Commentary on “Mayor Pete Butt-Gig and the Crackup of Christianity”(by Pat Buchanan) – Religions vs Religiosity

https://buchanan.org/blog/mayor-pete-and-the-crackup-of-christianity-136855

In some ways, religiosity is stronger than ever. Indeed, paradoxically enough, the reason for the decline of traditional religions is because they no longer offer the moral high and high ground of religiosity. People are abandoning them not because they are rejecting religiosity but because they can find it or more of it in something else.

Now, religiosity is not the same thing as religion. Religiosity is the state of strong commitment, righteousness, and/or moral outrage. Religiosity can be gotten from anything, even non-religions. Marxists and Maoists were surely riding high on religiosity as they firmly believed that history, humanity, truth, and morality were on their side.

A religion has power only if it retains the element of religiosity. Consider so many religions that have fallen by the wayside. Zoroastrianism for example. Today, it is mostly a matter of scholarly, mystical, and/or theological interest. Almost no one gets worked up over it.
Some people seek out Eastern Mysticism, but it will never gain power because it lacks religiosity. Buddhism, Taoism, and such religions are about peace of mind, the search for the Way, the harmony. This was one reason why the East was less dynamic than the West, the culture of which was driven by Greco-dialectics and Judeo-monolithics. According to the Greeks, if there is A and B, the two must duke it out. Thus, the philosophical and historical pendulum swings violently back and forth, left and right. It causes a lot of friction and even trouble, but it also sets off lots of sparks. If both A and B remain viable, the dialectics continues and keeps shooting off sparks, some of which are destructive, some of which are constructive. But if A or B were to overcome the other or arrive at synthesis, it goes up against a new force: C, D, E, etc. As for Judeo-Monolithics, it says the ONE idea is absolutely true and all the power must be exerted to spread that idea far and wide. This is the core of Western Messianism and puritanism. Greco-dialectics made for dynamism, and Judeo-Monolithics made for commitment, aggression, and expansion. The Crusading or Jihad Mentality.

In contrast, Taoism and Buddhism seek to rise above conflicts. Taoism seeks the Way, or the hidden harmony behind all chaos. It urges people not to involve themselves directly in world conflicts and instead to recede and contemplate with a cup of tea. Buddhism says everything is an illusion, and people should meditate to reach Nirvana and eternal extinction. With such spiritual outlooks, it's no wonder the East was less dynamic(though it allowed for longer stretches of peace and stability, albeit of the repressive kind by today's standards).

Modern religiosity thrives on psycho-cultural legacy of Greco-dialectics and Judeo-monolithics. Pat Buchanan loved politics all his life as a kind of sports. Political season is like sporting season. And so many people see the world in terms of 'we are right, and you are wrong'. Most people don't seek the middle-ground or the Way. They savor the dialectical bloodsports of politics. This owes to the pagan Greco-dialectical tradition. But Greeks and Romans, with their many gods, weren't really into the cult of self-righteousness. Through endless discourse, they believed somethings were more right than others, but they didn't believe there was anything or any people that was the holiest in the world for all eternity. They regarded everything, even the great gods, being in a state of flux.
In contrast, Jews did see the world in absolutist and monomaniacal terms. They weren't just another tribe, but the Tribe, the Chosen, and their God was the only true God, and they were blessed by the true God. So, Jews were filled with sanctimony and (self)righteousness, and this mindset flowed to the West via Christianity. If Greeks politicized conflicts, Christians spiritualized and moralized them. In the Athens vs Sparta conflict, both sides knew that it was all about power, economics, and influence. Sure, each side called on their gods for favors, but it was a conflict of 'mighteous' than righteous. It was dialectical politics. In contrast, infused with the mindset of Judeo-monolithics, Christians saw their conflicts in strongly moral and spiritual terms. So, there was a greater sense of moral outrage in conflicts involving Christians(which is why the US tries to morally justify everything it does around the world, a factor that blinds so many Americans to the true nature of what is really going on). Each side among Christians was totally holier-than-thou, even though many of the wars were triggered by political or economic factors than spiritual or moral ones.
The Thirty Years War was even more destructive and harrowing than the Peloponnesian War because of the sense of spiritual outrage. If Spartans and Athenians were merely seeking political advantage over the other, Catholics and Protestants, armed with Judeo-monolithic moral outrage, was trying to totally crush the other for all time. When Spartans finally won, they let Athens survive. But if either Catholics or Protestants had gained total victory, the losing side would have been totally crushed and rubbed out. But as it happened, the stalemate finally led to some kind of understanding, and the art of Greco-dialectics prevailed over Judeo-monolithics. Catholics and Protestants would have to co-exist in lively conflict and not try to crush the other totally in the spirit of moral/spiritual absolutism.

Why did Christian religion lose its religiosity in the 20th century?

We know the usual suspects. The rise of science undermined religion, especially among the elites. Around the time the US was founded, many of the most intelligent people in both Old World and New World still believed in God, sought meaning in God, attended religious schools, and spread the Gospel. Religion back then had spiritual and moral authority, from top to bottom.
But with the rise of modernity, most intelligent people abandoned religion, and if they did remain religious, it was on the personal level than on moral, spiritual, and social one. With best and brightest eschewing the religious life, the leadership came increasingly from the less intelligent segments of the population. Also, as religious authority lost prestige, fewer men were willing to give up worldly happiness for God. Back when the Catholic Church was like the Harvard of the West, many intelligent men were willing to sacrifice sex and good times to serve God. As priests, they had much respect in society. But when society no longer regarded priests as anything special, what was the point of giving up sex, marriage, and good times? So, an increasing number of priests came from eccentrics, derelicts, perverts, and homos. Some homos sought repentance for their sinful ways by serving God. Other homos figured they would take over the Church and make it 'gay' to serve toot-toota-loop homo vanity.

Mainline churches replaced saving souls with saving the world with good work. But what is 'good work'? As worldly matters and issues were defined by secular forces, Mainline church's idea of 'goodness' came to be defined by academia and media. Then, it's no wonder than Mainline churches now think god is all about the 'gays'. After all, Ivy League, Hollywood, and NYT said so. Evangelicals were more traditionalist and moralistic, but they were dumb, and dummies lose out to smarties. Being dumb and childlike, Evanjellies could easily be manipulated by the Power. It's no wonder so many Evanjellies are into 'muh Israel' and 'Jews are holy' even though Jews despise them and turned the Holy Land into Sodom and Gomorrah. Also, Evanjellies put emotions before dogma. It's all about the FEELS. Then, it is no wonder that homomania is making inroads even among childlike Evanjellies. Also, as most Evanjellies, like Mormons, suffer from inferiority complex of status and class, they tend to suck up to the rich and powerful. Look how Mormons are changing full-steam ahead toward homomania because the rich and powerful now worship it as their main cult. And many Evanjellies are suckers for televangelists whose shtick is 'god made me rich' and 'Jews are great cuz they are so rich'.
As for the Catholic Church, it shot itself in the foot by the reforms of the Second Vatican Council. While some of the reforms were good and necessary, others presented the Church in the position of weakness, especially via Jews and modernity. The main mode was of concession and contrition, and this put the Church on the moral defensive than offensive. Instead of judging the world with the One True Faith, it sought forgiveness from the world. Thus, being a Catholic came with less religiosity and more perplexity.

While people may be drawn to religions for metaphysical or philosophical reasons, religion has power ONLY WHEN it has the element of religiosity. Religious or secular, people are more prone to organize, unite, and rally IF they the run the fever of religiosity. This is why the anti-homo voices tended to come from the religious. There are non-religious people who oppose the homo agenda, but they feel less worked up because they just believe it is wrong, not an affront to God. There are secular people who are anti-abortion, but again, they see it as ugly and wrong, whereas religious people see it as a grave sin. Because of their element of religiosity, the religious often united to push for or against certain issues.

This is what Jews hate about Christian religiosity. (They hate Islamic religiosity too, but at least in the West, they make alliances with Muslims against Christians.) Those armed with religiosity are more likely to leave the house, meet with others, gather together(esp in churches), and protest. Even when people dislike or oppose something, the chances are they are not gonna do anything about it unless they are armed with religiosity. They see it as a personal matter -- "I don't like it" -- than as a grand moral/spiritual one -- "It is an affront to God".
But Jews fear Christianity far less now because it's either been bled of religiosity or infected with neo-religiosity of PC, e.g. all those churches that are now all about Diversity, Globo-Homo, Anti-Whitey, Holy Negro Worship, and Jew-Worship. Catholic Church is no longer a force of religiosity because it's in cucky-wuck apologetic mode. "We are sorry so many of our priests buggered boys". "We are sorry for having aided and abetted imperialism, genocide, etc." "We must fill up Europe with Africans and Muslims because Christians have so much to atone for." There is no moral pride or spiritual authority. It now even has what looks like closet-homo pope, aka the Poop, who says Europe must be Afro-Islamized as fast as possible. Because the Church is still officially opposed to 'gay marriage' and abortion, progs still eye Catholicism with disgusts and trepidation. But because it is so cucked and wussy, traditional Catholics feel nauseous about sticking with the Church. There is hardly any real religiosity found in Catholicism anymore.

But people love religiosity because it's like a drug. It gives them the high of moral sanctimony, the rush of holier-than-thou rage, and a sense of unity with 'history is on our side'. The thing is religiosity can be gotten from anything: Ideology and 'Idology'(or idolatry as ideology).
Those Red Guard lunatics during the Cultural Revolution were surely filled with righteous religiosity. Incidentally, the Cultural Revolution showed that religiosity had little to do with truth and more to do with control of information and indoctrination. After all, Mao's policies had killed tens of millions in the Great Leap Forward. He should have been disgraced forever based on historical facts, but with control of propaganda and the military Mao and his gang were able to instill countless young people with fever of religiosity and set them loose to smash 'class enemies' in ruthless abandon and righteous rage.



It's like no amount of destruction done by Black Savage Reversion, Crazy Jewish Supremacism, and Nutty Homo Perversion has made any real dent in the holiness of those three groups. Given all the black crime and thuggery, one might think Americans would have wised up to the fact that blacks are the crazy savage race, but Jews control the media and they keep rerunning the Emitt Till and MLK narrative over and over. And come Superbowl season, white cucky-wucks are back to worshiping blacks as sports hero demigods. And given what Jewish Power has done to the US in terms of financial distress and foreign Wars for Israel(that created WWII situations in Middle East), you'd think people would have wised up to Jewish power by now. But every year, it's Holocaust this, Holocaust that, and "Jews are eternally holy holocaust people" and "If you notice Jewish power, you're an anti-Semite." So, even 'literally Hitler' Trump spends most of his time with his lips wrapped around Netanyahu's pud. And given the HIV mess caused by deranged homos, you'd think people would have woken up to the danger of homo influence and practice. But Jews(who run the media) 'sacralized' homos in movies, TV shows, and advertising. And Jews associated homos with the 'rainbow', and whore politicians just can't get enough of pontificating about how the New Normal of morality is all about celebrating homo fecal penetration and tranny-penis-cutting.

If Rob punched you but has the megaphone and says that you punched him while he makes himself out to be the poor poor victim, people will side with Rob and denounce you and maybe even punch you. Worse, even people who saw Rob punch you may not come to your aid because Rob's megaphone can attract many more people to his side. Or, even those who witnessed Rob punching you may believe you deserved to be punched because you're a bad person. This is what Jews are doing with 'punch a nazi' meme. They are saying that if Jews, Antifa, or blacks attack whites who happen to be 'nazi', then the righteousness belongs to the puncher because 'nazis' are evil and deserve it. This is how religiosity works. It's not so much about objective definition of right or wrong or legal or illegal. It's about holy vs unholy. It's about blessed vs the wicked. Just like Christians in their hyper-religiosity could be inspired to carry out violent acts against heathens, the PC crowd can be driven to rages of religiosity to attack any people and feel good and righteous about it.

As Jews control academia, media, entertainment, and whore-politicians, they control the levers of religiosity. Academia writes the sacred texts, the canons of officialdom. Media relay them as 'news' and sermons. Entertainment turns certain figures and narratives into idols. And whore-politicians use oratory to push the acceptable narrative.

People are leaving the church and flocking to PC, Homomania, and Afromania because most of the hottest religiosity is now to be found there. PC slogans and chants about 'Diversity' and 'Inclusion' are the new mantras and catechisms. And 'gay rights' became Gay Rites, a neo-religion. There was a time when NO ONE was worked up over homo issues. At most, some supported the legalization of homosexuality because they figured homos were born that way. Also, they figured homos are deserving of individual rights too. It was a legal matter, not a moral one. No one thought there was innately holy about being a homo. No one felt he was holier or more righteous because he was pro-homo.
But Jewish media spun the HIV crisis to make homos out to be victims of something akin to a holocaust even though homos did it to themselves by acting like a bunch of butt-bang-boys in bathhouses. Movies like PHILADELPHIA and BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN made homo lust the highest and most tragic kind of love. Homos were made into saintly icons. Such ploy would have been thought outrageous when the US was more religious and moral, but in Boomer-dominated America of the 1990s and 2000s, it went over with post-religious people and young people raised on degeneracy. Also, as Bush II was such an awful posterboy of the Christian Right, young people turned away from religion. Furthermore, what with religions being so cucked & apologetic while AND homomania got more judgmental & aggressive, young people realized that there was more religiosity points to be found on the holy-homo side than on the religious side. While homomaniacs are passionately and aggressively sure of their cause and position, the Religious Right seemed confused, cowardly, and castrated. As Jews came to dominate the GOP and bought off most top church leaders, NO ONE on the Right mounted any counter-attack against homomania. They kept their heads down like the worthless Rich Lowry lest they offend Jews as allies of holy homos. Also, young people, raised on celebrity culture, were addicted to the cult of the cool. So, what some pop star or famous actor said mattered more to them than what some crusty religious type said. Mormons for one are really a bunch of Mammonites who will sell their mothers down the river for thirty pieces of silver. Look at those worthless piles of shit Mitt Romney and Harry Reid.

Now, it may well be that the current religiosities of PC may blow away. After all, where is Maoist religiosity today? Where is Stalinist fervor? Secular forms of religiosity have short-shelf lives because history proves them wrong. History proved communism wrong. All the icons and altars to Marx and Lenin came to mean nothing to Eastern Europeans with the fall of the Iron Curtain. Hitler, who was once the much revered icon of glory among Germans, has been disgraced. In contrast, God cannot be deposed and may yet win again in the long run. That said, in any given MOMENT in history, those with more religiosity win over those with less. And the fact is religions have lost the fire of religiosity either because people lost faith or because the religions have become cucked and apologetic. There was a time when to become a Christian was to be filled with a sense of salvation, glory, and pride. Now, joining the church means you should kneel before a homo and apologize for the church's 2000 yrs of 'homophobia' against guys like Butt-gigs who thinks dicks-up-my-ass is great because 'god made him gay'. Using such logic, a fatso should take pride in his gluttony since god made him want to pig out like a hippo. And I suppose a drunken Irish can argue that his alcoholism is a wonder to behold because god made him want to hit the bottle.

Ideologies can be full of religiosity because they offer a formula for understanding history and fixing humanity. As such, they are more than mere ideas but a worldview of 'what REALLY happened' and 'what must happen'. It has an element of prophecy, and so, ideologues are armed with religiosity. In time, ideological religiosity may fade as people get tired of the same-old-same-old and/or because the promises don't come true. This was true enough with communism.
Or, even if the ideology does succeed -- such as the Americanist individualist-capitalist ideology -- , it can lose its righteous luster if critiqued endlessly by radicals and subversives. Notice how the very founders and makers of the American nation have been so drastically 'discredited' by Jewish use of PC that now says MLK is the true 'founding father' while all those 'dead white males' were a bunch of hypocrites who owned slaves. (Never mind Jewish bankers funded much of 'white supremacist' imperialism around the world, and Jewish immigrants worked alongside whites to wipe out Indians and enslave & exploit blacks.)
In our increasingly post-literate age or what Christopher Hedges calls the Empire of Illusion, the power of 'idology' or neo-iconography may now matter more than ideology. Why are so many people reverential toward rappers even though all they ever say is 'muh gun', 'muh dick', 'muh bling', 'muh ho', and etc? Because idolatry makes them look cool and badass, and that's enough for neo-worship in our deracinated and degenerate age. But then, because of the narrative and iconography of the Noble Negro as victim of 'white racism', the image of black cool is fused with image of black tragedy, and this makes them even more potent as idols for young people to worship and that means a lot of religiosity points in the 'idolic' worship of the Negro. And of course, nothing is holier to SWPL crowd than the holy holy of the 'rainbow' valley. Compared to that, what does the current Church have to offer except butt-hurt apologetics and "I'm sorry".

Commentary on "2020: Socialist America or Trump's America?"(by PAT BUCHANAN). What to do in One-Party Future? If Jewish Power uses POC against Whites, Whites should use POC against Jews. It's only fair.

https://vdare.com/articles/patrick-j-buchanan-2020-socialist-america-or-trump-s-america

And what would then happen if the Democrats simply held the House, added three Senate seats and defeated Trump in 2020? An all-out effort to abolish the Electoral College that is integral to the historic compromise that created our federal Union. Puerto Rico and D.C. would become states, giving Democrats four more Senators and making America a bilingual nation.

Donald Trump has turned out to be useless. GOP is cooked demographically. It's only a matter of time before US turns into a one-party state like Japan, China, Turkey, or California.

That being the case, it is about time to end the GOP, and all Goppers should join the Democratic Party in a one-party America. The future politics mustn't be about party vs party but about masses(of all colors) against the globalist elites.

And Goppers should go full socialist to hurt Big Capital.

The problem with Goppers is twofold:

White Goppers are for capitalism even though capitalists have pushed for social degeneracy and demographic transformation. Capitalists have certainly NOT been better on the immigration issue. If anything, they've often been worse than the socialists. Also, capitalist monopolists(especially of Jewish ethnocentric bent) are denying free speech and financial services to conservatives(especially in concert with Jewish Supremacist groups like ADL and SPLC).

Why should Goppers be for capitalism against socialism when capitalists use PC to shut down white patriots and POC(people of color) to replace white Americans with? It makes no sense. It is time for Goppers to side with socialists to bring down the capitalists. If that leads to civil war and riots, so be it. It might do some good as many non-whites will flee from a nation racked with economic and social problems. Also, an America without a dominant elite will clear the path for new revolutions that must happen.

Even a bigger problem is the matter of white attitudes about Jewish Power.

Indeed, the single biggest pathology of US politics is this:

Jews use POC(people of color) against whites but whites try to protect Jews from POC in the hope that Jews will appreciate the gesture and side with whites.
Imagine a Jewish guy using a pitbull to maul a white guy, but the white guy tries to protect the Jew from the pitfull that he is using against the white guy. Even though the pitbull is mauling the white guy at the behest of its Jewish master, the white guy goes out of his way to persuade the Jewish guy that the dog is dangerous and may turn on its master; therefore, the Jewish guy should work with the white guy against the mad dog. The white guy, being even more servile than the dog to the Jew, never mentions the fact that it is the Jew who is using the dog against him.

So pathological and pathetic.

Here's a better solution. If Jews use POC against whites, whites should return the favor and use POC against Jews. In any Jewish vs POC conflict, whites should side with POC. See how Jews like it. Let them have a taste of their own medicine. Even a 'white advocate' like Jared Taylor is stuck in this pathetic rut. Even though Jews treat him like they treat Palestinians in West Bank, Taylor goes out of his way to support Zionist imperialism against Palestinians and to protect Jewish Supremacist Power from criticism within his 'white advocacy' camp.

Just look at the pathetic Gopper cucks. Ilhan Omar talks about Jewish power, but Gopper cucks all side with Jewish Power against her EVEN THOUGH Jews have been fanning Muslim-American hatred against whites forever. And even though Jews are working 24/7 to flood white towns with Muslim 'refugees', white Gopper cucks serve the Jews by voting to shut down BDS. What a pathetic strategy. Zionists take over Palestinian towns in West Bank, and Jewish-Americans do everything to flood white towns with Diversity Invasion, but the priority of white Goppers boils down to "How better can we serve our Jewish masters?"

While Jews are using rabid POC dogs against whites, whites are praying for the political conversion of the Jews and beseeching God to protect Jews from POC. So, what good has all this pro-Jewish cucking done for white Americans? Zilch and nada.

GOP is cooked because of demographic changes pushed mostly by Jewish Power. In an insanely diverse nation with no majority group(the America of the near future), should whites side with POC or with Jews?
Well, we know what Jews will do. Jews will keep using POC as attack dogs against whites. Obviously then, the most logical thing for whites would be to use POC to maul Jews in turn. Fight fire with fire.
If a Jew uses a club to beat you, should you try to defend the Jew from the very club that he uses to beat you with? Sounds retarded, doesn't it?
But, that is how retarded whites have become.

Imagine if whites had fought WWII this way. Japan attacks Pearl Harbor and all US politicians pledge to defend the noble and wonderful Japanese nation from the Japanese navy while totally overlooking the fact that it is the Japanese nation that is using the Imperial navy against the US.
Sounds surreal, but that is EXACTLY what whites are doing while Jews kick them in the ass with the POC boot.

Commentary on "Elite White Privilege"(by Audacious Epigone) & the Jewish Strategy of Power by Elite Control and Demographic Manipulation

https://www.unz.com/anepigone/elite-white-privilege/

http://www.mideastweb.org/mandate.htm

The Mandate for Palestine was a dress rehearsal for something much bigger.

Mandate for the West(and then the Rest).

Mandate for Palestine led to eventual Jewish demographic takeover of Palestine to be reconstituted as Israel, the Jewish state, the only part of the world deserving of national identity and right of territory. Jews are mono-nationalist. Only their nationalism is true nationalism. All other nationalisms are false and must be dissolved. Jews denounce on poly-nationalism like Jewish monotheism reviled all pagan idols as false gods.

Mandate for the West is to eventually replace native-whites(in Europe) and founder-whites(in North America & Australia) with masses of non-whites. How does this benefit Jews? Diversity will make cohesive nationalism impossible in white nations. Diversity will create cracks and fissures, and Jewish elites get to pit various sides against one another while taking the lion share of the prize.
Imagine a nation as a Spartan military unit. United and strong, standing together with shields and spears. Very difficult for outsider-enemy to penetrate the phalanx. But imagine a rag-tag bunch of troops of diversity. They would never stand and fight together. As they push each other, cracks form among them, allowing for easy penetration by the enemy.

Mandate for the West thus favors Jewish power in the long run.

Finally, there is Mandate for the Rest. As non-whites flock to the West(the Metropole), they take on PC ideology and globo-homo POZ and export them back to their home countries. In time, even the nations of their origin turn globo-homo and worship diversity. They too allow massive immigration-invasion, and diversity leads to divisions and cracks, and Jewish power can penetrate, exploit the differences, and take over. After Europe, it will be smaller East Asian nations that will fall, esp Japan, S Korea, and Taiwan as yellow dogs are most imitative of the West as model.

Jews think big. With prophetic minds, they look ahead to their grand chess plan for the world.

Audacious Epigone: If the new populations view them as especially egregious examples of the old population and the old population views them as traitorous backstabbers, I’m not sure that works out particularly well for them in the end.

It works out because 'new populations' are diverse. Even if they come to envy and resent Jews, they will be at loggerheads with one another. Browns, yellows, and blacks don't see eye to eye. Neither do Chinese and Hindus. And even among browns, there are so many gradations of identity and color(flimsily held together only by shared resentment of higher-achieving 'gringo' or 'yanqui'). Puerto Ricans don't have much in common with Indios from Guatemala. So, they will be more divided among their own kind than against Jews. Also, as Jews are on top and will remain there due to higher IQ, non-Jews know they must suck up to Jews to gain access into the uber-sphere. Besides, Jews can exploit the 'new people vs old people' dichotomy indefinitely as immigration-invasion is to be endless. So, even as new people settle and evolve into old people, there will be ever more new peoples.

As for old people, Jews only need the collaboration of the elites. Masses don't count for beans UNLESS there is a massive populist revolt with pitchforks(which is rare in history like asteroids hitting the earth). The fact is white elites are willing to sell their souls to Jews for financial gains and on insta-moral grounds. If you're a white cuck and serve Jewish Power, there are lots of prizes. Paul Ryan will make a killing as a lobbyist. Also, as Jews are the Eternally Holy People of Shoah, white cuck elites feel 'cleansed' and 'baptized' by rubbing shoulders with Jews, especially as the Jewish-controlled media and academia made whites out to be uniquely tainted by history. As the result, whites need atonement and salvation, and one quick way to get it is by sucking up to holy People of Shoah. "Look, I got some Jew Magic on me!" Since white elites suck up to Jews more than the white masses do, it creates the impression of 'good whites' at the top and 'bad deplorable whites' on the bottom. This has the effect of making 'good white elites' serve Jews than represent 'bad white people', who Jews say must be replaced. It divides whites along class lines.

Mass-Immigration-Invasion of non-whites is the final nail in the Jewish Strategy for Total Power.
Jews had the unique potential of rapidly gaining the dominant position in the US. Now, how could they when they were only 2% of the population? I mean there was no chance that the Jewish 2% of US could elect a Jewish president. The Irish had the numbers to take over many big cities. Jews didn't. Even in NY, they are like 20% of the population. Jews gained power not by elections but by taking over elite institutions. Only they could have done this due to combination of high IQ, chutzpah, and big think. Also, they could pass as whites, which made it more acceptable to the white majority(than if Asians tried it, but then Asians lack chutzpah and are less intelligent than Jews). So, Jews used the bypass method of power. Just gain control of elites, and you gain control of society. Selection than election. With Jewish control of media, law firm, finance, entertainment, vice industries, real estate, and etc, they could buy off any politician of either political party. Also, with control of media, they could smear and destroy anyone. And, Jews spread the notion of 'antisemitism' that says anyone who notices nefarious Jewish influence is a 'nazi' while anyone who serves Jews 24/7 is the most wonderful goy. Since the Shoah Narrative made Jews out to be holy and since flattering Jews could be rewarded with blessings of approval from the holiest people, it became De Rigueur for whites to roll over before Jews for pats on the head. So, everyone in power became cucks to Jews.

But Jews still felt nervous because having elite power alone doesn't secure permanence. This was evident in the history of the British Empire. The Brits gained control of non-white territories by bullying and buying off the local elites. So, if the Brits could control their puppet leaders in Asia, Africa, and Middle East, they had control of all the territories and all the populace as most people are sheeple. BUT, there was the chance that a real national leader might arise and challenge the cuck-collaborators and the Empire. Such a leader may rouse up the masses... like what happened in Cuba. The US had TOTAL control of most of the political and economic big-shots in Cuba. By scheming with the cream at the top, US could effectively milk all of Cuba. But Fidel Castro and others came along and they led the national masses to victory against the Cuba elites... and this spelled doom for American influence as well because US had put all its eggs in the elite-basket. Once the Cuban elites fell, US influence was gone as well.

This is why Jews aren't content with elite power alone. If white masses reject the current white elites, they also reject Jewish power that is mainly attached to white elites than to white masses. At least in the past when US was ruled by white Christians, there was a connection between white Christian rulers and white Christian masses. But will white Christians, for the long haul, accept Jewish rulers? For the time being, it seems whites are pro-Jewish and support Israel, but could this last indefinitely, esp when there's mounting evidence of vile and nasty Jewish behavior in so many sectors, not least against whites who, besides, are often berated by (((fellow whites)))? What if white masses lose confidence in their own leaders as a bunch of 'cuck-collaborators' and long for an American Castro or Putin? This is why Jews hated Donald Trump with such virulence(even though he turned out to be just another cucky-wuck). Trump ran on America First that implicitly said a white guy like him should reconnect with and protect the traditional (white) American nation. Jews called Trump 'literally Hitler', and even though that is hysterical, there is a kernel of truth to the notion that Trump is figuratively Hitler. After all, there was the nationalist element in Hitlerism that called for unity of German elites and German masses(a good idea before the pathological nut decided to shift into imperialist mode). Hitler was a bad example of it, but there is nothing more effective against imperialism than national unity between leaders and masses. US went from empire to colony of empire. During the Cold War, it was USSR empire vs US empire. After the Cold War, US became a colony of an even bigger empire: Empire of Judea with networks all across US, Canada, Latin America, EU, Russia, Israel, and etc. So, EOJ(Empire of Judea) wants the white elites to serve the empire -- like British expected Hong Kong elites to serve the British Empire than represent Chinese nationalism -- than reconnect with their own kind.

The way Jews see it, AS LONG AS there is a white majority in the US, there is a 'chance', even if a slim one, that white elites and white masses may unite against the Jews. Or, a new white elite will arise(like Castro and others did in Cuba) to reject the cuck-elites. (Alt Right had this chance, but idiot Richard Spencer allied with neo-Nazi morons and yammered endlessly about a need for Faustian white neo-imperialist supremacism.) Jews believe that securing elite power isn't enough. If white elites stop collaborating with Jews or if they are rejected by white masses who demand a new white elite that is actually responsive to white needs, Jewish elite power will fail like American power in Cuba. As the existing cuck-elite falls, so will its master and sponsor.

So, Jews feel that they must secure demographic power as well. But how can they when there's no way Jews can be the majority of any nation except Israel? This is where Diversity enters the picture. Jews know from the Austro-Hungarian Empire that Diversity can be useful to Jews. Recall that most groups in that empire distrusted and even hated Jews.... but they also hated one another and were thus unable to unite against Jewish power and influence. Diversity means Jews can pit whites vs blacks, whites vs yellows, whites vs Hindus, whites vs Muslims, whites vs browns, blacks vs browns, blacks vs yellows, blacks vs hindus, blacks vs Muslims, browns vs yellows, browns vs Hindus, browns vs Muslims, etc. Sure, there is some POC talk about unity of non-whites against whites/Jews, but it's mostly empty noise because non-whites don't see eye-to-eye on many subjects... such as Affirmative Action.

Imagine the NY Giants playing a team made up of players of various teams. All the Giants are playing for their side against their opposing team. In contrast, the diverse players of the other team, while playing against the Giants, are also playing against one another, which makes it impossible for them to form a cohesive team. Giants have a huge advantage.

Jews are masters at splitting the goyim between elites and masses. Jews did this with whites and can do it to ANY goy group. White elites like Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Hillary Clinton, and Beta O'Dork do NOTHING for whites. Their main priority is being part of the Privilege Club, and so, they suck up to Jews.
The same can be done with ANY group. Notice how Hindu- and Chinese-American elites in the US are total suck-ass dogs of Jewish Power. Once they've been let into the Power Club, their main priority is to BELONG(be an insider), and that means sucking up to Jews while snubbing their own people. Look at Fareed Zakaria. This non-white brownie has been let into the Power Club, and he beats the drums for Wars for Israel. The one time he praised Trump was when missiles were fired into Syria.

Commentary on "Mr MAGA and the end of Western Civilization:(by the Saker)

https://thesaker.is/mr-maga-and-the-end-of-western-civilization/

Alas, it also has a darker side: imperialism, racism, genocide, slavery, religious and political persecutions and, of course, two world wars.

Hardly different from rest of humanity.

By the way, race + ism should be defined as belief in reality of race and racial differences. ISM means belief, after all. Using 'racism' to mean 'mindless or groundless racial hatred of supremacism' is to fall into the trap of the enemy. Everyone is race-ist, explicitly or implicitly, because it's impossible not to notice racial differences.

But what the so-called “collective West” (aka the AngloZionist Empire) is showing today is the exact opposite of what the West is supposed to stand for. Here are just a few examples

When has the West, or any civilization, ever practiced what it preached?
I will grant that the hypocrisy is louder than ever under globo-homo Zionist control, but it's a matter of degree than substance.

International law: with the US/NATO aggression against the Serbian nation, a major feature of western civilization died: international law.

True to an extent. Serbia was targeted because it was the strongest state in Yugoslavia and because it was closest to Russia. Also, Jewish power, by coming to the 'rescue' of Muslim Albanians, wanted to propagandize itself as 'pro-Muslim' so as to prepare for wars against Muslim nations. Nice shtick: "Gee, how can WE AMERICANS be anti-Muslim when WE bailed out the Albanian Muslims?" Of course, Jews were being rank hypocrites. Jewish logic says the West had to help Jews take back the Holy Land BUT Serbians had no right to take back their ancient homeland from Albanians who'd come invading under Ottoman rule.

That said, US/NATO intervention in Serbia was a mixed bag. For most of the 90s, NATO had done little or nothing to stop the slaughter, just like the UN did nothing to stop the Rwandan genocide. There was a sense that SOMETHING had to be done to end the bloodshed and cycles of violence.
In retrospect, it was handled badly, but INTERNATIONAL LAW means that nations around the world must work together to stop excessive mayhem in a part of the world. In a more perfect world with a better superpower than the US, maybe something good have come of it. But the US had no credibility as it had used sanctions to kill 100,000s of kids in Iraq.

Law of War and Geneva Conventions: same here, the US is gleefully ignoring many of the most sacred provisions of the laws of war and the Geneva Conventions

What of massive civilian bombings in WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, and etc. US support of right-wing death squads during the Cold War. 100,000s, possibly millions, slaughtered in Latin America.
It was always like this. Soviets backed their own bloody regimes in Asia and Latin America. Chinese backed the loathsome Khmer Rouge. The world didn't suddenly suck just now. It was always a mess.

Respect for alliances and partnerships. The AngloZionist Empire has no allies – only vassal states, puppet regimes and comprador 5th columnists.

One of the benefits of being an empire. Puppets are more reliable than allies. Allies can break off he alliance. Puppets always do as told. In that sense, we can't blame the US for preferring puppets to allies. Better off owning a trained dog than partnering with a lone wolf with a streak of independence.

When the Neocons finally came out and showed their true face, they did more than just affect the image of the US abroad, they also gave a signal to their colonial administrators that all pretense of decency could now be dropped.

Jewish tribal supremacist takeover of US empire has been most unfortunate. Though both the US and USSR got their hands dirty and bloody in the Cold War(and supported murderous proxies), there really was a clash of big ideas and visions relevant to much, even the majority, of humanity. It was a world conflict for world-ideas. Big power engaged in big action for big isms.

But, we now have the US as lone hegemon using its immense power and influence to serve the narrow interests of a single tribe(allied mainly with homo supremacists). There is so much tensions around the world to indulge the Jews, a tiny percentage of world population, and homos(the cherry-picked allies of Jews): Jewish King and Homo Queen. Since Jews know that it's too much to ask all the world to risk WWIII, IV, V, and etc. for Jewish interests, they couch their chosen conflicts in terms of 'human rights' and 'spreading democracy' and etc, but it rings so hollow. Or Jews try to spin the conflicts as holy crusades to spread homomania, which actually goes over well with many people in the West for whom queertianity is their new missionary-fairy faith.

Many Russians living in the West (such as Dmitri Orlov) have noted the numerous similarities between the late Soviet Union (especially the so-called “stagnation years”) and the modern US . I myself made such a list of similarities as far back as 2014 when I listed the following:

A bloated military budget resulting in an ineffective military

I dunno. US seems to be pretty effective in smashing nations. Just ask the Libyans, Iraqis, and Syrians. Maybe US sucks at nation-building, but it is an expert at nation-wrecking.

A huge and ineffective intelligence community

Ineffective? It seems very effective. US was able to mess up computer systems in Iran. It has hidden devices in computers all over the world. Also, Intelligence works closely with Jews and Israel, which means all the political dirt are known to Jews who can blackmail anyone.

A crumbling public infrastructure

Depends on where you look. Certain big cities are richer than ever. And even now, most roads in the US are better than roads in Russia or China.

A world record in the per-capita ratio of incarcerated people (US GULag)

Blacks. Evolution made them meaner and tougher. Have blacks, will have lots of inmates.

A propaganda machine which nobody trusts any more

I wish this were so, but plenty of morons trust every word of snakes like Rachel Maddow and S.E. Cupp. And all that anti-Russia hate news must have worked because the great majority of Americans now hate and fear Russia more than ever.

An internal dissident movement which the regime tries to keep silent

True of any society.

An industry whose main exports are weapons and energy

Isn't that Russia NOW? In contrast, the US is also a huge exporter of high-tech, medicine, media, entertainment, chemicals, foods, and etc.

A population fearful of being spied on by the internal security services

Sadly, most Americans have learned to stopped worrying and love the spying. There was some fuss from progs about the Patriot Act during the Bush II presidency, but when Edward Snowden spilled the beans, the entire elite and proggy class denounced him. Conservatism Inc, the arm of the war state, didn't defend him either. It took mavericks like Glenn Greenwald and Oliver Stone to come to his defense. Progs claim to stand for ideology, but 'idology'(idolatry as replacement for ideology) is bigger among them. One of their main 'idological' obsessions is the Magic Negro. As Obama was a Magic Negro, progs just venerated him as a 'historic president' and turned a blind eye to all his warmongering. Progs are more 'Catholicist' than 'Protestantist'. They are more dazzled by 'idolic' symbols and spectacles than true to the letter of progressive ideology.

A financially catastrophic over-reach of the empire across the planet

US is financially over-stretched, but I don't think its overseas empire is the main problem. It's bankers privatizing profits and socializing losses, and it's the masses hooked to entitlements.

An awareness that the entire planet hates you

Nothing new here, but there was always love/hate between US and the world. After all, the world still wants to come to the US and become Americans. Few Americans want to move to Russia, but plenty of Russians want to come to US and become Americans. Even Muslims whose nations have been blown up by the US want to come to US and become Americans into rap and burgers.

A young generation which believes in nothing at all

That wouldn't be so bad. It would at least mean that young people are skeptical. But in fact, too many young people truly and really really believe in globo-homo, Afromania, and Jew-Worship, or the Holy Three. Young people worship MLK, Diversity, Inclusion, 'gay' rainbow, and etc.
In this, they are different from latter-day Soviet youth who really were jaded and felt that they were being lied to about the richer and more advanced West.
In a way, the sheer superficiality of current Western ideology and 'idology' makes them more effective. One problem with Marxism-Leninism was that it just seemed boring, dull, worn, same-old-same-old, and tiresome as the years went by... like someone reading Church dogma for the umpteenth time. In contrast, even as current Western ideology and 'idology' are pretty idiotic, they are always changing color and shedding (snake) skin according to fads and fashion. The conceit of novelty, newness, and 'change' keeps young idiots excited and thrilled: 'gay pride', 'slut pride', BLM, Pussy March, MeToo, tranny-mania, Green New Deal, climate change, 'migrants welcome', 'microaggressions', etc. It's 31 flavors ideology/idology. In contrast, Soviets had only one flavor: Red. Most young people are idiots and care more for pizzazz than meaning. As idiotic as the current Western ideology/idology is, it knows how to hook people to a 'vibrant' sense of 'celebration' and 'happening'. The Revolution has been Advertised. This is why so many youths are indeed 'passionate'(or childishly excited) about whatever flavor they're obsessed with at the Moment.

An educational system in free-fall, (the Soviet one was much better, btw)

Many schools are a mess because of blacks and maybe some browns. And of course, lower-income whites do poorly. But US education is pretty solid for Jews, Asians, and white middle class. If we compare US whites with whites in Europe and Russia, they usually come off better.

A massive and prevailing amount of corruption on all levels of power

This is problematic, mainly due to blacks and Latin Americans/Muslims/Asians who bring their norms to the US. Also, diversity increases distrust.

Anyway... one big difference between US and old USSR is this: The MAIN reason why USSR collapsed was not due to all those problems listed above. It was because its elites got tired of managing the system and taking care of the 'lazy' masses. They wanted to end communism and become super-rich oligarchs. And THAT is why the system collapsed. It was blown up from the top.
In the US, the top elites are super-rich oligarchs. Why would they collapse the system when they already have it so good? During the days of USSR, the Soviet elites envied the capitalist elites of the West who were richer, freer, and had more stuff. The only way they could have it all was by ending communism, which was destroyed from the top than from the bottom.

The elites have it better than ever in the West. Why would they do anything to end the system? Trump made noise about draining the swamp, but it looks like he's been totally co-opted by now. Trump is Scump, saying nasty shit about Queen Ann(Coulter).
Also, as problematic as diversity is, it is actually to the advantage of the elites(esp minority Jewish elites) because diversity makes it impossible for the various racial/ethnic folks to unite to challenge elite power. Also, as at least 50% of whites are totally for diversity & homomania and see 'white supremacy' as the biggest threat, they work with Diversity and globo-homo elites to suppress any effective white mass challenge to elite power.

Commentary on "Holy Minority Day: Holocaustianity, Hysteria and the Hotel of Hate"(by TOBIAS LANGDON)

https://www.unz.com/article/holy-minority-day-holocaustianity-hysteria-and-the-hotel-of-hate/

There is a political paradox.

Even as Jews increasingly vilify white conservatives(scapegoats for all problems) as the unifying theme for Jews and People of Color, they also increasingly draw on white conservatives to support Jews and Israel, because, after all, Grievance Politics among the POC often turns against Jewish privilege and Zionist tyranny. Jews depend more and more on the water from the well they are poisoning. With decreasing support for Israel and growing criticism of white-Jewish privilege among the expanding non-white and radical-white base among Democrats, Jews have to depend more and more on white conservatives for unconditional support for Jews and Israel. The vile Anti-BDS law passed with near-total support from Republicans while only 40% support from Democrats. Jews will increasingly have to rely on the very people they denigrate most in media, academia, law, state, entertainment, advertising, and corporacracy. But can Jews be assured of continued support among white conservatives when the latter is beginning to awaken to the fact that it's the Jews who are leading the anti-white derangement syndrome among the POC? But then, Jews must shame and blame whites in order to make them serve Jews. After all, the default position of any people is to feel good about their own kind and serve their own interests. Naturally, white Christians and conservatives should serve white/Christian/conservative interests. To make them do otherwise, they must be made to feel that the Other is somehow superior, morally or spiritually, to themselves. And Jews have done this by implanting 'white guilt' into the souls of whites, both liberals and conservatives. Thus, whites feel morally tainted by history and seek redemption by serving the Holy Other. As far as white conservatives are concerned, serving Jews(and maybe blacks and homos) should be good enough, and so, they go out on a limb to appear as 'good for Jews'. But for Jews, this isn't enough because there is still the possibility that whites may change their minds one day... and then what? So, the ONLY way to ensure permanent Jewish domination is via Diversity. That way, with whites relegated to minority status in the US, they won't be able to use electoral-demographic majority power to topple Jewish supremacy. Jews want more Diversity because, deep down inside, they know Intersectionality is really about Gridlock among Goyim. Even within the Proglob camp, so-called intersectionality has led to Demolition Derby or Roller Derby among blacks, homos, women, white working class, browns, yellows, and etc. It's turning into Road Rage politics... like the movie CRASH that won Best Pic.

Anyway, it seems more and more whites are waking up to the fact of Jewish hostility towards them. An obvious case has been Ann Coulter who, in 2016, mocked GOP candidates for droning on and on about the 'fuc*king Jews'. For such awakened whites, we need to end mass immigration as soon as possible because loss of white majority will mean end of GOP, and then whites are lost for good.
But whites should take cues from the Jews on the Art of Power. If a people need majority power to rule, how does one account for the fact that Jews, who are only 2% of the nation, totally rules the US?
So, how can whites threaten Jewish power even if they lose majority status in the US? They can make Jews have a taste of their own medicine. Jewish 'progressive' line has been 'diversity and equality are good, while privilege is bad'. Okay, then whites should take the Jews at their word and side with the POC against the most privileged people in the US, the Jews. Jeremy Corbyn is doing this in the UK with hilarious reactions from the Jewish community. Jews in UK have been dumping on white Britons as 'racists' and demanding that whites welcome and embrace non-whites. Well, that is exactly what Corbyn's Labour did, and guess how the Jews are reacting? They are flipping out because most non-whites don't give a rat's ass about super-rich Jewish bankers, Israel, Zionist imperialism, and Holocaust-Cult-Forever. This is why the US would do best to get rid of the GOP, have all whites join the Democrats, and then have whites side with POC against the Deep State dominated by Jews, homos, and cucks. Then, the current elites can be brought down, and then, the ensuing chaos will bring back the Restart of History from the terrible 'End of History' of Fukuyama's naive idealization.

I suppose Jews still got the homo card. Homo Power is mostly white-male, and it is reliably on the side of Jews because vain homos love power and privilege. It's no wonder that 10% of DC is now homo. Homos go there to seek power, and Jews have elevated them(along with cuck-dog Mormons) to serve as the missionary arm of globo-homo hegemony. Thus, homos, along with Mormons, have played a big role in Wars for Israel and new 'cold war' with Russia. Homos + Mormons = Homormons. Homos not only love to serve the Power(that is mostly Jewish) but appreciate the fact that Jews have decided to make Homomania the substitute for Christianity, indeed the Cult of the New World Order. As for Mormons, most of them are just status-strivers and moral-materialists, i.e. their moralism is all about making money, and money is the highest good. Also, ashamed of their history as an odd cult and ever so eager to appear respectable to the current globo-homo ruling elites, Mormons will go out of their way to cuck hard. Salt Lake City Mormons are the favorite dogs of Goldman Sachs and dutifully voted for Obama and Hillary. Mormons are the Sheep State within the Deep State.

Patrick Little vs Nick Fuentes — Why Fuentes is wrong and right — Paul Nehlen and Patrick Little

In the heated exchange between Patrick Little and Nicholas Fuentes, the latter says an election has no meaning unless it is to win. Perhaps it was rhetorical flourish on Fuentes’ part to belittle Little as a pathetic Loser, because Fuentes surely knows that elections mean different things in different contexts. Fuentes would be right in the case of Little IF there was any real chance of a Republican winning the Senate seat in California. But there is NONE. So, the next Senator of California will be another Democrat. Republicans have about as much chance of winning a state-wide seat in California as a fish has of surviving in the desert. So, I don’t begrudge Little’s use of candidacy mainly as a platform to inform people of the Jewish Question.
Also, if indeed California is the future of America, Little’s reaching out to non-whites serves as a template for what-is-to-be-done by whites. Ideally, the US will remain a white-majority nation, a part of Western Civilization. But if Jews do succeed in engineering the US to become a new Brazil or Venezuela(to the point where White Power will be permanently broken), then the only option left for whites is to get revenge on Jews by forming any possible alliance with People-of-Color against Jewish supremacist power. If Jews amassed great power and destroyed white America by making the rising tide of color direct all their rage & hatred against Whitey, then whites must return the favor once the US is lost to them forever. Indeed, I’ve argued that the GOP should be folded, and all whites should just join the Democratic Party. Turn the US into a one-party state and then form ANY kind of alliance with any group to bring down the Jew. Make the Jew taste his own medicine. If Jews pushed the Narrative that ‘whites are evil cuz of white privilege and must atone by siding with people of color’, then whites should indeed side with people-of-color and expose Jews as the real rulers, elites, and tyrants of not only the US but the world. After all, just do the math and add up the numbers. Jews are 2% of the US population but control how much of finance, foreign policy, media, academia, gambling & other vice industries, Hollywood, Silicon Valley, Real Estate, sports franchises, Big Pharma(the harma), and etc.? So, if the future of the US is California, whites cannot regain White Power & Dominance again but they can, at the very least, get sweet revenge against Jews by, ironically, playing by the Jewish rule-book. Jews have said everyone, ‘good’ white and people-of-color, must unite against Evil White Privilege. Okay! Since Jewish Privilege is the Ultimate in White Privilege, then all white goyim should side with blacks, browns, yellows, Hindus, and Muslims against Jews. Whites should demand NO special treatment for Zionists and Palestinians. After all, if favoring one group over another(especially one with far less power) is a form of supremacism, then US media and foreign policy are totally supremacist in favoring Israeli-Zionist death squads over Palestinian women and children being gunned down out in the open(with the blessing of US whore politicians who take 30 pieces of silver from Judeo-Nazi globo-pimps).
So, given that Patrick Little or any other Republican has zero chance of winning the Senate seat in California, I have no problem with Little using his campaign as a platform to raise the JQ and wake up peoples of all races and backgrounds as to which people have the Real Power and are doing most harm to the world. On that score, Little deserves more respect than any Cuckservative GOP candidate who did little but sing hosannas to Israel DESPITE THE FACT that Jews have been at the forefront of the War on White. GOP’s cuckservative whores and wussies deserve no respect. Little did nothing wrong in using his campaign to spread a message. He had no chance of winning the election so he decided to say that which cannot be spoken in American politics.

Another reason why Fuentes is wrong to focus so much on ‘winning’ is that certain ideas take time to sprout, grow, and bloom. When Pat Buchanan ran in 1992, he knew he had slim chance of winning. And he knew he could have gotten more support from donors if he’d championed globalism and ‘free trade’. He didn’t. Instead, he spoke up for the American working class. He was attacked by the Media for his ‘fascism’. For much of the decade, people like Rush Limbaugh derided Buchanan as a ‘populist’ than a conservative. Buchanan failed to win once again in 1996 and lost big in 2000. And for his opposition to the Iraq War, he became a total persona-non-grata to the Republican Party. So, it seemed as if Buchanan was the biggest loser in US politics. But precisely because he stuck to his guns, stood on principles, and carried on with core conviction, his ideas eventually bore fruit with the rise of Donald Trump and populism(that, among the base, now has more positive connotations than ‘conservatism’ that came to conserve nothing). Also, Buchanan’s 1992 speech, which had been denigrated as one of the biggest mistakes ever, is now seen by many as one of the great political speeches in US history. It would resonate with many Americans if they heard it today. So, when Fuentes just dismisses anyone who fails in political campaigns as irrelevant ‘losers’, he’s being glib and shallow. He is also betraying himself because he also could have won much more in the media if he’d taken the 30 pieces of silver from the likes of Ben Shapiro or some well-funded Establishment operation. But because he chose the honest and courageous path, he has to work up his reputation from the margins. The easy path has been denied him, so he has to take the longer and harder uphill path with a machete. Along the way, there will be lots of poison ivy, snakes, and other dangers, but it’s never meant to be easy for those with principles.

But in respect, Fuentes is right and Little is totally wrong. It’s one thing for Little to court controversy and take tough stands on sensitive issues, but it’s quite another for him to spread lies, talk nonsense, exaggerate his importance, turn it all into empty theater, and, worst of all, go 14/88. It’s a cliche but true: Two Wrongs Don’t Make a Right. Just because Jewish Power is now the worst evil in the world doesn’t mean that all enemies of Jews were good people. Farrakhan has been blasting Jewish influence & corruption, but he is a son-of-a-bitch himself. And even if past ‘anti-Semites’ may have had sound reasons for their antipathy for Jews, it doesn’t mean everything they did was justified. Some of those pogroms in Ukraine spiraled out of control. And the Nazism constituted a kind of Teutonic ideological pathology no less demented than Jewish globalist supremacism. We should know this by now. Sure, the Soviets achieved the awesome feat of defeating Nazi Evil, but the Soviets also committed lots of evils. The US did noble things around the world but also terrible, ugly things. Jews did a lot of good as well as lot of good. It makes no sense to go the David-Duke path where just about the ONLY GOOD JEW is Gilad Atzmon who happens to be especially harsh on his Ttribesmen. Even if we have every right to be very angry with current Jewish Power, we can still keep our sanity and not fall into the trap of praising insane ideologies and movements just because they were ‘woke’ on the JQ. We tend to think in terms of ‘enemy of our enemy is our friend’, but the ‘friend’ can turn out to be just as bad or even worse. Remember how the Ukrainians initially welcomed the Germans as liberators(from Soviet tyranny), only to discover that the Nazis considered Ukrainian Slavs to be a bunch of ‘subhumans’ to be treated even worse than under Stalin. But for whatever reasons, Little has decided to take his anti-Zionism and anti-Jewish-supremacism into Neo-Nazi territory. He claims that the Shoah didn’t happen. He says outrageous things like how Germans treated Jews better than Japanese were treated in internment camps during WWII. Sure, some Jews were treated better because they bribed the Germans. Or for propaganda purposes, Nazis created a few ‘potemkin concentration camps’ where Jews were treated rather well and made ‘documentary’ films about them to show to the world. But then, Soviets did the same thing. Judging by communist documentaries coming from the USSR, one would have thought that workers and peasants were living in a socialist paradise of plenty and bliss. Patrick Little, who is now so skeptical and cynical about Jewish claims, is willing to swallow every BS peddled by crazed Neo-Nazis and their ilk. But the essence of reality and truth is not a matter of black or white, night or day, this or that, especially when it comes to something as grand and complicated as history. Just as it’d be stupid to say everything about Nazism and Hitler was bad, it’s wrong to be totally anti-Jewish on everything. And just as we must be careful not to fall for Jewish BS(about Iran, Russia, Syria, Palestinians, white people, the ‘far right’, etc), we must be careful not to fall for the nonsense peddle by Neo-Nazi types. Granted, Neo-Nazi types have no power whereas Jews have immense power around the world. But lies are lies, nonsense is nonsense, and we need to come out on the side of truth.

Because Patrick Little spouted off Neo-Nazi talking points, he disgraced himself. Worse, he associated all the necessary and compelling things he said about Jewish Power and Zionist influence with crazy 14/88 ‘Hitler did noting wrong’ craziness. Before Little let down people like Fuentes, he disappointed and alienated people like Ryan Dawson. Dawson was looking forward to a sane discussion about Jewish power and what’s happening in Israel/Palestine, but it wasn’t long before Little veered into utterly crazy talk about how Nazis treated Jews like guests at Waldorf Hotel. It got repulsive, and in a subsequent video, Dawson reiterated the importance of not losing one’s head and lurching into cuckoo banana’s territory. Just like outlandish theories about 9/11 undermine intelligent skepticism of the official narrative, insane anti-Jewish vitriol undermines necessary expose and criticism of Jewish power. Just because Jewish globalist now act like Judeo-Nazis doesn’t mean we should be praising the Old Nazis. Two wrongs don’t make a right. And it is for this reason that Fuentes was correct in not associating himself with Little.

Though I don’t think Patrick Little is a fed-larping-as-‘far-right’-dissident, he might as well be whenever he spouts off about how ‘Hitler did nothing wrong’. On the issue of Shoah, Little makes the same ‘mistake’ of those in the Holocaust-Desecration cult who extrapolate one falsehood about the Narrative to nullify the entire event. For example, even experts admit that many accounts of what happened at Auschwizc can no longer be supported by evidence. And there have been Jewish charlatans who gave fabricated tales for attention or even wealth. And certain confessions made by Germans were under the duress of torture. But that doesn’t mean the event didn’t happen. Surely, there were plenty of men who exaggerated or told tall tales about Gettysburg or Normandy, but that doesn’t mean those events didn’t happen. Skepticism is a good thing, but why is it that so many people who become skeptical of the Jewish Narrative become such suckers for other extreme Narratives? It’s as if, having been soul-cleansed of one sacred story, they crave another story that fills them with a sense of certainty. Because truth is often complex, multi-faceted, and ambiguous, people who come to reject the Big Lie easily fall for another Big Lie. They break free of the Lie but still retain the craving for some all-encompassing truth that had once been satisfied by the Big-Lie-as-Sacred-Truth. It’s like people who lose religion often turn to secular cults with a fanaticism that mimics religious fervor. Isn’t it ironic how secular progs are more rapturous and delirious in their celebration of Homomania than many religious people are in their worship of God?
Anyway, regardless of whether Patrick Little is a ‘fed’ or not, his antics are reminiscent of the flaming lunatic named Sinead McCarthy. Though initially greeted as a lively, funny, and irreverent voice of the Alt Right with her parodies and passionate views, she soon turned totally nutter and argued in favor of Flat Earth Theory, as if to Westboro-ize the movement. It was then that people began to suspect she is really a nutjob or an infiltrator whose game is to make the Alt Right look bad by having their views be associated with nonsense like Flat Earth and other silliness. And yes, she also went 14/88 and then began to attack most Alt Right people as either ‘fags’ or worse. Little is nowhere near that level of insanity, but his campaign, at least when it came to Hitler-Nazis-Shoah, clearly went off the deep end. Granted, there are plenty of Judeo-Nazis are no less crazed. People like Max Boot would have us believe Putin is ‘new Hitler’ or that Iran poses some ‘existential’ threat to the world. Ben Shapiro is a Jewish supremacist hypocrite who berates even the slightest hint of identity and interests among white people but demands that all whites rally around Zionism. And who can forget Madeleine Albright who said it was worth it to kill 500,000 Iraqi kids or Sheldon Adelson who called for nuking Iran, a nation that has no nukes. Insane. But we shouldn’t be countering insanity with insanity. Judeo-Nazis are evil but so were the original Nazis.


Sadly, even people who should know better in the movement keep flirting with or pushing 14/88 garbage. Kevin MacDonald has done important work on the JQ. Also, we can forgive his past associations with men like David Duke and Don Black because, having been pushed to the fringes, he had no choice but to form alliances with people of shared interests. After all, the conservative De Gaulle formed an alliance with French Communists in the Resistance against German Occupation. But Kevin Macdonald now has enough recognition to be pushing Neo-Nazi radical nonsense on Occidental Observer. How can MacDonald scoff at accusations of ‘supremacism’ when he allows pro-Hitler garbage on his website? Now, the problem is not nuance or complexity when it comes to the discussion of Hitler and National Socialism because, after all, positive things can be said about them, as of communism and other radical movements. The problem is gushing endorsement, which some writers at Occidental Observer have clearly made of National Socialism. Never let your hatred of a**holes turn you into one. On the JQ, Fuentes has broached the topic without going cuckoo bananas. He named the power and discussed what really happened with USS Liberty and other instances of Zionist spying, theft, and sabotage. And he did it without the ‘Heil Hitler’ nonsense. Because Little veered into total nonsense territory with 14/88 garbage, he got stuck in the ditch. Sure, he will continue to have back-slappers on 4Chan who love to egg on any self-destructive loudmouth, but that’s no way to be a serious and mature person.

If Nehlen imploded because he wasn’t smart and feisty enough to handle the controversy and firestorm — even at his most outrageous, there was something soft, passive, and Mr-Rogersy about him — , Little’s problem seems to be he’s too bright and aggressive for his own good. Intelligence is a great asset but not when it lacks patience, balance, and probity. Instead of carefully weighing and digesting everything he’s learned in the past few years, Little just takes them as literal truths, immutable and invincible, and lets his mind run free to draw any conclusions that cast Jews in an evil light. Little has mental energy that was rarely evident with Nehlen, but he ingest ideas like he vapes on that stupid pipe of his. He’s read this and that, so he knows best, and there is nothing more to know. He’s like a born-again Evangelical except with Damn-the-Jews as his newfound faith. Personality counts for a lot in human affairs, and the strengths of Little’s personality are also his deficits. He can be tireless, which is good, but to the point of zealousness. He can be combative but to the point of being insulting and arrogant. He can be engaging and articulate but to the point of sophistry. Of course, none of this matters if he is indeed a ‘fed’ just larping as ‘right-wing dissident’ whose main objective is to associate legitimate criticism of Jewish Power with neo-Nazi desecration and mockery of all things associated with the great tragedy called Shoah.

A Response to "Heritage Foundation Defends Facebook’s ‘Right’ to Censor, Will Oppose Regulation" on Breitbart

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/05/03/heritage-foundation-defends-facebooks-right-to-censor-will-oppose-regulation/

Heritage Foundation is so full of BS.

Now, the argument that Facebook can do as it pleases because it is a private company has merit... if it were consistently applied.

BUT, would Heritage Foundation argue in such manner IF Facebook were owned by Palestinian-Americans and banned Pro-Zionist pages and voices as 'hateful' to Arabs? Really?

Or suppose Twitter is owned by Iranian-Americans who detest Israel and Zionists. Suppose they ban AIPAC, ADL, and other pro-Zionist groups as 'hate groups'. Would  Heritage Foundation support the right of Twitter to ban pro-Zionist voices?

Or suppose Youtube is owned by Chinese-Americans and they worked with pro-Chinese voices(even in China itself) to shut down critics of China as 'hateful'. And suppose pro-Tibetan voices are banned from Youtube also. Would Heritage foundation support that?

No, of course not.

Also, the so-called Liberals are total hypocrites. They've been saying forever that it was EVIL and ANTI-AMERICAN for the Red Scare and Anti-communists to have fired and blacklisted people suspected of being communists or communist-sympathizers because, after all, the Constitution protects people's civil liberties regardless of race, color, or creed.

CREED means ideology, belief, religion, or conviction.

But now, the Liberals are saying people should not be hired or they should be fired on the basis of creed alone. If their creed is 'hateful'(according to Judeo-Nazis and Homomaniacs who rule current America), they must be shut down. Examples of obvious truths censored by Twitter that takes from Judeo-Nazi organization ADL that supports Zionist tyranny over Palestinians:

And,Heritage Foundation, a cucky-wuck organization, says Facebook and other companies(owned by people of certain ethnic group) can ban people who advocate for white interests.

With a 'right' like that, who needs the left?

Worst of all is the sheer hypocrisy. The goal posts keep changing to favor one side. So, we are told that blacklisting communists and leftist radicals during the 'McCarthy Era' was so terrible because of 'Muh Constitution'. We've heard that narrative a million times from textbooks and PBS documentaries.

But when it comes to pro-white voices calling for white national liberation from PC tyranny and Jewish Supremacism, they must be fired, blacklisted, and shut down. And the Liberal Media are fully behind the silencing. But then, most of the media, like most internet platforms, are owned and controlled by Jews who are only 2% of the US population. (And Heritage Foundation relies on rich Jews and cuck-oligarchs for donations.)

But then, the very people who've denounced America of the 40s and 50s for anti-communist and anti-Soviet hysteria are now pushing the totally nonsensical paranoid hysteria about 'Russia Hacking'. These psychos are shameless. At the very least, the Soviet Union after WWII was a real empire with a radical ideology. In contrast, Russia today just wants peace and trade. So, why is anti-Russia hysteria worse than ever? Because Jews rule America and hate Russia because Russia won't play nice doggy to EOJ or Empire of Judea. It won't bend over to Homomania(a form of Satanic-Jewish-christianity) and won't let Jewish oligarchs totally own the place.

In truth, Jew-run Hollywood was always about blacklisting. Suppose any writer or director proposes an idea for a movie about the Nakba Pogroms of 1948 from the Palestinian POV. Or a movie about Charlottesville that shows what REALLY happened, i.e. Jewish mayor, black police chief, Deep State, and Big Media all conspired to shut down the event and railroad White National Liberationists who said NO to Jewish Supremacism.

I guarantee that person will never work in Hollywood again. The anti-communist era blacklisted lasted just several years. But anti-white and anti-Palestinian blacklisting in Hollywood go on forever.