How Negrolatry or Afromania among Silly Whites parallels the Transformation of Worship from Pagan Cults to Judaism to Christianity — The Problems of White Psychristianity — Nature vs Nurture in the God-Myth

BASIC FACTS ABOUT RACE IN 13 MINUTES - American Renaissance

The history of the transition from paganism to Old Testament to New Testament is instructive in an understanding of how whites came to bow down to Negrolatry.

Though there were many kinds of paganism, the pagan gods weren't generally high on the moral scale. Some were downright cruel and murderous, like the gods of the Aztecs. Human sacrifice was also practiced by certain paganists of Ancient Near East. Pagans feared and worshiped power for power's sake. Their spiritual vision was far from moral. It was all about might. The gods were like the forces of nature. Floods, earthquakes, volcanos, drought, pestilence, and etc. Good or bad, it didn't matter. It was fearsome and frightening. Nature could be on your side or against your side. All you could hope for was good fortune. Hopefully, nature will favor you, and you had to do whatever necessary to earn those favors. As gods controlled nature(or nature = gods), you had to pay them tribute. It could even be in the form of ritual human sacrifice if indeed it was deemed the only way to placate and appease the gods. Gods were powerful. They were the forces behind or within nature. It was presumptuous of man to expect, let alone demand, that gods be moral and caring about feeble and flawed mankind. Gods were gods, super-beings of great power. And they did as they pleased, and the most mankind could hope for was easing their wrath(or direct it at enemy tribes). Maybe then, the gods won't kick your butt too badly. Maybe the gods will spare your kind and take out their fury on some other hapless tribe. Paganism was spiritual nihilism. Might was right.

Then arose the Jewish religion(as well as other religions that sought to morally justify, as well as bind, the spiritual forces). It winnowed the spiritual realm into the universe of one God. Judaism went even beyond 'holocausting' all the other gods. Instead of Yahweh prevailing over all other gods, vanquishing them into extinction, it argued there was never any other god than the one and only God. So, all other gods never existed. They were false, figment of the imagination, whereas Yahweh was the one true God from(or before the) beginning. Jewish Spirituality was a revolution in thought. At once, it elevated the conception of God to levels unknown to mankind. The Jewish God wasn't just the one and only God but the all-powerful and all-knowing God. Among pagan gods, some were more powerful than others but no god was all-powerful and all-knowing. But the Jewish God was the one supreme being. Jews made their God into a singularity, more powerful than all the other conceptions of gods combined. And yet, Jews also hamstrung their God more than any other people did. By moralizing their God as not only all-powerful and all-knowing but good and wise, the end-result was God that was allergic to the nihilistic temptation of might-is-right.

So, even though the Jewish God was more powerful than any god imagined before, He couldn't even demand that Abraham kill the kid. Sure, as the one and only God, it was His right to demand that Abraham sacrifice Isaac. But, if He'd really made Abraham carry out the blood ritual, He would have revealed Himself as no different from the pagan gods. So, the Jewish God was at once the lone superpower of the spiritual realm and morally owned by the Jews. (In a way, Jews played a similiar mind trick on the Anglos. Jews flattered the Anglos as not only the mightiest people in the world but also the noblest. Thus, Anglos were goaded into believing their great power must be morally justified, especially in Jewish eyes. Their might had to be right. Of course, what constituted 'good' in Jewish eyes was on the basis of "Is it good for Jews?" As Anglos became ever so mindful of Jewish sensitivities, their godlike power came to cuck to Jewish agendas, whereupon Jews eventually took over as the new gods.")

Even though Jews moralized spirituality and conceived of the one and only God(who is not only all-powerful and all-knowing but all-wise and all-just), God of the Old Testament retained some of the darker characteristics of the cruel pagan gods. The ever-fluctuating Jewish concept of God ranged from wise, caring, and compassionate TO cruel, ruthless, and murderous. Jewish God seemed to be kind of schizoid. Too often, His wrath seemed unbalanced and disproportionate to the crime of the wrongdoers. Or, his violence seemed arbitrary as far as the human mind could fathom.

Also, there was a seemingly insurmountable contradiction within the Jewish moral conception of God. On the one hand, Jews praised Him as the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-wise, and entirely just Deity. On the other hand, they wanted Him to favor the Jews uber alles. One interpretation of the Covenant was that Jews would be favored by God if and only if they sincerely aspired to be BETTER than other peoples. In other words, Jews would strive to be wiser, fairer, and more moral than other peoples, thereby deserving the special blessing of God. This was the kindlier take on the Covenant. But, there was another interpretation that implied God would/should favor the Jews uber alles simply because Jews got Jewish blood. At best, this was rank tribalism, and at worst a kind of supremacist nihilism.

At any rate, it was frustrating for Jews that despite the manner of their deeds, good or bad, they remained weak relative to other tribes. Was God holding back his full blessing because Jews weren't good enough? Or did God intend Jews to remain politically and militarily weak because their true destiny was to formulate a new kind of power that conquers souls with words than lands with swords? By developing their spirituality, Jews would master the art of survival despite their military setbacks. Thus, while other peoples that concentrated on physical conquest would rise to greatness with victory but fade into oblivion with defeat, Jewishness would outlast all of them because its essence was soul-bound to God regardless of victory or defeat in battle. It helped that the Jewish God couldn't be represented in idol form, which would have led to at least the symbolic desecration of His Being by the enemy's sword and hammer. It's harder to destroy a mystery than a representation. (On the other hand, mystery remains dark and anxiety-inducing.) Still, it was tough-going for Jews to be surrounded by empires far more powerful than their tribe. Even if Jews licked their wounded pride with self-assurance that they alone possessed the formula for survival and longevity, even a mere century seemed like forever to the people living in anxiety and turmoil.

When Jews prayed for the Messiah under Roman Occupation, they envisioned him to be a super-warrior-prophet who would vanquish the Romans(and all other enemies of Jews, as well as collaborator-Jews) and restore Jewish independence(and maybe even bring about Jewish hegemony). But, other Jews conceived of different possibilities, and one of these led to the birth of Christianity. In a way, the Warrior-Messiah template was fulfilled by Muhammad some 600 yrs later, but he was an Arab who, in his own way, universalized Hebraism(and its link with Hellenism via Christianity).

There has long been the Utopian dream of starting anew. A new beginning without the stain and imperfections. A kind of New Eden. Even God is tempted in this direction, as when He sent the flood to drown out the wicked so that humanity could begin again with the virtuous Noah and his family... but things went badly once again.
Some of the most radical firebrands in the modern era wanted a new beginning, a kind of Year Zero experiment. Reform and even moderate revolution weren't good enough because they tolerated too many of the Old Imperfections. Instead of eradicating all old evils and starting anew, reform took a gradualist approach upon a corrupted order and succumbed to reactionary pressures and opportunistic tendencies. Instead of cutting off the hand of the Devil, reformists shook it and contracted the disease of accommodation in the name of craven pragmatism.

Communism swore to stamp out the old and oppressive in one clean sweep and replace it with the new and just. It led to Stalinist collectivization, Maoist Cultural Revolution, and most frighteningly the Year Zero experiment in Cambodia. At the root of communist theory was the idea that one could not compromise with the Old Way. Social-Democrats were denounced for having succumbed to 'moderate' bourgeois temptations. Leninism and Maoism waged war not only on the evils of the Old but on the Old itself as an evil that must be eradicated in its entirety to make way for the New. (Granted, Classic Marxism wasn't so much an attack on the Old as on the New. It believed capitalism was doing an awesome job of eradicating the old way and making way for the new, except that its contradictions and imbalances couldn't possibly be the basis for a stable social order as too few would end up with too much at the expense of everyone else.)
The shining New Order needed not be grasped for in the dark. It was not something that would gradually come into view through trial and error, steps forwards and backwards. No, this New had already been envisioned in the mind of Karl Marx. Like Zeus's head birthed the full-grown Athena in her full glory, Marx had seen the Future, how it would happen and what it would be about. For this prophecy to be fulfilled, the Old(or the Bad New)simply had to make way for the New or the Good New(that would be premised on justice prophecy than on just profits). It wouldn't be yet another chapter in the customary historical process of the old constantly ceding to the new(which becomes the new old ceding to the new new and so on) but the end of the Old for good and beginning of the New forever. It would be the End of History and the Beginning of the Future.

But seeds of such thought were there in Christianity itself(though its Utopian vision was directed toward Heaven). It imagined God born anew. For Christians, the birth of Jesus was like spiritual Year Zero. Anno Domini. In a way, it was the human equivalent of what God had attempted with the Flood but in spiritual reverse. Mankind had proved to be a disappointment, and the Flood was meant to wipe out everyone but the good man Noah and his family so that humanity would have a new flowering without the weeds.
Likewise, God turned out to be a big disappointment for many Jews though, whereas it seemed only right for almighty God to air His grievances about man, it was unthinkable for man to do likewise about God. Why were the Jews so weak? Did God fail to live up to His end of the bargain? Or was the fault with the Jews? Besides, if Jews worship an all-wise and all-knowing God, why was the Torah so full of contradictions? Why are there so many suggestions of God's imperfections even though He is supposed to be perfect? Why does God have so many contrasting 'personalities'? How come the various great prophets disagree with one another as to the nature of God and His design for the Jews and mankind?

Of course, Jews couldn't admit that the fault was with God. They couldn't say it but they nevertheless felt it. There was something wrong with God, and there was too much contradictory and bewildering baggage in the Torah. If God failed to fix the world with the Flood and the new beginning with the good man(Noah), perhaps the answer was a new beginning with the good God. A Year Zero for spirituality. But how could Jews reject the Old God when He was the one and only God, the all-perfect and all-wise Being? That would have been blasphemous. The renegade Jews who comprised the Early Christians had an idea. How about the Son of God? Even though the Narrative is that He suffers and dies for the sins of man, the crypto-narrative could be He does penance for the sins of His Father. Such can't be said because God is supposed to be perfect. But if indeed the Old God is perfect, why a need for the Son of God as the equal of God and the founder of a new religion? Why a need for the face of God(in human form) who heretofore didn't have a face to show to mankind? Ultimately, Abram was spared from having to sacrifice his son, but according to Christianity, God had to sacrifice His Son to bring about the New Faith, the ultimate one, and the Redemption. But only of man or of God Himself as well? Upon closer examination, the Jesus Narrative is about penance of both man and God.

Via creation of the Jesus Myth, spiritual Year Zero could conceive of God without the old baggage. Unlike the Old Prophets who consulted the Jewish Tradition and History to grasp God's meanings & intentions and build upon earlier wisdom(or delusions), the new prophecy of early Christians would be written on a blank slate. The newly birthed (Son of)God could be all about love, peace, and forgiveness, conceived of only the highest virtues and in a manner far more consistent than the Old Testament narrative. He would signify the end of the Old Covenant that bound volatile God to the troublesome history of the Jews. The New Covenant wouldn't be bound to any history or custom. It would be based on Faith and purity of heart and open to all mankind. Jews were so fearful of their God. God was good and just but also ruthless and terrifying. God was a helping hand but also a clenched fist. The Messiah of Christianity had bleeding hands. Christ, having felt the fleshly pain and suffering of mankind, would understand. He would be of a bleeding heart(though not the sappy kind of the 'liberals'). Furthermore, there would be not one but two Year Zero narratives around Jesus. His birth in Bethlehem heralding a new promise and the Resurrection where He would defeat death and enter into the Kingdom of Heaven.

This way, mankind could hope for a more humane and loving God. Jews believed God existed before the world, long before the First Man, who only came into existence through the will of God. God created the world and always exerted a patriarchal and masterful authority over humanity. So, it wasn't the role of mankind or the Jews to mold God's nature. God molded them, and mankind could only hope to understand God a little better.
But with Christianity, mankind could nurse Christ-as-baby in their arms. Mankind could have a parental role over Christ as starchild. Mankind could mold Jesus in His formative years. Jesus, though God by nature, was Man by nurture. (Moses spent his formative years as an Egyptian but as a man turned full-Jew and destroyed many an Egyptian. In contrast, though Jesus would come to realize He is God than mere man, He would forever feel indebted to the good people who loved, nurtured, and taught Him.) Mankind, in imagining its role in the maturation and education of Jesus, could assure themselves that the Son of God as the new face of God would be fundamentally different from the Old God of the Torah who was unpredictable like the weather. Jesus would be more like the weatherman looking out for mankind.

Now, what can this teach us about the development of Negrolatry in the West? First, we must acknowledge that even modern secular white folks still think and feel in terms of Idolatry and 'psychristianity'. Even if no longer religious, a part of them is into idol-worship of all things thrilling & titillating(especially as modern culture is mostly about sports and youthful enthusiasm, with most people growing older not with pride of wisdom but resignation to irrelevance), while another part cannot shake off the guilt-complexes and redemption narratives inherited from Christianity that governed Europe for over a millennium. Also, Northern European Protestant types have long been craving for Idolatry or at least iconography that had been purged from their culture in rejection of semi-pagan Catholicism. At least German Protestants compensated for their lack of spiritual color with the power of music. Anglo-Protestants were especially vulnerable to the temptations of Negrolatry because of the dryly literary insistence of their culture.

From the white perspective, there are parallels between the developmental stages of Negrolatry AND the evolution of paganism into Jewish Religion and then the transformation of Judaism into Christianity, the universal faith, one that especially came to conquer/convert the white heathens of Europe. (From the black perspective, it could be they are aiming at something resembling Islam, a secular faith for whites where blacks-as-gods thrive less on kindly virtue than on fearsome power. If Black Muslims of the Nation of Islam seek racial separation[at least in theory], much of so-called Critical Race Theory or CRT is about whites worshiping and obeying blacks because blacks are good simply for being black.)

Like Ancient Religions and Cults, the crudest and most elemental forms of Negrolatry have to do with paganist fear-and-trembling before raw power, the might-is-right thing. This is Negrolatry #1. Before the emergence of higher moral/spiritual concepts and codes, mankind worshiped gods simply for their awesome power. Never mind right or wrong. Just bow down before the terrifying might that can smite your butt. No wonder so many tribes, in both Old World and New World, made human sacrifices to the gods. (Today, so many whites are willing to sacrifice so many whites and other non-blacks to appease the black gods. White victims are presented as sacrificial offerings to black thugs, criminals, leeches, and crooks via reduced sentencing or 'affirmative action'. Of course, stuff like BLM ends up killing more blacks due to reduced police presence, but the holy god of black egotism matters more than the mere flesh of black bodies riddled with bullets. This has to be seen as a kind of neo-human-sacrifice - https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/08/exclusive-lawsuit-filed-wake-forest-university-coach-killed-man-one-punch/ )

In a similar vein, Negrolatry in its most primitive form is about white awe of the bigass megaton Negro. Even in the old days when blacks were slaves in the South, whites noticed that 'dem ni**ers' could carry heavy loads and holler up a storm while picking cotton. It's like Ancient Folks held powerful animals in awe and even worshiped them: Hippos among Egyptians, bulls among Persians, and etc. Negro was beastly, and even though high spirituality is at the opposite spectrum of beastliness, spirituality initially grew out of worship of beastly power. Even as gods and God evolved into higher spiritual/moral conceptions, they could never lose the element of great power if they were to hold sway over mankind; indeed, the Jesus Narrative couldn't have become a religion without the Resurrection Myth as His Death would have signified ineffectiveness than the triumph of goodness. History of both man and god(s) is about power turning good than good gaining power. Power is always the first consideration. Most people admire bad power over good weakness, though they wish for the good-and-powerful. Admiration is reserved first for power, and then comes the wish for power to be just.

It's like the crude gods preceded the more complex gods in Greek mythology. It's like refined fuel originates from crude oil. And so much of pop music, despite their complexity and sophistication, draw their core energy from wailing/hollering blues and the like.
So, even though civilized white man considered black slaves to be of a beastly lesser race, that very beastliness also impressed the white man for its raw prowess. So, on some subconscious level, white man felt about the Negro like a primitive tribe about a volcano. It's like modern man, for all his collective power and dominion over nature, still feels a certain awe when pondering a bear, lion, rhino, elephant, or killer whale. Or a hurricane or earthquake. And kids feel awe about dinosaurs, especially the T-Rex.

But just like Jews moralized spirituality from a might-is-right cult to a right-is-might faith, there was another side to white man's formulation of Negrolatry. This was the foundation of Negrolatry #2. White do-gooders wanted to regard black soulfulness as akin to spiritual grace. Blacks in the South were like Jews in bondage in Egypt. They needed a Moses to lead them to the Promised Land. This Moses figure could be black(like Frederick Douglas and later MLK) or white(John Brown or Abraham Lincoln). The beastly was idealized as priestly. According to Negrolatry #2, blacks loved to sing-and-dance not because they are a bunch of savage jive-ass bunners but because their hearts are bursting with passion for freedom, equality, and dignity.
White folks, especially of Abolitionist bent, projected their own dreams and hopes onto the Negro. These Northern folks had little first hand knowledge of the jivers and their ghastly racial nature. But they knew a lot about the Bible and projected Biblical narratives upon the Negro. Of course, the South also consulted the Bible to justify slavery. They said Ham saw his father Noah naked, and God punished him by turning him into a Negro condemned to slavery under other races.
Jews, yet to develop a universalist mentality that came with 'emancipation' of their own(in Europe), were okay with the Southern explanation as to why blacks should pick cotton for whites(and Jews). It was because Ham saw Noah naked. But the fanatical Christian Abolitionists in the North weren't satisfied with Old Testament explanations alone. They were into sanctimony and holier-than-thou-ness. And what better way to feel piety and self-righteousness than by denouncing slavery, especially of the Noble Negro? UNCLE TOM'S CABIN even has a Noble Negro as christ-like figure dying for the sins of white folks. Of course, sympathy for the Negro had an element of condescension as well. Many Northern whites thought it was bad enough to be Negro with dark skin, nappy hair, and fat lips. Why make it worse for such an unfortunate people by using them as slaves as well? Also, many whites in the North thought blacks would always remain childlike dependents and sidekicks of the white race. They had no idea they were lighting a powder keg full of gunpowder.

But UNCLE TOM'S CABIN notwithstanding, whites weren't ready to confer unto the Negro the role of Christ in the American Narrative between the Civil War Period to the Civil Rights Era. Rather, the road from slavery to freedom was deemed akin to the Exodus story, albeit one led by white saviors or White Moses, especially in the figure of Abe Lincoln. Whites, especially the do-goody types in the North, wanted to believe that Negroes had noble souls and would be grateful and use their freedom wisely. Many whites in the South thought otherwise for reasons of firsthand knowledge and/or prejudice. While many were bigoted against blacks for racial reasons, they also instinctively sensed that Negroes could abuse their newfound freedom by terrorizing white folks in a reversion to oogity jungle nature.

This phase of Negrolatry lasted roughly from the Civil War to the Civil Rights Movement. The latter made a difference in that MLK took on the mantle of Black Moses who would fulfill the unfinished project of the White Moses Abraham Lincoln. But, his death turned him from a dead moses to resurrected christ. Negro Narrative went from a struggle for freedom to stairway to heaven.

But then, there is a reason why whites so desperately cling to the Cult of the Black Christ or Blackrist. It somewhat akin to why some Jews deviated from the Old Religion to formulate a new one that became Christianity. God of the Jews seemed at once unstable and tempestuous AND indifferent and uncaring. He could suddenly send floods, pestilence, and disasters out of the blue. Or He could be silent and distant just when the Jews need Him most. The Jews who would become the Early Christians wanted a more consistent and principled God. Also, they wanted to feel His nearness and what better way than by imagining Him as the Son of God who lived among mankind, died, and was resurrected to be one with the Father, God Himself. It was more soothing to believe in the Christian God. While the God of Judaism was a high concept God, the Torah's spiritual vision spanned the development of gods from might-is-right to right-is-might, which is why God in the early part of the Old Testament resembles the deities of the frightful pagans. He even makes a pagan-like demand on Abraham to make a blood-sacrifice of his son, only to 'change' His mind at the last minute. Thus, God presented Himself to Abraham as a moral God. Even so, God in later parts of the Old Testament never quite shed the vestiges of terrifying pagan gods. One can never be certain with the Jewish God, as Job found out the hard way. Then, it's no wonder that certain Jews dreamed of the Year Zero God, the one who could be conceived almost from scratch with only the good qualities minus the torrid and terrifying aspects in the Torah.

There is a parallel between the renegade alt-Jews(who became the early Christians) and today's whites who dream of a Better-Blackness. They've been enthralled with black prowess and associated it with the Noble Negro Narrative... but blacks by and large haven't conformed to the Narrative, remaining ignoble or 'nignoble'. While black problems have been a tenaciously cursed element of American History, blacks were more or less kept in 'their place' until the 1960s. The South had Jim Crow laws. And the North had its own subtler means of keeping whites over here and blacks over there. There were all sorts of discrimination against blacks in the North and the West. Jews in Hollywood had their own ways of keeping the lid on blacks.
Because of white social pressures and political muscle, blacks had no choice but to at least pretend to be a 'credit to their race'. Of course, plenty of blacks were louts and thugs. Norman Podhoretz's essay on the Negro Problem shows that, even before the Civil Rights Movement and the riotous 60s, black thugs had been harassing, beating, and robbing non-blacks, Jews included. Still, white society, both liberal and conservative, had been overwhelmingly on the side of preserving white spaces denied to blacks and dealing with blacks as second-class citizens or a can-of-worms to be kicked into the future. With such odds stacked against them, blacks couldn't go totally crazy, and whites in their safe white spaces could cling to the dream of the Noble Negro doing his best and in need of white sympathy and support. The Civil War Narrative held that blacks were freed and were on the gradual path to equality and justice. It would take time but blacks would eventually reach the Promised Land. But the Civil Rights Narrative spun a counter-argument. The Emancipation had been betrayed and the Negro had yet to break free. White Moses Abe Lincoln failed, and black Moses MLK would finally finish the job and make it to the mountaintop and lead his people to milk-and-honey.

Given the actual nature of the Negro, race-ist white skeptics had reasons not to fall for the Dream. But America is nothing if not naive and idealistic in some stupid(and inspired) way. Also, most skeptics were too genteel and inhibited to spell out in graphic and grisly details as to why the Negro Experiment wouldn't work. For some reason, White America chose to forget all about Jack Johnson and propped up the cult of Joe Louis, the nice BROWN(than black) Bomber. Apparently, Louis was such a nice guy, and it was only by accident that he knocked out all those white guys who just bumped into him. It was like the 'bum of the month' was really a 'bump of the month'. He didn't want to do it, but those clumsy uncoordinated white guys were haplessly walking into his fists and falling down.
As the raw truth remained unsaid even by the race-ists, white dreamers got the upper hand with the Narrative. The Dream would be MLK would finish the job and at last America would fulfill its mission. Of course, many chose to believe the mission was derailed by the assassination of MLK, but in fact, race problems got out of control while he was alive. Massive riots broke out in 1965, three years before MLK's death and by 1968, many blacks weren't even heeding King's advice and getting more rowdy-radical.

Because of the moral-spiritual investment of so many white folks(especially the wiberals) in the Noble Negro Narrative, they were willing to make excuses for mounting black rage and violence. After all, you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. And hadn't whites also rioted in the past? So, maybe it was black people's turn to rebel and turn over the apple cart. But the difference was that, while white folks made even more progress upon gaining freedom(via means violent or peaceful), black folks got even worse with more freedom. It was as if blacks-and-freedom was like drinking-and-driving. Freedom inspired white people to shoot for the stars. Freedom drove black people to dive for the mud.

In time, even do-good wiberals joined the White Flight. Jews joined the Jew Flew. (And Asians joined Chu-Too, and Mexicans did Brown-Not-Stick-Around.) It was getting ever harder to maintain the Noble Negro Narrative. White Flight was the result of Black Blight. Too much crime, too much craziness, too much ghastliness. And for those in the know, Abraham Lincoln actually had little sentimentality about blacks. His idea of playing White Moses was to lead blacks OUT of America. And MLK, for his all hammy but inspiring oratory, was a lout, punk, thug, and beast. Had he lived, he would have become just another Jesse Jackson... or worse a kind of Al Sharpton. Indeed, most Civil Rights Era blacks became crooks, thieves, and/or charlatans. It was his death that led to the myth of the Blackrist.

Now, if whites had sense and shook off the Noble Negro Narrative for good and saw the Real Negro at last, there would have been no more of this nonsense. But mental habits die hard, especially when the Jewish-controlled Media and Academia have been doing everything to elevate MLK into god-status and instill whites from cradle with Negrolatry. For most white young ones, the four most sacred people are MLK, Harriet Tubman, Oprah, and Obama. White parents have been made anxious about their kids becoming 'racist' at the age of three. According to Jewish Media, white kids have a natural inclination to turn 'racist'. It's almost as if the 'original sin' of 'racism' is hard-wired into the white DNA. Therefore, white parents must train their kids to be 'anti-racist' from the earliest age possible, and that means feeding them Negrolatry from the cradle.
So, most white kids come to awareness believing that any pro-white consciousness is evil while any pro-black consciousness is sacred. Stuff like Diversity-Inclusion-Equity training is not about instilling and/or reinforcing the same virtues of diligence, honesty, integrity, courage, and responsibility on ALL people regardless of race but about conflating goodness with certain identities. Being black, Jewish, or homo/tranny makes one automatically good, and the less fortunate groups without magic identities can only attain a measure of goodness by being especially partial to Jews, blacks, and homos/trannies. In other words, it's a total perversion of morality. Jews, blacks, and homos/trannies are good even if they act bad because their identities are 'good'. In contrast, even whites who are most diligent, honest, conscientious, and courageous are morally suspect because their identity is associated with all sorts of evils and failings throughout (selective)history. Instead of promoting 'diversity, inclusion, and equity'(or DIE) among whites(but then notice how this never calls for Jewish Guilt and Atonement for the mistreatment of Palestinians who are certainly NOT INCLUDED in the American Debate), society would do much better to promote accountability, appreciation, honesty, and humility among blacks. What US needs is not DIE but AAHH.

So, despite all the troublesome facts about blacks, whites cannot shake their 'psychristian' complexes about them. And yet, it's hard going to keep up with the pretense of the Noble Negro in a world where blacks act so ignoble. White people want to believe that black fevers of the soul, passion, and even rage are essentially driven by righteous hunger(or lust) for justice and goodness. It's like the Jews in the Old Testament are far from perfect but more blessed than other races because they got God on their side. Also, even though the Old Testament God is sometimes terrifying and unpredictable, He is the source of all that is good, as well as ultimately the great redeemer. And yet, the rise of Christianity suggest that enough Jews could no longer accept the anxiety-inducing uncertainties of the Old Narrative. Given the dire events of history, certain Jews agonized and strove for a new explanation, the Year Zero option where they could conceive of God from near-scratch.

We see something similar in the Third Phase of Negrolatry, that of the Blackrist. This is Negrolatry #3. Is it any wonder that so many whites have adopted black babies? Just like God was conceived anew through the narrative of Jesus as Baby God, molded and nurtured in part by man(and woman), white folks dream of the black starchild by way of white nurture. Negroes may be noble and all, but they are too fearsome and unstable, often scaring white folks half-to-death. So, how about if they adopt a black child and mold him to be the Noble Negro more in harmony with white fantasies? Just like the rise of Christianity tamed God into a more loving figure with a closer ear to man's problems, the cult of Blackrist seeks to 'fix' the problem of the broken Noble Negro Narrative. If blacks left to their own devices cannot live up to the Dream, whites must somehow intervene and replace the Old Negro with the New Negro.
Some do it by adoption, but it's also done by ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. Thus, the white woman carries the Noble Negro seed, much like Mary carried Jesus in her womb. Unlike a Negress who, though 'naturally noble', is too wild and funky for motherhood, the white woman would birth and nurture the mulatto kid to conform to the White Dream of the Noble Negro. No wonder so many whites greeted Obama as akin to black jesus. He was birthed by a white mother and raised by whites.
Another way is by Mass Immigration of Africans. Europeans have Noble Negro cult of their own. They believe America failed the blacks who turned out criminal and violent ONLY because of white tyranny and oppression traumatized the Negro soul. In contrast, Europe would welcome black Africans and treat them nice and show the world how naturally noble the blacks are. It's a variation on the Year-Zero-Negro, or Year Zegro. Europeans feel that American blacks became problematic solely due to mistreatment. It's like believing a tiger in captivity is dangerous because of abuses suffered at the hands of its owner and convincing oneself that a tiger would make the most wonderful pet if treated nice from infanthood. While it's true that a well-trained tiger raised from cub-hood can be friendly with humans, it can never be a proper pet because its very nature is wild & predatory and, furthermore, it is many times stronger than man.

Of course, there is one big difference between the transformation of God from the Old Testament to the New Testament and the transformation of Noble Negro Narrative from Troublesome Black Moses to Transcendent Black Christ. Whereas God isn't real whether one believes the Jewish version or the Christian version, blacks are all-too-real. There are tens of millions of them in the US, millions of them now in Europe, a billion of them in Africa, and there will be billions more in decades to come. Even though idea of God is a powerful concept, maybe the most powerful ever, it is still a matter to be pondered and debated. God doesn't exist in the real world. So, whether one is 'right' or 'wrong' about God, it is really a matter of theory.

In contrast, being wrong about Negroes is dangerous(and maybe fatal for Western Civilization) because countless blacks exist in reality and in ever increasing numbers, and they are by far the most aggressive, destructive, and dangerous race. Turning Negrolatry #1 into Negrolatry #2 was a big mistake. Whites noticed the raw power of blacks in muscle & music and conflated them with morality. Jack Johnson was about might-is-right, or 'we blacks be badass cuz we whup you white boys'. Upon noticing this fact, whites should have done everything to bring about permanent racial separation. But whites went with the cult of Joe Louis: the Nice Negro who uses his power as a credit to his race; he beats whites but is almost apologetic about it and, above all, wants to be liked by whites and be an American Hero in service of patriotism. But that Narrative fell apart in the 60s when blacks gained full confidence to riot and loot and scare whitey half-to-death.
But instead of waking up from the nightmare-mistaken-as-dream, whites ended up reaching for Negrolatry #3, whereby they came to fantasize about reinventing the Negro in their mind's eye. So, how did the Obama thing turn out? How are all these black kids created either by ACOWW and/or adoption turning out? Colin Kaepernick anyone? Is he the blackrist?

Can whites ever wake up? Perhaps not because of the 'viscerality' of black advantages. Jared Taylor detailed how blacks are better at certain things(like basketball) while Asians have their own niche advantages(like math and science). So, why can't people accept that blacks are better with balls and worse with ballpens? After all, most white people don't expect Asians to be good at basketball because they are better in math. White people aren't upset with Asian underperformance in America's most popular sports, and that's okay. So, why are whites upset with blacks not exceling in everything? Why not just say Asians are better at math and blacks are better at running/jumping? if whites can accept Asian inferiority in basketball, why not accept black inferiority in calculus or physics?

It is because math/science isn't visceral or exciting. In school, all the attention is on athletes, not on mathletes(even though the latter generally do better in life). So, the fact that Asians are good in math doesn't generate much excitement or convulsion about them. They are just seen as nerds.
In contrast, sports is visceral, and black dominance leads to white hero-worship of blacks as demigods or titans. Thus overwhelmed by excitement, whites have come to wish the best of their hero-race of blacks. (Likewise, white obsession with Jews has less to do with Jewish wizardry in math and science than their humor, forceful personalities, and prophetic reach that seem 'sexy'. Ayn Rand was no looker but her powerful big-think won over lots of acolytes.) This goes to show that Rationalism was bound to fail.

The perverse thing about the Cult of George Floyd is it managed to fuse Negrolatry 1, 2, 3 into a single package. He was beastly, a career thug, criminal, and druggy. He even had a stint in pornography. His fearsome beastly prowess made him like one of the crude pagan gods of dark nature. Negrolatry #1. But the Noble Negro Narrative spun his biography into something like a one-man exodus story. You see, he wasn't simply a lifetime criminal wandering across America to rob and cause more havoc. No, he was on a spiritual journey of self-discovery, in search of his milk-and-honey in a land mired in 'systemic racism'. A lone black moses in the tradition of the fugitive slaves on the run for freedom and dignity. Negrolatry #2. (Never mind Floyd was a free man and used his freedom badly. On the one hand, the Negrolators say it was a great evil to deny blacks equal rights and freedom in the past. On the other hand, Negrolators seem to imply that blacks + freedom is a bad mix because historical traumatization culturally or epigenetically drove blacks to be angrier and more dangerous; therefore, we can't expect blacks to use their freedom as sensibly as whites and non-blacks.) But then, Floyd died one day. How and why? He imbibed too much fentanyl, but the Jewish-controlled media and their minion-disciples, in a perverse variation of the feat pulled off by renegade Jews(who turned Jesus' tragedy into triumph), created the magic-myth of how Saint George Floyd was murdered by a 'white supremacist' centurion but overcame defeat and death by rising to heaven and gaining his place in the firmament. Thus, Floyd became blackrist. Negrolatry #3. We sure do live in crazy times.

COMING UP | THE GREAT DEBATE: E. MICHAEL JONES VS. JARED TAYLOR - Guide to Kulchur

Why did Capitalism go 'Woke'? — Idolatry, so intrinsic to Capitalism, led it toward the promotion of Jewish Supremacism, Negromania, and Globo-Homo — Political Correct Capitalism as the Neo-Catholicization of the New World Order

During the Cold War, there was the sense that the West was about freedom, about having a good time and being 'cool'. Not everything had to be politicized. In contrast, the communist world was seen as overly political, with ideology shaping and coloring just about everything. This was especially true of Stalinist USSR and China of the Cultural Revolution. So, while everything had to be Marxist-Leninist in the communist world, one could be just cool and happily apolitical in the West. You could have fun and be left alone by the state, commissars, or activists. It's like that movie NINOTCHKA. Garbo as Soviet commissar is staunchly ideological, so hardline. She is humorless and stern. But when she begins to laugh, she begins her transition to capitalism and freedom. She learns one doesn't have to be uptight and upright all the time with radical commitment. One could take it easy and enjoy life. And unlike communist propaganda devised to shape one's politics and worldview, capitalist advertising had only one thing in mind: To sell stuff. It was about profits for the company and fun/convenience for the consumer(as king or queen). The appeal of capitalism was its apolitical character. It was about products and services. It was about money for the company and happiness for the consumer.

So, even though the West was plenty political and ideological during the Cold War with its own propaganda and messaging, one could nevertheless ignore all the humorless and heavy-handed stuff in the world of capitalism, consumerism, and entertainment. For sure, Americans weren't dragged to ideological sessions. One's involvement in politics was voluntary, not mandatory. One didn't drink Coca-Cola to be political. One didn't watch a Disney movie for ideology. One didn't watch a 007 movie for propaganda. Even when James Bond took on the Russkies, it was more about fantasy and romance than politics. One didn't read Archie comics for 'moral' instructions or guidance. Indeed, the West often portrayed itself as apolitical compared to the Communist East. The dreary notion was that people behind the Iron Curtain, from cradle to grave, were molded into 'good communists' and everything was politicized. If you were politically suspect or heretical, you could be hounded, persecuted, or even executed. But in the West, the capitalists didn't care about your ideology. They just sold you stuff and services. And when you took part in capitalism, it was to buy something of convenience or pleasure. You didn't purchase it for meaning or commitment. When Richard Nixon met Nikita Khrushchev in the 1950s, the message was that Americans were consumers with freedom and money to buy what they wanted without meddling of the state. And when China opened up in the late 70s, one of the famous images was of Chinese youths wearing sunglasses and drinking Coke. The appeal of sunglasses and Coca-Cola wasn't ideological. They were consumer products. At most, they had 'idolic' value. Cola meant easy pleasure, cold drink on a hot day. Sunglasses meant looking 'cool' and stylish.
During the Cultural Revolution, sunglasses had been banned as a product of 'Western Decadence'. And in the Soviet Union, body building was frowned upon(if not illegalized) as a form of vanity and narcissism. And indeed, one of the Western attractions for people in the communist world was the sense of apolitical freedom, especially in America. In the movie MOSCOW ON THE HUDSON(by Paul Mazursky), the Russian exile(played by Robin Williams) encounters many problems in the US, but he still chooses to remain because he's left alone and free to do his own thing. There isn't a commissar breathing down his neck 24/7. He could say to the Power, "It's none of your business", something disallowed in a communist system. You don't lose your job over politics(unless it's truly grievous).

So, the idea was that capitalism is fun, cool, easy-going, tolerant, individualist, and apolitical whereas communism is radical, fanatical, censorious, repressive, dogmatic, and conformist. This contrast is illustrated in THE UNBEARABLE LIGHTNESS OF BEING where pro-Western Czechs act in libertine fashion whereas the Communist Order is presented as rigid and heavy.

So, what happened? Why did capitalism in the West turn 'radical' in the current 'woke' form? Why is it so incessantly activist and pushy with its constant messaging and propagandizing? Why are people being fired or demoted or censured over some tweet years ago? Why are they being denied products and services over matters of personal creed, politics, and values? Why do capitalists fund, propagate, and lend support to views that smack of 'radical' nuttery? When Coca-Cola made inroads into China in the 1980s, it was the apolitical drink of the world. The idea was its dominance owed to quality and service, not to any idea or message. But now, Coca-Cola is the promoter of the cult of White Fragility. Burger King constantly reminds us of the sanctity of homos, as if it wants to rebrand itself as Bugger King. What does sodomy have to do with burgers? But then, why did Homosher take off as the new kosher? Why are Oreo Cookies packaged in homo colors? What do cookies have to do with guys sucking each other's pud? Why are capitalists pushing BLM the big lie when surely anyone with a sense of reality knows that blacks mostly kill one another(when not attacking non-blacks) and that the number of innocent blacks killed by cops is negligible, if existent at all? It's bad enough that capitalists are taking part in politics(when they are all about products and profits). What's worse is they willfully take the ideological or idolatrous line than have any real concern for the truth. They go with what is politically advertised than what is true in the real world. It used to be capitalism was like the Beach Boys(fun, fun, fun), whereas communists were like the Red Guards. Now, capitalism funds and supports 'woke' mobs and pushes 'radical' dogma through their public announcements and advertising. Also, they fire and intimidate their own work force on the basis of ideological correctness and idolatrous sanctity. How did things become this way? It's almost as if capitalism has taken on the attitude of Jewish Bolsheviks in the 1920s. 'Wokery' is doing to business what Neocons did with American Conservatism. It's in selective purge mode, condemning whiteness while enabling Jewish Power to grow ever bigger.

1. Surely, the ascendancy of Jewish Power is a major factor in this as Jews are the top capitalists and have an obsessively supremacist mentality. Jews love money, but their top priority is tribal supremacism. Having abandoned socialism, Jews are now totally capitalist and determined to use their monopoly power to shape the narrative and direct the course of history to secure their supremacist position. Mass media are part of Jewish capitalist enterprise, and Jews use their near-monopoly lock on news and information for tribal supremacist's sake. So, for Jews, capitalism isn't just a cash cow but a political weapon of mind-control. Jews especially feel vulnerable despite their vast riches because they are only 2% of the population. For Jews, capitalism is useful as both a political and apolitical tool. As an apolitical instrument of hedonism, leisure, fun, and entertainment, capitalism turns the masses into complacent and infantilized bunch of mindless consumers. Better to have goyim obsess about sports, video games, movies, and gambling than gain independent political consciousness that might realize that Jews control just about everything.
But an apolitical order never stays that way. In a vacuum of political meaning, some force enters the scene to offer meaning, direction, and sense of purpose. Man doesn't live on bread alone, not even on bread-and-circus alone. In the past, Jews used capitalism for profit-making and used socialism & radical politics for meaning. Jewish capitalists made the profits, and Jewish leftists served as the prophets. But genuine Jewish leftist have all vanished. Most Jews are capitalist and pro-rich. They are for more money and more privilege for the Tribe and have lost interest in Humanity. Thus, Jews have bundled profit and prophet into one package. For example, in the past Jews made some movies and TV shows for fun and nothing but fun. They hardly had any politics and were made to be as uncontroversial as possible to make the audience complacent and happy. But Jews also made other kinds of movies, usually scripted by leftists, radicals, and subversives, that were meant to push a message. These movies generally made less money and even lost money. Still, they had political and propagandistic value.
Today in contrast, even mindless entertainment is likely to be loaded with politics. Advertising is often heavily politicized or in service of ideology or idolatry of certain groups, especially Negroes and Homos, the holy icons of commercialism. The way things are going, even slot-machines of the future might be politicized with ideological symbols. Jews control advertising, entertainment, and news media, all of which are capitalist enterprises. And as the #1 priority of Jews is Jewish Supremacism, they are hellbent on using whatever means, even consumer-capitalism, as a tool of power. As Jewish Power relies most essentially on the cuckery of white goyim, Jews use capitalism to spread images, ideas, and narratives that gaslight, shame, or paralyze white identity and interests.

2. The corruption of Gramsci-ism. When Antonio Gramsci spoke of Cultural Hegemony, he hardly had stuff like 'gay' Oreo Cookies or BLM-narcissistic fests in mind. His idea wasn't to take over capitalism to spread idolatry in favor of certain groups. Rather, the idea was for leftists and socialists to gain cultural influence to win over hearts & minds. His idea of Good Culture would have been something like BICYCLE THIEVES or the films of Roberto Rossellini. For him, Marxist cultural hegemony was to destroy capitalism, not to take over capitalism and indulge in narcissistic hedonism as proper platform for good ideas and values. If socialism must have dignity, it must be conveyed through serious and noble manner. In contrast, today's neo-hegemonists indulge in the culture of excess and use such means to convey supposedly important messages. It's like radicalism expressed through a strip-tease.

If Gramsci looked forward to winning hearts and minds with a new cultural paradigm, the neo-hegemonists are perfectly fine with capitalist excess, self-indulgence, narcissism, vanity, and infantilism... as long as those are loaded with the favored idolatry, mainly of Jews, homos, and blacks. So, it's great to 'twerk' as long as it's for BLM or Globo-Homo. It's okay to indulge yourself with wild-partying and girls-gone-wild and wanton hedonism AS LONG AS you remember to pay tribute to Jews, blacks, and homos.

This has obvious appeal to Neo-Hegemonists who are more Cultural Marx Brothers than Cultural Marxists. There is precious little that is Marxist or even mildly socialist about them. They are total capitalists even if they make some obligatory noises about the dangers of 'greed' and the 1%. Indeed, the neo-aristocratic globalists fixed it so that leftism would be changed from a movement of laboring masses and lesser-haves to a movement centered on vanity, celebrity, narcissism, freakdom, and mental illness(as the new normal). Leftism went from the voice of the majority to that of favored minorities, Jews-blacks-homos. This bogus 'leftism' is not about basic justice or equality but the look-at-me obsessions of those infected with 'celebrititis'. It's not about homos asking for tolerance but demanding they be celebrated by the entire world, even in places of worship. It's not about blacks struggling for justice but howling to be the center of attention and affection REGARDLESS of how they act. It's not about blacks condemning white bigotry and violence against blacks but about them bitching and yapping about how it's unjust for blacks to be brought to justice for bad deeds and criminality. The Civil Rights Movement ran on, "Don't hurt us", but today, it's more about "Shut up when we hurt us." And of course, this is partly due to the fish rotting from the head. Jews are the ruling elites of the West, and they rigged things so that they have license to kill, steal, and feel(the shikses). With Jews having such power and privilege, why wouldn't blacks and homos, two especially self-centered groups, demand similar affection, deference, and privilege? The new 'leftism' is about the nihilism of Jews, blacks, and homos intoxicated with idolatrous megalomania.

Jewish supremacists and globalist elites studied history. They know why the French King lost his head and why the Russian Tsar was mowed down. Them fellers were at least honest in their relation to the masses. They ruled over their subjects. The neo-aristos of Jews and globalists also rule over us, and in more ways than one, they are even more powerful and privileged than the kings and emperors of old. And they know the people may rise against them IF they are seen as the over-privileged ruling elites. And so, they decided to appropriate, indeed confiscate, the cult of leftism for their own uses. This way, they can have the power of ultra-kings and uber-emperors BUT be shielded by their professed 'leftism'. In actuality, they work against the people, but their mantle of 'leftism' creates the impression that they are for 'progress' and 'justice'.
This is why today's capitalists and globalists love it when idiot conzos call them 'communists' and 'leftists'. Imagine that, conzo losers with little or nothing calling super-duper capitalists and their well-funded flunkies a bunch of 'communists'. The right would do much better to adopt socialism, and why not? Nationalism is intrinsically socialist in this sense. It says, regardless of private property, a nation belongs equally to all its people. It doesn't matter how rich or poor someone is. The nation belongs equally to the rich and the poor. Therefore, the rich national must make common cause with the poor national, at least as fellow patriots. He may be rich while the other is poor, but they are fellow nationals, and as such, there is a bond and obligation that goes beyond dollars and cents. But globalist capitalism tells people that the Nation is an outdated and archaic idea. The only thing that matters is a system of global networks whereby the elites of the world all collude with another. The rich national has no obligation to fellow nationals. Of course, this doesn't apply to Jews. While Jews push ultra-individualist libertarian deracination for white goyim, they themselves have a sense of Jewish brotherhood and sisterhood. Even as they pressure whites to give up every last vestige of white identity and interest, they press upon whites to support Jewish identity and interests. Jews even got Jonathan Pollard sprung from prison, and the freed Jew is now in Israel urging fellow Jews all over the world to betray goy nations for Jews Uber Alles. No wonder Jews grow stronger as a group while whites are dividing into successful white individuals and unsuccessful white individuals(who are derided by successful whites as 'losers'). Rich Jews look out for lesser Jews, but rich whites sneer at have-less whites as 'losers' who should use opiates and die. If rich whites care for anything other than themselves, it is in accordance with the gods controlled by Jews. So, white goy elites sing paeans to Jews, homos, blacks, and even illegal immigrants while spewing venom at the 'deplorables'.

3. Another factor is the catholicization or 'christmasization' of capitalism. Look back into Christian History. Christianity was not a happy creed. It was about self-denial, sacrifice, poverty-as-virtue, turn-the-other-cheek, and other righteous deeds & values. In contrast, paganism was a lot more fun and colorful. Paganism indulged in pleasure, appreciated beauty, celebrated life as a circus, and had space for vanity, narcissism, and egotism. The Greeks and especially the Romans knew how to have a good time. Christianity looked upon much of paganism as sinful, wicked, demonic, satanic, and degrading. Christianity was severe and spartan in its mode of life and expression. It was deeply ideological. And yet, the Catholic Church didn't want pure Christianism. It was too gloomy, depressing, and judgmental. And so, the Church found ways to fuse the spiritual righteousness of Christianity with the colorfulness of paganism. This way, the Catholics could have the cake and eat it too. Practice Christianity but in a colorful pagan way. Make the faith more festive and cheerful. Of course, the Church was careful to reject the more licentious aspects of paganism and shape paganesque expressions into something holier and sanctimonious. Still, Christianity in its spiritual purity was too stark and depressing for the Catholics who found a way to fuse Christian ideology with pagan idolatry. If pagans, lacking deep spiritual grounding, were drawn to Christianity's profound faith, it was the case that Christians, lacking color and cheers, were drawn to the excitement offered by paganism. While some pagans rejected Christianity to the end while some Christians denounced all vestiges of paganism, the Catholic Church arrived at a synthesis of faith and festival. And this has been especially true of Christmas. Ostensibly a somber observance of the birth of Christ, it has turned into a kind of pagan bacchanalia of materialism, partying, and hijinks. Jesus and Santa.

In our post-Christian age, people of the West have been clamoring for new 'spiritual' meanings, and of course the Jews, as controllers of media, academia, and entertainment, get to choose the new gods. And the new gods are the globo-trinity of Jew Worship, Negro Reverence, and Homo Devotion. This new trinity constitutes the new faith. But just lamenting the Shoah, crying about Slavery, and recalling how homos used to be called 'fags' wouldn't be much fun. They need color and excitement, sass and zing.
This is where the symbiotic partnership with 'pagan' capitalism comes in. Capitalism, often characterized as crass and trashy, is redeemed by its association with Sacred Jews, Noble Negroes, and Holy Homos. And in turn, the Jewish cause, black cause, and homo cause are made cool and fashionable by capitalist color. Consider the marketing that goes into AIPAC conferences. It's like the freaking Emmy Awards night. Jews hire publicity firms to put on a big show with fanfare and razzle-dazzle. Indeed, what is the Academy Awards ceremony all about? Hollywood is mostly about marketing crass entertainment, but once a year to burnish its image Hollywood puts on a big show about how it cares about art, quality, meaning, and values.
Even though the moralists and activists may resent the power of money, they are also dependent on and grateful for the money that comes their way. So, if Marxists sought to totally do away with capitalism, the neo-catholicist 'left' is happy to form a symbiotic relationship with Big Money. The Golden Calf is also the golden goose for the activist community. Same goes for the so-called Green Energy movement. It's really bait-and-switch. It's about Jews invoking environmental concerns to replace goy-owned fossil-fuel industry with Jewish-owned fossil-fuel industry, except that the latter has been packaged with 'green energy' credentials when, in fact, most of the Jewish-backed industries are overwhelmingly run on fossil-fuel. (As for nuclear energy, Jews oppose its proliferation because other nations might, like Iran, have the potential to develop nukes. Whatever is good for Israel.) So, the Jewish oligarchs of 'green energy' aim to take over entire sectors of the energy industry, and the 'green' activist community is flush with donations. Even though the latter are mere tools, they like being in the limelight in their roles as the saviors of the planet. But then, the clergy played much the same function in European history. They mostly served the ruling elites but got housed in nice big churches and hogged roles as spiritual-moral voice of the community.

4. In a way, the fanfare around LGBTQ and BLM makes sense in accordance to the logic of capitalism. The favoritism for homos and blacks owes more to capitalist logic than socialist/Marxist logic. After all, capitalism is far more idolatrous than communism is. Granted, there were massive Stalin and Mao cults in Soviet Union and China. But the monopolization of iconography by Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and other top leaders meant that everyone else had to remain on the human level. In Cuba, Fidel Castro and Che Guevara were like gods but everyone else was merely human, equal to others. And when Soviet Union did away with the cult of personality after Stalin's death, it was mostly humanist. It was a repressive and restrictive form of humanism but humanism just the same. Humans had value as humans, neighbors, comrades, fellow citizens, and etc. Not as idols, icons, stars, and divas.

And in a way, the West was wrong to assume that the communist world was about nonstop propaganda. While propaganda could be overbearing and shrill at times, most of the arts, culture, and entertainment in the communist world was humanist than ideological. They were about people faced with daily problems, something anyone in any part of the world would recognize. So, on one level, communism vs capitalism wasn't entirely about radical propaganda vs apolitical pleasure.
It was also a matter of humanism vs stardom-ism. When youths in communist nations hankered for blue jeans, rock n roll records, and Western fads, they weren't merely seeking escapism from ideology and dogma. They were bored with humdrum humanism and were besotted with the narcissism and celebrity-cult of the West. While some resisted communist ideology in favor of Western freedom, others rejected social humanism in favor of capitalist idolatry, i.e. they weren't so much striving to be free as to fall under the spell of Western excess of vanity and diva-cults.

Apart from elevating Marx, Lenin, and some local ruler to high heaven, communism offered humanism as the proper mode for most people. Accept and appreciate people as people, as fellow workers, patriots, and comrades. Don't put on airs like you're something special. Don't be aloof and 'cool' like you're above the fray. In contrast, especially with the rise of youth culture around Elvis Presley, James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, and the Beatles, capitalism turned into a mass idolization of celebrities, stars, and divas. Nihilo-Narcissism pushed humanism aside in the West. The French New Wave got started with the humanist 400 BLOWS by Francois Truffaut. But on the eve of May 68 disaster, Jean-Luc Godard was already pondering the emergence of youth centered on 'Marx and Coca-Cola'.

But over time, people forgot about Marx altogether, and if there are young Marxists today, they got it from The Clash or Rage Against the Machine, except the Machine could easily appropriate the 'rage' that was never anything more than moral narcissism to parade onstage by shallow divas.

If the current order was truly about 'cultural marxism', then it would certainly not favor homos who are natural materialists, narcissists, egotists, and aristos. Homos have always been deferential to the rich, privileged, and/or famous. No wonder the US deep state is teeming with homos who work for NSA and CIA to smash other nations. And globo-homo agenda isn't about tolerance for homos(a good thing) but compulsory celebration and deification of homos and trannies as new angels, even new messiahs.
As for the Negro agenda, one could argue it is more in line with 'cultural marxism'. Negroes, after all, have roots in slavery, and many of them toiled in low-end jobs on farms and factories. But is that the reason why Negroes get so much attention? No, if that were so, how come browns don't get much attention? Browns were conquered by whites and mostly toiled as peons and servants in South and North Americas. Even when white libby-dibs feigned outrage over Trump's "kids in cages", it was less about the illegals than about JEWS, i.e. border security reminded all these libby-dibs of Jewish Refugees during the Holocaust, LOL. (And now that Biden's administration is putting the kids in 'cages', they aren't cages anymore according to the Jewish-run media.) And if 'cultural marxism' is about the oppressed, there is precious little discussion of the American Indians, the most tragic people in the world who permanently lost their homeland to foreign invaders. And there's hardly any talk of Palestinians and Arabs destroyed by Wars for Israel cooked up by Zionists.

So much for 'cultural marxism'. So, the reason why blacks get special love is due to 'cultural capitalism', not 'cultural marxism'. It owes less to the history of slavery or Jim Crow than black success in the idolatrous fields of capitalism, mainly in sports and pop music. It also helps that Jews own the media and much of sports industry and have much to profit from black ability and talent. And of course, Jews associate 'white guilt' with blackness because blackness is most potent in paralyzing white agency and unity. After all, people feel more guilty about having done wrong to the superior than to the inferior. It's like there's more outcry over someone killing a grand elephant than a lowly warthog. As whites idolize Negroes as rappers, athletes, and super-studs in the capitalist-hedonist order, it was only natural that so-called 'woke' capitalism would come to favor blacks and BLM mainly due to the higher idolatrous value of the Negroes.
So, in a way, capitalism's promotion of globo-homo and BLM isn't so much a fusion of 'right-wing capitalism' with 'leftwing ideology' but the logical outcome of capitalism's obsession with vanity and idolatry, finally leading to the moneyed apotheosis of whatever has the most 'idolic' value. It's hard to think of two groups more narcissistic and exhibitionist than blacks and homos, and not surprisingly, under Jewish media orchestration, BLM and LGBTQ symbols are often displayed side by side. This is 'cultural capitalism'.

“THE LIE OF LIMITED GOVERNMENT” MIKE PEINOVICH, APRIL 10, 2021

Negrolatry or Negro-Idolatry as It pertains to the Electronic Mind and the Common Thread — Reflections on Blackness as Unifying Jungle Faith, the Spiritual Corollary to Jungle Fever, in the Aftermath of Mass White Spiritual Cuckery to Blackness as Holiness

Negrolatry has something to do with the Electronic Mind and the Common Thread. It seems, if whites got Jungle Fever for black bodies, they now have Jungle Faith in black souls. Caucasians might as well be called 'Cuckasians'. But, why is Modern Consciousness so partial to this kind of thinking? Let's consider the transformations of consciousness resulting from Modernism and Electronica.

The rise of the Electronic Mind has fundamentally altered modern consciousness. In a way, it has erased or at least eclipsed consciousness as it had been understood. Prior to electronic communication, entertainment, and media, people generally processed one idea, idol, or icon at a time and for a duration. It might be awhile before they got another dose of information or indoctrination. It's like a meal that you consume and slowly digests throughout the day. It's no wonder the Novel caught on as a form of popular art because, when not working, people had lots of 'dead time'. Without the TV, radio, internet, and iphone as constant means of stimulation/distractions, people could immerse themselves in stories with many characters and extended plots. And if they wanted to read another book, they had to go to the book store or library on foot. And it took some time for books on order to arrive. So, there were always lots of 'dead time' BETWEEN social activities. Even many privileged people didn't have many books, and you had to live in a good-sized town to have access to any kind of real library. Most people had Bibles, Almanacs, and few works of ideas and fiction. Because non-stop bombardments on the senses and the mind were inconceivable in the pre-electronic age(which was most of human history), people developed more consistent and continuous views of their lives, values, and meaning. People became immersed in the Bible. Or, for meaning, they became involved in the family, the community. Or because the economy was labor-intensive and society had yet to provide much in the way of safety-nets, people spend a lot of time with work and derived meaning from production. When you eat a meal and wait awhile before the next one, you have ample time to digest all of it. In contrast, if you're snacking all the time and going from flavor to flavor to flavor, the body doesn't really know what to make of it, especially as you keep eating for the flavors than hunger and need. Your digestive process becomes inconsistent and incomplete, even contradictory, than consistent and complete.

Take the Electronic Mind in the experience of cinema, or the Movic Mind. A cinephile might, on the same day, take in a trashy Hollywood comedy, a crazy Hong Kong action flick, a b/w 'classic' of yesteryear that is relatively wholesome & sentimental, and a dour or solemn European art film. What happens when the mind experiences such drastic and total shifts and contrasts in tone, mood, and meaning in expression in rapid succession? Now, one may note that the human mind was always multi-faceted and shifted gears from one perspective to another. After all, people appreciated both comedy and tragedy in Shakespearean and Ancient Greek times. As human emotions have a wide range, everyone through the ages had something to laugh about, something to cry about, something to tickle his fancy, something to rouse him to fury, and etc. Even a stern priest might tell a bawdy joke or two. Still, he might say it underneath his breath. He would know it's just a morsel, not the main course, of life. For most of human history, there was more consistency and insistence on what was essential, crucial, and important as opposed to what was peripheral, trivial, or disposable. So, if a priest were to tell a dirty joke, he would say it in hushed tone with someone he's close to. His input with vulgarity wouldn't be the same as his investment in spirituality. Some things got more light and attention while other things remained in the shadows or hidden around the corner. Also, even if someone experienced two highly contrasting or contentious views around the same time, the chances were he would have had time to address the contradictions to some degree as the chances of yet another problematic idea or idolatry to cross his path would have been unlikely.

But things are different in the Electronic Age. In a city with lots of movie theaters, one could go from one reality to another, one after the other. In the past, if one attended an opera, he would have the whole day or week to ponder and process what he'd seen and heard. But in the electronic age, one might encounter an artistic/intellectual experience of great depth but, even before processing it halfway, might take in other stuff — ones that utterly violate and demean the spirit of the work of depth —that jolts his senses on the same day. When the mind/senses are constantly taking in new stimuli without ever fully processing earlier ones, what happens? It's akin to people who keep shopping without ever using their purchases to proper use. It got even crazier with the rise of TV, then Cable TV and Video technology. And then, things got super-crazy with the coming of the internet followed by devices people carry around at all times. Even before one could properly ponder and process one consumption of entertainment/propaganda, he could be fed, even bombarded, with another and then another then another, all in quick succession.
Besides, the Electronic Mind has gotten so accustomed to endless sensory-stimulation that, like someone sitting before a slot machine, it feels compelled to absorb more and more sensory data in the manner of an addict than an autodidact. (US empire has become cancerous in this manner. It feels this constant need for more growth, more expansion, more power, more control, more hegemony, more wars, and etc. without ever fully formulating what it's all about and why. Shopaholic US empire must have more just to have more.) Just like many people need more and more sex without thought of relationship, emotional life, & commitment and just like too many people need to eat and eat without any meaningful relation to food, nutrition, & health, so many modern minds, Movic or Networkic, have become insatiable for endless streams of sensory data. Indeed, they can't handle 'dead time' because it would call upon them to sit still and finally process and think about what they've read, seen, or experienced. Their minds demand constant 'motion' as distraction from the meaning of existence.

One reason why the most popular works of literature happen to be in Teen Fiction or Stupid Sex(like in FIFTY SHADES OF GREY) is because people are reading fast for thrills than meaning, depth, or originality. It is the age when even adults talk seriously about HARRY POTTER and HUNGER GAMES. In Peter Weir's movie TRUMAN SHOW, the TV junkies are rooting for Truman to escape and break free from the TV world, but they are hooked to the TV even as they cheer on Truman. And when Truman finally breaks free, the movie ends with a TV junkie wondering what is next on TV. He was so into Truman's adventure but almost instantly forgets it as he channels-surfs for the next big thrill on the Tube. So, there isn't even much time BETWEEN the Truman Show and the Next Show. It's total insta-immersion in one thing followed by total insta-immersion in the next thing, even if the two things may be diametrically opposed in tone, style, tempo, message. Electronic Media isn't only instant but totalizing. A reverend may give a powerful sermon in a church, but he will tell a dirty joke behind closed doors or in the hallway with a friend or intimate. One thing is infinitely more important than the other. But, everything conveyed via electronic media has a totality of expression, an authority equal to any other. Nothing is a whisper, and everything is a shout. Indeed, the most outrageous, shameless, and 'dirty' things have an advantage as electronic media are the product of amplification, and loud stuff is more suited for electricity than quiet stuff is. A rock show or vulgar comedy comes through with greater force than a solemn sermon or reflective drama. No wonder superhero movies, rap videos, lewd comedies, general pornification of mainstream culture, and partisan-propagandizing of the news tend to dominate the airwaves and social networks.

Still, as people cannot indulge in mindless trash all the time, they also seek out meaning. They go from 'porning' to mourning, shrieking to seeking, sensuality to spirituality, nihilism to moralism, and etc. Sometimes, one masquerades as the other. So, Quentin Tarantino's INGLORIOUS BASTERDS has been sold as both nihilistic celebration of sadism and a moral statement about World War II, a kind of Morality-Porn, which can also be said of RAMBO, a dumb trashy gung-ho fantasy masquerading as serious statement about 'Vietnam'. Rappers wallow in thuggery but pretend to be 'speaking truth to power'. The decadent hedonism of globo-homo vanity has become conflated with 'spiritual' redemption, especially as so many churches now fly the 'gay flag'. (In some ways, such spiritual-vandalization is worse than the physical destruction of churches under communism. After all, while physical attacks on churches ennobled Christianity as victim of barbaric violence, the church collaboration with globo-homo degeneracy is an utter betrayal at the spiritual level. A Christian may face physical defeat but still possess a victorious soul, which is the story of Jesus. But when the Christian spirit succumbs to the sickly and hollow vanity of neo-aristo homos who work in league with neo-imperialist deep state and super-capitalist oligarchy, it means the Faith is dead from within. Furthermore, communism's attack on the Church was, at the very least, not without moral and material justification. Communists wanted people to break free of the opiate of religion, especially as it had been controlled and manipulated by the ruling elites, and see reality for what it is and work to create a better society on Earth than dream of some fantastic Kingdom of Heaven. Though history judged communism to be more bad than good, there was genuine moral and philosophical reasons for its opposition to religion. In contrast, globo-homo-mania is utterly cynical and opportunistic in its infiltration and corruption of the Church. Even though it is ultimately the tool of Jewish globalist-supremacists whose objective is to destroy Christianity and the Goy Moral Order, the agenda pretends to represent the TRUE meaning of Christianity and all forms of spirituality... because what? The highest form of divination is to instruct humanity that nothing is more sacred than homo fecal-penetration and tranny penis-cutting?)

Because of endless barrages of contrasting and contradictory images, idols, and images in the electronic media — with each image, idol, icon, or idea vying for totality of the moment for the duration of its hold over the consumer — , the Electronic Mind is bound to be fractured and fragmentary. One minute, you could be watching an exciting TV cop drama about law-and-order heroes, next you could be watching a gangsta rap music video extolling the thug lifestyle. You could be sucked into a Zionist talking point on Youtube followed by a pro-BDS video. Even if you were to be politically partisan and choose only one ideological point of view, there is hardly any consistency on either the 'left'(or the 'right' for that matter) as the 'left' went from Mayday & the Workers to Gayday and the 'Wokers'. The so-called 'Intersectionality' is a constant clash of 'totalized' priorities and interests. And the 'right', though accused of 'white supremacism', goes out of its way to snuff white politics while promoting Zionism and Lady Maga. (Today's 'conservatives' are supposed to support Israel because it has maybe the biggest 'gay pride' parade in the world. Right, 'True Conservatism' is about praising the Jew for turning the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah, so says Dennis Prager.)

Even in the political and cultural landscape where most of the Electronic Express — media, academia, entertainment, and state propaganda — is controlled by so-called 'Liberals' or 'Progressives', it is difficult to push a single, consistent, or unified line, message, or narrative because, whereas ideologies tend to be radical and purist, entertainment tends to be irreverent, hedonistic, and nihilistic. Even if every last vestige of conservative ideology/politics were to be banned from media and social network, the contrasts and contradictions between Liberal entertainment and Liberal ideology would be bewildering. A culture that promotes both MLK and David Chapelle, both TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD and DJANGO UNCHAINED, and both Mandela as saint and rappers as cool thugs will be all over the map. Such problems exist in China as well. Ruled by the CCP, China is far more ideologically monolithic than the West. But its often nihilistic-consumer-hedonist entertainment serves a very different vision of the world than the Official Morality & Consciousness promoted by the State. Even with total suppression of conservatism, Liberal States will end up with deep fissures inherent in what Sam Francis called 'Anarcho-Tyranny'. While the Power developed Anarcho-Tyranny as a means of control, it can run out of control, as has happened with BLM riots in both the US and EU.

And there is so much confusion. Are white women 'fellow victims' along with POC of evil white men? Or are they modern witches, or 'Beckys', who call the police on innocent black men? Are Muslims to be welcomed as immigrants or blown to smithereens as terrorists? Should homos push globo-homo even further in big cities, OR should they apologize to blacks for taking the limelight away from black issues and BLM? Should Liberals insist on the equality of the races on grounds that 'race is just a social construct' or lionize blacks as special and superior on account of their tougher muscles, louder voices, bouncier buns, and bigger dongs? Who are More Woman, the 'Terfs' or the Trannies? Should good white 'liberals' prioritize Gentrification or the Gentle Giant? Or maybe the two can be combined by moving the Gentle Giants to the 'racist' Suburbs while the cities further gentrify? Or maybe white 'liberals' are afraid that blacks are beginning to catch onto the Blue Privilege Agenda.

All such contradictory positions or attitudes are pushed by Electronica, and each message vies for its totality. So, if one were to watch these views in succession in a single sitting, he will experience a kind of whiplash between one insta-totality to another and then another and then another. At the end of the day, he will have a cubist mind that feels disjointed, disoriented, perplexed, and neurotic. Such is the modernist mindset, but most people, even modernists, find it unsatisfying, confused, and difficult. It's like people may be provoked, fascinated, and challenged by the works of Pablo Picasso, but they don't really find enjoyment, any more than from Serial Music or other forms of Modern(ist) Music. Modernism may engage the mind/intellect but usually offers no assurance emotionally or spiritually. There is no common unifying theme, but the eternal mind/soul craves it. Then, the dominant 'idology'(something between idolatry and ideology) will be whatever or whichever that attains the semblance of the Common Thread in the realm of the Electronic Mind. And this is why, currently at least, there is Negrolatry, Jew Worship, and Holy Homo Reverence. The biggest power in Electronica, the Jews, have used all their means to create a web across electronic spaces to ensure that Jews, blacks, and homos are part of the Common Thread DESPITE all the contradictions inherent in the electronic system. Howard Stern once declared himself the 'King of All Media', and Jews would have us believe that Jewish Themes(along those of blacks and homos) are the unifying threads across all nations, cultures, and times.

Take, for example, the 'gay rainbow' as symbol, emblem, insignia, even battle regalia. It is no longer associated only with homos but with just about everything. You want to have some Oreos, grab a burger, or drink some soda? Well, look at the advertising, and there are 'pride cookies', 'pride burgers', and 'pride sodas'. You love Israel as the Holy Land? Well, the Holy Land is now inseparable from the mantra of 'Israel has the biggest gay pride parades'. You want to be a Good Conservative? Well, the new line according to Neocons who control Conservatism Inc. is that 'gay marriage is conservative values' and 'Lady Maga is special'. When BLM was all the rage during the final yrs of the Obama presidency, many of its rallies were peppered with 'gay pride' flags, indeed as if BLM and the 'gay rainbow' were part of the same Happy Meal package. The globo-homo logo has become so 'sacrosanct' in globalism that even Palestinians, though oppressed by Jews and globalist homos in the US deep state, try so hard to link their struggle with 'gay pride'. We live in a world of Logo over Logos. Even though globo-homo-mania is the neo-missionary project of Jewish-controlled US imperialism, those claiming to be anti-US-imperialist also wave the globo-homo banner. It's like 'With Gays on Our Side' is the new 'With God on Our Side'.
Of course, some nations have held out against globo-homo, but they tend to submit to another globo-enforced Common Thread, which is Jew Worship. So, even as Russia is constantly attacked by Jewish Power, it is always making noises about how the Russian state is good for Jews, how Russian values are justified ESPECIALLY because Russia defeated Nazi Germany that killed Jews. In the US, 'liberals' and 'conservatives' may growl at each other on certain issues, but both major parties are totally united on Jew Worship, support for Israel/Zionism, and shoveling more Fed money to Wall Street. And both parties are committed to shutting down BDS. The academia is supposed to be 'liberal' and critical of the Power, but most of it is amazingly silent about Jewish Power and the Zionist Question. While there are pockets of academia that do criticize Israeli policy, they are mostly ineffective and ignored by the MSM that is totally Jewish-controlled and by politicians who are totally owned by Jewish donor class. Donald Trump, like Russia, has been attacked by Jews from day one, but he's all about 'I Luv Jews and Israel'. Even as blacks bitch about 'white privilege' and 'police brutality', few prominent blacks dare mention that Jews played a big role in Gentrification and Israelization of the US police. (ADL played a role in turning US police in big cities into the Zionic-Bionic Men.) Thus, Jew-Worship is part of the Common Thread. Despite all the cacophony of Electronic Media with so many disparate and opposing views, most are united in sucking up to Jewish Power and 'Muh Holocaust'. The only truly vocal opposition to Jewish Power comes from the Dissident Right, but as Jews control the Platforms and Media(and as the US government and justice system haven't done much to control Jewish Monopoly), speaking-truth-to-Jewish-Power still has a long way to go before the Holy Jewish Spell is broken.

When we take white women, there is no Common Thread of their goodness, wonderfulness, or holiness. While white women are promoted as victims of white fratboy rapists in colleges or the 'pussy-grabbing' Orange Man, they are evil Beckys if they dare to call the police on illegal or dubious black behavior. White women as pro-globo-homo feminists are good, but white women as TERFS are bad. So, white women could be virtuous in one thread but villainous in another. Same goes for Muslims. As immigrants, they are holy victims of evil Donald Trump and 'white supremacist Islamophobes'. But as Iranians or Syrians who resist Jewish Supremacist Power, they might as well be subhuman who should be blown to smithereens.

But there is a Common Thread about blacks, possibly even more than for Jews and Homos. Upon closer scrutiny, the common thread of Globo-Homo across so many sectors and spheres is artificial and even antithetical. After all, what does homosexuality have to do with Oreo cookies or a hamburger? What exactly is a 'pride burger'? Why must Burger King bill itself as Bugger King? Food has NOTHING to do with homosexuality. (Even Jack Tripper of THREE'S COMPANY only pretended to be homo.) And what does BLM have to do with globo-homo? What do black protests about imagined White Police Brutality have to do with homo pride or tranny celebration, especially when the police has used extra force against blacks precisely to keep cities safe for Jews and HOMOS? And why did Christianity cave to Queertianity? What do God, Jesus, and Salvation have to do with men buggering another or a man with a wig pretending to be a 'woman'? And why do sports franchises celebrate globo-homo? What does Football or Basketball have to do with fruits and fairies, especially as sports are about machismo disdaining sissy boys? So, the common thread of globo-homo isn't natural. It's been enforced by Jewish Power.

In contrast, the Common Thread of Negrolatry is more understandable and more natural as blacks dominate the fields that get most people excited, thrilled, or hyper. Rap and Hip-Hop are the most popular musical forms around the world, and so naturally, many peoples of all races are madly into Negrolatry in pop music. Also, sports make people lose their minds. Globalization and mass migration have led to black athletic colonization even in non-black nations. Britons, French, Dutch, and other Europeans look to blacks as their New National Heroes. Black Idol Imperialism has reached even Japan. In China, yellow boys hug their basketballs like women hug pregnant bellies as they watch the NBA, the bastion of Negro athletes who are the most revered 'heroes' for many young Chinese. So, blacks got pop music and sports. Also, the internet has pretty much made pornography accessible to all the world, and something like 1/3 of all internet traffic is pornographic. And this led to the spread of Negro Dong Fetish around the world. The other black fetish among non-blacks is 'twerking'. Even college-educated women in US, Canada, Australia, Russia, Japan, and Europe are 'twerking' their buns like black women. What were black women thinking when they came up with 'twerking'? It's really 'sex with negro dongs' dance. There was a time when pornography was a Red Light district affair or kept to adults. Nowadays, even young boys and girls grow up to porny images that are easily accessible through smartphones. Also, as the culture-at-large has been pornified, there is hardly any shame or opprobrium associated with overt sexuality. White female singers and white actresses now regularly appear in music videos, TV shows, and movies as the sexual interests of Negro men who are now promoted over white men. So, Negroes not only got sports and pop music but the pornographic imagination, the three big thrills of globalism. That's a lot of Common Thread in pop culture/entertainment.

But Negroes are not only objects of worship as Victors but as Victims. Unlike the Narrative about Homo Victimization, which is mostly bogus as homos were never a specific group — besides, even when homosexuality was held in contempt or criminalized, plenty of homos were born into privilege and abused power in all sorts of ways — , the Narrative of Black Victimization in the West is true enough. As a backward savage people, they were preyed upon by fellow blacks, Arabs, and whites as slave labor. The Atlantic Slave Trade was truly a horror, and blacks did struggle as slaves in the New World. (Though black slavery in the US gets the worst rap, it was far worse in Latin America.) Also, there was the Civil Rights Movement, which had a certain greatness to it but for the fact that the 'racists' were, to a large extent, justified in their Fear of the Tougher, More Aggressive, and More Thuggish Negroes. It wasn't just about the color of the skin but tone of the muscle as Negro men, with equal freedom with white men, were bound to eventually kick the white boys' ass — blacks call white men 'white boys' — and colonize white wombs as women naturally drop loser men and go with winner men. Especially as blacks have louder and more booming voices, the black holler for truth and justice felt more powerful and compelling in the white imagination. So, blacks came to dominate the Common Thread as both high-fiving Victors in sports/entertainment and holy Victims in a spiritualized vision of History that said whites must atone for 'racism'. (Even as modernism billed itself as avant-garde and more evolved, its contradictions led to obsessions with the primitive. In its confusion and obfuscation, it sought out the elementary and vital in, say, African Art and nude Tahitian women. Initially, the fascination was intellectual, but as the years passed and as modernism lost its luster and was eclipsed by an uninhibited pop culture, the primitive went from a cultural artifact to the main fuel of post-Western Imagination.) Because whites worship blacks as natural victors, their guilt about blacks as victims was bound to be greater. With Negro-hood dominating the Common Thread as both dominant victor bodies in sports/entertainment and main victim souls of oppression/injustice, the resulting Mandela/Mandingo Complex among whites is surely a sight to behold. Ridiculous but spectacularly so.

In a way, whites and modern folks have always craved a Common Thread because Modernity and Modernism created such a fractured world of ideas and senses. Modernism insisted that such alienating and anxious consciousness of modernism was good as the necessary price for real freedom. It laid the ground for existentialism whereby individuals must seek their own meaning. Traditional societies put forth essential truths that were meant to be embraced and valued by all. But modernism meant freedom, and that meant the clashing of so many ideas, information, idols, and icons, and therefore, it was up to the alienated and anxious individual to seek his own meaning from the constant melee. So, even as modernity was bewildering and even though modernism wasn't emotionally satisfying, they were challenging and compelling us to think for ourselves. We must all become more 'cubist' in thinking and worldview, so claimed the modernists. But, the human mind craves some kind of essence, some kind of truth that runs as a common thread through all spheres and domains of thought, feeling, and experience. Then, it's no wonder that so many people in the modern world gravitated toward Marxism that did offer a Common Thread of dialectical materialist class analysis that supposedly explained all the past and all the future through an ideology that united philosophy, science, spirituality, and meaning. But in the end, Marxism was the god that failed.

So, what is left as the Common Thread? Jews tried globo-homo, and it has had great success as everything, even Chick-Fil-A(which is now Dic*-Fill-Ass) has been globo-homo-genized, but it's really artificial, more the product of massive promotion via advertising. So many things associated with globo-homo actually have NO relation to homosexuality. Who really thinks of sodomy while sipping Coke? What does the beautiful rainbow have to do with men with wigs who plan to have their penises cut off?
In contrast, blacks are naturally dominant in sports, pop music, and sexual fetishes of whites, what with Emmanuel Macron calling on Europeans to welcome 100s of millions of blacks so that European wombs will be Africanized as white men go cucky-wuck. One would think Viktor Orban would be seen as the sane leader in Europe, but he is denounced as an 'autocratic dictator' whereas a collaborationist cuck who kowtows to Jews and blacks(and homos) is praised as what 'liberal democracy' is all about.

How about Jews as a Common Thread? After all, Jewish Money controls so much, and Holocaust Movies are now a genre unto themselves. But even as so many goyim suck up to Jewish Money and Power, Jews are loathe to make a big deal about their influence and wealth, Alan Dershowitz's chutzpah notwithstanding. As for the Holocaust Narrative, it's too depressing. Jews used to have much cultural capital as comedians, but Jews now seem almost allergic to comedy as satire has always been threatening to the dominant ruling power. Also, Jews aren't great orators(though verbally gifted), great athletes, or great singers. (Bob Dylan lucked out as he came to prominence when people still approached music intellectually and seriously.) Jews may have bigger dongs on average if Ron Jeremy is a realistic representation of Portnoic lusts, but Jewish men lack muscle power. Even if a Jewish Portnoy and Negro with equal-sized dongs stood side by side, the Negro would seem more dominant. This explains why even Jewish men are beginning to fret about all those NY Jewish women going with Negroes. Indeed, it may be the Negro sexuality that finally destroys the unity of Jews as Jewish women tend to be pretty nutty. Just like Jewish men were wildly chasing after blonde 'shikses' in the 70s and 80s, we know have Jewish women chasing after black shakas(or shaka-zulus) in the 21st century.

So, from the most secular-spiritual iconography to salacious pop cultural idolatry, there is the Common Thread of the Negro. It's telling that George Pretty Boy Floyd(or Ugly Boy Floyd as the case may be) the Knee-Groid once acted in porn and is now called a saint. In other words, St. George could be Saint George or Stud George, but in our age, the Mandela/Mandingo Complex have conflated the two. Besides, if Christianity has cucked to Queertianity and now conflates god and jesus with ass-buggery and tranny-penis-cutting, who's to say a drug-addled porn actor can't be a saint as well? To push this logic further, who's to say counterfeit money(like the one held by saint-stud George) isn't real money? If the Fed can print gazillions for Jewish Wall Street, maybe Negroes in the street should be allowed to print their own money too. Trans-money. If tranny men are 'women', let trans-money be real money. In the modern world with so little in the way of Common Thread — made all the worse by baffling Diversity — , so many people are grateful for the Common Thread of Black Celebration because it's the one thing that naturally or 'organically' exists across the cultural landscape, from high to low, to moral narratives to sensual experiences.

In other words, Welcome to Clown World.

Ben Shapiro said, 'Facts don't care about your feelings', and he's right, but therein lies the problem. Facts don't care about ANY feelings, good or bad. Facts are just cold data. A computer drive could be filled with tons of facts, but computers feel nothing. So, having facts on your side doesn't matter as long as you don't FEEL for the facts. Against the current false Narrative of Negro Martyrdom, many on the Right have been spouting off facts about black crime in the genteel manner of Jared Taylor. But those facts, even if true, are uttered without feeling. Those facts will matter ONLY IF whites invest them with feeling, with passion, with rage, with anger. It's not enough to mention that blacks commit more crime and attack and murder more whites. The fact that whites can mention such facts WITHOUT righteous rage means whites are either cold automatons or cucked maggots. When blacks are attacking your race on a daily basis, you should be angry. You should be shouting out every day, 'blacks rob our kind, blacks rape our kind, blacks murder our kind'. Whites should be saying BLM stands for 'burn, loot, and murder' as some have noted. But whites, even in the Dissident Right, are often about the facts without the feelings. Blacks attack whites but only angrily shout 'black lives matter', but whites are likely to either cuck and say 'blacks lives matter' or speak defensively and say 'all lives matter' when, if they had any balls and rage, they would say 'white lives matter', and 'we are not gonna tolerate anymore savage black violence against whites'. In other words, it's time for Race War.