I guess not. All those brainy people on the Left, all those millionaires in Silicon Valley — not even they can figure out how to explain why we’re wrong. Why can’t they? Because we’re right. And so, we have to be smothered.
Proper terminology is of the essence. Indeed, many dissidents on our side have long argued that the Enemy willfully, stupidly, or just dishonestly uses false labels to smear the opposition. So, whites opting out of the globalist program are smeared as 'white supremacists'. Nowadays, if you mock Seth Rogan and Sarah Silverman's X-mas offal, you're a 'white supremacist'. Parents who criticize CRT are 'white supremacists'. Those who demand more investigation into the 2020 election are 'white supremacists'. Whites who are okay being white are 'white supremacists'. Dissidents on our side are rightfully angry that they are smeared with false terminology and slanderous labels. It's like brand-hoaxing, but then, we live in a world where trannies are labeled as 'women' as if gender-confused maladies are a badge of pride.
If the great lie of the Jewish globalist cabal is to smear anything pro-white as 'white supremacist', the great lie of White Advocates & Dissident Rightists(and conservatives in general) is to use the 'left' label on their persecutors. The Jewish-led Cabal is no more 'leftist' than pro-white groups are 'white supremacist'. (There is a small faction of genuine white supremacists but half of them happen to be recalcitrant neo-nazi and the other half are Feds.) Both sides dare not name it as it really is. Jewish Power(that is behind all this 'woke' garbage) and the Right spectrum are both incapable of seeing it like it is or saying it like it is.
It's far worse for the Right because, whereas the Jewish Lie is to pinpoint and vastly exaggerate the White Politics of the Right, the White Lie(that employs the 'leftist' label as all-inclusive epithet) is to give cover to the identity of their main enemy. Imagine Bob and Billy are at loggerheads. Bob goes out of his way to name BILLY as the baddie and says "BAD BILLY is an a**hole", "BAD BILLY is a shi*head", "BAD BILLY is a psycho", and etc. Bob calls Billy "Bad Billy" and associates Billy with all that is bad. But, what does Billy do? Instead of calling out on Bob, let alone Bad Bob, he blames all of Bob's nastiness on "Mr. Negativity". So, Bob is never mentioned by name. All his nasty antics isn't associated with his personage. Rather, they're blamed on some vague generality called "Mr. Negativity". Anyone listening to this debate would think, "Maybe Billy really is Bad Billy and responsible for all those awful things. And, if Billy is right, Negativity must be to blame for the other problems." In this war of words, Billy is named but Bob isn't. No matter how often Bob associates Billy with Bad Stuff, Billy never names Bob and blames Bob's bad stuff on some vague 'negativity'. Guess who's going to win?
Even though both the 'white supremacist' and 'leftist' labels are misleading or downright falsehoods, the key difference is, whereas pro-white people feel the sting of being called 'white supremacist', Jews and globalist elite cucks love being called the 'left'. It is precisely what they want. Imagine having all the power, privilege, connections, and advantages but being associated with radical egalitarianism. ROTFL. Imagine being George Soros and being called a 'leftist'. Imagine being Michael Bloomberg or the Google Billionaires or some Zionist Jewish tycoon and being called a 'leftist' because one supports the smoke-and-mirrors false 'leftism' of gender-pronoun nuttery that is really the product of capitalist decadence and globo-homo neo-aristocratism.
While Jewish Power isn't only naming but DEFAMING whiteness by associating anything pro-white or race-neutral as 'white supremacist', those on the Right Spectrum dare not name the real power behind the anti-white lunacy(either due to craven fear of Jewish Power or the internalization of the notion that ANY anti-Jewish criticism is tantamount to naziesque 'antisemitism'). According to Jewish-controlled 'wokeness', even 'progressive' whites are 'white supremacist'. Now, this much reviled 'whiteness' really applies to Northern European(and pale-faced)whiteness, not to Latin whiteness. You'd think given the Latin/Hispanic lead in the conquest of the New World, the slave trade, and various 'genocides', Latin-American whites would especially get it in the neck from 'wokeness', but they're relatively spared because they are useful allies against 'gringos', the real prize white horse on which Jewish Power sits astride. After all, if Jews had moved only to Latin America, would they be masters of the world? No, Jewish supremacism needed to harness the ability and competence of Anglo-Germanic whiteness.
'Wokery' says all (pale)whites are 'white supremacist', but the dividing line is between those who profess their sins vs those who refuse to repent. In other words, it shares the same moral-spiritual dynamics of Christianity that says ALL humans are sinners and must rely on Jesus for salvation. Thus, Christianity isn't about the sinless vs the sinful but about the repentant sinful vs the unrepentant sinful. The repentant sinful feel more virtuous because they confess their sins and admit to the wickedness within their hearts, and this fills them with righteous fury toward those who reject the notion of sin and refuse to self-flagellate themselves. 'Wokristianity' says all whites are stained with the sin of 'white supremacism' because of history(though some even claim it's ingrained in lame whitebread genetics, thereby the only way out is through ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs that makes white women give birth to sacred black babies, a kind of baptism of the white body with black semen, which seems to be the point of madonna's "Like a Prayer" video). 'Wokery' insists that even the most proggy do-goody whites are 'white supremacist' either subconsciously or by habit, legacy, or social privileges. Thus, it's not a matter of 'white supremacism' vs 'white egalitarianism' but between repentant 'white supremacists' who tirelessly purge their wicked hearts of this white 'sin' and 'white supremacists' who either revel in their supremacy or deny that they are supremacist even though they're beneficiaries of 'systemic racism'. This is why 'woke' whites are especially nutty. It's not just a case of tribalism of us-vs-them but the righteous pride of spiritual atonement. What made Christian piety so insufferable is also what makes 'wokeness' so hard to stomach. It's about people claiming, "I'm so much better than you because I atone and admit how totally shitty I am." Self-abasement as stepping stone to self-aggrandizement.
Of course, this nuttery is appealing to white progs because it's just pseudo-sophisticated enough to catch their fancy — ooh, 'subconsciously racist', that's some psychologically intellectual stuff — and comes with a kernel of truth, i.e. society doesn't suddenly change into what it professes to be but lingers(even for a long spell) with traces of the past, e.g. Modern India ideologically did away with the caste system, but the legacy lingers; China did away with Confucianism, but its cultural shadow still looms large; Japan hasn't been a samurai society for over a century and half, but certain samuraish ways still remain. But, the same could be said of Jews and blacks. Modern Jews claim to be mostly liberal and cosmopolitan, but their behavior continued to be guided by ancient tribalism. Blacks claim to be part of the modern world but are still driven by jungle-jive genetics.
The comprehensive use of 'white supremacist' to describe American History(and the West in general) is misleading. US was white-dominant than white-supremacist. It was founded by whites, and naturally whites created a new order in their image and on their heritage. (In a way, it was more Anglo-dominant as non-Anglo white immigrants were pressured to assimilate to Anglo-American norms. It's certainly the reason we all speak English.) But, if America had been founded and settled from the Pacific by the Japanese, it would have been Japanese/Asian dominant. Every civilization has a dominant force, power, presence, rule. Arab World was Arab-dominant, and Muslim World was Muslim-dominant. Slavic World was Slavic Dominant, just like Turkey was Turkic-dominant. A kind of dominance remains in force even under foreign occupation; such sub-dominance later becomes the basis for national liberation. Even under Roman rule, Jewish communities within Judea were Jewish-dominant. Even under British rule, India was demographically and culturally Hindu-dominant. Even under Russian-Germanic imperial rule, Polish society was Polish-dominant, and this Polish sub-dominance later re-emerged as rallying cry for national autonomy.
It's like, even under Jewish Rule over America, many white Christian communities remain white/Christian dominant. This fact appears to enrage Jews who want to substitute whiteness with total cuckery and Christianity with globo-homo-BLM 'wokeness'. The difference between 'supremacist' and 'dominant' is the former tends to have no sense of limits and seeks hegemony over others. When Adolf Hitler was focused on German revival, he was for German Dominance. When he invaded Poland and later Russia, it was a case of German Supremacism. Most white Americans today have no use for world conquest or control — the US, a huge country with the best land in the world, is enough for them. European patriots want to keep their own nations, worlds of their own. They don't want to conquer Africa, Asia, or the Middle East. Notwithstanding neo-imperialist morons like Richard Spencer(who thinks he's 007 in Darth Vader helmet), most white American patriots had enough of overseas wars and want the military to guard US borders.
If any group is in supremacist mode in the US, it's the Jews, homos, military-industrial complex, and the cuck-dogs of Zion(like John Bolton and so many others). It's amusing indeed that the most supremacist and aggressive forces in America accuse white patriots of 'white supremacism'. In other words, those who prefer peace and national security are 'white supremacist' while those who call for hegemony and more tensions with the rest of the world are for 'liberal democracy' and 'equity'. What a joke to be 'woke'. Essentially, 'wokeness' is a Jewish psycho-moral weapon to guilt-bait whites into paralysis and submission, which is then used to manipulate whites into serving Jewish Power. The mental programming goes like this, "I'm a white person stained with the sin of 'racism' and 'supremacism'. Thus, I deserve no agency and autonomy and must look to the sacred races for guidance. I must wash black feet and obey Jews, the Holy Holocaust people, and maybe just then, I'll earn an ounce of redemption points." Even though conzos reject 'wokeness', they have their own variation which operates much the same way. After all, what is the GOP platform based on but "We are the good guys because we cuck to Israel more"? But, why would the Party of White Christian Conservatives need to cuck to Jews and Israel? It can only be explained in terms of "We white Christians are morally deficient, therefore we need the approval of Holy Holocaust Jews to attain real moral worth." So, any Zio-Cuck conzo should look in the mirror before he or she lambastes the inner dynamics of 'wokeness'.
The knee-jerk tendency of designating the Enemy as the 'left' has made it harder to drive a wedge between the globalist/cabalist elites and the masses of whites into the politics of justice. Granted, there are some genuine leftist types who call foul on globalism, corporatism, deep-statism, and the like. But as long as they're lumped in with the billionaire oligarchs, Zionist-globalists, and the power elites, there will be far less inclination on their part to see the light and resist the real power. Indeed, even though Jewish Supremacists sometimes blame the 'right', they are far less likely to go on and on about 'the right, the right, the right' because they're focused on driving a wedge between elements within the Right Spectrum. By focusing on 'white supremacism', they seek to cause a rift between 'decent conservatives' and 'those racists'. So, even as the Democratic Party is broadly 'anti-right', it offers an olive branch to 'decent' elements of conservatism, and this is what National Review runs on: "We are the good decent principled conservatives who cuck half the time, unlike those 'racists'." In contrast, by constantly attacking the LEFT, the Right Spectrum only ends up strengthening the bonds between Jewish oligarchs/Big Capital and the white masses into Resistance Politics.
What we really need to do is drive a wedge between the elites and the leftist masses and then build a bridge between white populists and white socialists. Socialism isn't to be confused with communism, which is dead and has no chance. Socialism is necessary because the current system is a rigged game. The government is no longer interested in going after monopolies. 'Free trade' undermined unions. The Covid regimen showed how the Power can push a few buttons and destroy countless middle class businesses while fattening the wallets of the already-super-rich. Any notion of free and fair competition under such a system is a pipe dream. Now, the socialism I have in mind isn't anything like communism and accepts the role of capitalism. But it also understands that capitalism leads to monopolies, concentrations of power, and corporate collusion between big capital and big state(something totally overlooked by libertarians who seem to idealize capitalists as principled individualists when many of them are unscrupulous tribalists or gangstoids). The socialism I have in mind uses political tools to combat the worst abuses of capitalism and its cancerous coordination with elite power centers.
Also, this socialism isn't to be confused with statism(with is really status-ism via collusion of state and capital). True socialism is about use of power to favor the people, the powerless, and the under-represented. In contrast, statism is about careerism via government jobs or state funded programs. While socialism always needs to use the power of the state, statism is far less concerned with the interests of the people than for the individuals who procure roles for themselves in government or by NGO funding. Though statists often claim to be working for 'social justice' or the People, they are only in it for themselves. They are looking for sinecures and the like. The proof is in the pudding. Notice how so many urban educated 'woke' types and blacks claim to be 'socialist' but all they care about is obtaining some statist job or gaining funding so they can sustain status and lifestyle on par with the professional class. When have these 'woke' statist types ever spoken up for the workers, the underclass, and the like? No, it's mostly about globo-homo or tranny nuttery. Or pie-in-the-sky schemes related to global warming, which means all they have to do is produce more paperwork and 'studies' without doing anything concrete or real. Or, it's about More Immigrants so that Big Business can have cheaper hirelings. Or, it's about the mindless adulation of blackness as a kind of racial fetish when anyone really interested in black well-being would call for less immigration(thus raising wages for blacks) and more police protection(that not only shields whites from blacks but suppresses black-on-black violence).
The future must be neo-fascist or social-nationalist. It has to be about the union of rightism and leftism as both have much value to offer. So, stop dumping on the 'left' and focus on the supremacist manipulators of globalism, capitalism, and statism. At the top, it's Jewish Power. Speak up for Palestinians because what Zionists did to Palestinians was dress rehearsal for what is being done to the West. Do everything to make the people, 'right' or 'left', more aware of who really rules the West. Point out that the core tenets of Globalism are really fueled by ultra-right Zionist Supremacism, not by Leftism. For proof, look how Jewish Power has totally suppressed BDS and pro-Palestinian voices within the supposedly 'leftist' Democratic Party. Point out to the progs of their misguidedness in opposing 'white supremacism'(when whites only want liberation from Jewish supremacism) while, in effect, doing the bidding of Jewish Supremacists who are the main drivers of wars and imperialism around the world. Indeed, what better way to save the world than via White Liberation from Jewish Supremacism. Once whites say NO to Jewish Power, Zio-Globalism will no longer have a white war horse to ride on to trample around the globe.
Among many on the Right Spectrum, there's the image of the Democratic Party being driven to the Far Left. Nothing can be further from the truth. The problem is the Democratic Party is totally beholden to the Imperial Center. Biden's regime is filled with Jewish Supremacists and totally in cahoots with Big Capital. It sees eye-to-eye with Zion. It is favored by the Military Industrial Complex that revs the engine for wars with Russia, China, and/or Iran. Sure, there's massive border crisis and tranny-gender nuttery, but both are favored by Jewish Supremacist-capitalists. The True Left didn't come up with globo-homo, even though plenty of leftists foolishly signed on in deference to Jewish Power(but then so did plenty of conzos). If the Democratic Party were truly controlled by the Far Left, things would actually be far better. The War Industry would be called out. Wall Street would be denounced. Big Pharma would be condemned. Homos would be criticized for working in the deep state to spread wars and terror. Blacks would be called on to favor universal justice over racial idolatry. There would be calls to treat Jews and Palestinians equally. But where do you see that in the Democratic Party? In truth, the agenda is purely Imperial Centrist, aka Jewish-capitalist-supremacist.
Two main ways by which our side has continued to stumble are:
1. Blaming the 'left' for problems since the End of the Cold War.
2. Using 'racist' as epithet.
Globo-Homo is 'leftist' only in label. In fact, it is the proxy of ultra-right Jewish Tribal Supremacism. The current 'left', totally dominated by Jews, is not True Leftism. It's really just a peekaboo game of ever-changing 'leftist' tropes to serve what are ultimately the ultra-right agenda of Jewish Supremacists.
Indeed, the current struggle is not about Right vs Left but Right vs Right, except that the Jewish Ultra-Right hides behind 'leftist' and 'progressive' labels to lend its agenda a 'universalist' sheen of 'liberal democracy', 'human rights', and 'equal justice'. But really, just ask the Palestinians and those who support BDS, aka justice for Palestinians. In truth, there is no real difference between the likes of Trevor Lynch and the Jewish Power. Both are motivated by ultra-rightism and tribal supremacism. Lynch has Nazi sympathies(even while being critical of aspects of Nazism), whereas Jews are hellbent on world domination and tribal supremacy. If 'white nationalists' are less despicable, it's because they are honest in their tribalism whereas Jewish supremacists put on 'progressive' masks. That said, the Jewish Right is far more forthright in Israel where Jews make up a solid majority. There, Jews feel secure in their power & numbers and openly yammer about how they're #1. They even have openly ultra-nationalist politicians in government. But as Jews are a minority in Goy Nations, they know it'd be foolish to candidly air their core ultra-rightist convictions. So, they masquerade as 'liberals' and even 'leftists'. But it's all a fraud because the very Jews who shriek about 'white supremacism' do everything to suppress BDS and to pressure every goy politician into supporting Zionist-centrist US foreign policy that turns a blind eye to the plight of Palestinians and other victims of Jews. And the very Jews who call just about any white conservative a 'nazi' in the US will readily work with quasi-nazi elements in Ukraine. It call comes down to the tribal question of "Is it good for Jews?" And these supposedly compassionate Jewish Liberals who stand for modernity will support the most retrograde extreme Islamic terrorists against secular modernizers like Assad of Syria. Jews use 'leftism' much like the US used Red China against the USSR. Nixon met with Mao not to approve of the Chairman's ideology but to use China as leverage against the Soviet Union(even though Soviet Communism was, at the time, moderate compared to the virulent Maoist kind).
By characterizing this ultra-right Jewish Supremacism as 'leftist', our side is actually doing our enemies a favor. The last thing Jewish Supremacists want is to be is outed and exposed as ultra-rightist tribalists, which is what they really are. Jews may support homos coming out of the closet but remain very much in the closet as Jewish Supremacists. The face they show is that of 'Jewish Liberals' and 'Jewish Progressives'. But, it has always been tribalism-uber-alles with Jews. Why were Jews worried about Joe McCarthy? Too many suspected of radicalism were Jews. The very Jews who bitched about the Red Scare and the blacklist had NO problems with the much bigger blacklisting of pro-German individuals in Hollywood and culture; and of course, Jews didn't lift a finger for Japanese-Americans who were dispossessed and 'interned'.
Jews love being called 'leftist'. It gives cover to their ultra-tribal-rightism. It fools so many into believing that the great struggle is between reactionary rightists vs progressive leftists. Furthermore, super-capitalists — the top 1% is now richer than the entire middle class — also love being tagged as the Left because the last thing they want is for us to notice how super-privileged they are(and getting even super-richer). In the current retarded discourse, we have the middle class(and working class) being reduced to penury but attacking their super-rich neo-aristocratic overlords as 'leftists', or even as 'socialists' and 'communists'. The super-rich are cracking up at this. It's like some sadist beating someone with a stick but being accused of being a 'pacifist'. Billionaires like Bill Gates, Sergei Brin, Michael Bloomberg, and George Soros are 'leftists', ROTFL.
The True Left is hardly alive. No one in any position of power believes in universal justice or equal rights anymore because idolatry has replaced ideology. In a truly leftist system, people would be equally outraged by victimization at the hands of black thuggery as of white violence. But the idolatry favors black tribal supremacism. Blacks can do no wrong. Long ago, the Civil Rights Movement did run on leftist values: equality for whites and blacks under the law. But that was then, this is now. Today, blacks are deemed right simply because they're black. After the most thoroughgoing investigation of the Michael Brown case, it became obvious the white cop acted in self-defense against loathsome Brown. But to many people, Brown is still a saint while the white guy will never work as a policeman again; and no one pleads his case. This isn't leftism but tribal supremacism in favor of blacks. It is ultra-rightist, just the flipside of white supremacism. Of course, because of past history of racial discrimination and the Civil Rights Movement narrative, blacks still manage to disguise their tribal supremacist agenda with rhetoric about 'equal justice', but blacks, like Jews, are for idolatrous supremacy. They believe themselves to be the new thug-version of aristocrats: above the law.
You have to give the Left credit. They never take a day off.
Such hasn't been the history of radical leftism. After the initial stages of violent campaigns and purges, the leftist system turned into rigidity and dogmatism. By the time Stalin consolidated power, leftism became a matter of the same old same old. Soviet Union was a mummy state under Brezhnev. It was like a broken record playing the same tune over and over. Socialism became static and resistant to change.
Restlessness is the product of capitalism, and what is called 'leftism' in the West reflects the fashion-obsession of consumerism. Just like popular culture pursues one fashion craze after another, Western consumer pop-politics is mostly about the latest fad, the hot thing. 'Pussy Hats' today, 'Migrant Kids in Cages' tomorrow, 'Saint George Floyd' the day after, etc. No wonder Big Capital is so in cahoots with this kind of bogus 'leftism'. I think Jean-Luc Godard called it 'Marx and Coca-Cola'. Antonio Gramsci and Calvin Klein. It's not about class warfare against the global-capitalist oligarchs but about new vanity hysterics, mainly of homos and blacks, both in the pockets of Jews who control most institutions and industries. Even the so-called 'communist' Antifa got most of their ideas from pop culture: punk music and grunge. And they emulate pop icons and rappers. And by their very nature, homos tend toward narcissism, nihilism, aristocratism, and preening snobbery. No wonder Big Capital loves homos. No wonder just about every 'leftist' agenda or movement is branded with globo-homo symbols at the behest of the Big Jew who provides the funds for these movements. Just like all foods must be kosherized, all of politics must be homosherized. And, it's hardly surprising the Deep State is welcoming of homos because they've proven to be the most ruthless, cunning, nihilistic, and cold-blooded bunch of killers for the System. Homos cater to power, and they've been among the most loyal servants of Jewish Hegemonism that recruits and favors homos all over the world to serve Jewish Supremacism against national autonomy.
Once they have finished destroying us in effigy, the next logical step is destroying us in person, i.e., open genocide against whites, rather than the stealth genocide they instituted in the 1960s with multiculturalism and race-replacement immigration.
Not going to happen. If whites were gone from the face of the earth, Jewish Power would vanish also. Jews use 'leftism' against whites to make whites serve Jews. Sure, Jewish Power wouldn't mind killing millions if it had to, but it would be to teach a lesson, not to wipe whites out. Jewish Bolsheviks were ruthless and worked with Stalin to kill millions, but it wasn't to wipe out the Slavs but to teach them who's boss. It's like what Jews have done in the Middle East(with white goy support). Jews have waged Wars for Zion that have led to the destruction of millions of Arab/Muslim lives in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and etc. Jews are capable of mass murder, but their plan is not to wipe out the white race but to subjugate it.
But Leftists don’t just tear down idols. They are also both shameless and tireless in molding new idols from human excrement. George Floyd is just the latest and most ludicrous in a long line of fake heroes, saints, and martyrs: Lenin, Stalin, Martin Luther King . . .
This is absurd. Why would anyone compare George Floyd to Lenin or Stalin, or even MLK? Lenin was a highly intelligent revolutionary who devoted his life to the cause. Stalin was a tireless worker and transformed Russia into an industrial and military powerhouse. One could argue Lenin was evil and Stalin more so, but they were not molded from excrement. They were extraordinary human beings who changed history. In contrast, George Floyd is a total joke because he did nothing in life. He was just some street scum turned into a saint by the Jewish-run media. He's even lower than Horst Wessel. Lenin and Stalin were genuine historical giants. They weren't nobodies molded into somebodies. Even MLK, for all his gross failings, had vision and skill as a movement leader and world shaker. It's like, however one may loathe Mussolini and Hitler, they were remarkable men of immense power and vision.
Jewish gay rights advocate Harvey Milk (1930–1978) is one such figure.
No, the Milk Cult has nothing to do with Lenin or Stalin. Or even MLK. As much as I loathe MLK and dislike blacks, they had a compelling case during the Civil Rights Era. In contrast, Harvey Milk was a second-rate scuzzo turned into a big deal by the Jewish-supremacist gangster state of mass advertisement, a total clown world. Whatever one thinks of Lenin or Stalin, one cannot overestimate their place in history. Milk, in contrast, would be nothing without the hype. His cult is a demonstration of the power of advertising and celebrity culture. The Milk Cult is really an expression of ultra-right Jewish Supremacism. Jews push globo-homo to recruit 'rainbow'-collaborators all over the world to work against their own nations/cultures. In addition, Jews favor homos-uber-alles because it's a case of minority-elite-supremacism, one that complements Jewish minority hegemony over goyim. Also, homos came to prominence under hyper-capitalism that encourages vanity, narcissism, privilege, greed, and neo-hierarchy. As homos are disproportionately energetic, ruthless, devious, and cunning in their ambition, even rich Republicans have become dependent on homo aids and agents.
Finally, this wholesale attack on the Left is self-defeating. The whole point of fascism is to combine the Right and the Left. Mussolini began on the Left and moved to the Right but never became a reactionary seeking to turn back the clock. Adolf Hitler was the head of Nationalism + Socialism. Instead of falling for the fatal dichotomy of Right vs Left, the new way forward must be neo-fascist in fusing the good of the left with the good of the right as neither side offers all the answers or holds all the secrets to History.
And let's remember that it's the Jews than the Left who are tireless. It could be Democratic Jews or Neocon Jews. It could be Jews who pretend to be 'liberal' like Jerry Nadler or Chuck Schumer. Or it could be the openly ultra-rightist Netanyahu, a very tireless Jew. Notice Jewish 'conservatives' are more tireless than white goy liberals, and Jewish 'liberals' are more tireless than white goy conservatives. It's an ethnic thing. It's like homos are generally more energized than straight people. And blacks are louder and more aggressive than non-blacks. Genetics. Alan Dershowitz has drifted from liberalism to conservatism but is the same tireless Jew. Many Neocons were Jews who went from Left to Right, but they never lost their energy and soon enough took over the GOP, purged all 'Arabists', and steered US foreign policy toward serving Wars for Israel and Jewish hegemonism.
Now, there are some genuine leftists in the West, but they don't have much power. They tend to support BDS but get nowhere. They are as hopeless as MAGA people. Tulsi Gabbard had the most leftist anti-imperialist foreign policy among the Democratic candidates, but she was soon booted out by the power(and regular 'progressives' mostly ignored her).
One thing for sure, most goy 'leftists' today are completely without agency. For them, what counts as 'justice' or 'sacred' must be handed to them from above by the Jews. Take the 'gender pronoun' thing. Goy 'leftists' couldn't have cooked up such nonsense on their own. They became obsessed with it because Jews concocted and hyped the nuttery via media and academia(and statist institutions). This points to a deeper problem among goyim. They lack the autonomous power of prophecy and vision. They want to feel passionate about something but lack the inner fuel to start their own fires. So, they rely on others to supply the heat. Consider the spread of Christianity in Europe. All those white folks failed to create their own lasting god(s) and came to rely on a Jewish source.
If whites are to be free of Jewish Supremacism, they must learn to ignite a prophetic fire within their own hearts. Today, as even Christianity has run its course and gone cold, so many Christians turn to the new gods of globo-homo and BLM. Look at the churches with BLM and globo-homo symbols. Why? Because having lost the messianic and missionary zeal of the Faith, white Christians are drawn to the warmth of the new fire(or flashing lights): Holy Homo and Noble Negro.
Comedy offers a glimpse into the Jewish Way. No entertainment format requires as much nonstop energy as comedy does. Sitcoms must produce laugh-a-minute. Stand-up comic must always keep the audience laughing(just like salesmen must 'always be closing' in GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS or do something else). In the long run, leftism was too earnest and humorless(and even relatively witless) for Jewish Energy that needs constant outlet. No wonder then that real Jewish Global Supremacy came not by the way of communism but capitalism. Whereas communism is highly charged in its early radical phase, once the system is in place it's all dogma and stability, like a religious theocracy. In contrast, capitalism is always about rolling the dice, the constant process of creative destruction. In the end, Jewish Energy is more Marx Brothers than Karl Marx. And as long as Jews control 'leftism', it can't be about equality because who in his right mind believes Jews want to be equal with goyim? Just ask the Palestinians.
In the long run, all struggles are about Right vs Right than Right vs Left. While leftist ideology can burn like wild fire and transform the world, eventually ideology gives way to identity. Ideology is about what's in the mind. It's like air and lacks grounding. In the end, ideas must serve something, which is why Russian Communism, Chinese Communism, Yugoslavian Communism, Vietnamese Communism, and Cuban Communism all turned nationalist. When tensions flared up between Russia and China, it was really about identity/territory despite the ideological rhetoric about the other side being 'bourgeois'. Likewise, while many Jews did indeed become genuine leftists in the late 19th century and first half of the 20th century, their ideals eventually burned out or attached to identity: Many early Zionists combined nationalism with socialism, even with communism. They were even willing to work with their ideological enemies, Jewish capitalists, because they shared commonality in identity. And when communist China punitively struck communist Vietnam in the late 70s, it was partly to avenge the persecution of Chinese capitalists in Vietnam. Identity over ideology. So, the larger arc of history is really about Right vs Right. And that is precisely the true nature of the conflict today. It's about Jewish ultra-right(in 'leftist' or 'liberal' clothing) vs the rightisms(or identity-centered politics) of goyim, such as Palestinians, Syrians, Russians, Hungarians, Poles, and now, even China, as Jews figure Yellow Peril is useful in distracting Americans from the truth of Jewish Supremacist Rule over America.
Traditional Left Ideology sets out a vision of how the world ‘ought to be.’ ...if the Left focuses on ‘what could be,’ the Right focuses on ‘what is.’ If the Left operates where people ‘could be,’ the Right operates where people ‘are’ or at least, where they believe themselves to be. The Right does not aim to change human social reality but rather to celebrate, and to even maximize it.
There's some truth to this but not quite. There's always been a Rousseau-ean aspect to the Left. As an Mexican elder says in THE WILD BUNCH, "We all dream of being a child again, even the worst of us..." But the Left also developed as a movement of reality check. The modern left originated with the intention of waking history out of its slumber. The masses were trapped in the dream of the Divine Right of Kings, God & Heaven, and virtue of meekness. But in fact, kings and noblemen were merely human like everyone else. They weren't special or innately superior despite all the pomp and posturing. And was there proof of God & Heaven? Should the clergy have power and influence when their institution is based on a myth? And why should the people be meek and humble when the vain elites live in opulence and feel contempt for the unwashed(contrary to Christ's teachings)? Much about the French Revolution was meant as a reality check on the state of things. It told the people that the regal monarch is just a man, like you or me. So, why should he be blindly revered and obeyed? And why should his heirs take power and hog privilege? By what right should they rule over the people? The Left also spilled the beans on religion and clergy. The rise of reason and science called for demonstrable proof, and there was no evidence to Biblical claims. Furthermore, even though the clergy preached the Christian message of meekness, many were corrupt status-seekers catering mostly to the rich and powerful. In ANY institution, it is usually the opportunistic, cunning, and shrewd than the honest, principled, and scrupulous who make it to the top.
So, the Left was trying to wake people up from the slumber of history dominated by kings, aristocracy, and the church. What did Napoleon mean when he said, "China is a sleeping giant. Let it sleep"? He meant it's better for China to remain 'rightist' and static than go 'leftist' and dynamic. It was conservative China that was asleep in its own Middle Kingdom conceits. So sure of itself and its civilizational values, it refused to wake up to the reality that the West had surpassed it in every measure of power and wealth. Before Western Imperialists ventured into China, there were obvious clues that China must fundamentally reorder society to remain a great power and deter foreign threats. But it kept on sleeping in its smug 'rightist' conservative dream of superiority and security. It was the introduction of Western Leftism that forced many young Chinese to wake up and smell the coffee(than the usual tea). It was this materialist perspective that urged them to break out of Confucian conceits(of the useless literati) & Taoist musings and accept the material dimensions of reality: Facts over Feng Shui. It's no wonder communism was appealing to so many young Chinese in the early 20th century. It spoke of history as hammers and nails than brush and ink.
Karl Marx argued the people should wake up to the truth of history. He called religion the opiate of the masses. He argued that the main engine of history is not Great Men, Spiritual Ideas, or Philosophy but the struggle for the control of material reality. Throughout history, the elites found clever ways to exploit the masses and hog most of the wealth EVEN THOUGH it was the masses who did the heavy-lifting. He regarded capitalism as both a liberating revolutionary force and an exploitative form of new oppression. Capitalism was liberating in that it was totally materialist, something it shared with socialism. It accepted matter as the true basis of power. Titles such as king or duke meant nothing to capitalism. Neither did God or spirituality. Capitalism was about property, investment, factories, and technology. It was about the buying and selling of materials and labor that turned raw material into manufactured goods. To facilitate investment and transfers of wealth, capitalism relied on ever more elaborate schemes of finance. Because capitalism focused on the material world and real results, it revolutionized technology and profoundly transformed the landscape, along with human relations based on production and distribution. However, because it was focused mainly on profit and finance(that managed and manipulated the profit), capitalism had two problems, one moral and the other economic. Capitalists didn't care how much the masses suffered as long as their own profits increased. Even though finance is supposed to serve the material economy, it could take on a life of its own and create a form of economics that defies material sense — today, Wall Street and globalist banks cook up ever more surreal ways to increase wealth. Jews as 'made men' with insider information grow ever richer and buy up everything.
So, in that sense, Marxism was to wake people up from the dream of kings & queens, myth & religion, and the 'virtues' promoted by the powerful to hoodwink the masses. It also warned that 'liberalism' and 'individualism' were smoke-and-mirrors used by the propertied class to justify their exploitation and wealth. Their real power owed to control of materials via capital, not abstract ideals about 'freedom'. Also, it was the freedom of power that mattered. Most people without power had useless freedom. For the exploited masses, 'freedom' was meaningless because they lacked the material means to ensure their own interests. So, true freedom for the masses could only come by gaining control of the material means of production. Why did so many Russians join the Revolution? The horrors of World War I and its social impact woke them up to the realization that Tsar Nicholas wasn't some wise grand patriarch, the father of his people, but a half-wit, fool, and weakling. Nicholas, the biggest rightist force in Europe, had been asleep about reality and history. He thought the people would remain loyal to him no matter what because he regarded himself as the loving father of his people; he loved them and they loved him, or so he thought. What a rude awakening for him.
So, there was a side to leftism that was about waking up to reality and seeing the light. The Left grew out of the Enlightenment. Let there be light and let us look upon reality with a clear eye. Let us be critical of power than just obeying it. Let us ask questions than accept the old answers as sacrosanct. But the Left had its own problems arising from arrogance, ignorance, ur-spirituality, and limitations of man. Some on the Left were so sure of their truth(supposedly based on science and reason) that they became intolerant of and even murderous to those who disagreed. Despite the conceit of true knowledge and reason, mankind can only know so much. An expert in one field knows nothing of other fields. And even experts often turn out to be wrong(or they cravenly cater to the Power). What was 'certain' in medicine a hundred yrs ago, or even fifty years ago, may be null and void today. And there is the 'spiritual' nature of man. Even those who claim to be totally rational and materialist(or secular) have a secret need to divide the world into the holy and the unholy. Consider the Holocaust, Globo-Homo, and the Magic Negro. Holocaust should be treated as a historical subject, but it's become a religion where one must not question the numerology of the sacred six million. 'Gay rights' became Gay Rites, a cult of sodomy as the wonder of the ages. Homos used to push their cause on secular grounds of individual rights. Now, they insist that religious institutions fly the 'gay' banner. And if anyone says homo fecal-penetration is gross, he or she must be purged, shamed, and blacklisted. It's the 'inqueersition'. Indeed, anyone critical of the homo lifestyle has no chance of making it in higher echelons of government or industry. Globo-Homo is the official faith of the Deep State and Big Capital. You better get on your knees, take it up the arse, and BELIEVE... or else be cast into the purgatory of demotion or unemployment. And consider the BLM nonsense. Most blacks are murdered by other blacks, and if anything, cops save a lot of black lives. But as blacks are now holy objects, ANY instance of a black thug killed by cops is an act of blasphemy or 'blaxphemy'. Michael Brown was a thug who got killed in Ferguson. He never said, "Hands Up, Don't Shoot", but that has become part of the Sacred Narrative among blacks and white progs. Why all such nonsense among people who claim to be rational, secular, and modern? Because human nature is 'spiritual', and that means even those who reject God and Church will find new icons, idols, and causes to worship. Notice how all these white progs kneel at the feet of MLK, Mandela, and Obama(and Oprah too). These people claim to be moral or righteous, but theirs is a form of fanta-morality, or morality based on fantasy. True morality must be based on reality. In the Current Year, there is so much moral outrage based on so little truth.
Of course, the choice of Jews, blacks, and homos as the holy trinity is largely the result of Jewish Supremacist control of media, academia, finance, and most whore politicians. Jews naturally promote themselves. Jews value homos as useful allies in turning Leftism from Mayday to Gayday. In the past, many Jews were of working class background or starving intellectuals. They were sincerely on the Left. Today, 50% of Jews make over $100,000 a year. Jews are the richest people on Earth. Jews want to keep the brand of 'leftism' and 'radicalism' but in service of wealth and privilege. So, why would Jews favor traditional leftism when something like communism would be devastating to Jews? Indeed, even in the Soviet Union where many Jews had an auspicious start, they eventually lost out to non-Jews. Jews are arch-capitalists who cling to the 'leftist' brand because it acts as a shield — they grow ever richer through capitalism but are accused of being 'socialists' or 'communist' by the Idiot Right. When billionaires are lumped with 'communists', it works as moral cover for their wealth and privilege in the eyes of disgruntled 'progressives'. Look how Bernie Sanders runs as a 'socialist' and then urges all his herd to vote for Hillary or Biden(who serve super-rich Jews). Maybe Sanders was once a true socialist, but now, he's a Jewish Supremacist first and socialist second. There are commie-types among Antifa, but they are useful to Jewish Capitalists because Commie Thought says, "Greatest Evil is Nazism and Racism." So, as long as the Jewish Capitalist Media tells the 'commies' that there are 'white supremacist' and 'neo-Nazis' afoot, the dummy 'commies' are too busy attacking whites to ever get around to attacking capitalism and the oligarchy. (Traditional communism argued that capitalism, not fascism, is the biggest enemy because Fascism and National Socialism are merely fake-revolutionary movements used by capitalists to capture populist sentiments. In other words, fascism is merely iron boots capitalism. But most of today's commies are the product of pop culture. Their ideology is based more on TV shows, rap, and punk/grunge music than true understanding of the history of the Left. If German capitalists protected and funded the fascists to beat the communists, Jewish capitalists today use the 'commies' to beat down the 'nazis'.) Of course, US politics is pro-elitist on both sides of the aisle. The priority of both Democrats and Republicans is to prop up the elites in the 'center'. Democrats appeal to non-whites & white proggies for votes, and GOP appeals to whites & conservatives for votes. But once elected, politicians of both parties serve the oligarchs and grow fat themselves. Democrats are about suckering the 'leftist' masses to serve the rich and become rich, and Republicans are about suckering the 'rightist' masses to serve the rich and become rich. Donald Trump was hardly different but was loathed by both parties because his style and rhetoric accused the 'swamp' of hoodwinking and manipulating the masses.
If Leftist Ideology is based on 'what ought to be' than 'what is', could one argue that capitalism is leftist? Or that the West has been leftist even prior to the French Revolution, perhaps going back to the Renaissance? After all, capitalism has been about 'what ought to be'. It's been tireless in coming up with new and better ways of production, transportation, communication, and etc. Take the invention of flying machines. Most of humanity had given up on such dreams as impossible. Birds can fly, man cannot. But Western Man was not content with the reality that man is a terrestrial creature. He had to keep striving for 'what ought to be', and it was realized. So much that seemed impossible, ludicrous, or fantastical 100 yrs ago, let alone 200 yrs ago, have been realized. Back in the 1980s, only rich people had portable phones, which were cumbersome. Now, people have slick cell phones even in the slums of the Third World. When I was young, I didn't expect something like the internet to arrive suddenly and revolutionize the world. The West advanced so much faster than the Rest because it got into the habit of pushing for 'what ought to be' than 'what is'. People during World War I were amazed by new technologies, but they were obsolete in a mere two and half decades in World War II. And who would have thought something like nuclear power was even possible? And yet it came to fruition because the West pushed for 'what ought to be'. Steve Jobs came to greatness in the second chapter of Apple by imagining 'what ought to be'. A declining company became the biggest in the world. Granted, 'what ought to be' is more sensible in science/technology than in social 'progress' as objective than subjective standards apply, but ever-competitive capitalism is always fixated on 'what ought to be' than merely 'what is'. So many companies operate on the basis that 'what is' now will be obsolete in the future when there will be products that come closer to how it 'ought to be'.
Leonardo Da Vinci made illustrations of flying machines. He failed to create one, but his mind was certainly in the mode of 'what ought to be', and this attitude did much to stimulate the West beyond the barriers of the 'possible'. And in time, so much that seemed impossible became possible. Leftism seems to share this spirit but in the field of social science. And in many areas, there have been key reforms and successes because of leftist pressure and visions of a better society. But then, this drive for more, the better, or the further emerged in the West prior to the rise of the Radical Left. Columbus had this spirit when he went on his voyage. Otto von Bismarck was a rightist-conservative but committed to creating a modern prosperous Germany with social services. And 'right-wing' autocrats of Asian nations after WWII were all invested in creating new orders; they embarked on tasks that seemed forbidding and impossible at the time.
Granted, even as both the 'right' and 'left' in the modern world keep pushing for new possibilities and improvements, it's generally true that the Right has a better sense of limits than the Left does. So, while rightists will adopt certain socialist policies, they don't believe in panaceas. They are less puritanical even though puritanism is usually associated with the Right, not least because modernity rebelled against the moral teachings of the Church, not least on sexual matters. But when it comes to holier-than-thou fulmination, the left is far more puritanical. The Right is judgmental and repressive but not concerned with uprooting all evils. It accepts the sinfulness and imperfection of the world. It's like Franco's Spain tolerated the Left as long as it didn't make trouble. In contrast, the Leftist order seeks to weed out all crime-think and seed the mind with correct ones. It's why George Orwell became so alarmed about the Left. And Jonathan Haidt finds the leftist mind to be more arrogant and intolerant in its outlook. It's not enough for the Left to control society; it must take possession of souls. Protestantism began as a proto-leftist puritanical challenge to the Catholic Church that seemed overly compromised with the reality of power and wealth. The current 'left' is deeply problematic in that it's radically perfectionist in its imperfectionism. It especially denounces Nazism as an evil obsessed with 'Aryan supremacist perfectionism' and urges all people to be more 'inclusive', or tolerant of differences. But then, it also insists that sodomy is some holy act and that trannies must be celebrated and lionized. And the 'body positive' movement doesn't merely say we should tolerate fat or ugly people but hail them as 'beautiful'. It is the narcissism of the ugly. The Imperfect is the 'New Perfect'. Also, it fetishizes blackness as a supremacist heroism that all races must idolize. Forget about the 'Aryan superman' but believe in the Afro-Aryan-superman who is so awesome that white men should cuck at his feet and offer up their daughters to. Arno Breker is out but Afro-Breker is in. Indeed, Leni Riefenstahl went from fetishizing Aryan supremacism to Afro-supremacism, which was noted by Susan Sontag.
The left vs right dichotomy is especially confused in the West because of Christianity. As the official faith of the West, it became a symbol of establishment and conservative values. But Jesus was a rebel-heretic-maverick Jew who pissed off Jewish Conservatives. And His message is eternally radical(though not a radical call to arms). All of Jewish History was about the children of men and women who, in turn, became fathers of sons and daughters. So, despite all the spiritual content, it was grounded in the reality of biology and history. In contrast, the Christo-myth says Jesus is the miraculous Son of God. Though born of Mary, she was only a vessel. And, He didn't have sex or get married and have kids. He lived the life of the Perfect Man and died and defeated death. This fantastical story and message are more suited to leftist than rightist thinking. Also, whereas Rightism tends to be particularist — our tribe, our culture, our people — and hierarchical, the universal and egalitarian thrust of Christianity is closer in spirit to Leftism, which is universalist. But Christianity became the religion of the rich and powerful in the West. And the Enlightenment associated Christianity with kings, noblemen, corrupt clergy, superstition, reaction, and etc. But the meaning of Christianity never favored the rich and powerful. (One might say the development of the Roman Church was a betrayal of Christianity as it welded the pacifism of Christ with the militarism of the Romans. Furthermore, inspiration became an institution. Granted, all things need institutions to survive and propagate, but Catholicism turned worship of faith into worship of an institution. But, Christianity exists with or without the Catholic Church or any church for that matter. All one needs is the New Testament.) And there were many Christian progressives who believed the Faith must be on the side of the powerless than the powerful. Many Italians were both Marxist and Catholic. Still, one might say Christianity is conservative or rightist in its moral judgmentalism. It calls for social order in admonishing people to be sober, solemn, and pious. Leftism, in contrast, has a libertine streak. Many anarchists and early Marxists spoke of Free Love and other sexual experimentation. Some tried to fuse Marxism with Freudianism. And to that extent, Leftism was neo-paganist at odds with the moralism of Christianity. Ancient Greeks were certainly more libertine than the ancient Jews and Early Christians. But then, to the extent that the pagans were more cold-eyed about power and reality, they could be said to have been more 'rightist'. The Romans saw the world in realist terms of winners and losers. If your side won, they were winners; if they lost, they were losers. In contrast, Christianity said the material winners of this life could be spiritual losers in the afterlife. Paganism's no-nonsense view of power could be construed as 'rightist' in contrast to Christianity's abstract view of power as it 'ought to be': The meek and powerless in this world could be(as they ought to be) the powerful in the next life(while the rich and mighty in this world are doomed to burn in Hell for all eternity). Perversely, current 'leftists' have the puritanical mindset of hard-line Christianity and the puerile sensibility of paganism at its most degenerate. It's as if the characters in FELLINI SATYRICON got 'moralistic' in celebration of debauchery: "I'm holier than thou because I take my kids to Drag Queen story hour." It's as if we are living in a dream because strange things happen in dreams, and the Current Year is very strange indeed.
According to this perception, the dream is there to sustain the slumber against all odds.
But it's also because most people lack the power to dream, therefore they want to be part of the bigger dream. Perhaps, MLK's (I Have A)Dream. Dream in the literal sense is what we all do when we sleep. Dream-as-metaphor is what we inhabit in the real world. There is no such thing as absolute living-in-reality as our understanding of reality is subjectively shaped by our senses. When we walk down the street, we are often just barely aware of the surrounding so as not to trip over or get hit by a car. Otherwise, we hardly acknowledge or think about the reality before and around us. We don't think, "I'm walking on concrete sidewalk, this is a parking lot with those cars, that is a tree, that is a person with a grocery bag, that is a cat, etc." Instead, our minds process what holds most meaning for us. It could be about personal relationships, but it's often about things that interest, stimulate, and provoke us. And these are often narratives, stories, images, idols, and issues, not least because people with smart phones are always 'hooked' to their favorite 'channels'. These function as something far more than mere knowledge. When someone watches the umpteenth show about hapless innocent noble blacks terrorized by the KKK, one doesn't coolly think, "There was a time when certain white groups used violence against blacks in the South." Rather, those images linger in the mind as dreamlike ghosts. They haunt and lurk the soul. Thus, they function as dreams than mere knowledge. In this sense, we are all living in a dream, and mankind always has.
Among primitive folks, a shaman or storyteller who tells the tale or narrative infects the listeners with heroes, villains, images, and visions that take on a life of their own in the hearts and souls of the listeners. Thus, the listeners come to partly live in the dream of the storyteller. Why do Jews now want to clamp down on Free Speech? They want to control the Dream Machine. They want all of us to be characters in their Dream Play, just like every instrumentalist in an orchestra plays a socially subordinate role to the conductor who, in turn, is 'spiritually' subordinate to the composer. So, even though we all exist as individuals in the physical sense, our minds are often NPC-like in the Dream of another. Under Stalinism, so many Soviet citizens were NPC-like minions of Stalin's Dream of Power and Justice. Under Maoism, so many Chinese youths were NPC-like minions of Mao's grand dream. All those Germans under National Socialism fell under the spell of Adolf Hitler, a great orator who could pull people into his dream of Germany.
It may well be that conservative types are less dreamy than those on the left. This element could keep them closer to reality, but it could also mean that conservatives become more dependent on the dreams of others who have the power to dream. Why can't conservatives create their own Hollywood, their own dream-machine? Even as they complain about the Liberal/Leftist control of Hollywood and other dream-centers, they rely on the Other for visions and narratives. The fact that so many German conservatives and rightists threw caution to the winds and surrendered to Hitler's dream suggests that one's inability to dream doesn't necessarily lead to more reality or clarity but to reliance on the dream of others. This may explain why American Conservatism sucks so bad. Without the power of dreams, it has adopted the dreams of the other side: 'Diversity Is Our Strength', 'MLK was awesome', 'Gay Marriage is a conservative value', 'Muh Israel', 'Women in the Military', and etc.
The problem with reality is it's difficult and inconvenient. The mind finds dreams more appealing than reality. This is why truth upsets so many people, especially if the Dream has elevated certain ideas or groups to holy status. So, honest talk about Jewish Power or black crime or homo degeneracy upsets people who've come under the spell of the Schlomo-Afro-Homo dream of Tri-Supremacist Holiness. Granted, what is currently 'acceptable' depends on the nature of the Dominant Dream. At one time, even most Liberals believed that homosexuality was a mental sickness, even a disease. In either case, pro-homo or anti-homo, it wasn't merely cold knowledge about homos but a mythic vision of them as either darkly corrupting pathological villains(as they were portrayed in so many movies even up to the 1980s) or pure-as-snow angels of 'rainbow' wonderment.
We are living in the Jewish Dream. Even those who are cast as villains and deplorables in this Dream are part of the dream because they explain themselves in accordance to the dream logic. For instance, most 'conservatives' will say "I'm not racist" or "I'm not homophobic". They are morally defensive than morally autonomous. They accept the rule-book of the Dream that says 'racism is evil' and 'homophobia is wicked'. They don't ask why it's called 'racism' when Ism simply means belief. If Ism means belief, race + ism should mean belief in the reality of race. Of course, race is real because evolution is real, and different groups evolved separately. But even if we accept 'racism' to mean 'racial supremacism', isn't it obvious that Jews are supremacist because they demand the West favor Jews uber alles and Israel over Palestinians(and Muslims & Arabs in general)? For the sake of moral consistency, it is wrong for Jews to say that privileging whiteness is evil BUT favoring Jews is wonderful. However, such illogic can be 'logical' in a dream, a Jewish Dream, one in which Jews blame whites of 'racism' but practice 'racism' to the hilt for their own power and privilege. And yet, white conservatives who are demeaned as 'racists' by Jews go out of their way to prove they are NOT 'racist' by sucking up to Jews and praising Israel that is so blatantly 'racist' to Palestinians. It's like Jews say Donald Trump is Hitler but Trump goes out of his way to prove he's not 'racist' by totally supporting Zionist 'racism' against Palestinians and imperialism against Iran/Syria. So, even white conservatism operates within the hegemony of the Jewish Dream. It has no moral autonomy. It is essentially an NPC that plays according to Jewish Dream Logic that is illogical by any rules of moral consistency. How is it that Jews can denounce whites as Nazi but then ally with quasi-nazi types in Ukraine? How is it that Jews can condemn supremacism but demand governments to shut down BDS, a movement that calls for equal justice for Palestinians? Or take 'homophobia'. Any conservative who says "I'm not a homophobe" is an NPC in a Jewish Dream because, by his denial, he accepts the reality of 'homophobia'. But Jews made up that bogus concept to imply that anyone who counters the globo-homo agenda or makes fun of homos is suffering from a psycho-pathology. In fact, 'homophobia' doesn't exist. While some people hate homosexuality or have strong antipathy to homo behavior, it is not a phobia which specifically means extreme fear and panicked response to something harmless. 'Homophobia' exists as an article of faith in the Jewish Dream. In truth/reality, homos do indeed exist as some people are born homo, and this reality must be accepted, and social policy should be based on this fact. But it's also true that homo-fecal-penetration has no biological or moral worth, and it makes no sense to celebrate sodomy with 'rainbow' colors. And now, we are told there's 'transphobia' because many people still insist Bruce Jenner is a man and not a 'woman' or because they object to penis-and-balls-cutting as medical practice. What kind of sane medicine mutilates and removes perfectly healthy organs because some nut demands it? Also, if truth is a matter of subjectivity — "I'm a woman because I feel that I'm a woman even though I got penis and balls" — , what happens when such 'logic' is applied to race and other attributes? Is a dumb person a 'genius' because he says so? But maybe we are there already because so many mental midgets are now promoted as public intellectuals, especially if they're black or tranny. All such craziness are allowed because we live in The Dream that is Jewish. As Jews control the media, academia, deep state, and the megaphone, they get to weave The Dream. What they show on TV, teach in classes, print in papers, and allow on platforms come to determine the narrative, the myth, idols & icons, and the Current Year map of Good vs Evil. No wonder then that, even though Jews turned the Holy Land into Sodom & Gomorrah and dump on white Christians all the time, most Evangelicals are always shouting "Muh Israel".
The world is like The Dream because most people lack the power to dream. So, they rely on the dream of others. Much of the film MULHOLLAND DR. takes place in the dream of a woman, but her dream unfolds according to the dream logic of Hollywood fantasy. So, even her own dream is part of a bigger dream, the myth of stardom and cult of celebrity. In TWIN PEAKS THE RETURN, David Lynch's character meets Monica Belluci in a dream who says, "We are like the dreamer who dreams and then lives inside the dream. But who's the dreamer?"
Who is the dreamer of The Dream we are all part of? In that dream, we are mere phantoms because our 'thoughts' and 'actions' all follow the 'logic' and sub-will of the dreamer. We are free only like NPC are 'free'. Jewish Power is the Dreamer. All of us dream little dreams when we sleep but our waking life is part of The Dream of Jewish Power. In that dream, we are programmed to feel and behave in accordance to the 'rule'. In whose game are we effectively NPC's without true autonomy of thought, freedom, and liberty? But then, is liberty an effective counter against The Dream? Libertarians tell us so, but what if most people are incapable of being free and independent? In that case, The Dream can be countered only by another Dream. It means history can never be about dream vs reality but dream vs dream. Reality is too harsh and dreary for most people. No wonder then that even fat ugly women go to hair-dressers and cling to the fantasy that they are attractive. Indeed, things have gotten worse. Well, if a man can be a 'woman', who says a fat ugly woman can't be a beauty? This anti-essentialist subjectivism all points to how dream-ism has infected so much of society. Such lunacy is intrinsic to The Dream pushed by Jewish Power. REQUIEM TO A DREAM. You may be nothing and have nothing, but YOU ARE SPECIAL because you're part of The Dream.
'Reality' and 'logic' in The Dream is as Jewish Power programs it. So, even though blacks are the main thugs and killers, we are led to chant BLM and cry for precious black lives being 'genocided' by white police. We prefer fanta-morality than real-morality. It's utterly absurd as a claim in the real world, but countless people who've been sucked into The Dream keep the faith. The Dream is so powerful and pervasive that all of us are, in one way or another, part of The Dream, if only because we must always remind ourselves and others that it isn't real. Thus, no one is really fully awake. Either you go along with The Dream or you're a lucid dreamer who knows you're in The Dream but can't really break out of it. As we are all social creatures, we can't help but be part of the prevailing order. So, if much of society is still in The Dream, we are also partly in it because we are part of society. It's like even anti-Hitlerians under National Socialism couldn't fully escape The Dream. It became too much of the life and culture.
The dream is sort of like a game, especially a con-game. Cons work because the con-man slips something with a distraction. Thus, the conned fail to see the reality of what is happening as he or she is fixated on what is shown. It's why the woman falls for the con in HOUSE OF GAMES. That the woman is 'too smart to be conned' is actually part of the con devised against her. Dreams work in a similar way. We believe in the unbelievable in the dream — dead people alive in front of us and etc. — because the dream turns off the mechanism of verification and detection. Furthermore, the dream keeps streaming new 'information' to the mind that is too distracted to process anything for verification. While what happens in a dream isn't logical, there is a logic behind the process of the dream that keeps the dreamer hoodwinked. And even when a person becomes a lucid dreamer, he is in the dream.
What is true of a single mind is true of an entire society, especially when everyone is connected electronically. Electronic media are like collective neurons of society as a hive-mind. But who's the dreamer or game-creater? Who is the 'user' and who are the 'programs'? People's minds are colonized by the electronic-neurons beamed by media, the Dream becomes their dream, and they become part of The Dream Empire or Dreampire as envisioned and programmed by Jews. So, even though Sigmund Freud failed as a scientist(as current psychology believes he was wrong about most things), his obsession with the power of dreams could have served as the blueprint of takeover of power. Marx was utopian but concentrated on the materialist reality. But all the talk of labor, production, and etc. got pretty dreary and boring to most people. Capitalism beat communism not only in the material sphere(of producing more) but in creating the Empire of Dreams, which Chris Hedges calls the Empire of Illusion. No wonder Jews were so eager to acquire Disney and then STAR WARS. Walt Disney and George Lucas had the power to create dreams. Dream as metaphor for power is explored in EXISTENZ by David Cronenberg where goyim move inside a maze created by a Jew. Even as they identify the Dream-Maker and kill him, they're not sure if they're in reality or still in the Dream. Even the Anti-Dream could be part of the Dream. And such is true in our world. Even those opposed to Jewish Supremacism are marked by the 'logic' of The Dream. If you oppose Jews, you must be 'nazis', 'white supremacists', 'anti-semites', or etc. Of course, there are neo-nazi types who can't oppose Jewish Power without resorting to 'Muh Fuhrer', but this is because they lack the autonomous power to dream. Therefore, they must borrow the dream of Hitler to combat the Jewish Dream instead of creating a new and better Dream from scratch.
How do a people replace one Dream with another? A New Dream in which most people become figures in another Dream. They become NPC's in another people's game. US politicians, 'conservative' and 'liberal', are little more than NPC's in the Jewish Dream. One way to replace one Dream with another is by invasion. US defeated Japan, erased the myth of the sacred Emperor, and installed the new Dream of Japan as a peace-loving democracy, which, however, must take orders from the New Empire that invades and destroys other nations. (Incidentally, blaming Japanese Militarism for Japan's woes is disingenuous. After all, Japan embarked on its imperialist ventures BEFORE the military takeover and with the support & even encouragement of Western Imperialist powers. Furthermore, the leading imperialist powers in the world were all 'democratic': UK, France, and US. Also, most militarist governments were generally less imperialist, and more often than not, a nation turned to militarism as last recourse against foreign domination or total chaos. Franco and Pinochet were military leaders, but they didn't invade anyone, and they came to power to defend the order from International Communism, a form of ideological imperialism. But as the US-dominant Narrative governs the world, Japanese are to believe that they were saved from bad old militarism with defeat and democracy. Such is the power of the Dream.)
The Dream can be replaced by outright invasion. Still, invaders without a strong Dream may fall under the Dream of the vanquished. Mongols invaded China but fell under the spell of the Middle Kingdom Dream. The Romans, for all their military glory, were weak in the power of Dreams. So, they fell under the Dream of the Greeks and worshiped a fusion of Roman and Greek gods. Their art imitated Greek imagination. And later, Romans and the Greeks fell under the Dream of Christianity even though Christians had no means to conquer them militarily. They became figures in the Dream of Jesus and Paul, Jews rejected by Jews. Later, the Germanic barbarians invaded Rome, much like Mongols would invade China later, but as the barbarians were weak in the power of Dream, they too fell under the sway of Christo-Roman Template.
The Power of Dreams come in two forms. One where the Dream takes on a power all its own independent of its originator and the Other where the Dream is used by a people to control others. For example, all of the West fell under the power of the Greek Dream. Especially the Renaissance, Enlightenment, and 19th century archaeology prized Greek culture as the shining ideal. Still, it was the Greek Dream without Greek power as the Greeks had long declined and fallen. And Greeks were okay with this: The Greek Way conquering the human imagination around the world WITHOUT Greeks having power over the world. In contrast, Jews felt differently. Via Christianity, there was the power of the Jewish Dream without Jewish Power. Christians read the Sacred Texts of Jews, and Jewish spirituality and historiography had great impact on the West. But even as Europeans fell under the sway of the Jewish Dream(as Jesus, Disciples, and Paul were Jews steeped in Jewish tradition), they were independent of Jewish Power and even hostile to Jewish People. And Jews took umbrage at this. Perhaps, the relation between Jews and Christians would have been better IF Christianity didn't insist that Jews rejected the Messiah and murdered Him. But, there was bound to be hostility between Judaism and Christianity because Jews couldn't help but feel that Jesus and Paul laid the groundwork of smuggling the Jewish God to other peoples, the dirty gentiles. It was a violation of the Covenant, and therefore, Jews could only feel hatred for Jesus and the heretical Jews. As Jews were anti-Christian, Christianity could only develop as an anti-Jewish religion.
Anyway, if Greeks were resigned to the prestige of the Greek Dream being independent of Greek power(that was non-existent at any rate), Jews couldn't tolerate Jewishness as an abstraction for other peoples without the input of the Jews themselves. Jews felt that all who adopted the Jewish Way must come under Jewish Sway. As both Christianity and Islam have origins in Judaism, Jews must control the West and Near East. So, Muslim nations must be battered with Neocon militarism to teach them a lesson of who's the real Chosen of God. Because Islam is a proud militant religion, Jews know it's difficult to take over the Muslim Soul. But because Christianity is a religion of humility, guilt, and sin, Jews knew they could worm into the Christian Soul and re-code it for self-destruction. Alter the Christian Guilt Code toward feeling most ashamed of the Holocaust and Antisemitism(and 'racism' and 'homophobia') and then watch the dominos fall. As most Christians are craven, shallow, or stupid, their Sin Complex could be manipulated in algorithm. Do it like the guys in INCEPTION by Christopher Nolan. Enter the White Christian Dreamscape, locate and unlock the soul-safe Houdini-style, and alter the main object of worship from God and Jesus to Jew, Negro, and Homo. Replace Virgin Mary with Anne Frank. Replace God with bellowing Negro. Replace angels with homo fairies. Thus, Christianity became cucked and worthless, a mere NPC program in a Jewish Dream of Dominion.
Jewish Power seeks to Greek-ize the West. Just like the Greek Way became divorced from Greek Power(whereby even non-Greeks took Greek ideas and idols with no regard for actual Greeks), the Western Way is to be divorced from Western Folks. We are told that Western Civilization is an Idea. It's not a people and their land. It's an idea or ideal that can be adopted by anyone. So, the power of the West should be an abstraction. Even if whites lose their lands and become minorities in their own nations due to mass immigration-invasion, there is no need to worry as Western Civilization will remain powerful as a Dream for all of humanity. White people having power isn't what the West is about. All that matters is the propagation of the Western Idea. As long as the Idea lives on as the Dream for others, the West is still #1. And what is this Western Idea: A Universal commitment to liberty, individuality, rule of law, and property rights(and sucking up to Jews, blacks, and homos). So, even if white people were to vanish from the world, the West would be alive and well as long as people are into 'muh liberty' and property rights. Following this logic, Chinese need not worry if China vanishes as long as people enjoy Mooshoo Pork. Chinese culture still alive, you see.
But of course, Jews would never want this for themselves. If someone told Jews, "Hey, don't worry if Arabs or Muslims take over Israel and if you Jews vanish off the face of the Earth because the Jewish Idea will always be with us in the form of the Bible and the achievements of Jews such as Albert Einstein and Steven Spielberg." And even the Koran could be said to be partly Judaic since Muhammad was influenced by Jewish Texts. Now, would Jews be okay with a world of the Jewish Dream without Jewish Power(and People)? Of course not. Jews want to use their Dream as their hegemonic power over others. The Dream must never be independent of Jewish Power. Jews weren't content with Gentiles adopting and worshiping the Jewish God. They wanted to gain control over those who adopted the universalized form of Yahweh. Indeed, Jews even wanted to take God back from those people. What is Globo-Homo Queertianity but a bait-and-switch Jews are pulling on the Christians? By making Christians worship the inanity of Sodomic Globo-Homo, Jews effectively turn Christianity into a junk-religion devoid of God. Of course, Jewish Rabbis pretend to go along with globo-homo, but it's just a ruse for the rubes. After all, the Talmud teaches the Jews to use all forms of deception to hoodwink and destroy the goyim. For Jews, a jealous people(like their God is jealous), Jewish Power must always command the Jewish Way. If Greeks are flattered that non-Greeks took the Greek Way and came to greatness(and even surpassed the Greeks), Jews are not happy about non-Jews having taken the Jewish Way and come to greatness. Deep down inside, Jews hate Christianity and Islam even as they take pride in the fact that all those hapless shallow goyim fell under the power of the Jewish Dream. For Jews, the respect for the Jewish Way must be accompanied by supremacy of Jewish Power. Jewish Way must not become independent of Jewish Power. Muslims must be hammered into submission by the Chosen People of Zion. Christians must be manipulated into changing their religion to suit the outlook and sensibilities of Jews. So, how dare the Russians not fly 'gay' flags in Orthodox Churches to appease the Jews... like the Catholics are finally on the verge of doing, what with the poop-pope Francis blessing 'gay marriages'.
White people have two paths: the Greek path or the Jewish path. Greek path says your civilization will live on as a great idea but minus the power(and even the survival) of the people who created it. Jewish path says your civilization must live on as an idea that is inseparable from the survival, security, and power of the people who created it. Jews believe that even though non-Jews can learn and take from Jewishness, the Jewish Way really belongs to the Jews who are its real owners. But Jews tell white people that the Western Way cannot in any way be claimed by white Europeans. It is to be a dream independent of the dreamer... so that it will succumb to The Dream Empire of the Jews.
