Paradoxically, the Best Way to Defend Free Speech is to Deny It to Your Enemy — Then, Your Enemy will Work Hard to Defend Free Speech — Call for Hate Speech Legislation against Zionist 'Hate Speech' against Palestinians and Anti-White Defamation emanating mainly from Jewish Supremacism

Jews who monopolize social and video platforms like Facebook and Youtube are at it again. They are purging entire accounts and deleting 100,000s of videos. Some say internet companies are implementing this policy under duress from organizations like ADL but that’s neither there nor here as both ADL and the monopolists of those internet companies are Jewish and arch-Zionist. The wretched hag Susan Wojcicki, who was given control over Youtube, may pretend to care about free speech, but it’s all phony hand-wringing. Her ilk would like for us to believe they are defenders of free speech but are forced to act under pressure from ADL and the like. But this is nonsense. Google that owns Youtube is one of the richest companies in the world. It doesn’t have to listen to ADL. It can do as it wants, which is, of course, what it does. And what it chooses to do is work closely with ADL to push Terms of Services that are conducive to the Only Rule that matters to Tribe: "Is it good for Jews?" or more precisely, "Is it great for Jewish Supremacism?" And it’s not a left vs right issue because Jews on both sides of the political aisle work tirelessly to shut down BDS by means of both business and the state. Incidentally, BDS is mostly aligned with the American Left, but it’s given no latitude by the Zionist monopolists of Google and Facebook who are less ideological and more tribal-supremacist.

Google and Facebook(and other companies) yammer about Terms of Services, but it is THEY who have violated the Terms and Promises. When they were getting started, they wanted to draw everyone in because they wanted to be monopolies. If they had honestly stated from the get-go that they’d favor the Democrats, Globalists, Zionist-Supremacists, Homomania, and etc. at the expense of others, many many people would not have used those services and instead would have sought out alternative services. The ONLY reason why ALL OF US decided to use those services was because Google, Facebook, and the like more-or-less promised us neutrality, fairness, and balance. Google even boasted early on that it would not do ‘evil’. Because people of all stripes trusted Google and Facebook, they signed up for those services on a massive scale, thereby turning them into mega-monopolies that pushed out all competition. But now that they have amassed monopoly powers, what are they doing? They are using their muscle to favor and promote certain voices and viewpoints while suppressing, censoring, and banning others. This is called the Jewish Hustle. It’s like what a pool shark does. He plays the first few games not so well and even loses a few to lure suckers into more games with higher stakes. Google and Facebook Jews conned us. They became monopolies but sucking ALL OF US in on the basis of fairness and neutrality, but once they gained great fortune and power, they decided to use their monopoly muscle to favor certain voices over others.

Furthermore, they’ve betrayed the entire spirit of Youtube and Facebook. Youtube became a thing because, for the first time, ordinary people could become part of the media than mere passive observers. Prior to the internet and effective video-platforms, most people watched TV news and shows made by a handful of corporations, but there was no effective way for them to offer feedback or create their own content. But with advancing video-streaming technology, millions of people were able to become content-creators and share their views. And in some ways, they were advantaged over media ‘mavens’ because they didn’t have a boss telling them what they could or couldn’t say. This freedom made some of the commentary downright loony, but it also meant more freedom for people to speak freely, something that is impossible in ‘mainstream media’ where any reporter or personality who spouts wrongthink can summarily be fired. So, on a host of issues and subjects, the personalities on Youtube and Facebook began to share their views with genuine sincerity. This element of sincerity and courageousness made certain Youtube, Facebook, and Twitter personalities very popular(or notorious), regularly drawing a larger share of the audience than ‘mainstream’ media where most news people and opinion-makers couldn’t step beyond the boundaries set by corporations and official narrative.
That was the whole point of Youtube's appeal. If we should just watch and listen to Corporate News and Shows made by a handful of mega-corporations, why bother with a platform like Youtube or Facebook where the DIFFERENCE is you can gain access to things OUTSIDE the perimeters of corporate and state control? Youtube began as a place where you could upload videos and share your views and share in the views of others just like you who had something to say and could do by making videos. But, what has Youtube been doing lately? It’s rigged search results so that, on any hot, controversial, or contentious topic, just about the only search results it will show are those by corporate news and bogus ‘independent’ content-creators(like the Young Turks) who’ve been tamed by massive funding by the super-rich Jews. Again, what is the point of using Youtube if it’s going to operate just like the Old TV. YOUtube has turned into WEtube, the ‘we’ in this case being oligarchic Zionists and mega-corporations that hog ownership and control of most of the media. They now say, ‘WE’ got the power, and ‘WE’ Zionist oligarchs will work with other Zionist monopolists of the media to control the Platform, Megaphone, and the Narrative. When push comes to shove, Jews prove to be tribalists first and ideologues second. All this stuff about ‘free speech’ and ‘First Amendment’ means nothing to Jews if free exchange of facts, analysis, and opinions threatens the Jewish lock on power.

Of course, the problem isn’t merely Jewish but Cuck-Wasp. Anglo-Americans who once used to rule America handed over power to the Jews so thoroughly and completely that Jewish Power has no effective opposition. When the Founding Fathers formed the new republic, they were careful to implement a system of checks and balances where no person, sector, or branch of government could have total power. But when Wasps handed over power to the Bugs(Busy Urban Globalist Semites, aka Jewish elites), they implemented no standards and methods by which the New Power could be counter-balanced and critiqued. But then, this massive quasi-revolutionary transference of power took place almost stealthily without declaration. It could be a Silent Revolution, Silent Coup, Silent Surrender, and Silent Betrayal because it didn’t happen overnight but over a decade or two. It was dramatic, indeed seismic, but gradual enough for people not to notice, especially when the Jew-run media created the impression that Whites were still in control, not least by using Wasp figureheads & mouthpieces and by getting young people all worked up about ‘white privilege’.
It’s incredible that the Founders were more concerned about the future of the American republic than the late-stage Wasps who handed power to Jews without putting any safety locks in place. To be sure, it would have been risky for late-stage Wasps to sound the alarm as Jews had such control of media and academia when the transference of power happened. Back in the early days of America’s founding, all the organs were controlled by Anglo-Americans who could freely debate the nature of power. But when Jews were taking over, they had near-total monopoly of the media, academia, and the deep state, and it would have been risky for anyone to raise questions about the character of ascendant Jewish Power. Even in the early 70s when Wasps still held the power, Richard Nixon and Billy Graham had to speak secretively about the Jews.

Even though Jews could loudly voice their issues with Wasps, it became deeply contentious and then downright taboo to discuss the problem of Jewish power, personality, and pathologies. Jews could psychoanalyze men like Nixon and raise alarms about the ‘authoritarian personality’(of white goyim, of course), but no one better say anything about Jewish neuroses and pathologies. One thing for sure, late-stage Wasps were most derelict in their duties. Perhaps, it was inevitable that the power would pass over to smarter and more driven Jews, but Wasps, in losing power, could still have created a Culture of Critique(of their own) to scrutinize and expose the dark side of Jewish Power. After all, if Anglo/Germanic Americans(especially those on the Right) were infected with the ‘authoritarian personality’, then one could say Jews carried within them the germ of the radical will(though a compliment in Susan Sontag’s vocabulary) that has caused so many problems around the world(while also leading interesting ideas and propositions).

Anyway, in order to face the rise of censorship in the West, we need to expose and discuss its core source. We need to remind ourselves that it’s not mainly ideological but identito-centric. Essentially, it’s about Jews shutting down any voice they find threatening to Jewish supremacist power. Those who say the ‘left’ or ‘woke capital’ is behind the Culture of Censorship are focusing on the dogs, not on the dog-owner; on the puppets, not on the puppet-master; on the ‘buffers’, not on the guy who is ‘pushing the button’. Besides, the Real Left is deader than the Right. As I’ve said many times before, today’s so-called ‘left’ is just an ‘idological’(idolatry as ideology) front of Jewish Supremacism and Global Capitalism. Big Money and Big Institutions pushed bratty and insipid inanity, triviality, and decadence as the hallmarks of ‘new leftism’ so that Jewish Superpower and Global Capital would NOT come under any real pressure from the populace.
As history has shown, the most effective counterbalance against Big Capital is nationalism and working-class consciousness. Nationalism pressures Big Money to be patriotic and prioritize what is good for the nation-as-a-whole than "what’s in it for ME?" Nationalism binds the elites to a place and people. And worker-consciousness can organize for higher wages and more concessions from the Big Capital class. This is why Big Capital has come to dislike nationalism and worker-consciousness. By undermining nationalism, Big Capital can make more profits by outsourcing jobs and ‘insourcing’ cheaper foreign labor. Furthermore, to erode nationalism even further, the elites say the foreigners must be accepted as ‘New Nationals’ or else it’s ‘racist’ or ‘xenophobic’. Thus, the rich elites, who’d been morally defensive against the demands of nationalists and workers positioned themselves on the moral offensive as the ‘inclusive’ and ‘welcoming’ Good People at odds with ‘closed-minded’ nationalists and ‘petty-minded’ working class folks.
Of course, the rich elites don’t have to bear the brunt of mass Diversity as they, with increasing profits via globalism, can afford to live in the nicest and safest areas. And even if they rub shoulders with Diversity, it is with the quality kind — the most educated and high-earning POC(people of color) — than with the worst dregs of society. Just like rich whites get the Obamas whereas poor whites have to deal with the Mike-Tysons of the world, rich whites(and Jews) rub shoulders with affluent Asians and Hindus(and white Latinos), whereas the poorer whites must deal with the worst elements among the new arrivals. The elites claim to reject nationalism as too small-minded and petty because their hearts and minds are BIG ENOUGH for all the world and all of humanity. But this is utter nonsense because, even as they destroy national walls, they are busy building economic walls of privilege for themselves that are among the most exclusive habitats on Earth. Also, while elitism on a national level is realistic, elitism on a global scale is merely rhetorical. Elites can lead nations, not the world. Thus, those who claim to care about the whole world end up doing nothing for anyone... but themselves. It's like parents who neglect their own kids in the name of helping ALL THE CHILDREN of the world end up doing nothing for anyone; by focusing on all the children, they neglect their own kids, but then, they do nothing for all the children since it's impossible; it just becomes empty pretty talk. This Elysium World of Globosphere was sharply presented in Woody Allen’s BLUE JASMINE.

All these people put on airs of being open-minded even as they live in the most enclosed places on Earth. Their residences are not necessarily gated or walled of physically, but the costs are forbidding enough to keep most people out. Now, if these people were only about piggery and privilege, it wouldn’t be so bad. What makes them insufferable and ultimately intolerable is they have a bogus and conceited air about them. Ooh lala, they are not only rich and privileged but are MORALLY better than the hoi polloi because they are soooooo open-minded and tolerant(especially of fancy-pants homos). It’s really like Marie Antoinette play-pretending to be a shepherdess. It’s like the jerks at Google and Facebook. They rake in all the money from globalism, live in their ultra-posh neighborhoods that exclude most people, and send their kids to the most expensive schools, but they act like they’re so ‘progressive’ because they are so ‘tolerant’ and into ‘diversity’.

And of course, they are into the Holy Three of Jew Worship, Negro Worship(from a safe distance), and Homo Worship. If these people were truly ideological in the leftist sense, they would favor no particular group over others UNLESS the favored group happens to be the masses of workers, the ordinary folks. Leftism was about the People against the Rulers, not about One Particular Group over Other Groups. Now, some may argue that Jews, blacks, and homos had been victimized in history, and therefore, they are deserving of leftist sympathy as ‘oppressed groups’. But if we look back in history, EVERY PEOPLE had been oppressed at one time or other. Also, blacks were big players in the slave trade and did all the capturing and selling to whites(and Arabs). As for Jews, they were as often victimizers as victims. In the 20th century, they were among the greatest victims under Nazism, but they were also among the biggest villains as communists, Zionist-imperialists, finance capitalists, and cultural subversives. As for homosexuality, even though it was repressed for most of human history(and for good reason), homos never constituted a valid social group because a homo could be BORN INTO any family, any nationality, or any class. A homo could be born into a slave-owning family or into a slave family. Also, given their vanity and natural narcissism, homos have often sidled up to the Power in its exploitation of the masses. In this, both Jews and homos have something in common as historic ‘minority collaborators’ with the Ruling Elites that squeezed their own peoples. And today, globalist homos work with Jewish globalist supremacists for World Hegemony, what with Jews as the King and Homos as the Queen.

So, all would-be truth-tellers need to stop calling the Globalists the ‘left’. As I’ve said many times before, it’s giving them too much credit. It only creates the impression that the current Globalist Elites who rule the West and much of the world are on the side of ‘progress’ when their ideology is really but the Regression to the Greed. How can globo-homo issues be ‘leftist’ when homos and trannies make up just a tiny fraction of society, especially a haughty, fussy, arrogant, and ooh-lala one at that. These homos cater to the rich and powerful. To understand homo psychology, watch THE TALENTED MR. RIPLEY(with Elizabeth-Warren-lookalike Matt Damon as the homokin) or the psycho-homo played to perfection by Will Patton in NO WAY OUT.

Now, some might argue that being pro-mass-immigration is leftist because it pits the poor(or poorer) masses of the Third World against the richer and ‘more privileged’ whites of the First World. But, in fact, the Diversity of the newcomers make it impossible for them to unite as a bloc against the ruling power that remains Jewish, Homo, and white-cuck-collaborationists. Also, as the newcomers mainly compete with the white hoi polloi, the elites can exploit the tensions of the lower orders while grabbing most of the loot for themselves. The elites know that white-and-nationalist people, out of racial solidarity, will not side with People of Color against Jewish/white elites; they also know that the POC will not rise against the Jewish/white elites who are for mass-immigration. If anything, POC generally side with Jewish/white elites against the white hoi polloi. Also, even if POC,-as-new-nationals, vote for so-called ‘progressive’ politicians, the fact is they don’t get to decide policy. They only supply votes for politicians handpicked by Jewish supremacist elites who make sure their paid-for-whores shill for Jewish interests and Israel uber alles. If ideology really matters in the US, why is there no difference between the GOP and the Democrats in the mindless support for Israel and endless hosannas to Jews? While more of the grassroots Democrats may be sympathetic to Palestinians and BDS Movement, those concerns are NEVER addressed at the upper echelons of the Party where all the key decisions are made. So, the rank-and-file just supply the votes for the puppet-politicians vetted by Jewish Power to be servile to Zion and Jewish globo-homo supremacism. BDS is usually associated with the Left, but it gets ZERO protection from high-powered Democrats. Even Tulsi Gabbard supported the Anti-BDS bill.

The ‘Idology’ of Jews matter more than any ideology in American ‘progressivism’ or ‘leftism’, which is now totally bogus. Now, it may well be that many so-called ‘progressives’ are passionate and sincere in their hysterics, but they are utterly lacking in agency. They have no clue as to who really rules the world, and their minds are so easily molded by the Jewish Hand that has monopoly control of media, academia, deep state, and finance. If ‘progressives’ are so independent-minded, how did they so suddenly lose interest in the working class and become so obsessed over globo-homo issues? It’s because their silly little heads are hardly different from TV sets. Their antennas pick up signal from the Central Command System. So, if TV shows say ‘homo is holy’, the progs are thus programmed. So-called ‘progressives’ really ought to be called ‘programmives’. They are like chorus characters in a Jewish-Homo musical play. If progs lack true agency, Negroes are mostly about URGENCY; they are masterful slaves of their basest instincts for hollering and ‘twerking’. Dominance of urgency essentially robs blacks of real agency because their instincts, sensations, and emotions override any rational and/or reflective understanding of the world. Black soul is a pool of narcissism that blacks endlessly stare into to feed their junglomania. Even a fat, ugly, and stupid black woman has the diva-complex of thinking she be ‘queen of the Nile and shit’.

Now, what would be the most effective way to combat the rise of censorship? First, we must focus on the main source behind it. All honest observers will notice it is Jewish Power. Then, we must fight fire with fire against Jewish Power. We must direct all or at least most of our fire on the Jews. Next, we must ask, "What means are Jews using to shut down free speech?" It is the moral passion of combating ‘hate speech’, speech that is SO BEYOND THE PALE that it mustn’t air freely lest it poison the social ecology. As emotions override reason among many people, especially in relation to sacrosanct matters, there has been a growing number of people who are willing to sacrifice free speech 'absolutism’ in favor of Approved Free Speech(which is really free-speech-in-name-only). Especially among Millennials, a generation raised under PC in schools and pop culture from cradle to school to work, there is a willingness to shut down ‘hate speech’ that supposedly defiles the Holy Three of Jew-Worship, Negro-Worship, and Homo-Worship. Indeed, there are SPECIAL TERMS to defame any view that dares to speak truth to Jews, blacks, and homos: ‘Antisemitism’, ‘racism’, and ‘homophobia’. Granted, ‘racism’ can mean any kind of racial or ethnic bigotry, but it has bite ONLY in relation to blacks because Pop Culture and PC Narrative have instilled so many folks with images of the Magic Negro. Because blacks have been presented as especially tragic and ‘spiritual’, people are more triggered by heresy against Black Worship than by negative things said about most other racial or ethnic groups. Consider how Hollywood got away with all those movies that stereotyped Arabs/Muslims as subhuman terrorists. Or, consider how it’s perfectly okay for Hollywood to stereotype Russians as vile thugs or fan the flames of yellow peril where the Chinese are presented as especially villainous. Thus, so many Millennials grew up with images of holiness that favor blacks over others. Because Millennials and self-righteous PC types(whose minds have been so thoroughly warped by TV and/or academic indoctrination) are so weepy-eyed and holy-schmoly about Jews, blacks, and homos, they would rather sacrifice free speech in the name of banning ‘hate speech’, which is to them what devil-talk was to Christians in the Middle Ages. Even the rational side of man often caves to the power of taboos that is out to snuff the blasphemous. This aspect of progs is often overlooked because of the conceit that ‘liberalism’ is secular and rationalist, therefore opposed to religious dogma. But ideology, especially when laced with ‘idology’, is just a secular variant of theocracy. Whether it was the mass reverence for Marx, Lenin, Stalin, or Mao OR it is the virtual worship of Jews(as Shoah People), blacks(as Magic Negroes), or homos(as fairy-angels of the new era), the same psychological dynamics come into play. The emotional commitment is so powerful that the faculty of reason and true secular/liberal principles break down. Also, such emotions tend to simplify and ‘dichotomize’ any issue that pertains to their notion of the holy. Just like for the true believers of religion, there is God and the Devil, there is for the PC-indoctrinated minions a worldview where the Good is pitted against the Evil. Because of such Manicheanism, even moderate and slightly deviant views could be denounced as wicked. Just like the Pod People in THE INVASION OF THE BODY SNATCHERS cannot tolerate any human — each and every person must be made into a Pod Person! — , PC minions believe they are on the ‘right side of history’ and that anyone who disagrees must either be converted soon enough or condemned as hopelessly ‘hateful’. This is why even moderate ‘rightist’ thinkers like Charles Murray and Heather MacDonald have been hounded by PC loons. In their pathetic but passionate little minds, there is Good and Evil, and they are on the side of the Good. The Evil is lack of reverence for Jews, blacks, and homos. Because the Holy Three is SO IMPORTANT to them, even mildly critical or neutral feelings toward the trinity are deeply suspect and to be condemned. It’s like, for true believers in Religion, there can be no middle ground between Faith and Devil-Worship. To the true believer, the moderate non-believer is hardly different from an outright Devil Worshiper. Because he believes God is so true and holy, those who stand outside the light, even if not vociferously anti-God, must be agents of the Devil. Likewise, PC minions’ faith in Jew Worship, Negro Worship, and Homo Worship is so total as the fashion-passion of the moment that they simply cannot conceive of any goodness or decency outside their vision of the Light. To be on the side of angels, one must condemn any critic of Jews as ‘nazi’, any skeptic of LGBTQ nonsense as ‘homophobic’, and any speaker of truth about blacks as ‘racist’. PC isn’t merely about hostility against what it deems as evil but about rage & exasperation over any lack of requisite enthusiasm for the Holy Three. Middle-ground is not acceptable for PC. You must believe! One mustn’t let facts, reason, and skepticism color one’s views about Jews, MLK & Mandela, BLM(even though blacks usually kill blacks), and globo-homo fruitkins(who are now so holy that ‘gay colors’ now routinely adorn Mainline churches.) Just like narcissists are blind to the world in their obsessive self-worship, moral narcissists of PC are blind to all of reality that don’t conform to their self-esteem as holy-schmoly(if Jews, blacks, or homos) or properly-redemptive-and-atoning(if white and cucky-wuck). Take Ken Burns, aka CucKen Burns, an insufferable dweeb who is so into Negro Worship that he is totally blind to all the trouble blacks make for whites. But then, rich and privileged whites like him can choose to rub shoulders with the Nicer Negroes.
Also, blacks tend to treat rich whites differently from poor ones. The poor ones, they beat up and terrorize, but the rich ones, they flatter and schmooze. This is why rich whites, Democratic or Republican, have a totally different experience of blacks. Not only do they rub shoulders with better kind of blacks but blacks, even lowly ones, tend to behave better around rich ones. After all, if a black guy is a limo driver or receptionist, he is bound to treat rich ‘honkeys’ with respect he would never show to a lowly ‘honkey’. So, the rich ‘honkey’, being accustomed to being treated with respect by blacks, has a far more positive view of blacks than lowly whites do who are disrespected and humiliated. Also, the rich ‘honkey’ feels a certain anxiety complex because he is superior to the Negro in social status but below him in ‘moral status’(according to PC that posits Jews, Negroes, and Homos as the holy three); the reason why so many rich whites, including ‘conzos’, took so quickly to Homos is because homos are ‘holy’ and high-status. When a socially superior rich ‘honkey’ is served by a ‘morally superior’ ‘groid’, the former feels his ‘white guilt’ compounded because, even after all these years, he the whitey is being served by the blacky. So, he feels an added urge to be nice to the Negro and entertain friendly thoughts about blacks in general. In contrast, when a rich white guy is with a rich homo, their social parity makes things a bit smoother.

Anyway, once we have identified the main source that threatens the principle of Free Speech, we need to go on the offensive as well as play defense. No one ever won a war purely by playing defense alone. Even the toughest boxer will eventually be KO’ed by an inferior boxer if he only plays defense. This is why Jews keep winning. They play defense and offense. They defend Israel as their national homeland while attacking the nationalism of goyim. They defend their own identity, legacy, and heritage while impugning the identities, legacies, and heritages of other groups. Jews defend their own right to free speech while denouncing the uses of free speech by their enemies or rivals, real or perceived. When Jewish radicals were hounded by anti-communists in the early 50s, Jews lavishly funded ACLU to defend even anti-American and pro-communist speech(or silence as in taking the fifth) as a means to defend Jewish speech(as so many of the leftist radicals were Jews). Even as Jews were going out on a limb to defend their own liberty and speech rights in the US, many of them were supporting Stalinism in Eastern Europe even though people over there were being denied basic democratic rights and even being imprisoned or executed. Why? Because many of those Stalinist agents were Jewish, and Western Jewry regarded them as fellow tribal brethren. This is how Jews play the game. Nationalism for me but not for thee. Free Speech for me but not for thee. Jews also support gun rights in Israel because a well-armed populace means Jews with Guns. But in the US, Jews oppose gun rights because most guns are in the hands of goyim, especially white conservatives and patriots who tend to be more opposed to Jewish agendas of deracination and degeneracy. So, there you go: Guns for me but not for thee. Jews play defense and offense. They defend what is theirs but go on the offensive against what the Other has.

Now, some may argue that it’s not just the Jews. Non-whites are also opposed to Free Speech and Gun Rights, but then, ask yourself, why this is so. It’s because they’ve come under the influence of Jewish media and academia that tell non-whites that white people’s speech is ‘hate speech’ and that an armed white populace are ‘nazis’. Non-whites, just like so many cucky-wuck whites, are mental clay in Jewish Hands. The source of anti-free-speech-ism is not non-whites but Jews who mold so many minds via their control of institutions and industries. Also, Jews are especially dominant in the Democratic Party, and their main strategy for keeping the diverse and divergent coalition together has been by vilifying whiteness. And that is why so many non-whites have come to regard free speech and gun-rights for whites as problematic. Because Jews told them to see whites as the White Devil, they’ve come to regard white speech as devil-talk and white gun-ownership as the Wehrmacht or the KKK. The real source of white problems is the Jews.

Almost always, your enemy will give you bad advice. He will tell you to do what you shouldn’t do while he himself doesn’t do it, indeed does the very opposite. It’s like the British/Jews told the Chinese to use opium while they banned it in their own domains. You would have to be stupid to give your enemy good advice, which would be like feeding him key information. Now, if Jews regarded whites as allies and friends(as whites have come to see Jews), then Jewish advice might be of value. But the truth is Jews regard whites as the enemy(or main rival), and therefore, it doesn’t matter what whites think of Jews. If Bob sees Bill as a friend but Bill sees Bob as an enemy, Bob’s hospitality and trust will be completely wasted because Bill is committed to bringing Bob down. In the end, what YOU think matters less than what HE thinks of YOU. If HE thinks you suck and should be brought down, no amount of YOUR positive view of him will change the fact that he’s out to get you. Likewise, it doesn’t matter what whites think of Jews. The truth is most Jews see whites as either enemies or rivals... or at best lackeys and servants, certainly not as equals. In the present, whites are so trusting and servile to Jews that they will gladly take on the roles of servants out of their total awe of Jews as brilliant rich folks and Holy Holocaust People. For many whites, Jewishness epitomizes Materiality(money) and Morality. If you’re such a white person, you’re a hopeless and pathetic. Your message to Jews is, "Please don’t hate me, please don’t treat me like an enemy or rival, because all I ever want to do is praise, worship, and serve Jews, Jews, Jews, Israel, Israel, Israel." Such cucks are not even hoping for equality with Jews. They are happy to play the subservient role. It’s like the Charlie Kirks of the world whose big ambition is to be the next John McCain the Cuckaine or Mitt the Shit Romney.

Because the enemy will give you bad advice, indeed quite often the exact opposite of what it does, white people should always have the following rule in mind when dealing with Jews: Do as the Jews do, Disobey what They say. If Jews push ‘white guilt’ on whites, whites must push ‘Jewish Guilt’ on Jews. If Jews push ‘diversity’ on white nations, whites must push ‘diversity’ on Israel. If Jews work with non-whites against whites, whites must work with non-whites, especially Palestinians, against Jews. If Jews shut down white speech as ‘hate speech’, whites must attack Jewish speech as ‘hate speech’. If Jews say ‘antisemitism’ is just horrible, whites must say anti-whitism(the favorite pastime of vile and venal Jews) is totally terrible. Unless whites identify Jews as the main enemy and fight fire with fire, they will lose... as certainly as the Byzantines lost to the Turks. Whites need to go into Reconquista mode that took back Spain from the Moorish invaders. Whites must reconquer what is theirs, and in order to do this, they must seek White National Liberation from Jewish Supremacism.

To fight fire with fire, White Liberation(or White Emancipation or White Independence) from Jewish Supremacism must adopt a Speech Policy that is akin to the Jewish Strategy. Whites must demand a speech code that forbids the defaming or dehumanizing of whites. After all, Turkey has a law that bans insult to Turkey-ness, and Russia has a law that bans denigrating the memory of Russians in World War II. Whites must demand a speech code that forbids any insult to whiteness, any impugning of white memory. Of course, whites will be free to criticize, condemn, and disparage other groups. Whites should call for ‘hate speech laws’ that favor white identity and interests, just like Jews push for ‘hate speech laws’ that favor Jewish identity, Zionism, and their interests. From the Jewish POV, any criticism of Jewish power is ‘hate’. Harsh condemnation of Zionist tyranny over Palestinians is ‘hate’ or ‘antisemitism’, which is why Jews insist that BDS be muted, shut down, and railroaded.
What this shows is that ‘hate speech’ is never a neutral concept. ‘Hate’ is defined by those who control the law. In Turkey, those who insult Turkey-ness are labeled as ‘hateful’, which is why it’s illegal to discuss the Turkish mass-killing of Armenians following World War I. Jews mold the meaning of ‘hate’ to suit their needs. So, all their anti-Wasp and anti-white screeds are not ‘hate’. Jews can defame, dehumanize, and scapegoat whites for all the problems of the world. Indeed, Jews can smear whites much like how Nazis once smeared Jews. All that is not ‘hate’ as far as Jews are concerned. But if any white person shows the slightest hint of white pride or speaks even a bit of truth against Jewish power, that is HATE, say the Jews. This is how Jews play the game. Then, whites must play the same game. Whites must say it must be illegal to insult whiteness. Sure, whites have a checkered history, but then, SO DO ALL OTHER PEOPLES. Why single out the white race as especially guilty or blameworthy for all the problems of the world? This is bigotry and maggotry. Also, what about all the positive contributions that the white race has made for the world? Why not balance the bad with the good? Why dwell so much on white wrongs while never giving credit for white contributions? Such lack of balance goes to show that anti-white dehumanization has become de rigueur in the global debate dominated by Jews. Jews do to whites exactly what they blame the Nazis of having done to them. Jews smear whites as intolerable scum of the Earth UNLESS whites get on their knees and grovel before Jewish Supremacist Power as its cuck-servants. Then and only then are whites tolerated as House Honkeys(if members of the elite) or Field Honkeys(if part of the white hoi polloi). In other words, Jews will not accept whites on an equal basis as a people with sense of identity, illustrious history, and right of destiny. No, Jews regard whites as untermensch, a people who are tolerable only as a slave race. It’s like Nazi German plan for the Russian Slavs was as a race of helots. If allowed to survive, their existence must revolve around serving German ‘Aryan’ interests. Now, there is no need for bad blood between Jews and whites. Both groups could get along, BUT as long as Jews insist on acting the way they do at the moment, whites must push back in kind because otherwise is to risk their survival for all the future. Use the Jewish Way against the Jews. If Jews say, "We believe in free speech but not in ‘hate speech’", say likewise but define ‘hate’ in way that suits white interests. Define ‘hate’ primarily in terms of defaming and dehumanizing whites and furthermore denying the right of pride for all the great achievements made by whites. Also, define ‘hate’ as the neo-imperialist insistence that white people don’t have right of territoriality over their ancient homelands and over nations they built virtually from scratch in North America and Australia. Also, even white self-loathing must be deemed as ‘hate speech’, and the blame must primarily go to the group that did most to instill whites with self-hatred, and of course, the main peddlers of Hate-Whitey Ideology have been the Jews.

Now, some may argue that such ploy would go against the principles of Free Speech, but principles are useless when the Other Side only cares about Power and will do ANYTHING to get what it wants. Principles matter only when (1) all sides commit to the same set of rules and standards or (2) a certain group has the power to enforce the principles on all groups. But the current US is not that kind of country. It’s a nation ruled by Jews whose only ‘principle’ is "Is it good for Jews?" or more accurately, "Is it great for Jewish Supremacism?" Jews violate both rules 1 and 2 of Principle-ism. They don’t care about principles, and they don’t use their dominant power to enforce the same set of principles on all groups, including themselves. Rather, Jews are always busy moving the goal posts to the extent that the US has become a Kafkaesque nation, and ironically enough, the goyim are now like a bunch of Joseph K’s who are toyed around by Jews who control the Castle of Power.

It is only by putting Jews on the moral defensive and threatening their anti-white speech that they will come around to defending free speech(like they once used to when their radical/communist speech was threatened and when they sought to legalize pornography). Why should Jews defend free speech when they have control over the levers of media & academia and when their anti-white speech is not only protected but part of official dogma? Generations of kids, white and non-white, have been raised to the catechism of Blame-Whitey-for-Everything. And white elites, out of craven cowardice and/or outdated sense of magnanimity, put up with all the anti-white garbage. They sense that they must go along with anti-white dogma in order to keep their privileged positions under Jews as the ‘good whites’. Also, old habits die hard. Just like it took time for it to sink in among aristocrats that their days are numbered, white elites(especially the Wasps) had been so used to having the power that many still carry on with the illusion that they are the ruling class of America. Of course, Jews like to sustain such illusions to (1) to hide their power behind the facade of Wasp privilege, thereby making whites the magnet of most criticism(as in "Hollywood-So-White") and (2) to flatter white cuck-collaborators who, having lost their power, have little left but to cling to their title as the Ruling Class. Because white cuck-collaborators still have a lot of money and privilege(if not much influence and real power), they have a bad habit of conflating their own white privilege with the condition of all whites who are NOT privileged; indeed, many whites are now suffering terribly from loss of work, drug addiction, integration with thuggish Negroes, and mass replacement by foreigners.

We need a new movement that is not for the principle of free speech but for shutting down ‘hate speech’ that defames and dehumanizes whites. The position should be, "While it's fair to criticize wrongs and abuses committed by whites, it is NOT ACCEPTABLE to speak of whites as especially burdened with guilt and blame." After all, such is the Jewish line. Jews will say it’s okay for people to criticize Zionism and Jewish abuses, but it’s wrong to say everything Jewish is bad or to blame everything on Jews. (Of course, Jews even denounce mild criticism of Jewish bad behavior as ‘antisemitic’.) What’s good enough for Jews should be good enough for whites. Also, whites must put Jews on the moral defensive by decrying Zionism as ‘hate speech’ that led to the destruction and ‘genocide’ of the Palestinians by means of immigration-invasion. Whites should balance the good/great elements of Jewish history/culture with the dark side, such as Jewish role in communism, radicalism, subversion, criminality, and financial theft. And if Jews bitch about evil white history, whites should point out how Jewish finance played its part in the Western Imperialist ventures. Jewish History is inseparable from 'white supremacism' because Jews were co-partners in the Western Conquest of the World, even going so far as to play a key role in the Latin American slave trade and selling opium to the Chinese under British Imperialist protection. Also, to the extent that Jewish immigrants worked alongside white immigrants to eradicate the American Indians from the Great Plains, Jews also took part in ‘genocide’ of the natives. And to the extent that Jews and their money played some role in the making of the new empires and nations of the New World, Jews are no less ‘guilty’ of the slave trade. Despite Jewish kvetching about ‘white supremacism’, Jews have been tailing ‘white supremacists’ all over the world to make their fortunes. Jews tagged behind Anglos to make tons of money in the diamond mines of South Africa. Wherever Anglo, Spanish, Portuguese, and French imperialists went, Jews followed as financiers, merchants, and investors. Jews exploited every opportunity made possible by ‘white supremacist’ conquerors of the world. And Jews pressured and bribed ‘white supremacist’ Great Britain and Europe in general to aid in the Zionist project that targeted the brown Palestinians for destruction, replacement, and erasure. It isn't very difficult to push Jews into a morally defensive posture. And if Jews bitch about the Shoah(aka Holocaust), remind the world of how Jews played a key role in communism that led to the deaths of millions all over the world. Only when the pushy Jews are pushed back and their rights of speech are threatened, only then will Jews come around to defending free speech. When Jews defended free speech in the past, some thought it was out of principle. But it was just opportunism. When dealing with such people, we need to shelve principles and fight fire with fire.

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

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

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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

'Refreshing' the Native or Majority Population of a Nation is a Bogus Idea — Why doesn't Israel share its formula for natal success with the White World — The Sheer Worthlessness of the White Elite that doesn't Protect and Serve their People but Plan for their Demise under Orders from Jewish Supremacists

The argument for Population 'Refreshment' is totally bogus. According to some globalists, mass migration isn't about the Great Replacement but something closer to Great Replenishment. The logic argues that since the native populations(generally white and East Asian) are not having enough kids to maintain existing population levels, there must be massive influxes of foreigners to keep up the current demographic equilibrium. It's like, if water in a cup keeps evaporating, more water has to be added to maintain the water level. Therefore, mass immigration shouldn't be regard as being about replacing white people but about replenishing them(indeed doing them a favor) because their balls and wombs have dried up and fail to produce More Life that is so vital to the future of the country. But this is a totally BS argument for several reasons:

1. If the point of mass migration is to maintain current population levels, why do globalists push for migration levels to vastly INCREASE the national population? Suppose there is a nation with 50 million whites, and due to low birth rates, the population will dwindle to 30 million in a generation. So, the globalists argue that 20 million foreigners must be brought in to keep the population at 50 million. But do globalists argue thus? No, they argue that the nation needs more and more and more immigration-invasion because More Diversity is always a good thing. So, they would not be aiming to keep the population at 50 million but to increase it to 60 million, 70 million, 80 million... 100 million and so on. Globalists argue that white nations can't have ENOUGH non-whites coming. Emanuel Macron wants 100s of millions of black Africans to come to Europe, beat up weaker white guys, take over sports and pop music, and colonize white wombs.

The US population was 225 million in 1980. If indeed the globalists were worried about existing Americans not having enough kids and the resulting fall in population, then they should have called for just enough immigration to keep the population at 225 million. But that is NOT what they did. They said more and more and more should come, and now the US population is over 325 million, or probably over 350 million if we include all the illegals. So much for immigration as a means to replenish the existing population that aren't having enough kids. It appears globalist mass-migration-invasion agenda is really to inundate white nations to the bursting point with non-whites in the crazed notion that Diversity is some magical formula; whereas US and Canada at least have lots of land for newcomers, European nations & New Zealand do not, but globalists push it on ALL white nations.

It's all the more idiotic(and immoral) when we consider Diversity in the New World has been the product of conquest, imperialism, colonialism, genocide, slave trade, and demographic invasions. After all, the Americas were once 'homogeneously' brown(or 'red' in North America). There were no whites, yellows, Hindus, Muslims, Africans, and etc. It only had the 'red' and brown natives. Then, what led to the Americas becoming crazily diverse? First, whites conquered and added diversity to the New World by taking over territories and 'raping' the natives. Then, whites added further diversity by bringing over millions of blacks to North and South America(and Caribbeans) without any approval from the natives who were never consulted over anything. Thus, the natives lost out not only to whites but to blacks. And then, to put down railroad tracks and man the factories, whites called on More Immigration from all over the world. So, what is so morally ennobling about Diversity when it's been the history of imperialism? And now, whites who once used Diversity to enrich themselves and boost their own power are being colonized and destroyed by their own tool(turned into suicidal weapon). Of course, to Jews(who now rule the roost), Diversity is a means to cause dissension among goyim so that Jews, as supremacist elites, can play divide-and-rule among the bickering and mutually negating goyim.

If anything, Diversity is not a cure for 'white guilt' but a furtherance of it. The New World became diverse precisely because of the 'historical crimes' of white people. Diversity is NOT something that the indigenous folks of the Americas asked for or celebrated. It was imposed on them by white invasion, white importation of black slaves, and white promotion of mass-immigration to create civilizations in the New World modeled on the Old. If 'good white people' are serious about redressing their 'historical sins', then they must realize that Diversity is the biggest consequence of their conquest, semi-'genocide', and mass-'rape' of the New World. To the indigenous folks, immigration was simply invasion, displacement, and even mass extermination by conscious policy or by outbreaks of disease to which they had no immunity.

Now, one could bring up the issue that the US(and even Latin America) for most of their history generally limited legal immigration to whites from Europe. Some might say this was 'racist' and 'exclusive', but we need to consider two things. (1) As they founded and built the new nations, it was their right to decide the demography, language, culture, and mythos of their nations. If non-whites of the Old World wanted to define the Americas, then THEY should have gotten off their asses, built ships, risked lives in ocean voyages, and conquered the lands before Spaniards and Anglos did. They most certainly did NOT, so they have NO RIGHT to lay claims on the Americas. (2) As white folks took the land from the native peoples of the New World, they owe something to those indigenous people and to NO OTHER. American Indians have valid reasons to gripe about the loss of their sacred hunting and burial grounds, but by what right should Asian Indians bitch and whine about how THEY are owed mass entry into the Americas? It's like Jews owe something to Palestinians because the land was taken from the latter. Imagine a bunch of Africans, Asians, and Latin Americans saying they have a moral right to move to Israel because Jews took it from Palestinians.

Anyway, when white folks allow more immigration, they are furthering the conquest of the New World that had, for 10,000s of years, belonged to the Red Man and Brown 'Indios'. This moral dilemma is quite evident in the case of Hawaii. If only the whites had invaded and took over from the Fat Hawaiians, it wouldn't have been so bad. Then, Hawaiians would have lost their island to just ONE people. But insane whites invited tons of Asians to come over(of course without consulting the native Fat Hawaiians), and that led to Fat Hawaiians losing their beloved land not only to whites but to all shades of yellow. And we know what mass immigration did to Palestinians in what had once been Palestine, wiped off the map to make way for Israel. (And yet, Jews tell lies about how Iran wants to wipe Israel off the map. Yeah, let's just forget Palestine was really wiped off the map, and West Bank is now targeted for the same fate. How vile. Yet, these Jews see fit to pass judgement on Goyim.)

2. A nation is not a number. In the end, a people, land, and culture are not defined by numbers, not by quantity but by identity. If anything, a nation should fear mass immigration precisely when its population is declining. For example, if whites have high birthrates, non-white mass-immigration would be less threatening to the survival of White America because growing white population would keep the nation majority-white. But if white numbers are falling while non-white numbers are swelling, the traditional Anglo/European character of America will be lost forever. All throughout history, nations/kingdoms/states underwent tremendous rises and falls in populations due to disease, wars, and other tragedies.



Jews surely understand this better than anyone. Jews lost millions in the Shoah. Now, suppose someone went to Jews and suggested that the Jewish community should include '6 million' non-Jews as New Jews to make up for the dead ones. But, such would reduce Jewishness to a mere number. After the devastation of WWII, Jews understood that in order for Jews to regrow, they had to cling to their identity and have more Jewish babies. Jews love to push the notion of 'New Europeans', but how would they like it if we insisted Jews should welcome tons of Arabs and Asians as 'New Jews' with full rights to move to Israel if they wish.

3. Speaking of Israel, Jews will say Israel has no need for mass immigration because it has a healthy birthrate among both Jews and Arabs. No need for replenishment when, if anything, the problem may be Over-Population in the Holy Land(turned into globo-homo Sodom and Gomorrah by modern Jews gone satanic). (But if over-population is the problem, why does Israel call for ever more immigration of Jews? It seems there's always more room for Jews, especially as more Palestinians in West Bank are slated for expulsion and erasure.) Anyway, if Israel has a healthy birthrate among both Jews and Arabs, it must be doing something right in the natal department. Since Israel arrived at a solution for demographic equilibrium(and even growth), shouldn't Jews be sharing their successful formula with the West(and East)? If it works for Jews, why wouldn't it work for white folks in Europe, Canada, Australia, and the US(not to mention places like Japan and Singapore)? But, Jews never seem to urge whites and other goyim to follow in the footstep of Jews. "Natalism for us Jews, Negation for you goyim." It's like Jews are mono-nationalist and believe Jews and Only Jews are worthy of national identity, national pride, and national territory. All other people are like cattle to be herded, domesticated, and controlled. Jewish Power isn't actually for 'white genocide' as Jewish Power would crumble without white managerial and military support. What Jews are after is White Herding, White Cattling, White Domestication. Jews are FREE to have identity and pride and be masters of the world. In contrast, whites, along with other goyim, are to be branded, herded, hormone-injected(mainly with estrogen), and when necessary gelded to serve Jewish Power. 'White Guilt' is the psychological whip used against whites(as the horse for the Jew to ride, the crypto-theme of Steven Spielberg's WAR HORSE: For the boy to love the horse, the horse must serve the boy; likewise, for the Jew to value the goy, the goy must serve the Jew, just like John McCain, Mitt Romney, Charlie Kirk, and even Donald Trump, a wilder horse who nevertheless is most loyal when Netanyahu and arch-Zionists are sitting on his back).

Anyway, if Jews found a secret to healthy demographic sustenance in Israel, shouldn't they be sharing it with the world, especially the Western World? After all, Israel prides itself as a bastion of 'Western Values'. If so, why not share its secret to National Life with the West that is suffering from birth dearth among whites? Jews constantly remind themselves and press upon whites that Israel must be vigilant and fecund to survive as a Jewish nation. Jews demand upon whites to sympathize with the challenges of Jews to maintain Israel as their Homeland by all means necessary. And yet, these very same Jews in Israel and abroad are telling white people to forsake their own racial identities and national territoriality. They say that whites must welcome Africans, Asians, and Arabs as 'New Europeans' or else be condemned as 'racist', 'xenophobic', and even 'nazi'. Tons of Israeli activists actually aid the mass movement of non-whites to Europe. Jews say white people should have a heart and open their nations to 'refugees', but (1) most migrant-invaders are not refugees but economic opportunists and (2) most real refugees are fleeing from Wars for Israel instigated by Jewish control of US deep state & media and The Lobby.

Anyway, what's good for the Jews should be good for the Neander(thals, aka Europeans). Just how did Israel, a modern nation-state, manage to procure healthy birthrates for itself? Does it have something to do with national pride? Sure, a people who are more positive about their own kind want to produce more of their kind. Does it have something to do with Israeli leaders representing Jewish people? After all, the main role of national elites is to protect and serve their own folks. THAT is their main duty, just like the main duty of the police is to 'serve and protect'. Imagine if cops aided trespassers, burglars, and invaders against the well-being of home-owners. That'd be terrible, but that's the kind of elites that white people have. Take the worthless traitor cuck governor of Minnesota who says his state is all about endless immigration-invasion from Africa, and if white-Americans who built up that state have reasons to complain, they should shut up or leave. With elites like that, who needs foreign occupiers? Sadly, via the power of media and academia(largely controlled by Jewish globalists whose motto is 'Identity for me but not for thee'), even many of the white masses are totally supportive of their own replacement because... 'muh white guilt', 'muh restaurant', and 'muh hipster creds'. (Is Somali cooking all that great?)

Anyway, what is the point of having national elites if they don't defend the nation's foundation and definition, if they don't defend their folks, culture, and land? Imagine the leader of Israel telling Jews to shut up about their identity and that his main priority is to allow massive non-Jewish immigration so that Jews will end up just like the Palestinians before them: Replaced and non-peopled. Fortunately for Jews, the Israeli State ensures the Jewish population that the government and all top institutions are always looking out for their interests above all else. No wonder Jews want to have kids in Israel.
Another factor for Jewish birthrates in Israel is ethno-consciousness and ethno-competition. The Jewish state and media never tire of reminding Jews that they better have lots of kids because, otherwise, the damned Ay-Rabs will overtake the Jews and turn Israel back into Palestine. And Rabbis are hard at work telling Jews that they must have kids for spiritual and ethnic reasons than merely for personal or material ones.
Jews do all that, but when it comes to the West, they order their white goy cuck-collaborator elites to denounce white identity, white unity, and white obligations. So, while Jewish folks have Jewish elites who look out for them in Israel and around the world, white people have elites who tell them to shut up about their whiteness, piss on their own past, welcome replacement diversity, wave the globo-homo flag, and celebrate ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs via jungle fever and cuckery. When Hungary went about trying to reverse its population decline with pro-family policies, Christian values, and nationalism, Jews shrieked like hysterical rats even though they have no problem with Israel using nationalism, pro-family policies, and Judaic values to boost its Jewish population.

If Jewish elites serve the Jewish People, white elites serve the Jewish elites and snub white folks who are constantly excoriated by both Jews and cuck-collaborators that 'whiteness' is a myth and that even European history was always as much 'African' and 'Muslim'(and of course Jewish) as Greco-Hellenic, Germanic, Celtic, Latin, Slavic, and Christo-Pagan.
Jewish elites and cuck-collaborators plan for replacing the white masses with a new people, but what really needs to happen is for white masses to replace the Jewish elites and cuck-collaborator scum with New Real Elites — Donald Trump ain't it as the stupid moron turned out to be just a loudmouthed neocon shill who blabbers about nothing but Israel, Israel, Israel while insulting Palestinians whose homeland was destroyed by massive Jewish immigration. Anyway, Jewish natal success in Israel seems to have something to do with (1) unity of Jewish elites and masses (2) generous economic incentives to those who have lots of JEWISH kids (3) raising awareness of natal competition from Arabs. But if whites in the West were to resort to the same strategy to boost white birthrates, we know these hypocritical Jews would scream 'Nazi', 'racism', 'xenophobia', 'hate', and 'fear-mongering'.

4. Finally, if indeed the national population is falling, return the land to nature. Animals and plants can always use more land. Birds can always use more habitat. It's good to have more forests, ponds, and prairies. It's good for nature, it's good for the environment. Also, if the national population were to regrow once again, it's feasible to take the land back from nature. But if tons of foreigners had been brought over to occupy the land, it's be a messy 'human rights' issue to take the land from them if the nationals were to reclaim the land for development. Indeed, consider all the headache involved in Jews taking their homeland back from Arabs who'd taken over and settled over the years. (Incidentally, Serbs tried to do the same thing in Kosovo — take the land back from Muslim-Albanian settlers — , but Jews led the way in having Serbia destroyed. Again, "Identity for me but not for thee.")

The Most Important Fact of Post-Cold-War Globalist Hegemony is that Jewish Power won the INVISIBLE WAR

When we think of wars, we usually think of military conflicts. The US has been involved in many of those and won most of them. Even when it lost, the other side suffered far greater harm than the US. It’s been said the US lost the Vietnam War, but when we consider the respective damages suffered by both nations, there is simply no comparison. The Vietnamese forced the US to give up South Vietnam but suffered most of the losses. It was nearly a Pyrrhic Victory as the US proper remained untouched(except by anti-war protests) whereas Vietnam had to rebuild nearly everything up from scratch. Think of Dragline(George Kennedy)'s 'loss' to Paul Newman's character in COOL HAND LUKE. Dragline walks away, but Luke got all the lumps. Many argue that the US lost in Iraq too, but then, who'd be the winner? It certainly wasn't the Iraqis who were rocked not only by the invasion but by ensuing civil strife that tore the nation apart(and continues to haunt them to this day). The other great 'war' of the 20th century was known as the 'Cold War' where the US and USSR managed not to confront each other directly, mainly out of fear of World War III that might even include nuclear weapons. Thus, the Cold War was considered a war of nerves than of arms. Still, both sides used proxies who died in the millions and for whom the 'cold war' was anything but a game of bluff and brinkmanship.

Anyway, there is a kind of war no less crucial than military wars(and far more consequential than 'cold wars'). It might be called the Invisible War. Beginning in the Sixties and especially following the end of the Cold War, the Power within the US was largely determined by the outcome of an Invisible War. It was this War, more than the Cold War and its end, that shaped the future of America and the World, much of which is but a political, economic, and cultural colony of the US-as-lone superpower. USSR had once been a hegemon and global player in both hard and soft power, but ultimately it failed to win the hearts & minds, eyes & ears, (and/or the loins and groins) of the masses of the world who could see that the 'Free World' was winning in Food and Feels. So, once the Soviet system collapsed(or was collapsed from within by wanna-be oligarchs who wanted to profit from being part of the World Order), the question was which group would get to shape America’s lone-superpower agenda for the entire world? Controlling America is like having a machine gun in a room where others have sticks or, at most, pistols.

The outcome of the Invisible War mattered a great deal especially because the US came to be ethnically & racially diverse. Victory of one group over the other could alter the 'racial' character of the US agenda. All nations experience Invisible Wars among various groups contending for dominance, but in a homogeneous nation, the dominant race-and-culture remains in charge regardless as to which side wins. Suppose there are various factions vying for power in China. Whichever wins, China would be controlled by Chinese, and its policy vis-a-vis the rest of the world would be Sino-centric. But imagine if the invisible war(of jockeying for power) in China were fought among Chinese and various non-Chinese groups. Perchance, if a non-Chinese group gained top power in China, it could fundamentally change the nature of China's place in the world because it'd likely use China to serve its own tribal interests than what is good for most Chinese people. In a way, China was trapped in such condition under the rule of Manchu dynasties whose relation to China was ambiguous. In some ways, they were part of Chinese civilization, but they also regarded the Chinese as their subjects, and that partly explains why, when threatened by Western Imperialism, they feared the awakening of Chinese Nationalism as much as they feared foreign aggression — Chinese nationalist uprising to do away with the 'foreign devils' might just as well sweep aside the Manchu ruling elites as well.
Likewise, the reason why so much hung in the balance in Russia of the 1990s and 2000s was because the success or failure of Putinism would decide whether Russia would remain sovereign or fall into the clutches of Jewish-supremacist globalists. (It was perhaps a shock for many Russians to realize the full extent to which American Jews had consolidated power during the Cold War, indeed even to the point of dictating their agenda to the once-great Wasps reduced to pushovers of the Chutzpah Clan.) Though a tiny minority in Russia, the Jews with their higher IQ, radical will, & support from World Jewry almost managed to wrest total control of the Russian nation. Had the Jews gained total dominance, the Russian state wouldn't have served the Russian people but would have been exploited, manipulated, and abused simply to maximize (the mostly extractive)Jewish Power around the world.

When America was mostly white and Anglo-ruled(and Anglo-Americanized even among non-Anglo white ethnics, most of whom were Christian and traced their roots back to Europe), the outcome of the Invisible War(among various factions of Anglo-American and/or Anglo-Americanized white gentile groups) had far less dire consequences regardless of which side won. In the end, it was one bunch of Anglo-Americans or Anglo-Americanized gentile whites or another bunch of the more-or-less the same. Liberal or Conservative, American Interests remained essentially white-and-Anglo-centric, and this was more-or-less just because the US for most of its history was overwhelmingly white and Christian. (It's like the aftermath of the Civil War when, once the dust settled, America was still ruled by white Christian gentiles who, in sympathy with their defeated racial brethren in the South, didn't throw them to the wolves or apes of ghastly black power.) Thus, the white elites were representative of their racial masses, and the masses were supportive of their racial elites.
And on this basis, the entire world knew what American Power was really about — an expansive Anglo-centrism — and adjusted their positions accordingly when dealing with America. This arrangement was good for white American elites, white American masses, and nations around the world. Good or bad, right or wrong, the world understood WHO ruled America and WHAT Americanism was about in terms of its reach, promise, limitation, and hypocrisy(which is inherent to any system in the absence of real world utopias). For most of US history, the only major groups vying for power were white Northern-European Protestants, or Wasps. Even when waves of immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe added new groups in the contest of power, most of them were rapidly Anglo-Americanized and deferred to Wasp Power as deserving to rule for historical, cultural, and meritocratic reasons. Given the relatively poor governance and entrenched levels of corruption in the nations and kingdoms whence they came, they couldn't help but be impressed by the New Nation created by Anglo-Americans out of the vast wilderness.

But something fundamentally changed since the 1960s, a period when the Invisible War was no longer about white gentiles vs white gentiles(thus ensuring white gentile rule no matter which side won) but came down to enervating Wasps vs energizing Jews. This was fought in the realm of media, academia, arts, culture, finance, ideas, and various industries. But it wasn’t a simple 'turf war' between racial/ethnic/religious groups like the ones between, say, the Italian mafia and the Irish machine. The lines were NOT clearly drawn in terms of 'us' and 'them'. Invisible War happens in the realm of ideas, values, discourse, and culture, and that means your side could be seduced and recruited to serve the other side. You could be colonized by the ideas, narratives, and values of the enemy camp(posing as the friend to all). In such conflict, the winners tend to be the ones who are more energetic, creative, ruthless, and cunning in the fields of media, academia, propaganda, advertising, arts & culture, and of course, finance(as lots of money are needed to fund think tanks and lavish prizes on the willing).
The crucial problem for whites wasn't simply that Jews were more energetic and big-minded than Wasps(known for moderation, pragmatism, and empiricist caution) in the field of ideas and culture but that White Liberals were more creative and energetic than White Conservatives. Given the numerical advantage, whites could have held Jewish Power at bay IF white liberals and white conservatives had combined their power and resources. White Liberal decision in the 20th century served as the linchpin of America's destiny. Would they offer their considerable intellectual and creative talents in a racial alliance with white conservatives, OR would they side with the sneaky Jews who speciously espoused that they were not out for Jewish Power but for universal justice for all, a noble cause worthy of commitment by White Liberals so eager to do the right thing? If Jews had been honest about their agenda, their blatant tribalism would have given offense to white liberals who therefore might have sided with white conservatives to check Jewish power seeking supremacy and hegemony(not unlike the Nazis). But Jews hid their tribalism, or they white-washed it as a means to honor their tragic history as poor innocent helpless little victims. White liberals fell for the bait and threw their lot with the Jews, and there was no way that white conservatives, lacking in spark and creativity, could have fended off the combined power of Jews and White Liberals.
Also, if in times past, even victorious white liberals regarded white conservatives as their racial brethren and favored them over the Other, the victorious Jews(who edged out others in the coalition) pressed upon white liberals to hate, despise, and hold in contempt the incorrigible white conservatives who are either stupid rubes, unimaginative bigots, or crytpo-nazis. Then, it is not surprising that, over time, more and more Wasps went over to the Jewish camps as allies, servants, and finally cucks. As Jewish ideas came to dominate over White Liberal ones, not least because white liberals were also tainted with 'white guilt' that undermined their moral legitimacy — indeed, white liberal pride is mostly about how it feels more self-loathing about being white than white conservatives do, i.e., "We weep harder when we read TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD" — , the Jewish/White Liberal relationship essentially became one of teacher and student, moral master and moral slave, spiritual pimp and new age prostitute. Most Liberal Wasps pitifully came under the domination of Jewish politics. And in time, most Wasp conservative figures followed suit and were mentally-colonized by Neocon thought. Jews won not only by conflict but conversion.

Ultimately, Jews won the Invisible War in America, and that's why they've been able to push an agenda that's been turning the world upside down with Wars for Israel, Open Borders, anti-nativism, pro-invasivism, Homomania, deranged feminism, Afromania, and Jungle Fever that promotes ACOWW(or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs).

It is a strange agenda, of course. At its core, it is undeniably tribal and ethno-supremacist, but it is promoted as ‘western values’, ‘human rights’, or ‘universal principles’, all vague notions manipulated and distorted in meaning and implication to serve an agenda that, more often than not, aligns with Jewish supremacist machinations. But then, just like Stalinism and George Orwell's ANIMAL FARM illustrated so powerfully, the Power can shape truth to be just about anything, not least because most people are craven cowards, malleable lunkheads whose brains are clay in Jewish hands, or opportunists who will go with the strong horse(and thirty pieces of silver).
This ‘universal values’ requires the US(and that means ALL OF US who contribute to American Power) to make life hell for Muslims over there but hug them like long-lost brothers over here, especially if they are to demographically replace white Americans(and even black Americans). It’s seems crazy and illogical, but once you understand the Power and all those who serve it, what seems like contradictions on the surface make perfect sense at the core: "Is it good for Jews?" or better yet, "Is it great for Jewish Supremacism?"