What Happens When the Weak-of-Survival Are Favored over the Strong-of-Survival? The Western Conundrum under Jewish Supremacism.

Suppose there are organisms in a certain environment. They compete with other organisms and even face the invasion by foreign organisms. Within these native organisms, there are those that react strongly to threats and act accordingly. They fight or build defenses. And then, there are those that are passive, weak, or even welcoming of rivals or invaders. Over time, what will happen? The Law of Survival will weed out the weak members as they'll be conquered and devoured by rivals or invaders. Meanwhile, the strong members will survive with their tenacity and fighting spirit. In time, the organisms will be defined by the survivors with the spirit of warriors. That way, the organisms will remain strong.

But what if a different set of dynamics takes hold of this environment? Suppose there is a Power that coddles and protects the weak-willed members of the organism while hampering the strong-willed members that are exposed to constant attacks and invasions. The weak-willed survive because they don't have to fight under the protection of the Power. In contrast, the strong-willed come under ceaseless pressure. Furthermore, they are prevented by the Power from using all means at their disposal to counter the attacks and invasions. What will happen over time? The strong-willed will wither, fade, and eventually be forced to cower before the enemy. After all, even the strongest bear or biggest bull can eventually be brought down by a pack of wolves; even a giant lizard succumbs to a massive killer ant attack. Meanwhile, the weak-willed members survive and even thrive... but as pathetic puppets and minions of the Power that protects them(and subverted the defensive capability of the defeated strong-willed members).

Imagine an environment with lots of chimps. Among them, there are strong-willed chimps and weak-willed chimps. Strong-willed chimps are vigilant, always on the lookout, and ready to fight for territory, females, and food. Weak-willed chimps, on the other hand, are passive and kindly toward outsiders, be they rival chimps or dangerous animals(such as leopards). Now, when crisis breaks out, the strong-will chimps will prioritize survival and go into fight-or-flight mode. Fight those that can be defeated, take flight from the stronger, and set up a wall of defense. In contrast, the weak-willed members will be slower to flee from danger. They may even move toward danger as a 'friend'. They'll act like the dufus scientist in the 1950s sci-fi horror THE THING, a naive brainiac who seeks to commune with and 'understand' the fearsome and ruthless creature from another planet. Over time, as the weak-willed chimps will be weeded out by murderous enemy chimps and predators, the chimp community will have more strong-willed members.
But suppose a Power takes over the chimp community. It creates a well-stocked sanctuary for the weak-willed chimps that thus become favored in the game of existence. Despite possessing traits disadvantageous for survival, they are favored and coddled by the Power. The strong-willed chimps get no such protection and are therefore disadvantaged in survival. They must fight and struggle to survive, and tough as they are, some are destroyed or devoured by rival chimps and predators. But there is worse. The Power decides to make things more difficult for the strong-willed apes. Their fangs are ground down so their bites are far less effective. Also, they are supplied with narcotics, and many succumb to addiction. Under such organizing principles, the weak-willed members survive(but essentially as chattel dependent on the protection/mercy of the Power) while the strong-willed members dwindle in number and eventually become destroyed.

In a way, the favoring of the weak-willed over the strong-willed is the story of civilization. It is also a strategy of power. It can be advantageous to a people if they control the terms of 'domestication', but it can be disadvantageous(and eventually fatal) if the terms are controlled by another group.

There are parallels between humans and dogs, though some human groups and certain dog breeds became more domesticated than others. The Golden Retriever became more domesticated than the Alaskan Husky that, despite living with man, still came under tremendous natural pressures in freezing climates and in proximity with dangerous predators such as polar bears and wolves. Dogs are weaker and smaller than wolves, their ancestors. They are also weaker-willed and more prone to trust and be friendly with other organisms, especially humans. As such, humans favored and protected dogs. But humans also owned dogs as property, as pets and servants. Thus, even though countless dogs led far safer and happier lives in the protective human realm than wolves did in the wild, they were at the mercy of their human masters. But humans didn't merely favor dogs over wolves but made a concerted effort to make things difficult and often deadly for the wolves. Therefore, even though wolves have greater survival skills than dogs if both were placed in the same wilderness — indeed, it's likely that most, even all, dogs will be destroyed in the wild — , the Power of Man has made it so that weak-willed dogs have far greater chance of survival than wolves in the wild(that has been limited to wilderness preserves). The interference of the Power made it so that the wolf's natural advantage became a disadvantage whereas the natural disadvantage of the dog became an advantage under Man. After all, mankind naturally prefers the trusting, submissive, and friendly dog to the ferocious and proud wolf. Dogs have done better under humans than in the wild but at the loss of all pride, autonomy, and independence. Still, as they are animals, pride doesn't matter much to them. But what about people who've lost pride and independence?

But then, can real pride and independence exist in civilization? After all, if people, as truly free individuals, decided to do as they like, civilization would fall apart. Imagine a world run over by Alexes of A CLOCKWORK ORANGE. Despite all the talk of freedom and individualism, the main reason why modern civilization holds together and continues is because most or majority of the people support or serve the hierarchy and adhere to the 'values' and 'narratives' pushed by the Power. Also, the Power enforces the same sets of laws, language, and lore over the vast populace. Under communism in the Soviet Union, the law was Marxist-Leninist. The language of the empire was Russian. And all children were raised on the lore of communist saints and heroes. There's been far more freedom in the West, but the system cannot be sustained unless enough people submit to the existing Power Structure. For most people in the West, there is a measure of freedom in their personal lives but hardly any freedom or means to change the workings of the existing power structure. Only a handful of people with the means to enter the inner sanctums of power can make a real difference. Also, even personal choices are shaped, even dictated, by a handful of big players. Most movies are made by Hollywood, or Movie Inc. People choose from what is offered to them by mega-corporations, just like voters choose from a bunch of politicians vetted by the ruling power, i.e. people vote for puppets, not leaders. People may select from various media outlets that create the impression of choice, but most of media are controlled by a handful of Jewish oligarchs. People may choose the kind of music they like, but pop trends are dominated by a few entertainment oligopolies. There was talk of how the internet would unleash an era of citizen journalism and alternative views, but the biggest platforms are dominated by Zionist Jews who shut down what they deem as 'hate speech'. Jewish oligarchs at Google also manipulate algorithms so that Jew-run news are favored in search results over voices critical of Jewish Supremacism. Therefore, what is called 'free press' and 'free speech' are highly proscribed and controlled in the Free West. Indeed, paradoxically enough, people in a democracy might be even more clueless as to what's really happening because the conceit of 'liberty' and 'freedom' blinds them to the fact that they aren't so free. At least, people in Iran and China know their freedoms are restricted by the State. In the West, many are still under the delusion of living in a 'liberal democracy' when, if anything, they are minions of a Jewish Supremacist Oligarchy. Labels can fool a lot of people. It's like the 'fat-free' label that fools so many people who don't realize that the fat has been replaced by more sugars. Same with 'progress' and 'conservative'. So much of what is nowadays labeled as 'progressive' or 'conservative' is anything but. So-called 'progressive' Democrats are totally in cahoots with Wall Street that push globo-homo to replace May Day with Gay Day. And so-called 'conservative' Republicans are now into chanting 'gay marriage and trannies-in-washrooms are conservative values.' How the world loves a label than the reality.

In a way, this loss of true freedom and independence is the price we all paid for civilization. A civilization can be more free or less free, but when push comes to shove, it must be about most or the great majority submitting to the power, the status quo. Those in power may change — American Power went from Wasp Rule to Jewish Rule — , but regardless of who are on top, most people must go along. So, Russia went from the people obeying the Czars to obeying the Commissars to obeying the oligarchs. And most Germans went from obeying the Kaiser to obeying the Weimar Republic to obeying the Nazis to obeying the bureaucrats in West Germany or East Germany. Even if many people are cynical about power and disrespect the ruling elites, they've no choice but to go through the daily motion of working for the system. In other words, even the disobedient find they've no choice but to obey to make a living.
And even when the people do rise up and overthrow the existing system, as in the case of Shah's Iran, the only way civilization can continue is if most people support or comply with the new order. Civilization cannot tolerate too many wolves. It needs lots of dogs. As for controlling the power, it usually goes to the weasels. George Orwell in ANIMAL FARM illustrated how the banishment of humans only led to the rise of Pig Tyranny. But then, as bad as the pigs are, can the animals govern themselves? Besides domestication means to become part of a system, an order based on organizational principles. It is then the nature of domesticated organisms to long for the iron hand, albeit so-called Liberal Democracy learned to cover it with a velvet glove. As individuals, we can only be so free. After all, we don't want to live in a world of chaos where everyone, as an independent maverick, makes up his or her own rules. This is so many manifestations of 'rebellion' and 'difference' in a 'liberal democracy' are manufactured as a chimera by the Power. Have the 'rebels' conform to officially tolerated or approved forms of 'rebellion', like cheering loudly at Rock concerts, piercing one's nose, or turning one's hair green, all of which are harmless to the Power(while harmful to the pride of resistance). All these 'differences' lead to new conformist communities than truly independent turns of mind and spirit. It's like the Power's idea of 'dark web dissident right' turned out to be Zionists like Ben Shapiro & Dave Rubin and shills of Zionists like Jordan Peterson. But then, even if dissident rightists were to come to power, wouldn't they prop up their favored Norms and Sacraments as the governing principle in the new order?

Civilization must favor the mild-willed over the strong-willed. While weak-will is too sappy, strong-will is too contentious. While society gains something by having some strong-willed leaders and alphas, most people must be less-strong-willed if people are to get along and go along. (Also, if two civilizations are defined by mild-mannered-ness, they may find ways to co-exist and cooperate than remain locked in terms of conflict. Mild-willed outlooks can serve as roads and bridges between civilizations.)

If everyone were strong-willed, it'd be an endless battle of egos. Therefore, most people must be mild-willed, somewhere between weak-will and strong-will. And the meritocratic system is geared to favor mild-willed over strong-willed, that is unless the strong-willed happen to be particularly gifted in intellect, creativity, or leadership qualities. After all, what is required to do well in school, gain credentials, and find good jobs? One must be patient and diligent. One must be reasonably obedient to teachers and authority figures. Despite the American mythos of the cool rebel, most people who succeed play by the rules. No wonder women and Asians are favored in the current order. Both are more mild-willed than white males who tend to be a bit more adventurous and cantankerous in spirit.
Obama certainly understood who's boss(the Jews) and did as told to be handpicked to be president, or cuck-in-chief of the Jews. One reason why Jews can't stand Donald Trump is the way he became president. He howled too much like a wolf than acted the well-heeled canine in a dog-show. Though a total dog to Jews in substance, he was wolf in style, and the Jewish Masters of America took this very badly, and the whole Russian Collusion Hoax and other nonsense were a means to punish the Bad Doggy.

Anyway, precisely because civilization favors the mild-willed over the strong-willed for most of its managerial positions, there is the real danger of a survival-deficit in elite ranks of society. Consider nations like Sweden. Well-ordered and well-run, peaceful and prosperous Sweden elevated mild-willed individuals to upper levels of government and institutions. Indeed, its military is run by a bunch of mild-willed women who did the homework and did as told in their student days. So, is it any surprise that the Swedish state is so soulless, gutless, and bland? Its managerial class may be well-educated, diligent, and competent on the technical level, but they lack patriotic passion, survival instinct, and requisite ruthlessness toward potential threats and enemies. If anything, it is most 'triggered' by the emergence of strong-willed Swedes who see what is happening and demand that something drastic be done to stop the invasion and great replacement.

Since individuals can't be truly free and independent within a civilization, the only way for a people to be free is as a collective. While Me-the-Person can only be so free within the Order, We-the-People can be free from the control of Other Peoples. It's like Asian Indians gained independence by rising up against British overlords and expelling them. The Vietnamese gained national liberation by resisting French Colonialism and then American Neo-Imperialism. And it was as a collective that Russians pushed back against Napoleonic France in the 19th century and Nazi Germany in the 20th century. Freedom for the Motherland couldn't have been won by Russians as individual wolves. They had to cooperate and fight as Russian dogs in defense of the Order.

While ideally the freedom of we-the-people should expand the freedom of me-the-person within the Order, it hasn't always been so. Textbook examples are Tokugawa Japan, Red China, Castro's Cuba, Islamic Iran, and North Korea. Though politically independent and relatively free of foreign influence, their suppression of me-the-person either intensified or hardly eased despite the autonomy. The reason was either for the survival of the Order or survival of the elites. In certain cases, the Order had to suppress considerations of me-the-person because it was under threat and at a great political-economic-military disadvantage. After all, patriotism and willingness to die were essential among the Vietnamese IF Americans were to be driven out. With excessive freedom of me-the-person, too many Viets might choose not to fight or even join with the other side as collaborators. In Sam Peckinpah's STRAW DOGS, David Sumner(Dustin Hoffman) decides he must force his wife to obey him if they are to defend the house from marauders. She is forbidden from collaborating with the Other side. She is forced to choose we-the-people over me-the-person despite her temptation otherwise.

Castro's Cuba also had to be repressive in order to survive. As the US had so much more money, it could have bought off so many Cubans to do the bidding of US interests. Indeed, Cuba had essentially been a CIA-mafia-Jewish-run plantation/casino before Castro led an army of spartan patriots to take power. But, of course, the downside of repression in favor of we-the-people over me-the-person has been downright Orwellian. The system threw the baby out with the bathwater in its purge of turncoats, traitors, spies, and collaborators. Worse, over time, the invocation of we-the-people can become an excuse to perpetuate a system of we-the-elites.
This is why a system has to find a balance between me-the-person and we-the-people. One thing for sure, history has shown time and time again that an order that is independent of foreign tyranny can be rife with domestic tyranny.
While all systems must maintain order with some degree of repression and control, some take this to extreme measures due to radical ideology, excessive paranoia, or just plain greed of rulers who stingily hog all the power and privilege. As profoundly different as North Korea and the US are in just about every way, if they have anything in common, it's that both are ruled by elites who will do ANYTHING to maintain their supremacist or absolute grip on power. Even though North Korea seems like a fossilized hermit kingdom whereas the US seems a dynamic country constantly reinventing itself, both are essentially governed by the principle of elite-stasis. In other words, the reason why Jews are trying to make America so different is to keep same the power equilibrium, i.e. Jewish Supremacism must define American Power. As Jews are a minority-elite, they fear that stability in America will eventually lead to people realizing they're ruled by Jews. For that reason, Jews stir up the impression of constant upheaval and transformation to misdirect the American Gaze from the one true constant in American Power Politics: JEWS RULE, JEWS GET RICHER, JEWS EXPAND THEIR CONTROLS.

Anyway, if civilization ordains that people must be servile dogs than defiant wolves, at the very least human-dogs can be ruled by their own kind than by another kind. In other words, English dogs should be ruled by English masters, Japanese dogs should be ruled by Japanese masters, German dogs should be ruled by German masters, Italian dogs should be ruled by Italian masters, Russian dogs should be ruled by Russian masters, Iranian dogs should be ruled by Iranian masters, Jewish dogs should be ruled by Jewish masters(though, to be sure, every Jew feels as a master than dog), and etc. After all, there is greater likelihood that master A will feel greater affection and sense of obligation for dogs A, and master B will for dogs B. Granted, it may not always be so. Master A could be cruel and abusive of Dogs A, and it's possible Master B has more sympathy and heart for Dogs A. But generally, rulers of Nation A will have more feelings for the people of Nation A than for the peoples of Nation B, C, D, E, F, etc. Do Jewish rulers in Israel have more feelings for Jewish people or the Arab people, the Palestinians?
Now, one may point to white elites who seem to care just as much, if not more, for non-whites as for whites, but his anomaly is the result of Jewish conquest of the white mind/soul. Jews made it anathema among white elites to care about fellow whites because they want white elites to primarily serve and obey Jews. In other words, to convince white elites to favor the Jewish Other over the White Brother, Jews indoctrinated white elites(and even many among the white masses) that there are few things as evil in the world as whites caring for whites. It's NOT OKAY to be white. Another problem with elites of one nation excessively caring for other peoples than for their own is they will end up ill-serving both. After all, it is a full-time job to govern and take care of a nation. A national elite that tries to save the world as well as govern its own people is like a dog that loses the bone in his mouth for the one reflected in the water. It's like a parent who tries to take care of all the kids in the neighborhood. He'll just fail with all the children, including his own. Also, it makes the elites of other nations lazy and corrupt. Suppose if the elites of Nation B came to depend on elites of Nation A to provide food and aid for the people of Nation B. Why would the elites of Nation B clean up their own act when Nation A is providing Nation B with free stuff? And why would the people of Nation B try to replace the existing elites when they get by on handouts from Nation A?

While all of us must be more dogs than wolves within civilization, the ideal should be for the dogs and masters to be of the same identity. English masters for English dogs. That way, even if civilized man cannot be truly free and independent like a wild wolf, he can still be part of a people that are free and independent of rule by other peoples. The problem with the current West is that white folks are not only dogs of civilization — a necessary condition for social order — but dogs of a foreign master, the Jews. Worse, Jews are not even good masters over the Other. Jews look upon goyim as mere cattle, commodities, or cuck-dogs. The way Jews look upon goyim is far more contemptuous than how British Imperialists looked upon Hindus and Africans. At the very least, the Christian element of Western Civilization reminded whites that non-whites are also precious children of God. In contrast, Jews look upon goyim as barely human. Jews believe a single Jewish life is worth more than a million goy lives. Just Ask the Palestinians! Under Jewish rule, whites don't even have the freedom, pride, and power of We-the-People. They've been reduced to We-the-Cucks.

The black African threat to Europe makes things much worse. Blacks are barely domesticated as dogs; they are more like wild dogs, almost like wolves. As such, a sane West will do everything to protect European mild-willed dogs from African wild dogs. But three factors are forestalling this most necessary course of action. (1) Jewish globalist supremacists who control (((Western))) media and academia have elevated Negroes to god-like status. So many whites worship MLK and Mandela more than their own national/racial heroes, even over God and Jesus. And Jewish Power vilified 'racism' as the worst of all sins, and 'racism' is deemed most wicked when harboring negative feelings about blacks. Political Correctness demands that whites must love and honor blacks NO MATTER WHAT blacks do. (2) Even though blacks have thug supremacy over weaker whites and cause havoc in white nations, the fact remains Europe is rich while Africa is poor. Therefore, many Europeans still have this image of themselves as all-powerful and of blacks as helpless/harmless children. Thus, they fail to grasp the threat posed by black thugs on Western Civilization. (3) Even though civilization did wonders for non-black mankind, it also turned robust human-wolves into less impressive human-dogs. Though civilization can be maintained only by human-dogs, there is still the wolfish element in human-dogs that hankers for wolf-like glory and excitement. Because blacks are more impressive in sports, dancing, hollering, and fist-shaking, many white dogs are in state of awe of the wild black dawg that seems so badass.

The result is that the Current West not only favors mild-willed white dogs(those who go-along to get-along) over the strong-willed white dogs(those with the most survival instincts and fight/flight reflexes, problematic in peace time but essential in times of crisis) but also favors wild black dogs over strong-willed white dogs. This fatal alliance of mild-willed white dogs(and weak-willed white dogs) with wild black dogs against strong-willed white dogs will be the lethal formula that will bring down the West. In times of crisis, the strong-willed dogs must come to the fore to defend the order. In such times, the mild-willed dogs must look to the strong-willed dogs. (However, beware of the ultra-strong-willed dogs like Adolf Hitler. While Hitler's strong-will led Germany in its recovery of lost lands and resurgence in pride, he wasn't content with German affairs and embarked on wolf-attacks on OTHER nations to create a Greater Germanic Empire. This is why strong-will must be limited by Universal Nationalism — respect other nations as you expect them to respect your nation — and humanism that reminds people of their all-too-fragile humanity. Fascism elevated man to mythic hero while communism reduced man to a unit of History. In World War II, the German ubermensch rediscovered their humanity in defeat and humiliation. And the story of communism is the danger of sacrificing human lives as so many units in the service of History.)

The Lost Connective Links of Our Decadent & Degenerate Society — The Only Remaining 'Value' is Nihilism and Blind Worship of Power & Privilege — There is No Moral Core, just Moral Covers — The Lost Ideal of Virginity and the Rise of Whore-Moms

Civilization is turning into a trash heap because the connective links have been lost. Consider the cells in our bodies. Why are we different from single-cell organisms? A single cell organism like an amoeba lives only for itself. In contrast, all the cells in the human body must coordinate together. No cell in the human body can exist or live alone. It only has meaning in relation to all the other cells in the body. A single brain cell is nothing. It only has meaning in relation to other brain cells, and the cells in the brains have meaning in relation to cells in the heart, cells in the lungs, cells in the bloodstream, and cells throughout the nervous system.

Civilization is like a vast organism. Each person has meaning in relation to the larger society. Without such link, his life lacks meaning and larger purpose. What is the difference between a thug/criminal and a soldier? Both commit acts of violence. The difference is the thug uses violence only for self-gain. He is like a lone animal that attacks only to serve itself. In contrast, a soldier fights for the good of the team, the army, the society, nation. Ideally, he fights for a just cause or for the survival of the community. He is willing to sacrifice himself for the good of others with whom he identifies. Even in death, he hangs his hope on the larger community commemorating the heroism of people like himself, and in a sense, something of him lives on as long as the memory is kept alive. It’s like the Toshiro Mifune character in Akira Kurosawa's SEVEN SAMURAI gains larger meaning by using his fighting skills to defend a village of farmers under attack by bandits. He could have been a petty thief serving only himself, but he chose to fight and die for something nobler and worthier. And the thief in KAGEMUSHA gains new meaning through attachment to the Takeda Clan. Prior to his role of service to a higher cause/power, he was just some lone thief with nothing to live or die for except petty interests. It’s like the outlaws in THE WILD BUNCH(by Walon Green and Sam Peckinpah) gain a bit of redemption when they put their lives on the line for the principle of loyalty. Prior to their awakening and resolve, they’d been little more than killers and thieves. So, the difference between thug violence and soldier/policeman violence is the thug only thinks of himself whereas the solider or police officer thinks of the larger community and higher ideals and/or just cause.

Unlike animals that live for brute survival and most primal needs, humans have developed complex morality, values, and organizations. Being part of something bigger, our lives gain meaning in terms of morals, values, duties & obligations, legacy, and posterity. Moral civilization is about posterity, whore culture is about the posterior.
What goes for violence also goes for sex. Sex is animal drive and natural act. But humans are more than animals. Non-black races can be more than savages. So, they have found deeper meaning and purpose in sex. They learned to devise rules and laws to tame and control the biology of sex. Animals don’t know sex leads to new life. They just go into heat and hump one another. Negroes do know sex leads to new life, but Negro men don’t care to take care of their kids. They just want to go around and bang as many ho’s as possible and leave it to OTHERS to raise their kids. (And Cuck Christians and Prog-Whites, by indulging bad black behavior as the White Man's Burden & Blame, encourage more blacks to act nasty and crazy.)

Unlike blacks, the civilized races(at least those who haven't fallen to decadence and degeneracy fueled by demented popular culture) don’t see sex as mere animal horniness or wild debauchery. They see it as a natural drive/process that leads to new life and all the attendant blessings and burdens. Also, sex is seen as part of something bigger: Search for love, courtship, marriage, new life, parenting, acculturation, and etc. So, sex isn’t just for sex but part of something broader, deeper, and more meaningful. Without such mindset, civilization is impossible to create or sustain. Civilization isn’t about petty individuals indulging themselves obliviously to the larger needs of society. It’s about building links between various facets of life and society-as-a-whole to construct and preserve a system of meaning, worth, and higher values. Society links a warrior’s violence with duty, cause, heroism, and sacrifice. Civilization links sexual desire with love, marriage, parenting, children, and posterity. When such links are severed, warriors are reduced to thugs and mercenaries. And sexual desire just turns animal and crude. It is just for the pleasure of the moment. When things fall apart, the morally-minded seek to do the right thing to restore order whereas the nihilistic take advantage of the chaos to do as they please. While some people have an innate sense of morality, others are naturally prone to nihilism. Notice how blacks tend to riot and loot whenever the chance arises. It's almost as if they feel most at home in a savage state-of-nature. And then, there are lots of people who can go either way. They have good in them but also some bad. In the short story RASHOMON, a man finds himself without a purpose in a collapsing world. He teeters between morality and nihilism, finally choosing the latter. As most of us have both good and bad in us, we can go either way, though most whites and Asians will tend toward the good whereas most blacks will choose the bad under trying circumstances.

Matters are all the more dangerous today because the hubris of animal drives is no longer checked(at least immediately) by the nemesis of consequences. By the ruthless laws of nature, a woman who fools around too much will become pregnant or become diseased(and die). Being pregnant, she will have to sober up and take care of the kid. But in modern society, a woman can rely on artificial means of the Pill, condoms, and abortion to free herself of the consequences of her behavior. So, she can act wild and excessive without nature's check on her thoughtlessness. If she gets a disease, she can be treated with antibiotics. And even if she does decide to have the kid, the state will pay for child care and provide her with everything. So, female behavior can get totally out of control, and it’s gone totally nuts in the black community, what with black mothers even raising their kids to 'twerk'. Advanced technology enabled people to act even wilder and more savage than they would in the jungle wild. And this craziness is spreading to white and Asian communities too.

It should be no surprise that Homomania made huge gains in recent times. It is due to the de-linking of the natural drives from morality, culture, and nobler themes of society. There was a time when marriage linked together nature, morality, culture, family, spirituality, and children. But as the links have been cut, there is only the hedonism of the individual. So, everything is judged according to what kind of pleasure it brings to the Individual. So, if vain homo individuals demand their 'happiness' with ‘gay marriage’, then they must be allowed to ‘marry’ too. This is what happens when ‘marriage’ is de-linked from nature, morality, & culture and is, instead, regarded merely as a jolly 'choice' or 'right' of individuals in pursuit of hedonistic ‘happiness’ as vanity and 'pride'.
Worse, a disconnected society will come to favor power and privilege as the highest goods. As nature is no longer restrained, controlled, and guided by morality, integrity, and truth, it runs wild in pursuit of unfettered power and domination. The post-moral West is all about power and money. As Jews have most wealth and influence, they can rewrite the rules and even bring about something like 'gay marriage'. Why not? Jews got the most power, and a nihilistic society worships power. If Jews want it, they get it. (Notice that so-called Conservatives, so worshipful of Jewish Power, did NOTHING to stop Homomania. It's telling that the main donor to the GOP is Sheldon Adelson, the sleazy casino oligarch.) And as homos are the favorite ally of Jews and have plenty of power & privilege themselves, they can do as they like and demand that we follow along. And so many people go along because, deep down inside, the only thing they worship is power and privilege. And why are blacks allowed to do as they please and run wild and act crazy? Because a nihilistic society worships naked displays of power, and so many people in the West now worship Negroes as athletes, rappers, and studs. Just like black college athletes are protected from legal issues for their prowess on the field, the West indulges whatever blacks do because blacks are deemed 'badass' and 'cool'. Of course, Jews, homos, and blacks don't publicly claim to be about nihilism and power-worship. If anything, they make a lot of moral-sounding noises about 'antisemitism', 'racism', and 'homophobia', but their arguments are not true morality but distortions made possible by an excess of power and corruption. Globo-Homomania cannot be true morality. It can be a form of sham-morality only in an utterly degenerate society where the Good is determined not by genuine understanding and conscience but by deceptions & decrees of the ruling class that only really cares for power and privilege. The current US is not about having a moral core; it's about using moral covers to excuse the vile and vicious behaviors of Jews, blacks, and homos. Consider what Jussie Smollett was allowed to get away with, and consider how Google algorithms undermine the search for truth about his 'hate hoax', really a hateful crime against white Americans. And consider how the Media and Academia have made 'pride' nearly synonymous with homosexuality and trannies. Now, I'm sure those into Globo-Homomania sincerely feel themselves to be 'good' and 'moral' people who are all about 'tolerance' and etc., but such delusions only go to show how the Power can distort and deform hearts & minds of people who, under normal conditions of sanity and sobriety, would know better. A society that forces people to say "I love Big Brother" is bad enough. At least those saying it would know they're being forced. But a society where people are made to say "I love Big Brother" with heartfelt sincerity has truly gone over the cliff where decency and integrity are concerned. The existing Power would be such that it can not only force people to say or do the insane and demented but convince them that they are doing something sane and moral, even 'spiritual', what with so many churches being draped with the 'gay rainbow' flag.

So many women are now sexually degenerate, utterly corrupted by the Power that now equates whore-behavior with empowerment. (No wonder the Power used Camille Paglia to push the idolization of the skank.) They no longer see sexual desire as a link in the chain of love, courtship, marriage, family, parenting, children, and posterity. It’s just a Lady Gaga or Lena-Dunham thing where it’s just about momentary orgasms, howling like morons at nightclubs, dancing by sticking their asses to be rubbed by male groins in public, and etc. And there is no shame… or shame has been repressed because Mammon decrees that nothing is more shameful than to feel shame about surrendering to debauchery. Shame the shame and de-link people from the larger themes and meanings of a moral community. Just tell them that what matters most is the individual’s pleasure of the moment.
Or worship whoever has the most money or power. Consider how the current 'leftism' is all about corporate power and wealth. It's about the supposedly 'progressive' support of global corporations that monopolize everything and just get richer and richer. Today's supposed 'leftists' are more likely to champion Mark Zuckerberg and Google oligarchs than Julian Assange or Edward Snowden, the whistleblowers against the power. They are more likely to support oligarchic suppression of free speech that speaks truth to Jewish Power, exposes Globo-Homo degeneracy for what it is, and frankly discusses black problems of crime and mayhem.

Of course, moments pass, and people grow old. And when all their moments were lived only for the moment, they have nothing to call their own. Moments are like bricks. If you can see the bigger picture, you stack each moment like a brick in the building of a house. Over time, all those moments come together to constitute a meaningful house of purpose and memories. But, if you see each brick as just something to toss into the air for the fun of it, all those bricks become strewn and lost, without rhyme or reasons, and there is no house at the end.

The de-linking of natural drives from culture, meaning, morality, and posterity will be the undoing of civilization.

------------------

Ideally, people shouldn’t throw away their virginity on some punk or floozy.
It should be lost with or offered to the right lover/spouse. It used to be the norm that virginity was prized and highly regarded as something precious. It was something you guarded and kept, especially if you were a woman, and finally offered to the one you truly loved.

But then, virginity came to be seen as something like a disease, a plague. It had to be gotten rid of as fast as possible. It was like the cooties.
So, we have teens eager to lose it as fast as possible with someone they don’t even like, often while they're drunk and semi-conscious... just so they can say "I lost it" to their peers who are similarly brainwashed with degenerate Pop Culture. So, some teen guy will roll in the hay with some fat ho’ just to brag that he's now some kind of stud. Or the teen girl will lose it with some half-wit moron and make a fuss about how she lost it.

How did this happen? How did we go FROM a society that prized virginity as something precious that should be offered to the one you love TO a society that regards virginity as social disease, something one should be ashamed of? Pop Culture?

For most of human history — at least outside Negro-verse of wild jungle-bunner behavior in Africa and America — , the ideal was to hold virginity as something special to finally offer to the one you love.

Take the concept of ‘deflowering’. So, the virginal poon was like a pretty flower and it was to be offered for deflowering only to the worthy gardener. But now the only concept is ‘plowing’. A guy will say he met some ho’ and ‘plowed’ her fat arse.

I compare the generation of my friends’ parents and my friends, and there is no comparison. Whether Jewish, Catholic, Protestant, Italian, Asian, Muslim, Hindu, or whatever, the parents all got married, raised families, and grew up. But so many of my friends are immature infantile degenerate tards forever. Also, among my parents generation, it was often the case that their husbands were the first and only man the mothers did it with. There was special bonding and loyalty. But among the daughters, I see a lot of whore behavior. And some of them got ugly tattoos, and they dress like hoors. Now, what kind of mothers will they be to their kids? It will be like kids growing up with prostitute moms. Most of my friends had moms whom they respected. They saw their moms as having been respectable women before they met their hubbies and had kids. But when their daughters become moms, their kids will grow up seeing their tattoo mom-whores as someone who banged tons of guys before they finally settled down with some husband who might not even stick around. It’s all shudder-worthy. What degeneration of society. It’s like the world is becoming Negro-globalized or Neglobalized.

On the Three C's. The 3Cs of Convenience, Conversion, and Convulsion. Wolf vs Dog. Negro vs White Man. Savage and Slavish. Civilization and Its Costs.

On Convenience, Conversion, and Convulsion.

Some people have noted that blacks have achieved least in the creation of civilization, complex societies, and high culture. And yet, maybe in a certain sense, blacks could take pride in not having been able to create Wakandas. After all, for every gain, there is a loss. And for every loss, there is a gain.

To create civilization, the slavish genes have to outnumber the savage genes. Obviously, slavish dogs are easier to control and handle than wolves. And yet, wolves are freer, wilder, and more robust. Dogs are more useful, more cooperative, and gentler, but they are comparatively wussier creatures than wolves.

The races that created civilization needed to be more slavish. Maybe natural forces, such as extreme cold that necessitated closer cooperation and delaying of gratification, made them more slavish, and then perhaps, 'civilizational' factors compounded the slavishness by weeding out the savage genes by execution or exile. So, as a community, such people could achieve more collectively, but this came at the cost of individual savage gene that was more robust, rambunctious, colorful, exuberant, and etc.

It’s like Chinese and Japanese built high civilizations, but they regarded by Modern Pop Cultural standards as colorless, mostly skin-and-bones, timid & sheepish, and not very good at singing, dancing, and sports. They are regarded as akin to dickless space aliens who appear at the end of CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND. The natives of Mexico may have built the great city of Tenochtitlan, but their descendants are deemed a dull, timid, and sheepish bunch. In order for them to have built civilization, they had to be have been more slavish than savage. (Granted, slave-made complex civilizations could carry out savage deeds like human sacrifice, but that's not the kind of savagery we are talking about. Savagery in our context means a primitive level of human existence and culture.)

Now, compare the wolfish Mongols with the doggish Chinese. Mongols, by Asian standards, are big & robust and have barbarian souls. They don’t like to take shit from anyone. They preferred to sack and loot other civilizations than build their own, but there’ something vital about their character, duly noted in the novel and movie WOLF TOTEM by a Chinese author who lamented that his Han tribe, in building civilization and establishing order, lost something vital and natural that the Mongols still possessed. For sure, Mongols in Sumo summarily bounce Japanese guys off the 'dojo' like ping pong balls. Though both Mongol and Japanese societies were warrior-centered, Mongols prized the robust and hale rider-hunter who took charge of things. In contrast, samurai favored the obedient subordinate and ruthlessly executed those who exhibited independent streaks; thus, a vital element of human nature was weeded out of the Japanese gene pool. This made the Japanese more cooperative and mindful of others, but it also made them duller and more neurotic. This is why so many Japanese are like the character Yohei in SEVEN SAMURAI.

Pitiful Yohei, the typical Japanese Male.

Because Negroes failed to develop civilization, they came to be subjugated by other races with superior organization, technology, and culture. And they became slaves in Arabia and the New World. But even if historical and economic circumstances made them more likely to be slaves, their nature was less suited for slavery(at least in a complex order). Blacks have more savage genes than slavish genes. From a modern social perspective, the black savage gene has been problematic because it made too many Negroes run wild and act like lunatics. But countless people also find it vibrant, exciting, manly, sexy, badass, and etc. Look at the worldwide success of rap music, reggae, and other black-infected pop music. And blacks have dominated so many of the world's most popular sports. No one watches Chinese sports outside China, but many millions of Chinese love to watch the NBA where big ass Negroes dunk the balls while being cheered by blonde women cheerleaders who now salivate over big muscular Negroes who be seen as the superior males.

Among all the arts, music is the most spontaneous and powerful, and blacks have been, pound for pound, the most dominant force in pop music in the 20th century with their contribution to or invention of blues, jazz, rock n roll, soul, reggae, rap, and etc. Such music arose from the savage genes, and it turns a lot of people on. Even though so-called 'black music' of the 20th century would not exist without white influence, input, and instruments, one could argue that the core energy is the black fire. It's like gasoline is useless without an engine, wheels, and other parts of the car, but it is the fuel that fires up the engine. So, even though something like Rock music owes a great deal to white contribution, much of its raw fuel is black coal. White influence gave it structure and style, but the core energy of beat, rhythm, and soaring/scouring vocals owes to something particular to blacks. (Similarly, much of the power in classical music owes to the Germanic soul that added an especially potent mix to the musical form invented by others.) In contrast, the world community is far less interested in the slavish-genes-music of, say, Mexicans or Chinese. Now, a musicologist could argue that there are no objective standards by which to argue that some music is 'better' than others. Also, popular doesn't necessarily mean better. Fast food is more popular than fancy food, but is it better? TRANSFORMERS made more money than worthier films, but it's certainly not better. And yet, there have been lots of great black music(and white rock fueled by black coal) that managed to be both popular and inspired, and that surely counts for something. As for rap, even though people like myself detest it as attitude and expression, there is no denying its appeal as a means of forceful expression that many find infectious.

So, in some ways, blacks may take pride in not having been able to build the Pyramids of Egypt -- most Ancient Egyptians were not black-black -- and the Great Wall of China. They were too independent-willed, too 'badass', and too wild to be subjugated into hauling bricks to build stuff for oppressive kings and queens. They preferred to run wild & free and chuck spears at hippos and then run from hippos when hippos had enough of the Negroes acting wild and funky.

For every gain, there’s a loss. Chinese may have built a great civilization, but look how scrawny they became. Non-Asian women feel no excitement about Chinese men, and just about any good-looking Chinese woman in the US would rather marry anyone but the men of her own race. Asian women are the Story of the Horniness of Women with Hots for Bigger/Tougher warriors. http://dailybruin.com/2012/11/29/rally-responds-to-incidents-of-hate-speech_1129_1129/ Despite the matter of Asians having higher IQ than blacks, if a white guy were presented with a chance to become a Negro or a yellow, he would likely prefer to be Long Dong Silver than Wong Dong Lee. Consider the first part of the animation movie HEAVY METAL where a white guy enters the body of a black guy and turns into a warrior-stud who humps white women. It was cuck-fantasy before cuckery took off. And all those white college boys cheer for black athletes as demigods that they wish to be. And the movie GET OUT is about how Liberal Whites actually see blacks as so superior that they want to kill blacks to take over black bodies. While whites may feel that Asian-ness is preferable on the cerebral level, most people's immediate responses tend to be visceral than intellectual. One can admire an athlete right away, whereas it takes time to appreciate a writer, scientist, or an artist. A woman can be turned on by a tough guy right away, whereas it takes time for a woman to appreciate an unexciting guy who happens to have good qualities as friend and companion. It's the same with men in how they react to women. Any man can look at a 'sexy babe' and be turned on immediately, but it will take some time to appreciate a homely woman who happens to have good qualities.

Animation Movie HEAVY METAL where a white boy enters a body of a black guy to hump white women.

Humanity operates, for good or ill, according to three main modalities: Convenience, Conversion, and Convulsion.

Civilization greatly improved the means of Convenience, and this has been especially true of the West(that came to change the Rest). Think of all the great Western scientists and techno-inventors who created stuff like cars, refrigerators, airplanes, machines, toilets, and etc, etc, that made life so much easier, more comfortable, and more convenient. We owe so much to such individuals, but how come they are almost invisible to us? Because the purpose of convenience is to serve us and make us forget it even exists. We don’t think about the technology of plumbing every time we use the faucet to drink water or flush the toilet. We are very glad to have such things, and they make life easier. But they don’t turn us on. They make life more bearable but not more pleasurable. They lessen the pain but don't intensify the pleasure. Once they've become a part of our lives, we really notice them ONLY WHEN they malfunction or are denied to us. Who thinks about water or electricity except when the service fails?
Also, they don't move us sensually or emotionally. Once the air conditioner is on, we hardly think about it or respond to it, any more than we think about the very oxygen we breathe, essential as it is. Elevators are useful but we don’t get excited about being inside one. Western civilization has been the king of convenience, but how many white folks are reading books about past inventors to get their jollies? Think of the guy who invented modern textile technology. He did something very great. But I don’t know his name and likely neither do you. Machines are essential for they exist to serve us and make life more convenient. And convenience is very very nice, even essential, but it’s utilitarian, not 'orgasmic'.

Then there is the matter of Conversion. It comes alive in the realm of ideas and emotions, the mind and heart. Religions and ideologies are 'conversionary'. Religions and ideology may require time and patience for us to appreciate. To truly understand Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Taoism, or whatever, we have to calm & control ourselves and do some intense reading & contemplating. And there is the need for prayer and meditation. Thus, we gain inspiration and the passion to serve something higher and greater than ourselves.
To understand ideologies, we have to attend meetings, read certain texts, and join discussions. In the end, religions or ideologies may be very fulfilling and transforming. They may provide us with the meaning of life, a sense of truth and righteousness, and the possibility of redemption and salvation. They make us realize that there’s a higher meaning to life, i.e. life isn’t just about material well-being but about spiritual, moral, and/or intellectual pursuit of truth.
The Middle East, Asia, and Europe achieved great things in 'conversionarity'. Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Christianity, Greek philosophy, Confucianism, and many schools of thoughts arose from those civilizations. Conversionary stuff may not make life easier in the physical/literal sense -- as the instruments of convenience do -- , but they are compelling because they imbue us with a sense of truth and meaning. And this is why some Muslims in the West still cling to their Old Faiteh. Sure, the Modern West offers a great deal in terms of convenience -- medicine, technology, and etc -- , but it’s not very meaningful to worship a refrigerator, ponder the significance of carburetors, or meditate on the truth of toilets. People find meaning by thinking about God, myths, high art, philosophy(ultimate meaning of life), history, moral progress, and etc.

When it came to matters of Convenience and Conversion, black African produced next to nothing. No great science/technology/invention. No great religion, philosophy, ideology, or school of thought.

But then, there is the power of Convulsion. Human eyes, ears, tongue, genitalia, and certain parts of the skin are all erogenous-like zones. Convenience makes the body comfortable. Conversion makes hearts and minds feel meaningful. But it’s convulsion that makes the erogenous-like senses explode like Juicy Fruit gum and go crazy.


Convenience is like a perfect chair that makes the ass comfortable. Conversion is the book one holds while sitting on the chair. In contrast, convulsion may not offer any long-term utility or any deep meaning, but it provides intense explosions of pleasure. It’s like a vibrator-dildo up a nympho’s pooter(though some might call it cooter).

Now, we could argue that humanity should be wiser and favor convenience and conversion over convulsion, but the power of pleasure(especially in our electronically-connected world overflowing with leisure) is so powerful for a lot of people that they’ve come to favor convulsion over all else. It’s like if you give cocaine to a monkey, it will just want more doses. It’s like once a boy or girl experiences orgasm, he or she has to look for more and more. It’s like once young ones listen to pop music, they don’t wanna do anything else but listen to more. It’s like sports addicts are crazy about sports 24/7. It's no wonder that Soma and Feelies are so crucial to the world of Aldous Huxley's BRAVE NEW WORLD. The Power figured that, instead of maintaining order through strict repression and regimen, people could be better-managed by making them carry out certain tasks in allotted roles for routine rewards of intense pleasure.

It is in the areas of convulsion that blacks pose the greatest threat to the white race. Though convulsion may be the opposite of convenience and conversion, paradoxically the power of convulsion became magnified because of the success of convenience and conversion. The Western triumph in convenience led to huge technological advances. As people in the West have all the basic amenities and own TVs/stereos/computers, their minds are barely fixated on convenience(even as their lives owe so much to it). In the 19th century, white farmers struggled to eke out a living. They had to grow food, and their minds were occupied with making life easier by gaining greater convenience with improved methods of agriculture and tool-making. Also, as there were no radios, TV, and stereos, fun and pleasure amounted to local folk dances and get-togethers where parents and preachers kept a watchful eye on the young ones(who had to grow fast into adulthood to take on backbreaking labor). And as morality and spirituality of Conversion guided society, sexuality was carefully regulated.

But today, we have enough food and water. We don’t worry about disease and cold. Also, religion has faded due to science, wealth, and education. And grand ideologies such as Marxism have lost their appeal in a world with far less need, one where even poor people get fat. If anything, 'idology'(the politics of idolatry) has supplanted ideology. Our social mores are more libertarian and freewheeling and hedonistic. So, people take basic necessities for granted and instead seek wild/intense pleasure through sports, music, movies, TV, porn, dating-services(aka hookups), and free sex.

Conversion also paved the way for the rise of convulsion. How? Because conversion-dialectic led to the emergence of the kind of political/social/moral philosophies that best served to create and maintain modern societies of peace, law, and order. Once such socio-economic-political success was achieved, people began to take ideas for granted. After all, how many people regularly read the documents of the Founding Fathers? How many read up on the history of advancement of law and ethics from Roman times to the present? Though some people do find intellectual fulfillment in reading and learning, most people don’t much care about ideas as long as life is pretty good for them. What passed for ‘ideas’ since the 'End of History' has been stuff like WWG(world war gay) and WWT(world war tranny).

But one thing people are mad about is pleasure and more pleasure. If you’re dying of thirst, a glass of water will suffice as pleasure, mainly to overcome the pain of thirst. But if you have all the water in the world, you want something like an ice cold beer or soda pop with the fizzle.

Since the success of the Modern West put people’s minds off convenience and ideas -- as their utility is taken for granted -- , people are looking for more and more pleasure. People on a cruise ship don't think about the engines, steering, plumbing, and myriad other things that make the trip possible. They are fixated on fun. Likewise, how many people watching a movie think about the machinery of film-making and film-projection? They are just fixated on the fun images on screen. How many people think about how their smart-phones work and what went into them in terms of ingenuity and innovation? They just want to trade 'butt pics' and 'dick pics'.

And it is in the area of convulsion that Negroes are beginning to take over.

Look at sports. Muscled Negroes dominate. White girls cheer for black studs and line up to have sex with Mandingos who give them the biggest orgasms. White boys in the stands cheer for black athletes like crazy. The emotional response of white male fans to black athletics is almost 'orgasmic'. White boys turn quasi-homo in their worship of black muscle and mastery on the field. They act like white cheerleaders. They scream their heads off like they’re having orgasms all over their bodies.

And consider the worldwide potency of rap music. Black guys sing about how badass they be, about how white girls worship their muscle and big dongs. And white girls have conniptions listening to that stuff. They ‘twerk’ their asses to rap as if they’re mounting big Negroes. And white boys listen to that stuff too and get quasi-homo jollies in their worship of black toughness and cool thug attitude. White rock critics sing hosannas to Kanye West. White guys try to emulate black rappers. White homo guys look for black guys to pump them in the ass.

Intense sexual pleasure are found through feelings of conquest or feelings of submission. White girls and white guys find great orgasmic pleasure in submitting to the Negro as Nature's Master(and in vicariously ‘sharing’ the conquest by the Negroes). There was even an article in DETAILS mag about how white elites are having 'mandingoes' hump their wives on their own beds. White wives must have the big Negro, and white guys can get off only by submission fantasies before black guys as the superior race over wussy whites. This has now caught on in Japan, with clubs where small Japanese men gather to see big black Americans hump Japanese women who, having caught jungle fever, are having more kids with black men and producing offspring who dominate Japanese sports and defeat weaker yellow guys.

The power of convulsion is huge in the current Globo-Homo-Afro-Shlomo order. It’s like WUTHERING HEIGHTS where some hussy runs off with Heathcliff. Or Kate Chopin's THE AWAKENING which I haven’t read but I think it’s about some white woman getting turned on by a mulatto. Or Jane Campion’s silly PIANO where some white hussy goes off with some white guy who’s gone native and acts the Maori warrior. She feels ‘liberated’ by sexually submitting to the ‘savage’.

We may admire Japanese contribution to the technology of convenience, but in the area of convulsion, Japan fails at least in its male-dom. East Asians make the bulk of world electronics, but what most people watch through TV, computer, and smartphone screens are whites and blacks than Asians(who are more likely to be depicted in cartoon form in anime or manga). Japanese males are seen as a bunch of 'scrawns'. Hard-working drones who make good radios but who count for zero in convulsion factor. On the other hand, Japanese women may offer some convulsion goodies since men prefer women who are feminine, and it seems men all over the world have fantasies about me-so-horny mama-sans.

Negroes achieved zero in convenience and conversion, but they seem to be masters of convulsion. And yet, this triumph of the Negro has been made possible by Western triumph in convenience and convulsion. Western invention of electronics, TV, stereo, and etc., made black music accessible in the bed room of every white boy and white girl. Western moral-intellectual development led to the feelings of ‘white guilt’, and MLK-ology is the reigning ideology of White folks. And of course, it was the white-made transport systems and economies of scale that led to whites going to Africa AND blacks coming to the West. Without the triumph of convenience, whites would have remained in the white world, and blacks would remained in the black world.

So, even though blacks are only really good at thuggery, humpery, and jiveassery, their power in these areas have been magnified as pleasure-drugs all over the globe through Western media. And ease of travel have sent Negroes all over the world to hump women of all color.

Pleasure may be fleeting, but it is intense(just look at the loonies who totally lose their minds during Santana’s ‘Soul Sacrifice’ in WOODSTOCK), which is why some druggies are hopeless. Also, there is an endless barrage of pleasure-inducing sounds and images via countless devices that service pop culture. Junkies may know that the drugs that give them convulsions are destroying them, but they are so addicted to the pleasure, they gotta have more and more and more. It’s like the orgasmo-orb in Woody Allen’s SLEEPER.


Just look at the state of UK today. You still have elites who are well-mannered, well-read, and well-spoken(though all seem to be committed to Diversity and Vulgarization of Society), but the main cultural interest now revolves around convulsion, especially in relation to the Negro. Andrew Sullivan the homo may find meaning in books and surely appreciates modern conveniences(created by so many white scientists and inventors), but where does he find the greatest pleasure in life? By having some muscled big-donged Negro pump him in the ass. Milo shares that excitement as he's 'married' to a homo-Negro. That pretty much sums up the essence of what the British elites stand for nowadays.


Today, Jews control much of the Convenience industry(especially in high tech) and the Conversion industry(academia, media, publishing, etc). Control of sectors like Silicon valley and finance technology gives Jews tremendous amount of wealth. And with that money, they’ve bought up all the media and funded much of the academia. And they use their control over conversion-spheres to promote ‘white guilt’ as the main moral-spiritual 'idology' of the age.

And as Jews own much of sports, media, TV, music, and porn, they work in cahoots with Negroes to push the Negro dope or Negrope on white junkies who are totally addicted to orgasmic convulsions from sports, rap music, porn, and even watching one’s own wives humped by Negroes.

So, as we look to the future, the issue is no longer a matter of which people created the greatest civilizations but which people produce the biggest convulsions for humanity?

Though non-blacks created the greatest civilizations, the price they had to pay was the rise of slavish genes over savage genes. The higher degree of slavishness among whites, Near Easterners, Hindus, and yellows enabled them to build bigger cities and get along better and obey orders. But they also grew wussier, wimpier, doglike, Dan-Quayle-like, and David-Cameron-like. Without inspired leadership from above, most non-blacks fear to step forward and take action. In the past, British elites led the British masses in defense and aggression. Today, with the elites have been brainwashed by Jewish Conversion and/or addicted to Negro Convulsion, they no longer rouse up the British masses for racial solidarity and national power. Your average Briton, left to his own devices, would rather accept national suicide than give offense to others with 'nasty views' such as 'racism'. His instincts are more slavish than savage.

Just like Japanese built high civilization but get bumped around by bigger & tougher Mongols(who excite Japanese ladies who also run around Yokohama looking for Negro studs) in the Sumo 'dojo', white folks built greater civilization but at the cost of becoming dweebier and doglike, at least when compared to blacks.

Even though the dweeby and doggish naturally fear the wolfish and savage, they are also turned on by displays of wolfish or pitbull-ish prowess. It’s like dogs are more impressed by wolves than vice versa, and female dogs will could well have bigger orgasmic convulsions with male wolves... and in time male dogs will find their jollies as quasi-homo bitches of male wolves. Looking forward to the future of wolfish Negro males and doggish white males?

A Response to David Yorkshire’s Review of ZARDOZ by John Boorman

ZARDOZ: Natural Order against the Left by David Yorkshire: https://www.counter-currents.com/2018/04/zardoz-natural-order-against-the-left/

"John Boorman's films are implicitly white, as they address themes that pertain to people of White European descent, whether historical, philosophical or mythical."

Not necessarily. Boorman made HELL IN THE PACIFIC that is about cooperation between Japanese soldier and American soldier. He also made EMERALD FOREST that romanticizes the jungle natives of the Amazon as living in unity with nature. If anything, that movie is most damning of incursions of white civilization into the natural order. Boorman made a movie about Burma in BEYOND RANGOON. He also made a movie where a white woman romances a black man. So, he's not this explicitly pro-white director you make him out to be... even though his themes and treatment would be politically incorrect for many today.

"for the film is a biting satire directed at creamy bourgeois Leftists."

The Order in ZARDOZ is highly conservative, exclusive, and hierarchical. It has a clear division between civilization and barbarism. It was established on a shining ideal of eternity and wisdom, but all that power and privilege has created a society of dogmatism, consensus, asexuality, and/or jaded apathy. The people of the Order have had it so good that they can't value what they have.
Also, they fail to understand the true danger posed by the barbarians because their Order has been impenetrable and impermeable as far as they can remember. They have no reason to regard barbarians as any kind of threat.
And yet, precisely because the Order is so crystalline and immaculate in its conception and design, there is a fear of the slightest alteration or revision. It can only exist as a utopia, a perfectionist order that cannot tolerate deviance from the rule. Perfection is unnatural, therefore fragile, and must be guarded with iron resolve, like the inner mechanics of a Swiss watch. Everything must adhere to the programming.
Originally, the Order was created to expand freedom and potentiality by prolonging life into virtual eternity. But thus elevated into near-god-hood, the main priority of the Eternals came to be self-preservation, and that meant the suppression or termination of anything that threatened the basis of their exalted existence.

So, to say that the Order is just 'leftist' or 'bourgeois' misses the point. Now, it may have elements of what we might call 'leftist' by today's standards. But the Order is really about hierarchy and total exclusion. In its cult of reason and science, it be construed as 'leftist'. In the equality of men and women in the Order, it could be seen as 'leftist' too.
But then,there is no need for manliness because the Order is so secure. Also, as people are immortal, there is no need for sex and love. People are supposed to devote their energies to contemplation and leisure. But all such things have become boring without the cycles of life and without challenges to the Order.
So, it's glib to say ZARDOZ is an anti-leftist tract. It is essentially a call for reconnection with nature, the stuff of life. The World of ZARDOZ fails for the same reason the world of CAMELOT does in EXCALIBUR does. Too much success and power have led to complacency and lazy gossip and battle of egos and vanity. It is only when Arthur drinks from the Grail that he realizes he must be one with the land, with nature and the people.

Boorman isn't anti-civilization or anti-Christian(with its linear view of history), but he fears that civilization and abstract ideas can fatally sever man from nature and its cycles of birth and rebirth. Only with death and rebirth is life revitalized. Prolonging life may overcome death but could lead to boredom, enervation, and dissipation. Even decadence and degeneration. To counter decline and resignation, one may insist on the strict regimen of devotion and discipline, but this could lead to the rigid dogmatism of the Middle Ages or traditional Jewish culture that revolved around almost incestuous obsession with Ancient texts.

But more often than not, too much prosperity and security leads to a deadly combination of complacency and compassion. A carefree naivete that has forgotten the warning of 'Do not feed the animals'. Having been secure and prosperous for so long, they've come to take their well-being for granted and assume it will be painless and joyous to welcome the world with open arms. They see themselves as white jesuses taking care of lambs from around the world. They are innocent spoiled brats getting high on their own delusional virtue. They are blind to the delusion because they've had it so good for so long. They lack the experience of survival & hardship and have forgotten the lessons of their ancestors who had to struggle against great odds to secure the land and build a civilization.
And this is what has happened to Sweden. Too much ease and good life led to ZARDOZ-like conditions where overly well-fed and bored white folks welcome invasion simply because it is 'virtuous' and vibrant, the stuff of life lacking in well-ordered Sweden.

"Ostensibly, the Eternals are all at peace, free from violence and death, and forever young. Their society is democratic and imposes equality on all. (Men's) impotence has led to women becoming leaders along feminist lines in spite of the ostensible commitment to equality."

The world of Vortex is NOT democratic. It is elitist. It is equal only in the sense that Spartan Warriors were equal with one another or aristocrats are equal among themselves. But, in fact, Spartan elites lorded over the helots. And aristocrats lorded over the serfs. So, the Eternals are NOT democratic. They are equal only among themselves, an elite breed of sci-fi aristocrats.
Also, women do not rule the Vortex. Since the realm is asexual, men and women are almost the same. The women in ZARDOZ are not interested in the sisterhood or women's issues. They only identify as Vortexians.

Feminism is about women forming a sisterhood against the men. There is no such politics in ZARDOZ. Rather, female aristos in ZARDOZ work with male aristos to maintain the exclusive hierarchical order. They are more like princesses working with princes against the serfs. They are not about the Sisterhood.

"'Penic erection is one of the many unsolved evolutionary mysteries surrounding sexuality.'... The speech is a look at sexuality straight out of 1970s feminist pamphlets, with the only difference being a smugness in victory, dressed up as concern for the wellbeing of both women and men."

Actually, Boorman's point goes deeper than a critique of feminism. Boorman senses in higher spirituality, Christianity especially, the denial and repression of natural sexual drives. This goes back to the Old Testament. In Eden, Adam and Eve were nearly equal. But there was the Original Sin, and man and woman had to struggle in the world of Nature that was seen as FALLEN. And the divide between man and woman grew wide after the Fall.
In Eden, it had been peace and harmony for Adam and Eve. God provided everything. Adam didn't have to be a hunter-warrior. Eve didn't have to do women's chores. But after the Fall, Adam had to be tough and manly to hunt and procure food. And with all creatures at war with each other, Adam had to defend himself and Eve from other animals. And Eve had to be womanly and do women's things.

Christianity offered a Way out of such Fallen State. Men and women would deny the pleasures and fears of the flesh and redeem their souls to enter Heaven to be with God for all eternity. Thus, Christianity is anti-nature. It sees nature as fallen and sinful. It views human nature as a baggage of vices: lust, gluttony, greed, vanity, etc.
In EXCALIBUR, Merlin mourns that One God comes to drive out the many. Paganism is fading and nature grows silent.

Another danger is an Order becomes obsessed with more order. And this was true of Victorian England where sex was taboo as a subject. Also, the rise of effeminate style among men long predated feminism. It began within the aristocracy itself. Initially, aristocrats were warriors, tough and hardy. But as they accrued so much wealth and privilege, they got fanciful and had homos devise feathers, dress, jewelry, and etc. for them. Look at Tim Roth's character in ROB ROY. French aristocrats wore fancy wigs, used perfume, and powdered their faces.

As for feminism, it's a confused self-defeating ideology. There has been a strain of feminism that was anti-sex. But there was also another strain that emphasized little more than sex. Today's feminists are confused. They go on and on about "Don't grab my pussy" but they publicize their pussies for all too see. PUSSY-ism is new feminism. They are into slut pride and damsel-in-distress both. Also, feminists demand total happiness for women. But happiness for women comes from sexually surrendering to big tough alpha males. So, even as feminists castrate men, they also demand men with mega-dongs to hump them. As a result, we have the funny spectacle of white women castrating white men but burning with jungle fever for black mandingos who act like shameless savages. This is why feminism is self-defeating. The women in ZARDOZ are not like this. They are neo-victorian in their total denial of sexuality.

"Yet this has created anything but an idyll, with particularly the men wishing for death, as Arthur Freyn, acting as the chorus to a theatrical play, states he longs for at the beginning of the film. This introduction, however, is one of the unsatisfactory elements of the film, as it rather gives the game away, Freyn himself exposing that the film is a morality play, who he is and what the film is about. It is unnecessary and an insult to the viewer's intelligence."

No, most men don't wish for death in the Vortex. They are perfectly happy. Frayn and Friend are rare exceptions who secretly conspire against the system. But then, May the female also ends up helping Zed because a part of her also feels that the system is fatally flawed in some ways. She kept Zed alive because a part of her sympathized with him, longed for him. (Later, it becomes apparent that all the Eternals have a hidden death wish as they come to welcome the deliverance of death. But not having experienced violence for eons, they panic and run when the horror ensues. They thought it would be fun, liberating,and innocuous. It is actually brutal and ugly.)

Frayn's intro doesn't make ZARDOZ a morality play but a philosophical theorem. Frayn is not preachy or judgmental. He's a magician, a trickster, an artist. He wants to have fun toying with people. He wants to play god as puppeteer. He is the Merlin-like figure... though with only the semblance of wisdom. He'd been given the job of using the Stone godhead to fool the barbarian dummies. He had a great run messing with the yokels, and he later decides to pull a stunt on Eternals themselves.

He is not primarily motivated by morality but by creativity and artistry. The whole experiment is like a philosophical parlor game for him, and he cooks up a scheme with Friend(who is more serious). He has no idea how things will really turn out. Indeed, he dies brutally like the rest. His experiment finally engulfs him in the horror as well. The master puppeteer, the man-who-would-be-god, is reduced to a pig-for-the-slaughter for the butchers. Frayn is rendered as helpless as Ned Beatty in DELIVERANCE.
If the Eternals, in their eons of seclusion, lost all sense of horror, the Exterminators have practiced nothing but horror. It's like hungry wolves set free in a pasture of sheep.
It's like today's helpless Swedes and Germans as deer-in-the-headlights prey to the brutalized arrivals from Africa and the Muslim world.

Even though Frayn takes after Merlin, the difference is Merlin understood the nature of tragedy. He knew what it is like for an Order to fall. So, against all odds, he tried to help Uther and Arthur maintain the order from chaos. When Uther proves to be hopeless, Merlin bio-engineers a super-baby in the figure of Arthur. Frayn similarly engineers a superior figure in Zed, who has the warrior vitality of Exterminators and the intellect of the Eternals.

Even so, Frayn is like a child compared to the wise Merlin. Frayn has no idea of what it would be like for the Vortex to fall to barbarism. It's all just a game that he accelerates... until it finally happens, and then, panic-stricken & speechless, he is slashed with a sword while shitting bricks.

In a sick and dark way, one can argue that the Current Left is like the Friend-Frayn Nexus in their Afro-mania.
Even though the 'Left' pretends to believe that 'race is a social construct', they really feel that white race is deficient, inferior, and missing something. Consider the rise of Rock n Roll(and the fascination with blues), especially in once rigidly ordered and finely mannered England. It was as if whites with frozen souls were thawed, warmed, and heated by the burning souls of blacks. And overly rigid and hierarchical British Society was made looser and freer by black influence in music, style, and attitude. And this is why whites became so Afromaniacal. White boys turned cuckish in their worship of Negro athletes and badass warrior-thugs. And white women got jungle fever from watching all those big-donged black athletes beating up weaker and slower whites. But we know from Africa and Detroit that blackness = savagery and disorder.

In contrast, a people like the Japanese can create and maintain order. But white people are not excited by Japanese who come across as physically shrunken, weak-voiced, servile, lackluster, conformist, and timid. White people are excited by blacks with booming voices, bulging muscles, and dongs-and-butts. GET OUT is about whites wanting to be in black skin.

Japanese can build and maintain a modern society whereas blacks can't.
But blacks can make music and do athletics that excite whites... something that Japanese can't do. Japanese have higher IQ but blacks have more Iconic value or ICQ or iconic quotient.

So, the resolution at the end of ZARDOZ is now the template for leftist engineering via race-mixing. The bloodbath at the end of the movie makes us reject both the Vortex and the barbarism. Vortex was an elitist order divorced from nature, but the barbarism of raw nature is stupefyingly ugly.

So, what is the new hope? Zed and Consuela mate and create new humanity. Zed is a blend of natural barbarism and knowledge. And Consuela is a woman of knowledge who has regained her natural self.
In today's UK, this unity is seen as mixing of the black male as the ideal icon of manhood and the white female as the ideal icon of female beauty. The blending of tough black manhood and beautiful white womanhood is supposed to create a new superior race that finds the balance of nature and civilization.
And that was the appeal of Obama, the blend of black intuition and white intellect. He represented the ideal interracist template favored by the so-called Left. This 'Left' is race-ist in its own way but loathe to admit it. It doesn't see all races as equal or valuable. Rather, its ideal vision is the blending of blackness and whiteness. Blackness represents virility, rhythm, musicality, athleticism, and prowess. Whiteness represents reason, intellect, control, and organization. In ZARDOZ, Frayn created Zed as a kind of 'interracist' hybrid of Exterminators and Eternals. Zed has the body and toughness of the Exterminators but the mind and knowledge of the Eternals. In a similar vein, the current Left prizes the mulatto higher than both blacks and whites as he or she is supposed to represent the unity of black prowess and white proficiency.

It's pretty crazy, but today's LEFT is actually closer to Frayn-Friend's plot to bring down the Order and to create a new order formed by fusion of Afro-vitality and Euro-ability. They feel that this will result from the Negro penis and white vagina. In a way, Frayn is like a George-Soros-like figure who pushes Open Borders to bring down the ossified elite order. He is like the Loki character in German mythology who plays both sides -- gods and giants -- and finally helps breach the barrier that stands between the god realm and the world of giants.

Now, this isn't to say John Boorman had such in mind, or that he wanted Europe to be invaded by masses of Africans. But the satire of ZARDOZ goes far deeper than easy jabs at Leftism. It is about the problem of civilization itself. It is a timeless dilemma. We all want to create and be part of a Shining Order. But every Order, in order to perpetuate itself indefinitely, prolongs itself to the point of violating the cyclical way of nature and man. Thus, the order survives but loses in vitality.
And yet, the condition of man is always between Scylla and Charybdis. An order that lasts too long grows either apathetic or dogmatic. But then, the cyclical way is no circus. The stage of fall, even if necessary, is horrible and traumatic. We can't escape the tragedy of existence even if we wanted to.