Why Most Journalists are Essentially 'Spiritual' and Incapable of True Rationalism — How the 'Sacralization' of Jews, Blacks, and Homos has led to the Megalomania among them and Mimimi-mania among the Rest — Man and Matter must not be revered as Holy and Sacred

The role of journalists should be excavation, not burial or concealment. But too many journos use the shovel to bury than to dig. These shills should really work for the Ministry of Propaganda, which is what most of MSM really is.

One problem is most of MSM is in the pocket of Jewish gangster oligarchs, and big media companies favor Zionist-centrists and Jewish supremacists for hiring and promotion. And even among many talented Jewish reporters and journalists, there is a wink-wink understanding that the #1 mindset among them must be “Is it good for Jews?” Jewish Power is enshrined in their hearts and is tantamount to the the highest good imaginable. They were raised that way and think that way in what has been the most tribal culture in world history. So, even though they can be good and honest journalists on matters not pertaining to Jewish interests, they become quasi-Talmudic first and foremost on anything that touches directly or indirectly on Jewish-related matters. This is why most Jewish journalists, left or right, are on the same boat on Russia, Syria, and Iran. Their reporting, commentary, and narrative revolve around the core consideration of "Is it good for the Jews?"

Next, there are those who enter journalism for the glam factor. Maybe they grew up watching ALL THE PRESIDENT’S MEN(the Watergate movie) or have a Hollywood view of journalism as where the action is(in terms of activism, adventure, truth, justice, and celebrity). If Washington is Hollywood for ugly people, journalism is Hollywood for 'caring' and smart people though, to be sure, many in journalism tend not to be very smart; they just think they are. They don’t have the intellect/patience to be academics and don’t have advanced skills to be a leader or game-changer in anything — one thing for sure, science journalists know a hell of a lot less than scientists. So, they serve as scribes on the run. It’s like “Those who can’t, teach”: “Those who can’t, report.” At any rate, as this kind of journalists entered the field for the glam factor, their main concern is status and the buzz. So, if they have to stick with PC to be hired and promoted, they will do just that. They are like Peter Keating in THE FOUNTAINHEAD.

Now, what about goy journalists of integrity and honesty? Why are so many of them almost as useless as the Jewish Firsters and Paparrazi with pens? Because Political Correctness instilled them with quasi-spiritual thinking. To understand how this works, consider the psychology of the devoutly religious. They can speak and think freely on lots of things. They can even speak honestly about the failings of church elders and corruption in the highest echelons of authority. They can pore through financial dealings of the church to find fault. But they cannot talk badly or even think bad thoughts about God or Jesus.
There is a dividing line between what is man & matter and what is holy & sacred. Even the pope is part of the world of man & matter, but God and Jesus are supreme above all. Therefore, even in personal conversation or private thought, one dares not speak or think ill of God or Jesus. One can accuse the church of failing to live up to its mission or standards, but one cannot be critical of God, the Lord of all, and Jesus, who is believed to be perfect.
But such sacramental thinking operates among secular people as well because human psychology is profoundly 'spiritual'. This was evident in communist nations that were officially atheist but rooted in dogmas of godlike Marx and Lenin, the holy icons of the system. So, even though one might discuss and report on the various failings of the communist system, one better not dare cast doubt on the core foundation of Marxism-Leninism. Such mentality was so strong among true believers that even private thoughts skeptical of the basic principles of Marxism-Leninism made one feel 'sinful' and unworthy. The problem with communist systems was that, for too long, no one dared to question if the ideological underpinning itself was the real problem. While communists could, at times, criticize the outward practices of communism, they could not question the core principles. When things went wrong, the blame fell on the misapplication of dogma than on the dogma itself. It’d be like finding faults with certain calculations of geocentrism without challenging its core validity, esp in light of a seemingly better system of the heliocentric model.

We have a similar kind of problem, even among journalists of honesty and integrity? Never mind the Jewish Firsters and Paparazzis with pens. The more important question is, why are so many non-Jewish journalists of intelligence and integrity so full of nonsense or so unwilling to GO THERE? It’s because even most secular people have a spiritual side to their mentality. Just like smart and serious communist journalists were too ‘spiritually’ beholden to Marxism-Leninism to ask the deeper question — could it be that the insurmountable problems of communist societies emanate from communist fundamentals themselves? — , today’s PC-indoctrinated journalists are too emotionally and ‘spiritually’ beholden to idolatrous or iconic cults of the Magic Negro, Shoah-Worship, and Globo-Homo-mania to ask the bigger questions.

Magic Negro worship means ‘racism’ is all bad. Shoah-Worship means ‘antisemitism’ is the worst thing ever. Globo-Homo worship means we must be vigilant against ‘homophobia’. Blacks-Jews-homos are to PC journos what God & Jesus are to the devoutly faithful — unfortunately, virtually all journalists, even those of Conservatism Inc., have succumbed to PC, what with the two sides yammering, "Conservatives are 'racists'" and "Liberals are the 'real racists'." And just like the faithful may find fault with the church, church leaders, and church community but NEVER with God or Jesus, PC journos may find problems in the black community, Jewish community, and homo community(and critique some of the leaders and managers), but they feel they mustn't find any fault with the holy cult of the Magic Negro, Super Jew, and Holy Homo. So, most black problems must be blamed on whites or few bad apples among blacks. But BLACKNESS itself is magical and wonderful. Get on your knees before the portrait of MLK-Mandela(or even Obama) or twerk in veneration of the Great Negro. Same goes with the Jews. Scandals involving Bernie Madoff, Anthony Weiner, and Harvey Weinstein have shown that journalists can report on some Jewish bad apples. But never ever think that such examples reflect on or reveal something about the Jewish Community in general — indeed, one of the main media narratives associated with the Madoff case was that his crimes caused harm to some high-profile Jews and, furthermore, might fuel 'antisemitic' stereotypes, i.e. when Jews do bad, let us worry about Jews-in-general as potential victims than about the actual victims. All generalizations about Jews must be positive, never negative. The bad Jews are outliers than manifestations of something seriously wrong in the Jewish community. So, even as journalists can expose some individual bad Jews, they are never to question the essential nobility and wisdom of the Jewish People. (It'd be like pretending that there is NO LINK between the mafia and Italian culture attitudes. Of course, Jews never tire of telling the world that there is an indisputable connection between bad white deeds and the white community in general.)
And as this mentality has been instilled in the minds of journalists from cradle, they truly do revere the Jews and would feel guilt/shame if they thought ill of the Jewish community even in private behind closed doors. It’s like a religious person dares not think ill of God or Jesus even when no one is watching or listening. Their religiosity isn’t merely a response to external factors, a matter of shame, but an internal reality, a matter of guilt. Even if no one knew of their ill begotten words or thoughts about God and Jesus, they themselves would feel terrible for having entertained them. One feels free to think and say anything about the world of man and matter, but one’s mind better tread carefully about reverential, spiritual, or holy matters. Among many secular folks, Jews-blacks-homos are their highest objects of ‘spirituality’, and they can no more venture to question the sanctity of Jewishness, blackness, and homo-ness than communists could doubt the holy writ of Marxism-Leninism.

So much of what is wrong with the West is due to Jewishness, blackness, and homo-ness, but these problems cannot be honestly addressed because even the best-and-brightest are under the spell of Jew-Negro-Homo rapture, just like even the best-and-brightest under communism were beholden to the ‘scientific’ dialectical-materialist dogma of Marxism. (Ironic how, by naming something as ‘scientific’, it became holy and beyond rational discussion and critique.) While certain features of communist society could be criticized, it had to be done from the perspective of Marxo-centrism. In other words, communists could be criticized for failing communism, but communism could not be criticized for failing the communists.

Likewise, certain Jewish individuals can be criticized for making the Jewish community look bad or giving ammo to evil ‘anti-Semites’, but no one dares to ask if there is something fundamentally wrong, problematic, hypocritical, or rotten in the Jewish community, culture, or mindset. No one dares to wonder if the so-called ‘Anti-Semites’ were right on certain features of Jewishness, Jewish personality, or Jewish worldview. Rather, it is assumed Jews are holy while ‘Anti-Semites’ are evil, and therefore, any sign of Jewish abuse/criminality is lamented not as evidence of Jewish rottenness but as ammo for those evil ‘Anti-Semites’.
Imagine an order where Bob is said to be so good while Bill is said to be so bad, mainly because he said bad things about Bob. Now, if Bob often acts bad, it would seem Bob is a bad kid or has some serious issues that needs to be addressed. But because it is assumed Bob is good while anti-Bob Bill is bad, Bob’s bad deeds are blamed not on Bob’s lack of character but for having lent credence to Bill who is bad, bad, bad. Now, why would such an order feel this way about Bob and Bill? Because Bob has been sacralized while Bill has been demonized. Therefore, rational thinking is impossible regarding the two. Bob has been placed in the domain of spirit and sanctity than of man and matter(whereas Bill has been placed in the domain of devil and damnation than man and matter). Thus, even Bob’s bad deeds can’t reflect badly on him. If anything, there is even more hatred for Bill because Bob’s bad deeds have given cred to Bill’s Anti-Bob-ism, and we simply can’t have that in an order where Bob is holy while Bill is unholy.

The same logic applies to Negroes. We are told blacks are holy and magical. In contrast, there is almost nothing worse than White ‘racism’. Such ‘spiritual’ thinking dominates among even smart and serious journalists because humans are naturally spiritual, which means even secular types must BELIEVE in something. So, if too many blacks act badly, rational and critical thinking on the matter is nearly impossible. Reason wilts before the heat of spirituality. So, what is to be done when too many blacks act badly? First, the facts themselves are problematic because they go against the Sacred Narrative. Instead of pondering those facts and asking if the Official Narrative itself is fundamentally flawed, most people stick with the Narrative and either try to suppress the evidence or spin it to maintain the aura of Negro holiness while blaming it all on ‘racists’. So, if too many blacks act badly, the main problem is not with black behavior but with ceding credence to the claims of evil ‘racists’ that undermines the Sacro-Narrative. Therefore, if blacks steal too much, we shouldn’t pressure blacks to change their ways but lament how such deeds are tarnishing the Magic Negro image while giving ammo to evil ‘racists’ who’ve long maintained that blacks are more prone to violent, criminal, and transgressive behavior resulting from evolution.

A rational and critical order would formulate its general views and impressions of reality based on facts and evidence, but most social orders have sacro-narratives than hard facts as foundations of self-perception and worldview. The US Narrative, especially the one arising after WWII, says noble and magical blacks were enslaved and mistreated by evil white ‘racists’, and therefore, the US can be redeemed only by the ascension of the Negro. One can understand the appeal of such a Narrative given US history, but facts say black aggression and criminality are rooted in black genetics that formed over 100,000s of years of evolution. But as the Narrative > Facts, most of bad black behavior is blamed on history of ‘racism’ without the slightest inkling that maybe the ‘racists’, while wrong and extreme about some things, were indeed right about some other things.

And then, there are the holy homos. What was the main cause of the HIV crisis? We know why. Facts say homos bung-donged each other in bathhouses all over the West(and the Rest) and spread HIV like a wildfire. In other words, sodomy is one helluva way to spread disease and, furthermore, homos tend to be impulsive and excessive in their lusts and lewd behavior. Facts say homos are born homo and that we should accept this fact. But facts also say homos are weird and tutti-fruity, often vain and narcissistic to a pathological degree, and whoopity-poopity-doo, and such ‘gay’ sensibility can lead to lots of social problems and cultural decadence.
But no, the current dogma says homos are holy, and the HIV thing must be remembered as something akin to the 'Homocaust' where homos were just pure angelic innocent victims of an uncaring society. Young ones have been told, "It was hate and lack of compassion(than overly ripe 'love' among homos) that spread AIDS far and wide and killed all those homos." Yeah, never mind all the dongs up bungs. It’s incredible that homos, who did most to spread HIV and kill other homos, have been least blamed for the disease that has been, if anything, blamed on ‘uncaring’ conservatives. The current media are downright neo-victorian-repressive of certain facts just like Old Victorians were about sex. It’s as if all those homos died of some mysterious ‘homophobic’ disease that targeted holy homos for no reason. The biggest fairy-tale of all time. Once homo-worship became bigger than god and jesus in US culture and media, even so-called ‘conservatives’ dared not stand up to the ‘gay’ lobby. If anything, even churches began to cave and bend over to Anno Sodomini.

Now, does this mean that Jews, blacks, and homos are all bad or necessarily worse than others? No, it means that they, like all other human groups, have problems, serious failings, and dark tendencies. Same case can be made of Russians, Muslims, Japanese, Chinese, Anglos, Germans, and etc. After all, there is much about Germans and Japanese that are respected and admired the world over, but those positives don’t prevent us from looking at historical facts of German evil or Japanese lunacy. Every people can go bad, crazy, or evil. That’s why their darker tendencies need to be aired, exposed, and criticized. The German soul led to both Beethoven and Hitler. The Russian soul led to both deep spirituality and lazy barbarism. It’s fair game to contemplate the darker sides of the Russian national character, the German cult of the will, and the Japanese hive-mind. And Jews have spoken countless times about the hypocritical aspects of the Anglo character and the like. Without such push-back, a people are likely to grow more rotten and arrogant.

It’s like the prince-ling phenomenon. Inside every boy is an angel, a child, and a spoiled rotten brat. There is the good side, the all-too-human side, and nasty-vicious side. Some kids are naturally nicer than others, but no child is born perfect or holy. But suppose a child is treated like a prince-ling and doted on as the most wonderful kid in the whole wide world regardless of what he does. Suppose he’s treated like he’s something near-divine, like Puyi kid in THE LAST EMPEROR. What happens to the mind of that child? He turns into a spoiled brat and becomes utterly blind to how totally rotten he is… as with the kid in THE MAGNIFICENT AMBERSONS who surely deserved comeuppance. Now, suppose adults around the kid look upon him as such a darling and angel, and therefore, everything he does is seen as either wonderful or somehow the fault of others(or the world) but never of the child. And if anyone just about had enough and calls out on it, he is seen as the villain for pricking the balloon of magic air. The result is like scenario in "It's a Good Life" of THE TWILIGHT ZONE.

Now, it may be that Jews, blacks, and homos are especially problematic for the 'extreme' innate qualities. Jews, with their higher IQ, pushier personality, acute neurosis, and Covenant-based worldview, have a tendency to be subversive, supremacist, and contemptuous. And blacks, due to their naturally thug-like tendencies and stronger muscles, are more prone to become criminals or bad boys or skankass biatches. And fruitkins, due to their tootsy ways, tend to be more vain, narcissistic, egotistical, and amoral than others. Still, one could name a host of positive characteristics of those groups as well, and besides, every human group has its pros and cons.

Then, the proper thing would be to have a honest fact-based discourse on Jewish Power, Black Problems, and Homo Predilections. At the very least, such fact-based discussion would counter or forestall the ‘sacralization’ of man and matter(of which Jews, blacks, and homos are a part), a stupid and dangerous thing to do as people and things should not be elevated to the status of gods or angels. Why did mankind get rid of monarchy? Because the king wasn’t just a leader but some kind of quasi-divine being whose power could not be questioned. Whether it was the old king or the new king(like Hitler or Stalin), such cult of personality led to megalomania among the rulers and ‘minimi-mania’ among the masses, who as sheep-like minions, were happy to love Big Brother.

So, if Jewish Power could be honestly criticized and countered when it goes wrong, it could do a lot of good in the world. Jews would come under pressure to be better and curtail the worse. But, the current cult of the Holy Jew prevents this. The result is ever greater megalomania among Jews and ever more ‘minimi-mania’ among goy sheeple. Just look at both Democrats and Republicans sucking up to Jews like minions before an emperor. As for homos, they've contributed much to human civilization with their creative gifts in arts and culture, and as homos will always be with us, they can go on doing much that is good for humanity. But with the current globo-homo madness, homo megalomania or homogalomania has gotten totally out of control. Instead of ‘gay’ creativity adding to human culture, we have excessive homo vanity and degeneracy defining what is left of Western Civilization, and it is an ugly sight.

But even the best journalists, because they’ve been indoctrinated since cradle with Holy-Schmoly Jew-Negro-Homo worship, are unwilling to ponder the real sources of the problems facing the West: The rot and decay emanating from Jews-blacks-homos gone bad due to the ‘sacralization’ of their identities. A person or a people are at their worst when he or they get everything he or they want. Look what happened to Michael Jackson when he could do whatever he pleased. Same with Elvis before him. Look at the Nazis at their height of power. And look what’s become of the US as the lone superpower, the thug-scum a**hole of the world. But same applies within any order. Consider ridiculous Kim clan of North Korea. All that cult of power and worship went to their heads and have done incalculable harm to the nation.

Even though the West is still politically and socially free in many respects, it isn’t ‘spiritually’ free because the cult of Jew-Negro-Homo worship has imprisoned the Western mind/soul in blind worship of certain groups as if they’re divine and holy. It’s like one can be physically free but mentally owned by another. A man can be under the spell of a woman he adores so much that he acts like her dog and obeys all her commands. In time, such mental imprisonment eventually turns into physical imprisonment as well because the woman can tell him to go to the basement, hand over the key, and lock the door. Being a mental slave, he will likely obey even though not physically forced to. And then, when he's locked up and hands over the keys, his mental enslavement has turned into physical enslavement.

Indeed, consider how the mental imprisonment of the white race is leading to its physical imprisonment. While Jews don’t own whites as chattel-slaves, Jews do own the minds/souls of whites via the cult of Shoah Worship, 'white guilt', and the like. As whites are so mentally beholden to Jews, they just nod along and go along at every turn even as every Jewish request chips away at white freedoms and security. More mass-immigration and more Diversity? If Jews want it, it must be holy, so never mind that it’s leading to White Nakba. Jews want more ‘hate speech’ laws to shut down BDS and ‘white supremacist’ defiance of Jewish Power? Well then, the FBI must be called to track down sentiments such as “It’s Okay to be White”, and the courts must allow more and more prohibition of free speech. With less and less free speech and more and more non-white immigrants who vote Democratic and support gun-control and speech-suppression, white people will go from mental prisoners to physical prisoners.

How Jewish Bagel Brains Came to Own Irish Potatoheads — How Jews Manipulated the Mis-Alignment of Self-Preservation and Self-Righteousness in Irish Politics, Values, and Spirituality.

There are two ways of responding to the world around us, two ways of feeling about who we are and how we relate to others, near and far. They define much of our lives as a constant struggle and/or exertion(and even excitement). One is about self-preservation and the other is about self-justification(that can easily turn into self-righteousness). Most ideal is when self-preservation is aligned with self-justification. Most dangerous is when self-justification comes to malign self-preservation. Consider Body and Soul(or Spirit). Consider Health and Sensation. Though the soul/spirit is an extension of the body, excessive indulgence of the body or excessive purification of the spirit can lead to misalignment of the two. A person who prioritizes only the needs of the body will neglect the spirit, and a person who seeks spiritual perfection will neglect the body. The narcissism of the body will conflate physical beauty with sanctity itself. The purist strains of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Christianity have led to problematic, even pathological, rejection of the needs of the body. And even though sensations exist to preserve life and health — hunger makes us eat, cold leads us to warmth, pain alerts us to seek relief, sexual desire leads to birth of new life to perpetuate the species, etc — , they can take on a life of their own and deviate from their original/main purpose. Normally, pain and strain alert us that something is wrong, and pleasure assures us that health has been restored. Hunger is a kind of strain/pain and makes the organism seek out food that provides pleasure and ensures its preservation. But what if the organism overly fixates on pleasure of eating and keeps eating beyond what is necessary for health and preservation? Consider all the fatsos who keep eating and eating when they don’t need all that food. They’ve fallen into the Pleasure Trap where pleasure no longer serves its primary purpose of preservation but exists for its own sake. We see such behavior with sex, drugs, and leisure of all kinds. These kinds of pleasures aren’t correctives to Pain Alarms that something is wrong but sensations that demand more and more stimulation, titillation, and scintillation for an organism that has become addicted to excessive jolts of intense pleasure. This is most problematic with drugs such as crack, meth, and heroin. Pleasure offered by such drugs do NOTHING for preservation of health of the organism, but it is sought out by the organism that finds itself increasingly divorced from reality. It’s like the 1980s commercial of the monkey that became so addicted to cocaine that it neglected everything else to get more highs from the drug... even unto death. Same could be said of pleasures offered by vice industries such as gambling and prostitution, real-life or electronic(aka video-pornography).


Ideally, body and soul are united in purpose. Though body and soul are different, they must be complementary, like negative and positive charges of electricity. Likewise, pleasure associated with eating should primarily be associated with needs of health. When hungry, people should seek out good food and consume essential calories and nutrients. While a bit of junk food snacks like cookies and ice cream are okay in small amounts, they should be avoided as main course or staple diet. (Consider that much of the obesity and diabetes problem in the West has to do with people constantly munching on snacks of all kinds away from the meal table.) Even healthy activity such as exercise must be in sound coordination with the needs and limits of the body. Consider all the people who end up with chronic aches(or even debilitating injuries) because they pushed their bodies too hard in search of pathological narcissism or egotistical glory. Unless one is a professional athlete or adventurer, one should never push too hard. No sense in pushing oneself to become tougher and stronger only to end up crippled or dead.

The same rule applies to self-preservation and self-justification. They must be balanced and aligned with one another. One must serve the other with an understanding that they aren't synonymous. Just as it’s wrong to conflate self-preservation with self-justification, it’s wrong to risk self-preservation for sake of self-justification(morphed into self-righteousness). Nazi German soldiers fought to preserve themselves in Russia, and to that extent, they were working in the mode of self-preservation. But were they in the right to invade and terrorize another nation? At least on Russian soil, didn’t Russians have the priority of self-preservation against the German invaders. Thus, Russian self-preservation was aligned with Russian self-justification whereas, by normal standards of universal nationalism, German presence in Russia was not justified. Of course, there were Nazi radicals who argued that Germans had the racial right to invade and conquer Slavic territories since ‘Aryans’ are the superior and more deserving race. To be sure, it’s been a common justification all through the ages. For example, Latinos and Anglos certainly felt justified in conquering and taking the New World from the natives who were seen as savage, primitive, backward, inferior, or satanic(especially with the massive human sacrifices in South America and Mexico). Nazi Germans felt likewise justified in their invasion of Russia to create lebensraum for the Teutonic ubermensch. Humans certainly feel this way about animals and nature in general. Human races the world over have wiped out entire floras and faunas to create safer and securer habitats for themselves as the premium and more deserving species. And the West says the Jews were justified in carrying out Nakba Pogroms against lowly Arab Palestinians who were colonized, conquered, and expelled from their ancient homeland.
Still, while mankind has always been invasive, the defenders of blood & soil were always more justified in protection of homeland from invaders. And in cases where invaders did take over and put down roots, they went into defensive mode to protect their acquired territory from further invasion. And after many years passed, the descendants of the invaders came to regard the land they were born on as their homeland of blood and soil. History has always been complicated in this respect. Invaders become defenders, and defenders can become expansive and invade territories defended by others. History of imperialism has been like a football game where the only meaningful boundary is the latest scrimmage line. That said, the persistence of homeland often survived despite the anarchy of borders. For instance, even under Roman Imperial rule, the Jews regarded Jerusalem as their sacred city. And even after Poland was effectively wiped off the map, most Poles between Prussia/Germany and Russia had a general sense of their heritage and territory, which is why it was relatively easy to reconstitute Poland once Russian and German empires fell in World War I. And despite the vastness of the Soviet Empire, various ethnic groups maintained a sense of territorial integrity that emerged into full-fledged nationhood once USSR came to an end.

A people are most justified when their sense of self-preservation is paired with a powerful sense of self-justification. Indeed, such a people tend to be the fiercest fighters with the highest morale and determination. Take the Vietnamese under Ho Chi Minh. They believed in Vietnam as their motherland to take back from foreigners, be they French or Americans, and this sense of national self-preservation(or self-restoration) was almost synonymous with their sense of self-justification. They felt 100% justified in fighting for defense of their homeland. Justification = Preservation. They felt this so powerfully that they were willing to fight the French and then the Americans against all odds and despite losses of millions of lives. The Irish too were a fierce people at one time because their sense of self-preservation was one with their self-justification. They believed in national liberation and independence of Ireland from British Imperial rule. Their sense of nationhood was justification enough. Their sense of national memory & territoriality was powerfully wedded to their sense of political morality, historical necessity, and ideological commitment. Ireland for the Irish, the Irish for Ireland. Thus, despite the great military advantage of the British Empire, the greatest in the world at the time, the Irish independence struggle remained a major thorn on its side.
And of course, the reason why Jewish Power and Israel/Zionism are so mighty has to do with the complementary relation between Jewish self-preservation and Jewish self-justification. Jews don’t need to invoke GDP numbers or variety of -isms(and catchphrases and mantras about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’) to justify the existence of Israel. The fact that it is the homeland of the Jews is justification enough for Jewish national self-preservation. Jews don’t need to ideologically defend their identity and territory. The mere fact of preserving Jewishness and Jewish homeland is more than sufficient. Then, it’s no wonder that Israel is so powerful and confident. (Granted, Israel was created by destroying Palestine. Indeed, Jewish-European imperialism kicked into gear just when Christo-European imperialism was beginning to recede from the Third World following the end of WWII, but Jews do have ancient roots in the land, the holiness of which wouldn’t make sense apart from Jewish ethno-spiritual narratives.) In a way, Israelis today feel as Irish did a century ago. Or, as the Vietnamese did as they struggled against the French & Americans. Algerians and Cubans also had a unity of self-preservation and self-justification in their struggles against imperialism/colonialism, respectively, of the French and Anglo-Jewish-Italo-Americans. And both Algerians and Cubans prevailed.

Still, it seems national identities have been fading all over the world, that is except for Jewish Identity. Part of the reason is Jewish Globalist agenda of weakening goy identities to make it harder for various goyim to unite into particular nationalities against Jewish globalist-imperialism. After all, even though Jews prize Israel as their sacred homeland, they also operate in neo-imperialist mode and derive most of their wealth and power from manipulating and exploiting goyim. Jews seek to flood the entire goy world with mass global migration while Israel alone remains afloat like Noah’s Ark in a mixed sea of miscegenationist confusion that shall engulf all goyim like the Sea of Reeds crashed upon Pharaoh’s chariots. Jews keep the crown and the rest of us drown. But, there is another reason for the fading of goy national identities. Many goyim around the world have artificial constructed identities, and ironically enough, their sense of nationality wouldn’t exist if not for European imperialism. After all, what is an ‘Indian’ or ‘Indonesian’? How did some Arabs end up as ‘Syrians’ while others ended up as ‘Saudis’ or ‘Iraqis’? How did some Kurds become ‘Iraqis’ while others became ‘Turks’, ‘Iranians’, or ‘Syrians’? While Arabs and Kurds pre-existed the coming of European Imperialism, they ended up in nation-states that resulted from often arbitrary lines drawn on the sand by the imperialists. To be sure, the line in the sand in the Middle East wasn’t certain even prior to European Imperialism.

What is the crucial difference between Israel and Ireland today? In Israel, there is virtual synthesis of Self-Preservation and Self-Justification whereas in Ireland the passion of Self-Justification has come unglued from Self-Preservation. There was a time when nothing was more just, necessary, and sacred in Irish hearts and minds than the independence and self-preservation of Irish people, land, and culture. But the great majority of Irish no longer feel that way. Indeed, many feel that the notion of Irish Self-Preservation is offensive, immoral, ‘racist’, ‘xenophobic’, and even downright evil. Their primary sense of Self-Justification comes from raving about Globo-Homomania, celebrating Diversity, welcoming ‘immigrants’(who are really invader-colonizers), Afro-worship(as Irish women got jungle fever, Irish men worship black athletes, and all Irish regard black music as the highest and deepest expression of soulful truth), and Jew-worship. (Many Irish still tend to be pro-Palestinian as legacy of past struggles when IRA and PLO were allies, but their anti-Zionist stance is ironically the consequence of their mindless Jew Worship. The Irish are so morally awed by Jews as the greatest victims of all time — the holy holocaust people — that it bothers their sensitivities to see wonderful Jews acting like a bunch of bullies against a powerless people such as Palestinians. Indeed, many Europeans have similar views. They are so committed to worshiping Jews as a holy people, the new christs who died for the sins of white folks, that they simply can’t digest the fact that powerful Jews in US and Israel are acting rather like Nazis.)

Because of the divergence between self-preservation and self-justification, the Irish are now a very schizo people. At the gut level, all organisms(which includes humans) instinctively want to secure their existence and ensure their continuance. So, even among Irish progs, there is some buried organismic want for survival. This side of them, no matter how repressed, is present in their drives and passion. But as Irish self-preservation has been ideologically and ‘idologically’ pathologized as ‘racist’, ‘far-right’, ‘exclusive’, and ‘xenophobic’, the majority of Irish now feel ashamed to harbor such nationalist passions. But because the feeling is there(as it’s natural), the Irish go out of their way to condemn it with even greater fury. If society deems something as sinful and if this sinful something happens to be ineradicable(as all natural feelings are no matter how repressed), extra measures must be taken to attack and condemn it day in and day out. It’s like the vilification of sexuality led to especially hysterical attempts to suppress natural passions in the witch-hunts of the Middle Ages. And communist societies had to be endlessly vigilant and alarmist about ‘greed’ precisely because self-interest is a permanent feature of human nature, even in the so-called New Man of Marxism-Leninism. Repressive hyper-virtue that runs against nature wants to be rid of all temptations and anything that reminds them of temptations. Then, it’s no wonder that campaigns against nationalism are so hysterical, relentless, fervent, and dogmatic. (Granted, human nature comprise opposites. Just as nationalism is natural, so is internationalism. Human nature is both naturally conservative and liberal, both cautious & wary and open & exploratory. Though the term ‘xenophobia’ is thrown around a lot, it should really apply only to societies where the order hysterically tries to suppress the natural inclination of humans to be curious, adventurous, and open to new experiences. North Korea would truly be a xenophobic nation. It is the mirror opposite of current Ireland. If North Korea ruthlessly suppresses the natural tendency of a people to look beyond their own domain, New Ireland fervently suppresses the natural tendency of a people to protect and preserve their own domain. Both are out of balance.) When people are pressured to do what goes against their nature, they must be drummed with constant reminders that the inquisition or purging is most necessary, desirable, and justified. Take the ritual of Seppuku in Japan, aka Harakiri. Suicide goes against organismic nature since life wants to live. People dread not only death but the pain involved. So, if samurai listened to their nature, they would have run like a mothafuc*a if expected to rip open their bellies. In order to counter such natural reaction, Japanese society devised an elaborate rules of duty and redemption whereby one’s honor could be restored ONLY BY MEANS of ritual suicide. To make the unnatural seem most natural and necessary(if circumstances demanded it), samurai from a young age were conditioned and tasked with an outlook that reminded them day in and day out that it was glorious to die an honorable death and that they must have absolutely no fear of it. The unnatural was made palatable through poetics and spirituality.

There is this sense in the death of Jesus as well. According to Christian mythology, the human side of Jesus feared pain and torture of Crucifixion as any man would. It went against human nature for Jesus not to be like a Negro and run like a mothafuc*a. More human/natural would have been for Jesus to go with the ‘last temptation’ of Martin Scorsese’s film. So, why was Jesus willing to surrender His body to such agony, humiliation, and death? He spun a myth about Himself whereby self-justification demanded His body be sacrificed for the redemption/salvation of mankind. A powerful sense of mission for humanity. And there was the matter of His massive Jewish ego. Still, He agonized all night, even panicking at moments and bewailing God for having putting Him in a bad situation. Finally, He was able to go through with the plan because His sense of self-justification overpowered His sense of self-preservation. His spiritual sense convinced Him that His physical demise would open a way for spiritual resurrection and everlasting glory. He needed an elaborate mythology of spiritual justification to overpower the physical demand for self-preservation.
And something similar happens in wars too. Every soldier knows he could get killed or horribly wounded in battle, and a part of his human nature tells him to take flight than fight, especially if the war happens to be imperialist in nature and has nothing to do with national defense or survival. (No wonder so many Americans were demoralized in Vietnam. Why did they need to fight rice-eaters to protect the American Way? While most didn't desert, few felt eagerness to put their lives on the line for the sake of foreigners.) Still, most soldiers pick up their guns and charge into battle because there is also the fear of court-martial and/or contempt as a coward(and being killed by the other side of course). As humans are social animals sensitive to how others feel about them, their natural fear in one area could be overcome by natural fear of social opprobrium or legal sanction(that could even lead to execution. e.g. Soviet troops who retreated in WWII were summarily shot by commissars — more honorable to be killed a hero by the Germans than killed a coward by one’s own side).

In a similar way, there is a natural Irish will to survive. It wants to preserve the people, culture, and land of Ireland for the Irish. But the elite Irish powers-that-be, especially the media and academia that take cues from the US as the metropole of the Empire of Judea, have inculcated generations of Irish children that the highest goods are Diversity(created by mass-immigration), Homomania, Afromania, and Jew-Worship. Now, some degree of cosmopolitanism is good and natural — as humans are naturally expansive as they’re naturally defensive — , but current Political Correctness goes far beyond a healthy balance of nationalism and internationalism. Rather, it calls for total eradication of traditional nationalism in favor of turning one’s own nation into an interchangeable bloc in the World of Glob, world where globalism runs rampant like the broomsticks in SORCERER'S APPRENTICE with Mickey Mouse. As current globalism is utterly radical and crazy, the natural response among the Irish should be for More Nationalism and efforts at Self-Preservation. But this is proving difficult and even near-impossible as the ‘Poz’ has utterly disconnected Irish sense of Self-Justification from Self-Preservation. So, if past Irish felt most justified in struggling for preservation, they now feel most justified in working against it. And precisely because the current National Suicide(or Irish Harakiri) goes against human nature, the delusional Irish must make an especially rabid effort to convince themselves that it’s ALL FOR THE GOOD to turn Ireland into New Africa-India-Arabia. (It's like whites cheer with artificially heightened enthusiasm for the Great Replacement to drown out their natural fears that it will turn out to be disastrous as the 'evil racists' have warned. Or, it's like gamblers get especially excited as they place big bets to suppress the very natural fear that they will lose everything. Consider Julie Hagerty's delirium in LOST IN AMERICA as she hangs all her hopes on '22'. It's like the globalist whites are collectively betting and shouting for '22' while the odds are totally against them. Crash-22 here it comes.)

Just like a samurai on the eve of Seppuku mustered all his energy to convince himself he felt no fear and welcomed this most honorable death, the Irish are forcing themselves to believe they’re having the grandest time in utterly transforming their nation into the Third World. This is all very ironic considering that Ireland was once one of the poorest nations in Europe, indeed its own little bit of ‘third world’. Irish had to work extra hard to turn poor Ireland into a genuine First World Nation, but they now seem hellbent on turning it literally into a Third World nation by importing tons of blacks, Hindus, and Muslims at the behest of globalist intellectual elites who take their cues from Jews. And yet, it all makes sense in a way. Due to centuries of deprivation and backwardness, the Irish had always felt an inferiority complex vis-a-vis the most advanced nations of Europe, and once they really began to make money, they(like the Spaniards) went out of their way to prove that they are just as intellectually, culturally, and politically advanced as the most modernized nations. So, a mindset developed whereby status-seeking Irish elites came to crave, above all, the approval of the elites of nations like Germany, Sweden, France, Canada, the US, and even UK, its old enemy. If Irish Celtics and British Anglos now have one thing in common, it’s that they are both neo-colonial subjects of the Empire of Judea and, as such, desire nothing more than to win the approval of Jewish overlords and super-elites who rule the world. So, if Jews say Globo-Homo and Diversity are the highest goods for white goy nations, both Anglo and Celtic cuck-elites are eager to prove that they are more ‘pozzed’ than the other. It’s a race among dogs before the Jewish Master.
But then, the Irish mindset was always compromised as the Irish were both the biggest victims and biggest beneficiaries of Anglo Imperialism. They were the first victims of British expansionism and often treated harshly, not least because the British were appalled by all the drinking, wife-beating, and brawling among the ‘micks’. But, no non-Anglo people benefited for as long and as much as the Irish in sharing the spoils of Anglo imperialism. Wherever Anglos went, the Irish followed along as soldiers, traders, adventurers, and pillagers. The Irish sure gained a tremendous deal from the US, essentially the product of Anglo Imperialism and Colonization. So, the Irish were both tough resisters against and happy collaborators with the worldwide Anglo Empire. Then, maybe it’s not so difficult to understand why UK and Ireland are going down at the same time in the same manner for the same reasons. The Irish and Anglos have been more joined at the hip than any Irish or Briton would like to admit.

Any nation of people, culture, memory, and territory must have unity of self-preservation and self-justification if it is to secure any long-term survival strategy. It is simply not possible for a people to preserve themselves as a nation IF their main sense of self-justification is at odds with the demands of self-preservation. The danger could be spiritual, ideological, or ‘idological’. While spirituality lends deeper/higher meaning to a people, it can also divorce them from worldly demands of survival. Consider all the Hindu yogis who dropped out of society to beg for alms while they stuck needles into their noses and arses. If one takes Buddhism to its logical conclusion, he should cut all his ties, duties, & attachments and just meditate to reach Nirvana. This is why Buddhist societies that survived restricted the scope of Buddhist influence or somehow managed to associate Buddhism with tribalism, like the Tibetans. Likewise, if Christians decided to become spiritual purists and live by every letter of Jesus, they will end up dead like the hero-priest in Roland Joffe’s THE MISSION. Without spirituality, life becomes too mundane, but excessive spirituality can lead to loss of reality. This is why Judaism is favorable in many ways to Christianity. Its universalist spiritual content is balanced by the tribal element of the Covenant, and its moral concerns are tempered by demands of the real world is understood not to be a place for saints. Judaism is about conviction and commitment but not about sainthood that came with Christianity. It is moralistic but not sanctimonious, the element that makes Christianity insufferable at times in its holier-than-thou piousness.

Of course, even as Jews feared the power of Christianity, they closely examined its psycho-spiritual anatomy for its Achilles Heel and found it. Jews realized how they could own and manipulate the Guilt Complex of Christianity for their own ends. Manipulating the nerve centers of Christian Guilt was as effective as toying with erogenous zones as a means to gain sensory control over goyim. Is it any wonder that Jews are both masters of Holocaustianity and Pornography? Jews understood that there is a kind of spiritual-erogenous or ‘spirogenous’ zone within Christian Psychology, not least because Christianity, far more than Judaism and certainly more than Paganism, was repressive about sexual matters, what with the Catholic Church even saying you will burn in purgatory if you masturbate. So, sexually repressed Christians had to transfer their repressed sensual passions over to the the spiritual realm, and this explains why so many churches developed services where people go into fits of rapture that are like spiritual orgasms. Rapturous Christian bliss results from friction of guilt and redemption. The faithful arrive at church and feel as sinners who need saving. To be washed of their sins for the week, they holler and shake their bodies to be rid of the Devil, and they feel joy when the angels shower them with God’s glory. It’s about connecting with God, but it doesn’t work without the element of guilt, the sense that one’s body is filled with Devilish temptations.
Likewise, sexuality gains its power from friction of shame and release. If all people were naked all the time and could have sex with anyone anywhere anytime, sex would be nothing special. It’d be about as interesting as eating a bag of potato chips. But even in a libertine society, there is the fear of rejection, shame of reputation, suspicion of betrayal, and the reality of exclusion, especially by the most desirable members of society. So, when an average person finally arrives at a sexual union of sufficient quality, the sense of release is far greater than if sex were so easy all the time for all people. Jews understand the usefulness of controlling the ‘spirogenous’ and erogenous zones, and that’s why they pushed for Globo-Homo and Pornificaition of society. Via Globo-Homo, they’ve replaced inherently ‘antisemitic’ Christianity with Queertianity where one feels redeemed and most justified for having washed oneself of ‘homophobia’ and ‘transophobia’. Also Homomania is far easier than Christianity because it makes no arduous demands for sanctity other than waving the ‘gay’ flag and regarding trannies as new angels. And via pornography(and pornification of society in general), Jews gained direct control of erogenous zones of countless goyim. Also, by peddling stuff about incest and the like, Jews charge sexuality with that potent combination of shame and release. While pornography has been made readily available(even to young ones), it still maintains the aura of being forbidden fruit filled with dark themes of humiliation, incest, and miscegenation.

This is where the neo-spiritual meets the ‘idological’ where idolatry eclipses ideology. Idols can be either beneficial or harmful to the self-preservation of a people. Ideally, the idols of a people will feature heroic or vaunted members of the tribe. Greeks had Achilles as their hero. And Greek Olympics were limited to Greeks who became champions among the Greeks. When white people have white champions who become the basis for white idols, idolatry can become a potent symbol for the nation. But if, say, black idols replace white idols in a white nation, it will undermine self-preservation as white people will come to admire and even worship blacks as their heroes, champions, and top studs. It will lead to cuckery among white men and spread jungle fever among white women, and THIS is precisely what is happening all over the West under the hegemony of Jews who regard blackness as their surrogate body conjoined to the Jewish head. Jews could outwit whites but couldn’t beat them physically to win top trophy of manhood, but Jews could use blacks to beat down white manhood. Thus, whiteness could be both outwitted and out-muscled by a combination of Jewish brains and black brawn.

https://nationalvanguard.org/2020/01/thanks-jews-black-violence-now-stains-the-emerald-isle/

We’ve been told endlessly that blacks need BLACK role models in prestigious areas because people identify with their own kind. If this is true of blacks, it must be no less true of whites. When white idols are replaced with black ones, it leads to white demoralization and white death, which has now reached near-genocidal levels in the West. In order for whites to feel self-justification in the name of self-preservation, they must write their own ideology that rejects the mindless mantras of ‘Diversity’ handed down by Jews as would-be-overlords. Whites must have their own idols in a world of their own that excludes other races, especially blacks who can beat up white men in sports and streets in an integrated social order. Just like human physical pride can exist only apart from wild animals — as humans are no match for wild boars, bears, tigers, rhinos, hippos, crocodiles, etc in physical confrontations — , white pride of manhood can ONLY EXIST apart from blackness that will defeat and humiliate white men because black men got longer limbs, harder muscles, faster reflexes, and bigger dongs. The world is truly diverse in that there are different races with different attributes and advantages. And every race should be wary of other races that pose a potential threat to them. This mania for Diversity is leading to a world of Universal Imperialism where every people, even the imperialists, are being drowned in non-stop floods of invasion, confusion, and alienation. But then, it all happened before with the Romans long long ago. The greatest conquerors the world had ever seen were overwhelmed by those they conquered, and in time, the empire was about every people conquering and being conquered by every other people until finally it all fell apart. If Jews get their wish, all nationalisms will be washed away EXCEPT for their own as the Noah’s Ark nationalism of all eternity. The US used to be a nation where white imperialists conquered others and then demanded that newcomers assimilate into Anglo-Americanism or accept its authority. There was once a sense of who the real masters and owners of America were. But now, non-whites come to America to lose their identities and heritages along with white American cucks who’ve lost all sense of identity, roots, and heritage. Indeed, their only concern regarding nationalism is "Muh Israel". What did Nancy Pelosi say? Even if the walls of Congress come tumbling down, the US will always be there for Israel! How pathetic can you get?

Is Reincarnation a sound spiritual and moral idea? Some thoughts in relation to the debate between Kevin Michael Grace and Jennifer Scharf.

In the Counterculture 60s, many Westerns expressed interest in Eastern Mysticism. Hinduism was studied by artists, seekers, and scholars for insight and inspiration. Hare Krishna and Buddhism caught on with certain sectors of Western Society. Some came to favor reincarnation over the cosmology of the Bible. There is no doubt that Hinduism and Buddhism are great religions with rich culture and history. But could there be a problem with reincarnation and its implications? If so, what could they be?

For starters, the idea of Reincarnation negates the idea of 'you' or 'me'. According to Judaism or Christianity, there is a specific and unique 'you' or 'I'. Your soul is yours alone. It came into existence with your birth(or conception) and it either dies with your's passing or continues in afterlife. So, you are you, body and soul. There was no you before you(birth), and there will not be another you after you(death). And, other peoples have souls too, but it's their own souls, no one else's. Christianity says there is an afterlife where your soul can be with God, but again, it's your soul and your soul alone. Your soul can be with other souls in Heaven, but each soul is unique and belongs to one being. So, according to Christianity, there is a unique and particular 'you' or 'I' for each person.

If we follow the logic of reincarnation, there is no unique 'you' or 'I'. 'You' or 'I' would merely be a vessel through which an ever elusive and evanescent soul moves in and out of. 'You' or 'I' would merely be a shell. If a soul reincarnates from person to animal to person to animal to person to animal, then each person or animal is merely a 'clothing' for the soul. Each person or animal would possess no individuality or uniqueness. It would just be the latest in a series of vessels that holds the soul. It's like your clothes and shoes have no unique identities on their own. If you go through a hundred different pairs of shoes, those shoes only serve to support you. On their own, they are nothing. If souls reincarnate and pass from creature to creature, then each of us is merely 'clothing' or 'shoes' that holds the soul that moves in and out of endless series of ‘containers’. Suppose a soul passed from a frog to a turtle to an aardvark to a Hindu(named Babu) to a butterfly to a lion to a Mexican(named Pedro) to a catfish to a Negress(named Skankura) to a mold to a snake to a pigeon to a rat to a Frenchman(named Pierre) to you in the present form. And then, after you die, suppose the soul that had been in your body passes to a spider to a monkey to a Vietnamese(named Nguyen) to a mole-rat to an alligator to a bacterium to a squid to a penguin to a Catholic(named Kevin) to a hyena, and ad infinitum. Such process would indicate that the soul isn't any of those things but merely passes through them as temporary shells(like hermit crab goes from shell to shell). Each person or animal would merely be a ‘box’ that momentarily ‘houses’ the soul that keeps moving to other ‘boxes’. So, no human or animal would possess a soul that is unique unto himself/itself. They would merely be a series of puppets through which a 'soul-hand' passes through. Imagine a hand that goes from hand-puppet to hand-puppet. Each hand-puppet would have no agency or uniqueness. It would only seem to be 'alive' when the hand slips into it. But once the hand slips out(and enters another hand-puppet), it would be nothing, and another hand-puppet would be animated as the new vessel for the ever-migratory hand. It's like each of the Muppets on Sesame Street has no unique identity or soul. They are mere vessels animated by the creative soul of Frank Oz with his many voices.

In other words, if reincarnation is true, there would be no unique soul that belongs to Jennifer Scharf alone. Jennifer would merely be the latest sockpuppet through which the ever wandering soul happens to pass. Also, it'd be misconceived to say Jennifer was 'such-and-such person or animal in HER previous life'. All those earlier lives would have been mere sockpuppets through which the soul traveled. Given the fluid and ‘promiscuous’ wanderlust nature of this soul, it would be independent of all the life-forms it passes through. So, the soul in Jennifer would not be HER soul but an independent soul that merely sought temporary shelter in her body.

According to Christianity, each soul is unique to the person who possesses it. While the soul can transcend the body-after-death, it cannot transcend individual identity. So, according to Christian cosmology, Jennifer would believe that her soul came into existence with her birth, and after her body expires, her soul can reach Heaven and be with God. From her birth to the end of time, it would be her unique soul and hers alone.
However, if reincarnation is true, Jennifer would be soulless. What now seems to be her own soul actually isn’t hers. Indeed, this soul that is currently within her would exist even if Jennifer had never come into existence. This soul had been passing through countless series of animals and humans through the eons. If Jennifer didn’t exist, the soul would be in some other body, either of human or animal. It's like virus. A virus moves from organism to organism to organism, be it human or animal. Virus doesn't need Jennifer to exist. It can use other humans and animals as hosts/vessels. So, if reincarnation is true, it means each of us is not unique, special, or necessary because souls would exist independent of any of us. If Jennifer didn't exist, the soul that is now within her could be inside a mule, dog, cat, German, Palestinian, Jew, Russian, rat, rabbit, or Negro. Jennifer isn’t unique but ultimately superfluous. The soul that is within her isn’t hers but merely using her body as a host/vessel, and after she dies, it will pass onto another host. Indeed, this soul was in countless other animals and humans before it found residence inside Jennifer. So, according to reincarnation, each of us is not a temple or a home for the soul(that is bound to its address/identity) but merely a hostel or motel through which the soul passes like a salesman.

Personally, I'm a non-believer and always has been, but the idea of soul in Judaism and Christianity seems more reassuring because it says your soul is yours. It is unique to you and has a special relation to God and time. It's like your own toothbrush than one that goes from person to person to person. If I were a religious person, I would like to believe my soul is mine alone. Why would I want a hand-me-down soul that had been through rats, cats, pigs, pigeons, worms, ticks, Gypsies, drunken Irish, and Negroes?
According to Christianity, YOUR unique soul could enter Heaven and be with God. So, there is a special you, a unique you, after all, and your soul would always be bound to your identity. Your soul would be like a loyal dog that belongs to you alone than a stray dog that goes from place to place without being bound to anything to anyone.

Unlike Christians, Jews don't believe in Heaven, so their souls cannot ascend to the divine realm. Still, even though a Jewish individual’s unique soul fades with death, something of his essence is passed down through his ancestors, each of whom is born with a soul unique to him or her.

Finally, one might argue that the Jewish cosmology is actually closest to how the science of biology works. For starters, Jewish Covenant takes into account the roles of puds & poons and importance of blood. Jewish pud is blessed by God and meets with Jewish poon — the meat must meet — to create Jewish children through whom the Jewish blood/essence continues to flow through time. So, even though Jews cannot pass their individual souls down to future generations, they can pass down their blessed blood/essence through marriage-and-sex that births new Jewish bodies-and-souls. According to this Cosmology, every Jew has both soul and essence. Souls belong to unique individuals and cannot be transferred, but essence passes down through the generations. The passage of the essence from parents to children through sex allows for the creation of new individuals with souls. While souls belong to individuals and are un-transferable, the essence is transferred down the generations from parents to children through the act of sex(ideally within marriage). While this essence isn't the soul, it holds the secret key to creating new bodies with souls.

Now, when we study biology/science, the way of life seems closest to the Jewish Cosmology. Reincarnation says the soul, the core substance of being, can go from species to species. So, the soul within a monkey can move to a rat and then go to a human and then to a snake and so on. Biology doesn’t work like that. Now, one may argue that all of life are interconnected and recycled from the same matter, and this is true enough in a material sense, especially in what we eat and excrete. We eat animals, and their flesh are broken down into nutrients and absorbed into our bodies. And when we die, our bodies decay and become fertilizer for plants. So, there is a cycle of life where animal matter becomes human matter that becomes plant matter that becomes animal matter and so on. The proteins in your body are recycled matter from meat you’ve consumed. Even vegetarians consume animal matter because plants absorb nutrients from dead organisms. All true enough.

But the unique essence of a species — why it is the way it is and different from other species — is really in the DNA, and this is passed down through the generations WITHIN, NOT ACROSS, the species. So, if we were to trace back Jennifer's ancestry, we’d take into account the DNA she got from her mom and dad, and then, the DNA her mom and dad got from their moms and dads, and the DNA of their moms and dads ad infinitum. So, even though we materially absorb other life-forms — carrots, cows, pigs, chicken, and etc — through what we eat and digest, the reason why we are human is because of our DNA, and the human DNA code was passed down through the generations of human ancestors. Human DNA didn't leap from species to species. Granted, humans evolved from apes that evolved from monkeys and etc, but even there, we see a unique line of ancestry through which the DNA gradually progressed. Because Judaism emphasizes the importance of ancestry — the stuff of reproduction, blood, family, and remembrance — it is closest to how biology really works.

Furthermore, reincarnation would suggest that one’s special bond and intimate connection with one's parents and children are merely illusory. According to Judaism and Christianity, you are the product of your parents(who are the product of their parents and so on), and your children are the direct products of you and your spouse. Your body and soul emerged from the love of your parents, and your children’s bodies and souls emerged from the love of you and your spouse. So, family relations are real and deeply meaningful.
But if reincarnation is true, it means your core self doesn’t really owe its origin to your parents. Your soul didn't arise from the love between your mom and dad but merely slipped into your body after having been through a series of bodies, be they a monkey, rat, cat, dog, spider, Mexican, hyena, Negro, and etc.
So, your soul isn't really connected to your parents. While your parents created your body through sex, the very soul within you(which is never 'your soul' since it has traveled through countless bodies through the eons) came from elsewhere because reincarnation says souls are not uniquely linked to individuals or even species. The soul within you could have been inside a scorpion or barracuda in its earlier migration.
Therefore, you’d have no soul-connection to your parents or to your children. Only a physical connection. So, even though you, your parents, and your children are all members of a family, the soul within your father could have come from a spider, the soul within your mother could have come from a dead Hindu, the soul within you could have come from a dead cat, the soul within your husband could have come from a dead slug, and the soul within your child could have come from a dead Negro. Who needs a soul that left a dead Negro?