If Whiteness has no Validity or Meaning, then Whites cannot lay claim to anything, and there is No Common White Property — The Political Art of White Dispossession by Jewish Supremacism, especially by pushing ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs

What secures the survival and well-being of a people? What keeps them healthy in body and spirit? What provides them with a sense of meaning and purpose, even destiny? What fills them with a sense of distinctness, a special quality that makes them rise above mere genericity, rise above the occasion?

A people must have a sense of their evolutionary origins and understand what makes them different from other races. If of a spiritual bent, a people must be bound by the conviction that God created different peoples, and each group is unique in its own way. A people must have a sense of history. Just like every individual has his own unique biography and every family has its own story, every people need to keep with their own history with its origins, myths, tales, and heroes & villains. Just like it's tragic for an amnesiac or an Alzheimer patient robbed of memory, a people without historical memory and a deep sense of roots & mythic bonds are truly lost, like a confounded hiker or navigator without a compass, no sense of where he came from and no sense of where he's going and why.
For security-sake, it's essential that a people lay claim to certain territories as rightfully theirs. A people without a country are like a man without a home: Doomed to wander as nomads. There's a difference between a traveler and a nomad. A traveler has a home to return to in the end, like Odysseus. In contrast, a nomad is a chronic wanderer. Steve Martin's character in PLANES, TRAINS, AND AUTOMOBILES has a home and a family waiting for him. John Candy's character is always on the road, condemned to drift from place to place.
Furthermore, as one lives forever, a people must produce new generations, and this requires the union of man and woman. To preserve the unique features of form and beauty of a people, most of the sexual unions must be among the men and women of the group. Excessive miscegenation leads to something like the mulatto-mestizos of Latin America, confused populations with weak sense of who or what they are.
In addition, to ensure the synthesis of identity, history, and territory, there must be proper authority, a concentration of power, that works to lead, represent, defend, and preserve the people and culture. Without these supports, a people's long-term survival comes into question. It's like there's no guarantee that a chair with four wobbly legs will remain standing. If a horse with one broken leg is useless, imagine one with four broken legs. What happens to a building when its columns or support beams are broken? The whole thing may well crumble to the ground. Indeed, bigger the structure, stronger its support system must be. Bigger they are, firmer they must stand... or else harder they fall.

Now, it's possible for a people/culture to survive without all the supports. Jews certainly did for nearly two thousand years without a homeland to call their own, and Kurds continue as a people & culture despite being dispersed among several non-Kurd-majority nations like Turkey, Syria, Iran, Iraq, and etc. In the case of the Jews, their magic formula was the Covenant, which went beyond mere identity, territory, and history. The Covenant created a spiritual bond between Jewish Blood and Heavenly Spirit. It meant that wherever Jews may be, whatever straits they were in, and however downtrodden they may be, they are the Chosen People favored by the one and only true God. The fact that Jews survived over the millennia despite so many setbacks(and even loss of territory) is a testament to the power of bonding blood with spirit. At any rate, Jews are an exception in history.
Furthermore, while there's much to learn from the Jewish Example, one should never heed Jewish advice as the essence of Jewishness is to maximize its own tribal power, wealth, influence, and control at the expense of goyim. If something works great for Jews, Jews will recommend the very opposite for the goyim. But then, Jews are being smart in their deviousness. If gold is buried in spot A, of course it makes sense for Jews to tell others it's buried in spot B... or C or D or E. It's like the Vikings who settled in Iceland wanted it for themselves. So, they gave it the forbidding name of 'Iceland' to keep others away while naming a far less hospitable land mass 'Greenland'. Likewise, Jews want to hoard their own 'Iceland' for themselves while recommending the metaphorical 'Greenland' for goyim. Iceland is really green whereas Greenland is frozen.

For most peoples, the failure to secure one of the pillars of peoplehood is like being a Paralympian than an Olympian. It's like competing with a missing arm or leg or with a broken spine. Such peoples must hobble through history and are always at a disadvantage vis-a-vis others with sturdier, sounder, and more complete support systems. An engine running on all six cylinders has more kick than one running on three. A plane with four working propellers is preferable to one with only two working. Jews are like someone using both arms and both legs urging others to tie one hand behind the back and jump around on one foot. Some Jews go even further and urge upon goyim to cut off all limbs. Jews would have goyim, especially white goyim, turn into Boxing Helena.

Still, a people with one or two cylinders working are better off than a people with all the cylinders out of order. The rule of history is that a people with essential support systems, no matter how poor and backward, are better positioned to survive into the future than a people who, no matter how well-fed and affluent, have been robbed of theirs. Indeed, compare the Palestinians and Anglo-Canadians. The latter enjoy much better living standards than the tragic Arabs living under Zionist occupation and tyranny. But, whereas Palestinians doggedly cling to their pride of identity and sense of history(and totally believe in the rightness of their cause and see Jews for what they are) despite their loss of territory, Anglo-whites in Canada have no pride of identity, no sense of history, and no claim of territory. Indeed, for Anglo-whites nothing is conceivably more evil than the idea of white authority/power in service of white interests. Even as a defeated people, Palestinians know what they are and do what they must to survive. Despite their affluence and privileges, Anglo-whites of Canada have zero defense systems against the Great Replacement(or White Nakba) and, if anything, believe the evil of whiteness must be erased by Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity, or D.I.E.
So, whereas Palestinians struggle to remain Palestinians with each passing year, Anglo-whites lose out ever more in Canada(and it's the same in all of Anglosphere and Germanosphere as Northern European whites are now totally mind-controlled by Jews). Of course, Jews sought to mind-trick the Palestinians as well. Zionists argued there's no such thing as the Palestinian people, Palestinian culture, or Palestinian history. Jews said it's all just a 'social construct'(but for some reason, we are to believe Zionism is so natural and real that it has the right to destroy the natives of Palestine to make room for Euro-Israel dominated by Ashkenazim). If Palestinians didn't take the vile Jewish bait, whites not only took it but swallowed the whole thing as good medicine... only to have the hook stuck inside their intestines which are now fatally wounded and bleeding.

Jews rule the world and seek to undermine and invalidate any concept of White Property or White Possession. White Dispossession is the name of the game. This is why Jews attack the very notion of whiteness. If whiteness is a valid category, then whites would have reasons to defend their identity, heritage, history, territory, wealth, authority, and power. But if whiteness is invalid, just some ‘racist’ construct or at best a figment of the imagination, then whites have no unique, special, and/or commanding claim to anything. Minus such conviction, whites don't deserve to own anything as a people, not least because even their peoplehood lacks legitimacy.
Of course, whites as individuals can own stuff, even lots of stuff(like Bill Gates or Warren Buffett), but there is nothing that whites as a race, culture, or people can have, defend, and preserve as their own. The politically correct mantra of Diversity really means that anything white can be claimed and taken by nonwhites? (It's like Asian-Indians as individuals could gain wealth under British Imperialism, but they, as a people, could not claim India as a national entity independent of Rule Britannia).
It's akin to conditions of slavery, at least on the legal and psychological level(even if whites aren't literally slaves). Consider blacks in the American South when slavery still existed. Not all blacks had to pick cotton from sunup to sundown. Some black slaves could learn a craft and earn money(even save enough to purchase their own freedom). But no matter how much they earned(and even upon gaining freedom), it was virtually forbidden for them to think that they deserved or owned anything as a collective, as a people. For blacks, wealth and freedom were just individual matters. Some blacks could do pretty well as individuals and some could be legally free, but they couldn't be empowered as an united people.

Today, Jews have done the same to whites who are but soul-slaves of the Zionic Tribe. Jeff Bezos and Tim Cook are among the richest whites in the world, but their wealth is purely an individual matter. They can spend it on themselves and their close ones but never ever for white interests. But then, as people aren't mere individuals but part of a larger community, what can rich whites do to show they aren't just in it for themselves? There are three choices: (1) Libertarianism, a soulless ideology about 'muh freedom' that only further atomizes the white race and separates rich whites from those with less (2) The Approved Tribalism or Idolatry of Jews, blacks, and homos — even though Identity is generally denied to most groups, especially whites and Palestinians, it is not only tolerated but celebrated among Jews, blacks, and homos as the three magical groups (3) Mania for Diversity and Inclusion, which means rich whites should care about nonwhites around the world and welcome them into the West, not least to snub and replace 'racist' whites.

Is it any wonder that Jews(who are only 2% of the US population), blacks(who are 13% of the population), and homos(who are only 2.5% of the population) have more authority than whites? All Jews can coordinate together for Jewish Power. Blackness has been made sacred, i.e. blacks, just by being black, are deemed holy. Globo-Homo is now celebrated, and an entire month is reserved for Limp-Wristianity or Queertianity as replacement for Christianity. And even though the identities of Mestizos, Asians, Arabs, and etc. aren't especially regarded in the West, they have prestige as 'immigrants' bearing the wonderful gift of Diversity, further pushing whites to the back of the bus. (Of course, no one asks why people from Latin America must come to the US for a better life when their own countries are plenty diverse. Why has Diversity failed to do its magic for Latin America? Does Diversity become magic only when whites in the West are on the verge of losing their majority status? Odd how that works.)

Anyway, War-on-Whiteness(or WOW) and the ensuing White Dispossession allow Jews to lay claim to and gain possession of just about anything that once belonged to the white world. Nothing white is deemed sacred or priceless. Jews look upon the white world as a Jewish pawnbroker looks upon property. They are all trinkets for his taking. Everything white has a price tag and can be bought or sold or just taken by Jews or nonwhites.
Of course, Syrians aren't so lucky either. Jewish-controlled US foreign policy led to the military occupation of entire swaths of Syrian territory. The way Jews see it, Syria doesn't belong to Syrians, and Jews can use their goy military puppets to invade and occupy any piece of Syrian territory at whim. Currently, Syrians don't even have access to their own oil due to Jewish-guided US occupation. And of course, Palestinians in West Bank are silenced by the Jew-run media while yet another piece of their territory is swallowed up by Jewish invader-settlers. Jews look upon all the goy world as their oyster or goyster.

Since whiteness is an evil notion, the idea of White Territory is intolerable. Whites have no territory to call their own. All of the West must be on the auction block. It is to be sold and bought. Worse, any bunch of nonwhites can trample into white lands because Jewish-controlled globalism(the current ideology of the West) says Europeans don't even own the identity or meaning of European-ness. Anyone can become 'European' because globalism defines 'European-ness' as the celebration of Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity.
So, while white individuals can own lots of private property, there isn’t a single square inch in the world to designate as White Territory. Jewish supremacists who rule the West insist that whiteness is an evil that must be eradicated, and therefore, nothing can be claimed in the name of whiteness. White people must live merely as generic people or deracinated individuals in service to Jewish Identity, globo-homo-afro idolatry, and globalist ideology. Of course, Viktor Orban disagrees and says Hungary is sacred birth-and-burial ground for Hungarians. Jews cannot tolerate this. Not because Hungary itself is an important and consequential nation in the literal sense — a middle-income country with population of mere ten million, it isn't — but because its European-and-Christian-centered nationalism, in rejecting the entire paradigm of the Jew World Order, may inspire whites around the world to think outside the Jewish Box and say NO to Jewish Supremacism in the name of White Liberation. To Jewish Supremacists, the Hungarian example is akin to Palestinians saying Palestine is their homeland on the basis of pride of identity, resilience of history, and claim of territory. Well, at least Jews also have historical roots in the Holy Land, but it is outrageous how they lay claim to all the West that rightfully and racially belongs to whites.

For Jewish supremacists, the idea that white women belong to white men to have white kids with in order to preserve the white race is also evil. As whiteness is just a figment of ‘racist’ fantasy, white women are mere commodity for other races. They are whores for Jewish merchants and ho’s for black men. Jews say there is no deep and meaningful bond between white men and white women because whiteness is just garbage cooked up by ‘racists’. This is what Jews push. Jews want white wombs to be colonized by black men.
But it's rather odd if one thinks about it. On the one hand, Jews and blacks impugn whiteness as just worthless garbage, but they seem obsessed with white beauty that is the product of tens of thousands of evolution whereby white men mated with white women. If Jews and blacks see nothing special about whiteness, why do THEY lay claim to beauty that is unique to whites? Of course, the black threat is especially damaging to whites because of the Jungle Fever factor. Even with anti-whiteness in full force in media and academia, most white women won't sexually venture outside whiteness as they don't feel much attraction to most nonwhite men. But it's different with white women and Negroes because black men are better at sports, can holler & sing louder, and have bigger dongs. Indeed, even when the West was 'racist' and enforced taboos against miscegenation in the past, some white women went with black men because of the sheer pull of jungle fever. In our times when Jews control ideology(propaganda) & idolatry(marketing) and outright promote Jungle Fever and encourage millions of black Africans to move to the West, ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs is an existential threat to the white race. It effectively turns white women into 'mudsharks' and reduces white men into wussy cucks, resulting in the erasure of European uniqueness in form and beauty as the white race will be mulatto-ized and claimed by blackness that, contra whiteness, is much celebrated and even sacralized in the Jew World Order.
The way Jews see it, Jewish Supremacism depends on white submission, and there is no better way to effect permanent white obeisance than by breaking the sacred bond between white men and white women with Jungle Fever. Today, cuckenized white men celebrate the very fact that white women reject them and go with blacks. Jews brainwashed white males into believing that black sexual imperialism and white sexual defeat are synonymous with 'anti-racism' when, in fact, it's premised on black men being superior men to white men. Of course, it could be just a case of White Male Cope. Since they are losing white women to black men and can't do anything about it, they pretend they are letting it happen of their own accord out of racial magnanimity or commitment to combating 'racism'. So, even though white women are being taken away from white men, white men pretend they are giving their women away out of free will. It's like the landlord in THE GODFATHER PART 2 who complies with Vito Corleoene's request out of fear but pretends it's out of the goodness of his heart.

In the Jew World Order, there can be no such thing as White History, yet another essential pillar or support system lost for the white race. Indeed, Jews insist White History never existed because whiteness was always a fantasy of ignorance + supremacism and nothing else. Kids nowadays are told Greeks and Romans weren’t white. Iceland and Sweden were always 'multicultural', meaning multi-racial. Blacks always roamed around Britain and France. So, why not fill up all new movies about European lore and history with blacks and nonwhites? And even if some parts of Europe were indeed all-white, how terrible indeed and in need of being remedied with the wonders of Diversity. It's as if such whites lived inside a cave without the sun and must be brought out into the light. Shame on such history for its lack of diversity. As diversity is so wondrous, all Europeans must fantasize that their ancestors and heroes were black even if such weren't the case.

As for the politics of white authority or white power, NO WAY insist the Jews. Whiteness is ‘racist’, therefore any power or authority centered on serving white identity and interests is totally anathema to all that is good. So, while white individuals can make lots of money and work for powerful institutions, they must never think white or serve white interests. They must serve lofty ideals such as ‘diversity’, ‘inclusion’, and ‘equity’…. though for some reason, they must also serve Jews and blacks and homos as the Holy Three even though we’ve been told tribalism is wrong.

This is why whites are so powerless. Even though whites are still numerous in the West, have lots of wealth, desired for their looks, and are well-represented in elite institutions, whites are powerless as a race because even the most successful white individuals can never ever serve or defend whiteness but must serve ‘woke’ ideology or the idolatry of the holy three: Jews, blacks, and homos. If Bill Gates were to donate a measly $100 to Jared Taylor's American Renaissance, the full force of Jewish Supremacism and its white cuck-collaborators, what with their total grip on elite power, will pounce on him at once and destroy his reputation, connections, and wealth. Also, the courts will dig up anything to bring him down as so-called 'justice' is just a gangsterist lawfare arm of the Jews.

Whites today are like all those horses. Horses are big powerful beasts, but whatever their number, they are powerless as horses because they’ve been trained to serve humans. No matter how powerfully they run and do their horsey things, it’s never for horse-sake but for human-sake. Whites are now essentially saddled horses of Jewish cowboys.

The REAL Pandemic : "HATE CRIMES" On The Rise! - Nick Fuentes

Ron Paul style Libertarianism is Useless against Globalist Gangster Fascism of the Deep State & Big Industry, both of which worship the Gods controlled by Jewish Power — Only Solution against Globo-Homo Gangster Fascism is the National-Humanist Neo-Fascism of the Patriots

When Fascism Comes, It Will be Wearing a Mask - Ron Paul http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/january/25/when-fascism-comes-it-will-be-wearing-a-mask/

The problem is not fascism as all power is fascist. The question is WHO controls it.

US is under Jewish Supremacist gangster fascism. THAT is the problem.

A true liberal democracy never existed and is impossible. Every system is dominated by one group and its arm of the deep state. And there’s always bound to be a close working relation between big government and big business. Japan Inc. developed that way. So did Germany in the 19th century. So, if state + industry means fascism, even democracies have been fascist. Israeli state and Israeli industry support one another. If that is the definition of fascism, Israel is fascist.

The real problem is that the use of power in the US is centered on Jewish Supremacist interests.

We see this in the apotheosis of the tranny. Now, did most women want this? Did they want to take a backseat to a bunch of freako men pretending to be ‘women’? No. It was Jews who wanted it. Why? Jews seek to suppress any notion of majority identity and pride. Among womenfolk, real women are more than 99% whereas tranny faux-women count for less than 1%. And yet, women now must make way for trannies as champions of female sports.
Why? Jews see tranny power/privilege as analogous to Jewish power/privilege. In both cases, it’s the minority-elite dictating and dominating over the vast majority. When the great majority of goyim let themselves fall under Jewish Power, stuff like globo-homo and transmania were almost inevitable as furtherance of Jewish Power Strategy. Jews see it as cultural rhyming: Jewish minority elite power rhymes with tranny minority elite power.

Against Jewish gangster-fascism, we need a fascism of our own. The problem in America is not the threat of fascism but lack of our fascism against their fascism.

Ron Paul is a nice guy and all. He means well, but libertarianism is useless as a power strategy because it atomizes people into individuals who only care about ‘muh freedom’. To fight the concentrated unity of Jewish supremacism, goyim must unite into ‘ouh power’.
Why did Western frontier towns need sheriffs and deputies? Whereas the outlaws led by Lee Marvin were united in their nastiness, the townsfolk were divided as individuals and too disorganized to come together as a fighting force against the bullies and baddies. It’s like Frank Miller and three men can subdue an entire town in HIGH NOON because the folks don’t think and act as one; each person thinks only of ‘muh life’. It’s like a small pride of lions can kill lots of wildebeest because the latter never unite as a fighting force but only flee with ‘muh life’ in mind. If wildebeest acted as one, there’s no way lions could kill them.

The weakness of libertarianism is evident in the post by the libertarian John Matze(CEO of Parler):

https://parler.com/

The pooter-boy posted a comment:

"Many upsetting things have occurred over the last year. The natural reaction is to cast blame, or to jump to pre-mature conclusions.
We should, in the spirit of Parley, place aside our differences, place aside our biases of one another, and have a respectful conversation in order to improve our society. We shall check our baggage at the door, and start fresh with one another.
I believe everyone in the tech community, political, and others should put their differences aside to move forward together."

What a wuss. Big Tech companies under direction of nasty Jews colluded to shut his company down, and Big Media, also run by Jews, praise the censchwarzship and smear his reputation(and encourage antifa types to make threats to his family), but pooter-boy Matze sheepishly pleads for civility and discourse.
A man so incapable of righteous anger is worthless, but that is the essence of libertarianism, and it affects so many even on the Dissident Right. The sheer dweebiness is sickening. While mere anger doesn’t get one anywhere, neither do mere ideas or facts. It is rage, anger, or passion that fuels whatever ideas one believes in or facts one espouses. Andrew Torba of Gab has the passion along with the idealism. In contrast, Matze is a wuss, a dweeb, a pooter-boy.

Even funnier is his notion that ‘in the spirit of Parley, place aside our differences…’

What? The whole spirit of a site like Parler is to air the differences and have honest discussions and let the chips fall where they may. If the spirit of Parler is to hold hands and sing kumbaya, Matze should serve as waterboy on the Oprah Show. This is why libertarianism is useless. It is weak. And many dissident right types are weak at heart because they began as libertarians who never appreciated the power of unity via fascism.

All power is fascist. So, we need to stop denouncing bad power as ‘fascist’. Rather, we should identify the bad power correctly as THEIR FASCISM while working to construct OUR FASCISM based on our identity and the real truth.

It is war. When the enemy is united and attacking as a force, the last thing you want to do is to tell the men on your side, “Fight as individual soldiers and never unite into a fighting force as that would be ‘fascist’.” Well, that's libertarian thinking. Ron Paul is a nice guy and means well, but his ideals are utterly useless in the real world. An atomized people will lose to a united people, indeed even when the former outnumbers the latter by a huge margin. Always. Consider. If there are 1,000 goyim and just 10 Jews BUT if goyim only act as individuals whereas Jews fight as a group of ten, Jews will win every encounter. There is no power without unity, and that is one of the essences of fascism. Jews act fascist but smear others as 'fascist'. It is a power strategy to keep the advantage of fascism for themselves while discouraging it among others. We need to call out on Jewish fascism and build our own counter-fascism. If you're honest, you'll know it's the only way.

FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR SARA CARTER AMPLIFIES DEFAMATION OF YOURS TRULY, PROVING FOX IS TRASH

White Americans Are Not Free Individuals but Mere EXTENSIONS of Jewish Supremacist Power, mere Tentacles to the Jewish Octopus Mind and Will

Jews understand a crucial truth. People are Extensions than Individuals. As social creatures, people are more like ants than lone animals like tigers or bears. People constantly pick up signals, all the more so in our age of electronic media and gadgets. Every time someone uses 'my' device, he or she is being tuned to signals emanating from a center of power/influence. He or she thinks, "I'm a free individual with 'choice'", but in fact, the possible 'choices' are fed into his/her mind through electronic signals. In some ways, people became less individualistic with the rise of radio and TV. Prior to such technology, everyone in the US did something different on any given night. Some read books(countless different titles) and magazines, some went for social gathering, others went for a walk, some stared at the moon, and etc. If ANYTHING unified people in the US and the West prior to Radio and TV, it was the Bible. But with the TV, just about everyone in the US could be watching the same show at the same instant. Despite the 'participation' of countless millions, the shows were created by just a handful of people. As Jews gained control of the media, they were filling our minds with 'control' signals. A the guy in A SERIOUS MAN(by Coen Brothers) messes with the TV antennae, he senses the TV is exerting serious influence on his children, not all of it good. Still, Jews needed to worry less about TV & Radio as Jewish Media Masters were careful not to send signals that would be negative for Jews. Instead, signals instilled the mass public with the message that one's moral character is a measure of his/her 'philosemitism'. If animus, hostility, and hatred were spread by the electronic signals, they were aimed at whites because Jewish supremacist power needs white submission and obedience, the product of white shame, moral paralysis, and self-loathing. Jews need whites to be in forever-redemptive mode for their history of 'racism', 'antisemitism', and etc. because then they can exploit the white need for atonement by directing white actions toward Judeocentric goals. "Jews are so good and holy, whites are so vile and loathsome; therefore, in order for whites to cleanse their souls, they must look to Jews for wisdom and guidance."

In a way, libertarianism, especially the kind pushed by Ayn Rand, has been of great use to Jews. Libertarianism served as a loosening agent. It's like you must first weaken the bonds that hold a structure together; then, the structure can be dismantled brick by brick. But do you break things apart to keep them apart indefinitely? No, you take them apart to use as building blocks for a new structure based on YOUR blueprint. Libertarianism promised individuality, freedom, and choice to everyone. It was especially useful in disassociating the White Right from its bonds of conservatism. White Conservatism championed bonds to the past & heritage and bonds among white folks(and Christian folks). While Americanism(and Western Culture in general) had long been more individualistic than others, it rejected radical individualism. If one had to make a choice between unity/community and division/individuality, the former was prioritized. So, while American Conservatism wasn't anti-individualist, it put unity before the individual. Libertarianism was poised to reverse the formula. Among the more moderate libertarians, it was individuality and choice before unity and tradition, but they weren't hostile to latter. Ron Paul belongs to this school. (His is the school of Virtue Libertarianism, the idea that more freedom and individuality will mean more choice and means by which people can make better, saner, more rational, and sensible decisions. More freedom means more opportunity to be good and moral. In contrast, there is the school of Vice Libertarianism that looks upon traditional virtues as 'square' & 'lame' and argues that vices will cancel each other out and lead to a kind of balance. This might as well be the Anton LaVey school of individualism.) If moderate Libertarians placed individuality before unity(but still valued unity), the radical libertarians were opposed to any sense of unity and heritage. It was all a matter of 'me and my choice'. It's no wonder they oppose nationalism, which is about the consensus that favors policies thought to be good for the organic whole. Radical libertarians see such policies as standing between the individual and choice. The GROUP representing National Interest prevents individuals from acting freely vis-a-vis the rest of the world. Anyway, unbeknownst to most goy libertarians, Jewish elements pushed libertarianism as a means to an end, not as the end itself. Consciously or subconsciously, Ayn Rand and other Jews would have sensed that Jewish Power will grow immeasurably if whites could be made more individualistic while Jews are made more tribalist, more pro-unity. Unity creates a gravitational core whereas individuality scatters force in all directions. The universe is filled with stardust, but stardust remains adrift in the dark. Bright suns are created by the unity of stardust into great concentrations of matter that generate tremendous energy. No wonder cities rule over the countryside. Cities concentrate power, countryside scatters it far and wide. Even Mao Zedong, who called for 'surround the cities from the countryside', got his education in the cities and, when his side won the war, made sure that the communists controlled all cities with a tight grip. Paradoxically, city life is more rootless and individualistic, yet power is concentrated into a singular unity. In contrast, country life is more rooted and communal, but people are smaller in number and separated across great distances. Perhaps, city folks could be more individualistic because they can take their systemic unity for granted. They live in such an elaborate and elevated form of social order that they don't have to work so hard at basic survival. Anyway, dimwit goy libertarians thought that individualism was for everyone. Everyone would become deracinated and come to regard himself or herself primarily as an individual, as a 'me' or 'myself'. Everything else — national loyalty, racial identity, religious affiliation, kinship, or etc. — would be secondary or nonexistent. All groups would move in this direction. Not only whites but Jews, blacks, browns, and the rest. But just when whites were moving toward an identity based solely on the individual, Jews were playing up the Holocaust Cult, Zionist Ideology, and Yiddish sensibility. Jews were reminded to never forget their Jewish history and unique ALL-TOO-JEWISH suffering. So, even though Jews prized individualism, it came AFTER unity. Philip Roth, for example, could be an individual and write 'porny' stuff, but all said and done, he was praised for his Jewish pride and Zionism. Jews were JEWISH individuals, not generic individuals, which is what Jews urged whites to become. For non-whites, Jews had a different agenda. Jews did everything to weaken the identities of Muslims, Asians, Hindus, Latin Americans, and Africans. After all, mass immigration is about the Melting Pot. Jews pushed for more immigration and in order for all immigrants to get along, they must put aside their identities/loyalties of origin and become 'good Americans'. And yet, if non-whites were urged to be just like whites, 'generic individuals', they wouldn't be of much use to Jews. Indeed, whites and non-whites as 'generic individuals' might come to see eye-to-eye on lots of things. But Jews needed to use non-whites against whites. But what kind of identity could non-whites have if they were urged to become part of the melting pot? Jews pushed Negative Identity on non-whites, an identity based on hostility toward whites. Thus, being non-white, be it black, brown, yellow, Hindu, Muslim, or whatever, is less a matter of positive connection to one's racial or cultural background than a matter of being AGAINST whites. Blackness is essentially about 'victims of white supremacist racism'. Brownness is mostly about resentment at the Gringo. And yellowness is about proving one's credentials that Asians are not a 'model minority' and also 'victimized' by whites on a daily basis — I mean, it could be a micro-aggression! While Jews also have a powerful sense of Negative Identity — "Evil White goyim did pogroms on us and threw us into gas chambers" — , they also have a powerful sense of Positive Identity rooted in history, heritage, and remembrance. In contrast, as most non-white goyim have weaker cultures and identities, all they have left as identifier is the 'moral pride' of being wronged and victimized by White 'racists' and 'supremacists'. It's like Jews tell Muslims, "Forget about Islam, let your daughters grow up to 'twerk' & act like sluts, let your sons ape black rappers, and wave the 'gay pride' flag." So, what would be the meaning of being a Muslim in America? It would be as a member of People of Color who are forever 'victimized' by nasty 'white supremacists'.

So, at the end of the day, Jews got positive and negative identities, non-whites got negative identities, and whites got generic identities. Jews have a sense of history and unity(separate from whites) and a sense of moral outrage(in negative opposition to white 'Anti-Semites'). Non-whites, in their amnesia, lose all sense of who they are independent of whites, and as such, their only identity is in relation to whites: "White racists did us wrong." And whites have no sense of who they are and where they came from. Whites are discouraged from looking into their racial, historical, mythical, and spiritual roots. Whites are now utterly post-cultural. If the European past is invoked, it is to willfully misinform whites that Vikings and Romans were black and that Europe was ALWAYS about mass immigration and 'diversity'. (If so, why do Jews say Europe was so 'racist'?) So, can whites at least be free individuals who are left alone to do as they please, like the fellas in Richard Linklater's DAZED AND CONFUSED? No, not even that. Whites too must have an identity that operates on a reverse moral dynamics as the non-white Negative Identity. If non-whites define themselves with Moral Pride vis-a-vis whites, whites must define themselves with Moral Shame/Guilt vis-a-vis non-whites(and Jews of course). Non-whites see themselves as "people who were always wronged by whites", whereas whites are to see themselves as "people who always wronged non-whites". Thus, both non-white identity and white identity lack autonomy and independence. Jews have a sense of who they are apart from their relations with whites, but non-whites, having far weaker memories, only have a sense of 'victimization' under whites. It is a Negative Identity of Moral Pride. Whites have a Negative Identity of Moral Shame. As whites have no sense of who they are independent of the rest of humanity — the mantra of 'Diversity Is Our Strength' across both North America and Europe has made it taboo for whites to conceive of a world unto their own, past, present, or future — , whites have been conditioned to always think of themselves in relation to the Other. According to this logic, there is no whiteness independent of non-whiteness. White Identity is always a function of its relational dynamics with Jews and non-whites. Now, can one say that whites sometimes did wrong to others and vice versa? After all, whites were invaded by Huns, Moors, Mongols, Arabs, Turks, and etc... and they are being invaded today by Third World hordes. And weren't whites victimized by Jewish money-lenders and weren't countless Christian Slavs killed by Jewish communists? No, such thinking is taboo and forbidden. Whites must only focus on the wrongs they did to others, that is unless whites did it for Jewish Supremacists. Whites need not dwell on the guilt of having supported Zionist wars on Palestinians, Iraqis, Iranians, Syrians, etc. Of course, when the 'refugees' from the Wars for Israel end up on European and American shores, THEN whites must feel shame and guilt for not taking in more of them. When it comes to smashing Arab/Muslim nations, Jews urge white military men to be like ruthless and heartless Nazis. But when, the 'refugees' come knocking on the doors of the EU and US, the faceless victims suddenly take on the aura of 'New Jews escaping the holocaust'.

In the 1960s and 70s, when Jews were preaching Free Speech and youth culture, it seemed as though most of them just wanted all Americans to be freer and less hung up about race, culture, and identity. And yet, what Jews were really doing was using libertarianism to loosen white bonds from white heritage and white unity. Once loosened and taken apart, there was no way Jews were just going to let whites remain as independent bricks. And they sure as hell weren't going to become like whites and turn generic and 'white bread' as rootless individuals. (If Jews seemed rootless to goyim, it was because they refused to become rooted to goy conventions. They insisted on being rooted to the much deeper history and identity of their own Tribe.) Once white unity was dissolved and whites were turned into atomized individuals, Jewish Power planned to construct them into a new sense of whiteness, the Negative Identity of Guilt & Shame. And this was to be realized through PC permeating not only education but entertainment, advertisement, endless crusades, new purges, and ceaseless public announcements. In a way, Jews did it to mold whiteness into a useful tool for Jewish Power. But it was also because Jews sensed that arch-individualism is not natural to humans who are social creatures. Indeed, there were signs of a Christian Revival and counter-revolutionary Conservative tide in the 1980s after the tumultuous Sixties and the Me-Decade of the Seventies. It was a high water mark for Evangelicals in the post-war era. Against them, Jews concocted Political Correctness, Magic Negro, Globo-Homo, Diversity-mania, and Holocaust Cult as the new secular religions. Jews figured that whites would feel too lonely as mere individuals and would want to coalesce into some kind of 'spiritual' community. But what kind of community? The kind that is about white pride, Christian values, conservatism, family values, and nationalism? If whites were to be steered away from individualism toward some kind of unity and identity, it had to be one where white sense of goodness derived from their atonement scorecard. Whites feeling good about being white was absolutely unacceptable. Whites could only feel good about atoning at the feet of Jews and blacks, celebrating Diversity, cheering globo-homo, and praising white female race-traitors who go for Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. Over time, this mentality even spread to once conservative American suburbs and small towns. After all, no matter where you live, you have a TV set that emits signals from Jewish-controlled centers of news, information, and entertainment. As Joe Biden said, Jewish media made America accepting of 'gay marriage'. All those electronic signals beamed into the eyes and ears of Americans made them regard homos, the proxies of Jewish Power, as 'angels' while despising anyone opposed to the 'gay agenda' as a subhuman 'homophobe', the face of which became the Greensboro 'church', which might as well be a Jewish Front(just like all those phony Neo-Nazi groups led by Jewish hucksters).

As such, all those white people became mere EXTENSIONS of Jewish Power. Even though they feel themselves to be free and independent, they are bombarded by Jewish electronic signals on a daily basis. The airwaves are essentially mental whips, rods, and leashes. They tell us what is 'true' and 'false'. They work on our emotions. Consider all the stupid white people who were led to believe it is 'Nazi-like' to support or enforce border security. Getting their news and opinions from Jewish-controlled sources, they're like dogs on a leash. They are like horses with blinders on, constantly goaded with cracking whips. They consider themselves to be free individuals who seek out the news, but most of the news they absorb comes from a handful of Jewish-owned-or-controlled conglomerates that work hand-in-glove with the Deep State. Instead of them seeking out the news, it's more like Jewish Propaganda and Mind-Control seeping into them through the devices that they own. (Those devices are like crack pipes. You may own the pipes, but the drugs are supplied by the pushers. You own the crack pipes, but the drugs own you, and the drugs are sold by the kingpins.) If they're truly free and independent, they would be for Free Speech and more options, but having been so brainwashed and conditioned by Jewish Power, they support speech control and censorship lest they see or hear something that runs counter to the Official Narrative that they've been fed. Because PC dogma makes them feel good for parading their 'white guilt' but feel bad for being critical about Jews and non-whites, they'd rather have censorship than be 'triggered' and psychologically threatened from their 'safe spaces'. It's funny how these idiot whites oppose border security that makes for physical safe spaces but support speech restriction to maintain their psychological safe spaces. They confuse mind with matter. But as the recent BLM riots have shown, what makes for psychological safe spaces makes for physical danger zones, which eventually destroy the psychological safe space as well. So many whites feel psychologically 'safe' with the conceit of Magic Negro and struggle against 'white supremacist racism'. They scream and shout at those who object to such fantasies. They feel psychologically threatened by the truth and demand their mental 'safe spaces'. And yet, what did the ideas emanating from their psychological safe spaces lead to? It led to 'defunding the police' and blacks acting badly with the support of Antifa thugs. The end result has been many more actual dangerous spaces and zones for both blacks and whites. Ideally, psychological safe space should be in sync with physical safe space. Indeed, that's how the suburbs grew and expanded. Whites knew that moving away from blacks would make for safer neighborhoods. They knew it in their minds and felt it in their feet. But over time, the Jewish media-control filled white minds with the notion of Magic Negro vs Evil White 'Racist'. So, blacks were always good and true, whites were always bad and false. Saddled with such PC notions, even whites in white communities came to regard Diversity and Blackness as holy while feeling disgust at whiteness. So, instead of trying to defend and preserve their communities, they chipped away at the foundations of their own physical well-being in subservience to the demands of psychological safe spaces deluded with PC soma. Consider white idiots in the suburbs holding rallies in honor of Fentanyl Floyd. In a way, it's fitting that the druggy Floyd has been 'canonized' by secular progs in search for new gods. In a way, psychological safe space is like addiction to opium. Someone sucking on an opium pipe is in his la-la land. He thinks he's in heaven, and even though his habit is actually ruining his physical and material well-being, he prioritizes mental bliss over physical reality. Of course, it's only a matter of time before deteriorating material reality catches up to him and drags him down to the gutter in the most unceremonious way. So, in the end, white people didn't become individuals but mere EXTENSIONS of Jewish Power. Of course, they are too ignorant or stupid to realize they're being thus manipulated and led around by the nose. Or, having been instilled with Jew-Worship, Homo-Mania, and Magic Negro Reverence, maybe they feel virtuous in being so servile and obeisant to the Power. But then, are American 'conservatives' any better? The essence of current 'conservatism' can be found in Chris Christie's groveling at the feet of Sheldon Adelson, Mitt Romney shuffling before his massuhs at AIPAC, or Marco Rubio playing his turn as the wooden dummy of The Lobby. They are mere Extensions. Now, it's natural to be an extension, but of what? Of white identity/interests or Jewish interests/identity? It's like the Bob Dylan's song(during his Christian phase) called "Gotta Serve Somebody". It could be the Devil or the Lord, but you gotta serve somebody. Ants on their own are nothing. But then, the queen ant would be nothing too if not for the fact that all the other ants are essentially extensions of her role in the order. They protect and feed her, and she produces the offspring that keeps the species alive. In the case of slave-taking, the ants of one colony can be made to serve another. The raiding ants take the larvae of another ant colony, and the baby ants are raised to serve the former. Of course, they don't know it, even as they dutifully serve as the Extensions of the colony that raided and/or destroyed their colony of origin. Whites brought over black slaves to serve as Extensions of whites. Because whites were far more advanced, blacks(even as slaves) had much to gain, but the fact is they were no longer serving their own tribe but working for the white tribe. And even as a free people, blacks in the US military continue to serve as Extensions of the US Empire, now controlled by Jews who are most hellbent on Wars for Israel and Judaic Hegemony. Still, if blacks always knew they were slaves because their subjugation was so visible and physical, most whites don't know that they are essentially mental slaves of Jewish Massuhs(who use blacks, Diversity, and Antifa Janissary idiots as overseers to attack and intimidate the white masses). If whites enslaved blacks physically, Jews stole the hearts and minds of Jews. Jews stole the white soul. In a way, what Jews have done to whites is worse than what was done to blacks. Blacks were savages and, despite physical slavery, were given souls with Christianity. Even as whites made blacks pick cotton, they spread the notion among blacks that God is bigger than any number of white folks with guns & whips, and that Jesus, the Son of God, loves the wretched of the Earth, the poor, and the oppressed. So, even as whites shackled blacks physically, they freed black souls from the depths of jungle savagery. And in time, black Christians would use a powerful spiritual argument for freedom and dignity. In contrast, Jewish Power used media and academia to rob whites of their hearts and minds that make up the soul. Jews, the masters of psychology, studied what methods are most effective in slipping into the subliminal and subconscious zones of people. Having thus sneaked in, they set all sorts of traps and spread all sorts of poisons in the white minds so that whites would feel nauseous at any thought of 'white pride'(like Alex in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE) and would feel nervous at entertaining any thought that might offend Jews, blacks, and homos. Jewish mind-control crept into the hearts of white goyim and convinced them that the essence of Christianity is worship of sodomy and a Negro druggy. Every man, no matter how smart or strong, isn't much on his own. He is just one person. He gains power by turning other men into Extensions of himself. Their bodies serve as extensions of his mind, will, and vision. He is the will-to-power. Under Adolf Hitler, it was like all Germans were extensions of the Fuhrer's own arms and legs. And under Mao, countless Chinese were carriers of his will. More Extensions means more Power. This is what Jews had in mind. In a world governed by power, people exist as Extensions. There are many more Extensions than Extenders, just like there is one Sun but many planets. THE GODFATHER is not about individuals but about a handful of characters, Vito and Michael(and Barzini), who are Extenders while the rest are mostly Extensions or Buffers of one kind or another. And in THE GODFATHER PART 2, even the witnesses at the Congressional Hearing are Extensions of one side or another. They either belong to Michael Corleone or to Hyman Roth. Most people belong and serve. On their own, they are nothing or with protection. At one time, Jews rose up the ranks in the US as Extensions of Wasp Power, but the tables were turned, and now Wasps serve as Extensions of Jewish Power. The difference is that, even when Jews were playing the role of Extensions of Wasp Power, they had a powerful sense of who they are and planned for the day when they would rule. In contrast, today's Wasp Extensions of Jews are truly a sorry and pathetic lot. They are without identity or pride and happily servile as minions of Jews. They are like ants-taken-to-serve-as-slaves. They are 'white uncle toms' or 'white toms'. And if Wasps in the past thought it was rather uncouth to be overly 'antisemitic', Jews today are utterly shameless and relentless in insulting, humiliating, and dehumanizing whites in every possible way. And what do whites do? They beg the Jews, "Can I suck your dic*?" At most, some whites will plead with Jews, "Please oh please, don't be so mean to us? I mean, you wouldn't like it if we did it to you. So, please oh please, be nice to us, and we will kiss your behind." How utterly pathetic. In the movie MY BODYGUARD, the small kid is bullied by tougher kids and recruits a much bigger guy to serve as his Extension. Jews are nothing without their Extensions. Ironically, the most valued Extensions of Jewish Power is white people even though Jews also believe they need Diversity as bulwark against the White Threat. Jews see whites as the most useful horse but also the most dangerous that may throw off the Jewish rider and kick him in the skull and run off to be free. So, Jews need Diversity as added baggage on the horse so that it won't be able to jump and be wild. Of course, if Diversity serves as the straw that broke the white horse's back, Jews will have nothing. With whites, it's a game of carrot and sticks. If a white person collaborates fully with Jews, he gets lots of carrots. If they deviate from the Plan, they are attacked with big sticks. (It's like Leon Wieseltier's formula for dealing with Muslims. Total ruthlessness OVER THERE where they pose a threat to Israel and kindness OVER HERE where they can used as part of the coalition against whites.) Jews use Diversity to tame whites but fear that too much anti-white bashing may lead to diminished white energies, in which case whites won't be so useful as managers and foot-soldiers of the empire. In MY BODYGUARD, we naturally sympathize with the small kid because we don't like bullies. And we would like to believe that the good weakling uses his wits to hire good muscle as Extensions to push back against bad bullies. But the kid is also a smart-ass and a jerk. In a way, the dark version of him is Sean Penn's character of Davey Kleinfeld in CARLITO'S WAY. Here's a brainy guy who isn't good with fists and guns, but he knows the law and has connections. He can get people to do all kinds of things for him. And yet, he is a crook and an arch-criminal in the making. Over the years, many Americans got to thinking that Jews, while not the toughest and hardiest men around, are the smartest, wisest, most decent, most judicious, and most understanding, not least because they suffered the Shoah and have been the People of the Book, the greatest ever written. So, why not have Jews take over elite institutions? Why not be guided by Jewish wise-men, philosophers, big thinkers, and teachers? What better kind of elites can one hope for? Let the US be led by such sterling people and let the rest of us be happy and lucky Extensions of Jewish Power. The problem with this view is it misunderstands the nature of power. It may well be that there are wise, smart, and judicious Jews, but such people almost never gain power. Power almost always ends up with the cunning, devious, egotistical, ruthless, greedy, vain, nasty, vicious, corrupt, unscrupulous, and/or decrepit. So, what kind of Jews gained power? The likes of Norman Finkelstein(who, for all his faults, is sincere in trying to come to terms with the Palestinian issue) or a sleazebag like Chuck Schumer? Thus, letting Jews take power didn't end up with US being ruled by wise-men but by gangsters with law degrees, business degrees, or high-tech know-how, the geeksters. George Soros, Paul Singer, Mark Zuckerberg, etc. The Question is, "Do you want to be an Extension of this Power, or do you want to cut free and become an Extension of the forces that defend, support, and preserve YOUR OWN race, culture, and history?" Choose the Proper Extensionism for yourself. https://www.bitchute.com/video/5sTJuYiYD0k/

The Significance of Nicholas J. Fuentes, or Nick Fuentes as a Metaphor

Of late, Nick Fuentes has been in the news due to the controversy stirred up by his allies, associates, and fans who constitute what is often referred to as the 'Groyper Army'. At events hosted by Conservatism Inc. such as TPUSA, members of the Groyper 'movement'(if it could be called that) have shown up in force to lob questions ranging from 'inconvenient' to taboo. Most of these questions are related to Con Inc.'s Israel-First-Position, virtual surrender to Globo-Homomania, betrayal of Christian values & tradition, and avid support for Mass Immigration(as long as it is Legal even though most immigrants are not only non-white but overwhelmingly lean toward Democrats as either the anti-white or pro-immigrant party). All those questions add up to the Bigger Question of what exactly is so-called American Conservatism conserving when its main loyalty happens to be to a foreign nation(and to a powerful minority that happens to be the main instigator of anti-white propaganda), its modus operandi is pitiful surrender to every social/cultural fashions pushed by decadent Global Capital, and its position is to welcome the very demographic trends that are not only decimating Republican districts across America but degrading the values that conservative white Americans have stood for.
At the very least, the Palestinians have always resisted Zionism and didn't welcome Nakba that wiped Palestine off the map. Palestinians lost, but like the American Indians, they at least have the pride of having put up a fight — and to this day, Palestinians continue to resist the invasion into West Bank by Zionist Caravans whose ultimate agenda is to take all of West Bank(and then expand into neighboring Arab territories). In contrast, the white race has become a total disgrace. There are now two main camps. The white globalists who see whiteness as the ultimate stain on humanity and seek redemption by browning white nations demographically and browning white people genetically. Some in Con Inc. claim to be 'nationalist', but it is what is called 'civic nationalism' which almost makes no sense since most modern democracies have more-or-less similar-sounding values.

For example, all modern societies are agreed that tolerance is a good thing, but the bigger question should be Tolerance By Whom? After all, in an overwhelmingly Muslim society, tolerance is toward non-Muslims, and in a Jewish state like Israel, tolerance is toward non-Jews. So, even if both domains were to agree that Tolerance is good, each nevertheless holds steadfast to the necessity that their society must be mostly Muslim or Jewish. Tolerance doesn't mean that all things are equal in society. It means that the most powerful and dominant group should be tolerant to those fewer in numbers and lesser in power. Thus, a Western Nation can protect and preserve its need to remain a white nation while, at the same time, showing tolerance to non-white minorities. Likewise, straight people who make up the overwhelming majority can tolerate homos and other sexual deviants.
But at some point in Western History, the concept of Tolerance turned insidious. Instead of the principle of the powerful/dominant group tolerating the less numerous/powerful groups, it turned into a case of the minority group being regarded as just as essential to society or even more so than the people who've always composed the overwhelming majority. It turned cancerous. Consider the human immune system. The human body tolerates a lot of germs and toxins because we can't live in a perfect world. We've all learn to live and even interact with bacteria, virus, and etc. (Indeed, there are some bacteria that are beneficial to us.) But there is a limit to this. Even if we've learned to co-exist with germs and alien elements, they are not the same as our essential selves. Our skin has lots of germs, but the germs are not our skin. Our guts have even more germs, but the germs are not the intestines. It's like there are Christians in Muslim Iran, but they are not the essential core elements of the nation. They can be(and should be) tolerated and treated kindly, but if Iran were to dispense with Islam as the defining faith, then non-Muslims would have equal claim to the nation, and that could lead to a wholesale transformation of society.
From its founding to its creation to its core development, there is no question that America was an extension of European(especially Anglo-Germanic) Civilization in terms of people, culture, and ideas. America developed that way, but due to the fact that the land was taken from native Reds and that many black Africans were imported for slave labor, White America had to learn to tolerate the presence of non-whites and to treat them better. This was tolerance in the proper meaning of the word. But over time, this meaning began to lose out, especially because of the arrival of Jews who, with superior wits and stronger will, became the new elites and because of the ascent of blacks in sports and violence. Usually, the majority has power over the minority in almost all respects. But Jews, though only 2% of the population, managed to gain economic and intellectual dominance over the white majority population. As the ruling elites, mere tolerance was no longer sufficient for Jews. Jews were no longer content with being a tolerated and well-treated minority, as they are in places like Russia and Hungary. They became accustomed to power & domination and demanded Obedience from the white majority population. In effect, Jews went from a minority in need of protection to a minority in want of supremacy. Jews in the US are today more like British overlords in Old Bombay or Old Hong Kong than ghetto Jews in shtetls of the Russian Empire. Tolerance is no longer enough for them, and if anything, they will NOT TOLERATE any voice that dares to dissent from what they themselves prescribe(and indeed decree) to the goy population whom they regard as a subject people.
As for blacks, they were no longer content with tolerance(and even guarantee of equal rights) once they began to dominate whites in sports and sex. A primitive-souled people, blacks judge worth mainly by who-can-whump-whose-butt and who-can-hump-whose-ass. As they became the lords of NFL, NBA, and boxing, blacks came to look down on the white majority population as either a bunch of 'faggoty-ass-white-boys' to intimidate & beat up OR skanky white bitchass ho's whose wombs must be colonized by black seed. As such, blacks, like Jews, no longer care for tolerance or even parity with whites. They are convinced that THEY, as the superior race, have the right to rule over all others. In that, both have something in common with Richard Spencer who think he(or his kind) is entitled to rule.

In our world, the meaning of Tolerance has been turned on its head. Instead of the dominant majority tolerating(and even protecting) weaker minorities, we have a case of dominant Jewish minority(with their homo allies) showing zero tolerance toward non-Jews(especially whites) who won't kowtow before Globo-Homo-Shlomo power. It went from "We must tolerate 'gays' for what they are" to "You will be destroyed if you express negative views about sodomy, refuse to bake a 'gay wedding cake', or speak truth to Jewish Supremacist Power(JSP)." But then, we live in a world where neo-imperialism is the most powerful force — not least because the Empire of Judea controls the US as the 'lone superpower', the battleship among nations — , and that means the majority power of every subject nation(and that includes the US as Americans are now subject peoples of Jewish supremacist globalists) must take a backseat to the demands of World Jewry and its proxy globo-homo agents. This is why Jews seek to suppress or destroy nationalism in all nations EXCEPT in Israel, though, to be sure, Jews will exploit one kind of nationalism(even ultra-nationalism) if it happens to be opposed to what they deem to be the bigger enemy, e.g. the Jewish Supremacist Power's support of Ukrainian ultra-nationalists against Russia, the nation Jews hate most at the moment, not because Russia is ruled by evil tyrants but because it said NO to globo-homo that is the proxy force and quasi-spiritual crusade of World Jewry.

Anyway, what is the true significance of Nick Fuentes? By 'significance', I mean something larger than Fuentes himself who, like anyone else, has pros and cons. Fuentes is too inexperienced and 'green' to qualify as the leader of anything, though, to be sure, in the age of the internet, old rules no longer apply, for good or ill. Without the internet, there's no way someone so young and 'heretical' as Fuentes could have gained so much popularity(and notoriety). For him to have amounted to something in the movement, he would have had to pay his dues and gradually work up the hierarchy. In the pre-internet age, someone so young could not have risen to prominence so fast... unless, like Ben Shapiro and Charlie Kirk, big money were behind him to build him up as a Teen Idol of Conservatism Inc. Teen Idols of the early 60s were mostly Italian-American pop stars groomed by the industry to make the rebellious and raucous culture of Rock N Roll more palatable to Middle America. Ben Shapiro is like Paul Anka, and Charlie Kirk is like Fabian. But then comes Nick Fuentes with the irreverent, rebellious, and cantankerous demeanor of the often abrasive Bob Dylan. And yet, he has some of the spirited and happy high-energy of the Beatles. Most likely, Fuentes hasn't gone about carefully crafting a persona for himself like Richard Spencer who, very possibly, practiced in front of a mirror as a preppy Neo-Kiplingite mix of Darth Vader, 007, Tom Buchanan, and Batman. In contrast, Fuentes seems almost utterly lacking in self-consciousness, which can be refreshing but also prone to infantile tantrums. His combination of feisty antics and laughing mockery certainly makes for a pretty entertaining show, fun and amusing in the way Camille Paglia when she first exploded on the scene. Also, his allergy to degeneracy and drugs has prevented him from going over the deep end like Milo with sexual matters and Spencer & co. with alcohol and/or drugs. And his comic side seems to have had an easing effect on his considerable ego, also abated by what seems to be sincere faith in Catholicism. In contrast, certain neo-paganists like Spencer tend to fall into the foolish habit of self-worship as if they're Zarathustra 201 because they read some Nietzsche and watched BATMAN movies too many times.

For a person his age, Fuentes seem to be very well-read and erudite about political and historical matters(though he falls way short in the realm of art & culture as he thinks current cinema is the best of all cinema because of 'muh special effects', considers JOKER to some kind of masterpiece, and prefers the dreadful Kanye West to just about any other musical act), especially when we consider that so many young people today, even those in Ivy League schools, tend not to be serious readers. Though Fuentes has read some books by deep thinkers, his aspiration isn't intellectual or philosophical, let alone prophetic. Rather, he's like a young Pat Buchanan who, from a young age, relished politics as a bloodsport. His forte is political analysis but with a candidness generally missing in establishment media, official narrative, and the 'conop', or controlled opposition, of Conservatism Inc. And it is here that we can glean the significance of Nick Fuentes and what he stands for. Whatever may become of Fuentes, who faces serious drawbacks as holds key advantages, he stands for something in the Moment, something rare all across the political spectrum. Among people in mainstream academia and media, there are surely many people who know as much and much more than Fuentes. And privately, they probably see the truth of much of what he is saying, but the fact is they will lose their positions and status if they were to go off the reservation. As in the old Soviet Union, it doesn't matter how many bright, intelligent, and knowledgeable people there may be. Many people in the upper echelons of Soviet institutions knew the truth beyond official dogma, but they kept mum and mouthed the same platitudes because their position and privileges meant more to them; there was also the real fear of something far worse than ostracism: Possible exile and, in some cases, execution. Much the same can be said of the current West. There are no gulags, but people with so much in terms of wealth, connections, privilege, and status can lose them all IF they were to mouth 'inconvenient' truths. And this is what the mavens of the establishment find so frustrating about People-like-Nick-Fuentes or PLN. It's not that PLN knows more than they do. If anything, due to their connections, they know lots of things that most of us don't know. But they can only say so much because if they don't go by the playbook of JSP(Jewish Supremacist Power), they will be subtly or not-so-subtly disfavored and even destroyed.
Also, most people who are on par with Fuentes in terms of wit, intelligence, and energy tend to favor social success and status-climbing uber alles. Privately, they may well know that the MSM is full of shit and that elite institutions are marked by hypocrisy & corruption, but they do not want to jeopardize their chances of making it, especially as opportunities are dwindling for straight whites, especially those even slightly suspected of being 'conservative'. Thus, with most such people, courage and conviction take the backseat to the willingness to be co-opted. "If you can't beat them, join them." For this reason, Fuentes is a rare breed indeed. He truly went against the grain of most people like himself.
And then, there are individuals with plenty of courage and boldness. They share with Fuentes the willingness to put their names and faces online and speak their minds. Such courage is all very good except for the fact that such personality types tend to be reckless, shameless, outlandish(& outrageous), and/or crazy. The most famous example, of course, is none other than Alex Jones. Some say Jones is just 'conop'(controlled opposition), but whatever he is, he's really been out there, shouting his 'truths' and berating people for being sheeple. His boldness has been refreshing, but he's also a very kooky character who's gone out to discredit himself with ridiculous rumors and hysterical exaggerations. There are also many mini-alex-jones or wanna-be-alex-jones all over Youtube and the internet. You can credit them with courage and conviction, but they often say crazy things or tend to act retarded, like Owen Benjamin of the Man-didn't-land-on-the-Moon school. Who can forget Paul Nehlen, the once 'normie' candidate who just went crazy when he came upon the JQ. Patrick Little went off the cliff even more dramatically. They couldn't be faulted for courage, but something in the air has tended to destine "Courage + JQ = Nuttery". Fuentes sanely disavowed Nehlen-gone-nuts and smelled a skunk in Patrick Little from day one. And there is Richard Spencer. Spencer isn't a dabbler of crazy conspiracy theories and nutball narratives, but his shameless ego works like alcohol on his brains. Though there are layers within him that are capable of sound analysis, careful reasoning, and intelligent insight, his core/essence is raving egomania, vapid vanity, preening narcissism, and selfishness, all of which inflated his (lack of a)soul with pathetic delusions of grandeur. His lament seems to be, "Why doesn't the world love, admire, and worship me like I love, admire, and worship myself?" Because you're a fool, Richie Rich. To be sure, the first real blowup between Spencer and Fuentes resulted from the latter misconstruing, willfully or not, Spencer's remark about pornography and pedophiles — Spencer was NOT advocating legalization of child porn — , but Spencer has shown, time and time again, a self-destructive tendency toward deranged reactions as if it's a cosmic betrayal if his coterie doesn't see eye-to-eye on things. The fact that Fuentes spotted this character flaw before most of Spencer's associates and strategically distanced himself from Spencer and his circle now seems to be to his credit.

Anyway, in a sense, Fuentes is a rare breed. Generally, sane, sober, and intelligent individuals tend to be cowards, indeed craven ones at that, who will sacrifice integrity and honor for their slice of the System's Pie. At the other end, bold, courageous, and daring individuals tend to be reckless, shameless, and even not quite right in the head. (Then, there are sane and smart dissident members who do possess courage and integrity but aren't politically interested in the bloodsports of everyday politics. They prefer ideas, analysis, and deep criticism over politics as spectator sports. This is why men like John Derbyshire, though long involved in political analysis, have hardly been at the center of attention, though Derbyshire got some unwanted notoriety when he wrote an article that pointed out that young whites[and Asians] have far more to fear from blacks than the other way around. Unlike most such people, Fuentes relishes being part of the public debate and has shown up at even at events where he's been partially or wholly banned. This combination of sanity & smarts, courage & integrity, and passion for politics-as-spectacle is truly rare in our political culture, especially on the American Right as its members face many more taboos than those on the so-called 'left'. Whereas globalism disdains communism and far-left rhetoric, it doesn't feel threatened by the(at least after the end of the Cold War), whereas it still considers any emergence of nationalism, especially among whites, as the biggest problem. Awakening of white identity could mean white elites and white masses must be one people, thus implying white elites must prioritize representing and leading their white masses than serving the globo-homo Jewish-Zionist masters.) Fuentes has been nimble in navigating through the narrow pathway between the Scylla of craven careerism(where success depends on being a cuck-servant of JSP or Jewish Supremacist Power) and Charybdis of reckless courage(that has sent so many bolder members of society off the cliff). Now, this isn't to suggest that Fuentes possesses the brilliance of Odysseus who couldn't have it back home if not for his wits, and he surely has plenty of time to implode into craven careerism or explode with crackpot courage, but since 2016, it's difficult to think of another personality who was associated with the Alt Right, justly or not, who found that difficult but plausible balance between mainstream appeal and 'shitlord' edginess. This 'navigational' ability is exactly what was missing with Richard Spencer, but then, perhaps the Real Spencer would have emerged sooner or later because, at his core, he is a deranged egotist, whereas Fuentes seems to be a genuine Catholic Conservative with racial-historical consciousness(which makes him closest to Patrick J. Buchanan). Spencer sincerely believes he is some awesome Pop Nietzschean hero, the rightful master of the universe, whereas Fuentes seems to truly believe in God and higher powers/values that are beyond the reach of any single individual. Now, Spencer's nuttery would have been more palatable(with even a dash of awesomeness) if his sense of destiny was fueled by some genuine mad passion, the kind that makes for heroes and prophets in times of crisis. But one can't help feeling that his megalomania is little more than the manifestation of his bratty upbringing where his spoiled self was the center of mommy and daddy's affection and showered with all the toys. It's this sense of entitlement that makes him so insufferable. He says the untermensch of the world should look up at his face and see the master, the one to kneel and bow down to.

Now, it's true that white people, especially the Anglos, did gain awesome power in the last several centuries and dominance over much of the world. Indeed, many non-whites and Jews did look up to a face not unlike his as the countenance of the ruling race. But the crucial difference is that Anglo-whites didn't gain such power and prestige by bratty 'entitlementality'. They didn't go around hissing and ranting about how awesome they are. No, they were serious and sober people with work ethic and conviction who made great sacrifices to, often with their own lives, to create a new order at home and abroad. Nothing was handed to them on a silver platter. If Anglos of the past had Spencer's attitude of entitlement — "I should own the world as my oyster... just because..." — , they wouldn't have achieved much of anything. They believed in industry, dedication, sobriety, and teamwork. There was a time when I rather respected Spencer because I believed he did give up much to follow his vision. After all, given his looks and smarts, he could have gone far in Conservatism Inc. if he'd just played along. He could have been another Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan, or even more. But he pursued a far more difficult path that required courage and conviction, and it seemed Spencer had something that most of his peers did not. But year after year, it became more apparent that Spencer lacked focus, consistency, commitment, honor — the way he shut down Alternative Right site without notifying Colin Liddell and Andy Nowicki was disgraceful — , and worst of all, a sense of judgment, choosing to work with second-raters like Alex Kurtagic. Instead of staking his reputation on one thing and seeing it through completion, he would go from this project to that to another, just leaving a lot of debris and flotsam along the way(and leaving his associates and partners more than a little betrayed). Spencer seems, at once, manically ambitious and pathologically lazy, and the two characteristics fed into each other. If Spencer were a gold-miner, he would be dreaming only of the mother lode and throwing fits if none were found. When reality doesn't measure up to his entitled sense of expectation, Spencer is totally lost and goes off on another of his wild sheep chases. If he had a sense of pacing and stamina, he could have gradually built up the Alt Right as an intellectual and ideological movement with balance of caution and daring, but his projects never amounted to anything. His golden opportunity — potential mother lode of political fortune — was when the Hillary Camp decided to smear Donald Trump with the 'Alt Right' label, a truly stupid move as most Americans had never heard of the 'alternative right'. It was then that the media needed a 'bad boy' spokesman for the Alt Right, and they settled on Spencer. If Spencer had fully appreciated this as good fortune, a chance of a lifetime that comes but once, he would have appreciated it and handled it with care to grow a movement. But being an egomaniac, he convinced himself that the media were all over him because he is so brilliant, awesome, and irresistible. He began to think that he would be a media darling no matter what he did, and that's when he began to throw away the golden nugget that fell into his hands. It's difficult to think of another person in the last 25 yrs who used his political fortune so unwisely and tragically.

One hopes Fuentes will not make the same mistake, and in his favor, despite his own kind of egotism, he has a sense of humor about himself(as well as a sense of limitations), which Spencer has been sorely lacking. Indeed, it's likely that Spencer still doesn't get that no one that matters takes him seriously. Everyone sees him as a sad joke. Spencer could have used his bohemian streak effectively(as we are living in the age of the hipster), but the loutish side(or core) of him won out. Due to the rather straight-and-square qualities of Fuentes — even his fandom for Kanye West is conformity to cultural norms of his generation — , he is culturally far less interesting than Spencer and the more imaginative figures on the Alt Right, but bohemianism is less suited for politics that generally favors the habits of consistency and steadiness. No wonder Sam Peckinpah made it in cinema, not in politics.

Considering the significance of Nick Fuentes as a rarity who represents both All-American Flavors and a Taste for Dissent, he might be useful as a metaphor or a meme. So, what is Fuentes as a metaphor? What kind of American, Conservative, or Youth does he stand for? It is a political consciousness of defiance, independence, and individuality(and of course contradictions). Oddly enough, even though Fuentes isn't an arch-individualist of the libertarian school, the kind that the likes of Charlie Kirk claim to be, he has a strong individual sense of self that won't be cowed by the Libertarian Machine of Conservatism Inc. that, despite claims of individual freedom and conscience, demands that EVERYONE get behind the globo-homo program, welcome mass-immigration-invasion(along with Great Replacement and 'Erasism' or erasure of white identity), mindlessly support Israel, and support state-sponsored suppression of the BDS movement. Something is strange here. Conservative-communitarian Nick Fuentes is far more likely to speak his mind and offer up genuine dissent whereas all those so-called freedom-and-liberty loving 'libertarian-conservatives' are deathly afraid of the Power & Big Money and always looking over their shoulders at what their sponsors and patrons might think.

If American politics has taught us anything, especially since the end of the Cold War and the ascendancy of Jews as the new ruling elites, it is that we simply cannot rely on 'leaders', 'experts', and 'managers' to decide truth and falsehood for us. We must all be more engaged, not least because the US is the lone superpower whether we like it or not. Even if we choose to be apathetic and not care about other nations, the fact is our taxes are being used to commit horrible crimes around the world. The psychopathic Deep State and the neo-imperialist US military destroy other nations, peoples,and cultures. Indeed, what the Deep State is now doing to America was honed to perfection abroad in so many coups, acts of subversion, terrorism, misinformation campaigns, and invasions. While the CIA, Pentagon, and the military-industrial complex were carrying out such crimes all over the world, most Americans were disengaged and apathetic, which was all to the advantage of the Deep State as so much of its actions did little but serve the interests of Jewish supremacists, war profiteers, and homosexual psychos. And in exploiting and exploding entire parts of the world, the Deep State learned countless tricks, all of which are now being used against Americans. Therefore, all the Americans who used to say, "Just leave me alone" or "I don't care about other people around the world" were utterly misguided. While Americans are not obliged to fix the world's problems, they should at least be aware of the crimes committed by its own government and deep state apparatus in other parts of the world since they are funded by US tax-payers and further their aims via the US military as lethal-invasive force. All those Americans who said, "I don't care about the Palestinians" are now waking up to find out that what Americans had blindly enabled Jews to do to the Palestinians, it is now being done by JSP(Jewish Supremacist Power) against white Americans and white Europeans in what could only be called the White Nakba. What goes around comes around. Americans unthinkingly supported the Zionist destruction of Palestinians(or chose to ignore it as 'not my business'), but it only emboldened Jews to stage an encore on a much grander scale against all of the white world. Due to their higher IQ and ambitious nature, Jews were destined to be powerful in the US, but the current state of Jewish Supremacist domination is, to a large extent, the result of so many whites having chosen to be asleep at the wheel while Jews were plotting to take over the US and use it as their private aircraft carrier and super-gangster-bank to dominate all the world. Obnoxious Jews would never have grown so powerful IF more white people had been engaged in politics(or what-is-being-done-with-your-tax-dollars-and-by-whom-and-why) and stood up to the cancerous growth of JSP(Jewish Supremacist Power), but the opportunity was lost, and American Politics has degenerated into a dog-and-pony show of both parties fetching and rolling over for Jewish Supremacist Power.

In a nation as big as the US, one would like to think there would be more young people like Fuentes, but they are relatively rare. This is especially odd considering that Americans like to take pride in themselves as free-thinkers, dissenters, rebels, mavericks, and rugged individualists. Then, why is there such conformity and consensus of thought among both Democrats and Republicans? Reality seems to suggest that the American Self-Image is mostly a myth. While it may be true that Americans are more direct in manners and forthright in emotions, they are no freer in thought and ideas than any other people. Reality says Americans are sheeple like the rest of humanity, and it's rare to find a wolf who dares to howl out the truth(or for the truth). Of course, it's true that there are many more people like Fuentes who've chosen to remain anonymous and/or silent due to fear of ostracism or to natural timidity, but it seems like MOST people, 'left' or 'right', are content to go along with the consensus, if only for the fact that most people have 'social' personalities that are, above all, sensitive to public perception of them. Thus, they fear to rock the boat and risk being shunned. We can see such tendencies beginning with children. This is why brazen dissenters and truth-tellers tend to be rather asocial, if not anti-social, i.e. they are impervious to peer pressure and un-peeved by public opinion. While those who speak their minds often tend to spout lies, nonsense, or craziness, the will to speak freely regardless of risk is a surer way to the truth than speaking to earn pokemon points of political correctness(be it 'right' or 'left') is.

A free-thinker or free-speaker may be wrong(even terribly so), but the main thrust of his expression is to honestly convey what is truly in his heart and mind. In contrast, while a correct-thinker could speak the truth(if indeed the Official Narrative happens to be true), his main impetus is to seek approval. Thus, even when a free-thinker is speaking falsely, he is motivated by a will for truth, whereas even when a correct-thinker is speaking truthfully, he is incentivized by want of acceptance. If A is true while B is false, the free-thinker who says B is nevertheless sincere in his conviction that what he says is true, whereas the correct-thinker who says A is, above all, less concerned with truth than with confirmation from superiors and peers. This is why all organizations favor correct-thinkers over free-thinkers. Whether on the Right or the Left, the truth-speakers are more difficult to handle or tame.
By Fuentes' own account, he was once approached by Conservatism Inc. but was kicked out the minute he displayed distressing signs of non-conformity, especially where Israel was concerned. And it seems Spencer and others on the Alt Right wanted to shape Fuentes into a good soldier for the movement, but again, Fuentes was too free-spirited to be a mere 'Tom Hagen' type(in THE GODFATHER). Because Fuentes has a strong personality, he tends to stand his own ground and brush away any strings others have tried to tie to his limbs. But the downside of a strong personality, as evinced in Camille Paglia, is the stubborn pride that refuses to admit wrong. That said, Fuentes was quick to disavow Nehlen gone nuts and changed his mind on Donald Trump following the State of the Union speech when the Orange Man said he is for Massive Legal Immigration. So, despite problems of pride, Fuentes hasn't been so rigid and has been flexible enough to modulate his views on key players and current events.
Also, his 'optics' seems to be a genuine outflow of his core convictions. After all, the matter of 'optics' is a double-edged sword. Good 'optics' is admirable as sincere outer manifestation of one's core values and manners, but it is disingenuous and contemptible as a veil over an agenda that is crazy or extreme. Saul Alinsky stood for the second kind of 'optics' as he advised social radicals to dress up as normal middle class folks. In the end, whatever 'optics' tokens Richard Spencer may have had was lost when it became clear that he is a nihilist than a moralist at the core. With someone like Spencer, 'optics' can only be a cover over a stinkpot.

We need more PLN(or People-like-Nick-Fuentes) because the contradictions of the current Power Structure and current Official Narrative are too great. When things get too crazy, we need more free-thinkers than correct-thinkers. It's like the boy was most indispensable in the story "Emperor Has No Clothes" because mass delusion had taken hold of everyone from top to bottom. Someone had to say the obvious, i.e. that the lord was made a fool. The fact of the matter is the US and the West are currently ruled by JSP or Jewish-Supremacist-Power. This is so obvious, but almost no one who matters in media, academia, or government dares say anything. Fuentes' critics may argue that he talks 'obsessively' about Jews, but it's really a counter-obsession to the Real Obsession from top to bottom in US media and politics that does little but sing paeans and hosannas to Jews and Israel. Not only are most of media and much of academia dominated by Jews but we are bombarded day in and day out about how wonderful Jews are, how Israel is our 'closest' and 'greatest' ally, how Jews are the most tragic eternal Holy Holocaust people, how all of humanity must apologize to Jews for Shoah(and whatever else Jews gripe about), and how 'antisemitic' it is to notice negative aspects of Jewish power and influence. According to the Power, the US Congress making an ass of itself by giving Netanyahu 6 million standing ovations is not being obsessed with Jews; US politicians making pilgrimages to Israel and pledging to support Zionists uber alles is not being obsessed with Jews; members of both parties appearing at AIPAC conferences and hailing Israel to high heaven is not being obsessed with Israel; favoring Jews for special pardons by governors and presidents is not being obsessed with Jews. Oh no, it's only normal and natural for us to think of Jews all the time AS LONG AS we have happy-feely and worshipful attitudes about Jews. But if you dare to question the gushing worship of all-things-Jewish and ask some inconvenient questions about the JQ, then YOU are deemed to be 'obsessed' with Jews and/or Israel.

Arguably, Fuentes' main contribution to the Real Conservative Movement has been (1) the willingness to address the JQ in a forthright and satirical(necessary due to increasing censorship) manner and (2) keep away from the derangement syndrome that all-too-often has befallen on those who became woke to the truth of Jewish Power. Fuentes sensibly understands, "Just because Jewish supremacism is bad doesn't mean that Nazism was good." Shooting the rat doesn't mean you must shoot your foot. Talking honestly about Jews shouldn't turn you 14/88, but this tendency has been problematic in the Alt Right. Perhaps, it's because the human mind abhors a vacuum; it craves certainty. So, when young ones realize that the Jewish-controlled worldview is seriously wrong, they feel disoriented & confused and reach for strong medicine that sets the world straight, and this is when some of them go 14/88 because it offers a simple and compelling explanation of the All-Evil-Jew. Too many people simply cannot handle complexity and ambiguity. It's like, if an organism is forced out of one shelter and feels exposed to a hostile world, it will scramble for the nearest shelter. Too many goyim who were liberated from the Official Narrative suddenly feel homeless or rudderless and seek out a simple/powerful explanation as to why the world is as it is. Why is it that Fuentes has been immune to this danger? Part of the reason seems to be self-confidence that he can figure things out for himself than having to rely on some radical Grand Theory to explain the Jews. Thus, he could be critical of Jewish Power without the 14/88 baggage that is really for the Tards. Granted, some have accused Fuentes of being a 'Holocaust Denier', especially on account of his sardonic answer to the question about Cookie Monster baking 6 million cookies, but his irony-laden playful response suggested savvy that, mongoose-like, knew how to cavort with current climate of political correctness. Though it came close to being 'dangerous' and even offensive, the real implication was that we aren't supposed to question any aspect of the Shoah Narrative and just swallow the official narrative whole hog. Instead of just denouncing the caller as a 'neo-nazi' or earnestly going the 'denier' route, Fuentes tiptoed around both, something Ramzpaul is also very good at.

Anyway, Nick Fuentes is a useful metaphor or role-meme for all the young people out there(and not just conservatives) who want to speak their minds freely and without fear. Unless one is retarded, autistic, or specious, there is no way any honest person cannot be aware of the stupefying contradictions that define American Life. Just how is it that Jews, the most powerful people in America(and by extension the world) still act like they are members of a victim group? How is that Jews, the most privileged people, berate white endlessly for 'white privilege'? How is it that Jews who pushed Wars for Israel that destroyed millions of Muslim lives in the Middle East and North Africa posture as defenders of helpless Muslims against 'Islamophobic' bigots in the US? Was it rednecks who made all those Hollywood movies with Muslims as little else but terrorists? How is it that Jews who've done so much to lock up tons of blacks(to bring down urban crime) and used gentrification to push blacks out of cities pretend to be the most compassionate friends of blacks while accusing whites and policemen for all the problems faced by blacks, especially when most blacks are killed by other blacks? How is it that Israel that stole nuclear material from the US and has 300 nukes is showered with money and praise while Iran, a nation that has no nukes, is sanctioned endlessly? How is it that Israel and Zionists who(in cahoots with Saudi Arabia) lent support to ISIS and Alqaeda terrorists in Syria get to accuse Syria and Iran as sponsors of terrorism? Just how did homosexuality and tranny business become the holiest things in the US? Just how did a 'secular' movement of the 'gay agenda' turn into a quasi-spiritual one that seeks to place globo-homo symbols in all churches? And of course, anyone who knows anything knows it was the Jews who funded globo-homo madness as their proxy. And considering that blacks are the most aggressive, dangerous, and thuggish group in America that commits the most crime against non-whites of all colors, how is it that blacks are forever portrayed as pure-as-snow victims? And exactly why do we need a 'new cold war' with Russia, a nation with 1/20th of the economy of the US? And if race is just a myth and social construct, how come so much of media, entertainment, and sports are rife with all sorts of blatant racial stereotypes DESPITE the fact that all such outlets are controlled by Jews who claim to be 'liberal'?

The rational, curious, and inquiring minds want to know. The whole purpose of education is to inspire curiosity, sharpen our critical skills, train us to be analytical, teach us to be skeptical & reject matters of blind faith, and to ask tough questions. And at least in the context of current politics, that is precisely what the PLN(or People-like-Nick-Fuentes) stands for. Whatever his faults and shortcomings, Fuentes has been out there asking the tough questions about the real nature of power and privilege in America. Whether one agrees or disagrees with his basic values or tenets, he's been tirelessly asking tough questions and demanding answers day in and day out. It used to be the case that Liberals were once known for criticality, free inquiry, skepticism, and harboring contrarian views, but that was then, this is now. Jews, the most dominant faction among Liberals, now got the power, and they no longer believe it's salient for people to be curious, critical, and inquiring. Why, such people might confront the truth about Jewish History and demand answers about Jewish Power. Therefore, over the years, Jewish Liberals went from defending free speech and encouraging controversy to pushing indoctrination, blind faith, consensus, and conformism. How many times have we heard Jews say, "The debate is over, we won, you lost, shut up, and kneel!"?

Though Fuentes isn't alone in asking the tough questions and commenting on the true nature of power with scales removed from one's eyes, he's arguably been most successful in conveying his message and building himself into an online personality. And he seems to be emboldening many others of his generation with the notion that "It's Okay to Ask Honest Questions." After all, what is the point of living in a democracy and enjoying liberty & rights IF one must always remain herd-like within the reservation of permitted narrative? In a way, all of us are like in a TRUMAN SHOW(with Jim Carrey and directed by Peter Weir). In the movie, Truman has been brought up to believe that he's a happy citizen in the freest society in the world. He can do anything he wants... or so he's been led to believe. But it turns out that the 'free world' comes with all sorts of controls, contrivances, and manipulations. And when Truman begins to doubt the world around him and decides to go off the reservation, he is blocked at every turn by a series of 'accidents' or 'incidents' that he realizes can't be coincidental. In so many ways, our so-called democracy is like that. We are told we are free and that free speech is a right protected by the Constitution, but whenever anyone mutters anything that is 'triggering', he is threatened, silenced, defamed, and/or deplatformed. But when Jews say far more controversial or offensive things about non-Jews, especially whites, it's perfectly okay or even admirable as far the Power is concerned. We are told about the importance of American freedoms and the bad ole days of Joe McCarthy, but if you're a Palestinian-American who supports BDS, a movement for justice for Palestinians, you will be fired and/or blacklisted in half the states by none other than the government. We are told that US is about colorblind justice, but Jews, blacks, and homos seem to be above the law as so many of them are virtually allowed to do as they please. So many white-collar Jewish crooks got off the hook, and so many black street thugs get away with so much. We are told American universities are places for free thought and open discussion, but if you put those principles into practice and try to have an honest discussion about race, Jews, blacks, and/or homos, the school administrators and police will sit back and let antifa thugs and brainwashed PC students use violence and hysteria to shut you down. US democracy was never perfect and always full of hypocrisy, but it is now worse than ever because the new elites are Jews who, unlike the old Wasp elites, sorely lack the capacity for self-awareness and the virtue of self-criticism. Whether it's a Jewish 'liberal' or Jewish 'conservative', it all boils down to "Is it good for the Jews?" With such Jews controlling both political parties, nearly all media and academia, and so much of finance, American democracy has degenerated into something like an 'octocracy'. With Jewish monopoly domination over so many institutions and industries, so much of the so-called 'opposing factions' are essentially the various tentacles of the same octopus. GOP and Democratic Party are merely two tentacles of the Zioctopus. This is why Jews don't care if states turn 'blue' or 'red'. Whether GOP wins or Democrats win, the priority of both is to serve the Jewish Master.

Against this, PLN(or People-like-Nick-Fuentes) have decided to speak the plain truth. They may not always be right, but they really begin from the premise that, "I want to see reality as it really is, and I want to speak the truth as I really feel it." Even with the hideous Jews at Youtube trying to alter the Terms of Service to restrict free-and-honest speech about the Power — Jews at Youtube seem to follow the control manual out of TRUMAN SHOW — , Fuentes and others like him have managed to do all they can to speak truth to power, candidly and without going over the edge like Spencer, Nehlen, and the rest. Who knows what tomorrow will bring, but for now, Fuentes and Groypers represent a good beginning and deserve credit for being one of the few sane and honest voices out there in a political climate and culture so controlled by the fixers and riggers of the official 'left' and 'right'.