It’s customary in media and political discourse to label just about anything as ‘nazi’ and anyone as ‘Hitler’. Of course, those with more influence and reach(based on money and the misconceived notion of prestige money can buy) have more sway in their various hitlerantics and nazisteria. ‘Hitler’ and ‘Nazi’ have become metaphors in the art of political demonology, used by all sides as the mud of choice. If opposing sides in battle once invoked “God on our side”, adversaries today are more likely to cry “Hitler on their side”. No wonder then the so-called West is fighting Putin the Putler, and Russian ‘special operations’ in Ukraine are about ‘De-Nazification’. While Vladimir Putin is correct about sub-nazi elements in Ukraine, surely he knows the real power is with Jewish globalist supremacists. Even as Russia struggles to wrest itself free from (((Western))) control, it resorts to the established tropes of discourse: The Hunt for Nazis everywhere, as if everyone is a Simon Wiesenthal.
Given Russia’s titanic role in World War II and decisive crushing of Nazi Germany(and its wild exaggerations about what happened at Auschwitz — during the Cold War when Poland was under Soviet Occupation, the official victim count was four million), its great national myth is one of eternal heroism against evil fascists and Nazis, the mass-murderers of innocent Jews as well as noble Russians. So, in keeping with Russia’s self-image as Nazi-dragon-slayer and to win Western hearts and minds, Putin spoke of smoking out the ‘nazis’ from their cubbyholes while saying nothing of the Jewish Hand behind the recent mess in Ukraine. (Not that this has earned Russia any favors from most in the Jewish-controlled West. The highest ‘good’ among Jews is “Is it good for Jewish Power”, i.e. “Never Again” translates in practice as “Always More Power”. So, while Jews are all for people screaming against ‘nazis’ in service to Jewish-favored agendas, nothing aggrieves them more than when Anti-Nazism is used as justification for agendas that counter Jewish Supremacist interests. Just like the Jewish God is a very jealous God, Jews are very jealous about the Nazi thing, which is to be used only in service to Jewish Power. No matter how sincere, idealistic, or courageous one is in his Anti-Nazism, he will be disfavored, even hated, if his position is deemed hostile to Jewish interests. In the current conflict, Putin declared war on ‘Nazis’ in Ukraine who just happen to be useful to Jewish Power, and this is intolerable because Jewish Supremacism > Fighting Nazis. If favoring Nazis is advantageous to Jewish Supremacist interests, Jews will be pro-nazi, as in current Ukraine. So, Anti-Nazism is like Free Speech and Terrorism as far as Jewish Supremacists are concerned. For all their talk of defending free speech and dreading Islamic terrorism, Jews attack free speech that undermines Jewish Power and support terrorism that is useful to Israel. From a purely realpolitik view of things, this should be obvious, but given all the ink Jews have spilled on the pure evil of Nazism, it is rather jarring to observe them take side, even blatantly, with Nazi-like elements in Ukraine. As far as Jewish Power is concerned, Russia is the prize whale while Ukro-Nazism is merely a pesky shark of no global consequence and, in the meantime, useful to set loose on Russians.)
If Russians are smart(and have a pair of cojones), they should make a big stink of their experience in the 1990s, which if aired could have epic consequences on the World Stage. After all, a nation can be exploited and plundered, in effect utterly devastated, without war. It happened to Weimar Germany. It happened to the American Middle Class in recent years, with the top 1% having more wealth than the entire middle class. But Russia in the 1990s was a true gangster paradise, a hell on earth, and without war, at least in the conventional sense with tanks and bombs. It was led by think tanks and the weapons of finance. The economy was raped, the masses driven to destitution, the political process utterly corrupted, and the media used as propaganda tool of Jewish globalists with zero concern for the Russian folks.
The fact that Russia managed to rebound at least halfway from that period of economic blitzkrieg should serve as basis for a great historical narrative, somewhat comparable to the Great Patriotic War when Russia finally managed to push back against the German juggernaut. In both cases, the motherland was nearly reduced to slave or whore. Had Germans prevailed in World War II, Russians would have been reduced to helots. Had Jews prevailed, Russians would have been reduced to a race of soul-slaves, already the case with Anglos and Western European cucksters whose entire lives revolve around the ‘rules-based order’ of “Jews say, goyim obey”.
As the struggle against Germany became the stuff of collective memory, a galvanizing myth, the struggle against the Jewish Rape of Russia should is also deserving of proper recognition and remembrance. An official holiday, day of prayer, and/or teachable lesson about how the nation was nearly conquered by a bunch of decrepit globalists who look upon Russian folks as untermensch. Russia should commemorate the defense of motherland not only from Napoleon and especially Hitler but from Jewish Globalists.
There’s no need to denigrate all Jews in the remembrance of the Rape of Russia, no more than the Great Patriotic War obliges condemnation of everything German. No need to be like Jews who condemn Germans for all eternity for Holocaust Guilt. Ironically, Jews decry the logic of ‘antisemitism’ that blames all Jews for all time for what some Jews did(or might have done), but they apply that very logic on Germans who are deemed BORN GUILTY(and also on White Americans, stained forever with the guilt of ‘racism’ and ‘Jim Crow’ upon birth, furthermore regardless of the fact that many more white Americans have no roots in the Deep South and/or arrived as immigrants after the Civil War). Russia needs more National Narratives, especially ones based on truth. Rape of Russia really did happen(and will happen again if Russians lose their vigilance), and the top villains were Jews. Sadly, in the Empire of Lies, the biggest narratives are based on frauds such as BLM that would have us believe that blacks are being mass-murdered by white cops.
The reason why so many in the West are shocked, yes shocked, by recent events is they’ve no prior knowledge of pro-Russian Narratives. Narratives matter because they provide context, rightly or wrongly. Our response to stimuli operates on the same principle, i.e. as the mind cannot process everything all at once, new stimuli are placed within recalls of familiar impressions. Thus, we are able to focus on what is new or different within a sense of continuity. Same goes for history. Consider the moral mileage Jews got out of the Holocaust Narrative on the Israel-Palestinian issue. Because so many people in the West were made familiar with the Jewish Narrative(whereas ignorant of the Palestinian one), they were likely to see the creation of Israel(or the eradication of Palestine) as ‘Jewish refugees fleeing from antisemitism and seeking a safe haven, a nation of their own’ than as the destruction of Palestine by Jewish immigrant-invaders who’d long been planning to colonize and takeover, indeed as early as the late 19th century.
When Jews commit acts of violence, the Narrative reinforces the view that Jews are merely reacting in kind to unwarranted terrorism by the Arabs — notice MUNICH by Tony Kushner & Steven Spielberg frames the violence between Jews and Arabs within the narrative of Arabs initiating the slaughter at the 1972 Olympics than Jews destroying Palestine in 1948. Given the Jewish control of dominant narratives, Arab violence is usually regarded as ‘terrorism’ by most Americans who are unfamiliar with the Nakba. Indeed, recent events in Syria would have been inconceivable without Jewish Exceptionalist control over the minds of the West. (When Jews pontificate about ‘American Exceptionalism’, they really mean all Americans must regard Jews and Israel as exceptionally awesome in every way. If indeed American Exceptionalism is about equal justice for all, people would be calling for equal treatment of Jews and Palestinians as a matter of US foreign policy.) Given the power of narratives, it’s too bad Russians didn’t forge a powerful(and inspiring) chronicle of its resurrection from near-death in the 1990s. In its eagerness for acceptance into the Western ‘rules-based order’ and abject fear of Jewish Power, Russia chose not to ruffle the feathers with a powerful narrative on the dark side of Jewish globalism, thereby missing an opportunity to project a powerful resistance-and-revival narrative for international consumption.
Likewise, Ukrainians, no less eager for Western approval, have been mostly silent(at least on the international stage) on the role of Jewish Bolsheviks in the Great Famine(and how World Jewry acted in concert to hide the great horror, as was certainly the case with the New York Times, whose Walter Duranty won the Nobel Prize for willfully false reporting). If the Rape of Russia had been made one of the central narratives, brought up over and over as part of the World Discourse, more people would have understood the true origins of the Ukrainian Crisis: Another case of Jews exploiting and manipulating divisions among Slavs to gain power over them. While wars are most often memorialized for obvious reasons, great events that inspire and shape the future need not be wars. After all, while most American Narratives are centered around wars — Revolutionary War, Civil War, World War II, aka ‘The Good War’, and etc. — , one could argue that the Civil Rights Movement has come to loom larger than all of them combined. Likewise, a Resurrection Narrative could be spun to make Russian folks(and indeed the world community) appreciate the transformation and partial revival since the hellish 1990s despite the ceaseless adversity and antagonism from abroad, especially the US that, since the end of the Cold War, truly became an Evil Empire of deceit and hubris.
But because Russians officially remained silent(at least before the World Community) about what had happened in the 1990s and tied none of it to Jewish Globalism, most people in the West lack the proper context as to why tensions in the region grew to where they are at now, i.e. Jews never gave up trying to subvert and take over Russia like they’d done already with the Anglsophere and EU. (One thing for sure, if a bunch of goyim entered Israel or New York and bled dry the Jewish community, Jews would never stop talking about it. Notice Jews never stopped talking about pogroms despite their revenge 1000x over against Russians and the Orthodox Church in the Bolshevik Era. And Jews never shut up about the McCarthy Era and ‘Red Scare’ despite having done far worse in blacklisting and destroying countless others, like BDS movement. Russian stoicism about the 1990s may be admirable on some level, but the sad fact is the complainers get heard whereas stone-faced stoics never do. What did American Indians ever get by being like the ‘Big Dumb Indian’ in ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO’S NEST? Jewish Globalists are inveterate & shameless liars and must be hammered with the truth. Never let Jews get away with any lie. The current policy of the West is driven more by Jewish lies than anything resembling truth. Most importantly, the lies must not only be called out but be associated with Jewish Power as the source-culprit.) Putin and those around him may be decent managers, but they’ve lacked the balls to say it like it really is. If things continue this way, Russia needs a coup d’etat whereby Pavel Craig Robertsky the Terrible is put in power to purge the nation of all dumbshitsky globalists and traitors, to be replaced by robust leadership. Putin may have done some good things, but the Russian folks deserve better.
Given recent events, actual vs reported, one can’t help but notice the discrepancy between truth and propaganda. If someone fifty years from now were to randomly peruse the current media-scape, endless lies could mislead him into believing the Russian Menace was behind Trump’s 2016 election and was the sole reason for the war in Ukraine. Given all the lies that fed misperceptions that led to wars and tragedies in the 20th century, one would think humanity would have evolved toward something saner, but no. In the current climate of Jew Worship, Globohomo-mania, Diversity fetish, BLM lunacies, Russyteria, and the like, no use expecting a people who can’t even define ‘woman’ to process and understand anything resembling the truth. Honesty and integrity have effectively been expurgated in the West.
The general quality of journalism appears to have been degraded since the 1970s. This may seem odd given the professionalization of the field, with many more journalists with academic credentials than in the past. Part of the reason owes to the shift in tone. As culture became more infantilized and shameless, the general tenor of the media(and the academia) got trashier. Colleges now teach courses on crude or deviant subjects(often dumbed down in consideration of ‘minorities’ or fetishized for the freaks or queers), and many journalists are products of such education and culture; even if they stick to conventional fields of study under sound professors, they are affected by prevailing attitudes and ‘values’. While leftist ideologies(always prevalent in journalism) could be wrong-headed, they imbued adherents with a degree of logic and principles. But with the fading of leftist ideology in favor of neo-idolatry(mainly of homos and blacks), the media became quasi-theocratic in tone. (The mendacity of popular culture made things worse. For those on the ground, such as policemen who deal with scummy elements night and day, it’s common knowledge more blacks end up in jail because they commit more crime. And those who know blacks up close understand there are differences among races other than skin color. But such reality isn’t represented in entertainment that not only overlooks the truths of black criminality and pathology but portrays blacks as nobler-hearted defenders of justice against evil, usually embodied by white males as the dragon to slay — in reality, white men defend their women from black thugs, but in popular culture noble black men defend white damsels from evil white males, therefore gaining the sexual favors of white girls; such is Jewish Social Logic mandated across movies and TV shows. Notion of racial equality between blacks and non-blacks is a thing of the past as blacks are now deemed worthier than non-blacks in every way, i.e. ‘racism’ now means failing to acknowledge the sanctity of blacks, how they deserve to be above the law. Given popular impression of reality relies more on entertainment than the news, which is hardly better, no wonder many Americans were suckered into supporting BLM. They didn’t see George Floyd as typical of his kind, a black career thug, and instead grafted the idolatry of the Noble Negro or Awesome Black on the fool overdosed on Fentanyl.)
No less important, liberalism lost out to Jewish tribalism among Jews and goyim alike. When Jews were ascendant and faced with censoriousness from conservative forces, they appreciated the value of liberalism and its defense of liberties, free speech, and tolerance: Let all sides say their say, let the chips fall where they may. In the free speech atmosphere of the 1970s, a controversial figure like David Duke could be invited to give speeches and debate the student body. Such is now unthinkable, what with a milquetoast figure like Charles Murray almost getting mauled at an elite college.
Why did liberalism fail? One reason was Jews became more fixated on control than liberty as they gained in power. As long as Anglo-Americans were at the top, Jews could pose as adversarial underdogs despite all their wealth and networks. But as top dogs(with Wasps as their lapdogs), they became the natural target of those speaking-truth-to-power, and so, free speech became a liability, whereupon Jewish Power disingenuously pushed for censorship of ‘hate speech’ in the name of protecting vulnerable groups from ‘white supremacists’ when, in truth, it was to silence criticism of Jews as the new ruling elites. If Jews are about protecting the weak from the powerful, why have they targeted the BDS movement more than anything? Last I checked, Palestinians are among the poorest and weakest people on Earth oppressed and terrorized by Israel, the regional superpower showered with endless favors and billions from the US.
Jewish War on Free Speech went bareknuckle after 2016 when it was agreed that free and open debate on the internet tipped the balance in favor of Donald Trump. So, Jewish Power, despite calling itself ‘liberal’, went all in to control, suppress, and block certain personalities and kinds of speech(even from accredited professionals). The very people who’d been endlessly bitching about evil Joe McCarthy went totally hysterical about Russia-Russia-Russia. If McCarthy was at least half-right, the Russysterics were totally wrong and, worse, knew it but lied just the same; but then, this is a country where Joe Biden’s obvious corruption in Ukraine was shielded, whereas Trump was impeached for prying into it.
Power is almost always about ‘whose side’ than ‘what truth’.
The demise of liberalism also owes to the rise of Political Correctness that eventually metastasized into the monstrous cancer that is now called ‘wokeness’. If PC got its start by trying to discourage certain kinds of speech, the goal of ‘wokeness’ is to compel people to mouth the same slogans(because… ‘silence is violence’). If PC was about being ‘nice’ so as not to offend, ‘wokeness’ is about being rude as part of the offensive.
Thus, the culture of academia went from the defense of free speech and appreciation of controversy to the insistence on speech codes and then institutionalization of consensus whereby all must agree that certain things are good while others are bad, without question or debate.
And don’t expect to find any principle in the vanguard of the Tridolatry of Ziogromo(Zionism-Negro-Homo). If you were to chant the mantras about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’, you better not ask why Biden’s administration is disproportionately Jewish(to say the least) and why powerful institutions/industries make no effort to ‘include’ the concerns of Palestinians. Why no promotion of PLM or Palestinian Lives Matter and why no Hollywood movies about Nakba and Jewish Globalist Rape of Russia?
So, while you’re urged to chant ‘woke’ mantras, you better not probe as to their consistency in application and/or critique, like “If concentration of power and privilege among one group at the expense of others is bad, why do we tolerate so much accumulation of wealth and control among Jews, and why does US foreign policy pretend as if Palestinian and Syrian victims don’t exist?” While the Jewish-controlled media have turned a blind eye to real victims of the Syrian War, they commend all Americans to get worked up over fake ‘victims’ choreographed by globo-propaganda.
Given this is the cultural climate in which Millennials grew up, is anyone surprised that they make up many of most infantile, insane, and/or insipid journalists? Because they were acculturated in a world of constant moral panic — “Look, a ‘racist’, the KKK at Oberlin, white frat rape at UVA, a ‘homophobe’, a ‘transphobe’, #MeToo and ‘Muh Pussy Hat’, ‘Blacks Lives Matter’(cuz white cops are murdering millions of blacks every year!!), “Putin’s puppet”(because Rachel Maddow says there’s a Russian under every bed), “my pronouns”, and etc. — , their emotions outrun their rational faculties, which are cluttered with PC gobbledygook at any rate. The stupidest and most shallow members of society deem themselves the most conscientious because they’ve learned to EMOTE rapturously about the correct idols.
Such thinking extends to so-called ‘conservatives’ like Amy Coney Barrett. This silly twad not only adopted a black child — “I’m not racist because I got a black kid” — but apparently wept over George Floyd. Did she ever shed a tear, even a crocodile one, over all the peoples killed by the US empire and Israel in Palestine, Syria, Libya, or Donbass? Did she ever get all mushy about the countless victims of black thugs and criminals? Of course not. But her stupid self turned crybaby over George Floyd who almost certainly died of drug overdose.
Another reason for the degradation of culture owes to the fusion of commercialism and agitprop. While stories have often been used for political ends in art and popular culture, there was a clear dividing line between the serious and the unserious. In other words, while a serious TV series like ROOTS addressed the issue of slavery and racial oppression, no one expected anything grave, serious, meaningful, or enlightening from random TV commercials, magazine ads, Archie Comic books, and the like. As for childhood, it was about innocence and having fun and learning basic skills. It was deemed the last refuge of scoundrels to politicize kids who don’t know any better, indeed can be made to believe in Santa and the Tooth Fairy — such ‘brainwashing’ was associated with Nazi Germany, Communism, or Jesus Freaks. But over the years, even stupid kiddie cartoons and dumb ads are heavily laden with message and agenda. And sex education, once controversial even for middle schoolers, has not only permeated down to the pre-school level but push porny instructions that would have appalled adults not so long ago. And ‘woke’ parents weaponize their kids into foul-mouthed brats giving the middle finger and dropping F-bombs on Youtube videos; and if some adopt black babies as ‘virtue symbols’, others dream of turning their kid tranny(with drugs and surgery) to show off one’s magic ‘rainbow’ child to their equally deluded peers.
Millennials were the first generation to grow up under this regimen(and its many times worse for ‘zoomers’, 40% of whom consider themselves LGBTQXYZ), and this accounts for their inability to distinguish between serious and unserious because even the most trivial and frivolous cultural product is now loaded with the ‘message’. Hardly surprising then that the White House would recruit TikTokers to serve as ‘influencers’ on Ukraine. The fusion of silly and serious, resulting in the ‘sillious’ mentality, affects journalism too, which is now full of simpering dolts.
The demise of true liberalism has led to the rise of neo-idolatry, which makes critical thinking virtually impossible. Free/critical thinking in the skeptical-secularist sense is difficult when socio-political taboos dictate silence on certain matters, and indeed, there was a time when Liberalism, represented by groups like ACLU and the rationalist tradition, made this very point. But precisely because liberalism is a principle than a conviction, it tends to bend under pressure of concentrated passion, especially if the passion strikes a chord with liberal sentiment. Liberalism successfully fended off challenges from impassioned Evangelicals and the like because such folks were regarded as arch-conservative and anti-liberal. In contrast, liberal principles were weakened by partiality to certain causes(and even felt guilty and apologetic when it failed to throw its full weight, in the name of fairness or objectivity, on the side of the Good against the Bad).
Liberalism, centered on civil liberties, individual freedom, and tolerance, championed the rights of blacks, homosexuals, and other minorities/deviants of society who were denied basic rights. In doing so, it overlooked the danger of tyranny rising from within its own ranks. Accustomed to regarding blacks and homos(and the like) as marginalized minorities denied basic human rights, Liberalism was blind to the anti-liberal strains within black politics and homo sensibility. In truth, blacks weren’t content with equal rights under the law and craved favoritism, adulation, and idolatry; and homos, by their very nature, were prone to be vain, narcissistic, bitchy, hissy, and demanding. They weren’t satisfied with the same basic rights as everyone else and soon enough insisted on being favored, celebrated, and promoted uber alles. Homo-Promo is intrinsic to Globo-Homo. In other words, even as homos and trannies demanded full rights and total freedom to express themselves any way they wished, they wanted their critics and opponents to be silenced and suppressed on grounds that the “debate has been settled, that’s that, and you better agree or be ‘canceled’.”
Liberalism was fully aware of the dangers of conservative authoritarianism, majoritarianism, religious traditionalism, and etc., as they’d been the historical enemies of liberalism. But, Liberalism didn’t imagine that the marginalized elements of society, whom it protected and championed, could grow to such power as to undermine the principles of liberalism itself. Liberalism failed to understand the ‘radical will’ of certain groups and agendas. While most groups and interests are content with basic equality and parity — Greek-Americans, Polish-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Russian-Americans, Iranian-Americans, and etc. aren’t demanding any special privileges and are satisfied with basic rights — , certain groups, ideas, and causes are inherently aggressive, expansive, and/or virulent. It’s like not all organisms are alike. There’s a difference between growing a rose in your house and letting loose a certain strain of bacteria. Rose will remain in the pot, whereas the bacteria will spread all over and infect everything. Among mammals, rodents pose a special threat. Liberalism was right about the dangers of Christianity(and Islam) as it has been, by nature, a highly aggressive and conversionary religion seeking to take over all souls around the world. But, Liberalism apparently forgot that Christianity too had once been a marginalized and suppressed movement. Once Christians were protected by the Roman authorities, they were no longer content to freely practice their Faith and set about converting everyone and destroying all other faiths.
While blackness and homosexuality aren’t creeds, ideologies, or religions, black nature is more aggressive than most racial natures, and homosexuality is characterized by penchant for fussy-wussy bitchy-witchy hissy-wissiness. Liberalism was correct as principle to champion the basic rights of blacks and homos but asleep at the wheel or weak in the knees when those groups began to make demands that overstepped the bounds of liberalism, i.e. they wanted their egos stoked and their opponents, enemies, and critics silenced. At that point, Liberalism should have sternly reprimanded blacks and homos that they too must abide by liberal principles but failed to do so, out of either sentimentality, fear, or corruption. As more and more concessions were made to blacks and homos, they became idolized, and once something gains sacral status, it enters the realm of taboo and is beyond rational discourse. Try to discuss, in the most level-headed and rational way, the problem of black crime and George Floyd’s life as a career criminal, and the result is the ‘wokesters’ will be triggered and throw tantrums. Try to make an objective case as to why homo fecal-penetration doesn’t qualify as real sex, and the result is the globo-homo community will foam at the mouth and do everything in their power to have you ‘canceled’. Liberalism, which started with the proposition that marginalized groups should be allowed to speak and be heard, ended up with the position that those groups should silence voices they don’t like.
Some might argue that this is the natural life cycle of liberalism, but others would argue that it didn’t have to be this way. Liberalism could have stood by its guns and demanded that all groups be allowed to say their say without being ‘canceled’ by the powers-that-be(in the name of ‘protected’ groups). So, why did liberalism end up betraying itself? The Jewish Factor was most instrumental. Jews, like blacks and homos, have a tendency toward egotism, collective passion, vanity, megalomania, avarice, and aggression. They too aren’t satisfied with ‘enough’, the stuff of basic rights. Many Jews are insatiable and want to have more, indeed they feel they deserve more as the Chosen People, the smarter people, the pushier people. Or as the uniquely victimized people who deserve reparations forever from all the world. If liberalism especially indulged blacks and homos, it was in large measure due to its having fallen into Jewish control, a fatal outcome for liberalism. After all, in the over-indulgence of blacks and homos, there remains the implication that liberalism can be redirected back to its principled roots, just like a parent can stop spoiling his children if he so makes up his mind.
But, once liberalism fell into Jewish hands, it simply became an instrument of Tribal Supremacist Agenda. (There are outliers to be sure. Glenn Greenwald is Jewish AND Homosexual but genuinely committed to liberal freedoms and civil liberties.) Of course, Jews played up their own history of marginalization, discrimination, and even extermination(under the Nazis) to justify their Kafkaesque abuses of liberalism. Jews had long experienced hostility and come under suspicion from the Christian Majority, and there were anti-semitic laws and the like. Naturally, Jews-as-minorities gravitated to liberalism as a guarantor of their basic rights, and liberalism regarded Jews with a measure of sympathy.
But, like blacks and homos, Jews wanted so much more than equality or parity. They wanted power, then total power, and control, then total control. So, even as they squeezed liberalism for all it was worth to defend their own liberties, freedom, and reputation, they increasingly perverted and distorted it to deny the same rights and freedoms to other groups deemed hostile, critical, or threatening(even if only potentially) to Jews. Jews argued that, as precious as free speech is, some groups are under such threat of dehumanization and violence that they need special protection from the majority. (Never mind that, as examples of British Imperial rule over Indian, Turkic rule across the Ottoman Empire, and Anglo-Boer-Jewish rule over blacks in South Africa amply demonstrate, minorities have often been the oppressors of majorities throughout history.)
As Jews grew in power and took over as the new ruling elites of the West, their twist on Liberal Logic was more a means to shield supremacist power on top from challenge from below than to protect weak groups on the bottom from violence from the top or the unruly majority. Today, liberalism is essentially dead or has been rendered ineffective as certain groups are now so idolized and certain narratives so sacralized that it’s virtually impossible to speak honestly and rationally about them lest one be ‘canceled’ many times worse than in the days of HUAC and Joe McCarthy, but then, Jews are perfectly fine with this because, whereas many Jewish radicals were persecuted during the ‘Red Scare’, it’s the Jews who now call the shots on who gets destroyed. It’s like Jews don’t care about ethnic oppression as long as Jews get to do it to Palestinians; it’s wrong if it’s ‘anti-semitic’ but perfectly fine when ‘anti-Arabic’ at the hands of Zionists.
One cannot speak the truth about BLM without getting ‘canceled’. Charles Murray laments that even the National Review refused to review his book on race, blacks, and crime. And, if it’s mandatory to celebrate and revere certain groups and narratives, it’s no less mandatory to hate and revile others, especially ‘whiteness’ and Russia(and increasingly China). Whiteness is bad, period, just like blackness is good, period. It’s wrong to say there’s good whiteness and bad whiteness; no, whiteness itself is bad and must go. And anti-Russia nuttery is now such that it isn’t enough to hate Putin and the current Russian folks. One must also rebuke and ‘cancel’ past Russian greats in arts, literature, science, and technology. Yuri Gagarin has been ‘canceled’. Funny that he was okay, someone to be honored, when the Soviet Union, the system responsible for mass killings and totalitarian tyranny, was around, but he is to be posthumously canceled because current Russia isn’t onboard with Jewish supremo-globo-homo.
The nature of such lunacy comes into focus only if we take into account the Jewish control and perversion of ‘liberalism’. The contradictions of Jewish Liberalism have long been problematic as it was at once committed to liberalizing Western Society and strengthening Jewish consciousness. Why would a people who do most to liberalize a society insist on the most stringent form of tribalism(and supremacism)? It comes down to the question of “principle or instrument?” It’s like there are sincere Christians who live the Christian Life and those who merely use the Faith to gain influence. Same goes for liberalism or any other creed. Some stick by principles while others cynically exploit it for advantage.
When Jews were ascendant and benefited from liberties and rights, they appreciated the value of liberalism. Certain Jews in groups like ACLU really seemed committed to liberal principles. But, there were also the (Leo)Straussians and (Herbert)Marcusians for whom any ideal or principle was merely a tool of power and control. Over time, the stated ideologies of the Straussians and Marcusians faded, and both sides converged into the neo-con/neo-lib Jewish Supremacist worldview that today invokes notions such as ‘liberal democracy’, ‘free enterprise’, and ‘human rights’, along with diversity-inclusion-equity, in the most cynical way. Jews corrupt and manipulate the tenets of universal liberalism to serve Jewish tribal supremacism.
However, the reason for this requires some explanation. It’s not a simple case of universalism vs particularism or integrity of ideals vs tribal loyalty. Whereas most tribal loyalties are about blood, kinfolk, ethnicity, or nationality, Jewishness amounts to something more. It is a fusion of tribalism with spirituality; it is a meditated form of tribal identity, much like Brahminism is about the unity of caste with the cosmic way. Thus, if modern secular cosmopolitanism renders basic tribalism as crude, primitive, and atavistic, it doesn’t have the same impact on Jewishness that isn’t only about blood but spiritual vision and fusion of historical narrative and moral laws. Thus, Jews regard Jewishness not merely as a matter of blood bond or flag-waving but a way of mentally organizing and interpreting mankind and history; it constitutes a worldview. So, Jews don’t feel they are betraying higher principles in favor of tribal power. They believe that the thing they’re most loyal to, Jewishness, is the highest principle of all time, based on the Covenant, if not with God(whom most Jews no longer believe in), then with biology, history, and destiny, i.e. among all the human groups, Jews are most godlike and thereby ideally positioned to push humanity to the new frontier, as Yuval Harari has said.
Or, perhaps Jewish elites and goy peers believe liberalism is too precious to be wasted on the people. Like aristocratic monopoly on weaponry, perhaps liberalist thinkers now believe true liberalism is suited only for the elites who know how to weight and handle complex, difficult, and thorny issues, whereas the less intelligent, temperate, and educated are likely to misuse freedom and misinterpret data, losing sight of the bigger picture. Furthermore, mass liberalism, even if intelligently utilized, can be problematic in fostering endless debates and divisions that prevent consensus necessary to push an agenda. Therefore, true liberalism ideally should be reserved for the inner-circle, or so the elites seem to believe.
Indeed, it is precisely why Project Veritas has infuriated so many elite liberals who speak differently in private than in their professional or official capacity. In private, they resemble true liberals open to consideration from all angles, even in criticism of their own side, whereas they present a different face to the public, that of Corporate Liberalism. Within their inner sanctum, they practice controversial-liberalism, the true kind, but push consensus-liberalism out in the open, which is dumbed down and doctrinaire, mainly purposed to rally the less intelligent and informed minions who deem themselves uh-duh ‘progressive’. For those in the inner circle, there is a degree of independent liberalism, but the masses must do with Guided Liberalism, premised on the notion that they’re too dumb to think and make sense of the world for themselves and therefore must be nudged to adopt the Official Line of the Current Year.
It’s as if elite liberals gave up on the Enlightenment Ideal that most people, with proper education and cultivation, could be more-or-less equal in intelligence, knowledge, logic, critical thought, and civic sense. After over a century of mass education and mass communication, many more people have been educated but the mass by and large remain childish, gullible, and idiotic. Such realization feeds the conceit that true liberalism should only be for those with the proper faculties of rationality, skepticism, judiciousness, and criticality, as well as a good dose of cynicism grounded in realism. (It remains a conceit because the elites are deluded that THEY know better, especially to rule us.)
History has shown that intelligence, rationalism, skepticism, curiosity, empathy, and objectivity cannot be inculcated on the mass level even with lavishly funded public education. Yet, because the modern world is founded on promises of democracy and equality, the people must nevertheless be persuaded that they are indeed living in the Free World, and this requires many layers of deception. The end result is the several tiers of liberalism. There is true liberalism, still practiced behind closed doors among insiders and initiates. Then, there is professional liberalism, the kind one finds in the pages of the New York Times. It is crafted to sound intelligent and critical but really functions to maintain the Overton Window of acceptable discourse, beyond which dissident or opposing ideas are impugned as ‘discredited’ or ‘debunked'(mostly on the basis of circular logic among people who agree with one another, or “I said what he said, and he said what I said, and that makes it true.”) As a true liberal within the inner circle, someone like David Reich can be more forthright about race and group differences but, when speaking with the NYT and the like, must spin the findings as being in accordance with official dogma… even when they really aren’t at the scientific level.
Professional Liberalism isn’t true liberalism as it’s more about shaping opinions and reinforcing truisms but has hallmarks of true liberalism in its upper-middlebrow engagement with the arts, culture, history, and science. And then, there is Mass Liberalism that has nothing to do with true liberalism. It is on the childish level of Sesame Streets and amounts to little more than mouthing platitudes and shouting slogans disseminated through TV news, celebrities, cultural commissars, and politicians, e.g. exhortations to ‘trust the science’ among those who know little or nothing about science or endless chants of ‘Black Lives Matter’ among those who know nothing about blacks, genetics, and crime. Such goes by the label of ‘liberalism’ because it adheres to the agenda favored by so-called Liberal Elites, but there is nothing liberal in the thinking process or tone of discussion as there’s no room for heterodoxy. You either bark along like dogs or are barked at into submission.
It’s worth noting, just because elite liberals practice true liberalism behind closed doors, it doesn’t mean they are committed to truth and integrity based on honest discussion and critical examination of the facts. The case of NYT editor Matthew Rosenberg, whose private conversations were exposed by Project Veritas, should leave no doubt as to elite liberal mentality. Rosenberg privately admitted that the 1/6 event was hardly a big deal and, yes, FBI informants were all over the place. In the mode of true liberalism, he was more than willing to speak the truth in what he deemed to be private space. But, he stood by the official line at the NYT and publicly insisted FBI was not involved and that it was indeed AN INSURRECTION, almost the end of the Republic! So, when elite liberals practice true liberalism among themselves, it’s more a matter of privilege than principle. They value their own space in which they practice free speech and discuss matters candidly, but their priority is power, and if the lie serves their agenda, they go with the lie every time. It’s sort of like the levels of freedom in George Orwell’s 1984. Wherever Winston Smith goes, there is Big Brother’s eyes following him, with nary a place without Big Brother’s near-omnipotent gaze. But, Winston Smith realizes that in the office of O’Brien(member of the Inner Party), the tele-screen with Big Brother need not always be on. O’Brien has the privilege of turning it off.
Hitler, Putin, and Zelensky, a False Start
Given recent events in Ukraine and the (((Western))) news coverage, Putin’s characterization of the West as an ’empire of lies’ rings true. Not that Russia is a fount of truth, but its vision of Russian interests and limitations functions within a semblance of reality and sanity, recognizable to anyone whose mind hasn’t been rotted by the Empire of Lies. Russia has a sense of its own place in the world and navigates the global waters on those terms. It is not seeking hegemony, not even over Eastern Europe which the Soviet Empire relinquished at the end of the Cold War. Russia, like any sovereign nation, has its own interests, and as a major regional power, is mindful of its sphere of influence. Russia has been upfront about its basic needs and interests, seeking to resolve them through negotiation. For example, Russia is fine with neighboring nations(like Georgia and Ukraine, among others) dealing with the West AS LONG AS they do not conspire with the West to endanger Russian security. The problem is legitimate Russian interests will be addressed ONLY IF the West shows Russia a modicum of respect, but the West is unwilling for various reasons. One reason is Jews hate Russia and also control the West. Another reason is people are naturally contemptuous and have an urge to superior to something other, just like they’re naturally spiritual and need to worship something even as secularists. As negative feelings about Jews, blacks & non-whites, immigrants, homos, and members of the EU have been made taboo, who can the Europeans freely hate and feel superior to without censure? The favorite target used to be Big Fat Stupid Ugly Americans, but as America is now about globo-homo and BLM(and even had a black president), Anti-Americanism isn’t what it used to be across Europe, which has been turning into Euramerica, at any rate. Well, there is RUSSIA. So, all the old Western prejudices about Russia serve as safety valve for pent-up need to feel superior to the Other. White-America-as-all-around-scapegoat or ‘whiteness’ serves a similar function in the US, e.g. blacks attack Asians, but Asians blame ‘white supremacism’. Therefore, Russia has become like Rodney Dangerfield: It gets no respect, and the West has simply been unwilling to work in good faith with something it doesn’t respect. The Western attitude toward Russia is somewhat akin to globalist feelings about MAGA Deplorables. Russia and Deplorables are just barely tolerable as well-heeled helots, never as people with sovereignty of identity and interests. Of course, the deepest source for both hatreds is Jewish. Russia is a vast country with a good-sized population, but its global interests are modest, even too modest, whereas Jews are a majority only in tiny Israel and tiny minorities in all other countries, BUT Jewish ambitions are boundless in greed and lunacy. To get a sense of current world affairs, imagine if the kid in Wes Anderson’s RUSHMORE got control of Western institutions and industries. He’d operate on the basis of god-complex, i.e. the world must accommodate itself to his fantasies than he should accommodate himself to world’s realities. Perhaps, Jews in politics are especially crazy because they couldn’t cut it in the truly brainy fields of science, math, medicine, and the like, therefore compensating with an extra dose of Tough Jew antics.
Having experienced the hellish 90s on the meat-hooks of Globalism and then targeted as the all-around villain by the Collective West, especially since the Maidan Coup of 2014, Russia has sensibly learned not to trust the West but been unwilling to name the Jewish Power behind the anti-Russian hysteria that replaced the Cold War with the Scold War, or War of Narratives, for which the Western arsenal is many times that of the USSR, though the bombshells of fake news have been so excessive that much of the ‘Global South’ has tuned out the Western Narrative on the Ukraine issue.
If there’s a fundamental untruth eating away at Russia, it’s the fear and anxiety about naming the Jewish Power, the real culprit behind the West-Gone-Mad. That aside, however, the Russian state and interests are rational and reasonable. Same could be said of China. Even more than Russia, China’s media are controlled, and censorship is rife. Still, in terms of what China is and expects of the world, there’s a good deal of truth in Chinese foreign policy.
In contrast, the (((West))) or Schwest is an empire of lies because it’s really about Jewish supremacist gangsterism relying on smoke-and-mirror proxies and fulminating about ‘liberal democracy’, ‘human rights’, ‘equity’, ‘inclusion’, etc., none of which Jews care about — just ask the Palestinians. Even calls for ‘gay rights’ are bogus. They give the false impression that West wants all nations around the world to accept that some people are born homo and should be left alone in their private lives. Instead, ‘gay rights’ amounts to quasi-spiritual Gay Rites whereby homosexuality is to be mass-fetishized, sacralized, and celebrated as the new catholicism. It’s not a matter of tolerance of deviance but promotion and institutionalization of deviance as the highest value. It serves as proxy of Jewish Power that seeks to subvert the moral confidence of all goy societies. It’s also a way to harness restless globo-homo energies toward serving Jewish interests via collaboration. It’s also to inculcate goy minds with the notion of minority uber majority. So, this ‘gay rights’ thing is really about ‘gay might’, the empowering of homos to shove their collective fist up the world’s arse. It amounts to the figurative sodomy of nation after nation. Surely, there’s a difference between tolerating homos to be homo in their own space and letting them bugger your buns. By ‘gay rights’, globalists demand that all nations not only tolerate homos but let homos bugger their arses. Russia allows homos to be homo, but it comes nowhere near easing the demands of Jews and their cuck-minions, for whom the only acceptable deal is the unconditional surrender of “We bend over, and you bugger us.” All nations must enforce homo-promo in government, schools(down to the elementary level), advertising, entertainment, and etc. Disney(or Jizzney) is now globo-homo agit-prop industry, hair-breadth away from promoting full-blown pedophilia. And homos love this because their vanity, like Jewish power-lust, is insatiable. Homos used to plead, “let us be free to do our thing” but now say, “bend over and take it up your ass… otherwise, you’re a homophobe denying our humanity and ‘visibility’.” (Why would anyone want to be ‘visible’ as the guy who takes it up the arse? How the values of the West have changed, mostly for the worse.)
‘Liberal Democracy’, as promoted by the Schwest, is no less bogus. However democratic the electoral process is in a particular nation, it’s deemed ‘autocratic’ if results go against the Jewish globo-homo hegemonic interests. On the other hand, if a puppet regime amenable to the Schwest is installed by the CIA, what a beacon of freedom it is! Individuals like John Mearsheimer are more honest than most, but even they dare not speak the whole truth. This so-called Western expansionism isn’t about ‘liberalism’ or ‘democracy’ at all. It’s really about Jewish Supremacist control. If indeed genuine liberal democrats spearheaded a movement to democratize the world in their image, we could fault them for naivete, foolishness, and moral pride, but AT THE VERY LEAST, we could still credit them with good will and idealism, misguided as it may be. It’s like Christian Missionaries in the movie HAWAII(directed by George Roy Hill based on James Michener’s novel) may be delusional, but they are sincere in their calling and dedication. So, if the so-called ‘liberal democratic’ Western order was at least sincere in its ‘rules-based’ idealism, there would be some good will in its international policy. But, whole thing’s a sham because the real animating force behind the Schwest is supremacism of strong-willed Jews and the ‘submissivism’ of cowered Anglos(so impressed with Jewish intelligence, personality, and ‘prophetism’). Jewish fingerprints are all over the ‘Western’ blueprint. Whatever other interests are involved — military-industrial complex, oil industry, mineral industry, globo-homo missionaries or mission-fairies, feminist ideologues, and etc. — are secondary or subordinate to Jewish interests. If Jews prize or protect something, it isn’t to be touched; if Jews hate something, it is to put on the chopping block. The so-called Military-Industrial-Complex follows than leads Jewish Power. While it is perpetually on the lookout for conflicts and war-profiteering, it targets for destruction/plunder only with the go-ahead from the Jews, much like dogs, though natural hunter-predators, will only go after prey chosen by the master.
Russia is for Russia, China is for China, Iran is for Iran, and India is for India. Each constitutes a truth in terms of territory and interest. In contrast, the meaning of the ‘West’ is amorphous, hardly limited to the actual North-West of Europe and America as it tries to define all the world, East, North, and South as well. Besides, it’s a total lie that the West is for ‘Western Values’. Much of what passes for ‘Western Values’, as spun by Jewish Supremacism, has no resemblance to Western history and culture — in the Current Year, ‘Western Values’ are about whites in Europe worshiping black Africans, homos, & Jews and welcoming demographic replacement as the final culmination of European destiny, all the while reiterating that Israel must forever be an ethno-state for Jews and Jews alone.
The West is now the Schwest or JeWest and exists to obey and cater to every Jewish demands. All those anti-Russian hawks among Democrats and Republicans wail and scream for one reason only: To be noticed and rewarded by their Jewish Masters. For the cowed and browbeaten, the only way to retain a semblance of self-respect is by barking loudest at whatever is allowed, thus appearing tough. A dog has no pride before its master as it must fetch and roll over as ordered. So naturally, it goes into hyper-aggression when permitted to bark or bite at something as, finally, its wolfy fangs can fulfill its purpose. But as the dog always requires the permission of its master, it lacks true pride, one of freedom and agency. Likewise, in the Empire of Lies that is the Schwest, all these Anglo-Cucks who growl at Russia are not fooling anybody who can see. They are just barking dogs.
Of great significance is what the decline of white power and prestige has done to the world’s perception of the West. For most of modern history, the Rest regarded the West with fear and envy but also respect and admiration as the land of proud and united White Christian Folks. There was no denying the West’s greatness and power grounded not only on material-technological prowess but spiritual, political, cultural, organizational, and moral advantages. Even if the Rest found Western moralism to be hypocritical at times, it was nevertheless impressed by the moral pride of whites in their God, civilization, history, and culture. Whites had control of their narratives and icons. The great gangsters in THE GODFATHER hate but also respect one another, like the rival lords in KAGEMUSHA(by Akira Kurosawa). Michael Corleone and Hyman Roth plot against one another as formidable foes deserving of respect. In contrast, when Senator Geary drops his guard and falls into a trap, he isn’t deserving of respect. At a minimum, the Rest respected the West as the culmination of white achievement and confidence. But today, many around the world feel no such respect, especially whites are so lacking in self-respect. In some ways, Western Pride(verging on hubris) is bigger than ever but justified on the basis of expurgating whiteness, i.e. the whole world should aspire to follow in the catwalk of ‘Western Values’ because they’re about Jew-Worship, Globo-Homo, Negro-reverence, and purging Evil Whiteness. West and Whiteness used to be synonymous, but the pride of one is now inversely proportional to the shame of the other. The more whiteness is thrashed with the BLM whip, more the West is justified in the eyes of the world… or such is the logic pushed by the likes of George Soros.
Most probably, all the world leaders know Jews really control the West and that whites have been reduced to a race of Senator Gearys. Just look at the likes of Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, John Brennan, James Comey, Ben Sasse, and etc. Or take Joe Biden, a total joke. For eight years, clown George W. Bush was president. And whites were foaming at the mouth, wetting their pants, and fainting right and left over Barack Obama, the product of a black guy humping a white woman. White men are a bunch of cucky-wuck maggots by the looks of advertising, Hollywood movies, TV shows, pop music, political oratory, and etc. BLM thugs burn down cities, but whites put up BLM signs. Trump came along and stoked a bit of white populist pride, but nearly all the white elites served their Jewish supremacist masters in the plot to bring down the Orange Man. It’s almost as if whites have grown so accustomed to revering Jews, celebrating homos, and idolizing
And it’s no different in UK and Canada. The Australian Covid Policy proved that Anglos now operate in accordance to “Jews say, goyim obey.” When the non-white world watches this dumpster fire, what’s going on inside their minds in regards to the white race and the West? There are all these whites in the Collective West shaking their fists at Putin and acting tough, but who are they fooling? It’s plain as day they make such noises to win plaudits from their Jewish masters. Anglo-cuck Mitt Romney or Anglo-cuck Richard Spencer, what’s the difference anymore? Both are variations of Senator Geary, what with their faces squeezed in between the ass-cheeks of Jewish Supremacism. Why have whites been so helpless to stop the demographic invasion; worse, who so welcoming of their own replacement? Why is the entire West adopting blackness as the official new face of the West? Why are white men cucking to Afro-Colonization-of-White-Wombs? How come white men, even so-called ‘conservatives’, lack the spine to oppose globo-homo and even tranny nuttery whereby guys-pretending-to-be-girls beat females in women’s sports? (It’s almost as if white men, having been beaten by black men in the most popular sports, find themselves pussified and reduced to beating women much like how black men beat white men; if white men can no longer be the best men, they can at least be the best women.) Within the larger context of profound transformations within the West, white Americans and Europeans acting tough against Russia is really a sign of weakness. It is less directed against Russia than meant to win approval from Jews, their masters. It’s not free men shaking their fists but dogs barking for their master(and expecting pets on the head and doggy treats). It is also a club of cowards triggered by a ‘rogue’ white nation that refuses to cower before Jewish Globalism. They collectively act ‘tough’ to destroy a genuinely tough power because its example puts them to shame as a bunch of doglike cowards incapable of anything without the go-ahead from the Jews.
So, what are the consequences of White Debasement on the world stage? The Rest, long accustomed to regarding white prestige and Western power as synonymous, now sees the white race, especially the Anglos, as a bunch of cuck-maggots who lick Jewish boots, kiss homo ass, and suck Negro dong. As a result, the West seems unmoored, lacking in clear hierarchy and chain-of-command. Of course, elites in the Rest know that Jews rule the West, but Jews hide behind the whites. (Jewish Power has promoted black idolatry, even to the point where blackness is now akin to Western neo-spirituality, but for all their visibility blacks are not the ones calling the shots on the world stage. Obama, for example, merely did the bidding of his Jewish masters. Because Jews hate Russia, black ‘leaders’ also mouth anti-Russky diatribes.) If Jews were to take the throne like the great Persian Kings of Old and declared, “We rule the West, and all of you better kiss our ass or be destroyed”, then the world would better understand current Western dynamics. But Jews, for all their power and wealth, are anxious not to be recognized as those calling the shots in the West. If Jews openly accepted the role of Masters of the Universe, their identity and interests would naturally come under scrutiny(as was the case with WASP power when Anglos ruled America). So, Jews would rather pull the strings or pretend they’re just ‘Americans’ working in service of ‘liberal democracy’, ‘human rights’, and ‘muh freedom’. Even as they make up 70% of Joe Biden’s administration, they remain hush-hush about their Jewishness(and its policy implications) and try to persuade the world that they are operating within the ‘rules-based order’, a weak argument as the US is a premier globo-gangster state, but it’s one of those offers you can’t refuse, as Jews will call out their ‘Luca Brasi’ or ‘Al Neri’ to destroy anyone calling out or deviating from the bogus narrative. (In the Empire of Lies, Jewish mendacity — Russia Collusion Hoax, Covid Hysteria, Hunter Biden’s Laptop from Hell, BLM moral panic, etc. — has more bearing on reality than all the truths in the world, not least because your average American’s worldview is almost entirely molded by Jewish monopoly media.) Current US policy would finally make sense ONLY IF Jews came to the fore and admitted, yeah, it’s all about us and our tribal power. While Jews are immensely giddy of their power at the private level, they fear going public with the pride because goyim would begin to openly Jewish Power and pry into its abuses — such would no longer be ‘Anti-Semitic’ since Jews would have openly admitted to their dominance and control of the world.
Whites no longer get any respect as a kennel of Senator-Gearys who fetch and roll over for Jews. However, Jewish Power projection is often confused, muddled, and ineffective because Jews can never admit to what it’s really about. Jews either use goy proxies(who are often not up to the job) and/or project their power as promotion of ‘democracy’, ‘human rights’, ‘free enterprise’, and the like, but the implementation invariably fails in principle because the goal-posts are changed ever so often. ‘Democracy’ has come to mean nations around the world submitting to the likes of George Soros. No matter how democratic the process, it’s deemed ‘anti-democratic’ if Jewish demands aren’t appeased.
White Westerners, now cowed and cucked before Jews, homos, and Negroes, get no respect from the Rest nor from nonwhites in the West. Indeed, the fact that WHITES are always blamed even when the culprits are Jews(as when Jews do bad, they are simply whitewashed as people with ‘white privilege’) or blacks(as when Asians blame ‘white supremacism’ for all the black-on-Asian violence). Whites are always scapegoated for whatever is wrong. When nonwhites in the West are indoctrinated and encouraged by the Jewish-run academia, media, and the state to blame everything on whites, how can there be any respect for whiteness, especially when one bunch of whites, the so-called ‘progressives’, bend over to homos and wash Negro feet with tears streaming down their eyes while another bunch of whites, the so-called ‘conservatives’, bleat about how ‘liberals’ are the ‘real racists’, do nothing to stop the desecration of white heritage, cower before homos, and praise Jews to high heaven? Indeed, the white brand is now so toxic(despite the continual appeal to jungle fever and grooming gangs) that the so-called ‘West’ tries to legitimize its power projection around the world on grounds of BLM or ‘diversity’ or ‘inclusion’. Indeed, one main strategy is to argue that the Chinese are the ‘real racists’ because China is still about Chinese power(and, furthermore, appreciates the value of whiteness and white history/culture), whereas ‘woke’ whites in the West, in abnegation of racial identity and interests, seek world hegemony not to impose the White West over the Rest but to remake the West in the image of the Rest, so that the West and Rest shall merge into a seamless whole(though the metropole shall remain in D.C. and NY); apparently, even though the West and the East may never meet, the West and the Rest shall meld into one. As the New Empire or Universal Empire isn’t about one people over other peoples but about all peoples sharing in World Domination, empire is now sold as empowerment for all. The whole idea would be ridiculous even if true or in earnest, but of course, it isn’t. BLM isn’t about equal respect for all but about idolatry of blackness for all the others. Also, homos and trannies are elevated uber alles — when will they have month-long Hindu pride parades in the West, or a month devoted to Arab identity and interests? BLM and Globo-Homo are essentially the tools of Jews as the real new masters of the empire. For all the talk of ‘inclusion’, don’t expect to be included in the club if you wave the BDS flag or propose Yasir Arafat be placed on the same firmament alongside Nelson Mandela. It’s all just a sham.
All the contradictions only feed into schizophrenia of the West in relation to the Rest?
Traditionally, for as long as anyone could remember, the power of the West was understood to rest upon a ‘Eurocentric’ view of the world, with nonwhites scrambling to emulate and catch up with the West, especially the Anglo-Germanic world. Even now, whites have immense wealth and are numerically dominant in many elite institutions/industries but minus the pride of identity and unity. If anything, whiteness is something that even the richest and most privileged whites must feel apologetic about, as if it’s more a racial sin/stain, an inborn disease, than a racial identity/heritage. It implies that, for all their wealth and stake in the system, whites cannot act in white interests, let alone white power. Therefore, white money and talent must ultimately be in service to something else, something ‘higher’, namely ‘diversity’, ‘inclusion’, and ‘equity’, but in reality, white input is re-laundered to serve Jewish Supremacist interests. Just look at Biden’s Cabinet. And despite Kamala Harris’ yammering about ‘equity’, she sucks up to Jews and doesn’t even acknowledge Palestinians as a people. But, with Jews refusing to show their head as the true face of power, the West now seems like the emperor with nothing above his neck. White head has been chopped off but the Jewish head hides beneath the collar.
Hitler, Putin, and Zelensky, For Real
Two fallacies have been haunting the Narrative, one that is pervasive in the (((Western))) media and the other that tempts the dissident/alternative spaces. According to the Official Story, there is always the New Hitler, and Putin or ‘Putler’ being the latest incarnation, and his actions are seen through the prism of the events that led up to World War II. So, over and over, there are ‘New Munichs’ and latest reiterations of ‘appeasement’.
The idea of ‘Germany’ has also been used this way. So, the rise of China in the 21st century is compared with the rise of Germany in the 19th century(to demonstrate the timeless lesson of the Thucydides Trap) despite the greater differences than similarities. (Even more deranged is the conceit of projecting American perspectives onto others, as if every rising power aspires to be the New Lone Superpower. It’s also imbecile because if another nation has no right to be a superpower, the same should apply to the US, but then, rules don’t apply to the ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ nation.)
While certain figures since World War II bear some resemblance to Hitler, calling someone the ‘new hitler’ or something the ‘new nazi’ is usually a matter of political expediency than an attempt at understanding. After all, isn’t it rather odd that Israel is hardly compared to National Socialist Germany even though its guiding ideology has striking similarities with Hitler’s order? And the Yinon Plan has elements of the German dream of ‘lebensraum’ in the East. But as the West is controlled by Jews, forget the irony of Zionist perspectives overlapping in with the Nazi Worldview. Besides, Israel is a democracy(!!), the only one in the Middle East, we are told. Never mind it is not a ‘liberal democracy’ that forsakes blood-and-soil ethno-nationalism in favor of deracinated individualism and replacement citizenship. Israel is, in fact, a national democracy where the elections are geared to protect, preserve, and strengthen the Jewish State, just like Iran is an Islamic Democracy, which is to say, regardless of electoral outcomes, the core essence of the Iranian regime is to uphold Islamic values as the defining culture of Iran. In Israel and Iran, individuals can indulge in various freedoms, but personal liberties are not the defining feature of the core civilization. As individuals, you may do your thing(within limits), but as a collective, there is the unifying theme of ethnicity and/or spirituality. (The moral tragedy of Zionism is it went from national democracy to imperial democracy whereby the Jewish Global Network renders all other democracies around the world useless, drained of sovereignty and national themes. For example, European democracies cannot defend national integrity or ethnic pride and must welcome the Great Replacement while, at the same time, being obliged to praise Jews & Israel and pledge to defend Israel’s right to be a Jewish State to the last breath. Under Imperial Democracy, only one people have national sovereignty for themselves, and they use global hegemony to render all other democracies bloodless and subservient. One would think that the US, as the lone superpower, would be at the center of this Imperial Democracy, but truth is otherwise as the overwhelming goy majority of America play a secondary role to Jewish Power. White goyim are the majority of Americans, but their racial identity and interests are taboo. Is it because the newly formulated US favors no particular race or culture in the spirit of ‘inclusion’? Then, why the profuse emphasis on Jewish identity, Jewish interests, Jewish preciousness, Jewish specialness, Jewish holiness, and Zionism, especially at the expense of Palestinians, Arabs, Muslims, Iran, and Russia?
If branding anyone disfavored by the EOJ(or Empire of Judea) as the ‘New Hitler’ is ridiculous, it is also misleading to assume the real Hitler may have been the polar opposite of the public image. While the cartoon villain Hitler as a raving baboon wanting to conquer the world is total fantasy, we would be fooling ourselves with the revisionism that Adolf Hitler was essentially a rational character who, acting on purely legitimate interests, fell into a trap set by powers far more pernicious than his regime and thus was forced into drastic measures that led to World War II. While there is a degree of validity to such argument, it is far from the whole truth, and one thing for sure, just as Putin isn’t a Russian Hitler, Hitler wasn’t an Austrian/German Putin.
In a perversely ironic way, the best way to understand(and appreciate) Hitler isn’t to compare him with Putin(and other ‘New Hitlers’) but with Jewish Power, as both had no sense of limits. While it’s silly to say “Hitler wanted to conquer the world”, his interests weren’t limited to Germany or sphere-of-influence politics but towards a worldview rooted in racial theory and grand vision of destiny. When every crisis involving Hitler on the leadup to World War II is analyzed alone or in proximity to nearby events, one could argue in favor of Hitler’s rationality, but there’s no doubt he was inflamed by deeper passion, which is why he couldn’t let things alone and kept pushing for more, finally leading to a huge win-or-lose-all gamble. If any single politician today is most like Hitler, it’s Erdogan of Turkey whose foreign policy is guided by an inflated sense of Neo-Ottoman-ism, which led him to interfere in just about every conflict — Syria, Libya, Gaza, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, internal European affairs, etc.— , thereby drawing ire from all sides, especially as he usually bets on the wrong horse, like in the debacle in Syria. Unlike Ataturk who was focused on Turkish national interests, Erdogan sees himself as the head of the neo-Islamic Ottomanic revival. Hitler was similar, which set him apart from Otto von Bismarck who, for all his tempestuousness, had a fixed goal of Germany’s place in the world.
Another characteristic of Hitler makes him closer to Jewish Power. For all of Erdogan’s hegemonic dreams, it’s really a cultural and spiritual vision. He wants the Muslim world to look to Turkey as the spiritual center, and it certainly isn’t about Turkish racial supremacism. In contrast, Jewish Power and National Socialism are deeply rooted in a sense of racial/ethnic supremacy. Of course, Jews have generally kept this a secret, but actions speak louder than words, and Jewish actions in the modern world clearly indicate their policy is rooted in a powerful sense of blood, history, and destiny. Likewise, Hitler didn’t merely regard himself as a European leader working to secure German interests. His animating ideology was profoundly racial, a hegemonic worldview that bound his understanding of the past with the future, the 1000 Yr Reich that would ultimately be the center of World Civilization. While racial views similar to his own existed in other parts of the West, they were usually tempered with the rhetoric of humanism, Christianity, Enlightenment Ideals, progress, and rights of man. So, even though Anglos were also highly racial(or racially supremacist) in their worldview, they weren’t so brazenly ‘pornographic’ about it. They would act on racial supremacist impulses, like in wiping out the American Indians or Australian Aborigines, but then justify it on grounds of spreading civilization and Christian values or shining the light of progress as part of White Man’s Burden: Imperialism as white man carrying the cross.
They sought to persuade their nonwhite subjects and even themselves that it was all for the good, whereby the whole world would benefit.
In contrast, Hitler stripped away the ‘Athenian’ illusions and sentimentalities and propounded a nakedly neo-Spartan worldview of the higher races in conflict with the lesser ones. In a way, Hitler seemed extreme and deranged, which was true enough at times, but one reason he upset the other ‘gentler’ imperialists was in unmasking a certain truth about Western Imperialism. For all the talk of progress and civilization, didn’t Anglos take the New World by wiping out the natives as the lesser race? Didn’t Anglos use ruthless means to quell rebellions and uprisings all over the world to maintain the empire? Of course, Hitler pointed to such ruthless realities not to condemn but to praise the Anglos, but it wasn’t the kind of thing Anglos wanted to hear in their anxiousness to have the cake and eat it too: Use ruthless means to establish Anglo supremacy while persuading their subjects, as well as themselves, that it was all for the progress for humanity. In a way, the moral dynamics of the Anglo Imperial Enterprise relied on this fragile balance of raw power and tidy principle. Great Britain crushed and ruled over much of the world, which generated good deal of racial and martial pride, but a haute Christian nation of ladies and gentlemen would have found it vulgar and uncouth to over-indulge in tribal pride and military prowess. So, Brits were assured that it wasn’t only about conquest but aiding the rest of humanity one way or another. And even as the Brits were often ruthless in putting down unrest among the ‘darkies’, they made overtures to win over the local elites who were promised with riches if they collaborated. As powerful as Britain was, the empire was ruled by a thin layer of British administrators over vast numbers of locals of ‘wogs’, ‘niggers’, ‘chinks’, and the like.
In their heart of hearts, Jews have been closer to Nazi Germans in their deep-rooted racial consciousness and supremacism, but they’ve been adept like the Anglos in putting forth a charade about ‘liberal values’ and ‘progress’. When finally push came to shove and Anglos had to choose between power and principles, they opted for the latter, whereas Jews chose power. But then, as Jews gained power over Anglos, even Anglo principles were betrayed as Anglos came to favor Jewish Power uber alles — for all neo-WASP fulminations about China’s ‘neo-racism’ or Putler of Russia, they blindly go along with Zionist destruction of Palestinians & Arabs and sign checks to the racial supremacism of BLM because Jews demand it.
Anyway, even though any action can be spun as ‘rational’ or ‘reactive’ within a limited time frame, similarly irrational patterns emerge in the actions of Hitler and Jewish Power over a wider span of events. While it’s true that anti-German forces were driving Hitler into newer crises, he too was instigating or inflaming them as his vision was fueled by a historic sense of destiny. Jewish Chutzpah and Nazi Angst, much like Japanese Imperialism, owed to the discrepancy between self-image and geographic possession, the surest foundation of power. Chinese and Russians, with their huge land mass, are more likely to feel secure and important on their own. In contrast, German sense of greatness was frustrated by its limited land mass and access to resources. It served as the basis of lebensraum ideology.
Perhaps, had the Anglos been more yielding to German(or German-American)identity and interests in the New World, things might have been different. But with World War I, Anglos totally stifled German expression of identity and interests in the US, whereby German-Americans essentially became another bunch of Wasps(assimilating into Anglosphere), and it was the other ethnics, the Irish especially and then the Jews, who became the partners, as well as challengers, of Anglo power. In World War I, German-Americans fought and killed their German brethren fighting for the Fatherland, and no amount of overtures by Hitler could convince the Anglos to sue for peace and understanding.
While it’s true that Anglo Anti-Germanism(as well as Anti-Russianism) heightened tensions in Europe, Anglos weren’t entirely without cause as there was an extreme and irrational side to the Germanic character, evident not only in politics but in arts and culture. British culture disdained emotions getting the better of the mind(at least prior to the rise of Beatlemania and spread of Negrophilia & Globo-Homo through the British sphere), and Germans seemed like a bunch of ‘white ni**ers’, or worse, ‘white ni**ers with engineering degrees’, or semi-barbarians who could make bombs. There’s a reason why fascist-like movements went nowhere in Britain, whereas the masses were spellbound by Hitler’s demagoguery. As culturally opposed as the Weimar period and the National Socialist period were, they had one common feature: German tendency toward extremes. Weimar Germany was degeneracy pushed beyond anything seen in Europe, and National Socialism was antisepticism(which became almost synonymous with antisemitism because Weimar Germany was about near-total German surrender to Jewish power) pushed to the limits. Of course, Germans in relatively rational state of mind were wonderful to work with, much like the polite and conscientious Japanese, but when Germans fell into extremes, their craziness, like Japanese craziness, seemed of another magnitude of nuttery.
True, Anglos were often hardly better than liars, cheats, pirates, and thieves, but they could also play the gentleman, and what matters most to a gentleman is reputation. The word and the handshake aren’t to be taken lightly. Then, it is no wonder that Hitler’s violation of Neville Chamberlain’s trust was so damaging to German-British relations. Chamberlain, as the honorable representative of Britain, put his reputation on the line when he conceded to Germany’s takeover of Czech territory in exchange for peace. Respect matters in politics, and politicians, especially in electoral democracies, rely on public opinion for their reputation. So, Hitler’s next move not only made Chamberlain look like a fool but a weakling and a dupe. leaving no one Hitler could work with in good faith in Britain. Of course, Hitler could have saved himself the trouble if he hadn’t moved on Czechia at all. Until then, he’d moved only to retake control of German territories, unite fellow Germans, and protect the overwhelming German majorities, especially in Sudetenland. Hitler should have left Czech alone and moved on Danzig, and he could have done this by instigating a proto-color-revolution there as most people of the city, Germans, would have demanded unification with Germany. Even anti-Hitler and anti-German voices would have had a hard time convincing the world that Germany was committing a crime by taking Danzig from Polish control, especially when most people of Danzig wanted to be part of Germany. But Hitler moved on the Czechs, the first indication that German ambition went beyond consolidation of German territories and peoples. Some called for war just then, but Chamberlain put his reputation on the line by offering a peace deal. Hitler signed on the dotted line and then tossed the agreement away.
Still, things might have been different if Hitler moved only on Danzig but instead, he decided to destroy all of Poland, with the Soviet Union as junior partner-in-crime. While Germany had legitimate gripes against Poland, the invasion, in concert with the Soviet Union, was disproportionate beyond measure. In 2014, following the Jewish-led CIA coup in Ukraine, Russia took Crimea, which was overwhelmingly Russian and pro-unification. The West called it the ‘invasion of Crimea’, but the very people of Crimea were with Russia, and there was nothing the world could do about it. Likewise, had Germany taken only Danzig, the great powers would have been at a loss as to their next move. It’s doubtful that UK and France would have declared war on Germany over Danzig(and there would have been little Poland could have done to regain control). But Hitler conceived of a bold and crazy plan to destroy all of Poland, and in doing so, made German and Soviet forces face off against one another(as uneasy partners), as Poland-as-buffer no longer existed. Some argue UK and France were hypocritical in declaring war on Germany but not on USSR, but it was rational as realpolitik(just as the war guarantee they’d given to Poland certainly was not). Declaring war on both empires would only have brought them closer. Also, Germany was obviously regarded as the closer threat/challenge to the West given the geography. Furthermore, it was clear that Germany, not the Soviet Union, came up with the plan and initiated the pact. Despite the problem with Danzig, Hitler had a good thing going with the neutrality of Poland IF his ultimate objective had been national security. Polish neutrality between Germany and USSR meant both behemoths had a sizable buffer against the other. Poland-as-German-ally would have endangered the USSR, forcing it into hostile stance, and Poland-as-Soviet-ally(unthinkable given ideological differences and historical memory) would have endangered Germany. Poles understood this, which is why they rebuffed Germany’s overture for an alliance, in which case Poland would have drawn the ire of the Soviet Union. Also, Poles rightfully feared that Germany, with far greater industrial might, might treat Poland less as an ally than a satrapy. Apart from the Danzig issue, Poland’s insistence on neutrality was utterly rational and responsible. Furthermore, despite the intransigence on Danzig being wrong, it wasn’t entirely unfounded from a psycho-political point of view, i.e. Poles correctly assessed Hitler as a man who would regard any concession as weakness or vulnerability, emboldening him to press with further demands. In other words, the dynamics of Hitlerism was like Jewish Power — give an inch, take a mile.
Given recent transformations in the West, it’s obvious that Jewish Power cannot be appeased. Give an inch and it takes a mile and then demands more and more. Just consider the globohomo and tranny issue, how it went from individual liberty for homos/queens to the Conversion Cult of grooming even kindergartens into Pedomania. You’d think given the rise, indeed triumph, of Jewish Power in the West, Jews would be satisfied with their immense wealth, power, and privilege. But no, they have designs on Ukraine, Russia, and the world. Reportedly, George Soros once regarded China as part of his ‘empire’ but now denounces it for not playing along with his agenda.
One thing for sure, whatever ‘reasonable’ mask Hitler wore in any given negotiation, just underneath was his megalomania and radically aggressive worldview, which he’d spelled out in MEIN KAMPF. Given the limitations of German power, of course Hitler had to shake hands and come to terms with other powers. But as he grew in strength, which fueled his volatile and restless ego, he grew bolder, more impatient and adventurous, especially as he was bored with day to day affairs. It’s been said by some biographers that Hitler was fundamentally lazy, that he tuned out the day-to-day running of the state. In other words, he wasn’t like Stalin, Putin, Zhou En-Lai, and Deng Xiaoping who were immersed in the minutiae of state management. Rather, he was a dreamer and visionary like Mao Zedong who was uninterested in details and fixated on the big picture, the grand plan.
On their rises to power and consolidation of control, both Hitler and Mao had to be pragmatic, realistic, and tactical. Indeed, they were at their best when their power was far from absolute and therefore had to operate within the realm of possibility. But once they gained sufficient power as the unquestioned master of the realm, their ambitions became ever perilously closer to outpacing reality. One thing for sure, if Mao had died in 1957, China would not have undergone the Great Leap Forward and the Cultural Revolution. And had Hitler died in 1939, World War II probably would not have happened, even with Western provocations. Joachim Fest’s damning biography argues Hitler would have gone down as one of Germany’s greatest leaders under such a scenario.
As reckless as Hitler’s actions were, they were also bold, imaginative, and inspired, indeed operatic. None of that can be said for Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, which was long time in the making. Putin finally acted as it was obvious that the West, controlled by pathological Jewish supremacists, were never going to come to any agreement or compromise. In other words, Putin played the game until he was forced to act.
In contrast, Hitler relished playing with fire. Just as he was provoked, he provoked others. And Wotan-like, he took pride in outsmarting and outmaneuvering others. The difference between Putin and Hitler is the former sees himself as the leader and guardian of the Russian nation and interests, whereas Hitler had a sense of greatness and destiny beyond the German nation and interests. This is where he was different from Bismarck who saw himself as a servant of the German nation. Hitler regarded himself as the master of Germany, a godlike figure chosen by history, someone on par with Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon. Serious early setbacks might have tempered his megalomania. But there was success upon success. Economic revival, massive support for his leadership, alliance with Italy, regaining control of Rhineland, taking Sudetenland, Anschluss with Austria, crushing of Poland, and finally easy victory over France, which really went to his head. And in the first months of Operation Barbarossa, it seemed a done deal, and Hitler was already conversing privately about his big plans for Russia.
Even people without much innate egotism can develop an inflated sense of worth when things go their way. During the dot.com bubble era, countless ordinary Americans regarded themselves as financial wizards and thought their portfolios would go up forever. Why not, as whatever high-tech stock they bet on was going through the roof? If that’s the case with ordinary folks, imagine what happens when a natural megalomaniac believes everything to be going according to The Plan.
So, even as we need to reconsider the complexity of events that led to WWII, we mustn’t lose sight of Hitler’s essential character. There was indeed a kind of mad genius to his inner self. A kind of demonic spirit propelling him forward. Personality matters. The reason why Hitler continues to fascinate is only partly due to his utility as the cartoon villain of history, the perennial evil incarnate, the secular equivalent of Satan. It’s also because he was truly one of the most unique figures in history. As John Lukacs said, Stalin was essentially a modern and totalistic embodiment of tyranny known throughout history. He was a master of power, not a visionary or dreamer. Like many of his generation, he turned to radical politics and later gained absolute mastery via control of bureaucracy. He understood the machinations of power. Though Putin isn’t a monster like Stalin, his path to power is also rather unremarkable. His maneuvers were masterly at times but in the tradition of statecraft. He’s an apt student of history and politics.
But, there was no one quite like Hitler. Even Napoleon’s power seems normal in comparison. After all, Napoleon was a military man, and in times of political crisis and chaos it hasn’t been unusual for the military to take control. In contrast, Hitler’s formative years were as an artist and bohemian whose imagination was aroused by Richard Wagner’s operas, which, more than any ideology, shaped his worldview in mythological terms.
The 20th century figure resembles him most(despite striking differences of course) is Mao Zedong who, for all his commitment to Marxism-Leninism, was by nature a dreamer whose formative influences were the legends of godlike kings and romantic rebel-bandits. A pragmatic and rational person doesn’t come up with something like the Great Leap Forward. Though sometimes compared with Stalin’s forced collectivization in the 1930s, Mao’s plan was more comparable to Hitler’s reckless invasion of Russia. Stalin’s collectivization was costly in lives but coldly calibrated to result in massive industrial growth, thus justifying its cost-benefit analysis in the most brutal terms. It was ruthlessly rational and forced upon many parts of the Soviet Union. In contrast, the Great Leap Forward was a leap of faith based on wishful imagination, and it hardly needed coercion as the masses of Chinese were culturally submissive and, furthermore, brainwashed into ideological fervor. It proved to be an utter disaster like Germany’s invasion of Russia but, as China did it to itself, didn’t result in a defeat to a foreign power.
There’s been various explanations for Hitler’s invasion of the Soviet Union, his boldest, most awesome, and disastrous move. Neo-Nazi types, who hardly matter in the respectable discourse, say Hitler was trying to take out Jewish Bolshevism in defense of Western Civilization. Most historians argue Hitler was trying to fulfill his lifelong dream of lebensraum and Greater Germania. John Lukacs and a number of revisionists argue that, by taking the Soviet Union out of the equation, Hitler hoped to convince Great Britain(and greater Anglosphere, including the US) that it simply had to come to terms with Germany. On its face, the argument seems absurd as the Soviet Union was a far greater challenge to Germany than the UK, an island nation separated from the Continent with no hope of invading Germany; in contrast, were Germany to fail against the Soviet Union, it could be crushed and engulfed by the Soviet counter-offensive, which is what indeed happened.
But perhaps, psychology played a role, as Hitler admired the Anglos while loathing the Russian Slavs. Ideally, he wanted Anglos as world partners and Russians as defeated helots. Or, as certain historians, like Adam Tooze and Brendan Simms argued, Hitler was obsessed with American power, especially given his experience in World War I when an almost certain victory was snatched from Germany by American entry into the war with its seemingly limitless manpower and resources. So, it could be argued, even though the US wasn’t at war with Germany, Hitler feared Anglo-America would once again come to the aid of UK, and the united Anglo power would overwhelm Germany. Therefore, the ONLY way to persuade the Anglo/American power to accept German mastery over Europe was by decisively defeating Russia. While the Soviet Union was the more immediate and direct challenge for Germany, the combined power of the British Empire and the US would pose the far greater threat in the long run. Besides, if Germany had some chance of defeating USSR, it had no chance of defeating UK-US-alliance in a long drawn-out struggle. Hitler was deeply scarred and haunted by World War I, where Germany beat Russia but was ultimately defeated by the US.
Another revisionist view, almost unanimously rejected in the West, but gaining in favorability(if only as theory or speculation), not least for its utility as neo-Anti-Russian narrative, is that, yes, Hitler was a low-life scumsucker and skunk, BUT he was forced to preemptively attack the Soviet Union because Stalin had been planning to invade Germany first. (Just like Jews find ‘Ukro-Nazis’ useful against Russia, this revisionist camp, though far from exonerating Hitler, at least makes Stalin and the Soviet Union/Russia equal in evil and mendacity. Here’s this demonic monster Hitler, but, evil as he was, his hand was forced by Stalin who had plans to conquer not only Germany but all of Europe. Or, “Stalin was the real Hitler, or More Hitler than Hitler.”
But even if it’s true that Stalin planned to attack first, it’d be misconstrued to regard Hitler’s invasion as merely a ‘defensive’ response. Rather, Hitler took advantage in the ‘never let a crisis go to waste’ mode and embarked on his lifelong dream of lebensraum, an idea that, to be sure, had been floating around in German elite circles even before Hitler was born. Just like Jewish Power used the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait as an excuse to crush Saddam Hussein and later used the ‘War on Terror’(following 9/11) to implement the long-brewing Yinon Plan, Hitler wasn’t merely mitigating the threat posed by the Soviet Union but pouncing on the crisis to fulfill his radical racial imperialist dream. Indeed, Hitler had spelled it all out in his memoirs as to his ultimate goals. And if the ‘Table Talks’ are authentic, Hitler obviously had extensive plans for what he would do with the Russian people and lands. In this, he was fundamentally different from Putin. So, just as it’s ridiculous to say Putin is the ‘New Hitler’, it would be foolhardy to assume that Hitler was the ‘Then Putin’.
Hitler was certainly driven by something other than national security and interests given his powerful obsessions. Personality matters, a matter of distinction between Omar Bradley and George Patton in the famous movie. Bradley, a soldier’s soldier, does what he must but has no love for war. In contrast, Patton loves war as the ultimate expression of heroic virtues. If Patton had his way, WWII would have directly led to WWIII with the Soviet Union, at least according to the movie. Hitler had a grandiose view of history and his place in it. Though trained in fine art, he was also a consummate actor, like Charlie Chaplin. He could be charming and conciliatory, even deferential. Benito Mussolini was won over by Hitler’s show of respect. He could come across as diplomatic and understanding, which is why Neville Chamberlain bit the bullet and cut a deal. But Hitler regarded most of it as performance or theater. In THE GODFATHER, Tom Hagen is a cold rational operative. He’s about ‘business’ and advises Sonny, on purely rational grounds, to settle with the Tataglias despite the attempt on his father’s life. On the surface, Michael can also play it cool and rational, or ‘business’ uber alles, but he is fueled by deep passion and won’t be satisfied until the enemies have been wiped out. Hyman Roth is the same way as he knows how to hold a grudge. Hitler had deep-seated vengeful feelings about Jews. If everything worked according to plan, his idea of magnanimity was sending Jews to Siberia. If Germany was doomed, he was set on taking full revenge and dooming the Jews as well. If triumphant US could drop two nukes on Japan on its last legs, it’s hardly surprising Nazi Germany, facing eventual defeat, would go all in to punish Jews in the worst possible way as they were held responsible not only for the Weimar Period and the Bolshevik Revolution but in having turned the Anglo world against Germany.
Portrait of an Artist as a World Leader. That was Hitler. The arts are the least rational endeavor of man and perhaps most dangerous when their creative/destructive energies are projected onto the real world. Good thing Sam Peckinpah(of THE WILD BUNCH), Francis Ford Coppola( of APOCALYPSE NOW), and Michael Cimino(of HEAVEN’S GATE infamy) stuck to arts & entertainment — even truer of Rock stars. Real world requires calculation than creativity. Hitler, having failed in his creative pursuit, discovered he had talent for political calculation, but all said and done, the animating spirit behind his ultimate dream was the power of myth than the limits of reality.
Psychology matters more with some individuals than others. With Putin, psychology is irrelevant as his view of Russia and the World is rather conventional. It’s been portrayed as ‘extreme’ by the Jewish-controlled Western Media that would have us believe Putin the madman is trying to restore the Soviet Empire. (If anyone needs a shrink, it’s the Western Jews, but never mind as most of psychiatry only made things worse.) Putin has no grand vision of Russian destiny and nurses no mega-global ambitions. He’s proud of his Russian heritage & nation and feels Russia, as a major power, has an important role to play in regional affairs. Putin is obviously angry(even very angry) about recent events in regards to the ‘empire of lies’, but his psychology isn’t driven by personal demons. He was trained to be a lawyer and thinks like a lawyer. He’s more like Tom Hagen for Russia, which is why some observers, like Pavel Craig Robertsky, feel he simply lacks the stuff to be a wartime consiglieri and go all the way. But as recent events has shown, Putin can lay low, fix his targets, and strike when necessary. He could play at war, and it’s not all ‘business’.
With Hitler, psychology totally matters as he was one of the unlikeliest leaders of European history, or any history for that matter. In normal times, a man like that comes nowhere near power. It is in times of great duress that a radical force can seize power, as happened in Russia with the Bolsheviks, but even they gained dominance by the conventional tools of power politics: organization, machinations, conspiracies, and etc.
By such metrics, Hitler was hardly more skilled than other members of National Socialism. What shot him to the top was spellbinding charisma and oratorical prowess of a modern-day sorcerer. His passions intoxicated the masses who, after years of economic havoc and social decay, hoped for a deliverer, a prophet, maybe a god. Even more than the flamboyant Mussolini, he turned politics in theater, history in the stuff of myth. Even those more intelligent, knowledgeable, experienced, and judicious than him were enraptured and ‘converted’(much like Anglo ‘liberal democratic’ rationality is helpless before the black magic of Afromania and Jungle Fever). Also, Hitler’s charisma wasn’t just playacting. He wasn’t merely a performative actor but prophetic author of his own kind of madness that was as enticing as frightening, or enticing precisely because it was so frightening at a time when Germany seemed like one big horror show of decline, poverty, and humiliation. In NIBELUNGEN and PARSIFAL, the order of the gods or kings is mired in a state of paralysis, and it takes a bold outsider to shake things up and bring about the new dawn. Hitler regarded himself in Wagnerian terms, much like today’s young ones tend to see the world through the prism of STAR WARS or STAR TREK(or one of those superhero fantasies or THE MATRIX, or 007 movies in Richie Spencer’s case). It is why Hitler is actually diminished in History if analyzed only rationally, as if forced into fatal decisions under pressure from bigger powers. To fully appreciate him, we must give the devil his due. It won’t do to pretend his story is like the Animals song with the lyrics, “I’m just a soul whose intentions are good, Oh Lord, please don’t let me be misunderstood.” The real Hitlerian psychology is closer to the Who song that goes, “No one knows what it’s like to be the bad man, to be the sad man behind blue eyes. No one knows what it’s like to be hated, to be fated to telling only lies. But my dreams, they aren’t as empty as my conscience seems to be. I have hours, only lonely, my love is vengeance that’s never free.” Or the David Bowie song “Quicksand” that goes, “I’m the twisted name on Garbo’s eyes, living proof of Churchill’s lies, I’m destiny. I’m torn between the light and dark where others see their targets, divine symmetry. Should I kiss the viper’s fang or herald loud the death of Man. I’m sinking in the quicksand of my thought. And I ain’t got the power anymore.”
Psychology is also key to understanding men like T. E. Lawrence and Che Guevara. How does one explain Lawrence’s egomaniacal fusion of Greek Hero and Biblical chieftain? And why wasn’t Guevara content to preside over the Cuban revolution at Castro’s side? Castro had a big ego but also a sense of reality and limitations. For Guevara sky was the limit, and it was moon-or-bust. His envisioned the revolution engulfing all of Latin America, culminating in the downfall of America itself. He was a born dreamer(as well as maniac).
Will to Power operates like Work Ethic. A man has to work, even work hard, to make ends meet, but that, in and of itself, isn’t a sign of work ethic but work necessity. True work ethic is when someone doesn’t have to work to live but nevertheless immerses himself in some task in the belief that a person must be productive and contribute something to society.
In a similar vein, those who feel wronged or unrepresented feel a need to gain some power to secure their place in the world. They must struggle for power, but it isn’t necessarily a Will to Power. Once sufficient security and representation are attained, they accept their place in the world. Their struggle had fixed goals and wasn’t necessarily an obsession with power itself. In contrast, those with Will to Power are never content with enough power, security, and/or opportunity. They must have more, then more, then more… like with the Max character in ONCE UPON A TIME IN AMERICA. Hitler and Guevara weren’t greedy for money but had insatiable appetite for power to remake the world in their image.
Psychology matters with demonic personalities, for whom enough is never enough. In GOODFELLAS and CASINO, Joe Pesci’s characters are not just run-of-the-mill hoodlums. They got more coal in their steam engines. Whether it’s the business world, gangster world, or the political world, some people are content to belong and stick with the norm, whereas others just can’t help testing the limits and pushing for more to see who has the biggest balls; it’s like James Dean’s character playing ‘chicken’ in REBEL WITHOUT A CAUSE.
It’s what set Mao Zedong apart from men like Liu Shao-Chi and Deng Xiaoping. Psychology hardly mattered with men like Liu and Deng, essentially managers ruling over bureaucrats(or technocrats) to get the job done. In contrast, Mao was megalomaniacal by nature, and psychology, more than ideology, drove him to the end.
We would be selling Hitler short if we characterized him merely as a well-meaning actor who lost control of events as the big powers conspired to bring him down. He was a figure like no other, and his significance on the world stage, in all its awesome and terrifying dimensions, cannot be understood apart from the demons that possessed him, in the same way that those, who’d characterized Mao as essentially a humble ‘agrarian reformer’(as many China Hands sympathetic to Chinese Communism referred to him) whose modest goals were to resist Japanese imperialism and improve the lot of Chinese peasants, failed to understand his grandiose vision of things. Putin doesn’t compare himself with the great Tsars of Russian history. His model is someone like Pyotr Stolypin, a diligent manager laboring to balance the contentious forces in the order. In contrast, Hitler measured himself against the great conquerors of history, and Mao regarded himself as the Red Emperor(though with false humility he could tell the likes of Edgar Snow that he was merely a ‘teacher, a school teacher at that’). A stable and functional system is usually closed to such men who live by the credo of Frank Sinatra’s “I Did It My Way”. Indeed, it’s rather surprising(and fortunate, though some may disagree) that a man like Putin managed to gain control of Russia after the 1990s, an opportune time for radicals, visionaries, and maniacs to seize the moment. Given that Russia came under the control of men who favor stability and diplomacy, why did things go so wrong between Russia and the West? I know it sounds like a broken record by now, but it was the Jews.
The so-called ‘liberal west’ or the ‘rules-based international/democratic order’ is anything but. For all intents and purposes, it is a Jewish-Supremacist empire, and many Jews are Zio-Hitlerian in their megalo-ethnic view of the world. They aim to take over every goy society, fill it up with diversity(to play divide and conquer), plant globo-homo victory flags, install pawns(financial, ideological, and/or idolatrous), spread degeneracy, threaten with terror and destruction, all of which they did in Ukraine until Russia just about had enough of the lunacy. But, demon-possessed Jewish Supremacism goes unnamed and even unidentified because Anglos, who ceded power to the Jews, are such lame, craven, and despicable cucks to Jewish Power. Anglo elites bleating about Evil Bad Russia is simply to gain more good-doggy points from the Jewish masters. “Look, me good dog, another biscuit please.” How utterly pathetic. Because Anglo elites, still coasting on prestige of legacy, play along with the charade of ‘liberal democracy’ and ‘rules-based order’, enough white dummies are fooled that the World is divided between ‘democratic orders’ and ‘autocracies’ when the real division is between Jewish Supremacist Hegemony and sovereign nations.
If most sovereign states are not(or cannot afford to be) democratic, it is because true democracy has been perverted by the Jewish-supremacist deep state that exploits freedom in any nation to corrupt politicians(with bribes), convert status-anxious elites(to whatever degeneracy is fashionable in the West), gain media control, promote civil unrest(via agitation by agent provocateurs that can turn into ‘color revolutions’), and burden with debt. What kind of a ‘democratic’ or ‘rules-based order’ is it when the lesser member-states are made to bow to the will of the imperium, conform to the same ‘values’(as dictated by Jewish Power), follow the same fashions, agree on the same narratives, worship the same secular idols/gods, and enforce the same policies? Are the lesser member states allowed any agency or autonomy? Recently, Hungarians overwhelmingly re-elected Viktor Orban, and the so-called Democratic West targets it for destruction. What is the point of democracy if a nation is to be destroyed for voting against Sorosian globalism and loss of sovereignty, for defending health and sanity against the perversion of the globo-homo agenda? The so-called ‘rules-based order’ makes an “offer you can’t refuse”: Adhere to the DC and NY line, like the lesser communist states had to parrot and implement the Moscow Line. What’s the point of democracy when all the peoples in the so-called ‘free world’ are relentlessly berated to feel, think, and act alike(or be sanctioned to oblivion or color-revolution-ed)? If the Jewish-controlled West allowed democracies in other nations to develop of their own accord, the world might be full of national democracies embodying both freedom and sovereignty. But wherever a bit of freedom and openness expands in some part of the world, it isn’t long before the Jewish-controlled US deep state comes trundling along with bags of money, influence-peddling, false values, and dirty tricks to corrupt the budding democracy into yet another satrapy of the sicko West. In these times, sovereign nations are forced into partial autocratism because their openness is taken advantage by the George Soroses of the world who work in cahoots with the Jewish-controlled US empire.
In a way, Jews are more problematic than Germans of the National Socialist period who mainly longed for normality and stability — they looked to extraordinarily abnormal Hitler because extreme times call for extreme figures — , whereas a large number of Jews vape on neuroticism as the favored norm, as during the Weimar Period that many Jews even now regard with fondness, which explains why Jews used all their power and influence to turn the US into Weimerica; different groups have different norms, and one main source of woes around the world is the assumption that the norm of one group prevails among others, e.g. expecting black Africans to act like Swedes, and another source of woes is fixating on the positive or alluring quality of the group norm while overlooking the problematic aspects, e.g. admiring Jewish wit while overlooking Jewish personality’s boundless capacity for hostility. Most Germans didn’t want wars and more gambles with history. For them, the man of the hour was Hitler who possessed the power of will and vision at a time when most German elites seemed confused, timid, craven, and/or uninspired, lacking the boldness and determination to restore social order and national pride. Unfortunately, Hitler had bigger plans, just like Alexander the Great kept pushing forward despite his men feeling they’d conquered ‘enough’, a word missing in Alexander’s vocabulary.
The ensuing economic recovery following the Nazi downfall showed that most Germans didn’t ask for much more than a decent life. Without political pathology at the top, most Germans are sane and sound. Not so among Jews. Pathological tendencies appear to be more common among Jews. Indeed, what is remarkable about the Jewish War on Palestinians/Arabs, Iran, Russia, Christianity, the entire white race, and now even China is that degree of venom glistening on Jewish fangs. Remove the crazy Jews on top, and there are many more batches of Jewish gremlins waiting in the wings to take their place. Jews in the media, academia, government, entertainment, and various other fields share in the bottomless contempt or hatred for just about anything. Just look at the deranged look on Victoria Nuland’s face, and the unnerving fact is she isn’t some outlier but an archetype(following in the footsteps of the equally deranged Madeleine Albright). It would appear lots of Anglos are similarly deranged in their anti-Russian animus, but they are dogs doing the bidding of their master. The minute Jews say, “Let’s be friends with Russia”, and the Anglos will follow along.
If Nazism could be destroyed along with the regime, Jewish craziness will percolate upward from the bottom even when removed at the top. In THE WIZARD OF OZ, things returned to normal once the Wicked Witch met her demise. But what if the town is full of wicked witches? Get rid of one and another just takes her place. What is amazing, indeed astounding, is the sheer number of crazy Jews at every level of institutions and industries who share in the diabolical hatreds of the top Jews. Germans were spellbound by Hitler but regressed to normality once he was gone. But, rid the world of Robert Kagan and Victoria Nuland, and there’s a ten-mile-long line of Jews just itching to fill their shoes.
One would assume that for every Jew who thinks one way, there’s another who thinks another way. Then, how is it that for every Stephen Cohen(who correctly argued Putin is a man the West can do business with), there are fifty Robert Kagans for whom any compromise with Russia is out of the question as the only acceptable outcome is, “Jews Win, Russians lose”? (Ronald Reagan “We win, they lose” quip was merely ideological as he harbored no animus against Russians per se. But for Jews it’s a matter of ethnic domination by the Chosen over the Cattle.) There’s a gnawing rodent-like nature to Jewish personality that simply won’t give up. It’s like the guy in THE HEARTBREAK KID(by Elaine May) who simply won’t accept NO to his quest for the golden shikse, just like Roy(Richard Dreyfuss) in THE CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND must find his way to touch the space aliens. And even though Tony Montana in the SCARFACE remake isn’t Jewish, something of Stone’s half-Jewish nature seems to have rubbed off on him. Montana says, “This town’s like a big fat pussy just waiting to get fuc*ed.” He’s like a gangster heartbreak kid, or ball-busting kid.
The Jewish view of Russia is essentially Montanaean. Jews see Russia as one big pussy just waiting to be fuc*ed. Why not, as the Anglo World has been turned into one big anus pummeled day in and day out by the big fat Jewish pud? What is Anglosphere but a ‘bacha bazi’ of Jewish Power? Afghan perverts have their jollies with young boys, and Jewish Globalists do so with White America, one big gaping hole of a Bacha BaZion.
It explains Anglo hysterics about Russia’s saying NO to being bacha-bazized by Jewish Power. Russia’s forceful NO exposes the shameful and fallen state of the Anglo World. Anglos would feel less humiliated if the whole world succumbed to their position vis-a-vis the Jews. Imagine some pervert butt-rapes a bunch of boys who come to accept their ‘bitch’ status. At the very least, they are equal in their humiliation. But then, suppose one boy says NO and won’t bend over despite all the threats and violence(and even manages to land some blows on the pervert). The courageous thing would be for the other boys to cheer on the defiant boy, but what if they’re resigned to their servitude to the point where they’re unnerved by any show of resistance? It is like how cops, though ideologically right-leaning, beat up conservative protesters even harder for exposing the craven obey-the-orders operation of the police that usually does the bidding of the ‘liberal’ power elites. Anglos used to rule the world, but they now bear witness to lowly Russian Slavs standing up to Jewish Supremacist power while they themselves, from UK to Australia to Canada to US, line up, face the wall, bend over, pull down their pants, and wait their turn to be buggered yet again by Jewish Power.
The Jewish War on Russia parallels the Jewish War on Reality(the ultimate source of Jewish Power) as Russia refuses to bend the knee to the decree that the Neo-Talmudic Word trumps the Actual World. If Jews say a green ball is purple, we must see purple. It used to be that Liberal Democracies were committed to reason & truth(and only tolerated deviance & weirdness), whereas dictatorships and autocracies suppressed facts and distorted logic, as if reality itself toed the party line — if millions were starving in Ukraine but Stalin said bumper harvests ensured everyone was eating well, everyone was eating well.
But, the so-called ‘liberal democracies’, now totally under Jewish Control, are about the tyranny of deviance and perversion than their tolerance. Indeed, Russia and China(and even Islamic-ruled Iran) now seem relatively sane and grounded in truth vis-a-vis the West, not because they’re committed to principles of liberty, reason, and facts-at-any-cost but simply because they have a basic grounding in reality, like, for example, a man wearing a wig is NOT a woman or that sodomy isn’t some ‘rainbow’ magic that should be celebrated, especially among children. Just like a one-eyed man is king in the land of the blind, the mere fact of calling a spade a spade makes one sane in a crazy world of Jewish-hegemonic globo-homo-ism. Indeed, even Russia in the bad old days of communism had a firmer grounding in reality than the current West. Despite its philosophical flaws, Marxism-Leninism was grounded in concern for the proletariat, the very people doing the heavy lifting of economic production. When Marxism failed to deliver, communist states fudged on data. Still, communism’s war on reality wasn’t as total(and arbitrary) as the current war on reality waged by Jews. Communist states didn’t say homo fecal-penetration was biologically or morally equivalent to real sex between men and women. They didn’t believe young children should be ‘instructed’ with porny comic books. Communist states didn’t say a man could be a ‘woman with male genitals’, a ludicrous notion.
But, the current West isn’t only making such ludicrous claims but mandating that all of us agree… or else be ‘canceled’. Instead of tolerance for weirdos, the weird MUST BE accepted as the New Normal. The source of his lunacy is Jewish Power, and it actually has less to do with homos and trannies than the Will to Mold Reality as the Jews please. Jews not only want dominance in reality but domination over reality, i.e. the godlike Jewish Word shapes the World. Suppose there is a tree before a Jew and a goy. The tree is real. Now, suppose the Jew gains control of tree. So, the Jew takes the biggest fruits from the tree while goy gets the smaller ones. Still, the fact of the tree’s existence is a truth higher than the Jewish control of the tree. The Jew may control the tree, but even he has to accept the reality of the tree. And even though the goy knows the Jew gets the first picks, he too knows the tree is real, and therefore, there is a reality higher than the Jew. But suppose the Jew wants the power OVER reality, i.e. being the lord IN reality is no longer sufficient for the Jew who now wants to be lord OF reality. Even objective reality must bend his will. So, suppose the Jew says the tree is now a flower, and the goy MUST agree it is so, or else. Thus, the Jew doesn’t merely have power over the goy but the power to mold the goy’s perception of reality itself. It’s what George Orwell demonstrated with the notion of 2 + 2 = 5 in 1984. ‘Big Brother’ has godlike power over reality itself. It isn’t enough that Jews have power over us IN reality as that would imply reality exists as a fact independent of their wishes. Therefore, if Jews are to have total control over us, they must have power over reality itself, mold it as they please, and demand that we agree with their anti-essential and anti-obvious assertions — women are more than half the population, yet Jewish Power has managed to press upon all Western elites(and some Easter ones) that trannies, a tiny sliver even within the LGBTQXYZ community, are the ultimate authority of what constitutes womanhood. Liberalism is gone, replaced by Delusionalism, or maybe similar to the literary genre of Magic Realism, what prevails is Magic Liberalism, one based on fantasies of the Narrative than facts of reality.
So, if the Jewish Mandate insists there’s no such thing as a core German people because non-Germans can gain German citizenship, it must be true, no less than the notion that a guy with pud-and-balls can be a ‘woman’. But then, if Jews state that they constitute a unique people, and Israel must preserve the core identity and demography of their kind, that must also be true. Never mind logic or consistency. ‘Reality’ is always as Jews say. This way, we can no longer point to reality or appeal to logic to counter the Jewish narrative/script as ‘reality is always as Jews say’, like ‘science’ has been ever so ‘fluid’ under Jewish-controlled Covidian cult(and the stuff about ‘race being a social construct’). Whatever Jewish Power says in the Current Hour is the truth, that is unless it says something else — ‘Trust the Science’ really means ‘Trust the Jews(or Schwience)’. Whether something is potentially true or mere ‘disinformation’ is simply a matter of what the New York Times says(and its minion media outlets parrot). If a black African marauding into Europe is just as much a ‘Frenchman’ or ‘German’ as the native folks with roots reaching back thousands of years(and evolutionary past going back tens of thousands of years), then of course a man with penis and balls is a ‘woman’ if Jews say so. We are told the great thing about ‘liberal democracy’ is it rejects ethno-nationalism… but all ‘liberal democracies’ around the world must pledge to support and favor not only Jewish identity and Jewish nationalism in Israel but Jewish hegemony over the globe. It’s a Zeligish view of the world. What goes by the name of American Exceptionalism amounts to white goyim denouncing ethno-nationalism as the worst possible thing for whites and the best possible thing for Jews; indeed, it’s so great for Jews that mere ethno-nationalism is inadequate for awesome Jewish Pride and must be expanded into ethno-supremacism.
Zelensky is a perfect avatar, so symptomatic of Jewish Power as the cancer of our times. He might as well be called Zeliginsky as he’s adept at morphing into whatever in regards to the setting and audience — you’d think a second-rate Peter Sellers is the head(or hand, foot, knee, abdomen, penis, ass, etc) of Ukraine. One thing for sure, Putin stands for Russia. Hitler stood for German/Aryan power. That much was never in doubt. But, while Jewish Power is clearly for Jewish influence and hegemony, Jews dare not admit it out of fear that the goyim may wake up, realize what’s going on, and become critical of Jewish Power(as the real hand behind the major events and crises). So, Jewish Supremacism plays differently from the run-of-the mill ethnic, national, and/or imperial interests. It is laundered through various facades and charades in a never ending spin operation. So, even though nations like Russia, China, Iran, India, and others discuss matters of universal or international relevance, they also make clear the particularity of their vantage points.
In contrast, even though Jewish Power works to further tribal supremacism, it pretends otherwise, hiding behind legalese and bogus rhetoric when its actual behavior reeks of decrepitude and hypocrisy. Consequently, Jewish-controlled US is the most threatening and coercive power in the world yet also the most opaque and contradictory because it is never honest about its character and agenda. Jewish-controlled American Power is like the barber in the Monty Python skit who really wants to be a lumberjack, or the most eccentric sort, a tranny lumberjack, but is afraid to blurt it out. Then, no wonder Putin called the US and West in general(as the mini-me of the US) the ‘Empire of Lies’, though he also enabled the Lie by failing to name the Jewish Power behind it all. He named the ‘nazis’ but not the Cabal that recruited them as muscle — it certainly wasn’t for their minds.
Jews have come full circle, even jumping the shark, by siding with quasi-nazi-types(of all people, but then, they’ve also come to represent the vanguard of Neo-McCarthyism(despite having denounced the Senator from Wisconsin as the worst figure in US history) without any pushback from academia, media, and the state, all of which are controlled ideologically and/or financially by Jewish supremacists and their puppets. Thus, Censchwarzship only grows in severity and reach, silencing ever more voices, unlike McCarthyism that was soon brought down by a partnership of both parties, forever disgraced and eventually disavowed even by the likes of William F. Buckley. Back then, American Liberalism developed in defense of civil liberties against the likes of Joe McCarthy but, as ascendant Jews became addicted to supremacism, has degenerated into a full support of blacklisting, silencing, and even de-banking individuals on the basis of ideology.
Jewish political perversions are truly through the roof. Though Jewish Power used 9/11 as rationale for War on Terror against Arab/Muslim states targeted by Israel, they turned it into War with Terror Israel and World Jewry decided to hit Libya and Syria next — within ten years, the mission to destroy Alqaeda turned into mission to arm Alqaeda. It’s batshit crazy, but that’s where we are at, and there’s no hope until people finally start to name the Jewish Power. Baldy legal expert Robert Barnes blames the Wasp elites as the perennial Deep State baddies when, in fact, such ilk are now little more than cuck-functionaries of Jewish Power. Despite the dark side of Wasp history, it once did produce men like George Kennan whose influence on US foreign policy erred on the side of patience and judiciousness. Anglo-American animus against Russia during the Cold War was ideological than ethnic, whereas it is almost entirely ethnic in the post-ideological age among Jews, a people still fuming(or pretending to) over the barring of their grandfathers from Country Clubs. There was once some degree of ‘racial’ unease among Anglos and Germanics toward Slavs, but it faded once ‘racism’ became the biggest ‘sin’ in the West, rendering the US-USSR conflict into one of political systems than bloodlines(though the recent fervor bordering on ecstasy of ‘Russophobia’ suggests ‘racist’ feelings, being innate to human nature, are gratefully running wild against an approved target, especially as it is white). During the Cold War, many Jews, then on the Left, sided with Russia out of ideological affinity despite ethnic tensions, but once the secular god of Marxism failed, soon followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union, only ethnic feelings remained in Jewish hearts, arrogant and scornful, even vengeful(as the USSR had sided with Arab nations against Israel and suppressed Jewish ‘liberals’, actually ethno-wolves in globo-clothing). Furthermore, some of the more diehard Jewish leftists may have felt it wasn’t socialism that failed the Russians but Russians who failed socialism. End result would have been ethnic disdain among the remaining Jewish Leftists as well.
Given recent events, at least since the end of the Cold War, we can perhaps appreciate the role of communism in the 20th century. One merely needs to look at how the US, as the lone superpower, has acted on the world stage in the absence of countervailing forces. We’ve witnessed the return of naked imperialism, especially in the Middle East. One could argue this was the direct result of Jewish takeover of the US. As the main source of Jewish Power has been global-networking than deep loyalty to any single goy nation, Jewish elites eschewed modest nationalism and ‘humble foreign policy’ as the post-Cold-War consensus in favor of squeezing the New World Order for all it was worth.
Anyway, had the Soviet Union persisted as the Formidable Other, what would have been America’s course of action? With Soviet Power still occupying Eastern Europe, the Western military alliance would have had a less free hand elsewhere. (In a way, Cold Warriors dreaded the Cold War end more than its continuance. As either shills of the military-industrial complex or careerists whose positions depended on superpower rivalry, they had no qualms about exaggerating the Soviet threat. The unintended salutary effect of such exaggerations was the greater caution in foreign policy lest either superpower trigger another land war in Europe and even a nuclear exchange.) At the very least, Soviet overtures to the Third World pushed the West not only into an arms race but a heart race, one where the West rebranded itself as anti-imperialist and pro-liberation/independence for all peoples.
However, soon after the end of the Cold War, US and NATO became brazenly neo-imperialist, acting less like a triumphant world cop than a gangster finally showing his true face. Imperialism had been hidden away than expunged from the Western agenda, only to burst out of the closet like the homos beginning in the Clinton 90s(though the first Gulf War was a harbinger of things to come).
At least with Afghanistan and even Iraq, the US had 9/11 had excuse as either revenge or preemption. The madness however continued after Bush II with Obama administration’s gangster tactics in Libya(in which mini-me European members of NATO participated, as being part of such super-duper alliance makes even the dinkiest European nation feel important as a member of The Club) and Syria. Worse, there was hardly any pushback from media(and academia), apparently totally taken over by ethno-regulatory or ethno-editorial capture. The West has obviously gone insane, geo-politically as well as culturally and spiritually. During the Cold War, the West made a big deal of its free press and free speech to counter the Soviet empire of censorship and conformity, but the Cold War’s end, especially with Jews-as-the-new-elites, made free and open public debate/dissent less useful to the regime. (A window of opportunity for free speech opened with the internet and social media, contributing to Trump’s win in 2016 and surges of white populism, whereupon the powers-that-be declared open season Free Speech. On the other hand, the increasing pornification of society is enough to keep many people fooled that ‘free speech’ is alive and well in the West. They believe ‘sexual licentiousness = freedom’ and ‘sexual modesty = repression’, failing to understand that anarcho-tyranny could be using debauchery to debilitate moral and dignified opposition to the regime.)
One wonders if the West would have become so degenerate and decadent had the Soviet/Communist persisted as a looming threat, as well as the official command center of International Leftism. (The fact that the USSR was leftist posed a thematic threat to the West. Given trajectory of modernity, leftism with its cult of change, progress, and social justice had a decisive advantage over rightism in the global imagination. After all, the American Revolution and the French Revolution, two world-shaking events in modern history, both defined themselves against the Old Way. And even after the French Revolution fell to the forces of Reaction, Western History marched onward driven by leftist and liberal energies, though often unappreciated at the time, the rightist remnants provided the stability and continuity necessary for the changes. Minus the challenge of Soviet Union and Communism, the West could have presented itself as the leading leftist force in the world but was forced into a de fault ‘rightist’ position vis-a-vis the communist order committed to radical leftism, anti-imperialism, and world liberation. Because of leftism’s allure, the majority of educated and intellectual classes in US and Western Europe leaned leftward. Even when anti-communist, they felt that rightism was somehow worse or a bigger threat because, at the very least, radical leftism was for the good things albeit in a bad way whereas rightism was just blind bigotry and dogmatic intransigence against necessary change and progress. Therefore, it was the dream of Western Power Elites to own the leftist brand as their own to brandish themselves as the torchbearers of progress and justice. Thus, the end of the Cold War was regarded not so much as a defeat of leftism but an opportunity for Western elites to refashion leftism in ways that best served their own power, and the end result has been ideology replaced with idolatry, mainly of Jews and their main allies, homos and Negroes.) During the Cold War, the West had to hold a manly bulwark against a formidable rival, and something like overt globo-homo degeneracy would have defeated the purpose.
And, even though communism racked up a criminal history all its own(unprecedented in some respects), it also served as a moral crusade against capitalist exploitation and Western Imperialism, with the salutary effect of compelling the West to enact reforms and clean up its image, especially in the Third World. It went away with the fall of communism. Western capitalism became ever more brazen and gutted the national working classes, leading to the present moment where the top 1% has more wealth than the entire middle class. Given the rise of ‘wokeness’, one might think the West has turned far-left, especially given the unrelenting moral pressure on the white-majority. In other words, the West prides itself as at total war with ‘racism’ in the name of ‘equity’ and ‘social justice’. Thus, the West seems capable of genuflection and redemption without the challenge of communism. But upon closer inspection, ‘wokeness’ is really a furtherance of Jewish Supremacism as, far from being a proponent of equality for all, it plays favorites with the races, with some being more-equal-than-others. ‘Wokeness’ is certainly muted about the Zionist tyranny over Palestinians, US mass-killings in Syria & Iraq, and black terror against non-blacks.
Just like some bio-labs formulate ethno-specific germs, ‘wokeness’ is race-specific in its targeting, i.e. some races can never do wrong, some can never do right. It favors the virulence of globo-homo that, via the neo-vatican of the media, has been elevated to the holiest of the holies among the ‘educated’ classes. ‘Wokeness’ is a perversely brilliant move by Jews to make neo-imperialism palatable to the both the Western elites(whose highest value derives from ‘rainbow’ sodomy and catchphrases like ‘diversity is our strength’ & ‘black lives matter’) and nonwhites(as new recruits as servitors of the empire, therefore traitors against their own kind, like Fareed Zakaria the Muslim who beats the war drums against Muslim countries — indeed, consider how easily the empire was able to morally launder its crimes through Obama, the ‘first black president’, also labeled the ‘first gay president’).
And, so-called ‘progressives’ were okay with continued US presence in Afghanistan because there were ‘gay rights’ lessons for Afghan girls. And besides, bombs can’t be that bad if consecrated with BLM signs.
No wonder then the new imperial design is to portray US as the empire of ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ against China as the ethnocentric nation-state and Russia as the civilization of Christian revival. Contra ‘racist’ China ruled by Han people, the lone superpower takes special pride in the self-abnegating white majority extolling Negrolatry and Gay Rites as the highest truths. One may argue that most non-Westerners(outside Black Africa) may not be won over by this. Why should Hindus look kindly upon an empire that favors blacks uber alles? But, apart from Black Magic serving as global moral currency(like the US dollar), the appeal may not be so much the ascension of the Negro as the descension of the Whitey because whiteness has been for so long synonymous with world imperialism for the last several centuries. Thus, blackness serves as a trope even for non-blacks, much like Japan’s victory in the Russo-Japanese War of 1905, the first time a non-white nation bested a white nation in the Industrial Age. When whiteness has so long been dominant around the world, anything that beats and humiliates it, physically or morally, can be a cause for celebration in the non-white world. Likewise, Vietnam War was more than about the Vietnamese. It symbolized for much of the world the struggle against the Imperialist West, the latest manifestation of which was deemed to be capitalist US. Of course, blackness is more complicated as it’s largely the cultural export of the American Empire. For example, something like Rap music can be seen as a rebellion against ‘racist’ White America but also as a cultural arsenal of American ugliness, vulgarity, and arrogance. One might draw parallels between the brutality of the US military and the thuggery of gangsta rappers, both of which rest on bad attitude toward the Other(fuc*az).
Whatever positive effects that communism had on the 20th century in applying moral pressure on capitalism, ideologically combating imperialism, checking the power of the US, and ironically serving as a culturally conservative force for nationalism & traditionalism(as lack of capitalist dynamics prevented the rise of fad-and-fashion culture on par with the West), thus preventing it from becoming the hubris-laden sole arbiter of right and wrong around the world, it was bound to fail in the long run because it couldn’t economically sustain itself for long(and besides, Russia held out as long as it did because of its vast size and abundant natural resources). So, if the US was bound to win the Cold War sooner or later, future power competition may turn out differently. Though fascism was defeated militarily in World War II, thereby leading to the fallacy that it lost out ideologically, it could serve as the basis for power greater than what goes by the name of ‘liberal democracy’. Also, the power of ‘liberal democracy’ has been exaggerated because Anglos happened to take possession of the best lands on earth that had been sparsely populated by primitives. Without the US and its vast resources and living space for an increased population, would ‘liberal democracy’ have really won out in the 20th century? Just like communism benefited greatly because it happened to take over resource-rich Russia, ‘liberal democracy’ became exaggerated in worth as formula for power because of America’s immense natural wealth that could be exploited by sufficient enterprise and organization. The problem with ‘liberal democracy’ is that a certain group, with a mix of talent and cunning, can take over the system and not only control elite institutions and industries but manipulate them to favor a new set of gods, which in the West became Jew-worship, Negrolatry, and Globohomo. Also, instead of using the power to uphold principles, the Power can act like gangsters and employ lawfare as it chooses. The result becomes tribal oligarchic gangsterism, which is what the US is today. Still, given the will and talent of the ruling Jewish elites, America’s vast size & resources, huge manpower, financial control, media control, and the like, the US is still uniquely positioned to dominate much of the world. Still, it faces a challenge because the rivals are no longer communist. While communism was effective in consolidating power and unity in Russia and China during the Cold War, its long-term economic prospects were dire. Soviet economy began its long decline in the 1970s, and Maoism kept China as a mostly agricultural economy, not even a productive one at that, well into the 1970s. But since the 1980s, both abandoned classical Marxism. In Russia, the shock of wild-west gangster-capitalism in the sudden aftermath of the collapse of the state meant globalist leeches could bleed the country dry. In contrast, the state remained strong in China and stage-managed the transformation from communism to limited capitalism. In time, Russia also regained political stability, and both systems now use capitalism as the economic basis of national power. Thus, unlike their communist past, they are on far firmer material grounds for either resisting, standing up, or even challenging the West. Also, as neither Russia nor China is a ‘liberal democracy’, it’s much more difficult for the likes of George Soros to gain control of all institutions and industries that matter. One could argue Russia and especially China are more repressive than the West(which, however, is getting more repressive by the day), but given the political and cultural fate of the West under the so-called ‘liberal democratic’ order, it’s not necessarily a bad thing, especially as so-called ‘liberal democracy’ has allowed itself to become consumed by tribal supremacism, cultural degeneracy, sexual(or ‘gender’) lunacy, censoriousness(which nullifies the claim of liberality), and mindless idolatry(that undermines secular reason). It now seems ‘liberal democracy’, though a good idea, had an Achilles Heel that could be targeted to bring it down, all the while continuing to use the label as ideological cover. Even though many people are loathe to use the term, it’s coming down to a test of national fascism(Russia and China) versus tribal imperialism(the West under Jewish control). Both sides are creative in their own way. Fascism, unlike communism or reactionary traditionalism, was open to experimenting with various combinations of leftism and rightism to arrive at what works. If in the past, communist Russia and China couldn’t utilize the power of capitalism for ideological reasons, such inhibitions are gone as they’re driven more by nationalism than ideological dogma. Also, in emphasizing the national interest, they can control and rein in capitalism and its detrimental cultural effects, pretty dire in the US, Europe, and Jatako(Japan-Taiwan-South-Korea). Russia and China would rather not call it ‘fascist’, a term associated with their great enemies in World War II, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. But many in the West also prefer not to call it ‘fascism’ because it would give the lie to the notion that fascism lost out ideologically, when it only lost militarily. Granted, one could argue that fascism drove Hitler to World War II, but the far more aggressive world powers were ‘liberal capitalist’; after all, Anglos and the French had already gobbled up much of the world before the term ‘fascism’ was muttered for the first time. But because the Grand Narrative says that Liberal Democracy beat out all other ideologies, especially fascism and communism, in the 20th century, it won the War of History of Ideas. Whereas communism really did lose ideologically(as the Cold War never became a hot war between US and USSR), it’s simply not true that fascism lost ideologically to capitalism. If World War II could have been avoided, and especially if the Soviet Union moved from the communist model to a more fascist one, there’s no telling which side would have prevailed in the long run. (While the communist order had a hard time accepting full-blown capitalism, as it would mean the implosion of state power, it could accommodate the transition to fascism whereby market economy would be allowed while allowing the existing political power structure to remain intact, which was the case in China, and something which Putin has struggled to restore in Russia as, in the absence of such central authority, the nation could be ravaged from all sides by globalist sharks and the people, from elites to the masses, could be corrupted with endless temptations.) If WWII could have been avoided, would Germany have done better under its fascist or National Socialist system? East German communism didn’t pan out in the long run. Germany as a ‘liberal democracy’ did make good use of capitalism but became a culturally hollow and soulless place, one of sterility and decadence.
Anyway, on the matter the fluid nature of Jewish Power and how Zelensky is almost its perfect embodiment. His cult grew out of his role as entertainer, actor, comedian, song-and-dance man, globohomo clown, and impresario. Slavs, apparently as dumb as goyim everywhere, fell for his TV persona where he played a righteous underdog who stood up to the corrupt power structure and prevailed in Capraesque fashion. Mr. Zelensky Goes to Kiev(or Kyiv). (Can anyone imagine a bunch of clever goyim pulling something like this on Jews in Israel or NY? Jews would see through the BS and sound the alarm, as well as have a good laugh at the expense of the goyim of course, but goyim are almost ‘innocent’ in their gullibility. But then, whereas Jews invented their own God, goyim ‘stole’ or was sold the spiritual vision of the Jews and became Christians or Muslims. As nasty as Jews are, one wonders if it’s only right for them to rule over goyim who are so dumb and/or weak.)
Here’s Zelensky, a jester, doing his shtick on a show funded by Zionist-globalist oligarchs, and he becomes the Great Slavic Hope of Ukraine, even though his mission is to colonize Slavic hearts-and-minds with fantasies cooked up by Jewish media monopoly(or psycho-labs).
Just like Woody Allen’s character in ZELIG, Zelensky or Zeligensky’s gimmick is to morph into just about anything in the moment. Near the end of ZELIG, we even see Woody Allen’s gumby-like character become a Nazi in one of the most ROTFL moments in movie history. While there were ideological similarities and even strategic links between National Socialism and Zionism before World War II, who would have thought Jewish Power would so brazenly end up in the same bed with Nazi-like elements? Ukraine, what a surreal place, an artificial national construct ruled by Jewish oligarchs(with backing of Zio-centric and European puppets) and defended(and expanded) by Sub-Nazi types.
At first sight, this Zionist-Nazi alliance makes no sense considering how much Hitler hated the Jews and how Jews made ‘nazi’ the secular synonym of Evil. Paradoxically however, the antagonism between Jewish Power and National Socialism owed to their similarities along supremacist lines. Universalism might work if a set of principles were to be accepted equally by all the peoples of the world. Particularism might work if all peoples not only insisted upon their own uniqueness but acknowledged that of other peoples as well, whereby they respect the varying narratives, cultures, values, and geographies.
But, when a particularist agenda seeks hegemony over others, it is tribalism on a universal scale with serious contradictions. And Nazism and Zionism were alike in this sense. At their cores, both were defined by tribal uniqueness so extreme as to foster a coldly contemptuous supremacist worldview. Feeling superior, it seemed only right that they should lord over others as helots or cattle. Even though Western Imperialism in general had supremacist tendencies(like many other imperialisms since the dawn of time), it was ameliorated by Christian piety and/or Enlightenment ideals. Nazism was short on such sentiments, and Jewishness merely exploited universalist ideas to advance Jewish supremacist interests. (21st Century events indicate, whereas Nazi Germans didn’t seek control of the entire world, Jewish Power is indeed fixed on world domination. Germans wanted equal or even junior partnership with the Anglos, whereas Jews insist on Anglos serving as their dogs and horses. George Soros, as the notorious face of Jewish Will, hasn’t been content with control of Anglosphere, dominance over the EU, and financial plunder of Asian nations. His current rage against Russia and China owes to being thwarted from controlling them as well. He sought to remake the Soviet Empire into the Soros Empire and once boasted about China falling into his hands. The fact that he isn’t only allowed but enabled by Western powers to throw his weight around wherever he goes speaks volumes about the nature of Jewish Power. As far as the Jewish Globo-Mafia is concerned, Soros is a ‘made man’, and he can do as he wishes and no one better stand in his way. His likes and dislikes are so aligned with current (((Western))) Policy.
Things have only gotten worse and will get even worse given the rules of elite selection in the West. To rise or remain high as a Jew, you must be a nasty vicious tribal-supremacist, someone like Victoria Nuland and Stinkin’ Blinken. If you’re a Jew with a conscience or integrity, you’ll end up like Norman Finkelstein, pushed to the margins. As for goyim, their password for elite entry is ‘Cuck-Hard’. In other words, a Jew must have a master-race will-to-power mentality and a massive pair of balls chugging with bile to make it, whereas a goy must have a servant-race will-to-cower mentality and be castrated. It is why Arabists are nowhere to be found in the US government. Goyim aren’t allowed to be judicious and fair-minded; they must be 100% servile to Jews and Zionism. Imagine someone like George Kennan having influence on foreign policy today. Anyone who even dares to challenge the Jewish Supremacist narrative will be branded a ‘Russian stooge’, and there’s nothing that can be done about it because, whereas Joe McCarthy was a lone gun eventually brought down by the Real Power, Jewish Blacklisting has been institutionalized at every level of government, academia, media, entertainment, and the courts. Mechanism of elite selection has had huge repercussions, and the result is vicious Jewish Masters and servile Anglo Dogs.
Zelenksy or Zeligensky can be anything to any side. To the British, he’s said to be ‘Churchillian’. To Americans, he pontificates about MLK and 9/11. To the Germans, predictably he plays the Holocaust Card. Before the Israeli Knesset, he pretends Ukrainians and Jews were always best-friends-over and allies against the eternal common foe, the Russkies. And in private meetings with Ukrainian Sub-Nazis, he surely plays the ultra-nationalist card. Houdini-like, he shape-shifts to worm through tight spots. Not only is he a man of many faces but of many places. He could be in Kiev, but he might be in Poland or some other safe country. And even as he calls on NATO to escalate the conflict into full-blown World War III, he makes conciliatory gestures toward Russia, as if on the verge of breakthroughs satisfactory to both sides. A Man for All Reasons. Of course, his only real concern involves fellow Jews and tribal power. Surely, his feelings about Slavs(as cannon fodder) are similar to the Woody Allen character’s observation of soldiers on the battlefield in LOVE AND DEATH, his counterpart to Kubrick’s BARRY LYNDON. Though ostensibly a satire of war, the tone is derisive of the sheep-like stupidity of goyim.
ZELIG was Allen’s most intellectually oriented film up to that time, one that recruited big names in literature and philosophy to lend the ‘mockumentary’ the illusion of gravitas. Allan Bloom mentioned it in THE CLOSING OF THE AMERICAN MIND as an instruction on the dangers of relativism, which became a buzzword among American Conservatives for the next two decades, as if the rise of increasingly shrill Political Correctness had much to do with something so nuanced.
A more valid critique of ZELIG would address its essential dishonesty. As Woody Allen would have it, the problem of Jewishness has been the lack of ego, agency, and purpose. So, Zelig, having no soul or core identity of his own, metamorphoses into whatever he happens to be nearby. Around blacks, he turns blacky. Around Wasps, he turns waspy. And most outrageously, around Nazis, he turns Nazi. (What about when he’s around Wasps, blacks, Poles, Chinese, and etc. at the same time?)
Zelig is thus presented as essentially a passive figure. His uncertain identity is resigned to the environment around him. It’s been said of Peter Sellers that he lost his true sense of self as he got so used to mimicking others; or maybe it was the product of having no core identity to begin with.
Yet, this is misleading because, despite Zelig’s malleable octopus-like qualities, he always reverts back to his Zeligish self. He doesn’t permanently turn into the Other but merely mimics it. So, there is a powerfully resilient Zeligish core, just like the creature in John Carpenter’s THE THING, despite taking on various forms, has a core design and agenda, also true of the T-1000 in TERMINATOR 2, which, despite the ability to morph into any shape, is on a mission to destroy humankind.
If Zelig were truly passive, he would fully assimilate into the Other, but, octopus-like, he’s always restored to his Zelig-self. Zelig has an amazing ability but isn’t fully cognizant of what’s happening, as if it’s being done to him than him doing it. But, can this be said for Jewishness through the ages, i.e. Jews were ‘innocent’ of their knack for adaptability? Perhaps, Allen’s idea of the confused and disoriented rootless Jew applies to a particular generation(s) in the modern era when Jews, upon Emancipation, did try to become one with the Other. Perhaps, such Jews did try to abandon Jewishness and merge with goyim but discovered they cannot because they’re animated by an innate force that sets them apart from various goy kind. Also, paradoxically, the very talent for mimicry made Jews less likely to assimilate, at least fully, because the game was too easy to play, like hitting the light switch on/off, thus rendering goy-toy cultures as something to caricature than sincerely embrace. In the end, Al Jolson was no Negro.
But then, sincerity didn’t necessarily pay off either. Jews who tried to be ‘good Germans’ ended up in Nazi concentration camps. And those who tried to be good comrades in the Soviet Union couldn’t bridge the gap between themselves and the witless Slavs. And even as Jews and Wasps did business together, the differences stuck out like a sore thumb; initially, the Wasps noticed even the assimilationist Jews as problematic, and later, Jews(as new elites) noticed the deferential Wasp brownnosers as problematic, craven and contemptible. In THE WOLF OF WALL STREET, Jordan Belfort and other Jews play at brokers at a Wasp-sounding company, but they are Jews through and through and proud of it, especially thrilled with their Zeligish ‘Waspy’ shtick. At any rate, their playing at faux-Wasps isn’t passive but totally aggressive and conscious. Allen’s film suggested Zeligery just happens without the Jew being aware of what’s happening, i.e. the process is beyond his control, whereas the Zeligery in THE WOLF OF WALL STREET is a conscious ploy, a strategy to defraud the suckers and dummies, most of them goyim. Allen would have us believe that Jews are hapless ‘victims’ of some unfathomable innate mechanism. So, don’t blame the Jew as the Jew can’t help it as he has no control over what comes over him. After all, Zelig morphs into the nearby Other involuntarily. If he’s around Chinese, he just turns Chinese, not because he wants to but because he can’t help it. But could Jews have survived 2,000 yrs in exile with such passivity and unawareness?
Oddly enough, Zelig’s passivity is also ultra-aggressive because the process is so total and effortless. He doesn’t meekly submit to the Other’s identity but almost ‘steals’ it, indeed like the creature in THE THING. But we are to believe that the character of Zelig has no idea of what is happening to him and why. If anything, he’s made out to be deserving of our sympathy, the care of a psychiatrist and the medical community. (Likewise, the virulently hostile and aggressive Jewish character played by Kevin Kline in SOPHIE’S CHOICE is ultimately made sympathetic, even tragic, because of his mental issues, which are, via the most convoluted logic, associated with what happened across the ocean in the Holocaust. And, let’s not forget the dirtbag Michael Cohen, the backstabbing lawyer of Donald Trump, had a uncle who ‘survived the Holocaust’, a fact that’s supposed to make Cohen somewhat redemptive in our eyes.)
Even though Orson Welles made THE TRIAL in sympathy for Jews(especially in light of what happened in World War II), he noted something about Kafka’s novel that went against the grain of literary scholarship. The general idea was that Joseph K. is merely a passive and clueless victim of the system, whereas Welles saw him as a feisty and strong-willed individual who resists to the last. (Welles didn’t cast a Jew but a homo, Anthony Perkins, and homos too are pretty passive/aggressive, which perhaps explains the almost telekinetic vibes between Jews and homos.) He isn’t merely pushed but pushes back. And if the novel is read psychologically and the trial is a metaphor for K’s self-tormenting psychology, one might even argue that K’s sense of persecution is double-edged, i.e. it’s not only an expression of being wronged by the world but of an hidden will to possess the power to persecute the world as one pleases, much in the way that a character’s own paranoia consumes his very view of reality in the tales of Edgar Allan Poe. And today, Kafka’s works might as well be the manual of social and mind control for Jewish Power.
We can’t help noticing a pattern here. What were once Jewish jokes turn into Jewish realities. When Jews joke, are they covering up their big plans with humor as palliative? Take Weird Al Yankovic’s “Amish Paradise”. Funny stuff, but Jewish Power really did turn Ukraine into Jewish Paradise(and hell for Slavs).
Zelensky, with multiple personas, is a Zelig-like figure but with the key difference that he knows what he’s doing. He’s doing it for Jewish Power(and of course for his own big fat Jewish ego and privileges, as he will be showered with even more fame and fortune as an exile in the West, but then is it really exile when his real home isn’t Ukraine but worldwide Jewish Network? He will feel at home equally in Israel, Miami, NY, or London). Perhaps, Allen, having grown up in a world where Anglo-Americans still ruled and Jews cautioned one another not to rock the boat too much, felt compelled to present Zelig as more a figure of pity and amusement than strategy and power, just like we’re supposed to regard the Marx Brothers as harmless clowns despite their proto-anarcho-tyrannical attitude toward goyim, which can also be said of Sacha Cohen, the supposedly libertine satirist who calls on fellow Jews to tighten censchwarzship on the goyim(and then, there’s Howard Stern who, in solidarity with Jewish Big Pharma and Alan Dershowitz, is calling on forced ‘vaccinations’ on everyone). In ANYTHING ELSE, Woody Allen plays an older Jew advising a young, seemingly better-adjusted, Jew. His fear seems to be that young Jews, having grown up without ‘antisemitism’ and with prosperity, lack the historical anxiety that animates the tribal will, a fear shared by David Mamet. Allen need not have worried as today’s younger Jews are far nastier and more vicious than past Jews. Unlike older Jews who witnessed and experienced some degree of pushback and criticism from the goy community, younger Jews grew up in a world of total Jewish control and total goy cuckery at their feet. If older Jews knew the hunger for success and respect, younger Jews feel addicted to entitlement because they’ve grown up in a world where the Jewish Demand is the Goyishe Command. Also, as the culture has grown more shameless and obnoxious, Jewish arrogance and contempt are brazen beyond belief, totally in your face. They rig elections and brag about it. They bring US and Russia to the brink of World War III like it’s a grand bloodsport entertainment for Jewish Power. And Anglos, once their biggest rival, grovel at their feet and pledge their undying loyalty no matter what Jews do. It’s the Age of Bratowicz.
If Zelig’s Nazi act is unconscious or beyond his control, the likes of Victorian Nuland and Zelensky knew exactly what they’re doing when they allied with Sub-Nazi types in Ukraine. As much as Jews hate the Nazis, they will use whatever is most useful against the main enemy, which is Russia. Besides, as Ukrainians and Russians are both Slavs, some way must be found to drive a wedge between them. And the most radical and firebrand way to make Ukrainians hate Russians is by fostering a racial supremacist ideology whereby West Ukrainians are ‘Aryans’ whereas the Russians are something like untermensch.
Actually, Jews see both Ukrainians and Russians as dumb Slavs who should serve Jews, but for the time being, Jews stoke the flames of Ukro-Slavic-Supremacism against Russo-Slavicism. As radical types are most willing to fight, live or die, Jews find the Sub-Nazi radicals in Ukraine most useful, much like ISIS and Alqaeda became handy in the Middle East. (And in the US, they find Antifa and BLM effective as mindless attack dogs of Jewish Power against White Middle America. And Jews prize an alliance with homos whose power-lust is driven their higher levels of vanity, narcissism, and resentment.) That said, there are some parallels between supremo-Slavicism of the Ukrainian ultra-nationalists and supremo-Semitism of the Zionists. Just as Ukro-Slavs feel racially superior to Russo-Slavs, Judeo-Semites have a supremacist attitude toward Arab-Semites. When Jews complain about ‘antisemitism’, it only concerns negativity toward Jews. When it comes to hatred or violence against Arab Semites, Jews promote it and practice it to the hilt. And Jews exploit Islamic purity spirals to make one bunch of Arabs attack and kill another bunch of Muslims, among others hated by Jews. So, just like some Slavs are better than other Slavs, some Semites are better than other Semites.
If Nuland and Zelensky’s flirtation with Nazism is essentially opportunistic and strategic, other Jews point to a deeper connection or at least a similarity between Jewishness and Teutonism. Consider their respective mythologies. Jewish religion is rife with stories of the angry God destroying entire cities and populations, even almost all of humanity. God thinks and acts big, does it for keeps. Even heretical outgrowth of Judaism, Christianity, culminates in the vision of the Second Coming and Armageddon, when Jesus shall return like General MacArthur and fulfill His ultimate prophecy of death and destruction. Germanic mythology also comes with apocalyptic vision, that of the warrior than of the prophet. Great warrior gods and great warrior heroes are doomed to fall in the final battle with the Giants and Wolves, resulting in Gotterdammerung, the inspiration for Wagner’s opera that inflamed the imagination of Hitler, who did bring about such in the real world. Jewish religion and Germanic mythology tend to see the world in absolute terms of creation and destruction. That said, one need not totally despair of the destruction because the world fire(or world flood) clears the way for a new beginning. It’s not only the end of the world but beginning of a new one, perhaps a better one.
Greeks, Romans, French, Spanish, and Anglos didn’t think in such a way. Neither did the Chinese and Russians. Chinese and Russians regarded themselves as tragic peoples with the numbers and strength to overcome great setbacks, but they weren’t filled with dreams of apocalypse and renewal. But such a mindset did affect Jewish and Germanic thinking, and perhaps it’s no accident that the two of the most disruptive historical events emerged from the friction of Jewish and Germanic modes of thought. Karl Marx the Jew read Hegel and cooked up his brand of communism that would turn the world upside down in the 20th century. Hitler and others were driven to radical fury by Jewish influence and dreamed of Wagnerian vision of renewal and winner-takes-all expansion. Big vision and deep passion mark both the Jews and the Teutons, even though Jews, being minorities in goy domains, kept their rages better hidden, though Jews in Israel, as masters of their own domain, often can’t help spilling the beans of what Jewishness is really about: Beat on the Goy, Beat on the Goy, Beat on the Goy with a baseball bat, oh yeah.
Sometimes, the biggest enemies are most similar in some crucial way as their mutual hostility is borne of comparable power-lust and egotism. Though Germans after World War II were totally defeated in pride, will, and confidence, even the desire to survive, they were perhaps the most powerful-souled people apart from the Jews prior to that cataclysmic event. In the post-Holocaust World, we’ve been led to believe that nothing could be further away from Jewishness than Nazism, with Jewishness representing eternal victimization at the hands of supremacist goy ‘Aryans’.
But, the Jewish agenda and its supremacist tendencies betray similarities with Nazism, i.e. World War II was less about Nazi warmongers against Jewish peace-lovers than about one supremacism vs another supremacism. Though John Milius is regarded as an outlier, a ‘right-wing Jew’ with even Teutonic ‘fascist’ fetish — he wrote APOCALYPSE NOW and directed CONAN THE BARBARIAN — , perhaps he is far more representative of the hidden inner makeup of many Jews who claim to be ‘liberal’. (Indeed, Neocon foreign policy of endless wars and imperialism is like Milius-ism on steroids, the difference being Milius fancied himself a fellow warrior willing to join the battle, whereas Neocons are war nerds who push dumb goyim to do all the killing and dying.) When it comes to sheer bloodlust, Steven Spielberg is surely a master, as evident in RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK and SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Milius’ vision is like a combination of apocalyptic Biblical prophecy and all-out Gotterdammerung. And then, there’s Stanley Kubrick and DR. STRANGELOVE where machines, given to mechanical intercourse, eventually explode in the orgasm of nuclear rapture. In one way, the film is political satire, a warning of how crazy paranoid right-wing military men might blow up the world. Yet, the film is not all doom-and-gloom. Just like Jewish religion and Germanic mythology fear the destruction but are nevertheless enticed by the hope of a new beginning, DR. STRANGELOVE ends on a rather light note. Sure, the world may blow up in nuclear conflagration, but it’s also promises a new beginning, possibly one more congenial to the managerial elites. The elites can survive the doomsday in mineshafts and need only worry about the ‘mineshaft gap’. ‘Mineshaft’ can be punned into Mein Shaft(or My Penis), as the future will depend on elite men humping lots of gorgeous women to repopulate the Earth with the fusion of brains(men) and beauty(women chosen for their looks). So, all is not lost in the Gotterdammerung of a nuclear apocalypse. It offers an opportunity for the mother of all Great Resets. From “Now, I’ve become death, destroyer of worlds” to “Now, I’ve become life, maker of new worlds”. Indeed, the figure of Dr. Strangelove is most intriguing as he is ostensibly an ex-Nazi scientist but was modeled on Jewish scientists(and possibly even Henry Kissinger), but then, some of the most influential and paradigmatic Jewish figures in the 20th century were of Germanic origin and profoundly influenced by German culture, even if in opposition, just like it’s impossible to comprehend National Socialism without its oppositional energies to Jewishness. One is shaped as much by the enemy as by one’s allies, just like great boxers are defined by their toughest rivals who forced out the best in them. Given the perverse fusion of Nazi and Jewish elements in the invention of Dr. Strangelove, one could characterize him as a Jewzi. Perhaps prophetic as Jewish Power now is the most nazi-like force in the world. Besides, it is even allied with what some call the ‘real nazis’ of Ukraine. DR. STRANGELOVE was meant as satire, but like Kafka’s works, seems to have become a blueprint for Jewish Power strategy for tyranny, or Satiranny.
No comments:
Post a Comment