And it was for this reason that the Left represented something exciting and essential in the Modern Era. It called for greater freedom in search for the truth. And this is why it makes no sense to attack the idea of the Left in a wholesale manner. Without it, there is no Modern World. The Left played an invaluable role in pushing for more freedom and truth in a world dominated by kings, aristocrats, and clergy. Kings and aristocrats prioritized their power and privilege above all else. They were more than willing to favor falsehood over truth IF falsehood ensured their continued dominance. While kings and aristocrats did patronize scientists & philosophers and were interested in knowledge & truth, they were more than willing to clamp down on any finding or ideas that threatened their power. The Church also patronized scientists and mathematicians. It was certain that science and math would lead to the evidence of God, make mankind better understand the laws of God, and confirm mankind’s special relationship to God. (Just like Jews insisted on believing that the God of All favored Jews above rest of humanity, the Catholic Church wanted to believe that Earth had a special covenant with God, i.e. God placed Earth, as the home planet of mankind, at the center of the universe.) But as with monarchs and noblemen, the Church had limits when it came to free inquiry. As long as science and mathematics didn’t threaten core theological assumptions(sometimes by esoteric means), they were to be tolerated, even encouraged. But if the evidence and explanation undermined Church teachings, a man like Galileo could expect to be persecuted.
Against the power of Monarchs & Noblemen and the Clergy, there was the Rationalists of the Enlightenment. In the context of events that led to the French Revolution, the power & privilege of the Kings, noblemen, and clergy came to be known as the Right whereas the push for more freedom and openness came to be known as the Left. Back then, the Left stood for something invaluable. Why restrict freedom, the spirit of inquiry, and open discussion of ideas just to maintain the power of Inherited Privilege and the dogma of the Church? And since all men had the power of reason, why should education and knowledge be the privilege of the few? Why were rights enjoyed only by kings and noblemen? Why did kings have the right to rule and why did aristocrats have the right to property and legacy but the people who did all the backbreaking work from sunup to sundown not have the right to basic things that make life meaningful? After all, humans are not mere work animals. They do have minds and souls. Also, people are not children forever. They grow into adults, and grownups are supposed to think. So, while religion-as-fairytales might be useful in controlling little children, why must adults be expected to bow their heads to the power of superstitions and myths for all their lives? So, shouldn’t all people have the right to be educated? Shouldn’t all people be given a chance to grow into thinking adults with a sense of individuality and autonomy?
This Right vs Left divide emerged due to the acceleration of history. For most of history, there was no right vs left. It was right vs right because things changed so slowly. Even the great Roman Empire didn’t undergo many socio-economic changes. Same was true of China, Persia, and the Hindu World. No one expected rapid change. As most people were concerned, they lived like their ancestors, and their descendants were likely to live much like them. The methodology of knowledge remained mostly static, and most people assumed that their existence was in tune with Eternal Truths. In such a world where so little was new, people didn’t envision or expect a better future, more truth, or greater freedom. Everyone, from top to bottom, was bound within tradition and customs.
But at some point, history began to accelerate in Europe, and the rapid changes in ideas, methods, discoveries, and possibilities changed the way of seeing things. Thinkers, idealists, visionaries, and adventurers grew impatient with the known world or accepted dogma. Just like explorers couldn’t wait to find new islands, new lands, and even new continents, the scientists and philosophers were enthusiastic to find new facts of life-and-space or to conceive deeper, more meaningful, or more just ways to live, rule, and/or organize the affairs of man. And artists were also energized by the spirit of exploration & expression and sought to break free from traditions. And even though mankind has been inventing things forever, the very idea of invention became an obsession of individuals who began to believe that their contraptions could not only serve humanity but revolutionize all the world. (Indeed, one could argue that the inventor of the steam-engine did more to permanently change mankind than political ideologues. In the end, the printing press was more revolutionary than any tract produced by it. Whether cinema or the internet is used for ‘this’ ideology or ‘that’ ideology(or no specific ideology at all), the truth is their very emergence profoundly changed so much of history and humanity in ways that cannot be understood by any ideology.
So, the Left, as champions of the ideology of revolution, played a most crucial role in the Modern West. Indeed, would the West have made such advances without the Left? Other civilizations didn’t have a concept of the Left. They had rebellions and political conflicts, but it was about Right vs Right. It was a struggle among chieftains for power(without ideas). Or even when the people rose up to overthrow the existing order, it wasn’t to create a new order based on a new theory of justice but to replace the old boss with the new boss. So, in time, everything ended up much the same even after great violent upheavals because the ideas and material conditions remained much the same. In contrast, the West formulated an ideology committed to progress, advancement, reform, and development. And it is for this reason that being anti-left is stupid. Sure, in the narrower historical context, the Left can be associated with failed ideologies such as communism and radical fads & fashions that come and go. But in the broader context, the conception of the ‘Left’ was what set the West apart from the Rest. This is why the genius of Fascism was to fuse the Left and the Right. Fascism and National Socialism, at their best, was a kind of left-rightism. What the fascists understood was that the radical left that sought to destroy everything of tradition and ‘eternality’ to make way for the Utopian New was blinded by infantile hubris. But in the broader scope of things, the idea of the Left was of profound importance to the West. It was against the complacency of monarchical and aristocratic privilege that just rested on its laurels. It was against the self-satisfied and sometimes smug eternalist dogma of the Church that believed all the truth was in the Bible and that everything had to be in accordance to sacred text as revealed by the Old Prophets. Indeed, even science had once been hampered by eternalist cult-worship of Aristotle who’d been regarded so highly as an genius-of-all-times that his theories went uncontested. For instance, Aristotle said heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects. People through the ages never thought to question this theory until Galileo demonstrated that it’s not true. The only reason heavier objects fall faster is due to friction of the air.
Even though the Left emerged as an idea with the French Enlightenment followed by Revolution, its spirit had been practiced by Europeans who developed a mindset that wasn’t satisfied with the status quo, received knowledge, and the known world. When Europeans set sail to distant far-off lands to discover new things, they were thinking quasi-left. When European scientists and mathematicians were questioning Church doctrine and arguing for new assessment of reality based on their own findings and calculations, they were acting quasi-left. When European inventors got into the habit of tirelessly inventing new gadgets, they were also acting in the spirit of leftism. They were not afraid to overturn the status quo. They were willing to bring about paradigm shifts.
For virtually all of humanity for most of history, few ever thought in terms of paradigm shifts. If they did offer change or improvement, it was to serve the existing paradigm. So, if a certain bright mind improved on existing technology or invented something new, his purpose was to serve and strengthen the existing power. This is how the Ottoman Empire and Far East operated. They did produce new technologies but always to serve the existing order. As for Far East, their geo-political priority was to keep the foreigners out than to discover the unknown world. Chinese were less adventurous than even the Russians, the most conservative civilization in Europe. As Siberia is right above China, the Chinese could have claimed it all. And as Alaska is closer to China than to European Russia, the Chinese could have colonized Alaska after taking Siberia. But it never occurred to the Chinese to be so bold. And compare Spain/Britain with Japan. Spanish and British discovered and unified the world whereas Japan remained at home. And in time, Britain overtook Spain despite the latter’s head-start because Spain suppressed quasi-leftist tendencies and grew overly conservative. Too often, we associate the Left with communism, anarchism, and radicalism. But it was also a spirit. Of course, many people who were on the Left would today be called rightist or even far-rightist. But the crucial thing is the West conceived of a spirit of adventure, discovery, and transformation. Prior to the rise of the Left, there was no left or right. Just ‘eternality’. Even struggles of power were within the same paradigm. Consider the Byzantine Empire that was hardly stable and racked with endless intrigues. It never lacked for new rulers and regimes. But the overall paradigm remained the same: Christo-Dynastic rule. Same with Ancient Egypt. It was like a world that was always night or always day. Now, the Ancient Greeks were more adventurous in thought and laid the groundwork for what was to come later in the Renaissance and Enlightenment. And the Ancient Jews were very profound and contemplative in their new theories of God. But both the Greeks and Jews were too tribal to think in terms of Revolution. Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle didn’t have revolution in mind when they theorized as they did. They were searching for a better formula to serve the existing reawlity. As for the Romans, their main theme was power and control. So, when the Roman Empire fell, it was just about the loss of power. In contrast, the fall of the French Monarchy wasn’t just about change in power and control but the creation of a wholly new order, a new paradigm in the concept of governance and representation. This is why ‘Alt-Right’, if it is to be successful, is a misnomer. If it has any chance, it must be the Left-Right, or a Neo-Fascism that takes the noble aspirations of Fascism while rejecting what was most poisonous about it: Cult of Personality and denunciation of individualism. While radical individualism of libertarianism is also poisonous, we need individuality to maintain a society of freedom, emancipation, and, above all, conscience. For there to be genuine collective conscience, there has to be individuals with conscience of their own, i.e. they must develop a sense of right-and-wrong based on individual reason and personal emotions. A people for whom the terms of right-and-wrong are determined by decrees or dogma of the Order or the Zeitgeist are not truly ethical or conscientious. Germans under Nazism were more like dogs than thinking humans. When Hitler said USSR is the eternal enemy, it was. When Hitler said Germany and USSR are now allies and friends, they were. When Hitler invaded the USSR and said it is the enemy again, it was. Germans just went along with those shifts in the Official Line.
Same with Chinese under Maoism. When Mao said USSR is an eternal friend and the US is the eternal enemy, Chinese went along. When Mao said USSR is the eternal enemy, Chinese went along again. When Mao said US is an ally, Chinese nodded along once again. This is dog-mentality. Notice how dogs will like or hate someone based on the orders of its master. If the master tells the dog to bark at someone, it barks. If the master tells the dog to be nice to that person, the dog changes accordingly. Sadly, even most Americans are like that. They think "Israel is America’s greatest ally" because the Master Media and Whore Politicians have repeated that line over and over and over. Most people don’t think to question and challenge what they’ve been told by The Power.
The problem with the Modern Left was threefold. (1) When pushed to radicalism, it didn’t merely seek to move beyond the status quo but destroy it. Imagine the upper branches and leaves of a tree trying to destroy the roots. The fact is, no matter how many paradigm shifts humanity undergoes, there will always be something continuous in the racial saga. Our basic racial nature remains the same. It’s like Modern Jews are very different from Ancient Jews, but there is a deep and rich connection between the Jewish present and the Jewish past, and it’d be stupid for modern Jews to reject all their history, culture, and memory. The massive destruction of the Cultural Revolution by the Red Guards was one of the clearest cases of how Leftism can turn into a mindless evil. And there were elements in the French Revolution who were so obsessed with the New that they were willing to destroy everything old. Granted, such mentality didn’t begin with the Modern Left. Smashing the icons and idols of the vanquished power was as old as history itself. When the New Power took over, they either smashed the old symbols or refitted them with new meanings. Still, it was mainly a matter of power than of principles or ideals. It was about one power de-legitimizing another power. It was with Christianity that the practice of iconoclasm took on a new meaning. Christians didn’t smash pagan temples simply as a power move. Rather, pagan idols and iconography were deemed wicked and evil, therefore their eradication was a revolution in morality than merely a change in power. Still, Christianity couldn’t be leftist, at least in the modern sense, because it was Eternalist. It said there is one God for all times and He has one Truth for mankind as revealed by His Son, Jesus Christ. So, even as the proselytization and ‘institutionalization’ of Christianity would be violent and disruptive, it was to create a world of eternal peace and harmony. Granted, there were similar ideas in Marxism, i.e. after the Proletarian Revolution, a classless society would be one of justice and mutual respect. But there were also other strains of leftism that believed in Permanent Revolution whereby the main objective of mankind would be change upon change upon change. Anyway, history has shown that a people who cut themselves from the roots are bound to fail. War on roots could come from communism or capitalism. The reason why the US became soulless enough to support ‘gay marriage’ was because its roots have been severed, leaving Pop Culture as the sole culture for the great majority of Americans. They have no sense of family, community, lineage, church, and history. It’s pop culture morning, noon, and night. So, if Pop Culture says Homos are so ‘cool’, ‘cute’, and ‘cuddly’, most people go along because Celebrity is at the core of their cultural experience. (2) The other reason why Leftism is always bound to fail is the resilient rightism of human nature. Even if leftists were to take over all the world, they would eventually turn quasi-rightist. George Orwell illustrated this in ANIMAL FARM. In the end, hierarchy returns with the smarter pigs gaining dominance. And among the pigs, those with greater will and cunning take over. In the US, Jews call themselves leftist but took power. And among Jews, the wicked greedy Jews have power over the idealistic and fair-minded Jews. The likes of Sheldon Adelson have far more power than the likes of Norman Finkelstein. Even if a regime comes to power in the name of Leftist Revolution, the human nature drives the New Bosses to conserve and keep their power. Stalin and Mao became new emperors, and they ruled much like emperors of old. Jews are the new elites, and despite all their BS about ‘equality’, they act like globo-aristocrats who are above the law. They are all about Jewish Privilege. Also, they play tricks with notions such as ‘diversity’. They say ‘diversity’ is about leftism and progressivism when, in fact, Diversity has always been the product of imperialism and the preferred tool of the hegemonists of empire, e.g. the British sure got a lot of traction by using Diversity to set various peoples against one another. The main reason why Jews push Diversity is to bolster and maintain their globo-aristocratic domination. Anyone who says ‘diversity’ and ‘equality’ in the same breadth is either a cunning Jew or a naive gentile dupe. (3) Another reason why Leftism runs into trouble is that its spirit of freedom, adventure, and change creates all sorts of contradictions that eventually trip and tumble over one another. After all, unloosed imagination plays by different rules than unleashed reason. Reason relies on facts and logic(though often sparked by intuition), whereas imagination runs on creativity and fantasy. Both Reason and Romanticism were the result of greater freedom of mind and spirit, but they often ran counter to one another. Also, there are Apollonian and Dionysian aspects in both Reason and Romanticism. One side of Reason means more order, clarity, and predictability. Yet, in using science, technology, and better organization/management to create an orderly world of greater prosperity and individuality, the end-goal of Reason is Recreation. With the help of Reason, we want to create a world of less struggle and more fun. So, even though Reason is usually associated with Apollonianism, it is also closely related to Dionysianism. Romanticism is usually associated with the Dionysian for good reasons, but it also has an Apollonian side. As a ‘reaction’ against rapid industrialization unleashed by the power of Reason, the Romantics sought to reconnect with the organic balance and order of Nature. Also, there was neo-spiritual aspect of Romanticism that aspired for cosmic meaning above and beyond the ever-changing truisms of modernity. Mankind was supposed to control Reason, but from its pandora’s box emerged the uncontrollable innovations of science that led to industrialization and the Satanic Mills. It used to be that mankind thought of nature as wild & unpredictable and of society as tame & stable. But the industrial revolution made society seem far more out-of-control than nature. Entire landscapes were transformed within decades into behemoths of factories and machinery.
Another contradiction within the Left owed to the conflict between truth and freedom, between truth and justice, and between justice and freedom. If Reason could lead to the truth, should all people be forced to commit to the truth? Or should people be free to be wrong-headed? If Reasons proves there is no God, should all people effectively be forced to be atheist(as in communist nations) or should they be allowed to worship in the name of freedom of worship/conscience? If Reason can lead to truth, isn’t it the responsibility to force all people to be on the side of truth than falsehood? Those in favor of freedom argued that the Truth, even if based on Reason, could turn out to be false. After all, while Reason is useful, the calculations could be wrong due to insufficient data. Or, the Power could misuse and monopolize Reason. After all, didn’t communists claim that Marxism was ‘scientific-materialist’? Today, many people say Global Warming is irrefutable and even go so far as to say those who reject the idea should be silenced, fined, and even imprisoned. Cass the Ass Sunstein once wrote that Global Warming rejecters should be treated like ‘Holocaust Deniers’. Then, there is the conflict between truth and justice. Many so-called Progressives, especially Jews, worry that evidence of racial differences, even if verifiable and increasingly irrefutable, is true, it should be banned or muffled because it might be bad for society. In other words, maintain the Noble Lie. Because something as evil as Nazism was based on the theory of racial differences, these ‘Justicist’ Progressives believe even the truth must be silenced IF it is ‘good’ for society. But those in favor of truth could argue that Truth is a form of justice and Falsehood(if willful) is evil. Or, even if Falsehood isn’t evil per se, an order based on Falsehood will lead to evil. Also, the evil of Nazism owed not to racial science but FALSE racial science. All that Nazi rhetoric about Slavs-being-subhumans was sheer nonsense. Also, stuff like slavery existed without racial ideology. It’s been around for 10,000 yrs. Indeed, most slavery existed within the mono-racial framework, i.e. blacks enslaved blacks, yellows enslaved yellows, whites enslaved whites, and etc. It was only beginning in the 17th century that a form of slavery based on one race enslaving another became a major phenomenon(due to Spanish subjugation of Meso-Americans and the Atlantic Slave Trade). Most troubling of all is that something far worse than Communism and National Socialism threatens to destroy the West due to the Falsehood of anti-race-ism. (By race-ism, I mean belief in the reality of race and racial differences. If Ism means belief, race + ism should mean belief in the validity of race as a human category.) Unless white folks wake up to the fact that races are different and that black race is especially dangerous, the West will be destroyed. The current EU is under the PC bogusness that black Africans are just white people with black skin. In fact, blacks are less intelligent, more aggressive, more muscular, and bigger-donged. Blacks in Africa can hardly maintain any kind of civilization in their own nations, and in huge numbers they will turn much of Europe into Detroit. While Communists and National Socialists did a lot of damage, they still maintained civilization. The blackening of Europe will mean the end of civilization. Rapping and Twerking ugabugans will turn all of European culture into ‘muh dick’ and ‘muh booty’. And as stronger and tougher blacks will kick white man’s ass, white males will be cucked and minus manhood while white wombs are Afro-colonized. This is the biggest threat facing Europe, but the demented theory of justice at the core of PC has brainwashed most white people that it is ‘evil racist’ to wake up to the reality of race and racial differences.
And then, there is the contradiction between justice and freedom. In the US, many people believe in freedom of speech and freedom of association. They want the freedom to say whatever is on their minds and to associate with people they prefer. This is not a matter of truth but about freedom. But the leftist theory of justice argues that such freedoms will lead to ‘hate speech’ and hurt feelings. Also, it will lead to ‘exclusion’ of certain groups. After all, many whites moved to the suburbs mainly to get away from urban Negroes who got out of control due to BAMMAMA Factor — Blacks Are More Muscular And More Aggressive. Those in favor of freedom believes that white people had a good reason for fleeing from dangerous blacks. But the current Leftist theory of justice regards blacks as sacred beings who are victims of ‘discrimination’. In fact, the problem is not so much that whites discriminate against blacks but that blacks crime-hate against whites and others.
The Left unleashed the struggle for truth, freedom, and justice, but the three often don’t get along together and instead act like the Three Stooges. In the media and academia, Justice is like Moe, Freedom is like Curly, and Truth is like Larry. Another problem with Leftism is one man's freedom is another one's subjugation. The West's voyages of discovery around the world were spectacular and led to all sorts of new possibilities. But they also led to invasions of other civilizations or tribes and eradication or enslavement of entire peoples. MOANA ends with an anti-conservative message that celebrates the spirit of exploration & discovery and leaving one's old homeland behind, but what might happen if these adventurers come upon another island inhabited by another tribe? Archaeology tells us that it usually led to violent confrontations.
Anyway, we were talking of Reason and why its use is so problematic in certain quarters in regards to certain issues. It appears Reason is pretty effective where restraints don’t exist, and this explains the rapid advances in sciences and technology. Physicists, chemists, and biologists(as long as they avoid the issue of race) can pretty much do as they please. And most people involved in technology can pursue possibilities and come up with innovations without restraint. If anything, they are encouraged toward and rewarded for more innovations. (To be sure, the examples of Enron and Theranos show that even those involved in science and technology can be hampered by the Power. Elizabeth Holmes reportedly fired anyone who dared to confront her about the fraudulence at her company.) It’s been said that mathematicians were one group of people who were totally free in communist nations as their expertise had nothing to do with ideology. But every order is held together by certain myths. Even when existing myths are removed as morally tainted, they are replaced by new myths. There is a sense that a community, especially a complex nation, can’t be held together by truth, freedom, and justice alone. After all, truth has a thousand faces. Freedom can mean a million different things. And meaning of justice differs from group to group, individual to individual. Therefore, a nation is held together by a unifying myth, consensus of Narrative, and shared worship of certain sacred symbols. Those lend shape, structure, and bounds to the idea of truth, freedom, and justice. For instance the Cult of Holocaust fixates Truth on the nobility of Jews and evil of ‘anti-Semites’. And it limits freedom to those who dare not offend Jews. Because Jews as the Holy-Holocaust-People are sacred, freedom will be punished if it offends Jewish sensibilities. And justice comes to be defined as making things better and easier for Jews. Since Jews are holy, the highest form of justice must be whatever seems most ‘just’ to Jews. The other holy symbols in the US are MLK Cult and Homomania. So, freedom that offends blacks is a non-starter. And truth must conform to the nobility of blacks, especially those of the Civil Rights Era. And justice must be about massaging Negro ego because blacks are sacred. And then, there are the Holy Homos.
The creation and dissemination of myths leads to mytho-mechanism within the mind. Mytho-mechanics plants certain tripwires within the mind that limit the free flow of Reason. They have the effect of electric fences, cattle-prods, mines, and booby-traps. They make Reason tread carefully or think twice about venturing into certain areas or saying certain things. If you are told you need to cross the field to get to the other side that has the fruits, you will likely choose the shortest path, which would be most logical. But suppose you discover the field is laden with mines and booby traps. Suppose there are electric fences along the way that force you to go around. Suppose wild dogs chase you if you enter a certain zone. In Franz Kafka’s THE CASTLE, the seemingly short trek to the Castle takes forever because so many obstacles are in place to prevent one’s full entry. And in Andrei Tarkovsky’s STALKER, the eponymous character who is steeped in the myth of the Zone insists on a convoluted and meandering path to the Room. And there is no simple way back to Kansas in THE WIZARD OF OZ where dream-logic traps Dorothy in mythic witchcraft. And in CLOVERFIELD, it takes forever to move a few blocks in NY because of the Monster and all the complications unleashed by it.
The same kind of dynamics operates in the minds of so many Western folks. Their psyches have been so deeply embedded with certain iconography, idolatry, and narrative by mytho-mechanism that their Reason cannot go from point A to point B in a straight line. They must go around and around to get there. Many never get there and end up back to point A. Some people dread to tread into certain thought-zones out of fear. They’d been admonished for thought-crimes or witnessed others who were destroyed for having expressed them. But for many, it has less to do with fear than the Glow and the Tripwires. Even if you’ve never been censured for being politically incorrect and don’t know anyone destroyed by it, the very fact of having been mytho-mechanized with certain symbols and narratives undermines your propensity for Reason. Having certain idols & icons and sacro-narratives lodged in the corridors of your mind means that your thought processes will trigger certain tripwires that will alter the flow of your thoughts and their outcome. Think of a pinball machine or a pachinko machine. Why do balls operate differently from machine to machine? Because the setting of the obstacles is unique with each machine. Supposing the ball is a metaphor for a thought, it will bounce around differently within the panel or board depending on the placement and size of the bumpers and spinners. So, even if the objective of the thought-ball is to go straight to the Occam’s out-hole of conclusion, it may take some time for the ball to get there because the bumpers, ramps, spinners, and flipper bats do everything to keep the thought-ball on the board. As Jews have control over media and academia, they get to place the idolatry, iconography, narratives, and taboos(that serve as bumpers, ramps, spinners, and traps) inside our mind. So, our thought-balls are complicated by those obstacles and ‘trips’. Also, as we are connected to electronic media day in and day out, it’s like there is a Jew inside each of our minds to hit the flipper bats to keep the thought-ball from making it to the out-hole. Jews are pinball wizards and messing with our minds.
So, let’s consider some examples of how these tripwires work inside the mind. Because of the traps, alarms, mines, electronic fences, and obstacles within the mind, it’s often difficult for a perception or idea to go from start to finish in a straight line. Instead, the thought process often halts and prays before altars of holiness while trying to traipse around cursed objects of taboo.
D.W. Griffith, for instance, is one of the most important film-makers ever. His THE BIRTH OF A NATION revolutionized cinema. He should be considered as one of the absolute giants of movie history, and he used to be lionized even by scholars and film critics who were critical of his views on politics and race. But PC planted such powerful traps inside the minds of culture critics that NO ONE now wants to go anywhere near THE BIRTH OF A NATION. It is almost never mentioned among the absolute greatest films even though its importance is up there with BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN. In contrast, a film as worthless as JEANNE DIELMANN is esteemed so highly now because ‘intellectual’ minds have been planted with the sacred icons of Jewishness, homo-lesbianness, feminism, and Marxism(or at least ‘cultural marxism’). So, even though JEANNE DIELMANN is quite possibly the worst film ever made, so many worthless cinephiles get down on their knees and offer prayers to Chantal Akerman’s pile of crap because it’s aglow with those holy-schmoly factors. By golly, she was a Jew, a lesbian, a Marxist, and a feminist. Wow, just wow. An honest mind would be able to recognize Griffith as a true giant and THE BIRTH OF A NATION as a great work even if some of its history is shoddy and simplistic. After all, cinephiles have no trouble voting for BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN as a Top Ten movie in Sight & Sound Greatest Films poll. Even though the film is a historical lie and filled with crude caricatures of eeeeeeevil reactionaries, it is a stunning work that really put montage on the map. There is no problem with recognizing a Soviet film so highly(despite communism’s bloody history and the fact that classic Marxist theory has fallen out of favor among Progs) because there is still the Cult of Leftism as radical commitment to Good Intentions. In other words, no matter how cataclysmically communism failed, it's still deemed a Noble Failure. Also, there is still the myth that the Revolution might have turned out for the better IF Leon Trotsky or someone like him(especially a Jew) had beat out Josef Stalin. Thus, there are no tripwires against radical leftism and communism in the minds of academics and cinephiles. If anything, there are many altars to radical leftism planted inside the minds of many ‘intellectual’ and/or ‘hipster’ types. Despite or especially because their lives are compromised by so much privilege, wealth, and leisure, these people play the roles of armchair radicals and put on airs to convince themselves and the rest of us that they are with the Cause. It’s like all those educated bourgeois-hipster Latin American elites who do everything to further their position and privilege but wax romantic at the altars of Che Guevara. It’s like the rich noblemen through the ages who lived for power and wealth but postured as Good Christians by wearing golden crucifix necklaces. Our mental pinball machines are set in such manner that D.W. Griffith is not properly respected but a total phony like Chantal Akerman is praised as one of the all time greats. It gets even more comical with near universal hyperbolic praise of stuff like THE LAST JEDI and BLACK PANTHER. Whenever the thought-ball bumps into Diversity or Sacro-Negro, the mind lights up with holy radiance. Criticality vanishes and makes way for mindless hosannas. Today’s pinball pinheads are so messed up in the head that they will even give Best Picture prize to a movie about a woman humping a fish-man because it’s supposed to be about Open Borders, Diversity, and Interracism.
Consider some other examples of how the tripwires of the mind works. The effect of this is most evident with peoples associated with strong iconic value and taboos. Take Jews. Our minds have been pinball-machined with icons of the Holy Holocaust and taboos of ‘antisemitism’. So, when we think ‘Jew’, our mind lights up with Holy Holocaust glow. We think of Anne Frank and SCHINDLER’S LIST where a Jew is played by ‘Gandhi’. So, our minds feel pressure to have goody-good feelings about Jews. If our thoughts and feelings turn negative about Jews, our thought-ball hits the ‘antisemitic’ wire, and alarm bells go off. We feel shame and self-doubt with the fear that, oh my, "Am I an ‘anti-Semite’ or a Nazi?" OH NO!!! This affects our thoughts about Jews 24/7 and on any subject. For instance, take the current problems with Russia. Any honest person knows it’s about the Jews. Jews hate Russia because it resisted total Jewish takeover in the 1990s. Jews hate Russia because it said NO to the Jewish Proxy Neo-Religion of Homomania and also because Russia began to promote Christianity. Jews hate Russia because it’s been allied with nations like Iran and Syria that are loathed by Israel. Even though Russia has close ties with Israel and is good to its Jewish population, that is NOT enough for Jews who must have it ALL. That is why Jews created all this problem with Russia. It’s so obvious. Our thought-ball should go directly from the launch to the exit-conclusion, but instead, it bounces around the board and is rattled all around because Jews have planted our minds with sacred cows and taboos. Whenever our thought-ball realizes anything negative about Jews, it bumps into obstacles that sound the alarm ‘anti-Semite, anti-Semite’, and our minds fear to ‘go there’ and look for another path. So, even though Jews are most responsible for so much that is wrong with the world, most people would rather not discuss the Jewish role in any of this. Now, some people are consciously aware of Jewish power and fear it for obvious reasons. Surely, Donald Trump knows all about Jewish Power. He knows he has to kiss Jewish ass. Vladimir Putin knows this too. They both know the world is ruled by the Empire of Judea that can make or break nations. So, even as they do things that displease the globo-homo Jewish overlords, they can’t go all-out in naming the Jew and dealing honestly with the JQ or Jewish Question. But many more people don’t name the Jew because their minds have been pinball-machined into worshiping Jews and hating anything that is counter-Jewish as ‘antisemitic’ or ‘Nazi’.
And the same goes for blacks and homos, two other peoples who’ve been sanctified and taboo-ized. They are bolstered by sacral blessings and protected by powerful taboos. So, most American minds feel good when they have Nice feelings about Negroes & Homos and feel bad when they harbor negative feelings about them. These tripwires of sacred cows and taboos undermine Reason because our thoughts cannot travel in a straight line from observation to conclusion. Too often, the thought process comes to a standstill while our ‘hearts and souls’ kneel before the Holy Negro or Holy Homo. And then, the thought process trigger alarm bells if it feels anything negative about Nasty Negroes and Degenerate Homos. After all, the sacred cows tell us that Negroes are the MLK-people like the Mountain-Sized Negro who loves a little white mouse in GREEN MILE and that homos are ‘rainbow’ angels. Negroes and Homos being so sacred and special, how dare our minds have any negative thoughts about them. So, even when blacks act badly, we are not supposed to notice and instead just sweep the facts under the rug. We all know that more black students get suspended because blacks misbehave more. But our Reason cannot go straight from observation to conclusion because our pinball-machined minds will trigger so many alarms that cry ‘racism, racism’. So, our thought-balls bounce around and look for other explanations as to why all those black kids must be getting suspended. It must be the fault of schools than blacks and their DNA that evolved to select jungle-bunner behavior of hollering, ass-shaking, jiving, and apelike antics. Evolutionary Momentum in black Africa came to favor the jivers for two reasons. Africa was filled with big dangerous wild animals, and Negroes had to be tough warrior-hunters to survive. So, the toughest fellers were favored by evolution. Being tough, they not only had tough sons but wild bitches for daughters whose idea of womanhood was shaking their jungle-booties to attract muscle and dong. In contrast, the Ice Age in Europe favored the kind of people who could calm down and cooperate better with one another. As it was so cold up north, white folks would have run out of calories if they were shaking their booties or dongs all night long. Also, exposing body parts would have led to frostbite, gangrene, and painful death. Another factor that tames the human DNA is agriculture. As it produces surplus food and stable settlements, the hunter-warrior is less favored. Also, the system eventually comes to weed out the overly aggressive and anti-social as there is need for order and consensus among a large population living in close proximity. There must be more cooperation, and that means jive-ass behavior is looked down upon. Because black Africans didn’t go through the Ice Age and lived in primitive conditions in close proximity with big dangerous animals that hated Negroes more than anything — African animals were the first ‘racists’ who saw the Negro for what he be, a jive-ass fool who be chucking spears at hippos — , their genes were selected for hunter-warrior abilities. Also, there is an avalanche effect in evolution. Once a people come to value certain traits as special, they(consciously or unconsciously) keep pushing for those traits to become more pronounced. So, what began as natural selection soon turns into social selection of DNA. Once primitive black tribes began to favor proclivities associated with ass-shaking and dong-swinging, black evolution accelerated in that direction to make dong-booty-centric behavior even more pronounced. Also, if some human communities value a wide range of human characteristics — the Ancient Greeks valued everything from intellect to athletics to aesthetics to creativity — , some human communities come to favor a few traits above all else. With black tribes, the Evolutionary Momentum came to fixate on ‘muh dick’ and ‘muh booty’ and ‘chuck a spear at hippo’ and ‘run like a mothafuc*a’. And Jews came to fixate on prophetic thinking and profiteering. It is no wonder then that black Africans and Ashkenazi Jews evolved so differently from one another. Jews are the ‘happy merchants’ who own the media and sports franchises. And blacks are the athletes who play on the teams, kick butt, and hump da ho’s.
 |
| Evolutionary Momentum accelerated the developments of different traits among Jews and blacks. While the world of black Africans naturally favored the tough hunter-warriors while the world of Jews favored the scholars and merchants, the conscious obsession with those traits-as-preferable made them develop in an even more pronounced manner. So, not only were tougher blacks favored by the African environment but the African village came to obsess about the hunter-warriors with the dongs and the women with the fastest ass-shakes to attract the big boys. African culture came to center around contests of which guys who chuck spears and swing their dongs the most and which women can shake their booties and 'twerk' like baboons. So, 'blackness' was not only favored by the environment but by the tribal culture that came to obsess over ugity-bugity. In contrast, Evolutionary Momentum came to favor the Big Think and Big Money among Jews. Consider Jews vs Chinese. Chinese were also adept at business, but the culture looked down upon merchants. So, traits associated with 'merchantry' were not favored by Chinese culture. Even though Chinese merchants made good money and had more kids, there was no culturally-favored Evolutionary Momentum to favor the merchant traits in particular. The culturally favored traits among the Chinese was Obedience of Knowledge, or scholarship based on deep respect for the wiser elders. So, even as economic factors favored Chinese merchant traits, the culture favored traits associated more with bureaucrats than merchants. One of the reason why the Jewish communists lost out in the Soviet Revolution was that, even as the ruling class, they still acted like merchants than like bureaucrats. Stalin the bureaucratic-minded bully was able to outmaneuver the wily and tireless merchant-like Trotsky who tried to sell the idea of Permanent Revolution on a world scale. Anyway, unlike Chinese who economically valued the merchants but culturally disapproved of them -- thereby limiting the Evolutionary Momentum toward obsessively favoring Merchant Traits -- , Jews came to honor the merchants, middlemen, and money-men to such a degree that their Evolutionary Momentum did come to obsessively favor merchant-traits over others. This is why even non-business Jews act and talk in styles like they want to sell you something all the time. It's like what the Burt Young character says of Jew kid in ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA: "I got this insurance agent, this Jew kid named David. He conned me into every policy in the world. Every policy, name it, dogs, house, wife, life, anything. I'm drinking with the boys one night. He comes in with his wife, a brunette with a nice ass who works for a jeweler. And he's still on the hustle, this guy." |
Granted, not all tripwires in the mind are set by the Power. Some of them are natural. Humans aren’t naturally programmed to be honest. This is true of animals as well as many of them depend on deception for survival. They don’t need to try to be dishonest. Its part of their DNA, as when octopuses use camouflage, leopards use stealth to stalk, hawks rely on element of surprise to swoop down on their prey, alligator-snapping turtles use their wiggly tongues to bait fish, and etc. Are animals capable of self-deception? Maybe for some. Could it be possible that a dog feels emotions of hope and fools itself into believing that its abusive master is really a good guy? Hope often leads to self-deception but keeps spirits high. Humans are most capable of self-deception because their self-image is so dependent on how others see them. So, most humans want to believe that they are well-liked, admired, or respected. Also, humans prefer optimism than pessimism. They don’t want to believe or confront anything that lowers their spirits or sense of pride. So, there are natural trip-wires in the mind that act against honest and truthful path of reason and factual observation. This is quite evident among white males who’ve had trouble admitting that their manhood has been seriously compromised by black males. The whole black-white problem could have been avoided if, say a hundred years ago around the time Jack Johnson became heavyweight champion in boxing, white males had come together and openly admitted that white manhood cannot stand up to black manhood in a fair fight. Therefore, white manhood needs safe space from black manhood. But even as white males feared the rise of black manhood, they were too proud to admit their fear and anxiety. Admitting as much would have triggered tripwires in the white male psyche. White Male Pride didn’t want to be triggered with the fact that white males feared black males. So, what became the end-result of such unwillingness to face the truth? Racial Integration, black takeover of white-made sports, black bullying of whites, jungle fever, cucky-wuckism among white men turned into ‘white boys’, and ACOWW(or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs). As Merlin said in EXCALIBUR, it is truth that is most essential.
D.W. Griffith was one of the few honest white men who demonstrated the truth with the prophetic THE BIRTH OF A NATION, but both the White ‘left’ and the White ‘right’ came to denounce that movie because they were too triggered by its racial truths. (While Griffith’s film is historically dubious like most historical movies, there hasn’t been a more honest work in cinema about racial realities of blacks and whites. It’s especially amazing that the film prophesied Obama 100 yrs earlier with its two-faced mulatto character who play on naive white good-will. The jiggity Negro sensibility jazzily dances around the square dancing and straight-walking sensibility of white folks.)
Anyway, the Role of the Left-Right or Neo-Fascism must be to remove the obstacle to the free flow of Reason so that facts, honesty, and logic will prevail in our assessment of the world. While it’s true that any human community is more than a product or summary of facts, honesty, and logic — every social order must have its set of myths — , the soundest foundation of Order must be facts, honesty, and logic/reason. It’s like whatever ideological purpose something may serve, its usefulness depends on its grounding of truth. The US and USSR were locked in a space race in the 1960s that was loaded with ideological significance. But in the end, it came down to which side had the better science and technology. In order for the US flag to be planted on the Moon, US needed better rockets. And rocket technology couldn’t be dictated by ideology alone. After all, the US ideology loathed Nazi ideology but still used Nazi rocket scientists, as did the Soviets. The undeniable fact was Nazi-era German engineers were the best rocket-designers.
So, whatever one’s preferred ideology or mythology, he must be for a social order founded on reality and reason. Indeed, that is what set fascism apart from traditionalism and liberalism. Traditionalism clung to the dogma of faith when modern science made such faith impossible. I mean, can any honest educated person really believe in miracles, the supernatural, or divine sources of wisdom? We simply can’t believe in the old gods. And yet, liberals and leftists proved to be wrong too in their cult of reason. The human mind works mythologically and spiritually. Even those who claim to be ‘scientific’ and ‘rational’ are really of a neo-religious mentality, which is why Marxism-Leninism became an ideological-theology with its own sacraments & taboos and why so many ‘rational liberals’ worship Homomania and the MLK cult. They are incapable of thinking rationally or honestly about these issues because of their need for ‘god’ and worship in something. So, what is modern man left with? He can no longer believe in the old gods. His attempt to be ‘rational’ and ‘secular’ has resulted in worship of new false-goods of Marx/Stalin/Mao-as-prophet, MLK as Magic Negro, and Holy Homos. For others, there is the neo-religion of Climate Change. (Global Warming could be very real and a problem that needs to be addressed, but the hysteria around it is surely quasi-religious in nature. Its end-of-the-world doomsday cultism, that is UNLESS we allow Wall Street to make a killing with a new bubble in Green Energy, has all the makings of messianic lunacy. And Jews who push it are like televangelists trying to rake in billions. They already have their money invested in startup green energy firms in Wall Street. All they need is a massive green energy bubble that will turn their millions in investment overnight into billions. Of course, they will pull out before the bubble eventually busts. Financial Bubbling is more worrying that Global Warming. Why is Darren Aronofsky so obsessed about Global Warming and Green Energy? His first film was PI, about some Jew-kid whose math may unlock the secret to the stock market. I wonder how much money Aronofsky has invested in green energies. These Jews...) Anyway, what is to be done when modern man cannot return to the Old Way but remains too ‘mythonic’ to be truly rational, empirical, and factual? Also, even if SOME people are capable of creating and maintaining a social order that is essentially rational and secular, they will always constitute a small minority because there are too many dummies in the world. So, even if the smarties can order society around reason and facts, the problem is there are too many people who simply cannot work with reason and facts. Then, how could the masses of dummies be controlled? It is here that even rationalists might see the value of religion that gives some kind of meaning and compass to the lives of dummies. For those who are incapable of moral reasoning, the only powerful argument may be "God said so, dummies, so you better shut up and obey." The other way to control the dummies is to turn them into stupid animals who are so addicted to dumb pleasure that they will work hard to make just enough to blow on consumer items that gives them the feel-goodies. Paychecks for Videogames. Granted, there is a danger to animalizing the dummies because animalized people can get out of control and ruin things. But then, animalized idiots are also easier to manipulate because they are so childlike. After all, adults can easily mess with children’s minds and even make them believe in Santa Claus and the bogeyman. Jews prefer animalization of the masses because it is profitable to vice industries owned by Jews, but it is also because Jews fear that a Moral Community of Goyim may have pride-of-character and work against Jewish Power that may be deemed alien, subversive, radical, or avaricious. But there is the danger that an animalized society may, in the long run, fall apart because there is no real meaning to lives obsessed with wanton pleasures and infantile delights. Indeed, look at all the wasted lives among Negroes, whites, and others who chose the Dazed-and-Confused lifestyle of Richard Linklater movie. That sort of thing is fun in highschool but fails in the end. Jews have two ways of dealing with the problems of animalization. One is to have the animalized idiots grow addicted to opoiods and just grow old and die, often leaving no kids behind, to be replaced by the New Americans made up of new waves of immigrants whose children will also be animalized and turned into fat disgusting tattoo-and-piercing-marked addicted to a host of drugs. The other is to counter-balance its filth and profanity with the neo-religions of PC. So, if Jesus is no more, worship MLK. If Christianity must go, kneel at the altar of Holocaustianity. If Western Civilization is a dead concept, there is still Homomania as the new ‘pride’ of the West. So, you see, old morality and spirituality have been replaced with new ones. But the new cults are useless because they are false gods. Worshiping MLK the loutish Negro as some god-man is total BS. Also, the ‘sacralization’ of the Negro makes us willfully blind to the bad behavior and troubled nature of blacks, the most destructive race on the planet. And Holocaustianity insanely elevates every Jew into a little jesus-messiah(who died for the sins of mankind) and must be honored no matter how lowly and dirty he acts. With Jews being the most powerful group in the world causing so many tensions among nations and peoples, it is downright insane to blindly worship the Tribe as holy-schmoly. And even though so many people seek meaning from Homomania that is celebrated with such ‘vibrancy’ and colorfulness, it’s all empty calories, or empty calories laced with arsenic. The fact is, no matter how much they dress up Homomania with Disneyland spectacle and colors, it is a total sham. The idea of conflating homo fecal penetration and tranny penis-cutting with pride, morality, marriage, and even traditional religions(as more churches are festooned with homo symbols) is demented, possible only in a civilization that has been severed from its roots, wiped clean of meaningful memory, and drunk on punch spiked with evil spirits. It is only because the values of family, community, history, and spirituality are dead that so many people base their value system on nothing but Pop Culture(that is all about vanity, celebrity, hedonism, and fads & fashions) and Political Correctness(that is all about infantile sense of ‘justice’ expressed in terms of idols and slogans, much like the indoctrination of Red Guards in the Cultural Revolution with the Little Red Book or the Quotations of Chairman Mao). Whatever problems Christianity and Western philosophy had, they were genuine moral systems in that they taught people that morality must be a matter of individual conscience and the struggle of the soul. While it’s important to belong to a people, community, and culture, you cannot be judged good or bad mainly on the basis of your identity. Christianity says even a Christian, or especially a Christian, can be sinful and must make an effort to be a better person. It’s not enough to be born or raised Christian. It’s not enough to attend Church. The fact is every heart, even Christian hearts, is tempted by the Devil and must struggle to be good. And all Western philosophies call upon individuals to think, make sense of the world around them, and develop one’s own sense of conscience.
But what does PC teach? The laziest form of morality whereby some people are evil for what they are, some people are just okay for what they are, and some people are good for what they are. According to PC, whites are naturally evil and must struggle endlessly to be good because they are born evil due to the legacy of ‘racism’. It’s like Pigpen of Peanuts Cartoon is always dirty no matter how much he tries to be clean.
Anyway, the promise of neo-fascism is in the conscious understanding that we cannot return to the old gods and old faiths but also that we can’t simply be rational mind-machines. Our minds are naturally mythic, and there is a need for visions, symbols, icons, and sacred-narratives that unite a people together as one. But because we live in the modern world of science, we can’t believe in the literal sacrosanctness of these myths. We know they appeal to our visionary, emotional, romantic, and ‘spiritual’ natures. For example, there is nothing special about Israel or Japan from a purely geological view. The soil in Israel is hardly more special than soil in Lebanon or Jordan. In a chemistry lab, sand is sand and soil is soil. Also, there is no single correct mythic narrative of the Holy Land. Jews can claim it on the basis of Biblical chronicles and their idea of the Covenant. But Palestinians can make counter-claims because Philistines had been there before the Jews. Also, Palestinians put down deep roots while Jews had been exiled for nearly 2,000 years. Also, Christian Crusaders also had their own sacred narrative to lay claim to the Holy Land. It was the place of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the King of Kings. So, it didn’t belong to Muslims or Jews but to Christians. Or a cosmopolitan-globalist may argue for Open Borders for Israel, i.e. all the world, including Israel, should be open to individuals all around the world. No place belongs to a people for all time but only to free individuals on the move in search of knowledge, opportunities, and adventure. He may argue that the idea of the nation is the most unnatural thing because, after all, ‘ownership’ of territories always changes among animals in the wild. No wolf pack holds a turf forever. Even as animals mark territory, it’s not supposed to be permanent. Or, one could argue that humans should do away with borders and territoriality because they are higher than animals with ‘savage’ territorial instinct that leads to so much violence than cooperation. Unlike animals, humans should embrace universalism and the brotherhood of man, and all the world should be open to all the peoples to move freely and live. But then, a nationalist could argue that, regardless of whether territorialism is natural or not, it is a fact that certain peoples have settled in certain lands and developed deep attachment to the soil. Also, unlike animals with short memory and no language to develop a sense of history, humans do have memory that leads to the development of culture and sense of history. And that sense provides great meaning to a people who exist not only as individuals but as ‘continuals’. In other words, humans are less like individual mushrooms that sprout and disappear but more like parts of a tree. Unlike animals who don’t know where they came from or who their ancestors are, humans can pass down memory that serves as the basis of history or storytelling. So, even though our ancestors are long dead, they remain 'alive' as the roots of our collective family tree. We know that we wouldn’t be here in the now if it weren’t for them(our ancestors) who’d lived, developed a civilization, produced children, and passed down the culture. So, we know there is a connection between us in the now with them in the thousands of years ago. All those people in the Bible died long ago, but Jews(at least those who care about their history and culture) still feel a connection between those living in the now with those who’d lived and struggled in the past. Also, as their stories have been preserved, they are brought back to life for each new generation with retelling and dramatization.
Indeed, even if you don’t know much about your great-great-great-grandfather, you know that if he hadn’t existed or had kids, YOU wouldn’t exist now. Such a thought is inconceivable to the smartest animal. So, there is a connection between us in the now and them in the past, and there were so many them’s, and when we die and pass down the legacy, we too will join ‘them’ and whatever that was us will remain and continue with the descendants who keep the torch of memory. Many people may choose to just forget the past as irrelevant and live for today. Young people are especially prone to feel this way because they are full of spunk, and youth is a time for some measure of carefree abandon. But in the long run, life is only meaningful as a continuum. After all, youth goes by so fast, and things that seemed so exciting when we were young begin to seem rather silly or trivial as we grow older. Imagine an old man lying on his deathbed without a family and his main thoughts are, "I used to play this really cool video game back in my teens..." How pathetic is that? In the end, life is only meaningful if you realize that you’re part of a people, culture, and history. You are part of something far bigger than yourself, and you received the torch from those before you, you tended the flames, and you passed it down to those who follow you. Of course, life isn’t ONLY about passage of culture. There is a need for fun, recreation, creativity, and adventure. And some people will break free of the tribe & culture and begin something new and different. After all, the different races and different cultures are all a part of a branching out, indeed even to the point of creating new identities, myths, and narratives. History has mavericks, sorcerers, visionaries, and destroyer-creators of new worlds as well. But for most people, the greatest meaning comes being part of a culture and receiving the torch, tending the flame, and passing it down with reminders that unless the fire is kept lit and handed down, it will be lost forever(and then people will end up like the alienated and fragmented lives in GHOST WORLD). Thus, culture comes to be regarded as something precious and special.
Even something that’s been around for so long will die if not tended. Just because a tree is 200 yrs old doesn’t mean that its longevity is ensured. If it no longer gets water, it will die. And even a fire that’s been burning for 500 yrs can be snuffed out forever. Because some cultures have been around for so long, there is the complacency that it will go on continuing because of its proven longevity. But, nothing is assured or guaranteed in reality. If something has been around for a long time, it’s because the conditions allowed it to be so. Dinosaurs had been around for so long that if anyone had been around before The Asteroid hit, he would have thought that the future existence of dinosaurs was most assured. But the asteroid hit(or something cataclysmic happened), and the altered conditions wiped out dinosaurs in short span of time. What had lasted for 100s of millions of years was gone in a blink of an eye. The stupidest thing is taking things for granted. Even the fast hare lost to the tortoise because it took its victory as a given. Jews, of course, understand this. This is why Jews have hedged their bets when it comes to power. Because Jews have been exiled from many nations, they learned never to put all the eggs in one basket. Indeed, imagine if all of Jewish Power had been in Germany in the 1930s. It could have been destroyed for good. But because Jewish power had been spread out and networked over the US, UK, USSR(as communists), and other nations, even when Jews were getting hell in Germany, other Jews could work together to bring down Germany(though, in the end, the man most responsible for destroying Germany was the reckless and megalomaniacal Hitler, his own worst enemy). Anyway, because Jews have hedged their bets in the game of power, even if one tribe of Jews get wiped out, other tribes continue and carry on with the torch. This is why Jews will not be content with Israel as Jewish state. If all Jews were to move to Israel, what if Israel falls to its enemies? Then, it is Game Over for Jews. That is why Jews need to take over other nations and make them serve Jews. It's way of hedging their bets. Even if one bunch of Jews fail 'over here', there are powerful Jews elsewhere. This is why Jews need to increase Diversity in all nations(except Israel) so that the native elites will be made to serve Diversity than their own kind. This is good for Jews as they fear nothing more than the unity of native elites with native masses. If the native elites unite with native masses, they can challenge Jewish minority power. But if native elites forgo and even denounce unity with native masses and serve Diversity, then there won’t be a massive power bloc to challenge and push back against Jewish power.
Anyway, the necessity of Neo-Fascism is that it understands the psychological need for the mythic even in a world where we can no longer literally believe in myths. This is what Joseph Campbell understood. By Jordan Peterson as well. Campbell was a Neo-Fascist thinker(though he didn’t bill himself as such), and Peterson is more a classical liberal than anything else. But Peterson, like Campbell, understand that the meaning of life, culture, and history comes not only from liberty, materiality, recreation, and consumption. There is a need for culture, history, philosophy, and meaning. Therefore, Peterson isn’t your soulless libertarian who’s all about ‘muh liberty’ and ‘muh constitution’.
Even as Neo-fascism knows there are no gods, it has a psychological fascination with and appreciation of the mythic dimensions of the mind and soul as a world of visions, dreams, and poetics. John Boorman expressed such views in ZARDOZ and EXCALIBUR with inspiration drawn from Carl Jung.
In a way, both religious folks(usually 'conservative') and secular people(usually 'liberal') are living in a state of denial. The religious who cling to faith in old gods continue to deny that science has proven there is no evidence of gods and miracles. The secular who claim to be so rational are remarkably unaware of how quasi-religious they really are. Communists failed to understand that they worshiped Marx and Lenin as new gods. Progs are blind to the neo-spirituality of MLK, Mandela, Homo, and Holocaust cults, for which rational thought is not possible or even allowed.
Fascists could have overcome both failings by mapping out the strange dimensions of the mind and consciously embodying the myth. Fascism could have been like lucid dreaming. To accept and embrace the mythic and 'irrational' side of us while, at the same time, rationally understanding its processes and dynamics. But unfortunately, Fascism and National Socialism also developed into mindless cults with blind obedience to Il Duce and Der Fuhrer. This is why we need Neo-Fascism.
Now, Progs could argue that they are searching for truth and justice with their various causes and movements, but Jordan Peterson is right to reject PC as shallow, vapid, and infantile. While it’s true that Progs are ‘passionate’(rabid or hysterical is more like it) about certain issues, they lack depth and meaning because they have no sense of organic community, history, culture, and seriousness. Because their culture is Pop Culture and because their ideology is PC, they are prone to fall for the latest fads and fashions. So, if the notion of 50 genders is the latest hot topic, the progs who’d never given such nonsense much thought become the most zealous proponents of it. These progs are not based or grounded in anything except in the ‘feeling’ of self-righteousness. It is the ‘feel’ that counts. Because they aren’t grounded in anything of lasting value, the thing that lends them the most meaning and makes them FEEL most self-righteous could be something as ridiculous as green-haired fat tranny insisting that he be called a ‘she’ or even a ‘they’. Their passions move wildly from issue to issue. Whatever happens to be the most feels-worthy at The Moment matters utmost to them. So, what drove them most to hysterics last month is forgotten in favor of the new hysterics this month. It's like going from one flavor of ice cream to another. It's like the travelers in AIRPLANE! being led from one gate to another. These progs run from one hysteria-of-the-moment to another because they are essentially Justice-Junkies addicted to the highs of self-righteousness of Now, Just Now. It’s essentially the Michael-Jacksonization of ‘progressivism’ into freak-show vanity for every nutjob who wants his, her, or they’s fifteen minutes of holy victimhood.
Neo-Fascists have no use for such ‘truths’ that depends on fads and fashion. While Neo-Fascism acknowledges and even admires the leftist spirit of adventure, exploration, and expression, it understands the difference between the serious and the trivial, between the healthy and the diseased, between truth over falsehood, and between the life-affirming and death-inviting. Not everything new is good, sensible, or useful. It’s like most genetic mutations are harmful and don’t serve any evolutionary purpose. Likewise, most of today’s cultural and ideological mutations are pathetic dead-ends. Gender dysphoria and ‘gay marriage’ are insanities. They are not serious, and it says something about the trivialization of society that so many people take Homomania and gender-freak theories so seriously. Also, humanity is part of nature, and there are things that are healthy and things that are disease-inducing. Surely, a river filled with fish and plants is healthier than a river polluted with chemicals. So much of our culture is inorganic, filthy, decadent, and overflowing with garbage. It’s bad enough that so many idiots get tattoos and piercings, but imagine such idiots becoming parents. Imagine having a mother whose idea of maturity is having green and pink hair. Imagine the practice of culture as sitting around watching the most putrid and nonsensical trash on TV or listening to music where the theme is ‘suck my dick’.
Now, culture doesn’t have to be wholesome, the banal ‘family values’ crap. Authentic culture isn’t pure or ‘clean’. Death and decay are part of nature. Diseases are also part of nature. And nature produces abnormalities and defects. They are part of the nature of things. So, any ‘wholesome’ or ‘clean-cut’ idealization of culture — like what became of Disney in the 1960s and 1970s when everything had to be Rated G — is useless. Culture must take into consideration the cycles of life and death, the horror and darkness. Disney used to run these nature programs where animals rarely got hurt and everything was so cute-and-cuddly. But today’s decadent proggy culture wallows in the diseased. It celebrates the fat, ugly, gross, morbid, and trashy. Worse, it tries to pass that stuff as the New Wholesome, the New Normal. Family Values ‘wholesome’ culture is pretty inane like white bread, but it’s still what it is. But imagine pushing moldy bread or rotten food as the New Wholesome. Inane is bad enough, but pushing insane as the New Inane is downright demented. It'd be pushing porn as the new kiddie entertainment.
The leftist spirit used to champion new meaningful forms and expressions in arts, culture, and criticism, but at some point, it became obsessed with defending and promoting every new form of useless and ridiculous insanity that passed itself as 'significant' on account of some conceit or other. Also, the leftist spirit in the sciences stood for truth against the dogma of religion and tradition that said we should unquestioningly cling to handed down truth. While tradition could be of value and dogma could hold certain truths, any real search for truth cannot rest simply on receiving established Truth without questioning. Every generation and every individual must ponder the validity of what he’s been told and taught. But the Left created its own dogmas in time. But if an ideology of Marxism at least had a compelling moral argument in favor of the toiling masses, what passes for ‘leftism’ today is intellectually empty — BLM, slut feminism, Homomania, Jew-worship, globalism, celebrating tranny kids, and etc. are dumb or crazy — or merely serve the Power.
https://twitter.com/HuffPost/status/1012723617405292545
Most dangerously, the Empire of Judea(or EOJ) that rules the world has jiggered ‘leftism’ to be whatever coincides with the globalist ambitions of Jews. So, hating Russia, Iran, and Syria is now part of ‘leftism’. So, anything that weakens Christianity is ‘leftism’. Anything that furthers the divide between white men and white women is ‘leftism’. Anything that promotes Diversity in every nation but Israel is ‘leftism’. When Jews didn’t rule the world and were climbing the ladder to challenge Wasp or Anglo-Germanic Power, they had some sense of principle based on the courage to speak Truth to Power. But once Jews got the Power, they’ve been defining Truth simply in terms of "Is it good for Jewish supremacism?" It’s hard to ascertain what truth is in a world where so many educated people think homo fecal penetration and tranny penis-cutting have the same biological value and moral meaning as what happens between men and women to create life. And this brings us to the matter of life-affirming versus death-inviting. The rule of life is profoundly simple. Each of us are born of father and mother. We are the product of sperm fertilizing eggs. And this is also true of fish, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Jews who wrote the Bible didn’t need fancy college degrees to understand the basic truth of life. There is a reason Noah takes a male and female of each species. There is a reason he didn’t take two ‘gay’ rabbits or tranny opossums. We know what makes life. And we know what is necessary for a healthy and moral life. Every child wants to know who his or her parents are. And if a man and a woman create life, they should be responsible for what they’ve created. That is life-affirming. But our society is oriented toward death. Kids are told that it’s noble for men to be trannies and have their penises sliced apart to make for a fake vagina. They are told a vagina can be made into a fake penis. They are told that fecal penetration and ‘pegging’ are wonderful. As a result, anal cancer has skyrocketed four-fold among millennials. Also, women are told that abortion is no problem. Why shouldn’t women just kill their kids in the name of ‘choice’, ‘empowerment’, or convenience? Why be bound to anything? (Granted, abortion is good at least with blacks because it’s better to spend $500 getting rid of a black fetus than spending $500,000 to deal with problems resulting from his birth and growing up to be some idiot like Michael Brown. More blacks mean more Detrotization, more Baltimorization, more Fergusonization. Negroes got the Bongo gene that is savage and destructive. Indeed, the main threat to Europe is the exploding population in black Africa threatening to swamp all of Europe with ghastly ‘groids’. It never makes any sense to be a purist about anything. It’s like war is horrible, and we should try to avoid it as much as possible, but it’s crazy to be a pacifist who renounces war under all circumstances, surely a path to defeat and extinction as humans, as naturally invasive and aggressive organisms, will take over any social order unwilling to defend itself.)
Neo-Fascism appreciates both the rightist respect for roots, tradition, the tribe, & the tried-and-true AND the leftist yearning for the new, the adventurous, & revolutionary, but it favors the serious over the trivial, the healthy over the diseased, the true over the false, and the organic(and life-affirming) over the inorganic(the artificial and death-inducing). National Socialism in Germany failed because it was a culture of sterility led by pathological psychopaths who thought themselves noble and near-divine when, if anything, they lacked the most essential preconditions of nobleness. They were men without souls, much like so many people who run the Deep State or head the Empire of Judea that practices a form of Judeo-Nazism all over the world on the basis that anything and anyone are worth smashing and destroying to further the insatiable appetite of Jews for more power, wealth, and influence.
In a way, what happened to the Left was all too predictable. What happens to a kite if the string is cut? It flies off and loses its way. When Leftism was struggling against the forces of the Right, it was like a tree pushing away from the roots. So, even as a tree grows taller and away from the roots, it was still connected to and nourished by the roots. Leftism wanted to move away from the Right but was still grounded in the Right. So, the Left and Right, though seen as enemies, were complementary. The Left, in creating new possibilities, came to strengthen the Right. After all, the socio-economic changes that Germany and Japan underwent in the 19th century swept away some of the Old Order but also made it stronger. Improved ways of production and social organization made possible the rise of modern nation-states. Surely, a Japan that opened to the West and gained modern arms made the ruling elites more powerful. Indeed, the Meiji Reforms were enacted in the spirit of learning the new to preserve the old. But the Left also gained something from the existence of the Right. The Right, for all its faults and problems, provided form, structure, and sense of continuity. It served as a framework within which social experiments could take place. So, as long as a powerful Right existed, the leftist reforms and experiments had something to work with. It’s like a painter needs a canvas to create his work. If he destroys the canvas in the name of more freedom, where will he apply the colors? The problem of the current proggy ‘left’ is it has nothing to work with because its war on the Right(and even on the Classic Left) has been so total. Take the issue of Immigration. How can any true-blue leftist do anything to improve his nation when it’s constantly being invaded by newcomers who alter the dynamics of society? Leftism worked better in the past when nation-states had legitimacy as stable entities. So, leftists could come up with reforms and experiments specific to the nation in question. But when the very meaning of the nation is undermined by Mass Invasion(immigration) and Diversity, the ‘leftists’ are too overwhelmed with ceaseless changes to come up with any useful plan. Imagine you come up with a solution to fix a certain problem but the problem has been replaced by a new one. What worked for California when it was solidly majority-white no longer works for a California that is teeming with non-whites whose abilities and attitudes are markedly different. It used to be that Leftists offered proposals or solutions to fix specific problems. With better ideas, they hoped to change the environment for the better. Today, proggy ‘leftists’ have embraced ceaseless change(of all kinds) as the highest good, and as the result, they find it impossible to come up with any solution because everything is changing too fast. Imagine a doctor who is trying to diagnose and treat one patient, but just when he’s about the treat him, he is presented with a new patient and then a newer one and newer one. When FDR tackled the Great Depression, he was dealing with a recognizable and consistent America. But when the demographics of America are changing so fast that entire areas of America are no longer recognizable in a matter of decades, how can anyone come up with solutions? Indeed, the idiotic PC consensus is that Diversity in and of itself is the cure. So, if Mass Invasions create a host of problems, don’t stop the invasive tide so that you can deal with the problem at hand. Just let in MORE masses of invasive immigrants on the hope that MORE Diversity will treat the problems of Diversity. And so many people can’t see the craziness of all this because their pinball-machined mind sets off alarm bells when one realizes Diversity as a problem. The alarm flashes ‘racist’ and ‘xenophobia’ over and over and over.
The idea of Unite-the-Right got it wrong. The thing is to Unite the Left and the Right. And by the Left, I don’t mean today’s so-called Progs and ‘leftists’ who are mostly a bunch of imbeciles or crazies. I mean the noble themes of the Left that were so instrumental in making the West embark on a different path from the Rest. The emergence of the idea of the Left was akin to breaking the sound barrier by Chuck Yeager.
It meant the birth of a spirit that was willing to rise above and go beyond the strictures of culture and customs, to journey beyond the known world and find new ones. Too often, those on the Right define the Left as a set of people. They look at today’s idiot ‘leftists’ and don’t want to have anything to do with them. This is understandable as PC academics, Antifa scum, and Homomaniacs are a bunch of tards or snakes. But Leftism is also a spirit, and it can be used by anyone. It is the spirit of revolution, the spark of inspiration. It is the will to break free of the status quo, to conceive of new paradigms. Granted, everything Left and Worthy becomes the New Right. The Right preserves what is accepted as true and worthy. So, when a proto-leftist scientist like Galileo arrived on the scene, the forces of the right sought to preserve the Official Truth of Geo-centrism from the heresy of Heliocentrism. But once Heliocentrism was proved beyond a doubt, that became the New Official Truth, the new Rightism. Rightism plays a noble role as the guardian of the Established Truth. The problem is what is deemed to be the Truth could prove to be wrong. When a new paradigm appears that appears to be irrefutable and threatening to the existing paradigm, the Right undergoes something like the Five Stages of Grief: Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, and Acceptance. Of course, there are cases where the new paradigm that seems to be true actually turns out to be totally false. Only a leftist-fetishist falls into the trap of thinking that something New must have more value simply because it’s novel or 'radical'. At any rate, Rightism is like the championship in boxing. The reigning champion will do everything to remain king of the hill. He will try to knock out all challengers. He is the well-established top dog. The would-be challengers are like the Left. Each challenger claims he is better than the current champion and should take the belt. But he has to prove himself in the ring. If he loses, his ‘leftist’ contention proved to be false. The reigning champion is indeed The Truth. But suppose a challenger defeats the champion. Then, the ‘left’ wins over the ‘right’, but in being the new champion, what was the ‘left’ becomes the ‘right’, the new reigning Truth of Power. Thus, the spirit of the left and the strength of the right aren’t merely opposites but complementary and interchangeable. We must unite leftist spirit with rightist strength. Furthermore, so-called Rightists must understand that so much of creativity and innovation aren’t merely the product of tradition, practice, and experience but of the spark, vitality, and excitement. Genius intuitively recognizes genius. Brilliance instantly picks up the signals. Why do some kids pick up the art of chess right away? Almost instantly, they become better chess players than adults who’ve practiced at the game for many years. Why is it that young person with limited experience with music shows knack for musical genius right away and begins to compose music more remarkable than works by veterans who’ve worked at music all their lives? It’s like the spark from two flint stones can start a fire with new pile of wood. A crusty conservative might say a pile of burned woods and ashes are better for fire-making because they’ve been through the experience of burning. But maybe they are burnt out and spent. And even if they’re not and still have some burning-material left, it will not light up without the spark. A new pile of woods have no experience of burning, but it can be lit with the spark. So much of innovation and ingenuity of expression is the result of a creative spirit that is alive in certain individuals than the product of tradition or experience. Some people just pick it up right away. They have an inner-spirit that clicks with kindred spirits of something they come in contact with. Orson Welles picked up the spirit of Shakespeare instantly and became the boldest director of Shakespearian plays in America. And upon embarking on cinema, he picked up on its tricks and possibilities right away. Of course, people without the gift of genius can become pretty good at something over long yrs of practice. Clint Eastwood never showed spark of genius as a film-maker but through perseverance and practice became an impressive craftsman. There is something to be said for that kind of achievement. But the truly amazing breakthroughs are the result of genius, and it is about the spirit that can’t be understood in terms of tradition. Of course, tradition is important in providing the material for which the genius can apply his spark. If there had been no tradition of classical music, Mozart and Beethoven couldn’t have become innovative masters in the field. But genius is really a meeting of spirits than the tradition of knowledge. A kid with natural musical talent, upon listening to a few works of classical music, feels the spirit and senses the essence of the music even though his knowledge of history and theory of music is lacking. The problem of the Right is its over-emphasis on tradition blinds it to the spirited aspect of genius and creativity that is mercurial, slippery, and intangible. It’s like we can see lamps and appliances, but we can’t see the electricity that runs through them. Conservative prefer hard, solid, and tangible things over the spirited-realm of ideas, expressions, and speculation. As they say, Conservatives tend to be Apollonian than Mercurian or Dionysian. And this is also why the Right prefers something like monarchy or inheritance of power. It is more Apollonian in transferring power from one known physical entity to another. Father to son who grows into father who passes it down to his son and so on. Thus, power takes on a tangible characteristic. Power is about blood and connection than about something as elusive as intelligence, cunning, ingenuity, brilliance, and strategy. The rise of modernity came to favor the power of spiritedness: Those who were most ingenious in making money, verbal acumen, theoretical brilliance, inventing new products, marketing new ideas, and etc. This could be bewildering as the Power seems to have no sure center or meaning. The Right prefers to see power situated within tangible objects. So, if there is a lit lamp, the power is associated with the lamp itself. But there is another way to conceive of power, and it is to focus on the electricity that flows in and out. It can light the lamp but also other lamps. Or its power can be denied to the lamp that was once lit. Or it can choose to light appliances and gadgets that are not lamps. Jewish power is like electricity. Rather than being fixed with one object or nation, it flows everywhere and spreads its juice all over the world. Its power rests in penetrating the grids and objects of all places but also in the threat of denying its service to those places. Jewish Power is leftist in the sense that it is ‘spirited’ than ‘mattered’. One place where Jewish power is ‘mattered’ and rightist is in Israel.
