Even if GOP can draw more 'Latinos' from the Democratic Party to win elections, Problem is All Politicians must swim in the Fish Tank controlled by Zion and Its Puppets

https://vdare.com/articles/is-the-black-brown-coalition-unraveling

But if the GOP wants to survive, it better figure out Realpolitik real fast. A key point: Making the Democrats the black party requires understanding how much Hispanics disdain and in some cases dislike blacks, and why remaining in the party does not serve Hispanic interests.
The Democrat coalition is a hodgepodge of loud, non-white, sometimes sexually-deviant sub-groups with conflicting interests. Try getting Aztlan irredentists, black nationalists, homosexual activists, Islamic grievance hustlers, and leftist Jews in one room.

Democratic Party is the Jewish Party. It's about ultra-right Jews larping as ‘leftists’. It is also the white-elite-party that makes it so formidable. Majority of Democratic voters are still whites, the bulk of the most educated and well-connected.

In truth, only Jews, blacks, and homos matter in the American Political Drama. Crumbs are thrown at Muslims, but they got zero power, and most Americans don’t like them(even true of blues state folks). Browns are numerous but hopeless. Look at Latin America. After several centuries, white minorities still rule over mostly passive brown folks. Most browns are Tacoans, not Aztlanists. In other words, they live for taco and cerveza, not the strong brew of contentious politics. Even the crime problem in Mexico is the product of most browns being tacoan beaners. They are nice people and don’t stand up to drug cartels and the like. They keep their heads low.
Americans love winners, and that’s why only Jews(winners of brain power), blacks(winners of sports & pop music), and homos(winners of fashion & style) matter. Yellows do well in school but are ‘lame’ and don’t count in identity-idolatry. Hindus seem to count more but they are mainly useful as collaborators. Under British Rule, Hindus became adept at working with the West. Sure, Indians eventually gained independence but PEACEFULLY and by adopting Western ‘values’. It also became the “world’s biggest democracy”, which goes to show how culturally servile to Anglosphere it became.

We must never underestimate the one huge advantage for the Democrats. Most white elites are Democrats, and they either control or manage all the elite institutions. This matters big time because it’s the Deep State that constitutes the permanent government. In the stupid movie THE GOOD SHEPHERD, Matt Damon’s CIA character says his WASP folks own the US and the rest of Americans are mere guests. Deep State thinking is the same. Its members are the permanent rulers, and the politicians are mere guests. Politicians come and go, but the deep state remains.

So, while politicians rely on the votes of the hoi polloi every 2, 4, or 6 yrs, once ensconced in office their chief roles are focused on appeasing big donors and the deep state. This is why the GOP is utterly useless even when they got majority hold of Congress and the presidency. In their day to day operations, all politicians must deal with the institutions of power and industries with big money. They reach out to their constituents only during election seasons, if that(as most don’t even do that), and spend of their time at the feet of Big Money and Big Government. They know the best assurance for re-election is appeasing big donors and assenting to the Deep State.

The real problem with the GOP is not elections but its total absence in the Deep State. Washington DC institutions are 95% Democratic. So, even if GOP were to win ALL the seats in Congress and have the presidency, they must deal with entrenched institutions that are wholly Democrat-controlled.
Government is a fish tank. So, Republicans lose even when they win. Imagine if politics were about land animals versus aquatic animals, BUT the government is situated in the water. Thus, wateriness always prevails. So, even when land animals win the majority of seats, they struggle to remain barely afloat in the domain of dolphins, turtles, sharks, and fishes. How can you drain the tank(or the swamp) when all the levers of power are held by the water creatures?

Now, does that mean the institutions are progressive and into social justice because they're all Democratic? No, that’s just a ruse. The Deep State is about power for power’s sake, and it’s currently controlled by Jews who got the most money, select the puppets & whores, and control the gods(the sacred symbols & narratives of society).

Pedro Alvarado focuses on the rift between brown voters and black voters, but that’s about the powerless rabble on the bottom. It ignores the white ‘liberals’ at the top in the institutions working with and for Jews. Even if more browns vote GOP and send more Republicans to Washington D.C., the latter will just end up doing the bidding of the Deep State that serves Jewish Supremacism. Look at the likes of Mitt Romney, Lindsey Graham, Youngkin, and so many others.

And let’s stop pretending Democrats are Jewish Leftists. Just ask the Palestinians how the Jews really care about 'social justice'. The likes of Chuck Schumer are closer to Netanyahu and do everything to suppress BDS. Most of Jewish 'Leftism' is just a masquerade. It’s Jewish ultra-rightist supremacism laundered as ‘progressive’. That said, there are genuine Jewish Leftists like Max Blumenthal. Like them or not, there is a certain consistency in their principled stance. But with most Jewish Democrats? Forget about it.

What to do about blacks? Bolsheviks had the Cheka, later replaced by OGPU that morphed into the KGB. A movie was made about Chekists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X48uZMsbufI

The main driver of ‘wokeness’ isn’t ideology but idolatry and of what? Jews control ‘wokeness’ and mainly use the idolatries of globo-homo and BLM. During the Obama yrs, globo-homo was most prominent. Jews didn’t worry about black loyalty then because having Obama assured virtually all black votes for the Democrats.

But after Obama, blacks were less enthralled of the Party because, looking back on the 8 yrs under Obama, Jews and homos got most of the goodies(and immigrants gained a lot) while blacks got little but symbolism. No wonder Donald Trump increased his share of black vote. Not by much but every vote counts in some blue states. Also, in the 2016 election, many blacks in Michigan didn’t vote at all.

So, in the final yrs of Trump’s presidency, Jews decided to go big on BLM or black idolatry.
Thus, politics since then has been stoking black ego and erecting monuments to blackity blackness, like George Floyd statues, ROTFL. It even led to de facto human sacrifice in riots(as offerings to angry black gods) and the bogus trial of Derek Chauvin who most certainly did not kill Floyd, the fentanyl junkie.

Anyway, if early Soviet Union was terrorized by the Cheka or Chekists, one could say the current order is tyrannized by Blacka(or Bleka) and its Blackists(or Blekists). This is what it should be called. Blackism or Blekism(to play a word game on Chekism). And it is of course a reign of terror because it goes against truth and common sense. The obvious lie can be enforced only with threat and violence.

Communism lasted as long as it did in Russia not only because of terror and repression but because enough people at the top really believed in the nonsense they were peddling. So, even when the system was faced with crisis after crisis, they doubled down on their radicalism…. until finally they stopped believing and the whole system became one big cynical game of position and status until that deteriorated too.

For now, we must let Blekism run its course. Let the Blekists idolatrize blackness as innately noble and sacred. Let them blame all black problems on non-blacks. Let them sweep black criminality under the rug and pretend it doesn’t exist or is justified. Let them do this until they can no longer deny the truth.

This news story is beautiful: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2021/12/07/where-have-all-the-flowers-gone/

"They will next be robbing hotel guests room by room. I remember checking into an upscale hotel on Rio de Janeiro’s Copacabana Beach sometime in the 1980s. I asked the clerk why the hotel had 30 armed guards with submachine guns in the lobby. He replied that last week a gang took over the hotel and robbed guests room by room. The same event can’t be very far in our future. Democrats already permit blacks to burn and loot the business districts of Democrat-controlled cities. Just ask any resident of New York, Chicago, Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland, Atlanta what life is like in Democrat cities."

It’s Blekism running riot and spreading terror. It’s like use of poison gas in war. It's used against the the other side but the wind may blow it back in your direction. Blue city elites meant to use black terror against Middle America but it’s blowing back in their face. It’s total LOL.

So, I say let Blekism take over blue areas. Black-and-Blue, the new formula of ‘wokeness’. Let the blues believe blacks are saintly Emmett Tills being killed by rednecks when, in truth, black thuggery and criminality(sanctified as noble) are wreaking havoc all over. Blue city folks won’t listen to us, so they will have to learn the hard way… just like communism finally failed of its own excesses.

By the way, what is a ‘Latino’? White ones? Brown ones? There are even black ones. ‘Anglo’ only means white Anglo Americans. But ‘Latino’ can mean any race. So, a brown tacoan with zero white blood still counts as ‘Latino’ simply because he speaks Espanol. Ridiculous.

A thought. If whites are offended by the term ‘white supremacism’, maybe they should go with WHITE STUPDENOUSISM or WHITE STUPENDISM. White Stupendism believes white achievements have been stupendous, which is true enough historically in arts, culture, science, and philosophy. Saying that one’s race, people, and culture is stupendous is surely less controversial than saying it is supremacist.

VINCENT JAMES || DEREK CHAUVIN APPEALING HIS CONVICTION

Some Notes on the Current Situation following the DEEP STATE DEMOLITION Celebration of January 6, 2021

I recommend that Jan 6 Event be called the Deep State Demolition or DSD in honor of Steve Dahl.
DEEP STATE SUCKS! DEEP STATE SUCKS! DEEP STATE SUCKS!
Indeed, it should be a populist holiday to be celebrated every year.
Every Jan 6, return to DC to do DSD. The populist gathering of the Tribes.

One thing for sure:
America will become less divided if Americans unite to oppose Jewish Power.

America will become more divided if Americans unite to obey Jewish Power.

Jewish Power depends on the strategy of divide-and-rule among the goyim, therefore the more the goyim are united in their support of Jewish Power, the more Jews will use their power to create more divisions among the goy populace.

1. Jews produce far more lawyers than any other group but are most invested in unlawfulness. But then, if, as judges and lawyers, they rewrite the laws, what was once criminal no longer is. And if that doesn’t work, they can use money power to bribe politicians to pardon Jewish crooks or, better yet, just look the other way at all the dirty Jewish schemes. Look at the list of people pardoned by Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Georg W. Bush, and Donald Trump. The expertise of law, especially under Jewish Power, doesn't exist to serve the law but to shape to Jewish Supremacist ends. By lawyerly tricks, Jews found ways to circumvent the laws. But as judges, top lawyers, politicians, and big donors, they've changed the laws so that the only working constitution is "USA exists to serve Jews and Israel."

2. BLM and Antifa riot and loot and burn down entire cities. They even attacked the White House and set Washington DC on fire. And yet, they were showered with billions by corporations. The Power made sure that Antifa thugs were released back into the streets, and BLM liars(of ‘systemic racism’) were elevated to the ranks of Great Thinkers and Sages.
In contrast, corporations say they will now shut off funds to the GOP because a handful of Republicans questioned election fraud. And Simon & Schuster canceled the contract for Josh Hawley’s book because he didn't get on with the Narrative. Reality being thus, how retarded that so many conservatives still bleat about ‘socialists’ and ‘communists’ when, in fact, super-capitalists treat them this way?

3. The uprising at the Capitol Building was the mutiny by nationalism against imperialism. Congress is no longer a national entity and doesn’t represent the American People. It serves the Globo-Homo Empire of the Jews. Of course, so many 'liberal' Americans are brainwashed and see the Democrats as the ‘good guys’, just like so many 'conservative' Americans still think the GOP has their back.

In truth, both parties repressive than representative of their voter base. Democrats serve the Jewish cabal, and GOP does the same. Most of the mutiniers at the Capitol may not have known it consciously, but theirs was a nationalist attack on imperialism, which is what American politics has become: The game of Invade/Invite whereby the US military and financial power invade and penetrate the world while peoples from all over are 'welcomed' to flood into the US as new peons. It was a case of patriots attacking the capital of Israel on American Soil.

4. What’s wrong with ‘insurrection’ against the government of infiltration and usurpation? The US government has been thoroughly infiltrated and usurped by forces of Jewish Supremacism. When US politicians are a bunch of treasonous servants of Globo-Homo-Schlomo imperialism, why should Americans show them any respect and loyalty? Traitors(serving globalist Jews than their own nation) demanding loyalty from the people is a real laugh. And they demand rule of law when they encouraged mass riots all throughout the summer?

5. There is power in unity. When BLM and Antifa mobs were burning down DC and smashing cities all across the US and attacking the police and tearing down monuments, ALL Democrats were united, from NY elites to DC power-brokers to big city mayors to lowlife on the street. Even as their cities were ransacked by Antifa and BLM thugs, blue city mayors stuck with the Narrative of ‘peaceful protesters marching against systemic racism’. And the Jew-run media stuck with this too. As crazy as it was, there was power in their unity.
But when a far smaller-scaled chaos ensued in Washington for an hour or two, the only kind of unity among Republican and official ‘conservative’ voices to 'condemn the violence'. They didn’t unite with the rightfully angry American patriots or with Donald Trump but with the enemies of the white race.
What does that tell you? When the Democratic side does violence, there is unity from top to bottom. When there is far milder violence by American Patriots, the GOP elites and ‘respectable’ conservatives condemn the violence as most un-American. And even Donald Trump gets cold feet and tells his people to ‘go home’.

6. The patriots should stop looking to DC for leadership and representation. No sense wasting time and energy on attacking the empire of the enemy. They should build a new capitol, a separate capitol, to initiate the creation of bi-nationalism as the new mode of American politics. Let Libbies and Progs have their own government and president(to serve the empire), and let patriots have their own capitol and president(to serve the nation). You don’t need geographical secession for this. It just takes a bit of imagination and chutzpah, which goyim need in these times.

7. You are either a meta-Israeli or a meta-Syrian in the current order. Jews of course and blacks and homos count as meta-Israelis. They are above the law. They can do all kind of violence. Even when THEY do the violence, their victims are the ones who are condemned. Anyone attacked by blacks is a 'racist'. Anyone attacked by Jews is a 'Nazi'.

It’s like Israel routinely shoots missiles into Syria and drops bombs. It supports ISIS and Alqaeda in to bring down secular Arab governments. But no one in the US government calls foul. In contrast, Syrians are fighting for their lives against terror and foreign invasion, but they are painted as the bad guys, and ‘Assad must go’.

Same logic operates in the US. Jews use Hollywood to make hateful anti-Muslim movies. Jews make all those anti-white movies, some calling for mass murder of whites as ‘nazis’. Jews promote hateful rap calling for murder of cops. Jews fund ADL and SPLC and other hateful groups. Jews spread lies and bring US and Russia to the brink of war. Jews pull off violent coups in Ukraine. Jews use blacks to burn down cities as a warning that things will get worse if Trump remains prez for four more years. But Jews are never called out on it.

But if whites have had just about enough of the lies and fraud and commit 1/1000th of the violence, they are treated like Assad and Syrians. They are the worst and must be destroyed. And Trump, as the American Assad, must go. But the irony! After all, what did Trump do for 4 yrs? He gave Jewish Power free rein on foreign policy, threatened Iran, and murdered the hero Soleimani. The failure of Trumpism proved that no matter how much you scream & shout and gather in large crowds at rallies and protests, NOTHING is possible unless you name the Jew.

In FULL METAL JACKET, all the firepower did absolutely no good until one guy finally identified the source of sniper gunfire. If anything, all that extra firepower had only created the illusion that there were many more snipers and served as a massive distraction. So, more valuable than all the clamor at Trump rallies is the calm and collected statement of truth that “Jews did this.”

There are those who know the truth but fear speaking about Jewish Power because of the charge of ‘antisemitism’. But, there is a rational step toward necessary criticism of Jewish Power. Just state the plain facts of Jewish Power. Before we say it’s good or bad, just state it as fact to establish it as a fact that we all must live with and deal with. With the fact out there, people of all stripes will begin to discuss the problems of power as crucially interrelated to Jewish Power. And that can start to change things from both the ‘left’ and ‘right’.

8. What is a more shameful day in the history of Congress?

When a patriotic mob stood up to the crooked politicians approving a fraudulent election?

OR

When elected representatives bowed to a foreign leader of a terrorist nation, Israel?

People standing up to politicians is more inspiring than politicians submitting to the supremacist ambitions of another nation and tribe.

Of course, the irony is that Trump, though the chosen leader of the patriots, was a top-contender with Nancy Pelosi is licking Netanyahu’s anus.

America is united most in whoredom to Jews. And yet, these congress creatures talk about ‘terrorism’ and ‘treason’. What a shameless bunch. But then, Jews control the gods.

Commentary on "Holy Minority Day: Holocaustianity, Hysteria and the Hotel of Hate"(by TOBIAS LANGDON)

https://www.unz.com/article/holy-minority-day-holocaustianity-hysteria-and-the-hotel-of-hate/

There is a political paradox.

Even as Jews increasingly vilify white conservatives(scapegoats for all problems) as the unifying theme for Jews and People of Color, they also increasingly draw on white conservatives to support Jews and Israel, because, after all, Grievance Politics among the POC often turns against Jewish privilege and Zionist tyranny. Jews depend more and more on the water from the well they are poisoning. With decreasing support for Israel and growing criticism of white-Jewish privilege among the expanding non-white and radical-white base among Democrats, Jews have to depend more and more on white conservatives for unconditional support for Jews and Israel. The vile Anti-BDS law passed with near-total support from Republicans while only 40% support from Democrats. Jews will increasingly have to rely on the very people they denigrate most in media, academia, law, state, entertainment, advertising, and corporacracy. But can Jews be assured of continued support among white conservatives when the latter is beginning to awaken to the fact that it's the Jews who are leading the anti-white derangement syndrome among the POC? But then, Jews must shame and blame whites in order to make them serve Jews. After all, the default position of any people is to feel good about their own kind and serve their own interests. Naturally, white Christians and conservatives should serve white/Christian/conservative interests. To make them do otherwise, they must be made to feel that the Other is somehow superior, morally or spiritually, to themselves. And Jews have done this by implanting 'white guilt' into the souls of whites, both liberals and conservatives. Thus, whites feel morally tainted by history and seek redemption by serving the Holy Other. As far as white conservatives are concerned, serving Jews(and maybe blacks and homos) should be good enough, and so, they go out on a limb to appear as 'good for Jews'. But for Jews, this isn't enough because there is still the possibility that whites may change their minds one day... and then what? So, the ONLY way to ensure permanent Jewish domination is via Diversity. That way, with whites relegated to minority status in the US, they won't be able to use electoral-demographic majority power to topple Jewish supremacy. Jews want more Diversity because, deep down inside, they know Intersectionality is really about Gridlock among Goyim. Even within the Proglob camp, so-called intersectionality has led to Demolition Derby or Roller Derby among blacks, homos, women, white working class, browns, yellows, and etc. It's turning into Road Rage politics... like the movie CRASH that won Best Pic.

Anyway, it seems more and more whites are waking up to the fact of Jewish hostility towards them. An obvious case has been Ann Coulter who, in 2016, mocked GOP candidates for droning on and on about the 'fuc*king Jews'. For such awakened whites, we need to end mass immigration as soon as possible because loss of white majority will mean end of GOP, and then whites are lost for good.
But whites should take cues from the Jews on the Art of Power. If a people need majority power to rule, how does one account for the fact that Jews, who are only 2% of the nation, totally rules the US?
So, how can whites threaten Jewish power even if they lose majority status in the US? They can make Jews have a taste of their own medicine. Jewish 'progressive' line has been 'diversity and equality are good, while privilege is bad'. Okay, then whites should take the Jews at their word and side with the POC against the most privileged people in the US, the Jews. Jeremy Corbyn is doing this in the UK with hilarious reactions from the Jewish community. Jews in UK have been dumping on white Britons as 'racists' and demanding that whites welcome and embrace non-whites. Well, that is exactly what Corbyn's Labour did, and guess how the Jews are reacting? They are flipping out because most non-whites don't give a rat's ass about super-rich Jewish bankers, Israel, Zionist imperialism, and Holocaust-Cult-Forever. This is why the US would do best to get rid of the GOP, have all whites join the Democrats, and then have whites side with POC against the Deep State dominated by Jews, homos, and cucks. Then, the current elites can be brought down, and then, the ensuing chaos will bring back the Restart of History from the terrible 'End of History' of Fukuyama's naive idealization.

I suppose Jews still got the homo card. Homo Power is mostly white-male, and it is reliably on the side of Jews because vain homos love power and privilege. It's no wonder that 10% of DC is now homo. Homos go there to seek power, and Jews have elevated them(along with cuck-dog Mormons) to serve as the missionary arm of globo-homo hegemony. Thus, homos, along with Mormons, have played a big role in Wars for Israel and new 'cold war' with Russia. Homos + Mormons = Homormons. Homos not only love to serve the Power(that is mostly Jewish) but appreciate the fact that Jews have decided to make Homomania the substitute for Christianity, indeed the Cult of the New World Order. As for Mormons, most of them are just status-strivers and moral-materialists, i.e. their moralism is all about making money, and money is the highest good. Also, ashamed of their history as an odd cult and ever so eager to appear respectable to the current globo-homo ruling elites, Mormons will go out of their way to cuck hard. Salt Lake City Mormons are the favorite dogs of Goldman Sachs and dutifully voted for Obama and Hillary. Mormons are the Sheep State within the Deep State.

Non-Jewish Neocons will compromise or betray anything for Personal Position & Privilege. In contrast, Jewish Neocons pursue and wield Power & Position to serve a narrow Tribal Agenda they will NOT compromise or betray. Non-Jews betray their own kind for personal gain, whereas Jews seek personal power to serve their own kind.

Non-Jewish Neocons like Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, John Bolton, and Nikki Haley are followers, not leaders, of the Neocon 'movement'. To lead, one has to have a sense of purpose and direction. For non-Jewish Neocons, the main interest is to move UP to where the power is. But they haven’t the idea as to which way to move once they’re perched at the top. It takes those with agenda and vision to suggest and insist the direction the power must take. For non-Jewish Neocons, position and prestige are enough.
Especially if they’re white, it’s difficult for them to have vision and direction because whiteness is now associated with ‘guilt’. It is taboo for whites to serve white interests. So, whites at the top find it difficult to use their power against others. Sure, some may invoke ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’, but those rationales aren’t sufficient to summon mass support for neo-imperialism and new wars. So, while whites can move up to positions of power, they feel lost as to what to do with the power. In contrast, Jews not only move up to positions of power but feel justified in putting forth aggressive strategies for using the power. Once on top, they move sideways to threaten, invade, destroy, and/or dominate other domains. Jews, being the Holy Holocaust People, aren’t tainted with ‘guilt’ but armed with moral pride. It is then no wonder that non-Jewish Neocons and Jewish Neocons(the real Neocons) have developed a symbiotic relationship. Non-Jewish Neocons(white elites) have high positions and may want to use their power... but for what? Whites aren’t supposed to serve white interests. Whites are burdened with ‘white guilt’. It would be ‘racist’ for them to conquer and control other peoples.
But what if they’re allied with Jewish Neocons? After all, Jews are the ‘greatest victims of all time’ due to the Shoah Narrative. Also, poor little Israel is supposedly surrounded by all those quasi-nazi Muslim and/or Arab nations. Something has to be done to prevent Another Holocaust. Therefore, non-Jewish Neocons need Jewish directives to serve as the compass of power. Since whites cannot serve white interests, whites must ally with Jews who can serve Jewish interests. (Then, whites can enjoy the game of wielding power around the world.) Whereas white identity has grown shallow and vapid, Jewish identity still remains strong and proud. While Jews love position and privilege, their profound sense of identity compels them to bend the power to serve Jewish Tribal interests. Power for Jews must bend to identity. In contrast, whites are content to bend their identity to the power. It’s power for power’s sake for white goyim.
But then, what about those non-Jewish Neocons who seem so passionate and committed about their global strategy. Doesn’t the intensity of their conviction prove that they’re not just about power & privilege but a certain set of purpose and principles? Not really. The passion is about as meaningful as the ferocity of dogs barking loudly. While it’s true that dogs can get furious and fearsome in their aggression, they are only taking cues from the master. So, the very dogs who could bark at you like they want to maul you to death can be made to calm down and act friendly toward you IF the master tell them to shut up and act nice. In other words, whereas Jewish Neocon passions are deep and genuine, non-Jewish Neocon rage is mostly a put-on. They bark loudly because they take orders from their Jewish superiors. If Jewish power were to vanish in the US, non-Jewish Neocons would latch onto something else. If non-Jewish Neocons didn’t exist, Jewish Neocons would still be passionate about Jewish issues, but if Jewish Neocons were to vanish, non-Jewish Neocons would lose their Judeo-centric passions pretty quickly... just like Eastern European elites stopped singing hosannas to the Soviet Union once the Iron Curtain came down in 1989. If Jewish Neocons ordered non-Jewish Neocons to stop hating Russia & Iran and make nice with them, non-Jewish Neocons will obey. But if non-Jewish Neocons implored Jewish Neocons to stop hating Russia and Iran, it won’t have any effect as Jews have autonomy of likes and dislikes. Jews don’t take orders from OTHERS as to whom they should hate or not hate. They choose on their own and then try to impose those feelings on the rest of us. So, if Jews hate Russia, we must all hate Russia. If Jews hate Iran, we must all hate Iran. Our hate must follow their hate.

Non-Jewish Neocons jumped on the Neocon bandwagon precisely because Jews have so much power. Non-Jewish Neocons staked everything on latching onto the winning team. Jews were the winners in the post-Cold-War order, but most Jews were Democrats. So, what were non-Jewish Republicans to do? They couldn’t latch onto the Winning Jews of the Democratic Party, so they put all their eggs in the Neocon Jewish basket in the GOP. Though Neocon Jews were far less powerful than Liberal Jews of the Democratic Party, maybe they could pull off something so bold and spectacular that it might change the world(and especially the Middle East) for the better(especially for Jews). Then, Neocon Jews will gain prestige as the Premier Jews(above that of Liberal Jews), and then all the white Republicans will be partnered with the most winning-est bunch of Jews, the Super Jews. White Republicans could say with toady pride, "Our Jews are better than your Jews." And with prime Jewish prestige residing in the GOP, maybe many talented Liberal Jews might leave the Democratic Party and become Republicans. With the bulk of Jewish talent in the GOP, the Republicans could own the future. Of course, Jews would control the direction of the Party as they have tribal will and moral nobility(related to Shoah) lacking among whites. In any movement, there are those who lead, and those who follow. Even though Cheney and Rumsfeld held high offices, they were followers of Jews because they were tainted with 'white guilt', which could be laundered only through association with Jews or Israel.

Cheney never had ideology. He just wanted power, but power that only moves up is ultimately ineffectual. It's like holding a ceremonial post. Imagine you get into an attack helicopter and ascend up and up. You’re high above and top of the world, but what would be the purpose of such elevation UNLESS you can fly in a certain direction to attack others? Horizontal movement must follow vertical movement. After all, it is an ATTACK helicopter. Attacking means aggression, and that requires moral justification or tribal interest. As whites no longer have tribal identity or race-ist consciousness, they must rely on a powerful people who still have a strong tribal will. Jews, of course. Furthermore, Jews not only have tribal consciousness but moral sanctity because they’re perceived as the Holy Holocaust People. Tribal + Moral = Global.
Of course, non-Jewish Neocons and Jewish Neocons were using one another. They knew the rules of the game. Still, Jews had the upper-hand because they got to decide the direction of the power(mostly toward waging Wars for Israel) and, besides, if things went wrong, Jews could fix the blame on the more prominent non-Jewish faces of the Power such as George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, John Bolton, Donald Rumsfeld, and the various goy clowns of the CIA. Like Cheney, Rumseld was never about ideology. He was just a suit. He executed agendas conceived by others who had the big picture. Jews came up with the grand prophetic plan for the Middle East, and the likes of Rumsfeld played the role of executives and managers. He was nothing but an Organization Man. In contrast, Jewish Neocons have an ideology rooted in identity and grand vision. Was it any surprise that US foreign policy continued in the same vein under Obama? Neocons were out of power, but Liberal Zionists shared the same identity and the same passionate affinities and hostilities.

For those who insist that many rank-and-file Neocons are neither Jewish nor slavish to Jewish interests, they need to explain why it is that ALL Neocons, Jewish or non-Jewish, are so virulently hostile to nations hated by Jews and/or Israel. Indeed, Jewishness trumps ideology among nearly all Jews. Liberal Zionist Jew or Neocon Jew, they remarkably share the same hatreds. For example, Liberal Zionist Jews hate Russia, and Neocon Jews hate Russia. Liberal Zionist Jews hate Iran, and Nneocon Jews hate Iran. Liberal Zionist Jews hate Syria, and Neocon Jews hate Syria. Liberal Zionist Jews used Obama to destroy Ukraine, Libya, and Syria just like Neocon Jews used Bush II to destroy Iraq.

If anything, State Department’s current philo-Semitism is far more problematic than its past ‘antisemitism’. When the State Department had been ‘antisemitic’(distrustful of Jewish interests and motives), ruthless and megalomaniacal Jews couldn't get everything they wanted. Pushy Jews got some pushback. And vile Jews like Jonathan Pollard got Life Sentence for their vile acts of treason and double-crossing. And let’s not forget that many Jews during the early years of the Cold War deeply compromised American security by spying for Soviets, even going so far as to pass Bomb secrets to communist tyrant Josef Stalin. Imagine if German-Americans slipped Bomb Secrets to Nazi regime. Imagine if Japanese Americans slipped Bomb secrets to Japanese militarists. Imagine if Muslim-Americans today slipped atom bomb secrets to a Muslim nation deemed as a terrorist state. It’d be a total outrage.
Indeed, the reason why Jews feigned so much hysteria about the ‘Red Scare’ was because they were trying to drown out the fact of Jewish vileness as Soviet agents and communist fellow-travelers. What Jews did to the US to aid and abet the USSR was so beyond the pale that a major political and social movement against Jewish Power and Networks would have been most justified in the 1950s. Try imagining an act of treason greater than slipping atomic bomb secrets to America’s biggest enemy following WWII. It’s impossible to imagine anything worse. Many Jews were involved in espionage and subversion, and the Jewish community deserved to come under close scrutiny and face a major purge because SO MANY Jews were up to no good against a nation that offered them sanctuary and a new life. Jews knew that their crimes were so grievous and extensive(throughout the Jewish networks) that no amount of apology or contrition on their part could prevent a major purge of Jewish figures from all walks of life. So, Jews used the media to spin a Narrative that made Jewish communists, radicals, and subversives as the Good Noble Guys targeted by a ‘witch-hunt’ when, in fact, there were lots of spies and traitors in the halls of power and influence. But then, we know from the bogus Russia Hacking Conspiracy Narrative that Jews will go to any length to spread lies and poison minds to hide their filth behind the smoke of false narratives. In retrospect, given that so many Jews were on the radical left, it made good sense for US government to be wary of Jews, or be ‘antisemitic’.

Look at the State Department in our time. It’s been totally dominated by Jewish Power, and what has it given the world? Insane ‘new cold war’ with Russia, and all because Jews hate Russian sovereignty that stands in the way of total Jewish takeover of Russia and its vast resources. Arrogant Jews believe that Russia belongs to them than to dummy Russians who should be used like cattle(like how pigs in Animal Farm use the big but dumb horse). And then, all these wars in the Middle East that destroyed millions of lives are essentially Wars for Israel. It will take many years for those nations to recover and rebuild, and why? Because Jewish globo-ego is willing to sacrifice any number of lives to serve the query, "Is it good for Jews?"

Given the carnage and mayhem caused by philo-Semitism(and Jewish supremacism) that informs so much of US foreign policy(since the Clinton Era), it is reasonable to argue that things were better in the past when Jews had been regarded with justifiable suspicion. Given the fact of troubled Jewish history and experience with various non-Jewish peoples, it made absolutely no sense for Americans, especially those at the top, to drop their guard against Jewish ambitions.

George Scialabba's Stupid Review of Jonathan Haidt's Stupid Book The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion.

If you want a good laugh, get a load of George Scialabba's review of Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion" in the Boston Review. Though no fan of Haidt, I must say Scialabba unwittingly validates Haidt's thesis more than his silly mind can ever fathom.
Early in the review, Scialabba summarizes Haidt's ideas thus: "Experiments repeatedly show—-to oversimplify only a little—-that we all believe what we want, regardless of reasons." In other words, as Haidt succinctly puts it: "Intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second."

As if to go out of his way to prove this thesis, the liberal Democrat Scialabba writes, rather gratuitously, later in the review: "Republicans cheat a lot. The Nixon campaign attempted to forestall a peace agreement in Vietnam in October 1968 that, had it succeeded, might have won Hubert Humphrey the election. The Reagan campaign allegedly attempted to delay the release of 52 American hostages held at the U.S. Embassy in Tehran until Jimmy Carter had left office. A Republican Supreme Court awarded the presidency to George W. Bush in 2000. The Swift Boat campaign against John Kerry in 2004, financed by Republican donors, was based on lies, while the CBS 60 Minutes report alleging Bush’s evasion of National Guard duty was substantially true, despite a firestorm of successful Republican denial. The dirty tricks of Republican operatives such as Lee Atwater and Karl Rove are too numerous to catalogue. Currently Republicans across the country are busy with voter-suppression efforts under the deceitful pretense of combating vote fraud. No doubt the Democrats are hardly political innocents, but compared with the Republicans, they are hapless pikers. Yet, oddly, the Republicans’ godly supporters do not object to this ungodly behavior."

"Democrats are hardly political innocents, but compared with the Republicans, they are hapless pikers."
Rotfl. My beef is not with the assertion that Republicans cheat a lot. Rather, the notion that Democrats are 'hapless pikers' when it comes to political dirty tricks makes me wonder what planet has Scilabba been on for the last 70 yrs? It's a clear case of using 'strategic reasoning' to buttress one's own political biases.
Democrats 'hapless pikers'? Does Scialabba know about how Kennedy won in 1960? Maybe he never heard about the Daley political machine in Chicago. Does he know anything about the political history of Lyndon B. Johnson? How he got where he got and how? Does he know about all the dirty tricks pulled by FDR during his 12 yrs of presidency? Or the Gulf on Tonkin Incident?
Surely, Scilabba knows that most big city politics--where the power and wealth are concentrated--have been dominated by Democrats. Does Scialabba really believe that the Democrats who've run places like Chicago, NY, New Orleans, Detroit, St. Louis, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, Atlanta, Washington D.C., and etc are 'hapless pikers' when it comes to politics compared to Republican politicians of the suburbs and small towns? Is he really this naive about the role of Irish in big city politics? Or the collusion between liberal Jews of Wall Street and New York city politics? Were Daley and Koch able to run Chicago and NY for so long because they were 'hapless pikers'? What about Blagojevich, the governor of Illinois? Just another hapless piker, I guess. How about Clinton's sleazy career? The endless lies, selling of influence to Chinese, backroom dealing with Wall Street's globlalist Jews, and his pardon of Marc Rich? Reagan got in hot water in the late 80s for accepting 2 million from the Japanese, but liberal Democrats seemed to be impressed by Clinton racking up over 100 million since he left office. And how about Al Gore who reaped billions by having Obama's administration feed tons of cash into his 'green' ventures?

I do not defend the Republicans and their dirty tricks though, to be clear, the GOP has been dominated by Zionist neocons since the early 90s, i.e. the both parties are essentially run by globalist Jews who are the real masters of cheating.
Consider how Jews 'serving under'--more like 'lording over'--Clinton and Bush II rigged the system to allow Wall Street Jews to rake in huge fortunes. But when it went bust in 2007-2008, Wall Street Jews(socially liberal and economically 'conservative') got 'bail outs' from both Bush II and from Obama. And where were the media, the so-called Fourth Estate, on all this? Well, the media are also owned by globalist Zionists. And did Hollywood make truly critical movies about Jewish power in Wall Street? All we got were tepid movies that tended to HUMANIZE all those anxiety-ridden Wall Streeters.
Hollywood is more worried about North Koreans invading America(in RED DAWN remake) or Muslims abducting American women(TAKEN and TAKEN 2) than with the real power in America that happens to be globalist-Jewish. Did the government go after Wall Street crooks? Why would it when both parties depend so much on Wall Street for campaign donations. Obama, the 'hapless piker', filled his economic team with Wall Street insiders to be in good graces with the Jewish elites.

Yet, Scilabba the gutless liberal says nothing about Jewish power but bitches and whines about Rove and Atwater. Yes, Rove is a low-down dirty pig, and Atwater was a shark--though his Willie Horton ad was correct, factual, and justified; the real shame when it comes to black crime is the liberal media establishment has done everything to bury it; instead of calling black crime by its name, blacks are referred to as 'teens' and 'youths'. If white youths went around beating up blacks, the liberal-dominated media would be calling out race. Even when the Hispanic Zimmerman defended himself from a black thug, the media spun it was 'evil white guy attacks innocent black kid'. The weasels and liars in the media--of which Scialabba is a part--are certainly no hapless pikers when it comes to cheating, deception, and mendacity. Willie Horton ad was to the point because it was about a black guy overpowering a white guy and raping a white woman. It is a racial FACT that blacks are tougher, stronger, and more aggressive than whites, and therefore whites do have much to fear from black aggression. And this can be seen in blue states where most white liberals try to live apart from most blacks. Not many wonderful white liberals taking advantage of cheap rents and housing costs in Detroit. Gee, I wonder why. Most white liberals may denounce Atwater, but deep in their hearts, they act with Atwaterian instincts about race.

Michelle Malkin is a total partisan when it comes to politics, but she hits the bull's eye on this one:


And Ramzpaul makes much the same point in this video:


Even if we assume that the GOP cheats MORE than the Democrats, why would this be? Maybe they need to cheat more since most of the major institutions cheat on the side of Democrats? After all, much of politics is driven by the media, and something like 95% of journalists are liberals or leftists. 90% of the media are owned by Jews, and most Jews are liberal. And even most neocons are essentially Jewish social liberals who use the GOP for Zionist and Wall Street interests.
Let us assume Kennedy was cleaner than Nixon. But Kennedy had the media on his side. The media covered up for Kennedy no matter what he did. But the media were out to get Nixon from day one. Nixon was 'paranoid' about the media, but the media were 'paranoid' about Nixon. More recently, the media have served as Obama's propaganda wing, portraying him as the neo-messiah and then the gay messiah. In the 2008 election, the liberal media knew all about John Edward's affairs but kept it secret so as to make him steal white votes from Hillary, thereby helping Obama. As for Obama's links to the Far Left and lunatic Jeremiah Wright, MSM initially buried that story, and when it finally leaked out, covered it 'objectively' without any sensationalist rhetoric, thereby preventing it from 'gaining traction'. But imagine if the GOP candidate had Far Right ties. MSM would have foamed at the mouth, like they did over Buchanan's convention speech in 1992.

According to liberal MSM, if one goes after the Far Left, one's being 'McCarthyite'. But if one goes after the Far Right, one's being 'courageous'. So, liberals get to attack any conservative for far right ties, but conservatives are not allowed to go after liberals with far left ties. This is how the game is rigged. Many more people's lives and careers have been ruined by witch-hunts for 'racists', 'sexists', and 'homophobes' than have been ruined in the so-called 'witch-hunts' for communists. While McCarthy did abuse his power, liberals seem to forget that the more grievous abuse of power happened under FDR and Truman when many Soviet spies were allowed to gain access to all levels of the US government, culminating in the passage of atomic secrets--the most carefully guarded secrets in America--to mass murderer Stalin.
But somehow, that is considered a less evil than HUAC's search for communist subversives. Why is our understanding of history so twisted and corrupt? Because history departments are dominated by liberals and Jews. Since many of the suspected communists of the 40s and 50s were Jewish, Jews have rewritten history so as to make it seem as though it'd been a case of 'innocent' liberals--oh those hapless pikers--set upon by monstrous 'red-baiters'. In the liberal mind, passing atomic secrets to a communist tyrant who killed 15 million is less grievous than blacklisting some Hollywood writers for a few yrs.
Of course, the very liberals who were for 'free speech' back then are now pushing for 'hate speech' legislation since they have all the power. What need for free speech protections when Jews own government, Wall Street, media, law firms, courts, etc? Now they want to shut down free speech of people who are critical of Jewish power.

The real dichotomy when it comes to dirty politics is not Republicans vs Democrats but Jews vs gentiles. We gentiles are hapless pikers compared to Jews. Liberal Jews and Neocon Jews colluded to give us the Iraq War. The Jewish dominated media spread the lie that the Iranian president wants to wipe Israel off the map when he never said any such. Jews preach about equality to the rest of us when, in fact, they are the most powerful and privileged people in America. Under both Democrats and Republicans, American history of the past 30 yrs can be summarized as "Jews get richer, goyim get poorer." Jews denounce racial stereotyping, but Jewish Hollywood fills the screens with Zionist war porn that dehumanizes all Muslims as terrorist subhuman. Though black crime is a daily reality in America, most criminals and thugs on the big screen are 'angry white males'. Jewish Hollywood make movies like RISING SUN and the coming remake of RED DAWN to spread yellow peril paranoia in order to distract us from Jewish power.
And Scialabba, the lying liberal, lacks the guts to speak truth to Jewish power. Jews have, of course, rigged the game so that anyone who speaks critically of Israel or Jewish power shall be blacklisted or destroyed, like Rick Sanchez or Helen Thomas. It's okay for Jews to scream about THOSE Russians, THOSE Muslims, THOSE angry white wasp males, THOSE yellows, THOSE Mormons, and etc, but we cannot say THOSE Jews. Why, that would be 'antisemitic' and you'd be a 'Nazi'. Jews in the media bitch about 'white privilege' when, in fact, the real power and privilege in this nation are concentrated among Jews, followed by gays. It's okay for Jews to shout 'white privilege'--connotation being US is ruled by wasps--, but imagine what would happen to a white gentile if he or she yelled 'Jewish privilege'. He or she would be cast out of positions of power forever.

The proof that white gentiles are hapless pikers compared to Jews can be seen in white conservatives. Most Jews are liberal, Democratic, and anti-conservative, but white conservatives are the biggest fans of Jews, Jewish power, and Israel. Jews spit on white conservatives, but white conservatives want to worship and serve Jews. Indeed, if one really wants to understand Jonathan Haidt, one needs to consider his Jewishness. His lukewarm endorsement of conservatism has really nothing to do with philosophical thesis. It's really about Zionist interests. Haidt is worried that the rising numbers of global leftists, blacks, and browns in the Democratic Party may not be amenable to Zionism and Israeli interests. After all, what if blacks and browns identify more with oppressed non-white Palestinians than with European-Jews who rule Israel? And among Mainline Protestant churches and some members of the academia--and even in the pop culture world--, there's been increasing comparisons between Israel and South Africa under apartheid.
Then, it's not surprising that Haidt would have warm feelings for someone like Sarah Palin, the pro-Zionist political porn star. A man as intelligent as Haidt cannot possibly respect a dodo like Palin for her intellect or ideas. What he likes is her blind commitment to Israel, her insane worship of Jews. In this respect, Haidt's partial turn to the 'right' is much like David Mamet's, whose turn toward 'conservatism' is also largely fueled by his Zionist interests.

Another reason Haidt has made himself prominent as a 'liberal Jew with friendly feelings toward conservatives'--and indeed has been promoted as such by the Jewish-controlled MSM--is because Haidt, along with many Jews, are worried that white conservatives may be waking up to the fact that Jews really hate them. Since Jews are behind Obama, illegal immigration(to increase non-white numbers so as to play 'divide and rule' among various goyim), the ridiculous 'gay marriage'(if 'same sex marriage', why not 'same family marriage' or 'incest marriage'?), political correctness, and etc. Also, Jews run the foreign wars but all the dying are done by gentiles, most of them white gentiles. If white conservatives wake up to the real nature of Jewish power, they'll stop rooting for Israel and start taking a critical look at Jewish power. So, Haidt puts himself forward as the liberal JEW who has learned to LOVE conservatives. And some conservatives are dumb enough to fall for this con game worthy of David Mamet movies.
Haidt plays the rational philosopher/psychologist of morality, but his real motives are tribal-Zionist.

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

"Experiments repeatedly show—to oversimplify only a little—that we all believe what we want, regardless of reasons. Changing one’s views in response to an opponent’s arguments is about as rare as an honest member of Congress. (Cases of both are known, but only a few.) Arguments are largely instrumental; they are meant for attack or defense. Most of the time, we argue like lawyers rather than philosophers."

This is only true on a short-term basis. If you sit down with someone and try to change his/her mind with reasoned argument, it's not going to be easy, even if you're right. Part of the reason is the matter of Ego. Oftentimes, the person is not so much resisting the argument as resisting the domination of one's ego by another person. Children don't like to admit they're wrong even when they're wrong.

But there are many instances where people's views can change very fast. Especially in cultures known for authoritarianism, people are more likely trust what is told them by the authorities. How else does one make sense as to why so many Germans turned to Nazism so quickly? How did so many Russians and Chinese swallow communism(an alien/radical idea) almost overnight? In some cultures, there is a kind of master/student structure to relationships so that even if the student may disagree with the master, he will feel great pressure(both inner-psychological and outer-social)to change his own views to conform to that of the dominant authority.
Such is less likely in the US where individualism is a core facet of life. But then, America isn't just about individualism but popularism, which isn't the same thing as populism. Popularism is the desire to be popular and be liked, to feel a part of whatever happens to be cool and trendy. Thus, mass culture can change people's views and values very quickly. 20 yrs ago, most Americans would have said NO to 'gay marriage'. But ever since the airwaves have been filled with 'gay is cool', 'gay is beautiful', 'gay is saintly', 'gay is hip', and 'gay is the new straight' celebrations and propaganda, a whole lot of Americans are now for 'gay marriage'. So, it's not necessarily a case of "we all believe what we want" but more a case of "we all believe what THEY--the controllers of mass media--want us to believe."

Or consider the mentality of team sports. In highschool, suppose students are divided into several teams. Members of one team will form a bond very quickly and feel as a close-knit group. Each tries to play well to be liked by other team players. If the team members are switched around, kids will feel disoriented for a day or two. But a new powerful bond will form very quickly among the new groupings. So, the mortal enemy can suddenly be your best friend. Europeans who hated one another in Europe quickly became one people in America. Ancient hatred vanished almost overnight because everyone watched John Wayne movies together and rooted for the same Team America. Red China was the worst nation on Earth as far as Americans were concerned in the 50s and 60s. But when Nixon met Mao--and with US media portraying a happy and healthy China under communism--, American view of China changed almost overnight. They were our 'friends' against those evil Rooskies.

If reasoned conversions can sometimes be difficult, emotional conversions can be instant. Many non-believers have instantly become Muslims or Christians. Why? They were feeling down in their lives and the sudden acceptance by a community of religious people made them feel at home. If you're an agnostic or secular Arab immigrant in America and feel alienated from everything, imagine coming upon a Muslim community that embraces you. Instantly, you feel 'at home' even if you're in America. You may instantly wanna be part of that faith. A lot of hippies who burned out from too much drugs became born again Christians almost overnight.

There is also the power of sensual conversion. Take Rock n Roll music. Many white conservatives hated it, and some even called it 'nigger music' and denounced Elvis as a 'white nigger'. But it wasn't long before Elvis was embraced by white conservatives as a good southern boy with charisma and talent. And white leftists generally disdained popular music as 'capitalist'. White leftists jeered at Dylan for going electric or 'commercial'. In their eyes, he went from a loyal Jewish leftist to a Jewish capitalist. But Dylan's electric music was so good that even most leftists began to embrace him again. And Muhammad Ali, the 'nigger troublemaker' of the 60s--the man who opposed the war in Vietnam--became the icon of American patriotism in the 70s, traveling around the world as the goodwill ambassador of America, even shaking hands and taking photos with dictators and tyrants chummy with America. Leftists who praised him for his anti-Americanism were praising him for his pro-Americanism.

There are two kinds of values. Values in sync with human nature, values in opposition to human nature. This was the flaw of communism. Despite its having created generations of people sincerely indoctrinated in communism, people wanted to feel free as individuals. So, when the time came, it crumbled overnight; even diehard communists seem to morph overnight into liberal democrat capitalists.
Communism came to power by tapping into certain aspects of human nature. Humans are naturally envious and want what others have; and people love easy scapegoats. Communism offered land and bread and scapegoated capitalists and the old elites. So, communists rode the waves of human nature to victory. But once in power, communists banished all freedoms, and it wasn't long before communism was in opposition to human nature--there may be only one human nature but it has many facets, e.g. human nature is for both love and hatred, for both individuality and community, for both power and servility, etc.

Rock n Roll and its related values/attitudes conquered America(and much of the world)because it was so much in sync with human nature turned on by sex, thrills, youth, narcissism, will to power, and excitement. Since culture carries values, embracing rock n roll also meant one embraced values/views/attitudes one may have disdained earlier. And this can happen quickly, almost dramatically. Such is the power of seduction. Why was it that Germans and Japanese who'd committed their lives to fighting to the last man in WWII almost overnight became pro-American democrats? It wasn't just the defeat and agony. It was American chocolate bars, American pop culture, and American culture of freedom. Japanese who'd been bowing down before the Emperor were bowing down before MacArthur and Marilyn Monroe. Germans who not long ago worshiped Hitler as the greatest man of all time were rocking to Elvis in the 50s.

Sometimes, it may seem as though people's minds don't change much because the labels remain. For instance, take the Chinese Communist Party. It still goes by its old name, still commemorates the founding of the People's Republic, still uses Mao iconography, stills plays the Internationale, and etc. But today, what is it really? It's a nationalist party that has made peace with capitalism and capitalist giants all over the world. So, everything changed, but the fiction remains that China is still ruled by 'communists', and since most Chinese are obedient to the party, we can maintain the fiction that China is still 'communist'.

Same can be said for the labels 'liberal' and 'conservative' in America. Liberals of yesteryear would not recognize today's liberals. Same with old conservatives and new conservatives. The GOP used to be the party of Lincoln. Today, it's more the party of Neo-Confederacy and Neocon Zionists, or Neocon-federacy. Conservatives used to be anti-big-government, but Nixon greatly expanded welfare and Bush II did nothing to make government smaller; if anything he made it bigger. (An average conservative would rather side with a Republican politician pushing a liberal agenda than with a Democratic politician pushing a conservative agenda. Same goes for liberals. Clinton did a lot of 'conservative' things, but he was still hated as 'that dirty liberal'. Bush II did a lot of liberal things, but he was still hated as 'that dirty conservative'. Nixon is remembered for his Southern Strategy, but he also attempted the Liberal Strategy. By expanding welfare, government, and affirmative action, he hoped to win over liberals and non-whites. But they still saw him as the 'arch conservative'. Labels matter.)

Democratic Party used to be the party of white ethnics, working class, southern farmers, and etc. Today, Democratic Party is essentially the Jewish-and-Gay party, what with nearly 80% of Democratic party funds coming from those two groups who make up maybe 4% of the population. Since 2/3 of the superrich are Democratic and since Democratic Party relies on Wall Street as much as GOP, Democrats have been major pushers of globalist free trade, especially when New Democrat Clinton signed NAFTA.
And the idea of 'gay marriage' would have been laughable to most Democrats even 20 yrs ago. Indeed, leftism used to see homosexuality as a decadent 'bourgeois' disease, not least because so many gays were into fancy and privileged things. If anything, fascism was chummier with homosexuality than communism was, that is until Hitler and Himmler made their move against Ernst Rohm and his gay-led S.A. If Rohm had prevailed over Hitler, Nazism would have been a full-blown gay-led movement. Leftists often used to attack Hitler as a closet-gay, mocking his 'gay' gestures and manners. So, just how did leftism and liberalism become synonymous with the gay agenda? Today's liberalism and leftism aren't yesterday's liberalism and leftism.
But the label remains. And as long as labels remain, there's the fiction that the 'right' and 'left' dichotomy cannot be changed since most people are so locked/trapped in their ideological fixations and certitudes. But in fact, conservatives changed so much over the years that they are no longer like conservatives even 20 yrs ago. And liberals changed so much that they are no longer like liberals even 20 yrs ago. Even many Republicans are clamoring for 'gay marriage' and saying it's 'conservative' to have gays marry since marriage is conservative. And liberals now love billionaires as long as they fund causes like 'gay marriage'.

At one time, the hallmark of liberalism was a total commitment to free speech. Today, liberalism is defined by political correctness and 'hate speech' legislation.
At one time, conservatives used to argue for censorship against communists, subversives, and perverts. Today, feeling the pressure of the liberal-dominated media, academia, courts, and government, conservatives are calling for total freedom of speech. So, what is 'liberal' and what is 'conservative'? During the Bush II presidency, liberals marched endlessly and tirelessly against war. Under Obama, liberals are suddenly no longer anti-war, even as Obama rained down bombs on Pakistan and Yemen; even as he expanded the 'War on Terror' to Libya.

So, even as people cling to labels, they often change profoundly and quickly when it comes to values, attitudes, and views. They just don't know it because they are so enamored of their label. So, it doesn't matter if you're for Wall Street and 'gay marriage'. If you still go by the label of 'liberal', you are on THIS side as opposed to THAT evil side.