Fast-and-Easy Path to American Citizenship Has Universalized Treason around the World

Hegel and Marx expounded on the dialectics of history. It seems ‘digestics’ is what animates America. A hyper-materialist society, America has turned consumerism as a metaphor for everything. According to Americanism, not only do people primarily exist to consume-dispose-consume-dispose-consume-some-more but they themselves are to be consumed and disposed with ceaseless intakes of new peoples of different races and cultures. The elites don’t see rooted, established, and existing Americans as a special people with history, heritage, and meaning. They see existing Americans as stale old masses to be replaced by endless servings of New Americans. So, historic European-Americans are just pieces of meat in a melting pot to be digested and excreted to make room for servings of New Americans.

Especially since individualist-materialist consumerism fixates Western attention on hedonism and vanity, it is assumed that white peoples in the West cannot sustain themselves. They are too much into fun & feasting to prioritize family & future. So, let white people have a good time and then make way for New Arrivals since white people (1) don’t have enough kids and (2) no longer care for their roots and heritage anyway.
Of course, in time, even immigrant groups and their children will be 'Westernized' and experience plummeting birthrates as their main priority will be short-term self-interest than racial-cultural survival. In time, even non-whites in the West will go the way of whites. (Such a view would indicate that the modernity is a success in creating things but a failure in creating life. Since modern nations can make things but can’t make life, they rely on non-modern nations to produce life for export to the modern world. But then, immigrant groups, upon being modernized, will also become deficient in creating life and will have to be replaced by waves of newer arrivals. To be sure, there’s a good chance that non-whites, due to lower IQ and other problems, won’t become properly modernized, in which case they will either continue to produce life but not things or fail to produce both life and things.) On that basis, the elites insist that the only way to sustain the population is to bring in more New Peoples. The message for Europeans and Americans, especially white ones, is that they shouldn’t bother about marriage and children if such get in the way of fun, career, or self-fulfillment in tune with latest fashions. White women should fixate on careers, make money, and blow it all on themselves on shoes, travel, fancy food, and loose sex. Men should forever remain boys hooked on video games, hobbies, and recreation. The main purpose of jobs is to make money to spend, spend, and spend. And nothing has any lasting value. New items are soon old items to be tossed out to make room for newer items.
And what goes for TVs, appliances, and clothes also goes for peoples. Americans no longer have any identity or history. (If there is a historical narrative, the message is 'America is all about immigration', i.e. American history is about replacing existing peoples with new ones. This history is not remembrance of things worth preserving but reminder that everything must be replaced or reinvented.) They are just consumers who live for fun, work for fun. Old people are warehoused in nursing homes while the grandchildren grow up identifying with pop idols and celebrities as ‘role models’ or demi-gods. For spirituality and uplift, there is Homomania or Queertianity. For truth and ‘poetry’, there is Rap music and Magic Negro cult. For ideas, there are PC slogans to chant for the hive-minded.

When it comes to consumerism, of course we want things to be fast-and-easy. Who wants to stand in long lines for ice cream or hamburgers? Who wants to go through hassles and complications to buy a TV or a car? But at some point in American history, the consumerism went from convenience(a good) to compulsion. (Consider the shopping habits or rituals of Americans during Black Friday sales.) People have to have it NOW and more of it. If you don’t have the money, use credit. Borrow and buy more. And don’t buy things because you really need or want them but simply for the thrill of buying. The ideal American according to the globalist formula is the shopoholic who shops until she drops and then shops some more. A shopoholic is addicted to the rush of acquiring new things. The things themselves matter less than the excitement of acquiring things. It doesn’t matter that what were bought goes unused, neglected, or forgotten. They are either pushed back in the closet and forgotten or tossed out to make room for new stuff and then newer stuff.

This kind of consumerism is vapid and shallow. It may be ‘good’ for the economy, at least if people can really afford the stuff instead of borrowing and spending what they can’t pay back. But it can’t be good for the soul because it’s a life fixated on flash and fashion. If rampant consumerism is bad for the soul, it is immeasurably worse when applied to people themselves? It’s one thing to regard Americans as insatiable consumers but quite another to see them as consumer items than as a people with a culture and history, which are priceless than about price tags. The current elites have a shopoholic attitude about the core European peoples of America. They see established or existing Americans as stale Americans. They are enthralled only with the prospect of acquiring ‘fresh’ peoples. Elites are no longer interested in established groups of Americans. Indeed, what need for groups and collective identities/memories when everyone is seen as an atomized individual disconnected and unbound to anything related to ethnos, history, or culture? A people are no longer unique; they are just units, like the 1's and 0's of digital coding. There’s no longer any nobility and passion in representing, defending, and preserving white Americans as a people-and-culture since they are seen as meaningless units and the same-old-same-old, just like a shopoholic woman has lost interest in shoes already stacked away in the closet. Her mind obsesses on getting New Pairs. Likewise, elites feel excitement only when salivating over New Americans to acquire.

The idea that there once was nothing but then something with the founding and construction of America, a magnificent creation deserving to be preserved in its essence, has faded from the narrative. European-America that had been envisioned and maintained was to be utterly transformed by endless waves of non-whites from around the world with the passage of the insane 1965 immigration law that handed over the keys of America to vicious Jews. That was the Trojan Horse moment in American History.

Statue of Liberty that used to represent (1) sharing of the light of freedom with the world and (2) offering opportunity to Europeans & Jews in the 19th century has come to represent the shopoholic mania of a soulless vapid America. There’s also the tear-jerking mendacity about ‘huddled masses’ and ‘refugees’.
After all, most immigrants today are not desperate people. They were not starving in their homelands. And many from Asia are well-educated and had decent jobs there. Also, as democracy has become dime-a-dozen around the world, most immigrants come from nations with free elections and basic human rights. They are not running from tyrants. And most of these nations have sufficient freedom for peoples there to fix problems and make progress.
But then, why would these people go through the hassle of improving their own nations when they can just get on a plane and fly to America for instant material improvement? Even if they overstay their visas, they can find ‘sanctuary’ in Treason Cities.

And why would the elites care about ‘tired and boring’ existing Americans when they snort New Americans like cocaine. The elites say the non-white immigrants are the Future, as if America can’t have a future without Future Peoples. I guess the elites have forgotten that new life can be created from wombs of existing Americans. Even with zero immigration, existing Americans have a future ahead of them if they are encouraged to favor family and life.
But then, women as mothers will work less and spend more on babies than on themselves. And men as fathers will save more for the family than spend and spend. Bad for consumerism as far as the elites are concerned. Besides, the cult of Diversity has infected elite minds with the notion that nothing is more fabulous than more colors and odors. Since most of the immigrants are non-white, it’s like elites shopping for different-colored shoes. And remember, more restaurants!!

Now, if the ‘naturalization’ process in America were a long and arduous, the elites wouldn’t be so thrilled in their shopo-demo-holism. It’s like consumers wouldn’t turn into shopoholics if it were difficult and painstaking to purchase items. It is because it’s so fun and easy to shop that people become addicted to shopping.
Likewise, it’s because the path to citizenship has been made so easy that the elites have become addicted to shopping for more immigrants, especially since the Current Year reverberates with chants of ‘Diversity is our strength, diversity is our strength, etc’. If diversity is indeed our strength, then nothing is more fab than for politicians and elites to ‘shop’ for New Americans. It’s like buying new stocks. The elite’s socio-political and moral status rises with their competitive bidding for more New Americans. With Diversity as the highest value, one can burnish one's reputation by advertising for more New Americans. After 9/11, America was all about shopping for more stuff and shopping for more New Americans. Cult of Diversity made the Yet-to-be-Americans more valuable than stale Been-here-done-that-Americans.
And this bug also infects Canada where elites compete to gush about how they welcome diversity more than the next guy does. Justin Trudeau isn’t a leader of his people. He’s a shopoholic for New Canadians. Canadians, as they’d come into existence since the founding, no longer matter. They are regarded as old, boring, and tired. It doesn’t matter if they’re young. All white people are deemed ‘old and boring’, and they have no right to defend their identity and territory. With Diversity as the religion of the land, the only purpose of whites is to increase Diversity like a dairy farm is to increase the production of milk.

Now, what makes sense in one realm doesn’t for another. We all want ease and convenience in commerce. We want stores and services to be quick and efficient. But when the same logic is applied to humans themselves, it spells doom for culture and civilization. Consider the film KOYAANISQATSI where people as consumers seem indistinct from what they consume. A society so obsessed with cycles of consumption and disposal comes to regard consumerism as metaphor for everything, even everyone. As Americans are now regarded mainly as consumers and disposers, eaters and shitters, they too have no meaning outside such processes. As such, they themselves are regarded as existing to be consumed and disposed. As far as the elites are concerned, the ‘old and tired’ white Americans had their turn. They are not people with culture and heritage worth defending and prolonging. They are like people at McDonalds or a movie theater who must clear the seats so that new customers or audience will take their place. They are like burgers being digested into fecal matter to be shat out. As the logic goes, if hamburgers have no right to stay in the stomach forever and must pass through the bunghole to make way for future burgers, why should white Americans hold onto America as their homeland? Elites just see it as clogging the system. Globalism says whites had their fun, the jig is up, and it's time for others to take their place. Or whites are to be distracted with mindless fun while they’re replaced by New Americans who supposedly deserve their turn at careers and leisure until they too are replaced by Newer Americans and so forth and so on.

For Globo-America to run smoothly, amnesia is crucial. If Americans don’t know or care about their history and heritage, they won’t feel that they have anything worth defending or preserving. As for basic historical lesson, just poison the well of memory and invalidate the white saga so indispensable to America’s founding and development. Thus, whites feel guilt than pride about their history, resigning themselves to collective suicide to redeem the legacy of ‘white privilege’.
Needless to say, Jews don’t feel this way about their own identity, history, and heritage. Jews do retain a sense of history linked to a sense of prophecy. The reason why Jews push amnesia onto white goyim is to control them. After all, humans with memory control animals without memory. Why is the devious detective able to run circles around the tragic hero in Chris Nolan’s MEMENTO? Because the cop has a functioning memory whereas the hapless hero couldn’t store new memory since his wife’s murder. Granted, some Jews are getting high on their own supply and may end up self-destructing like the rest. But as of now, Jews have the advantage because they insist on identity, heritage, and history. Even as Jews urge gentiles to become a globalized mass of zombie-like consumers(or consumbies), they guard their blood-narrative, soil of Zion, and seal of Covenant.
Indeed, the reason why Jews push amnesia on gentiles is because any people with autonomy of identity and narrative will define and defend their own sense of history, urgency, and destiny. Imagine if cows had intelligence and memory of their own. Would they take orders from ranchers who use them as cattle? Cows don’t know whence they came and where they’re going. Likewise, would so many white people act like cattle if they weren’t spellbound with amnesia(via pop culture) and ‘white guilt’(via Political Correctness)? White masses are corn-fed on mindless pleasure and cattle-prodded with PC. Fixated on fun and guilt, they fail to see the big picture.
It’s also paradoxical that Jews would push so much fun and pleasure on a people deemed so guilty and undeserving. If indeed whites must atone and be punished for their sins, why should they be encouraged to indulge themselves at movies, concerts, casinos, malls, eateries, etc.? Shouldn’t the People of Guilt be punished with pain and deprivation, like criminal convicts in prison? And yet, Jews tell whites to have as much fun as possible.
Why? For two reasons. One is white consumption makes Jews richer because Jews control much of finance, commerce, and vice industries like gambling and drugs. The other reason is a people addicted to revelry and pleasure are like stupid children primed for manipulation. If white people were sober, disciplined, and moral — as Anglo-Americans once were — , they might unite and stand as a brick wall against Jewish filth and deviousness. But if white people are given to debauchery like Lola in BLUE ANGEL, they can be bought and sold with money. And those tempted by the seductress will succumb to disrepute and even end up destitute, with Jews holding all the cards in the end. Consider what happens to the professor in the Josef von Sternberg's film.

But the negative effect of mass replacement by endless immigration isn’t only on white Americans. After all, the New Americans will, in turn, become Old Americans when their time is up and then be chewed out and replaced by Yet Newer Americans. Furthermore, because the US is the land of amnesia and hedonism, the children of the New Americans will grow up as soulless zombies who favor leisure of the now over longevity between past and future. They will treat sex like fast food. Also, the New Americans, in speedy exchange of their own identity for the soulless neo-American consumerism, will be relinquishing their roots and culture for naked material interests, albeit masked with the faux-culture and pseudo-values of PC.

Now, let us imagine how things might have been more meaningful for everyone IF the process of ‘naturalization’ had been arduous, demanding, challenging, and difficult. It would have been better for the pride and security of white Americans as the founders and builders. And it would have been better for non-white wanna-be-Americans since they would have been made conscious of the full implications of their decision to abandon their own lands, peoples, and cultures for America.

Suppose the path to citizenship required 20 yrs than mere 5 years. And suppose every would-be immigrant, prior to arriving in the US, must answer 10 questions pertaining to their born identities & loyalties and new identity and loyalty as ‘Americans’.

These Questions would be devised to make the would-be-immigrant think twice about emigration. After all, permanently moving to another nation is essentially an Act of Treason. You’re basically abandoning and rejecting your original/born identity, culture, lineage, and loyalty to take on a new identity and pledge new loyalties. Especially if you’re moving from a nation/civilization with deep culture and tradition, you’re surrendering something so rich and meaningful to adopt a new identity of a wholly different nation. In the case of the US and the modern West, the only theme is the Cult of Fashion(of the New) than Concern for Tradition. The Current Americanism requires all peoples to favor amnesia over memory. The only exception is the Jews, who’ve manipulated the system so that all goyim will be turned into blank slates while they themselves remain a people of the written scroll that reaches back into ancient times.

When people do trivial things, it doesn’t require much thought. For instance, if you want to buy an ice cream cone or watch a movie, it doesn’t much matter because you’re just seeking momentary pleasure. But in deciding to permanently move to another nation where your descendants will be born and dissolve into a 'melting pot', one has think deep and hard about the move. It’s like people should really think twice about having an abortion or getting tattoos. An abortion is far more serious than getting a haircut or having nails clipped. You’re killing a human life growing inside you, and there may be emotional scars later, that is if you’re a person of conscience. And getting a tattoo means you are stuck with that ugly stuff forever. Do you really want to do something that will mark or define you for life? Or consider gender-assignment surgeries. It’s such a drastic undertaking that the patient must be absolutely sure what he or she is getting into. It isn’t a decision to make lightly. Or it’s like changing religions. Surely, if a Christian wants to become a Muslim or vice versa, he should really think hard about what he is doing. It’s not just a mind game but a fundamental shift in spiritual beliefs, commitments, and loyalties. It should never be done lightly. This is why Evangelicals who push Jesus onto others like candy are shallow idiots, not unlike the globalists who want to pass out American Citizenship like flyers. While we can understand why Evangelicals want to save souls and bring others to the love of Jesus, they should also be mindful of the fact that there are other rich, deep, and meaningful spiritual systems. So, if non-Christians are to convert to Christianity, Evangelicals should at the very least inform potential converts of the profound changes that will follow. It’s like marriage or divorce is not something to be handled lightly. Marriage means you are committed to the person for life. And divorce could mean emotional scars, legal complications, and worst of all, trauma for the children.
Some things don’t require fundamental shifts or change of commitments. Deciding to buy a new music CD is nothing compared to, say, deciding to join the military. The latter requires tough training, years of duty, and the possibility of killing other people and being killed or being crippled for life. Some decisions should not be made lightly. And yet, immigration is now treated like the most easy, fun, painless, and natural thing. Not only are globalist Western elites calling on non-whites to come in droves but non-white elites are telling their own people to flock to other nations. Now, if the elites of a nation are proud of their identity and tradition, why would they encourage their own people to give up their own nations, move to other nations, and pledge loyalty to other governments(that could even be enemies)?

For the longest time, neither China nor Japan allowed foreigners to enter or their own people to leave. They saw foreigners as invaders, and they didn’t want their own people to go to other lands and work for the enemies/rivals. Japanese didn’t want their own people to become New Chinese and possibly serve China against Japan. And Chinese felt the same way. But then, Western Powers forced China and Japan open, and both nations realized that they must learn new ideas from the West and build their own technologies to defend themselves. So, ideas and goods should move freely, but the nation-states should still maintain border controls. But this wasn’t so easy, especially as imperialist nations began to carve up China. With China being unable to keep foreigners out, they got into the habit of moving to foreign lands. Also, due to pressures of increasing population, there was the temptation to dump the poor folks to the wide open spaces of the New World.

The modern world gave rise to both nationalism and anti-nationalism. With centralized state power, mass communication, and public education, more people could be brought together under a shared national identity. Thus, Russian peasants who’d only known their local village and customs began to think more in terms of their shared Russian-ness with other Russians. And the rise of Turkey owed to modern political influences from the West. So, more people than ever before gained shared/collective pride as member of a nation.

But modernity also facilitated movements of peoples via ships and then airplanes. The world grew smaller. And people being organisms, they were tempted to move to other places IF they could have better material lives. Modern Turkey is very nationalist, and yet, so many Turks have left Turkey for Germany and other European nations because they want more money and welfare. And the Turkish government, like the Mexican government, promotes both nationalism and immigrationism, a great irony. If indeed Turkish elites are so proud of being Turks, why would they want Turks to abandon their own nations and move, often permanently, to other nations? Won’t these Turkish emigrants be abandoning their own identity and culture? If indeed Turks become ‘New Germans’ and if Germany and Turkey end up in a war, won’t the Germanized Turks be fighting against Turkey? But then, Turks may feel that Turks who emigrate to Europe will likely retain their identity. In other words, they aren’t so much immigrants in Germany but colonizers. As white Europe is aging, dying, and losing faith in God and nation, why shouldn’t the more virile and vital Muslim folks move and take over?

Same kind of double-think may operate among Mexican elites. In a way, it makes little sense for proud Mexicans to encourage Mexicans to move to Gringo-Land and serve goddamn Gringos. But, Mexicans can smell the blood that Gringo has lost his mojo-ez. Gringo is cucked out and decadent. So, Mexicans who move to the US aren’t so much switching loyalties and siding with Gringos against Mexico but carrying out Reconquista of the lands back from Gringos who’d humiliated the ‘tacoheads’ in the Mexican-American War and been making Westerns were Mexicans are usually ridiculous, albeit endearing, characters like Ramon in THE BIG COUNTRY and Pedro in RIO BRAVO.

Anyway, moving to another nation is not something to be taken lightly. The reason why it’s become a New Normal is because globalism has undermined nationalism and patriotism. It has severed identity from its roots. Globalism says no people, except Jews, have an organic connection to their ancestors, lands, cultures, and traditions. All identities are just like baseball cards to be traded back and forth. Identities are to be traded like currencies or bought and sold on the demographic stock market. We don’t trade in slaves anymore but in entire peoples. Even though people feel free in having easier access to other parts of the world, they’ve become a new kind of 'slaves' because they’ve lost the meaning of who they are really are. They’ve been cut off from their roots and chained to migratory patterns where the ONLY consideration is material interest, hedonism, and self-indulgence. So, if you live in Nation A and if moving to Nation B will make you richer, your identity and loyalty easily shift to Nation B.

Paradoxically, the only people who resist such mindset, the Jews, are the ones who are pushing it most fervently on other peoples. Why? Because Jews want gentiles to be adrift as rootless economic units whose loyalties can be sold to the highest bidder. Since Jews got the most money, they can buy the loyalties of most people. Look at the minions of George Soros al over the world. With their mega-stash of gold, Jews can dish out thirty pieces of silver to so many gentiles who, having been culturally hollowed out by Pop Culture and intellectually reprogrammed by PC, are easily sold to the money changers.

Now, let’s consider a hypothetical where every would-be-immigrant is fully warned of what he is committing to IF he decides upon permanent emigration to another nation. He would be informed of the profound implications of his decisions on the political, cultural, and even spiritual level. And it wouldn’t be just about him but his ancestors and descendants. After all, if he adopts the identity and narrative of another nation, his descendants will likely drift from his identity & culture and forget his ancestors in the ‘old country’.

So, what would the questions posed to the would-be-immigrant be? As follows.

1. Are you proud of your people, culture, and history? Do you feel a deep attachment to your people and land? If so, why do you want to abandon your nation and come to live in America where your culture and identity won’t be central and will likely be rejected, neglected, or forgotten by your children and grandchildren? If you’re non-white, do you find white people to be superior? Why do you want to move to a nation envisioned and built by white pioneers? Do you believe white people do everything better, whereas your people, being inferior and hopeless, will never achieve the levels of wealth and success found in Anglo-built America?

2. What is your main motivation for wanting to permanently move to another nation and replace your existing deeply rooted identity with a new one based largely on consumerism, careerism, and recreation? Are you motivated by idealism or materialism? Are you willing to abandon your own identity, people, and culture just to have better material life in America?
Or do you value individualism and freedom that you believe are enshrined by Rule of Law in America? But if you long for more freedom and individualism, why don’t you struggle for them in your own nation? Are you and your people incapable of working together for greater liberty and rule of law? Are you and your ilk so lazy, cowardly, craven, and stupid that you people can’t attain those things on your own and must move to white-founded-and-built nation to enjoy them?
Or if your nation is free and democratic but saddled with rampant corruption, why don’t you get together with your countrymen to organize movements for reform? Why do you shirk your responsibilities at home while you seek to shunt off to America to enjoy the fruits of what other peoples, especially whites, have accomplished? If you admire the American Way, why don’t you do something to realize similar improvements in your own nation? A true idealist doesn’t run away from the problems of his own people to enjoy paradise built by another people. He rolls up his sleeves and struggles to make things better for his own nation and people. The West didn’t become rich and successful because white people ran to success created by others. It was because men and women of values and ideals acted on their convictions to construct something out of nothing, thus transforming a wilderness into a civilization. But you don’t want to serve or improve your own nation. You just want to run from problems to easy solutions in America created by other peoples. You don’t want to do the homework for your own people in your own nation. You want to go to America and live off the homework done by whites. Are you ashamed of yourself? What kind of shameless craven tard are you anyway?

3. Are you aware that America was created by taking land from the native populations? If childish Indian savages were the original owners of America, then why do you want to join the white race in furthering the conquest of America and render Indians into yet a smaller minority. If it was tragic for Indians to lose their lands to Europeans, isn’t it doubly tragic for Indians to lose their land to peoples from all over the world? If whites took land from Indians, isn’t the moral obligation of whites to take good care of Indians than open up the New World to yet more invasions from all over?

There’s a good chance that your people had also been colonized by Europeans although not ethnically pogrom-ed off the land as Indian were. Aren’t you relieved that your people regained your homeland and were liberated of foreign imperialism. As it stands, Indians lost their land and will forever live under ‘foreign’ white rule. So, why would your kind want to move to America and participate in an Eurocentric race-ist order that has permanently extinguished the hope of Indian Liberation?

Furthermore, even though our official creed is now ‘Diversity Is Our Strength’, the fact is Diversity is really the product of imperialism, conquest, mass rape, slave trade, and waves of invasive immigration. In North and South Americas, Diversity was forced on the natives by imperialists. And the presence of blacks to further the Diversity was the result of centuries of Slave Trade. So, if you come here to celebrate Diversity, you are participating in the Imperialist Saga.

4. Are you aware that the US not only developed as an imperialist power across the American continent but expanded its imperial reach overseas as well? Do you know that US imperialism and intervention in world affairs led to the deaths of millions in Asia and Middle East? Consider the US support of Japanese imperialism before the two empires butted heads in World War II. Think of US invasion of Philippines, US wars in Korea and Vietnam. Think of US actions in Guatemala and Iran. The invasion of Panama. Think of US colonial grab of Puerto Rico. Think of how the CIA and US mafia ran Cuba before Castro liberated it from Hyman Roth. And have you already forgotten the US invasion of Iraq and Libya that led to destruction of entire cities and deaths of 100,000s of lives? The US also aided terrorists in Syria to either topple or cripple the secular modern Assad regime. The US, being controlled by Jews, also supports the seemingly never-ending Zionist oppression and dispossession of Palestinians. Given the history and direction of US power and its imperialism, why do you want to move to America, work for the US economy, raise your kids to serve in the US military, and pay taxes to the US government when the US will use the added might(of immigrant labor and revenues) to expand its empire to terrorize and destroy more peoples and nations all over the world? Do you want to participate in American Imperialism? Do you want to work and pay taxes to fund the US empire that has caused so much harm in every corner of the world? Are you some kind of amoral freak? Haven’t you read Paul Craig Roberts? Or are you the kind of tard who got all your information from Jew-run CNN?

5. Are you a decadent or degenerate freak? If not, why would you want to come to America? Don’t you know that the current religion of the US is Homomania and Queertianity? Don’t you know that Americans now celebrate fecal penetration among homos? Don’t you know that America now fires, fines, and blacklists people who won’t acknowledge Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner as a ‘woman’? Don’t you know that US companies are obliged to use 50 gender pronouns? Don’t you know that Washington D.C., the capital of the US, is 10% homo and virtually all politicians are shills of heinous Jewish globalists? Why do you want to bring your children to America to be indoctrinated in public schools and by mass media(all controlled by Jewish globalists and their homo proxies) to praise, celebrate, and even worship homos and trannies? What kind of parent are you that you are willing to turn your children’s hearts, minds, and souls over to the devil of decadent and degenerate globalism just because you want to make more money, drive a fancy car, and live in a McMansion? You must be some kind of turd to expose your children to such filth. And do you know what American pop culture is? It is about keeping men boys forever, addicted to video-games and comic book culture. And it’s about turning girls into whores or ‘thots’ at the youngest age possible. The US influence will turn your son into an immature dork or a fruitkin. And your daughter will likely throw away her virginity at 15 and screw around like the disgusting Lena Dunham and Emma Sulkowicz. You must be some kind of degenerate freak yourself to want to come to America and expose your children to that kind of filth.
Aren’t you proud of your own history, culture, and values? Or are you already ersatz-Americanized via globalist media that are beamed into homes all across the world? Are you already a tard whose idea of culture is tattoos, piercings, and the umpteenth comic book movie? Are your kids already into rap or some other trashy music? Is your son already an Americanized idiot who imitates rappers and demented celebrities? Is your daughter already a thot-in-progress? You must be one lowlife shithead of a father. So, you couldn’t resist the worst aspects of American Pop Culture even in your nation and you want to come to America to wallow whole hog in degeneracy and filth. US may be rich, but it has a shithole culture, and you want to eat from it like a pig. Apparently, you have no feeling or connection to your own culture and history because, if you did, you would want to preserve it and defend it from the foulness of globalist US influence that is spreading like a plague all over the world. If you come to the US, a nutjob like Michio Kaku will just see you as a worker-consumer-tax-payer whose only purpose is to keep the economy running so that megalomaniacal geeks like him can invent technology to turn themselves into ‘gods’, like how Mason became Largo in BUBBLEGUM CRISIS.

6. Despite all the official crap about ‘equality’, do you know that the US is really about the royalty of the holy three: Jews, blacks, and homos? Both political parties must honor and praise Jews no matter what they do. Jews are the most powerful people in America and must be obeyed at every turn. And we must turn a blind eye to Zionist oppression of Palestinians. We must not protest our tax payer money going to Zionist tyranny. Do you want to take part in this evil? Don’t you have any sympathy for Palestinians? No? Why you dirty heartless bastard. Crazy Jews run the US, and moving to the US to serve Jews is like moving to Nazi Germany to lend support to the Wehrmacht. If Jews want more Wars for Israel, America must deliver. If Jews want to wreck the economies of Iran and Russia, all Americans must comply because all politicians are shills for Zion. Why would you want to participate in this monstrous system? Not only was the US created by ‘racist’ imperialism against childish Indian savages and not only did it develop by slave labor, but the US continues to be an aggressive nation hellbent on world domination. If anything, it is worse today because at least the Anglo-American elites of yesteryear had some conscience, some sense of honor, some sense of limits, some sense of magnanimity, some sense of Christian grace. Also, they didn’t deny their power and listened to criticism and were self-critical. In contrast, the current Jewish elites are utterly neurotic, psychopathic, sociopathic, megalomaniacal, egotistical, chutzpahlsy, and delirious. Even though they cause the most harm around the world, they pontificate like they’re moral paragons or eternal victims of the Shoah. If you come to the US, you will be serving this evil power. Do you even know WHY the Jews are ‘welcoming’ non-white folks like you? They just want to set goyim against goyim. If you’re Muslim, you know Jews are making White Christians in the military bomb your nation and make your life hell. But these same Jews then ‘invite’ your kind to America and make you hate White Christians. It’s pure misdirection. It’s the Jews who make whites hate, invade, and destroy Muslim nations. Jews run Hollywood and made all these movies and TV shows with ‘Muzzie’ baddies. But when you come to America, Jews will pretend to love you and set you against white gentiles as 'Islamophobes'. Why do you want to be played and manipulated by Jews? You must be a freaking idiot to want to come to America and be used as globots by the heinous Jewish imperialists.
And then, there are the blacks or Negroes. They are the other people deemed holy by the American Narrative. But in fact, blacks commit the most crime, destroy entire cities, degrade academic standards, holler like lunatics, and tell lies upon lies. Even though most blacks have most to fear from other blacks, the insane BLM movement made believe that innocent law-abiding blacks were being gunned down by ‘racist’ white supremacist police. If you want to run some store in a big city, there’s a good chance some crazy ‘groids’ will loot it like they did in Ferguson in the name of justice for Michael Brown, a fat thug who got shot for charging a police officer who was only doing his duty. As blacks are revered as ‘kangz’ in America, rappers are treated like poet laureates and prophets. But all they yammer about is ‘biatches’, ‘muh gun’, ‘muh bling’, ‘muh dick’, ‘muh attitude’. Why would you want to bring your kids to a nation and raise them to imitate crazed blacks who imitate drunken apes?
And then, there’s the Homos. Maybe you know that some people are born homo and like to do ‘gay’ stuff. Okay, live and let live, I guess. But in the US, Jews via control of media-academia-finance-entertainment, have turned homos into the angels and saints of America. Even though HIV epidemic spread because homos were buggering one another in bathhouses from coast to coast, Americans are forced to believe that homos were just hapless and innocent victims, oh boo hoo hoo. And if you open a pastry shop, you better bake a cake to service a ‘gay wedding’. If you don’t, you will be sued and destroyed financially. And Antifa thugs will attack you in the streets while hideous Jews giggle with glee like the demon girl in Fellini’s TOBY DAMMIT. Do you still want to come to America? If yes, you must be some kind of disgusting freak yourself.

7. Do you care about the environment? If you do, why do you want to come to America, consume more energy than you are now, and add to the carbon footprint to the planet? Studies show that when people come to America, they drive bigger cars like SUV’s and live in McMansions. They use more energy of all kinds and add more CO2 into the air. Don’t you care about the planet? Also, as an American, you will likely eat a lot of beef, and that means more cattle, and that means more cow fart which adds lots of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Why would you want to become a stupid fat American eating all those burgers, driving an SUV, and living in a McMansion? It’s bad enough we have enough stupid Americans messing up the planet. Why would you want to be yet another fat stupid American? Why don’t you do us a favor and stay in your nation and live within your means and be more environmentally-minded. We have enough gross fat Americans who use excessive energy and befoul the planet with auto exhausts and cow flatulence.

8. Do you know that financial sector is the biggest share of the US economy? The US has manipulated, abused, and fleeced the world with Wall Street fraud and Dollar supremacism. If you come to America and if your kids do well in school, there’s a good chance they too will work in the financial sector and facilitate more predatory fraud around the world. Why don’t you stay in your own nation and make money the honest way than coming to America and goading your kids to go to business school, join Wall Street, learn dirty tricks, and make lots of money by making or producing nothing? The last thing the US needs is more financial sharks. It needs more Real Economy. The problem is immigrants come to the US and work to expand stupid bubbles that distort the economy for everyone. Consider all the Hindu dotkins who played a key role in the Dot.com Bubble in the 1990s. And the Housing Bubble that nearly KO’ed the world economy owed much to providing easy loans to tons of immigrants and even illegal aliens who bought houses they couldn’t really afford. The US economy is seriously distorted and, in turn, distorts the entire world. The fact that you want to join this bubble economy means you’re sick in the head. Why don’t you want to stay in your own nation and build up some honest industries?

9. Do you want to aid and abet in Jewish Supremacism and oppression of Palestinians? While the US has many groups, some are more equal than others, and no group is as ‘more equal’ than the Jews. Jews use their great power to force all groups to support the Zionist Occupation and Oppression of Palestinians. What kind of lowlife sicko are you that you want to come to the US and aid in the oppression of Palestinians and other peoples? Why do you hate the Palestinians? Why do you want to work in the US and pay taxes into the system that funds the terrible Zionist tyranny over Palestinians. You must be a sadistic bully with a hole where there should be a soul. So, you’re the kind of lowlife who’s willing to come to America and pay taxes to support the oppression of Palestinians just because you want your SUV, McMansion, and 5 burgers per serving. Have you seen a spiritual counselor recently? You should because you are willing to take thirty pieces of silver and oppress Palestinians.

10. Why do you want to kill your own people? If you’re Chinese, there’s a chance that US and China will be at war. If that happens, you will have to support the US as it drops bombs and murders countless innocent dog-eaters and cat-torturers. Are you a Muslim? Then, you must surely know that Jewish-run America uses its military and economic sanctions to target, subvert, and destroy any Muslim or Arab nation hated by Israel. Are you some lowlife Muslim cuck(with brains rotted from too much cousin-mating) who takes pleasure in coming to America and paying taxes to support a system that drops bombs on Muslims, forcing them into refugee status?
Or if you’re from Latin America, you must know of the long US history of exploitation of nations and peoples south of the border. Look what Hyman Roth did to Havana in THE GODFATHER PART 2. Jews and Anglo-Americans have been using Latin America as their backyard. They’ve been invading, bullying, and exploiting Latin America. And yet, your dream is to come to the US and work for gringo and pay taxes into the Yanqui Empire so that the US will continue pushing around Latin American nations? Are you loco?
And if you’re African, why do you want to run from fellow blacks and come to a white-built nation? Are you a ‘racist’? In America, ‘racist’ whites take flight or white flight from black areas. That is deemed discriminatory or bigoted. And yet, you want to take flight from fellow blacks and come to white Europe or white-founded America. Are you a self-loathing black ‘racist’ who runs from fellow blacks and come to live with ‘whitey’? Are you really that disgustingly ‘racist’? If you got talent and brains, why don’t you work to improve and fix your ‘shithole’ nation? If you got shit all over, clean it up. Don’t run from your own shit. Are you too lazy to fix your own problems? Then, you are reinforcing ‘racist’ stereotypes of blacks being lazy, indolent, and irresponsible. There’s a ‘racist’ stereotype that black men are prone to getting women pregnant and then shirking their duties and running off to hump more whores. Do you see your own nation as a ‘whore’ to run from? Do you want to confirm the ‘racist’ stereotype of blacks as carefree ‘groids’ who won’t be their brothers’ keepers?

*Bonus Question. If you believe that white Americans should be replaced by non-white New Americans, do you support the same fate for your own nation? Should foreigners take over your own nation and fundamentally change its demography? Do you mind if that happens? What? You’re not worried about that since your nation sucks and no one wants to come to it anyway?

Anyway, if after considering all the above questions, if your answer is still, "Yes, I want to come to America", then our decision is NO, YOU CAN’T COME because the fact that you still want to come to America after being so warned means that you’re a trashy, shallow, and disgusting person. As the US has enough trashy, shallow, and disgusting people, it doesn’t need MORE.
So, stay home and fix up your own nation.

Is a Nation(such as America) Just-an-Idea? Is a Person Just-an-Idea?

It’s a common practice(even habit) among politicians and thinkers(mostly official scribes) to reiterate that America is an Idea or even ‘just an idea’. But is a nation just an idea? Can a nation be just an idea? And if a nation is just an idea, is it no longer a nation if those ideas fade and are replaced by new ones?

Let’s compare a nation with a person. Just like nations have an official ideology, identity, and/or narrative, every person has set of values and beliefs. So, the person is shaped by those ideas. Therefore, does it follow that the person is those ideas? Of course not. Rather, isn’t he a holder of those ideas or ideals? Isn’t he a believer in certain tenets and principles than the very embodiment of those ideas? If he is those ideas, is he not himself when sleeping and not thinking of those ideas? Even in waking state, is he himself only when he espouses those ideas?

While ideas and beliefs are very important, a person is primarily his core biological and biographical being. He was himself even before he espoused those ideas, he is himself with those ideas, and he will still be himself even after he has rejected those ideas and moved onto a different creed. Suppose a person claims to be a libertarian or communist. That makes him a person who espouses libertarian principles or communist dogma. So, is he the person = set of ideas? No, he is a person who follows or upholds those ideas. To conflate him-as-core-being with him-as-believer-of-ideas is utterly foolish. If we define people that way, a person is nothing unless he comes into belief in a set of ideas. And he must remain faithful to those ideas because failing to do so will unperson him. Idiotic, right?

Then, why do we apply such fallacy to the nation of America? If America is an idea(as opposed to a nation that upholds certain ideas, which have changed over the course of its history), then America was not America until those ideas came to fruition & dominance. And America would no longer be America if those ideas were compromised or rejected for new ones. In fact, however, America will always be America no matter what ideas it espouses since America is essentially the land mass between Canada and Mexico(and Alaska and Hawaii) constituting the continuity of a particular civilization that originated and developed from the mass arrival of Europeans.

Also, using the current PC logic of ideocentrism, America was not America for most if its history. If indeed America is the current set of globalist PC ideas, then it couldn’t have been America since it held onto different ideas, attitudes, and values in the past. Until the mid-1860s, America had slavery, and until the Civil War, the Northern Free States tolerated slavery in the South. Since America then had slavery — ideas at odds with freedom — , America must not have been America. We are told that America cannot be ‘racist’. But America wouldn’t exist if not for ‘racism’. White Europeans conquered America and drove out the native peoples who came to be called ‘Indians’. And there were race wars between whites and reds where the former prevailed. Also, until 1965, American immigration policy favored Europeans, especially Northern Europeans, over other peoples. Since the ideas back then were very much at odds with current Ideas(that are said to define True America), America must not have been America in the past, at least prior to 1965 when the Immigration Policy was changed by Jews.

Some have said America is a Christian nation. Some revised it to Judeo-Christian nation. It is true enough that America, as founded, was an overwhelmingly Christian Protestant nation. There’s no doubt that Christianity has been culturally and historically important to America. But is America = Christianity? But the Founding Fathers were Deists who were skeptical of Biblical claims. And they thought Jesus was a great man than a Son of God. If America = Christianity, it was founded by remarkable men who were not the most committed Christians. Also, many Americans of prominence were agnostics or atheists.

While ideas and values matter a great deal, a nation is much more than that. Nations are like people in this sense. If Bob and John are both libertarians, are they the same? After all, they believe in the same ideas. If nations are ideas, why shouldn’t we say humans are ideas too? So, Bob and John would be interchangeable since they are both ideas of libertarianism. But we know this is not true. Even if Bob and John believe in a certain ideology, they are more than what they believe. Also, even when people espouse the same ideology, they interpret and practice it differently. There are no two same Christians. Each person responds to Jesus in his or her own way. And each person came to libertarianism in his own way. And he practices libertarianism in his own way due to factors of intelligence, integrity, character, personality, happenstance, and circumstances. So, a person has a being and story beyond any set of beliefs.
Furthermore, an idea changes over time and can evolve to the point where it has little semblance of its original self. It’s like meanings of words change over time, even to the point of meaning something profoundly different from its original usage. Consider how the Greek term ‘tyrant’ didn’t necessarily have negative connotations but came to mean an evil oppressive ruler. Indeed, even Liberal Americans of the past would not recognize today’s so-called ‘liberalism’. And Progressives 100 yrs ago, or even 50 yrs ago, would be appalled at much of what passes for ‘progressivism’ today. And Conservatives from 50 yrs ago would find nothing conservative about current Conservatism Inc. that’s mostly about "Democrats are the real racists" and "Muh Israel".

Just like every person is more than the ideas he believes, a nation is more than the ideas it upholds and practices. If America is an idea, then it would follow that any other nation that shares those ideas are also ‘America’. If America is about democracy and tolerance, then isn’t Mexico also ‘America’ since it is also a tolerant democracy? Isn’t Germany also ‘America’ since it is democratic? Isn’t Brazil also America because of its democracy?
As for ‘diversity’, it can be an ideal or a condition. A nation can be diverse in actuality but not see diversity as a good thing. A nation can be homogeneous but see diversity as a desired ideal. Many diverse nations are not happy with their diversity and plagued with tensions. Some nations have traditionally been homogeneous but came under Jewish PC influence and feel inadequate because they are not ‘diverse’ enough. So, they welcome Africans and Muslims to increase diversity. Current Sweden believes Sweden = Ideal of Diversity. Since the new mandatory Idea = Diversity, many Swedes don’t believe Sweden was True Sweden in the past. True Sweden can only be created via adherence to the idea of Diversity. See how utterly stupid this line of thinking is? If indeed Sweden = Diversity, are Peru and Morocco ‘Sweden’ since they have Diversity?

Furthermore, if we claim that America is America ONLY IF it commits to the current PC of ‘anti-racism’, then even the America of either political party is not that True America. After all, both parties support Zionist-imperialist-supremacist repression of Palestinians. If True America must not play favorites among racial, ethnic, or national groups, why does the current US favor Zionists over Palestinians? Why does it favor Israel(that has 200 nuclear weapons) to Iran(that adheres to international nuclear agreements and has no nukes)? And why do the national Media favor Jews, blacks, and homos over other groups IF INDEED America is all about ‘equality’ and not about ‘playing favorites’? And if all peoples and groups are equally valuable, why must all peoples be made to support Jews/Zionism and Homomania BUT Jews and Homos are not required to support, praise, or celebrate Mormons, Palestinian-Americans? Or Chinese-Americans, Russian-Americans, German-Americans, or Incest-Sexuals? And if America is about using its might to remind us of past injustices, why is there no Nakba Remembrance Day? And if America is about waging war on its ‘racist’ past, why is the South attacked for Confederate monuments but the North isn’t condemned for its ‘genocidal’ wars against Indians? And if America is all about ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’, why does it honor the memory of Emma Lazarus who fully endorsed Manifest Destiny and called on more Europeans and Jews to come to America and grab remaining Indian territories by killing Indians or reducing them to wretched huddled masses in barren reservations?

If America is an idea, it is not America whenever it violates those principles. So, America could not have been America during WWII since its media called Japanese ‘Japs’ — how ‘racist’!! — and since the government rounded up Japanese-in-America for ‘internment’. Some German-Americans, tens of thousands of them, were also ‘interned’. Since the US violated its ideals, it must not have been America back then.

Now, certain ideas and values have become so ingrained or instituted into a nation or civilization that there is a tendency to conclude: Identity + Place = Ideas + Values. But the core identity of a people in a place is always more than any set of ideas and values. China was a Confucian Civilization for a long long time. But was it no longer China because Chinese Communists waged war on Confucianism? No, China was China even under the ideology of Maoists. Current China dearly loves businessmen who get rich. But Confucianism despised the merchant class. If China = Confucian Ideas, then current China is not China since the current ideas and values are so much at odds with traditional Confucian moralism.
Now, take the Turks. For the longest time, Turks were defined by Islam. But Kemal Ataturk came along and created modern secular Turkey where religion was banished from much of public life and state affairs. So, were modern Turks no longer Turks since Turkishness = Islam? Atarturkism proved that there is more to Turkishness than what Turks believe as credo.
Same goes for Greeks. Ancient Greeks were pagans. Then, they became Christians. Since their ideas and credos changed, were they no longer Greeks? Or did Greek become True Greeks only as Christians? But, if Greekness = Christian Credo, are Greeks no longer Greek if they become atheist or secular?

Ideas matter but they are not the core of an identity. Under communism, the Soviet authorities insisted that Russia and its Soviet Republics were all defined by an Idea. Soviet Union was a Proposition Empire of Marxism-Leninism. But if that is True Russia, was Russia not Russia prior to the Revolution when it had espoused different ideas and values? And did Russia cease to be Russia when the Soviet Union collapsed and communism was no longer the Propositional Idea of Russians?

The fact is cradle matters more than credo. Each person exists because he was born and develops a biography. That existence is the core essential self. Now, ideas and values are very important because humans live with beliefs and principles. But a person is a person, he is himself, regardless of what he believes. John is John as a libertarian. If he chooses to reject libertarianism and adopt communtarianism, he is still John. And even if he changes his name to ‘Muhammad’, he is still his biological self who was born of his parents. Even as ‘Muhammad’, he is the person who was born to such and such parents and was named John, experienced a unique personal history that led him to current set of beliefs that led him to change his name to ‘Muhammad’.

This much is true. Bad ideas or attitudes lead to degradation and demise of a person or nation. Hedonism will destroy a person. Fanaticism can destroy him too. And radical ideologies can bring about hell on earth to nations. Also, crude impulses can ruin a person like crazed personalities can destroy a nation. Take National Socialism. It had good ideas and bad ideas. Its good idea was nationalism and German revival, its bad idea was imperialism and racial chauvinism. What really destroyed Germany wasn’t so much the ideas but the crazed personalities who impulsively acted on the worst ideas of National Socialism. (Even systems with bad ideas can be steered safely by sane personalities. Gorbachev and Deng took over systems founded on radical ideas but steered them to moderation and world peace. If someone like Albert Speer had gained control of National Socialist Germany, wars would have been avoided.) Personalities of a nation are like impulses in a person. If a person’s neurons go haywire and go for short-term impulses than long-term sobriety, a man or woman can be lost to drugs or debauchery. Likewise, if a nation indulges the most radical, fanatical, or crazed personalities to to pursue their egotistical or tribal lusts without restraint, the result is something like US embroilment in Wars for Israel that laid waste to the Arab/Muslim world and destroyed millions of lives, resulting in the massive flood of Europe with 'refugees' as well. Another result is the ‘new cold war’ with Russia on the premise that the entire world exists mainly to serve the megalomania of Jewish supremacists who hypocritically mask their ultra-tribalism and egotism with platitudes about ‘spreading democracy’, ‘liberal democracy’, and ‘human rights’.

One of the worst and most dangerous ideas is to put credo before cradle or to conflate cradle with credo. Such assumption says a person’s ideas are more important that the person. Indeed, we are believe he is the idea. Using such logic, he is no longer a person unless he espouses certain ideas. He is unpersoned if he were to question or reject those ideas. Likewise, globalists threaten to un-nation America unless it commits to the ideas of Emma Lazarus.
But then, even if we play by rules of PC, are Lazarusean ideas really in line with Current PC that claims to be the True America? Wasn’t Emma Lazarus an imperialist and ethno-supremacist? After all, more European and Jewish immigration to America meant the expulsion of American Indians from their ancestral lands. If America is about ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’, didn’t Lazarusean ethos violate those principles since continued mass arrival of Europeans and white Jews made America less ‘red’(Indian) and more white? Jews say their ancestors ran from pogroms in Eastern Europe, but wasn't America created by 'pogroms' against Indians, just like Israel was created later with massive pogroms against Palestinians in the Nakba?
Furthermore, if Americanism is about atonement for its ‘racist’ past, why does the current America support Israel that was created by imperialism, pogromic ethnic cleansing, & destruction of Palestine and, furthermore, occupies West Bank & practices Apartheid there? If America is an Ideal that requires feeling guilty over Jim Crow and once-alliance with apartheid-practicing South Africa, why is it so un-repenting of its historical ‘sins’ against Palestinians? And if America is about equality, why is there more ‘white guilt’ for what was done to blacks than what was done to American Indians? Surely, ‘genocide’ is a bigger crime than slavery.

When we look at Current America, it’s less about an idea than an agenda(driven by the zealous ego of an ethnic tribe). If America is really an idea as this ethnic tribe claims, why don’t the members of this tribe practice these ideas themselves? If whites must forgo their racial identity and interests to serve the higher idea of True America, why don’t Jews forgo their identity and tribal interests to just merge with all other Americans? Why do Jews tell European-Americans that it’s wrong to preserve and serve European identity but insist that not only Jews but all gentile groups must support, praise, and serve Jewish identity, Jewish heritage, Zionist Israel, and Wars for Israel? Why do Jews insist that all non-Jews must worship Jews-as-Jews. Worse, why do they insist that all non-Jews must hate peoples and nations hated by Jews? So, if Jews hate Russians, all gentiles(even Russians) must hate Russians. If Jews hate Iranians, all gentiles(even Iranians) must hate Iranians. So much for America being an Idea. That ‘idea’ in Current America is just a ruse used by the Agenda serving the Ego of a rabid, virulent, and fanatical ethnic tribe.

Finally, if indeed America is an Idea, there is no need for people to come to America. Ideas are portable and transferable. If American Ideas are the best, then the rest of the world can adopt and use those ideas. It's like, if a people learn how to make fire, that idea can be borrowed by other peoples who can make their own fires in their own lands. They don't have to come to the people with the fire to have the fire.
It's like one doesn't have to go to Mecca to be a Muslim or go to the Vatican to become a Catholic. Islam and Catholicism are ideas or creed. They can be adopted by any people in any part of the world.
So, even if we argue America = Idea, the world can just adopt Americanism-as-Idea in their own nations. There is no need for them to flood into America. Also, if democracy was a precious commodity in the 19th century, it is dime-a-dozen all over the world. Most nations are democracies around the world. Besides, much of the world has been 'Americanized' with McDonalds, Hollywood, Evangelicalism, and even Homomania. They can have their 'America' in their own nations.

Rejection of Nature is the Source of Self-Righteous & Holier-than-Thou Sanctimony among the Religious and Politically Correct

Ever notice that religious people and so-called 'progressives' tend to be the most self-righteous, sanctimonious, and holier-than-thou? This may seem rather odd, even counter-intuitive, considering that the two groups are usually billed as polar opposites. Religious people are said to favor faith and spirituality. 'Progressive' people are said to embody secular values of reason, science, and intellect.
So, why are they so alike emotionally? Why do they so prone to moral one-upmanship, moral narcissism, me-huggery, and pious snobbery. Why does it seem as though their mode of identity derives from feeling superior to most people and being part of an elect community of special people? Sure, both Christians and Progressives claim universality and the welcoming of the entire world into their tents. But then, terms of entry have been devised to be as exclusive as inclusive. After all, if everyone joined and became part of the club, those in the club would no longer feel special. It's like an elite university, however 'inclusive' it claims to be, is no longer an elite university if anyone can be admitted.

What religion and political correctness have in common is the rejection of nature as the basis for understanding humanity. Christian cosmology begins with the perfection of God and the purity of His Creation. According to the Judeo-Christian view, God is perfect, and He created a perfect order, but mankind betrayed, defiled, and corrupted it. But God, out of love for mankind, sent His Son to die on the Cross so that humanity may be redeemed through holy blood sacrifice. According to the Judeo-Christian view, the natural is sinful, filthy, and obscene. It is part of the Fall, the exile from Eden. And the redemption offered by Jesus is one of self-abnegation and condemnation of fleshly desires as the temptation of the Devil. Thus, even though Christianity is open to all who seek salvation, it isn't easy to be a good Christian and nearly impossible to be a perfect one. Christianity is obsessed with sin, like a germ-freak is obsessed with ‘filth’. A good Christian must always purge his or her soul of sinful desires of the flesh and instinctual animal drives. Both the will-to-power and will-to-procreate are treated with heavy suspicion. (Even though Christianity claims to uphold and represent universal, eternal, and immutable truths, it isn't impervious to the socio-politico-cultural pressures of the here-and-now. Consider how Catholic Church once made a pact with Fascists, how the Russian Orthodox Church caved to Stalinism, and how the Church of England — among many others — has bent over to the neo-religion of homomania pushed by Jews. Given that the biggest 'sins' according to dominant PC doctrine is 'racism', 'antisemitism', and 'homophobia', much of today's Christianity is obsessed with atoning for those PC-defined ‘evils’ than for upholding Core Christian Beliefs and Values that are bound to be offensive to Jews, homos, and Negroes. Core Christianity says Jews are to be damned for rejecting Jesus. Christianity, like true Judaism, is anti-homosexual and anti-decadence. Also, Christianity's morality of humility and spirit-over-flesh is at odds with the Afromaniacal jungle-jive that places thuggery and animal lust at the center of life.)

Now, the conundrum is not Christianity's problems with nature per se. After all, even nature has problems with nature. Nature is in constant state of warfare. Animals are always attacking and/or eating other animals. Animals of the same species fight for territory and mating. They often fight out of fright and panic. Because nature is so brutal, mankind cannot have community, let alone civilization, if members act purely in accordance to raw nature. Natural instincts and animal impulses have to be controlled and proscribed among mankind to have social cooperation and relative peace. So, the problem is not with Christianity's conflict with nature. Any kind of civilization must be in conflict with nature. No civilization can sustain itself by surrendering to the ways of nature. This is why black Africa has problem creating and maintaining civilization. Being naturally a wilder, more aggressive, and more animal-like race, blacks are less likely to restrain their wild nature. They are more likely to loot and pillage than to do business. They are more likely to rob and rape than respect social contracts and higher principles.

Anyway, the problem with Christianity is it rejects the validity of nature. It sees nature not as the foundation of life and the world around life but as the work of the Devil. Instead of seeing nature as something essential, vital, and powerful, the raw material from which civilized mankind is to be molded and sculpted from, Christianity sees nature as the problem itself. (Buddhism goes even further in rejecting all of reality as false illusion.)
Imagine you come across a dog. Suppose the dog is wild and aggressive. You want to raise the dog, but the dog needs to be tamed and housebroken. It needs to be trained to obey orders. You value the dog and its canine nature. But you also understand that the dog cannot be a companion of man unless it is tamed. So, you value its canine nature but also see the need to tame and control it.
Now, imagine an alternative scenario where you come across a dog and see it as a demonic creature(as indeed many Christians regarded cats as witch's companions during the Middle Ages). Suppose you figure you need the dog to serve you and guard the house. But instead of regarding the dog's nature as healthy and vital, you see it as wicked and foul. So, instead of trying to control and tame a healthy and vital natural-force, you try to expunge it and turn the dog into a creature of total obedience that is furthermore, ashamed of its dog-nature.

Both the first dog-tamer and second dog-tamer have one thing in common. They understand that the dog has to be tamed. Its nature has to be controlled. But the first dog-tamer values the dog's nature. He values the dog's natural hunting instincts, fighting instincts, and mating instincts. He values the dog's energy, spunk, curiosity, and adventurousness. They are hallmarks of the dog's nature, and he doesn't want to destroy them. He wants to tame them to the extent that the dog will be able to work with mankind.
In contrast, the second dog-tamer sees the dog's nature as essentially ugly and lowly. As such, he would like to destroy the dog's nature as much as possible so that it will be tamed into submission of total obedience. It's like Muslims see nothing good about dogs and their nature.

Because of Christianity's cosmological principles of the Creation and the Fall, followed by Jesus' offering of redemption by the pure ritual of self-sacrifice and spiritual transcendence, it cannot accept nature — wild nature and human nature — for what they are. For Christians, nature itself is sinful. It is not something that is vital and healthy that must be controlled but something that is sinful, wicked, and obscene. Before the Fall, spirit and flesh were one. Both were immortal, pure, and eternal. But with the Fall, the flesh began to age, rot, and wither. It became part of the world of decay and death. Only the spirit had the possibility of surviving death. For Jews, the spirit was carried down through the generations. For Christians, the spirit could rise above the flesh via Jesus sacrifice and enter Heaven.

Such a mindset led to sanctimony among Christians. This may seem counter-intuitive since Christianity says all flesh of all humans are wicked. That means even the flesh of earnest Christians are sinful. So, if Christians themselves are wrapped in impure flesh, why should they feel so holier-than-thou and self-righteous? It is because Christians feel they are at least closer to God, whereas heathens are without God and Jesus. At the very least, Christians feel that they are aware of their sinful condition and doing something about it to cleanse their spirits to prepare for Heaven. In contrast, the heathens are blissfully ignorant of the sinful nature of their flesh.
But then, even among Christians, there are further opportunities for sanctimony and holier-than-thou one-upmanship since some Christians work harder to be nearer to God whereas others just go through the motions.

In contrast to Christians, the neo-fascist accept nature for what it is. Neo-fascists don't see nature as wicked or sinful. Nature is the product of billions of years of evolution. The process of life is brutal, ruthless, and violent. And humans are the product of this long evolution from single-cell organism to fish to reptile to mammal to ape to man. Whatever we think of nature and its processes, they are what they are. They are neither good nor evil. Without nature, there is no life, and no life means no humans. So, we have to accept the truth of nature as the foundation of all that is. However, humans developed advanced communities and civilizations, and for such to be maintained, we need to control and tame nature, even as we harness its power, both internal and external. Raw nature will bring down any civilization. We may find Rock-n-Roll acts fun on stage, but if most people acted like that, we will revert to savagery or worse.

Neo-fascists understand that nature created different species. And within the same species, there are different subspecies or races/breeds. And these differences can be significant, indeed significant enough to deeply influence patterns of crime, violence, sex & mating, achievement, dominance, success, and status. For neo-fascists, not only species but subspecies are obvious. They are too evident to be denied. After all, who can deny that Ashkenazi Jews achieve far more than blacks in mental endeavors due to higher IQ? And who can deny that blacks achieve far more than Jews in sports due to greater strength and speed? Even though the prevalent characteristics of a race don’t apply to every member, they exist generally more among certain groups than among others. There are more people like Mike Tyson among blacks than among Jews. There are more people like Alan Dershowitz among Jews than among blacks. And these differences have a huge impact on society in terms of finance, media, sports, sex, crime, and violence.

This is why neo-fascists, race-realists, and race-ists(meaning those who believe in the reality of race and racial differences) have little need for self-righteousness, moral one-upmanship, and me-hugging sanctimony.
Now, neo-fascists, race-realists, race-ists, and Alt Right types do believe in morality as the means to control nature. Letting nature run wild is like letting dogs and cats run wild. It's like a lion tamer who lets the lions do as they please. That will lead to mayhem. So, morality and laws are necessary. Unless human aggression, sexuality, gluttony, and greed are contained, things will fall apart.
So, we need morality and rule of law. But for neo-fascist, race-realists, race-ists, and alt-right people, it's not a matter of being holier-than-thou or self-righteous but being right about the ways of nature and controlling them. Neo-fascists, race-realists, race-ists, and alt-rightists value nature for what it is. Without natural urges, energies, drives, and passions, we wouldn't be human. After all, humans are hairless apes in many ways. Without emotions, we would be anemic robots. But, if we just gave into our raw natural drives and desires like young people did at Altamont Rock Concert in 1969,that is recipe for chaos and disaster. Indeed, look what happened to much of the black community once blacks reverted to their wild African-jungle nature. Many black communities look as though populated with baboons or chimpanzees.

This is why neo-fascist, race-realist, race-ist, and Alt Right moral philosophy is about being sane, sound, and sensible than self-righteous and holier-than-thou as me-huggers. Unlike Christians who believe that God's perfect Creation was destroyed by man's wicked surrender to the desire of flesh and ego, neo-fascists believe that man is the way he is because he evolved from apes that evolved from monkeys. Animal nature is part of what we are. And this nature is valuable as the primary fuel that makes us seek food & shelter, compete with others, seek sex to create new life, express ourselves to gain attention, and etc. Religions such as Buddhism and Christianity idealize the transcendence of spirit from the flesh. They favor the total abnegation of fleshly desires in favor of spiritual uplift. Christianity envisions the spirit departing from the flesh and entering Heaven. Buddhism goes the extra mile and informs the spirit that it too is an illusion and must also be extinguished in the void so that there will remain nothing in the end, neither filth of flesh nor fantasy of spirit.

The difference between neo-fascists and Christians in relation to nature is like the difference between the two dog-tamers. The first dog-tamer values the dog's nature but knows it must be tamed in order for the dog to be a useful companion to man. He doesn't deem the dog's nature as wicked or wrong. Indeed, a wild dog must rely on its wild nature to survive. But in the world of man, a dog cannot act wild. But then, there is much in dog's nature that is appealing and even useful to man. So, the first dog-tamer respects the dog's nature but tames it and channels it in ways that make the dog compatible to the world of man.
And this is the neo-fascist view of human nature. Neo-fascists understand the organismic foundation of man. Unless we understand the biological foundation of humanity, we won't understand its true nature. Neo-fascism believes in the necessity of morality: A morality of realism than purism. Since Neo-fascists understand man's animal origins and essential animal-organismic nature, they understand those factors must be controlled and channeled in order for man to rise above savagery and barbarism. Without the fuel of animal nature & drives, mankind would be without the Will to Power and creative energies. But if mankind fail to control those drives, they will remain on the level of the savage, like among Negroes who hardly developed great civilizations and turned Western cities like Detroit into jungle-lands. (The question is, "Do men want to have mastery over nature or allow nature to have mastery over them?" All animals, even the most intelligent, are slaves of their nature and instincts. They cannot break out of their natural programming. They are driven by their instincts and drives. The only way they can be freed from enslavement to raw nature is by coming under the control of man, but then, this makes them slaves of man. Only man can understand his own nature and gain mastery over it with the use of consciousness, reason, morality, context, and wider perspective. Man can go from being the horse-of-nature to horseman-of-nature. Man can be like a dumb horse or be like a smart rider atop the horse. Only man can ponder how human nature can lead him astray or how he can become the slave of other men. Only man can create culture as a bulwark against nature. But then, man can also understand how culture, turned tyrannical or corrupt, can rob him of sense, reason, morality, freedom, and natural essence. A man's search for his true self is like the myth of Sisyphus: A never-ending struggle. The Hellenic ideal seeks mastery over nature by envisioning the free man of reason & will who shapes his own destiny. The Hebraic ideal seeks mastery over nature by having man serve the only true master, the one and only God.)

So, morality is a necessity. Indeed, even among animals, especially social ones, certain 'rules' or 'understandings' come into play to regulate and restrain raw instincts. Without such checks, a wolf pack or lion pride wouldn't be possible since those species rely so much on cooperation. In contrast, Christian morality is one of purity because it is premised on the Edenic bliss that had been bestowed upon man by God but was lost through man's disobedience and surrender to pleasure and thrill.
Neo-facists don't believe there ever was an Eden or could there be any such in the real world. Also, Neo-fascists, even as they respect Jesus and the religion He found, don't believe in the redemptive transcendence of the soul from the body. However noble or uplifting such ideas may be, they have nothing to do with reality. They only lead to more neurotic frustration, preference for fantasy over reality, or radical attempt to purge the world of sin, leading to wretched violence and repression.

Emma Sulkowicz's 'struggle' for 'social justice'

Christian way is like the second dog-tamer. If the first dog-tamer recognizes and values the dog's nature but stresses the need to tame and control it, the second dog-tamer reviles the dog's nature itself as inherently wicked and in need of being purged of its essence. He not only tries to tame and control the dog but instills it with guilt over its nature.

Given PC's official secularism and, for the most part, anti-religion-ism, you'd think 'progressives' would be like the first dog-tamer. After all, they know of the animal origins of mankind. They know that mankind's animal drives are natural, formed by millions of years of natural selection, than the work of the devil. For the most part, they don't believe in God and a set of perfect purist laws as set forth by Him. They don't believe in Eden or Jesus and the Resurrection. So, why are they so much like Christian moralists? Why are they like the second dog-tamer?

It is because, in a way, the 'progressives' have their secular twist on the Edenic narrative and christo-redemption narrative.

For starters, the French Enlightenment, even as it stressed facts and logic, was less the product of scientists than philosophers or philosophs. And the proto-social-scientific views of these philosophs were idealistic than realistic. They imposed their vision of hope, redemption, and progress on the cult of reason. Thus, their idea of 'Reason' wasn't necessarily rational or even reasonable. It's like Marxism imposed its theories as 'scientific materialism' even though much of its theory was founded on sketchy or flawed evidence, downright falsehoods, intellectual egomania, and Messianic fervor. The French Enlightenment was for reason but was more defined by the overly optimistic Cult of Reason. The philosophs were sure that the triumph of Reason would lead to their desired social or political goals. But their Cult of Reason lacked reasonableness and the cautious curiosity of true rationalism whereby every side would be required to assiduously weigh the arguments and evidence offered by other sides. This is why the supposedly Rational French Revolutionaries were soon massacring one another. If Christians butchered one another on the premise of "God on my side", the Rationalists butchered one another because each side was so sure that its position was the truly rational, therefore incontestable, one.
Now, it's one thing to claim that 2 + 2 = 4 in mathematics. But there are too many variables among humans, society, and history for any single theory to be conclusive. And even things that are correct may be so only in certain contexts. For example, one can argue that democracy is a good political system. But democracy can only work in a certain historical, economic, political, and demographic context. Just because liberal democracy works well in one nation is no guarantee that it will have the same effect on another nation with very different content and context. It's like what works for one breed of dogs will not work so well with other breeds, let alone cats. Try using bloodhounds to herd sheep and try using collies as tracking dogs.

The French Enlightenment had its Edenic vision in the ideas of Rousseau, and this optimistic vision of human nature has always been a feature of 'progressivism'. This Edenic view of human nature says that all humans are born with these positive, noble, and wonderful qualities. But society, burdened with the history of oppression and corruption, tarnishes human souls and lead people astray and, thus, problems get worse. Anarchists believe in the goodness of human nature and blame social institutions for corrupting individuals to become nasty exploiters, oppressors, or criminals. A variation of Rousseauean view is found in THE CATCHER IN THE RYE where Holden Caulfield is distraught at the compromised, hypocritical, and even corrupt world of humans. And this mentality carried over into the 60s where one of the biggest hits of the decade was THE GRADUATE, a story of a young man who doesn't want to graduate to adulthood of ‘plastics’. Woodstock Concert was about going 'back to the garden'. Apologists of black pathology have insisted that Negroes are so wonderful and radiant BUT so many fail in society because of the legacy of slavery and racial discrimination. So, the Edenic Negro soul and even once-Edenic Africa are now the way they are because the Greedy West perverted and corrupted their true nature that is so sunny and wonderful.

Also, the entirety of Jewish history is narrated as one of victim-hood under Gentiles, especially white ones. So, these nice, innocent, and wonderful Jews were oppressed, exiled, and brutalized by these bad nasty Gentiles, and that is why Jews are so neurotic and traumatized. And according to feminists, female nature is so wonderful and glorious, but evil patriarchy kept it inside a cage and enslaved it. So, for women to be free, they must run wild and do as they please. And in the 60s, there was the cult of youth that said young are so wonderful and pure-of-heart, but the Man and the System of Older Folks are standing in the way. As Times-they-are-a-changing, the Man and the System need to step aside and let the youth run wild and free.

Monterey Pop - 1967 - 'Summer of Love'

So, the result of all this was a kind of neo-Edenism, a secular variation of Christianity. Certain groups — Jews, blacks, womenfolk, youths, and later homos — were innately so noble and wonderful but were held back from reaching their full potential by the Man and the System. There was a burst of optimism in the 60s when so many social barriers fell. Finally, blacks could be freer and more equal than ever before. Young people had the leisure and freedom to indulge in youthful energies. Women, encouraged by the feminist movement, decided to do their own thing. And later, homos began to run wild too. And Jews began to challenge and even eclipse the Wasps as the dominant elites in America. There was no more restraints by the Man or the System. According to neo-Edenism, all should have gone well. After all, those wonderful people were no longer hamstrung by the Man(especially the Wasps).
But, what happened? Something like the crazy-birds-gone-wild in Alfred Hitchcock's famous movie. Youth movement degenerated into excesses of drugs, sex, and alienation. Negroes ruined city after city, and crime went through the roof. Womenfolk turned into nasty unhappy bitches, with rising rates of eating disorders and sexually transmitted diseases. Homo orgies led to the HIV epidemic. And Jewish power led to New Cold War, mass corruption on Wall Street, destruction of the Near East, a culture of greed to make previous greed seem piddly by comparison, and degeneration of culture by Jewish control of media.

Given these outcomes, one would think 'progressives' would have wised up a bit. And some, like Steven Pinker, saw the light at least halfway. He realized the dark-side of the libertine-ism of the 60s and 70s. But most 'progressives' never saw the light, and why not? They are still stuck on the neo-Edenic vision.
Yes, they will admit that a lot of things went wrong with blacks, womenfolk, homos, youths, and Jewish power. But, they still blame OTHERS for the failures. It is always The Man. So, how do we explain the HIV epidemic? Should homos be held accountable for their irresponsible mass orgies that spread the virus via fecal penetration? No, that would violate the neo-Edenic view of homos as angels and saints. Just blame "Reagan's Indifference". So, homos did nothing wrong in butt-banging one another across so many continents. The real culprit was Reagan didn't spend enough on some magic cure so that homos could do their thing without worry of disease.
As for youth culture, we are fed the same theme over and over. Blame the Adults. This has gotten tricky for boomers who first identified as Youth as an Identity. Now, many boomers are in their 60s and even 70s. So, shouldn't young people blame them? Liberal Boomers have dodged this responsibility by always pandering to a new batch of young people by vilifying the Conservative Boomers. Following this logic, all would have been well if every single Boomer was more like Bill Clinton than Newt Gingrich. But then, didn't even Liberal Boomers go for big money, privilege, power, and stuff like locking up record numbers of blacks to revive cities?
As for feminism, it is still stuck on blaming men(especially white gentile straight men) for whatever is perceived to be wrong with women and girls. So, even though Jews and Homos run the fashion industry that make women feel neurotic and insecure about their looks, the blame only goes to White Male Patriarchy. And even though the problems faced by non-white women owe to culturally distinct sets of circumstances(as well as to globalism), feminism makes believe it’s all Donald Trump’s fault.
As for Negroes, it is never their fault. So, if black students get suspended more, it must be the fault of 'racist' teachers. If too many blacks are dying by gun violence, it must be the white police than blacks killing one another. Even the GOP will never blame blacks. Donald Trump panders to blacks and blames all their problems on the Democrats, which is a twist on the Democratic habit of blaming all black problems on the GOP and 'racism'.

Now, a sensible attitude would call for the realization that human nature is a form of animal nature, and as such, it needs to be restrained, tamed, controlled, and channeled. Just as white males allowed to do as they please will act like barbarians or drunken frat-boys, the same holds true for any other demographic. Now, 'progressives' will admit as much about white males. After all, white-boys-gone-wild is often vilified and condemned as a sign of degradation of social mores. It is associated with the Duke Lacrosse Gang-Rape of a black woman that, by the way, turned out to be a hoax. It is associated with the UVA Gang-Rape of Jackie Coakley that, by the way, also turned out to be a hoax. But then, white-male-craziness isn't blamed on unrestrained male-animal-nature but on 'white privilege', as if it is the evil of privilege that makes males want to act like animals. (Germanic Barbarians who sacked Rome must have been filled with snotty 'white privilege'.)

UVA Rape Hoax

Anyway, if white males can act stupid, crazy, and dangerous if their natural urges aren't restrained, why wouldn't the same apply to other groups? If allowed to run loose, wouldn't they cause the same problems? And yet, 'progressives' have a hard time grasping this simple fact since they cling to the neo-Edenic view of certain groups as naturally good(and corruptible only by the Man and the System). So, when blacks act crazy and cause havoc, they are called 'teens' or 'youths'. Or, the news is suppressed and covered only locally and in dry & neutral manner. Or, when the violence is so extreme and obvious, black rage is explained in terms of legacy of slavery or lingering 'racism'.

And the same logic applies to Jews too. Recently, some Israeli-American was caught making hate-hoax bomb threats to Jewish centers across America. Jews made a big stink about the rise of 'antisemitism'. But, when it turned out that the main hoaxer was a member of the Tribe, Jews like David Schraub of Berkely Law School cleverly twisted logic to argue that the guilty Jew is really just another 'anti-Semite' who hurt Jews than a Jewish-Supremacist who defamed white gentiles to serve Jewish interests. So, even when Jews do bad things, the fault is with others. A Jew who pretends to hurt Jews to really hurt white gentiles brings shame on 'anti-Semites' than on Jews.

In a sense, 'progressives' share the Christians' rejection of nature. This may sound counter-intuitive since 'progressives' seem to embrace the natural in sex, fun, thrills, and frills. Also, 'progressives' love violent sports and licentious pop music.
But, here's the difference. Their understanding of nature is hedonistic, illusory, and/or utopian, in spirit neo-Edenic than evolutionary. They indulge in the fun & pleasurable part of nature without pondering the dire consequences, which have been suspended or delayed with the aid of technology such as modern medicine, surplus food, welfare safety nets, and/or contraceptives. A society of plenty can sustain(and even grossly profit from) a lot of bad behavior by formulating ways for the masses to indulge in excesses without suffering consequences that had been virtually inevitable in the past in conditions of relative scarcity and hardship.
Furthermore, the progressives’ ideological conception of nature is philosophical-political than biological and evolutionary. Even though they know humans evolved from apes, their concept of human natures owes more to the Narrative than to natural history. This 'narratural' view of mankind or 'narraturalism' divides mankind into those with pure/holy natures, those with neutral natures, and those with impure/unholy natures. In a way, it is a variation of the modern 'scientific racist' view that also ascribed different 'human narratures' among the races. According to this view, most extremely pushed by National Socialists, the white race evolved to be most noble, wise, and heroic. In contrast, the Jewish race evolved to be cunning, vicious, and vile. And the black race evolved to be savage and primitive. And the Asian race evolved to be slavish, servile, and despotic. Both the radical anti-racist and radical racist view of various human groups go for hierarchies, and in some ways, the PC anti-racism is an inversion of European radical racism and indeed could not exist without it. Radical racism, once prevalent on both left and right, presented the intellectual and moral rationale for white imperialism, white 'antisemitism', and white racial domination over other races, especially blacks. This led to much violence and oppression, as well as imperialist wars(between imperialists and subject peoples & among the imperialist powers vying for mastery), and the horror of World War II. Due to moral doubts arising from WWII & the post-imperialist world order and due to Jewish attainment of supremacy in the West, the official narrative was used to invert the hierarchy. Even though the leftist argument was for equality, in terms of symbolism, iconography, and storytelling, the narrative was skewed to present certain groups — especially Jews, Negroes, and later homos — as intrinsically holy and pure while making the white race, especially the males, the official face of all evils.
Given the white domination over the world for so long, the rising PC attempt to redress past wrongs might have seemed understandable, at least for a time. And it was good and necessary to tear down the myth of nonsense ideologies such as 'Aryan' supremacism that could only lead to nihilism. The reason why National Socialism turned so monstrous was its concept of right-and-wrong was ultimately determined by race. Since 'Aryans' were deemed the superior race, they are always right, and since non-Aryans are lesser races, they must be wrong. So, even a bad 'Aryan' is better than a good decent Jew. The great irony is that PC works the same way. By ‘sacralizing’ certain races as Noble Races of Eternal Victim-hood, peoples such as Jews, homos, and Negroes never need to make any attempt to be good, and when they do bad, they are easily forgiven or the transgressions are forgotten since they run against the Narrative.

PC moralism is also a nihilism because morality and righteousness become a matter of group inheritance than individual cultivation. Using such logic, if your grand father was a great noble man, you are noble too even if you're a worthless piece of turd. Or if your grandfather was a thieving pirate, you too are stained with sin since you inherited it from your grandfather. PC morality is for the lazy and spoiled. Interestingly enough, even though scientific race-ism and radical racism could be offensive and simplistic, they were still closer to the truth than current PC anti-racism is. Even the old scientific race-ist views of Jews, blacks, and Asians were closer to the truth than today's PC anti-racist views of them are. Jews do have a more cunning and devious nature than whites do. Blacks are more aggressive, wild, and demented. Asians are more servile and slavish, which explains why so many Asian-American academics are mere yellow dogs of Official Dogma of PC without ever coming up with a single original idea. Even though the adherents of scientific race-ism used their ideas to oppress and abuse others, any honest look at the world will demonstrate that their views of race were closer to the mark than PC anti-racism that would have us believe Jews are noble & blameless, blacks are pure & sacred, and homos are angelic & magical. Also, if the world carries on with current PC anti-racism, the result will be far more dire than even WWI and WWII. While those wars were horrible, Europe still survived and civilization survived. Whites destroyed one another, but whites still ended up on top after the conflagration, and they quickly rebuilt their nations. But what will happen when the West continues to let Jews dominate the institutions, infect & paralyze white minds with PC virus, encourage Afro-Colonization of White Wombs, and welcome endless non-white immigration to the point where US turns into New Brazil while Europe turns into Afro-Arabia? Then, it will be the end of the white race, and once-greatest-center-of-civilization will be just one big Morocco-Pakistan.

Political Correctness or PC is premised on the rejection of nature. This may seem odd since PC is secular and accepts science & biology. But science can also be affected by ideology, passion, and dogma. This was true enough of National Socialists who rejected certain scientific ideas as 'Jewish Science'. By rules of National Socialism, Jews were a wicked race, therefore any idea that originated from Jews must be wicked and nefarious in intention. National Socialists were so fanatical in their negative views of Jews that even scientific truths uncovered by members of the Tribe were suspect. And consider the role of ideology in science in the Communist world. What came to be known as Lysenko-ism was ideology imposing its views on science. Communists were so fanatically resolute in their moral philosophy that they willed their preferred vision onto science. When PC types accuse Western Science of such biases, they are not entirely wrong, but their criticism is ultimately useless because, instead of rooting out anti-scientific biases, its agenda is to institute and enforce new biases. Worse, they even accuse real science of being ideological science, in effect projecting onto real scientists their own ideological fanaticism to weaponize science to further ideological agendas. (In a way, such animus, sometimes approaching inquisitional fury, is really a form of masked envy because only those in hard sciences can claim recognition as discoverers and caretakers of actual truth. As such, hard science attracts the most advanced intellect, and its findings can be verified as true independent of agenda. Thus, hard science is above politics, ideology, and opinion, though clever charlatans may twist and corrupt the findings to serve their own pet causes. For this reason, science is the object of envy by religion, ideology, culture, and popular opinion. Science is threatening to all other fields of knowledge because its only loyalty is to factual truth regardless of how it may impact a particular dogma or cause. So, just as the Catholic Church once applied pressure on science to adhere to Divine Truth, today’s ‘progressive dogma’ or Progma bullies science to be ‘careful’ lest it be denounced as an Evil White Male Patriarchal Conspiracy.)

If humans were without emotions and worked like computers programmed to obey rules of logic and facts, political correctness would not be a problem. But humans are emotional beings, and emotions trump facts. After all, emotions, not facts, lend meaning to life and, more crucially, the ‘crazy’ will to live and fend off death as long as possible.
This is why religion or spirituality is still going strong even if all facts point to a godless cosmos.
From cradle, many young ones were raised to believe in God & Jesus, that God created everyone equally, and that we must love all of humanity equally. Among non-religious families, the kids were raised from cradle to worship MLK, see 'racism' as the greatest evil, and associate any scientific theory about races & racial differences as 'Nazi-like'.
Much of PC is about ideological passion and sanctimony. Those emotions are so powerful that PC-addled minds panic and recoil from facts and ideas deemed 'racist'. But they are also confident that facts and science are on their side since academia is infected with PC and has cleverly doctored research and papers with smug disingenuous terminology. For example, Charles Murray's ideas have often been dismissed as having been 'discredited' by the 'scientific community'. To impressionable young minds, such a message has a double effect: "Don't even consider Murray's ideas because they are just flat-wrong and NO ONE takes them seriously" and "If you want to move up the professional ladder, views such as Murray's will NOT be tolerated." There's the smear factor and fear factor. Humans are socio-economic players, and status & peer-approval mean a lot to them. With the rising numbers of servile East Asians in the academia willing to serve as toadies and commissars, the problems of PC will increase.

Another problem arises from Jewish control of the Narrative. How powerful is the influence of Narrative? Consider why the Judeo-centric Narrative came to dominate the West and the Middle East. It is because the Jews wrote the Torah that centralized their view as THE TRUTH in regards to Ancient History. Even though other peoples and cultures also produced written texts — even more than the Jews — , the Torah formulated a powerful unity of narratives. The Torah brought together holiness, mythology, history, genealogy, poetry, prophecy, laws, ideology, and politics in one unified volume. It’s everything in a single canon. (Bob Dylan holds a central place in Rock history because his two albums, HIGHWAY 61 REVISTED and BLONDE ON BLONDE, are seen as having interwoven all the various disparate strands of arts & culture: Rock n Roll, Country, Folk, Poetry, Religion, Modernism, Traditionalism, Personalism, Satire, Rebellion, Reverence, Love, Hate, Circus, Theater, Realism, Surrealism.) It was to knowledge what the Ark was to all of life. The essential core. So, even though Jews were never a great political power in the Ancient World, their Narrative came to dominate the world, in time leading to the Christian-ization of the West and Islam-ization of the Middle East. Neither the New Testament nor the Koran is conceivable without the Torah.

The power of the Narrative is even more evident in the case of Jesus. He got whupped and killed real bad. When He was stripped naked, whipped, tortured, and nailed to the Cross, it's hard to imagine a bigger loser. And that would have been that... but for the fact that a handful of men spun an inspired narrative about Jesus and then worked tirelessly to disseminate their accounts and interpretations all around. It was the power of Narrative that resurrected Jesus from a hapless loser to the King of Kings. The Narrative has the power to do that. People love a good story. And Jews, the craftsmen of the Torah and the New Testament, know the art of storytelling and 'sacralization'.

So, how does Jewish control of the Narrative play into neo-Edenism that led to White Guilt? By arguing that the US is a 'proposition nation', Jews claim that America was created as a New Eden of equality, justice, love, and harmony. But, according to the Jewish PC-narrative, whites befouled this Eden with 'genocide' of Indians and the slavery of blacks. (To be sure, the 'genocide'-of-Indians Narrative gets far less play, not least since it undermines the notion of America being a 'nation of immigrants'. Immigrants are, after all, invaders, and therefore, favoring immigrants must disfavor Indians as native inhabitants. Jews prop up Emma Lazarus as the prophet of justice, but if she really cared about the 'huddled masses', why didn't she champion the huddled Indians who were losing their lands to white & Jewish immigrants? In the end, Jews favor their own tribalism over interests of others. Indeed, the championing of Indians in the 1960s was more a neo-pagan thing about hippies, who took their cultural cues from aspects of German Cult of Nature, than the main topic among Jews who preferred the Negro Narrative and then the Homo one.) According to the Jewish Narrative of the US, the white Adam and white Eve failed, especially with the Original Sin of Slavery. Notice that the 'genocide' of Indians not considered the 'original sin' of America even though whites had to conquer the red man's land before blacks could be brought over. Also, consider the oddity of associating slavery with 'original sin'. Slavery has existed for 10,000 years according to anthropologists. It existed for eons in Africa, Arabia, Asia, Europe, and in the Americas among the native Indians themselves. Slavery had existed in the Americas for at least 10,000 yrs before the white man came. Also, Spanish and Portuguese who conquered Central and South America practiced slavery there BEFORE Anglo-Americans founded America. So, why is slavery an 'original sin' in America? This notion works ONLY WHEN we adopt the notion of America as a 'proposition nation'. Supposedly, that 'proposition' made the New Nation in a New Eden. Thus, America was no longer part and parcel of human history, with all its bloodshed and turmoil, but a New Eden founded on perfection of ideals and values. And given that Edenic proposition, America had an obligation to be perfect. But it had slavery and other problems that later came to be deemed as 'unjust'. Therefore, the failures, shortcomings, and hypocrisies of America were not the same-old-same-old replays of the flawed nature of man but a Great Sin against Edenic Justice and Truth.
Now, the notion of America as a 'proposition nation' isn't entirely a Jewish Creation. Rather, it is a Jewish radicalization of the founding principles of America. It is true that the Founding Fathers did have high-minded ideas and were dedicated to creating a better nation with ideals of liberty, tolerance, justice, rule of law, and acknowledged talent. But they weren't naive sop-eyed idealists with utopian dreams. Indeed, the fact that they were Deists than literal-minded Christians shows they preferred reason and caution than messianic visions. Also, their policies regarding France and Great Britain indicate pragmatism than ideological fervor. After all, their victory of independence was won with the backing of France, a nation that was then politically more monarchical than Britain.

But just like Ayn Rand radicalized American capitalism and individualism as purist ideologies(than as competing and cooperative ideologies along with religion, tradition, community values, and some socialist principles), the Jewish Narrativists radically idealized the founding of the US. Initially, such idealization seemed to flatter the Anglo-Americans. After all, Jews were patting Anglo-Americans on the back for having founded and built the greatest nation on earth with the noblest set of principles. It's no wonder Anglo-Americans like Theodore Roosevelt sucked it all up from Jews like Israel Zangwill. Anglo-Americans failed to understand that they were being hustled. Jews were rolling out the red carpet before them as a trap only to pull it from under their feet when they got on it. If Jews said US was created as the most perfect nation and if Anglo-Americans fell for this bait, then it was only a matter of time before Jews began to berate Anglo-Americans for having failed to live up to such perfection. If someone praises you as perfect and if you accept the praise, he can then inspect you more closely and then accuse you of failing to live up to the ideal of perfection. So, when Jews were praising America(as envisioned and built by Anglo-Americans), the more sensible thing for whites would have been to reject such praise and realistically say that America is no Eden and wasn't meant as such. Rather, it is a continuation of Western Civilization(especially that of Anglo-tradition), which itself is a continuation of human history filled with all manner of tragedies as well as triumphs. Then, Anglo-Americans and whites in general could have evaded the Flatter-Flatten Strategy of the Jews.
Indeed, beware most he who comes to you with praise. He gives you empty praise to stoke your vanity while planning to take your pride and property. You gain empty words in exchange for a real world. And in the end, you even lose the words of praise because, after all, your world was taken away on the basis that you are not worthy of those words. Jew says to Anglo, "You're perfect." Flattered Anglo lets Jew into his world. Jew then says, "You're not all that perfect", meaning that the Anglo isn't deserving of pride of property. So, to appease the Jew and hear more words of praise, the Anglo hands over more and more of his world to the Jew. But the Jew only complains more, and in the end, the Anglo has given everything to the Jew. And then, the Jew takes back even the word(of praise) as well since, as things played out, the Anglo wasn't the perfect person deserving of his property, his world.

It is because of the Neo-Edenism of the American Narrative that the moral failures or shortcomings of the US seems so horrific and traumatic. Everything depends on context. After all, how come the eating of the Forbidden Fruit seems like the worst thing in the Bible even though far uglier and horrific things happen later? I mean, how can eating a fruit be worse than fratricide, rape, wars, eradication of populations, and ceaseless bloodshed in the later stories? It is worse because Adam and Eve did an imperfect thing in a perfect world. It's like belching at a classy dinner in a fancy restaurant is far worse than farting like crazy at a drunken frat party. Bible is filled with wars and other horror, but they are terrible things done in a fallen world. In contrast, Adam and Eve disturbed the order of a perfect world.

Similar dynamics shape our view of American History(that has come to inform ALL of Western Narrative as the entire world is being Americanized) given the prevailing neo-Edenic vision enforced by Jewish Power. Because of the over-idealized vision of the Edenic 'Proposition Nation', we believe the US should have been perfect from day one. It should have been a utopia of freedom, liberty, equality, justice, happiness, bounty, and peace. But in fact, the some of the Founders were slave-owners. And their intentions weren't entirely noble or idealistic. There was a huge discrepancy between their rhetoric and their deeds. None of this should surprise us since the Founders and the men of the time were humans with their flaws and imperfections. But within the neo-Edenic context of the utopian Proposition-ism, all their failings are magnified, especially as PC becomes shriller as shaped by the pushy personality of Jews, savage personality of blacks, bitchy personality of feminists, and hissy personality of homos. (And yet, these groups could be falling into neo-Edenic traps of their own making. The way they bitch and whine, you'd think they're pure and perfect angels un-besmirched by history. But all one has to do is assemble the Black Book on each of them, like a Black Book was compiled on communist crimes by French former-communists. And then, they can be made to look dirty and stained as their real histories are so at odds with their professed innocence and 'eternal victim-hood'.) Of course, the Jewish mind-trick couldn't have been possible if the Anglo/American mind hadn't been instilled with Protestantism that promoted conscience, reform, and rectitude. It is no accident that the Protestant World came to lead the crusade in abolishing slavery all over the world. Jews sensed that the Northern European Protestant Mind had a Will to Progress & Redress that was lacking in most cultures, including that of Jews of course. So, by flattering this good-and-noble side of Protestant Northern Europeans, Jews could ingratiate themselves into the Order as aids and admirers. But once ensconced within the Order, the Jew could keep pestering the Anglos about all that is imperfect and wrong. And having been accepted into the Order, the Jew could use his wits to gain financial supremacy over the system and gradually buy off one Anglo leader after another... until it is the Anglo elites who are held by the Jewish purse-strings. And with all that money, Jews also buy up much of the media and use the power of information to shame & defame Anglos while presenting themselves, the Jews, as faultless angels.

Neo-Edenism comes naturally to people since humans, like all organisms, are naturally amnesiac. Humans, like all animals, are born without memory of the past. Also, most people are not interested in history. They see it as recordings about the dead past that are most irrelevant to the present. It is not natural for most people to sit down, read books, and concentrate long hours on knowledge that has no immediate relevance to the moment. This goes for spirituality as well. For everyone who bothers to sit down and read the Koran, thousand others prefers to watch TV or listen to pop music. Of course, people love stories and want spiritual uplift, but they want it to be immediate and powerful in impact. So, people prefer movies to books, and they prefer popular history(for general reader) to academic history with lots of details and footnotes. And people like easy spirituality of singing in churches or feeling New Age vibes at a Rock Concert than reading and pondering Hindu, Buddhist, Rabbinical, or Christian texts. Most people are not interested in the minute details of what really happened with MLK and Lyndon B. Johnson. They just want the myth, as seen in PBS documentaries. Most people are not interested in multi-layered facets of spirituality and religion; they prefer the 'kumbayah' feeling they get from Oprah or the celebrity-shtick of the current Pope Francis the attention-hog, a kind of Catholic Bono.
And the power of electronic Pop Culture and infantile Political Correctness have made mass amnesia ever more attractive. Pop Culture shapes minds to favor things of instant gratification and click-bait-appeal. It's like the effect of the Remote Control x 1000. Pop Culture mentality feeds into Political Correctness since both are predicated on shallow impatience and snippy intolerance of anything of deeper meaning. Just like a Pop-Culture addict can't stand something that requires more curiosity, depth, attention, and concentration, the Politically Correct mind-set can't abide by anything that doesn't fill them with instant self-righteousness. Just like Pop-Culture addict don't have the requisite patience to appreciate classical music, folk music, or serious literature, the Politically Correct Mind-set cannot tolerate anything that is deemed to be 'evil' by its narrow rules of righteousness. So, if anything that smacks of 'racism', ‘homophobia', or 'antisemitism' — though, off and on, 'sexism', 'xenophobia', and 'Islamophobia' could be added to the mix — is immediately dismissed or denounced without any consideration to its deeper meanings or values. Furthermore, the Politically Correct are incapable of examining the credence of their own convictions just like the devoutly religious are incapable of pondering that, maybe just maybe, God isn't real. Even though Pop Culture prefers fantasy over reality and even though Political Correctness prefers falsehood(or semi-truths) to the truth, they are naturally appealing to the masses because they are so easy. That's why Jews prize them so much. Pop Culture is designed to be appealing to everyone, from intellectual to idiot. In the past, elitism played a role in pressuring the educated to focus more on serious culture than on easy mass culture, but the decline of shamelessness has made Pop Culture the main culture of the elites as well. Is it any wonder that the cultural sensation among elites is HAMILTON the rap musical? And once the elites have embraced vulgarization, they infect even high culture with the vagaries of Pop Culture mentality and stupidities of Political Correctness, as one can see in Donna Zuckerberg's brand of Classical Studies.

The rise of amnesia also creates a kind of Perpetual Neo-Edenism. Lacking depth in history and culture, the faddish mind of amnesia foolishly falls for every new fashionable attitude or 'ideology' as a quantum leap in human evolution. According to the Jewish Narrative, America was founded as an Edenic 'proposition nation', but it failed to live up to its billing. So, it can ONLY REDEEM itself by constant reinvention, replacement, and reformulation. So, existing Americans have to be replaced by New Americans. After all, the US is a 'nation of immigrants'(or future Americans) than existing Americans. Then, it follows that true American Values are the yet-to-be-values of Americans who, as newer and newer Americans(via never-ending mass immigration-invasion), become 'more evolved' with notions such as Bruce Jenner being a woman named 'Caitlyn' or there being 50 genders or some such. People get so swept up in such nuttery that they failed to see how their vision of creating New Eden is turning into new hells or that decadence has become the new deity.

Another thing we need to consider is that heaven is its own kind of hell. This is true enough in the utopian visions of heaven where radicals, so sure of their rightness, are willing to commit to any level of violence, terror, and repression(where they to gain power). But even when heaven is attained, it is a kind of hell. While mankind has never created heaven-on-earth, some societies have come close(or at least closer) to achieving the utopian dream of man. But such success, while solving many problems, has created a host of new ones. In one sense, Eden(as heaven on earth) was cursed with boredom. Since all was well, harmonious, and peaceful, Adam and Eve led uneventful lives. And they were tempted to eat from the Tree of Knowledge precisely because they were so bored. Men in the hell-fire of war may dream of home, but once back home, they may miss the eventfulness of conflict which, despite its dangers and horrors, lent meaning to their lives. Whether it's Ethan Edwards(John Wayne) returning from Civil War in THE SEARCHERS, the Swedish knight returning from the Crusade in THE SEVENTH SEAL, or soldiers returning from WWII in THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES, men forged in furnace of war feel empty and purposeless in peace. Though soldiers are expendable in war, they die for a Cause. In peacetime, people get to live but to stock shelves as a supermarket. To die for something Big is more exciting than to live for something humdrum. When one is at war, he feels more as a man than men who stay behind for whatever reason. Soldiers are heroes; men who stay behind are zeroes. But when the soldiers return home, they are hardly distinguishable from the zeroes. Worse, zeroes(despite their cowardice, luck, or disqualification) are in one piece whereas the heroes may be physically broken, like the young man who lost his arms in THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES or Ron Kovic(Tom Cruise) in BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY. This is why some soldiers fear surviving as a cripple than dying as a hero in war; consider the Gary Sinise character in FORREST GUMP.

Peace is nice, but it can lead to boredom, apathy, decadence, naivete, and/or hunger for purpose. Boredom manifests itself different among intelligent/sophisticated/educated and among unintelligent/simpleminded/uneducated, but the results are equally dire. Among the elites, it leads to decadence in attitudes, values, and arts/culture. Among the masses, it leads to indulgence in trash culture & neo-savagery(usually of the Afro-black kind), addiction to drugs(legal or illegal), and ugly expressions, such as tattoos, piercings, and hair-dyeing. If many people stave off boredom with decadent conceits or degenerate fantasies, others just fall to apathy and become emotional vegetables, like the Apathetics in ZARDOZ.

Another problem of peace is naivete, especially in a Trust Culture. Some societies tend to be more immune to naivete because, even in peace-time, corruption and/or clan-based mentality is everywhere. Thus, Southern Italians, even in peacetime, are keen about the tawdry side of human nature. But in Trust Cultures like Sweden, peace means relatively clean government, economic efficiency, and social order. This leads to trust in institutions and official dogma. Such naivete is hardly dangerous IF borders remain secure and cultural cohesiveness is maintained. But when such a society enters into globalism, the naivete can become fatal, and we are seeing the death of Sweden and similar nations in the global order. Swedes, having had semi-heaven for several generations, grew naive and trusting. They only knew their own nice quiet society. This led many Swedes to think that all of humanity are as trustworthy as Swedes themselves. Also, being only around fellow countrymen, Swedes lost a sense of relative worth. Because Sweden has been a nice place, even the slightest failing of Swedes has been exaggerated and amplified. So, Swedes feel scandalized by the 'moral' shortcoming of any Swede even though, by world standards, it is trivial compared to the horrors in Africa, Latin America, Middle East, and parts of Asia.

In a way, Swedish cult of tolerance has made it far less intolerant in other areas. Humans are naturally righteous and judgmental. If humans are pressured to be tolerant in one area, it must be balanced by rise of intolerance in other areas. Purely from the viewpoint of political pragmatism, in order for one thing to be tolerated, its rival ideas/attitudes must become objects of intolerance, especially if the object of tolerance is also to be celebrated and semi-worshiped; this is true enough of homomania that, as the neo-religion, cannot tolerate ideas, icons, and attitudes deemed 'homophobic'. But apart from the issue of power-dynamics, there is an emotional craving for intolerance. While tolerance may make people feel fuzzy-and-warm, it doesn't make them feel righteous and justified. Such strong emotions can only be had through intolerance, the rallying of the faithful to hunt witches and burn them at the stake.
So, it's not surprising that, as Sweden became more tolerant racially, sexually, and culturally, it became more intolerant politically, ideologically, 'narratively', and 'iconographically'. It's like people who either abandon religion or subscribe to religious tolerance must compensate with heightened intolerance in ideological matters. It's no wonder that some of the most self-righteous prigs and progs are to be found in secular institutions such as colleges. For those who celebrate homo-fecal-penetration and tranny-mutilation-of-dicks-and-balls-to-get-fake-pussies as beautiful-as-a-rainbow, tolerance for so-called LGBT isn't enough. That makes them feel fuzzy-wuzzy good, but it doesn't make them feel justified. The ONLY way they can feel righteous and sanctimonious is by screaming 'burn the witch' at those who remain unconvinced of homo quasi-sexual acts and tranny genital-atrocities as noble & inspiring ways of human behavior worthy of association with the beauty of rainbows.

Sweden is a case of how a kind of heaven can turn into a kind of hell. All that peace and prosperity led to boredom. Boredom led to neurosis and then to decadence. It also led to naivete in the absence of 'red-pilling' bitch-slaps by reality(by most of humanity).
Worse, Swedes grew accustomed to their decadence, and this made things worse. And in a way, the political formula that allowed Western societies to remain socially stable and economically productive despite decadence prepared Sweden for the terrible fall that it is experiencing today. When Ingmar Bergman made his films, he was presenting a new Sweden freed from traditional restraints of class, mores, values, and religion. And yet, Bergman and others like him had still grown up under the older certitudes(even as such were ebbing away). So, even as they welcomed social changes and greater freedoms, they also felt a conflicted sense of anxiety and even pangs of guilt. Yes, there were all these new libertine freedoms that overturned the social repressions and spiritual dogma of the past, but what could and should be done with this freedom? For a time, neurosis was the new religion. Though it didn't provide mankind with certainty(like the existence of God and His goodness), it offered something that was quasi-religious: a sense of inner-conflict and inner-struggle. If meaning of life could no longer be expected from God, it had to be found through psychology or philosophy. Modernist Art and new schools of philosophy, such as existentialism, reflected this anxiety and, as such, staved off complacency and shameless indulgence in narcissism and hedonism. It's like Guido in Federico Fellini's 8½ wants to be free of the gravitational pull of tradition, family, church, intellect, money, morality, & socio-economic crisis and fly around by the whims of his spirits. According to tradition, highest spirits are those of God and Heaven. But Guido, like so many of his generation, has lost faith even though there is still a side of him that longs for the holy and pure.

Through a Glass Darkly - Ingmar Bergman

8 1/2 - Federico Fellini

In the age of Freud, the spirits are merely repressed sexual energies. If Christianity taught that spirit triumphs with the subjugation of sexuality, Freudianism taught that true spirits will be released with the rejection of religion; and this idea was at the center of JULIET OF THE SPIRITS, a film where a wife discovers her true self by finally purging herself of the guilt complex inculcated in her childhood by the Catholic Church. (It was also a convenient way for Fellini to rationalize his womanizing, i.e. the problem wasn't so much his affairs with other women but his wife’s hangups due to Catholic upbringing.) Anyway, the point is the generation of Bergman, Fellini, and Antonioni, even as it valued and welcomed the new freedoms, was ridden with anxiety and doubt. This was especially true of Bergman, relative to whom Fellini became rather euphoric & careless(in his role as the Wizard who believes in his own Oz) AND relative to whom Antonioni dabbled in the purgative power of revolution(as in ZABRISKIE POINT) though not without trepidation. ZABRISKIE POINT, like Jean-Luc Godard's WEEKEND, is radical to the extent that it believes the System must be destroyed, but there is little to indicate that the youth generation of the 60s has anything going for them but the naivete of radical hope. Their vision is of destruction, not construction. It’s nihilism than idealism.

Swedish generations since the 1960s have grown up in a libertine world devoid of traditional themes and restraints, and the result is a culture of shamelessness and moral decadence. In some ways, things might not have been so bad IF such new modes had led to social, cultural, and economic collapse. Such would have had a sobering effect on the population. But capitalism managed to not only weather the rise of decadence/degeneration but thrive & profit from them. So, the degradation in social mores that would have destroyed earlier societies made modern capitalist societies even richer and more productive.
The prediction of some observers that the spartan communist east will triumph over the decadent capitalist west didn't come to be. While rise in decadence/degeneration did lead to all kinds of social problems, they also made rampant hedonism the great incentive for work and ambition. After all, once the basic needs of survival are met, there’s no greater incentive for work than pursuit of happiness & pleasure. So, as more pleasures(however decadent and debauched) were offered to the public, the more tirelessly people were willing to work to make more money to indulge in more fun. And once capitalism broke out of the moral restraints of Protestant Work Ethic(that said work is noble simply as work), there was the exponential explosion of Vice Industries that catered to all sorts of whims and fantasies. As for industries, they were willing to sell anything to make a buck, and since outrage = sensationalism = easy publicity, the culture got coarser as a series of whores, especially beginning with madonna, competed with one another with the Latest Whore Outrage of the Month. Granted, the rise of Vice Culture or Vice-olution had led to problematic class divisions. It had divided people into three basic groups. The morons who are dumb enough to accept Vice as their main culture and indulge to the point of destroying self, family, and community. This is especially true of the Negroes. And then, there are those who indulge in vice but have it under control to the extent that they are willing to work hard to enjoy more vice. They've succumbed to the enticements of vice, and as such, they are moral-spiritual zombies by traditional standards. But they still have the work ethic and sufficient self-control to delay immediate gratification. They live for Prurient Work Ethic; they work like Protestants-of-old but for the attainment of Prurience-of-new.
And then, you have the elites who are like the smart drug-lords: They don't get high on their own supply. It's like the smart British and Jews sold opium to the Chinese; they didn't use it themselves and banned it among their own kind. Many elites who work in Vice Industries push vice-dope on the masses but they themselves see it for what it is and raise their children differently. It's like Jews push the false god of Diversity on all gentile nations but not on Israel. Smart Jews don't get high on their own supply, though there are less-smart Jews, like Naomi Wolf, who get high on PC themselves. Jews look down on her as an idiot who smoked the PC that she was supposed to push onto others, the goyim. To be sure, there are some principled smart Jews like Norman Finkelstein and Philip Weiss who are critical of Jewish Power & Israel out of higher ideals, however misguided or naive they may be.

Anyway, the ever-'creative' ingenuity of capitalism managed to monetize decadence and degeneration in ways that made society even richer and more powerful. And first real understanding of this potential perhaps arose during the Prohibition. Back then, many people worried that alcohol would have a debilitating impact on family, morality, and the economy, made all the more worrisome with immigrant populations and growing licentiousness of the Negroes and their music. (Gorbachev dabbled in limited prohibition in the USSR in the 1980s because alcohol-related problems were taking a toll on the Soviet economy.) Many hoped that Prohibition would lead to a more sober, sane, and productive America, and maybe such would have been possible if US was not a democracy. But being a democracy, a relatively free society compared to much of the world at the time, people could get away with all sorts of illegal activity, and the Prohibition led to rise in urban organized crime and corruption in government. So, the US eventually ended the Prohibition but with rules and regulations that gave the state increased powers to contain alcohol-related problems, all the more necessary due to the rise of the automobile. (Prior to the automobile, a drunkard on feet or atop a horse, was hardly a threat to others. But put a drunkard in control of an automobile, and you have a machine of death for both the driver and other people.)

Still, when Prohibition ended, America was still mostly a conservative society with families, importance of church life, patriotism, and sensible race-ist understanding of the dangers posed by the savage Negro who is more muscular and more aggressive than the white race. But, over the years, the US and the Modern World as a whole, have been growing more and more decadent and degenerate in all levels of society. So, while something like the Prohibition could be contained by a mostly moral society and while the race tensions & youth culture excesses of the 60s could be balanced by the stability of the 'silent majority', a most pressing question of the present is what will contain and stabilize the increasing levels of decadence and degeneration we see all around? At the current rate, the family as an institution is breaking down in huge segments of society. Many boys fail to grow up into real men, and many women are stuck in trashy whore culture and unfit to be wives and mothers. Colleges are places of excessive Negro trash culture and radical political correctness. The People of Correctness or the PC gang claim to stand for idealism and truth, but their main objects of reverence are crazy thuggish Negroes and narcissistic self-indulgent homos & trannies.

Vice can be controlled and even serve as a useful incentive in a moral society. It's like some junk food and soda/beer won't destroy health as long as people believe in exercise, remaining fit, and eating healthy. Indeed, some vice-food-and-drink serve as incentives so that one can have some fun in life too. But what happens when vice-foods are promoted as being of equal value with virtue-foods? What happens when the casino becomes as much a family-place-to-be as the church? What happens when a slickster phony like Barack Obama is made to the equal of Jesus, a 'kind of god'? What happens when a homo's anus is said to be equal sexual value as a vagina? Is it any wonder that we are now seeing homo symbols displayed even in churches? And look at the state of Fine Art today. Most of the stuff is only good for hype, speculation, and investment among the money-men who keep the charade going just to have something through which to launder their money. When society becomes this demented, decadent, and degenerate — where the solid-silent-majority itself is turning into a minority — , the system itself will eventually buckle and fall. It will be like yeast feasting on sugar and eventually dying in the very alcohol it produced. The glamour and glitter of modern globalist cities are built on the fecal muck of moral degeneration and social decay.

Sweden is a nation, but it can also be seen as a state-of-mind or a self-enclosed prosperous social order of excessive boredom, trust, naivete, and good-will; we might call this ‘SwEden’.
There are SwEdens all across America, places that are mostly white, prosperous(compared to other parts of America), well-educated, and politically correct(above the national norm). Though most SwEdens are not inhabited by Scandinavians, they benefit from the same advantages and suffer from the same deficiencies. The problems of Minnesota can also be found in Maine, Vermont, and Washington, especially around the cities. Being overwhelmingly white, these places are less aware of the dangers posed by blacks and excessive Diversity. Their view of Negreality(Negro-reality) and Diversity comes mainly from the Jew-run media that indoctrinate minds with the mantras 'blacks are holy and cool' and 'diversity is our strength'. So, even though SwEdens are nice places because of lack of blacks and Diversity, they go out of their way to bring more blacks(even from Africa) and immigrants. Like Sweden the nation, SwEdens are populated with white people who are bored, naive, and trusting. Being bored, they want some excitement or vibrancy. Being naive, they fail to see that other races/cultures can be threatening and destructive. Being trusting, they fall for Jewish-promoted PC that is programmed to instill homogeneous societies with 'guilt' of lacking 'inclusive' diversity. Also, being societies of spineless Tolerance, the only way that the people of SwEden can feel righteous is through Intolerance of those who remain skeptical of the panacea of Magic Negroes, Divine Diversity, and holy homos. (In a way, the puritanical mindset of Protestantism has never left them. If their forebears denounced the corruption of the Catholic Church and went about purging impurities of faith, the current secularized crop of rectifiers, pegged with same mindset, call for the casting out of all evil spirits in accordance to PC, the reigning faith of the age.

One problem of Sweden or SwEden is that the peace-taken-for-granted leads to an unrealistic impression of nature. Just like cinema can give the wrong impression of war as 'heroic' or violence as 'cool and fun', social peace can lead to the naive misreading of nature and the larger world. Such protectiveness has the same impact on animals themselves. If you raise wild animals in a safe surrounding with love and affection(and plenty of food), they are less likely to have the necessary ruthlessness and 'cunning' to survive in Real Nature. In a man-made zoo-setting, even wild animals can be raised from early age to be trusting of humans and other animals. So, tiger cubs, wolf cubs, bear cubs, piglets, and calves can be raised to 'trust' one another, tolerate one another, and get along. Even though predatory instincts remain even in human-raised carnivores, they are likely feel fondness even for 'natural enemies' with whom they were jointly raised. It's like dogs and cats raised together as puppies and kittens become lifelong friends... as long as there is human supervision and provision of food & comfort for both. But outside the man-made enclosure or environment, the 'learned' or 'instilled' affections and attitudes of the animals have little use or relevance in the natural world. A bear in the wild must fear the tiger. Pigs must run from wolves. Real nature is a world of merciless conflict.

Humans who live in close proximity with nature know this. They don't romanticize about lions that can kill them or eat their mother. Eskimos or Inuit in Alaska fear the polar bear and brown bear. They don't play games like the 'Grizzly Man' did(in Werner Herzog's movie). Indeed, the German romanticism about nature was possible only because all of nature was pretty much under human control in Germany and Western Europe. (When a group of Germans went to colonize some area or Brazil in the 19th century, they were met with forces that undid them much like the expedition came apart in Herzog's AGUIRRE THE WRATH OF GOD. If you want to create your own Racial Zion, don't attempt it in the jungle.) The white frontiersmen who had to fight Indian savages and survive against bears, wolves, cougars, moose, and rattlesnakes knew nature was not about funning around. Even so, the white American conquest of the gigantic North American continent was so swift and dramatic that it wasn't long before a romantic myth grew up around the 'red savages'(as noble savages) and the lost wilderness. Out of guilt or nostalgia, the white man came to favor myths than reality about Indians and nature, both of which survived in a world of brutality and cruelty. By the time the 60s came rolling around, the the romanticism about 'touching Indians' and going 'back to the garden' had the whiff of naive German idealism about nature, albeit without the German discipline and tidiness; German nature-worship, naive as it could be at times, didn't lead to something as gross as Woodstock or demented as Altamont. One reason is Germans have fixed territory, and every inch of Germany is seen as homeland or heimat. So, if you made a mess of things, you needed to clean up. In contrast, there is an element of American psyche that is somewhat similar to the Russian one: Both people have vast territories, and so, they(or some of them) developed this tendency to just run off to greener pastures if they made a mess of one area. American Mythos was built around 'getting away from problems of Europe' and starting over in the New Land. And if they couldn't make it in the East Coast or if they made a mess of things, they could just move inland, and then move westward ever still. And when the US was all settled and unified, move from cities to ever-expanding suburbs. US could indulge in endless sprawl from the cities because of all that space. If white men once chased after Indians to take more land, they could later run from Negroes to live in safer neighborhoods. In contrast, people of smaller nations have no such option... that is unless they themselves decide to forgo domestic responsibilities by moving to the US or Canada. But given what is happening to UK, Sweden, and France, it seems even the mentality of small(er) nations have been Americanized. Even nations that can't afford or accommodate endless sprawl are going the American Way, inviting more diversity, and forcing European natives to seek residence away from darkening cities. But how far can this go on in cramped Europe? As for Germans, who've been world-renowned for orderliness and cleanliness, they've decided to open their nations to waves of brutish, vulgar, and uncouth Arabs, Muslims, and even Africans who throw garbage and urinate/defecate all over. Germans, who are so hard on one another over issues of sanitation and recycling, have decided it's wonderful to let Germany be flooded with people whose culture of hygiene and sanitation is completely at odds with the German model. It'd be like a school where every student is pressured to be respectful and diligent letting in tons of students who have no use for discipline and respect. Could it be that, on some level, Germans are vicariously enjoying the barbarism of non-Germanic invaders who don't give a damn about social rules and regulations? Since Germans themselves don't have the guts to give a middle-finger to social order, they've outsourced social rebellion to the invaders who, furthermore, don't give a shit about the Jews and the Holocaust, two things all Germans must worship. So, even as Germans are appalled and distraught by the mess caused by the invasion, there might be some repressed glee upon witnessing the invaders act in vibrant unrestrained ways that are not permitted to Germans who've become slaves of Political Correctness and National Shaming.

Anyway, just like those who don't know real nature tend to romanticize nature(as a kind of wild eden) — pictorial wonderland show in PBS documentaries where even brutal hunts are made 'thrilling' and 'exciting' with pulsating music and slow-motion cinematography — , people who don't know the reality of the Other tend to underestimate its savagery, barbarism, hostility, and/or degeneracy(due to cultural, ideological, or genetic factors). People of Sweden and SwEden see the entire world/humanity through the prism of their ideology of PC, which is naive and stupid as hell but drills confidence and conviction of absolute faith in its followers. This is because PC dominates big media and elite academia.
Naturally, people who pay attention to the news(what's going on) and devote themselves to study(higher knowledge) know more than most people. Ideally, that should be the case IF the media and academia are doing their job. But as PC is the reigning ideology in the West, those who rely most on establishment media and higher education for the truth often tend to be the most naive and stupid. They may be smart, diligent, and dedicated, but in their trusting earnestness, they swallow whole hog all the crap that is fed to them by the Jew-run Media and PC-virus-infected academia. So, we have the current situation where to 'know more'(according to media and academia)often means to know less(of actual reality).
Now, I’m not endorsing a populist anti-elitist argument that lazily champions the 'common sense' of the silent majority over the conceits of the eggheads. When it comes to specialized knowledge in many fields, the elites and experts do indeed know best. And ideally, if social sciences and humanities were to do their job, they would do much to sustain an elite community where critical thinking, empirical truth, free exchange of ideas, and necessary revisions define the culture. But PC has corrupted elite culture with dogmatism, conformism, cravenness, cowardice, opportunism, and/or bullying. So, as long as PC dominates the discourse, many of the most 'informed' and 'educated' people are far from the truth. And unbeknownst to their inflated egos, they fail to realize that they're worthless running dogs of PC because they will do ANYTHING to gain status by spouting the approved catechisms of the Current Year.

But the disease isn't limited to the elites, though it is most consequential there since they control the levers of power and decide national policy. The disease spreads to the populace at large through Public Education, Pop Culture, and State Policy. Even when the people begin to sense that something is wrong with globalism and PC, they feel at a moral disadvantage since they've been drummed day in and day out with mantras about 'white guilt', 'racism', 'xenophobia', 'diversity is our strength', and 'homophobia'. So, even an illegal Mexican in the US has moral advantage over white American 'gringos'. Under current PC, he can just spout cliches about 'diversity', 'xenophobia', and 'racism'; therefore, the white American is put at a moral disadvantage and feels pressured to defend his values against such character-assassinations. Given current PC, no one asks the illegal Mexican, "Why don't you respect the laws of another nation? Who gave you the right to violate American laws and barge into another nation?" Also, "If you Mexicans love your own kind so much, why do you want to get away from them and come live in gringo-land?" And, "If gringos are wrong to reject Mexicans, why do Mexicans reject other Mexicans?"
Indeed, there is a moral contradiction in the illegal Mexican who accuses the 'gringo' of not wanting to be around 'too many Mexicans' when he himself fled from Mexico because he himself doesn't want to be around many of his own kind. The illegal Mexican may argue that he came to the US for jobs, but when the patriot should ask the Mexican, "Why can't you Mexicans build industries and create enough jobs in your own nation? What's wrong with you people that you let your own nation be run over by drug gangs and corrupt politicians while you guys don't fight and only want to jump the fence to come live in the US?"

Anyway, PC inverts morality and truth so that the lawful, natural, and patriotic are placed on the moral defensive against the criminal, degenerate, and treasonous. So, the treasonous who create 'sanctuary cities'(which ought to be called 'treason cities' or 'illegopolis') act holier-than-thou to the patriots who call for implementation of national laws. So, we have homo-degenerates who indulge in fecal-penetration sermonizing to normal straight people about moral and even spiritual values. (We are told Christian churches must make way for homo symbols.) Blacks who commit the most crime and violence strut around like they are radiating with divine holiness. And Jews, the most powerful and most destructive force in the world, bitch about the 'human rights' abuses of other peoples. And since white elites must go along with such nonsense(if only to maintain their status and privilege in the Jew-run world), the PC dogma & narrative are foisted on ALL white people, and then disseminated around the entire globe by US media and Western academia(that educates the elites around the world).

True understanding of nature is the best antidote to the Edenic illusion of lion lying with the lamb. But when neo-edenism infects a society, its people lose sight of the true horror of nature. It's like the Eternals in ZARDOZ have become so accustomed to security and safety in their world of privilege and complacency that they're not only naive about barbarism & death but welcome them as a kind of 'spiritual' deliverance. If Christians were fed to the lions, the Eternals feed themselves to the barbarian hordes as ‘saviors’. And such decadence descends very quickly, indeed in a few generations.
And even though we may scoff at the naive fools of PC, in a way we can't blame them as people's sense of reality relies on available sources. If you live in some nice white community in Minnesota or Maine and have no direct contact with Negroes or Diversity, then your only source of information are Hollywood movies, news media(run by Jews), and education. Hollywood movies give you Magic Negroes and 'evil white racists'. Also, even thug Negroes are presented as 'cool', 'badass', or 'glamorous. So, even black pathology is given a positive spin. Or, even a supposedly realistic show like THE WIRE is ideologically framed and contextualized so that black problems are seen as the product of 'history' or 'society' when, in fact, they are mainly due to BAMMAMA, or "blacks are more muscular and more aggressive".
This is why some idealistic white students enter into education and dream of going to teach blacks. The result is almost always hopeless, with whites teaching little and blacks learning little while acting like louts and messing things up. Black pathology is bad as it is due to black nature that is wilder, more thuggish, and nastier than those of other races. But it's made worse by the Magic Negro cult, 'white guilt' cult(that must be shared even by non-black minorities or NAM), and 'badass nigga' cult. The Magic Negro Cult or MNC says blacks are naturally and innately more soulful and spiritual than other races. Given natural black predilection for egomania, such adulation is like adding gasoline to fire or passing a case of whiskey to an alcoholic. In association with the MNC is the White Guilt Cult or WGC that says whites(and indeed all non-black minorities) must atone and apologize before the Negro who suffered like no other race has done. This, of course, is nonsense, but since whites came to dominate the world, even 'white guilt' has been universalized. If in the past, whites pressured the world to worship the Christian God, today's West pressures the world to worship Holocaust Jews, holy homos, and Magic Negroes. When whites worshiped God & Jesus, whites tried to convert the world to Christianity to worship the same God and His Son. Now, that whites have lost faith in God & Jesus and instead worships Magic Negro, Holy Homo, and Holocaust Jew, they apply pressure on the entire world to worship the same gods. Of course, Jews, Negroes, and Homos love this since it means all of humanity will be made to worship them and put out to them. This is why those three groups love globalism as conveyors of the PC religion that seeks to convulse and convert the entire world toward worshiping the new holy trinity of Jews, Negroes, and Homos.

For people who only know the safe & secure world of artifice, there is much to learn from the brutality of nature. Thus, one is made to appreciate the safety and security provided by artifice while also respecting the awesome power of nature. Indeed, seeking haven from nature is part of nature. Even in the wild, all organisms seek safe space. Birds build nests. Bears, badgers, and wolves dig dens. Bees and wasps build hives. Beavers build shelters. Humans took this furthest by developing technology to wipe out all animals deemed dangerous to human habitation and by building towns and cities with roads and barriers. In a way, artificial is natural to the extent that organisms have this innate natural tendency to create havens and shelters that separate them from rest of nature. Just like babies are created within the safety of the womb, organisms feel most secure within a sanctuary. Since they cannot return to their mothers' wombs, they create physical havens that protect their own kind from threat posed by hostiles. And yet, even as we seek protection from nature, we cannot live without nature that provides the air, trees, soil, animals, vegetation, water, and etc. Likewise, most modern nations cannot survive without worldwide trade. Germany and Japan make good machines, but they are deficient in energy resources. Saudi Arabia produces lots of oil but is deficient in fertile soil and manufactured goods. So, peoples around the world must trade and interact with one another. But they must also secure their own nations and cultures in order to survive as a special & distinct civilization.
The best way is to appreciate the artificial world and the natural world for what they are. One must understand that the artificial world cannot exist without the natural world, but then, neither can it exist without barriers against the natural world. So, artificial world has to be appreciated as providing humanity with safety and security, and the natural world must be respected as a awesome amoral force that poses a threat to humanity but also possesses the raw materials necessary for all life on earth. Without trees, there wouldn't be enough oxygen. Without ants, much of vegetation would die, and humanity would also face extinction.
Likewise, every people need to value their own nation as a repository of their ethnos, culture, and history. But other nations have things of value in materials, goods, services, ideas, and arts/culture. Therefore, a balance must be struck between protecting & preserving one's own nation from other nations & people while, at the same time, being open to the ideas, goods, and expressions of other peoples that may be of value as utility, instruction, or inspiration.

But PC has undermined such balance. When it comes to nature, PC paints a simpleminded portrait of humans(especially Westerners) as villainous despoilers and nature as holy mother victim raped by her sons. Given the power of modern technology and the extinction of so many species of animals, concern for nature and environment is certainly understandable and necessary. But such view overestimates the power of man while underestimating the power of nature.
Also, it lets nature off the hook as some Eden of harmony. But, in fact, this 'harmony' found in nature is merely the balance maintained by ceaseless warfare among the animals. It is ‘harmony’ as the end-product of ceaseless mayhem. Without predators to devour cute bunny rabbits and beautiful deers, the herbivores will eat all the plants, and then, they too will starve. So, there must be predators waging war on herbivores who, in their own way, are predators of plants. So, predators are the best friends of plants who, if they had consciousness, would fear herbivores the most. Also, if humans seem 'ravenous' and 'piggish', it is because their 'human nature' is part of nature. Nature is ravenous. Bacteria and viruses try to take over everything. A forest tries to expand in all directions. Ants will grab all they can. Lions try to conquer as much territory as possible and devour their prey without mercy. Pigs and rats are horribly destructive of whatever they run across. And locusts will eat up entire fields. So, if humans have a 'hungry', 'greedy', and 'ravenous' nature, it is because their emotions and appetites are part of nature. Nature is excessive as every organism must be excessive in its effort to hold its own against other organisms. But the flaky New Age PC version of nature would have us believe that all things in nature cooperate according to some symphonic harmony. So, even when predators attack and kill prey, it's a musical like THE LION KING. It's as if the prey animals are instinctively 'understanding' and 'accepting' of the role they must play in the natural balance of things when their only modus operandi is the Negronic "Run like a mothafuc*a".

Given Western PC's willful naivete about nature, it's hardly surprising that it has concocted similarly naive fantasies about other races, cultures, and peoples. Especially because of the cult of 'white guilt' that admonishes white folks to atone for the past sin of 'racism' and 'supremacism', whites feel this New Burden to reject any sense of white pride while exaggerating the 'achievements' of non-whites, however piddling they may be. So, we are believe that the Apollo mission's success owed especially to the three Negresses of HIDDEN FIGURES(though with all the chicken and watermelon they be consuming, their figures aren't exactly easy to hide). The combination of PC ideology, cult of youth(that favors immaturity), and fantasies about nature has led to neo-edenism that is destroying the West.

At this point, the ONLY correctives are Neo-Fascism and Organicism that counter and repel the willfully naive dogma of PC that’s been manipulated and programmed by Jews to weaken gentile societies so as to make them more penetrable to the Jewish virus. Are all secular Jews consciously working to push such an agenda? Some Jews are surely self-aware and know full well what their kind has been up to for millennia. But many secular Jews push this agenda with only a subconscious understanding of what is really animating them.
For thousands of years, Jews have struggled and survived as an intensely tribal and nomadic people. This made them both more principled and more opportunistic than other peoples/cultures. In their devotion to God and their identity, many Jews kept the fire burning, even through the darkest times. The idea of the Covenant bound Jews to the one and only true God, and this mind-set made Jews more resolved to stick to their sacraments than any other people. And yet, especially as a people without a home after exile after exile, Jews had to hustle and wheel-and-deal with goyim in order to put food on their table. And over time, they got so good at it and perfected ways to fleece the world. And this aspect of Jewishness made them the most opportunistic, cunning, and devious people on Earth.
Perhaps, Jesus’ rebellion against both Romans and Jews was to break out of this mold. Indeed, it must have seemed outrageous to an idealist like Jesus. After all, if indeed there is the one and only God and if He has blessed Jews over all other peoples, why should Jews cower and compromise so much in relation to other people? If the Jewish God is the only God and if Jews are His Chosen, then Jews shouldn’t compromise, especially with the pagans who’ve conquered Jews. Why claim something so lofty as the Covenant — special connection between God and Jews — but then act so cravenly, bowing down before pagan Romans(and before them, other pagan powers) and begging for mercy and favors. Jesus refused to play the game, and He got killed... which proved the ‘wisdom’ of Jews who’d compromised and survived. And then, it fell to St. Paul to find a way to resolve the contradiction between pure principles and clever pragmatism(especially by saving his own neck by invoking Roman citizenship) to spread Jesus’ message far and wide. According to this formulation, there are four kinds of people in the world. (1) The highest is the person of pure principle who never compromises. Such a person is usually destroyed. Even those who admire him fear him because purity of principles threatens the way of the world. We admire such a person because he sticks to principles with courage and conviction while most of us seek compromise to self-interest and resolution. Jesus, according to Christian myth, was that kind of pure perfect person. (2) Below the person of pure principle is the person committed to the pure principle but incapable of being pure himself(mainly out of fear but also matters of self-interest) but uses his compromised pragmatism to further the spread of the pure principles. This would be St. Paul who wasn’t as pure as Jesus. Indeed, had he been like Jesus, he would have been killed much earlier, and then, he couldn’t have achieved what he did. St. Paul had to compromise and play the game at times, but he always did it with the ultimate purpose of spreading the Gospel. So, even though St. Paul was often pragmatic than confrontational(in the mode of a purist) and could even be said to be opportunistic at times, his cunning was ultimately in the service of God and Jesus. If he learned the art of living another day by compromise, he spent the next day to spread the Word to one more person. (3) Below the person-without-purity-who-nevertheless-uses-pragmatism-to-serve-the-pure-principle is the person who uses pragmatism and opportunism for no other purpose than to serve oneself. If for St. Paul, pragmatism and compromise were means to an higher end — he had to survive and live another day so as to spread the Gospel — , there are those for whom pragmatism and opportunism are ends in themselves insofar as they’re useful in helping them attain status and goods of self-aggrandizement. Such people may ascribe to some principle and, in a superficial way, believe themselves to be committed, but their bogusness will be plain to see when the ideological winds blow in the opposite direction. Their so-called ‘conviction’ will shift with the winds. Is there something lower than an opportunist-pragmatist? (4) There is the person of pure principle of the profane. If some people are committed to the purity of principled truth, the polar opposite is not the devious opportunist without principles. As contemptible as such people may be, they are not the most dangerous since they will bend with shifting winds. The bigger danger is the people of pure principle of the profane, false, and vile. A good example of such holy cretins is found among so-called SJWs or Social Justice Warriors. These morons are indeed true believers, and some of them are even willing to risk their lives to push or defend their commitment.
But what are the obsessions of their ‘pure hearts’? Worship of Jewish Power that has come a long way from WWII & Holocaust and is now the predominant evil force in the world. The ‘sacralization’ of homosexuality and trans-gender nonsense, whereby humanity is supposed to derive its moral and spiritual meaning with rapturous ecstasies around the wonders of homo fecal penetration and tranny genital-mutilation. Apotheosis of Celebrity Madness or Celebristianity as the new christianity.
Yes, we are to look to ‘inspirational figures’ like Bono, Lady Gaga, madonna, Miley Cyrus, Katy Perry, Oprah, Ellen Degeneris, George Clooney, Brad Pitt, Matt Damon, gangsta rappers, and Negro athletes as founts of wisdom. No wonder Obama, the celebrity candidate, made so many shallow idiots foam at the mouth and faint left and right.
And of course, there is the false god of the Magic Negro. In our demented Jew-controlled world, the vilest and nastiest race that is most destructive and defiling of civilization is to be worshiped as the soulful chosen of the cosmos, that is after Jews and homos. While there are plenty of opportunists who go along with the PC charade just to get theirs, there are SJW-types who really and sincerely believe in all this nonsense with purity of conviction. When such purity of devotion is wasted on falsehood, corruption, and dementia, it is truly a tragic farce indeed.