and gown than body and soul. Look how Charles Murray the bald-headed cuck-fool supported 'gay marriage' when it became the fashionable thing among elites. In contrast, even though blacks are dumber and poorer than whites, they hold their own against Jews because they push back and possess a special sense of black covenant called FOABP, or Fear of a Black Planet to scare 'honkeys' with, though one might call it POTA or Planet of the Africans.




There are two kinds of people in the world. Owners and the owned. Masters and Slaves. Masters own, slaves are owned. When we consider the Jewish Worldview, it is to be owners of the world. But before you own others, you must own yourself. You must see yourself as special, not a commodity to be traded. And your people must treat others of the tribe as fellow owners. Jews developed this sense via the Covenant that said even the lowest humble Jew was equally precious in the eyes of God the Almighty who didn't favor some Jew simply because he was richer than others. Thus, every Jew, even a lowly Jew, felt that he owned himself as a human. He wasn't owned by others. The only power that owns him is God. In contrast, goy orders were made of masters and slaves. Masters owned the slaves, the minions, the rabble who had no autonomous self-worth. (Also, the elites felt as owners ONLY IF they retained political/military power over the minions. Without worldly power, they felt as worthless.) So, only the elites felt as owners whereas the masses felt as the owned. This was Russia under the Tsars. The Tsar was the master, albeit supposedly a benevolent patriarch, over the masses of Russians who were deemed childlike and cattle-like. Most Russians felt owned by the Tsar and the nobility, and this mentality lingered even after serfdom was abolished. It is then hardly surprising that a single Jew in Russia had 100x the confidence and will-power of an average Russian. Communism didn't help matters. Though it spoke of liberation, Russians just became owned by the Iron State ruled by the likes of Lenin and Stalin as new master-owners.

In contrast to Russia/USSR, the US imbued its citizens with the sense of ownership. And yet, even this couldn't stand up to Jewish power because Anglo-American concept of ownership was centered on individuality, dry letter of the law, property rights, and opportunity. In other words, it was bound to lead to atomization and the Coming Apart along class lines. Also, the excessive emphasis on property rights meant that consumers obsessed with commodities could themselves become human commodities whose only value is economic or GDP-related. No wonder we hear stuff like, "Great Replacement is okay as long as economic activity goes up." Also, excessive materialist-individualism meant that rich Americans would feel as winners or uber-masters, while poorer Americans would feel as abject 'losers' or servant-class.
If whites had a Jewishy concept of ownership that was essentially tribal, cultural, historical, and spiritual, they would be in a much better shape. For one thing, they would be united as a people on grounds that all whites, regardless of class, would be considered as brethren within the white family with shared destiny. Such a rich cultural sense of ownership would mean that even a poor white owns something of great historical-spiritual value, something that cannot be priced with dollars. But the soulless materialist concept of ownership in the US means that the haves feel like masters(as long as they keep on 'having') while have-nots feel like slaves or 'losers'. It's like what Kurt Vonnegut said.

Jews are owners twofold in the US. As the wealthiest group, they own so much of America. But as Covenant-ists, they feel that they own themselves. They are their own people with a deep and rich history. Indeed, even when Jewish immigrants arrived on American soil with little or nothing, they still felt that they owned themselves, not by goyim no matter how richer the goyim may have been. You see this in the Bible too. Even when Hebrews are held captive by more powerful groups, Jews feel they own their own souls. If any Being owns them, it's God and only Him. This is in stark contrast to the Japanese Way where nearly everyone felt he was owned by someone higher. The essence of Japanese-ness was to serve. To serve the master than be a master. And besides, even being a master meant one had to serve a higher master with absolute devotion. 'Bushi', the term for samurai, means 'to serve'. So, when we compare Jews and Japanese in the US, the difference couldn't be starker. Jews feel they own themselves(and even feel that they should own the silly inferior goyim). But Japanese-Americans are happy to be owned by the dominant power. Look at Francis Fukuyama, that worthless spineless cuck-servant before the Jewish globo-homo masters. He's like the Japanese after World War II who groveled at the feet of General MacArthur as the New Shogun. Of course, it was right for Japan to surrender as they couldn't continue with the war effort, but did they have to grovel before the power that had so utterly crushed them? Even if Israel were to face defeat and be conquered by the Other, Jews won't grovel. They will smile, shake hands, and pretend to go along, but they will not surrender their sense of ownership to the Other. Indeed, even after Exile in Roman Times, Jews never lost their sense of spiritual ownership of the Holy Land. That is the difference between Jews and Japanese. This is why, even though Israel is a much smaller nation than Japan, it is getting stronger while Japan is dying. Even as Jews spread globalization to goy nations to destroy them, they maintain total Jewish ownership of Jewish homeland, Jewish bodies, and Jewish history. In contrast, the hapless Japanese cucks, in total obeisance to their globalist overlords, are committing massive harakiri, also true of other East Asian nations with the possible exception of China. Japanese surrendered their Narrative to the West, and Japanese regard their women as sex toys as pornography is a big feature of their 'culture'. It's a nation of plastic toys than soulful humans.

White people used to feel as owners in America. They owned their bodies and souls. They owned their narratives, icons & idols, and the land. They conquered it, they claimed it, they built it, and they kept it. They sometimes owned other peoples, especially the blacks as slaves, but the idea of white folks being owned by the Other, or White Slavery, was anathema to white pride and dignity. And this was due to White Race-ism, the greatest thing in American history. White Race-ism was the glue, the bond, and a kind of emotional sub-covenant that held white folks together.
But the over-emphasis on individualism, materialism, and universalism eventually frayed this sense of white unity of ownership of body, soul, and land. Individualism led to atomization, an excessive focus on me-as-winner than we-as-owners. So, if a white individualist could betray his own kind and cut a deal to make money, he did just that. So many whites became a bunch of Mitt Romneys. Materialism meant that the essence of life was to buy stuff. So, one's value was tied to consumer goods and services. That meant one had no value unless attached to some hedonistic-economic activity. In other words, if electricity were to go out, a white person would have no value, no reason to live. And all this talk of universalism meant that white bodies, white lands, white wealth, and even white history could be owned by others. So, we got jungle fever and Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs. We have white-built sports taken over by blacks who now reign as heroes and idols of whites; this means whites are owned by black demigods in fantasy, recreation, and entertainment. Whites used to protect their heroes from the Other. So, white sports kept out blacks, the tougher race. But individualism and universalism undermined white race-ism and paved the way for black supremacism. This has been crucial because the most impressionable things in peoples memories are the peak moments of thrill. People ignore or forget most things in their daily lives and remember only the most exciting moments. It's like we look at peaks of mountains than at slopes or valleys. As blacks took over the peaks of sports, pop music, and sexualized culture, most whites conflate blackness with peak thrills of life. Whites don't even own their heroes. As the demigod heroes are of the Other, it's like blacks own the sensations of whites. And as black entertainers and athletes are owned by Jewish moguls, it's like Jews own whites two-fold. They own the blacks who own the whites-as-hapless-cucky-wucks.
With the fading of white race-ism, whites can no longer claim ownership of white lands, even in Europe. Whites are not owners but mere commodities. White lands can be claimed by anyone, and white people can be declared obsolete or 'antique' and replaced by new people as new cattle, new pets, or new furniture. The rise of pornification of society means whites have gone from owners to the owned. Look at Miley Cyrus and other creatures of Jewish-run Disney, now a shikse-whore-factory. They are not humans but commodities, sex dolls. And white people accept this because they don't even own their minds. Indeed, white minds are now mere extensions of Jewish-owned electronic media. If Jews say 'gay marriage is holy', white minds hooked to Jewish-owned TV nod along. Even the white religion of Christianity has been owned and altered by Jews into worship of Globo-Homo as so many churches now are essentially about worship of Sodomy and tranny-penis-cutting than anything else. (But then, the fact that whites had been converted in such huge numbers to Christianity, a religion originating from the Other, suggests whites are easily owned. Incapable of creating a prophetic vision of their own, they surrendered their souls to a Jew as Son of God.)

Now, imagine Arabs in Israel controlling prostitution & pornography and using Jewish women as sex meat for Arab men, Palestinian men, and Negro men. Jews would be outraged that another group is treating Jewish women as objects to be owned and exploited. They would see it as Arabs treating Jews like commodities. But Jews apparently see nothing wrong with treating whites that way. Worse, if whites a hundred years ago would have been shocked and offended by Jews using whites in such manner, white cuck-maggots of today are sheepishly resigned to the fate of existing to be owned, bought/sold, and ordered around by Jewish Power. Even Donald Trump, who'd been harassed by Jewish Power from day one, is totally owned by Jews and do their bidding, like killing Soleimani, a proud man who is NOT owned by Jews. (And of course, young white men in the US military don't fight to defend America as a nation they own. No, they are mere mercenary goons owned by Jewish Power that sends them to slaughter Arabs and Muslims for the glory of Zion that owns almost all US politicians who are worthless toadies.) Indeed, it seems as if owned white fools like Trump and John McCain are envious of goyim who are not owned. No wonder McCain barked so loudly at Vladimir Putin. No wonder Trump took out Soleimani, a painful reminder to cuck-dogs like The Donald that indeed a goy can be his own master and not be owned by Jewish supremacists.
Under Sorosian Jewish Supremacism, a white man in Europe who says his nation belongs to his own people is now a 'far rightist', but at the same time, all European elites are expected to say Israel belongs to Jews and Jews only. So, Jews are to be admired and supported as Owners whereas whites must resign themselves to Owned status. Indeed, it's gotten to the point where whites can't even own their own history as justification for owning their lands. Under Jewish control, white narratives are being taken away from white hands and rewritten by Jews, white cuck-scribes, and blacks into a 'Diversity' narrative. In other words, Swedes have no ownership of historical narrative to buttress territorial ownership of their land because... uh... the Vikings were black and shit. Right, and because some European merchants visited China and India, those Asian lands belong just as much to whites as to yellows and browns. Can you imagine anyone in China or India falling for that bull? But then, Japan seems falling for it as it's just a cuck-wussy colony of the US that is a cuck-wussy colony of the Empire of Judea.

Zionism vs Afrikanerism as Political Philosophy of Labor — How the Ideology of National Labor eventually trumps the Expediency of Global Labor — Mind and Body in Man and Nation

Politics of Labor will decide the future of nations.

What was the most crucial difference between Zionism and Afrikanerism?

Zionists debated early on whether the Jewish settlers should hire Arab workers or Jewish workers. Zionists came down on the side of Jews hiring Jews. Thus, the Jewish head would be wedded to the Jewish body. And as the theme of Zionism would be ethno-cultural, it would serve as the heart between the head and body of the Jewish nation. In the short-term, it would have been more profitable to use Arab labor. It would have been cheaper than Jewish labor. Also, whereas a Jewish boss would feel moral obligation to treat fellow Jews with some sense of justice, he might merely exploit Arab laborers as expendable than essential members of the Community. But if Zionism had opted for Jewish owners and Arab workers, it would have failed in the long run. As there are always more workers than owners, Arabs would have outnumbered the Jews, and Jewish dominance would have been difficult to maintain. So, even though Jewish owners hiring Jewish workers was economically more costly in the short-run, it was crucial in the long-run in the creation of a Jewish state where the Jewish mind was united with Jewish body. It became one organic unit and fought off all challenges. But, suppose Zionism had opted for Jewish owners hiring Arab Workers. When the Partition of 1948 was declared, would all those Arab employees of Jewish owners have sided with their Jewish bosses or with their Arab brethren? Most would have joined with Arab Brethren, and the Arabs would have won the war, and Jews would have been expelled from Palestine permanently. But because Zionist opted for Jewish owners and Jewish workers, when the crisis moment arrived, all Jews from top to bottom united as a single force and fought the Arabs and won... and were even able to grab most of Arab territory.

In contrast, let's look at the Politics of Labor of South Africa. Afrikaners were race-conscious, but they opted for economic expediency. They decided to hire lots of black workers to do much of the work. In the short-term, this was a terrific bargain. Blacks could be hired for cheap. They could be exploited because they weren't white. White owners and bosses felt some paternal feelings for black workers but not as much as if they'd been white. So, this was a great boost to the South African economy on farms and in the mines, not unlike the economic arrangement in Rhodesia where blacks worked for white owners. But in the long run, what happened in South Africa? These blacks increased in number, outbred whites, and more blacks moved to white areas from the hinterland and even from other African nations. This meant lots of cheap labor that whites could exploit, but it also meant whites being outnumbered by blacks by an ever-increasing margin. Unlike Israel that came to be about Jewish mind wedded to the Jewish body and united by Jewish heart, South Africa increasingly became a world of white mind wedded to the black body with heart of stone lodged between the two communities. Afrikanerism wasn't organic like Zionism. Zionism decided to see Labor as part of 'us' and 'ours'. Afrikanerism decided to see Labor as the Other.
Zionists had been tempted to go with Arab labor. After all, Western Jews honed their skills in white-collar professions and in ownership of property. They weren't really into manual labor. That was for the goyim. Granted, there were poor Jews in Eastern Europe at the time who did manual labor. And even in the West, there were plenty of poor Jews in the garment industries. Still, the Jewish ideal was to use one's brains, not to toil like a 'dummy'. Labor was looked down upon as stuff Dumb 'Polacks' did. Even Jewish communists wanted to be intellectuals or commissars representing laborers; they didn't want to become laborers themselves. Karl Marx never stepped inside a factory in his entire life. And yet, another side of Jewish culture had more respect for the common man, at least if he was Jewish. As Jewish culture wasn't about warriors, it didn't develop an aristocratic culture like the Europeans and Japanese. Among the goyim, the warrior caste became the noblemen, and their power and privilege rested on blood. So, the Western ideal came to be aristocratic-minded, like that of Sparta though not nearly as extreme. Aristocratism deemed that a certain caste was superior over all the rest, and they had the right to rule over others who had to do the heavy lifting as peons and peasants. In contrast, the Jewish Covenant was shared equally by all. Rich Jew, poor Jew, it didn't matter. So, at least within the Tribe, Jews could be more mindful of the humanist value of every Jew. After all, in the Jewish Lore, the kings came later, long after the emergence of the Jews as a people and culture. In contrast, many goy narratives begin with some great leader figure who conquers and rules. According to the Jewish Lore, Jews are a people with certain needs, and they reached a point where they needed a king. In contrast, the Goy Narrative is often about how some guy beat all the others and gained the right to rule, and therefore, it was the duty of everyone else to obey him and his descendants.

National Laborism believes Labor isn't just some economic entity or measure but part of what defines and defends a people, land, and culture. Zionism is National Laborism, and it may be the only nation that is ideologically formulated to be that way.
In its day, National Socialist Germany had a similar ideology. German workers weren't seen merely as economic units but as part of the national family. Labor was organic. It was the body wedded to the German mind and soul. Unfortunately, this ideal all went to hell when Germany decided to go imperialist and turned non-Germans into slaves, thus going from National Socialist ideal to Imperialist Exploitation expediency. And yet, Hitler understood the need for German owners and German workers to be united in the newly occupied lands. Hitler's vision of Russia wasn't for German owners to hire and rely on Slavic laborers. Initially, Germans would use Russians as slaves, but eventually they would be replaced with German workers as a strong German Empire could be assured only by unity of German minds and German bodies. But this was a grisly vision outside Germany because it entailed removal, even extermination, of entire populations. Hitler was right about the New World. North America(minus Mexico) was sounder than Latin America because North was mostly about white owners and white workers. There was organic racial unity of white mind and white body. In contrast, Latin America was about white minds ruling over brown bodies. Thus, there was no heart between mind and body in Latin America. In North America, there was a sense of heart between white mind and white body because it's tougher to exploit one's fellow tribal brethren than another people. It made labor more expensive but also more precious because it wasn't seen merely as economic value but as national-cultural asset. But Hitler was wrong to apply New World historical lessons to the Old World. While it's true that the Red Man lost out tragically to the White Man in North America, there weren't all that many Indian savages in North America. Also, primitive world was supplanted with a modern world as a result of White Conquest of the Americas. In contrast, German invasion of USSR was a war on 170 million people. Also, despite evils of communism and Slavic backwardness, Russia was still part of the great civilized world. Eradicating all of that to create Greater Germany was a mad vision. Though Zionist occupation of West Bank isn't nearly so spectacular, it could be the undoing of Israel if it's ever annexed as Israel will have to offer some form of citizenship to all those Palestinians who may tip the demographic balance of bigger Israel. But then, Jews could try to expel them, but that will stir up a giant international shi*-storm.

When the US was gloriously race-ist, it had a defacto if willy-nilly kind of National-Laborism. While immigration was key to the rapid expansion of the US in the 19th century and early 20th century, most of the newcomers were white and, in time, assimilated. People like the Joads in THE GRAPES OF WRATH mattered because it was deemed a moral necessity for white haves to have a heart for white have-nots. George Bailey doesn't bowl alone in IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE because those white folks of Bedford Falls are his people. If they were a bunch of crazy Negroes, apathetic Mexicans, and angry Muslims, he would have left the town. Labor was seen as part of the National Family. New Deal addressed the issue of Labor and Laborers as fellow Americans.

In contrast, the white elites in Latin America always saw Labor as a huge threat. Latin whites were the mind, but the Laboring body was brown(or black). There was little heart between the two. In some ways, Latin white elites envied American white elites, and vice versa. Latin white elites thought American white elites had it better because they hired white workers. Latin America too tried to encourage more white immigration to stem the tide of Rise of Color. But most white Europeans wanted to move to US than to Latin America. Anyway, American white elites also envied Latin White elites. Because American white elites had to hire white workers(for the most part), they felt an obligation to pay them more and offer more benefits. After all, it wouldn't do for whites to mistreat whites. But in Latin America, white owner class could treat the brown workers like expendable peons desperate to work for few pesos. It's no wonder some American capitalists romanticized Latin America. It's like what Hyman Roth says about Cuba. Money goes further in Latin America where the owners don't have to treat the people as Workers with Identity and Rights. Workers are mere peons, and political 'leaders' are whores who can easily be bought. (Today's DC resembles Havana before the Revolution, and ironically enough, this makes Trump with his Deplorable rabble army seem like New Castro to the Deep State.) It's no wonder Buckleys and Bushes had romantic views of Latin America and Mexico. It's where the distinctions of race and class have been more clearly etched. Owners are up here, and workers are down there.
We tend to associate mono-racialism with conservatism, but there is something inherently socialist about mono-racialism even if the dominant economic system in such a society is capitalist. Under mono-racialism, everyone is seen as part of the national family, and so, there is a sense of obligation to each and every person who is seen as deserving of education, opportunity, job, and benefits. In contrast, Diversity means the owner class may well be racially and culturally different from the working classes. And that means the owners don't have to pay much attention to the Other, the lesser folks who do work that is deemed low and inferior. Though Diversity is often associated with liberalism and equality, its effect is often a form of conservative hierarchy like in caste-ridden India of old. Latin America was more diverse than the US and also more conservative and reactionary in just about every area. To this day, it's about white elites ruling over browns. Of course, the official rhetoric of Latin America is that everyone is nicely mixed and no one sees race, but that's just bogus fantasy to mask the fact of hierarchy and lack of communion between those on top and those on bottom.

East Asian nations like Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan have been about yellow minds and yellow bodies. And nationalism was the heart that glued yellow minds to yellow bodies. But the rise of elitism via near universal college enrollment and elevated expectations may lead to the demise of National Labor ideology in these nations. Today, most Japanese see non-white-collar jobs as 'dirty, demeaning, and dangerous.' Same in South Korea and Taiwan. Not only do many yellows prefer to commit suicide than take up 'dirty and demeaning' labor, they refuse to have children who might fail in school and end up doing 'dirty and demeaning' labor. Also, Asian women, nearly all college educated, only want to marry 'winners'. This means sudden drop in birth-rates, and it means low-level jobs must be filled by... someone, and so, even Japan is now taking in 500,000 foreigners to take up those jobs. And according to Peter Frost's research, South Korean labor will be 40% non-Korean in 25 yrs. Taiwan seems to be following similar trends. So, their economic ideology is closer to Afrikanerism than Zionism. In the short term, it will be profitable and convenient as poor laborers arrive from places like Philippines and Indonesia to fill up 'dirty and demeaning' jobs. But in time, those newcomers will take over the nation just like blacks took over South Africa. Another threat to East Asia is globalism. East Asian mentality is essentially TO SERVE. The samurai, also known as 'bushi', was about submission. 'Bushi' means To Serve. Even though samurai were the elite caste, they were all about serving the Lord. Without someone to serve, one was a ronin, a nothing. Among Chinese and Koreans, the ideal was to become a Confucian bureaucrat and serve the emperor or king. Thus, an individual has no value except in service to the highest power. In Akira Kurosawa's SEVEN SAMURAI and RED BEARD, samurai are initially reluctant to serve the 'common rabble' than some fancy lord. They are used to serving the High than the Low, just like the shoe-maker in HIGH AND LOW must really struggle with himself before coming to regard his chauffeur's kidnapped son as akin to his own. When the top power in Asia was national, most were happy to serve the local power. But now that globalism made the West the uppermost power, most Asian elites are servile to the Western globo-homo way. This is in contrast to Jews who have a sense of self-worth. The Covenant means that every Jew has a direct connection to God. So, even as Jews may work for or with other people, they don't believe they exist to SERVE others. If anything, the key is to make OTHERS serve them, the Chosen Individuals. Asians lack such mentality. Today, Asian elites believe they should serve the West, the toppermost power, and they think they, as 'fancy Asians', should be served by lower people such as 'jungle Asians'. This goes against the grain of Zionism and will be disaster in yrs to come. (There is also a matter of personality. Three groups -- Jews, blacks, and homos -- have big personalities that tend to be egocentric or vain and expect the world to serve them. In contrast, most other groups have either neutral or servile personalities. Jews think everyone should revolve around Jewish Genius, blacks think everyone should suck 'muh dick', and homos think everyone should kiss their behind. No wonder the Three have such out-sized roles in World Culture.)

At one point, whites were like 50% of the South African population. Had Afrikaners taken the Zionist route and decided upon white workers for white owners, South Africa might have become a White Israel. But whites thought short-term. And same could be said for California. When the Golden State had been gloriously race-ist, it came to its senses and excluded Chinese Invasion and Colonization. It didn't want to end up like Tibet or Xinjiang are ending up today. California Dream was a kind of White Israel on the West Coast. And it was a fantastic success story, in some ways the most spectacular tale of American can-do spirit. But at some point, white Californians got used to Too Much of a Good Thing. And they turned grasshopper and took things for granted, even leading to the rise of the California Teenager meme. So, Californian economic ideology went from quasi-Zionism to quasi-Afrikanerism: Whites were too good for certain jobs, and they were to be taken by all those lowly 'beaners'. But just as lowly blacks took over South Africa, these lowly 'beaners' came to demographically take over much of California. This is what happens when the mind and body are no longer one.

Though a collective of people is different from a single person, there are certain parallels that are instructive. Even if heads and bodies could be traded among peoples, a person functions best if his head is connected to his own body via his heart. "My mind, my heart, and my body." But suppose we do an experiment where one person's mind is connected to another person's body and both are pumped by heart of yet another. Would such a person feel as one? When men pretend to be 'women', what happens to their psychology?
In John Carpenter's THE THING, the extraterrestrial creature doesn't care about any of the bodies it takes over since it can move from body to body. It has no organic unity with any single body. It considers every body as expendable. As far as it's concerned, all bodies exist just so it could move from one to the other to spread more Thingish-ness. Now, imagine if your head was severed from your body and suppose your head could move around from place to place. Suppose, it could supplant the heads of other people and take over their bodies. Would you take good care of those bodies? Not likely. Why not? They are not your bodies. You're just a parasite that sees every body as a host. You'd use and abuse the body as long as possible and then move onto to new bodies to mess with. This is indeed how George Soros and Paul Singer operate. They are heads without bodies. They move from nation to nation and attach their heads to the nation as 'advisers' and then do everything to suck that nation dry and then move onto new national bodies. But would Paul Singer do such to his beloved Israel? No. When Singer's head connects with Israel's body, it feels like 'Home', like when ET saw Yoda on Halloween.
https://youtu.be/VrVEHszxL7E?t=2m12s
In the current West, the Jewish head/mind feels little connection to the white body. If anything, the Jewish mind fears rejection by the 'deplorable' white body that might call for the return of the proud white head, and so, the Jewish mind is hellbent on diversifying the body so that it won't be white anymore: White torso, Mexican liver, Asian lungs, African dong, Muslim hands, homo anus, and etc. These body parts will be too busy rejecting one another to come together to reject the Zardoz-like Jewish Head.
As for the former white mind that used to control the white body, it was decapitated long ago, and having no organic connection to the body, it dreams silly dreams of Homo and Tranny as the new god.

A sane and sound person's mind is connected to his body and soul. A sane and sound nation is essentially of one elite ruling over one people. While Israel has a sizable Arab population, it has been a Jewish majority nation led by Jewish elites for Jewish identity from Day One. Zionic beats Bionic. Organic beats artificial. And if Turkey remains viable to this day, it's because modern Turkey was founded as an organic nation of the Turks. Its biggest problem has been with Kurds, a people who insist they are not Turks, but fortunately for Turkey, Kurds are a minority like Arabs in Israel.

Now, it may be understandable why some elites want to boost Diversity and destroy organic nationalism. They feel burdened by having to lead and deal with their own people. It's like Moses had a fearsome task ahead of him because he was a Jew leading the Jews. Because they were his people, he couldn't just see them as chattel or the rabble or human trash(even though the mobs sometimes acted like that). He had to whip them into shape, inspire them, and secure their future in terms of land and survival. Such is a huge challenge and burden, and not all elites are up to it. They just want to make money, gain privilege, and live in the glam world.

American elites were more conscientious and mindful. Protestantism suppressed narcissism and vanity. In contrast, in the colorful Catholic Latin America, the elites were more shameless in lavishly furnishing themselves with the Good Life and style over substance. In a way, the rise of Marxism was like the Second Reformation in Latin America. A way of saying ENOUGH IS ENOUGH to all the Havana playboy lifestyle. Castro decided to play Moses by ruling Cuba as a nation where every worker would matter as part of the national family. Unfortunately, the fool chose Marxism than Neo-Fascism, the true way to bridge the mind and body. But in the end, the problem wasn't only bad choice of ideology but race. No matter how much Cuba's white elites tried, they couldn't represent whites, blacks, and mixed-race people in between the same way. A racially diverse nation has a hard time being organic. Ideology goes only so far in stitching the differences.

Anyway, Zionism or Afrikanierism when it comes to Labor? Should Labor be seen as part of National Family or Global Finance? When we compare the fate of Israel vs South Africa, I think the answer is clear. So, why do Jews push Afrikanerization of Labor for all nations EXCEPT Israel? Because smart(and devious) power wants to keep the secret formula for itself. Let the suckers fall for the hustle of short-term profits for long-term demise.