Why Jews Turned Diversity into a Hate Cult & Why the Jew Taboo Preempts European Resistance to the Real Power behind Diversity

Jews, whites, and Diversity. A conundrum.

Jews use the Diversity Card to secure their Tribal Supremacist Power. Jews have elite power but are weak in numbers. As only 2% of the population, they feel vulnerable against the 98% that is gentile. So, Jewish rely on growing Diversity to create divisions among gentiles and to use non-whites against the diminishing white majority.

But there is a problem. Jews have a hard time making Diversity(masses of non-whites) love Jews. Mexicans and Asians are indifferent to Jews. Blacks tend to be hostile. Muslims even more so. Hindus will play every which way.
So, Diversity cannot side with Jews on the basis of love. Many non-whites see Jews as too rich, too powerful, or too corrupt. Many see the GOP as the bigger Israel First party.

So, if Jews can’t get Diversity on-board the Jewish train on the basis of love for Jews, the only option is on the basis of hatred toward whites. So, notice how PC made Nancy Pelosi’s grandchild feel ashamed of his whiteness. He wants to be of another race. Whites are made to hate their own kind, and non-whites are made to envy, resent, and hate whites, even as they want to be with whites and get stuff from whites.

Diversity is a Hate Cult. If Jews could have made non-whites love Jews, it might have been a sunnier cult. But Jews have failed to make most non-whites care much about Jews. If anything, plenty of non-whites just see Jews as the richest whites. Also, growing numbers of non-whites favor BDS over ADL.

So, the only way Diversity can be an effective tool of Jews is by making it into a hate campaign against whites. Unite non-whites under the banner of hatred against whites if it's impossible to unite them under the banner of love for Jews.

Anyone who knows anything should know that Jews use Diversity as a weapon against whites.
That being the case, the most natural thing for whites would be to call out on Jews for their anti-white hostility.
But, whites can’t because there’s this thing called the Jew Taboo.
The Jew Taboo decrees that Jews can never be accused or judged because Jews can never do wrong(and even if they do wrong, they are still right because they are above the law like God over man). The Jew Taboo assumes that Jews are a perfect people, always so wise, angelic, or tragic(as innocent victims of ‘rabid’ and ‘virulent’ ‘anti-Semites’).

So, given the pervasive, omnipresent power of the Jew Taboo, whites cannot call out on Jewish hostility toward whites. The Jew Taboo says Jews are incapable of doing anything vile, ugly, hateful, or evil. So, if whites feel that Jews are being hostile, the problem is in the minds of whites, and it is their obligation to purge their ‘paranoid’ minds of ‘nazi’-like suspicions. And if on occasion Jews do admit to their hostility, whites fully deserve the animus because whites are still the primary source of all the problems that plague the world. So, most times when Jews spit in the faces of whites, whites must make believe that Jews didn’t do it because accusing Jews of such dastardly deed would be ‘antisemitic’. And in the few cases when Jews do admit to spitting on white people’s faces, they were well-deserved because white people still have so much to atone for.

Since Jews are deemed holy and untouchable, whites can only say and do things that are complimentary of and beneficial to Jews. So, if Jews use Diversity — massive colonization of the West by non-whites who are taught to hate whites the moment they get off the boat — to undermine white power, pride, property, & heritage AND if whites are alarmed about the radical transformation of their lands, whites must never blame Jews and instead frame their complaint in such a way as to exonerate Jews. So, even when Jews are the main culprits and whites feel compelled to vent their anger, whites must always be mindful that Jews cannot be named as the villain.
Imagine if a Jew punches you in the nose, and you are allowed to blame anything in the room except the Jew. So, you hurl your rage at chairs, tables, walls, various objects, and etc. as the reason why you have a bloody nose when, in fact, it was the Jew who smashed your nose. But the Jew Taboo prohibits you from naming the Jew. Doing so would be ‘antisemitic’, and then, you’d be a ‘nazi’. So, you try to convince yourself that you will be safer if you replace or dispose of the various objects in the room. But then, even after the room is transformed, you are punched in the nose again by the Jew, but again, you can’t name the Jew, so you once again repeat the cycle of blaming the anything in the room but the Jew. Or if indeed the Jew admits he punched you, it was surely your fault for standing in the way, in which case you most richly deserved it.

Since whites cannot blame Jews for the Diversity that is leading to Eurocalypse, what can whites do about the mounting threat to their race, culture, and lands?
The most that whites can do is argue against Diversity on grounds that it may harm or endanger Jews. Since the Jew Taboo says Jews are holy, the primary concern of whites must be the well-being of Jews. Whites must put Jewish interests and well-being before their own. It’s like Jews bitching about why white people weren’t so eager to sacrifice their own kids to save Jewish kids during WWII. Now, if a bunch of gentiles were being butchered by Nazis who, hypothetically speaking, had decided to leave Jews alone, does anyone think Jews would have been willing to sacrifice their own children to save the children of goyim? Did American Jews volunteer to save Ukrainians being slaughtered by the Bolshevik killing machine? If anything, a whole bunch of Jews were pro-communist and supported the oppression and mass killing of Christian Slavs. Jews don’t care about gentile lives, but Jews milked ‘Holocaust Guilt’ to make whites feel that they mainly exist as cattle to serve Jews, protect Jews, and even sacrifice themselves and their children for Jews. So, the relationship between whites and Jews is as follows: Jews have a right to put Jewish identity & interests first and foremost, and Jews are right to expect that gentiles will always be mindful to watch out for Jewish needs and wants, BUT whites have no right to put white identity & interests first, and if anything, they must be ready and willing to serve and even sacrifice themselves for Jews and on demand. This is why, even when Jews use Diversity against whites, whites can only oppose Diversity on the basis of protecting Jews from non-whites who may be less sympathetic to Jews and even ‘antisemitic’. And since it’s now well-known that Jews are wild about Homomania or Queertianity(as replacement for Christianity), whites must frame their anti-Diversity argument on the basis that non-whites, especially Muslims, may do harm not only to Jews but to homos. Never mind that Jews and Homos dominate the political power that calls for More Diversity.

Now, it may well be that certain elements of Diversity do indeed harm and even, on occasion, murder Jews. After all, there have been outbreaks of anti-Jewish violence in parts of France.
But overall, Jews see Diversity as a net advantage because it divides the gentile masses into warring factions, all the easier to manipulate and control the goyim via divide-and-rule. All said and done, most Jews came to the conclusion that Diversity is indispensable as a weapon to undermine white power so as to permanently secure Jewish supremacism in the West.

Because of the Jew Taboo, this obvious truth cannot be spelled out. The most that white people can do is try to justify their anti-Diversity position on the basis of working desperately to save Jews from non-white ‘anti-Semites’ who might bring upon the New Holocaust. Of course, Jews are laughing at the stupid, pathetic white goyim.

To better illustrate the point above, imagine a Jewish guy grabbing a mallet and clobbering a white guy in the head. The most obvious thing would be for the white guy to call foul on the Jewish guy hitting him on the head. But that simply isn’t an option because the Jew Taboo says Jews are always holy and innocent. So, the only recourse for the white guy is to condemn the mallet on grounds that it may sprain the Jew’s precious wrist. Never mind his own aching skull from being hit on the head by the Jewish guy. Never mind the Jewish guy hit him with malice and contempt. Never mind the Jewish guy sadistically gloats over the harm done to the white guy. Despite the virulent hatred felt by the Jewish guy toward the white guy, the latter’s main concern must be for the well-being of the Jew because, of course, Jews are so holy. So, instead of accusing the Jew, the white guy condemns the mallet, and not so much for the harm it did to his head but the harm it might do to the Jewish guy’s wrist(in hitting him many more times). Of course, the white guy gets hit harder and harder by the Jewish guy because no one, especially a vicious Jew, respects a cowardly craven stupid servile cuck.

Democrats vs Republicans? Well, How about the Imperial Party vs the National Party?

Maybe, it’d be more honest and useful if we could scrap the current two-party system of Democrats & Republicans and reorganized & restructured the American Political System with two new parties:

The Imperial Party and the National Party. Even though Democrats and Republicans are divided on a host of issues — many of them overblown trivialities or manufactured distractions — , the current political fault-line fails to address the most fundamental issue of American Power, namely the question of "Is America a republic or an empire?" and "Is America for Americans or is America for the World?" Though the answers are not so cut-and-dry or black or white, the growing political gulf is about the big question of America’s role in the world. The reason why the issue is complicated is that America is a superpower and had a very important role to play vis-a-vis other nations. So, an ‘isolationist’ kind of republicanism is not possible at the present or the future. America must play a big role in the world. But where and when does importance turn into imperialism? Nationalists believe America should focus mainly on American affairs. They believe it’s good for America(especially in not getting involved in foreign wars, usually at the behest of Zionist interests) and also for the world since US intervention has led to such dire results all across the globe. America’s record in Guatemala, El Salvador, Korea, Iran, Vietnam, Cambodia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and etc. have deeply traumatized those nations. Even the ‘success’ of South Korea overlooks the fact that the war killed millions of people and left the peninsula divided to this day.
Therefore, even if the US has a key role to play in the world, why must it so intrusive and destabilizing? And why have so many military bases in every corner of the world? Isn’t that imperial overreach? Would American security and well-being be threatened if all those bases were not maintained? Does anyone really believe that trade routes will be endangered if US military moves out of Europe and the Pacific? Are pirates going to take over the seas and plunder everything?

Globalists obviously want the US to be on imperial footing. They aren't content with America as a limited power even with a superpower military and giant economy. They want America to be the policeman, judge, and jury of the world. Some admit that it is a kind of empire but a beneficent one based on justice and human rights than plunder and exploitation. They point to the generosity of US aid, trade deals, and protective alliances. If only it were so. If indeed the US were ruled by wise elites with nobility of mind and soul who really care about the humanity and want to use its power to prevent horrors like the one that happened in Rwanda, maybe the US as a Tough Love Empire wouldn’t be so bad. But as things stand, the US is ruled by an ethno-oligarchy(of Zionists) that is utterly corrupt and near-psychopathic in their power-lust and contempt for dumb filthy goyim. Jewish Globalists, as the new elites, don’t care about anything but maximizing and securing their own tribal-supremacist power. So, US-as-an-empire in its current position only means a world bullied and bloodied by a superpower whose muscles are directed by the sick minds of Jewish Supremacists.

And then, there is the other question of, "Is America for Americans or is America for the World?" This too cannot be answered simply. After all, America is a vast young nation, and most Americans are composed of conquerors, settlers, immigrants, and those who arrived as slaves. And even a good number of people who entered illegally were granted Amnesty, and some of them became Good Americans. So, there is no such thing as an American with ancient roots in or claim to America. Even American Indians don’t qualify because the nation-state and modern civilization of America came into being only with the vision and expansion of white Europeans, especially from Great Britain and other parts of Northern Europe.
Even so, there is a definite history of America. Even if theoretically anyone can become ‘American’, America became what it is because a certain kind of people conquered it, settled it, envisioned it, and founded it. If Chinese, Hindus, or Arabs, instead of Anglos and Germanics, had first arrived in the Northern Hemisphere of the New World and settled and expanded, the resulting civilization and its culture/laws/values would have been wholly different. If Muslims had the chance to found and develop their version of ‘America’, there would be a mosque in every town. Good or bad, it’d be a very different kind of civilization.
Also, even though different kinds of people arrived and became ‘Americans’, the ORDER OF ARRIVAL was absolutely crucial. The ones who arrived first got to establish the political and economic methodology, spiritual and ethical norms, and the mores, culture, & language. If Russians had arrived, settled, and defined ‘America’ first and if Anglos had come afterward, the Anglos might have been compelled to assimilate to Russian language, culture, and political norms. After all, if an Anglo were to decide to move to Russia permanently, he will have to assimilate to Russian-ness since Russia is the land of Russian people and culture. So, the ORDER OF ARRIVAL was key to the meaning of Americanism. Indeed, if Germans than Anglos had founded and settled ‘America’ first, then Anglo arrivals would likely have assimilated to what would have been an essentially German-America. Even though Jews came to dominate America, why did they master English and adopt many Anglo-American norms? Because they arrived later and had to respect and assimilate to the template established and defined by another people. If proto-Zionists had founded America, they may have established Hebrew as the dominant language and defined America as a Great Jewish State. And if non-Jews had been allowed to immigrate to work on farms and fill up the factories, they might have been regarded and treated like Arabs in Israel/West-Bank.

There’s a saying, "Finders keepers, losers weepers." In the case of America, it used to be "Founders decide, Followers abide." So, even as new people arrived and became Americans too, there was respect & appreciation for the pioneer stock and the mostly European(and African) folks who laid down, through mind and/or body, the core foundation of Americanism. Not only was there a historical, cultural, and racial acknowledgment of the main thread of America but a profound respect for the Constitution, Rule of Law, Due Process, and Property Rights that made American Democracy and its reforms possible, along with economic opportunity and growth unprecedented in human history. So, even if there was room for yet newer Americans, the understanding was that they would come with admiration and respect for those who’d been in America first or before.

Also, because Americanism was founded on the Rule of Law and Constitutional Rights, the process of immigration and naturalization must adhere to clear legal standards. After all, one thing that set the US(and Northern European nations) apart from the rest of the world, especially the Third World, is that Americans have traditionally been far more mindful of laws, rules, and standards than in nations like Mexico and other Latin American nations where everyone, from elite to peon, has tended to play fast and loose with the rules for petty interests or personal gain. Even among Europeans, there is far more Rule of Law up north than in Southern nations like Italy or Greece. Indeed, there are huge differences even among whites. If Anglos had settled South America and if Latinos had settled North America, the Anglo-South would likely be far richer than the Latin-North.

For a time, immigrants came with admiration and respect for the great founders of America and the earlier Europeans who did the heavy lifting on farms and factories. But with the Jewish takeover of elite institutions, the Narrative was altered so that the Founders got stained with the ‘original sin’ of slavery(which is rather odd since white people conquered Indians before they brought blacks, and that would mean ‘genocide’ is the original sin of America, but I guess blacks are just ‘cooler’ than Indians). Because the founding of America was fraught with ethnic cleansing of Indians and slavery of blacks, the New Narrative said it was tainted for all time. Also, because immigration policy had favored Anglos and Northern Europeans over other kinds of people, it was condemned as ‘racist’ and ‘white supremacist’. So, the New Narrative said that America can only be redeemed by newer waves of immigrants — preferably non-Northern European and even non-white — who would arrive and start anew without the stain of ‘genocide’, slavery, and ‘white supremacy’. So, instead of new immigrants coming with respect for America’s past and its founders & builders, they would come with sneering contempt and sniveling disdain. They would come to accuse and judge than appreciate and thank. Instead of immigrants respecting America’s past, existing Americans(especially whites with deep roots in America) should wax romantic about the future. Since the past is so tainted by ‘white supremacy’, America can only be saved by its future of ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’.
But argument fails here under the scrutiny of moral logic. After all, if Early America was tainted by slavery and ‘genocide’, how are the later immigrants any less tainted? After all, they are participating in and partaking of something that was created by ‘historical sins’. Those who share in stolen loot are just as guilty. If indeed all those noble Jews and non-whites were so shocked by how America was founded and built, why didn’t they stay away? If Jews abhorred the pogroms in Europe, why did they come to land where Indians were ‘pogromed’ off the land? Also, if indeed whites are guilty for the tragedies suffered by Indians and blacks, how does it follow that whites owe something to all the peoples of the world who were not done wrong by the white founders and builders of America? Just think. Since Jews took Palestine from indigenous Arabs, they owe something to those people. Most decent people would agree. But who in his right mind would argue that because Jews took land from the Palestinians, they are obligated to let in a million Chinese and Hindus? And how would that help the Palestinians? They would just be losing their lands to Chinese and Hindus as well as to Jews. It’d be even worse.
Also, all these immigrants are coming from blood-lands of their own. As every history has been soaked in bloodbaths, wars, famines, slavery, rapes, conquests, and even genocides, they all have their own ‘original sins’ and all other kinds of 'sins'. ‘Genocide’ and slavery didn’t begin in America. Both have long pedigrees. Furthermore, even if we acknowledge the historical tragedies of America, when we compare the rise and development of America with other civilizations in the same time frame, there is no denying that something great and magnificent was created in America, and this owed to the founding by Anglos. At the time of America’s founding, European Imperialism had yet to conquer all the world. If China, (what is now)India, Persia, and Russia had played their cards right, they too could have done great things. But they lacked the bigness of vision and the spirit of freedom. At one time, Russia even claimed Alaska but failed to do much with it and stupidly sold it to America at fire-sale price. China, with its vast pool of talented people, could have made great advances, but it was filled with arrogance, complacency, and tyranny. And the bloodbaths in other parts of the world equaled or exceeded anything that happened in America. Also, as Hispanics got a head start in what came to be Latin America, they too could have done great things. But like the Spanish kingdom, Latin America just got saddled with corruption, confusion, and stagnation.

But just because Jews resented the fact that Wasps weren’t so eager to invite them to play golf or bonk their daughters, their vengeful viciousness came to dominate the immigration debate into a case of "Let’s bury whitey."

Anyway, due to the change in the Narrative, the question of "Is America for Americans or is America for the World?" has become greatly complicated. There are few Iron Nativists left in America. Most Americans don’t mind new people coming to become Americans. But their Americanism still maintains that America belongs to Americans: the people with deep roots in America and people who arrived legally with due process with respect for American history, culture, and laws. The idea that America belongs to the World is anathema to them. They believe the world has people who might become good Americans, and therefore, the American system should select those well-intentioned people of good character and hopefully some skills because 21st century America is not a world where any bunch of illiterates can find ready work on farms or factories. So, a broader meaning of ‘America is for Americans’ doesn’t mean that only existing Americans can be Americans and no one else. It says America is something good because of its history of culture, laws, and achievements, and from all this, a certain American civic identity and character have formed. So, to keep this fire going, America must be careful and mindful of what kind of people are allowed and in what numbers. Numbers matter. After all, assimilation becomes ever more difficult with massive arrivals of people. If Jews had trickled into Palestine, they might have assimilated into the Palestinian nation. But TOO MANY Jews came to replace Palestinians, just like TOO MANY Mexicans and Asians have come to replace whites and even blacks in parts of California. If massive arrival of ‘gringos’ changed the character of SW territories from Mexican to Anglo in the 19th century, why wouldn’t the reverse process also drastically change the character of those areas? And if Mexicans are moving to the US, it must because Anglos did a much better job in America than Mexicans did in Mexico. So, if all those Mexicans move up north and take over, won't they be spreading their own problems to America? This also goes for Haiti and Dominican Republic. Race and culture matter. If Haitians move to DR in great numbers, they will Haitianize DR into a 'shithole'.

Unfortunately, the pro-immigration people have gone utterly loco with what could only be described as suicidal will among ‘progressive’ whites and homicidal urge among non-whites who are now into parasitic colonizer mode than immigrant mode. They no longer come with any respect and admiration, especially as anti-white PC has been globalized. So, new arrivals from India, Nigeria, Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, South Korea, Taiwan, Egypt, Syria, Pakistan, and etc. all come with the attitude of "racist white supremacist whitey, fuc* you, and you owe me." And they, even Muslims, ally with homos(mostly white decadents with tenuous connection to reality) who are now adored as angels and saints of America. Gee whiz, with Diversity blessing the homos and vice versa, how can any decent person object to the Color-Colonization of the West? After all, PC tells us that nothing is holier than homos and nothing is more wondrous than Diversity? The most fervent advocate for this future is, of course, Justin Trudeau, a ‘natural liberal’ who has no sense of roots or attachment and is so addicted to the fanfare of the ‘new’ that he’s willing to piss away the entire history and culture of Canada to feel thrills up his legs. But then, the majority of Canadians voted for that fool, so what does that say about the white race? It means, what with Jews controlling most of the media, academia, and entertainment, even masses of whites have been turned into mental mice following an idiot pied piper like Trudeau.

Anyway, given that the main divide in politics is about Americans who mainly see America as a nation for Americans in a world of many nations VERSUS Americans who mainly see America as an empire that should swallow and be swallowed by the world, the conventional divide between Democrats and Republicans isn’t very useful, not least because there are plenty of globalist-imperialists and patriot-nationalists in both parties.

The Imperials see America as the only nation that matters. Even as they claim to care about Diversity, they believe the world should come to America as the only nation of importance, the exceptional nation. If they really respected true diversity and wanted other peoples and nations to thrive, would they be telling the world to, "drop everything in your nation, leave your people, forget your identity, come to America, and become Americans." But then, what is so great about being an ‘American’ when these ‘progressive’ globalist-imperialists say American history has mostly been about ‘white supremacism’ and ‘racism’? If their argument is ‘racist’ America must be saved from itself by wonderful Diversity, then why call on Diversity to leave their own lands? If indeed Diversity is so wonderful, aren’t non-white living in paradise in their non-white ‘diverse’ lands? Why try to uproot them and bring them to America just to save the souls of whites? There are too many contradictions and absurdities in the Global-Imperial position, but then, empires have always been unstable because their combination of inequality(between the dominant power and weaker peoples) and diversity(divisions held together only by bread & circuses or porny displays of power) is difficult to sustain across vast distances over long periods.

Nationalism may be less exciting and adventurous, but it is more sound and stable over the long haul. How nice if National Socialist Germany had stuck to ‘boring’ nationalism than embarking on adventurous and exciting imperialism. Same was true of Napoleon and France. They should just minded the business of France.
In a way, the Imperial Game of America is both unnecessary and almost inevitable. It’s unnecessary because America is an empire unto itself. Few nations can claim to be both a nation and an empire(within its own borders). America, with its vast territory plus Alaska and Hawaii, has a lot to play with without meddling in or melding with the rest of the world. But then, because the US is so populous, vast with farmlands, endowed with almost limitless natural resources, and so wealthy, its ambitions and energies were itching to spread out over the bigger world. American business, military, media, academia, churches, and etc. want to play global roles to gain more markets, convert more hearts, persuade more minds, build more military bases, and etc. It’s just the nature of power. Too much power wants to break out and grab more power.

Anyway, if we were to designate two hypothetical parties as the Imperial Party and the National Party, how would their platforms differ in the most fundamental sense?

1. The Imperial Party would be bored with little old America. It would want global hegemony and to rule the whole world. Its core strategy would be Fuc*-and-Suck, that is Fuc* other nations with military power and financial muscle, and then Suck in their people as immigrants and ‘refugees’(often from war zones created by American imperialist aggression, as was the case of Libya and Syria). Also, suck in the talents(aka brain drain) for the American high-tech industry and suck in the helots for picking tomatoes and as demographic pawns to push black criminal elements out of cities. Because Imperial Party would really be about world hegemony, it’d have no qualms about interfering in other nations, messing with their political processes, and rigging their elections(but then, it might bitch about how Russians are messing up American sovereignty and democracy, an example of rank hypocrisy that betrays American arrogance as the ‘exceptional nation’ that is above the law and has the right to meddle in the affairs of all other nations, but other nations, especially if hated by Jews, better not try to meddle in American affairs. And even if they didn’t meddle, they could be accused of meddling just the same because Jews need scapegoats for whatever goes wrong with their agenda). Like imperialist forces anywhere and all throughout history, the Imperial Party would be addicted to more money, more control, more power, and more hegemony. And also to more More-Americans(endless mass immigration) as the Imperial Party's over-arching ambition and appetite would be bored and unsatisfied with existing Americans like a vain woman is bored with her existing collection of hats and shoes.

(2) The National Party would be for securing borders than complaining of boredom. It wouldn’t be bored with American history and American people. It’d want to preserve Core America that developed as essentially an extension of Western Civilization and European folks. Its main moral narrative would be about owing something to Indians and blacks(of slave ancestry) on grounds of America’s particular history. After all, American history was about particular peoples clashing with other particular peoples on a particular territory that led to particular triumphs and tragedies. When whites conquered the land of Indians, it was a particular, not a universal historical event. When whites brought blacks to work as slaves, that also was a particular story of one particular people doing something to another particular people on a particular territory, mostly the American South. Since American history was about particularities, the National Party would see no reason for America to feel that it must atone universally for wrongs that were done particularly, i.e. if a particular set of whites took a particular territory from a particular set of Indians, the moral issue has to be between whites and Indians, not between whites and Asian-Indians or Chinese.
The National Party would reject the ‘moral’ conviction that the US must serve as a dairy cow to provide milk of human kindness to all of humanity. A nation should only owe something to the peoples it has wronged. Indians and blacks have legit historical grievances. In contrast, seven billion people who want to move to America for material improvement(largely because they messed up their own nations with stupidity and corruption) have no moral justification to demand entry. They are not ‘dreamers’ but creamers who just want to slurp on the cream of others.

The National Party’s vision of the present and future flows from the remembrance of the past. It would regard the immigration waves of the late 19th century as a chapter in US history, not its template for propositional holy writ that America belongs more to outsiders than insiders.
The National Party would also object to any group trying to exploit American power to serve its narrow tribal interests. It would seriously abhor what Jews have done with their near-monopoly control of American power.

Now, there are elements of the Imperial Party in both Democratic Party and Republican Party. Hillary Clinton and John McCain are joined at the hip. Paul Ryan also belongs in the Imperial Party.

There are elements of the National Party in both Democratic Party and Republican Party. Plenty of Democrats used to be for the American workers and immigration restriction before super-rich globalists took over the upper echelons of the Democratic party, as also happened in the Republican Party.

Anyway, even if America continues with the current two party system, things might come into clearer focus if we spoke not so much of Democrats and Republicans but of Imperials and Nationals.

Contradictions in the ‘Progressive’ Theory on Essentialism

Lately, so-called ‘progressives’, who are really a bunch of Decadents, have waged a Culture War on Essentialism, by which a person is defined by his birth, sex, race, cultural background, religion, and/or nationality. According to Decadents, Essentialism is unjust in predetermining a person’s identity instead of allowing him or her to formulate, choose, and decide what he or she REALLY is.

This is obviously a vulgarization and degeneration of a philosophical debate between essentialism and existentialism. According to existentialism, a individual should accept his freedom, learn to think on his own, and arrive at his own meaning of life. It had more to do with credo than ethnos or any identity.
An existentialist’s primary concern is man's cultivation of ethics and ideology. Instead of just receiving and obeying what is foisted upon him by the established system, he should question everything, learn as much as he can, think about his place in the larger world, and gradually arrive at a set of values and course of action based on his free will.

Whatever one thinks of existentialism, it has been part and parcel of modernity. And men like Jean-Paul Sartre and Albert Camus didn’t so much invent as illustrate the modernist way of thinking and reacting in a rapidly shifting world where certainties could no longer be taken for granted. At the very least, this kind of existentialism was meant to be rigorous, and it encouraged, indeed compelled, people to be well-educated, well-read, well-conversed, and always questioning and seeking. After all, if people are to be free individuals is search of their own meanings and values, their moral reasoning has to grounded in erudition and sharpened by experience, the trials and errors of life.

But as higher education has grown more democratic and ‘inclusive’, Ph.D’s came to be handed out like flyers, and second-rate and third-rate academics now fill the minds of dimwit or neurotic students with all sorts of silly ideas appealing to the stupid who are incapable of thinking or soul-searching. Just like Modern Art degenerated into Pop Art, Modern Education degenerated into Pop Education. Thus, even philosophical concepts have been turned into pop fads for easy consumption by shallow dolts whose main cultural mode is ‘celebrity’.

So, what had been intended as an arduous journey of self-discovery and attainment of personal truth based on experience, learning, & logic has degenerated into a vehicle of fast & easy self-promotion as a darling freak. It’s been made especially easy by turning the focus away from philosophy to identity(as opposed to inheritance that is rooted and received than invented on a whim). Right or wrong, wise or foolish, every school of philosophy requires lots of reading, reasoning, and contemplation. One cannot declare oneself to be part of any school of thought just by making noise or hoisting a banner. One has to read essays and tomes on the idea and formulate one’s own interpretation of those ideas. One also has to be acquainted with alternative & opposing schools of thought and logically argue why he believes his chosen ideas are superior or more useful than other ones. Or, one must come up with a new school of thought by rejecting or radically reformulating previous ideas. Such an endeavor would require real devotion to scholarship, as well as tremendous discipline and diligence of mind. And of course, such thinkers still do exist.
But how can masses of shallow idiots(addicted to trashy pop culture) be persuaded to embark on such a challenging, though ultimately rewarding, path? Also, given that so many professors are idiot ideologues than true thinkers themselves, their main objective is to amass or at least FEEL the power. It’d be difficult for a professor to FEEL the power if he or she must devote so much of his/her energies toward turning students into real thinkers. For one thing, if students do learn to think freely, they might think differently from the professor. So, in order for the professor to OWN his/her students, they must be fed PC nonsense whose emotional appeal isn’t much different from the childish Little Red Book or Quotations of Chairman Mao. After all, Mao’s main obsession was power, and he had no use for real intellectuals and philosophers who might disagree with him, better him in debates, and even see him as stupid and crazy.
Whatever one thinks of Marxism, it was the product of much research and intellectual labor. Even though Marx was full of contempt and intolerance for those who disagreed with him, he did embark on a formidable intellectual journey to understand and explain how history really works and where it is headed. And he wanted others to understand and respect his elaborate and ‘deep’ ideas. In this sense, Marx was a true thinker who abhorred the idea of compromising his intellectual vigor with easy opportunism.

In contrast, second-rate thinkers like Mao(though a first-rate strategist in his path to power) couldn’t hold a candle next to real intellectuals and philosophers. He couldn’t even win debates against the cleverer colleagues in the Communist Party. So, his way of regaining absolute power in the 1960s was to appeal to the masses of young dolts who would be his Red Guards intoxicated with fortune cookie radicalism of the Little Red Book, a kind of Communism for Morons. If Marx was spectacularly wrong but intellectually profound, Maoism was just spectacularly and profoundly retarded. But the, stupidity is always far more appealing to the masses. It’s like people understand astrology better than astronomy. This is why 'progressivism' has degenerated into winning hearts-and-minds with new STAR WARS movies as SJW fantasies.

So, if ‘radical’ professors with chips on their shoulders(especially in second-rate colleges) want to FEEL the power and want to play at Little Mao, what better way than to dispense Pop Ideas to their none-too-bright or neurotic students? Appropriate certain ideas from philosophy & past ideologies and vulgarize & popularize them into bite-size cliches and slogans that especially pander to the students’ sense of celebrity.

Celebrity is about idols and icons than about ideas. Most celebrities are famous for their ‘star’ quality in sports, music, movies, humor, and etc. As it turns out, most people don’t have the talent to succeed in the ‘cool’ fields. Then, how can everyone earn their 15 minutes of fame/celebrity? By imitating the most vain and narcissistic group in the world, the so-called LGBTQ community filled a self-promoting self-worshipers. And so, the Culture War on Essentialism is now centered on the issue of gender.

Gender Wars say that LGBTQ people are holy, magical, noble, saintly, wonderful, and glamorous. The home team has to win the Superbowl or World Series to have a parade in its name. Musicians have to make hits to win awards. Actors must do good work in movies to win the Oscar. But, people just need to be homos or trannies to be showered with love and adulation every year in massive homomaniacal parades and festivals. Due to influence of the Jew-run media, the widely shared assumption is that LGBTQ = Celebrity & Glamour. Indeed, a bunch of homos or trannies need not accomplish anything in life. Homos are cool and holy simply because they are homo and do fecal penetration, a behavior that is now consecrated with ‘rainbow’ colors.
And Bruce Jenner only needed to put on wig and dress to be showered with praise as ‘woman of the year’. Just like just being Obama got him the Nobel Peace Prize, just the fact of being ‘gay’ or ‘trans’ makes a person a cut above the rest. To be homo in our world is like being born an aristocrat in the pre-modern world.

This is why so many young people gravitate to LGBTQ worship and gender wars. As they grew up in a celebrity-saturated culture, they also want to be or be associated with celebrities. But most people just don’t have the talent to be good in music, sports, acting, comedy, and etc. Also, most of them have no access to famous people.
So, what are they to do? Should they pretend to be ‘gay’, lesbian, or tranny? Some non-homos do gravitate in that direction because people are naturally emulative of what is considered prestigious or respectable. It’s like all those Chinese women got their feet bound because it was deemed the privileged and noble thing to do in pre-modern China. As most people are unoriginal, weak in individuality, and sheep-like, they are followers than leaders or rebels. Even their acts of ‘rebellion’ are usually just imitations of others who lead the way. Most hippies were just imitating the trend-setters of Counterculture.
So, it’s not surprising that non-homos and non-trannies are now eager to be homo-like or experiment with being tranny. Even so, most non-homos can’t play that game for long. Non-homo guys will not want to experience fecal penetration. And most non-tranny guys will not want to get their penises and testes removed.

Still, so many straight men and women want to be associated with the ‘gay’ community and themes because mainstream media and pop culture have conflated LGBTQ stuff with glamour and even spirituality. Besides, while it’s difficult for a normie to come face-to-face with a famous star, he or she has a good chance of rubbing shoulders with a genuine fruitkin.

Still, because it’s too much for straight people to become homo or lesbian, the Gender Wars has made available something like 50 genders to choose from. Now, most of these ‘genders’ are just variations of homo or straight, but words are funny things. Words can create the impression of ‘fluidity’ even in things that are essentially fixed. If the only categories were homosexual, trans-gender, and straight, then 97% people would realize they are straight, and that’s that. Thus, they would have less reason to dilly-dally with the LGBT community. But if there are 50 genders, maybe all those straight people are not really straight but one of the many alternative ‘genders’, like the many ways of 'walking' in DEAD POETS SOCIETY. (Conformism is a problem when people are forced to consent to something stupid, retarded, or evil, like forcing young one to conform to PC. But, normal people doing what comes naturally is not 'conformism' but 'confirmism' of what they really are and are prone to do. So, the scene in DEAD POETS SOCIETY is a stupid lesson on 'conformism'. There is nothing wrong with people walking normally and properly because it comes naturally to them. If anything, willful non-conformism by walking like idiots is the real stupidity. If a society were pressure women to conform to foot-binding, that would be bad. But if women walk normally in a natural way, they are merely confirming their true selves, and there's nothing wrong with that. PC and Pop Culture pathologize what is healthy and normal while applying pressure to conform to what is deviant, demented, and degenerate, like getting body piercings, tattoos, and green-colored hair as false emblems of freedom and 'empowerment'.)

Anway, by feeling so preciously ‘different’ by adopting one of the 50 genders, maybe even people who formerly thought of themselves as 'straight' have far more in common with homos, lesbians, and trannies than with lame and boring cis-gender types. Cis are the new sissies.
Such nonsensical logic is the gist of the Culture War on Essentialism. It rejects the notion that straight people are essentially straight. It says each straight person should seek out ‘his’ or ‘her’ own gender-identity among the 50 or maybe 500 genders. Or maybe an individual isn’t a ‘he’ or a ‘she’ but a ‘they’.

And this game is especially appealing to young idiots because there is nothing easier than gender politics. It’s all a game of genitals and pronouns. ‘Muh dick’, ‘muh pussy’, ‘muh dick is a pussy’, ‘muh pussy is a dick’, ‘muh dick is a dick and a pussy’, ‘muh pussy is a pussy and a dick’, ‘muh dick has been replaced by a pussy’, ‘muh pussy has been replaced by a dick’, and etc. It’s really on the level of Beavis and Butthead but in bogus intellectual packaging.

But then, this Culture War on Essentialism has huge contradictions. If indeed straight people are not essentially straight but must seek out their ‘true’ genders, why does the LGBTQ community argue that homos were born homo, lesbians were born lesbian, and trannies were born tranny and THERE’S NOTHING THEY OR WE CAN DO ABOUT IT. Sounds pretty essentialist on a biological and inborn level.

A key contradiction in the Cultural War on Essentialism stems from the positing of gender as both biological and anti-biological. Decadent ‘progressives’ prefer to use the term ‘gender’ than ‘sex’ because the latter denotes biologically determined differences that demarcate males and females. Now, both terms can have merit in this sense: While the biological sexes of male and female do exist in reality, sexual identity is very complicated because cultures define masculinity and femininity differently. So, in some cultures, it is manly to cry, whereas other cultures see crying as essentially a feminine trait. So, even if there are only two sexes and even if the notion of masculinity and femininity is generally sound, different cultures have their own ways of defining norms in the male domain and female domain. However, that is not how those in the Gender Studies Departments approach the matter. They tend to argue that the concept of sex must be discarded entirely and be replaced by gender theories that argue that all ‘sexual’ identities and norms are ‘social constructs’. (And yet, these same people argue that some boys are born homo and want to play with dolls because they are genetically predisposed to do so. So, while there is no female nature among girls that prefers to play with dolls than with guns, that nature suddenly exists when manifested in young homo boys who prefer dolls over toy guns.) But despite all the efforts of gender theorists, the fact is gender theory cannot be understood apart from the reality of sex. After all, if we were to imagine a sci-fi clone world where everyone is a copy of Hulk Hogan, could ‘gender theory’ even exist? How could there be femininity in a world where all the people are macho Hulk Hogans? And which members of this Hulk Hogan community would suddenly want to act ‘gay’ or girlish? No, gender theories are possible because biological sexual differences are real, and these differences go way beyond different genitals. Emotionally and cerebrally, men and women are different, and homos and trannies are different from straights due to biochemical factors related to hormones.

So, the entire field of Gender Theory that wages war on Essentialism is one big contradiction. On the one hand, it encourages young people to put aside ideology & credo as the core source of their identity and instead focus on their biology and genitals. Instead of "I think, therefore I am", go with "Muh dick, therefore I’m man" and "Muh pussy, therefore I’m woman." So, your core sense of self should be more about what’s between your legs than what’s in your brains. Biology over Ideology, or Biology is ideology. But then, as if Gender Theory realized its mistake of Essentialism(rooted in birth or biology), it argues that gender identity isn’t biological but ‘creative’ or ‘constructed’. It’s a strange kind of game where you tell some kid, "What’s inside your mind is secondary to what’s between your legs. If you got a ding dong, you are a male chauvinist pig and evil patriarch, and you can’t do anything about it(unless you’re a homo, in which case you’re excused)... but then, never mind, because having a ding dong doesn’t necessarily mean you’re a man because you might want to put on a wig and dress, in which case, you’re a ‘woman’ and suddenly have more pokemon points than real women..."

This is why tranny business is so essential to the anti-essentialists. After all, even homo men are still male, and homo women are still female. So, even homos uphold the essentialist template of the reality of sexual differences. Homos may have different orientations than straight men, but Gore Vidal was clearly a man, and Susan Sontag was clearly a woman. It is only with trannies and theories of 50 genders that the essential notions of sexuality are really subverted. So, if a man puts on a wig and dress, he is a ‘woman’ and even feminists better accept ‘her’ as such or else they are the essnentialist ‘bigots’. Ridiculous, eh?

There is also the Political War on Essentialism, and this has to do with mass colonization of the West by hordes-of-color. Again, this has nothing to do with ideas or philosophy. It’s all a game of labels and brands. In order for globalists to realize their radical agenda of turning all the world into one big mass of interchangeable consumerist units, all racial-cultural-national identities must be subverted, undermined, and eradicated. So, any essentialist definition of a culture and people must be denounced and discredited. So, there are no Real Hungarians, no Real Poles, no Real Russians, no Real Japanese, and etc. All national identities must be ‘Americanized’, especially as the meaning of American is no longer essentially European or Western. Even up to the 1980s, an American was quintessentially a person of European heritage due to history, culture, and demographics, but the massive rise of non-white numbers has effectively redefined ‘American’ as whoever wants to come to America. Thus, Future might-be-Americans are more ‘American’ than Americans with deep roots in America or racial ties with those with deep roots. After all, if the meaning of ‘American’ must be anti-essentialist and ‘inclusive’ of anyone, any notion of American identity based on history, culture, and roots must be rejected because it will imply that those with deeper roots in America are more American or have more claim to America than those just off the boat or those who have yet to get on the boat.

This is one reason why the globalists have lost all interest in American Indians. If people were to feel that American Indians have a special claim to America because of their deep roots, then it also follows that whites also have a special claim to America since they have deeper roots than most recently arrived non-white groups who have historically contributed little to America.
Also, if indeed the main narrative of America is "whites took land from Indians", then the main moral obligation of white people should be to make amends to the American Indians, and surely massive colonization by non-whites is NOT any way to help the Indians. The result will be Indians losing their lands not only to whites but hordes of non-whites who can’t even make the claim of having founded and developed America as a modern nation.

But what do globalists care about real justice? Real justice is about a people owing something to the people they’d wronged. On this basis, one could argue that white Americans do owe something to the Red Man(who lost their lands) and blacks(who were brought over to work as slaves). But what do whites owe to the whole world when white Americans didn’t do them any wrong? Only demented globalist logic argues that white Americans(and white Europeans too) exist only to make life better for non-whites and Jews all over the world.

But even the Political War on Essentialism has its contradictions. After all, if indeed no race-culture-nation has any essentialist claims, why do Jews insist that Jewishness and Jewish nationhood cannot be negotiated? We are to believe that Jewishness exists as a fact, identity, culture, and history, and of course, Israel has a RIGHT TO EXIST as a Jewish state.

Another contradiction is the cult of White Guilt. If there is no essentialist history, culture, race, or identity, why can’t whites wash themselves of the social construct of the ‘original sin’ of ‘white guilt’? And why must ALL white people atone for the ‘sins’ of other whites? Why must Poles and Hungarians pay the price for what the Germans did? After all, if the argument is German people must commit national suicide for their crimes in WWII, why does this apply to other Europeans who were victimized or bullied by Germans? And why are Russians being compared with Nazis by Jewish globalists when more Russians were killed by Nazi Germany than any other people? And why are all white people in America made to feel ‘guilty’ about slavery when most whites never owned slaves and many came to America after the Civil War? And why does ‘white privilege’ essential-istially apply to ALL whites, even to generations of poor white folks who worked in coal mines or factories? In contrast, even the richest Jew whose ancestors had it so good get to flaunt his ‘essentialist’ identity as a member of the Holocaust Tribe.

It’s obvious there are no principles or consistency in the Cultural and Political War on Essentialism. Like most things pushed by Jews, the goal posts are changed ever so often to suit the agendas of people like George Soros and the loathsome Pritzkers. If one thing is for sure, Jewish Power is essentially hideous and vile.

Why We Need to be Vigilant of the Power of the TEMPLATE

Some on the Patriotic Right fret about the corrosive effects of Cult of White Guilt, but it’s actually a secondary problem flowing from a much bigger one, namely the power of the TEMPLATE.

The Template decides who are approved & who can accuse as opposed to who are accused & who must atone.

But once the Template is smashed, it doesn’t matter what people believe as individuals. The personal consciences of individuals matter only in relation to the condemnation or consecration by the Template held by the Power. Why does one’s personal views and feelings about Jews matter in America but one’s views and feelings about Buddhists don’t? It’s because the Template protects and favors Jews but is utterly indifferent about Buddhists. So, a person can love or hate Buddhists, and it wouldn’t matter one way or the other. Neither loving nor hating Buddhists is either an advantage or a disadvantage. The Template just doesn’t care. But if one’s feelings about Jews were made known, it’d have serious consequences on the social, economic, and political level because Jews are so central to the Template.

Take communism in East Germany. As long as the System was in place, the Template was “Marxism-Leninism is the eternal truth, and good communists are on the side of angels, and it is their right and duty to accuse and expose anti-communist heretics.”
Under the System, the pro-communists could accuse and condemn anyone deemed anti-communist. They didn’t need to explain or justify their feelings and actions. The System ensured its supporters to take for granted the infallibility of Marxism-Leninism. All they had to do was point fingers and accuse. Destroy the enemy and feel justified as good comrades. As for the accused, they had to either deny the charges of anti-communism or defy the system with all the courage they could muster(and almost invariably pay a heavy price). The System enforced the Marxist-Leninist Template. Even if we were to suppose everyone in East Germany, communist and anti-communist alike, was motivated by the purest ideals and principles, what ultimately decided their fate was not their individual consciences but the Template that had the power to choose winners and losers.

But once the System came tumbling down in East Germany, it no longer mattered if there remained hardline communists or Marxist true believers. The System no longer existed to protect and favor them. Whether few or many, they were now all alone to make their case without the System enforcing the Template in their favor.

Also, their accusations no longer carried any weight. They suddenly lacked the power to affect the lives of others because the Template no longer existed to lend them support against others. If anything, there was the sudden realization that their power had been illusory. Because they could destroy other lives under communism, they’d been lulled into believing that their personal sense of righteousness, in and of itself, had the force of history. But in fact, it had been the systemic wind behind their backs that had created the impression of having agency in history.
It’s like Christians in a Christian Order may feel empowered by Faith alone. After all, the Christian Faithful feel blessed in a Christian system that favors their kind. One could easily overlook the crucial role of the system and believe in God as the source of one’s blessed position in society. But one’s favored status really owes to the power of the Church that endorses and ensures the privilege of the true believers. If the power of the Church were to fade, their faith alone wouldn’t amount to a plate of beans. Today, American Christians have begun to realize this. Because core institutions of America are now effectively post-Christian(and even anti-Christian), what with the Template consecrating Jews-Negroes-Homos above all others, being a Christian today has little resonance within the domains of power. If anything, it could be a liability in many key areas.

Anyway, the fall of East German communism meant that anti-communists no longer needed to fear informers or cower before their accusers. They no longer needed to deny their anti-communism. They no longer needed to defend or justify their anti-Leninism. They could freely express their disdain for communism.
And as long as the New Template favored those who called out against communists of the prior regime, their anti-communism had value as a token of power. But once the New Template lost interest in making an example of former communists, even anti-communism came to mean nothing. In time, neither having served communism nor having resisted communism carried any water in the New Order where the Template was devised and enforced by globalists.

Same logic applies to the cult of ‘white guilt’. It’s not the feeling itself that is most worrisome. Same goes for the cult of Diversity and Homomania. Before Diversity and Homomania were promoted as part of the Official Template, it didn’t matter if one espoused nationalism or anti-homo sentiments. One could openly question or mock Diversity or the Homo agenda prior to their consecration into the Template. And it didn’t matter if some people were pro-homo-agenda or pro-mass-invasion. They lacked the backing of the Template and could therefore be pushed back because they stood alone with their own convictions.

But once Diversity was canonized into the Template, its advocates had the blessings of the System. And its opponents were effectively excommunicated by the System. If an idea isn’t yet canonical, opposing it cannot be heretical. Thus, while opposing it may lead to heated arguments with its advocates, one cannot be destroyed by the System for harboring such views because the System has yet to canonize the idea that would render such views heretical.

Once elite institutions canonized the tenets of PC, opposing views were no longer regarded as mere disagreements or dissent but as heresies of ‘hate’. So, with the full spectrum of elite opinion from left to right chanting the sacred mantra of ‘Diversity is our strength, the message was loud and clear that Diversity now has the full blessing of the Template. It was no longer a position among other possible positions but The Position, the Only Position.

So, the key issue isn’t White Guilt per se. Such sentiments always exist because any society(even non-white ones) will have its share of self-loathing types who love to make a spectacle of their higher virtue via atonement and redemption.
What gave Self-Loathing Whites or SLW’s the moral and political advantage is that the Globalist elites used their immense power to push the Iron Template of Diversity and Homomania. So, SLW’s are now favored in the way that communist zealots, communist toadies, and communist hacks were favored in Stasi-dominated East Germany. But notice how the commies in all walks of life lost their advantage overnight when the System came down. Being communist in a system tailored to Marxism-Leninism was like having an anti-gravity belt. But once the system’s power was shut down, those hovering in the air all came crashing down. Tragicomically, while they were up in the air, they thought their power of levitation emanated from within their own souls. They learned the truth the hard way when the system no longer supplied power to their belts. It's like a soldier has the power to kill other people as long as he is consecrated as a 'hero' by the System. But back in civilian life, he realizes his 'power' of 'heroism' totally depended on the System.

So, the problem isn’t so much the existence of SLW’s, annoyingly unbearable as they may be. Rather, it’s that they are blessed by the System that calls for Open Season on White Heretics, aka the Patriots. Once the Template is smashed, the Patriots can fight back with the full force of facts, logic, and passion, and then, SLW’s will have to stand on their own legs in the fight that they will inevitably lose. After all, those who hate their own kind will lose to those who love their own kind. Also, the support of the Template made the SLW’s spoiled and lazy. Their reliance on anti-gravity belts powered by the Template made their bones weak.

We must smash the Template, or the Tabernacle.

AMERICAN MADE starring Tom Cruise Showcases the Limits of Free Will

*The views below are in relation to the movie, not to actual events. It goes without saying that any Hollywood claiming to be based on a true story takes considerable liberties for sake of entertainment or politics. Even though many of the events in the movie have been disputed, what does ring true is the depiction of a certain psychological strain of American Freedom.

Americans love to think of themselves as free. After all, America is called the Land of the Free. Even though many nations around the world claim to be free and democratic, the brand has really stuck to one nation, the United States. USA is the land of liberty, individuality, and the dream. Due to its great spaces and tremendous resources, enterprising individuals have been able to achieve more in America than elsewhere. Its relative meritocracy and Rule of Law also made America the favorite destination for those seeking freedom and fortune. And even those who live outside the US have looked to America as the market of choice. Whether it’s German or Japanese companies selling cars or Colombian cartels selling drugs, there has never been a richer market than America. It’s the first nation that people want to come to, the first nation that people want to sell to. And even though the US has faded in certain industries, it is still second to none in the production of high-tech, military-ware, food products, energy, media, drugs, and academia.

But sometimes, people can lose sight of things. Icarus, having wings, thought he would fly as high as wished. And "Sky is the limit" could be the motto of the character in AMERICAN MADE. He is a free-spirited pilot with brash adventurousness to dive into one risky business after another. Because of this reckless stuntman-like quality, he is seen as useful by many people. Indeed, it’s ironic that the CIA selects him as prime candidate for its mission. After all, the CIA knows he has a carefree and opportunistic streak, smuggling illegal contraband while working as a TWA pilot. He doesn’t play by the rules. But that is exactly why he’s an asset because it takes a man with knack for transgression who will thrive in dangerous operations that requires flights over territories controlled by Marxist guerrillas who readily shoot at what they suspect as spy planes.

One could say, the Cruise’s character, Barry Seal, is partly motivated by patriotism, but he isn’t particularly political. One might say he was pressured into taking the job since the CIA has the dirt on his smuggling of Cuban cigars. But it’s not like he committed a capital crime. No, what motivates him most is the thrill of adventure. He seems unfazed even when his plane is hit by guerrillas and feels exhilaration in carrying mission after mission. He’s more soldier of fun(and later of fortune) than patriot or true-believer.

His cowboy spirit makes him an All-American character, even something of a ‘hero’ at times, but is he really free when he doesn’t think about anything he’s doing? He does it with free-spiritedness but seems utterly lacking in curiosity as to the history and politics of Latin America. This begs the question. What does it mean to be free? If we let a dog outside, it runs around freely. So do horses. They feel free in spirit and enjoy the rush of feeling wild and alive. But are animals really free? Aren’t they following their instincts? Also, they are free only as long as their human masters let them run free.

When people act wild and free, are they any better or higher than animals? Aren’t they really acting on impulse? And this applies to Barry Seal. His freedom is closer to that of an animal than a thinking human. While it’s true that he, as an individual, chose to take on the role of sky pilot, his emotional involvement is like that of a dog or horse running wild. As for intellect, meaning, and morality, there is nothing. He’s like a child, an animal, an barbarian despite the fact that he gets to use all sorts of sophisticated machines and gadgets at the behest of the government.
But then, this question is relevant to modern life in general. Our electronic media get more sophisticated with advancements in technology, but most of what passes through the grids and airwaves is mindless childishness, barbarism, or savagery. Even a cowboy in the Classic Western was freer in the sense that he understood the moral choice between the good and the bad. But such considerations never enter into the mind of Barry Seals. Though vaguely instructed of the Cold War dichotomy between good ole USA and evil USSR(that is supposedly seeking beach-heads in Central America), Seal is purely in it for the adventure. As a gung-ho pilot, he feels alive and free, but there’s no meaning to his life. Freedom without meaning, purpose, and direction is like a cocaine high, a nihilism.

Indeed, consider the steady decline of White America since the 60s when freedom was severed from issues of moralism and set free to indulge in hedonism. We all love Rock music and the Beach Boys, but that kind of freedom centered on thrills and good-time turned white people into hares who just took things easy and for granted as long as they could have their fun, fun, fun. Meanwhile the demographic tortoise was closing in on them. They never asked what is really happening to their nation because the primary focus of their lives was the pursuit of happiness at the crassest level. So, while white Californians were surfing or acting the Valley Girl, real history was happening and masses of non-white immigrants were fundamentally altering the landscape demographically, politically, and culturally.

Because Seal is so hollow at the core, the arrow of his freedom is decided by the wills of others with a plan or agenda. So, he is turned into a tool of the CIA. But he easily becomes a tool of the drug cartel. When confronted with drug lords who want him to fly narcotics to the US, Seal decides to make the bargain. Now, one could argue he didn’t have much of a choice. CIA sent him to Latin America but didn’t give him much cover or protection. So, when surrounded by drug gangs, he is vulnerable and isn’t in a position to Just Say No. And yet, he doesn’t just agree to a single flight to make it to safety to the US. He decides to go whole hog as carrier for the drug cartel. And because he does it with such gusto, he fools himself into thinking he’s a cowboy in control of his destiny. If he’d really thought of his situation, he might have realized that he was not free in making the decision. The drug lords made it for him, and he had no choice. But because he is doing something exciting and daring, he once again feels free, and he mistakes that feel of freedom for real freedom when, in fact, he’s become a running dog of the drug cartel. If he was really honest with himself, he could have transported the first shipment of drugs and then gone to the CIA and informed them what really happened. But no. Just like he’d mindlessly taken on the CIA mission for thrills, he finds new thrills with being an aerial smuggler of drugs.

This becomes the pattern for the rest of his life. After being imprisoned in Colombia along with members of the drug gang(who soon gain freedom through bribes and/or threats), he is sprung out by the CIA because it has another mission for him, this time to transport arms to the Contras in Nicaragua. Again, he is more than willing since it’s better to fly around in a plane than be stuck in some seedy prison in Latin America. Again, his life is adventurous, and he feels free and independent.
But again, he had no choice in the matter. The only reason why he is free is because he agreed to the deal. He is to play a key role in supplying the Contras with arms so that they will overthrow the Sandinista government. The problem is reality on the ground is so at odds with the American grand strategy that is about as ridiculous as that of the Soviets. Both sides present themselves as being on the right side of history, the true torch-bearers of justice and liberty. But Soviet Union was then a stagnant empire running on empty in terms of ideas and goods. As for the US, it was more an empire of excess, vanity, and greed than virtue or ideals.
As for the Third World peoples caught between the great powers, they hadn’t a clue what was what and had no concern other than "gimme what’s mine". Indeed, it is hilarious to watch the US involve itself in so much ‘necessary evil’ of corruption to aid the supposedly idealistic and patriotic Contras made up of a rag-tag bunch of bumpkins and halfwits. In such context, idealism is for fools, and so, the cynical operators like Noriega, drug cartels, and deep state operatives in the US have the upper hand and play the game every which way they can. And if someone like Oliver North was a true believer in what he did, he was just a simple-minded idiot.

Anyway, Barry Seal is bounced around like a pinball. The sheer frenzy lends a sense of vibrancy and freedom, but there is no real agency. Seal is so without purpose or plan that he has no idea what to do with all the money he’s making from the drug trade. He just loves feeling like a rock star on tour, going from concert to concert, pumping up the volume to drown out everything but the thrill of the moment. Seal is addicted to the high life but has no real sense of life. His spirit is always up in the air and never grounded to anything like a soul. In a way, one could say he has the most infantile kind of globalist-mindset. He has no loyalty to anything even though, to his credit, he does stick with his family. But his home is just a rest-station for him to crash in before he’s back to his high-octane adventures again.

In some ways, he’s like the Henry Hill character in GOODFELLAS, the adaptive flunky who leans whichever the wind blows. But Seal is more of a cowboy with nerves of steel under fire. He also seems to relish living on the edge, like everyday is a gamble of life and death. And yet, despite his nerves and derring do, he’s never anything more than a ball kicked around by the real players because he lacks a moral compass and vision of humanity.

There are three ways to be truly free. One is to have real moral sense. A moralist, in favoring principles over the easy prize, may not gain great wealth or power. But he has the pride of righteousness. He can tell himself that he chose the path of virtue with his free will. Now, it may well be that ‘losers’ may use moralism as a crutch for their relative failure in life, like the Ed Harris character spouts off about the ‘working man’ every time something goes wrong in GLEN GARRY GLENROSS. (Of course, he cheats too when he sees the chance. His moralism is fake, an excuse.) A true moralist is someone who could have gotten something by bending the rules but didn't because his conscience told him not to. The main character of PRINCE OF THE CITY is a true moralist, albeit not a perfect one, but then, that’s precisely the point of that film.

The second way of freedom is to be a committed immoralist. In a way, the drug lords in AMERICAN MADE are freer than Barry Seal. They are not in it just for the fun and thrill of it. They are not boys who wanna play with toys. They are committed to creating an empire of greed. They are awful disgusting people, but they do have a purpose in life, however wicked it may be. They will kill and even die for this ‘dream’ of theirs. They don’t care if their dope turns countless lives into living nightmares. They have a plan and will do anything to see it through all the way. They are filthy gangsters, but they’ve freely chose to commit themselves to some purpose in life.

The third way of freedom is to be an amoralist-realist, like the character of Akira Kurosawa’s YOJIMBO. Henry Kissinger and Zhou En-lai were amoralist-realists. They were not lacking in moral sense, but they knew that if they stuck to moral principles, they’d either fail to move up the rungs of power or end up purged and persecuted. So, they decided to betray what many of us would consider basic moral principles. They accepted the world for what it is and the game of power as deadly competition rife with ugliness and corruption. And yet, the world is what it is, and those who decide to play the game simply can’t keep their hands clean.
But even as their means are often sordid, they do have a vision that isn't void of moral design. They think in terms of means-to-an-end, not means-as-the-end. In contrast, the immoralists like the drug cartel just revel in vileness because that is the final summation of what they’re about. Granted, there is a grey area between immoralists and amoralist-realists. Everyone who works in government, especially in the intelligence services, see themselves as amoralist-realists who accept the need to play dirty to win the war for the good guys. It’s like George Smiley is not above using dirty tricks in TINKER, TAILOR, SOLDIER, SPY and SMILEY’S PEOPLE to prevail over the enemy. But his side did it because the other did it too. It was just the nature of the game. It’s like even a 'good war' cannot be won without killing innocent civilians and being tarnished with some degree of atrocities and war crimes. But then, nothing can be done if moral perfection is the only option.
Anyway, even though people in government like to tell themselves that they do bad things for the higher vision of the ultimate good, there’s too much evidence that a lot of people in government, especially the deep state, are really sociopaths and egotistical lunatics who are addicted to power and control. They may not get ultra-rich doing what they do, but power is their drug and their main motivation. The ‘new cold war’ with Russia endorsed by the deep state cannot be understood in any other way. Also, even though they pose as well-educated elites committed to the ideology of ‘human rights’ and ‘progress’, the real animating principle is the exclusive vanity of insider privilege and the pissing contest of egos. More than any idea, value, or principle, what matters to them most if that they are on the inside unlike most people who are on the outside. Status and the cult of secret knowledge that make them feel so special is what they’re really about. And just to stay on the inside, they will change their tune and serve a new agenda if doing so keeps them on the inside and climbing the ranks. And this is why they need to keep playing the game by creating more enemies all over the world. They need bounties to collect so as to burnish their credentials. It’s a club of trophy hunters who target entire nations just so that the members can feel big about themselves. Bagging a lion or elephant is bad enough. But these deep state elites try to bag entire nations as trophies. Or they try to keep vassal states like tigers or bears in a zoo. They want control for control’s sake.

Anyway, even though AMERICAN MADE is not a great movie, it is enthralling from beginning to end, and it does make us think about the illusion of free will. It shows how a man can feel so free living so freely despite completely being at the mercy of much greater powers. It’s like a skilled surfer can ride the waves but is powerless to change the course of those waves. All he can do is coast on them and try to remain standing. Life is like that for most of humanity, so what is the problem with Barry Seal? It’s that his skills as a surfer — he is really talented in slipping through the Charybdis and Scylla of the powers arrayed around him — fools him into thinking he has agency and control beyond his penchant for squeezing out of tight spots with the help of luck. Also, he’s so sure that he’s indispensable to all sides that he fails to see how he is equally dispensable, again to all sides, as well. The US government and drug cartels value him for his willingness to play it loose to get things done. All sides see him as an asset but also a handicap. The only way he can stay in the game is to please all sides. A tightrope walker may feel free up high in the air, but how much freedom does he really have? His only choice is to walk along the narrowness of the rope. One wrong step, and down he goes.

Mass Immigration by Foreign Elements Is Imperialism, Pure and Simple

US should have severely restricted non-white immigrants like the Founders intended.

We hear all this whining about ‘hate’, but ‘hate’ is appropriate to cases where a people aggressively attack and invade other peoples, not when they defend their turf from outsiders who are different in race and culture.
Were Algerians and Vietnamese ‘haters’ against the French in their resistance struggles? No, they only hated French aggression and imperialism. They had no hostility against the French nation per se. They were only trying to reclaim their beloved homelands from foreign occupiers.

Japan doesn’t want to be invaded and colonized by Muslims. Is that ‘hate’?
Must a people invite demographic invasion to be on the side of angels? No, a people who invite invasion are HATE their own kind. Self-hate is the worst kind of crime.

Donald Trump deserves a lot of criticism from all sides, but on the plus side, he has allowed Russia and Iran to finish off the psychopathic ISIS in Syria. He also condemned the Iraq War and Libyan War during the Presidential campaign. If anything, it was the ‘progressives’ who were tight-lipped about all the War Crimes committed against Libya, Ukraine, and Syria during the Obama-Hillary years. Notice that those who now claim to love Muslims did nothing to protest the invasions and destruction of Muslim nations prior to Trump’s victory.

Now, if Trump’s stupid talk about Iran turns into real escalation, he’s be just another pezzonovante of the Jews. I suspect he has no personal animus against Iran. He’s just sucking up to Zionists because Jews are the real masters of America no matter which way you turn. Paradoxically, one has to be more pro-Zionist if hated by most Jews. Because Jew Worship is mandatory and because ‘antisemitism’ is a cardinal sin, one has to go the extra step to prove one’s pro-Jewish credentials when attacked by Jews themselves. Since Jews say Trump is hitler, Trump must do heavy-lifting to demonstrate he’s the best friend of Jews and the ultimate shill for Israel. Even so, there’s no guarantee that he will opt for war with Iran. He could be using heated rhetoric against Iran to keeps the Jews at bay.

Concerning the ‘refugees’, the solution is for the US to stop meddling in the Middle East. Then chances of war will greatly diminish, and then, there will be no more refugees. Muslims can stay in their own nations. If Muslims want to flee their own nations even in peacetime, it means they hate their own kind and prefer to live with whites. They would be the self-haters. Why should the West welcome self-hating Muslims who don’t even want to live with their own kind?

Anyway, no nation can survive by allowing massive foreign invasion-immigration. Mass immigration of foreigners IS invasion. Mass arrival of Jews led to destruction of Palestine. Mass arrival of Spanish led to demise of native peoples in Meso-America. Hawaiians are a minority in their own homeland because of white and yellow mass immigration. The only kind of immigration that works on a large scale is one that lets in the same kind of people. This is why Israeli immigration is Jewish Only. More Jews arriving in the Jewish State means Replenishment, not Replacement. But if Israel allowed tons of non-Jewish immigrants, Jews will face Replacement, and then, the Israel as Jewish State is lost forever.

Anyone who pushes mass immigration by foreigners is an imperialist.

People like Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel, Theresa May, John McCain, Joe Biden, the Bush clan, and etc no longer have any concern for their own race, culture, and people. They identify with power and privilege(mostly dominated by Jews). If it’s globalism they must serve to keep their positions and privilege, they will do so.

The difference between past imperialism and current imperialism is the former was about one people colonizing another people’s land whereas the latter is about ALL nations being demographically colonized by all peoples as the elites around the world collude to favor their own aggrandizement and privilege above all other considerations. Of course, Israel gets pass-over rights in being exempted from obligation to welcome foreign invaders.
But then, which people control globalism? Only Jews are allowed an arrangement where elites identify with and protect their ethnic kin. Among gentiles, elites are to despise and abandon their own national folks in favor of the company of ‘cosmopolitan’ People of Privilege, all of whom must serve the higher power of Jewish Globalist Supremacism.

Of course, these immigrant-invaders play the passive/aggressive game. They aggressively colonize other nations but then play ‘victims’ of ‘hateful bigoted natives’ who won’t let more of them in. Just look at those Hindus. They seek to take over Anglo-made worlds with massive colonization, but they harp as ‘victims’ of ‘racism’ and ‘xenophobia’. Invading other nations is now a ‘human right’ according to globo-dominated UN. Mass invasion by boat, foot, or by plane is hailed as some god-given right. So, the US is expected to offer ‘sanctuary’ to illegals sacralized as ‘dreamers’. EU must absorb all those who invade by boat or boot.

Natives are supposed to be in self-hate mode and gain love points only by welcoming invaders.

How did the world become this stupid?

Why White National Liberation Movement Must be Wary of Asians in America

White National Liberationists are familiar with the machinations of Jewish power, the plague of black thuggery, and the Reconquista revanchism of Mexicans. But what about Asians, especially East Asians, who constitute an invisible minority? How do Asians fit into the bigger picture?
If America were a white-dominant nation, there would be little to worry about as Asians are programmed genetically and culturally to obey and conform to the prevailing power. Unfortunately, the ruling elites of America are not white gentiles but Jews, most of whom are hostile to white identity and white interests. Just like Asians in the Soviet Union dutifully served the central authority of the Communist Party, Asians in current America will dutifully serve the prevailing authority of Jews & Homos in promoting Diversity, White Guilt, Homomania, and Negro-Worship.

Most East Asians in America are proggy because they’re yellow dogs. As teacher's pets and imitative followers, they uncritically swallow the official ideology without reflection or contemplation. Consider the Cultural Revolution that ravaged China in the 1960s. Consider how Japanese became fanatic militarists during WWII. And then, under American Occupation, the Japanese became the most obedient toadies of Uncle Sam even though the US had killed millions of Japanese. Koreans have shown themselves to be little more than imitative monkeys or servile dogs. Either they are imitating rapper thugs or serving as commissars of PC. In the Vietnam War, they served as yellow attack dogs of the US empire. Perhaps, higher IQ was wasted on East Asians, a race of dog-like people that know how to learn and follow but not how to lead and think.

Since PC dogma reigns in the US, yellow dogs mostly lean to the ‘left’ and bark rabidly at ‘whitey’. Mao made his minions destroy thousands of years’ worth of arts and treasures all over China. The victorious US tamed Japanese into a bunch of hapless toadies. Uncle Sam merely needed to yell "Attack" to make South Korean dogs maul and murder Vietnamese. North Korean masses are mindless robots and dogs of the Kim regime. Sure, there are always exceptions, but history is made by the general rule, not by outliers.

Given the nature of Asians, it’s hardly surprising that some of the most rabid and virulent anti-white agents in America are these yellow dogs who bark on command of Jews, homos, and Negroes. Since Jews rule the US and have anointed Homos and Negroes as the quintessential and iconic Americans and Magical People, the slavish and dog-like Asians feel it is their duty to serve the Three Holy Peoples. If the Holy Three say whites are the source of all evil and injustice, yellow dogs in their roles as teacher's pets will bark like mad at white people even though the ONLY reason why Asians got to enjoy their place in American society is because Europeans envisioned, founded, and did most to build America. Yes, yes, blacks did a lot of heavy lifting in the slavery era, and Chinese played a key role in the building of railroads, but without Europeans, there would be no America, period. But that isn’t what is taught or emphasized in schools; therefore, Asians, as simple-minded teacher's pets, tend to earnestly follow the official narrative of PC that permeates all textbooks. Also, because they are so deficient in the Cool Factor, they are so eager to seem hip and 'edgy' by imitating or sucking up to Pop Cultural fashions that glorify blacks, homos, and Jews. Even though white gentiles are prominently featured in Pop Culture, they are not allowed to express any racial identity, solidarity, or pride, and almost all villains are white, except in cases where they are Asian or Muslim. (Notice the villains are almost never Jews, homos, or blacks.)
While it’s true that many Asian kids don’t come to America with anti-white animus or are raised that way by their parents, even they will likely turn proggy once they undergo years of PC indoctrination. Also, being status-obsessed, yellow dogs will submit and conform to ANY ideology that happens to be associated in the Current Year with prestige and social approval. While all people try to avoid social opprobrium, such concern is a much bigger factor among Asians because they lack a strong sense of individuality. As such, their main identity comes from fitting in, belonging, and being approved by others. Notice how the Japanese are so mindful not to upset the cart and raise the ire of the larger community. While this aspect of Asian-ness comes with certain advantages — more cohesion and cooperation — , the downside is Asian individuals tend to be more defined by what OTHERS think of them than what they themselves think in their heart of hearts. As such, a true sense-of-self fails to fully mature and develop among Asians.
Since Americanized Asians seem more outgoing and expressive than Asians in Asia, one may be tempted to think that they have gained or developed true individuality. But in fact, most of them are merely trying to imitate the American Norms to win acceptance and approval. In contrast, Jews, Homos, and blacks, despite their minority status, have exhibited stronger will, attitude, and agency in creating their own styles and narratives, in time even changing the norms of the White Gentile Straight majority itself. In contrast, Asians in America, as ‘yellow cake’, is blander than ‘white bread’. Having no assertive will of their own, Asians need to draw upon the energies of the Other to feel purposeful in life. Why did so many Chinese become such mindless sheep of Mao? Having no individual will or soul, they were attracted to the Great Man who imbued their dog-like existence with direction and goal.

This is why most Asians in America are proggy, filled with anti-white animus, and call for Diversity.
As the most powerful will, attitude, and agency are now with Jews, homos, and blacks, most Asians in America obey Jews, serve black rage, and worship homos. If Asians in Past White-Christian-dominated America tended to become good obedient Christians, today’s Asians become commissars of PC or consumers of trashy Pop Culture.

Most Asians in America are earnest-naive-stupid. At least Jews push PC notion like Diversity to boost their own power. Jews are the ruling elites who use Diversity for divide-and-rule strategy in a gentile majority nation. Jews are too smart to push for non-Jewish diversity in Israel. So, Jews know what they’re doing. They know PC and ideology are mere instruments to further Jewish Power. They don’t really believe in that stuff. Faith in PC is for the birds. It’s like Stalin and Mao used Marxism for their own ends. They often deviated from the theory because their main agenda was about power and control. Smart people know that ideas exist to serve a people. Stupid or childlike people believe they exist to serve an idea. Jews, being smart and savvy, know well enough to promote Diversity in gentile nations but NOT in Israel.

In contrast, earnest yellow dogs ingest the Rules of PC as holy text. They seek academic and professional success in the West not to gain dominance but to serve the dominant power, which currently happens to be Jewish and Homo. And since yellows swallow the PC whole hog, they sincerely export the nonsense back to their homelands. All those imitative yellows in Canada and US are regurgitating the PC they imbibed(in Jew-homo-run America) back to their nations of origin. Why is else Taiwan so crazy for ‘gay marriage’ now?

Paradoxically, as yellows gain more positions in elite ranks in the West, they will end up doing more harm to their own kind as well as to whites. Just think: Yellows seek status to serve the Dominant Power that happens to be Jewish-Homo-Americanus. Since Jewish-Homo-American globalism is against all vestiges of gentile-nationalism, these privileged yellows in high positions will eventually export anti-gentile-nationalism to their own homelands and end up unwittingly working AGAINST their own kind. Because Asians in America are so devotional to the Dominant Power as the purveyor of all truth, they earnestly believe that PC is the highest good for all mankind. (They are too innocent and stupid to ask, "If Jews push this Diversity stuff on gentile nations, why don’t they do likewise on Israel?") Asians in America gaining elite positions doesn’t necessarily translate into greater Asian power. If anything, the result could be the very opposite. It’s like, when a Negro was elevated from a Field Negro to a House Negro, it made the prospect of black power and liberation even dimmer. Why? The House Negro wasn’t allowed into the master’s house to take over. Rather, he was let in to serve the massuh in controlling the rest of the Negroes even better. Likewise, these yellow dogs enter Ivy League colleges to become servants than masters. Just look at the spread of homomaniacal crap in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and even Vietnam, the proud nation that sacrificed millions of lives to drive out American Imperialists!

Whites must oppose yellows as either servants or masters. There is no reason for white nations to be ruled by non-white elites/masters of any kind. Also, when yellows become servants, they are NOT serving white gentile nationalism but Jewish-Homo Globalism. Because the West is ruled by Jews and Homos(the quasi-spiritual proxies of Jews), white people have become a subject people, a colonized people. Since yellows love to serve the Master, they currently serve Jews and Homos to break the body and will of white gentiles.
But then, since the Jewish-Homo agenda is to weaken the national pride & unity of all gentile nations, these yellow dogs will, in time, serve as agents of Jew-Homo-Globalism in the cucking of Asia. Taiwan is a harbinger of things to come. It is now just a yellow Canada, a cultural Puerto Rico of the Homo West.

Given their nature, yellows will never gain dominance in the West, but they are dangerous nevertheless because they are diligent and dutiful servants of the Power(of Jews and homos). And if yellows feel frustration and dissatisfaction in America, Jews will manipulate childish Asian minds to blame it all on Whitey. So, if black criminality harms Asians, it’s Whitey’s fault. If Jewish Hollywood stereotypes or excludes Asians, it’s Whitey’s fault. If Jewish-run elite colleges discriminate against Asians, it’s Whitey’s fault. If some Asians lose themselves in drugs and decadence, it’s Whitey’s fault. Now, why would Asians in America be discontent? Some Asians will surely wonder why they never seem to gain real traction and power despite their excelling in academics. In truth, they fail to gain dominance because, once they come to the West, yellow women lose all respect for dorkus yellow men like the silly ‘Jap’ loser in FARGO. So, even as they pass exams, they fail in making love and life, and this failure now has infected yellow nations themselves. Also, as alpha Asians will mix with whites & other races, the remaining Asians will become even more passive and dorky because the alpha genes will have been lost even more from the Asian gene pool. It’s pure genetics as more able and adventurous Asians mix with other races. So, those Asians who stick together will be dorkier and dorkier… like Amish genetics being weeded of adventurous and individualistic traits.

So, yellows are not dangerous like Jews with a powerful sense of identity, indeed even when they didn’t have a nation of their own for 1000s of yrs. In contrast, Asians lose their identity and culture the moment they leave their homelands. In their new nation, they just want acceptance and approval from the dominant power, which currently happens to be Jewish-Homo Globalism with Negroes as magical icons.

Still, yellows will make a difference in the future of American Power because they will serve as the most dutiful commissars of PC. Look how all these yellow dog judges and lawyers have been working so diligently to block Trump’s agenda and the interests of white Americans. For that reason, yellow dogs must go.

Now, the Hindus… that’s another story. They are more likely to stick together. There is less out-marriage, so their identity will remain more intact.
Also, Hinduism has a sense of truth beyond the temporal, and this gives them a power akin to that of Jews.
East Asians, steeped in Confucian philosophy, have no sense of power or truth beyond the political or social. The biggest man-made power is the ultimate authority for East Asians. So, if PC is the highest man-made authority in the West, East Asians kowtow to it 100%. It’s no wonder why so many Chinese swallowed Maoism 100%. When Mao was alive, he was god-emperor simply because he had the most political power.

In contrast, even as Hindus or Dotkins play along with PC, their cultural habit is to behold(and hide) a sense of truth deeper and higher than the ever-changing social constructions of man.
Jews had this sense too. Even when dwarfed by much greater political-military might of gentile empires, their sense of the Covenant with God made them feel special and unique beyond any temporal or worldly consideration. Their ethno-spiritual consciousness meant more than all the empires of the world. Hindus, with a similar ‘ethno-spiritual’ worldview, are more adept at the chess game of power. They know how to play all the pieces whereas East Asians only know how to play the subordinate pieces to serve whatever happens to be dominant man-made power of the Current Year.

P.S.

Asian-Americans will be the uber-unter(or over-under) class.

They will rise over the great white middle but serve as commissars under Jewish, Homo, and white cuck elites.

Yellows are diligent and study hard to make the climb but lack agency to think or lead on their own. They only know how to follow, imitate, seek approval, and obey orders. So, they will be the commissar-class of globo-hegemony. They will work against both white patriots in America and yellow patriots in Asia. They will identify mainly with globalism and seek privilege within it. As commissars of Jews and Homos, they will work to undermine white power in the West and subvert native sovereignty in Asian nations. It’s like Francis Fukuyama is a shill of George Soros. He doesn’t defend Japan from globalism. He wants Japan to be open to globalist elite and demographic takeover.

Jewish Globalists push Diversity in elite institutions to make gentile elites identify mainly with their shared privilege under Jewish hegemony than with their own national folks.
British Imperialists employed the same strategy. They trained diverse elites of all colors to identify primarily with British Imperial Glory than with their own peoples. So, if Hindu, African, Arab, or Asian elites all studied together in British institutions, they were likely to identify more with one another as blessed subjects of the British Empire than identify with their own racial kin back home. (In the past, white ‘racism’ awakened the diverse elites to their inferior status within the Empire, and their hurt pride inspired them to struggle for national liberation than continue to serve the Empire of White Privilege. But because the Jewish-dominated American Empire now often favors non-white elites over whites(who are usually blamed for everything), there is a great temptation for non-white elites to side with globalism than with their native folks. The new imperialism of globalism allows non-white elites to reach the top in America and Europe, the richest areas of the world. So, non-white elites often choose to permanently align with American globalism than with their the nationalism of their own folks. If anything, they work with Jews to undermine the sovereignty of their own nations. Because of the PC impression that 'white supremacy' and 'white privilege' are the greatest evils in the West, non-white elites think they are taking over the West by besting the whites. What they remain unaware of is that Jewish supremacists who hold the real power are merely using Asians against white power. So, the rise of Asians in the West is not about gaining mastery but serving the true mastery of Jews who, after having fatally weakened white power, will do the same thing to Asian nations with, of course, the collaboration of Asian agents of globalism.

The Old Imperialism came under attack following WWII as Anti-Imperialist struggles accelerated around the world, heralding the Golden Age of Universal Nationalism.

But, following the end of the Cold War, Jewish-Homo globo-hegemony centered has been pushing a new kind of Universal Imperialism where ALL NATIONS(except Israel) are pressured to resign themselves to massive demographic invasion and the cultural imperialism of Homomania and Negromania.

If white gentile patriots ruled America, yellows would dutifully serve them. But because PC is the official Template of the land, the naturally servile yellows will serve Jewish/Homo globalists and Mulattoes. Also, they will race-mix with Jews, white cuck elites, and mulattoes. They'll just be the minions of Jewish-Homo or Jomo Globalism.