New York Times 1619 Project is Jewish Globalist-Supremacism by Other Means — Why is Black Slavery a Bigger 'Sin' than American Indian 'Genocide'? — Idolatry of Black Supremography

https://www.unz.com/article/the-1619-project-devours-its-liberal-parents/

Some thoughts on the article by Robert Hampton on New York Times 1619 Project:

We can't fully understand the NYT-1619 project without taking into account the Jewish Factor. Jewish Hegemonists at NYT are pushing this mainly to prop up Jewish Supremacist control of the US. It is a roundabout way of justifying and perpetuating Jewish globalist imperialism & Jewish control of guilt-ridden white cucks. In 1776, the British were imperial overlords over the American colonies. Back then, 'Americans' were subjects of the empire though, being white, had more rights and privileges than non-white subjects. White Americans existed mainly to serve and support the empire. The British could foresee how the American colonies would keep expanding and then it was only a matter of time before Americans would outnumber the British. Thus, in order for the empire to remain intact, the British would have to preserve their authority over a larger number of White Americans as loyal colonists. This authority had to be moral and emotional as well as military because it'd be difficult to maintain control over a growing entity with brute force alone. It's like a lion or bear trainer needs something more than fear to keep the beast under control. The beast must be made to FEEL that the human, though weaker and smaller, is its emotional master deserving of respect.

British minority-elites sought indefinite domination over American majority-masses. But White Americans, at least one-third of them who supported the Revolution, developed an independent streak and identity of their own. They decided to break free of the empire. It was the first case of America First. And so, the British lost the empire(though, of course, the French played a key role). One can argue til the cows come home whether the Revolutionaries were in the right or wrong. Many historians think British taxation was valid given the huge costs of the French and Indian Wars, which was triggered by colonial demands by the way. Also, the destinies of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, none of which fought for independence, suggest that the British would have been fair, just, and humane rulers over the American colonists had there been no Revolution. But still, the American Revolution, justified or not, was led by men of great talent, intelligence, and vision. And even though British subjects of Canada and Australia came to enjoy freedoms and rights much like those of white Americans, freedom in America had a romantic element because of the founding myth of resistance and liberation. Freedom was granted to white Canadians and Australians, whereas freedom was WON by white Americans, and that made a huge psychological difference.

At any rate, Jews are nervous about the rise of white populism all around the world. Jews are most worried about the US, the center of the Empire of Judea, or EOJ. Indeed, under the current globalist regimen, US isn't so much the sole superpower as the main aircraft carrier & bank of the Empire of Judea that pan across the continents. Jews do have their own nation in Israel, but their real power rests in American Power or, more accurately, in the interconnected-ness of the globo-homo empire. Jewish power rests on hegemonism. If all white nations were to go primarily into nationalist-populist mode, the majority in each nation would ask, "What's in it for us?" Poles would put Poland first, Hungarians would put Hungary first, Germans would put Germany first, French would put France first, Brits would put Britain first, and etc. That means the primary goal of each white nation would be to serve the interests of its majority population than pander to the elitist-supremacist-minoritarian demands of Jewish globalists.
And so, Jewish hegemonists today are like the British Imperialists of old. Just like the British dreaded the rise of national consciousness in the American colonies and demands for national independence/liberation among Asian-Indians, Jewish imperialist-supremacists fear sentiments such as 'America First' or Russia First, Hungary First, Poland First, Britain First, and etc. Jews want all white folks in all white nations to chant 'Jews First', 'Israel First', and etc. And of course, AIPAC, ADL, and other Jewish groups are hard at work pushing for Jewish and Zionist interests. But Jews fear that this can lead to a backlash if they push too far. If everything turns into a matter of 'honor Jews', 'serve Jews', 'obey Jews', 'worship Jews', 'apologize to Jews', and etc., then white goyim may get tired of the shtick or, at the very least, begin to murmur, "Wow, Jews really do control everything." So, Jews seized on seemingly non-Jewish issues to push what is essentially a Jewish Interest. Globo-Homo-mania is a prime example of this. World Queery is just a proxy of World Jewry. Jews have been its main funders. Jewish-Homo alliance is close, not least because top homo movers and shakers are Jewish. Homo elite-minority supremacism of the neo-aristo variety complements Jewish elite-minority globalist supremacism. Also, homos and trannies turned leftism from Mayday to Gayday, thereby emphasizing the demands of urban haute elitists over the needs of middle and working classes. Jews and homos easily work hand-in-hand because both are overly represented in certain key elite institutions and industries.

With the 1619 Project, Jews are merely using blacks in the same way. By pushing the narrative that American National Independence sprung from a pro-slavery agenda, Jews are slyly arguing in favor of empire/imperialism over nation/nationalism. In other words, American colonies would have been more just and humane IF they had remained within the empire. It's like Jews rail against America First and American Nationalism on grounds that the US, as sole superpower, must maintain the New World Order... or else the world will blow up!! The US must embrace its neo-imperial destiny. Funny that nations like Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Ukraine were wrecke precisely because of US intervention, but never mind. Jews are in imperialist mode. They now control the US that controls the EU and UK. (UK would be better with Brexit from Zionist-American Empire than from the EU.) Canada and Mexico are mere puppet-extensions of the US, and Japan and the so-called 'tigers' are little more than dogs of the US. China is independent, but it too has become overly reliant on US markets. Still, China, Russia, and Iran represent a solid bloc of nations that have pushed back against the empire. Jews almost had Russia in the 90s but lost it when Vladimir Putin consolidated power, and Jewish imperialists have been plotting all sorts of machinations to turn Russia into just another globo-homo colony.

Though Jews gained the greatest success in America and developed a certain sentimentality about the America as myth, they never cared for America as an independent and sovereign nation. The most famous Jewish American poem by Emma Lazarus defines America not a self-contained nation but one that opens its arms to other Jews(though Lazarus cleverly whitewashed her Judeo-Centrism with talk of immigrants-in-general, the wretched refuse and blah blah). As Jews were scattered across many nations, as Jews in America wanted to bring more Jewish Immigrants, and as Jews around the world sought to forge a vast network of Jewish Power, the notion of an autonomous and independent American nation was ultimately anathema to the grand Jewish plan. Jewish Power could operate more effectively in a world defined by American Imperialist Power.
Of course, American nation itself had developed as part of an empire, and the Westward expansion had the features of imperialism, colonization, and hegemony, though completed easily enough because the native savage 'Indians' were relatively few and far between. Wherever Anglo-Americans expanded, Jews found new opportunities to sink in their claws. Lands taken by whites from the Indians could lead to real estate bonanzas for Jews. Would there be Hollywood in Los Angeles if Anglos hadn't taken California from Mexico? In Jewish eyes, Anglo-Americans were a marvel because (1) despite their 'racism', they considered Jews as fellow whites (2) despite their Christianity, they were far less 'antisemitic' than Old World whites, not least because many White Americans considered America as a kind of New Jerusalem and prided themselves for their relative lack of religious prejudice (3) they practiced Rule of Law that, while not perfect, was fairer than anything else in the world and (4) they were an enterprising and capable people who opened up new frontiers for Jewish opportunity. Anglos were useful to Jews also but Anglo-Americans were even better for their relative lack of class snobbery and greater directness, which suited Jewish interests as Jews tended to be pushy, brazen, and vulgar, traits that might be disdained in Europe but rather admired in rags-to-riches America of "Go West, Young Man".
Now, if Jews were merely appreciative & grateful and latched onto White America as the best of all possible worlds, they might have joined with the American Nation. But despite the value they saw in Anglo-Americans, their main loyalty was still with other Jews around the world. Also, despite Anglo heritage and Anglo-American dynamism, Jews still regarded themselves as a superior, wiser, deeper, more profound, and ancient people. Consider the exchange in the Western movie CIMARRON(based on a novel by Jewish authoress Edna Ferber).

A white character says: "One of my ancestors was a signer of the Declaration of Independence."
A Jewish character says: "That's all right. A relative of mine, a fellow named Moses, wrote the Ten Commandments."

So, across time and space, Jews can never respect any goy nation as self-contained. Ultimately, they all exist to play a role in the realization of the Jewish World Hegemony. Goy concept of time and space is too petty for Jews. For Jews, ancient history is still relevant to future history. When Jews turn back the clock from 1776 to 1619, they are really wink-wink turning the clock as far back as 1619 B.C. or 1776 B.C. Jews seek to control the boundaries of 'America' and its time-frame. So, according to Jewish globalism, America is all of the globo-homo-shlomo empire. Americans have a right to invade and occupy the Middle East(as extension of the empire), and non-whites all over the world have the right to come to America. Indeed, anyone who wants to come to America, legally or illegally, is an 'American' or a 'dreamer' according to Jewish Political Geography.
As for the historical time frame of America, by pushing the 1619 Project, Jews are effectively saying WE get to decide the real timeline of America. And why not? Jews get to decide what marriage is by legalizing and celebrating 'gay marriage'. Jews now even decide what Christianity is, which explains why so many churches now fly the 'gay' flag. Jews lead, goyim follow. Jews got Big Think, goyim got Small Think. Jews are prophets, goyim are props. And with their control of mass media, Jews effectively plant our memories. In BLADE RUNNER, we learn Rachel's childhood memory is really an implant. When it comes to historical remembrance, our collective memory is implanted by the mass media with its selective collage of images and sounds, idols and narratives.
Now, if goyim were to awaken to the nature of this machination, it'd be much harder to fool them. But too many people still haven't figured out a way to see through the curtain at the man behind the Wizard(of Oz). Once the spell is broken, it's broken for good. It's like once a kid realizes that adults lied to him about Santa Claus, no amount of pro-Santa propaganda can make him believe again. Once you realize that a magic trick is bogus, no amount of new magic tricks, however dazzling and impressive, can fool you they're real. Even if you don't know how it's done, you know it's only a trick. Likewise, if people realized what kind of people control the media and how they operate and why, they would much less likely be fooled. So, the first step toward understanding the man behind the curtain of the 1619 Project is to smoke out its Jewish Supremacist angle. Indeed, isn't it odd that the 1619 Project doesn't have much to say about Jews despite the fact that Jews played a huge role in the slave trade, especially in South America that took in many more slaves. (By the way, if black slaves = prosperity, shouldn't Brazil be 10x richer than the US since it took in 10x the slaves? And since Africa had black slaves forever before the white man ever landed on the continent, shouldn't it be one big giant Wakanda? Funny how slavery turned out so profitable under management of Anglos but not so much under others.) Jews played a key financial role in the Southern Slave economy, and most Jews supported the Confederacy. What does NYT have to say about that?
Also, it's more than a bit amusing that slavery is made out to be America's greatest 'sin' when we've been led to believe there is nothing more evil than genocide. After all, doesn't the Shoah have a special place in tragic historiography because it was a case of genocide? Slaves at least get fed and are allowed to live. Now, if genocide is far worse than slavery, then it seems NYT should focus mainly on the 20,000 B.C. Project to commemorate the true beginning of America via the arrival of proto-Asiatic hunter-gatherers from across the Bering Sea. But Indians who suffered something like a 'genocide' are given short shrift by NYT. That gives the game away that NYT is concerned less with morality and justice than power and control. That's the first lesson we must take from any moral hysteria generated by Jewish Power. Jewish morality is selective in service to Jewish interests, not principled universal justice. Indeed, the very Jews who bitched about bad ole Joe McCarthy have been pushing the most insane paranoia about Russia. They very Jews who decry the Nazis have forged an alliance with Nazi-esque organizations in Ukraine. We saw from the Syrian War that Jewish Morality is purely about "Is it good for Jews?" So, Jews had no problems with Obama/Hillary pulling strings to turn Syria upside down, but when Trump muttered something about pulling troops out, Jews in media were up in arms about all those poor poor Kurds.
Same goes with selective narratives about blacks and Indians in the US. Or Palestinians for that matter. Why doesn't NYT have a 1881 Project about how the first Jewish immigration to Palestine set the grounds for Nakba pogroms, thereby paving the way for endless Middle East conflicts? Why hasn't NYT hired a single Palestinian-American journalist in the name of Diversity of views and as a voice of the oppressed Palestinians? To the Jews, the American Indian Narrative is just too inconvenient for their globalist control of the world. Why? The fate of American Indians suggest Mass Immigration = Genocide or Replacement of Native folks. Given what mass colonization followed by mass immigration did to the native indigenous folks of the Americas, Jews obviously don't want to go there. To be sure, there was a time when certain Jewish Leftists in the 1960s made an issue of the American Indians because Diversity then wasn't the mantra it has become today. Back then, Jews sought to associate 'genocide' of the American Indians with what the Nazis did. But since then, people are more likely to associate the fate of American Indians with the effects of mass immigration. Immigration = Genocide, thus undermining Emma Lazarus as the voice of justice. Also, more than a few people have drawn parallels between what whites did to American Indians and what Zionist colonist-imperialists did to the Palestinians. Besides, the 'genocide' of Indians might compete with the Shoah narrative, especially because unlike the Jewish Tragedy, the mass deaths of Indians happened here in this country — Shoah is a Jealous Genocide and there shall be no other genocides before it. And so, slavery has become a bigger injustice than genocide in the American Moral Narrative. If it's inconvenient to Jews, just never mind.

At the very least, Jews might be less obnoxious if white people shot back. After all, contrary to the Jewish Narrative of the Tribe always having been hapless victims of Christian goyim, Jews played a sizable role in Western Imperialism. Jewish financiers bankrolled many ventures of conquests, plunder, and slavery. Jews were the main sellers of opium to the Chinese. Jewish merchants sold guns and ammo to whites to kill Indians with. Jews ran much of Southern finance. And Jewish agents, managers, and moguls exploited and ripped off countless black singers, athletes, and other talents. Also, the increasing tension between Jews and blacks in New York suggests many Jews regard blacks as a nuisance at best and thugs at worst while many blacks regard Jews as super-white people who grab all the loot. No wonder Jews at NYT are pushing the 1619 Project to distract people from the very real problems between Jews and blacks. Of course, the problem is made worse by the relatively poorer religious Jewish community. Whereas most secular Lib Jews are affluent enough to live safely apart from blacks and work in institutions/industries that don't deal directly with them, there's the Hasidim and certain Orthodox communities who live in proximity with blacks. These Jews manipulate real estate to squeeze blacks out of their historic neighborhoods. Also, they dislike blacks because Negroes commit lots of crime and act wild and crazy. Unlike secular Lib Jews in the 50s and 60s who made their money and joined the White Flight or Jew Flew from blackening areas, these ultra-religious Jews seem stuck in their ghettos(and in a ghetto-mentality) that keeps them in closer proximity with wild and crazy blacks. But all such goes against the BS narrative about Noble Negroes and Holy Hebrews in a sacred alliance against white 'racists' and 'nazis'. So, Jews have to keep pulling out Emmett Till stories and now this 1619 circus out of their arse to sustain the illusion of Jews and blacks united against Evil Whites.

Of course, reasons as to why Jews favor blacks over American Indians have to do with numbers, profitability, idolatry, and potency. There are many more blacks than American Indians, and so black concerns get more hearing. But then, why do blacks get more attention than 'Hispanics' who are now bigger in number? Also, don't 'Hispanic' browns have a tragic history that is even worse than black history? Historians say the arrival of Europeans led to the demise of over 90% of the natives, and this was especially tragic in what became Latin-America as something like 55 million out of 60 million perished, mostly of diseases. Also, unlike blacks and yellows who still have their own nations, browns of Latin America lost possession of their ancient lands forever under the Diversity-regimen. Indeed, it's telling that the #1 issue in Latin American politics is whether to go with 'Latino' or 'Latinx' instead of asking why the brown folks of Mexico, Central America, and South America should be referred to as 'Latino' or 'Hispanic' when they have identities and histories going back many thousands of years prior to the arrival of whites. Even with 'Hispanic' numbers eclipsing black numbers, the Jewish Hegemonic Narrative is fixated on blacks than on browns. Now, one might say it's because black history is American History whereas brown history isn't(until relatively recently), but then, why does the US make such a big deal of Zionism, Israel, Shoah, and European 'antisemitism' when those are NOT part of American history?
Again, it all comes down to "Is it good for Jews?" While black numbers matter a lot, they are also profitable to Jewish merchant-kings of sports, music industry, and entertainment. Blacks, being better athletes and louder singers, gain top slots in athletics and popular culture, and Jewish moguls rake in billions in profits by recruiting and promoting blacks. Black success in pop culture and sports have imbued the black race with power of idolatry(or 'idology' or idolatry as ideology) that has great sway among whites, even conservatives. So many whites revere and near-worship blacks as awesome demigods. So, naturally, Jews understand that blacks, as the god-hero-race, have far greater sway among white folks spellbound by black awesomeness in sports, music, and sexuality. Psycho-spiritually, people tend to feel most guilty when they feel they've wronged something superior. It's like Americans are more outraged by a white hunter killing a lion than a skunk(or by a Japanese vessel killing a whale than a slaughter house killing a million pigs). Lions and whales have iconic power, skunks and pigs don't. If Jews tried to make whites feel guilty about American Indians or short brown people from south of the border, it wouldn't be as effective. Even if white minds were made to consciously understand that red folks and brown folks suffered a lot at the hands of whitey, something within the white psyche wouldn't feel all that tragic. Even as they think, "what a tragic people", they'd feel, "a bunch of mediocrities who deserved to lose."
Granted, the tragedy of the Indian once had greater traction when (1) the American Narrative was controlled by Anglo-Americans (2) there was still the memory of Indians as tough worthy foes — in that regard the American Western did the Red Man a favor by featuring him as a fearless and fearsome hunter-warrior — and (3) American values were more stoic and inhibited, thereby more admiring of the Indian temperament. As Anglo-America was forged from confrontations between white settlers and Indian tribes, a certain respect was due to the people who were here first and put up a brave fight. Also, when the making of America was still fresh in the minds of Americans(and when blacks had yet to reach domination in sports), the image of hunter-warrior prowess was owned by the American Indians. Even Indians who'd savagely killed white folks, such as Geronimo, came to be included in the pantheon of American Mythology. They were deemed worthy warriors who fought for their land, culture, and honor.
But that was then. Anglo-American narratives have fallen by the wayside, replaced by Jewish-favored ones. Especially with the fading of the Western genre, most Americans have no more sense of Indians than of Cowboys. And the American Popular imagination has been taken over by black rappers, black athletes, and handful of whites who aspire to sing black or just hang on in sports where blacks rule. Jews understand that Progressivism isn't enough. It supplies (self)righteous vibes and a set of ideas, but ideology isn't enough to get people excited. Jews understand the power of idolatry, and so, they combine Progress with Prowess. Progressivism is about the Idea(usually supplied by Jews), and Prowess-ivism is about the Idol(usually supplied by blacks as top-dog-stars of sports, pop music, and sexuality). In other words, it's not enough to bait 'white guilt' but to switch on 'white thrill' that, esp since the time of Elvis Presley, has centered on acting the White Negro. So, Jews understand that blackness has the potency to make whites cower to black power. Even whites who roll their eyes at talk of Progress tune into the Superbowl to drool all over Black Prowess, which means White Pro-Wuss. Now, if American Indians were the toughest race while most blacks were like Gary Coleman or Emmanuel Lewis, the current Narrative might work differently, but blacks dominate the idols. It's like what Al Pacino's Schwarz says to DiCaprio's character in ONCE UPON A TIME... IN HOLLYWOOD, "... playing punching bag to every swinging dick..., that's gonna have a psychological effect on how the audience perceives you... Down goes you, down goes your career as leading man." In other words, the Image matters. When black men began to beat up white men in sports and took over as symbols of manhood, it had a profound impact on mass psychology and perception of Americanism. It wasn't just a matter of black individuals beating white individuals but blacks as new idols smashing the white idols of manhood. Of course, cucks like Ken Burns and Quentin Tarantino are okay with this and even celebrate it, but its effect on the white race has been far more damaging than knocking down Confederate statues. (More than not, 1619 Project is less about blacks as founders than blacks as idol-champs that came much later. Having come to dominate American Idolatry late in the game, there is a retroactive effort to make blacks crucial from the very beginning.) Indeed, if white men dominated sports but lost all Confederate statues, they would be in a much better position. Though ONCE UPON A TIME... IN HOLLYWOOD has almost no blacks and the violence is between whites vs whites(and a bit of pitter-patter between Brad Pitt's character and 'Bruce Lee'), it is cognizant of the power of idols and how fantasy idols serve as compensation for defeat in reality. When whites lost in boxing, they looked to Rocky who was fantasy-champion in the movies. And yellows looked to Bruce Lee as fantasy hero who could beat up not only Japanese but big Russians and towering Negroes. Tarantino, no stranger to fantasy and ludicrous violence(esp in KILL BILL and INGLORIOUS BASTERDS), seems in ONCE UPON A TIME... IN HOLLYWOOD to be more thoughtful about the dichotomy between real violence and movie violence. Anyway, when whites lost to blacks in sports and felt threatened by black music, they looked to white heroes in movies and adopted black music to create White Rock. That way, whites maintained the semblance of domination. But now, even movies are awash in Jungle Fever, and black rappers took over as top musical acts. Whites are totally under cultural colonization of blacks. Blackness has potency over whites(and even over NBA-worshiping Chinese), and this is NYT uses blackness to toy and mess with not only White Guilt but White Thrill.

On the matter of black labor building Early America, there is much truth to this, but what's appalling is blacks want all the credit, like they want all the grammies, as if all plaques must be for blacks. There were plenty of white farmers in the North and South as well, and they did grueling labor day in and day out. And most factory workers and coal-miners were white. Also, if black labor, especially slave labor, has such a magical impact on the economy, why didn't the countless slave economies of Africa result in growth and development? It's been said slavery began in Africa 10,000 years ago, but blacks seemed not to have gained much by using black slaves. Besides, slavery was common all over Arabia, India, and East Asia. Yet, it didn't lead to development of modern economies. And black slavery in Latin America failed to produce first-rank economies. In contrast, Canada-Australia-New-Zealand became successful economies without black slaves. And if black slavery was key to the rise of modern economy in the US, how did the Germans, Japanese, Swedes, and rest of them manage to build prosperous modern economies without black slaves?
So, while it's true that black labor played an important role in southern agrarian economies in Early America, it seems absurd to insist that it was THE most important factor. If America hadn't brought over a single slave, its economy would surely have been slower to develop, but it would have been better in the long run as the US would have averted the Civil War, problems of racial tension, black violence, and black pathology that turned Detroit from a city of the future into a city of Jafric lunacy. And look at black blight in Baltimore, Philadelphia, Chicago, St. Louis, and etc. Blacks-in-America proved to be a short-term gain, long-term loss. Imagine Detroit without blacks. It'd be a first-rank city. But blacks messed up Detroit worse than atomic bomb did Hiroshima, at least in the long run. Afrotomic Bomb is the most horrible thing in the world.
Furthermore, let's consider South Africa. Why did its economy come to be bigger than all of black Africa combined during the Apartheid Era? Because whites were the ruling and guiding hand over black labor. Blacks can provide labor but don't have much to offer in terms of brains, vision, organization, or persistence. Black-ruled African nations had as black labor as South Africa or even more, but they weren't able to get anything done because blacks made incompetent leaders, owners, governors, and managers. Indeed, the fact that all those black Africans want to scramble for Europe and live under whites is proof enough that black labor can't do anything on its own.

At any rate, an economy isn't just about labor and physical power. All European and Asian nations had horses and cows, but certain European nations did far more with them than others did. Horses and cows surely played a very important role in the development of the American economy. Horse power facilitated travel and communication(prior to the telegraph) and cow power plowed the earth. But horses and cows on their own couldn't have built an economy. It all depended on how they were used by humans. And the same goes for black labor. Africa had plenty of black labor and lots of slavery, but Africans never came up with a good way to use black physicality except to beat bongo drums, chuck spears at hippos, and run like a mofo. And Hispanic and Jewish slave-holders in Latin America were far less efficient than white American slave-masters. Given the numbers of black slaves in Brazil, Colombia, and Venezuela, those nations should have been first-rank economies if we follow the logic of the 1619 Project. It was White Americans who came up with more efficient(and humane) ways to use black slave labor for maximum results. Whites came up with the Whips-and-Watermelons methodology of Governance over Negroes. If Negroes acted all jive-ass and uppity, they got the whip. But if they picked cotton and called the white man 'massuh', they got an extra helping of watermelons. In Latin American nations, there was too much whip and not enough melons. And as whites were smaller as share of the population or mixed-in-race with native browns in Latin America, there was a more confused identity and sense of purpose among the owners and elites.

None of this is to diminish the contribution of black labor to the development of Early America, but it has to be seen in a proper context. Black labor was efficient in America ONLY BECAUSE whites knew how to harness its power. Also, one of the features of Western Civilization, especially since the rise of capitalism, was the constant advancement in science and technology, and this was entirely a white thing. Did blacks invent or make the ships that sailed the oceans or the cotton gin? And did blacks invent the machines that finally rendered slavery outdated and burdensome? But blacks are blind to all this because their jungle nature tends to be more aggressive, abrasive, self-centered, proud, and full of jive. This is why stoking black vanity is like serving more alcohol to a wino or adding more gasoline to the fire. The natural megalomania of blacks need deflating, not inflating. Of course, Jews inflate black megalomania against whites, and this is why whites should react in kind and inflate black megalomania against Jews and point out all the bad things Jews have done to blacks. But then, Jews will whine about 'antisemitism'. They encourage blacks to hate whites, but whites better not encourage blacks to hate Jews. As whites are such worthless cucks at the feet of Jews, they will go on suffering this humiliation instead of manning up and fighting back in kind.

As for blacks who say their struggle helped to improve American Democracy, this is both true and untrue. In a way, there was genuine inspiration in the American struggle to end slavery and recognize blacks as fellow humans and Americans. And there was genuine greatness to the Civil Rights Movement. But wouldn't American Democracy have been better IF not a single black had been brought to the Americas? There would have been no slavery, no war between the states, and no ugly racial tensions. And blacks wouldn't have suffered as slaves in America and would have no reason to bitch endlessly about 'honkeys'. After all, European nations evolved into democracies just the same WITHOUT racial problems. Wasn't it more pleasant for them than for Americans who had a huge racial challenge to surmount? Did Australian democracy suffer for the lack of blacks? If anything, recent African immigration to Australia seems to have resulted in all manner of crime and pathology.
American democracy would have evolved faster and more naturally without blacks. After all, the reason the North advanced faster in most areas than the South was because it was all white and felt more secure to welcome change. If anything, blacks held back the advancement of democracy because of racial tensions. Also, the problem wasn't entirely with whites. Blacks were not white people with black skin. Racial differences are real. Blacks were naturally the meaner, more aggressive, more thuggish, more psychopathic, and less intelligent race. They posed a real threat to white security and safety. Though KKK was excessive in its actions, there was reason for white fright over blacks. The black rampage since the Civil Rights Movement of the 60s is a testament to this fact. Though white nationalists or white advocates fixate on IQ differences between whites and blacks, that is the least important factor behind race problems. Far more crucial is the Song-Dong-Strong or SDS Factor. Black voice has sirenic power over whites, so much so that even after blacks terrorize whites and cause more problems, whites are yet again lulled and seduced by black vocality. Bigger dongs of black men lead to jungle fever and cuckery of white men. And tougher muscles of blacks lead to much criminality and victimization of whites, which is why whites need guns for safety. If whites and blacks were same in everything but intelligence, it would hardly matter. After all, Mexicans are said to be somewhat less intelligent than whites, but as they aren't tougher or more aggressive than whites, their only problem for whites is demography. Mexicans don't harm whites physically or threaten white idols or symbols of white prowess.
It's often been said Demography Is Destiny, but Supremography also matters. After all, if numbers decide history, why is it that Jews who are only 2% of the US have such total power over the nation? When the US was 89% white Christian and only 2% Jewish, the Law of Demography-Is-Destiny would have secured white rule over Jews. But Jews gained mastery over whites despite their deficiency in numbers. Why? Jews were superior to whites in IQ, stronger in will & personality, larger in vision, and more shameless in deviousness. And why are blacks gaining such prestige, reverence, and power in the West despite being minorities? Blacks are 13% in the US and fewer percentage-wise in Canada and European nations, but they dominate much of the idolatry as athletes, singers, 'twerking' skanks, and studs. Also, as Jewish-controlled US academia and media serve as model for all of the West, many whites in Europe look to MLK and Mandela as the premier saint-prophets. As far as Europeans are concerned, they themselves are frigid and frozen Ice People who were thawed and given warmth by Negroes as the sun god(and homos as the 'rainbow').

Anyway, even if the black story added something to the progress of American Democracy, blacks themselves gained higher morality and concept of human rights only through the white man. While blacks, like Asian Indians led by Gandhi, held the Western Moral Mirror up to the Hypocritical White Face that said one thing but did another, the values that they espoused came from whites, not from their own cultures. After all, what was indigenous black African values but oogity-boogity and jungle-jivery. Indeed, look how blacks have been reverting to their true nature once they gained total freedom in the US. Black culture is now about Rap thuggery and 'twerking' skank-ass-ho behavior. So, while it's true that through blacks and other non-whites, the Christian-Enlightenment West became aware of their shortcomings and hypocrisies, it's no less true that non-whites gained higher values and advanced political morality from contact with whites. Frederick Douglas and MLK didn't get their ideas from the Dark Continent but from Western Civilization.

As for blacks claiming cultural ownership over the very civilization that enslaved them, changed their names, and erased their cultures, it seems absurd but is also indicative of how history works. And we see this all across the West. The very blacks who used to yell, "Hey Hey Ho Ho, Western Culture's Got to Go" are now claiming not only America but Europe as 'African' or 'Always Diverse'. And white cucks are aiding in this: BBC made several shows about past British history with blacks in white roles. Even Finland made a TV movie where a black guy is the national hero who fought the Russians. Blacks realized that the West is too good to let go. Too rich, too advanced, too impressive. But since the West has been white than black, blacks(and their enablers) are altering true history to push the myth that Europe was always multi-racial or that Middle Age Europe wasn't white.

But then, didn't the Germanic barbarians do something similar in adopting the culture and partially even the identity of the very people who'd done so much to conquer, enslave, and kill the Germanics? The Roman Empire at its height invaded Germanic lands and slayed tons of people and enslaved even more. And yet, it was so impressive that many Germanics adopted Roman Imperial identity. Indeed, the myth of Roman Might was such that even after the fall of Rome, various Germanic kings sought to revive it as a Germanic thing. The sackers of Rome claimed to be heirs of Rome. And even though the monotheistic religion of Christianity that arose from Semitic Jews came to destroy the indigenous European pagan cultures in one of the greatest 'cultural genocides' ever, the white 'victims' of this cultural erasure adopted the New Faith as if it had always been their highest value system. History and humanity are funny that way.

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

200 years from now, when an honest historian asks, "Why did the West fall?", the main reason will be white people in the late 20th century and 21st century came to most revere, admire, and worship the people most antithetical to civilization. Blacks-and-Civilization is like drinking-and-driving. But due to the combination of 'White Guilt' and White Thrill, whites became spiritually and sensually owned by blacks.

Are there grounds for 'white guilt'? Not really. True, blacks suffered under whites, but history has always been about one people clobbering another. Consider what the Bantus did to other blacks(and to other Bantu Tribes) in Africa. Consider what Romans did to Germanic barbarians and ancient Britons. Mass killings and mass enslavement. Consider what Mongols did to Russia and Persia. Consider what whites did to natives of the New World. Consider the bloody history of the Aztecs. It's all tragic and sad, but no single people had a monopoly on horribleness.
So, why the special hysteria about black suffering? US empire killed millions overseas in the 20th century while a mere thousand blacks were lynched by whites, but there is more outrage about one dead Negro than many millions dead among non-whites. It's like Romans killed so many people by way of crucifixion, but Christians only care about the Crucifixion of Jesus. Why? As the Son of God, He was deemed the Superior Being wronged by inferior humans. Thus, Jesus's suffering matters infinitely more in the hearts of Christians. Once blacks were lionized as the Magic Negro and Macho super-dude, inferior-feeling whites looked upon blacks as the superior race, and that accounts for the excessive 'white guilt' about blacks, the psychology of which Jews understand and exploit to their benefit in order to control and own whites. After all, the most effective way to take away a people's pride and autonomy is by 'guilt' and 'thrill' for the Other. 'White Guilt' paralyzes white pride and white assertion. Whites in atonement mode seek moral redemption by serving the Holy Other, namely Jews and Blacks. And white thrill for the Other in sports and pop music becomes a kind of addiction, like to drugs. Even as it harms whites, they keep sniffing the glue.

Whites need to realize two things.

(1) While white history is certainly not without 'sin', this is true of ALL peoples. Black Slavery was hardly unique as a historical wrong. If there is one advantage to the fall of the Liberal Paradigm, it's that people may regard the US as just another nation with the same kinds of historical crimes and problems, not some 'city on a hill' that should be judged by ludicrously high standards. In a perverse sort of way, all this 'white guilt' stuff is paradoxically the product of excessive white pride. White Americans were so full of themselves in pride of having created an exceptional nation of liberty and justice that they became extremely sensitive and upset to evidence to the contrary. Therefore, instead of romanticizing America as the beginning of freedom and justice, it makes more sense to see America as an extension of human history with warts and all: Wars, conflicts, oppression, exploitation, and etc. Then there would be far less reason to be so 'triggered' by the fact that the American Nation was drenched in 'sin'... like the rest of humanity in all parts of the world. So, hell with the Liberal Paradigm. As for blacks who point to all the faults of white history, whites should shoot back and point to all the vile things of black Africa, black race in general, and black culture. True pride must be based on the mud-pie of human reality, not the pie in the sky of impossible idealism. American Pride should be based on American Achievement, not American Perfection. What people have been perfect?

(2) Whites need to realize that the very things that most excite them about blacks also represent the greatest threat to the white race(and to other races because Western Worship of the Black is having a global impact; White West is still the model for the world, and so, if whites go 'black', so will other peoples to their own detriments). Are blacks better athletes? Yes, but what are the implications of this fact? Tougher blacks in schools, streets, buses, and elevators can beat up whites with impunity. Whites need to learn to connect the dots. It's like a stupid baboon cheering on a leopard will realize soon enough it will be next on the leopard's menu. In other words, any white guy who cheers on a black football player might as well be cheering on blacks beating, robbing, raping, or murdering weaker whites. (While we can all be impressed by the prowess of anything or anyone, we also need to ask, "What does this prowess or power imply for me and my side?" After all, while Iranians may marvel at US military prowess, it would be stupid for them to cheer for it as it could very well turn Iran into rubble. We can be amazed by the power of a lion, tiger, or grizzly bear, but we'd be stupid to cheer for its prowess when it's charging right at us.) It means white manhood will be lost to blacks, and it just so happens that a race without manhood and respect of its womenfolk is a dead race. Just look at the spread of Afro-Colonization of White Wombs in US, EU, and UK as the result of the demise of white manhood at the feet of Negroes.
We see this in Japan as well. Even though Japan is, as yet, still mostly homogeneous, Japanese men have lost their pride of manhood under globalist pressure. Japanese youths grow up watching Mongols sumo monsters toss away Japanese wrestlers like ping pong balls. Japanese MMA shows feature whites and blacks destroying Japanese runts. The demented sexual culture of Japan have encouraged the women to grow up as clubbing whores who latch onto foreign men. The result? Not long ago, Japan put forth a mulatto as Miss Japan, and its most revered athletes are mulattoes in tennis and track, products of Japanese women and a black men. Even before demography is messed up, the psycho-national health of a nation can be crippled by the destruction of symbols of national manhood. We see the same thing all across Europe. France is an extreme case where blacks dominate sports almost 100%. But even in nations with far fewer blacks, the black takeover of sports has led to countless whites looking to blacks as representatives of national heroism. Now, one could argue athletes are not heroes and just physically talented sportsmen, but the fact is so many people the world over look to athletes as their champions, demigods, and superstars.

If white folks realize the dangers of 'White Guilt' and 'White Thrill' and act accordingly, they might survive. But at this point, it seems rather hopeless. Whites, both Libs and Cons, gushingly worship the Negro. Donald Trump too is just a cuck to Negrohood. And what did George W. Bush say was the worst day of his presidency? When god-man Kanye the ass said Bush doesn't like black people. Vaginal EU is now wide open to countless millions of black Africans. In US and Canada, the masses have black sports and black music as their main entertainment while Elite Institutions like Harvard and Deep State go the extra step to elevate blacks to highest positions regardless of merit on the premise that nothing imbues an organization or institution with holiness as Having-Our-Magic-Negro. Of course, because the elites can choose the Nice Smiley-faced Negroes for themselves, they can carry on with the illusion that blacks are so obammy-whammy. But things get pretty hairy at the lower levels of society where the less fortunate whites must integrate with ghastly Negroes. COMING APART means Upper Whites get the Nice Negroes while the Lower Whites get the Nasty Ni**az. But if two types of whites have one thing in common, it's that both elite white men and lower white males are willing to be worthless cucks to the blacks who take their women.

So, 200 yrs from now, when an honest historian wonders WHY THE WEST FELL, it would have been because the combination of White Guilt and White Thrill prevented whites from waking up and taking tough measures to save the West from the blacks, especially as whites were mental minions of Jewish Supremacist Power that used blacks to keep the lid on white pride of identity. Better to die worshiping the Magic Negro than be accused of the heresy of 'racism'.

Did Victimology associated with ‘White Guilt’ Bring Down the Power & Prestige of White Folks? Or was it the Combination of Victimology and Victorology?

Australian Aborigine, All Victimology and no Victorology

It’s been a truism in the pro-white movement that white identity, white interests, white pride, white prestige, and white power were eroded and brought low by the Victim Politics that instilled white folks with ‘white guilt’. But was that the main reason? Or was it victimology in combination with something else? Oftentimes, it is the combination that make something potent and dangerous, even deadly. It’s like certain chemical agents, though not particularly good for you, won’t cause you much harm UNLESS it is imbibed or injected along with something else. A flint stone thrown into a pile of wood won’t start a fire. A gun on its own or bullets on their own can’t do any harm. An empty gun just goes click-click. Bullets without a gun are about as deadly as rabbit’s foot. What makes a fire isn't just a flint stone on top of wood but two flint stones struck to create sparks that ignite dry leaves/grass around the wood pile. And what makes a gun deadly is when the bullets are loaded into the barrel.
In a similar vein, something like ‘guilt’ can’t do much damage unless there is something with the means(and meanness) to attack and harm those who feel the guilt.

No amount of guilt can do any harm to the guilt-feeler unless the object-of-guilt has the means to attack, harm, and ultimately even overpower him(and kill him). Suppose there’s a hunter who’s killed a lot of sparrows and squirrels. Suppose he took a BB gun and shot down hundreds, even thousands, of them. Then, one day, he wakes up and realizes that he’s acted like a real a**hole. He shot all those poor little animals just for the hell of it, for fun and sport. So, he feels guilty and decides never to harm sparrows and squirrels again. Indeed, he even goes to the trouble of offering breadcrumbs to sparrows and nuts to squirrels on occasion. Now, this man is clearly paralyzed by guilt from ever again using violence against sparrows and squirrels. But has his existence and well-being been seriously compromised or weakened? No. Even if he no longer kills sparrows and squirrels, they won’t do him any harm. After all, sparrows feed on insects and seeds, not on humans. And squirrels scurry around trees and look for nuts and other things to eat. They leave humans alone. Neither sparrows nor squirrels regard humans as prey or enemies. They are content to co-exist with humans. Their natural ideal, if such could be articulated, is, "You humans do your own thing, we little creatures do our own thing."

But suppose a certain hunter went around killing a different kind of animal. Suppose he hunted grizzly bears, wild hogs, lions, hyenas, or some such dangerous beasts. Suppose he killed a whole bunch of them, but one day, he feels bad about having done so. He looks back on his life and is overcome with grief over having killed a whole bunch of big wild animals. He suddenly feels guilt about what he’d done to those animals. He feels sorry and wants to atone for what he did. He swears to never kill those kinds of animals again. He decides to love, honor, and offer special friendship to them. He feels paralyzed in the use of any violence against such animals.
On one level, he is just like the killer of sparrows and squirrels. He’s filled with guilt for having used violence against animals. And like the former sparrow-squirrel killer, he forswears violence against certain animals and decides to be nice to the species of animals he’d harmed. So, will his fate be just like that of the former sparrow-squirrel killer? Or will he end up much worse? We know he will end up much worse.

After all, whatever one feels about sparrows and squirrels, they aren’t naturally aggressive toward humans. When did you hear of a sparrow swooping down to snatch someone’s child away? When did a squirrel ambush a person and jump on his head to tear it to shreds? So, if they are left alone by humans, they will just do their own thing. Whether man feels guilty or not about sparrows and squirrels, they pose no threat or harm to mankind.
In contrast, animals such as lions, hyenas, grizzly bears, or wild hogs are naturally threatening to man. Lions may attack humans for food or sport. Hyenas are powerful and aggressive animals that will attack and eat anything. Grizzly bears are naturally ill-tempered and often charge at people. There have even been cases of bears eating humans. Or they will enter into human habitats and mess things up. Wild hogs destroy entire properties, attack & devour house-pets, and sometimes charge at humans despite lack of provocation. All such animals are either big predators or invasive/destructive beasts. And they are bigger and more powerful than humans in physical terms. So, a man without a gun(or with a gun but without the will to use it) faced with a lion, hyena, wild hog, or grizzly bear is in serious trouble. Those animals have a Power-Advantage over humans, and some of them even regard humans as food. So, being paralyzed with guilt about those animals can be dangerous to humans UNLESS humans maintain a clear boundary between the animal realm and the human realm. If people come to feel bad/guilty about all the bears or lions they killed and create natural areas where lions or bears can thrive without human interference, that'd be one thing. But if this guilt means humans allowing bears and lions to enter into the human realm and do as they please, it means serious trouble for humankind. So, in the end, guilt in-and-of-itself hardly poses a threat to a person or people. What really matters is the nature of what you you feel guilty about. Is the object-of-guilt powerless or powerful? If treated nicely, will the object-of-guilt remain on the bottom or in the middle OR will it shoot to the top and take over? That is the crucial question.

And this question must be applied to human-to-human affairs. Looking back on the West since the end of WWII and especially beginning with May 68 Madness, the fatal danger of white folks wasn’t necessarily ‘white guilt’. It was ‘white guilt’ applied to two dangerous and aggressive groups of innately powerful and threatening peoples: Jews and Blacks. After all, there are so many cases where ‘white guilt’ hardly caused any harm to white folks. Take Australia. The so-called Aboriginal peoples were gunned down like animals by the British colonizers. They weren’t even valued as worthy of slave labor, not least because Australia could rely on steady flow of convict labor from the Mother Country.

So, it’s understandable that present-day white Australians feel historical ‘guilt’ about the Aborigines. And yet, it doesn’t matter because these people have no means of Victorhood to take advantage of the Victimology. Even though they remain poor and cause a host of social problems(related to drunkenness, disorder, or petty crime), they don’t create the kind of havoc that blacks have brought to Baltimore, Milwaukee, Detroit, Newark, Oakland, Gary, and etc. They are more comparable to Eskimos and American Indians, socio-economic ‘losers’ beset with a host of pathologies that remain mostly within their own communities. So, it doesn’t matter if white Australians are beset with and paralyzed by ‘white guilt’. Aborigines have no natural talent that can exploit white guilt-paralysis to their own great advantage. Whites feeling sorry about Aborigines is like a former-hunter who feels sorry about sparrows and squirrels. At most, Aborigines may be pests now and then, but they will not constitute a pestilence. So, whites can sing all the songs about ‘white guilt’ in regard to Aborigines. It will be inconsequential to the power dynamic of Australia. Aborigines will never amount to anymore than objects-of-pity.

The only way White Guilt in Australia can lead to dire consequences is IF it is divorced from the particular history of Australia and ‘universalized’ so that white Australians are made to atone for their ‘historical sins’ by taking in peoples such as black Africans, Arab Muslims, Chinese, and Hindus. Now, this would make no sense. Why would Anglo-Australians owe anything to Africans, Arabs, Chinese, and Hindus when the ‘historical wrong’ they committed was against the indigenous folks of Australia. If whites took land from the Australian Aborigines and even hunted them down, then the morally right thing would be to provide special treatment to that specific people. Why would whites in Australia owe anything to peoples in OTHER nations? Also, how does it help Australian Aborigines to have their homeland colonized not only by whites but by the world? It’d make no moral sense. But suppose white Australians decide to ‘universalize’ their sense of ‘white guilt’ and seek atonement via more ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’, sacred mantras in our PC age.
Now, why would this kind of ‘white guilt’ pose serious dangers to whites? Because, unlike Aboriginal folks who never amounted to anything but clobbering kangaroos and wombats with boomerangs, the Other non-whites can exploit White Guilt to gain a huge foothold in Australia and/or terrorize whites. Indeed, consider how recently arrived black Africans have caused more mayhem and terror in Australia in a few years than Aboriginals ever did. Why is this the case? Because Australian Aborigines are not particularly a powerfully-built people. They don’t dominate sports, don’t come up with stuff like gangster rap, and don’t have the Thug Gene. And even if they were to act nasty, a white guy can give an Australian aborigine a good fight. In contrast, black Africans who recently arrived from Sudan are big and powerful. They are muscled, fast, aggressive, savage, wild, and thuggish. Even though black Africans have been mostly backward and weak economically and technologically, they have a decisive power-advantage over whites in one-on-one physical confrontations. Indeed, black men see white males as ‘faggoty-ass white boys’, as easy prey. Black thug-mentality believes white males should cuck out and kiss black ass while black guys go, "Where da white women at?" and colonize white wombs. So, when White Guilt paralyzes whites into being unconditionally nice and kindly to blacks, it can be fatally dangerous. It’s like disarming yourself against wild hogs, Grizzly bears, lions, or hyenas. Indeed, consider the explosion of black African violence all over Australia. Though a small percentage of the population, blacks immediately turned to thuggery and violence because they sensed white wussy-weakness just like sharks pick up scent of blood and go into a frenzy. They act like hyenas at the sight of a wounded zebra or wildebeest.




While ‘white guilt’ about Aborigines in Australia has been of little social significance or political consequence, once it was ‘universalized’(partly due to Jewish globalist influence that controls much of Australian media, academia, and banking) into Australian whites sharing in Global White Guilt toward People-of-Color, White Australia was threatened by various peoples who can wield real power. While Chinese and Hindus don’t have the thug gene and muscle power to beat up and terrorize white people, there are billions of them, and both nations are eyeing to take over Australia demographically. Thus, White Guilt paralysis vis-a-via Chinese and India could lead to defenselessness against endless tides of yellow/brown mass invasions, in which case historic Anglo-Australia will be lost forever. All the hard work and heavy-lifting done by Anglo-convicts to build the new nation will ultimately serve the regional ambitions of treacherous Chinese and hideous Hindus. There is also the Arab-Muslim threat. Though the Arab-Muslim world is smaller in population than China and India, Muslims are an aggressive people who are nasty and opportunistic in taking advantage of generosity toward them. Just look how Muslim communities have shamelessly exploited the hospitality of Western European nations. Indeed, Arabs/Muslims regard generosity-toward-strangers as naivete, foolishness and weakness. Thus, they feel contempt for white 'suckers' who feed and house them. Also, even as they take from whites, they feel the enraged shame of having to depend on the infidel. Also, Muslims are often unpleasant because of their grandiose sense of themselves. They believe the one and only Allah is on their side and that Muhammad, their Prophets, is the final messenger of God. Thus, Muslims supposedly hold the ultimate truth. And yet, the Muslim world has lagged behind the West and East. This fills Muslims with rage and anger, and their resentment aims to ultimately destroy or take over more advanced Infidel nations that make Muslims look bad. Therefore, when White Australian Guilt is applied to black Africans, Chinese, Asian-Indians, and Muslims, the result can be devastating. It’d be like a guilt-ridden human deciding to be defenseless against and even supportive of Grizzly bears, lions, hyenas, and wild hogs.
And the same logic affects so much of what is happening in France. The French aren’t exactly proud of their history in Vietnam. They invaded and colonized Indochina, and then they fought a bitter war to keep the territory before they finally lost the war to the Viet Minh. Today, there is a sizable though not huge Vietnamese minority community in France. But even if the French were to feel most sorry and guilt about the Vietnamese, it would be of no significance. Even though Viets proved that they could be fierce warriors on their home turf, as minorities in other nations they are just a bunch of nobodies. Physically they are scrawny like chipmunks. They are even small by East Asian standards. Also, even though decent in IQ, they’ve never exhibited the talent or knack to take over other nations culturally, intellectually, or economically. So, the French Guilt about the Vietnamese has no meaningful consequence. It’d be like apologizing to sparrows and squirrels. But matters are different with French Guilt over Jews, Black Africans, and Muslims. Jews are smart, aggressive, and part of the network of EOJ or Empire of Judea. So, French Jews not only wield disproportionate share of power, wealth, and influence but work with World Jewry to influence French national policy. Because Jews are so powerful, influential, and nasty, French Guilt about Jews can be fatal. No matter how horribly Jews act, Frenchmen better shut up or they will be called ‘Nazi’. This is why the ONLY permissible criticism of Jewish power pertains to the Zionist-Palestinian issue, a matter that unfolds OUTSIDE and far away from France itself. France now has lots of blacks, and BAMMAMA — blacks are more muscular and more aggressive — is a huge factor in French social reality. Black guys push around white Frenchmen as a bunch of ‘faggotois-asseux-cuckoisie’. But French people are defenseless because any push-back against black thuggery and African mass invasion is deemed ‘racist’. Also, as French women have long been a bunch of slutty harlots, they have fewer inhibitions and easily transfer their sexual loyalty to whichever men who seem to have the Power. French girls, now Americanized and Afro-junglized like Anglo youths of late, are now rejecting white Frenchmen in record numbers and adopting for Junglois Feverois and ACOWW(Afro-Colonization of White Wombs) or CADWB(Colonisation Africaine des Wombs Blancs). As if Jews and Africans are not bad enough, France is now over 10% Muslim, and these Muslims are even nastier, more hostile, and more unpleasant than Muslims in Australia. At the very least, Australians have no record of violence and colonization against the Muslim World. In contrast, France used to rule large swaths of the Muslim World and even fought a bloody war in Algeria. To prove that they are now good people committed to atoning for their sins as former imperialists, the French have been very generous to Muslim ‘immigration’(mass invasion) and Muslim culture & values in France. But Muslims, given their outlook, never see niceness and generosity as goodness but as contemptible weakness and wussiness that should be exploited. (French-Muslim relations have been made especially problematic by France’s obeisance to both Jews and Muslims. Indeed, the fact that the French elites are more servile to Jews/Zionists than to Muslims have made the latter spitting mad. After all, there are taboos on Shoah but one can still mock Islam and Muhammad in France in the name of Free Speech. Also, despite much greater Muslim numbers, French Jews are so much more successful than Muslims in France whose main talent is imitating blacks and singing rap in Arabic.) There was a time when French Guilt seemed like it could only do good and not much harm. After all, the France in the 1960s was overwhelmingly French. Most Frenchmen regarded black Africans as poor dummies in need of aid. They regarded Jews as a people deserving of sympathy given the horrors of WWII. And they thought Muslims would just come to France, do menial jobs, and shut up. So, French Guilt was really a Pride of French Generosity toward the less fortunate. But as time passed, blacks began to kick French ass in sports, schools, and streets. And Muslims began to take over entire cities and create social turmoil. No matter how nicely the French treated them, their attitude was hostile and ‘gimme more’. As for Jews, they went from a Holocaust People to an Assholocaust People. Worse, when the elite power in the US and UK went from Anglos to Jews, the French found it far more difficult to stand up to US-UK power. When the power was Anglo-held, the French could snub their noses at it as it was fair game to talk shit about Yanks and Brits. But once the top power in the Anglo-World became Jewish, the French became increasingly afraid of being labeled as ‘antisemitic’ if they were to say NO to the demands of the Jew-run US. Thus, French Guilt became fatal because it paralyze the French from calling out and criticizing the harm and threat posed by Peoples of Power. Muslims got the power of numbers and collective-rage. Blacks got muscle, dong, and fist power. And Jews got brain-and-balls power and great reach around the world.

Now, let’s look at the US. It’s been said whites began to lose power and prestige because of the rise of Politics of Victimhood and White Guilt consciousness. But, let’s suppose the only minorities in the US are American Indians, Eskimos, and people of Chinese & Japanese ancestry. There was once a time when the white man fought the fierce Indians, but the Indians lost out, and that was that. Once American Indians lost their territories and warrior pride, they were finished as a people. As for Eskimos, the only thing they were ever good for was making igloos and lifting stuff with their ears. Chinese suffered in the building of railroads, and the Japanese were sent to internment camps during WWII, but they aren't peoples with innate power that could harm whites. East Asians may have IQs comparable to that of whites, but they have passive and/or conformist personalities. They are followers than leaders.
So, if those groups were the only minorities in the US, no amount of White Guilt could have real negative consequence on White Pride, White Prestige, and White Power. White people might go, "boo hoo hoo, we feel so sorry for what we did to you Indians, Inuits, Chinese, and Japanese", but what would this amount to? None of those groups would ever be able to exploit and use White Guilt Paralysis to their advantage. Indians will just say, "Come to our casinos and roll more dice." Eskimos will say, "Buy more beaver pelts." Now, Chinese and Japanese may earn some slots in elite colleges and get good jobs, but they would lack the fire to lead a minority movement to take over America. So, under those conditions, White Guilt would hardly be a threat to the White Race. It’d be like feeling sorry for sparrows and squirrels.

So, why did White Guilt become so fatal in the US? It was because certain Victim Groups have the innate power to become Victors and gain supremacy over whites in certain key areas. Now, if not for White Guilt Paralysis, whites might have come together and pushed against the New Victorology of the Victim Groups, but White Guilt became law-of-the-land, and whites became helpless to do anything about it. Suppose most blacks in the US were like Emmanuel Lewis or Gary Coleman. Suppose they are midgets, dwarfs, or cuddly munchkins. Then, it wouldn’t matter how much whites feel White Guilt about blacks because blacks would have no innate advantage or superiority over whites. Even if whites were filled with White Guilt Paralysis and pledge to be extra nice to blacks, what could a race of Emmanuel Lewises and Gary Colemans do to White America?

Jews cunningly promoted Afro-Munchkins to ease white fears about Black Thuggery. So, even as Jews were trying to infect white women with Jungle Fever for Mandingo-Shaft-Mofo, they were featuring Afro-Munchkins like Emmanuel Lewis and Gary Coleman to make white folks feel all warm and cuddly toward the Negro. (Jews promoted Oprah as Neo-Mammy for the same reason: A Negress who hugs you than talks shit like an Angry Black Biatch.) So, even though Gorillian blacks were kicking white butt in sports and schools, countless white folks gave their hearts to Negrolings as baby-chimp-chillun on TV. Anyway, imagine if black folks in the US were more like Gary Coleman or Emmanuel Lewis than Jack Johnson or Charles Barkley. Would White Guilt have been equally problematic under those circumstances? How much harm could a bunch of Lewises or Colemans do? Even when real-lifeColeman turned bad, he was a dwarf who hardly posed a threat to anyone but himself.

Recently, Donald Trump pardoned Jack Johnson in yet another display of White Guilt signaling, and it’s worth asking why this is so damaging to the White Race. What did Jack Johnson become famous for? He was the toughest boxer of his time who beat up tons of white guys and humped tons of white women. He destroyed white manhood that was beaten and humiliated before the eyes of lots of white women who then caught jungle-fever because women are sexually wired to give their bodies to physically dominant men. Given the racial reality of the times, Johnson’s story has been spun as one of racial justice and dignity, i.e. in a world of blatant white ‘racism’, Johnson stood up and defeated the symbols of white supremacism and earned respect for the black race. But here’s the problem with such a Narrative: Even if America back then had been totally friendly and welcome toward blacks in all walks of life, Johnson still would have beaten up all those white guys, robbed the white race of manhood, and conquered & colonized tons of white vaginas and wombs. As Jim Jeffries said after he got man-raped by Jack Johnson in the ring, he couldn’t have defeated Johnson in a million-billion years. Thus, Johnson’s black destruction of white manhood wasn’t limited to a historical period but established a fundamental biological truth about the races, i.e. when whites integrate with blacks, white manhood goes extinct. (It's like Charles Barkley telling Richard Spencer that the latter's daughters and grand-daughters will have their wombs colonized by tougher black men who kick white male butt.) And when the men of a race lose prestige-of-manhood in the eyes of their women, they turn cucky-wuck and wussy. And then, their women turn into whores and go with men of the stronger race. Jordan Peterson has spoken about how lobster males fight for dominance and how the loser-male-lobster loses confidence and effectively shrivels into a lobcuckster or incel-lobster. Just like Japanese men have turned into a bunch of wussies after losing WWII and having their nation occupied by Americans, the main reason why white males have grown so wussy and weak is due to the Negro Factor.
We are told that it’s mainly due to feminism, but why does the castrating effects of feminism have a greater impact on white males than on black males? Besides, despite all this talk of feminist power, there is no shortage of macho entertainment, macho fantasies, and women-as-whore fantasies in culture. If anything, so-called ‘toxic masculinity’ can be found everywhere: Sports, martial arts, video-games, music videos, pornography, action movies, superhero fantasies, and etc. So-called MMA fighters are more aggressive and nasty than fighters of old. Video-games have gotten more violent and bloody. Pro-Wrestling is going strong. Every summer has tons of movies about tough guys blowing up the world. Not only is pornography ubiquitous but even mass entertainment has been largely pornified down to stuff made for children. What is called ‘wholesome’ today would have been for Adults Only in the 1970s or even 1980s. If anything, feminism has largely been ineffective in stopping the sexualization of culture(that turns women into 'sex objects'). Kim Kardashian has been the most followed-celebrity. If anything, much of feminism turned skanky and slutty, embracing the inner whore than the Iron-Spinster-Sister.
Therefore, the recent decrease in overall white male confidence has little to do with war on ‘toxic masculinity’ & sexual expression than with their near-total triumph. After all, most kids grow up to rap songs where thugs sing about ‘muh dick’ and about fighting and humping whores. And ‘twerking’ is the biggest dance among young females. Thus, our culture is saturated with ‘toxic masculinity’ and ‘toxic femininity’(or femininity that is as brazen, aggressive, and shameless in its horniness as the male kind). And this was bound to favor black manhood over white manhood because blacks have a decisive advantage in sports, can holler louder, are naturally more aggressive, and have bigger dongs. It wasn’t the feminist suppression of sexuality that led to wussiness and cuckery among white men. It was the triumph of Black ‘toxic masculinity’ or Jack-Johnsonism.

And the main reason why so many white males found refuge in beta-male wussiness and cuckery was because they lost out to black manhood. When whites were secure in their own domain, white manhood need not compete with black manhood. Thus, whites could have a Hercules, Achilles, or Lancelot who was white. When Ancient Greeks had their Olympic games, it was for Greeks only. They didn’t invite Negroes from Africa to kick Greek male ass and have Greek women run off with Negroes. But once Manhood Competition was globalized, especially by having millions of Africans settle in white nations, white guys were going to lose out to the Jack Johnsons and Usain Bolts of the world. So, if white guys cannot be the representatives of Iconic Manhood in their own societies, what is left for them? If they can’t be alpha, they turn beta and turn wussy and cuckish and 'gender-fluid'.
This is also why Japanese and Korean males are turning into soyboy wussies. Their nations having been globalized, yellow males are beginning to realize they have no value in the Manhood department vis-a-vis the men of other races. So, what is left for them but to take on eunuch-mentalities, put makeup on their faces, and act like gayish flower-girly-boys? It’s estimated that 50% of Japanese men are unmarried virgin incel losers who have lost all pride of manhood, and 80% of Japanese women, having been globalized in taste and preference, say they are dissatisfied with their own men. So, the future of Globo-Japan will be Cuckpan where Japanese women go with non-Japanese men and have mixed-raced kids who take over the icons of Japanese manhood. Look how Japanese women are having kids with black men who are now taking over Japanese sports. Stuff like sports and pop culture matter because most people think in terms of idols than individuals. So, even if Japan is filled mostly with Japanese individuals, most of them are faceless nobodies. For the representative and iconic face of Japanese manhood and womanhood, the masses look to athletes, celebrities, and stars. So, if Japanese men are dethroned from the altar of manhood in sports and pop culture in their own nation, it will have a huge psychological effect EVEN IF Japan remains majority Japanese. It’s like, if the other side takes the battle flag of your side, it has a huge psychological effect on everyone. Or, if the Hero on your side loses to the Hero of the other side, it’s not just one individual losing to another but one icon losing to another. When Achilles defeated Hector, it had significance far beyond one guy beating another guy. He defeated the iconic representative of Trojan manhood. This is why black victory in sports has had HUGE ripple effect on all of white society. It wasn’t just some black guys beating some white guys. It was black manhood conquering, man-raping, and enslaving white manhood into wussy-dom. What Japan is now undergoing under globalist pressure, the UK, France, and Holland have already undergone. The idols and icons of representative manhood in those nations are increasingly black. Even though those nations still have many more whites than blacks, blackness has taken over as the iconic banner of manhood. Thus, not only are black men kicking white men’s butts in sports and conquering tons of white wombs but even white history is being rewritten to recast classic white heroes such as Hercules, Achilles, Lancelot, and many others into black heroes. The effect of idolatrous power can be seen in the not-very-good movie TROY. When Achilles defeats the goliath-sized Hero of the Rival army, all the men lose heart, turn wussy-cuck, and surrender.


Because blacks have an innate advantage and power over whites in brute strength and aggression, White Guilt Paralysis in relation to blacks was like a hunter who is overcome with guilt for grizzly bears, lions, hyenas, or wild hogs. Blacks want to kick white butt, humiliate white boy, and hump white women. They be nasty and aggressive. So, when whites fell for the BS cult of MLK about ‘peaceful resistance’ & reconciliation, they were setting themselves for racial demise. Via White Guilt, they rendered themselves defenseless against a most aggressive, nasty, and lip-smacking enemy. While it’s true that whites historically oppressed blacks, it’s no less true that blacks biologically want to beat up white boys and sexually conquer white women because blacks look upon whites like lions look upon zebras.

And then, whites totally underestimated the nature of Jews when they embraced White Gentile Guilt about Shoah/Holocaust. Jews seemed so pitiable after WWII in which Nazi Germans went crazy and carried out a horrible genocide. Besides, Jews were a small minority in the US. Even if they were disproportionately more successful than other groups, how could a tiny minority really take over the US and act like total a**holes? Would Jews really go from Holocaust people to an Assholocaust People? It seemed unlikely. And yet, whites totally underestimated the Way of Jews. Jews were not only more intelligent than whites by a standard deviation but were tribally networked all over the world, deviously cunning-conniving-and-venal, rabidly & virulently hateful, genocidally vengeful, and contemptuous & sadistic. Jews were like a monster-creature created by combining octopus, hyena, piranha, shark, weasel, cockroach, salamander, mole rat, bobcat, gopher, badger, kangaroo, buffalo, platypus, goat, seal, dolphin, lobster, crow, and bonobo. Jews were like The Thing of John Carpenter’s movie.

The real face of Jews: Exhibit A.

The real face of Jews: Exhibit B.

White folks simply had no idea of the true nature of Jews. Jews are a remarkable people, and that means they are great in wisdom and profundity but also in wickedness and megalomania. Thus, while Jews can do a lot for mankind if their talents and energies are steered and channeled properly, they can to spiral out of control and mess up the world if allowed to act like they are god himself. Jews, with their high intelligence and immense talent, are a people who must be carefully watched. Anything of great power must always come under scrutiny. (Funny that Jews say we must pay close attention to Iran, a nation without nukes, but we must turn a blind eye to the fact that Israel has 300 nukes that hardly go mentioned.) After all, why is there so much more care and caution at a nuclear reactor than around a camp fire? If something goes wrong around a camp fire, someone may burn his hand or marshmallow. But if something goes wrong with a nuclear reactor... well... the result is:

Jewish Power is nuclear, and what we are witnessing is a Jewclear Meltdown because White Guilt Paralysis about the Jew has made it nearly impossible to notice and criticize Jewish power that, unless carefully contained and inspected, has a way of going crazy. Ironically, the problem with Jews can be understood by studying the Germans. Germans were also a great people capable of so much good and so much bad. A talented, passionate, intelligent, and creative people, they could be great artists, visionaries, scientists, and thinkers. But they could also be great madmen, destroyers, and lunatics. Few peoples in modern times have done so many great things and so many evil things as the Germans have. Same goes for Jews. But after WWII, both Germans and Jews learned the wrong lessons that were then dumped on the rest of humanity. Germans were made to feel they are essentially evil at the core and must never imbibe another shot of passion and pride because it will lead to Nazism all over again. But Germans are nothing without passion and vision. Imagine Beethoven and Wagner rejecting their own passions lest they destroy the world. In contrast, Jews were made to feel they are innately holy & wonderful and nothing they do could ever be wrong. Thus, Jewish passions increasingly ran wild and crazy to the point where they befouled the world with filth of all kind.
The ONLY effective bulwark against Jewish Megalomania was responsible White Power, but White Gentile Guilt Paralysis made it nearly impossible for white power to ever notice anything dark, sick, or vile about Jewish power. Imagine if the humans in John Carpenter’s THE THING developed Human Guilt over the Thing and pledged to serve it and never use violence to fight back. What would happen?

White Guilt also muted white resistance to the Mexican Brown invasion. Though Mexicans-as-individuals lack the advantage of brawn of blacks and the advantage-of-brain of Jews, TOO MANY of them pose a real threat to White America. It’s like rabbits aren’t dangerous like lions or hyenas, but they can over-breed and take over entire areas and eat up all the plants. But the cult of White Guilt effectively silenced white resistance to Mass Invasion(aka Immigration) by the Other. Thus, the Mexican challenge also became very dangerous.
Anyway, the lesson from all this is, "Always be careful whom you feel guilty about." Certain groups that are deemed as ‘victims’ may hold certain Ace cards that can turn them into ruthless victors over your group when the tide shifts. White folks embraced White Guilt in regards to Jews and blacks on the premise that such minorities would remain noble objects-of-pity when showered with sympathy and affection. But in fact, blacks were eyeing for physical victory over the white race with their harder muscles and bigger dongs, and Jews were eyeing for political victory over the white race with their higher intelligence, pushier personalities, and more devious agendas.

Homomania or Queertianity = Satanic Jewish christianity

How Jewish Oligarchs & Commissars of Google observe Easter

How Jewish Oligarchs & Commissars of Google celebrate Homomania or Queertianity

Sometimes, what had been a great triumph for a people can turn into a matter of great shame and tragedy. When white Americans used black Africans as slaves, it was a great boon to the economy. White Americans even took pride in the act of civilizing black African savages into a people governed by law & order in a complex and advancing civilization. White people told themselves, "Those Negroes would be acting wild & crazy and dancing with gorillas IF we didn’t put them to good use as slaves in our superior order." So, white subjugation of blacks seemed like a good thing at the time. But once the Narrative changed and condemned the evil, greedy, and ‘racist’ whites for having enslaved and exploited an innately noble and superior-souled(and-bodied) people, white treatment of blacks in the past became a matter of great shame for white Americans, especially those in the South. Proud triumph turned into shameful tragedy for the white race.
Likewise, Nazi Germans were full of triumphant pride when they conquered and lorded over much of Europe. It was deemed as evidence of ‘Aryan’ superiority and awesomeness. It seemed as though the next 1000 yrs would be the ARYAN MILLENNIUM. The Germans seemed unstoppable. But then, the Soviets began to roll back Nazi gains, and eventually, the entire Nazi Empire came tumbling down. Then, everything the Nazis had done was deemed ugly, shameful, and evil. The change in reality and narrative turned Triumph into Tragedy, Pride & Prowess into Shame & Guilt.
This could also be said of Communism. There was a time when many people sincerely and passionately believed in Marxism-Leninism. They saw it as the wave of the future. They were so certain of its goodness and rightness that they believed ANY MEANS NECESSARY were justifiable to spread communism. Terror, mass imprisonment, state slavery, and mass killings were all fair game because History was on the side of Scientific Materialism of Marxism-Leninism. Communism would surely triumph and justify everything that’s been done in its name because its victory was as assured as the Sun rising in the East and setting in the West. But as communism became increasingly discredited and then finally collapsed, every triumph that had been associated with it came to be seen in a tragic light. In the Stalinist Era, it seemed as though all of Stalin’s deeds and accomplishments were awesome, superb, and morally justified. But in retrospect, Stalinism came to be associated with fear, paranoia, terror, ruthless repression, and mass killings. The once proud Red symbol of Communism came to stand for bloodbaths and rabid lunacy.
And consider the Narrative of Jews and Jesus. Jews worked with Romans to have Jesus killed and His Disciples harassed and persecuted. And when Jesus died on the Cross, Jews saw it as victory and triumph. They got rid of a heretic Jew with the blessing and support of Romans. Just like Jews today pressure goy elites to do the bidding of Jews, Jews back then pushed Romans to kill a renegade Jew. Of course, Jews today have supreme elite power whereas Jews back then were subjects of the Roman Empire. But it goes to show how even Jews-without-power have the Will-to-Pushiness that can make a great empire do their bidding. Anyway, Jews were satisfied and relieved that the dangerous Jew Jesus was killed and gotten rid of. They thought they won. But then, there arose the Narrative of Jesus as the Son of God who returned from the dead and gained entry into Heaven. As this Faith spread, what had been a triumph for Jews turned into tragedy. Jews came to be collectively blamed for the killing, indeed the murder, of the Son of God. (Jews say it was most unfair for ALL JEWS FOR ALL TIME to be blamed for the killing of Jesus, the blame for which btw has been shifted more to Romans after WWII, BUT Jews have no qualms about blaming ALL GERMANS AND ALL CHRISTIANS FOR ALL TIME for Shoah. It goes to show Jews are such hypocrites. They want to milk German Guilt and White Goy Complicity forever and ever and ever... just like the Overlook Hotel in THE SHINING wants to own the soul of Jack Torrance forever and ever and ever.) Anyway, the main point is that what had once been deemed triumphant/proud can later be regarded as tragic/shameful, and vice versa. It all depends on who controls the Narrative. Thus, any triumph/pride is vulnerable to reinterpretation that renders it as a case of tragedy/shame. (The British who used to be so proud of their Great Empire are now made to apologize for its abuses and exploitations 24/7, even tearing down symbols of past British pride in their own nation.) Likewise, what had once been deemed tragic or shameful can be re-jiggered to seem triumphant and proud. It’s like what Moses says of his staff to Ramses in the TEN COMMANDMENTS: "You gave me this staff to rule over scorpions and serpents, but God made it a rod to rule over kings." Ramses gave the stick to Moses as a beggar’s tool, but Moses wields it like the rod of God. Later, when Moses goes to receive the Commandments of God, the restless perverts among the Jews decide to go Ron-Jeremy-and-Sarah-Silverman and erect an idol of the Golden Calf to worship and celebrate. They are full of pride and riding high. But then, Moses returns and, with the power of the Lord, destroys the pride of pagan idolatry. What is ‘cool’ is made ‘fool’.

Because the Power of Narrative can turn black into white, white into black, black into white again, and white into black again, one must be careful and mindful of what he selects, blesses, and promotes with his use of Narrative. One must be sure to associate pride with what is deserving of pride. One must be sure to associate justice with what is just. One must associate beauty with what is possessed of beauty. After all, if the pride of beauty has been associated with something ugly, then it is only a matter of time before someone calls out on the discrepancy in the manner of the boy in "Emperor’s New Clothes".
But then, the power of Narrative is such that even the Worthy can be ‘discredited’ and condemned as Unworthy. Even Truth can be demeaned as False. Even real Beauty can be demeaned as Ugly. Even Tyranny can be sold as Justice. Of course, it’s more difficult to push the Bad as the Good, but the Power of Narrative and Social Conventions is such that Enough People can be fooled into believing that black-is-white. After all, how was it that all those Hindus thought it was a good idea to stick a piece of metal through their noses? And how was it that all those Chinese thought it was a good idea to ‘bind’ women’s feet? How was it that all those women in the Victorian Era thought it was a good idea to tightly strap corsets around their waists? (One thing for sure, women can be more easily goaded into doing totally stupid shit.)

We don’t need to look far to see how the Bad can easily be promoted as the Good in the Current Year. Just look at Homomania or Queertianity. It is now associated with ‘rainbow’ colors. Yes, homos(who indulge in gross fecal penetration) and trannies(who mutilate their puds and poons) get to hog all the colors of the rainbow. A symbol that had once been associated with the profound moral tale of Noah’s Ark and with the realm of the great Germanic gods is now the symbol of ‘pride’(more like poo-ride if you ask me) of Homos and Trannies. Also, what had once been called ‘gay pride’ is now just called Pride. Joining 'gay' and 'pride' is ridiculous enough as what is so pride-worthy about penises inside the anuses of men? And if trannies are so proud, whey do they go to the trouble of radically altering their hormones and bodies to be what they are not? But apparently, 'gay pride' wasn't good enough for homos. They want 'pride' to automatically mean 'gay'.
Just like homos appropriated the term ‘gay’ for themselves — ‘gay’ used to mean being light, happy, or debonair and didn’t apply ONLY to homos — , they decided to appropriate ‘pride’ for the LGBTQP — P is or Pervert-Pedophile — community or cum-unity. Talk about arrogance and megalomania. If Jews got chutzpah, homos got (poop)chutespah. An entire generation has been raised to associate the beautiful rainbow and the term ‘pride’ with homos, trannies, fecal penetration, and pud-or-poon-cutting. So, young children, upon seeing a rainbow, think ‘gay!!!’ Upon hearing the term ‘pride’, they think ‘gay!!!’ As if that isn't enough to stoke their egos, even food items are homoshered. (Jews insisted all foods to be kosherized, and now homos want all foods to be homosherized.) So, there have been homo-colored Oreo cookies. Burger King came up with ‘Pride Burger’. (Burger King might as well rename itself Bugger King.) Starbucks is always ‘pride this’ and ‘pride that’. (It might as well rename itself Starbuttfuc*s.) And the Jews who control Facebook and Google add homo-themed doodles, symbols, and icons all over. It’s like a waiter sprinkling curry on every dish you order. Imagine you order pizza, but its sprinkled with ‘pride spice’ of curry. Suppose you order ice cream, and you get the same thing. The tutti-fruities are now a bunch of Toots who push Tootalitarianism on everything. Every TV show or popular movie must have a positive homo or tranny character. Ads feature homo ‘parents’. It used to be that every hotel room came with a Bible. Now, every social network platform, every other show, and every other product come with homo-this or homo-that. And every city is inundated with a ‘Pride’ parade that celebrates decadence and degeneracy of Jewish-financed-and-promoted globalism. But as if that isn’t enough, homos have even pushed their perversion as the new holiness into churches. And most European churches and most mainline churches in the US have complied to this insanity. According to Homomania-Queertianity, there is no higher purpose or meaning to God and Jesus than blessing homo fecal penetration and pud-and-poon-mutilation. People like Tim Cook and even the current pope(who should be called the Poop) say God blessed with certain people with homosexuality. (I suppose God also blessed pedophiles, incest-sexuals, and bestiality-practitioners with their hankerings.) According to the vain and narcissistic pseudo-theology of Queertianity, one need not make an effort to rectify and save oneself to atone before God but, instead, bend the meaning and purpose of God to bless one’s predilections, orientation, and indulgences. If Alcoholics Anonymous followed the model of Queertianity, everyone would just drink and drink in the conviction that God gave them alcoholic tendencies that must be indulged to the fullest. So, if Tim Cook spends his life by having other men ram their penises into his bunghole and ejaculate sperm to mingle with his fecal waste material, it’s because GOD blessed him with such wonders of sexual deviance. When we see homo colors take over one church after another, it should be plain-as-day that the cause of ‘gay rights’ hid something sinister: The project of instituting Homomania as Gay Rites, a neo-religion of the West. But more crucially, this was more the project of Jews than homos themselves, even though, homos and trannies, in all their bitchy and hissy megalomania, were fully onboard with this enterprise of self-apotheosis. Why did Jews feed on homo-and-tranny vanity? Because Jews have always loathed Christianity as a religion stolen from Jews by dimwit goyim. Prior to Christian conversions among goyim, God only belonged to Jews. God only favored Jews. Sure, God sometimes punished Jews because they acted badly, but God never favored goyim over Jews. But with Christianity, there was the idea that the New Covenant didn’t belong to any particular Tribe but to those of all tribes who would convert to the New Faith. What had been a well-contained and organic religion of the Jews went ‘viral’ and turned ‘cancerous’ and spread out across so much of humanity that came to not only outnumber Jews but revile Jews. (No wonder Susan Sontag called the white race the 'cancer of humanity.) After all, Christianity didn’t just claim to go beyond Jews but condemned Jews as the killers of the Son of God. Imagine that. The very people who invented the one and only God got blamed for killing His Son. Buddhism, as outgrowth of Hinduism, never attacked Hinduism in such manner. Roman mythology, as outgrowth of Greek mythology, didn’t attack the latter in such manner. But Christianity, though having arisen from Judaism, made Jews out to be the worst folks(after pagans). Then, it is no wonder that Jews welcomed the arrival of Islam that, though not exactly nice to Jews, waged war on Christendom and, at the very least, acknowledged and respected Jews as fellow People of the Book. If not for the rise of Islam, the chances are all that all of the Middle East and North Africa would have become Christian, and then Jews would have been condemned for Deicide not only by European Christians but by Arab and other kinds of Christians. (Indeed, the current forms of Christianity that remain theologically most anti-Jewish are in the Third World. Not having fully emerged into modernity, people in such nations are much more likely to accept literally whatever is written in the New Testament. So, if it says in the Good Book that Jews done it, they believe it. This is one reason why Jews loath the spread of Christianity around the world and want to replace it with something else as the hegemonic voice of the West.) If not for the creation of Israel and Zionist interests in MENA(Middle East and North Africa), World Jewry could be far more favorable to Arabs and Muslims. After all, Jews find Muslims useful in the West as such folks are far removed from political tensions between Jews and Arabs in the Middle East. Once the Muslim population is firmly ensconced in the West, Jews find them most useful as demographic and cultural armies against whites & Christians. It is only because of the Zionist vs Arab conflict that some Jews in the West see the necessity of fanning white/Christian animus against them ‘Muzzies’ and ‘ragheads’ who are featured mostly as Terrorists in Jew-run Hollywood movies and TV shows.

Anyway, Jews are riding high right now with Homomania. They are amazed and delighted with how fast it caught on in the West and even parts of the non-West. Jews know how power works. Jews know that most people are sheeple and are easily swayed by the elites. So, in order to spread Homomania around the world, Jews only needed to bribe, blackmail, or brainwash the non-Jewish elites of the academia, media, law, finance, and the state. Even if most people were to object to Homomania, the fact is they rely on mass media for information, mass entertainment for escapism & enjoyment, and mass education for their children. So, it’s only a matter of time before something like Miscegenation or Homomania is normalized among the masses. After all, the Nazi monopoly of media soon made majority of Germans supportive of Hitler. And monopoly of media in Stalin’s USSR made the majority worship Stalin as a god-man and their children grew up as fanatical communists(for whom all other ideologies were either false or evil). People are like reeds swaying in the wind. Elites control the winds, and most people-as-reeds blow in one way or another. So, there was no need for Jews to go door-to-door(like Jehovah’s Witnesses) to win the hearts and minds of individuals. They only needed to alter and reprogram the New Normal at the top/center, and then, it was only a matter of time before the majority just followed like sheep. It’s like Google doesn’t need to go door-to-door to change the programming in every computer. They only need to alter the coding in their headquarters, and then, ALL computers around the world work according to the new algorithms.
Not only do Jews understand that Elite Control is most crucial but that people are swayed less by ideas and reason than by idols/icons and sensation. After all, religions have outlasted ideologies. And Catholicism and Orthodox have outlasted Protestantism that has, for the most part, been austere and spartan, void of iconography and idolatry. Indeed, the most successful brand of Protestantism in the US is Evangelicalism that is passionate, bombastic, and rapturous. The more subdued Mainline churches have either faded away into crusty irrelevance or sought rejuvenation with homo colors. Religions outlast ideologies because of the power of the irrational-inspirational. It's like people find more meaning in astrology than in astronomy. Furthermore, ideologies that hope to survive turn into ‘idologies’ because worship and rituals are more inspiring and exciting than logic-and-thought. After all, an ideology can be called into question or discredited IF new thinkers find fault in it. But if it is worshiped as an ‘idology’ with sacred icons and rituals — as with the cult of personality around Stalin or Mao — , then the masses will likely worship it like religious folks worship God.
That said, serious ideologies and religions have one disadvantage in the Age of Entertainment. Ideologies tend to have fixed ideas(or dogma) and idols/icons. In the end, communism got boring year after year because of the same rallies, same icons(Marx, Engels, Lenin), and same slogans. What had been an object of passion and commitment became the same-old-same-old. And religions now seem boring to modern people raised on the New Normal of fads and fashions. Because certain ideas, icons, and themes are sacred in religion, they can’t be toyed with like styles and wiles of fashion industry and entertainment. In our Attention-Deficit world, people are fashion-addicts who crave Something New all the time. Granted, most of what is New is just repackaged or recycled Old, but don’t tell that to a nation of amnesiacs. They are satisfied with the semblance of the New. Even though Pop Culture and Fashion are about short-lived trends and here-today-gone-tomorrow celebrity, that very transient nature is what makes them so resilient and powerful. They are less about attachment to one dominant idea, attitude, or style than about the continual search for something New. Change is the constant,and people find it exciting.
And this is one reason why Homomania has caught on with so many people. It glows and glitters with the iconic colors of the ‘rainbow’, and every ‘Pride’ parade, like the Mardi Gras or Brazilian samba festival, offers new fashions and styles of celebration and revelry. It is especially appealing to affluent white people because Homomania in the West is implicitly white. Even though affluent yuppie types denounce White Identity and embrace Diversity, they still prefer white neighborhoods to non-white ones(especially crime-ridden black ones), and they find the blatantly anti-white rhetoric of PC and Multi-Culturalism trying at times. Most time of the year, white progs are supposed to be in apologetic mode toward non-whites. But come Homo Season, they can celebrate 'Pride' that is overwhelmingly white in expression.
But then, around the world different peoples have varying reasons for embracing Homomania. Prior to the US legalizing ‘gay marriage’, European nations, Mexico, and Canada regarded Homomania as anti-American. The so-called ‘progressives’ in those nations saw the struggle as between revolutionary support for Homosexual Rights versus Evil Christo-Fascist America that oppresses innocent blacks and pure-as-snow Homos. Especially during the Bush II years, many peoples around the world defied the US by embracing the homo agenda against Evangelical Crusader Bush. They thought they were being anti-American. (Because the US is so ahead in science, technology, military power, and pop-cultural capital, other nations hope to best the US in something, and the cheapest & easiest way to appear 'more evolved' is by embracing whatever that's deemed to be the latest in progressive thought.) They were blind, often willfully, to the fact that the Real Rulers of the US are Jewish globalists who’ve been the main funders of Homomania around the world. (While homosexual culture and struggle for homosexual rights didn’t originate in the US or even with Jews, Homomania-as-a-neo-religion is essentially the baby of Jewish-American Globalists.) Amusingly enough, all those anti-American progs around the world who opposed and defied American Power by embracing Homomania were actually dupes and tools of the Real American Power held by Jews. Indeed, Bush II was also a tool of Jewish Globalists who cynically manipulated patriotism and Christian-Zionism to maneuver Bush into waging these Wars for Israel. As they say, Follow the Money. The money trail in the US and EU(and elsewhere) leads to Jewish control of both ‘conservatives’ and ‘liberals’. Whether one is ‘anti-liberal’ or ‘anti-conservative’ in the US, it all boils down to ‘We love Jews more’ and ‘We support Israel more’.

With 80% of sheeple Americans now supporting ‘gay marriage’ and shedding tears(or wetting their pants) over Holy Homo nonsense, surely Jews are confident that they’ve succeeded in replacing the much dreaded-and-reviled(among Jews) Christianity with the new faith of Homomania or Queertianity. After all, in the new US, you will never lose your job or get in trouble for mocking Jesus, Mary, or Disciples. (The most famous person named ‘madonna’ is a skanky pop star whose second act in a mostly sordid career was the worship of the black dong.) But if you say anything that is critical of homos & trannies and their chosen lifestyles, you are shrilly condemned for ‘homophobia’, ‘transphobia’, ‘hate’, ‘intolerance’, ‘exclusion’, ‘bigotry’, and hounded, fired, & blacklisted. (The only reason the stupid Negress Joy Reid survived despite her critical posts about homos in her past blog is because she is black, which makes her a holy person: The Holy Three are Jews, Homos, and Negroes.) Now, even many ‘conservatives’ are onboard in condemning anyone who has unkind words for stuff like homo fecal penetration or tranny penis-cutting. As Jews command the top of the food-chain in the US, there’s a trickle-down effect that shapes all of society. Just like Jews in pre-Emancipation Europe couldn’t enter into certain professions or careers as Jews and had to convert to Christianity to gain fuller access, there is little chance of anyone today making the socio-economic climb into spheres of privilege UNLESS he or she professes enthusiasm for Homomania. One must be ‘born-again’ into Homomania if not raised with Homomania from cradle. All politicians in big cities must show up at Homo ‘pride’ parades just like everyone-who-was-anyone had to take part in Communist parades in the Soviet Union. Jews find Homomania more useful than Zionism in gaining mastery over goyim. While AIPAC, ADL and other Zionist organizations do their best to pressure all members of American political and economic elites to support Israel, the problem is it sends a message to Americans and the World that Jews Control Everything and that All Politicians & Businessmen are Whores of Jews(if not Jewish themselves). Even though Jews relish their supremacist power, they are nervous about people noticing that Jews got Too Much Power. So, Jews use Homomania as a front and proxy for Jewish Power. As Jews are the main funders of Homomania(that also has powerful Jewish homos and trannies), Homo Power is essentially Jewish Power. It’s like Neoconservatism isn’t explicitly Jewish and has prominent non-Jews among its members, but it is essentially a Zionist-supremacist ideology. Now, if anti-Jewish forces were to take control of Homomania and use it to attack Jewish power and Zionism, Jews may have a change of heart. But Jews have created, shaped, and controlled Homomania from the beginning. It is so closely entwined with Jewish power that it is as crytpo-Jewish as Neconservatism and Tory Party of UK(that is sometimes called the Torah Party). There have been attempts by some people, including Jewish homos like Glenn Greenwald, to re-jigger Homomania as a weapon against Jewish power and Zionism. So, there are images of Palestinian Homos waving the homo flag in opposition to Israel tyranny. Or some in the BLM wave the homo flag and denounce Israeli policy as Apartheid. But those are anomalies than the norm. The fact is Homomania was, is, and will be a Jewish Baby. Also, if Christianity was the Baby of heretical Jews who were rejected by the Core Jewish Community, Homomania has been approved and embraced by the Core. Jews love it because Homomania tells the overwhelming majority of straight people to bow down at the altar of Homo Elite Minority Privilege. This dynamic complements the idea that the vast majority of non-Jews should revere and serve the Jewish Supremacist Minority Elites. In other words, Jews love Homomania because its Elite-Minoritarian outlook parallels Jewish minority-elite-supremacism. The fact that so many people haven’t yet figured this out goes to show what total morons and dummies most sheeple are.

At any rate, Jews are feeling so awesome and powerful because they managed to replace Christianity with Homomania. After all, the Jewish-globalist-supremacists Google ignore Easter every year but go all out to promote, celebrate, and ‘iconize’ Homomania. Again, this isn’t merely for ‘gay rights’ but for Gay Rites, an effort to elevate Homomania as the new-religion of the West and the World, which is why Jews even push the madness on Latin America, Asia, and Africa. In their ambition at least, Homomaniacs are like early Christians who weren’t merely asking for religious freedom and tolerance BUT eyeing to one day take over the Roman Empire, spread the faith to everyone, and smash all competing faiths and practices of paganism. Early Christians weren’t satisfied with something as humdrum as ‘Christian rights’ to be left alone to worship as they please. They were absolutely convinced that their Faith was the only true Faith, must prevail over the empire, and wage total war on all false idols and rituals. When Christians didn’t destroy or remove pagan temples or iconography, they took them over and remolded them to serve and represent Christianity. In the same way, Homomaniacs are now taking over Christian churches and reinterpreting the Faith to be about God and Jesus blessing holy homos. Likewise, when Muslim Turks took over Constantinople, they didn’t smash all Christian churches and symbols. They took over some of them and remade them into Mosques in honor of Allah and Muhammad.
Homos and trannies should never have been trusted in the realm of power because, by their innate nature, they are excessively vain, narcissistic, hissy, bitchy, sneering-and-sniveling, and whoopee-pee-poo. Indeed, homos must make an extra, indeed herculean, effort to boost their pride and confidence because what they do is so obviously foul and ewwww. I mean, what good thing can one say about homo fecal penetration, let alone stuff like ‘fisting’? That's some ‘gay’ shit. There is even less pride about a guy wanting to have his penis and balls removed to get a fake vagina. Because there is no natural pride to such behavior, homos and trannies must go all out and shoot themselves with artificial-pride-as-emotional-steroids to feel so good about themselves. Indeed, it takes some chutzpah or (poop)chutespah to claim the term ‘pride’ to be synonymous with homos having their asses rammed with penises or trannies having their puds or poons mutilated to get fake genitals. But then, this total weirdness may paradoxically be quasi-spiritually appealing to so many globalist proggy types. Though too educated and secular to literally believe in God and miracles, they nevertheless have some spiritual longing encoded in their DNA. They long for miracles in a world without miracles. So, when they see some man ‘magically’ transform into a 'woman' or vice versa, it's like a secular version of the modern-day miracle.

Jewish Globalist Supremacist may be celebrating their great victory, but things can easily turn against them. How is this possible, you may ask? After all, both the non-Jewish elites and the great majority of the masses are for ‘gay marriage’ and onboard with Homomania. Even Christian churches have bent over to take it up the ass with homo colors. All Democratic politicians worship Homomania, many Republican politicians endorse it, and even those who haven’t converted to the Homo faith dare not oppose it openly. Among politicians, it is well-known that Homomania is a Jewish proxy, and therefore, opposing Homomania means infuriating Jews. It’d be like a US politician favoring Palestinians over Zionist imperialists. Despite the Constitutional concept of Separation of Church and State, the fact is the current US is a deeply quasi-theological in its practice of power. The cult of MLK, the Shoah, and Homomania are essentially State Religions. They aren't matters of individual conscience or personal creed. They must be embraced and worshiped by anyone who wishes to make it in government or succeed in business, law, academia, or media. And their Narratives must be accepted at Face Value. They cannot be questioned or argued with. Did 6 million die in the Shoah and were Jews totally guiltless throughout history? You better believe it... or else you are a ‘Denier’ and ‘antisemitic Nazi’. Did white people have absolutely NO legitimate reason for discrimination against blacks even though blacks are naturally more muscular, tougher, and more aggressive? Yes, you better believe it or else you are ‘racist’ who has no place in America. And you better believe that MLK, the degenerate pervert thug, was not only a saint but a figure greater than God and Jesus. And you better believe that Homos are the new angels, miraculous creatures of joy and wonder. If you disagree, you are a ‘homophobe’. The mindless sacraments for these favored groups and the enforcement of taboos against free discussion concerning them suggests that there is a quasi-religious aura that surrounds them. Therefore, in order for the US to truly separate State from Church, we need to promote open discussion and argument about all historical, racial, demographic, and sexual issues. We must not take anything at Face Value for mindless reverence and worship.

Even though something deemed Sacred has greater power than something deemed secular, it is paradoxically more vulnerable for that very reason. At first glance, the Sacred appears shrouded with divinity and protected by taboos. In contrast, a secular item can be freely debated and called into question by skeptics and rationalists. A secular item is always vulnerable to new critiques and analysis. In contrast, the Sacred cannot be touched or questioned. Those who dare do so can be attacked and destroyed as ‘heretical’ or ‘blasphemous’, the PC versions of which are ‘racist’, ‘antisemitic’, or ‘homophobic’. But because the Sacred is so highly regarded, when it begins to lose its luster and iconic status, it fails and falls faster than any secular idea. A secular position can be weakened by reasoned argument but also supported by counter-argument. Thus, there can be a back-and-forth see-sawing between opposing sides. In contrast, once a Sacred Something has been dethroned, it loses its value immediately. It’s like once you know the trick behind the magic, you will never be wowed again. And once you realize that a certain preacher used deception to fool the flock with pseudo-miracles, he can never regain your trust. Or, suppose some guy claims to have magic powers in Martial Arts. Instead of having demonstrated his real ability in the secular arena of the ring, there is an aura around him akin to the Force around Yoda and other Jedi Knights. For those who’ve fallen under the so-called Master’s spell, he might seem invincible and awesome. But all it takes is one real fight to expose him as a fraud, and then his star falls totally and permanently. Sacred cows can become bullshit almost overnight.



Even though Jewish Globalist supremacists and Homomaniacs say they ‘won’ the ‘debate’ and the ‘culture war’, they did nothing of the kind. Jewish ethno-monopoly of the Media only promoted one side while defaming the Other wide as akin to the demented Westboro church. Also, instead of putting forth real ideas and reasoned debates, Jews used the power of icons like ‘rainbow’ homo colors, manipulative ads, and TV shows(and movies and music videos) that idolized homos and then even trannies as a specially blessed people. As Joe Biden said, the acceptance of ‘gay marriage’ had less to do with debate than Mass Media propaganda made possible by Jewish ethno-monopoly of the Media. Of course, Joe Biden blurted this out in total admiration and praise of Jews — he claimed "It was all for the good" — , but he did spill the beans on the extent of Jewish power in the West. Jews, with their ethno-monopoly of media and so much else, can fool masses of dummies and sheeple into believing anything. Of course, what Joe Biden doesn’t mention is the use of gangster-and-bullying tactics as well. Jewish strategy, like that of homos, has always been passive/aggressive. Jews pretend to be nice and pleading for their agenda, but it’s an offer you can’t refuse. If you say NO, Jews will set out to destroy you. So, you better support Israel 100% and you better worship Homomania because, if you don’t, the entire Judeo-Globo-Homo media complex will come after you, like what happened to Carrie Prejean when she said NO to ‘gay marriage’. GET WITH THE PROGRAM, GOY... OR ELSE!!

And Jewish control of finance will cut off funds and loans unless you bend over to Zionism and Homomania. And even non-Jewish and non-Homo companies will, either out of fear or true conviction(as Homomania is the most sacred neo-religion for many cucky-wuck stupid and shallow people), fire you if you defy Homomania. In summation, Jews and Homos didn’t win a clean honest debate to win the ‘culture war’ but cheated, used smoke-and-mirrors tactics, and threatened people with dire consequences if they were to resist. Imagine you’re a boxer preparing for a fight. But while the promoters make your opponent out to be cool and wonderful, you are made to be a lowlife thug scumbag. And then, you get a message that if you fight back against your opponent for real, you will be financially destroyed and your house will be burned down. And then, the referee allows your opponent to do anything, even low-blows and eye-gouging, while you are penalized for having done nothing wrong. You have no choice but to take a dive. THAT is how Homomania won in the arena of US culture & politics officiated by vile Jewish supremacist a**holes as corrupt promoters and referees. Likewise, Zionism never won a honest debate in the US. Anyone who looks at the facts would have to admit Palestinians got a raw deal, were terribly wronged, and continue to live under humiliation. But notice all US politicians support Israel. Even when Israel pummels Gaza and kills women and children, the entire Congress pledges to support Israel and stand with Israel. There is NOTHING about Palestinians and their plight. So, what Jews did to Palestinians and their supporters in the US, they did the same to sane, decent, and moral people who stood firm and said NO to Homomania. It's often been said that Jews won so much of the Culture War because of their superior verbal intelligence, but that's not the main reason. It had more to do with Jews controlling the media, rigging the perimeters of permissible discourse, using loaded terms like 'antisemitic' and 'homophobic', and underhandedly threatening financial ruin on their opponents. Edward Said had high verbal intelligence, but how often was he featured on the MSM? No matter how intelligently and factually you expose Zionist lies and terrorism, the Rigged Narrative and Terminology will brand you an 'anti-Semite' and ban you from 'respectable' and 'acceptable' discourse. Of course, Jews themselves can push any nonsense they wish, like the hysteria about Russia Hacking the 2016 election. Many in the Alt Right could easily defeat Neocons and their ilk in open debates, but they are shut out of media and college lecture tours because their views have been deemed by Jewish supremacist power as 'unacceptable' and 'toxic'. There are plenty of BDS people, some of them Jews, who could take on any Zionist in a debate, but they are virtually shut out of MSM and banned from certain colleges. Trying to be heard in an honest and open battle of ideas is now as difficult as it was for Jake Lamotta to secure a title shot in a sports so overwhelmingly dominated by Jewish gangsters and the mafia. The Jewish ducks(who duck honest fights and debates) will only allow cucks. American Discourses is mostly about Jewish ducks and goy cucks.


And yet, precisely because Jews and Homos won so unfairly, their sacred cows are so easy to call bullshit on. The Zionist Narrative on the Israel-Palestinian conflict is now unraveling so fast that Jewish Power has to push its whore-politicians to criminalize and shut down BDS. But doing so will only embolden more critics of Israel to come forth and say Enough Is Enough. Indeed, even many young Jews are calling BS on what is being done to Palestinians. Especially as the Internet is a great equalizer and has given Palestinians and their advocates a platform to get their messages across, the bogus Sacred Cow of Zionist-Hegemonism is eroding. Sure, Jews still have immense power and monopoly of so-called ‘mainstream media’ and internet platforms, but it’s difficult to play whack-a-mole with so many opposing voices. Youtube and Facebook, both Jewish-owned, work closely with Zionist organizations like ADL and SPLC(funded mainly by Jews) to deny voice to anti-Zionist voices, but there are Too Many now. And things are getting so bad in Gaza that the Sikh whore Nikki Haley(who sucks Zionist cock 24/7 and swallows) is finding it ever harder to bully or bribe other nations to kiss Israeli ass.

Precisely because false beliefs have no basis in fact or evidence, they have to be sanctified with fake holiness, protected by taboos, and promoted with mindless hysteria. As such, they may seem invincible for awhile, but they've been waxed with the sheen of invulnerability precisely because they are so vulnerable. Consider the sudden fall of Ceausescu in Romania. He was a total hack with no special talent or vision. He even had a speech impediment, especially problematic for a leader. So, he created a ridiculous cult of personality around himself and his wife. And for awhile, he seemed to ride high, and the masses seem to worship him. But once it became obvious that he was a phony, the cult around him rang hollow, and his fall was total and brutal. This is why the fatso in North Korea is afraid of real change. As his just a third-rate fat-boy, the only claim to power is the aura around his dynasty. Once that goes, people will laugh him as Boy Pig, and his fall can be swift and brutal. Even estimable leaders with genuine ability & talent — Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro, and etc. — needed to surround themselves with the cult of greatness to hold sway over the masses during trying times. Even so, when they began to believe in their own myths, they brought about disasters like WWII or the Great Leap Forward. And even Stalin, who weathered the storms, defeated Germany, and was admired around the world as a great statesman, soon became a near non-person in the very nation he'd built a few years after his death. By the late 1950s, Stalin was hardly featured in Soviet iconography centered around Marx and Lenin. Whatever Stalin’s achievements(some of which were great), the fact is the cult-of-personality around him went far beyond reality, decency, and proportionality. Therefore, his overblown iconic status had to be deflated and shelved in order for the Soviet Union to be a normal nation with real expectations.

Today, the Holy Three of the West are Jews-with-Shoah, Blacks-with-MLK-cult, and Homos-as-angels. Because of the quasi-religious aura and sanctimony around them, they seem invulnerable. But that very advantage is their fatal weakness. After all, spiritual aura, especially around secular entities, is not based on anything real or provable. While it’s true that Shoah happened, there is nothing in history or reality that says a people are forever-holy-and-innocent because of a horrible tragedy that befell them in a particular place and time. This is true of Jews and blacks. It is ridiculous to judge all their past existences and future destinies in relation to Shoah or Atlantic Slave Trade(or Jim Crow that was hardly one of the great injustices in world history). As for Homomania, it is a total joke, a pure fabrication by the utterly corrupt and degenerate Jew-run media.
At any rate, decent, sane and sober people must not approach the Holy Three as matters for secular debate but as false-religions that need to be exposed and false-idols that must be toppled. It is totally irrational and insane to assume that because Jews suffered Shoah, they were always pure & innocent and shall be wise & noble indefinitely no matter what they do. As for blacks, the fact is they were brutal savages for 100,000s of yrs before they were brought to the New World. And even though slavery had its ugly and dark side, the main reason for black problem is not history but biology, or BAMMAMA: Blacks are more muscular and more aggressive. We need to prick the bubble of Black Holiness that would have us believe blacks would have Wakandas all over the world if not for ‘evil racist honkey’. And MLK, though an important figure in an important social movement, was no saint but a punk, boor, and thug in reality. As for Homomania, it’s some bogus neo-Golden-Calf mass cult that fools us into thinking homosexuality is mainly about ‘rainbow’ colors than gross fecal penetration among men. It is putrid and demented, the product of mindless hype pushed by Jew-run media, entertainment, and finance. We need to approach the Holy Three like we approach Televangelists, false preachers, charlatans, cults(like Scientology), and other nonsense.

Even though I’ve never been religious and don’t believe in God or Satan, I would still say Homomania is satanic. Even if Satan doesn’t literally exist, certain things are so sick, demented, vile, and disgusting that they might as well be the work of the Devil if he existed. And even though I’m not a Christian, I’m deeply offended when Homo degenerates befoul a Christian church with homo colors or mock a Buddhist site with their putrid air of contempt. One doesn’t have to be a believer to acknowledge or admire the great visions and deep values those religions stand for. There is a reason why Christianity and Buddhism resonated so deeply with so many people for so long. And same can be said for Judaism and Islam(albeit to a lesser extent perhaps). It really takes a satanic mindset to associate those faiths with Worship of Holy Homo. Only a sick soul would drape a Christian church with colors associated with homo fecal penetration, bathhouse follies, or tranny penis-cutting. Only twisted ultra-narcissistic deviants could take Ass-selfies in front a monument to Buddha.

Never mind the Ugly American. In the Age of Homomania, we have the Butt-Fugly American. These homo degenerates' idea of appreciating culture and spirituality is to take Ass-selfies in front of Buddhist Temples. But what do you expect from homo tourists from a nation that now drapes churches with homo colors and practices Gay Rites as the highest expression of sanctimony?

Jews think they are winning with Homomania. They think they are digging for the ultimate gold to control the world with a neo-religion of their own making. But they could be digging their own grave because it will be a matter of time before people wake up to the fact that Homomania is really Satanic-Jewish-christianity or SJC. Once the scales begin to fall from the eyes of the people who realize that they’ve been duped, messed up, and mocked by vile, disgusting, and sinister Jewish globalist supremacists, they will begin to wake up fast and reject the false religion of Homomania. The fall of Homomania will be like the fate of Humpty-Dumpty or Ceausescu cult. It can never be put together again. When Jesus died on the Cross, it seemed like the end of Him and His movement. But what He’d stood for and preached was so deep, profound, and moving(even if impossible) that a great Narrative could be spun from it and proselytized as a great religion. And it is why Christianity has lasted for so long and even survived communism. But the foundation of Homomania is total nonsense and filth.
Now, the homo struggle in the form of ‘gay rights’ was legitimate to the extent that it’s a fact that some people are born homo, and it is not their fault for being what they are and in having deviant sexual preferences. So, it only seemed right not to treat homos as ‘mentally sick’ individuals to be banned from jobs and housing. But once homos and then even trannies were promoted as saints and angels whose lifestyles are akin to the miracle of the rainbow and deserving of mass ‘pride’ parades, society went the way of Sodom-and-Gomorrah. And then, when the meaning of marriage, the most important institution of humanity, was desecrated to appease homos and to conflate the homo fecal penetration & tranny penis-cutting with the real sexuality of men and women that produce the miracle of life, the West became a sick and evil civilization. And then, when people’s lives were ruined financially and/or professionally because they refused to comply with Homomaniacal decrees, like baking ‘gay wedding cakes’, the homos and their Jewish globalist supremacists revealed their true face of utter wickedness. And then, when homo colors were even pushed into churches, only the stupid and retarded can keep with the BS that homo agenda is a secular and rational program. If so, why are homos even targeting churches for takeover? No, the fact is Homomania is a satanic Jewish agenda to replace Christianity, a true and great religion, with a false religion of their own making. It’s like THE OMEN series where Satan produces a counter-messiah to take over the world. One doesn’t have to be religious to see the utter wickedness of Jewish Globalist Supremacists. Not all Jews are onboard with this craziness, but unfortunately, the majority of them are, just like, at one time, majority of Germans supported the psychopath Hitler.
Jews did this. They did it to humanity, civilization, morality, and spirituality. It is a great evil. Jews are dancing with joy in victory and triumph, but a false religion cannot last for long. It’s only a matter of time before it is outed and exposed. And we need to speak out and tell the world that Homomania = Satanic Jewish christianity, i.e. Jewish attempt to replace Christianity(or any other great religion or philosophy like Buddhism, Islam, Hinduism, or Confucianism) with a cynically concocted Global Cult of their making. Whenever we discuss Homomania, we must mention that it is not a secular movement but a neo-religion, and we must state loud-and-clear that it is the creation of Jewish radicals, Jewish globalists, and Jewish financiers. Make Jews own the filth they foisted upon the world. Tell the people of every nation that IF they cuck out to Homomania, they are effectively bending over to be fuc*ed in the ass by Jewish Globalist supremacism. No people who respect their own tradition, culture, heritage, and forefathers could do such a thing to their own nation. When pressured by Jews to embrace Homomania, people must stand firm, look straight in the eyes of Jewish supremacism, and say "I don't worship Homomania. I have my own religion or value system, and if I pay respect to anything, it is the line of my ancestors who bequeathed a rich and meaningful culture to me and my people."

We need to expose the true nature of the Homo Agenda, connect it to the Jewish globalist enablers, and then tell the whole world. Once peoples around the world come to realize that Homomania is the latest instrument of Zionist-American cultural imperialism and pseudo-spiritual crusade, the tide will turn.
And once all these idiotic Millennials realize that their lives, sensibilities, and morals have been compromised and degraded by kneeling before the altar of the Homo as the holiest icon and highest value in the world, they will crave real answers and real truth. And it is then that the Truth — Homomania = Satanic Jewish christianity — will hit them like a bolt of lightning, and they will reach for true meaning and justice.