Modern Mind became so like the Mind in the Middle Ages — The Blinding Effect of Pride & Ego on 'Progressives' who, driven by Idolatry than Ideology, utterly lack Self-Awareness

For all the talk of progress and advancement, it's like we are living in the Middle Ages or even the Dark Ages. So many people harbor superstitions based on mindless faith. But it's worse in a way because, at least in the Old-Old Days, people worshiped God and Jesus, not the cult of identity-idolatry. The great irony is that the so-called 'progressive' community believes itself to be most learned, most intellectual, most rational, most scientific, and most sophisticated, but they are the most stupid, ignorant, hysterical, paranoid, and enraged. Fashion-Play is their passion play. While atheist and anti-religious voices believe religion or spirituality itself is dangerous for clouding human minds with faith over facts, treating religion as religion and God as God is far less egregious and demented than treating ideas as idols and human groups as sacred. When ideas are turned into idols, they are more battle flags than issues for discussion. So, 'democracy' is invoked to justify US aggression and imperialism. Israel's crimes and atrocities are always justified on account of it being a 'democracy'. The cult of democracy also obfuscates the fact that democracies aren't governed by the will of the people(who, by the way, are mostly saps and sheep shaped by big media controlled by corporate monopolies or big education controlled by the power-hungry elites) but machinations of the rich and the well-connected. In democracies, people vote for puppets chosen by oligarchs. The Deep State, the most anti-democratic force in society, often invokes 'democracy' to defend all its dirty tricks. It works behind the scenes but pretends it's for transparency. It cooks up total nonsense like Russia Collusion Hoax in the name of defending democracy from tyranny and foreign interference(Russia, Russia, Russia) and pushes the Narrative, especially in total collusion with the so-called Free Press that is nothing but the property of super-rich oligarchs. And most journalists fall into two categories: Whores for hire who will say and do anything to climb the ladder or true-believing PC fanatics who swallowed whole hog the BS taught in schools. Ideally, knowledge should mean more reflection and consideration of facts. And true knowledge means NO TABOOS on what one can pursue or discuss. But US media and academia operate under a cloud of taboos. Many subjects are no-go zones, and it's difficult for someone to get funding for research into certain topics. And on the occasion they do, the System has created armies of red-alert guards, young PC idiots who scream, pull hair, and threaten with violence any academic who strays from the party line. And when the dissident academic is under assault, he or she gets no support from fellow academics, most of whom are craven cowards or true-believing dolts, and from the administration dominated by careerists who will say and do anything to steer clear of controversy. Because of existing taboos, true knowledge isn't possible. Instead, we must lend our ears to the approved 'official narrative' and dogma passed off as 'social science'. So much of it is rubbish but because it comes with the conceit of 'science' or 'evidence', suckers fall for it. It's like communism was dogma but sold as 'scientific materialism', which was sufficient for true believers to feel they had history, reason, and moral truth on their side.

True knowledge needs critical thinking, but ironically, Critical Theory waged war on the critical faculty. Perhaps, the original Critical Theorists were more free-thinking, but over the years, the second- and third-raters took the Idea and turned it into set of mantras and certitudes. If the original Critical Theorists sought new ways of thinking about Marxism(in combination with Freudianism), the latter-day kind have turned it into mindless worship of mostly homos & blacks and blaming everything on whites and 'patriarchy', whatever that means. Thus, Critical Theory dictates what one may or may not be critical about. One MUST BE critical of whites but one MUST NOT BE critical of Jews, blacks, homos, and whatever else happens to be in political fashion. This is obviously anti-critical, but Labels fool a lot of people. After all, it is called 'Critical Theory', so it must be critical. Likewise, sell indoctrination as 'education', and people think they are being educated for having their minds stuffed with PC mush. So much of media and academia is now about being 'woke', i.e. not to think critically about subjects such as race, sex, class, power, and etc. but to mindlessly and obediently soak up the correct narratives & dogmas on those subjects as sacrosanct. Don't think, don't question, just listen, obey, BELIEVE, and spout. And the fact that so many people do just that(and have done so through the ages) says so much about humanity. But then, the Power wants just that because a genuinely critical community may pry into its affairs and denounce the hypocrisies. Of course, the Power knows that one way to divert people's attention from abuses, failures, and betrayals of the System is to present itself as the lesser-of-two-evils. Just like many Conservatives put up with the feckless GOP as the lesser of two evils, so many so-called 'liberals' support the Democrats and the Deep State as the last bulwark against Literally Hitler Trump, the puppet of Putin the Putler. This way, Jewish Power can always get away with its abuses and corruption by presenting itself as the enemy of 'White Supremacism', the worst of all evils. Then, it's no wonder that so many progs who are disturbed by the Deep State and Zionist Imperialism just go along with the machinations of the Democratic Party as the best defense/offense against 'white supremacism'. But then, many who feel betrayed by the mostly worthless Donald Trump nevertheless stick with him because they see him as the last hope against globalism. Democracy is overlooking garbage on your side to cry foul on garbage on the other side. Never mind that both sides are controlled by Jewish Power. Of course, dictatorships and autocracies also do this. They justify their rule by presenting it as the only bulwark against the foreign enemy or some dark dangerous force. Jews have long complained that Anti-Semites used the bogeyman of the Evil Jew this way, but they are now busy using the same trick against the white race, Christians, Russians, Iranians, and the ever-morphing definition of whoever is 'terrorist'. One thing for sure, if you convince enough people that something is 'sacred', they will defend it with unthinking passion. Even the profane can be consecrated as 'sacred', as with the case of LGBTQXYZ Globo-Homo-mania. Indeed, there are so many white idiots whose very meaning of life revolves around the cult of the holy homo. So, any rejection of the 'gay' agenda is downright 'satanic' in their eyes. It's tantamount to 'heresy'. So much of PC 'wokeness' works this way. It's about emotions of rapture and hysteria, especially among white women who were brainwashed to reject what comes naturally: Love, Marriage, Family, Tribe, Nation. Without a family, race, and nation to devote their energies to, they latch onto the latest fashions of outrage and chest-thumping. Without a noble race-ist and heroic white elite to lead and guide the white race, the white masses come under the spell of Jewish-controlled media and academia. And whatever white elites that do exist serve their Jewish Masters than the White Masses. They figure serving the Jews is the best way to serve themselves. And if their cuckery to the Jews brings ruin upon the white race? They figure it's too late to save the white ship, and so, it's every whitey for himself or herself. So, AS LONG AS they and their close ones get the lifeboats, they don't care if the white ship sinks to the bottom of the ocean. What do the Bush family, the Clintons, or the Bidens care as long as their own ilk are well-taken care of? Shabbos goyim(or the shabbies) are the New Collaborators. And Jews and Shabbies convinced so many white people that their desire for independence and liberation from Jewish Supremacism is 'white supremacism'. In other words, the ONLY proper way for whites is to be stuck to Jewish Power and serve it and its proxies, mainly blacks and homos.

Then, it is no wonder that our times are so much like the Middle Ages or Dark Ages. For all the science, technology, availability of literature, and relative freedom that define the modern world, the truth is so many people, elites and masses, are as irrational, ignorant, stupid, superstitious, dogmatic, hysterical, and deranged as inquisitors and witch-hunters eons ago. In the Middle Ages, people blamed Satan or Devil for whatever went wrong. And it was common for people to be accused of harboring demonic spirits, practicing witchcraft, or being possessed by dark forces. Their fears were based on ignorance, and their proposed cures had no basis in fact. They didn't know any better as knowledge was hard to come by, and it would be several centuries before science and critical inquiry became the basis of a new worldview. Today, people mock and laugh at the Old Times. Or they feel appalled by the violence used by witch-hunters and mobs. People today feel glibly superior as they feel themselves to be educated, knowledgeable, and committed to truth based on facts and logic. But just look at recent events, and we might as well be living in the Modern Middle Ages or the 'Moddle Ages'. It's bad enough that nonsense like LGBTQ globo-homo & tranny business and BLM have no basis in facts and logic. What's truly amazing is that so many people believe in them with delirium and dementia bordering on religious fanaticism. (And the supposedly best-and-brightest and most educated Americans believed in Russia Collusion Hoax for nearly three years.) It's one thing to be wrong but quite another to embrace the wrong with absolute faith. THAT is what makes the current era much like the Middle Ages. The 'Moddle Ages' of the here-and-now demonstrate that even though mankind as advanced in so many directions, the human mind is essentially more-or-less the same as it was many centuries ago. It still longs for the sacred and holy. It still prefers passion over reason. It favors faith over facts. Indeed, it fears facts lest they interfere with the faith, something that lends meaning to their lives. While progs may sneer at religious dummies who believe in angels, they have no problem revering homos and blacks as real-life angels. How else can one make sense of the holy cult of Fentanyl Floyd? To be sure, Negroes are more likely to be regarded as angel-like and saint-like if killed by whites, especially cops, than by other Negroes. If something is made holy in conflict with the unholy, then blacks are made holy by contact with whites as the unholy. A black killed by another black is just a mundane fact. But as whites are unholy, their harm to a black person works as a magic charm to make the Negro glow with holiness; he becomes a Neglow.

Anyone who cares about facts knows BLM is based on nonsense. The fact is blacks kill blacks. Few blacks are by white cops. And most blacks killed by white cops asked for it by acting crazy or violent. All the evidence is out there for anyone who cares to know the truth. And yet, our 'Moddle Ages' prefer the holy hysteria about innocent, angelic, and saintly Negroes being hunted down by White Demons. People still chant, "Hands Up, Don't Shoot" even though a thoroughgoing investigation exonerated the white cop who shot the big thug Michael Brown who was no 'gentle giant'. How is this mass mania any different from the superstitions that prevailed in the Dark/Middle Ages? Indeed, it is worse and more dispiriting because, whereas folks in the Dark/Middle Ages were truly uneducated, ignorant, and often illiterate, modern folks have access to all kinds of news and information. We live in the Age of Universal Education and Universal Information. And yet, THAT is precisely the problem. While mass education and mass media can be most useful in disseminating knowledge & news and encouraging critical thinking, they can also be used to spread mass panic, mass hysteria, mass deception, mass paranoia, and mass dementia. It all depends on what kind of people controls media and academia. While all elites and ruling elements have been far from perfect through the ages, the Anglo elites had emphasized empiricism, restraint, and logic. Even when facts, ideas, and certain truths undermined their privileges and hold on power, they were willing to consider them through careful debate. In contrast, Jews are far more obsessive about their power and supremacism, and therefore, they are willing to use the media and academia in ANY WAY to maintain their grip. And if this entails destroying free speech, critical thinking, dissident culture, independent media, and logical/factual approach to the world, so be it. If 'gay' lunacy can be used to overturn normal morality and Christianity to the advantage of Jewish minority elite power, it is done. If the masses can be fooled with Russia Collusion Hoax, push the big lie. If the 'Trump Economy' can be destroyed by Covid Hysteria, why not? (Indeed, the mindless nonsense about the dangers of Covid ranks up there with panics in the Middle Ages.) And spread the word that ICE agents are demonic Neo-Nazi thugs while every illegal trespasser is a 'New Jew fleeing from Nazis'. (Applying logic, what does this mean? An illegal Mexican is running from fellow Mexicans who are 'nazis'? If Trump is 'nazi', what sense does it make for those seeking refuge from 'nazis' to come to US with Trump as president? It'd be like Jews fleeing to Nazi Germany. Of course, when Jews yammer on and on about 'nazis', they really mean they need more non-whites in the US to decrease the power of White Americans whom Jews regard as potential nazis. 'Too many whites' is nazi, therefore Jews seek refuge from such danger by reducing the relative number of whites vis-a-vis non-whites. Jews feel this way about whites, but whites are sucking up to Jews like a bunch of tards.)

Indeed, what is most interesting about the BLM phenomenon is that many of the most deranged white advocates are among the 'best educated'. If all that education and 'knowledge' led to such ignorance, irrationality, superstition, and quasi-spiritual worship of Falsehood about Negroes, what does it say about American Society as a whole? To be sure, the Powerful who pushed the BLM nonsense know it's bogus. The Chuck Schumers of the world merely used it as white-guilt-bait against Donald Trump and the part of White America that still has some semblance of group identity and interests. They are the cynical and powerful who know it's a farce but exploited it for all its worth. Then, there are the elite commissars who are so committed to PC as state ideology that they are willing to be true-believers, just like soldiers surrender their bodies and souls to the state. College is mental boot-camp for these types who need to believe and serve something. As smart and educated as these types are, they were instilled from cradle with the religion of MLK, Mandela, and Magic Negro(along with cuck-worship of Mandingo among those who came of age as Millennials). Just like smart people raised as Muslims or Christians still manage to circumvent around fact and logic to maintain their faith, those raised on the worship of Jews, Negroes, and Homos have all sorts of mental coping mechanisms that suppress logic and facts when it comes to the holy three. Emotion, especially molded in their childhoods, overrides their reason. As the issues and themes concerning Jews and blacks are so charged with matters of justice and Good vs. Evil, objective thinking is nearly impossible for many people. Jews are, first and foremost, the Holy Holocaust People, and blacks are the Sacred Slavery People associated with MLK, regarded as the greatest god-man of all time. Also, Jews and Blacks are seen and 'sacralized' through the prism of White Evil. Apparently, only Evil White people committed genocide, and only Evil White people practiced slavery. Or, perhaps the real problem is that White Evil is the function of an essentially Jewish Supremacist and Black Supremacist viewpoint. After all, if Jews and blacks are not special or supreme, their sufferings would be 'generic', much like tragedies that befell all of mankind. But there is a sense that the Shoah was especially evil because it affected Jews, and black slavery was especially evil because whites enslaved the special/superior race. How dare they! And yet, this attack on whites has masochistic appeal to do-goody whites who are unconsciously closet-supremacists. They feel that white evil is worse than evils done by non-whites because whites, as the more elevated race, should be judged according to a higher standard. So, if Arabs enslaved blacks, it was because they were just a bunch of cutthroat desert barbarians; they didn't know any better, whereas whites should have known better because they are better. If many smart people were conditioned by upbringing and education to behold the sacred cults around Jews, blacks, and homos, there are the trashy dummies, the Antifa dregs of the streets, whose entire cultural outlook could be traced to pop culture, drugs, and financial crumbs from rich Jews. As stupid losers of society, they hook their claws onto whatever cause that makes them feel 'committed' and 'impassioned'. And 'cool' and 'hip'. As pop culture and sports have made homos and blacks the most celebrated groups, the Antifa loser types either wave the homo flag or chant pro-black slogans in the hope of having some of that homo angel dust and black magic rub off on them. What they, from top to bottom, all have in common is the commitment to a culture of taboo and hysterics than reason and sense. In this, their mentality has much in common with the cult of Hitler and the cult of Mao, tragic cases of 'Moddle Ages' in the 20th century. It's interesting that Jews, who suffered from the irrational rages & passions of Nazism(and also eventually came to a bad end with Soviet Communism) and therefore embarked on a critical enterprise to favor mind over mania, have turned into essentially Judeo-Nazis who rely on stirring up wild passions and witch-hunts regardless of evidence and reason. Shut off your minds and just believe and chant along. When it comes to Jews, blacks, and homos, there is no good or bad. We aren't to think in terms of good Jews or bad Jews, good blacks or bad blacks, good homos and bad homos. THEY ARE ALL GOOD no matter what they do. If Jews massacre Palestinians by the bushel, they are still good simply because they're Jews and Jewishness is a blessing(whereas Palestinian-ness is not). If blacks rob, rape, and murder, they are still good because they're black. If a decent white cop shoots a black thug who's causing trouble, the cop is evil because he is white and killed a Negro while the dead Negro is lionized simply because he was black. And we all know homos are honored as tragic victims of AIDS even though it was homo behavior that spread the diseases so far and wide in the 'gay' community. This is the privilege of the holy three of Jews, blacks, and homos. They aren't good-or-bad based on content of character or behavior but ALWAYS GOOD simply for what they are.

This goes to show that wealth isn't enough in society. Of course, Jews understood this through their long presence in Europe. Even though Jews were generally richer than goyim and could enjoy privileges & pleasures as individuals, they were tainted with the label of Christ-Killer. So, no matter how rich and well-connected a Jew might be, he was always under a cloud of suspicion. He was, on some level, always the condemned. Despite his riches, he was spiritually and morally less than the poorest European Christian. In contrast, the Christian aristocrats had noble blood. That blood alone meant they were special, superior, deserving of privilege. Jews could buy privilege but never deserved it because they were deemed 'Christ-Killers'. In our world, Jews are the neo-nobles. Their blood alone makes them special, sacred, and wonderful. They have 'holocaust blood' running through their veins. It's no wonder Jews invoke how such-and-such among their relatives/ancestors was a 'Holocaust survivor'. It's like tracing one's noble lineage. Jews have become the new christs, and whites have become the new-christ-killers because, apparently, every Jew killed during WWII was a mini-jesus. (In a way, Holocaustianity's condemnation of whites is worse than Christianity's condemnation of Jews. At the very least, Christianity was about Christians worshiping God and the Son of God, not themselves. When Christians urged upon Jews to convert, they weren't saying Jews should worship white Christian goyim but to accept the Son of God. In contrast, Holocaustianity is about goyim, especially whites, worshiping Jews as a bunch of new christs. Jews themselves are the object of worship.) And under Jewish Power, Negroes also have noble blood, that of Sacred Slavery. Just as a poor nobleman enjoyed a higher status than rich Jews in Old Europe, any Jew or Negro in our time, no matter how humble his station in life, enjoys higher status than the richest white goy. If Jews in the past, despite their vast individual wealth, still had the mark-of-cain of 'Christ Killer', whites today, no matter how rich and well-connected they may be, carry the mark-of-cain of 'racist', 'white supremacist', 'nazi', 'Anti-Semite', etc. This is why even the richest whites are always under the moral pressure to demonstrate redemptive 'white guilt'. "I'm trying so very hard to cleanse my sick evil white soul." And so, they donate tons of money to Jewish causes or those with the stamp of approval of Jews: ADL, SPLC, BLM, etc. So, Jeff Bezos' former wife doles out millions to BLM. She's filthy rich but her whiteness means NOTHING except in redemptive mode. (Besides, rich people tend to be vain and shallow, conforming to the Zeitgeist to win praise and plaudits. Their donations are more about status-signaling than carriage of justice.)

In a way, the demise of reason in the culture is the result of mass-mind-control via media and academia(in the hands of Jews). But, it also seems to have resulted from the dire tendency to rest on one's laurels. In the story of the hare and the tortoise, the hare takes its speed so much for granted that it slouches off and fails to realize the tortoise passed it by. Mike Tyson was so sure of his power that he didn't train for the fight with Buster Douglas. A person who thinks himself so smart may not properly prepare for the exam... and fail. It seems the so-called 'liberal' and 'progressive' community has been making so much noise about being intellectual, rational, educated, erudite, curious, critical, skeptical, and sophisticated that they took those things for granted. Why make an effort when your kind is SO SURE that it's so smart, knowing, and 'enlightened'? Why worry about freedom and fairness when your kind is SO SURE that it's all about 'liberal values'? It's like conservatives took for granted their commitment to heritage and hardly made an effort to be truly conservative. They just got lazy with the habit of invoking Ronald Reagan at every turn. Since the 1980s, the so-called conservatives managed to conserve nothing but still call themselves 'conservatives'. Today, so-called liberals have betrayed all their liberal values and principles but still continue with the conceit of being for freedom and 'liberal democracy' when, in fact, they are idiotic dupes of Deep State tyranny.

One thing for sure, people today should no longer look upon the Middle Ages and laugh. They should look in the mirror. For all their modern conceits, they are riddled with taboos, prone to superstition(especially with witchcraft making a comeback among women with green hair & nose-rings), infested with faith against facts(such as BLM nonsense & shrines to Fentanyl Floyd), driven by mob passion, and barbaric in sadism & violence. Evidence counts for nothing in this world. Even though most racial violence is black on white(or non-black), the cult of Magic Negro would have us believe innocent blacks are hunted down by evil 'racists'. Even though progs profess to care about equal justice and insist that 'silence is violence', they don't care about victims of black violence and the countless casualties of Jewish-supremacist violence around the world. Their SILENCE about Palestinians is truly VIOLENCE. Of course, with the boorish Donald Trump and worthless GOP as the face of American Conservatism, it is all too easy for Jews and Progs to see themselves as the 'resistance'. But the fact is they're either no better or even worse. Indeed, they seem to be driven more by pride and ego than truth and justice. As bad as Trump is, his not having embroiled the US in another war is deeply threatening and shaming to the so-called progs. After all, if indeed Trump and his supporters stand for jingoism, imperialism, 'racism', and hatred while the Democrats and Progs represent justice, peace, and harmony, why is it that Obama and Hillary were just as big warmongers as George W. Bush? Then, it's no wonder that Progs, as tools of Jewish Supremacists, were eager to torpedo every effort by Trump to end wars in the Middle East or come to terms with North Korea. As their pride and ego matter more than anything, they are willing to push any lie or pull any stunt to sustain their self-image as 'good compassionate liberals'. If they were to admit that Obama/Hillary were bigger warmongers and mass-killers than Trump, they would have to reassess their self-image and swallow some hard truths. They don't wanna, and so, they live in the Middle Ages of the Mind.

WHY WHITE WOMEN WANT TO BE BLACK

In Response to Fred Reed’s Observations about the Military and Conservatism - Of Jews and Dogs

The Military instinct: The Human Race as Feral Dogs

https://fredoneverything.org/the-military-instinct-the-human-race-as-feral-dogs/

Fred Reed: Recently the collapse of the Soviet Union appeared to offer a prospect of extended peace. There seemed nothing left to fight about, at least on any scale. Yet the United States quickly launched a half dozen wars of no necessity and threatened others. Why?

WHY? Well, which group in the US has (1) elite control over institutions and (2) special animus against Russia, Iran, and any nation that happens to be disliked by Judea and/or Israel?

Mexican-Americans? Black-Americans? Hindu-Americans? Greek-Americans? Eskimos?

The answer is simpler. It’s World Jewry or Jewish Globalist power. If Jewish Power had never gained supremacy in America, the US military would not have invaded Iraq, would not be foaming at the mouth at Iran, wouldn’t have engineered a coup in Ukraine, and would not have triggered a ‘new cold war’ with Russia, a nation with an economy on par with Italy!

True, there is a male-warrior instinct, but if US military ventures are primarily motivated by Male Aggression Principle, why isn’t US calling for war with Saudi Arabia or Zimbabwe? Or with Israel? After all, the UN has a long list of human rights violations committed by Israel.
The real issue revolves around the question of "Who gets to choose the targets(as outlets for male warrior aggression)?" ‘Male’ or ‘conservative’ aggression is satisfied with hunting and destroying ANY enemy, therefore real power rests in those who get to choose the target for destruction. It's like chefs will cook anything: fish, fowl, meat, or vegetables. It all depends on who's holding the menu and making the order. The US military is a kitchen of destruction. It waits for orders from those who are looking at the menu. And it's the Jews who got the menus.

It’s like dogs will happily hunt any animal. The real question concerns who gets to decide what is to be hunted? Should the hunt be for rabbits, foxes, wild boars, deer? Dogs don’t decide. They obey the master. In America, those who get to choose the prey for the predatory military are ethno-tribal in nature. They are Jews.

Fred Reed: Dogs form packs, mark territory, and bark furiously at strange dogs. So, it seems, do people. An empire is just the result of these canine instincts.

But dogs lack agency. They look to their master for orders and approval. So, even though dogs naturally love to fight, hunt game, or just growl at other animals, they rely on the master to decide what should be hated, hunted, fought, or growled at, as well as what to be gentle with, showered with affection, protected, and/or loved. A dog can love or hate another animal or particular person... depending on the wishes of the master.

If dogs are ordered to attack, they will. If they’re ordered to show affection, they will. If you rouse a dog to attack and kill a cat, it will gladly. But if you admonish the dog to befriend the cat and treat it nicely, it will do just that.

Yes, the US military is like a dog, and it lacks agency. It follows orders. And its masters are in organizations like AIPAC. John McCain the militarist only hates nations and peoples hated by Jews. John McCain is McCanine. If Judea told him to be nice to Putin and treat Russia as a friendly nation, he will change his tune overnight. People like McCain not only crave an enemy to hate but a master to serve. As World Jewry are the current master of the West, dogs like McCain do their bidding.

Or consider the Wehrmacht. Sure, there were German generals and soldiers who relished a good battle and the blood-and-guts ‘heroism’ associated with war. But their animus or amity depended on the Fuhrer. When Adolf Hitler told them that USSR is an ally, they were happy to shake hands with Soviet troops. When Hitler ordered them to attack Russia, they did so at the drop of a hat and killed millions.

Fred Reed: Conservatives tend to be tribal, intensely loyal to their group–race, country, ethnicity, religious faith–which in national terms becomes patriotism. They lack empathy.

Actually, conservatives have more sympathy for people within the group, community, or tribe. Liberals feel less kinship sympathy for their own kind. Also, ‘empathy’ isn’t necessarily sympathy. It means the ability to read other people’s thoughts and feelings. The reason why some conservatives lack sympathy for certain other groups is precisely because they are empathetic in reading their minds. For instance, a keen conservative can read the mind of a Negro and see through the BS about ‘social justice’. They look into the Negro male mind and hear, “Where da white women at?” and read the Negro female mind and hear, “My booty be da center of everything.” And keen conservatives are empathetic in reading the minds of Jewish Neocons and their dirty tricks.

Liberals may appear ‘empathetic’ because they claim to be more open-minded about OTHER peoples, but this has less to do with genuine empathetic understanding of others than a naive conceit in their trust or superficial interest in the Other. Most Libby-dibbers who open their hearts and borders to Muslims have NO IDEA what Muslims are really after. Most Libby-dibbers who get all mushy about homos have no idea how the homo mind really works. Homos are vain, narcissistic, self-centered, and bitchy. But libby-dibbers see them as the New Saints who materialized out of ‘rainbows’. True empathy requires the keenness of mind to read the hearts of others. It’s like what Michael Corleone says in THE GODFATHER PART 2. He tries to see things as others see things.



Now, it’s true that many Conservatives are mere morons into ‘Muh country, muh God and muh guns, and etc’. But then, so many libby-dibs are into ‘Muh self-righteous vanity, muh Diversity and muh Inclusion, and etc’. They are enthralled with silly slogans and pat chants.

Fred Reed: Soldiers invariably fit the conservative pattern, prizing loyalty to their units and to their country, seeing threats everywhere, and becoming alarmed easily.

True, but the imperialist mindset can be construed as libby-dib. Most conzo-wonzos are content with what they got, what they are familiar with. It’s the libby-dibs who want more and get tired with what they already have. This leads to an imperialist mindset. (The ultra-conservative systems of Byzantine and East Asia were not interested in conquering or converting the entire world.) Also, libby-dibs believe they are intellectually and culturally superior, and such attitude leads them to believe that they have the moral right to remake the entire world in their image and ideal.

So, the US empire is a fusion of doglike conzo-wonzo soldiers and birdlike libby-dibby imperialists. After all, isn’t it odd that the US is now an empire that sends its soldiers to invade and transform other nations to… raise the Homo Flag?

So, aggression principle has both a conzo-wonzo aspect and a libby-dibby aspect.

Conzo warrior mentality is more defensive and preservative. Pre-Modern East Asia was very conservative, and its military was all about defending the realm from foreigners. This changed only in the 19th century as the the libby-dib West forced Asia to open up to world trade... or get blown to smithereens. (The two times Japan went into imperialist mode owed to Western influence. Hideoyoshi got guns and backing from the West. And modern Japan modeled itself on European and American empires.) Akira Kurosawa’s KAGEMUSHA is about the wisdom of cautionary conservatism in war. Be like a mountain and preserve the domain. Don’t risk losing the domain with vain ambition. But the reckless son wants to win it all and gambles everything, even losing the domain. (Ironically, the ‘far-rightist’ Hitler was more of a libby-dib warrior in ambition, and ‘far-leftist’ Stalin was more of a conzo-wonzo warrior in caution.)



Libby holy crusader mentality is more offensive and transformative. The West became the most progressive part of the world and waged offensives to conquer and transform all the world with Christianity, free trade, ‘human rights’, and etc.

Same goes for religion. The conzo spiritual mindset is more orthodox, more about preserving tradition and dogma. The libby spiritual mindset is more about spreading the gospel or the Truth to all of mankind, even if it means killing countless heathens and infidels. Communism was a secular version of the libby missionary mindset.

Now, there is good and bad side to both conzo mentality and libby mentality.

Conzos are less aggressive outwardly and therefore less likely to conquer other peoples. But this ultra-defensive posture can lead to isolationism, stagnation, and fear of new ideas that might bring forth progress. This is why the Ottoman Empire and East Asia fell behind the more dynamic and liberal West.

As for Libbies, they are more aggressive, adventurous, and ambitious. So, unlike the conzo Hindusphere and East Asia, the more libby Western Europe discovered the world and created new trade routes and made advances in every field. But it also meant conquest, imperialism, slave trade on massive scale, genocide, and etc. And today, the cult of Tolerance among Western libbies is leading to mass invasion by the Third World that could very well mean the end of Western Civilization.

Ideal is a kind of balance of conzo and libby tendencies. But in the US, both the conzo and libby tendencies of gentiles are harnessed to serve the ethno-ambition of Jewish globalists who manipulate and command gung-ho US conservative soldiers to invade and destroy nations(hated by Israel) and also to ensure the spread of Homomania and Hollywood values. Instead of a meaningful balance of conzo-ness and libby-ness, both are perverted to serve ethno-supremacist ambitions and homo-negro degeneracy.

Now, the US could play a responsible role as the policeman of the world. After all, there’s always the chance of dogs around the world getting out of control and barking and attacking one another. If a responsible person were to wield the stick and command the field, the dogs would know who’s boss and learn to behave. US could play this role if it were ruled by sane and sensible leaders.

But instead, the US is like a demented master that trains and encourages some dogs to attack other dogs. Indeed, American Power is now like Jews-as-masters abusing and exploiting goy Americans as bulldogs. US has become the master of New World Disaster. It used Jihadis to tear Libya and Syria apart. It encourages Saudis to raise tension levels with Iran. It used neo-nazi elements in Ukraine. It provokes North Korea with military drills with servile South Korea, a yellow dog that takes orders from American dogs who take orders from the Jewish Master.
Even US allies come under US bullying. So, even if a nice nation like Hungary wants to be friendly with the US, Russia, and Iran, the big US bully steps forth and says YOU CAN’T TRADE WITH THEM BECAUSE WE SAY NO(AND WE SAY NO BECAUSE JEWS SAY NO); IF YOU DISOBEY, WE WILL DESTROY YOU THROUGH SANCTIONS AND INTERFERENCE VIA CIA.
It’s how the current world is.

The Power of Mockology. If You Don't Want to Bother with Argument, Mock the Other Side.

Mockery has been around forever, but now it's a fine-tuned science that might be called Mockology. One way to argue, debate, and discuss matters is through earnest sincerity and facts & figures and in good faith. Traditional Wasp liberals tended to be of this sort. Agree or disagree, men like Senator Adlai Stevenson--the egghead--and John Kenneth Galbraith meant what they said and spoke with a degree of sincerity. In a way, one might trace such an approach to New England Puritan tradition. Though this tradition could be traced back to Great Britain, British society was ruled by its aristocratic and then bourgeois elites  who weren't very puritanical in anything--even during the Victorian Era. Brits were into Propriety, which is not the same thing as Purity.  Dignity of manners and demeanor mattered a great deal, but as long as one's air of 'dignity' was maintained, one could rely on irony, wit, mockery, sarcasm, and snobbery to better or put down others; and masters of such wit were much admired for their delicious 'dignified' cruelty. Since wit is rare--relatively few are born with it and those naturally without it need extensive training to learn the art--, the British style of debate and discussion favored the aristocratic, the rich, the privileged, the haughty. Though there were plenty of sincere and earnest British thinkers and intellectuals, the dominant voices of British Order really made their mark through wit, haughtiness, and mockery. Even the 'leftist' Christopher Hitchens was very much in this aristocratic tradition. Though a 'bad boy' personality, Hitchens' effectiveness depended on his snobbish air of superiority, i.e. not just 'I know more or better than you', but 'I speak better than you and know more fancy words and turns of phrases.'

Though Puritans didn't found the American Republic, their attitudes and manners influenced the formation of the American Character. And since the American Republic was supposed to be anti-aristocratic and reach out to the masses--The People--, it wasn't good form for American elites to put on haughty airs and go overly into ironic and witty mode. Thus, the culture of mockery in America often had a populist than elitist flavor. American Puritanism's culture of sincerity and good faith found its greatest obstacle in Populism. While populism panders to the masses, it isn't really about people power. Rather, it's about the manipulation of the masses by the cynical elites, deluded demagogues, or firebrand reformers. As we all should know by now, The People are incapable of leading themselves. Huey Long the Populist was a pretty clever guy, just like Lenin and Hitler. In Frank Capra's MEET JOHN DOE, we see how easily the masses can be manipulated via populism by the craven rich and their allies. What the fat rich guy does in that movie is no different from what Jewish elites do today. And the nature of Populism was also examined in movies like A FACE IN THE CROWD(directed by Elia Kazan and starring Andy Griffith).

Even so, American intellectual tradition had a strong Puritanical tinge. Men like John Dewey were very earnest in their causes. And American intellectuals tended to lose public debates to British intellectuals because the latter were trained in wit and irony whereas Americans dryly and earnestly stuck to facts, figures, and data.
Indeed, it was this aspect that gave a big boost to Bill Buckley in the 50s. While most Americans never read the NATIONAL REVIEW, Buckley became a very attractive figure to the mass audience because of his public persona as a debonair man of wit. He employed a kind of British wit and snobbery that mocked the liberals, and egghead liberals were made to look foolish(even if they were correct on certain issues). Buckley-ism was an odd phenomenon for Buckley the man with the snobby elitist style allied with vulgar populist Joseph McCarthy and claimed to represent REAL Americans from the liberal elites. Buckley was a neo-aristocrat appealing to the populist masses--it's no wonder he would later form a strong bond with Rush Limbaugh--against the technocratic liberal elite.

With Buckley, style mattered over substance, but in the mass media age, style IS the substance. While someone like Buckley figure might have been resented in class-bound England of the post-war period, many American conservatives ate it up--and even liberals were impressed. Though Americans were committed to 'equality', they'd always felt a certain inferiority complex when it came to flair and grace  compared to the Europeans. Thus, even populist conservatives were drawn to the aristocratic style of Buckley since it lent conservatism a measure of class and 'dignity'. Buckley was their 007, and it's no wonder that Buckley created a series of novels with an ersatz James Bond figure.
Buckley and Bozell won many debates against liberals in the 50s by employing wit and irony than facts and figures. Even when liberals were factually correct, Buckley pricked their 'lame' bubble of sincerity with his sharp tongue.

Another group that rose of great influence and prominence via wit were the Jews, and in a way, their wit was fiercer and more lethal. If British and Buckleyite wit tended to be dry and 'dignified'(as a form of aristocratic wit), the Jewish wit tended to be down and dirty(as a form of grubby middleman wit). British wit was like taking a velvet glove and slapping the opponent. Jewish wit was like pulling down the pants of the other guy and exposing his genitalia. Also, Jews with their higher IQ, had the sharper wit. If Brits and Buckley fought with a saber, Jews had a saber plus a knife behind their backs. Buckley was no match for Alan Dershowitz in their debates. Buckley daintily slapped Dershowitz while Dershowitz ferociously grabbed Buckley by the balls and wouldn't let go.
Consider the scene in SHADOWLANDS where some British professors makes a dry mocking remark to a Jewish-American lady, but the woman counters with a remark that pulls down his pants and leaves him standing like a fool. Check 3:25 of the video below:


Or watch how Buckley is totally outclassed in wit by Woody Allen. It's like German scientists could design rockets, but Jewish scientists could make the Bomb:


Perhaps, the rise of Buckley, the Jews, and gays had something to do with the fact that they were all masters of style and wit. Gore Vidal the homosexual 'leftist'--an eccentric one to be sure--became more famous and prominent than most fuddy duddy earnest liberals. It didn't matter if Vidal was right or wrong. He had the gay debonair style as could be seen in the video below:


Buckley was no friend of homos, but if he were liberal, he might be considered as 'pansy' by many red-meat Populist conservatives and too 'fancy' by heart-and-soul puritanical conservatives. Buckley probably found a lot of conservatives overly boring and square, and that may have been one of the reasons why he welcomed the neocons. Though Jewish wit was different from his own, Buckley appreciated the quick mind and sharp tongue. Besides, with his power of wit fading due to aging, mental block, and/or pot-smoking, he hoped smart neocon Jew could best carry out the conservative cause--even if it meant sacrificing one of the greatest wits on the Right: Joseph Sobran.

All said and done, wit has not been a strong suit among conservatives, and Buckley was like a diamond among stones. Oddly enough, liberals politicians, ever so stuck in earnest WASP mode, tended to lose in the wit department in national elections. Reagan and even Nixon had more 'charisma' than Humphrey, Carter, Mondale, and Dukakis the Anglo-Americanized Greek. Things began to change with Clinton, though dullness returned to politics with George W. Bush, Al Gore, John Kerry, and John McCain. Obama's one advantage was in the Style department. Romney, handsome and smart as he may be, had a certain stiffness about him.

With the the loss of Buckley, American conservatism returned to the mode of earnestness. If wit was to anywhere be found, it was populist wit of the likes of Limbaugh and Coulter. Both were pretty skilled at 'winning' by mocking the other side and making it look ridiculous than arguing with sound facts and figures. And of course, on YOUTUBE, there is Ramzpaul:


With Talk Radio and Sensationalist Fox News ascendant in the New Media against the dry and 'boring' MSM of network news and CNN, it seemed as though(for a time at least) conservatives were finally turning the tide in the getting their views out. (Liberals were so worried that many invoked the Fairness Act to force Talk Radio to give equal time to liberals.) It wasn't so much that conservatives were making the better argument. Rather, they were more brazen in their politics and mockery of the other side. Though MSM was always liberal-leaning, their commitment to 'objectivity' prevented them from being overtly partisan, and this made them look 'wimpy' and dry. And since a lot of leftists were academic intellectuals, they came across as 'elitist' and couldn't connect with the people. And intellectuals were supposed to rely on reason and facts, not on mockery. Though leftist intellectuals often fudged their data and told lies, they still had to maintain the facade of 'reason' and 'objective' scholarship; and that made them easy targets of ridicule of right-wing mocksters. But then, with the rise of Political Correctness, it became more and more fashionable for intellectuals and 'social scientists' to be openly mocking of views and groups they opposed, even calling for their silence via 'hate speech' laws.

And with the rise of Michael Moore came the leftist-populist schlockumentary that appealed to millions of people. If documentaries by filmmakers like Barbara Koppel won the critical accolades but went unseen by most people, countless people loved the Moore's clown act and connected with his 'every-man bowling alley and baseball cap' image.
And if liberal Talk Radio failed to match conservative Talk Radio, there was Liberal Talk TV--Bill Maher, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and etc.--that won a huge audience, among both the unwashed and the educated. And as TV talkshows like Letterman and others became more politicized, their Jewish comic writers delivered endless lines mocking conservatives and Republicans--and more Americans get their political attitudes from such shows than from political news sources.

Also, liberal news shows followed the Fox format and became brazenly and sensationally partisan, mocking, and aggressive. Liberals were no longer 'wimps' pushed around by 'macho' conservatives but pushing back and fighting with sharper knives(as most Jewish wit was on liberal side). Also, the rise of PC meant that liberals could fight a lot dirtier than conservatives could. For example, liberals could demean the Conservative as 'old, white, male, and etc', but the conservative side had to mindful not to push too hard on power of Jews, gay privilege, feminist hysteria, black violence, and Mexican tribalism. (Indeed, the issue of Jewish Power is an utter taboo for both sides, as both Joe Sobran and Rick Sanchez found out.) Mexicans, Jews, gays, and blacks can be 'racist' against conservative whites, but white conservatives must be ever so careful not to wage 'war' on women, minorities, and etc.   Liberal Jews can bash wasp conservatives all they want, but wasp conservatives must embrace Jews as the most wonderful people. Liberal Jews can trash white conservatives for being conservative, but the most white conservatives are allowed is toexpress sadness that too many Jews are liberal. Limbaugh and Coulter may rage against Mexicans, Chinese, and Muslims, but they never dare say anything about Jewish Power that did most to undermine white conservative America. Both liberal Jews and neocon Jews--as fifth columnists--did more to destroy to American conservatism than any other force, but they are untouchable in political criticism and discourse.
Though we are told that the 'model minority' is a pernicious idea, white conservatives are told that they must play by the 'model majority' ideal. While non-whites, Jews, and gays get to play down-and-dirty, whites must always be 'high-minded', generous, and 'fair'.  Though liberal Hollywood has made tons of anti-Muslim movies, GOP is accused of 'Islamophobia'. Most of the war porn movies sensationalizing American Power smashing the Middle East with big bombs were made by liberals. Though liberal Hollywood has spread 'yellow peril' fears with movies like RISING SUN and the remake of RED DAWN, liberals accuse conservatives of being anti-Asian. (Of course, GOP does play the 'yellow peril' card but no more than liberal media. NY TIMES endorses the idea that Asians are 'unfairly' being admitted in huge numbers to elite schools.)

In a way, the demise of the GOP and the awakening realization among white conservatives that JEWS WERE BEHIND IT ALL may finally change the political dynamic of this nation. It's like in THE GODFATHER. The Corleones find out it was Barzini all along. And in GODFATHER II, the grand manipulator turns out to have been Hyman Roth the Jew. Though both Barzini and Roth posed as friends of the Corleones, they were masterminding the destruction of the Corleones. Once the Corleones discover the truth, they get tough and ruthless and do everything to fight and destroy the enemy. At this point in American history, we need to learn that it was the Jewish Barzinis/Roths all along who've masterminded the destruction of White America. We need to go into Corleone mode. The old war of party politics may be over, but the new war of Race Politics begins now. And in this new war, whites will have to discuss white power, white interests, white identity, white pride, and JEWISH MENDACITY and JEWISH POWER.


Anyway, liberal mockery isn't merely mockery but a kind of science of making the other side look ridiculous. Jews, like Greeks of Old, are into intellectualizing and understanding everything. Seinfeld said that he didn't merely learn comedy but intensely studied it. He inspected what makes funny 'funny'. What are the main components, what are the mechanisms of humor and the patterns of absurdity? And in a way, SEINFELD and Larry David's CURB YOUR ENTHUSIASM aren't only comedy shows but the 'science of comedy' shows that toys with the rules and mechanisms of comedy. SEINFELD was SCIENCEFELD.
Having mastered the science of comedy and mockery, Jews have fashioned it into Mockology, and they use it in the media to make conservatives look very stupid, dumb, and bigoted, though to be sure, conservatives don't need much help, what with personalities like George W. Bush, Sarah Palin, the hacks on Fox News and clowns on Talk Radio, morons who fixate on Obama's mythical birth in Kenya, and etc. There are many smart conservatives, but since mockery is the main mode of politics, both liberalism and conservatism have been defined by the mocksters.
So, both sides are full of obnoxious and contemptible people. So why do the conservatives look dumber? Because there is more liberal control of media, more liberal mocksters, and better understanding of the science of mockology among liberal Jews. Also, keep in mind that many Americans pick up their political views not from politicians or pundits but from entertainment. Though ostensibly not political, 'everything is political', as leftists once used to say. So, if a TV show presents gays as angels while anti-'gay marriage'  conservatives as fat, ugly, and gross 'homophobes', that's how many Americans will come to see the debate: wonderful gays vs evil dumb conservatives.  Since liberal Jews control the media, that's just how it goes.