Showing posts with label virtue. Show all posts
Showing posts with label virtue. Show all posts

Friday, August 2, 2019

Why Law-and-Order Issues are so Problematic in the US(and the Africanizing West): The Clash of Reality of Black Criminality versus the ‘Idology’ of Black Holy-Schmoliness — Virtue vs Vision — Italians and Swedes


https://buchanan.org/blog/is-trump-capturing-the-law-and-order-issue-137355

Patrick Buchanan has written a column about how Donald Trump can own the Law-and-Order issue in politics. In many ways, he is correct that many Americans are concerned about law-and-order, the need to deal with problems of crime and violence that have infested and even devastated many communities across America. Indeed, even entire cities have been overcome with crime and violence. Consider Detroit and Baltimore. And half of St. Louis and one-third of Chicago have very high crime rates. Given the fact that no one wants to be robbed, raped, assaulted, or murdered, the issue of Law and Order should be clear enough and its appeal should be obvious. What sane person would choose disorder over order? What person would want to live in a town or city overrun by criminals than maintained by lawful peace? While plenty of Americans have romanticized outlaws, gangsters, and the like in entertainment, most Americans don’t want to live in a dangerous neighborhood where their loved ones could be harassed, attacked, or even murdered. No one wants their homes or apartments to be burglarized or invaded. Naturally, in a time and place where crime has gotten out of control, it’s only natural for people to be on the side of the Law against the Outlaw. And on those grounds, Pat Buchanan should be correct that Donald Trump has much to gain by running as a Law-and-Order President.

Indeed, one of the reasons why Republicans dominated the Presidency from 1968 to 1992 had something to do with the perception that they were tougher on crime as opposed to ‘bleeding-heart’ Liberal Democrats who'd become overly dependent on blacks as their constituents. And despite the Liberal Media’s bias, too many people became all too aware of the connection between blacks and crime. They witnessed entire cities fall into ruin as the result of out-of-control black behavior. The problem wasn’t just in the streets but at work. Black workers were more likely to misbehave, steal, and cause trouble. Even blacks who weren’t outright criminal had all sorts of behavioral problems. There was a time when New York, the premier city of wealth and power in the US, nearly went under due to rising crime, and of course, it was mostly black crime. The great housing projects that were supposed to improve black lives in the 60s and 70s only concentrated black criminality that festered and got worse. The environment-centric solutions hardly solved the problem, and if anything, it was like something out of CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES.
Post-War ideological trends posited rather dogmatically that all humans were more-or-less alike and that their behaviors could be fundamentally altered by external factors such as housing, schooling, and the like. It was as if humans were like pigeons inside B. F. Skinner’s experimental boxes, and the ideology underpinning the housing of blacks in huge projects was that modernity, efficiency, and symmetry would make blacks act in more orderly and productive ways. Such macro-experiment totally overlooked the possibility that blacks may be different internally at the genetic level due to 100,000s of years of evolution in Hot and Wild Africa.
Even though Modern Liberals believe in evolution, their ideological hangups have made them unwilling to accept certain implications. Evolution is about processes of divergence and change. For example, suppose there is a small race of humanoids, and those within the tribe more-or-less share the same gene pool. Then, suppose the tribe breaks up and go separate ways. Some remain in the same place, but others move to other areas that are either hotter, drier, colder, and have vastly different flora/fauna. As the various groups would now live in different environments, they would come under different evolutionary pressures that select for distinct traits as favorable. Obviously, a very hot environment will favor certain traits over others, and a very cold environment would likely choose for ‘opposite’ traits to those favored in hot regions. Furthermore, there are ripple effects to selection that have little to do with survivability. An environment that selects for certain traits may set off mutations that lead to further alternations that make the organism(and its kind) even more different from others of its kind living far away under different environmental pressures. For example, if a tribe of humanoids go separate ways and if one ends up in an extreme cold environment while another ends up in a very hot environment, they will diverge from each other in ways other than adaptability to climate. As the environment selects for traits that are better adapted to the cold, the changes may set off cascades of mutations that change the organisms even further. The same goes for those who adapt to an extremely hot climate. For example, blue eyes and blond hair are not necessary for survival in cold climate, but they arose due to mutations of those who adapted to cold climates and by relative ‘inbreeding’.

Anyway, the theory of evolution would make no sense IF organisms didn’t diverge and change from one another. No honest person can claim that the various human races are all the same and interchangeable in their abilities and aesthetics. The races are clearly different according to looks. PC types may argue that we must go beyond looks and focus on souls, but looks do matter, and aesthetics is a valid reason for wanting to preserve certain species, races, and breeds. If looks don’t matter, why do people react so strongly to ivories on an elephant, the mane on a lion, feathers of a peacock, stripes on a zebra, or fur on a mink? Is a peacock plucked of feathers the same as a peacock with a full dress of feathers because their 'souls' are the same? Is a lion shaved and devoid of fur/mane the same as a lion with natural fur and mane? People rely on looks to make the most important decisions of their lives, like finding a mate and buying a house. And in deciding which dress to wear. Looks DO matter, especially to eye-centric humans with complex sense of aesthetics and design. Organisms are the designs of nature.
Obviously, looks are not everything as beautiful people can be wicked and ugly people can be good-of-heart. The Left came to believe that all individuals were, more or less, same of soul upon birth. They were born with blank-slate souls that could be made good or bad depending on the environment, education, and culture. So, at the very least, no matter how ugly someone may be on the outside, he or she has the same chance to be a good person. But as it turns out, inner beauty/ugliness is also largely genetic though inner beauty doesn’t necessarily correlate with outer beauty(just like good looks don’t guarantee a lovely voice). It also turns out that not only are the various races different in outer looks but in inner temperaments. Blacks are more likely to have aggressive, rancorous, and troublesome personalities. Granted, a loud and boisterous person can be good-natured whereas a gentle and cordial person can be psychopathic, but generally speaking, a race that tends to be overtly aggressive and wild will tend to be more destructive of social order and peace. Even though blacks have the ‘ugliest’ and most savage inner souls, so many non-blacks are fooled by black vocality that, in its bellowing tremor, can create the impression of a deep-souled Negro, as when Paul Robeson sang "Ole Man River".

Especially the West, having been molded for so long by Christian theology, has a tendency to conflate the Negro voice with spirituality when, if anything, the core urges that drive the Negro soul is ‘muh booty’, ‘muh fist’, ‘muh dick’, and ‘where da white women at?’ Especially because of founding of America as New Jerusalem and the national ‘sin’ of slavery, white Americans have projected their hopes and dreams on the Redemptive
Negro. By rising from slavery to pursuit of happiness, the Negro is seen as redeeming the American Enterprise. By forgiving and healing white souls(stained with ‘white guilt’), the Negro is seen as the angel that can cure White America. Also, having been the most savage race to have been brought to America, the elevation of Negro to civilized status is seen as the greatest pride of the West, i.e. if the West, for all its ‘sins’, took a bunch of savages and turned them into civilized folks, it will have proven its worth. So, the Dream is that the Negro saves the white man from ‘white guilt’ in return for the white man having saved the Negro from savagery. Of course, the latter part of the equation is no longer muttered as it’d be deemed ‘racist’, but it is nevertheless felt strongly in the white subconscious. After all, why are whites most concerned about bringing progress to black Africa? Because it is the most daunting task as Black Africa is by-and-large the most savage and backward part of the world. While it’s no longer fashionable for whites to say, "We must bring the light of civilization to those black savages living in darkness and ignorance" — whites must only say that blacks are so holy & special that only Black Magic can redeem and cleanse the white race — , so much of what white elites do in relation to Africa & blacks suggests excitement over the most challenging task of transforming blacks from poor backward savages to not only civilized folks but the holy god-men of White Cucky-Wuck Fantasy.
Bill Gates as the Great White Geek
Anyway, why is Law-and-Order such a controversial issue in America? Naturally, most people of any nation would prefer peace and stability secured by law & order. Who wants to live in a world of criminality? We might get kicks from gangster movies or Western flicks with outlaws, but we want safe neighborhoods where kids can play and where old people can walk to the neighborhood store without getting mugged or beaten. I can’t imagine a politician or leader who gains mass support as the representative of crime and disorder. To be sure, there have been nations where criminal elements have pretty much gained control of society. This was once(and may still be) the case in Sicily. And it’s been well-known that drug-cartels have amassed tremendous hold over certain Latin American nations. There, law & order is hardly an issue since outlaws have the upperhand. If there is to be a kind of social order, it is essentially rule by warlords. ‘Peace’ is guaranteed by might than right. It’s a world of guns and bullets than law and order. In such a world, the people may prefer the better-organized and ‘scrupulous’ gangsters(those that have some honor-among-thieves) than out-of-control delinquents, the kind seen in the Brazilian film CITY OF GOD. In contrast, while the Italian mafia did terrible things in America, they kept the streets in their own neighborhoods safe.


It’s been said that organized crime played a big role in Italian-American neighborhoods and Chinatowns across America. Partly out of fear of gangsters and partly out of reliance on them(due to deep-seated distrust of the Law that was seen as corrupt, uncaring, or ineffective), the people of the community stuck with their own kind even if criminal because they were a ‘known quantity’. Thus, tribalism affects the way people see Law & Order.
Ideally, while most people prefer the clean workings of law & order over crime & corruption, they may side with criminal elements of their own kind over law & order that seems to be dominated by the Other. Out of bias, loyalty, familiarity, sentimentality, and/or fear, many Italian-Americans sided with the mafia over the Law. While they understood the dark side of organized crime, the mafia was ‘one of us’, part of Italian-American power and muscle. Just like some people prefer tyranny by their own kind over greater individual freedom(and even better governance) under foreign rule, people may have clouded views of law & order when the Law is perceived to be controlled by the Other whereas the criminal elements are seen as members of the community.
For example, there are plenty of Jews who will side with Jewish criminals(often white-collar) and gangsters over Law & Order. Jewish Power pulled all manner of strings to ensure that monkey-boy Obama would pardon Jonathan Pollard. Even Liberal Jews who kvetch so much about ‘social injustice’ are reliably silent about illegality, criminality, and pathology among their own kind... which is why the likes of Bernie Madoff and Jeffrey Epstein had been able to get away with SO MUCH bad behavior for SO LONG. The matrix of Jewish media, Jewish legal power, Jewish finance, and Jewish deep state ensured a kind of Omerta(or 'schmerta') among Jewish elites. They were like ‘made men’ and had license to lie, cheat, steal, rape, and even kill, indeed get away with just about anything. Sure, when some Jews get too greedy and take too many risks to the point of endangering the entire enterprise, the Jewish Power will sacrifice the Crazy Jew who's giving the Jewish Community a bad reputation no matter how much Jews try to keep it all under a tight lid(or yid). It seems Jeffrey Epstein went too far, and even Jewish Power figured it was better to sacrifice him than go down with him(as there are surely plenty more of such fiendish Jews working behind the scenes to pull all sorts of dirty schemes). Italian-American community has been the same, albeit in a cruder, way. While, theoretically at least, Italians in a purely Italian community may prefer law-and-order over criminality, certain factors have made Italians(in the homeland and abroad) notorious for their associations with crime and corruption. One reason is it took longer for Italy to coalesce as a modern nation-state. Thus, many Italians’ first loyalty was to a region than to the nation. Also, in contrast to Northern Europe, Italians were considerably different genetically, especially between north and south. While traditional Britain had problems among Scotch and English, at the very least they were racially identical and looked it. In contrast, while a northern Italian might look more Germanic, southern Italian might look more like an Arab or North African. Thus, instead of southern Italians working with relatively cleaner northern Italians to fight crime, many of them chose to side with the local mafia against national efforts to root out organized crime. Furthermore, the egotism and family-clanism of Italians made civic mind-set harder to come by. The egotism and vanity made Italians prioritize MY needs and wants above all other considerations. And the family-clanism meant that Italian parents, especially the mothers, were willing to go to any length to favor their own kids over the good of society. So, an Italian mother may appeal to the local mafia, boss, or chieftain to favor her son over the sons of other families who are more deserving by meritocracy. Too many Italians think ‘me over my family’, ‘my family over my town’, and ‘my town over my country’. Furthermore, for all their big talk, most Italian men are mama's boys. Indeed, they make a lot of noise as a kind of bluff precisely because they fear real confrontations that test their mettle. Being essentially cowardly, Italians would rather bend over backwards to criminals than be like Wyatt Earp and take them on.

It’s hard to maintain steady and stable law & order with a people with such mentality. Sense of civic duty is best guaranteed in an order where most people feel that the good of the whole trumps ‘myself’, ‘my family’, and ‘my clan’. A good society needs to be fair, and fairness must be decided by equal application of law and order. The good must be rewarded and bad must be punished regardless of who/whom. Some might characterize such principles or idealism as ‘universalist’, but paradoxically, universalism works best as a closed system within a particularism. Take Sweden before it went crazy under the influence of Jewish PC. Nearly all people were Swedish. They were one people in looks, culture, and history. And Lutheranism had long instilled qualities of sobriety, order, and earnestness. Also, Northern Europeans tend to be genetically more disposed to severity. Even as marauding Vikings, the Nordics were more sullen and heavy in their emotions than, say, the Jafro-Jiving black savages of Africa. This lack of color in personality made for a more even temperament that adopted Christian values and respected authority with greater sense of duty and trust. So, among such a people with particular-commonalities of looks, feelings, and thoughts, a Trust Society of ideals, values, and law & order could arise. In other words, universal principles of right-and-wrong secured by law-and-order was possible ONLY BECAUSE the people of Sweden saw each other as part of a close-knit national family with so much in common.


The key distinction between Italy and Sweden was peoples in the two nations were anxiety-ridden about different things. Italians fretted most(to the state of paranoia) about the possibility that other Italians might lie to them, cheat them, or steal from them. In contrast, Swedes were most anxious and ‘paranoid’ about being regarded as liars, cheats, and thieves by other Swedes. Italians worried that other Italians might be ‘get the better of me’, whereas Swedes worried that other Swedes might regard ‘me as not good enough for their standards’. So, Italians saw life as a game of out-cheating other Italians, whereas Swedes saw life as a duty of gaining the trust(and approval) of other Swedes. It just goes to show that an attitude or outlook can have a profound ebb-and-flow ripple effect from soul to society and back from society to soul, on and on.
Between traditional Italy vs traditional Sweden, the latter comes across as much better, a well-ordered society of rule of law, fairness, and trust. In contrast, Italy comes across as a cesspool of egotism, corruption, and pettiness. Sweden seems about higher principles over petty privileges, whereas Italy would be the opposite. However, Sweden could maintain such ‘universal’ ideals of justice ONLY IF it remained a nation of Swedes, a people of common looks, shared culture, familiar values, and similar temperaments. But because universal values worked so well inside Sweden, the foolish Swedes thought theirs was an ideal microcosm of a universal nation, and decided to become a ‘moral superpower’ by sending tons of aid to Africa and flinging open Sweden’s gates to the world. But Swedes in Africa made no progress in improving the lot of blacks who have different attitudes, cultures, values, temperaments, and IQ. And newcomers to Sweden from Muslim world and Africa could not become good New Swedes because they are so genetically and culturally different. Needless to say, blacks are the MOST problematic. But it was made even worse by ‘multi-culturalism’ that contradicted the whole Swedish project of being a universal moral super-power. After all, if the Swedish experiment had worked out so well because the Swedish Way is the way-to-go, then newcomers should be pressured to think, act, and behave like successful Swedes as much as possible. But multi-culturalism said Sweden should welcome foreigners and let them stick to their cultures of origin. But why? Didn’t it ever occur to the Swedes that the foreigners made a mess of their own nations largely due to their cultural attitudes and behaviors?
Even though much of Swedish attitudes and values were rooted in the severe strains of Lutheranism, the source of much stress but also strength, the modern Swedish lost faith in religion and sought out a new faith... and found it in the figure of the holy-holocaust Jew. Swedes, regarding Jews as a wise & saintly people who’d survived the Shoah, earnestly believed that Jews would only bless them with the best advice and most wonderful lessons. Little did they realize that the Shoah, though horrific and evil, was partly the product of Jewish behavior driving goyim to madness. (The Holocaust was also the culmination of a special kind of German madness, but things got far worse in friction with Jewish radical madness.) Little did naive Swedes understand that Jews primarily favor their own tribal interests, have a special animus against Christian Europe, and harbor fantasies of vengeance against all white goyim(over the Shoah and for other reason, such as vicious envy that, for some inexplicable reason, God made the filthy ‘goy’ Aryans more handsome than the Chosen Jews). Swedes, being earnest & sincere and having been rendered respectful to higher authority under its localized version of ‘universal values’, trusted the Jews whole hog. The result was dire Diversity. And of course, decrepit decadence, supposedly a magic cure from all that dark and heavy Lutheran neurosis that must be totally expunged from the Swedish soul. (While Lutheranism had its dark side and negative as well as positive impact on Sweden, did any Swede ever study the impact of jungle ugabuga culture on black Africans? Apparently not.)
In a way, the relatively enclosed and homogeneous world of Sweden was both a blessing and a curse. It was a blessing because the shared looks and laws made for a more cogent, coherent, and consistent society, a place where higher principles of ‘universal justice’ could prevail over petty passions. But this culture of trust in societal justice made Swedes all-too-trusting of both moral and political authority. And as every Swede was so anxious to be seen as a Good Swede by other Swedes, he or she was willing to show that he/she was with the program to make for a better society, a better world.
Now, who owns moral authority and sets the cultural tenor of society? At least in traditional Sweden, there was the power of church and community. But in late-modern Sweden of atomized individuals, the moral authority and cultural hegemony were determined by academics, politicians, public intellectuals, and artists. And as the culture of the West as a whole came to be shaped largely by the US that came under Jewish control, Swedish minds from top to bottom just became putty in the hands of Jews. Even if Swedes mostly did it to themselves, their elites and intellectuals were indirectly shaped by ideas emanating from the US. Also, as Jews became the Holy Holocaust people especially beginning in the Sixties, the Swedes(like so many in the West) were largely without critical defenses against Jewish power and agenda. Jews were seen as akin to a sacred god-race, and this allowed Jews to define the taboos of the West, and the #1 taboo became Thou Shalt Not Doubt or Question the Jew... for that would be the gravest of all sins, which is ‘Antisemitism’. Because of their trusting character and anxiety-for-approval, Swedes wholeheartedly came to embrace the new gods of Diversity, Feminism, Globo-Homo-Mania, Afromania, and the Cult of White Guilt. If Swedes of the past invested their sincerity, trust, and earnestness in God, Church, and Community, the atomized late-modern Swedes committed their goodwill to Diversity, Feminism, and Globo-Homo. And since trusting Swedes have a hive-mind, they had no defenses against the expanding horror. Even now, the average Swede is most anxious about "Will other Swedes consider me as unworthy?"
This goes to show that Swedes, though smart and capable, are incapable of independent search for truth, meaning, and justice. They can be very good at devoting their energies toward certain ideals and objectives, but they(along with most of the white race) cannot find the Truth for themselves. Rather, this truth has to be provided by the Other, those with greater prophetic vision and zeal. Because the white world lacked for prophets, it adopted Christianity, the creation of heretical Jews. White Christendom worked very hard at serving the Faith, but white folks failed to come up with a faith of their own. And in the modern era that saw the ebbing away of old-time religion, white people were once again incapable of discovering their own truths and therefore fell under the sway of the ‘truths’ as revealed by Jews with the power of radical will and prophetic personality. These so-called ‘truths’ could actually turn out to be falsehoods, lunacies, or even evil ideas, but they had the power to captivate and hold sway over countless millions due to sheer conceptual grandeur, intellectual drive, moral passion, and/or iconic power. Swedes, like most white folks, despite all their intelligence and ability, failed to dream their own dreams and envision their own destiny. And so, one had to be supplied to them, and it came from Jews whom the Swedes trusted and revered as the Holy Holocaust people, indeed as if every Jew were a kind of modern Moses-Isaiah-Jesus rolled into one. But in fact, they were fooled by the satanic venality of Jews who were really seeking vengeance(against all of Christendom and Western Civilization) and hegemony over the entire world. As far as Jews were concerned, Sweden as a peaceful and prosperous homogeneous white nation might send the wrong messages to whites around the world. Whiteness = Success. Such might signal that whites do best in a world of their own. But such a world might exclude Jews as the Other. Therefore, Jews went out of their way to pathologize whiteness and homogeneity so as to persuade whites that there is something wrong with the too-whiteness of their world that must be ‘enriched’ with Diversity. And stupid whites, in moral awe of Jews as the Holy Holocaust People, swallowed the BS hook, line, and sinker.

Now, one may ask, "But if white nations fail and fall apart due to Diversity, won’t white people finally wake up and realize that white homogeneity was better and it’d been retarded to trust the Jews?" Yes, effects of Diversity may make white people realize their grave mistake of trusting Jews, but then, it'd be too little and too late as their nations would have been already lost forever to Diversity. As such, they will have to live in a world where various goy groups are constantly at each other’s throats, in which case Jewish globalist-hegemonist elites can play their game of divide-and-rule among the lost and confused gentiles. With Jews, You Lose. Swedes have long ways to go before they fully realize that they’d been played for fools, but they eventually will one day. And as they look back and wonder why they weren’t able to stop the horror in its tracks, they’ll realize it was due to their Anxiety of Trust, i.e. each Swede was most hung-up with neuroticism that fellow Swedes might regard him or her as unworthy in his/her sincere commitment to ‘goodness’ and ‘justice’. And perhaps they will even realize that their fatal error was in having allowed the vile, venal, and vicious Jews to masquerade as the Wise People bringing the gifts of reform and redemption to all white folks around the world.

The lesson to learn here is that a people with strong set of virtues but without the will of vision can be led to serious self-harm by those who control the vision thing. Indeed, we saw this with Germans and Japanese in World War II. Germans and Japanese had many virtues such as courage, loyalty, hard work, dedication, willingness to sacrifice, and honor. But as most Germans and Japanese lacked the power of personal vision, they relied on some other to supply them with the vision. If the vision was good, all their virtues went toward serving that vision. But if the vision was bad, all the virtues were wasted in service of evil. It’s like dogs. We appreciate dogs for their natural ‘virtues’ of loyalty and dedication, but as dogs lack vision, their ‘virtues’ always go toward serving the ‘vision’ supplied by the master. A dog’s ‘virtues’ can be used to save or kill a person’s life. Whether a dog is used to track down an innocent man or guilty man, the dog is only capable of the ‘virtue’ of commitment. It cannot conceive of its own vision. As Germans had many virtues, they could have done great things IF Hitler who supplied the vision was a truly good man. But Hitler was a pathological demagogue, and so, the German virtues of courage, loyalty, and hard work were ultimately put to horrible waste and evil. This is what happens when a people with virtues but without vision(let alone prophetic will) come under the spell of an evil vision. What Hitler did to the Germans, Jews are now doing to the West. As white folks lack the power of vision, it is supplied by Jews who do have it, even if it has grown satanic over the years. Jewish Power of vision elevated Holocaust-Worship, Afromania, and Globo-Homomania as the new trinity.

Ultimately, in terms of power politics, it doesn’t matter if the vision is good or evil. The fact is those without vision will always go with those with vision, even if evil, especially as even the most evil vision presents itself as true and just. Unless the evil vision can be met with good counter-vision, people will fall under sway of vision. Virtues are good but are always in the service of something. Courage is a virtue, but in the service of what? Courage doesn’t decide if it will fight and die for Nazism or Communism. Rather it is the vision that commands the virtue of courage to serve its agenda. In our times, Jews supply the vision of the world: Israel is so great, Iran is so terrible; US as globo-homo empire is so wonderful whereas Russia is evil; the West must be remade by Diversity and ‘Inclusion’, even if it means the US, Canada, and Europe are swamped by blacks and other non-whites; the Jewish vision says any white who says NO to Open Borders is a ‘racist’, the worst thing in the world; Man is a ‘woman’ because there are infinite numbers of ‘genders’ that are fluid; and so on and on. As crazy as these ideas are, they are Big Ideas, and Jews have the chutzpah to dream them up and have the financial/media power to disseminate them. Also, as the Holy Holocaust people, they have the godlike visionary power to determine what the taboos are, and of course, the main taboo is to ever doubt the wisdom and all-knowingness of the Master Jew who must be obeyed. So, white people, especially those of Northern European extraction, still have lots of virtues(of hard work, dedication, commitment, seriousness), but all such virtues are befouled and wasted in the service of Jewish Supremacist satanic craziness.

The perverse irony is that when the vision is bad, lack of virtue is better than virtue. Indeed, Germany would have done far less harm under Hitler if the German people were more like Italians in their lack of virtue. Imagine if German soldiers were lazy, cowardly, craven, clownish, dishonorable, and lacking in scruples. Hitler couldn’t have done much with such a people to cause much harm to the world. He would have barely invaded Poland and would have been soundly thrashed by France, and never mind a war with Russia, which would have been impossible with human material lacking in virtue. This is why white people must wake up and shake free of the Jewish vision that is misusing white virtues for evil purposes around the world. No, Jews are not a holy, wise, and perfect people. Blacks are not Magic Negroes or Afro-Angels. Homos and trannies are NOT our moral betters who should be celebrated 24/7 all year round. And it is perverse that entire nations and peoples must be destroyed in the name of what is good for Israel, Israel, Israel.
When we look at Sweden vs Italy today in relation to the migrant-crisis and immigration-invasion, it may seem weird that Swedes with more virtue are faring worse than Italians with less virtue. But this is because virtue, in its earnestness and commitment, is more eager to serve the currently BAD vision of Sweden supplied by venal Jews. Swedes are being goody-good agents of a baddy-bad idea, and that makes things worse. Doing bad things in a bad way is less dangerous because incompetence, laziness, or inattention messes up the plan. It is when people do bad things in a good way that the greatest harm is done. Because virtue plays by ‘universal’ rules, the virtuous tend to operate with hive minds. They know what is ‘good’ and what is ‘bad’, and coordinate their combined efforts in the name of the ‘good’(which could actually turn out to be ‘bad’). Why the hive mind? Because virtue becomes meaningless if everyone decides what is good or bad on his own. Rather, virtue is widely recognized only because most people agree that it is in the service of ‘good’. And yet, this is the very danger of Sweden. When the vision is bad — the current vision of Sweden is absolutely horrifying — , it would actually be better for society if people grew cynical & sardonic as individuals and began to doubt and question what is ‘good’ and ‘bad’. They need to be more ironic than iconic in their mode of thinking. But Swedes are too virtuous in their hive-mind to really question that vision that has cast an evil spell on the nation.
In contrast, the wily Italians of late have been more willing to doubt the Jewish-infected vision of the Open Borders agenda of Afro-European Union. Though the lack of virtue has led to so much corruption, crime, and inefficiency in Italy, its one saving grace has been the greater cynicism about the Vision. Also, while petty Italian egotism has often undermined civic-mindedness, it has the advantage of being less willing to get with the globalist program of what it means to be ‘Good Europeans’. In contrast, the virtuous Germans with their greater zeal to be ‘Good Europeans’ have invested their civic-mindedness toward mindlessly welcoming the Merkel Millions from war-torn countries destroyed by Wars for Israel.
If white people in the West had their own power of vision, they would condemn Jewish Power and its Wars that destroyed so many Muslim/Arab lives. White people would condemn Jews for having created the Refugee Crisis by working with Saudis to foment strife and mayhem all over the Middle East and North Africa.
But lacking their own vision, most white people just rely on Jews to supply the Vision, it being "White People stained forever with ‘racism’ must redeem themselves by taking in tons of desperate refugees, or else they are heartless evil ‘xenophobes’." Notice how the Jewish vision never touches on the fact that it was mostly JEWISH POWER that pulled strings to destroy Arab/Muslim nations and force so many millions into refugee status. Never mind the Jews turning Arabs into homeless nomads. Just focus on how white people must be good & kind and welcome all those refugees into their own countries(while Israel and Saudi Arabia refuse to take any). It goes to show that virtue without vision is like being a dog. Without the power of vision, a people will always be servants of those with vision. When the vision is bad, it’s better to be a cynical and petty Italian than a do-goody Swede. At least, you’ll be more likely to save your own hide instead of earnestly working to sacrifice your entire nation to the Other. (In a way, it’s almost as if Hitler’s wishes are coming true. Facing defeat, Hitler damned the Germans for failing him and ordered Albert Speer to lay waste to all of Germany. Germany would have to vanish with him for its ‘sin’ of having failed to live up to his dream. Alas, Germany survived. But today, Germany and other European nations seem to have an Hitlerian will for self-immolation even if, ironically enough, in the name of anti-Nazism. Hitler wanted Germany and Europe destroyed forever for having failed Nazism. Today’s cucks want the West destroyed forever for having failed the Jews in WWII.)
Blacks are So Holy that we must convince ourselves that this is Beautiful. It sure is Bootiful.
Anyway, what is the problem of Law & Order in America(and West in general)? Why are so many people troubled by Law & Order issues when it’s so obvious that Lawfulness is preferable to Criminality? It’s because the demands of Law & Order violate one of the biggest idol-worships of America: Afromania. The problem is BLACKS commit crimes and acts of violence in far greater numbers than other groups do. Now, if there were no special love or consideration for blacks in the US, calling for more law & order to suppress black violence would hardly be a problem. Furthermore, if the US especially valued white lives, the call for law & order to suppress black violence would be even greater. Indeed, when the US was a pro-white white-majority nation long ago, whites felt no compunction about meting out harsh punishment to those who harmed white people. So, when Red Savages raided and killed white settlers, white rage united white folks in their wars on Indians. When Arab-African pirates raided American ships and enslaved whites to be sold into slavery, White America used its navy to crush the darky pirates. When a black thug raped a white woman or murdered a white man, white community came together to hang the Nasty Negro from a tree. When Mexicans slaughtered the white men at Alamo, white Americans got riled up and fought even harder to crush Mexico. When the ‘Japs’ attacked Pearl Harbor and massacred 3,000 white folks, a White America got so angry that it led a semi-genocidal war on Japan. So, if the white race were still seen as the essential and archetypal folks of America and if it was well-known that nasty Negroes were robbing, raping, and murdering too many white people, White people would totally be for more Law & Order to put the vicious blacks in their place.
But the fact is white folks lost their place on the American pedestal of worthiness. Initially, the idea was whites are good but so are non-whites, so the latter should be given equal place at the table. If whites are good, they should support equal protection under the law for all races. As a morally compelling argument, whites decided to de-racialize Americanism so that whites and non-whites could both be good citizens. But then, the Jewish control of academia/media and the white elite vanity of virtue-signaling especially blamed the white race for the troubles in the West. It went from ‘whites are good and so are non-whites who should be treated equally’ to ‘whites are not-so-good while certain peoples, especially blacks and Jews, are especially good’. And then, Jewish Power began to elevate the Shoah from a tragic historic event to some kind of neo-religion that must be worshiped. And the black narrative went from morally compelling to spiritually compulsory. Every American has to worship MLK(and revere Mandela) as god-men. With such premise, every year saw greater elevation of Jews and blacks(and then homos) to higher status while whites were increasingly demoted, degraded, and defamed as more a human plague than a human race.
It got even more ridiculous, what with white women being encouraged to side with Diversity, Jews, and homos against white men. Never mind the white world gave most freedom to women. Never mind white women were there alongside white men in the imperialist conquest of the world, therefore no less guilty(if ‘white guilt’ is to be believed). Never mind Jews see white women as whores and commodity to buy and sell. Never mind white women were created by straight white men, whereas homo ‘sex’ of fecal-penetration never created a single life. If anything, white women SHOULD side with white men, and Jews feared that very unity. And so, Jews devised an ingenious strategy. If Jews attacked white men and white women equally, white men and white women would found themselves in the same camp. To drive a wedge into the crucial unity of white men and white women, Jews especially vilified white men while offering moral amnesty to white women via feminism AS LONG AS white women identified themselves as just another victim group of Straight White Males. So, white women would be spared the full brunt of accusation of ‘racism’ and ‘supremacism’ IF they sided with Jews, blacks, Diversity, and homos against straight white males. And so many white women took the bait, but then, the female nature is essentially whore-ish, and women will go with the Power. As Jews held the power, so many white women became mental putty and bodily pooter in their hands. Jews are very clever. They understood that the white race would be stronger IF Political Correctness equally condemned white men and white women equally. Both would end up on the same boat and would be forced to work together as fellow moral lepers. Jews know that the most crucial unity of a people is between men and women, and that’s why Jews offered grace and forgiveness to white women IF they were to betray their own men and side with POC, blacks, and Jews. It’s like German women were offered protection IF they put out to Soviet Occupiers. Otherwise, they could be gang-raped or treated as badly as the German men. Jews pulled the same trick with Latin American whites. They knew that if they charged Anglo-American whites and Latin-American whites equally of ‘racism’ and ‘supremacism’, both groups would have no choice but to form a coalition. So as to divide the white race, Jews offered grace to Latin American whites(who could pretend to be ‘people of color’) AS LONG AS they worked with Jews against Anglo-American whites. Of course, Latin American whites, being generally venal and craven, took up the offer, and it was also because of their burning resentment against White Americans as having achieved so much more than Hispanic Whites who settled the New World south of the US. Jews remembered how Italian-Americans simply became a part of White America, with many of them becoming conservative Republicans, and Jews also remembered how white Cubans who fled Castro became some of the most rock-solid Republicans. They were not going to make that mistake with future Latin American whites who came to the US. So, just when Jews went out of their way to vilify, dehumanize, and demonize whiteness, they offered an olive branch to Latin-American whites as honorary People of Color IF they were to side with Jews against American Whites. This is why we see so many whitey-white Latin-Americans in the US pretending like they have more in common with Indios and brown Mestizos than with other Americans of European extraction. Jews are so clever.
Currently, Law & Order issues in America are problematic because whites have been condemned while blacks have been consecrated. The ideology-of-idolatry or ‘idology’ of America would like for us to believe that blacks are noble-souled folks while whites are intrinsically a bunch of nasty a**holes. Indeed, Law & Order would be extremely popular in America if whites committed most of the heinous crimes while blacks were the main interracial victims. So many people would call out for more Law & Order to suppress white criminality, especially to save the Noble Negroes from Wicked Whites. Then, Law & Order would be aligned with the ‘Idology’ and PC Narrative. But the reality says otherwise. It says that blacks, despite being 13% of the US population, make up the majority of super-thugs, and black crime in most areas is way out of proportion to their population. This led to the Crime Complex of America. Under the influence of PC, so many Americans(including Conservatives) want to believe in the nobility of blacks and the need for whites to do more to bring forth a truly just society. But reality makes mincemeat of that conceit because, by and large, blacks are NOT noble and, if anything, often rude, nasty, obnoxious, vicious, savage, demented, cruel, and unscrupulous to the max.


"Montage of mainstream media spreading fake news that #JussieSmollett was attacked by white men in MAGA hats."

American reality is at odds with American ‘spirituality’ of Magic Negro Worship. Granted, due to the influence of sports and rap music, many whites admire blacks for the badass-thug-value, but even that is a kind of ‘spiritual’ worship, albeit of a demonic nature; it assumes that blacks have superhuman powers of masterfulness. It’s like the cucky-wuck Rock critic Dave Marsh and dorky-shmorky documentarian CucKen Burns babbling endlessly about how blackness is so awesome and white folks would just be lame white-bread nothings without the black prometheus having gifted them the rhythm and beat. It’s as if blacks have real souls with burning fire whereas whites only have frozen souls, and so, white ice can only be thawed by the heat of black magic. The end-logic of all this is ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs on the premise that the black dong can warm the white pooter and plant the seed to produce the New Superior Race of Afro-Europeans. Black male meat must rub with white female meat to create the heat to ‘redeem’ the white race from an Ice People to a fellow Sun People. No wonder then that EU has become Afro-European Union, what with the likes of Emanuel Macron and Boris Johnson calling for endless millions of more Africans to come ashore and take white women while white men are reduced to pathetic cuckery.

But the fantasy of black nobility crashes against the reality of black savagery. All those black Africans in Europe will only spread the kind of mayhem and chaos that defines Sub-Saharan Africa. Even in North Africa and Middle East, the infusion of black genes among the Arabs and Egyptians hasn’t done any good. Indeed, the darker Arabs are generally far less accomplished than lighter Arabs. Consider the Arabs of Sudan or Yemen. And the black genetic material among southern Italians, Portuguese, and certain Latin Americans hasn’t turned them into Magical Sun People. If anything, North Africans would rather move to the White West than stay put in their own nations and, for sure, they do NOT want to move to Sub-Saharan Africa. Only in the silly fantasies of brainwashed white cuck minds are scum like Barack Obama and Oprah Winfrey the Hope of Mankind. Obama and Oprah have been nothing but ultra-grifters and egomaniacs who hustled white minds(turned into mush by Jewish control of academia and media) to grab the crown or to rake in the millions. Their status as national phenomena would not have been possible in a sober, serious, and sane nation grounded in reality, truth, and honesty.

Though there have been great religious movements in American History — beginning with the Great Awakening —, the dark side of mass-mentality set off by such events was the preference of Hope & Fantasy over Truth & Reality. Even secular America has carried on with this tradition. Since God and Jesus are no longer so relevant, people fall over themselves in rapture over Israel-Israel-Israel, Magic Negroes, Globo-Homos, and Jewish advertising campaigns. Such blind and gushing mind-set has a hard time processing reality, especially as ‘spiritual’ thought comes with powerful taboos. Since Jews-and-Israel are so sacrosanct, anyone who speaks truth to Jewish power must be a Vile ANTI-SEMITE. Since Negroes are so noble and wonderful, anyone who sees the dark side of blackness must be an Evil RACIST. Since Homos are so fabulous and sensational, anyone who sees the degeneracy of globo-homo worship must be a Despicable HOMOPHOBE. It’s virtually impossible to have a sane, sober, and/or serious discussion with people under such a spell. It’s like trying to convince a person infected with rabies that water isn’t harmful. Rabies isn’t called hydrophobia for nothing. It’s like trying to discuss the verity of religious claims with a True Believer. No matter how much you try to convince him or her that there is no evidence of miracles, they will insist on faith and, furthermore, condemn you as not just a non-believer but an agent of the Devil.

Blacks are like cows in India. To any rational mind and fairminded observer, it's obvious that letting cows run loose is bad for traffic, costly to society, and endangers many lives. But but but, Hindus in India believe cows to be sacred, and there isn't much that can be done about all the troubles they cause. Spiritual-thinking comes naturally to humans, but the downside is it can override reason and honest assessment of reality. Because cows are thought to be sacred, too many of them have been allowed to roam freely in India and wreak havoc in crucial sectors of society. Likewise, because blacks are regarded as holy, too many are allowed to romp and stomp around freely, and if they get way out of hand, we mustn’t blame 'blacks' because blackness is sacred; instead, we must focus on some other aspect of the perpetrators, such as their status as 'youths' or 'teens'. (And holy homos are allowed to take over entire cities in June and celebrate degeneracy, and of course, holy Jews have the license to mess up entire areas of Middle East with Wars for Israel[as the Neo-Crusades] and use Wall Street to rape entire economies. As we mustn’t badmouth the holy, we must just keep chanting 'Israel is our closest ally' and ‘God blesses those who bless the Jews’.)

It’s not enough to timidly assert, "It’s Okay to be White". People must wake up to reality and grow a pair and say the obvious: "Blacks are not sacred, blacks are not holy, blacks are not magical." Just because a people were treated unfairly in the past and because their story has been turned into a fairytale doesn’t alter the fact that, IN THE REAL WORLD, blacks are especially problematic and more prone to violence & psychopathy than the other races because of 200,000 yrs of evolution in the Dark Continent than 200 yrs of slavery in the New World. A myth that would have the most savage race be the most saintly race is worse than foolish. It is fatal to civilization.

Tuesday, May 15, 2018

From Extreme Virtue-as-Vice to Extreme Vice-as-Virtue: The Pathway to the Fall of the West

Many of us would like to live in a world of virtue. But utopias have failed time and time again. It is a hubris to think that we can create heaven on earth. People are not saints, and too often, the Rulers of Virtue have proven to be fanatical, arrogant, corrupt, and/or cynical. Che Guevara and Osama Bin Laden were purists committed to the Cause but pathological like Robespierre. Others talk the talk of virtue while grabbing everything for themselves. Communist regimes all came to be ruled by people not unlike the corrupted pigs at the end of ANIMAL FARM by George Orwell. The problem isn’t just disagreement as to what constitutes the best virtues or the ideal utopia. Even if everyone were to agree 100% on theory and blueprint, the problem of ego and vanity often get in the way of achieving the dream.

Therefore, even though it’s necessary for people to be as good as possible, we mustn’t be perfectionist in our expectations and execution. There must be leeway for failings and mistakes, a chance for redemption and improvement. Also, even good people are still animals and, as such, always under the temptation to deviate from the straight and narrow path of virtue. They need to blow off steam at times and even get a bit wild. The wild-animal side of us will always be there, just like a well-trained dog remains an animal and feels the urge to run wild and free once in a while.

This is why theocracies and ideocracies don’t make ideal societies. Theocracies may be committed to God and the Holy Truth. And its leaders may stress piety and sanctimony. And the masses may go along or pretend to. But man cannot know the mind of God. Sacred texts serve as guide but can’t ascertain what God wants us to do at every moment. There are innumerable ways to interpret God and sacred texts. Also, if we were to follow certain texts to the letter, it may well lead to our demise. Imagine what would happen if the West decided to truly live by the letter of Christianity, "Turn the other cheek" and all that. Also, crazy people can believe they have a special rapport with God. A crazy person is dangerous enough but when claiming to be the spokesman of God, all the more dangerous. More often than not, people just project their wishes onto God and then say God told them so-and-so. And we know from Televangelists that there is no shortage of charlatans and lunatics who use religion to turn people into suckers or fellow looneys.

Also, even if all the leaders and all the people of a theocracy may be good, decent, and virtuous, much of human progress comes not from virtue but from violations of norms. In other words, we must give Devil his due in stoking our egos, greed, vanity, and narcissism to seek further, strive harder, reach higher, and push it to the limit. So many of the great feats of mankind couldn’t have been achieved without hubris, greed, obsession, and/or megalomania.
Indeed, even religious prophets had something of the madman. Hubris is self-defeating in the end, but the reason why the West achieved more than other civilizations is it made greater room for egoism of the individual for whom enough was never enough(in fame, fortune, knowledge, discovery, and/or daring). Trying to climb Mt. Everest may have been foolish and egotistical, but someone did it because of the sheer audacity to do the impossible. Same with going to the Moon. So, there is a Faustian side to human progress, something that tends to be suppressed by theocracies that stress piety and humility before the Great Truth.

There is also the problem of violence and cruelty in theocracies and ideocracies. Being intolerant in their insistence on virtue, they tend to be brutal in suppressing dissenters, dissidents, and deviants. People who are perceived to be ‘different’ aren’t deemed only wrong or incorrect but evil or wicked. Therefore, so many people were burnt at the stake as witches. So many people were stoned to death for blasphemy. So many people were sent to the Gulag or shot in the head. Or they were made to sit through grueling sessions of re-education that was like mental torture. All such may have been done in the name of virtue(and sincerely too), but the sheer intolerance made for a repressive and fearful social order. Also, because such orders favor mediocrities who stick to dogma, there develops a pathological hatred for anyone who exhibits individual streak or spark. People who think or act differently are hated not only for being incorrect or impious but for having the audacity and daring to step away from the herd and assert his self-worth. Such courage makes the rest of the herd look craven and cowardly, and therefore, the man of daring is attacked not only for heresy but for heart. A repressive social order creates a community of cowards. But cowards don’t want to admit to their cowardice, which masquerades as collective conviction. And when a man of real courage comes forth and speaks otherwise, the cowards are triggered by his nerves and cooperate to silence and break him, not least to win approval from their masters. As such, a society committed to extreme virtue could actually turn into an inadvertent world of vice.

Therefore, even though virtue is to be valued, we don’t need a Virtutopia or Virtuocracy. People need to be more-or-less virtuous, and society must be governed by men of some virtue, but we can’t expect heaven on earth. We mustn’t be perfectionist with humanity, and we have to allow for differences, deviance, and even failings. Of course, society must stress virtue and use all its institutions, from family to education to government, to maintain a world of virtue. But society mustn’t expect heaven-on-earth of humble saints ruled by angelic sage-kings.

Now, what are the virtues and truths that make for a good society? Virtues warn against excesses of our natures. Everything good can become bad when pushed to excess. Appreciation of food, a necessity for survival and health, can turn into gluttony. The joys of sex can turn into out-of-control lust than basis for marriage and family. (Billy Boy Clinton is a classic example of a man unmade by excessive lust.) Even industriousness can turn into a kind of sickness, as with workaholic Ebenezer Scrooge. Even saintliness can become a vice-of-sorts. Surely, a man who is overly generous and selfless will be exploited by others. And being so busy giving to and living for others, he will never have a family for himself or have the urge to defend his own people and culture. This is why Christianity is a problematic religion. If not for the notion of Jesus as the Son of God, His excessive selfless devotion to mankind could be seen almost as a vice that did more harm than good. Christianity as a practiced religion is workable only because Jesus is said to be the Son of God, so He could go all the way in being perfect in virtue. However, it would be foolish for most of us to try to be like Him because we are not the Son of God and will just get whupped real bad without the resurrection and all that stuff. This is why it is said Jesus died for our sins. He did what we can’t be expected to do because we are not the Messiah. Most likely, we’ll end up like the guy in the Luis Bunuel film NAZARIN.
Furthermore, it must be stressed that Jesus’ message was NOT about saving the World or Humanity as a collective. Rather, it was about saving souls, and souls are individual possessions. Each person has his or her own soul, and each soul can be saved only on the individual level. Your people cannot be blessed or saved as a collective. You can’t ride on the good qualities of your people, just like you are not to be condemned by the bad qualities of your people. When it comes to Christian salvation, you must open up your own heart. Just because most people in your community are deemed good by God and will go to Heaven, it doesn't mean YOU get to hop on some collective magic carpet ride. The question is, "has your individual soul made a sincere effort to be nearer to God?"

For non-believers like most people on the Neo-Fascist Nationalist Humanist movement, it’s neither here nor there because we don’t believe in the godly and spiritual. Still, for those who do consider themselves as Christians on basis of faith, belief, or conviction — those with conviction may not literally believe in the Christian mythology but embrace what Jesus and Disciples stood for — , they need to remind themselves that Christianity was never meant to be about saving the world or humanity. Souls can only be saved on the individual level. It’s like what Jesus said to the crucified persons next to Him. They were all in the same boat. All crushed by the Romans. But Jesus offered salvation to the repentant but not to the repugnant. The problem with current Christianity is it goes for collective blessing and redemption. So, because blacks were slaves in the past, they are supposed to be holy as a collective. Christianity doesn’t work that way. You could have suffered a lot, but if you’re a lout and punk, you will not be saved. Indeed, Jesus was a very pessimistic figure and didn’t think highly of humanity and the world. He didn’t think either could be saved in its entirety or as a collective. The only thing that could be saved were individual souls that would repent. He would be the spiritual ark that would save them from the flood of puss and take them to Heaven. At any rate, the faithful can believe Jesus had such power because He is the Son of God. But even the most devoted Christian would be stupid to try to be like Jesus because he would get his ass whupped and that'd be that.

Anyway, let me try to illustrate why Moderate but Firm defense of Virtue with Tolerance for Vice is better than Extreme Virtue but then how the worst thing is Extreme Vice, especially when it pushes itself as the New Virtue. Consider the following options:

1. Extreme Virtue with zero tolerance of Vice. Theoretically, this sounds like the best possible world. An Eden where there is no evil. After all, what is wrong with a world where there is only good and no evil? The problem is we live in reality, not in theory. We heard of Eden and other Golden Ages in religions and mythologies, but we never saw one in reality. If there is to be Eden, there has to be an all-knowing God. We can conceive of such a Being, but we are not Him. And we can never know what He really wants and intends for us. Only God can create Eden or some utopia. Also, even the Bible says that man, being what he is, ruined Eden. And in Buddhism, it is said that the 'perfect' world in which Siddhartha grew up was just an illusion.
So, we can’t have Eden or utopia. We can work towards the Better but we don’t know what perfection is. Also, good people can be filled with doubt, whereas bad people can be full of conviction, like in the poem "The Second Coming" by Y. W. Yeats. The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.
Now, putting aside the possibility that the satanic can pose itself as angelic, let’s assume the world is to be ruled with an iron-fist by the best and the brightest. Let’s say these people are genuinely intelligent, good-hearted, fair-minded, morally serious, courageous, and filled with integrity. Why shouldn’t such people have total control and use draconian means in favor of virtue against vice? But even genuinely good people are not all-knowing. They too could make mistakes. Even the most brilliant minds cannot foresee the future or understand the full consequences of their actions that seem good and sound at the moment. If the sincerely virtuous stick to the tried-and-true, society will never change and make progress. It will not grow. If the sincerely virtuous are so sure of their reforms, there’s the danger of radicalism. Robespierre was a sincere revolutionary, a man of true integrity and courage. But in the end, he was blinded by his own virtue. His virtue turned into hubris.
It may well be that many of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionaries were sincere men of virtue who sought to transform Iran into a Republic of Virtue in tune with Allah’s wisdom and in opposition to the soulless and materialistic West. Surely, there were among them many men of courage who’d survived persecution and torture. But the righteousness of virtue can easily turn into self-righteousness, and it can blind people to other views and perspectives that, if not equal in value, are nevertheless of some value.
Many communist revolutionaries of Russia, China, Vietnam, and Cuba were men of sincere commitment to the revolution and the creation of the New Man. And they truly believed that Marxism provided the template for creating a new classless order in which all humans would be equal in value and virtue. But in the end, the moral spartanism of communism turned into a prison of body, mind, and soul.
This is why even most Muslims don’t want to live in a Muslim theocracy. And even most Christians don’t want to live in a Christian theocracy. In the end, Theocracies are not ruled by God but by men who claim to speak for God. But some of these Men of God turn out to be corrupt and cynical. Others turn out to be kooky, like the current Pope. Some turn out to be sincere in conviction and seriousness, but that leads to self-righteousness that turns into an iron-fist. Who wants to live in a world ruled by Martin Luther or John Calvin? They were sincere men, but their hearts beat like hammers.

2. Moderate but Firm Virtue but with Tolerance for Vice. This formula sums up the Bourgeois West of the late 19th century and much of the 20th century. This was the basis for Liberal Democracies or Enlightened autocracies. Such an order has a general sense of The Good. Centrality of family, respect for tradition, respect for religion, acceptance of progress based on science and facts, respect for responsible use of reason, admiration for creative talent, appreciation of manners and good habits, meritocracy & Rule of Law, need for duty & diligence, and freedom + responsibility for one’s freedom. This Order of Virtue didn’t claim to have ALL the answers or The Truth. It didn’t claim to speak for God. But based on tradition, reason, caution, and experimentation, it had a general sense of the Good as opposed to the Bad.
And yet, because we don’t know All the Good and All the Bad, it was willing to be tolerant of new attitudes and modes of behavior that may seem ‘bad’ at the moment but might prove to be good or have some worth later. After all, if the History of Art teaches us anything, it’s that the contemporaries often failed to appreciate the seminal works of their time. The most famous example may be Vincent van Gogh, though this idea has been corrupted of late, what with every atrocious and untalented hack being praised to heaven as someone ahead of his or her time(which is total nonsense since much of the Art World is nothing but a hype machine). Because even the most intelligent, well-meaning, and well-intentioned elites can’t know everything about everything, it would be foolish for them to decide what is ACCEPTABLE and what is NOT. They may pass judgement but shouldn’t have the power to say certain expressions should be banned. They could be right at most times, but there is the odd chance that they could be wrong. What they see as ‘vice’ may actually be a new kind of virtue or, even if not a virtue, a thing of some value. The works of Picasso can’t be said to add to moral or social virtue of a civilization but they do have value as works of originality and genius and, as such, add something of value to civilization.

Also, in a liberal democracy, we must accept the fact that some people have different orientations, and we should take a live-and-let-live attitude AS LONG AS people keep it personal and private. So, if homos want to bugger one another or if Paul Johnson the historian wants to be spanked in the ass by a dominatrix, it’s not my business. Or if guys want to get together and drink too much and act the fool over a weekend, let them... as long as they are mindful not to cause harm to others.

3. The Rise of Vice and Tolerance of Virtue. This is very problematic and increasingly became the mode of the West beginning in the late 1960s, culminating in the 1990s. We went from the Bourgeois Order to the Boomer Disorder. There is some good things to be said about the boomers and counterculture. They found their parents to be overly materialistic & ‘plastic’. Flush with new prosperity following WWII, too many of the ‘Greatest Generation’ folks focused on keeping up with the Joneses. It’s like the upper-middle class folks in THE GRADUATE and THE SWIMMER. Naturally, young people wanted to say NO to ‘plastic’ and YES to authenticity. But their mode of self-discovery got enmeshed with indulgence with too much sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll, like with the daughter in PEOPLE NEXT DOOR, the forerunner of THE EXORCIST.

The defining culture of the Boomer generation was Rock Music steeped in reckless hedonism, leering sexuality, youthful exuberance as middle finger to maturity & responsibility, and cool-centrism that favored style over substance, the image over the thing itself, and the instant over longevity. Thus, Vice pushed Virtue to the sidelines. After all, Vice is cool whereas Virtue is square. The nihilistic Eastwood of Spaghetti Westerns and amoral & suave James Bond of 007 movies were cooler than Classic Westerns and other Hollywood Classics steeped in moralism. (If moralism lived on, it was in anointing blacks, Jews, and later homos as new sacred icons.)

Even so, Vice didn’t take the place of Virtue. It was still understood that Vice should not be confused with Virtue. It was just that Vice was a lot cooler. It’s why the young kid wants to follow the egotistical libertine band in ALMOST FAMOUS. His mother might be right about the negative influence of Sex, Drugs, & Rock n Roll, but THAT happens to be central cultural mode of the kid and his friends(as is the case with the high schoolers in DAZED AND CONFUSED by Richard Linklater). There’s no greater failing among these boys and gals than being ‘square’ and ‘lame’. But even though Vice was prized as more fun-and-cool than Virtue, there was still a grudging respect for Virtue and Tradition. The Counterculture may have cooked up JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR, a Rock opera version of the Gospels, but Jesus was still the ‘superstar’ of Truth, not John Lennon or Mick Jagger.

4. Vice as the New Virtue and the Intolerance of True Virtue.

The Age we live in is truly sick and degenerate. Over-emphasis on Vice is bad enough. Still, a world of sinners conscious of their fallen-ness is still a world that knows the difference between virtue and vice. In such a world, degenerate gamblers in Las Vegas, at the very least, know they are indulging in vice. But imagine a world where gambling is seen not so much as regulated vice but the New Virtue, one that even provides ‘historical justice’ for American Indians and ‘rejuvenates’ local economies. Imagine a world where the supposedly conservative political party depends on donations from a casino mogul, someone like the loathsome Sheldon Adelson. Imagine a world where pornography isn’t merely tolerated as popular Vice but as the New Virtue of female empowerment? And maybe prostitution too(though pornography is essentially videotaped vicarious-prostitution). Imagine a world where homosexuality isn’t merely tolerated as a sexual deviance of those born with weird sexual predilections but something wondrous, miraculous, and rainbow-like, indeed something so glorious that children must be acculturated to adore and admire homos and trannies from the youngest possible age. Imagine a world where it’s perfectly wonderful for people to emotionally(and even intellectually) grow up backwards, becoming less mature and more infantile with each passing year. So, we often find women in their 30s and 40s with pink-or-green hair, tattoos, and piercings acting dumber and sillier than when they were 10 or 12. A world where people emerge from colleges looking, feeling, and acting more childish than when they entered. After all, PC infantilizes the mind. Imagine a world where women baring their breasts, buttocks, and vaginas in public is justified and championed on grounds of liberation, emancipation, and progress when it’s just mentally deranged women acting worse than apes.

Such is a world far worse than the Counterculture world of boomers, an experimental moment of excitement and uncertainty and transition. In the 60s and early 70s, there were many contending ‘schools’, and none of them had gained the power of Political Correctness. Also, much of the Vice unleashed by the 60s was defended as relatively harmless vice. The argument was that most people were not saints and even saints had flaws. So, just as utopia is impossible, so is virtutopia. Also, the idealized images of Americana, such as LEAVE IT TO BEAVER and FATHER KNOWS BEST, were TV fantasies and didn’t reflect the reality that was far darker and more complex. So, the idea was that people should develop a live-and-let-live way. Be more tolerant, even of vices and flaws in people.

But our world is radically different from the BAD-NEWS-BEARS culture of tolerance(and slovenliness) of the 70s. Ours is an era when so many people are convinced that Vice is the New Virtue. Having been inculcated thus by PC and Pop Culture, we live in a world where people believe in ‘gay marriage’ as a quasi-spiritual triumph and pretend that BLM garbage has moral value as the New Civil Rights Movement. At the very least, when black riots exploded in the 60s, even Liberals understood blacks had gone bonkers. Even as they continued to feel sympathy for blacks, they knew that those burning down cities weren’t just innocent babes. The Radical Chic infatuation that lent support to Black Panthers and other radical groups was seen as foolhardy by most Liberals, and the Democratic Party was deeply divided on the race issue. But fast forward to today, and BLM is a totally manufactured lie, a ‘Hate Hoax’ on a massive scale. And yet, the Mass Media, Academia, and the Government pretended as if it is some tremendous moral movement. (This is especially disingenuous since the reason for tougher policing in big cities was the globo-proggy-yuppie desire to revitalize urban areas by clamping down on black crime.)
As for Jewish Vice-as-Virtue, it is the queen bee of them all. Jews control the media and pushed the BLM narrative. Jews have also been most responsible for the elevation of Homomania as a neo-religion, a form of Satanic-Jewish-christianity or SJC. It was part of their design to destroy Christianity as the predominant cultural and moral value system of the West. To Jews, Christianity will forever mean "goyim stole our God thanks to renegade Jesus and Paul" and "goyim, armed with God and Jesus, feel more ‘evolved’ and righteous than us Jews." The New Testament says the Son of God was killed by Jews, and He was resurrected. This is why Jews at Google will NOT acknowledge Easter, but they will run theme after theme about homos, trannies, and the like. Queertianity or Satanic-Jewish-christianity(SJC) is owned and controlled by Jews, and that is why anyone who comes under its sway becomes the tools of Jews. This way, God comes to belong only to Jews whereas dumb goyim are led to worship the holy homo anus. Now, there are Jews who also sincerely believe in Homomania and don’t care about real religions, but the REAL REASON why so many rich and powerful Jews got behind Homomania was its likely effect on goyim, especially white Christian goyim. If those dumb goyim could be made to worship holy homo anus or Bruce Jenner’s penis-as-vagina more than God and Jesus, then they’ve been stripped of moral pride. After all, Homomania has no moral depth and relies solely on hype and hysteria. Remove all that Wall-Street-Las-Vegas-Hollywood-Silicon-Valley financing, and Homomania will collapse overnight because there is nothing there, nothing that is real or meaningful. It’s the delirious make-believe that what homos do with one another has equal biological or moral value as what men and women do in acts of Real Sex. Homomania would have us believe that homo fecal penetration is worthy of being associated with the rainbow and of serving as the basis for ‘marriage’. It is not about tolerance of homosexuals(and even trannies) but celebration, elevation, and deification of homos and trannies as holy angels. This is why proggy parents want their kids to be led by homos in Boy Scouts or spend time in kindergarten and pre-school with trannies. They believe their children will be blessed by 'angels'. This is why so many people feel better about themselves if they can claim to have a ‘gay’ friend(or a black or Jewish friend).

Since homos and trannies aren’t merely to be tolerated but sanctified, anyone who says NO to Homomania is deemed a heretic and to be destroyed. Thus, a decent, moral, and courageous baker who will not make a ‘gay wedding cake’ will be targeted, demeaned, dehumanized, fined, and bankrupted. Those who gleefully call for such a person’s destruction aren't secular libertarians motivated by ‘equal treatment under the law’ but rabid & virulent crazed neo-religious types whose faith is Homomania. For them, a decent and moral baker who won’t cave to the degeneracy of ‘gay marriage’ is a heretic, witch, and devilish monster who must be burned at the stake. Their foaming-at-the-mouth and lunatic rage cannot be explained in terms of legal matter or rational argument. They are true-believing fanatics who, being empty souls devoid of genuine morality and faith, have had their spiritual vacuum filled with degeneracy-fitted-with-angel-wings. Sick souls gravitate toward degeneracy, but even sick souls long for some kind of meaning and validation. So, nothing is more appealing to such people than vice-as-virtue. This way, the sick souls can wallow in vice and degeneracy while, at the same time, believing themselves to be morally and spiritually superior to those who refuse to come onboard and must therefore be stoned or burned at the stake in ritualized PC madness.
A world where Vice is more prevalent than Virtue is bad enough, but a world that mistakes Vice as New Virtue and wages war on Virtue as the New Vice is a truly demented one. It is the one we are living in because the world is controlled by the West that is under the power of EOJ or the Empire of Judea. We are living in a world where the Lie is the New Truth.

Imagine a game of 2 + 2. We all know that 2 + 2 = 4. An excessively virtuous world of 2 + 2 = 4 would force all people to adhere to the truth that 2 + 2 = 4... or else. Such a world would be virtuous but not very free. After all, even if 2 + 2 = 5 is false, why shouldn’t people have the freedom to say what is wrong? Shouldn’t freedom tolerate falsehood? Also, how can society move beyond 2 + 2 = 4 IF people are made to fear being wrong in their calculations. Progress in mathematics, like in everything else, came about through many mistakes, trial-and-error, and theorems that failed. If an order excessively insists on the truth of 2 + 2 = 4, people will fear being wrong, and that will make for a dull, fearful, and less experimental society. While many calculations other than 2 + 2 = 4 may be wrong, some might lead to new possibilities that arrive at greater formulas.
Now, imagine a society that tolerates a mistake like 2 + 2 = 5. The calculation is plainly wrong, but a free society should tolerate mistakes and even falsehoods AS LONG AS those with the truth can rebut and correct the lies and delusions. So, a world where people can say 2 + 2 = 5, 2 + 2 = 10, 2 + 2 = 100, 2 + 2 = 900, and etc. is indeed a free society. It would still maintain the truth of 2 + 2 = 4, but it would allow for people to make mistakes or say something ludicrous for the sake of freedom. So, if you want to say 2 + 2 = 1,000,000, so be it. It’d be fantastical, but fantasy can be fun... like James Bond falling out of an airplane but somehow managing to land safely on a yacht with a woman in a bikini.

But then, imagine a world that has come to accept 2 + 2 = 5 as a Holy Formula. It cannot be challenged or questioned because anyone who does so shall be denounced and/or destroyed as a five-o-phobe, a ‘hateful’ 4-ist, or ‘intolerant’ 4-centrist. So, even people who know that 2 + 2 = 4 dare not voice their views and remain mum while the powers-that-be in media, academia, entertainment, and government instill so many minds that 2 + 2 = 5 = rainbow = happy faces = coolness = holiness. This is truly a kind of hell. Not only has falsehood been tolerated but elevated to the status of New Holy Truth. Since the sacred hates the profane, the New Sacred Formula of 2 + 2 = 5 cannot tolerate the Formula of 2 + 2 = 4 that, as long as it is allowed to be muttered, could challenge and discredit the falsehood of 2 + 2 = 5.

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Of Needles and Balloons - Two Kinds of Ideologies & Two Kinds of Sensibilities


The Current Discourse can be characterized as a contest between needles and balloons. Guess which will win when needles meet balloons. Needles of course. Needles are steely and sharp. Balloons may be bigger, but they are full of hot air and soft on the outside. Truth is like a needle, and lie is like a balloon. Integrity and honesty are like a needle, and deception and falsehood are like a balloon. Needles do not fear balloons. If anything, they are eager to pop and expose them as mostly inflated rubber holding nothing but hot air. In contrast, balloons are deathly afraid of needles because even the slightest prick can expose their emptiness.

Granted, a discourse could be between needle and needle or between balloon and balloon. Certainly, the ideological debate between Democrats and Republicans is one of balloon vs balloon. It’s a contest of hot air of empty rhetoric pre-scripted and pre-packaged by the oligarchs, the network, and the handlers. It’s about paid politician as streetwalkers for globalist oligarchic pimps. But the contest could be between needle vs needle. After all, two opposing sides could be equal in intelligence, honesty, and integrity even if they see things differently. Or both sides may be sincere in their conviction that truth is really on their side. After all, we can never know the whole truth. We can only know some of the truth, and we are all affected by some degree of subjective bias or personal passion.

Also, virtue is no guarantee for verity. A person may have all the integrity, ability, and courage, but his knowledge of truth is limited to his access to education and information. Furthermore, human character is less about known facts than about one’s ethos and values. A person can be virtuous within the context of Hindu customs or within the framework of Islamic culture. All True Believers, even of false doctrines or dubious ideologies, can be men of integrity and character if they are sincere in their conviction and courageous in their principles.
This is why basic virtues aren't sufficient to make people strive for the truth. Every thought system makes demands on people to be serious, committed, and loyal. Through obedience and adherence to core values, people can be virtuous.
But a higher value can only be attained by an individual quest for truth. A person mustn’t only receive and revere the Truth handed down to him but question its assumptions, meaning, implications, and validity. This is a higher kind of integrity than sincere devotion to the Order.

It is that combination of curiosity and courage that makes for a needle. A ‘conservative’ or a ‘liberal’ who merely conforms to what he’s been told by the Authority or the Official Narrative cannot be a needle. Such people are filled with varying amounts of air or limp without air, but they are essentially passive in their submissiveness to the Order. They are dogs and teachers’ pets of the world. Or, being just plain lazy, all their ideas come from Pop Culture that is controlled by Jews, homos, and cucky-wucks.
To be a needle, one needs to step outside the box. The truth is not in being ‘left’ or ‘hard left’ or ‘right’ or ‘hard right’ but in the individual will to ask questions and understand the deeper layers of power.

Also necessary is a kind of personal sensibility that favors sobriety and probity over frivolity and insipidity. The Power knows this all too well. It fears the Needles, and that is why the 2 PC’s — Political Correctness and Pop Culture — are geared toward making us shallow, immature, infantile, delusional, escapist, and stupid. When one’s primary ideology revolves around LGBTQ fantasies of 50 genders, Afromania of BLM & Rap, mindless mantras about Diversity, porny version of feminism with pussy-costumes, tattoos-piercings-hair-color, and etc., you can never be a serious person asking serious questions and seeking serious truths. Style has value but only as an accent on substance. Style cannot substitute substance, especially if it happens to be demented and stupid, as so many styles are today.

The needles are serious people who are not afraid to ask the essential questions about the Power and the Way of the World. Needles are not afraid to connect the dots in ways that deviate from the official dictates of the Power. Needles have something of the Greek Hero in them. Something inside them want to challenge the gods and know of their secret. They want to discover the truth behind the Wizard in the World of Oz. And this is why the Power fears and hates the needles the most.

And yet, the System needs needles because only needles can probe for the truth. Yet, needles are dangerous because they can pop the Official Balloon at the center of any system, left and right. So, the System tries to allow the freedom of needles in most areas EXCEPT against the Core Balloon that holds the hot air of Dogma. The Catholic Church, for instance, allowed and encouraged needles in many scientific endeavors but wanted to protect the balloon of the Geo-centric Universe that was deemed to be essential to the spiritual premise of Church and Faith. Every system seeks to maximize the power of truth because truth is more useful than falsehoods. Try building a rocket with false calculations or assumptions. Every scientific discovery or mathematic solution is a needle. They can be used to further the power of the system. But what about the political justification for the system? For communism to survive, Marxism-Leninism could not be doubted or questioned. Though it began as a sharp instrument aimed at the hot balloon of the Tsarist and then Social-Democratic system, it turned into a big balloon once the New Order was firmly ensconced with its own myths, symbols, and slogans. Communism became a big balloon with hammer & sickle painted on it. But despite its grandiose size, it could easily be busted with a prick of a needle. And this is why the balloon had to be protected from critical/skeptical/analytical needles by a vast apparatus of brass knuckles. The balloon needed a safe space from needles. Since balloon can’t stand up to the pricks of needles, it had to rely on the power of fists. It’s like the game of scissors-paper-and-hammer. Papers can’t stand up to sharp scissors, but the blunt hammer can bash the scissors.

And the world we live in is very much one of balloons, needles, and iron fists. Jews used to represent the needles of America when they spoke truth(or clever lies) to power. Jews were like a skillful acupuncturist probing into all parts of Wasp America to find how the system works. Its strengths and weaknesses. Its reactions to the needles. Even though Anglos were called Wasps, all the stinging was done by Jews. Some Jews needled the power for the truth or justice. But others just wanted to deflate the Wasp balloon so that they could take over as the new masters of America.

But a system cannot be sustained with search for truth alone. It has to be filled with a Narrative with the stuff of myth, vision, and holiness. There has to be a quasi-spiritual faith in the system as something more than a realm of facts. It had promote itself as a realm of sanctity. So, Jews created a new balloon with the Narrative air of Shoah, Afromania, Diversity(via Lazarus-ian mass immigration), and etc.

It wasn’t enough that Jews won by meritocracy in intellect and drive. After all, superiority in intelligence and wealth doesn’t necessarily mean justification for power and control. A people can be intelligent and influential but vile and wicked. Talent means more ability, not more morality. After all, Jews had gained lots of financial success in Europe and were regarded as smart/clever, but that didn’t make the gentiles love the Jews any better. In order for Jewish Power to be protected, it needed to be inflated and shrouded with a Narrative. And Jews found the Shoah Narrative highly effective in making Jews out to be the greatest victims of all time and in instilling ‘guilt’ among white goyim.
Some may regard the ‘holocaust deniers’ as courageous needles, but they are more like idiots cutting their own flesh. While there can be serious and probing revision of Shoah, most of what goes by ‘Holocaust Denial’ is truly moronic stuff. Incidentally, the real danger of the Shoah Narrative isn't in the suppression of free speech but in the ‘sacralization’ of Jews into a holy race. Such deification of a group of humanity can be dangerous IF the people become very powerful. If we all deified Eskimos, it can’t do us much harm because Eskimos have little power. But if, as the result of Shoah Narrative, we were to regard Jews as wise, wonderful, perfect, and noble, it means we won’t be properly alert to the nature of Jewish power. Also, because of the ‘sacralization’ via the Shoah Narrative, we’ve effectively been banned from taking a cold hard look at Jewish history and learn of Jewish perfidy, abuses, corruptions, and ‘historical crimes’. So, while we regard most peoples’ histories as a mix of good and bad, noble and ignoble, we tend to see all of Jewish history as one of wise, wonderful, and blameless Jews having been set upon by wicked gentiles who never had a rational reason for feeling animus toward the Jews.
Indeed, what Jews fear most is not ‘Holocaust Denial’ but serious discussion and criticism of Jewish history and power. The main purpose of the Shoah Narrative isn’t to suppress the ‘denial of Holocaust’ but to keep alive the aura of Jewish sanctity that maintains the Jew Taboo that forbids honest discussion of Jewish history and power.

In a way, both Jews and blacks triumphed and won in the West due to meritocracy though in different fields. When faced with a superior rival, only social race-ism will protect a people. We understand this in mankind's relation to animals. If we struggled with animals on the meritocratic basis of brute strength, animals would crush us. So, we ‘cheat’ via social species-ism that says species exist, species are different, and we-as-humans need to be conscious of our species and do whatever is necessary to secure our survival and advantage over animals. If humans were to compete with animals on the basis of natural species-ism, many animals would gain advantage over humans because, in the contest of tooth and claw, humans cannot win against bears, wolves, buffaloes, elephants, hippos, etc. Humans could only win via social species-ism that allowed for ‘cheating’ with spears, arrows, barriers, and shelters. So, we’ve created an artificial world that keeps animals out.
Likewise, white people could only maintain a secure place for themselves against Jews and blacks only through social race-ism. As Jews are smarter than whites and as blacks are more muscular than whites, there was no way whites could win against Jews in a contest of natural race-ist contest of wits. And there was no way whites could win against blacks in a contest of natural race-ist contest of fists.
The Natural is race-ist in that it created different races with different abilities. So, natural race-ism made Jews smarter than blacks, and it made blacks stronger than Jews. And it made Jews smarter than whites, and it made blacks tougher than whites.
Whites understood the ramifications of natural race-ism via-a-via Jews and blacks. So, whites instituted quotas against Jews in elite colleges and barred Jews from certain clubs. It was the ONLY way to maintain the order of white power. Natural-meritocratic competition with Jews would not lead to equality or parity but to Jewish supremacism over whites. Now, this might not have been so bad IF whites could speak truth to Jewish Power once Jews became King of the Hill, but Jews cleverly denied this possibility by pushing the Shoah Narrative that sanctified Jews into a quasi-holy race. So, Jews not only won with meritocracy but were protected from criticism by sanctimonious taboos. And much of the problems of America and the World can be traced to the sanctification of Jews.
It allowed leeway for Jewish power to become especially corrupt and megalomaniacal. Too many Jews are now intoxicated not only with power and hubris but with moral and pseudo-spiritual vanity. They are full of themselves. This is dangerous because Jews, as the masters of the Empire of Judea(or EOJ), are now the most powerful people on Earth with too much hatreds for too many peoples: Russians, Iranians, Syrians, Palestinians, White gentiles, etc.
Anyway, the lesson from the rise of Jewish supremacist power is that natural race-ism leads to hierarchy and domination, not equality. Meritocracy for Jews led not to Jewish equality with gentiles but Jewish supremacist domination over gentiles who are seen as cattle and dogs by Jews.

Whites suffered the same fate with blacks, albeit in the realm of physicality. Natural race-ist competition between whites and blacks could only lead to black supremacism than racial equality. Having more fast-twitch muscles, stronger bones, and faster reflexes, blacks were bound to dominate sports if whites and blacks were made to compete on an equal footing. Therefore, whites needed social race-ism to create a secure space for white manhood and pride. Whites, especially white men, were totally justified in fearing the stronger, tougher, and meaner Negro. If whites dropped social race-ism, the future wasn’t racial equality or parity but black physical domination, black destruction of white manhood, and black colonization of white wombs(and pathetic cucky-wuckery for white men). So, why didn’t whites speak out on this? D.W. Griffith did try with THE BIRTH OF A NATION, but even he failed because the Wasp character was into either white pride or gentlemanly ideal. White pride led many whites into denial. They continued to believe in the Great White Hope or pretend that whites were tougher and could beat up blacks. Such pride was hollowed out when blacks totally came to dominate sports and conquer millions of white wombs. Now, white males are cuck-dorks who kneel before blacks. If the white priders were too full of themselves to admit to their fear of the Negro and sound the racial alarm, the gentlemanly types felt it was beneath contempt to speak of vulgar biological realities. They preferred the world of rules and agreements. Since ‘may the best man win’ is a gentlemanly value, they eventually decided the fair and honorable thing was to let the Negro compete equally in sports with the white man. The result was predictable. Blacks totally crushed whites. Worse, even the gentlemanly hope that the dignity of sportsmanship would rub off on the ‘groids’ didn’t come to pass. Black nature being wilder and funkier, blacks intoxicated with pride of sports domination just acted like jungle warrior and showered whitey with nothing but contempt and derision. White gentlemanly delusions about blacks didn’t pan out. Blacks soon reverted to their jungleman ways. (Whites would have been better off if more of them spoke of racial matters like Howard Stern or Tom Buchanan of THE GREAT GATSBY. Buchanan is uber-wasp but oddly fully of grubby chutzpah when it comes to matters of race. His talk isn't gentlemanly but more blunt and candid.)

But as with Jews, it was worse than that. Just as Jews were ‘sacralized’ by the Shoah Narrative, blacks were ‘sacralized’ with slavery-Jim-Crow-and-MLK narrative. So, blacks not only physically kicked white butt but were seen as black jesuses and even black god. Now, if blacks had won athletically and physically(especially through crime and thuggery) and if whites could call out on black abuses and bad behavior, there would be some push-back against the threatening and destructive power of blacks. But because of the sacralization of blacks, whites not only got clobbered by blacks in the stadiums and streets but they couldn’t even honestly voice criticism of bad black behavior. Indeed, the Official Narrative of America now says whites must praise, admire, and worship the very people who rob them of manhood and/or property. So, if a black guy whups a white guy and humps white women, the proper thing for the white guy is to be a white boy like CucKen Burns and praise the Negro to high heaven as the sacred master race. This is why a people cannot survive and secure their existence without an intelligent use of social race-ism. As the first true race-ist, Aristotle said so himself.

And of course, Homos complete the Holy Three along with Jews and blacks. As such, the three groups have immense power in the West. And for that reason, it is incumbent upon honest critics and observers to be needles and prick the balloons of falsehood and sanctimony about the three powerful groups.
The truth is that Jews are indeed smarter, blacks are indeed tougher, and homos are more creative in certain areas. But the other truth is that these advantages also lead to lots of abuses. Jews use their domination of finance, law, and high-tech to pull all sorts of dirty tricks. Bernie Madoff was one of the worst but not alone. Now, Jews threaten to engulf the world with war just to further their ambition for global domination.
And too many blacks act like thugs and louts because they think "We can whup people’s ass". The blend of black vanity and thuggery has led to a very ugly culture in America. And homos have used their great power to elevate themselves as a race of angels even though the main distinction between normal straight people and homos is that the latter are into gross fecal penetration. Homos have done much to degrade moral norms and to impose degeneracy as the New Decency. Also, all the lies we’ve been forced to swallow about homos have led to a culture of lies where truth has become as murky as biological sex in a gender studies program. And so, the responsible thing is for us to speak truth to Jewish power, black power, and homo power. We need to bust their bubbles.
After all, they initially gained power by pricking the bubbles of white lies, hypocrisy, and betrayal of principles. White Americans said the US is about equality of man and rule of law. But slavery gave lie to such an ideal. And white gentiles said US is about opportunity based on merit. But there were quotas against Jews in elite colleges. And traditional society and even psychology used to insist that homosexuality is a mental disease when, in fact, some people are naturally born with such deviant orientation.

So, the needles that pricked the false balloons in the past had value in advancing the truth. But that was then, this is now. We now live in a world where Jews themselves use quotas to favor their own kind over others in elite colleges. Also, Jewish power isn’t only about merit but (1) tribal and race-ist networking a (2) use of Jew Taboo to silence dissent and (3) White Submissivism that has made whites feel that they must deny their own identity and interests in favor of Jewish identity and interests. And blacks are out of control as criminals and thugs in so many communities. Jim Crow is ancient history in an America where black thuggery is not only tolerated but worshiped as ‘cool’, especially in the Rap realm. And homos, with the backing of Jewish Power, replaced Christianity with Homomania or Queertianity as the neo-religion of the West.

In other words, Jewish power, black power, and homo power have now reached a point that exceeds the bounds of merit. Jews did gain much by meritocracy, but once they got the power, they used the Shoah Narrative to browbeat any prospective critic of Jewish Power and to implement any scheme, no matter how ugly and demented, to further Jewish supremacism. The sight of tiny little Israel creates the false impression that Jews are merely worried about the security and survival of that tiny little state. In fact, the main obsession of Jews isn’t Israel but the Empire of Judea, of which Israel is the Temple, NY is the bank, LA is the myth factory, Las Vegas is the cash cow, and Pentagon is the hammer. The Empire of Judea has tentacles all over the globe though, of course, Jews project their octopus-like nature on others, currently on Putin.

As for blacks, they are no longer in the age of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD. Indeed, assigning school children with the book MANDINGO would be closer to the mark of where we are. Civil Rights Era is long gone. Blacks are in thug and beast mode. They feel arrogance and contempt toward other races. (But there is a GROUNDHOG DAY mentality that always resets the clock to the twilight of the Jim Crow. We are stuck in the conundrum of TO KILL A GROUNDHOG.)
And millions and millions of black Africans now believe that the West and white world exist only to serve and put out to blacks, not least because the world has become saturated with Hollywood images of noble blacks bestowing wisdom and coolness on the pale and vapid white race that can only be redeemed by Jewish genius, Negro cool, and homo radiance.

This is sheer cultishness and very dangerous because Jews, Negroes, and homos are now very powerful, albeit in different areas for different reasons. And this may prove to be even a bigger problem for EU. If whites everywhere are supposed to revere and worship blacks and if millions of black Africans wash ashore in Europe and cause so many troubles, are white people supposed to shut up and just keep praising blacks to high heaven? How is that any different from how Germans behaved during WWII? Instead of needling Hitler’s megalomania, too many Germans worshiped him and served him loyally to the end that saw the total ruination of Germany. Even though Diversity is sold as redemption for ‘white supremacism’ and ‘racism’, it has the same logic as the lunacy that engulfed Nazi Germany. It has Taboos and Sacraments that cannot be questioned despite all the facts to the contrary.
It’s a fact that blacks are tougher, more aggressive, and less intelligent. They are more psychopathic. Too many of them will destroy white manhood, and when white manhood goes, so does white womanhood as white women will become infected with jungle fever. And then, as Europe gets overtaken by wild black junglemen, it will be the fall of the West. But this truth cannot be spoken because it’s... uh... ‘racist’! We are supposed to tremble with fear before that bogus PC term that is meant to have the effect of ‘bad doggy’!

We need to speak the truth. It is time for needles. We need to prick the balloons of Jewish supremacism, black supremacism, and homo supremacism. These balloons are protected from the needles of truth by the iron fist of deep state, Jewish financial blackmail, the police that is controlled by ZOG, and Antifa Janissary(that is protected by the police).
The balloons are well-protected, but nothing can be completely protected. Just like Michael Corleone found a way to get Sollozzo and Captain McClusky in THE GODFATHER and Hyman Roth in THE GODFATHER PART 2, there are smart ways to use the needle against balloons. And then, it will be GOOOOAAAAAAL.