Ann Coulter's Flawed Logic on Diversity: The Real Problem is DAW(Diversity against Whites), which need be countered with DAZ(Diversity against Zion) — Explicit Politics uber Implicit Politics

https://anncoulter.com/2021/11/03/dems-post-election-plan-send-more-immigrants-to-virginia/

Ann Coulter says the Demmies are determined to bring in MORE IMMIGRANTS to win back Virginia because, after all, peoples from Latin America and Asia overwhelmingly lean Democratic(for reasons of immigration policies and Jewish anti-white influence in media & academia).

But she’s missing the larger point. Why is ‘diversity’ damaging to whites and conservatives? It is because Jews control the US and use nonwhites against whites. Via media and academia, Jews encourage anti-white animus among whites — even among aspiring whites anxious for status, being pro-white is an instant disqualifier, as is being anti-Zionist; no wonder then that even whites with deep southern roots do nothing to defend Confederate legacy as their priority amounts to seeking the approval of their 'betters', mostly Jews, cuck white elites, and Noble Negroes(and even homos); never mind that both political parties are totally supportive of the Jewish 'genocide' of Palestinians and the various apartheid-like policies that make life miserable for Arabs in the West Bank.

All things considered, Diversity is most problematic because Jews have weaponized it against whites. Whatever goes wrong, Jews blame whites or even the essentialism of whiteness. When blacks attack Asians, Jewish-dominated media and politics blame ‘white supremacism’, and yellows, being turdy craven dogs eager for approval from authority, go with the bogus narrative. And even most 'conservative' whites don't decry this utter nonsense. And Jews encourage browns to be anti-white. Even though Latin Conquistador-whites did more than their share in the destruction of native peoples and the Atlantic Slave Trade(often in partnership with Jewish slavers), the current Jewish Power bloc allows Latino Whites to pose as 'people of color' to keep them as allies in the anti-white side of the political aisle. Such is the nature of the Jewish Mitzvah(holy race war) against whites.

The only solution to DAW(Diversity Against Whites) is DAZ(Diversity Against Zion). It’s only natural that if Jews use Diversity against whites, whites should use Diversity against Jews. Whites should spread the message that Jews rule America, Jews control the wealth, Jews control the Deep State, Jews use US power to murder tons of non-whites Arabs & Muslims. And Jews fan black rage and violence against whites and non-blacks(or Jews allow blacks to 'roll' other peoples in pogroms while the Jewish-run media and legal system look the other way). Whites should also remind the world with historical narratives of Jews exploiting blacks.

Thus weaponized against Jews, DAZ(Diversity Against Zion) can be advantageous to whites as Jewish Power poses the gravest threat to white survival. The reason why Jews themselves don't worry about Diversity is because they weaponize it against whites but, heretofore, whites haven't dared to return the favor. But if whites weaponized it against Jews, Jews will begin to shit.

But what is the state of affairs in the US? Jews employ DAW(Diversity Against Whites), but whites vow to protect Jews from 'antisemitic' elements within Diversity. It's like Jews explicitly promote anti-white rage and violence among blacks, but whites never call out the Jews on this and, instead, thump their chests about how something must be done about festering 'antisemitism' in the black community. When blacks kick whites in the ass, Jews cheer, laugh, and call for more. When blacks beat on Jews, whites stand in between and take the blows meant for Jews while giggling Jews kicks them from behind. How pathetic.

So, Ann Coulter should worry less about Diversity than how it’s turned against whites by Jews. She should urge whites to change course and start weaponizing Diversity against Jews. Begin by supporting BDS.

But fat chance of that ever happening at least in the foreseeable future. When even race-realist Jared Taylor sucks up to Jews despite persecution at their hands, it’s utterly hopeless with milquetoast conzos. Jews kick Taylor in the ass, and what does he do? He goes into bitchy hysterics about the Muslim threat, to whites and Jews alike, in the hope that Jews won’t whip him so badly.

Jews are not about siding with whites or with Muslims. Jews are about making goy fight goy. Jews use whites to invade Muslim lands and kill bushels of Arabs. And then, Jews welcome Arabs as ‘refugees’ and allies against ‘xenophobic’ white Christo-conzos. Jews use whites to support Zionist erasure of Palestine but then reach out to Arab-Americans to denounce ‘Islamophobic’ white conzos.

It’s as simple as A-B-C. Jews use Diversity against whites. When will whites use Diversity against Jews? If whites won’t, they are finished and deserve to lose because they’re too dumb or craven to stare truth in the face and do what they must.

Jews shouldn’t be regarded as just another ethnicity. They don’t see themselves that way. Greasy Italians and Dumb Poles are generic ethnics in America. In contrast, Jews regard themselves as a Chosenicity. They are Choseniks, which puts them above mere ethnic groups and races.

The assumption among many on the ‘right’ is Diversity is necessarily bad for GOP and whites. While it’s true that Too-Many-Nonwhites will lead to the erasure of white societies, Diversity in and of itself need not be anti-white or anti-GOP in the hostile or hateful sense.

It all depends on how Diversity is used and by whom. Most nonwhite goyim are like white goyim: Sheeple, easily manipulated. In the West, they are manipulated to be anti-white by Jews... just like whites are manipulated to be pro-Jewish no matter what Jews do to them.

Iran is only 50% Persian and other ethnicities make up the rest of the population. But, despite ethnic tensions within Iran, most minority groups don’t work with Jews against Persians. Why not? Because Persian nationalists control Iran. Russia has many minority ethnic groups, but Russia’s Diversity doesn't work with Jews against Russia. Why not? Russians dominate Russia. (If any group is most willing to collaborate with World Jewry against Russia, it is the white cuck population there... just like the biggest shills of Jewish Supremacist power in US and UK are white cuckeroos.) If anything, during the Cold War when USSR backed key Arab nations against Zionism, all groups within the Soviet/Russian Empire were steered to support Arabs against Zion.

If whites hadn’t ceded power to Jews in the US(and UK and the West), they could have put forth a more appropriately pro-white or white-friendly agenda and attitude for nonwhites or Diversity. As most nonwhites won't or don’t think for themselves, they tend to go with the prevailing wind. It is precisely because whites ceded power to Jews that the latter was able to make anti-whiteness the political glue among various nonwhite groups(and white cucks), especially as ideology faded in significance as the ‘End of History’ drew near. Anti-whiteness among nonwhites was NOT inevitable, especially as many nonwhite immigrants moved to the West out of preference for whites and white ways than for their own. Diversity was made anti-white by Jewish Power. In the Age of Idolatry, Jews made themselves gods and made whites the Devil in the equation.

Something similar happened in China. As communist ideology lost its luster, CCP figured it had to rely on something else to hold the people together as one big patriotic family. And it was anti-Japanese sentiments. History was dredged up to make Japan the Big Bad Wolf. (It was probably a stupid move as it alienated Japan and drew it closer to the US.) CCP figured Anti-Japanese Remembrance would be the glue holding post-ideological China together. Jews figure Anti-Whiteness will hold Diversity together. Blame whitey for everything. Even in areas where Jews dominate, the game is to blame whites, e.g. #HollywoodSoWhite. Even though Jewish mayors of blue cities pushed for tougher policing to control black crime, the rulebook is to blame ‘white racist cops’ when racial controversies flare up, as with the case of George Floyd.

Blaming Diversity is like blaming trannies as both have been weaponized by Jewish Power. Most nonwhites are clueless sheeple, and their anti-whiteness has been fed to them by Jews. Trannies on their own would have been nothing more than a marginal community of laughing stocks. They were empowered and ‘ennobled’ by Jews.
Conzo criticism amounts to harping at the puppets but never tracing the strings to the puppet master, which is Jewish Power. Diversity and Trannies are no different from Joe Biden. All puppets of Jewish Power.

There is something to be learned from Ukraine. Jews sought to use Ukraine against Russia, and in turn, Russia decided to use Ukraine against the Jews. Jews installed a puppet government that provokes Russia, but Russia took back Crimea and supports separatist elements in eastern Ukraine.

Diversity must be used like Ukraine is used by Russia. If Jews steer Diversity to be anti-white, whites must steer it to be anti-Jewish. Just tell nonwhites that Jews hog most of the power and privilege in the West. Detail the dark chapters of Jewish History and inform every group of how it is negatively affected by Jewish Power. For example, Jews and slavery in Brazil. Jewish domination of the opium trade in China. Jewish use of Pentagon to destroy Arab nations. The role of Jewish financiers in the rape of entire economies. When Jews use Diversity to attack whiteness, whites must fight back in kind. Sadly, whites are a bunch of cucky wuck pussies.

In the US, both political parties(or patsies) are about ethno-idolatry or ‘ethnodolatry’ of Jews. Demmies look to Jews as prophets and Repubbies look to Jews as gods. Suppose both parties were to vanish into the thin air. Jewish oligarchs will just create two more political fronts to create the illusion of ‘democracy’ and vet a new batch of puppet candidates like Macauliffe or Youngkin(of Virginia).

Simple Rule of History: People who weaken their own identities will end up serving people who strengthen their own identities. It’s only a matter of time. Look at whites and Jews. Whites into deracination have come to serve Jews into racial identity.

In the end, implicit politics loses to explicit politics. At most, a figure like governor Youngkin represents implicit white politics. In contrast, the other side dominated by Jews and energized by blacks(and homos) is explicit in its pride and passion, in its diatribes and demands.

What is the difference between ‘implicity’ and ‘explicity’? Implicit politics is ashamed to express and expound on what it is really about. It must conceal its identity and interests, even to itself, i.e. so many whites who vote for white interests convince themselves that they are voting for universal principles of color-blindness. So, even though implicit politics may win a few rounds, it loses in the long run without the fuel to proudly express and defend itself and go on the war path against enemies and rivals. Implicit = Timid.

In contrast, explicit politics is all about pride, confidence, and aggression. It is fired up. Even if outnumbered and disadvantaged(at the moment), it has the wind of history on its back because it has the moral and ‘spiritual’ imperative. It can preach loudly and condemn the other side that is too afraid to express itself loudly and make effective counter-arguments. Explicit = Brash. Jews are explicitly into Jewish Power, blacks are explicitly into Black Rage, and Homos are explicitly into 'Gay Pride', but even white conservatives squirm like a toad upon being reminded, "It's Okay to be White".

Implicit politics, even when victorious, is unsure of itself and dare not convey what it’s really about. If anything, it outwardly agrees, more or less, with the moral argument of the other side and claims to practice those ‘virtues’ better in moderation and caution — but, if the 'virtues' are so correct and on the right side of history, why opt for moderation than total commitment?

The implicit side doesn’t oppose the arguments and demands of the other side but merely says it is too radical… at least for the moment. So, when it comes to fundamentals, the implicitly political side hides its real interests and claims to, more or less, agree with the premise of the other side that beams with righteous rage and makes unapologetic demands. So, craven shitters like Youngkin don’t condemn CRT or call out the lie of BLM but merely mutter, “Oh gosh, you’re pushing the stuff too far too fast, and we need some time out, that’s all”, and his voters are too craven to express real outrage over what Jews and blacks have done to this country since 2020.

Jews are 2% of US whereas white Christian goyim outnumber them many times. (White Conservatives complain about how lost California due to demographics, but if this is true, how come Jews control the state when they are many times outnumbered by goyim?) Why do Jews keep winning while whites and Christians keep losing? It’s because Jews control the gods, what is holy and unholy, and that means they can be EXPLICIT in their Jewish identity, pride, agenda, and demands(and in their anti-white hostility)… whereas whites and Christians, branded with the sins of ‘racism’, ‘antisemitism’, and ‘white supremacism’, must tread carefully and at best be implicit in their defense of whiteness or Christianity. Jews angrily wield Jewishness like a hammer, whereas whites/Christians warily handle whiteness(and/or Christianity) like radioactive material; they are afraid of their own identity and interests, of their own shadows. Whiteness is to whites what Kryptonite is to Superman.

Consider the problems of implicit capitalism under communism. Even under Marxism-Leninism, some nations experimented with market economics and introduced elements of capitalism. But the capitalism in communist nations could only be implicit, always under the moral thumb of communism. It couldn’t loudly and proudly proclaim itself as superior to communism. Rather, all it could hope for was some degree of tolerance and permission to carry on with market practices to allow for incentives and efficiency. Because communism owned the pride and passion, it could stamp out vestiges of capitalism any time it wished. Implicit capitalism was always at the mercy of explicit communism, and if anything, capitalists under communism argued that capitalist practices were merely to hasten the arrival of communism(as Karl Marx himself said capitalism would lay the grounds for socialism that would lead to communism). Likewise, implicit white politics never expresses pride of whiteness but argues that whites should be treated a bit better because, all said and done, what white conservatives really want is a better kind of Diversity, a happier kind of Great Replacement.

Unless whiteness is made explicit in its identity, interests, expression, and demands, it will always be disadvantaged and lose out in the long run because pride and passion are with explicit politics. It’s like a handful of burning coal produces more power than a ton of cold coal. And a few men with swords are more effective than many men with shields. When a roller meets the dough, what flattens what?

GREENWALD EXPLAINS HOW AMERICA’S NEW ‘WAR ON TERROR’ TARGETS OWN CITIZENS

Beware of Nominalism — Why Russian & Chinese National Fascisms are Necessary Bulwarks against Jewish-Gangster-Globalist-Fascism — Paradox of How the US destroys true democracy around the world by promoting its parasitic brand of deep state Imperial Democracy

Michael Lind: "Another answer is that members of the establishment are almost all nominalists. That is to say, if they give something a name, it takes on real existence in their minds. The Afghan National Army offers a perfect example. Because we called it an army, gave it lots of American money, equipment and training, and knew its order of battle, it was an army. But it wasn't."

'Democracy' is a word game in our political culture of nominalism, or judging things by name or brand than what it really is.

Fascist Theory of Power is true. All things of power turn 'fascist'. Ideology gives into the true dynamics of power, and the winners(or at least survivors) subscribe to all or most of the pillars of power-essentialism.

Jews used to be socialist, anarchist, communist, liberal, libertarian, or etc. Today, Jews are overwhelmingly tribal. They are now focused on power, not principles. Of course, they tirelessly invoke principles but only to twist and bend them to the needs of power, not the other way around. Fascist theorists understood this nature of power and human nature. In time, all things, at least those with the will and wherewithal to survive and gain in strength, turn fascist. A movement can start from the right or the left, but the end result for survivors and winners is the intersection where fascist truths converge. It's been said fascism was defeated in WWII, but only a kind of fascism met such fate. What we've seen since is the rise of new fascisms but guised as something other. Indeed, all post-WWII fascisms have postured as 'anti-fascist'. Even fascists hate the label because it's too candid and forthright about the nature of power. Just like people wear clothes to conceal their nakedness, most forms of power cloak themselves with rhetoric about 'higher principles', 'freedom', 'social justice', or 'the people'. Indeed, even Italian Fascists and National Socialists did this with their overripe reliance on myths and cult of personality. It was to hide the essentially gangster nature of those in power who, far from embodying the noblest qualities of their civilizations, gained position by a good measure of cunning opportunism and backroom compromises.

Supposedly, the end of the Cold War was also the End of History, with liberal democratism and free markets triumphant all over the world. But Francis Fukyomama got it all wrong. The passing of the Ideological Age didn't lead to the rise of the Individual Age but to the Globo-Tribal Age, one where a group(Jews) that refused to abandon its tribal identity &power urged upon all others to do just that. Following WWII, the ideal had been universal nationalism or universal tribalism: Each nation would embrace nationalism but against imperialism as a violator of national independence. Indeed, both the US empire and Soviet empire during the Cold War justified their hegemony as the guarantor of nationalism against the imperialism of the other side, e.g. USSR supported Cuban and Vietnamese nationalism against American Imperialism, and the US supported Polish and Hungarian nationalism against Soviet Imperialism.

But following the end of the Cold War, the new mantra wasn't nationalism-for-all but one-world globalism, or the (not-so)gradual erasure of all nationalism to bring about a New World Order with US as the lone superpower guaranteeing freedom of individuals and markets all over the world. According to Fukuyama, the future was about universal individualism for all nations under the protective power of the US as the great post-national empire, one that used its might not to dominate and exploit others but to emancipate them and open them to opportunities.
Whatever one thinks of this idea, pro or con, the people who gained dominance in the West had other ideas. While Jews pushed deracinated globalist individualism to everyone around the world, they themselves stuck to Jewish supremacist tribal-nationalist-imperialism. Thus, the New World Order was really Jew World Order, with one set of rules for most of the world and another set of rules for the Jews. This contradiction has perhaps been best exemplified by the diabolical figure of George Soros.
Jewish aim wasn't to simply join the global humanity but to rule as the master race over the rest. Notice Jewish Power has been about mass migration for all nations but NOT for Israel. Jews insist on white deracination but demand that whites praise and champion Jewish Power and Zionism. As such, the agenda of universal individualist-globalism was deeply marred(and even doomed) because its most fervent proponents, the Jews, refused to apply it to themselves. It's like the Sacklers pushing opioid junk on goyim. As far as Jews were concerned, globo-individualism was for goy suckers, not for themselves. It was to weaken goyim and bring about their dissipation into atomized individuals, all the while Jews would empower their networks and embolden their identity. (True, many Jews intermarry with goyim, but the children are raised as Jews, just like black-white pairings lead to 'black' kids. In any race-mixing, one race gains dominance over the other. It's like all those mestizos are labeled as Latino, a European-derived identity.)

So, the New World Order after the Cold War was a two-faced beast. On the one hand, as Fukuyama pontificated, it was about the spread of post-ideological and post-national global-universalism of individualism, free trade, and rule of law. (Rule of Law is problematic in a world where a tiny cabal uses its legal and financial dominance to rewrite any set of laws. While goyim are expected to obey the laws, Jews get to rewrite them as they please. Rule of Law used to mean defense of free speech as a Western principle, but with Jewish rewriting of laws, it now means the police can arrest you for speaking truth to Jewish power, Homo idolatry, or Black thuggery. Worse, Rule of Law is useless when Jewish-controlled US, as the lone superpower, does as it pleases around the world. US is illegally occupying the oil-rich parts of Syria but gets away with it. So much for Rule of Law.)

Now, post-national globo-individualism is anathema to many on the Right(and some on the Left who oppose capitalism), but it was doomed to create havoc because of Jewish supremacist hypocrisy. Perhaps, the globalist agenda would have panned out better in Russia had Jewish advisers been more principled and dedicated to fairness and justice. Instead, Jews exploited the opportunity to rape Russia... which turned most Russians against globalism. And in the US, Jewish Power grew ever greedier. Via ethically dubious machinations of finance and big tech, Jews got richer and richer. By suppressing BDS, Jews created a system where Jews can call for boycott of any political group or any Muslim nation but no one can call for boycotts against Jews and Zionism. Jews in power get to decide what is 'terrorism'. When Israel does it or supports it, it's never called 'terrorism', but false-flag events in Syria, of which Assad isn't guilty, are labeled as such. Even non-existent crimes of Assad are deemed 'terrorist' by US State Department and Jewish-controlled mass media, whereas Israel's endless terror-bombings of Syria and its support of ISIS goons never are.

What Jews did to Muslims, they've also done to whites who are now being denied platforms, free speech, and financial services. Samuel Huntington wrote about the Clash of Civilizations, but the most important one was not between the West and the Muslim World. It was between the West and the Jews, but people failed to see this because (1) there were too afraid to speak truth to Jewish Power (2) they were too philosemitically beholden to Jewish Power (3) Jews are regarded as part of the West because of assimilation.
Huntington spoke of Western Values vs Muslim Values, but the main threat to Western Values came from Jews who'd penetrated deep into Western institutions. While tolerance for homos can be said to be a part of Western Value, since when was Celebration of Sodomy a Western Value? Since when was Western Values about fifty genders and the fantasy that a fat guy with penis and balls is a 'woman'? Since when was the deification of black thuggery and Afro-savagery as neo-sainthood a Western Value? Since when was Jungle Fever and White Male cuck-maggotry a Western Value? No, all these sicknesses had no roots in Western Civilization but were planted as poison seeds by Jews. But Huntington focused on Muslims. Sure, Muslim values are at odds with Western values, but why were there so many Muslims in the West in the first place? Why did Europeans become so accepting of the Great Replacement and Diversity? (For most of European History, the West was about defense of the race, preservation of Classical Civilization, faith in Christianity, and/or Rationalism & Enlightenment. What passes for 'western values' in the Age of Globalism is anything but.)
And why did the West stir up the hornet's nest in the Middle East with interventions, wars, and support of terrorists(usually against Arab secular regimes war with Islamic fanatics who were mainly funded by Saudis, key allies of the West)? Granted, Huntington expounded his views before the West went fully 'woke' with globo-homo and BLM nonsense. Still, the main flaw of his thesis resulted from fixating on Muslims than on Jews. Even 9/11 wouldn't have averted if the US, under Jewish pressure, hadn't gotten so mired the Middle East, especially beginning with the Gulf War under George H.W. Bush. 9/11 was essentially blowback with the winds fanned by the hidden hand of Zionist gangsterism. Idiot Muslim terrorists were the sailboat, and Jewish Power was the gods blowing the winds in certain directions. Just like how the gods guide men vs men in THE ILIAD.

The Jewish refusal to surrender to globo-individualism(that was really meant for goyim) doomed the principled foundations of globalism. Whether one supports or opposes globalism, one could at least acknowledge its principled universalism had it demanded the same of ALL peoples. But for Jews, it was a case of 'you goyim take the medicine while we Jews play doctor'. Russians woke up to this, and globalism failed in Russia. But there was another factor. China, like the Jews, took part in the business-aspect of globalism but clung to its nationalism under the leadership of CCP, the only Asian government, apart from that of Vietnam, that wasn't created more-or-less under US neo-imperialist domination.

So, while white cucks in the West became totally spellbound by Jewish Power, Chinese(and Russians and of course Iranians) kept their independence. In a way, this explains why white cucks(libby-dib or conzo-wonzo) are so angry with Russia and China. Why should Russian and Chinese goyim remain independent of Jewish Power when whites in the West have totally groveled and cucked to it? The anger is partly based on ideology and partly on envy. Many white cucks sincerely believe they are the 'most evolved' people on the planet because they are into self-debasement, Negro Worship, cuckery to Jews, and globo-homo mania. They really believe this. But, on the subconscious level, they feel envious of Russians and Chinese who say NO to Jewish globalist authority. White cucks can't help sensing that Russians and Chinese are more like defiant wolves while they themselves are totally obedient dogs. John McCain barking at Putin was so much like a dog barking at a wolf. It was in total servility to the Jewish Master but also in envy of Putin's relative independence from him.

White cucks will say they hate Russia and China because those two states reject 'liberal democratic' values, but if that's the case, why are white cucks so supportive of Jewish supremacism, Zionist tyranny over Palestinians, and Black megalomania? It seems white cucks also have their tribal favoritism: Blacks over non-blacks and Jews over Palestinians & Iranians. And it seems white cucks believe that Muslims, such as Afghanis, have human value ONLY WHEN they adopt 'gender studies' and globo-homo. Are white cucks even aware of their hypocrisy? Cold Hypocrisy of cynical politicians is bearable because so many people say one thing while doing another. But, white cucks are into Hot Hypocrisy, the kind where passions are at odds with principles. If we tend to despise religious hypocrites more than political ones, it's because politics is about cold hypocrisy of saying whatever to get elected. In contrast, when religious types invoke God and morality but then act like louts, thieves, and perverts, it comes across as far worse. Because 'woke' craziness has all the fervor of a religious movement, the hypocrisy is hot and beneath contempt. And of course, Jews are among the hottest hypocrites, always sermonizing about 'hate', Holocaust, 'racism', and 'white supremacism', all the while acting like Zio-Nazis or Jewzis. Just ask the Palestinians. Also, Jews who, for so long, never tired of denouncing 'McCarthyism' as the darkest period in US history are now 100x worse than the anti-communists. The former bitchers about 'red-baiting' and 'anti-communist hysteria' are into white-baiting, Christian-bashing, Constitution-smashing, and free-speech-attacking. Jews also warned people of how the Nazis used medicine as cultural metaphor and political tool, but now Jews use medical tyranny to lend the impression that those who say NO to the 'vaccine' are germs that must be stamped out.

21st century has been about the resurgence of fascism even though all these new forms of fascism hides behind the nominalism of 'liberal world order', 'democracy', 'socialism', or what have you. While some governments admit to being nationalist, a term less toxic in the globalist-controlled discourse, none dares to admit it has anything to do with fascism. It goes to show that World War II still casts a long shadow on the future. Because the peak of Soviet/Russian prestige came with the defeat of National Socialist Germany and full independence for China followed the total defeat of Japan(an ally of Germany), both the Russians and Chinese carry on the charade that they've been the main victims of and victors over fascism. And because Jews met their greatest enemy in the German fascism of National Socialism, Jews have since postured as the biggest anti-fascists in the world(though it hasn't restrained them from supporting quasi-nazi elements in Ukraine).
Of course, the main reason Jews denounce fascism is they want to keep its magic formula for themselves. After all, fascism fuses rightist and leftist elements, whereas other ideologies pit right against left, thus creating division, distrust, and general havoc among a people — indeed, whites are so divided because they reject fascism and opt for ideological partisanship(or even purism) as a 'blue-stater' or 'red-stater', whereas Jewish neo-cons and neo-libs work together to make both rightism and leftism serve the Jews. It's why the secret to power for whites isn't found in the new right or the dissident right but in the left-right, which was the source of success for Adolf Hitler and FDR — Hitler adopted leftist elements into German rightism, and FDR adopted rightist elements into American leftism; and if communism had a saving grace, it fused socialism with nationalism.

Now, there is no guarantee that a nation will be good and decent because it is fascist. Fascism, like any ideology, can be used in bad ways — democracy too can be a disaster, like Russia of the 1990s, South Africa under black majority rule, and all Anglosphere 'liberal democracies' today that have facilitated the rise of Zio-globo-oligarcho-gangsterism. Fascism can lead to brazen rule by gangsters, a case of Machiavellianism. While fascism as theory of power brings us closest to the true nature of power, the moral worth of fascist rule depends on how those lessons are reflected upon and practiced. After all, the truth can be used for good or ill, just like a gun can be used to protect or rob people or chemistry can be used to create medicine or poison. Just because fascism makes us better understand the nature of power doesn't mean we will be better people with power.

Despite the problems of corruption and general abuse of power in China and Russia, it's fair to say their use of fascism is preferable to that of Jews. Besides, paradoxically enough, the biggest enemy of democracy around the world is the Jewish-controlled US as the most fervent promoter of 'democracy'. True democracy must organically grow from the soil of any nation. American democracy worked relatively well because it developed independently of foreign meddling. It was democracy by Americans for Americans. In contrast, whenever some nation around the world tries to open up and liberalize, the US takes advantage of the freedom to infiltrate its institutions & networks and subvert its sovereignty & integrity as a unique homeland of a people and culture. It was Yanqui meddling that undermined attempts at democracy in Latin America, especially in Guatemala. Whether democracy succeeds or fails in some Latin American country, it should be up to the people there, not for Americans to interfere and decide what's what. If anything, things have gotten worse ever since Jews took over the US. In the past, white Americans, being the national majority and imbued with sound values, had no problem with majority rule and true morality. If anything, the core values of White Christian America weren't all that different from those of the Non-West; the only major difference was more tolerance of deviance and more individual liberty in the West. In contrast, Jewish-Americans seek to undermine majority authority and moral sanity in every country by spreading globo-homo and Afromania, the idea being that all European and Asian nations should elevate homo minority over the majority and care more for black thugs than their own peoples. Of course, such minority-privilege and moral inversion is means by which Jewish Power gets to sink its hooks into other nations. Jews think any nation that elevates homos and blacks over their own majority population no longer has a strong sense of national identity & security and is therefore ripe for Jewish globalist picking. Because of Jewish-controlled US meddling, democratic experiments have failed everywhere. The only kind of 'democracy' that the US and its EU satellite will tolerate is one that bends over to the Jewish-controlled afro-globo-homo-schlomo agenda. Whenever freedom and democracy lead to a system that has other ideas and says NO to the afro-globo-homo-shlomo agenda, the US does everything to undermine that country. It's like the US was for the Arab Spring until free elections brought Muslim Brotherhood into power. Then, the US backed the Egyptian military in the coup against the rightfully elected government. And Jewish-controlled US recruited thugs and stirred up mob violence to unseat the democratically elected leader of Ukraine. In other words, US support of democracy is really a kind of 'demockery'. It's not about the freedom of peoples around the world to choose their own values and destinies but about the US exploiting freedoms in other countries to infiltrate, subvert, corrupt, and prop up puppet regimes onboard with the afro-globo-homo-shlomo agenda. In other words, it's not about spreading true democracy or freedom but propping up puppetocracies. It's a form of Imperial Democracy, the cloning of 'new democracies' around the world to serve as shills of Jewish-controlled US as the Imperium. If all the houses in the neighborhood agree to keep their doors unlocked, such openness can work ONLY IF everyone agrees not to trespass onto other people's homes and steal stuff. Whenever a nation around the world unlocks its door, the US trespasses and rearranges everything in the house and even steals stuff. Naturally, the doors must be locked again to keep out the Americans(who now do the stealing for the Jews). So, even though freedom is preferable to autocracy, some measure of the latter is necessary to maintain national sovereignty in a world where the US, as the tool of Jews, promotes freedom not to bolster but to destroy national independence. It's like Jews promote youth culture not to make young people more free and independent but more dependent and addicted to junk culture and dumb fads pushed by Jews. 'Liberal Democracy' has come to mean conformity to the demands of Jewish Globalists. Of course, any honest person would notice that what Jews demand of goy nations, they never demand of Israel. What is good for Israel is not good for Hungary. What Jews demand of Hungary, they never ask of Israel. This is why the national fascisms of China and Russia are, at least at this moment in history, laudable as bulwarks against Jewish Supremacist gangster-fascist-terrorism.

21st century is turning out to be about three dominant fascisms, those of China, Russia, and the Jews. Chinese rule China, Russians rule Russia, and Jews rule US, EU, Anglosphere, and its cuck satellites(like Japan). China has arrived at a fascist equilibrium. Confronting Western Imperialist aggression in the 19th century, China was like a turtle that hid deeper into its shell of ultra-conservatism and reaction. It only kept China weak when faced with the challenges of modernity. Then, as if to compensate for its long decay under rigid traditionalism, China embarked on radicalism under Mao, but this war of culture and ideology led to great havoc and destruction. Then, China embarked on what seemed like a pro-market-oriented neo-liberal path, but the fates of Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan under US ideological and idolatrous hegemony have proven to be culturally hollow, dissipating, and suicidal. Therefore, China seeks a balance of tradition and change, of international relations and national sovereignty. Same could be said of Russia. If rule under the Tsars was too reactionary, the rule by Bolsheviks was too radical and traumatizing. Also, mere communism held back initiative, enterprise, and economic growth, and then, following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the surrender to unfettered globo-capitalism led to Jewish economic rape, which dwarfed even the horrors of the Weimar Period in Germany. Vladimir Putin, for all his faults and limitations, have tried to steer Russia toward a balance of tradition and modernity, of markets and socialism. His method too is essentially fascist though he would be loathe to admit it in public.

At any rate, what Russian and Chinese neo-fascisms have in common is the conviction that power must be consolidated and constructed toward nationalist goals. Power must ultimately be about what is good for the nation and the people, not only for here and now but into the future. Therefore, even though Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin can act like gangsters at times, they do have some qualities of statesmen and genuine national leaders with a sense of patriotism and common good. Putinism is about what-is-good-for-Russia in Russia that is overwhelmingly Russian, and Xi-ism is about what-is-good-for-China in China that is overwhelmingly Chinese. Those are national-humanist fascisms. In contrast, Jewish supremacist fascism is purely tribal-gangsterist, indeed even worse than British and French rule over their colonies.

Nominalism(useful term invoked by Michael Lind) explains why so many people are fooled about the true nature of what's really happening. They are fooled by labels. Take 'gay rights'. It gives the impression that the globo-homo agenda is about allowing homos the right to be 'gay' and do their 'gay' thing. But that is not what the Agenda is about. It's about forcing everyone to celebrate and revere homos and even trannies. It's about official promotion of Anno Sodomini as the new faith for the educated elites, the 'more evolved'. Nominalism is used alongside symbolism, e.g. the 'rainbow' homo flag. So, even though homosexuality is about gross bung-donging inside the dark and dank anus, many people associate it with bright colors.

So, all this talk of 'democracy' vs 'autocracy' is BS. The current world is really about autocracy vs autocracy, except that Jewish Power hides behind labels of 'democracy', 'liberalism', 'tolerance', 'diversity', 'equity', and 'inclusion'. Right, Jews are so into diversity that New York Times is full of Palestinian-American writers - not. Jews are so into equity that.... now, that is too funny. Jews, the richest and most privileged people into equity, ROTFL. As for 'diversity', what is it really about? It's about White Preferism, Capitalist Greed, Jewish Supremacism, and White Cuck Saviorism.
It's White Preferist in that non-whites prefer to move to white nations and live with white majorities than with their own kind. If Diversity is so great, why don't browns stay put as all of Latin America is pretty diverse? India is said to be very diverse along cultural, ethnic, and linguistic lines, but all these Hindus wanna move to white nations. Diversity is White Preferism.
As for businessmen, they just want cheap docile workers who complain less than native folks. We can understand why they'd rather hire newcomers than blacks, but it goes much further. Big Business would rather hire cheaper inferior foreign workers to superior American ones just to cut costs.
There is also a Jewish Supremacist angle: Increase non-white numbers and use them against whites. Also, more diversity among goyim means more division among them... which ensures Jewish Power.
As for white cuck savior complex, so many whites are not only stupid enough to fall for Jewish Diversity BS but subconsciously hanker for a kind of white supremacism. They feel that nonwhites are too dumb to take care of themselves and must live under paternal white guidance to see the light and enjoy the fruits.

So, beware of nominalism.

After all, what is 'racism' really about. It's not about treating all races equally and rejecting racial favoritism. No, it means the 'moral' necessity and even sanctity of treating blacks as our superiors in every way. In reality, blacks are the biggest thugs and pose the gravest threat to white people, but in stupid Hollywood horror movies, whites are hunted down by space monsters or flesh-eating goblins(or Evil White Males) and must rely on heroic and/or saintly blacks as their protectors or saviors. ROTFL. When Paul McCartney was accused of possible 'racism' for having badmouthed Pakistanis in the UK, his defense was he can't be 'racist' because his favorite people are blacks. If 'racism' is racial favoritism, isn't it 'racist' to favor blacks over others? But then, the agenda around 'racism' is to favor blacks for sympathy and consideration, even admiration and reverence. It's not about racial equality but superiority of blacks.

And what is politics around 'antisemitism' about. It's not about treating Jews the same way as the rest of humanity. No, it's about the obligation that Jews be treated better, always be favored, always be forgiven, always preferred. It's not about treating Jews and whites the same way. No, it's about Jews dictating to whites as to what's what, what is right or wrong; and whites must nod along without debate. It's not about treating Jews and Palestinians the same way. No, it's about letting Jews act as they wish with Palestinians. Even when Jews are clearly in the wrong, we must support them over Palestinians, and to say otherwise is to be an 'anti-semite'. So, the politics of 'antisemitism' is really about Jewish Supremacism, not about the need to treat Jews like everyone else, i.e. neither more deserving nor less deserving of justice and fairness.

But people are blind to this because of nominalism. 'Racism' gives the impression that it's opposed to ALL forms of racial hatred. But if so, why is there total silence about non-black victims of black mayhem and violence? 'Antisemitism' gives the impression that Jews are especially targeted by irrational haters and that we need to treat Jews as human beings deserving of equal justice. But 'antisemitism', as framed by ADL, SPLC, and Jewish-run media & deep state, really boils down to Jews having the divine right to control everything and do as they please as the 'made men' who cannot be questioned. In other words, its actual practice is Jewish Supremacism. The hell with nominalism and say yes to ACTUALISM.

We need to reject nominalism and accurately describe and name what is really what and what is really happening. The problem isn't 'racism' but black-thug-supremacism. The problem isn't 'antisemitism' but Jewish supremacism and Zionist gangsterism. The problem isn't that homos are denied 'gay rights' but that Gay Rites are pushed as the new mandatory cult in the West and that anyone who won't bend over to this devil-god and take it up the ass is blacklisted and destroyed by the Power.

CHINA'S WAR AGAINST "SISSY-MEN," GAMERS & WESTERN HYPOCRISY

Transformation of Diversity Politics from Rule by Anglo-America to Rule by Judeo-America — How Jewish Power used Diversity to divide & rule over Goyim and then formulated New Terms of Goy Unity on terms favorable to Jewish Supremacism

The American Mythos of Anglo Pride

America was diverse from the beginning, predominantly Anglo but with other Northern European ethnicities, and it increasingly grew diverse as later newcomers were less Anglo or Northern European in general. There was also the large number of blacks, but they were sufficiently different to be considered and treated as a separate population, and this was even truer of the American Indians. More immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe and then finally from non-Western nations meant that the US would grow more diverse, which could also mean more divided.
Therefore, as counterbalance to the divisiveness wrought by diversity — even the American Civil War resulted from Diversity as an all-white South surely would NOT have seceded from the North; it did so because white Southerners feared the blacks and thought the whites in the North were agitating the Negroes — , the Anglo-American elites devised a formula for unity that roughly went as 'Principles for All, Pride for Us', i.e. the American Ethos would de-emphasize origin, race, ethnicity, color, religion, and etc. BUT the narrative of American Mythos would emphasize the vision, courage, foresight, ability, and wisdom of the Anglos. So, Americanism would appeal to all but reveal the Anglos as the true founders, builders, and settlers for all else for everything else to be possible. So, even as the US grew more diverse, dangers of division would be ameliorated by not only shared principles(in the Constitution) but shared respect for the Anglos as the First and Foundational Americans.

But Jews couldn't abide by that. Now, if Jews were a middling people with, say, an average IQ of 90 and possessed of a milder personality(than a pushy one with chutzpah coming out of their ears), they too would likely have abided by the Anglo Formula for Principles for All, Pride for Us(Anglos). After all, even though every non-Anglo group felt some degree of envy and resentment for the Anglos, there was more respect and admiration. It's like in the traditional Southwest, a Mexican might call an Anglo a 'damn gringo' behind his back but was ever ready to say "Si, Senor" when the Anglo boss needed the Mexican to do something, like saddle a horse in THE BIG COUNTRY. Same with the Negroes. For all their rage and loud talk, blacks on their own are like the Tataglias without the backing of Barzini in THE GODFATHER. Blacks on their own 'could never have outfought (white)Santino'. This is why blacks so eagerly pimp out to Jews. Not that they like Jews, but they know Jews place special value on blacks as bouncers and pimps.

Jews exploited the possibilities inherent in the promise of Principles-for-All in order to gain power over Anglo-Americans. Jews argued, "If the US is indeed all about equality and liberty, why was the history of America 'racist' and why was Free Speech restricted in one form or another?" Taking over the Law and Media, Jews pushed ever harder on civil liberties, especially as many Jews were radical, subversive, criminal, and/or pornographic. And under this pressure, the US did become freer than ever for awhile. Late 60s to the mid-80s were probably the golden age of Free Speech, not just in the US but in world history.

But as Jews aimed to grab more power and take over as the new ruling elites, they believed that both the politics of Pride and Principles as laid down by Anglo-America had to be altered. As long as the Pride of Narrative belonged to the Anglos, Jews would have to play a sidekick role in the American Mythos. Jews might even come to be seen as usurpers than rightful rulers.

Just like Christianity, though owing so much to Judaic tradition and Early Jews, defined itself against Jews as Christ-Killers — it was an effective way for Christians to wrest the rightful ownership of God from the Jews — , Jews felt they must villainize the white race(especially those of Northern European stock) in the American Mythos in order to conceive of a New Americanism where Jews and their allies/minions would be the true rightful owners of America.
Jesus was a Jew, but also the Son of God murdered by Jews, or so said the Christians. Gentiles took so much from Jews but blamed the Jews for the greatest crime conceivable, the killing of the Son of God. Likewise, Jews took so much from Anglo-America but felt compelled to stab its heart in order to lay claim to the New America. According to the New Jew Narrative, White Americans, despite having founded and built Early America, betrayed it like Judas betrayed Jesus: Whites talked a good talk but were really 'racist' & 'white supremacist' and crucified black jesus(though there isn't much talk of American Indians lately) while their racial brethren in Europe came to crucify the holy Jews as new christs. So, ultimately, White America is the Judas that betrayed the American Mythos, and the True Founding Fathers are the Immigrant Jews and the Blacks(and their proselytizing missionaries or missionfairies are the homos).

So, the Pride of Anglos had to be changed to Shame/Guilt of Anglos. And these emotions had to be a kind of Moral Pornography or 'Mornography', so relentless, aggressive, and overwhelming in its mind-fuc* that whites wouldn't dare stand up and say, "Wait a minute, you're going too far..." It explains why Jews promote stuff like MISSISSIPPI BURNING and 12 YEARS A SLAVE where southern whites males aren't merely flawed or bad but downright perverse & degenerate in their evil. It's beyond heroes and villains; it's about angels and monsters. So, the Pride of Anglos, which used to be a key unifying factor among diverse non-Anglo Americans went out the window. These days, the debate is about whether it's worth saving any statue or monument to Anglo-American heritage.

Now, what about the Principles? Would it still be Principles for All based on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Initially, Jews took full advantage as stalwart champions of this ideal to protect Jewish radicalism/subversion/pornography and also to ensure the separation of the state from any expression of Christianity. But, as Jews amassed more power for themselves and noticed that others were critically taking notice of Jewish power, Jews began to change their tune and go the neo-Bolshevik route of altering the meaning of Free Speech whereby it became 'free' only if Jews approved of it.
Likewise, when Jews talk of 'democracy', they really mean outcomes favored by the Tribe. So, if a legitimate democratic process leads to an outcome disfavored by Jews, it's 'autocracy' or 'far right'. But if Jews pull dirty tricks to subvert the democratic process but get the result they prefer, it is 'democracy'. For Jews, both the ideas of Free Speech and Democracy are about Rule of Lawyers, not Rule of Laws. Whatever Jews say is the 'truth'.
As a result, the Ideal of Principles-for-All turned into Power-for-Us, the Jews. New America is essentially about Shame for Anglos and Power for Jews. Blackness is the bludgeon Jews use against whiteness, and Queertianity is the replacement for Christianity.

Under Anglo-American rule, the problems of increasing diversity was dealt with limiting immigration mostly to whites, ending mass immigration in the 1920s, and instituting Principles for All & Pride for Anglos. And it more-or-less worked... except with the Jews, but then, this was to be expected from a people who stubbornly maintained a separate identity and culture amongst majority Christians and Muslims over the many centuries. Also, among the various newcomers, Jews alone had the combination of identity, ability, neurosis, and cunning to fully exploit American Meritocracy for their own aggrandizement and apotheosis.

Once Jews secured their place in the New Order, they concocted a grand plan of not only takeover but permanence. After all, in the game of king-of-the-hills, the king is usually pushed aside by challengers, old and new. If a people as prestigious, privileged, and powerful as the Anglo-Americans could be pushed off the hill, it could happen to Jews as well. Jews felt that, as long as the US remained a white majority nation, whites might finally come to realize Jews are a hostile/subversive bunch up to no good(not least because the better Jews, for sake of tribal, were too often hesitant to go after the bad Jews). Therefore, Jews needed to bring about even more Diversity to secure permanent power, and this time, the newcomers would be non-white.

Jews figured there would be less chance of non-whites uniting with whites against Jews than whites uniting with other whites against Jews. After all, blacks had been in the US for a long time, but white/black tensions were never resolved. Jews pushed for more immigration on account of 'Diversity' and 'Multi-Culturalism' being advantageous to Jews. And indeed, it did lead to more divisions among the goyim in the 'culture war' that took off in the late 1980s. Jews were relieved by the sight of babelization among the goyim.
But, this wasn't entirely good for Jews either. After all, if Diversity means more division among various groups insisting on their distinct identities & narratives uber alles, that meant there could be no national unity to get anything done on a domestic, let alone global, scale. For Jews to use American Power effectively, all Americans had to be united around SOME themes even if remaining divided on others.
After all, in a truly multi-cultural system, most gentile groups would ask, "Why should I praise Jews and support Zionism when I am not Jewish, and besides, what Jews are doing to the Palestinians is like what white imperialists did to my folks long ago?" A much divided America would mean the goyim wouldn't be able to unite against the Jew, BUT it also meant they couldn't unite on ANY issue as each group would be into 'our identity' and 'our interests'. Furthermore, if Multi-Culturalism really meant each group should stick to its own culture and values, most cultures(especially non-white ones) would be anti-globo-homo, something pushed by Jews. Such would be an obstacle to the Jewish Agenda.
Jews needed the goyim divided on identity & color but needed their unity on certain matters to render them useful to Jews. It's like a metallurgist uses heat to pry metals apart but then remolds them into unified solid metal. The increasingly diverse peoples had to be brought together on key issues and agendas favored by Jews. (Of course, Jews only needed to win over the elites and 'spokesmen' of every group, and such status-driven types were easy to bribe and browbeat.) And what would the terms of re-unity be for the diverse goyim in the New America with Jews as top dogs. It obviously couldn't be the old terms of Pride for Anglos and Principles for All. It had to be Shame for Anglos so that Jews and non-whites(and cuck-whites) would all be united on Blaming Whitey as the Eternal Bogeyman.
The other term was Power for Jews(than Principles for All), but it had to be veiled as the goyim might recoil from brazen Jewish Supremacism? And this is why Jews couldn't hog all the prestige for themselves and favored two other groups, Homos and Blacks to form a triumvirate. Homos of all colors(white, black, brown, yellow, etc.) would create the rainbow-impression that the New Order is about equality for people of all colors. And as the black narrative in America came to define the struggle against 'racism', blackness would have significance beyond its racial identity. MLK and Mandela are like global symbols for struggle for justice in the way that Jesus, though Jewish of origin, came to symbolize Love for All Humanity. With such elevation, of course homos and blacks were fully onboard with the Jewish Agenda... on the understanding that the two groups would pretend to be the best of friends — notice how BLM activities prominently display 'gay' colors — and either totally support Jews or at least keep mum about the crimes of Zionism & Wars for Israel. One thing for sure, whether one is Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, or Barack Obama, you get rewarded big time if you kiss the Jewish Behind.

The end result hasn't been Multi-Culturalism where each and every identity/interest is of equal worth and equal time but the Tri-Supremacism of Tentpole Identities(or Idolatries) of Jews, blacks, and homos. So, if you're Jewish, black, or homo, you are 'made', but if not, you must seek 'social credit' points by sucking up to one, two, or all three of the Tentpole Identities.
Indeed, for all the talk of 'white privilege', a white person who sucks up to Jewgromo(Jewish-Negro-Homo) Idolatry is favored many times over than a non-white who sympathizes with BDS, condemns the Wars for Israel, or denounces 'gay' behavior. The blondest and most-blue-eyed white person who sucks up to Jews, waves the 'gay' flag, and/or flashes a BLM sign is far more likely to succeed than the nappiest blackest black who, unlike Barack Obama and Kamala Harris, dares to condemn Israel and champions Palestinians and other brown people being crushed by Zionism and its wars.
In other words, one's own race/color ultimately matters less than which race/color one sucks up to. A white person's 'white privilege' actually expands IF he sucks up to Jews, takes the knee for the Negro, and bends over for the homo. In contrast, a non-white's supposedly magical 'diversity' means next to nothing if he or she goes against the terms set by Jews. There are many whites in the Deep State because they suck up to Jews. In contrast, Tulsi Gabbard's mixed-race identity means NOTHING because she dared to upset Jews on foreign policy. Indeed, so-called Liberal Jews much prefer white GOP cucks like Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell over someone like Gabbard. What does that tell you? It's the politics and 'spirituality' of group-idolatry.

Paradoxically, America's anti-class attitudes turned society into more of a neo-class system, at least with the rise of globalism. Prior to the radical expansion of 'free trade', the US had essentially a National Capitalist economy where the middle classes and working classes had considerable leverage in the economy. With the vast majority of Americans identifying as 'middle class', it seemed as if US solved the problem of class conflict after WWII and during much of the Cold War. But with hyper-globalism and China/India entering the world economy, the American Middle Class and Working Class were threatened. Also, the ebbing away of any traditional sense of Americanism and with libertarianism ensconced as the new defining value of Establishment Conservatism, the individual mattered far more than the community, and one's worth was entirely the product of personal success. Thus, successful whites were more likely to feel closer to other successful individuals regardless of race or color, especially as whites were taught to believe white identity/solidarity is 'racist' and any notion of white folk/volk is 'nazi'. So, what did this neo-individualism lead to? The rise of the new uber class for whom status-conscious membership in the club means everything whereas the unsuccessful whites are dismissed as 'losers' or 'deplorables'. In a way, the elite goy attitude toward the masses came to resemble Jewish attitude toward goyim: Contempt and derision. (Jews needed to worry less about class because the majority of Jews were very successful, and besides, pride of identity/unity wasn't verboten among Jews and, if anything, a tribal obligation that was, furthermore, cheered on by goyim who would have denounced similar consciousness among their own kind.) It's no wonder Jews encouraged the spread of libertarian individualism among whites. 'Muh liberty' negated 'Our Community' among whites. Of course, Jews, blacks, and homos were, contra the whites, totally encouraged not only to boost their own identities but demand that other groups favor Jewishness, blackness, and homo-ness over their own identities & culture. A Muslim who hollers BLM is favored over a Muslim who shouts, 'Proud to be Muslim', and a Mexican who waves the 'gay' flag is favored over a Mexican waving the Mexican flag.

Anyway, that's how the new unity works in New America. It's no longer about diverse white ethnicities and non-whites being united on Principles for All and Pride for Anglos. Rather, the pride(even holiness) is hogged by Jews, Homos, & Negroes as the Tentpole identities that the lesser multi-culti identities are pressured to rally around. As for Principles, the hell with Americans striving to live up to the promise of the Constitution. Why, that would mean equal gun rights and speech rights for all Americans. A well-armed populace might rise up against tyranny. And a free-minded people might speak truth to power, which is mostly Jewish nowadays.
So, it must be about Power than Principles. And yet, Jews understand that most people will not discard Principles in favor of Tribal Power for Jews despite their special sympathy or reverence for the Jewish people. So, even though it's really all about control, Jews have worded their power-grab in the language of principles pertaining to 'hate speech' and 'white supremacism'. (Of course, goy 'liberals' have their own reasons for supporting Speech Control. Prior to the internet and especially social networks and live-streaming, most discourse-of-consequence happened in the big media, elite academia, and institutions of the learned, or indoctrinated. So, it was mostly the educated talking amongst themselves. But the internet and live-streaming made it possible for the Average Joe to have his say on equal terms, and oddly enough, the less educated Joes sometimes had more interesting things to say because, being unattached to industry or institution, they could speak their minds in the way that elites could not, at least if they were to hold their status and positions; paradoxically, the more power you gain, the less power you have to speak freely. With all the Average Joes saying that Liberal Princelings wear no clothes, naturally the 'liberals' want to control speech for the masses. Other than that, the New Cult of Wokewicz demands that all be properly reverential to the Holy Three of Jews, Homos, and Blacks. If Jews want to control speech to protect tribal power, 'liberals' want to control speech to preserve status & prestige.) The gall, the chutzpah, of these people. It's like the notorious Jewish Harvard Professor Noel Ignatiev who rags on 'whiteness' as inherently 'racist' & 'supremacist' and must therefore be wiped out as an identity, but all of this is just projection because, if identity has been supremacist in conception and practice, it is Jewishness that says the Jewish soul, blood, and body are superior due to special blessing by the one and only God. So, Jews not only denied that other peoples have their own gods and insisted the God of the Jews is the only God for all the world and all of humanity, BUT this God made Jews better than all the rest. Jewish Supremacism is a jealous god that will simply not tolerate any other identity that has the potential of saying NO to Jewish Megalomania. This is why Jewish Power shames whiteness into paralysis so that it will serve Jewish Supremacism.

So, in summary, there was the problem of diversity that was solved under Anglo-American rule with Principles-for-All as ethos and Pride-for-Anglos as mythos.
But Jews brought about the second round of Diversity that led to yet another crisis of divisiveness. This served Jews well in having a goy populace that could not unite, but it posed the problem of each group being for itself than for any sense of common purpose. How could Jews rally the diverse goyim into serving the Jewish Agenda(as the New Americanism) if every group says 'Our Identity Uber Alles'? And so, Diversity had to be re-united under the New American themes of Sacred Semites, Noble Negroes, and Holy Homos. Therefore, whatever differences your people may have with other peoples in the US, just remember that it is the 'patriotic' duty of ALL AMERICANS to bow down before the Jews, kneel before Negroes, and cheer for homos & trannies. And spit on whitey.

WE KNOW HOW TO MAKE AMERICA STRONG - American Renaissance

How 'Facts' are Spun to Make Whites serve Jews and the Other — Spin than the Fact is More Crucial to Political Control, i.e. anything can be spun to push anything

The spin is more important than the fact in political control. Thus, the 'facts' of white superiority, white equality, and white inferiority can all be used to make white people tolerate, welcome, celebrate, 'include', and serve the Other. The current order manipulates all three modes among whites to make them serve Jews and/or non-whites(usually as proxies of Jews).

1. How white superiority is used to make whites serve Jews and non-whites. Whites are made to feel special, rich, powerful, and accomplished. They are great whereas so many other peoples are pathetic, especially those starving or diseased black Africans. Therefore, superior white people should be decent and take care of all those non-whites by allowing mass-immigration and providing endless super-aid. The White Knight Syndrome. Jews play on this psychology too. Jews paint themselves as forever Holocaust Victims, and great-good whites must step up to the plate to save Jews from 'new nazis', such as Iranians and anyone who dares to criticize Jewish Power or Zionism. There is also an aspect of white superiority in LGBT stuff, i.e. whites are 'more evolved' than the rest of humanity because they are most enthusiastic about queer culture, therefore whites should guide the world to celebrate homosexuality and trannies. So, feelings of white superiority are made to serve non-whites or to spread Jewish-concocted 'Western Values' via globo-imperialism. (Globo-Homomania is totally the brainchild of Jewish supremacists.) Of course, no one explicitly says whites are superior, but the implication of White-Knight-ism is based on feelings of enlightened superiority. Even 'white guilt' is intrinsically white superiorist in that it judges whites by a higher standard. All of humanity practiced slavery and waged murderous wars. So, why are whites judged more harshly? Because they deemed as higher beings and should have known better. "Oh, how could the white race have done such a thing?" If Arabs, Africans, and Asians did it, oh well, that was because they didn't know any better. But whites? As higher beings, they should have known better.

2. How white equality is used to make whites serve Jews and non-whites. Whites are told that all races are equal or that race is just a fantasy. There is just common humanity, and therefore, it doesn't matter if white world is demographically taken over by non-whites or if whites mix with other races. Whites and non-whites, they are not only equal but virtually the same. It's just humans and more humans. So, whites should welcome mass immigration and be either demographically replaced or miscegenated out of existence; it doesn't matter because whatever happens, it's just humans replacing or mixing with humans. As whites are the global minority, such an attitude would make white world subordinate to or supplanted by non-whites in the long run. What will happen to Europe if 100 millions of black Africans go there? Anyway, white equality as currently understood doesn't bestow white people the equal right to survive as race and culture(as Jews in Israel do). It's not about universal nationalism. Rather, whites must be erased like Palestinians and accept it as a 'good thing' in the name of equality.

3. How white inferiority is used to make whites serve Jews and non-whites. Whites are made to feel that the Other, especially Jews and blacks, are so awesome that whites should worship and serve them. If we go by images than ideas(or idolatry than ideology), the current Western Culture is totally racial supremacist in entertainment and emphasis. Sports, sex entertainment, and music are heavily about black dominance, black power, black prowess, and black whatever. Blacks are so highly prized that even black lies are favored over truth. Take BLM, based on a total lie but a quasi-religion among so many foolish whites. When it comes to sports, diversity has led to something like 'monoversity', or monopolization by one group in a diversified world. California is very diverse with a white minority population, lots of Asians and many more browns, but its sports teams are heavily black. Europe celebrates diversity and has many more Muslims and Asians than in the past, but its sports are turning more and more black, with France leading the way. So, diversity doesn't lead to more diversity at the top but to domination by one group. Today, the typical European Sprint Events have nearly all blacks(representing France, UK, Holland, etc.) 'Monoversity' also results in brainy fields. Technology is an open field in welcoming diverse talents from all over the world, but the top are dominated by Jews/whites, Hindus, and yellows. And finance sector around much of the world is dominated by Jews. It's not about more people having equal possession and control of wealth but about Jews gaining more financial access/control over other nations. Across Southeast Asia, diaspora Chinese dominate much of finance and economics. So, the promise of diversity hasn't led to diversity at the top but a kind of 'monoversity' where more diverse peoples come under the domination of a single or few groups. Globalism promotes diversity as equal opportunity for more diverse peoples, but even if it were truly meritocratic, innate genetic differences turns meritocracy into 'monoversity' of one group or few groups hogging most of the trophies or prizes. But it's actually worse because Jewish Power at the center of globalism rigs the game to favor Jews and their allies/puppets over much of the world(Russia, Iran, Syria, Venezuela, 'uppity' whites who believe whiteness is okay). Domination by meritocracy isn't enough for Jews. They must also rig the game by having the US sanction Russia and Iran(and any nation that does business with them). Also, Jews, who once used to take pride as champions of civil liberties, now use media monopoly, platform monopoly, financial service monopoly, and all kinds of lawyer tricks to shut down speech and discussion that goes against Jewish power and its favored Narratives. At this point, ACLU is just a wing of AIPAC. In a way, equality of opportunity allows for even greater manifestations of racial superiority. Allowing equal opportunity in sports led to black supremacy. Allowing equal opportunity in academia, media, and finance led to Jewish domination. Even as 'anti-racist' whites so often point to black success in sports and music as proof of 'progressive' triumph over white supremacy, they overlook the implications of black supremacy. After all, if blacks totally beat whites in sports, it may disprove white or 'Aryan' supremacy but it also suggests black supremacy, at least in sports. And if blacks are more 'athletic' and rhythmic in their music that excites people, then blacks must have certain advantages in sound & sensuality. What is 'liberal' rock culture but an idolization and imitation of blacks? It's about white sensibility under the spell of black sensuality. Dave Marsh the famous critic always posed as a 'liberal' or even 'leftist' who denounces white 'racism', but his entire worldview can be boiled down to whites should revere blacks because blacks are so much more awesome than whites. There's a book called GOOD BOOTY(by Ann Powers) that seems to be about how whites gained so much from the bouncing black butt. And what is all this Philosemitism about? It's a case of Heil Hillel. If the West is about equality and 'anti-racism', why is its current sacred law, "Thou shalt serve Jews and Zion uber alles, especially Palestinians and Arabs?" It's based on the notion that Jews are so awesome as businessmen, thinkers, entertainers, and etc. that white people should get on their knees and worship and serve the REAL SUPERIOR RACE. In other words, inferior whites should serve superior Jews. Now, how is it possible that white superiority, white equality, and white inferiority, though contradictory with one another, all serve the same purpose? Because 'facts' or assumptions are secondary to the spin they are given. Under current dogma and narrative control, all three modes have been spun to make whites serve the Other, especially Jews and blacks. Heads I win, tails you lose. It's like the story of the Talmudic Rabbi, the goy, and the chimney. Regardless of the scenario or situation, the Jewish guy comes out on top. Different 'facts', but same spin: "Jew is right, goy is wrong" https://aleph.org/resources/the-rabbi-is-in-two-men-come-down-the-same-chimney In Ryunosuke Akutagawa's short story "In the Forest"(basis for Akira Kurosawa's RASHOMON), three people tell three different accounts of the same murder, but in a way, they're telling the same tale as each is driven by ego and vanity. In a similar vein, current whiteness, whether spun as 'superior', 'equal', or 'inferior', is spun to serve Jews and the Other. Whether it's a white knight, white man, or white slave, he exists to protect, welcome, or serve Jews(and their favored allies). Lawyers and pundits know this trick. Whatever the fact, no matter how irrefutable, they spin it to suit their agendas. Whether the truth is white superiority, white equality, or white inferiority, the power of spin is with Jews who spin whiteness around and around to serve Jewish Power. ZIOBOLSHEVIK TAKEOVER; SURVIVAL OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION

How JUSTICE really functions in the IDOLATRY POLITICS of the Jewish-Supremacist West — The Immorality of Moral Immortality — US is a Theocracy of 'Idolocracy', a mindless worship of Jews, Blacks, and Homos

Justice, especially political justice, is a matter of who/whom: Who has the power and which groups have 'sacral' worth? This is also true of individuals — notice how certain Jews tend to get pardoned more than people of other groups, and consider how the Law pretty much allows black thugs and shoplifters/looters to walk free — but especially true at the political level. In Central America during the Cold War, the white-led right-wing regimes could employ 'death squads' and mow down countless indigenous brown folks suspected of being sympathetic to Marxist guerrillas. That was 'justice' in those parts, with the acquiescence of US power. In communist nations, the secret police could arbitrarily arrest anyone and charge him of treason, espionage, or 'bourgeois' thought crimes. The accused could be sent to prison camps or shot dead in basements. That was 'justice' under communism. So, justice is usually the tool of the power. It is what the Power wants and says it is.

Under liberal systems, there developed the idea that justice should be impartial, fair-minded, based on strict adherence to laws(applicable to all), and protective of the 'universal rights' of all citizens, rich or poor, regardless of color or creed. Though liberal systems were far from perfect in the practice of administering justice, it could be said that, more or less, the West was moving toward greater impartiality and fairness up to the 1960s. This mode of justice was based on individual rights. But the Civil Rights Movement wasn't just about the right of blacks as individuals but as a group, and that agenda, along with other trends, provided the groundwork for a different kind of justice. If traditional rightist justice favored the upper classes and certain races over others and if the radical leftist justice favored the notion of 'social justice' that trampled on individual rights in favor of the supposed good of the collective, the classic liberal notion of justice emphasized the rights of individuals. But the New Liberal theory tended to be both more collective-utilitarian(though not to the extent of communism) and special-interest-oriented in the name of reversing past injustice. Collective-utilitarian notion of justice was at the heart of the New Deal. And special-interest notion of justice animated the Great Society program of LBJ and the rise of Holocaust Cult. By emphasizing the problems of black history, the idea was that blacks as a group deserved special recognition. And because Jews suffered the Holocaust, supposedly the greatest evil act in all of history, they were deserving of special sympathy and consideration. (Initially, pro-black & pro-Jewish attitudes and policies were based on sympathy, but the rising cult of their Noble Suffering and their spectacular success in 'idolic' fields of brains & brawn led to idolatrous worship of them as the Truly Superior Races.)

This came to function as a template for other groups as well. Noticing how blacks and Jews gained so much by pushing for justice on grounds of special interest than individual rights, many groups in the US began to develop their own form of Identity Politics. Identity Politics was different from national chauvinism of old that was premised on the conviction of one's own people being somehow superior and/or more powerful than others. In contrast, Identity Politics was based on the cult of victim-hood. Your people could be said to be more special if they suffered more than others. As Identity Politics emerged when the white West pretty much dominated all the world — even the Soviet Union was mostly white, something Red China exploited in its appeal to the non-white world during the Sino-Soviet Rift — , the general impression was of White Dominance and Non-White Victim-hood. Still, as the scales of victim-hood were still determined by the Power, it all came down to who/whom/when/where as emphasized by the Narrative, the product of media & academia.
Victim-hood mattered more if the villains were white and if the victims were non-white or Jewish. And it mattered MORE if the oppression happened IN the West, especially the US or Northern Europe. And it was mostly about the 19th and 20th century. As blacks were oppressed in America by whites, they had a good claim. As Jews suffered in Europe in World War II, they too had an easy claim. But much less sympathy goes to non-white victims of whites in non-white lands. More blacks and Hindus were mowed down by whites in Africa and India, but there is far more outrage about far fewer number of blacks who were killed by whites in the US. As for all the violence among non-whites, they don't matter. Who cares about what's been happening in Kashmir? Even as anti-whites claim to call for 'de-colonization of the mind', they are hopelessly 'West-centric' in emphasizing what happened/happens in the West uber alles. (Furthermore, these 'de-colonizers' are desperate to depart from their own native lands to go live in the West. It's as if they still consider the West to be the only Metropole that matters. And of course, even most anti-Western rhetoric has been cooked up by self-hating Westerners whose minds were colonized by Jewish Power and fueled by post-Christian need for absolution by some other means. So, anti-white politics is essentially about non-whites adopting the politics of white self-loathing, and as such, non-whites are still under white mind-control, albeit that of self-loathing whites. And the fact that many of these non-whites prize Jews, blacks, and/or homos over their own kind suggests that they're still totally 'colonized' by Western Powers that now happens to controlled by Jews.) A truly de-colonized mind would stop seeing the West as the source of all good and evil — the paradise to emigrate to and the hell to denounce — , but such is the state of your average non-white & anti-white mind.

Because of the Rules of Identity Politics, various non-whites groups must demonstrate their worthiness of sympathy by emphasizing their victim-hood at the hands of whites in the West, especially in the 20th century(and maybe 19th century). But as many of these groups are relatively recent immigrants, their experience of oppression under whites happened mostly in non-Western lands, and that means their suffering counts for less than that of Jews and blacks. (Even as globalism attacks the notion of national territorial rights, the tragic worth of any history is largely determined by WHERE it happened, i.e. if the police kills a black man on US soil, that is an outrage, but if the US military kills scores of innocent civilians abroad, it doesn't matter. The logic of Tragic Dirt.) Shoah happened in Europe, and black slavery happened in the US, and as such, they matter more. (Oddly enough though, their cults of suffering are transferable to all others of their kind. So, even though American and Anglo Jews were safe during WWII, indeed infinitely more so than white goyim in Europe who died in greater numbers than the Jews did, they too can invoke 'muh holocaust' as fellow Jews. Likewise, recently arrived black African immigrants in US and Europe can also invoke BLM nonsense and 'muh slavery' even though their ancestors captured and sold black slaves to Arabs & whites and even though black-on-black oppression & violence in black nations are far beyond anything whites have done to blacks in recent years. Also, the fact that American Indian experience doesn't count for much in the Narrative shows that the rules of Identity Politics are not set in stone. If a certain group tends not to be vocal and exhibits no special talent in the 'idolic' fields, it is mostly ignored regardless of its tragic history at the hands of whites. Today, American Indians, the people with the biggest claim to victim-hood in American History, get less attention than Asian-Indians who are always talking and balking.) Identity Politics is based on victim-hood points, but over time, it has fused with the All-American culture of winner-takes-all. Jews and blacks began their Identity Politics by wailing abut their victim-hood but, in good ole American fashion, gained special consideration because of their success with money, humor, arts & culture, athletics, & entertainment. So, over time, Identity Politics became more like Idolatry Politics. In other words, 'muh victim-hood' wasn't good enough. What really mattered was 'muh victor-hood to accentuate muh victim-hood'. In other words, if a group could demonstrate superiority in some key field, its victim-hood was to be considered MORE TRAGIC on account of injustice having been done to something better. It's like it's deemed worse to kill a gorilla than a baboon or to kill a giraffe than a gazelle.

So, what we now call Identity Politics is essentially Idolatry Politics. We don't have mass parades in favor of Palestinians where everyone shows up and waves the BDS flag. But we do have 'Pride' Parades where peoples of all colors sing homosannas to fruits and trannies draped in 'rainbow' colors. Of course, Jews want it this way because an Identity Politics where all groups have equal worth — or where all non-white groups have equal worth — would be threatening to their Zionist-globalist supremacist agenda. Indeed, what would happen to Jewish Power if Americans were to give equal hearing to Palestinians, Syrians, and Iranians as to Israelis and their Jewish-American enablers? Also, so many groups around the world have had unpleasant experience with Jews, be they blacks in South Africa or the peoples of Latin America. And European History wasn't only of Antisemitism but Jewish chicaneries, some of which came to do great harm. This is why Jews are wary of all-out Identity Politics. It's like Ben Shapiro denounces it because it means groups such as Palestinian-Americans can have their day in the sun as a victim group as well.

As far as Jews are concerned, the only kind of Identity Politics that is acceptable is an Idolatrous one where Jews get to decide the who/whom. So, Jewish Identity and Jewish Suffering are special and must serve as the basis of goyim making amends to Jews by doing whatever Jews demand. And Jews have especially chosen homos and blacks as fellow Idolatrous Groups, not only because both are highly profitable to Jewish industries in fashion & entertainment but because blacks can be used to bait 'white guilt' and homo-celebration can be used to replace Christianity with Queertianity. (Deep in their hearts, Jews still regard Jesus and Paul as renegade Jews, and there is no 'hate symbol' more 'triggering' to Jews than the Christian Crucifix. Of course, as the West was overwhelmingly Christian for over a millennia, Jews couldn't say that outright, but their big dream was always to destroy Christianity and banish the Crucifix. They tried this by destroying churches in the USSR, but it didn't work, and so they are now working to spiritually corrupt Christianity with Anno Sodomini and worship of Magic Negro or Fentanyl Floyd.)

There can be no true justice or impartial justice with idolatry, which is a cheap form of theology. Idolatry may not be deep, but like religion, it is about blind or mindless worship/faith. As such, US justice system is essentially theocratic or 'idolocratic'. Just like religious folks cannot question, blame, or condemn God or gods(no matter what), the idolocratic US cannot condemn sacred Jews and holy blacks(and homos) no matter what they do. The ONLY time Jews, blacks, and homos come under fire is when they insult or attack one another. So, Donald Sterling the Jewish oligarch had to be denounced because he said unkind things about blacks. So, Nick Cannon has to be bitch-slapped back into 'sense' for having said nasty stuff about Jews — never mind what he said about whites. It's perfectly okay for Jews to insult, defame, and smear whites. It's okay for blacks to denounce whites as the devil. No matter how much abuse is heaped on them, whites must keep their mouths shut, do nothing as their symbols & monuments are vandalized by mobs or removed by the establishment, take the knee, and cuck out. Or, whites can go into brainwashed Janissary mode like Antifa goons or the likes of John Bolton & Dan Crenshaw and join with Jews against the Culture War on whites and nationalism. How can true justice operate in such a world?

The fate of Arabs and Muslims in the current order is a sure sign that Idolatry Politics has rendered Justice into a tool of special groups, namely Jews, blacks, and homos. BLM means black lives are precious, white lives are not. And, it's always who/whom. When blacks kill blacks, never mind. As blacks are special, they may kill other blacks, just like gods may fight gods. But how dare these inferior low-life white mortals dare to kill a black god like Fentanyl Floyd or Gentle Giant Michael Brown? Blacks have been robbing, raping, assaulting, and murdering whites in alarming numbers since the 1960s, but who cares? The god-race may attack the mortal-race. Gods are deemed immortal, and blackness has been immortalized in the sense that the black tragedy of American Slavery has been essentialized to apply to all black folks and all of black history. (Also, electronic recording means that all future generations of whites get to worship Otis Redding and Bob Marley as immortal gods of pop culture.) After all, the so-called 1619 project applies even to black African immigrants, the descendants of blacks who captured and sold slaves. So, all of blackness from time immemorial to all the future is to be defined by tragic suffering at the hands of whites. So, never mind Bantu genocides against other Africans. Never mind Zulu atrocities. Never mind the likes of Idi Amin and all those nasty black thugs in the US and elsewhere. All of blackness through the eons is now about 'muh slavery' and ennoblement by suffering under white 'racism'. 100,000 yrs of blackness is to center around 200 yrs of slavery in America. And Jews have done the same with 'muh Holocaust'. All of Jewish Identity and History are to be associated with that tragedy. It's as if all of Jewish-Gentile history led up to that point and all of Jewish-Gentile future must revolve around that memory that condemns whites while consecrating Jews. So, it doesn't matter if Jewish history is full of bad Jewish behavior and if Jews do terrible things now or in the future. Jewish Identity has achieved Moral Immortality via the Holocaust Cult. Of course, in practice, Moral Immortality can only be a monstrous immorality as it's downright demented for any human group to act like they're eternally hallowed and sacred, thus above the rules that apply to other groups.

What does Moral Immortality for blacks and Jews mean in practice? Consider the fate of Muslims and Arabs. There was the photograph of the Muslim man whose business was destroyed in the aftermath of the Ferguson riots. He'd done no wrong. He was strong-armed and robbed by Michael Brown, and later big bully Brown attacked a police officer and got killed in the altercation. But the ONLY narrative that mattered was 'black lives matter' or Negrolatry. The livelihoods or the lives of Muslim businessmen didn't matter at all. The Jewish Media pushed Idolatry Politics of blacks uber Muslims. And one wonders how many Muslim businesses were destroyed this time around following the death of Fentanyl Floyd? To the New American Mind, only Jews, blacks, and homos have starring roles as the good guys while whites have the starring roles as villains. All other groups have supporting roles(at best) or exist only as blurry extras in the background. In movies, we don't care how many people get killed as long as the main characters survive. In INDEPENDENCE DAY, who cares if the entire city blows up as long as the key characters are alive and well and get all the glory?
I'm assuming many more Muslims had their lives ruined as the result of riots following the death of Fentanyl Floyd, but no one cares. So, blacks have a righteous right to riot, burn, loot, and attack people. Their lives(and lusts) matter, but others don't matter. This proves the utter hollowness of all this 'liberal' yammering about Diversity and Equality. Not only are immigrant groups being slated to pay the bulk of 'reparations' to blacks but all these 'nice white liberals' show no sympathy for people such as Muslims who were attacked by black violence.

But it is even worse with Jewish Power and its use of Mass Murder Inc, aka the US military. When Neocons smeared the 'Arabists', what were they really attacking? An American policy of blindly favoring Arabs over Jews? No, so-called 'Arabists' were calling for a more fair and balanced approach to the Middle East by considering Arab/Muslim interests as well as those of Zionists. If anything, your average 'Arabist' was nevertheless more pro-Zionist than pro-Arab. Still, he wasn't 100% pro-Zionist and willing to lend an ear to the other side, especially in service to American Interests. But, that wasn't good enough for Jews, for whom it had to be 100% pro-Jewish and the hell with Arab/Muslim interests. In other words, US foreign policy must be totally JEWIST, but of course, all the cuck-shills of Zion aren't called that. Idolatry Politics means Jews are special, wonderful, and oh-so-admirable in every way. Jews being so great, how can anyone oppose any Jewish demand?
So, whatever the problem or consequence, the US must always favor Jews EVEN IF these policies lead to wanton destruction of countless Arab/Muslim lives. Jewish Lives Matter, Arab Lives Don't. Jews can wipe out Palestine off the map, but never mind, and Long Live Israel. Instead, focus on paranoid fantasies of how Iran is going to 'wipe Israel off the map'. Israel ignores international standards and has 300 nukes with stolen technology and material from the US while Iran has no nukes and has caved to every international demand. But never mind. Shower Israel with billions in aid while starving Iran and subverting its economy, making millions suffer. And if Jews cheer on Saudi Arabia's genocidal war on Yemen on grounds that it's good for Jews and bad for Iran, that's great too. And even though Mossad is carrying out terrorist attacks in Iran(and aiding the most demented terrorists in Syria), ignore all that and just accuse Iran of being the #1 terrorist nation, as worthless Donald Trump does all the time as the pathetic dog of Zion.
So-called 'liberals' are so into idolatry(of Jews, blacks, and homos) that they are incapable of fair-mindedness. And for all their bleating about injustice, they are such craven cowards who dare not offend Jews lest they lose their precious jobs in elite institutions and industries. As for 'conservatives', their hierarchical mindset means they will kneel before whomever has the most power and privilege. Whether it's Sean Hannity praising Amazon or Rich Lowry cucking before his Jewish donors, 'conservatives' are following in the grand tradition of sucking up to the royal court. As for some others on the right, cheering for White Jews over Brown Arabs is a subliminal way of White Pride. It's ironic of course. Jews prohibit white identity and white agency, but Jews wink-wink urge white rightists to cheer for white Jews and Israel(as outpost of Western Civilization) against those Sand Ni**ers. If you can't have Apartheid and Jim Crow anymore, you can at least cheer for Jim Crowitz and IDF death squads mowing down those brown women and children. The likes of David French will virtue-signal by denouncing Old America but cheer on Israelis defending the border and shooting women and children in Gaza. A truly surreal case of whites, having had their own 'racism' canceled by Jews, must outsource their 'racist' fantasies to 'white' Jews who, being Moral Immortals, have the license to mow down brown people in the old ways of colonialist-imperialist wars.

Moral Immortality means Jews and blacks get to loot the world. Jews, being smart, used financial trickery to rape the Russian economy. Jewish banksters in Wall Street got massive bailouts and grew even richer during the Great Recession at the expense of Main Street. Ever more billions are poured into the coffers of Israel while coffins multiply in the Muslim World. The likes of Paul Singer and George Soros can loot entire nations.
Blacks, being stupid and childish, loot in the savage-barbarian way of smashing windows and running off with the goods. And beating up or shooting anyone in their way. Outwardly, blacks seem to do far more damage, but the amount they steal is a pittance compared to cargoes of Jewish Booty. At most, blacks will destroy a part of town. Jewish oligarchs and sharks loot entire economies. Not for nothing was George Soros called 'the man who broke the Bank of England'. But just like most black looters get to walk away scot-free with their loot, Jewish globalist sharks are allowed to keep their ill-gotten loot and look to steal more and more.

But, Jewish Power isn't only about white collar crime. By controlling cuck-politicians of the US, Jewish Power gets to employ Mass Murder Inc, aka US military, to wage Wars for Israel, thus destroying entire nations with invasions, bombings, drone attacks, and blockades. The death tolls abroad from such ventures are far beyond the murder and mayhem committed by blacks. But what do Jews and blacks care? Even when they are caught doing bad stuff, they usually get a slap on the wrist or get pardoned. Most black looters will walk free, and so many bad Jews are never investigated, and even those who get convicted serve in minimum-security prisons or get pardoned. Such is justice in Idolocratic America. Justice follows the theocratic mode of worshipful attitudes toward certain groups who can almost never do wrong even when they do wrong, whereas certain other groups, especially whites, Palestinians, Russians, and Iranians, are always deemed wrong even when they do right. But what would be right-and-wrong in a world of 'gay marriage' and 'trannies are women' logic that has inverted all sense of reality?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/UZaI1ZqikkNH/