Luke Ford disingenuously posits Alt-Right’s Obsession with JQ(Jewish Question) is grounded in Animus towards Jews Caring for their Own Kind — Ford has it Upside Down; the Real Problem is Jewish Power will not tolerate Goyim, especially Whites, caring for their own kind

Luke Ford’s comment is at 29:00 of the following Video:

https://youtu.be/6Z3ex73PA94?t=1741



Invoking John Mearsheimer’s THE GREAT DELUSION(that argues that humans are naturally tribal and, therefore, nationalism will overcome liberalism in any real conflict), Luke Ford reiterates a common theme of his. He agrees that humans are naturally tribal, and all groups think of themselves as ‘special’ or ‘superior’(at least in some ways). Before we address the main topic of JQ, are Mearsheimer and Ford correct about the indomitable power of tribalism? If tribalism is so strong and resilient, why did most cultures fade from history, essentially merging or surrendering to other cultures? Among all the cultures of the Ancient World, how many survived? Isn't Jewishness just about the only one?
Now, while tribalism is natural to all groups, the us-versus-them mechanism may not always play along tribal or national lines. Despite tribal feelings, other considerations may take precedence. For example, all people naturally want fun in their lives but may well delay gratification because they are also naturally rational & calculating and may choose to work for long-term interest than for fun-fun-fun in the moment. There are competing natures, and everyone undergoes inner-conflict because one part of his nature tells him to do ‘this’ while another part of ‘nature’ tells him to do that. It’s like humans are both naturally ‘capitalist’ and ‘socialist’. There is a part of us that wants gain for self-interest but also a part of us that wants to be belong to a community and share. Despite their ideological polarities, libertarianism and communism have one thing in common in assuming that human nature must be either totally individualist or totally socialist.
In the case of tribalism, yes, it is natural, but is it the most powerful force in the world? Or, will people readily betray tribalism for individual gain, material advantage, hedonism & excitement, worship of power, and/or self-righteous vanity? Consider the areas of sex. If tribalism is so powerful, why do so many black men go with white women over black women? Isn’t it because they find white women to be more attractive and thus more pleasurable? Likewise, isn’t jungle fever about white female desire for the Negro with bigger dong, more muscle, and stronger voice? Why have so many white people rejected their own musical heritage for rap, reggae, soul, and other black or black-inflected music? Isn’t it because they find more thrill and excitement in black stuff? Why do many Asian-American women go with white men than yellow men? Isn’t it because they find more pleasure in being with white men who are deemed more attractive? And if Asian-American men had higher market value, might not they also favor white women over yellow ones given the global tendency to idolize white beauty standards? And consider immigration. Isn’t it a form of betrayal? When people emigrate to another nation, especially for permanent resettlement, they are shifting not only their bodies but their loyalties to a new political, economic, cultural, and demographic entity. So many parents all over the world are willing to move to the US, Canada, and Australia, raise their kids with English(than their native tongues), and pledge loyalty to the Anglo-Zionist Empire. Why would this be IF tribalism is the most powerful force on the planet? Look at Japanese-Americans in the US. They are completely deracinated and racially mixed. Around the world, it’s not uncommon for the majority in certain nations to say that, given the choice, they would love to permanently move to another nation... which are usually the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and European nations. So, even if they do have a tribal bone in their body, their desire for more money, access to white people(as better managers or sex-mates), hunger for more land & property, and fascination with power(as US and the West still dominate the world) trump their sense of racial-national loyalty. Look how fast Syria and other Muslim nations emptied when Angela Merkel said EU would welcome them with open arms. All those millions ran to the West for ‘more stuff’ while forgetting all about their own people and culture. Tribalism may be natural and offer a kind of security of identity and territory, but it’s not very fun nor materially rewarding in and of itself. You can be the most patriotic person in your nation, but that sentiment alone won't earn you a dime. After all, at most times, we are looking for food, fun, and ‘more stuff’. We are not thinking about "what am I?", "who are my people?", or "what is my heritage"? We want the next good meal, the next fun movie, the next ‘cool’ thing to do. Tribalism has long-term value but offers little of use, utilitarian or hedonistic, in the moment. Tribalism is very effective as a collective force — Jews working together for Zionism or Turks uniting for Turkish pride — but means little to the individual caught up in his daily life of work/struggle(mainly for material gain) and fun/leisure(for relief from weariness of life). Also, tribalism may be weaker, at least when food is plenty, than the feeling that comes from feeling righteous. (Tribalism is most potent when people don't have much to share in terms of food, land, and resources with the Other. It is then that they instinctively come together as a community to defend 'what is ours' against THEM.)

Now, in the LONG RUN, tribalism may be more resilient than righteousness(of ideology, hysteria, or fashion) because tribalism is merely about BEING whereas righteousness is about BEING-RIGHT. Because righteousness is a stronger and more aggressive emotion than tribalism(that tends to be wary and defensive), it can override tribalism in the short-term of history, but precisely because hot passions tend to burn out, tribalism often makes a comeback after the ideological fire has gone out. (The Ideal regresses to the Real. But then, the Regression to the Real doesn't necessarily mean upsurge of tribalism that, like Idealism, requires some degree of investment toward unity and commitment. Above all, the Real favors material interest for the individual, which is why 'liberal democratic capitalism' has caught on like fire as the most effective means to either enrich oneself or to gain proximity to those with wealth.) This was the case with the so-called Russian Revolution(that just as easily could have been called the Anti-Russian Revolution). Many of the revolutionaries were not only non-Russian but anti-Russian(especially true among Jews, Latvians, Poles, and etc.) and regarded the radical transformation as a means to destroy and curb Russian Imperial power, from whose ashes a new order would arise based on impassioned commitment to ‘social justice’. Also, great many Russians joined the revolution because they figured the Bolshevik promises of Land, Bread, and Peace were more important than nationalism and loyalty to the Tsar(and then to the patriotic Provisional Government). Also, many were spellbound by communist propaganda. Thus, material interests and righteous fervor overrode tribalism and nationalism. But in the end, the revolutionary fire burned out, and while there is no more communism, Russia still remains. One may say Russian Tribalism won out in the long run, but consider the costs in the radical interim: Millions(if not tens of millions) of destroyed lives, rise of police state, mass terror on an unprecedented scale, the brainwashing of generations of youths, ideological dogmatism, and one-party totalitarianism. It’s like, even if the forest will naturally regrow again, we cannot underestimate the destruction brought upon by forest fires. The Maoist ideological madness eventually subsided and blew over in China, but consider all the damage it did to the people, economy, and culture in its rampage phase.
It may well be that the current White PC-SJW madness will blow over, but it's been doing considerable harm for nearly two decades. Worse, the harm may be permanent because of massive demographic changes. If the demography remains constant, no amount of lunacy can permanently forestall the return of tribalism or nationalism. Maoism killed a lot of Chinese, but China remained the land of the Chinese, and a kind of nationalism resurfaced. Likewise, despite the tremendous human costs of Stalinism, not to mention all the deaths from the Nazi-German invasion of World War II, the fact is Russia-Proper of the Soviet Empire remained majority-Russian, thus facilitating the re-emergence of Russian nationalism after the fall of communism and the lost years of Boris Yeltsin when Jewish globalist oligarchs ran just about everything.
In contrast, something is happening in the West along with the crazy ideological fashions that may PERMANENTLY cripple and destroy traditional American nationalism based on European Heritage. Or consider Canada. If it remains mostly a white nation as it passes through ridiculous ideological fashions(such as globo-homo madness), one can be pretty sure that there will be a return of the national-conservative equilibrium. But Canada is reveling in ideological idiocy at a time of massive demographic change. Indeed, the main goal of that ideological idiocy is to fundamentally alter the racial demographics of Canada. That being so, if and when white Canadians FINALLY realize their ideology was stupid, the damage they’ve done will be irreversible. Demographic Imperialism is different from communism. As problematic as communism has been, it did not aim to demographically change the Core Population. Whatever gripes Poles may have had against communism, it kept Poland Polish. So when communism was finally swept into the dustbin of history, Poland remained Poland. In contrast, the new mad ideology of the West, that of Diversity-Worship and Immigration-Invasion, won't merely fill up minds with stupid ideas or turn back the economy. Its aim is to permanently replace the core populations of white nations(of Europe) or white-founded-and-made nations(of the Americas and Australia) with masses of non-white globalist leeches and parasites. And for this reason, Diversinoma(Diversity as Cancer) is many times more dangerous than communism. As Diversinoma is pushed most heavily by Jewish globalist-Zionist capitalists, we need to consider the true character of Jewishness, Zionism, globalism, and capitalism.

One thing for sure, it seems the reason why so many white people have chosen to turn against their own kind is due to (1) feely-good righteous passion (2) addiction to pleasure. As they were raised by PC in schools and via Jewish-controlled TV & Mass-Media, so many white people(and this includes majority of ‘conservatives’ as well) have been made to idolize the Magic Negro, place Shoah at the center of history, bellyache over ‘white guilt’(as the highest redemptive expression open to whites), and chant mantras about Diversity(when they are not bending over backward[and forward] to Globo-Homo). But other than virtue-high that comes with self-righteous PC, there is the white addiction to black music, black-dominated sports, and black sex(either as jungle fever among white women or cuck-behavior among white men) that have turned so many whites into sensual-slaves to the ‘cool’ and ‘badass’ Masterful Negro. Considering that even many white ‘conservatives’ go out of their way to show that they really really love blacks and that ‘Democrats are the real racists(and Anti-Semites)’, it goes to prove that tribalism can be overridden by other passions that are more in-and-of-the-moment. Most people are more about Will-to-Cower than Will-to-Power. They gladly fall into awed rapture of what is deemed Most Powerful. Just like so many people are willing to ditch their own nations, peoples, and cultures and come to the US and be part of the Lone Superpower, so many whites are eager to worship the Negro as the superior race of sports, music, and sex(and of course, the reason why homos have become such an object of fashion-passion is because they are associated with creativity, privilege, and power; it's all about hierarchy, not equality).

Anyway, returning to the main issue at hand, it appears Luke Ford is consciously or subconsciously not facing up to the truth about Jewish Identity and Tribalism. JQ or Jewish Question is NOT upset over the fact that Jews care about their own kind, their own history, culture, identity, and etc. If anything, non-Jews have long admired(and even envied) Jews for their longevity and tenacity to survive against all odds. The Real Problem is that of POWER, INTENSITY, and HYPOCRISY, especially in the context of America, the sole superpower that more-or-less dominates the world.

First, let's consider the issue of Power. While it may be true that various groups in America care about their own kind, obviously the level of power will determine the implications and consequences of such ethno-centrism. For example, let’s suppose Fat Hawaiians and Jews are equally ethno-centric. The thing is Fat Hawaiians have NO power, whereas Jews have tremendous power, especially with their near-monopolistic control over media, academia, finance, and etc. This monopoly control can be direct or indirect. Not only do Jews own many top law firms, high-tech firms, Wall Street firms, and the like but they use organizations like ADL, SPLC, and AIPAC to pressure even non-Jewish owned firms to comply with Jewish supremacist demands. Amazon.com isn’t Jewish-owned but chose to bow under pressure from the Jewish Lobby. Because Jews elevated Shoah or Holocaust to the status of New Religion, they have god-like powers to issue decrees that must be obeyed by rich and powerful non-Jews... lest they be accused of ‘antisemitism’ associated with, of course, Nazism. And so, Amazon no longer sells THE CULTURE OF CRITIQUE by Kevin MacDonald even though it is a very important book. Also, as Jews have come to dominate elite schools and control mass media, many goyim have been effectively brainwashed since grammar school to toe the Jewish line on just about anything; they’ve been led to believe that anything disapproved by Jews must be ‘hateful’. If Jewish power were limited to a small or weak nation, it wouldn’t matter. It'd be a Jewish thing among Jewish people. But as Jewish Power is the most powerful power in the US as the most powerful country on Earth, it makes little sense to say that Jews are no different in their ethnocentrism from other groups. After all, Eskimos can decide to be 100x more ethnocentric than the Jews, but it won’t make any difference to the rest of us because they have NO power in any of the institutions and industries that profoundly impact our lives. It’s like, even if every boy were a natural bully, the big kid’s bullying nature will matter helluva lot more than the small kid’s. While both big bully and little bully may want to bully, the big bully is going to get a lot more leverage out of bullying than the little weakling.

Secondly, there is the matter of INTENSITY, especially in the context of assimilationist America. Given that America’s emphasis, at least since the great era of Mass Immigration in the early 1920s, has been the Melting Pot, the fact is most Americans of all groups have grown markedly less ‘identitarian’ or tribal in their outlook. Most German-Americans don’t speak German and don’t care anything about Germany. They are just ‘Americans’. Same could be said for most Italian-Americans who hardly care about the mother country. Irish-Americans used to care about Old Ireland, but both Irish-Americans and Irish in Ireland have become a bunch of deracinated cucks and jungle-feverites(not least because they’ve come under the influence of Globo-Homo-Afro culture pushed by the Jewish media and globalist power). Asian-Americans assimilate rapidly into American culture. Japanese-Americans hardly exist as an identity or tribal group. Majority of Japanese-American women married white men, and Japanese-American men keep their heads low. The most famous Japanese-American thinker, Francis Fukuyama, is a tool of the Neocons and a fervent pusher of globalism, even going so far as to urge mass immigration-invasion on Japan.
Anglo-Americans, for the most part find, ‘racism’(especially among their own kind) to be the gravest of sins and spend more time pissing on the graves of their ancestors than sticking up for their own kind. Your average Anglo, even in the GOP, is more likely to be ‘triggered’ by "It’s Okay to be White" than express pride in identity and race.
Then, it’s simply not true that every group in America equally thinks itself ‘special’ or ‘superior’. By and large, most East Asians and groups from Latin America are without identity or pride. Japanese, Koreans, and Vietnamese in America are just becoming part of America, for good or ill. As for Latin Americans, there is a huge divergence between Latin whites and ‘Latin’ browns, though the line between white and brown is murky among those people. Also, there is hardly any commonality among Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, Cubans, Guatemalans, and etc. The ONLY issues that bind all ‘Latinos’ together is the desire for More Immigration(so that more of their kind can come to leech off gringo or yanqui, not least because their own nations are so corrupt and backward) AND acting all butt-hurt as the losers in the Anglo-Hispanic struggle for hegemony in the Americas. Anglos obviously won(before they lost to Jews as the New Elites of the World Empire) and have Pride of Victory, and so, ‘Latinos’ have clung to Nobility of Victim-hood as compensation and 'moral' weapon. (It’s also a handy way by which Latin Whites can divert the rage/resentment of browns[who are NOT ‘Latin’ in race or origin] toward ‘Yanquis’ or ‘Gringos’ away from themselves despite the fact that Latin America is the creation of ‘Latin’ Spanish and Portuguese Imperialists.) Even Muslim 'identity' is far from clear in the US as it is not race-based. A Muslim can be Arab, Asian, African, white, or whatever. So, despite occasional outbursts of radical Muslim violence, there is hardly a united Muslim community in the US. Pakistani Muslims have little in common with Muslims from Palestine or Somalia. Indeed, Palestinian Muslims are more likely to feel closer to Arab Christians, just like Pakistani Muslims are more likely to get along with Hindu Americans(despite the dire Indo-Pakistan tensions that exist to this day).

So, the intensity of Jewish identity and tribalism in the US is something of an exception than the rule. The ONLY groups with identities as powerful are the blacks and the Hindus, but blacks don’t control the elite institutions and industries(and if anything, must depend on Jewish money, which is why most black elites are shuffling ho-de-doing Cuckamungas of the Jews), and Hindus, despite their success and riches, are nowhere near Jews in power and influence. On Luke Ford’s very own show, the Jewish guests Kyle Rowland and Halsey English are very ethnocentric and identity-conscious, whereas ‘Monsieur’ the ‘Chinaman’ is a deracinated yellow dog who sucks up to whites and routinely badmouths his own kind. One may argue that ‘right-wing’ Jews are more tribal than ‘left-wing’ Jews, but in the world of power-politics and power-economics, we see no real difference between Jewish Democrats and Jewish Republicans on the issue of Jewish identity, Jewish power, Zionism, and Israel. How is Chuck Schumer any different from ‘right-wing’ Jews like Bret Stephens and William Kristol when it comes to Jewish pride and Zionism?

Thirdly and possibly most important is the matter of Jewish HYPOCRISY when it comes to identity and pride. Contrary to Ford’s contention that the ‘14/88' and Alt-Right communities simply cannot stand the sight of Jews caring for other Jews, the real problem is Jews cannot abide by goyim, especially whites and Palestinians, caring about their own kinds. If Jews were fair-minded about this and said, "Okay, we Jews will prioritize Jewishness while you various goyim prioritize your own ethnicity and heritage", there would be no need for JQ. That way, Jews could push for Jewish interests, Palestinian-Americans could push for their own interests, and white Americans could focus on issues and agendas that matter most to themselves. Then, the US would be a multi-identitarian nation, with each group pursuing its own particular interests. Of course, all groups would have to abide by certain shared standards and principles. For example, all groups should have equal protection under the law, same rights of free speech & free assembly, and same access to institutions of power on the basis of ability and meritocracy.
But, is this how Jews play the game? Jews have ADL to raise concerns about anti-Jewish expressions, but would Jews tolerate a white organization that focuses attention on all the anti-white filth that comes especially from blacks, Jews, and POC(brainwashed by Jewish media and academia)? How would Jews react to a white version of AIPAC that calls on US politicians to support white security, white pride, and white survival in Europe? Jews would scream ‘Nazi’. So, Jews organize to pressure and purchase US politicians to support the state of Israel and sing hosannas to Jews, Jews, Jews, but Jews will do everything to suppress even the slightest sign of white identity and consciousness, such as "It’s Okay to be White." Then, it should be obvious that Jews are not for multi-identitarianism or poly-identitarianism. They are for MONO-Identitarianism whereby Jews and ONLY Jews get to defend, promote, and celebrate their identity, culture, history, and future.
But it’s even worse than that. Even as Jews demand that white people suppress their own identity(or identities based on ethnic pride) on account that identity-politics is ‘racist’, they also demand that whites do everything in their means to praise Jewishness and support Israel, a nation defined by Zionism that has gone from nationalist to imperialist mode. And even as Jews insist that they, as proud Jews, have every right UNDER CONSTITUTIONAL LAW to push for Jewish and Zionist interests, they deny that very same right to Palestinian-Americans who aren't allowed to use the full force of BDS to organize a movement calling for a worldwide boycott against the Occupation of West Bank and massacres in Gaza by IDF death squads. So, according to the twisted logic of Jews, it is American-as-apple-pie for Jews to enjoy rights to defend and bolster their own ethnic-tribal interests, BUT the same rights must be denied to the Palestinian-American community. So, Jews in America(in coordination with World Jewry) can organize all they want and raise tons of funds to pressure American politicians to sanction and destroy the economies of nations(such as Iran, Syria, and Russia) hated by Jews and/or Israel, BUT Palestinians are blocked from voicing views and taking actions to raise awareness of the Zionist imperialist Occupation of West Bank, the last substantial remaining Palestinian territory.
What does Luke Ford have to say about this? It should be obvious to any fair-minded observer that the problem is not Jews having Jewish-consciousness or using Jewish power to serve Jewish goals; the REAL problem is Jews have immense power and use every trick in the book, legal and extra-legal, to ensure that their own tribal interest overrides all other tribal interests(indeed, even in the hearts and souls of goyim).

Furthermore, Jewish tribalism isn't merely national but imperialist and hegemonic. It's not just about Jews caring about Jewish matters but Jews using their wealth and influence to make non-Jews support Jewish causes and interests above those of their own and other goyim. For instance, I'm sure Greek-Americans have certain interests as they relate to their mother country. So, they get together, raise funds, and do whatever they can within their own community to serve their ethnic interests. It's a Greek-American and Greek thing that do not affect the rest of us. We don't see US politicians going before a Greek version of AIPAC and pledging total obedience to Greece or spouting specious sentiments like 'Greece is our closest ally'. The difference between Greek-Americans and Jewish-Americans is that Greeks keep their ethnic issues to themselves. It's Greek stuff for Greeks. In contrast, Jews not only serve their own interests but buy off, blackmail, or otherwise pressure goy politicians, clergy, and celebrities to support Israel uber alles and praise Juden uber alles. Jews don't just take care of their own Jewish business but make it the business of non-Jews who are routinely pressured(to the point of coercion by threats and blackmail) to suck up to Jews. Most groups think in terms of "You prioritize your people, and we'll prioritize our people", whereas Jews think in terms, "We'll prioritize our people, and YOU prioritize our people."
There have been several articles of how AIPAC works as essentially a strong-arm thug scheme of Jewish Power. It goes to politicians and makes an offer they can't refuse: Sign a unconditional pledge of support for Israel or else lose the next election where massive Jewish money will go to the opponent who will also get favored coverage from the mass media that are monopolized by uber-Zionist oligarchs.

So, let's cut out the bull. Luke Ford is a smart guy, and he knows what is going on. For him to say that the JQ(or Jewish Question) is about griping over Jews caring for their own kind is totally bogus. The real problem is Jews feel free to pursue their own interests but deny that right and opportunity to others, especially Palestinians whose BDS movement has been UNCONSTITUTIONALLY blocked by government, both federal, state, and municipal. And notice the near-total silence about this injustice from both 'liberals' and 'conservatives' alike. Also, Jews are now in supremacist mode and are no longer merely content with tribal security/survival. They crave hegemony over all the world, and Jews know they can create and maintain such a system ONLY IF whites shelve their own identity and interests in favor of serving Jews as the Master Race. Just like British Imperialism promoted British national identity & pride but suppressed such consciousness among their subject peoples, such as Asian-Indians, the current Jewish World Power does the same to goy subjects. British Imperialists understood that the rise of Asian-Indian nationalism would inspire Hindus to ask, "Why should we serve 'Queen and Country' when we, as Indians, should be focusing on our own identity, our history, our pride, and our land?" So, the British suppressed Indian nationalism that took decades to gain independence. Likewise, Jews know they don't have the numbers to rule the world on their own. They need the support, indeed obedience, of white goyim as horse-dog-cattle, and that is why Jews forbid whites from having white identity(that is defamed by the Jew-run media and deep state as 'white supremacism') because once whites think and act like Jews — putting their own racial, tribal, or ethnic interests first — , they will no longer prioritize "Is it good for Jews?" and may even regard Jewish tribal demands to be harmful and deleterious to the white race. Just like British Imperialists feared Indian National Liberation from the Empire, Jews fear White National Liberation from Jewish globo-homo Imperial hegemony. That is why Jews, who are the real supremacists in today's world, hypocritically defame others as 'supremacist'. As far as Jewish globo-homo imperialists are concerned, whites-going-their own-way(WGTOW) is threatening because, without white cuck managers, builders, and soldiers, the Jew World Order or the Empire of Judea will crumble. Indeed, could all those Wars for Israel in Iraq, Libya, and Syria have been possible IF whites thought of their own interests first? Would white Americans support the Jewish Cold War on Iran and Russia IF they really thought honestly about their own interests? Of course not. Jews have gotten their way because they suppressed white identity & consciousness and made white hearts & minds subservient to Jews as the god-race that knows best and must be obeyed at every turn.

Identity-over-Ideology(esp if masked with pseudo-universalist-values) beats Ideology-over-Identity — Why did Jewish Ashkenazim prevail over Anglo-Episcopalians despite Comparable IQ? — Why Jews beat Whites on the Issue of South Africa

One of the biggest truths of modern history is that those who favor ideology-over-identity will lose to those who favor identity-over-ideology. Those who choose blood over ink will prevail over those who choose ink over blood. Now, everyone has some identity and some ideology. The question is a matter of which goes on top. Among whites, it used to be identity first, ideology second. Now, it is ideology first, identity second. Or it's idolatry first, ideology second, and identity last? Idolatry of worshiping the Holy Three of Jews, Homos, and Negroes. The ideology of DIOS or 'diversity is our strength' and 'white guilt'. And last and also the least, white identity. In contrast, Jews and blacks put identity before ideology. Also, they celebrate the idolatry of worshiping themselves over the Other. Jews elevate and disseminate the image of Jews as Holy Holocaust People and Happy Humor People. Negroes elevate and lionize themselves as the superior badass people who win in sports, pop music, fighting, and sex. Blood is stronger than ink, seed is stronger than creed.

Indeed, we can see the results of identity-over-ideology vs ideology-over-identity in recent US history(as well as in South Africa or any other part of the world). Two highly intelligent and talented groups have been Ashkenazi Jews and Anglo-Episcopalians. Studies show that both groups have equal intelligence, generally one standard deviation above the American average. Some estimates even suggest Anglo-Episcopalians may have slightly higher IQ than the Ashkenazi Jews. So, given parity in intelligence and talent, the two groups should have been neck-and-neck. Or the Anglo-Episcopalians should have had the advantage since they are Christian and share race and religion with the white majority population, among whom Anglo or Northern European stock has been prominent. But since the end of World War II, Jews kept gaining while Anglo-Episcopalians kept losing ground. Now, one reason could be personality. Maybe Jews have more a dogged, aggressive, and insistent personalities, the chutzpah thing. Or, maybe Jews were more adept at navigating through modernity due to greater(and more shameless) familiarity with strangeness, and indeed, the 20th century was a very strange era with so many upheavals and transformations. Due to their long history as a nomadic people who developed Zelig-ish and Houdini-like means to adapt to different nations and cultures, all the while maintaining a strong and resilient sense of tribal continuity and identity, Jews were perhaps more 'creative' in the way they played the game of modernity. After all, if there are two boxers of equal speed and ability but one is rather stiff while other is fluid, the latter will have the advantage. Shamelessness was part of the fluidity that allowed Jews to take control of vice industries that, though disreputable(at least initially), made Jews a lot of money in stuff like gambling and pornography. Also, this strange fluidity served Jewish Identity well because hostile identity had to be camouflaged with hopeful ideology. Jews couldn't have won over goyim if they'd insisted on their identity alone. Imagine if Jews said, "We are so proud to be Jewish and want you goyim to do the bidding of us Jews." Even the biggest Philo-Semites would have been offended by such presumption and arrogance. So, Jews cleverly sought power by spouting ideological talking points about 'justice', 'equality', 'progress', 'universal values', 'human rights', 'proposition nation', 'fighting hate', 'diversity', 'tolerance', and etc. By pushing such ideological themes, Jews created the impression that human progress depends on peoples all over the world suppressing their particular identities to welcome the one-and-only universal ideology. After all, identity is rooted and tangible whereas ideology is rootless and abstract. You can't immediately transform someone to another national identity(nor would you want to, that is if you want to maintain the integrity of identity), but you can quickly convert anyone to your beliefs and values.
Now, if Jewish Power led the charge with identity, goyim would have countered with their own identities. If Jews say, "We are Jewish, we are proud, and we work for Jewish power!", then goyim such as Poles would have countered with "We are Polish, we are Catholic, we are proud, and we work for Polish power!" Therefore, Jews decided to charge with ideology than identity. Jews said, "We are for justice and progress based on 'western values' and universal human rights, and if you oppose us, you're a bunch of 'racists', 'supremacists', 'xenophobes', and probably 'anti-Semites' too." This had a disarming effect on the goyim. After all, if Jews claim such noble neo-Christo-visions of bringing all of humanity under one umbrella of justice, tolerance, and understanding, why should any people say NO?
In truth, however, Jews weren't charging with ideology to serve ideology above all else. They were charging with ideology to smash goy identity so that Jewish identity could squeeze through the barriers and score the touchdown to win the game. In football, the offensive linemen do not smash into defensive linemen to score touchdowns. The offensive linemen rarely get to handle the ball. Their only role is to defend the quarterback and/or open up holes for the running back to slip through. And this is the game that Jews have been playing. They used the force of ideology as offensive linemen so that the ball of Jewish identity handled by the quarterback/runningback would slip through and score the touchdown. So, in the end, the elite competition in the US after WWII was not about Jewish commitment to ideology vs Anglo-Episcopalian commitment to ideology. It was Jewish commitment to ideology masked with ideology vs Anglo-Episcopalian commitment to ideology over identity. Well, guess who won that game? Increasingly, Anglo-elites lost their sense of identity. They even came to regard it as evil and wicked. This spread not only among Anglo-elites in the US but spread to the UK where the elites now celebrate the fact that UK will be overrun with Africans and Muslims. (To be sure, white elites seek to preserve their own status and privilege, so they don't really practice the ideology they preach. But unlike Jews, they are not using ideology as cover for identity. Rather, they use ideology to have immunity. Sticking with PC talking points buys them some protection from criticism.) Anglo-elites have chosen ideology(and immunity) over identity... without realizing that Jews pushed the toxic ideology that is now poisoning the West in order to favor Jewish identity above all else. Jews didn't push ideology over all identities. They pushed ideology only against goy identities to make space for Jewish identity(that got passover rights). So, while Anglo-American elites in US and Anglo-British elites in UK have been pissing away their land, legacy, and lineage, Jewish elites the world over have been doing everything to reinforce and strengthen Israel as a Jewish State and to turn Holocaustianity as the reigning neo-religion all around the world.


Now, who knows how the world might turn out IF all groups sincerely and conscientiously committed themselves to ideology over identity. Whatever the result may be, at the very least one could say all groups acted in good faith. But reality is never one where all sides behave with utmost honesty and highest principles. After all, why does every nation have an intelligence agency that specializes in spying, stealing secrets, planting disinformation, subverting other nations though covert means, and etc? So much for mutual trust and fair play. Or look how corporations operate. Why do they get sued? Why do they have to pay fines? Because they are often caught cheating or doing stuff to gain an edge. It's always been like that and always will be. If anything, most big corporations seek monopoly power so that they won't have to deal with competition. It's the nature of power. Then, it's the same with tribes, peoples, and nations. The idea that all peoples will be equally committed to ideology-over-identity is a pipe-dream. Furthermore, even if MOST peoples do somehow manage to favor ideology-over-identity, it only takes ONE violator to mess up everything. Suppose there are 100 people, and 99 of them act fair and honest while ONE guy exploits the 'naivete' of others to steal the entire loot for himself. Just like one bad apple can spread its mold and mess up the whole barrel, one transgressor can mess up everything. This is why libertarianism never works. It assumes that all of humanity could be persuaded to behave as principled individuals who are sincerely committed to liberty and personal responsibility, but that is fairyland. Consider how all those guys on Wall Street were preaching about 'free markets' and against government regulation, but the minute their fortunes were threatened by the crash of 2008, they were the first to run to government for bailouts and protection. And notice how they used their muscle to ensure that none of them would go to jail. Talk about professional(and tribal) courtesy. Indeed, the reason why the US is so corrupt is because it came under the domination of Jews who rose in power by pushing ideology only to favor their own identity above all else. Indeed, Jews favor Jewish identity not only above goy identities but above the ideology that they pretend to espouse. What applies to other groups doesn't apply to Jews. So, the US must sanction Iran, Russia, Syria, and any nation hated by Jews, but if any conscientious people want to sanction Israel for its Occupation of West Bank and brutality in Gaza, the hell with free speech, freedom of conscience, and universal justice: Criminalize BDS. Its Juden Uber Alles. Current Israel is more further right(often in dark ways) than any European nation, but notice the Jewish-dominated media never call it 'far right' while the label is used so often to denigrate even moderate nationalist movements in Europe. So, even the slightest sign of white/European identity or Christian consciousness(the real kind as opposed to globo-homo-infected cucktianity) is 'far right'(implying connection to Nazism) while even the most hardline Zionist extremism and supremacism is merely described as 'right-wing'.
The main reason why Jews get so triggered about white goyim in EU, US, Russia, and etc. expressing the slightest concern for whites in South Africa is because such sentiments suggest at the stirrings of white identity, i.e., whites coming to realize that they must choose identity-over-ideology for the survival and well-being of their race. Jews want identity-over-ideology only for themselves. Indeed, Jewish-dominated media even try to suppress it among black Africans. While the globohomo media have no problem with Jews doing everything possible to keep Israel predominantly Jewish, they have lambasted black South Africans for trying to stem the tide of migration-invasion from neighboring African nations like Zimbabwe(with economy worse than South Africa's due to total black rule or misrule). Jews fear that if whites favor identity-over-ideology, whites will come to favor their own identity over any other. And that means whites will put their own racial pride and racial interests above those of Jews. If that happens, Jewish Supremacism and globohomo hegemony could well end sooner than later. The utter hypocrisy of Jews is most evident in their reaction to white favoring of Jewish identity over goyim, white or otherwise. If Jews are indeed disdainful of identity(as tribal , dangerous, and obsolete), why are they so happy to see so many white people pledging their support to Jews and Israel? Isn't Jewishness an identity and isn't Israel an identitarian-state? For whites to favor Jews means favoring one identity over another. e.g. Zionists over Palestinians. If the politics of identity is so toxic and if Jews insist that whites must forsake their own racial identity, why do they also insist that whites must extol Jewish/Zionist identity and do everything in the world to serve and defend it? Why should whites favor Jews over Palestinians? Why should whites favor Israel over Syria or Iran? Why should whites favor economic sanctions on any people, nation, or group hated by Jews -- consider the sanctions on Russia, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, Palestinians, Christians who won't bend over to Homomania, white identitarians like Jared Taylor who are denied Twitter and Paypal, and etc. -- while showering Israel with billions in 'aid' every year? Why should whites get all worked up over non-existent nukes in Iran while overlooking the nukes in Israel built with uranium stolen from the US? But then, Jewish logic would have us believe that actual Jewish communist spies and subversives in the 40s and 50s were innocent victims of the McCarthyite 'witchhunt' whereas Trump and his associates are guilty of 'Russia Collusion' even though there isn't a shred of evidence and the 'evidence', as such exists, was fabricate by goons hired by the Hillary Campaign and the Deep State. Jews often deflect criticism by invoking the concept of Protected Groups. Because Jews have defined themselves as the Holy Holocaust people, they insist on Protected Status. Perversely, such protection has led to Jews becoming the New Nazis or Judeo-Nazis. It's one thing to offer special protection to weak and helpless groups. After all, it makes sense to offer protection to few remaining tigers in their natural habitat. But if tigers were plentiful and prowling the streets to devour people, should they be protected? Maybe it made sense to offer protection to the badly wounded Jewish tiger after WWII, but today, the Jewish Tiger is the apex predator, and protected status for such power is dangerous for all of humanity. Just ask the Palestinians, Russians, Syrians, Iranians, white Christians, Libyans, white Europeans, Arabs, Muslims, etc. Or, consider the twisted logic when it comes to Jews and Muslims. Jews say Muslims need to be protected in the West due to 'Islamophobia', but it was Jewish Hollywood that made all those movies that portrayed Arabs and Muslims as subhuman scum terrorists. Furthermore, the biggest tragedies that befell the Muslim World since the End of the Cold War have been due to Wars for Israel steered by Jewish Neocons and Neolibs. So, Jewish Power has done tremendous harm to Arabs and Muslims. And yet, Jewish idea of Protected Status for Muslims and Arabs has NOTHING to do with what Jewish Power is doing to those people. Rather, it's about protecting Muslims from Donald Trump and his supporters who, if anything, are more likely to oppose further Wars for Israel and want to bring US troops from the Middle East. The concept of Protected Groups has rendered justice meaningless when it comes to Jewish-and-Arab relations. If, as Jews insist, Jews and Arabs/Muslims both deserve special protection, what are we to do when Arabs/Muslims need protection from Jewish Power? After all, isn't BDS a movement that calls for special protection for the much beleaguered Palestinians from Zionist-imperialist-supremacism? But, because Jews are also protected or more-protected-than-others, Jewish greed takes precedence over Palestinian needs. The end result is the Protected Supremacism of the Jews who, posing as Eternal Holy Holocaust People, get to justify all their nasty deeds by pretending to be a 'victim group' in this day and age. Imagine Nazi Germany invading Poland and then trying to silence all international opposition by claiming Protected Status for Germany. Nazi Germany and Judeo-Nazis both demonstrate how the Cult of Victimhood can blind so many to their victimization of Others. Because so many Germans felt that their nation got a raw deal at Versailles and suffered so much during the interwar period, they regarded themselves as righteous victims righting wrongs even though they were doing wrongs to other people. And because Jews rationalize everything through the prism of 'Munich' and destroying 'new hitlers', they are blind to how they've become the new hitlers.

Identity-over-ideology will always beat ideology-over-identity. The recent history of Jews vs Anglo-Episcopalians bear this out. And it explains why Israel is proud and has healthy birthrates while Scandinavian nations are browbeaten and have low birthrates; it's because Israeli Jews put identity over ideology whereas the Scandies put ideology over identity.
Now, this doesn't mean that a people should be all about identity and no ideology. "My country right or wrong" is a terrible idea. There must be a constant effort toward shared principles of fair play, justice, and mutuality among nations, peoples, and cultures, just like individuals mustn't think in terms of 'myself uber alles'. If you did something, you need to pay the price. Even so, to an individual, his own survival and well-being come first(as long as he doesn't maliciously harm others). To a nation or people, their survival or well-being comes first. As long as a nation or people acknowledge the right of other nations and peoples to feel and act likewise, there should be no problem. The problem with Jewish Power is not universal nationalism, which is a sound idea. The problem is mono-nationalism whereby Jews and Only Jews get to enjoy the rights of nationalism while all other peoples must forsake their own nationalism mainly so that Jewish hegemonic power can systematically penetrate their nations and take control, especially with the aid of globo-homo 'gay' collaborators of every nation. (Homos around the world collaborate with Jewish Power because the spread of Jewish supremacism means homo-favoritism.) Even as Jews tell goyim to abandon their identity, Jews not only cling to theirs but practice what is essentially 'my country right or wrong'. Jewish mono-nationalism isn't a fair kind of nationalism but a gangster-nationalism where the politics of Jewish Identity is above the law and beyond reproach. Zionists occupying West Bank? Israel aiding terrorists in Syria? Wars for Israel turning millions of Arabs/Muslims into homeless nomads? Whatever happens, never blame Jews. Even though Israel is aggressor against Syria, the cuck-puppets in the media yammer about how ISRAEL needs to be protected from Syria. It's all so surreal, so very strange and Kafkaesque, but then, Jews are masters of strangeness. Ironically, Jews have become like the Nazis who were into 'my country right or wrong' mentality. Now, if Nazi Germans and Globo-Zionists were without power, it wouldn't matter what they think. But because Nazi Germany was a great power, its arrogance and supremacist lunacy brought the world to the brink. And now, Jewish globo-homo hegemonic power is doing much the same, spreading filth, hate, and lies all over. In some ways, Jewish globo-homo lunacy is more dangerous than Nazi lunacy because, at the very least, the Nazis were honest and forthright about their arrogance, contempt, and supremacism. Even those who admired certain aspects of National Socialism could see that it was led by real a**holes. Jewish supremacist are also monsters but notice how they pretend to be human-rightists, liberal-democracists, universal-valueists, diversitists, and etc. But boil down the Jewish stew to its essentials, and remaining salts in the pot taste like Kosher Supremacism.

Now, there is a better kind of nationalism. A tempered and moderate one where a nation, people, and culture prioritize their survival, preservation, and well-being all the while rejecting the arrogant mentality of 'my country right or wrong'. Thus, if that nation or people are known to have done something wrong, they fess up and make amends. It's like if your son commits a crime, it is only right that he should pay a fine or do time in jail. But that doesn't mean he's not your son. After serving time, you still favor him and try to help him because he's part of the family. It was this kind of nationalism that prevailed for a time after WWII. Germany and Japan were made to admit their wrongs and paid a heavy price. But they were allowed to survive and take care of their own interests. Their nationalism was okay as long as it respected the nationalisms of other peoples. Back then, the US and Europe were ruled by genuine nationalist leaders who felt a strong bond with their own folks, culture, and history.
But ever since Jews gained supremacist power in the US(that controls so much of the world through money, hard power, and soft power), the ideological coding of the West has been altered so that its goy elites would not only favor ideology over identity but abort even the mere thought of white identity within the white womb. And yet, this ideology was bogus because it wasn't molded out of good will and reciprocity but to dupe goyim into dropping their own identities so that Jewish identity could slip through the weakened cracks to make the touchdown and win the superbowl of Global Power. It's like Jews want whites to surrender their guns so that Jewish-controlled institutions will monopolize all the firepower. At this point, trusting Jewish Power is like trusting a fox in a henhouse. Tails I win, heads you lose. Maybe, it needn't have been this way IF Jews, as the new elites, favored 'what is good for American people' over 'what is good for Jewish supremacism'? It need not have been a zero-sum game. But as the new elites, Jews never felt much fondness or connection with the non-Jewish majority and just focused on increasing diversity to make goyim-fight-goyim while they grab more of the loot.

People need ideology because identity alone isn't enough. But ideology must serve or revolve around identity. Just like Earth revolves around the Sun, ideology must revolve around identity. A people must be identocentric than ideocentric, just like true astronomy is Helio-centric than Geo-centric. Those who choose to be ideo-centrists will surely lose to those who choose to be idento-centrists(while feigning as ideo-centrists). That is the history of Ashkenazi Jews vs Anglo-Episcopalians since the end of World War II. So... which side won and why? Just do the political math.
And in South Africa, why are things getting worse for white Afrikaners while it's looking so up and up for Jewish super-capitalists? Jews all over the world, in the spirit of identitarianism, stick up for Monopoly-Capitalist Jews in South Africa. In contrast, whites all over the world have been made to feel that it's 'racist' and 'white supremacist' to care about white women being raped and white children being beaten to a pulp by blacks in South Africa.

Law of Tribalism says People want to be with their own kind - Law of Supremalism says People want to be the Superior or the Inferior even if Different

It is part of nature(and human nature) to fear and ward off the different. Nature exists in a state of terror and aggression. All organisms are hungry and want to devour others and fear being devoured by others. Organisms seek to get closest to organisms they want to eat and furthest from organisms that would eat them. To be sure, there are various organisms that remain oblivious to one another and co-exist peacefully as they don’t regard each others as rivals, predators, or prey. Full grown trout will swim alongside full-grown carps. Sparrows, pigeons, and ducks co-exist and just ignore one another. Indeed, often there is more violence among similar species or the same species than among different species. Chimpanzees are most violent with other chimpanzees and get along better with other animals. Squirrels are often quarrelsome and aggressive with one another while ignoring skunks, opossums, and pigeons.

In some ways, organisms feel closest to their own kind but also most competitive and acrimonious among their own kind as well. This is why many people prefer to leave their own community and go to another one where they can just be strangers. Indeed, that's been of the great attractions of America. If there were two very tribal societies, people in Tribe A would think twice about going to Tribe B. After all, Tribe B will see the member from A as an outsider. He may be treated as an outcast or come under great pressure to convert/conform to the ways of Tribe B. Therefore, in a world of tribalism, it’s best to stick with your own Tribe. Despite all the acrimony, bad blood, and competition within the Tribe, you are still treated as an organic member.
But what if there is land where everyone is a stranger? One may feel lonely and lost but also loose and liberated. One no longer has tribal obligations and duties. If you belong to Tribe A, you must carry out the duties of your Tribe, and they could be time-consuming, burdensome, or just plain boring. But if you move to a land of strangers, you can just do what you want. You are no longer part of a Tribe(and that is alienating and disorienting) but you also feel free and independent. It’s like when kids go to college and are surrounded by strangers. It can be lonely and confusing but also exciting and stimulating, as opposed to being at home where you must act in accordance to the rules of the family. Going from one’s Tribal community to a land of strangers isn’t really like going to the Other. If member of Tribe A goes over to Tribe B, he has to adjust to the Other. But in the land of strangers, there really is no Other since every person is on his own.

The land of strangers may be especially welcome to a minority living in a Tribal system. For instance, if you were a Jew in Poland or Hungary, you were reminded of your Jewish minority status at all times. There was a sense that Poland really belongs to Poles and Hungary really belongs to Hungarians, and YOU, as a Jew, was a mere guest. But in the land of strangers(like how Jews saw the US), the land belongs equally to each individual. A Pole or an Hungarian in America has no special claim on the land over a Jew. Now, Anglos and Northern Europeans who founded and built America may insist on a special claim, and Jews always saw such claim as a threat, and that was why they were so adamant from putting the Immigration Experience at the Center of the American Narrative.
And yet, there is a further twist. If indeed Jews only want to come to the US as a land of strangers where every individual is equal to any other, things might not have gotten so crazy. If Jews really only want to be individuals, there would at least have been consistency in their view of New America.
But, being free individuals hasn't been enough for Jews in America. Rather, they want to lay claim to America as theirs, indeed, the Jewel in the Crown of Judea or World Jewry. (Judea is the most powerful force in the world. The combined wealth of US Jews, Israeli Jews, European Jews, Russian Jews, Latin American Jews is much bigger than the US economy.)
In a way, Jews left Europe to get away from Tribalism and came to the US to be free as individuals. Jews valued the erosion of tribalism even among the Anglos who’d founded and built this nation. Jews envisioned a Melting Pot of free individuals easily co-existing with one another in a land defined by liberty, commerce, ambition, and potential. And yet... even as white gentile tribalism and identity grew ever weaker, Jewish identity and tribalism grew ever stronger. If the rise of Anglo-American power led to Wasps seeing themselves as a universal neo-imperial people spreading Americanism all over the world and taking in New Americans from all over the world, the rise of Jewish-American power led to Jews feeling more proud as Jews, Zionists, and citizens of Judea, or World Jewry. In the land of strangers where every group was supposed to let go of their tribal loyalties and just become ‘Americans’, Jews did the very opposite despite urging all other groups to lose their tribalisms. Jews can be Jewish, but all other groups are supposed to be just deracinated individuals whose only points of identity must be Israel/Shoah, Homomania, and Afromania.

Anyway, what is true among humans is also true among animals. A wolf may run from other wolves and prefer to live with other animals that leave it alone. While a wolf may ideally want to belong to a wolf pack, if its own pack is scattered or destroyed, it may have a difficult joining another wolf pack. Indeed, other packs may see it as a threat and try to kill it. In that case, a wolf has most to fear from its own kind and may seek solace as a ‘stranger’ among other species that just ignore him. And that is why people seek refuge in other nations. A Turk might be politically or legally persecuted by other Turks in Turkey. A Burmese may be tyrannized by other Burmese for political or whatever reasons. A Pakistani may be hounded by other Pakistanis who vie for power and dominance. Such an individual might prefer to just become a stranger in a place like UK, Canada, Australia, or the US. Or even in Japan. He may feel lonely as a stranger, but because he’s a nonentity, people will just leave him alone. This is especially true in many parts of the US where the ONLY thing that most people have in common is the fact that they are strangers in a strange land too.

An animal that flees its own kind may seek sanctuary among humans who tend to be more compassionate, at least in comparison to cold-hearted and ruthless nature. After all, wolves evolved into dogs because they preferred to be with humans than with other wolves that might kill them. While humans could be brutal to animals, they could also be kinder and empathetic. Also, as wolves could sense great intelligence among humans, they looked to humans as a guide. Animals can instinctively tell which animal is more special. Even a dog that has never seen a human or cat before will react differently to both. It will see a cat as just another animal but react with far greater curiosity toward the human. Even killer whales sense something special about humans.

Humans are organisms too, and even though many people want to be with their own kind and feel most comfortable around one another, there is also a wish among some humans to be with the superior or the inferior. This is where the Law of Supremalism comes into play. Supremalism can be (1) wanting to be with the superior people than with one’s own that seem inferior in comparison (2) wanting to feel superior over others who are deemed inferior. Missionary types are often (2) kind of supremal people. They want to feel special, admired, loved, and appreciated as a superior people. Of course, being Christians for whom humility is crucial, they won't admit to such supremal urges and instead will just claim compassion for humanity. But, in a way, they want to go to the wretched of the earth because it makes them feel as demigods or angels. Such missionary supremalism also exists among celebrities, like Bono of U2 going to Africa and standing among adoring black children. He feels like a white god bringing love and compassion to the jungle folks. Whether it’s a Christian missionary going to some poor country and playing the role Angel Savior or some Social Justice activist or journalist globe-trotting around the world and recording all the misery, a kind of supremalism is at play. Chris Hedges loves feeling important as the Big Caring White Guy who had stood with and over the Wretched of the Earth all over the world.

But there is (1) Supremalism where people want to depart from their own kind and be with the superior folks who could be superior in wealth, ability, creativity, beauty, athleticism, talent, and/or glamour. Many people want to leave their boring little town and go to the city(filled with very different peoples) where the action is because that’s where all the talent and glamour are. Many people want to move to the West because they see white nations are richer, white people are better in management & fairer with Rule of Law, white people are more attractive, white people are more capable, and etc. So, we have millions upon millions of Africans and Muslims heading to Europe. And we have people all over the world flocking to US, Australia, and Canada to be with superior white people.
Of course, they will never admit to this since it would be shameful. No one wants to admit, "Yeah, my people suck, they are ugly, they are corrupt, they are moronic, and I feel ashamed of them, so I want to go to a land filled with capable and pretty white people." No Mexican or Hindu will dare admit it. But he feels it deep down.

As for whites who welcome mass immigration-invasion, (2) Supremalism is a factor because all these non-whites flocking to white nations means that superior white Liberal folks get to lord over these ‘darkies’ pleading for a better life. Diversity makes white people feel more magnanimous as the superior breed. Again, they won’t admit to harboring such feelings because PC says we’re all equal, but such emotions are there. If indeed all people are equal, why can’t Mexicans make their own nation as good as the US? Why must they scramble to the US to live under Gringo to have a better life?
But there are also whites who want to be part of another people. Some whites see blacks as superior. They want to be with blacks, admire blacks, have sex with blacks, and have black kids. Rachel Dolezal wants to be black. And in the movie GET OUT, white people want to literally enter black bodies.
But some whites want to be with the Other because it makes them feel special. If you’re a white nobody in the white world, you must feel special if you’re among poor folks in Bolivia or India who look upon you as a kind of white god-angel.

Supremalism is built into our psyche and underlies all religions. Why do we imagine God or gods? Because we want to be with the superior being. Just as dogs prefer being with us than with their own kind in nature, we want to eventually take leave of our world and be in the world of God or gods, be it Heaven or Valhalla.

Among humans, there are many cases of preference for the Other that is perceived as more just, more able, more fair, more attractive. Taiwanese are Chinese but they prefer American hegemony over the Pacific because they see fellow Chinese in the mainland as ugly yellow barbarians. Taiwanese want to regard themselves as honorary whites. Many Zimbabweans want white farmers back because their own black kind have ground everything to dust. Most Arabs would rather go live in Germany than deal with their own cutthroat, corrupt, and haggly-waggly kind. And some whites wax romantic about the Other as wiser or more spiritual or ‘cooler’. People tend to undervalue & take for granted what they got and overvalue & obsess about what others got.

Many non-whites are drawn to white nations because they see whites as superior in every way. These non-whites get little or no justice from fellow non-whites who are superstitious, corrupt, brutal, and clannish. So, they want to go to America(or Canada or Australia) and live under white rule. Also, they find whites to be sexually more attractive.
This may seem counter-intuitive because non-whites scream about ‘white racism’ and ‘white guilt’. One might think, “If they hate whites so much, why do they want to run from their own kind and live in white nations?”
But it is precisely because they prefer whites and want to live in white nations that they employ PC to lower white defenses against non-white immigration/colonization.

And in a way, whites who welcome mass-colonization from Third World are practicing a kind of soft subconscious supremacism. They feel, “You darkies wanna leave your own inferior nations and cultures because you know that the white world and white people are better. You want to live in our superior world because you are incapable of creating anything so good in your own world.”

Most non-white ‘immigrants’ are closet-white-supremacists. They want to run away from their own kind, own nations, and own cultures to start new lives and take on new identities under white rule. They prefer white nations(esp those created by Northern Europeans) to their own kind despite the long history and culture. Chinese, Hindus, and Arabs have deep history, culture, and identity going back 1000s of years, but they are willing to give that all up just to have a chance to live with whites, have sex with whites, work for whites, and take on white names like ‘Heather’ and ‘Robert’.