Even as Jews increasingly vilify white conservatives(scapegoats for all problems) as the unifying theme for Jews and People of Color, they also increasingly draw on white conservatives to support Jews and Israel, because, after all, Grievance Politics among the POC often turns against Jewish privilege and Zionist tyranny. Jews depend more and more on the water from the well they are poisoning. With decreasing support for Israel and growing criticism of white-Jewish privilege among the expanding non-white and radical-white base among Democrats, Jews have to depend more and more on white conservatives for unconditional support for Jews and Israel. The vile Anti-BDS law passed with near-total support from Republicans while only 40% support from Democrats. Jews will increasingly have to rely on the very people they denigrate most in media, academia, law, state, entertainment, advertising, and corporacracy. But can Jews be assured of continued support among white conservatives when the latter is beginning to awaken to the fact that it's the Jews who are leading the anti-white derangement syndrome among the POC? But then, Jews must shame and blame whites in order to make them serve Jews. After all, the default position of any people is to feel good about their own kind and serve their own interests. Naturally, white Christians and conservatives should serve white/Christian/conservative interests. To make them do otherwise, they must be made to feel that the Other is somehow superior, morally or spiritually, to themselves. And Jews have done this by implanting 'white guilt' into the souls of whites, both liberals and conservatives. Thus, whites feel morally tainted by history and seek redemption by serving the Holy Other. As far as white conservatives are concerned, serving Jews(and maybe blacks and homos) should be good enough, and so, they go out on a limb to appear as 'good for Jews'. But for Jews, this isn't enough because there is still the possibility that whites may change their minds one day... and then what? So, the ONLY way to ensure permanent Jewish domination is via Diversity. That way, with whites relegated to minority status in the US, they won't be able to use electoral-demographic majority power to topple Jewish supremacy. Jews want more Diversity because, deep down inside, they know Intersectionality is really about Gridlock among Goyim. Even within the Proglob camp, so-called intersectionality has led to Demolition Derby or Roller Derby among blacks, homos, women, white working class, browns, yellows, and etc. It's turning into Road Rage politics... like the movie CRASH that won Best Pic.
Anyway, it seems more and more whites are waking up to the fact of Jewish hostility towards them. An obvious case has been Ann Coulter who, in 2016, mocked GOP candidates for droning on and on about the 'fuc*king Jews'. For such awakened whites, we need to end mass immigration as soon as possible because loss of white majority will mean end of GOP, and then whites are lost for good. But whites should take cues from the Jews on the Art of Power. If a people need majority power to rule, how does one account for the fact that Jews, who are only 2% of the nation, totally rules the US? So, how can whites threaten Jewish power even if they lose majority status in the US? They can make Jews have a taste of their own medicine. Jewish 'progressive' line has been 'diversity and equality are good, while privilege is bad'. Okay, then whites should take the Jews at their word and side with the POC against the most privileged people in the US, the Jews. Jeremy Corbyn is doing this in the UK with hilarious reactions from the Jewish community. Jews in UK have been dumping on white Britons as 'racists' and demanding that whites welcome and embrace non-whites. Well, that is exactly what Corbyn's Labour did, and guess how the Jews are reacting? They are flipping out because most non-whites don't give a rat's ass about super-rich Jewish bankers, Israel, Zionist imperialism, and Holocaust-Cult-Forever. This is why the US would do best to get rid of the GOP, have all whites join the Democrats, and then have whites side with POC against the Deep State dominated by Jews, homos, and cucks. Then, the current elites can be brought down, and then, the ensuing chaos will bring back the Restart of History from the terrible 'End of History' of Fukuyama's naive idealization.
I suppose Jews still got the homo card. Homo Power is mostly white-male, and it is reliably on the side of Jews because vain homos love power and privilege. It's no wonder that 10% of DC is now homo. Homos go there to seek power, and Jews have elevated them(along with cuck-dog Mormons) to serve as the missionary arm of globo-homo hegemony. Thus, homos, along with Mormons, have played a big role in Wars for Israel and new 'cold war' with Russia. Homos + Mormons = Homormons. Homos not only love to serve the Power(that is mostly Jewish) but appreciate the fact that Jews have decided to make Homomania the substitute for Christianity, indeed the Cult of the New World Order. As for Mormons, most of them are just status-strivers and moral-materialists, i.e. their moralism is all about making money, and money is the highest good. Also, ashamed of their history as an odd cult and ever so eager to appear respectable to the current globo-homo ruling elites, Mormons will go out of their way to cuck hard. Salt Lake City Mormons are the favorite dogs of Goldman Sachs and dutifully voted for Obama and Hillary. Mormons are the Sheep State within the Deep State.
If mankind were to disappear, nature will go to work and take back all of civilization.
People have become so accustomed to human mastery over the entire world that they fail to appreciate how invasive and destructive nature is. And because we leave it up to others in specialized professions to maintain things, we don't fully appreciate how this maintenance of civilization is a full-time job.
What's true of civilization as a whole is also true of every human community or nation. Humans are organisms and, as such, naturally invasive. Against such invasive-ness, other human communities must be nativist and defensivist. Just like animals move to where there's food and good stuff, human nature searches out for 'green pastures'. Long ago, hunters went where the mammoth were. Before mankind developed agriculture and put down roots in fixed territories that became their homelands, they were constantly on the move. Nomadism was the norm, like among African savage tribes, Germanic barbarian tribes, Mongol raiders, and other such folks. The rule was simple: Go where the 'mammoths'(in both the literal and figurative sense) are. They were merciless and tireless in their pursuit of fruits and meats(and maybe of womenfolk too). But then, the rise of agriculture made people more stationary, and people put down roots and developed a sense of fixed territories(and even borders). THIS is OUR land, THAT is YOUR land. But globalism is threatening this long-held state of affairs. Just like electricity & electronica have amplified hedonistic urges and made humanity revert to a kind of techno-savagery, the ease of communication & travel has made a huge proportion of humanity revert to a kind of nomadism, indeed on a scale unimaginable even few decades ago.
Some scholars have said that Jacob's advantage over Esau represents the shift from hunter-nomadism -- Esau is hairy like a barbarian and loves to hunt -- to a more ordered and settled life. Though Jacob is a shepherd than a farmer, his life is more stable and sedentary than that of the wandering hunter led by whim, lust, and hunger. As time passed, Jacobism gained more and more power among civilized folks. Even though there were times when the Esau-ians whupped the Jacob-ians -- Germanic sack of Rome, Mongol sack of China, etc -- , the Jacob-ians eventually triumphed and maintained modern civilizations. One could argue that mobile Western Imperialism was Esau-ian, but not so. It was more like Jacob-ianism on the move, especially since the Western Imperialists, far from being savage or barbaric, were more advanced than the peoples and/or lands they conquered. Also, Europeans conquered to create permanent stable civilizations than to 'play Indian' or slash-and-burn. They were more into New Romes than new roams. Indeed, it was the American Indians who were the Esau-ians, and it was the white arrivals who turned America into a permanent civilization with stable borders and settlements. But today, it seems like we are witnessing the Revenge of Esau. We really are seeing the vast movements of savage and barbarian folks who, upon entering Jacob-ian domains, turn them upside down. Look what's happening to entire city blocks in Sweden, Paris, London, Rome, Madrid, and etc.
So, why is so little being done about this? My guess is the Jacob-ians had it so good for so long, they took the viability of their own domains for granted. As a result, they've forgotten that civilization needs constant maintenance, checkups, tuneups, cleanups, stress tests, reinforcements, and etc. They've fallen into the habit of thinking that a civilization just takes care of itself. It doesn't. Unless it is constantly defended and maintained, it begins to corrode, rust, bend, cave, and crumble. No bridge maintains itself. If not properly inspected and repaired, it will end up like the one in MOTHMAN PROPHECIES.
Another problem of the current Jacob-ian world can be seen with all this Russia Hysteria. For much of human history, the Jacob-ian world was constantly under threat from the Esau-ian tribes. Even a high and mighty civilization like China could fall to ragtag Mongols. Even great Rome could fall to Germanic barbarians. This is why every kingdom had castles in which people could group together and take shelter when barbarian hordes came marauding into the area. Consider how both the Byzantine Empire and Persian Empire were shaken to the core by the sudden rise of nomadic Arab tribes led by Muhammad. And in Ancient times, great civilizations were shaken to the core -- and some were smashed forever -- by Sea Peoples. Chinese later got so worried about such things that they built a massive wall just to keep out Mongolian Esau-ians.
But then, with rise of modern technology, the idea of any civilization being brought low by a Esau-ian nomadic armies became laughable. Mongols invade Russia in the 19th century? Ridiculous. So, the only danger to a civilization was another civilization. It was no longer Jacob-ians vs Esau-ains but only Jacob-ians vs Jacob-ians... like in WWI and WWII, the clash of great civilizations. And this became a habit of mind among the most advanced peoples.
So, today, the EU still makes a lot of noise about the Russian Threat since Russia is a giant Jacob-ian power. It is a civilization with over 100 million people, and it has a sizable military and nukes. And some people in the West sound alarm about Iran, another major civilization.
Now, if every nation had strong borders and stringent rule of law on immigration, the West need only fear other Jacob-ian powers like Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, etc. After all, Russia can invade and destroy Poland if it wanted to whereas a bunch of ragtag migrants cannot. But that is ONLY IF Poland strictly maintains its borders and bans invasive migrant-marauders.
Disturbingly, the Rule of Law along the borders and the pride of identity(that morally justifies the defense of one's realm) have broken down in the EU. The weakening of national identities under EU domination has led to fraying and fading of the very idea of European-ness itself. It went from "a Pole can become a new Briton or Frenchman" to "a non-European can become a new European." It went from "one kind of white can become another kind of white" to "a non-white can become a new white." Thus, the West has become defenseless against neo-Esaus from the Third World. Many Europeans believe such invasive peoples must not be banned from Europe. Why, they are just 'new Europeans', and anyone saying otherwise is a 'racist'. The pope, or Poop, says the same thing too. He even allows Islamic prayers in Christian churches, implying that Islam is the new christianity.
So, the real danger is no longer Jacob-ian vs Jacob-ian, except when the US, as the lone superpower, bombs and destroys nations like Iraq and Libya. The real danger is about the Jacob-ian world being invaded by neo-Esau-ians who are massively on the move for green pastures and mammoth meat. In the short term, these folks may be useful to businessmen in search for cheap labor they can exploit to maximize profits. But these invaders don't return to whence they came when their employment runs out. They remain and call on more of their kind to join them. Even without jobs, there is a better life to be had in the land of greener pastures. Better to scavenge off mammoth remains than be stuck in poor Africa or Guatemala where the natives are still in subsistence or slash-and-burn mode. Esau-ians are on the move. Shiploads of Africans and Muslims are crashing onto the shores of Europe. Migrants from Central America and Mexico pour into the US. People are on the move all across Africa where effective border controls are non-existent. And the destabilization of Jacob-ian systems and infrastructure by the US and its allies in places like Syria & Libya opened the gates for Esau-ian ISIS and other Jihadis to move around and create all sorts of havoc.
Esau-ians are not to be confused with Mercurians, even though the latter often champion the former in reckless displays of virtue-signaling. Mercurians are elites and relatively small in number. They facilitate business all around the world and are most necessary. So, if a bunch of German executives travel to Paris, London, Hong Kong, New York, and etc., they are just doing business. It's like Japanese companies send their agents and representatives all over the world. Also, Mercurians move around the world with specific purposes. A German company will send its workers to Saudi Arabia to finish a project. It's like Burt Lancaster sent some guy to Scotland for a possible deal in LOCAL HERO. In contrast, Esau-ians move around not as purposeful individuals but parasitic packs and hordes... like the gypsies, the locusts among humanity. A group of German engineers or Japanese negotiators outside their own nations cannot take over another nation. But tons of Mexicans and Central Americans have taken over entire swaths of Southwest America. African migrants have taken over entire areas of Marseilles France. And these Esau-marauders or Esauders come with no purpose but to feed on green pastures made by white folks. They have no specific skills or vision. They just come to take advantage of richer areas. Their mode of behavior is closer to wild nature than civilized norms. Because the current PC has done so much to subvert the validity of identity and territoriality, the Jacob-ian worlds are once again being invaded by Esau-ian peoples, a phenomenon that was thought to have passed into dustbin of history forever. It's coming back like some disease that was once thought to have been eradicated forever, at least in the advanced world. (To be sure, some people are waking up and embracing nationalism. Nationalism is the necessary bacteria(along with white cells) -- there are good bacteria and bad bacteria for humans -- for the survival of civilization, but globalism keeps coming up with new strains of PC antibiotics to kill the beneficial form of bacteria and white cells while the nasty bad ones keep multiplying. Hopefully, the lactobacillus of European nationalism can develop immunity against PC eventually, and then no newer strain of PC antiobiotic will be effective.) Today, the Jacob-ian worlds have all the technologies at their disposable to keep out the Esua-ian marauders if they chose to, but their minds have been psycolonized by deadly PC that paralyzes their defensivist mechanisms of human nature that are supposed to carry out necessary inspections and maintenance of the system to ensure survival of the realm. Without such mechanisms, cracks and fissures develop in the system and foreign elements begin to creep in in ever greater numbers. It's like a house that isn't properly maintained has more to fear from moisture, mold, ants, bugs, mice, and etc than from a wrecking ball. It's death by a thousand cuts. It's like a boxer with no defenses will lose even to a weak boxer. Even if there is no KO-magnitude punch, the constant barrages of jabs and punches will wear down the boxer. The EU is alert to the danger of KO from Russia but willfully blind to endless jabs from the Esau-ian Third World that are really wearing down Europe and turning it into hell. It fears the Czar's sword when it's really dying by a thousand cuts by razors and switchblades.
People of the world may be categorized as four types: Mercurians, Apollonians, -- as Yuri Slezkine defined them -- , Jacob-ians, and Esau-ians. Mercurians would be the cosmopolitan elite class of businessmen and intellectuals. As long as they are trading ideas and goods, they do no harm to anyone. If anything, they make the world richer by creating new opportunities. And their minds are focused on specific tasks of business, technology, science, information, etc. Apollonians would be a people who are rooted deeply in their own homelands. Japanese and Hungarians would be such, especially those in small towns and rural areas. Many Americans are not Apollonians but Jacob-ians. Jacob, as a shepherd, was both on the move and a bearer of social order. Americans move around a lot with in the US and have weak sense of roots to any one area, though there are exceptions, like Mormons and Utah. (Utah is a special kind of place because of its mythic association with Mormonism. Mormons might see it as their 'Israel', and their narrative isn't simply one of migration and settlement but of neo-Biblical significance. While other parts of the US also have their cultural distinctness -- Germans in Wisconsin and blacks in the South -- , Utah is to Mormons what Monument Valley was to John Ford. There's a mythic connection. Whatever their history in and affinity for Wisconsin, there is no mythic bond between Wisconsin and German-Americans like there is between Utah and Mormons. Mormons have been mobile but also very insistent on maintaining historical roots and ties to a certain state as distinctly their own. (Also, whereas the story of Wisconsin is simply that of some German immigrants having moved and settled there, the Mormons created an Exodus-like Narrative about their 'wandering in the wilderness' to found a neo-holy-land in Utah. One might say this decision was as much made for them as was theirs since Mormonism was regarded with suspicion and even disgust for good part of American history.) If Europeans, at least prior to the creation of the EU, tended to be Apollonians -- Hungarians in Hungary, Poles in Poland, Irish in Ireland, etc -- Americans were more like Jacob-ians because there was so much land and new opportunities in America. To be sure, there are two kinds of Americans: Some who like to stay put and some who like to move(like the family that made it all the way to Oregon in SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION). 'Blue State' whites tend to be more mobile than 'Red State' ones who prefer to put down their roots. Southern whites must really like the South. I mean they insist on staying there even though there are so many Negroes. (College culture is contradictory. In some ways, professors could be said to be Mercurian since they visit other institutions and exchange ideas. But so many colleges are like closed provincial bubbles separated from the rest of the world. After all, the ideal of academia is to create a safe and quiet environment where thinkers can pursue the truth without distractions, pressures, and compromises. So, what happened at places like Middlebury?) Finally, Esau-ians are essentially barbaric or even savage, and the only logic of their behavior is primal-organicist. If possible, they will invade and feed off anything that looks like greener pastures. Just like Ice Age folks went where the mammoth was to feed off it and just like some African tribes stayed close to big game, today's Esau-ians see the White West as just one big whale or mammoth to hunt. And they may well hunt and feed on the West to extinction... like what happened to real mammoths and almost to blue whales. The Esau-ian mindset is hunt-and-kill-but-don't-know-how-to-breed-new-animals, slash-and-burn-but-don't-know-how-to-plant-new-trees, and take-but-don't-know-how-to-make.
“What’s happening here? The state population is now about 13 percent Hispanic, but only 1 percent black. Part of the explanation is probably the Mormon Church’s century of institutional racism.”
Race-ism is best foundation for social-capitalism. Swedish model of social-capitalism was working just fine when Sweden was all Scandinavian... but then Diversity came along. (By Race-ism, I mean, "Ism means belief, so Race + Ism = Belief in the Reality of Race and Racial Differences; and the need for Racial Consciousness".)
In a way, Mormons became the way they are because they excluded others, but it was also because others excluded them. In this respect, they are like Jews who were excluded by others but also excluded others. Thus, Mormons developed a ‘ghetto’ mentality.
There are Two Meanings of Justice.
1. Legal Justice and Righting wrongs. So, if Bob does something wrong to John, Bob owes John compensation. It is about redress and punishment for violation of the law or social contract. This concept of justice is represented by "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" in the Bible. By its standards, if someone didn't do you any wrong, there was no injustice, and he owes you nothing.
2. Tribal Justice. A sense of shared survival and success. This concept of justice is found in the Exodus. Moses feels a sense of obligation to lead ALL Jews out of Egypt. He doesn't owe them anything as he hadn’t done them wrong(on a one-on-one basis) in his capacity as an individual, but as a Jew, he feels responsible for other Jews. This concept of justice says it is not enough for a person to be successful as an individual and care only about himself. He must belong to a community and work for the common good. Greek mythology is more individual-oriented. It's about the rare hero who rises above the rabble and demonstrates his superiority, like Perseus in the slaying of Medusa. To be sure, through his extraordinary feat, he saves others of his kind. And Theseus protects his community by slaying the Minotaur who gorged on human offerings. Still, the emphasis is on individual feat and personal glory. It is about how the hero stands APART from the rest. In contrast, the stories in the Bible emphasize how every individual's deeds relate to family and tribe. Communism, a secular form of Judeo-Christian worldview, tried to realize this Jewish-communal-sense-of-justice on a universal scale, but it was too grandiose and unwieldy. Just like a tower erected too high will collapse, so will a bridge built too long. The ideal of communal justice works best on the ethnic/tribal level and even on the national level IF the nation is racially & culturally homogeneous or reasonably so. This ideal that a people must all make-it-together and not leave others behind is found in the Zhang Yimou film NOT ONE LESS, a kind of 'no child left behind'. It only works within a shared racial community.
Mormon capitalism is bound to their brand of social-culturalism. But, it will fray if the Mormon community becomes overly diverse. Mormon theology is hardly profound stuff. What has made Mormons special has been (1) a sense of community based on shared race and history (2) Muslim-like emphasis on daily rites, some of which are sufficiently strict to prevent members from giving into excessive vice.
When it comes to family formation, Mormons have an intuitive sense that generating children amounts to a kind of future-socialism or bio-socialism. In a way, having children is 'socialist' in the sense that you have to share your earnings with others. Purely from an economic viewpoint, children are 'parasitic'. They do no work and leech off the wealth of parents. Parents must buy them food, spend time with them, clothe them, provide medical care, and etc. It is very taxing, economically and emotionally. So, why do it? Because it is a kind of future-socialism. Why is future-socialism rewarding in ways that paying taxes to provide benefits to total strangers isn't? Because there is a special bond of love & happiness between parents and children. Also, unlike faceless strangers who live off the tax revenues of others(via the confiscatory state) and show NO gratitude(and often demand MORE free stuff as a 'right'), children are happy and grateful for what they receive from their parents, even just an apple or orange. It's socialism of emotions than just of materials. (This is why prolonged welfare dependency is corrupting to both parents and children. When kids see their parents struggle to make ends meet, they feel appreciation and gratitude, even a bit of guilt because parents work so hard for the family. But when kids see their parents as mere leeches off the state, they feel no sense of obligation because it wasn’t the parents who provided for them. So, do they feel grateful to the state? No, because the state is faceless and abstract as far as they’re concerned. It is just a system to milk.) Also, if children are raised properly with sound nurturing of identity, culture, history, values, arts, and appreciation-for-nature, they carry on with the heritage even after their parents have passed away. Indeed, they see it as their obligation to do so. And in earlier times, they would have taken care of their parents. This was a big theme especially in traditional societies. Kids were seen as organic Social Security. Parents provide for their children, and later, the children-as-grownups provide for their parents-grown-old. So, family formation has always been a bio-cultural socialism into the future. Parents share their wealth with kids, and in turn, kids feel obligation to their parents and the culture they all sprung from.
This sense has weakened over the years because the state or industries came to provide for old people. Also, with the fading of identity and real culture, there is less of a sense of inheritance from parents and bequeathing to children except in monetary/material matters. If a people no longer believe in what they are in the racial-cultural-historical sense, they feel no need to pass the torch to keep it going. Today, most young people culturally identify with celebrities and what Chris Hedges calls the Empire of Illusion, a frivolous(but intensely charged) Fantasy World, than in the richness and depth of the line-of-my-people.
Orthodox Jews and Mormons still have strong identities, and they feel their cultures must be kept going through the ages as living inheritances and timeless inspirations. And the ONLY way to ensure that is to have children and teach them well. More than anything, one’s wealth, knowledge, experience, and genes must be SHARED with one’s children. That is the deepest and richest kind of socialism. Bio-Socialism.
Unfortunately, there was hardly any non-religious opposition to the Homo Agenda except on willy-nilly libertarian or legalistic grounds. Hardly anyone mentioned the facts of biological hierarchy, i.e. real sexuality is meaningful, purposeful, and essential whereas homosexuality is a deviance in organic terms and perversion in moral terms. The secular and rational counter-homo arguments were heartless and bloodless, utterly failing to recognize the Homo Agenda as a war on biology and morality that it really was. As for the religious component of the opposition, which had long predated the half-hearted secular opposition(not least because the Bible adamantly commands that homosexuality is a sin), it simply didn’t have the means to summon up the kind of arguments that could persuade modern educated people. (Perhaps, the secular opposition to the homo agenda was weak because it was so unprepared for such a challenge. After all, most of human history, religious or not, had taken as granted the wrongness of homosexuality. There was no need to argue against it since it was understood that EVERYONE knew it was sick and gross even if not wicked and sinful. Perhaps then, it will take some time for a truly effective secular opposition and immune system to the homo agenda, which has metastasized into full-blown Homomania, to develop. As things stand, Homomania is the HIV of Western morality and culture. It is eating away at everything.)
At any rate, nothing in a republic/democracy like ours can be based primarily on religious doctrine or dogma. We can’t say “Evolution must be banned because it is an affront to God’s Creation.” Likewise, we can’t let religion decide matters on law and sexuality. We can’t ban or deny something on the basis of "God said so".
But then, opposition to the homo agenda didn’t need God on its side. Upon close scrutiny, it should have been obvious that a merely secular opposition had not only sufficient truth but all the truth on its side. What is this truth? Truth is that some people are born homo and can’t being what they are. Therefore, okay, let homos be homos and do their own thing in their own spaces. However, homosexuality cannot some kind of ‘new normal’ but will always be a deviance that has no biological meaning or sexual purpose. That is also the truth about homosexuality. Among men, homosexual acts are downright gross and putrid. It’s about homo fecal penetration. That said, we can acknowledge certain cultural benefits of homosexuality. Not in what homo do ‘sexually’ but in how they see and feel things that opens up new creative possibilities. Homosexual sensibility has certainly left its mark on arts & culture.
But homosexuality has no value in biology and family. Homosexuality cannot produce life. That is a truth. Marriage is a fusion of biology and morality. It must be based on the truth of life and the necessity of moral values. ‘Gay marriage’ is based on a lie. It makes believes that homosexuality has equal value with real sexuality. It makes believes that Tim Cook’s anus has the same value as his mother’s vagina that birthed him. Another observable and undeniable fact about homosexuality is that ‘gays’ tend to be vain, narcissistic, and self-centered in their ego. So, they have no sense of limits in terms of ‘sexual’ excess or self-aggrandizement. Homos have even pushed ‘gay rights’ into Gay Rites. They went from secular demand for ‘equal right’ to a quasi-spiritual demand to be worshiped as new angels and saints. Homos have even made ‘pride’ synonymous with homosexuality. They are so vain that they want to claim and own entire terms for themselves. And their chosen symbol hogs all the colors and associates homo fecal penetration and tranny penis-cutting with the miraculous rainbow that used to be primarily associated with the story of Noah where life is preserved by saving male/female pair for each animal.
Indeed, the Homo Agenda won not by rational argument but by the irrational appeal of sensual-sacro-propaganda. TV shows and Movies featured an endless parade of saintly homos were so well-groomed and more-normal-than-normal. Even as Progs generally mock 1950s culture of FATHER KNOWS BEST and the DONNA REED SHOW, homos were given a GAYS-KNOW-BEST make-over. Homos won by having at their disposal the power of advertising, fanfare, spectacle, parades, and etc. It’s like communism mainly cast its spell with songs, music, pageantry, rallies, and etc. Its success owed more to the appeal of the irrational. It is no wonder that homos soon targeted churches and sought to associate everything holy & sacred with homo colors, which are intrinsically ridiculous since what does the rainbow have to do with homo fecal penetration or lesbian poon-mooshing? Or tranny penis-and-testicle mutilation?
Most importantly, the main reason the Right failed to oppose the Homo Agenda was due to its slavishness to Jews and the Rich. As many homos became rich, powerful, and well-connected, more and more money-worshiping members of Conservative Inc. began to suck up to Homo Lobby. It became a status-thing to be pro-homo in elite circles. Consider how S.E. Cupp broke down with tears of joy when ‘gay marriage’ was forced on the entire nation. Look how the kids of the Bush family are all crazy for homo, homo, homo. It’s what fancy elites go for, so anyone who aspires for higher status must follow along and flash the same cues. (Also, homos built up a network of spying, gossip, and blackmail. If anyone opposed their agenda, they would be ‘outed’ and scandalized. Look how the homos and their allies in the media dragged Carrie Prejean’s name through the mud when she opposed ‘gay marriage’ at a beauty pageant. They dug up all the dirt on her and attacked her to send a warning to all women what will be done to them unless they comply with Homomania. Homo men are especially foul in personality. They have male aggression plus female bitchiness and hysterics, like with the homo guy in MEAN STREETS.)
As the GOP became slavish to everything Jewish, Conservatives dared not voice any real opposition to homosexuality lest Jews get upset. Jews sent out a message, “the homo agenda is OUR baby, and we’ll be very very displeased if YOU oppose. Saying NO to the Homo Agenda is saying NO to us wonderful super-Jews”. So, Conservatives only pretended to sort-of-oppose it while effectively doing NOTHING to expose and condemn the sick, perverse, and evil agenda of Homomania. Look how even Ross Douthat(the so-called Catholic) and Charles Murray caved. That bald-headed lowlife bent over to Tinkerbell Curve.
The failure was due to the lack of courage to handle truth and facts on a rational and moral basis. After all, marriage is a primarily a Moral Institution rooted in proper biology. Morality must be based on truth and justice, and it is neither truthful nor just to pretend that what homos do to each other has equal biological purpose and moral value as what men and women do in their practice of proper sexuality. Or that what trannies constitute health of mind and body. Since when is using Frankenstein medicine to remove perfectly healthy organs to be replaced with fake organs of the opposite sex a sane or moral act?
We have spineless idiots on the Right. But then, the Evangelicals and Mormons are so eager to suck up to Jews and Money that they’ve also muted their opposition to Homomania. Mormons will do ANYTHING to have Goldman Sachs build more office in Salt Lake City. And Evangelicals will do ANYTHING to please Zionists and prove it is not filled with ‘hate’. Since Jews say, "If you’re not with homos, then you are against us Jews", the craven Mormons and childish Evangelicals have decided to add Homo-Worship to their liturgy.
