As Jesus said, man doesn’t live on bread alone, whether bread means food or money. People need to feel justified, good, and decent. Even the worst of us want to be seen as ‘respectable’, even righteous. The Corleones in THE GODFATHER don’t just kill and rake in profits but give to the church and do good work to burnish(and launder) their reputation.
Now, the operative morality in the business world isn’t one of personal conviction or true principles. Rather, it’s a status-based morality and quasi-spirituality. Most businessmen lack core morality or spiritual conviction to guide them. Indeed, men of true conviction are generally unfit for business that is about wheeling-dealing and handshakes. So, business morality flows not from deep personal conviction but from anxiety of reputation. How others regard you counts for more than how you feel from within. So, if BLM or Globo-Homo is the latest fad in the righteous sweepstakes, most businessmen will enthusiastically support it or go along with the least resistance. It’s like Democrats are loudly globo-homo and the Republicans keep their heads low as Jews made it the New Normal in the West to celebrate and revere homos and trannies as quasi-spiritual superiors.
If indeed the business world is without deep conviction and genuine principles, WHO determines their ethos and morality, their quasi-spirituality? Who controls the gods? The control of gods leads to the control of all money. Jews control the gods, and this is why even the richest goyim bow down to Jews and their favored icons. Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and Jeff Bezos are stinking rich, but they don’t control the gods. Jews do, and Jews can destroy them overnight by accusing them of 'ungodliness', which these days means not being sufficiently deferential to Jews, blacks, and homos. If Buffett were denounced as ‘racist’, ‘antisemitic’, or ‘homophobic'(quasi-godly matters in our time), he would lose his partners, supporters, friends, and top employees who will go work for another firm that is ‘godly’ than ‘evil’. No matter how rich you are in the US, you better go with globo-homo, which is now a 'godly' matter. If you don’t, you can no longer be part of the game as a player. Jews understand the dynamics of 'sacronicity', the electronic idolization of what are currently deemed most holy-schmoly. If Jews determine what is 'sacronic', they control the empty deracinated neon-souls of the modern 'consumerian'.
While money = power, it is only a base kind of power. You can buy favors, services, and lots of things. You can hire people to do things. But it doesn’t mean you are good and justified. Money as money lacks sanctity. It’s like a rich guy can buy sex but can’t buy love. It's like a rich guy can buy a lot of toadies and flunkies but can't buy genuine friendship. He can buy fawning obedience but not real respect.
This is what libertarians don’t understand about capitalism and about themselves. They talk of liberty, individualism, and success, and those are good things, but a ‘spiritual’ sense of righteousness doesn’t arise from those qualities. Being successful means you’re better off, it doesn’t mean you’re on the side of angels, let alone the gods. Even Ayn Rand’s mythic cult of the individual failed in the creation of gods. It is then no wonder that even libertarians worship the gods controlled by Jews. For all their talk of liberty and individuality over they years, they've feel empty without some sense of sanctity and righteousness that transcend issue of mere freedom. So, they glom onto globo-homo worship and MLK cult and even support ‘hate speech’ laws and monopolist suppression of freedom and liberty. Supporting free speech is just a matter of freedom, whereas suppressing 'hate speech' makes one feel self-righteous, on the side of the gods against the devils. And they dare not support BDS even though its suppression is a clear violation of the Constitution and libertarian principles. Soul-empty libertarians are so taken with the godly thrills of worshiping Jews and celebrating globo-homo that there is a limit to their commitment to their soulless freedom. Their quasi-spiritual worship of Jews is more emotionally satisfying than a rational commitment to liberty.
Capitalism can generate wealth but it cannot create gods. At most, it can create idols, mostly in the form of celebrities of music, entertainment, and sports. But even mere idolatry, as popular as it is, doesn’t come with righteousness. Compare Muhammad Ali and Mike Tyson. Both were top champions, but why did Ali get more respect? Not only was he more colorful and entertaining but became associated with spiritualized themes. He turned to Islam as his new conviction at a time when it was exciting for a black man to go in that direction. And as he came to prominence during the Civil Rights Era, he became a symbol of a righteous cause. And when he refused to serve in Vietnam over personal conviction, that too elevated in the radical era. In contrast, Mike Tyson was only about power and money, unassociated with anything higher than his self-aggrandizement. Ali would have been a popular idol without ‘godly’ matters, but they made him much more than a mere celebrity.
It’s then not surprising that so many black athletes got to ‘taking the knee’. As successful athletes, they got the money and the blings. But that only means fame and fortune, sensationalizing them but not elevating them. They want to be associated with something higher, the ‘godly’. This sacredness could be based on something legit or something bogus. It doesn’t matter as long as it has the approval of the current gods. Most celebrity idols and businessmen are shallow and don’t care about the truth. They care about reputation and what offers them instant joy of being on the side of angels. Still, they themselves don’t generate the gods and angels.
Who does? Obviously, those who construct/control the gods need money and the means. But they need something more. They need ambition, prophetic vision, ruthless megalomania, and the sheer will to control and dominate. The radical will. And Jews are tops in this. Why? Jewishness is built on a massive neurosis. There are three possible spiritual visions:
1. Every group has its god, and there are many groups, each with its own god. So, if there are 100 groups, there are 100 gods, with each group having special claim on its own god. This was how paganism worked. Greeks had their own gods but didn’t deny Egyptians or Hindus their own gods. This way is consistently particularist.
2. There is one God, and as there is only one, He belongs to all peoples, and all peoples are equally loved by Him. He favors no particular tribe and loves the good and righteous among all peoples. This is Christianity and Islam. This way is consistently universalist.
3. There is only one God, and for some reason, He favors one people over all others. This is an inconsistent combination of universalism and particularism. The only-one-God part is universalist, as He is the ruler of all. But then, it says this one and only God favors Jews over all others. So, Jews have an expansive imagination of God that claims mastery over all the world and all humans, BUT Jews insist God favors their tribe as special and deserving to rule over the inferior goyim. This way makes Jews highly moralistic(as the Tribe that received the laws from God) but also emotionally stingy as they claim special relationship to the one and only God. Secular Jews replaced God with History or Self-worship. Notice how Jews incessantly pontificate about combating supremacism and related evils, but, at the end of the day, it all boils down to all non-Jews having to suck up to Jews as the master race(though masquerading as the forever victim race — the forever victim-master-race).
With such a radical will, it's no wonder Jews are so obsessed with controlling the ‘spirituality’ or the 'gods' of any society. Especially as they are well-represented in academia, media, history, the arts/entertainment, and advertising, they are powerfully positioned to create the narratives, idols, saints, angels, and passions that constitute the ‘gods’. So, while others are just making money, Jews create and control the gods. Jews promote them via Hollywood as the new secular vatican and the elite colleges as the new seminaries.
Unlike mere money-power that is base and crude, god-power feels holy and redeeming. And this means that once the gods take hold in the public imagination, even the richest goy must obey them as the new faith of the mob demands it. (But then, even before the 'gods' have spread to the mob-majority, there is tremendous pressure upon the elites to submit once the 'gods' have become 'canonical' in the uppermost realm. After all, elite vanity has less to do with approval from the mob than from one's peers and superiors. Also, as elites hold all the cards, it's understood that whatever the elites adopt will soon spread to the masses of sheeple as well. It's only a matter of time, like with mantras about 'diversity' and 'inclusion'.) Military men and mere rationalist thinkers don't create or control the gods. Notice how Jews create and control the gods of 'globo-homo', which has resulted in the US military men fighting for gods of sodomy and tranny-penis-cutting. Those with guns fight under the auspices of those with the 'holy' scepter. Mere historians don't control the gods either; if anything, most historians are mere scribes in service to the gods created by others, e.g. 'Muh Holocaust'. Controllers of the gods are those with the will and imagination to cobble together the stories, images, and emotions into overwhelming narratives for the mind, the heart, and the senses in communion. Jews wrote the Bible, and it proves they've long mastered the art of controlling the gods. They know how to combine ideas + stories + themes + emotions + passion + redemption + deliverance into Law & Lore. No wonder the Bible has come to be The Book, the Complete Volume, for countless peoples. In the modern era, the great Jewish dream(of vengeance) was to replace Christianity with something other, and Christianity has shown itself to be weak before the full assault of Jews with their new batch of 'gods'.
Also, as the 'gods' are holy, they are favored even over the principles of secular liberal democracy. As Jews are the holy holocaust people according to the gods, free speech must be sacrificed at the altar of Jewish Feelings, which are holy. Holy compulsion > Devilish liberty. And facts about black criminality must be ignored because MLK is god and blackness is holy. We can't hurt holy black feelings. So, even though blacks kill blacks and non-blacks, we must get on our knees and pretend innocent holy blacks are being targeted and destroyed by ‘systemic racism’. Even the life of a thug like George Floyd must be held more precious than all the lives killed by blacks. And as the gods say sodomy is holy, government buildings and businesses must fly the homo flag, and politicians must show up at ‘gay pride’ parades, OR ELSE! We are told we can't have God in school and the courts due to separation of church and state, but we must have the 'gods' in all of them. Though these 'gods' aren't technically part of a religion, they function in the same manner because 'sacrosanct' passions override secular facts and rights. (You can't have a honest and rational debate about matters that might offend and 'desecrate' the holy feelings of Jews, blacks, and homos.) And now, even churches fly globo-homo symbols and BLM ones too. As Jews control the gods, BLM and globo-homo are now holier than Christianity. Today, Christians feel they must justify their faith before the judgement of blacks and homos than insist that all-people-as-sinners justify their souls before God and Jesus. Christianity must prove itself worthy of blessing by homo vanity and black megalomania. The newly imagined god seeks approval from homos and blacks, not the other way around.
Jake Tapper can tweet as he did precisely because Jews control the gods. If Tapper were truly honest about ‘hate groups’, he should name ADL and AIPAC as the premier candidates as they pressure US whore-politicians into supporting terrorist and supremacist Israel that continues to occupy West Bank and mow down people in Gaza. ADL and AIPAC work to ensure that US politicians of both parties shall never criticize Israel but support more Wars for Zion regardless of the human cost.
The Jewish-run media are a hate organization because so much hatred is spewed against Russia, Iran, or any other nation that refuses to get on with the Jewish Globo-Homo program. But Tapper ignores all that and lists a bunch of 'white nationalist' groups. Like many other Jews, he is more offended by the white aspiration for agency and liberty from Jewish Supremacism than by Jewish Supremacism itself. For Tapper, Jewish Supremacism is just the way of the world. Indeed, it isn’t supremacism because it’s only right that Jews should rule and be on top. It’s just the natural, spiritual, and righteous way of things as far as Tapper and his ilk are concerned. As Jews control the gods(and feel as gods themselves), why should they be troubled by their own supreme authority?
The way Jews see it, it is ‘supremacism’ only when an inferior people elevate themselves as better than others. It’s like it’s perfectly natural for God to feel above humanity. It’s natural, cosmic, and holy, not to be questioned. The problem occurs only when man dares to challenge God or decides to go his own way. According to God, mankind that challenges God(as in the story of the Tower of Babel) must be ruthlessly destroyed. But, man cannot humbly walk away from God either. Man can never be independent of God and must bow down before Him.
Jews feel the same way in relation to goyim, especially white goyim. Jews should be on top, and this is such a natural and spiritual law of the universe that it shouldn’t even count as supremacism. It is only right because Jews are holy and deserve adulation. Jews are supreme but not supremacist. Jewish supreme-ness is just the way of the world. It is a matter of 'is' than 'ism'. It's like humans are supreme over all animals not because they believe so but because they be so. So, Jewish supremacy mustn't be regarded as supremac-IST because it's not based on Jewish beliefs but Jewish knowledge of being superior, either God-given or natural. In contrast, when an inferior people dare to challenge the Jews, it is a case of supremacism because it is based on belief than on being. So, despite the reality of Jews BEING superior, the Nazis BELIEVED that they themselves were superior. BEING SUPERIOR > BELIEVING IN SUPERIORITY. That means anyone who challenges the Jews for supremacism must be crushed.
But what about whites who have no supremacist ambitions and just want to be left alone and independent of Jewish demands & meddling? No, that can’t be allowed either because goyim exist to serve Jews. It's just the natural way of the world. Inferior must serve the superior. Besides, how could the Jew World Order function without white agents, experts, and managers doing the bidding of Jews? It’d be like British trying to rule India without the collaboration of brown native elites and others. Gandhi’s civil disobedience showed the Brits couldn’t maintain order without the collaboration of the Indians themselves.
Anyway, in the Jewish mind, their own supremacism is never supremacism but just a spiritual fact: Jews are holy and should rule. And because Jews are the sun of humanity, the rest of mankind must never challenge Jewish power and also remain within the gravitational orbit of Jewish Power. So, if whites show any sign of identity, agency, and territoriality, they are labeled as ‘supremacist’ even though their only desire is to stop sucking up to Jewish Supremacist Power and doing its bidding of wars, terror, and rapacity. It’s like the master in the uppermost stratum denigrating a slave as ‘uppity’ for looking up at him. Even though the master is in the upper realm, he tags the ‘uppity’ label on someone below merely looking up. So, when Jewish supremacists on top call whites ‘supremacist’, it’s just the master calling a slave ‘uppity’.
Human nature is essentially spiritual, and power is essentially theocratic, so when God is taken out of the institution, other/false gods are easily installed for inspiration. This is why secular education in time became quasi-spiritual and neo-theocratic. Education isn’t merely about skills and knowledge but about moral guidance, and in the absence of God and the difficulty of philosophy, there is the idolatry of the ‘woke’. What about rationality and critical thinking? The Power eventually comes to suppress secular criticality in favor of sacrosanct correctness. Wasp elites succumbed to the rise of Jewish Power because Jewish criticality was so incessant and relentless against Wasp-imposed correctness. Jews eventually gnawed at the legs of the wasp throne until it was toppled. But with Jews in control and with the imposition of their brand of Correctness, there is no other group to mount a culture war of unrelenting criticality. And why would Jews want a truly critical education when it may well lead to criticism of Jewish Power? So, Jews, who'd once championed secularism and the separation of Church and State, stuffed the new discourse with quasi-spirituality of gods of 'wokeness' and 'Muh Israel', both of which they control. Yes, Jews control the gods, and that is the biggest challenge in our time.
All these media pundits, Democrats, and Cuckservatives calling the 1/6 Deep State Demolition an 'insurrection' is truly ROTFL.
I mean, what were the four years of the Trump Administration but non-stop insurrection by Jews, Deep State, Big Media, Big Tech, and financial institutions. Their actions ranged from covert to overt, but everything they did was to undermine and thwart the Trump Presidency and agenda. Obama, the Deep State, and Big Media colluded to push the Russia Collusion Hoax and even spied on the Trump campaign on 'evidence' they knew was fake. This was 100x worse than Watergate, but if you're part of the 'made men' club, you can get away with anything. Jews rule, and that means anyone who collaborates with Jews are safe no matter what they do. And when these conspiratorial and nefarious plans didn't work, the Deep State Jews cooked up the Ukraine scandal. Most of those involved were Jews. These Jews worked with 'neo-nazi' elements in Ukraine to overthrow a democratically elected government through a violent coup. And they installed a puppet regime that did as told by US politicians who, in turn, are controlled by the Jewish Mafia. And Joe Biden meddled in that country's affairs and undermined its legal process, which was a joke to begin with. But Biden is a 'made man' in the eyes of Jews and the Deep State, so it didn't matter what he did. In Washington, WHAT you do matters far less than WHO you are. The old adage of "Do you know WHO I am?" is what that city is all about: Power > Principles. It was always like that but was made worse under Jews who don't even have the modicum of honor that the Wasp elites once had.
Trump, despite being president, was not a 'made man'. He wasn't part of the club. Jews had allowed him get rich in NY and serve as the face of real estate moguls when, in fact, Jews dominate the industry. Trump was useful as a goy toy: He was the working class's idea of what riches are about. So, the 'deplorables' might look up to him as a celebrity-billionaire, a super-success story, but Jews and elites looked down him as coarse and crude. He was useful when he played the game but intolerable as the top guy, especially as he rode to victory on the wave of populist revolt.
How did Trump really feel about his role as president? Did he prioritize the will of the people who voted for him but failed to gain traction because of the deeply entrenched forces arrayed all around him? No. Vain, narcissistic, arrogant, and insecure at the same time, he used his vaunted status mainly to win approval from the super-elites and be accepted as a 'made man'. But that wasn't going to happen. He said too many things that angered Jews and insulted the Deep State. 'America First' triggered the Jews about Charles Lindbergh style 'antisemitism'. Jews took 'globalism' to be a codeword for Jewish Power. And the Deep State didn't like being called the 'swamp'. Vain and snotty, despite being scumbag shills and swamp-creatures, the Deep Staters think of themselves as the Best and the Brightest who are working honorably for the empire.
Now, if Trump had truly gone against the Deep State and globalism, he would have been doomed as a one-term president. But he was going to be a one-term president no matter what he did because Jews and the Deep State were never going to forgive him for his 2016 campaign. If, at the very least, Trump had stuck to some semblance of a principled path, he could have lost with some measure of honor and self-respect. But even as he became president by pissing into the swamp, he hoped to gain re-election and be accepted as an insider and 'made man' by throwing lilies into the swamp once he became president. Just look at the swamp-creatures he surrounded himself with. (And he thought he was winning over Republican politicians to his populist agenda when, in fact, the cucks were just playing along to win votes among the rubes. Republican politicians knew that Trump would likely last four years or, at most, eight, and then what? Without the populist energy sustained by Trump, politics will go back to same-as-usual and that means cucking to Jews on just about everything. Republicans needed to stand with Trump for the populist votes but, behind the Donald's back, they had to assure Jews that they were just playing along and really despised Trump and would work with Jews behind the scenes to unseat him. Politics is 'business'. It's like Sal in THE GODFATHER turns on the Corleones once he realizes the new strong horse is Barzini. Trump, full of himself, thought the Republicans and Swamp creatures in his administration were on his side because they smiled and called him 'Mr. President', but it was all just an act. They knew that, once Trump is gone, the only game in town is going to be Jewish Power playing 'Simon Says', and the only way to salvage their long-term prospects was to wink-wink to the Jews that "I was only pretending to be on Trump's team but was really working against him all along." But then, Trump's shtick wasn't all that different from the Cuck Republican shtick. Trump used populism to become president to win respect from the elites, and Cuck Republicans used Trumpism to win votes from the populist base and stay in office, all the while looking to maintain good graces with the the all-powerful Jews.)
Trump's contradictions were self-defeating, and the only outcome was to lose with dishonor. Not only did he fail to gain the acceptance and respect of the Deep State but he lost the support of his hardcore supporters as well. The Deep State was after him from day one, and to push back, he had to call out on the swamp. But in so insulting the Deep State, he further alienated the institutions he was trying to woo over to gain 'respect'. And what were Jews obsessively plotting every single day during the four long years? How to get rid of Trump. When Jews want something, they never give up and keep gnawing like rodents. When the Russia and Ukraine thing failed to unseat him, Trump thought he was over the hurdle and relaxed his guard. But Jews and the Deep State were plotting the biggest insurrection of them all. Sink the economy and tank Trump's approval with Covid-hysteria. So, Trump's biggest asset vanished into the air. And he was smeared as a killer of all those victims of Covid. And the medical community, also run by Jews, played along.
The thing about Jews is that they will always choose power over principles. They are gamers who see the world as an endless contest of the f***kers and the suckers, and they don't want to be suckers. Jews wouldn't feel this way IF goyim were smarter than Jews, but Jews feel smarter and figure that they can run circles around dimwit goyim. Jews figure, "Why should we be governed by the same principles that apply to inferior goyim?" So, their main priority is to maintain supremacy over inferior goyim. Jews look upon goyim like adults look upon children. Adults want authority over kids, not equality with them. And in a way, we can understand where Jews are coming from because goyim are indeed SO DUMB. They are dumb like the moron in TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN who whips the shadow instead of the prisoner.
Goyim must be inferior because they totally suck up to Jews like dogs. When you look at Jews and goyim in the US, the relation is one of master and dog. The dogoy's innermost desire is to win approval from the master, and this sentiment is common even among the Dissident Right who will mention the JQ but pray for the day when superior Jews will come over to the white side.
Anyway, when the Deep State's insurrectionary acts against Trump failed, the Jews pulled all the stops with Covid-Hysteria and BLM riots. Jews, fearful that Trump's economy and swaggering style might win over record number of blacks in the 2020 election, decided to go whole hog in deifying the Negro as holy. So, with total approval of Jews, Deep State, Military Cucks, Big City mayors, and the Jew-run media, blacks were allowed to run wild, riot, rape, and loot. Blacks could do all that but the Narrative was 'mostly peaceful protesters' are fighting 'systemic racism'. Jews, who'd been pushing Globo-Homo to eclipse black issues, using gentrification & Section 8 to remove blacks from cities, enforcing tougher law & order policies to lock up black criminals, and favoring immigrants over blacks, were suddenly ALL ABOUT THE BLACKS to convince them to stick with the Democratic Party. It didn't matter that BLM and Antifa were burning down cities, looting, and even creating total havoc in Washington D.C., many parts of which were on fire. And when Trump called on the US military to step up and do something, the top brass, in tune with the Deep State and their Jewish Masters, rebuffed the president and did nothing. If this was not an insurrection from within and without, I don't know what is.
And, there was the Jewish Media and Pollsters' gaslighting of Trump supporters, telling them to stay home and not vote because Biden is leading in the polls by 10-15 points. And then the election itself was massively fraudulent. Perhaps, Biden really did beat Trump, but how could we know for sure when so many funny things and irregularities happened? And of course, the media just went along with the Big Lie. Had it been the other way around with utterly blatant cases of election fraud carried out by Republicans, of course the FBI, the deep state, and big media would have done everything to investigate every complaint. Imagine if an all-white county intimidated and kicked out black poll-watchers. That would have been a national scandal. And of course, the Covid-Hysteria set the grounds for massive mail-in fraud. All of these were acts of insurrection, but they were done by 'made men' and their minions. In the end, it's not WHAT you do but WHO you are. But then, the GOP and Trump never called out on the fact that the Jews are the toppermost 'made men' of America. Indeed, even after the election, what did Trump do but pardon some of the worst Jewish scumbags? It's all so embarrassing.
At any rate, as far as the Official Narrative is concerned, the Deep State insurrection wasn't an insurrection because it was done by insiders, 'experts', the elites, Jews at the top, and blacks on the bottom. It's like it's never terrorism when the US, Israel, or Saudis do it. But if a nation like Iran uses counter-violence against US-Israel violence, THAT is 'terrorism'. Whenever Israeli agents murder someone in Iran with bomb attacks, notice the New York Times puts 'terrorism' in quotes. But if Arabs or Muslims blow up Jews, that is TERRORISM alright. All a matter of who/whom than what/not. If you're part of the 'made' club, whatever you do is okay. So, Biden could meddle in the affairs of Ukraine. But if you're hated by the club, even your noble acts are 'treasonous'. But what is loyalty and treason in a country where most whore-politicians do little but suck up to globalist supremacist Jews whose only real concern is tribal power? Jews think thus: Power is #1. Game is #2. Principle is #3. As the power comes first, Jews will change the game to win. We saw that in 2020 with new election rules that made cheating so much easier. Jews love the game because the smart win over the dumb. It's like chess is a game of wits that favors the smart. As Jews know they're smarter, they love to play the game and win. But are they good losers on occasions where they lose, as in 2016? No, they are the sorest losers and go about changing the rules of the game to win. Having lost the game of Poker to Trump in 2016, Jews had many cards up their sleeves in 2020. Jews resort to principles as third option. So, when Jews weren't at the top, they pretended to be for free speech and constitutional rights. Jews in the ACLU made a big stink about liberty, even defending the speech of Nazis and KKK. But look at them now. They are totally okay with Big Tech silencing everyone and turn a blind eye to the suppression of BDS. With Jews, You Lose.
When Jews spread lies, it's 'freedom of the press'. Apparently, 'fake news' is spread only by people Jews hate. When Jews spread terror and pull off coups around the world, it's for 'liberal democracy' or 'human rights'. But when national governments push back against Jewish globo-hegemonism, they are 'autocracies'. According to Jews, true European Values are all about opening up the continent to Africa, Asia, and Middle East so that 'New Europeans' will replace 'white racist Europeans' who have no right of identity and culture. So, the only proper way for a European to be a good 'European' is to surrender his birthright, history, and territory. Like Barbara Specter the hideous Zionist said, "Europe cannot survive" unless it learns to welcome the Great Replacement. But then, white goyim are dumb enough to fall for this. If a Swede in Israel told Jews that Israel cannot survive unless Jews welcome tons of Africans, Hindus, Chinese, and Muslims as 'New Israelis', Jews would laugh at him. But white goyim, so idolatrously worshipful of Jews, listen with abated breath at 'Jewish wisdom', which is really Jewish lies to weaken and control goy domains via divide-and-rule strategy. Jews are stingy with power. When Jews give advice to goyim, it isn't to teach goyim to become more successful and more independent but to become weaker and more dependent on Jews. What people and nation since the end of the Cold War have benefitted from taking advise from Jews? What happened to Russia in the 90s? What is the Jewish Plan for Hungary?
But then, whites go along with the status quo without naming the Jew. I'll bet even the 'insurrectionists' on January 6 believe that China, Iran, Russia, or Venezuela were the main culprits in the election fraud when, in fact, it was THE JEWS. People this dumb, delusional, or dastardly will not win. Great things must grow from a sound foundation. This is why you don't plant seeds in rocks and pebbles or in the ocean. You plant them in soil with plenty of moisture and sunlight. Not naming the Jew is like planting seeds in the desert. Sidney Powell can blame Venezuela, Linh Wood can blame China, General Flynn can blame Iran, and the Deplorables can blame the 'left', but it's the Jews. (If the true Left is in charge, how come BDS is suppressed by all sides? BDS is usually associated with the Left as it calls for EQUAL JUSTICE for Jews and Palestinians than always favoring Jews uber Palestinians. If the real Left dominates America, BDS would be protected under the Constitution. But there is hardly any real Left in the US that is controlled by Jews. Idolatry of Jewish Power, not ideology of leftist principles, is the only real handbook in the land.) The tree of truth and power will grow and bear fruits for white ONLY IF whites identify and expose Jews as the ruling elites of America. When people become aware of this knowledge, everyone of all races and ideologies will look towards Jews as to why what is happening is happening. It's all the worse for whites to not name the Jew because Jews are 24/7 into naming the whites or 'white supremacism' or 'systemic racism'(for which whites are made to bear 99% of the blame) as the cause of all problems. It's like whites are trapped in a game of the invisible slapper. A man keeps getting slapped but doesn't see who is slapping him. So, he blames others without ever identifying who is really turning his face red. And so, the slapping continues and continues, and the slapped fool loses his mind and picks fights with ones who aren't slapping him. But then, even whites who do know Jews are slapping them turn the other cheek because if they ever complain, they get brass-knuckled in their face. Of course, Jews have allies, and these partners-in-crime hold the whitey for the Jew to slap. But current white mentality is to blame those holding him without ever mentioning the one who is slapping him. Tough talk without honest talk is really worthless. Look at Linh Wood talking tough but never naming the Jew. Useless.
I recommend that Jan 6 Event be called the Deep State Demolition or DSD in honor of Steve Dahl. DEEP STATE SUCKS! DEEP STATE SUCKS! DEEP STATE SUCKS! Indeed, it should be a populist holiday to be celebrated every year. Every Jan 6, return to DC to do DSD. The populist gathering of the Tribes.
One thing for sure: America will become less divided if Americans unite to oppose Jewish Power.
America will become more divided if Americans unite to obey Jewish Power.
Jewish Power depends on the strategy of divide-and-rule among the goyim, therefore the more the goyim are united in their support of Jewish Power, the more Jews will use their power to create more divisions among the goy populace.
1. Jews produce far more lawyers than any other group but are most invested in unlawfulness. But then, if, as judges and lawyers, they rewrite the laws, what was once criminal no longer is. And if that doesn’t work, they can use money power to bribe politicians to pardon Jewish crooks or, better yet, just look the other way at all the dirty Jewish schemes. Look at the list of people pardoned by Bill Clinton, Barack Obama, Georg W. Bush, and Donald Trump. The expertise of law, especially under Jewish Power, doesn't exist to serve the law but to shape to Jewish Supremacist ends. By lawyerly tricks, Jews found ways to circumvent the laws. But as judges, top lawyers, politicians, and big donors, they've changed the laws so that the only working constitution is "USA exists to serve Jews and Israel."
2. BLM and Antifa riot and loot and burn down entire cities. They even attacked the White House and set Washington DC on fire. And yet, they were showered with billions by corporations. The Power made sure that Antifa thugs were released back into the streets, and BLM liars(of ‘systemic racism’) were elevated to the ranks of Great Thinkers and Sages. In contrast, corporations say they will now shut off funds to the GOP because a handful of Republicans questioned election fraud. And Simon & Schuster canceled the contract for Josh Hawley’s book because he didn't get on with the Narrative. Reality being thus, how retarded that so many conservatives still bleat about ‘socialists’ and ‘communists’ when, in fact, super-capitalists treat them this way?
3. The uprising at the Capitol Building was the mutiny by nationalism against imperialism. Congress is no longer a national entity and doesn’t represent the American People. It serves the Globo-Homo Empire of the Jews. Of course, so many 'liberal' Americans are brainwashed and see the Democrats as the ‘good guys’, just like so many 'conservative' Americans still think the GOP has their back.
In truth, both parties repressive than representative of their voter base. Democrats serve the Jewish cabal, and GOP does the same. Most of the mutiniers at the Capitol may not have known it consciously, but theirs was a nationalist attack on imperialism, which is what American politics has become: The game of Invade/Invite whereby the US military and financial power invade and penetrate the world while peoples from all over are 'welcomed' to flood into the US as new peons. It was a case of patriots attacking the capital of Israel on American Soil.
4. What’s wrong with ‘insurrection’ against the government of infiltration and usurpation? The US government has been thoroughly infiltrated and usurped by forces of Jewish Supremacism. When US politicians are a bunch of treasonous servants of Globo-Homo-Schlomo imperialism, why should Americans show them any respect and loyalty? Traitors(serving globalist Jews than their own nation) demanding loyalty from the people is a real laugh. And they demand rule of law when they encouraged mass riots all throughout the summer?
5. There is power in unity. When BLM and Antifa mobs were burning down DC and smashing cities all across the US and attacking the police and tearing down monuments, ALL Democrats were united, from NY elites to DC power-brokers to big city mayors to lowlife on the street. Even as their cities were ransacked by Antifa and BLM thugs, blue city mayors stuck with the Narrative of ‘peaceful protesters marching against systemic racism’. And the Jew-run media stuck with this too. As crazy as it was, there was power in their unity. But when a far smaller-scaled chaos ensued in Washington for an hour or two, the only kind of unity among Republican and official ‘conservative’ voices to 'condemn the violence'. They didn’t unite with the rightfully angry American patriots or with Donald Trump but with the enemies of the white race. What does that tell you? When the Democratic side does violence, there is unity from top to bottom. When there is far milder violence by American Patriots, the GOP elites and ‘respectable’ conservatives condemn the violence as most un-American. And even Donald Trump gets cold feet and tells his people to ‘go home’.
6. The patriots should stop looking to DC for leadership and representation. No sense wasting time and energy on attacking the empire of the enemy. They should build a new capitol, a separate capitol, to initiate the creation of bi-nationalism as the new mode of American politics. Let Libbies and Progs have their own government and president(to serve the empire), and let patriots have their own capitol and president(to serve the nation). You don’t need geographical secession for this. It just takes a bit of imagination and chutzpah, which goyim need in these times.
7. You are either a meta-Israeli or a meta-Syrian in the current order. Jews of course and blacks and homos count as meta-Israelis. They are above the law. They can do all kind of violence. Even when THEY do the violence, their victims are the ones who are condemned. Anyone attacked by blacks is a 'racist'. Anyone attacked by Jews is a 'Nazi'.
It’s like Israel routinely shoots missiles into Syria and drops bombs. It supports ISIS and Alqaeda in to bring down secular Arab governments. But no one in the US government calls foul. In contrast, Syrians are fighting for their lives against terror and foreign invasion, but they are painted as the bad guys, and ‘Assad must go’.
Same logic operates in the US. Jews use Hollywood to make hateful anti-Muslim movies. Jews make all those anti-white movies, some calling for mass murder of whites as ‘nazis’. Jews promote hateful rap calling for murder of cops. Jews fund ADL and SPLC and other hateful groups. Jews spread lies and bring US and Russia to the brink of war. Jews pull off violent coups in Ukraine. Jews use blacks to burn down cities as a warning that things will get worse if Trump remains prez for four more years. But Jews are never called out on it.
But if whites have had just about enough of the lies and fraud and commit 1/1000th of the violence, they are treated like Assad and Syrians. They are the worst and must be destroyed. And Trump, as the American Assad, must go. But the irony! After all, what did Trump do for 4 yrs? He gave Jewish Power free rein on foreign policy, threatened Iran, and murdered the hero Soleimani. The failure of Trumpism proved that no matter how much you scream & shout and gather in large crowds at rallies and protests, NOTHING is possible unless you name the Jew.
In FULL METAL JACKET, all the firepower did absolutely no good until one guy finally identified the source of sniper gunfire. If anything, all that extra firepower had only created the illusion that there were many more snipers and served as a massive distraction. So, more valuable than all the clamor at Trump rallies is the calm and collected statement of truth that “Jews did this.”
There are those who know the truth but fear speaking about Jewish Power because of the charge of ‘antisemitism’. But, there is a rational step toward necessary criticism of Jewish Power. Just state the plain facts of Jewish Power. Before we say it’s good or bad, just state it as fact to establish it as a fact that we all must live with and deal with. With the fact out there, people of all stripes will begin to discuss the problems of power as crucially interrelated to Jewish Power. And that can start to change things from both the ‘left’ and ‘right’.
8. What is a more shameful day in the history of Congress?
When a patriotic mob stood up to the crooked politicians approving a fraudulent election?
OR
When elected representatives bowed to a foreign leader of a terrorist nation, Israel?
People standing up to politicians is more inspiring than politicians submitting to the supremacist ambitions of another nation and tribe.
Of course, the irony is that Trump, though the chosen leader of the patriots, was a top-contender with Nancy Pelosi is licking Netanyahu’s anus.
America is united most in whoredom to Jews. And yet, these congress creatures talk about ‘terrorism’ and ‘treason’. What a shameless bunch. But then, Jews control the gods.
-- But even with (Dylan) Roof’s case, I felt that I had seen this all before. Then I remembered where: Taxi Driver. --
Is there much in the way of parallel between Travis Bickle(Robert DeNiro) and Dylan Roof? Bickle, as troubled as he is, devised a clear plan that followed a certain logic. He went after figures of authority, the politician and the pimp. If Dylan Roof had gone after black thugs or politicians, he would have been like Bickle. But he went to a black church where nice folks welcomed him. I'm no fan of Negroes, but what he did was beyond the pale. Roof's act is more in line with the Columbine murders. He left a 'manifesto' of sorts, but it had no bearing on his actions whatsoever. If he had problems with blacks, presumably as bullies or criminals, why take it out on a black church full of nice folks? Even the Columbine Massacre, crazy as it was, had more rhyme and reason. Even though the two homo psychos mowed down kids of every clique, they felled some 'bullies' as well. Perhaps, they killed the 'bullies' out of revenge and killed others for having been all-too-compliant with the school hierarchy. Bickle acts with a degree of clarity and purpose(despite all the craziness), whereas Roof struck out as if in a haze. It's sort of like how Sirhan Sirhan insisted he remembers NOTHING of the day of Robert Kennedy's murder. We sense resolve in Bickle's preparation and action(as with Anders Breivik), whereas Roof seemed to have sleep-walked through his mayhem.
-- Travis Bickle, an alienated loner in an urban hellscape who decides to die in a hail of bullets --
Suicide by assassination? Perhaps not. The film was made cognizant of the spate of famous killings going back to the 60s. JFK, RFK, and MLK. George Wallace survived but was paralyzed from waist down. Assassination plots were hatched against Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. (Sean Penn starred in THE ASSASSINATION OF RICHARD NIXON during the Bush II years.) Even celebrities were not spared. Andy Warhol nearly died from gunshot wound. David Chapman was obsessed with John Lennon throughout the 70s before killing him in 1980. Some of these assassinations were the acts of lone lunatics. Others were seemingly political or ideologically motivated. Others were by lone nuts using ideology as crutch for their madness. If John Wilkes Booth was obviously motivated by politics in killing Lincoln, Lee Harvey Oswald(if he was the real culprit) was drawn to radical politics as a kind of psycho-drama. He hated being a nobody.
So, the conception of Travis Bickle has to be seen, at least in part, as a response to the times. Indeed, it's been argued that the Sixties as a cultural phenomenon began with the death of John F. Kennedy and the coming of the Beatles. Loss of innocence, rise of radicalism, and youth hedonism, all of which are reflected in TAXI DRIVER but in stale and deflated form. Bickle's mission is like a parody of the Kennedy assassination, and Iris(Jodie Foster) is the pathetic product of Counterculture and "Women's Lib". Sexual Revolution led to new forms of tyranny. Sport(Harvey Keitel) is made up like a debased version of the hippie(though he also resembles an Indian, perhaps an homage to John Ford's THE SEARCHERS, an influence). What seemed so new and fresh in the 60s had already grown tired and sickly by the 70s. No wonder the celebration went from natural outdoors(Woodstock) to the artificial dance floor(SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER).
The 1960s, for good or ill, were truly a momentous decade. It was like the Second Revolution or Second Civil War though the conflict was generational, racial, cultural, and sexual than military. In contrast, the first American Civil War was essentially a war among whites, pro-Union and pro-Secession. The 1960s affected everyone, everything, and every group in some profound and seminal way. Just about everything that followed has been an attempt at repetition or rejection. Antifa imitates the Weather Underground and SDS. Blacks invoke Civil Rights Movement over and over. MLK has been made god. And, what means of conservatism traces current social ills and moral malaise to the 60s. All roads, pro and con, lead back to the 60s.
For a time, the 80s were billed as an effective and successful counter-revolution against the 60s, but the so-called Reagan Decade was really an extension of boomer excess, this time with materialistic yuppies than delusional hippies. 60s anti-materialism and 80s materialism were really two sides of the same coin: Boomer egotism and narcissism run amok. Young boomers could play at anti-materialism because they grew up with prosperity that they took for granted; and when they graduated and entered the work place, they were far more acquisitive than their parents whom they'd once condemned. At any rate, the fact that the 80s decade defined itself against the 60s showed it didn't have compelling themes of its own. It's almost as if people have been unable to dream new dreams since the 60s. One either revives the 60s as exemplary or reviles the 60s as execrable. So, Obama was hailed as the new JFK, or current 'wokeness' is blamed as outgrowth of 60s student radicalism. Yet, even conservatives often wax romantic about the 60s as a time of free speech and, if anything, denounce current 'liberals' of having betrayed the 60s spirit of freedom. Even conservatives like Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter prefer pop culture from 60s onward. Either way, all things are measured in relation to that transformative decade.
The 70s were an interesting period as both continuation and rupture with the forces unleashed in the 60s. Gone was the naivete and idealism, and yet, the nation had yet to coalesce around a new consensus that would come with the short-lived Reagan's Morning in America and the rise of MTV that made Grace Slick truly slick with 'We Built This City'. In the 60s, the young cheered on Benjamin Braddock as the white(or swarthy)knight in THE GRADUATE, but Mike Nichols keynote film of the 70s was CARNAL KNOWLEDGE that documented the betrayals of the 'sexual revolution'. Also, more candid depictions of sex and violence went from liberation(BONNIE & CLYDE that gave Pauline Kael orgasms) to grim reckoning with brutality. Closer cinema got to sex & violence, uglier things seemed, as in STRAW DOGS and THE LAST TANGO IN PARIS. It turned into disgust and loathing(before the industry and audience accepted them as guilt-free meaningless thrills). One of the more controversial films from the period was JOE, starring Peter Boyle who appears in TAXI DRIVER. It too is about a man trying to save a girl(his daughter) from degenerates, a scenario revisited by Paul Schrader with his own directorial effort, HARDCORE. It's as if men and women, liberated from traditional roles, went from short-lived liberation to the state of pimps and whores, real or metaphorical.
Anyway, given that Travis Bickle was partly inspired by radicals or misfits of the 60s and 70s, is it fair to say he was seeking death? After all, most assassins of the period weren't looking to be gunned down. Lee Harvey Oswald ran for his life and pled innocence. Sirhan Sirhan was wrestled to the ground. The shooter of George Wallace wasn't killed either. David Chapman just surrendered after killing Lennon. Hinckley was jumped by secret agents and policemen. James Earl Ray ran from the scene. So, it's possible Bickle wasn't seeking death. He might have expected arrest and trial. On the other hand, his character seems partly to have been inspired by Yukio Mishima(a Schrader obsession) who did seek ritual death. As for the bloodbath in the brothel, Bickle did everything to avoid getting hurt. He was sure Sport was incapacitated, but the pimp came back and shot him in the neck. In the end, he tries to shoot himself because he's badly injured(shot in two places) and has no chance of escape. At any rate, he doesn't seem upset that he's alive in the final scene.
-- Any movie involving vigilantism is inherently anti-liberal, which makes it objectively Right-wing, regardless of the vigilante’s or the director’s intentions. Liberalism is the idea that we can be governed by laws, not men. --
Vigilantism may be anti-liberal, but it isn't necessarily right-wing, though it depends on how we define the term. After all, Antifa and BLM violence are premised on the notion that Law-and-Order as it exists is unjust and perpetuates tyranny. Therefore, radicals and blacks must take the law into their own hands and fight the evil police state that perpetuates 'racism' and 'white supremacism'. And Jews and globalists are happy to aid and abet such mindset and mayhem. At Charlottesville, the authorities let the radical rabble run riot and attack Alt Right types. Global Media controlled by Jews almost never condemned attacks on Trump supporters. When Richard Spencer was clocked, most 'liberals' cheered and called for 'punching nazis'. California courts were ultra-lenient on radical thugs, such as the professor who used a bike lock to bloody someone's head. In 2020, the Power, even the US military, bestowed blessing on BLM thugs and Antifa nuts. Governments in Portland and Seattle hardly did anything to rein in the 'mostly peaceful protesters'.
Now, one could argue that such violence isn't vigilante in the classic sense. Still, blacks and radicals believe they must take the law into their own hands because of the 'inherent violence' of the system rigged to favor certain groups. (To be sure, the current 'left' is less about the powerless against the powerful than the sacred select against the tainted others. Jews, blacks, and homos are sacred, and so, it doesn't matter how much power, privilege, and wealth they have, whereas whites and patriots, even the poorest among them, must be attacked and humiliated because they are eternally soul-tainted by History.)
Radicals clearly have a more abstract and theoretic sense of injustice; therefore, their violence is of a different kind than that of conservatives. While radicals and anarchists aren't claiming to act violent for violence's sake(which would be nihilism), their sense of wrongness derives from a macro-vision of the world. In contrast, right-wing vigilantism is grounded more in personal safety. Rightists take up arms because of direct threats to their well-being. (In RED DAWN, the townsfolk pick up arms because they were invaded by the Soviets.) So, when BLM marchers were met with a white middle class couple holding assault rifles in St. Louis, both parties were going against social norms but on different grounds. The marching blacks were not in danger of being gunned down by the police, but blacks and their white radical allies have a abstract vision of historical injustice with endless invocations about slavery and Jim Crow and etc. In contrast, the white couple picked up guns to protect their lives and property; they felt under direct threat. The Left responds to History, whereas 'right-wing' vigilantes react to circumstances.
From the encounter, we can deduce why the 'left' has an advantage over the 'right'. The 'right' is reactive and limited in scope; its members aren't willing to act unless they are threatened there and then; indeed, many such folks don't even deem themselves to be rightist in ideology. In contrast, the 'left' is motivated by a larger vision(even if delusional and nuts) that goes beyond the well-being of me-and-family. The 'right' is usually dormant when undisturbed whereas the 'left' is agitated even when its members face no dangers. All those college professors are affluent and privileged, but they still wage the 'culture war' and infect students with radicalism. Discontentment is always part and parcel of Leftism. Indeed, the average leftist feels ill-at-ease and guilty about feeling content. With all the problems in the world, why should anyone be happy? So, leftism tends to attract more malcontents who, even when faced with no danger, feel much rage and hatred in their hearts.
How would Travis Bickle fit into all this? On some level, he seems a conservative type disgruntled by all the filth and corruption. And yet, he is different from the stereotypical vigilante because he does have a larger sense of what's 'wrong' and goes after those posing no direct harm to him. Palantine is just another politician, one Bickle could just ignore. And Sport the pimp had no personal beef with Bickle. Sport is content to do his thing on his piece of turf. It is Bickle who intrudes into others' spaces. Furthermore, his sense of the Wrong is less personal than 'spiritual'. Though living in a dangerous city, he isn't particularly victimized by crime. If anything, he says he's willing to pick up anyone, even 'spooks', in his cab and take anyone to any part of the city. He seems to make okay-money driving the cab. So, what's his problem? He's more like Oswald the radical than Paul Kersey of DEATH WISH. Kersey hardly thought of bigger issues before his family was attacked. And he reacts to criminals who threaten his life. It's entirely personal. Bernie Goetz, who became famous or infamous in the 80s, was a classic vigilante. He wanted no trouble as long as others left him alone. If those black thugs hadn't accosted him in the subway, there would have been no shooting and no publicity. In contrast, Bickle, like Oswald, goes looking for 'trouble'. They both feel there's something wrong with the world that must be made right. In that sense, Bickle doesn't fit the stereotypical profile of the right-wing vigilante. He has right-wing sentiments but also radical obsession.
When blacks riot and loot, is it an act of vigilantism? After all, they justify their actions as righteous rebellion against a 'racist' society that won't give them a fair shake in the system. There was a TV show a year back with Al Pacino as a vengeful Jew. The scenario called on Jews, blacks, and cuck-whites to hunt down 'nazi' whites. Is that vigilantism? If so, Jews seem to be okay with vigilante justice as long as 'nazis' are hunted down and hanged. What about post-WWII violence in Europe? In Italy and France, communists and anarchists were let loose to lynch anyone accused of fascism or collaboration. The authorities either looked the other way or encouraged it. This complicates the meaning of vigilantism and rough justice.
Bernie Goetz
Of course, 'progressives' and 'leftists' almost never characterize their extra-legal activities as 'vigilante', a term that connotes bigotry or brute instinct, i.e. a vigilante has no sense of right-and-wrong or vision of society other than 'my security' or 'my tribe'. So, anyone from Bernie Goetz to KKK member could be labeled as 'vigilante' because they were motivated not by ideals but personal safety or tribal/racial security. In contrast, extra-legal violence on the Left is idealized as serving History or some greater cause. Whereas the vigilante acts to defend life and limb(and has no higher sense of good beyond himself, his family, and perhaps his tribe), the revolutionary is deemed as self-sacrificing; he takes up violence to make for a better world and is willing to give his life for it. Like Che Guevara, he's willing to offer himself up for the Cause, live or die. To the extent that Travis Bickle is a self-sacrificing character with shades of Jesus-complex, he doesn't fit the bill as the classic vigilante.
-- Vigilantism takes place when the legal system breaks down and citizens feel the need to take action themselves. --
It comes in two flavors. There is post-order vigilantism where people take up arms in a world where order has broken down. But there is also pre-order vigilantism, often depicted in Western movies. The frontier has yet to establish law-and-order(and secure systems of contracts and property rights), so everyone operates in vigilante mode with guns and guts. The appeal of the Western was contradictory because the genre revels in the freedom of violence but also roots for law-and-order whereby children and womenfolk could walk safely to church without being accosted by Lee Marvin. HIGH NOON is especially contradictory because the citizens won't stand behind the lawman who is left all alone to go 'vigilante' against the will(or lack thereof) of the 'good' people of the town.
It's also murky in STRAW DOGS. In a way, David Sumner(Dustin Hoffman) goes vigilante against the town thugs, but he is motivated by pride of principle than self-preservation. Indeed, he's willing to risk his life for that principle. He could have avoided the whole trouble had he given up the village idiot to the local yokels. He insists on protecting the village idiot out of some higher principle than self-preservation, the main objectives of most vigilante types.
-- and the lyrical but also menacing musical score by Bernard Herrmann --
The score is remarkable but problematic. It is too jazzy, hip, and loose to convey the constricted and sullen inner torment of Bickle. Herrmann's music for PSYCHO was closer to the mark with the subject matter. The score for TAXI DRIVER is more reflective of the city than of Bickle in particular. (Its jazziness also sounds overly nostalgic in the age of Rock and Soul, the dominant forms of music in the 70s. On the other hand, Bickle is a man out of time.)
-- So who is Travis Bickle? Travis Bickle is a twenty-six-year-old honorably discharged Marine... Travis suffers from insomnia. --
Some have tried to explain Bickle's madness as post-war syndrome, but he was surely borderline psycho BEFORE he entered the military, like Francis in STRIPES.
In a way, Bickle would have been better off in the military, which provides some sense of order, structure, and purpose. One of the characters in THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES has difficulty adjusting to life back home. At least in war, he was a 'hero', a patriot among 'real men'. As a civilian, he's suddenly a nobody.
It's no wonder Bickle shows interest in the secret service. He isn't only trying to measure up the enemy but fascinated with its sense of order and purpose, like with Clint Eastwood's character in IN THE LINE OF FIRE. One wonders why Bickle doesn't join the police force. Still, driving a taxi offers some semblance of order and purpose. Taxi cabs, like police cars, are alike in standardization. It's a way of being 'organizized'. There's uniformity and order in being a cabbie in a city full of crime and chaos. And yet, it isn't fulfilling because Bickle as cabbie can only be an observer than an enforcer. He belongs to an order of sorts but one of serving than saving the customers. There's a part of Bickle that wants to belong, to be part of an Order. And yet, there's another side to him that is deviant and asocial, rather like Paul Newman's character in COOL HAND LUKE. Bickle is a walking contradiction, like the lyrics from the Kris Kristofferson song. He's a misfit who wants to fit in. Unlike Randall McMurphy who revels in his anarchy, Bickle is uneasy with the bohemian side of his being. The Mr. Hyde part of him feels more at home with the hookers, junkies, and other flotsam, while the Dr. Jekyll part of him feels nothing but contempt for the lowlifes. He is a weirdo with the square's disdain for weirdos. No wonder he doesn't leave NY. And yet, another part of him recoils in disgust from the weirdness. It's like Woody Allen's quotation from Groucho Marx: "I would never want to belong to a club that would have someone like me for a member", which is visualized in the opening of STARDUST MEMORIES where Allen, in a train car full of Jews(and depressives), wants to be with the glitzy glam-goyim in the other car.
Some people are happy to be squares among squares while others are happy to be bohemians among bohemians. Bickle, in contrast, is like both a square among bohemians and a bohemian among squares. There's a film MAX about young Hitler with a similar theme. Hitler's problem is he's too square and straight to be a bohemian artist, but too weird & deviant to be fit into respectable bourgeois society. He's ill-at-ease in both worlds. In contrast, the Jewish Max is comfortable in both. Bickle has all this weirdness but simply can't face up to it.
-- He tries to connect with his fellow cabbies. But, being on the night-shift, they are almost as weird and asocial as he is. --
But the key difference is the other cabbies are okay with what they are. Weird or not, it's just a living for them, as with the characters in the TV series TAXI. Bickle isn't merely weird but ill-at-east with his weirdness. (In contrast, Jeff Bridges, originally slated for the role of Bickle, plays a happy-go-lucky weirdo in THE BIG LEBOWSKI. He's weird alright and proud of it. If anyone recalls Bickle in that movie, it's the John Goodman character who's just as weird as Lebowski but thumps his chest as an upright patriot and pious Jew to boot. BIG LEBOWSKI may have taken some inspiration from CUTTER'S WAY, which in turn, might have been partly inspired by TAXI DRIVER.) When Iris calls him 'square', he even misinterprets the word and says she is the 'square' one for doing all the un-square things. And he doesn't seem to understand the term 'hip' either in his encounter with Sport. As with James Dean in THE REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE, something's tearing him apart. If Dean's character was trapped in an all-too-square and conformist society, Bickle is caught up in the exact opposite, an open sewer of libertine freedom with humanity reverted to the tyranny of animality. Either way, there's lack of equilibrium, especially for the innately confused.
-- Senator Charles Palantine, who is running in his party’s presidential primary. (His party is not stated, but he’s clearly supposed to be a Democrat. --
Or, Palantine could be based somewhat on John Lindsay, the Liberal Republican.
-- he walks into the office and asks her on a date. Betsy accepts. Travis is strange, but he’s not bad-looking and has an off-kilter charisma. Travis blows it on their second date, however, when he takes her to a pornographic movie. It is painfully awkward. --
He initially strikes Betsy(Cybill Shepherd) as confident and worldly. But already at the first 'date', she notices something off about him. He seemed easy-going, even a bit suave, when he walked into the campaign office to introduce himself. But at the coffee shop, he comes across as overly earnest, almost like a Jehovah's Witness. There are also signs of agitation, like of a sculptor anxious to turn a slab of marble into his ideal vision. It goes from easy to a bit queasy. When she quotes from Kris Kristofferson's song about 'prophet and a pusher', Bickle takes it the wrong way(like Burt Lancaster's ruse in the restaurant scene in ATLANTIC CITY when Susan Sarandon's character says he has no fingerprints).
TAXI DRIVER stood the test of time. As mere sociology, it would have become dated, like JOE, PEOPLE NEXT DOOR, and NETWORK. But Bickle's problem is psychological, even spiritual, and as such universal and timeless. It's part of man's unceasing struggle with one's demons, but then the demons of one era are the angels of another. No wonder Scorsese has been more fascinated with the existential aspect of the struggle. The real meaning is in the struggle than in happy acceptance of official truths without questioning. How Christianity was struggled into being as vision and movement is more fascinating to Scorsese than how it was consecrated as the compulsory Faith for all in the Kingdom. Bickle goes about it the wrong way, but there is a certain dark integrity in his struggle to figure things out. Jesus is shown undergoing a similar struggle in THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST. The 'spiritual' aspect of TAXI DRIVER partly derives from Robert Bresson, whose works also influenced Schrader's AMERICAN GIGOLO and LIGHT SLEEPER. (Bresson's characters are usually inarticulate and withdrawn, social outcasts and pariahs. And yet, isolation and/or rejection may be a requisite for grace. Carl Dreyer with PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC and Tarkovsky with STALKER, NOSTALGHIA, and THE SACRIFICE also pondered madness as a kind of hell with a backdoor to heaven. TAXI DRIVER is impure in its fusion of Bresson and Peckinpah. (Bresson's more austere and purist take on violence can be seen in L'ARGENT.) It was also in the spirit of Sidney Lumet's work with SERPICO and DOG DAY AFTERNOON. By the looks of Robert Altman's NASHVILLE, the 70s malaise was a nation-wide problem. The country music capital, though far from New York, is beset with same problems of drugs, sex, and sleaze. It also ends with an assassination. And DELIVERANCE showed the woods ain't no sanctuary either. Hillbillies can be queers too.
TAXI DRIVER was both a Zeitgeist film and a stand-alone work. On the one hand, it was very much the film of the moment, the talk of the town about symptoms of the malaise. It dealt with violence and sex and urban decay, crime, pornography & prostitution, alienation, crisis of youth, the problem of guns & assassination, racial tensions(especially with blacks), and etc. Like Lumet's film from the same year, it can be approached as a social document. But like MIDNIGHT COWBOY, it is much more and has been compared with the works of Dostoevsky and continues to strike a chord with new audiences. In terms of alienation, Bickle most closely resembles Robert Duvall in THX 1138 though the worlds the two characters exhibit are diametrically opposed. Both are about individuals who feel such powerful sense of angst but can't put a finger on why.
Ironically, TAXI DRIVER'S biggest problem may be it's too-well-made. Scorsese displayed such mastery and brilliance of style that Bickle is transformed into an 'icon' of sorts. It partly sensationalizes and idolizes him even if such wasn't the intention of Schrader and Scorsese. The visual prowess canonizes his madness, much like in THE GRADUATE does for Benjamin Braddock(and HAROLD AND MAUDE does for its lead). In that sense, the raw Bickle might have been more honestly conveyed by a second-rate director lacking in visual flourish that inadvertently serves as advertisement for madness.
-- The choice to take Betsy to a dirty movie makes it abundantly clear that Travis has issues. It is not socially appropriate. --
And yet, here's the irony. It was both appropriate and inappropriate. Bickle attends porn movies because they were so conspicuous in the 1970s. There were porn theaters all over NY, and XXX movies were advertised in newspapers. Serious critics and scholars wrote about movies like DEEP THROAT, which also became the codeword of a key leaker involved in the Watergate Scandal. Pauline Kael, John Simon, Susan Sontag, and others weighed in on the matter of pornography. Playboy had already become a reputable magazine with serious interviews with important figures of politics and the arts. The Carter clan would soon become chummy with Larry Flynt of HUSTLER.
And as Bickle notes, couples attend porn movies, and there were plenty of educated middle class people, men and women, who watched porn movies in the 70s, out of habit or curiosity. So, given the culture of the times, Bickle's taking Betsy to a porn movie wasn't as outlandish as it may seem. (These days, stuff like Lena Dunham's GIRLS on TV and Miley Cyrus have pretty much legitimized porn among young people, and respectable journals like Forbes and other run articles about the porn industry as just another sector of capitalism.) There's no indication that Bickle has any special thing for porn. Confused and alienated with too much time on his hands, he wanders into porn theaters because they are there, like he watches whatever is on TV. So, he takes Betsy to a porn movie because pornography seems to be a normal thing in New York. In that sense, he is the one being 'normal'. It is Betsy, in taking offense, who seems 'abnormal', 'old-fashioned' and 'square'. She still seems to cling to 'outdated' notions of 'respectability' and 'dignity'. Initially, she seemed hipper than him, but there's still something of the small-town girl in her to take offense from pornography. She did say she's from upstate. This all adds to the confusion of modernity, and this confusion may be worse than ever. Women now celebrate 'slut pride' but also claim to take offense at Trump's 'grab pussy' remark. And their idea of wearing dignity on their sleeves was to wear pussy hats. Women who use sexual wiles to get ahead in the industry suddenly shriek and join the #MeToo Movement. That crazy and shameless skank Emma Sulkowicz also cried 'rape', and then made a porn video about the trauma. Porn and puritanism sit side by side.
-- He broods and ruminates. He tells Wizard, one of his fellow drivers played by Peter Boyle, “I got some bad ideas in my head.” Travis does not, however, come off as delusional. Instead, he is angry at the sleaze and injustice that surround him. --
He isn't delusional about social ills, but he's delusional in failing to realize his own sickness. Foul fumes rise from sewers, but Bickle own soul is a sewer. A part of him morally recoils from the urban rot, but there's something fermenting inside him as well, which he's unwilling or incapable of realizing. Paul Schrader said in an interview that Bickle is a uniquely American phenomenon. He said a European or Japanese Bickle, being more cultured and/or philosophical, would realize that the main source of his sickness is from within; therefore, he would commit suicide, presumably like the character in Louis Malle's THE FIRE WITHIN(based on a work by Drieu La Rochelle). In contrast, Americans, being less self-aware, are prone to project their inner demons on the outside world and strike out in violence; guns help some. The problem with Bickle is he both suffers from inner demons and is correct about the urban rot. So, his inner demons and the social decay become intermeshed, and he's not sure whether he's going crazy or being driven crazy by the city. And we aren't sure either as Bickle seeks an external solution to his internal troubles.
-- One wonders, though, why Travis continues to subject himself to this world. Not every city is as dystopian as New York. He could also focus on better neighborhoods and better fares. But he doesn’t. The truth is that Travis is a glutton for punishment. He has a masochistic, self-defeating personality. --
In a way, it's because he's just as sick as the city though loathe to admit it. In this, he's different from the retard in SLING BLADE(the indie FORREST GUMP). Billy Bob Thorton's character is capable of murder but is really a good soul. And he feels a peace of mind looking out the window of a mental hospital. In contrast, Bickle is always in a state of inner turmoil. So, things might be even worse for him in a stable and normal community. Amidst the peace and quiet, he would come face to face with his demons. In contrast, NY is somewhat therapeutic precisely because its craziness serves as a diversion. It's like someone who hallucinates strange voices may not prefer quietude as the voices will only grow louder. He'd rather be in a noisy place where the constant din drowns out the voices emanating from within. Craziness being commonplace in NY, he is distracted from his inner demons. Or, he can pretend his demons are the sounds of social degeneracy and decay. Bickle is a different animal from David Lynch who, as in ERASERHEAD, could probe into his weirdo psyche and see what's there. Bickle is loathe to stare into his own soul and prefers the distractions of NY. Easier to see craziness in the world than in oneself. (Likewise, a minor character in FIRST REFORMED, the latest Paul Schrader film, becomes obsessed with environmental issues as a coping mechanism for his depression. He clearly has psychological issues but would rather project them onto the wider world. But this poses a new set of problems. If the whole world is as diseased as one's own soul, where's the escape? The man commits suicide, like Max von Sydow's character in Ingmar Bergman's WINTER LIGHT who ascribes his depression to fear of nuclear holocaust.)
Also, despite Bickle's loneliness, it too is somewhat comforting. After all, anything goes and everyone is tolerated in a big city full of strangers. No one cares. It's lonely but one is left alone. If Bickle were to settle in a nice rural community, he would be observed and judged by his peers. If judged badly, he would be shunned by the community. In contrast, no one is exiled in NY because everyone is a stranger. Bickle is just one of the many nameless nobodies. It is lonely but also liberating. Besides, many people prefer to be a nobody in The Place than a somebody in no place. Why does Joe Buck hang around New York for so long in MIDNIGHT COWBOY? It's the capital of the world whereas the place whence he came was some nowhere-ville in Texas. Adolf Hitler hated degeneracy but was drawn to the city where things were happening. Only the 'happening' metropoles matter. It's like Washington D.C. is a sleazy place, but Pat Buchanan is addicted to the sports of politics. It makes him feel alive, and he just can't let it go despite his disgust. And in Oliver Stone's film, Nixon feels dead outside politics. You'd think he'd have peace of mind after bidding farewell to the System that only kicked him around, but he must re-enter the ring. The warrior part of Bickle knows the game is in the city. In a way, he's a war lover and still in the fight even after leaving the Marines.
-- Today, I look at Travis and see someone on the autism spectrum who is also an incel. --
He has issues but isn't technically an incel, which means 'involuntary celibate'. Bickle had a chance to have sex with Iris but refused. Even when he approaches the mulatto woman at the porn theater refreshment stand, he courts her. (In the background is a classical nude statue, suggesting Bickle's idealism about the other sex.) And he approaches Betsy with courtesy and feels she deserves respect. Ironically, he takes her to a porn theater thinking it is the 'proper' thing to do in NY. He thought she might appreciate it as a New Yorker.
So, if Bickle really wanted to 'get laid' or 'ball' someone, he surely could have. He is willfully celibate with Iris. Thus, he's more a 'wilcel', a willful celibate. It makes him feel special. In his mind, other men see Iris as a piece of meat, but he sees her as someone special; therefore, he is better, nobler. There's a similar appeal to Vito and Michael Corleone. Whereas Sonny, Fredo, and Carlo stick their dongs into everyone(and even Tom Hagen has a mistress), Vito and Michael are faithful to their wives. And Vito despised the Tataglias for dealing in whoredom. A key difference between Michael Corleone and Bickle is the former belongs to a family and tradition. So, Michael's 'psycho' acts(and those of Al Neri) have legitimacy within the milieu(with its core of honor), whereas Bickle's psycho act seems out of the left field... but for the fact that society comes to spin his crazy deed as an heroic act in total ignorance of the fact that Bickle attacked the brothel ONLY BECAUSE his attempt on Palantine was foiled. It's the thin line between monster and hero, but then in our age of George Floyd, notice how easy it was some lowlife Negro druggy to be spun as a saint, along with Michael Brown. And Jonathan Pollard went from arch-traitor, the worst in US history, to a hero who worked for Israel; as Israel is America's Greatest Ally, Pollard's deeds now seem justified. If the US's primary purpose is to serve Israel, then Pollard did no wrong in betraying the US for Israel. It's what 99% of politicians do on a daily basis. Maybe Jews will demand in that the US apologize to Pollard as the 'New Dreyfus'.
-- Betsy isn’t the only object of Travis’ gallantry. He also wants to rescue Iris, a twelve-year-old prostitute from a pimp played by Harvey Keitel. --
In a way, he 'also' wants to save Iris. In another way, he 'afterwards' wants to save Iris as compensation for having lost Betsy. Iris is like a consolation prize. Had things worked out with Betsy, it's unlikely he would have paid any mind to Iris. But after his humiliation with Betsy, he fixates on Iris to restore his pride. Betsy is too high above him. He saw her as an angel, even a goddess. He apologized and groveled, but she snubbed him as a loser and lunatic. He can't handle this pain, and so, Iris becomes useful to his wounded ego. After all, she's a young whore, the dreg of society. There's no way someone like her can look down on him. She allows any man to screw her orifices for money. She's so low in the totem pole that he need not worry about being rejected by her. Jesus too had a special relation with a whore.
People feel offended by being snubbed or rejected by superiors, not inferiors. People take offense when called dumb by a smart person, not by a retard. So, Bickle feels more at ease with Iris who is below even someone like him. Also, there's something similar to the dynamics in MULHOLLAND DR. There, Diane Selwyn feels dejected and humiliated by her friend who made it in the industry. In her fantasy, Selwyn-as-Betty is full of love and kindness; she would never do what her friend did to her and goes out of her way to help out an amnesiac stranger who is modeled on the friend. Similarly, through his concern toward Iris, Bickle is reassuring himself that he would never do to another what Betsy did to him. She turned out to be a BITCH, but he's no son-of-a-bitch. He cares and would go out of his way to care for Iris. But then, he's not being entirely honest. After all, his real objective was to kill Palantine(and face arrest or be shot by cops and secret service men). He attacked the brothel as compensation for his failed attempt on Palantine. Now, why did he target Palantine? He may consciously justify it on political or ideological grounds. But, it really has to do with Betsy. Subconsciously, he sees Palantine as the pimp who owns Betsy as his whore. In Bickle's subconscious, Palantine is to Betsy what Iris is to Sport. So, despite his bitterness about Betsy, a part of him still wants to prove himself to her as the slayer of the super-pimp who owns her.
-- The seventies were the decade of the anti-hero. The organs of the culture were by then firmly in the hands of the hostile elite. Thus the instinct of the critical mainstream was to weaponize anti-heroes like Bickle against the establishment, meaning against mainstream America. There was surely some hand-rubbing on both coasts when Reagan was shot by a wannabe Travis Bickle. --
But Bickle isn't at war with mainstream America but with the very things that led to White Flight. He seems uneasy in the presence of black thugs. And he feels contempt for the Jew played by Albert Brooks. Also, many Anti-Heroes of 70s cinema were accused of 'fascism'. Dirty Harry was an anti-hero cop. Unlike the traditional crime fighter, he played dirty like the criminals. He bent rules. But people still rooted for him because he got things done. Crime got so out of control that even Liberal Hollywood was making 'vigilant movies' and soon shut down the production of Blaxploitation movies as agitating the Negroes. SWEET SWEETBACK'S BADASS SONG was a runaway hit in the black community but was soon taken out of circulation.
Audiences also identified with the Corleones of THE GODFATHER. Corleones were killers and criminals but not without an element of Nobility of Evil in service to Family and Honor. THE LAST DETAIL mocks the military but also hippies and other freaks of the period. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST has an anti-hero who fights Negroes and a bitch-monster. If the problem in CUCKOO'S NEST is too much order, the problem in TAXI DRIVER is too much disorder. Both were released in the same year, but the 60s revolution is the gulf between the two anti-heroes. It was Liberals who were most upset with THE FRENCH CONNECTION where anti-hero cops played dirty to shake down black junkies and break up the international drug trade. William Friedkin's other big movie was THE EXORCIST, the appeal of which wasn't much different from TAXI DRIVER. A priest paralyzed with self-doubt regains meaning by fighting the Devil to save a young girl whose body is ravaged by onset of puberty.
With movies like NETWORK and ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN, things got further confused. Are the two newsmen in ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN heroes or anti-heroes? In a way, they are hero journalists. Yet, they can also be seen as assassins, gunning to bring down the President. You don't need a gun to hunt politicians, as Trump recently found out. Are Woodward and Bernstein righteous rebels against the most powerful man in America, as the movie suggests, or are they hired killers for the Establishment that simply didn't like Nixon? Heroes and Anti-heroes become even more muddled in the world of NETWORK.
-- Today, the hostile elite is fully in control. They are the establishment. They want to hold on to their power. Thus they live in terror of Travis Bickles like Brenton Tarrant and Dylann Roof. Hence the cultural organs pushed back hard against Todd Phillips’ Joker, which owes a great deal to both Taxi Driver and Scorsese’s later DeNiro vehicle The King of Comedy. --
I don't think the current elites would be much upset with a film like TAXI DRIVER were one to come out today(but for the part about blacks, especially the scene where Martin Scorsese as jealous husband says he's gonna take a magnum 44 and blow away his wife's pooter for her infidelity with Long Dong Silver). The reason why many critics reacted in horror to THE JOKER was it sensationalized Art House tropes for the mass audience. Some people might come away with sick ideas from TAXI DRIVER, but it was never going to turn mobs into Travis Bickles. From beginning to end, Bickle is on his own as God's Lonely Man. In contrast, THE JOKER is about how the lunacy of one spreads like wildfire and ignites a mass movement. Also, due to its superhero comic book pedigree, many more people were going to see THE JOKER than TAXI DRIVER(or something like THE KING OF COMEDY). Whatever its flaws, Scorsese and Schrader tried to be true with the material: What would really happen with someone like Travis Bickle, a ticking time bomb? In contrast, THE JOKER merely steals Art Film tropes and goes into fantasy mode not unlike V FOR VENDETTA. Genuine art rarely has mass appeal. Fantasy has mass appeal but is usually taken as fantasy, nothing serious. But THE JOKER was Mass Fantasy posturing as Radical Truth, and there lay the danger.
