Friday, March 23, 2018

POLITICAL TRIBES or a Globalist Political Diatribe by Amy Chua - The Book explores the Politics of Us versus Them WITHOUT taking into account Who is ABOVE the ‘Us’ and the ‘Them'

What’s up with academics in America? Why are even the less ideologically partisan intellectuals so devoid of truth where it really matters? Obviously, these people are not dumb. They are smart, and some are very smart. And surely, they are better-read and more learned than 99% of Americans. As academics, their role is to research the truth and speak honestly and without fear, especially in a Liberal Democracy. And on a wide array of issues, they do speak candidly and write with integrity. And yet, when it comes to what really matters, they fail time and time again. How can academics who write so truthfully about B and C be so untruthful about A? This conundrum reminds me of what a film critic said about Chinese film-making in the 1980s: Some budding ‘auteurs’ preferred to make films about the periphery or non-Chinese cultures because of less likelihood of censorship. A film about failures of Han Chinese society might be construed as criticism of the System, but a film that deals with issues of tyranny, superstition, cruelty, and madness in, say, Tibet might be overlooked as ‘exotic’ by the censors. This rule applies to academics all over the world. Obviously, even a Cuban or North Korean scholar can write freely about birds or reptiles. He would also be relatively free to write about some Other Culture(unless it happens to be arch-enemy Uncle Sam and its allies or puppets). But when it comes to Cuban government or the Kim Klan, the scholars better tread carefully. Or consider the Soviet Encyclopedia that had perfectly fine entries on most topics and subjects(by universal standards of knowledge) but gave totally skewed accounts of sensitive topics in relation to Soviet history and power. This being a near-universal rule — who expects total academic or press freedom in Iran? — , why is it so jarring when we see evidence of it in the West? Because the West, especially the US, bills itself as ‘exceptional’, ‘liberal democratic’, and committed to free inquiry & expression. After all, the New York Times declaration of principles runs as follows: "It will be my earnest aim that THE NEW-YORK TIMES give the news, all the news, in concise and attractive form, in language that is parliamentary in good society, and give it as early, if not earlier, than it can be learned through any other reliable medium; to give the news impartially, without fear or favor..."

From an early age, we’ve all been fed the truism that the US is land of the free and the Liberal West differs from repressive China and autocratic Russia. Americans believe people want to come to the US for freedom and liberty, to speak their minds, challenge power and authority, and call it like it is. And yet, we are not supposed to notice the Real Power, and those who do end up like Rick Sanchez and Helen Thomas. And despite all this mania for change as a good thing, we are not supposed to notice certain changes that are inconvenient to the Narrative. (Never mind that the power in America went from Wasps to Jews some time ago. And notice how sports narrative still runs on ‘not enough blacks in ____’ when the overwhelming fact of American Sports is that Biological Discrimination favoring naturally tougher and faster blacks have made certain sports No-Go Zones for non-blacks. No one asks, "Why aren’t there any white or Mexican running backs?" but the annual media mania is about "not enough black quarterbacks.") Instead, the Tropes of Power and Injustice are chosen and enforced by the Real Power that is not supposed to be noticed and named. So, do NOT notice the real power of the Jews and just pretend that Wasps still rule most of America while the KKK dominates the South. And never mind all the changes in race relations, with most of the violence being black-on-white. Just pretend we are still back in the days of Bull Connor. (And forget about the reality of South Africa and Zimbabwe. Just gaze at the screen featuring Wakanda as a vision of what Africa would have been without colonization. Never mind that parts of Africa that had come under direct European rule did far better than parts that were only indirectly ruled. What are we to pretend next? American Indians would be flying to Mars on space tepees, riding around in Beaver-trucks, and computer-coding in Hopi lingo IF ‘pale face’ had never set foot in the New World? I suppose China and Japan would have modernized EVEN MORE all on their own if not for the intrusion of Western powers that forced them to open. Damn those British who prevented Hong Kong from becoming what it really could have been: A super high-tech city-state that would have colonized a million star systems by now if not for the occupation by evil whitey.) Even though the US is about liberty and speaking truth to power, in reality The Power gets to decide the practical perimeters of ‘liberty’ and the means of gaining wealth and influence(that better be conducive to the interests of The Power).

But then, there never was unfettered free speech and absolute liberty in the US except perhaps in the brief limbo period between the late 1960s and the early 1980s, after which Political Correctness began to favor consensus over controversy. This brief window of near-total freedom owed to the uncertainty of power during the crisis-filled transition from Wasp domination to Bugs(busy-urban-globalist-semite, aka Jewish) domination. Similarly, there was something approaching real freedom in the transition period from post-Maoism to the New Order in China. There was Democracy Wall and, for a time, genuine discussion, top to bottom, about the disasters of the Cultural Revolution and need for reforms and modernization. But once the New Order consolidated its power, especially after the Tiananmen Square crackdown, many issues became more-or-less taboo despite Chinese society becoming freer in terms of personal and cultural liberties. Likewise, America enjoyed something close to unfettered freedom of speech when Jews were going from ‘oppositional’ dissident phase to the New Elite phase. In order to protect their own radical anti-establishmentarian speech and to legalize pornography & push for more licentiousness in pop culture(for reasons of profit and subversion of Christian morality), Jews upheld the banner of free speech for everyone, including Neo-Nazi groups. Even though working for their tribal interest, Jews invoked universal principles to fool America that organizations like ACLU were struggling for equal liberty for all. Back then, Jews knew unfettered free speech would favor their own kind because they were on the up against the Wasp order, Christian order, Catholic organizations, and Conservative groups(especially in rural communities). Because the main power was still with Wasps, total free speech meant Bugs’ firepower against Wasps and White America would be unrestrained. And since Jews had more verbal arsenal and more money than other groups, they were bound to gain most ground in power and influence. And indeed, by the 1990s, especially with the election of former counterculture Boomer Billy Boy Clinton, Jews had totally consolidated their control over America, especially with the Democrats abandoning Labor Unions and forging closer ties to Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Las Vegas, and the Deep State apparatus of CIA and FBI. Democratic Party had always been divided between Hollywood and Hardy Workers, but of course, deep down inside, Jews always favored the former. In BARTON FINK, the Jewish writer in Hollywood talks about the Workers(!!), but he would rather be with fellow writers whose profits and prestige rely on Capital, not on workers. It’s like in THE HUDSUCKER PROXY. You want the good stuff in life, kid? You gotta win at the top, not at the bottom. Being pro-worker is like being king of the losers. Better to be king of kings(or even a servant of kings) — like Mr. Schenk in HAIL CAESAR! — than king of losers or especially loser among losers.
Coen Brothers' BARTON FINK
Anyway, Jews gained near-total power by the 1990s and then got very nervous about defending their Power. They figured it would henceforth be advantageous to push Political Correctness. PC has two strains: idealistic and tribal. The True Believers really believe in their simpleminded view of history and justice. They are addicted to self-righteous supremacism and can’t conceive of any decent person disagreeing with them on the holy truths of the Current Year. As such, the PC Idealists believe that those on the Right, especially White Right, are ‘Nazis’(!!) and must be shut down. (Granted, they see ‘Nazis’ everywhere and even go after Ben Shapiro, Milo, Charles Murray, and Christina Hoff Sommers.) But there are tribalist PC-pushers as well. Jews, at least smart ones, know that much of PC is caca. Smart Jews no longer take Marxism seriously anymore and find much of ‘Cultural Marxism’ to be a joke. It’s for the birds as far as they’re concerned but NEVERTHELESS useful to the extent that Marxists and Proglodytes can be used as a Janissary Force against the White Right, the people that Jewish Supremacist Power fears the most. The main reason why elite Jews support PC is to guard their Tribal Power. Via control of PC narrative, Jews create the Narrative of Good vs Evil and Tyranny vs Freedom, and this requires a kind of MEMENTO-like(Christopher Nolan film) manipulation of historical memory via media and academia. Jews target ‘White Privilege’ as the Eternal Power against which all Jews, decent guilt-ridden whites, and People of Diversity must unite and fight. As for white women, they must hate White Men as the source of all evil and patriarchal oppression(even though women gained the most freedoms in white-male-run societies). (Only white homo men get pass-over treatment from PC fumigation. Latin American whites also get a pass as honorary ‘people of color’ if they join with Jews against white Americans.) Because most people are pretty insipid and infected with Jewish-controlled iconography from cradle to grave via media and schooling — holy MLK vs horrid KKK — , they fall for the Jewish BS. Jews also keep mind-wiping much of history following the Civil Rights Movement. Just like the corrupt cop in MEMENTO exploits the main character’s brain damage, Jews mess with us by erasing all the history of black robbery, rape, murder, and mayhem since the 1960s. The media and academia function like the Lacuna amnesia-inducing machine in ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND. So, we are made to forget about the Black Rampage of murder, robbery, mayhem, rioting, & thuggery and treated instead to the Ground-Hog-Day narratives of TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD and propaganda movies like SELMA and HIDDEN FIGURES. Never mind what happened in the Knoxville Massacre. Let’s have the umpteenth account of why the thug Emmit Till was killed by rednecks who resented his talking shi* to their womenfolk.
The Jewish-run Media have 'lacuna-ed' our minds of the Black Rampage that ran riot since the mid 1960s. The Jew-run media operates much like the Memory-Erasing Machine in ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND.
Anyway, we live in a world where the ONLY SPEECH THAT REALLY MATTERS(or OSTRM) is no less tightly controlled than speech and expression in autocracies. While dissidents aren’t sent to the Gulag or shot in the back of the head, they are effectively hounded, disgraced, fired, blacklisted, exiled to the periphery, and banned from the discourse. Because the top prizes are so irresistible(and even glamorous) in the US to the vainly ambitious, elites and would-be-elites dare not risk their fortunes for the truth. Courage Doesn’t Pay whereas Cowardice does. But then, who wants to admit he or she is a craven opportunist like Peter Keating or Mitt Romney? So, the trick is to appear courageous and outspoken while, in actual deed, doing the bidding of the Power. Sometime ago, I had to give George Hee-Hawley a good spanking for being a cucky-wuck. But a spanking isn’t enough for Amy Chua’s egregious crime against truth and integrity in her new book POLITICAL TRIBES: GROUP INSTINCT AND THE FATE OF NATIONS. It’s a classic case of a book that feigns ‘independence’ but does little but shill out to the Power. Spanking won’t do. Chua needs to be paddled for what is her worst book by far.
George Hee-Hawley deserved a good spanking
Amy Chua-pet deserves a good paddling
Why is it her worst book? Because nowhere in the book does she address the real Power and the biggest tribal power in the America(except to mention David Duke to discredit any theory about Jewish dominance. The PC formula is as follows: Noticing Jewish Power = David Duke = KKK). I haven’t read WORLD ON FIRE(except the chapter on Russian Jews) and her book on Hyper-Powers(even though I watched a video on the subject). I did read BATTLE HYMN OF THE TIGER MOTHER, which was amusing enough, and I did skim through THE TRIPLE PACKAGE, a book written with her hubby that was like a Group Self-Help book: "Are you a poor dumb Mexican and want greater success in life? Join the Mormons." At least with WORLD ON FIRE and THE TRIPLE PACKAGE, she addressed the subject of Jewish power, the greatest power in the world. This made good sense in books about Power Relations. To discuss American or World Affairs without mentioning Jewish Power is like discussing African Wildlife without mentioning lions, hippos, or elephants. But already in those books, there were signs of cold feet curling into cowardice. In her chapter on Russian Jewish oligarchs, she explains why it’s such a sensitive/difficult subject because of Russian history of violence and discrimination toward Jews. Okay, fair enough, but she fails to mention the Jewish Bolshevik violence against Russians & Christians and how Jewish financial robbery in the 1990s fit into this pattern. (If Jews acted thus in the 1990s, maybe their past behavior wasn’t all that different, and maybe just maybe, the ‘anti-Semites’ who carried out the pogroms were at least half-justified in their rage.) The anti-Jewish pogroms killed, at most, thousands, maybe tens of thousands, over decades. Also, even though Russian/Cossack ruffians clearly got out of order and did terrible things, it was not like Jews were perfect angels either. Furthermore, Jewish historiography libeled the Russian Tsar for having been behind the pogroms of 1903. (The Soviets did, however, support the Zionist Nakba pogroms against Palestinians in 1948.) At any rate, the real orgy of bloodbath began with the Bolshevik takeover of Russia in which many Jews took part in mass destruction of churches(50,000 by some accounts, confiscation of property, creation of mass Gulag system, political repression, brainwashing, and the deaths of literally millions due to starvation, torture, lynch mobs driven to frenzy, and mass executions). Also, the Jewish Rape of Russia in the 1990s wasn’t just some misguided failed experiment but tribal networking of the most insidious kind. It was the plot of Judea(or World Jewry) with networks all over the world. The rigged ‘reforms’ that fast-tracked Russian Jewish millionaires into becoming Russian Jewish billionaires virtually overnight by was no accident. It was a Jew d’etat of the biggest magnitude. And those Jews in Russia got special support from Jews in the West. There is no doubt about that. Also, the Russian casualties of this massive Jewish theft went through a period far more harrowing than even Germany during the Weimar Era. (The world should be so lucky that Russia didn’t produce a Hitler.) Also, so many Slavic women were sold into prostitution, and a vast white slavery ring run by Jews exported prostitutes all over the world, not least to Israel. (Of course, a Jewish-Hollywood financed movie like TAKEN would have us believe it’s only the Muslims who carry out White Slavery.) Amy Chua had enough integrity to mention the Jewish character of the financial heist that engulfed Russia in the 1990s, but her victimology and villainology nevertheless stuck to the Classic Semitic Textbook. So, when Russians and Ukrainians did wrong to Jews(like carrying out pogroms), they were clear villains and Jews were clear victims. But when Jews do far worse to Russians, Jews are just well-meaning or misguided bumblers while Russians... well, never mind.

And in THE TRIPLE PACKAGE, she pulls the same shtick but with blacks. Chua’s laughable explanation as to why Nigerian immigrants do better than American blacks is complete mushy-head stuff. For starters, MOST of Nigeria is far worse off that Black America, which is paradise compared to your average Nigerian village or street corner. While some Nigerian immigrants have done well in EU and US, most of Nigeria is a cesspool of corruption, ineptitude, chaos, and imbecility. Nigeria is also the source of much gangsterism throughout Africa. Conditions in Nigeria are so bad that the meanest toughest black gangs in the US wouldn’t last a day in the mean streets of Lagos. So, why are Nigerian immigrants doing better than most American blacks in academics? The reasons are obvious. Nigerians are 186 million strong, so there are many more smart Nigerians to choose from in contrast to 45 million black Americans. While most Nigerians are crazed imbeciles, surely out of that 186 million there are going to be some smart people and geniuses. Also, not all blacks are the same, just like not all whites are the same. Ashkenazi Jews and Albanians both count as white, but Jews are considerably smarter. Same goes for blacks. Some blacks, like Igbos, tend to be smarter due to their history as merchants that selected for cleverer traits. While worthless black dummies can easily flock to Europe on makeshift boats, it takes some money and means for most black Africans to make it to the US(unless they happen to be low-IQ Somalis who arrive as ‘refugees’). So, the US obviously gets the better kinds of Nigerians who, furthermore, benefit from Affirmative Action that was originally meant as remedial program for American blacks of slave ancestry. Even so, black Americans still do academically much better than most black Africans. But, Chua would have us believe that black Americans lag behind blacks from Africa because of Slavery and Jim Crow. But if not for slavery in the US, what would black Americans have been? They would have remained in Africa practicing savagery and driving hippos crazy.
What black-Americans would be doing if they hadn't been brought to the New World.
A Hippo crying out, "There goes the neighborhood" upon seeing Negroes.
And speaking of slavery, it was practiced far more extensively in Africa than in America. Indeed, slavery was universal before the West banned it around the world. (True, slavery in America was race-based or ‘racist’, but that was also why there was a powerful moral argument to end it. If white folks had enslaved whites as well as blacks, then slavery would have been seen as a universal practice than a particular form of injustice. Whites didn’t enslave fellow whites because they regarded slavery as wicked. Therefore, conscientious whites and blacks noticed the discrepancy between freedom for whites and slavery for blacks. In contrast, because slavery was a universal practice in other parts of the world, it was less likely to be seen as an evil to eradicate. Idea of justice, even if of universal import, begins locally and expands gradually, like a forest fire. Before whites embarked to end slavery all around the world, they had to begin with the conviction that it is wrong to enslave their own kind.) Also, Chua makes a big deal of white violence toward blacks in the US. Yes, slavery could be cruel, but it wasn’t like blacks were whipped night and day. Also, in the hundred years between 1865 to 1965, the number of blacks lynched was just a few thousands, a pittance compared to a single violent event in China or India or Africa that killed 100,000s. Despite sporadic white violence against blacks — usually over-reactions against black crime or violence — , it was NOTHING compared to the kinds of violence that have scarred Africa from time immemorial and continues to this day. A black slave was better off materially than a black savage in Africa, just like a tiger or lion in a zoo has a better chance of survival than in the wild. Sure, slavery was degrading in the American context because of the founding principles of Americanism. Besides, who wants to hear, "Hey nigger, go pick some cotton." If I were a ‘groid’ myself, I would want to beat up the ‘honkey’ who spoke to me like that. But American slavery was not without benefits, and indeed, tyranny throughout history has played a positive role in embedding certain constructive character traits. Slavery in America instilled order and discipline in the Negroes. It gave them some degree of work ethic. People may not want to admit this because PC says slavery was all bad and there was nothing good about it, but in fact, even or especially oppression can, under certain conditions, have positive impact on a people. Indeed, so many of the positive virtues and values that we admire in Europe, Asia, and Near East were the result of oppression and tyranny. Japan and China were very repressive social orders. If you didn’t bow properly, a samurai could chop off your head like in the TV series SHOGUN. If Chinese got of line, the emperor or the central authority routinely ordered troops to squash countless peoples to send a clear message. In GOOD EARTH, the military shoots looting ‘bandits’. In DOCTOR ZHIVAGO, the communists maintain order by ruthless policies against those who vandalize public property. European history had serfdom and other forms of repression under aristocratic rule. Much of British character was formed by ruthless discipline & harsh punishment just like Athens democracy was founded on slavery. In order for gentlemen to be free to pursue truth and knowledge, there had to be social order, and that meant making sure that the masses respected authority, like tipping their hats and saying "aye, guv’nor". Such systems were created and maintained by the Governing Hymn of Tiger Rulers of the Leviathan. If the peons didn’t obey, they could be shot or run through with a saber. In Great Britain, criminals were routinely gathered up and hung without mercy. And if a British sailor didn’t obey, he could be whipped horribly like in MUTINY ON THE BOUNTY. We look back on all that stuff and see it as pretty awful, and yes, it was. But they also led to development and instillation of culture of discipline, order, cohesion, and cooperation. The means were repressive, even inhuman, by today’s standards, and it’s a good thing we don’t treat people like that anymore... though if the social order frays and falls apart all over the world from neo-barbarism, a new order will have to be created by the same brutal means. (The problem with democracy is that politicians must pander to the People for votes, and that means the moral failings of the masses can never be properly addressed. When Jimmy Carter courageously touched upon the issue of ‘malaise’, he was roundly attacked by the system for giving offense to potential voters. Also, certain groups are especially protected by PC from moral admonishment, and this is especially problematic IF they happen to cause the most troubles in the US. So, while Hillary could attack the ‘Deplorables’ and while Trump dumped on ‘Muslim terrorists’, no one says anything about the three most destructive groups in the US: Jews, blacks, and Homos. Jews rob us financially, blacks destroy neighborhoods, and homo spread degeneracy.) Despite tyrannical means, the Old Order nevertheless instilled positive habits and virtues in many individuals. It’s like the boot-camp training does some good to the ne’er-do-wells in STRIPES with Bill Murray. It’s like the scum-of-the-earth in DIRTY DOZEN finds a measure of dignity as virtual soldier-slaves sent on a near-suicide mission. So, it’s ridiculous to caricature the black American experience as nothing but terror and oppression. Even though there were horror stories like families being divided and sold, most black American slave families were kept intact, and there were decent slave-owners who treated slaves like an extended family EVEN THOUGH, of course, there was a clear distinction between master and slave. If anything, American slavery replenished itself by emphasis on family and procreation, unlike in Brazil where most of the slaves were male, therefore necessitating the importation of ever new batches of slaves. Contra 12 YEARS A SLAVE, most slave-owners were not sadistic psychopaths but people like you or me who inherited an unjust institution and made the best of it. Given the nature of slavery, the slaves could suffer horribly under a bad master, but there were good masters too, like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. In ROOTS, we even have Father Brady as a slave-master, and he’s not so bad. He did sell Kizzy, but he felt compelled to because she helped a slave boy escape.

Also, we have to keep in mind that, even though slavery was unjust, white fears of blacks was justifiable. Naturally, any master lives in some fear of the slave population. Spartans certainly feared the helots, and the samurai caste made sure the Japanese peasantry dared not dream of rebellion. But it was especially troublesome with blacks because they are stronger, tougher, and more aggressive than whites. Indeed, THAT FACT had been why whites brought blacks to the New World. Whites noticed blacks are bigger and hardier than, say, the American Indians. Also, blacks had immunity to white man’s diseases whereas too many Indians dropped like flies upon coming in contact with whites. Now, imagine you’re a slave master, and there are guys like Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis, Mr. T, Radio Raheem, Apollo Creed, Shaq, William the Refrigerator Perry, and etc. working in the field. A cotton-picking ‘dream team’. You know and they know and they know that you know that they know that you know that they can whup your ass and the asses of all the white folks in town. If a bunch of beagles were to enslave a bunch of pitbulls, they will have to send a stern message to pitbulls to OBEY... or else the pitbulls will maul the beagles and show who’s really boss. It’s like CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES. Once the apes realize they can rise up and beat up humans, it’s some bad shit.

So, even though most white masters tried to be good Christian folks and treat blacks relatively humanely, there was always the fear of the natural tendency among blacks to feel, "Look at that wussy-ass massuh and his sons and cousins. I could whup their ass and hump all their women." Imagine George Hee-Hawley or CucKen Burns as a slave-master over the likes of Joe Frazier, Richard Dent, O.J. Simpson, Jim Brown, and George Foreman(before he turned rather nice with a bald head and hamburger-makers). The Negro slaves would have thought, "Man, why that wussy ass faggoty dweeby white mothafuc*a be telling me to pick cotton and watermelons? I could snap his pussy-ass neck like a toothpick and hump all his womenfolk like them nasty mofos in THE BIRTH OF A NATION and shit", and the Massuh Hee-Hawley or Burns would have come to realize, "Yikes, look at the muscles on them groids. If they ever get to acting uppity, they will rise up and kick my ass to the moon, from where I will be watching them through a telescope humping all the white womenfolk." Because of real racial differences, black-white relations were bound to be fraught with serious problems. When the most civilized and advanced people enslaved the most backward, savage, and aggressive race, there was very little chance of peaceful resolution. Chua places all the blame on slavery and violence, but slavery existed in Africa for 10,000s of years. It lasted in China longer than in Europe. Also, even though whites did use violence against blacks, the number of black deaths at the hands of whites was minimal compared to far greater violence in other parts of the world. Chinese killed more people in suppressing a single rebellion than all the blacks killed by whites in the America.

Also, if brutality and violence universally prevent the rise of a people, how does one account for certain groups, especially Igbos, succeeding in Nigeria when Nigerian history has been far bloodier than that of Black America? And how did China that suffered a century and half of bloodbaths from dynastic decline to imperialism to world war to Maoism suddenly make a turn around and build their nation? It’d be no exaggeration to say over a 100 million Chinese died unnaturally in the transition from Old Order to the New Order. And yet, Chua would have us believe that American violence against blacks was SO especially brutal that blacks couldn’t make progress. In fact, the Black American Experience was nothing compared to what happened to the natives of Latin America where diseases wiped out 55 million out of 60 million and where the rest were reduced to slavery or penury. And yet, even browns in Latin America aren’t as crazy as blacks in the US or black Africa. Chua can’t be this ignorant. As with Russia and Jews, I think she’s being willfully naive to cover her tracks from the PC police. (Or the sentimental iconography of Wise Jews and Noble Negroes enforced by PC overrides Chua’s rational faculties as emotions easily trump reason even among the smartest people.) After all, Jews and blacks, along with homos, are put on the pedestal as holy peoples in the West. Therefore, any criticism of Jews must be counter-balanced with profuse sympathy for Jewish victim-hood. So, before discussing Jewish economic looting of Russia, let’s not forget the pogroms against Jews(while failing to mention the far greater Jewish Bolshevik terror against Christian Slavs). And if Chua notices that African immigrants are doing better than American blacks in general, let’s pretend the backwardness of American blacks in education and enterprise is ENTIRELY the fault of Evil Whitey.

More likely, the real decline of black American values and culture owe to events that unfolded in the 1960s. With newly gained freedoms, blacks seemed to face a future of promise. But instead, things spiraled out of control for so many blacks. Because of their innate nature forged by 100,000s of years of evolution in Africa — a nature that had been restrained by white ‘racist’ power prior to the 60s — , blacks left to their own devices tend to regress and revert to savagery. Granted, this is true of ALL races. Just like kids left unattended will become ill-mannered out-of-control brats imitating morons on TV, humans left to their devices will turn into barbarians or savages. Look at the state of white Chav Britain, the ‘white trash’ culture in the US, and neo-barbarian idiocy of post-communist Russians who drink and fight too much. But this is even more problematic among blacks because they are naturally wilder, more aggressive, and more funky-ass ugabugaic than other races. It was especially problematic in the 1960s because Blacks gained full freedom at a time of youth rebellion, social libertine-ism, and hedonism. Emboldened by Civil Rights movement, radical politics, drugs, and wild music, blacks just went crazy beginning in the 1960s, and now their cultures mainly consists of foul-mouthed nursery rhymes of rap and ‘twerking’ as a dance form. It didn’t have to be this way, but it was all too likely because black nature, fueled by unfettered freedom, tends to favor the Jive than the Strive. It was made all the worse because blacks are tougher than other races and know it. It’s one thing to hate whitey for past oppression, but it’s quite another to feel contempt for whitey as ‘faggoty-ass’ weaklings. It was the contempt for white weakness than hate for white power that made blacks stop looking up to the White Model of progress, especially since libertine whites seemed to emulate all the jungle boogie-woogie wildness of Negroes.
This is New Britain. White People worship Afro-Savagery and welcome the transformation of Anglo-Saxon nation to Junglo-Saxon nation. Black guys see white guys as wussy cucks, white girls got jungle fever, and white boys worship Black Males as superior men.
If most blacks were like Emmanuel Lewis or Gary Coleman, they might have respected the Great White Man and try to emulate him. Sure, they might have thought, "You know, the white man has been bigoted and called us ‘nigger’, BUT, they are giving us a chance, and we should take it because they are a masterful race." But because blacks soon realized they could easily beat up white folks, they lost respect for the whitey. Given black nature, they tend to judge value by intensity, volume, vibrancy, and explosiveness. Black soul isn’t centered in the mind or heart but in the butts, dongs, fists, and vocal chords.
As a result, all the moral capital that blacks had accrued over the years were thrown to the winds as blackness came to be defined by funky-ass boogie-oogie, jive-ass punk-ass mofo neo-savagery. Now, consider Booker T. Washington’s UP FROM SLAVERY. He wrote something like, "Sure slavery was wrong, and it was terrible for the white man to make us pick all that cotton and watermelon. BUT we black folks done gained much honor, pride, skills, and habits through such toil. Though slavery was a shameful institution, there was no shame in black folks having worked hard and proven their worth as toilers of the earth and builders." Booker T. Washington wasn’t a jive-ass fool like that eldritch-energy-sensitive Ta Nehisi Coates(aka The Nasty Coates) whose logic goes, "Whitey, you done broke black bodies long ago, so gibs me dis, gibs me dat, gibs me, gibs, gibs me!!"
Booker T. Washington, a righteous Negro
The Nasty Coates, a Catfish-headed 'groid' whose shtick be like the Mofo Plant in LITTLE SHOP OF HORRORS that done say 'Feed me, Seymour, Feed me all night long."  From Freed to Feed.
Coates is just a free-loading moron, a pet monkey that the self-righteous-supremacist white & Jewish Liberal folks keep around as their Angry-Black-Laureate to burnish their ‘progressive’ credentials of lending an ear to black concerns. White Liberals prefer him because, for all his hissy piss-ant bitching, he looks like Gary Coleman or a black turtle without a shell. In contrast, Booker T. Washington had a far more powerful message. Instead of bitching about how the "whitey owe me and gots to gimme free stuff, sheeeeeeiiit", Washington’s view was that blacks have gained much honor as slaves and toilers of the field in the South after the Civil War. Through pain and injustice, blacks earned something in America: Dignity as people of work and family, and that this must be the seed of future advancement and the fire of future black industry and productivity. People like Washington wanted blacks to build on the culture of work, whereas people like Coates feel that all future blacks should rest on the laurel of their ancestors who did the heavy lifting and leech off whitey as owing free stuff to blacks for all eternity. Washington’s idea was that blacks, instead of asking for free stuff and acting the fool, should take pride in the fact that blacks had done much even as slaves, learn to revere work, and instill virtues of diligence & commitment as the essence of the black American character. And this respect for work and family more-or-less held up to the early 1960s. And that is why so many well-meaning white Liberals and white Conservatives in both Democratic and Republican Party thought the black experiment might work with the end of discrimination. After all, despite problems of crime and decay, the core institutions of family and respect for work held sway among blacks until the 60s. But what did blacks do with freedom when they finally got it with the Civil Rights Movement? They went on a rampage and robbed, looted, raped, and murdered. And then, Great Society came up with the insane idea of rewarding black teens for having kids out of wedlock. And pop culture became saturated with glamorization of wild sex, drugs, and youth stupidity. But Chua overlooks all such factors in THE TRIPLE PACKAGE. The failures of blacks are blamed entirely on whites.

Now, even if blacks had gained full equality under less decadent times, their eventual degeneration into savagery might have been inevitable in the long run. Consider the much-revered MLK. He put on noble-seeming Nice Negro show. He dressed and acted like a bourgeois-black. He seemed to impart middle class values to his brethren and sistren. But the real MLK was a wild-ass mofo. And I’m not talking about a fling here and there, which might be expected among famous men. Rather, he was a total degenerate savage behind closed doors. He acted crazier than a gorilla on crack. So, even the man who epitomized the highest aspirations of the black community was, in fact, hardly different in personal life from a rapper thug moron. In his time, due to socio-moral norms and pressures, MLK had to keep his wild side under wraps, but the savage ‘groidean’ side of him always threatened to bubble up to the surface.

Anyway, despite Chua’s conceit as an independent thinker, she sticks to the Narrative that exonerates Jews and blacks of all their moral failures and betrayals by invoking tiresome tropes of ‘Poor Jews attacked in pogroms’ and ‘Poor blacks oppressed by Whitey’. Chua refuse to ponder the reality of Jewish brutality, violence, and avarice. Jewish communists pioneered a new kind of state terror though, to be sure, they did it alongside radical Latvians, Poles, Russians, and others in the USSR. And Jewish finance capitalists were pathologically rapacious and all the more dangerous because they cooked up ever more creative schemes to fool and rob people. Just how did Bernie Madoff get away with so much awfulness for so long? Chua mentions David Duke to discredit any theory of Jewish domination and power, and it’s true enough that Duke has been associated with terrible organizations and said terrible things. But on the matter of Jewish power, he speaks more truth than Chua and all of media/academia combined.

One reason why blacks were miffed with Jews owes to black athletes and performers having been ripped off by Jews who exploited Negro innumeracy. (Granted, black nature being what it is, blacks spent all the money the minute it landed on their palms.) And what Jews did to Russia in the 1990s was nothing less than economic blitzkrieg(or Witzkrieg) that ruined tens of millions in a nation reduced to an open festering wound. Jews who pushed ‘privatization’ really pushed fire-sale ‘piratization’ and exploited the calamity all around. Many people died as a result, and Russia should erect a monument to the victims of the Jewish Rape of Russia. And speaking of pogroms, what was Nakba but a Zionist mass-pogrom against Palestinians?
As for blacks, the racial violence went both ways after the Civil War. Whites used terror to keep blacks down, but blacks, being naturally tougher and more aggressive, were prone to criminality and transgression. Even though black crime spiraled out of control in the 1960s, it had long been a festering problem(that had been kept in check by white repression and threats of retributive violence). So, it’s not like whites were always targeting innocent blacks, an insipid fantasy that still informs our PC narrative, which is why so many were eager to believe that angel-faced Trayvon Martin, a mere child ‘armed with only Skittles’, was murdered in cold-blood by some White Southerner when, in fact, he was a thug killed in self-defense by a Latino-mestizo-mulatto-American who was being beaten up. Many of the blacks who were attacked and killed(even lynched) in the Bad Ole Days were rapists and murderers. And then, following Emancipation 2.0 in the 1960s, black crime exploded all across America. Blacks didn’t just prey on ‘racist’ whites but on Jews, Mexicans, Asians, and womenfolk of all races. And black-on-black crime got out of control. But Chua plays the MEMENTO game and totally ignores all that has happened since the 1960s. She won’t mention the Rampage.
South African farm murders and torture, a horror conveniently overlooked by Chua whose globo-compassion conforms to the agenda of the Jewish Supremacist Power. This explains why Palestinian victims of Zionist Imperialists and white victims of black revanchists go unmentioned in Chua's narratives.
Chua also blames the backwardness of blacks in South Africa on white oppression, conveniently overlooking the fact that (1) blacks in black-ruled African nations fared worse(just like Chinese under Mao suffered more cruelty than Chinese under British rule in Hong Kong and Singapore) (2) even though blacks in South Africa got less than whites, they got more than blacks in black-ruled nations (3) blacks in black-ruled nations migrated to white-ruled South Africa even during Apartheid years for work (4) blacks in South Africa willfully sabotaged public education as a protest against white rule. When it comes to blacks, Chua repeats the same baloney over and over. If anything is wrong with blacky, just blame whitey.

Chua trembles before Taboo of the Holy Three: Jews, Negroes, and Homos, though less of Homos for now. When she deals with any other group, she can be pretty fair-minded, empathetic, and see both sides, and this includes her own folks, the Chinese. But when it comes to Jews and Negroes, everything is seen through the prism of victimology. This is rather odd since she doesn’t apply the same rule to her own people. Jews are all about Jews and blacks are all about Jews, but Chua can be more critical about the Chinese than of Jews and blacks. It’s almost as if she has imbibed ‘white guilt’ and turned it into ‘yellow guilt’. Is it the Imperialism of Guilt? The projection of Western Cult of Guilt on the rest of the world? There was a time when non-whites were made to respect and honor White Power. Now, it’s like non-whites all over the world must feel guilty about what white folks feel guilty about. So, if whites feel guilty about Jews and Negroes, White Guilt is universalized as the True Guilt for all peoples, even those who had NOTHING to do with Shoah or black slavery. So, if Palestinians hate Zionists because of what was done to them, they are treated like Nazis even though their reason for hating Jews is entirely different from the Nazi rationale.

Because the current White Narrative is "Jews and Negroes are holy, and we must weep for them, honor them, and apologize to them" and because East Asians are imitative of everything White/Western, they seem to feel obligated to follow suit and favor Jews and Negroes(and homos) above all others, including themselves. Indeed, when Chua talks about Chinese, she is not a chest-thumping Sino-centrist who only sticks up for her kind. She can be rather even-handed and see both sides. So, as a Chinese, she can express anger about violence done to Chinese minorities in Southeast Asia. But at the same time, she can understand why some of the natives might feel resentful and angry. She details how the Chinese can be clannish and collude with corrupt native elites. She details how the Chinese can be insensitive and collaborate with foreign imperialists against the local population. Indeed, the best chapter in her book concerns the role of the Chinese economic minority in South Vietnam that collaborated with the US ‘imperialists’ to the ire of the Vietnamese who felt both exploited by the greedy Chinese and occupied by arrogant Americans. So, Chua is capable of seeing both sides of the story. Chinese have been victimized by other Asians, but Chinese have done things that understandably upset the locals. She doesn’t just wave the Chinese Flag and say "Chinee so good, Viet no good." And Chua is like this with most peoples EXCEPT Jews and blacks. With Jews and blacks(at least Black Americans and blacks in South Africa), she sanctifies their victimhood and ignores their villainhood. Reading POLITICAL TRIBES, you’d never know there is a people called Palestinians who are still living under Occupation. Chua turns into Princess Chicken on the Tribe and Da Hood.
Boat People tragedy that was largely about Chinese ethnics fleeing Communist-Nationalist Vietnam in revenge mode against collaborators of the US empire
THE WARRIORS. A tribal vision of NY that didn't come to pass as Jews and Yuppies got their act together and used massive incarceration, gentrification, and immigration-tide to suppress the epidemic of black crime.
THE GODFATHER, the movie that prophesied the Decline of Wasp power and rise of Ethnic Dominance. Of course, it wasn't the Italians but the JEWS who became the New Master Class of America. Just like Kay married into the powerful Corleone Clan, Amy Chua married into the Powerful Jewish Elite Class. In the movie, Michael triumphs over Hyman Roth, but in reality, the Hyman Roths inherited the World.... just like, despite ROCKY movies showing an Italian-American heavyweight champion, blacks became the dominant figures in American Sports. In THE GODFATHER movies, Kay has moral doubts about the Corleones and ultimately leaves Michael(and even kills his kid through abortion). But in the novel, Kay is excited with the criminality of the Corleone clan. She has a cheerleader personality just like Chua who just can't get enough of  the super-duper hyper-power of the Jews.
Now, some observations about Chua’s Diatribes, big and small... but before, we get into the discussion, it’s important to remind ourselves that not all identities and tribes are of the same meaning and caliber. Some are real, deep, and substantive whereas others are fickle and faddish. To clarify things...

I think the term ‘Inheritance’ is useful. ‘Identity’ tends to connote self-identification, often according to whims of fashion. Inheritance has deeper meaning. It goes back to ancestors and tradition. It is not plucked out of the air like 50 genders.

Also, we mustn’t confuse Interest with Identity or Inheritance. A labor union is about shared interests, not identity, let alone Inheritance.
A black worker and white worker can have shared interests. But their inheritances are different in race, history, memory, and narrative.
Another example of Shared Interests but different Inheritances is tacit alliance between Saudi Arabia and Israel. They are different in ethnicity & religion BUT have shared interest in opposing Iran and Syria. Interests change constantly according to shifting alliances based on Realpolitik. In contrast, Inheritance is about Real Ethnicity.

Another distinction should be made between Inheritance and Ideology. Ideology is a belief system. Christianity & Communist are Ideologies or belief systems. One can be African, European, or Asian AND be a Christian or Communist. Ideology is not an Identity or Inheritance.
In terms of ideology, a Russian communist has more in common with a Chinese communist. But in terms of Inheritance, a Russian communist has more in common with a Russian rightist and traditionalist than with a Chinese Communist. In the end, Inheritance trumps Ideology. The Sino-Soviet rift was decisive. And the Communist Bloc broke apart into independent nation-states. China and Russia are now allies but as separate sovereign states. Different Inheritances with common Interests.

Vietnamese communists and Chinese communists were once united by interest and ideology — anti-Americanism and communism — but eventually broke along lines of Inheritance. In due time, China and Vietnam came to blows despite both being communist. Commie Vietnamese and commie Cambodians fought over disputes of Inheritance.

Inheritance is about deep ancestry, history, & narrative.
Identity can be based on Inheritance but can also mean self-identification.
Ideology is about a person’s or society’s spiritual or philosophical worldview.
Interest is about pragmatic strategy to achieve short-term goals.

Inheritance is rich & meaningful because it has deep basis in ethnicity, history, & hopefully territory. Its also self-sustaining. Jews on an island can survive forever as Jews by having children who will also have Jewish children ad infinitum who keep alive the fire of Jewish memory and history.
But 'gay' or 'feminist' is a weak identity & not self-sustaining. Homos or women alone on island can't reproduce on their own. Also, almost all homos are born of straight parents. We can't predict when and where the next homo kid will be born. In contrast, Jewish parents can always give birth to Jewish kids, Irish parents can always give birth to Irish kids, and Japanese parents can always give birth to Japanese kids. There is a continuity with Ethnic Inheritance whereas one can never tell which parents might give birth to homos. Also, there are homos all over the world, so there is no single homo identity. There are Anglo Homos, Arab Homos, Black Homos, Chinese Homos, Hindu Homos, Jainist Homos, etc.

Inheritance is autonomous & self-sustaining. If the Irish only remained in Ireland, they could perpetuate themselves forever by producing descendants who also hand down Irish tradition & memory. But imagine an island of lesbians only. It’d be biologically incomplete identity. It will fade away as the women grow old and die out. This is why so many faddish identities are ultimately useless. They are not autonomous, complete, continuous, and self-sustaining. At best, they are contiguous; otherwise, mostly peripheral or trivial.

Irish people on a small island may not constitute a big community or a great power, but it is complete. It has the essential components of a self-sustaining and whole community. It has the unity of Irish men and Irish women to have Irish children on their homeland to carry on their Irish tradition and memory. Even if shut from the rest of the world, they can survive indefinitely. That is wholeness.
Deportation of German ethnics from Slavic Lands after WWII
1. Chua mentions Japan and Germany as two ethnically homogeneous nations that emerged from the ashes of World War II. While she concedes Japan was always almost entirely Japanese, she writes that German homogeneity owed to the extermination of ‘Non-Aryans’. This is a total lie. The fact is the geo-political boundaries resulting from World War I made Germany a very homogeneous population. Germany during Weimar and National Socialist periods were almost entirely German. German Jews had disproportionate influence in finance, media, law, medicine, and culture, but they comprised a small percentage of the population. Even if Germans during the National Socialist era had left Jews alone, Germany would have been overwhelmingly German. Germans did carry out extermination campaigns, but they happened OUTSIDE Germany in places like Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia. It had nothing to do with German demographics within Germany. If Hitler had not invaded other nations and just presided over Germany, he would been a leader of a mostly homogeneous ethno-state.

Another reason as to why Germany was ethnically homogeneous after World War II owed to anti-German pogroms and mass expulsions by Eastern Europeans(mostly Slavs) who were hellbent on revenge. Ost-Germans were forcibly uprooted and pushed into Germany. Czechs were especially brutal in expelling just about every last German on their territory. While Germans committed great crimes in the war, most of the horror happened outside Germany. And after the war, German ethnics outside Germany were victimized, brutalized, gang-raped, and pushed into Germany. Now, given German actions during the war, the vengeful violence meted out by non-Germans was partly understandable and even justifiable. But right or wrong, the effect was millions of Germans-on-non-German being relocated to (a considerably shrunken) Germany.
But Chua, to score points with her Jewish masters, would have us believe that Germany was a multi-ethnic nation BEFORE the Evil Nazis exterminated the minorities. Vilifying Germans is always a sure way to win favors from Jewish masters. But in reality, German ethnics in non-German-lands got pushed into Germany, just like Japanese colonizers and China and Korea got shipped back to Japan after the war.

If there was a Germanic-ruled political entity that was multi-ethnic, it was the Austro-Hungarian Empire in which Austro-Germans made up 20 to 25% of the overall population. And it vanished almost overnight due to the debacle of World War I, after which the non-Germanic peoples in the empire demanded their own sovereign nations.

2. Chua's anti-Germanic bias rears its ugly head once again in her discussion of South Africa. Bashing 'Aryans' is her bread & butter or noodles & dog-meat to gain favor with Jews. In her discussion of global economics, she argues that the Rule of Market-Dominant-Minorities doesn't apply to White Dominance in apartheid South Africa because there were discriminatory measures that favored whites over blacks. Now, Chua is correct to an extent. Apartheid did favor whites over blacks in positions of power and privilege. But then, the same could be said for Jews in Israel. After all, Zionists gained power over Arabs through mass ethnic cleansing(Nakba), allow only Jewish immigration(while barring Right of Return to expelled Palestinians), and implement policies in Israel and especially in West Bank that favor Jews over Arabs. That being so, why doesn't Chua mention Israel alongside white-ruled South Africa as a case where the relative economic success of a certain group may be dubious due to issues of state violence and repression?
Furthermore, Chua is ignoring the fact that Jews had certain economic ‘privileges’ in Europe because only they were allowed to practice usury, a kind of mixed blessing as it was good for profits but bad for prestige. A kind of financial apartheid held back development of gentile capital in Europe and Middle East because of laws against gentile usury. So, Jews gained monopoly in money-lending. Granted, this 'privilege' wasn't granted to Jews as a favor. Rather, because usury was considered dirty and sinful, Christian elites decided that only 'dirty Jews' should deal with 'dirty money'. Still, this goes to show that Jewish success wasn't purely meritocratic but monopolistic.

Another thing to consider is that ethnic/racial favoritism does NOT ensure success and development for a people or nation. While it's true that whites were favored by the Apartheid state, it is no less true that most whites did a very good job of developing and maintaining a modern state, something black-ruled African nations were incapable of doing. So, white success in South Africa cannot be ascribed simply to ‘racism’. After all, black-ruled nations also played favorites along tribal lines. Usually, one tribe became dominant and took up most government positions(often through nepotism) and doled out most funds & loans to their kind. But did it lead to the rise of a modern economy? While the favored tribe did better than unfavored tribes, the nation as a whole nevertheless failed because even the favored tribe was utterly incompetent and corrupt. Idi Amin expelled the Asian Indians(who'd been favored by the British Imperialists) from Uganda and favored his own tribe, but what did his favored people do for Ugandan economy? Those around Mugabe did pretty well for themselves in Zimbabwe, but the nation as a whole just sunk deeper into economic morass. Zimbabwe terrorized and expelled most white farmers and favored blacks. So, what did blacks do for the Zimbabwean economy? And so on and so on.

If the success of white South Africa under Apartheid owed purely to State Policy, then the implication is any black-ruled African nation should have achieved comparable level of development by favoring a certain Tribe. If Chua's logic is "White success in South Africa owed to racial favoritism and racial discrimination", then black-ruled African nations should have resulted in "Tribe A's success in Black-ruled African nation owes to Tribal Favoritism and discrimination." She doesn’t question why Favored Whites in South Africa achieved so much more than Favored Black Tribes in Black-ruled African nations. The fact is black African nations were intensely tribal, and one Tribe usually dominated over other tribes, invariably with brutal violence that far exceeded anything whites did against blacks in South Africa. And yet, black African nations were not only mired in poverty but got regressively worse in the 80s and 90s. Indeed, even the living standards of the ruling and favored Tribe got worse and worse.

Chua pushes a fallacy. She argues, Because of pro-white preference in South Africa, white success owed solely or mainly to statist preference. But if statist preference for a certain race, tribe, or group ensures economic progress & development, it sure hasn't worked in much of the world. Black-ruled African nations that favored one tribe above others utterly failed in economic development.

In truth, while both whites and Jews were favored by the state in, respectively, South Africa and Israel, they were innately more talented than the neighboring populations. Indeed, consider the degradation of South African education, utilities, and institutions at every level since the end of Apartheid and expansion of black control. Furthermore, the main reason for black progress after Apartheid owed almost entirely to cronyism, corruption, and 'affirmative action'. While Apartheid South Africa did favor whites over blacks, it hardly violated rules of meritocracy because white were genetically and culturally better qualified to develop and manage a modern nation. Europeans Europeanize, Africans Africanize. South Africa is currently in the process of ‘de-colonizing’ and re-tribalizing and re-junglizing the mind. It doesn’t occur to moronic blacks that real science isn’t about cultural biases. The laws of chemistry and physics are beyond identity. But maybe black ‘scientists’ will one day unearth vibranium.

Currently, whites in South Africa face possible genocide, but Chua mentions nothing of this as her Politicized Compassion doesn’t allow it. Among Jewish-controlled Western/European nations, there is no concern for the lives of whites in South Africa. When Empires crumbled after WWII, European nations felt brotherhood of blood with their ethnic colonials abroad and took them back. Britain took back Anglos in India, Africa, and Malaysia(even though some of those colonials had been there for generations). French took back French colonials in Algeria and Indochina. Belgium took back Belgians in the Congo. And in Asia, Japan took back Japanese colonials in Manchuria, Korea, and Taiwan. It seemed the natural and right thing to do. But no white/western nation shows much concern for whites stranded in South Africa and faced with genocide at the hands of bloodcurdling blacks.

Why the silence in white nations for their white brethren in South Africa? Because Jews came to dominate the West and subverted the notion of white identity, white unity, and white solidarity. If white peoples in Western nations show concern for whites in South Africa, it could signal the resurgence of white-for-white sympathy like the kind of tribal sympathy among Jews. (Also, whites fleeing from South Africa would mean [1]Diversity has failed and [2]whites should fear becoming a minority.) American Jews care for Russian Jews who care for Polish Jews who care for German Jews who care for French Jews who care for British Jews who care for Latin American Jews, and etc. Jewish loyalty is to the Empire of Judea than to the gentile-majority nations in which they reside. Jews know that inner-group sympathy and identity are the source of their pride and power. Therefore, Jews seek to weaken and undermine racial solidarity and intra-sympathy among whites as a potential World Eurwy that might compete with World Jewry. So, Jews vilify Russia to set white Americans against white Russians even though the main force meddling in the politics of both US and Russia is Judea. Because Europeans caring for endangered White Afrikaners might ignite a renewed sense of Mutual White Solidarity, Jews effectively order their shabbos goy politicians to just shut up about Whites in South Africa. If anything, globalist elites(totally owned and controlled by George Soroses of the World) not only insist that future Europe must be non-white but suggest that European Past was also non-white. So, BBC runs a series about the Trojan War where Achilles is a black guy. Historical programs about past British history features blacks in white roles. The past is Retro-Afro-fitted to create the impression that UK and Europe exist only to be colonized by Diversity.

So, white Britons should feel closer to blacks, Muslims, and non-whites than with fellow whites at home or abroad. ‘Diversity Is Our Strength’ has become such a hypnotic catechism that the only way white people can justify their worth is by chanting DIOS, DIOS, DIOS. If a white person says he cares for Jews, homos, or blacks, he is a very good person. If he says he cares for Muslims, Asians, and Arabs, he is a good person. But if he says he cares about other white people, he is a terrible person who must be denounced like Goldstein in 1984. Indeed, whites caring for whites is deemed 'racist', the worst of all sins, even though whites are told they must support Jews who stick together in Israel and around the world.
But then, such hypocrisy is apparently appealing to Chua who sold her soul to Judea. Though born of Chinese parents, all of whose ancestors were probably Chinese for 1000 of years, Chua offered her womb to a Jew and gave birth to Zionist-Jewish kids. She is no longer connected to Chinese lineage and instead serves as the sexual-and-ideological concubine of World Jewry. She serves Jewish supremacism to degrade and attack White identity and interests. As someone who rejected and betrayed her own kind(the Chinese) and sucks up to the Ultimate Power(of Jews), why would Chua care about white people? She has the cheerleader personality that roots for the Power, which currently happens to be Jewish. (If Jews were poor whereas Iranian-Americans were rich and powerful, Chua would likely have had kids for Iranian Tribal Power.)

But then, another reason why people like Chua demean white identity and unity is, paradoxically enough, because they prefer white peoples/nations to their own. These Chinese prefer to live with whites, live under white rule, have kids with whites or Jews, and send their kids to schools full of whites/Jews than with Chinese kids. Chua's main loyalty is really to Power. As an intellectual cheerleader of Hyper-Power, she wants to serve Jewish supremacism. She has no sense of ethno-center as her middle-kingdom is the biggest power in the world, which happens to be Judea. Despite Jewish media's smearing of China as Dragon about to swallow the world, Chua had kids for a Jewish-Zionist man, and if Judea declares war on China, she will likely chant USA USA and call for the mass killing of 'chinks'. Now, if the US were ruled by white gentiles, Chua might be cheering for Anglo-America(like Madame Chiang Kai-Shek did). But because the main power went from WASPS to BUGS(busy urban globalist semites), she's totally with the Jews. When push comes to shove, Chua is just a mistress to Power. She puts out sexually, politically, ideologically, and imperially to the Hegemon. And since that Top Power happens to see White Identity as the worst thing, Chua goes about demeaning Germans and South Africans. (When she says ‘racism is the worst thing’, she’s not talking of Zionist supremacism but white identity and interests.) She lies that Germany is homogeneous due to extermination of non-Aryans. She lies that the success of whites in Apartheid South Africa owed mainly to racial discrimination. (If South Africa had measured success on meritocracy alone, it would still have been overwhelmingly white-dominated. Most of black progress since of end of Apartheid resulted from Affirmative Action and Cronyism. Likewise, even though the Irish Political Machine favored the Irish over blacks in America, the Irish would still have bested blacks even under meritocracy. Today, blacks complain of police and fireman exams because whites tend to score higher.) By the way, South African policies under Apartheid also favored Jews who became fabulously rich as diamond merchants and financiers. Will Chua then argue that South African Jews owed their success mainly to Apartheid and also throw in the not-trivial-fact that Occupationist Israel was the main ally of Old South Africa? Of course not. Such smears only apply to white gentiles, especially those of Anglo or Germanic stock. Chua sticks to the PC Manual.

Even though it is true that the Old Order in South Africa favored whites over blacks, there can be no doubt that they did well because they were capable workers. The success of Germanic populations in Germany, Scandinavia, the US, and Latin America is a testament to their 'national/cultural character', especially in contrast to Latin whites. Latin American nations favored Latin whites over brown natives, but why were Latin whites less capable than Germanic or Anglo populations around the world? Germanic peoples have also done better than Latin whites in Latin America. So, there is something of genuine worth in Germanic habits and values, but Chua overlooks them to please her Jewish masters who push the ludicrous Wakanda Thesis that Black Africa would be brimming with high-tech wonders and prosperity had it not been for European colonialism. Never mind that parts of Africa that came under direct white rule did better than ones that were hardly touched by European influence. Of course, the Wakanda Thesis would never be used on American Indians, Australian Aborigines, and Palestinians. Can you imagine Hollywood making a movie that says American Indians would be moving about in flying cars and sending Tepees to Mars if not white conquest? Or that Australian Aborigines would have superduper high-tech society if not for Anglo-invasion? Or that Palestine would be the most advanced part of the world had it not been for Zionist Nabka pogroms? Why do we have special fantasies about blacks? Why does Chua make special excuses for blacks when she isn't busy apologizing for Jewish Power? Has it ever occurred to Chua that Jews make a special case for blacks because (1) blacks are profitable to Jewish-controlled sports-and-music industries (2) blacks are most potent and effective weapons against white power because the Slavery Narrative paralyzes white pride and because black muscle advantage destroys the pride of white manhood?

3. From her writings, it is clear that Chua is NOT an opponent of imperialism and empire but a mere critic, or constructive critic at that. Her critical analysis isn’t to argue against empire in favor of national sovereignty but to formulate a better imperial strategy for Judea. She is a Courtesan of Empire. She’s like a non-Roman so enthralled with Roman Might that she chooses to be in Rome, marry Roman, have Roman kids, and spread Roman power all over the world. Since the US is ruled by Judea, that’s the power she serves. She was eager to attend the ultimate elite college(Harvard) and rub shoulders with the ‘best kind of people’ and then marry a Jew and serve Judea. She raised her kids as Zionists. She feels no sympathy for loser folks like Tibetans and Palestinians. She raised her kids to practice classical music for cultural prestige in the Empire. It’s one thing to genuinely appreciate Western classical music, but Chua wanted her kids to be ‘more western than western’ in sheer admiration of the Western Hegemony, now controlled by Jews. She shifted her allegiance from her Chinese father to her Jewish husband and his Jewish-Zionist-Globalist Tribe, but then, it’s a case of Like Father Like Daughter. Her father brought his kids to the US to serve the American Empire and Judea. Blind worship of power must run in the Chua Clan. A true patriot remains loyal to his or her own kind even if they are poor and weak. It’s like Jews maintained their ethno-centrism even when surrounded by much greater powers. Such mindset is sorely lacking in the Chua Clan who only seem to care about profits, prestige, and (service to)power. Her chapter on Russian Jewish oligarchs in WORLD ON FIRE seems less a condemnation of Jewish viciousness than a constructive criticism of how over-eager strategies can be counter-productive. There is no indication that Chua is pleased with Russian restoration of national sovereignty. As a cheerleader of the Power, she probably would have preferred Russia(and maybe China too) coming under the power of Judea. I’ll bet she’s one of those types who is pushing for Homomania(a Jewish proxy) in China.
Her chapter explains why Jewish supremacists ultimately failed in Russia by acting too hastily and greedily. Chua isn’t calling for anti-imperialism but a smarter imperialism. She worships the Hyper-Power of Judea-ruled US and wants to be on the sidelines. She wants to be its cheerleader but also offer coaching tips.

Her arguments in POLITICAL TRIBES aren’t directed against US imperialism per se but against its follies of conception and strategy. As Chua knows all too well, democracy works best in homogenous nations or at least nations with a commanding majority population, like Israel. (If anything, the existence of a sizable minority can have a unifying effect on the majority population. It is fear of blacks that unites many Southern white. And it is fear of Arabs in Israel that makes even leftist Jews side with rightist Jews to keep the lid on the Arab minority. If Israel were 100% Jewish, maybe there would be intra-Jewish conflicts pitting Ashkenazi Jews against Sephardic Jews, globalist Jews against nationalist Jews, and/or socialist Jews against capitalist Jews. What keeps the various Jewish communities together is the shared fear of Arabs/Palestinians. Likewise, it was Persian invasion that united Athens and Sparta in war, and it was Japanese invasion that even brought the CCP and KMT together.) In her chapter on Iraq in POLITICAL TRIBES, she doesn’t denounce the WMD lies or mention war crimes like Abu Grahib. Apparently, she feels that Judea-ruled US, as the only hyper-power, has some divine right to invade and intervene in any nation. Her only criticism is with tactics than with the template of the Jewish-controlled US as the rightful one-and-only superpower in the world.

While Chua is right about the problems of tribalism in Iraq, she fails to mention other crucial reasons as to why the US came to be so loathed. There is no mention of Abu Gharib or numerous other atrocities carried out by the US. No mention of torture and uses of terror by the US military. There is no discussion of how the US Occupation allowed the Iraqi Museum to be looted, almost certainly by criminal organizations hired by Jews. Those stolen objects are most likely stashed away in some vault in Israel. And there is no discussion of how Jewish Supremacist Tribalism was behind the Iraq War. And of course, Libya was War for Judea because Gadhafi was working on an independent currency for Africa based on gold. Also, there is no mention of the 100,000s of Iraqi women and children who may have perished due to Judea-imposed sanctions in the 1990s. Imagine if the US imposed such sanctions on Israel for its crimes of Nakba, theft of Golan Heights, military attacks on other nations, and Occupation of West Bank & apartheid policies; imagine if 100,000s of Jewish-Israeli women and children died as the result of the sanctions. World Jewry would surely have howled in outrage and called it the ‘Second Holocaust’, but it was perfectly okay for Jewish Madeline Albright to work with Billy Boy Clinton(a boomer shill of Judea) to engineer a sanctions policy that destroyed 100,000s of lives in Iraq. While Hussein was himself a bad guy for having killed 100,000s to suppress dissent and opposition, it was okay when the Judea-controlled US did much the same thing. (And of course, it was the US that goaded Iraq into invading Iran, setting off a war in which a million peopled died. But the US, that encouraged Iraq to invade Iran, later screamed ‘blood murder’ when Hussein decided to invade Kuwait.) What does all of this tell you? Chua is not an independent scholar. She is a cheerleader and fangirl, hardly different from Nikki Haley. She studied history and doles out advice in support of the Empire. She is a consultant to the Power. She is what Darrell Hamamoto calls the ‘Servitor of Empire’.

Chua is yet another example of how East Asians are essentially running dogs of Power. By genetics and culture, East Asians are prone to slavishly serving the Top Power.  (If Jews had a Prophetic tradition, Chinese had a Scholar tradition. Prophets have an uncompromising sense of truth and feel themselves to be the center of the world in service to their own people. In contrast, the main ambition of scholars is to pass exams and earn credentials to win approval and favors from whatever happens to be the most prestigious power.) So, even though Japanese had loyally served the militarist regime during WWII, once Uncle Sam became the New Shogun, the Japanese became total whores of the US. Chua is no different. Had she grown up in Mao’s China, she would have been a mindless Red Guard chanting slogans from the Little Red Book. But having grown up in the US where Jews rule, she chose to become the secretary of Hyman Roth. If Judea were to declare war on China, she would be like those American Indians who sided with whites against other Indian tribes. Just like South Koreans served as servile dogs of the US in destroying and raping Vietnam, Chua is a dutiful servant of the Judea-ruled American Empire. She is similar to Michelle Malkin in this regard but actually worse. Malkin may be a Filipino whore of the US, but her change in loyalty is clean and clear-cut. And sincere. She decided to become a Good Patriotic American who stands with the American People and for Rule of Law. It means Malkin feels a sense of bond with all Americans, rich, middle, and poor. In contrast, Chua feels no real loyalty to the US and most Americans who are turned into an abstraction called the ‘supergroup’. Her real allegiance is only to the POWER. And she knows Jewish Power rules the US. She knows Judea is the dominant empire in the world. US is merely a proxy, albeit the main proxy, of Judea. So, Chua’s loyalty to Judea leads to pretzel logic when it comes to her ‘ideology’. Sometimes, she seems to appreciate about America and its traditions, at least more than PC lunatics who want to tear everything down like Red Guards during the Cultural Revolution. But she is also for the ‘right’ of illegal aliens to invade and demand rights from the American people. She mentions her students who are of illegal parentage. It doesn’t bother Chua that non-white illegals get ‘affirmative action’ in college admissions. It doesn’t matter to her that illegal students take academic positions from bona-fide US citizens. Her main loyalty isn’t to fellow Americans but to globalism pushed by her Jewish Masters. Even though white people founded & built the US and even though the ONLY reason why people like Chua’s family decided to come to the America is because white founders and builders did a magnificent job, there is NO mention of any debt to White America. Like so many others, Chua bitches that Past America was discriminatory and ‘white supremacist’(though she would never call Israel ‘Jewish supremacist’ or Chinese history ‘Chinese supremacist’). But here’s the paradox. If the US had been ‘inclusive’ and ‘pro-diversity’ from the very beginning(as ‘progressives’ like Chua wish it had been), how would the US have turned out? Would it have been a nation that people like Chua’s family would have wanted to emigrate to? Imagine if the US population had become 10% white and 90% non-white(due to pro-diversity immigration policy) by 1900. Suppose white Americans were outnumbered by Africans, Turks, Hindus, Muslims, Arabs, Mexicans, Chinese, Burmese, Iranians, Afghanis, and etc. What kind of country would the US have been? It would have been as crappy as any white-minority Latin American nation or South Africa.

On some level, even Chua must know this(as, in one of her less PC observations, she admits white Americans, especially with rising prosperity after WWII, were more magnanimous precisely because they felt their political and cultural dominance to be secure). After all, Chua has pointed out that most Latin American nations have white minority elites and non-white majorities. And guess what, Latin America has been the great underachiever in contrast to far whiter North America of the US and Canada. Also, if Chua and her ilk detest whiteness so much, why did they decide to move to white-made and white-majority nations? Chua’s family would rather live in an Anglo-made nation(that once exploited Chinese railroad laborers) than move to China and be with their own kind. Chua would rather marry a white Jew and have white-Jewish kids than be with a Chinese guy with Ancient Chinese Secret.
It seems to me that the immigration preference of most non-whites is indeed closet-white-supremacist. If indeed, the US had banned Chua’s family from immigrating, what would have been the next choice? China? Taiwan? No, I’ll bet Chua’s family would have chosen Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or white Europe. Chua’s study of Asian societies revealed that non-Chinese Asians(especially in Southeast Asia) tend to be more brutal toward Chinese than white folks since end of WWII. There have been economic riots in which 10,000s of Chinese were raped, robbed, and/or murdered. Many more Chinese ethnics were massacred after the failed communist coup in Indonesia in 1965. If many Chinese were implicated in the Indonesian coup attempt, in the case of Vietnam the Chinese were mostly associated with collaboration with the French and then US imperialists. But when non-Chinese Asians treat Chinese minorities badly, overseas Chinese generally don’t want to move to China, their motherland. They don’t want to be with their own kind and prefer to immigration to Anglo-made nations and live as minorities of nicer white folks. Indeed, they don’t even want to go to Latin America even though the likes of Chua ‘celebrate’ diversity. If Chua loves Diversity so much that she will even side with non-white illegals over American citizens — the likes of Chua are committed to reducing whites to minority population in the US and Canada — , why don’t they just skedaddle to Latin America where whites are already a minority? Now, if Latin American nations are poorer, more corrupt, and more divided because non-whites outnumber whites, why would traditionally white-majority nations like US, Canada, and Australia be better off with more diversity and whites-becoming-minorities? What idiot really thinks France or UK will improve as a modern civilization by becoming more like racially diverse and mixed North Africa? And if the Diversity in North Africa and Latin America is so great, why do people there try to move to white Europe or whiter America?

Another thing that stands out about East Asian servitors-of-the-empire is their utter lack of ethno-agency. While all groups surrendered(and even betrayed) their identities of origin in the process of becoming Americans, the nature of the Bargain wasn’t so bad for three groups: Whites, Jews, and blacks. As America developed as an extension of European civilization, all white peoples who switched their loyalties to the US weren’t making that big a leap. (It’s like a Catholic becoming a Protestant is far less jarring than becoming a Muslim or Buddhist. It’s like an Orthodox Jew becoming a Reform Jew isn’t as ‘radical’ as becoming a Mormon or Jainist.) Anglo-Brits became Anglo-Americans with much continuity in language, values, and habits. And other Europeans who became Anglo-Americanized and spoke English were still participating in the Western historical and cultural pageant. Germans who forgot the German language and Swedes who forgot how to speak Swedish still remained a part of Western Civilization in the US. This was a bigger challenge for Eastern and Southern Europeans whose cultures and languages differed more from Anglo-civilization, but even they remained within the racial family of European-ness, Christian heritage, and shared myths and symbols(going back to the Greeks and Romans). They were losing their local-‘tribal’ white identities to take on a broader white/western identity, which was what Americanism essentially was until recent times.
As for Jews, they didn’t come to merely assimilate but to take over the elite institutions of power, gain control of the Narrative, alter the icons & symbols, and make white gentiles(and other gentiles) serve Jewish interests and identity(especially in relation to Israel). As they became the New Elites of America that was made to obey and serve Judea, their arrival to the US was also worth it.
As for blacks, despite the tragic side of their history, they came to dominate certain areas of Americanism in popular music and sports. They became stars, divas, and demigods. White women got jungle fever, and white men turned into cucky-wucks in reverence of black prowess. So, blackness has prestige and agency in the US. Blacks don’t like to serve others; they expect others to respect and revere blackness. Also, because Jews made White Guilt a core tenet of Americanism and because this Guilt was associated mainly with blacks(than with American Indians), white folks came to worship MLK and Oprah and vote for Obama(and wax romantic about Wakanda).
So, all three groups — white gentiles, Jews, and blacks — got something real out of Americanism. Whites got to build and experience America as an extension of Western civilization and values. Jews got to control the elite institutions of America and steer the American ship in their preferred destination. And blacks got to be demigods of oratory, funk, and sports who got to be worshiped by cucky-wuck ‘white boys’ and jungle-feverish white women.
But what do East Asians get out of America? Sure, they do well in school, but they are taking part in a civilization that is wholly different from East Asia. East Asian immigrants surrender their local-tribal identities NOT to take part in a Larger Asian identity. Rather, they surrender everything Asian to just become ‘American’ that is defined by whiteness, Jewishness, and blackness. When Asians sexually mix with whites or blacks, their Asian-ness is lost, especially as the race-mixers tend to be Asian women. Vaginas are usually submissive to the penises. So unlike Europeans who gave up one form of European identity to take up another kind in the US(a Pan-European civilization inconceivable except as extension of the West), Asians surrender Asian identity to become imitation-whites, imitation-Jews, imitation-blacks, or mindless homomaniacs.
Even though Asians do well in school(as servile grinds, drones, and teachers’ pets), their identity has no iconic or intellectual value. They have no agency or autonomy as identity, culture, or narrative. So, even if Asian parents were to try instill their kids with Asian pride, it doesn’t stick because Asian kids in the US grow up wanting to be white, listening to black music & watching black sports, and absorbing Jewish-controlled Narratives(which includes worshiping homos).
In her TIGER MOTHER book, Chua says her father wanted her to marry a Chinese man, but she didn’t and decided to go with a Jew and have Jewish kids. And her kids, despite knowledge of Mandarin, essentially regard themselves as Jews or citizens of America(where only whites, Jews, blacks, and homos really matter; indeed, even Chua must sense this on some level because her chapter on the Mexican death cult worship of Nuestra Señora de la Santa Muerte notes that many Mexicans in the US feel ignored, neglected, and stuck in menial jobs for generations on end; in essence, East Asians are like Mexicans with higher IQ or academic culture. They do better in school but lack clear identity or agency). So, while East Asians may gain academic or material success, their future is a total loss of identity, autonomy, and culture. Unlike Jews who feel themselves to be the Middle of the World no matter where they are and try to make OTHER peoples serve them(even in gentile majority nations), East Asians regard the greatest power as the center of the world and dutifully serve it.
American Legacy is white greatness; it has come under attack from PC, but the prestige still remains. And there are the Holy Three of Jews, Negroes, and Homos(who are really proxies of Jews). No one else really matters. GAP or Go Ask the Palestinians. When Peter-Keating-like Mitt Romney took a dump on a Palestinian-American pleading for his people, even the Liberal Media and Democratic Party said NOTHING to denounce his nasty lies. Now, if Romney had expressed such insensitivity about Jews, blacks, or homos, that would have been National News in the Jew-run media. But when it comes to Palestinians, Chinese, Iranians, and Russians, one can say the nastiest things. And yet, people like Chua are content to serve Judea and cover up their servility to the Tribe by pretending that All Americans constitute some ‘supergroup’, a term that may have been lifted from Rock Terminology. What does that make Chua? A supergroupie? She sure loves to hang around The Power.

And this is why East Asians are truly a pathetic bunch. Recently, whites have slipped in America, but they’ve been the ruling majority who came to define America. And Jews, despite being only 2% of the population, became the rulers of the US and give orders to all other groups. Even angry blacks have to kiss Jewish ass. And blacks have gained iconic power as the demigod-race that whites must worship athletically, sexually, and musically. White girls grow up ‘twerking’ their butts, and white boys imitate rappers and want to be ‘black’... or submit to wussy-dom like CucKen Burns. In contrast, East Asians come to the West to serve, serve, and serve & follow, follow, and follow. With East Asian women serving non-Asian men and having their babies, Asian solidarity can’t be a thing. Also, if whites or Asians who mix with Jews and blacks produce kids who want to identify with Jewishness and blackness(as both carry greater prestige), kids who are half-Asian don’t want to identify as Asian because, in the American Imagination, Asians have value only as yellow pussy like in Saigon where it was the easiest and cheapest thing in the world.

But it’s not just East Asian women like Chua who gladly play the role of servitors of the empire. It’s also East Asian men like Francis Fukuyama(the puppet of George Soros and Neocons), John Yoo(apologist for Neocon War Criminals), Victor Cha(puppet of Obama’s regime that destroyed Libya, Ukraine, and Syria), and many others. Because they have no sense of agency, covenant, ethno-centrism, or pride(that can be backed up with iconic power), they are prone to serving The Other with the Power. Even when Judea aims its dagger at Asia itself, these servitors will side with their Jewish masters against their own kind. So, Fukuyama goes around Asia saying it must open up to massive immigration like the kind Soros pushes into Europe. Though of Japanese ancestry, Fukuyama does NOT defend Japanese civilization. He wants it to be penetrated and destroyed by Jewish globalists in the name of End of History(which is more like End of Gentile National Sovereignty). And the same goes for the cuck-Asians of Taiwan, Korea, and Vietnam.
Francis Fukyomama, an unmarried and childless loser Asian male who has devoted his life to serving Judea. In 2003, he gave his intellectual blessing to the Zionist-Supremacist Invasion of Iraq. Things went so badly that he partly recanted and angered Neocons. So, how did he redeem himself for the Iraq Debacle? He jumped on the George-Soros band-wagon, promotes Homomania as New World religion, cheers for New Cold War on Russia, and calls on East Asian nations to follow the lead of UK, France, and Sweden in welcoming mass immigration-invasion and replacing the native population with foreigners. As Soros' ideological henchman, Fukyomama constantly attacks Patriotic Poland and Homeland Hungary. Apparently, if Japan were to be taken over by Hindus, Chinese, Muslims,and Africans, it wouldn't matter to Fukoyama who feels no allegiance to anything but The Power. In this, he is like Chua, another Servitor of the Empire. Also like Chua, Fukyomama refuses to Name the Jew. He pretends that the fall of the USSR signaled the End of History, meaning triumph of Liberal Democratic Free Market values, while willfully ignoring the hegemonic tribal domination of the Jewish Globalist Elite. Fukyomama calls it 'liberal democracy' and Chua calls it 'supergroup'. Both willfully ignore the Jewish Supremacist element in all this.
Such East Asian slavishness is different from the guile of Hindu-Asian-Indians who play a somewhat different game. To be sure, there are total whores like Nikki Haley who is so enamored of power that she will support Zionist-imperialism against Palestinians despite the fact that her own nation, India, had been under British imperialism for 200 yrs. But then, Sikhs were collaborator-goons of the British Empire and even attacked other Indians at the behest of their Anglo overlords, so maybe Haley is just carrying out the pathetic collaborationist tradition of her people. And then, there is that gross-looking skull-headed Fareed Zakaria the Pakistani-globalist-cuck who gladly serves Judea to keep his vaunted position in the media as big-mouthed lackey. He’s such a useful lapdog that the Jewish-run media even forgave his plagiarism. Zakaria hates Trump but loved him momentarily when missiles were lobbed into Syria. Being of Pakistani ancestry, you would think Zakaria would sympathize with Syria-as-victim-of-Western-imperialism, but NO, the brown cuck-collaborator of Jew-run America was ecstatic and praised Trump for finally becoming ‘president’ with the brazen display of might. What a servile disgusting prick. When South Asians are not shitting all over their country, they shit all over the media.
Still, one can’t help sensing that whereas East Asians, for reasons genetic or cultural, are really earnest in their cuckery, the South Asians, being more cynical and haggly-waggly Gypsy-like in personality and attitude, are playing the game to gain long-term advantage over the West. After all, India has 1.3 billion people(and Pakistan has 200 million people), which adds up to more than all of Europe, North America, and Australia combined. South Asians, smelling the blood of white weakness, could be maneuvering for a demographic and economic takeover of the West to create the Planet of the Apu. (East Asians may be servile and dog-like, but they have an honor culture in this sense: Once they give their loyalty to the Power, they feel they must serve honorably, even if slavishly. It’s like dogs will die for their masters. In contrast, South Asians have NO honor culture. Their ‘national character[or lack thereof]’ having developed in a world of Pathological Diversity of too many ethnicities, religions, languages, and castes, the prevailing attitude became one of haggling, swindling, cheating, lying, and etc. When 1.3 billion Indians and 200 million Pakistanis think and act this way, it isn’t good for social or national cohesion. But the advantage is that, outside their native lands, they tend to have a sharper, more passive/aggressive, and more adaptive negotiating skills that are generally missing from the more honor-based East Asians for whom the giving-one’s-word and saving-one’s-face carry more weight. Once East Asians pledge to the Power, they will die for the Power. Once South Asians pledge to the Power, they will only pretend and run like a mothafuc*a when the Power fails.) South Asians may lack iconic power(except as funny-accented clowns), but they have colorful personalities that make them endearing to the West. Also, even if Hindus aren’t good at sports, they have far more intellectual firepower than blacks. And being more self-centered and culturally proud than East Asians whose main mode is status-and-power-worship, they tend to cling to their own identity and interests, at least more than East Asians do. (Furthermore, Indian Hindus/Muslims and Pakistani Muslims have something in common with Orthodox Jews: A powerful historical, cultural, and spiritual sense of who they are regardless of political power. Just like the Covenant instilled Jews with a sense of Chosen-ness despite being surrounded by much greater political-military powers, Hindus and Muslims have a cultural-spiritual system that transcends politics, economics, and military power. So, even as Hindus and Muslims may be impressed by Western wealth and power, they possess deeper meaning in what they regard to be timeless and eternal spiritual and moral traditions. In contrast, East Asians, who were influenced by Confucianism that was essentially about political power and statecraft, have no sense of Higher Truth apart from the Power of Governance & Wealth. Furthermore, if the Jewish Idea of the Chosen People meant all members of the Tribe, the concept of the Middle Kingdom was centered on political power. It was about the Imperial Dynasty being at the center of the universe. The prestige of the ‘middle kingdom’ belong to the emperor, not to the people. Granted, one could argue there is a Higher Truth in Confucianism in the centrality of family and ancestry. But the rise of nuclear family undermined the Confucian ideal of the extended family. Also, the East Asian diaspora led to Asians identifying with other races whom they regard as superior in looks, athletics, or entertainment. And globalism has erased a sense of indigenous culture, e.g. Japanese kids grow up to fantasies of blonde white-looking video-game characters than identify with their own kind. Japan made a half-black woman ‘Miss Japan’, and Japanese women have children with black men, and these kids dominate sports and whup Japanese guys; meanwhile, half of Japanese men are projected to die without getting married or even having sex. Globalism is destroying Japan. So, the family aspect of Confucianism is now almost non-existent, and Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan cannot even produce kids, especially as feminism has further eroded the family ideal just like in nations in Germany and Sweden. Young generations in East Asia seem to worship Homomania more than Family, Ancestry, and Roots. All that’s left of Neo-Confucianism for East Asians is then [1] study hard and pass exams [2] serve the current Great Power, which happens to be Judea and Homomania. Because Confucianism neglected spirituality and mainly concerned itself with statecraft and Power, East Asians have a very weak sense of Truth apart from the Existing Power. The Current Power is the #1 truth for East Asians. Since Jewish Power, PC, Magic Negro Worship, and Homomania dominate the West that dominates the world, most East Asians in the West go that way. Lacking a sense of truth apart from Temporal Power, they make useful dogs as servitors of the empire.) Indeed, the sheer messy diversity of India made it necessary for every group to jostle for dominance and advantage. If Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans tend to feel a commonality of interest in their own nations, there has never been a comparable Common Factor in India. Even among Hindus, there are so many sects, cults, and castes. Also, a Hindu Indian could be racially closer to a Muslim Indian than with another Hindu Indian of another region, ethnicity, or even caste. Studies show people of Brahmin background in North India have more genetic similarity with people of Brahmin background in South India than with lower caste peoples in their own region. So, Indians honed the craft of navigating through choppy rivers of intersecting interests and conflicts. This made for a less unified India(than China), but it also made each Hindu group more Jewish-like in making special effort to jostle for its interests among competitive diversity. In contrast, East Asians are more simplistic in their values and loyalties. In East Asia, the rule was to be loyal to the dominant majority power: Chinese for Chinese power, Koreans for Korean power, Japanese for Japanese power. Far simpler than political and cultural reality in India, an inorganic nation resulting from massive invasions by different races and forged into modern state under British Imperialism. Also, Confucianism led to a systematic way of determining hierarchy via meritocracy of exam-taking. So, earnest devotion to study than crafty negotiating tactics became the basis of the East Asian cultural value system. So, when East Asians come to the West, their earnest mental habits tend to submit to serving the New Power. They have a weak sense of "my identity and interests in competition with others". Because their own kind has been demographically dominant in East Asian nations(though that is sure to change due to massive immigration-invasion from poorer nations as East Asians no longer have children), the East Asian mindset is "I must serve The Power." Therefore, East Asians in the West serve the dominant themes of Prevailing Americanism: "White is beautiful"(aka "Where the white women at?"), "Jews are wise", "blacks are badass", and "Homos are holy".

For that reason, it is misleading to consider Amy Chua as a Chinese-American academic. She has un-Chinesed herself in ways that really matter. She has chosen to serve Judea. She has decided to reject Chinese men and live with a Jewish man and have kids for him to be raised as Zionists(who oppress Palestinians and wage Wars for Israel). She will surely try to spread Homomania to China because it is the neo-religion concocted by Jews as substitute for Christianity and Islam. Chua was born Chinese, but she rejected Chinese identity and interest. Her exaggerated sense of Chinese tiger-mother-ness is just a prop to hide the shameful fact that her loyalties shifted to another Tribe. She is not proud of Chinese people. She is only proud of certain aspects of Chinese-ness that she uses to serve another people and power. If indeed Tiger-mothering is an Asian value/virtue, she certainly didn’t use it to bolster Chinese identity or interests but to raise successful Jewish-Zionist kids. It’s like some guy who teaches Kung Fu tricks to non-Chinese to better beat up Chinese. Chua isn’t about using Chinese values to defend or strengthen Chinese identity but to serve Judea. It’s like a Chinese chef cooking up a storm to feed foreign hordes to attack China. He is practicing Chinese Culinary Culture alright but against Chinese Power. It’s like all those Christian Zionists who invoke Jesus not to serve Christian Power but to serve Jews, Jews, Jews, and Israel, Israel, Israel. For people who really care about power of their own identity and interests, it’s not enough to practice one’s culture. The trick is to practice it to the advantage of one’s own kind. Under Roman rule, Greeks practiced Greek culture only to benefit the Roman Empire that ruled over Greeks with ruthlessness. Chua can feel soiled pride only as a peppy cheerleader for the ultimate power, and she has handed her body and soul to Jewish Power. She doesn’t condemn Zionist Neocon imperialism, globalism, and supremacism. Her only complaint is that Jewish-controlled US imperialism sometimes jumps the gun and fails in hegemonic ambition because of naivete about world affairs. She gives advice not to end US imperialism but to make it more effective. She might as well work for the goon-mafia institution known as the CIA.
5 main castes in India but there are thousands of sub-castes. As the caste-system breaks down due to modernization and urbanization, there is likely to be a greater call for nationalism as common theme. Caste system, good or bad, has had a binding and stabilizing effect on India for 1000s of yrs. As it weakens year after year and more people become confused in social place, only Indian nationalism will hold the nation together. Incidentally, the Untouchables in the West are the White Patriots because Jewish Globalists command the position as the Brahmin caste of the West. In current UK and Canada, the hierarchy of prestige goes as follows. Jewish-Zionist globalists at the top as the pharaohs; Homos as neo-saints-and angels at second rung; Magic Negro at third rung; White Cuck Collaborators at fourth rung; Diversity & Immigrants(Hindus, Asians, Muslims, Mexicans) at fifth rung; and White Patriots and Alt Right at the lowest rung constituting the Pariah class. 
Ironically, Chua has the same failings as the US empire. She who spots the blind spots of empire has her own blind spots. Chua contends that American Idealism — the spreading of ‘human rights’ and ‘democracy’ — tends to overlook or dismiss problems of tribalism that run counter to the wishes of what Fukuyama calls the End of History. But she is so full of girly enthusiasm as cheerleader for empire that she fails to notice that those ‘wars to spread democracy’ were actually TRIBAL in origin and intention. Current US is not some Liberal Democracy committed to ‘universal values’. It is essentially a Jewish Tribalist Oligarchy that cynically invokes universal values to lord over the world(just like the West once justified imperialist expansion on grounds of universal Christianity or Enlightenment values and just like the late Soviet Union justified Russian domination over Warsaw Pact nations and non-Russian republics on universalist Marxist-Leninist principles.) Even Carl Bernstein said Iraq War was driven by Jewish Neocon interests.

After all, if the US wants to spread democracy, why doesn’t it invade Saudi Arabia, a nation more repressive than secular Iraq, Libya, and Syria? And if the US really cares for the little guy or underdog in the name of ‘universal human rights’ and ‘self-determination’, why the silence about Palestinians still living under Occupation in the West Bank? Furthermore, hasn’t it occurred to Chua that, maybe just maybe, the failure of the democratic experiment was what the Jewish Neocons ordered in the Middle East. After all, why would Jews want to see the rise of a united modern Iraq freed of tyrant Hussein? What guarantee is there that this New Free Iraq would be pro-Israel or even pro-US in the long run? So, the chaos that engulfed Iraq wasn’t a total loss to the Zionist-First Neocons. It meant the implosion of a once modern Arab nation, a rival power of Israel. If that gives too much credit to Neocon strategic forethought, consider what the Jew-run US has done to Libya, Syria, and Ukraine under Obama. Those nations were willfully turned into World-on-Fire. After all, if the US had at least tried to install a new political system in Iraq, the US(again under Jewish power) just let Libya fall apart with the full knowledge that, minus Gaddafi, there was nothing to hold that nation together. And in Syria, the US, along with its allies the Saudis-Israelis-Turks, aided groups that it knew to be terrorists linked to Alqaeda and other Jihadi elements. The sole purpose was to turn Syria upside down because Jews hate Assad’s Syria as an ally of Iran and Russia. And in Ukraine, Jews like Victoria Nuland even recruited Neo-Nazi fighters to depose a democratically elected government. Yes, it was a corrupt government, but the US deep state isn’t corrupt?
Were all those cases the misguided failures to spread ‘liberal democracy’... or were they willful destructions of sovereign nations so that Judea could capitalize on the crises? Was Obama’s folly in Libya really just a ‘mistake’? Does anyone-in-the-know really believe that snakes like Obama, Hillary, Jewish globalists, and Deep State goons are committed to Boy Scout ideals of ‘liberty’ and ‘human rights’? In some ways, Chua is worse than Sikh whore Nikki Haley because we expect higher standards of truth from academics and intellectuals than from politicians who are invariably shameless jackals and scoundrels.

Zionist Imperialism's effect on Palestinian kids is not unlike Japanese Imperialism's effect on Chinese kids.
4. A clear example of Chua’s perfidy is plain in her account of a case study involving Jewish Israeli kids and Arab-Palestinian kids. It tracked the tribal animosities between Jews and Arabs, and how it affects the youths of both communities. Chua refers to a case that showed tribal bias and stereotyping on both sides, but it is skewed to favor Jews because Jewish attitudes, though suspicious, are presented as mild compared to the attitudes of Arabs. According to the study, Jewish Israelis responded that they see Arabs as more aggressive and hostile. Some might see this as evidence of Jewish prejudice and paranoia, but still, suspicion is hardly a cardinal sin. In contrast, the study reports that Arab youths would be HAPPY to see Jewish people dead. Woah! So, the example of Jewish animus against Arabs is one of mere suspicion whereas the example of Arab animus against Jews is one of psychopathic murderous-ness. By revealing bias in both groups, Chua feigns even-handedness, BUT by highlighting the discrepancy between Jewish anxiety(mild) versus Arab rage(harsh), Chua creates the false impression that Jews are civilized people with frayed nerves whereas Arabs are a bunch of psychotic cutthroat loons. (Imagine if a study in the 1930s showed that Japanese colonialists in China are merely suspicious of the Chinese whereas Chinese lunatics are burning with murderous rage against the Japanese. LOL) Now, I don’t deny that some Arabs are spitting mad and would love to carry out extreme acts of violence against Jews. There have been too many cases of Arabs committing acts of terror and acting nutty like Hollywood Terrorists.
But Zionists can be bloody murderous too. The only reason why Jews no longer use direct-terrorism is because they have a modern military(that can do far more damage) and have the backing of the West. But when Jews weren’t so advantaged, they pioneered modern terrorism in Israel. Even Jewish journal Tablet admits as much. Terrorism is nasty business, but it has always been the weapon of the disadvantaged(though to be sure, powerful nations like the US aided and abetted terrorists against rival powers who did the same). Algerians used it against the French; Vietnamese used it against the Americans. It’s been said terrorism is evil because it targets innocents. True, but the Allied bombing of Hamburg, Dresden, and Tokyo killed many more civilians. And what about the atomic-blasting of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? The mass-bombing of Korea by the US?
Also, let’s keep in mind that 99.99% of Nazi war crimes and horrors were not acts of terrorism but of conventional warfare. Even Shoah was not an act of terrorism but part of the military campaign of mass extermination. If anything, the resistance in Nazi-Occupied nations used terrorism against Germans. The only reason Jews no longer use terrorism is because they got something far more effective. They have jets and missiles to blow up entire blocks of Gaza. And they get $4 billion in military aid from the Jewish-controlled US. And the US even fights Wars for Israel on occasion and takes out regimes in Iraq and Libya, turning once stable nations into hell-holes. Or under Jewish pressure, the US enforces sanctions that lead to the suffering and even deaths of millions. Consider the 100,000s of dead women and children in Iraq. Or the crippled economy of Iran.

And despite the findings referenced by Chua, there are plenty of murderous passions among Jews toward Arabs. When Gaza was being bombed into the stone age, Israelis were cheering as if the destruction was a spectator sport. And there are plenty of Israeli politicians with extreme views about Arabs. While the Jew-controlled Western Media bitch about the extremism of Hamas, these extreme Jewish politicians serve in the Israeli government and direct policy.
But most importantly, let’s consider the context of the hostilities between Jews and Arabs. While it’s ugly for both sides to wish ill upon the other, who can deny that the Palestinians are more justified in their anger? It’s like Chinese had more right to be angry with Japanese colonizing Japan than the Japanese had a right to be angry toward Chinese resisting Japanese imperialism. It’s like Tibetans have more right to be angry with Chinese imperialist-migrant-invaders than the Chinese have a right to be angry with Tibetans. In World War II, Chinese were being invaded, colonized, and replaced by Japanese military and settlers, especially in Manchuria. And current China, invoking multi-culti diversity, now forces Tibetans to ‘include’ the Han Chinese who are taking over entire swaths of that once autonomous region.
Historically, Palestinians are a wholly innocent people. They had nothing to do with WWI, Communism, Nazism, WWII, and Shoah. But the great empires, in collusion with Judea, targeted Palestine for destruction. Nakba pogroms wiped Palestine off the map, and Palestinians have been living under Occupation in West Bank since 1967. Furthermore, Jews keep stealing MORE land, and the so-called Two-State Solution was nothing but a trick to fool the world. But, there is no mention of any of this in Chua’s book. Chua will mention the history of Russian pogroms against Jews, white America’s oppression of blacks, and the injustice of South African apartheid, but she will not mention the fact that Israel was created by wiping Palestine off the map and reducing Palestinians into a nation-less people. It’s all the sadder when we consider that her kind, the Chinese, nearly lost whole chunks of China to Japanese invaders. Given China’s experience under imperialist rule, you’d think Chua would sympathize with Palestinians. And there was a time when that might have been the case. But both China and Chua(and other un-Chinesed yellow folks in the West) now only care about money and power. China, as a rising power, is now closely allied with Israel and doesn’t care at all about Palestinians. Jews and Chinese have made a gentleman’s agreement. China will back Zionists against Palestinians(while giving lip-service to Palestinian rights at the UN), and the globalist media(controlled by Jews) won’t make too big a fuss about Han Chinese imperialism in Tibet and Xinjiang, aka Uighur-land. As for Chua, her main identification is with the Hyper-Power. Married to a Jew, she feels as an honorary member of the Tribe and supports its neo-imperialist power-projections around the world despite the deaths of millions and demise of entire nations. (The phenomenon of the Servitors of the Empire is the direct result of mass non-white immigration to the West. When the West was ‘racist’ and imperialist, the dream of non-whites was to expel white colonists from their own lands and defend & develop their own nations. But when the West opened its doors to the Rest, too many people like Chua abandoned their own people, culture, and/or nations for material improvement in the West and to join in the Imperial Power project. If the West had banned people like Chua and Zakaria, they would be in their own nations as patriots resisting globalist neo-imperialism... like Gandhi did upon being snubbed by whites. But because they’ve been allowed into the hegemonic West, they prefer the game of ‘supergroup’ politics as servitors of Jewish domination over the world. So, Chua sides with Zionists against Palestinians, and Zakaria cheers US missiles blowing up Syria. Now, non-whites may dream of TAKING OVER the West, but it won’t happen. Jews are smarter than them and shielded from criticism by the taboo of ‘antisemitism’ that is associated with Shoah. Also, apart from whites, Jews, blacks, and homos, all other peoples have no iconic power or special respect in the West. And they are not protected by taboos. We can badmouth Muslims, Iranians, Asians, Mexicans, and etc. Also, Diversity makes it impossible for non-white immigrants to form a single bloc. There are many kinds of ‘Hispanics’, and there are many kinds of ‘Asians’. Jews will keep the real power as they got the smarts, the shield, iconic power, and the brilliance of divide-and-ruler machinations.) In traditional China, a woman didn’t amount to much. She joined her husband’s family to produce children for that family and to live and die for that family. She cut her ties to her own family but wasn’t really part of her husband’s family either. She was a biological servant to produce children for the husband’s family. Even though Chua flatters herself as a modern woman, she is a biological-and-political servant of Jewish Power. She rejected her own kind, married a Zionist-Jew, and produced kids for the Jews. And in her role as professor and writer, she cheers for Jewish Hyper-power while dismissing Palestinian concerns. It’s been said of Modern Chinese, especially the women, that they tend to be shallow, vapid, crass, and materialistic, addicted to status and power. Chua’s entire value-system is warped by her obsession with Hyper-Power, one of her pet political theories like ‘supergroup’.
The Ultimate Supergroup?  WE ARE THE WORLD... meaning the world better bend over to Jewish Power, Hollywood, Rap thuggery, NBA, Twerking, Pornified Pop Culture, Tattoos and Piercing, US military threats and invasions, Opioids, Homomania, Diversity, Mass Immigration-Invasion, Wall Street rapaciousness, Junk Food, and PC.
Of course, to mask her servility to supremacist Jewish power, she feigns compassion by mentioning some illegal alien student in her class, oh boo hoo hoo. In Chua’s worldview, an illegal alien who entered the US for material gain is a bigger victim than the entire Palestinian people who’ve been ground to dust to make way for Greater Israel. For most Jews, ‘Two State Solution’ means Palestinians get only tiny Gaza as their own nation while West Bank is to be annexed by Israel... with long-term plans to push its Palestinian population into Syria... which is why Israel is so happy to see Syria ravaged by a civil war and emptied of millions who took flight as refugees. Just try wrapping your head around Chua’s moral perfidiy. If some Mexican illegally comes to the US and leeches off Americans, he or she is a noble victim and has Chua’s full sympathy. But if the Jewish Hyper-Power destroys an entire people who live in fear and desperation... oh never mind. Just refer to some academic study that shows that while Jewish kids just fear Palestinians, Palestinian kids want to see Jews dead.
Even if true, what’s wrong with Palestinian rage? When Germans invaded Russians, didn’t Russians want to see Germans dead? After Pearl Harbor, didn’t Americans want to see lots of Japanese dead? And during and after Shoah, didn’t Jews want to see Nazis dead? The Jewish Morgenthau Plan was devised to destroy Germany and kill millions by starvation as punishment. And Jewish Soviet writer Ilya Ehrenberg called for mass killing and mass rape of Germans as revenge. Also, the only dream of justice for most Palestinians is to WISH for revenge. Apart from occasional acts of terror, Palestinians have no recourse to revenge and justice. In contrast, Jewish-controlled US has been using its power of arms and sanctions to starve, maim, and/or kill millions of innocents all over the world.

Chua follows the PC Rule-book of Approved Sympathy. In other words, her sympathies and moral outrages are restricted to what is allowed by the Jewish-dominated Narrative. So, she expresses sympathy for Jews persecuted in pogroms, blacks oppressed by whites, and illegal aliens facing deportation. But there is no mention of Russians oppressed by Jewish Bolsheviks, no mention of white farmers in South African murdered left and right, no mention of Palestinians brutalized by Zionist occupation, etc. She looks over her shoulders at her Jewish Master for orders on whom to love and whom to hate. Since Jews will kick her like a dog if she expresses sympathy for Palestinians, she ignores their plight. But because Jews insist that we all bawl over those poor illegal alien darlings called ‘dreamers’, Chua obeys like a good little doggy that she is.

She is utterly silent about millions of Palestinians living under Zionist terror and tyranny. Expressing sympathy for them will lead to disgrace and demotion, and so, as a cheerleader of Hyper-Power, Chua cheers for Zionism. And she goes boo-hoo-hoo for an illegal alien who stole a college slot from an American citizen. She gushes over illegals because feeling sorry for ‘dreamers’ is now part of the Jewish Narrative. It’s like the emotions of dogs. Dogs will bark at whatever or whomever their master direct their aggression at, but they will also be kindly to whatever or whomever their masters love and favor. So, if their master is nice to a certain cat, the dogs will also go easy on the cat to win the approval of their masters. But if the master tells the dog, "Look! Bad raccoon! Attack", the dogs will run at the raccoon and tear it limb from limb. Because Jews hate and murder Palestinians, Chua is silent about Zionist tyranny and terror. But because Jews feign sympathy for illegals as ‘dreamers’, doggy Chuahuahua follows along. And she raised her kid to serve the Hyper-Power of America. Her kids are not a critic of the Power but half-Jewish globalists as part of Judea that says Homomania is the most sacred neo-religion in the world. In the past, Chua showed some maverick streak to think outside the box, but this side of her was not passed down to her kids, apparently lest it jeopardize their chances to be admitted into the haloed circles of the Hyper-Power. Privilege trumps principles in the Chuaverse. So, if Jew-run USA were to instigate war with China, you bet Chua will be cheering for her military daughter to go kill tons of Chinese.

True love and hate are autonomous and free-willed. People who love or hate depending on orders from above don’t know what true love or hate is. Chua’s feelings are like Arranged Marriages: Arranged Emotions. It’s like the servile Chinese under Mao. When Mao said "Soviet Union is our friend for 1000 yrs", the Chinese just loved the Soviets. But when Mao said, "Soviets are a bunch of a**holes", the Chinese dogs were hollering bad stuff about Russia. When Mao said, "US is shit for all eternity", Chinese dogs barked at Evil USA. But when, upon meeting with Nixon, Mao said, "US is bad but not that bad", the Chinese dogs were suddenly far less hostile toward the US. Same with Germans under Hitler. When Hitler said, "USSR sucks for all time", the Nazis were full of hatred for the commies. But when Hitler said, "Germany and USSR are friends" upon jointly invading Poland, Germans dropped their hostility. But when Hitler said "Russians suck again" in 1941 with Operation Barbarossa, Germans were again full of hate for the Soviets. US is a democracy and the ‘land of the free’, but most people don’t have Autonomy of Emotions or Free Emotions. They have Arranged Emotions like Amy Chua. So, if the Jew-run media say "Iran sucks" and "Russia sucks", we are supposed to join in the Two Minutes of Hatred. And if the Power says, "Israel is our greatest ally", we are supposed to repeat it like a mantra.
Amy Chuahuahua lacks Autonomy of Emotions. She obeys the Arranged Emotions of the Power that orders her to show zero sympathy for Palestinians while going boo-hoo-hoo over Illegal 'dreamers'. 
Anyway, Chua’s contrasting of Jewish anxiety vs Arab murderousness is as disingenuous as Steven Spielberg’s MUNICH. While the movie shows ugly acts of violence by both sides(and doesn’t present Arabs as outright monsters), it is skewed toward Zionism because of the framing of events. Everything happens within the context of the Arab terrorism at Munich. So, even though Israelis are shown carrying out acts of terror, they are construed as retaliation for Arab terror. The movie doesn’t ask the larger question as to why Arabs pulled that horrible act at Munich. It was because Zionists carried out Nakba Pogroms to wipe Palestine off the map and then occupied West Bank and Gaza as well in the 1967 War. The Munich attack, loathsome as it was, didn’t happen out of the blue. Arabs reacted violently to ongoing Zionist imperialism. It’s like our sympathy in Westerns depends on how the story is framed: Hard-working white settlers reacting to bloody raids by Red Savages OR Noble Indians reacting to imperialist conquest by rapacious Pale Face.

Now, Chua surely believes Chinese were right to use violence to repel Japanese imperialists. And the US Narrative on WWII has been that the killing of millions of Japanese, even women and children, was justifiable as revenge for Pearl Harbor. Then, why is it so different and morally reprehensible when Arabs use violence to avenge what Jews did to them? Worse than honest bias is dishonest bias that pretends to be fair and balanced. Chua prefers the academic style of engaging in rational discussion(though she loses her composure when she bleats about them poor poor Negroes as if she’d seen GREEN MILE a hundred times), but she is really no less biased than, say, Ann Coulter or Michelle Malkin. In some ways, Chua is worse because Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter are at least open and honest about their biases. In contrast, Chua playacts the role of thinking scholar but insidiously rigs her academic algorithms to favor one side over the other. She’s like someone who uses more stock for one bowl of soup than for another but pretends both soup are equal because they have equal amount of water. If Chua were an aid worker feeding a Jewish kid and Arab kid, she would feed more meat and vegetables to the Jewish kid while just giving bread and water to the Arab kid, BUT she will insist even-handedness on account of the bread and water weighing the same as meat and vegetables.

5. Chua’s bogus evenhandedness also rears its head in the discussion of white working class grievances and black grievances. By listing both sets of complaints, Chua would have us believe that she can see and understand both sides. But she neglects to mention that, whereas white grievances are the result of wrongs done to the white working class for no fault of their own, blacks grievances are largely self-inflicted. For example, let’s suppose there are two boys, Bob and John. Bob is a good kid but is spanked for no reason. In contrast, John is a bad kid and is spanked for bad behavior. Now, both Bob and John may complain about being spanked, but there is a huge difference between being punished for having done no wrong and being punished for having done wrong.

In her discussion of lower white middle class, white working class, and white underclass, she does acknowledge the challenges they face. She mentions anti-white ‘affirmative action’ that disproportionately handicaps lower-class whites than upper-class whites(though she doesn’t mention that Jews, though a small percentage of whites, are routinely over-represented in Ivy League universities by what could very well be a rigged system). Because Affirmative Action is mostly about race than class, it favors even rich blacks and mulattoes over poor whites, even those who have no ancestry of slave-ownership in the US. (AA also favors rich WHITE Hispanics who get to masquerade as ‘people of color’ even though their ancestors were the pioneers of the Conquest of the New World.) Chua doesn’t mention it(though she did in TRIPLE PACKAGE), but much of Affirmative Action benefits go to African immigrants than to blacks of American Slave Background. So, in the US, if you’re an African immigrant and if your ancestors actually captured and sold black slaves to whites and Arabs, you get AA benefits, BUT if you’re a working class Polish American whose people suffered Russian imperialism, Nazi terror, and Soviet occupation, you are smeared with ‘white guilt’. As James Webb wrote in "The Myth of White Privilege", the notion of ‘white privilege’ doesn’t just apply to whites with wealth and advantages but to all whites, even the poorest dimwit in Booneyville, Tennessee. If anything, whites with real privilege learn to virtue-signal and justify their own privilege by attacking the white have-nots who have no actual privilege. ‘White Privilege’ doesn’t so much refer to individual whites with privilege but to a white state-of-mind that refuse to be apologetic and grovel before PC. So, a poor white guy living a Trailer with a Confederate flag is more guilty of ‘white privilege’ than Bill Gates or Jeff Bezos(who says all the proper PC things) or Tim Cook, a fruitkin who funds Homomania and $PLC, a ‘white privilege’-laundering machine, i.e. if you a rich guy but donate to Morris Dee’s organization, your sins are partly cleansed because the SPLC will, in collusion with the media, direct moral outrage at whites in a trailer park with Confederate flags instead. ‘White privilege’ even applies to recent white immigrants from nations that had NOTHING to do with imperialism or the slave trade. An immigrant from Estonia? You are guilty of ‘white privilege’ too. (Ironically, the slave-trading whites did more than stay-at-home whites for the non-white world because their imperialism spread Western Values across all five continents. If all of Europe had been like stay-at-home Bulgarians, then Africa would be mired in primitive savagery, Middle East economy would consist of figs and rugs, and Chinese would still be binding their women’s feet(and Chua would be in China cooking her dogs for lunch than raising them as pets.) Affirmative Action is easier on ‘privileged’ whites than on unprivileged whites because affluent whites tend to be smarter than working class or poor whites. So, unprivileged whites will lose out to privileged whites(especially Jews) on account of meritocracy. But then, blacks will also be favored over unprivileged whites thanks to Affirmative Action. So, unprivileged whites lose out two ways: They lose out to both meritocracy and ‘inclusion’. Because Jews and privileged whites want to burnish their proggy credentials, they favor less talented blacks(even from rich families) over working class and underclass whites who often outperform even blacks from rich families. So, in some ways, AA is class war waged by rich whites(especially Jews) on poor whites. Also, due to rise of PC that devises ‘holistic’ approaches to college admittance, schools use ideological litmus test when processing applications. Because privileged whites(and Jews) tend to be more proggy(or deft at feigning Correctness to gain status), they are favored for admittance at institutions like Harvard and Yale that shape the future elites of America. The only way a bright working class white person might have a chance at entering Harvard is to write a long essay about how he’s homo or want to spread homomania all over the world as the neo-christianity or Queertianity.

Chua mentions high unemployment among white working class(though without naming globalism as a culprit), high rates of drug addiction(though without naming Mexican drug cartels and Jewish Sackler family that spread opioids like David Sassoon spread opium among the Chinese), lack of outreach-guidance-leadership from the elites(who shower all their attention on blacks and illegals), and media’s depiction of white males as a bunch of worthless losers. Worst of all, Chua doesn’t mention the problem of non-white crime. In Southwest areas, Mexican drug gangs have devastated border communities. But the bigger danger is black crime and thuggery because of the BAMMAMA factor: Blacks Are More Muscular and More Aggressive. But because blacks are one of the Three Holies and because the Official-Discourse-on-Blacks is still stuck in the mythology of TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD(where a black man is falsely accused of rape), we are supposed to pretend that the Black Crime and Thug Rampage since the mid-60s never happened or was no big deal. The Black Problem has been alleviated to a considerable degree for white/Jewish/Asian elites in big cities but made far worse for whites in suburbs and small towns. Via gentrification and Section 8 housing(and immigration), the white/Jewish/Asian elites have pushed out many urban blacks from what used to be called the ‘inner-city’, once a euphemism for crime-ridden black enclaves in big cities. To decrease crime rates, the urban white and Jewish elites got Billy Boy Clinton to lock up record numbers of blacks(a fact overlooked by blacks because they admired Clinton as the ‘first black president’ in Toni Morrison’s words), employed Stop-and-Frisk policies in NY & other cities to clamp down by black pre-crime, pushed gentrification that priced out blacks, implemented Section 8 programs that relocated blacks(often to lower-end suburbs and white working class small towns where stronger black kids beat up white boys and colonized white wombs), and mass-immigration that replaced blacks with Asians, Mexicans, Muslims, and etc. who, though bringing problems of their own, are nowhere as destructive as the ‘groids’. Another trick was using Homomania to make homo-and-tranny vanity the central theme of New Leftism, an idea loved by Wall Street, Amazon, Las Vegas, and etc. because homos, just like yellow dogs, are totally slavish to The Power — Homos, being more daring and adventurous(and lacking families) also spearheaded much of urban gentrification to the eternal thanks of the yuppies. (Indeed, the explosion of BLM where blacks often interrupted homo parades was partly a rebellion against New Liberalism that favored white homos as the prized mascots of Progressivism. Blacks got envious over homo lives mattering more than black lives, especially when Obama be the president.)
Needless to say, Liberal Elites, especially Jews, are full of shi*. They denounced Apartheid in South Africa while abetting Zionist tyranny over Palestinians(and overlooking the fact that Israel was South Africa’s #1 ally, even sending it nuclear weapon secrets). And when black violence got out of control in NY, DC, and Chicago, these Liberal Elites engineered demographic policies that led to separation of themselves from black thuggery and crime. Of course, Section 8 can be sold as a form of racial integration since ‘inner-city’ blacks are sent to white neighborhoods, but the black problem is being dumped on OTHER whites. So, while ‘progressive’-prosperous downtown areas of cities get whiter, more Jewish, more Asian, and LESS black, the less affluent outlying white small towns and white suburbs are more black with all the attendant problems. So, the proggy elite’s idea of integration is to have OTHER whites integrate with the worst of the ‘groids’ while they themselves select nice token clean-cut Negroes like Obama and Valerie Jarrett. Jews are two-faced liars, and Chua, having hung around them for too long, has taken on their conceits, though, to be sure, Chinese aren’t exactly world famous for straight talk either. Jews will bitch about Apartheid but use their immense wealth and clout to implement a kind of financial apartheid that keep them safe from blacks. This is true EVEN WHEN their community is in close proximity to urban black slums. Consider Hyde Park where University of Chicago is located. It bills itself as a ‘progressive’ community, but it’s one of the safest areas in Chicago because of double-layer of super-tough policing. Would the city take such pains to protect a white working class community from black crime? Of course not, but if it’s a Jewish-proggy community, super-tough police force effectively implements apartheid policies to send a clear message to the outlying black community that, "If you dare mess around in Hyde Park, your black ass will be dragged off to prison in no time."

Because Chua is a globo-servant who worships the Three Holies(though especially Jews and Negroes than Homos), she skips over the impact of black crime on whites. Because her PC Narrative can only consider Negroes as ‘victims’, she refuses to mention the dark reality of black-on-white crime. Just like Jew-run Youtube banned Colin Flaherty who tracked the never-ending epidemic of black crime, Chua self-censors herself from addressing the issue of black violence. But of course, the problem goes deeper than black-on-white crime. It is due to promotion of Jungle Fever and Cuckdom among whites, not least due to Jewish control of music, movies, TV, commercials, pornography, education, and news. White males in US and EU are facing the fate of the indigenous folks of Latin America where the native men lost their women to Spanish conquerors with names like Cuaron and Torres. When men lose their manhood, their civilization is bound to fall. With blacks dominating sports, pop music, and the cult of manhood, white men are losing their manly pride and losing their women to jungle fever and ACOWW, or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. It is the pussification of the ‘white boy’. And the Jew-run media promote this even to kids.

To Chua’s credit, she does mention the culture war against the iconic image of the white male that went from ‘John Wayne’ to ‘clueless white male’. But she fails to connect the dots. It’s Judea that controls the media & academia and uses both to colonize and infect(or incept) white minds with self-loathing, self-shaming, and internecine intra-hate. So much of white-on-white hatred has been engineered by Jews... just like the Ottoman Empire turned Christian Greek boys into servant-warriors of Turks to wage war on European Christendom. At any rate, even though Chua’s list of white working class grievances are far from complete, they do get at what is wrong with the working class. She is also right to note that, unlike other groups, white people are not allowed to have racial pride, unity, and solidarity. So, if non-white elite says he cares about his own kind, he is praised as a good noble person who cares about something other than his individual self. A rich Jew who makes a big deal about how much he loves fellow Jews and Israel is lauded. But if a rich white person expresses any concern for white working class or poor white folks, it could easily be construed as ‘racist’, ‘Nazis’, ‘far right’, or ‘demagogic’. ‘Populist’, with all the negative connotations, is the best that could be said for such a person. Indeed, Jews denounce even the desires of Poles and Hungarians to defend their own nations as ‘far right’ while praising EU politicians who call for the replacement of white natives with Muslims and Africans are ‘moderate’ as the true paragons of ‘Western Values’.

It’s the rule of history that people will eventually lose their way without an inspired ruling elite to represent, guide, and lead them. In the US, white elites are no longer connected in any meaningful way to the white masses, and that goes for both the GOP and Democratic Party. Once the GOP pledged its main loyalty to Wall Street, Las Vegas, and Zionism, it was all about ‘free trade’ and Wars for Israel than doing what was good for white people or Americans in general. White people continued to vote for the GOP out of habit and also because the Democrats are even more hostile and nasty toward whites.
As for the Democratic Party, it had a sizable white working class constituency as long as it stood firm against Wall Street and ‘free trade’. But once Billy Boy Clinton signed NAFTA and shifted Democratic alliances from Big Labor to Big Business, the Party had less and less to offer to the white working class. So, the white working class got no representation and no leadership from both parties that were all about Wall Street or War Party. Even white politicians from white working class communities were funded by rich Jews and, once ensconced in DC, they were all about me, me, me and Israel, Israel, Israel.

And then, Jewish control of media pushed stuff like Jerry Springer and even worse rot into the living rooms of white working class and underclass folks. Hit with local economic depression due to globalism(that shipped factories overseas) and hit with soul-murdering cultural rot & filth — and without white political leadership to guide them — , the white working class was bound to grow diseased and demoralized. And then, the big city Jews and White Liberals shipped the thuggish ‘groids’ to white working class neighborhoods. Black boys beat up white boys and took white girls. White boys had only two choices. Turn cuck, imitate rappers, and admire black guys humping white girls OR fly the Confederate Flag and cling to guns as the last defense against black thuggery and Jewish gun-grab.

Anyway, Chua must know that her acknowledgment of White Grievances is bound to ruffle some PC feathers, especially because Jews and white cuck-collaborators despise ‘rural’ whites as irredeemable and deplorable subhuman scum. (Though Chua quotes from white gentile Kevin Williamson’s dismissive article on the white working class in The National Review, she fails to mention that cucks like him copped such attitude from their Jewish Globalist Masters.) So, to shore up her credentials as a proggy globalist, she dishes out a litany of black grievances such as: "Whites may feel threatened, but they do not face mass, disproportionate incarceration.. White parents do not live with fear, as many black parents do, that their children will be gunned down without cause by the police... White 3 yr olds are not asked why their skin looks ‘so dirty’[LOL]... Whites are generally not followed around in stores or asked for identification when no one else is questioned. They are not passed over by taxi drivers or subjected to constant media images of them in handcuffs. Whites do not have to see people react to them by clutching their purses and crossing the street and not regularly subjected to police brutality.... If many whites feel anxiety in today’s America, many blacks feel an existential threat that seems never to end."

Well, let me tell you... my first reaction to such nonsense is:

Now, of course, Chua would never write a paragraph expressing similar sympathy for Palestinians living under brutal occupation under Zionists. Indeed, if her kid decides to join the IDF and beat up and murder Palestinian women and children, I’ll bet Chua will be cheering from the sidelines... along with George W. Bush, Nikki Haley, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump. What Palestinians suffer under Jewish occupation is 1000x worse than what blacks face in the US, but Chua makes a mountain out of molehill with blacks while refusing to acknowledge the mountain of injustices against Palestinians because she is a mistress to the Hyper-Power of Zion and Judea.

Why does Chua show Affirmative-Action sympathy for blacks? It’s because Jews promoted Magic Negro trope and ‘white guilt’ as a cornerstone of New Americanism. Why? Because, in order for Jews to control white gentiles, the moral pride of whites had to be paralyzed, and this is why Jews play on slavery and Jim Crow(while never discussing their role in Ukraine famine, Bolshevik mass killings, Soviet Gulag and repression, global financial rape, Nakba Pogroms and Occupation, and using the US to wage Wars for Israel that have destroyed millions of Muslim lives).

Anyway, let’s take apart Chua’s gushing lamentation about Negroes one by one. She says whites don’t face disproportionate mass incarceration like blacks do. But this is because blacks commit a disproportionately higher percentage of crime. And black violence isn’t just black-on-black but black-on-white, black-on-Mexican, black-on-Asian, black-on-Muslim, and etc. Blacks are champions of criminality in the US. Colin Flaherty did a fantastic job of reporting on local black crime ignored by the national media that would rather focus on bogus narratives about Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown of the "Hands Up, Don’t Shoot" hoax. Of course, Jew-run Youtube took down Colin Flaherty’s channel because Jews favor the Narrative over the Reality, just like the Soviet Union pushed the false reports of bountiful harvests even when millions were starving in the countryside.
Chua complains that crime news often features black suspects, but it’s only because blacks commit much of the crime. If anything, the media do their best to suppress the FULL extent of black pathology. Also, by featuring respectable-looking black anchormen and news reporters, the media send the message, "Remember, boys and girls, not all blacks are thugs. Look at our clean-cut Negro anchorman." So, we have a strange media phenomenon in the US where so many crime stories involving blacks are reported by Nice Negroes. But the real hilarity is with Hollywood. Even though blacks dominate urban crime, many Hollywood movies shows white thugs or multi-racial gang of thugs terrorizing the city. ROBOCOP the original had mostly whites and even an Asian guy terrorizing Future Detroit. The old DEATH WISH and the remake feature mostly white or Hispanic-looking criminals.

Surely, Chua is familiar with the writings of Heather MacDonald who has studied race and crime from all angles. (My only disagreement with MacDonald is that she wants to save cities from black crime whereas I say LET THE NEGROES DESTROY THE CITIES FILLED WITH THEM SMUG PROGGY LIBERALS. End all stop-and-frisk policies and release all blacks from prison and send them to where people like Amy Chua and Malcolm Gladwell live.) Also, police statistics show that white police are less likely to use violence against blacks(because of the dire consequences of accusations of ‘racism’ and riots) than against similarly threatening whites. Chua says that while whites ‘may feel threatened’, they do not face mass incarceration. But much of the real threat that whites feel come from blacks. Blacks threaten whites, attack whites, rape whites, rob whites, and murder whites. And it’s because of black criminality that so many blacks are incarcerated! But Chua makes black criminals, many of whom have attacked whites(and other races), out to be victims of society. Also, whites who end up in prison face the very real danger of being anal-raped by big-ass Negroes. Mountain-sized Negroes in prisons don’t while way the time by petting little white mice and weeping like five year olds. Instead, they like to anal-rape white butts, a horror totally overlooked by the Jew-run media. But white inmates face danger not only from big Negroes from even smaller Negroes. It’s like plenty of smaller black boxers have beaten up bigger white boxers. Because blacks got more fast-twitch muscles, even a smaller Negro can beat up a bigger white guy, like Sugar Ray Leonard KO’ed Donnie LaLonde and Joe Louis defeated Primo Carnera. It’s like a cougar can kill a bigger bear because it is faster and fiercer. But Chua says NOTHING about all the white victims of black criminality and murderousness. She hasn’t the guts of Michelle Malkin who discussed the matter.

Furthermore, blacks know they are more muscular and can kick white butt. And even white proggies must know this in private because Hyde Park has a double wall of police protection. And this is why white/Jewish urban progs are so supportive of gentrification, Section 8(to drive out inner-city blacks), and immigration(to use Mexicans and Asians as buffers against blacks). Urban yuppie progs and academics like Chua make all the nice-sounding noises about ‘We care about blacks’ but push the very policies that further protect their own communities from black thuggery and savagery. Or, white Progs will come up with Onion-parody-news-like theories about how Detroit was punished by white people who were envious of Stevie Wonder. Ludicrous? Read Andrew O’Hehir that gawky school-marm-faced cuck-dork.

Chua then says white parents don’t worry about their kids being gunned down by the police. Chua’s lawyerly mind plays it both ways. You notice she doesn’t say that the White Police goes around shooting innocent blacks because she knows it’s not true. But because PC insists that we perpetuate the myth of Negro Victimhood, Chua feels obligated to sympathize with black parental fears, no matter how unwarranted they are. An any rate, white kids are less likely to get shot dead by the police or other whites because they don’t act as crazy as blacks for the most part. White kids are less likely to shoot one another over drugs, blings, and Air Jordans. Even with the explosion of the meth trade and addiction in white communities, there is less gang violence among whites because criminality is less a part of their culture. The problem with blacks is criminality is their culture even when they don’t commit crime.

Also, contra the hyped-up media narrative on Michael Brown, the fat moron was shot dead because he attacked and charged a police officer. The "hands up, don’t shoot" story was a complete fantasy, like Wakanda. The much racialized Obama administration went out of its way to nail the white cop but, after turning over every stone and digging every hole, the cop was exonerated... but still lost his job while the Brown family cashed in big time from the city. Also, the blacks went on a riot and looted stores and beat up innocent people. There is NO sympathy for those victims from Chua’s PC poison pen. Indeed, like so many yellow dogs who drank the PC Kool-Aid, she favors the Holy Three even over her own kind. Consider. With rising Chinese immigration to the US, there have been many stories of Chinese immigrants being attacked by blacks. But Chua mentions none of this. Here’s a story about how black violence against Asian kids was so bad that many Asians refused to attend school, but such reality doesn’t exist in the Chuaverse where blacks are eternal holy victims and where Asians must stick to their apportioned roles as cheerleaders for the Holy Three. (PC says if your group lacks iconic value, you must attach yourselves to a group that does. It’s no wonder so many sides invoke Holy Homos to justify their agenda. Pro-immigration-invasionists wave the Homo Flag as symbols of ‘inclusion’ and ‘tolerance while anti-immigration-invasionist also wave the Homo Flag as a symbol of ‘western values’ that must be protected from Muslims. Since Chinese have no iconic power, Chua is busy attaching herself to Jews, blacks, and etc.) If a black guy beat up her father & killed her mother and was arrested & locked up behind bars, Amy Chua’s PC brain would mope and go boo-hoo about how a black man has been ‘disproportionately incarcerated’.

Jared Taylor says it like it is, but of course, he’s a ‘white supremacist’, so we must censor and suppress his views, and instead go with the White Submissivist BS about blacks as Eternal Victims. We live in some weirdo nation when so much bad black behavior is swept under the rug while whites are blamed for crimes they didn’t even commit. Consider the Duke Lacrosse Case and the UVA hoax journalism about Haven Monahan and gang raping some woman. In contrast, so many black college students who’ve been raping and robbing left and right have only been slapped on the wrist. Most hilariously, the black film-maker of the new THE BIRTH OF A NATION, which gives a total false account of history, turned out to be a rapist himself. Even though Jew-run Hollywood has been making movies like THELMA & LOUISE that depict white working class guys as rapist thugs, the #MeToo scandal exposed tons of ‘liberal’ Jews in media and Hollywood as a bunch of pervs. And there is a ‘tribal’ aspect to their sexual aggression. As Jews, they love to prey on Shikses. But don’t expect Chua to mention any of that in POLITICAL TRIBES which is just service rendered to Jewish supremacist Tribal Power.

Another thing. If, as Chua says, black parents are so concerned about their poor little darlings, why do so many black men refuse to play the role of fathers? Why do they go from ‘ho’ to ‘ho’ to ‘ho’, impregnating various women like chimpanzees in the jungle? And if black women care so much about their kids, why do they allow their kids to grow up imitating rapper thugs and gangstaz? Why do they raise their girls to be a bunch of ‘bitch ass hos’? And even though there are surely bad cops(black as well as white) and, on occasion, innocent blacks do get killed by cops, almost all blacks who get killed by cops are NOT innocent victims but those who either shot back or reacted stupidly in tense situations. Cops are people too, and they don’t want to risk their own lives just to be ‘nice’. If the likes of Chua think they can be better cops, they should leave the Ivory Tower and go to police academy and deal with Michael Browns of the world themselves. But she lives in a world of privilege, nibbling on pricey imported cheese and sipping fancy wine, virtue-signaling with faux-outrage about how much she cares about blacks(while saying nothing of Palestinians except that they want to see Jews dead... apparently for no reason except ‘antisemitism’ perhaps? Never mind that the IDF killed over a thousand civilians in Gaza).

Also, these black parents are a bunch of lowlife a**holes who can’t face the truth of their addiction to the crack of black egotism. In fact, the biggest threat to a black male is ANOTHER black male. The notion that blacks have most to fear from white cops is just so much nonsense, the kind peddled by NYT that is also responsible for anti-Russian hysteria. (Of course, Jews at the Times don’t really care about real blacks, any more than they care about the truth about Russia. It’s about manipulating the news to serve GFJ or Good-For-Jews. New York Jews used tough measures to suppress black crime in their city and, in the process, made a lot of blacks angry. And so, they divert black rage at the Deep South or Ferguson so that urban blacks will be less likely to burn down NY.) If anything, following the riots in Ferguson and Baltimore, cops retreated from black communities, and guess what, surprise surprise, the black murder rate rose sharply. Heather MacDonald, a far braver soul than Chua, had the integrity to point this out. Chua, desperate to be invited to cocktail parties, still pretends that we are living in the America of TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD. In truth, non-blacks have most to fear from blacks. If you live in a city and are victimized by crime, the chances are that the mugger, rapist, thug, or knock-out-artist is black. But because blacks are one of the Holy Three, even Donald Trump pretends blacks are just victims of, say, Mexicans, when in fact, black-on-Mexican crime rate is much higher than vice versa.

There is NOTHING in Chua’s book about how fear of black crime has shaped much of American history. We just get this BS about how blacks were always victims of white violence and that blacks still face racial injustice when, in fact, blacks are the most aggressive, nasty, and brutal race from whom all other races try to run from, and that includes White, Jewish, and Asian Liberals. If Chua feels so much for the Negroes, why doesn’t she move her family to black Baltimore or St. Louis? Does she think of blacks are more criminal, more thuggish, more dangerous? Oh really? Well, well, how ‘racist’ of her! Chua is one of those hypocrites who say one thing but do another. Hanging around Jews, the most hypocritical people in the world, she’s turned into a class A hypocrite herself. Jews rail against ‘supremacism’ but are the biggest supremacists whoeven restarted the ‘cold war’ with Russia(a nation with a GDP smaller than that of South Korea) because it won’t put out to Judea and Homomania. Jews, who denounce Poland and Hungary for wanting to preserve their nations and cultures, exert pressure on all Americans to support Israel that only allows Jewish immigration, forbids African ‘infiltrators’(who are not called ‘dreamers’ there), and still occupies West Bank.

But it gets even funnier. Chua says ‘white three yr olds’ are not asked why their skin is ‘so dirty’. What? So, are we to believe that black three year olds are routinely asked, "Why is your skin so dirty?" ROTFL.

Where did she get this? From her parents or Chinese people? White people are so deathly afraid of being called ‘racist’ that they wouldn’t dare ask such a question to a black child. If anything, white kids are made to feel that their souls are soiled and dirty from cradle. PC instills white self-loathing from a young age whereas black kids, along with Jewish kids, are made to feel they got noble-victim blood flowing through their golden veins just by the color of their skin or shape of their noses. According to Nancy Pelosi, her grandkid wants to look like a Guatemalan brownie. And mulatto children, even those who look more white than black, prefer to identify as black because ‘black is noble’ whereas ‘white is racist’. Media run stories of how mixed-raced kids are smarter, more beautiful, and better in everything.
Mestizo Guillermo, the mixed-race ubermensch of Future Taconda
Also, white kids grow up to rap music and black sports. White boys want to be black-like, and increasing number of white girls want to have black babies, just like Chua wanted to have Jewish/white babies than yellow ones that she might have deemed as slanty-eyed, bucktoothed, and ugly.
Now, there was once a study about how black kids want to play with white dolls than black ones, but that was yesterday. In today’s America, blackness is the new cultural icon of American-ness. Rachel Dolezal loves blackness so much that she pretended to be black. Shaun White, who looks mostly white, claims to be partly black because his white mother supposedly cheated on her white husband and had sex with a light-skinned black man. The fact is blacks have huge iconic value in the US as they dominate sports & music, and because black women’s butts and black men’s dongs are seen as prized items by whites, like in the movie GET OUT where these Liberal whites love blackness so much that they kill black people to take over their bodies and be black themselves... or so I’m told by those who’ve seen the movie.
If any people have no iconic value, it’s squat Mexicans, geeky Asians(after all, Chua herself rejected Chinese men as inferior), cranky Muslims(who lack the wit and verve of their Semitic brethren, the Jews), and Hindus(whose only iconic value is funny accent). America reveres blacks so much that Hollywood made BLACK PANTHER to fantasize a black utopia when, in fact, blacks have been the lousiest in building and maintaining modern societies. But the Narrative of the Holy Three decrees that blacks be regarded as Eternal Victims, so Chua twists facts and logic to do her part in the boo-hoo lamentation about blacks.

Chua says whites are not followed around in stores like blacks are. Now, why is that? LOL. Must I spell it out again? It’s because blacks steal a lot. They are more prone to steal due to evolutionary factors. Whites and Asians evolved in colder climates where people had to work closer and cooperate more. So, if one person got wild, he was likely exiled or killed, and his traits were weeded out. And when whites and Asians developed civilizations, they had strict rules and measures that punished and weeded out individuals who acted out of order. In contrast, black Africans, like rough Maori folks, evolved in a hunter-warrior environment where those who fought, killed, and grabbed-and-ran the fastest were honored and rewarded the most. Blacks evolved closer to wild animals and became more in tune with nature in which all organisms try to steal from one another. Now, it’s true enough that not all blacks steal, and we can sympathize with good blacks who are suspected of being like bad blacks. But even good blacks refuse to address the problem and often side with bad blacks in the name of racial solidarity. And blacks act like this all over the world. There was a case of black marching band that was invited to Japan. So, what did they do in their host country? They acted like they do in the US, only more so as they regarded the polite Japanese as easy prey. And Chua, being Chinese, surely heard of the recent case where some black basketball players in China got arrested for, yup, stealing. And when Trump bailed them out, what was one father’s attitude? Just a middle finger and no remorse whatsoever. And how do Somalis act in Minnesota? And this is blacks in Florida stealing and going crazy. And how are those Sudanese acting in Australia? Are they showing gratitude? Or are they acting like hyenas feeding on easy prey? This is why so many academics are worthless on certain ‘sensitive’ issues. Because they live in their cloistered little bubble of privilege and status-vanity(of having the right kind of views), they pick and choose facts(and even regurgitate lies) to bolster their delusional self-regard as ‘progressives’. Indeed, Chua’s pathos about blacks is really just patting herself on the back for caring so much for one of the Holy Three... even though she will never move to a black neighborhood.
Since Chua has it nice and her family is affluent and her girls grew up as princesses and will live in a world of comfy connections, she doesn’t have to deal with the reality of black lunacy and terror.

There is something especially nuts about black violence. There are many depressed white, Hispanics, and even Asian communities in the US, but people don’t act like wild baboons. West Virginia is dirt poor, but poor ‘white trash’ still don’t go for chimpouts and ‘sheboon’ behavior. Ordinary folks like you and me know the reality because we never knew the privileged life that the likes of Chua enjoy. We can’t play pick-and-choose with reality like a couch-potato with a remote control. But that is exactly what Chua does.
And it gets funnier as her litany goes on. She says whites don’t have to worry about Taxi drivers passing them by. But why do cabbies, INCLUDING BLACK ONES, not want to pick up suspicious-looking blacks? Because cab-driving is THE MOST DANGEROUS profession in America, even more so than being a police officer. And why is it so dangerous? Because of black robbers. Now, I can sympathize with any decent black guy who was passed over by a cabbie, but these cabbies(including black ones) are not trying to be bigoted. They just don’t want to get shot in the head. They want to go home to their wife and kids. Many cabbies are immigrants or working class.

But Chua cares more about the butt-hurt feelings of blacks than of cabbies who could easily end up six feet underground by picking up the wrong passenger. Chua and her hubby never have to worry about returning home to see their dogs and kids. But Chua is heartless when it comes to immigrant and working class cabbies who might not return home to their kids because they picked up the wrong guy and got their brains blown out. If Chua cares so much about blacks who are passed over by ‘racist’ cabbies, why doesn’t she give up[ her precious job as Yale Law Professor and drive a cab in a black neighborhood? I’ll bet she’s escorted around in limos and fly around first-class, but she turns up her noses and virtue-signals about those poor-poor blacks. Gimme a break.

Chau says blacks feel like they face an ‘existential threat that never seems to end’. But, where does this threat come from? It comes from black-on-black violence. The overwhelming number of dead blacks are killed by crazy blacks. The other ‘existential’ threat comes from Mass Immigration-Invasion. In 1964 when blacks got full rights, they were the overwhelming minority in the US. Indeed, they were the ONLY minority that counted. But with the 1965 immigration bill, the US flung its doors to the world. And then, blacks had to compete with the entire world that just kept pouring in and in. Within a few decades, blacks got passed over by ‘Hispanics’ as the biggest minority. Also, globalism that shipped so many factories to Mexico, India, China, and etc. took away lots of jobs from blacks. But Chua the globalist doesn’t mention any of this. Oddly enough, when she isn’t virtue-signaling about blacks, she is virtue-signaling about illegal aliens, aka ‘dreamers’, who should be called ‘wet-dreamers’. Now, don’t illegals take jobs and college slots from blacks as well as from white working class? But then, don’t expect any consistency of logic or morality from someone like Chua who hedges her bets on all issues.

So, why does Chua spew such total nonsense? It’s because of the Rule of the Holy Three. Because Jews, Negroes, and Homos are sacred, we can must talk about them as innocent victims WITHOUT honestly taking into account the WHY of their misfortunes, past and present. For example, why do many people around the world have hostile feelings toward Jews? According to the current Narrative of the Holy Three, it’s entirely gentiles’ fault and never ever the Jews’ fault. Jews are always pure and innocent, and gee whiz, we can’t imagine why anyone would dislike, resent, or hate such wonderful wise people.
As for homos, how did the HIV epidemic happen? Could it be that so many homos tend to be excessive, self-indulgent, wild, and degenerate in behavior? If the relatively staid and stuffy Alllan Bloom contracted HIV by ass-buggery, imagine what the less inhibited homos were doing in bath-houses and other places. They were acting like wild bonobos when it came to ‘bunging’. They were like bungobos. But let’s just shut our minds to reality and just think of the angelic-saint-yuppie homo played by Tom Hanks in PHILADELPHIA who is so noble that he even wins the respect of a cynical Negro ambulance chasing lawyer who done realize, sheeeeeeiiiiit, mebbe homos be even holier victim-folks than we Negroes be, dang! So, when it comes to the HIV epidemic in the 80s, never ever blame homo behavior since homos are the rainbows that now even festoon churches. Just blame "Reagan’s Indifference" or "our fear and intolerance". In fact, many more homos would have lived IF they’d listened to sober advice about sexual morality and restraint.
And then, there are Negroes. Because of the history of slavery and Jim Crow, it’s understandable why there has been this special sympathy for blacks. Also, Jews and white folks created this iconic image of the Noble Negro who be soulfully noble and shit. Such Negro never existed in reality, but GOOD white folks wanted to believe. It goes back to Uncle Tom. The Noble Negro is both pro-black and anti-black. It willfully suppresses the wild side of blackness in order to make the Negro safe for white consumption. It can be boiled down to, "I will worship you Negroes if you don’t kick my butt." Whites knew that blacks are more muscular and wilder. But whites also knew that slavery and discrimination were unjust and wrong. But if whites tried to make amends just by setting blacks free, there was the danger that Negroes might go wild and beat up whitey and holler like the angry simians in THE CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES. This has been the White Conundrum. If whites had enslaved a smaller people like Bolivian peasants, Pygmies, or Chinese, the end of slavery would have been easier. But because blacks can be super-destructive if they run wild with their harder muscles and bongo-wongo personalities, white folks were confounded as to what to do. So, they concocted this Ideal of the Noble Negro. This Noble Negro is full of tragedy and sorrow. He done carry all the hurt of the black experience, shoo! A part of him wants to whup the white boy, growl like Mike Tyson, and demand "where the white women at?" But and it’s a very BIG BUT, he is NOBLE, and as a Noble Negro, he is willing to forgive the white man, seek reconciliation, and sing "Ole Man River" or bellow "I have a Dream". That is the Grand Bargain. The Negro, though filled with righteous pain, forgives white folks and chooses peace in the understanding that white folks all go "Boo-Hoo-Hoo, sorry Mr. And Mrs. Negro, we will worship your nobility." And so, we have the mountain-sized Negro in GREEN MILE(who looks like he could whup a million white boys) weeping like a boo-boo baby. So, a towering Negro that looks like an entire gorilla tribe and King Kong put together just wants to pet his little white mouse.
"I's a Noble Negro. I don't want to whup white boys. It ain't me sayin', 'Where da white women at?' 'Murder'? 'Rape'? What dey be? Such ideas never crossed my mind dat be a terrible thing to waste on revenge. What I wants to do is pet a little white mouse, which goes to show I forgives white creatures, big and small, for whatever wrong dey's might have done. Shoo."
The problem is this is all a sham because the Noble Negro is a white construct(aided by cynical Jews). Noble Negro is like the tooth fairy or Santa Claus. It’s for infantile minds or adult minds stunted by PC. This is why Chua turns into Joyce Carol Oates on the Negro Question. In the real world, black guys just want blings and flings. They look upon whitey with contempt as ‘weak’ and be hollering "Where da white women at?" Sure, blacks can be savvy enough to play the Noble Negro(or Magic Negro) to get gibs from gullible whitey... like in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION.

Even today, the GOP salivates at the sight of any Black Conservative. And Democrats are so desperate for the Noble Negro that they pretend Al Sharpton is a legitimate moral leader and that Ta Nehisi Coates is some kind of genius, the James Baldwin of our age. (James Baldwin was a genuine intellect and artist.) Obama played a slicker version of the Noble Negro though it was closer to the Clean-Cut Negro. As a politician, he obviously couldn’t play it pure, but the campaign promoted him as The One, the messianic patcher of holes in souls of naive gullible white folks.
The problem with this sickly delusion is whites are making a pact with their own construct that has no bearing on reality. Saints are rare in any race, and even rarer among blacks who are naturally prone to more aggression, psychopathy, vanity, self-centered jive-assery. Sainthood and nobility can only come from self-criticism, introspection, and confession of one’s own failings. Even Jesus fasted and meditated for 40 days to expunge evil temptations within Him. A saint sees evil all around, but he begins his spiritual and moral journey by expunging his own heart and soul of temptation and vanity. But what is black morality is about? "We are totally innocent, and it’s all whitey’s fault, so gimme gimme gimme, or we will burn the city down." If blacks want a serious conversation about their problems, then Okay. But every black attitude or cause begins with Moral Diva-ism: "We be pure as snow, our souls be godlike, we be always right, and if you don’t kiss our ‘twerking’ booty, you be racist and shit." Whites are so addicted to the cult of Noble Negro that they project this fantasy even onto the most Ignoble Niggaz. It’s like indulging an alcoholic with free liquor. If any race is intoxicated with its own ego, it be blacks. This is why black men and women can’t get along in a free society. It’s all about ME than WE.

Precisely because blacks are naturally prone to be more self-centered, nasty, and narcissistic, it is not a good idea to indulge black moral vanity. It’s like pouring gasoline on fire. But that is exactly what we do in the Current West. There is this idea that if we praise them enough, love them enough, admire them enough, extol them enough, and even worship them enough, they will stop acting crazy and come around to acting nice, gentle, and kindly... when, in fact, such appeasement further emboldens their lunacy.
Even people who have been wronged can have character flaws, personal or collective, and it’s not a good thing to indulge their vanity. Germans suffered a lot during the Depression as the result of the Versailles Treaty, but appeasing Nazi Germany sure made things worse. Chinese suffered a lot at the hands of ‘foreign devils’, but Maoism proved how a people intoxicated with self-righteous moral vanity can do more harm than good. It’s no different with the Negroes. Sympathy is good but it should never become weak-kneed appeasement for the worst representatives of the aggrieved community. (Given what Russia went through at the hands of Jewish globalists in the 1990s, the world should be grateful for a leader like Putin who wants to bury the hatchet and get along with the world community. But the Judeo-Nazis happen to rule the world, and they eye Russia just like Hitler eyed Poland. They want it all and hate Putin for saying ‘nyet’, but the West, afflicted with the Cult of Eternal Holy Jew, carry on with the charade that Putin is ‘Hitler’ while Judea stands for ‘liberal democracy’.)
And yet, it’s further complicated by the paradox that, even as white/Jewish Liberals push the political construct of the pacifistic Noble Negro, the real reason why whites/Jews are so drawn to blacks is precisely because blacks are so dangerous and aggressive. It excites the whites to see such a wildass and badass folks. Indeed, if blacks were mostly like Emmanuel Lewis or Gary Coleman, there never would have been a need for the Noble Negro myth. After all, what harm could tiny blacks do to white folks? Even if Gary Coleman or Emmanuel Lewis were angry and said, "I hate you whitey for enslaving my people", white folks would just pet them on the head and say, "Sorry kid. Here’s $20, why don’t you get a bucket of chicken on me." Noble Negro myth was appealing because the Negro was like Jack Johnson kicking all the white butts and hollering, "Where the white women at?" Whites didn’t know what to do. A part of them wanted to say, "Look, blacks are stronger, more aggressive, and can kick our white butt. If we lose our white manhood to Negroes, our womenfolk are gonna get jungle fever and go off with the jivers. So we gotta either send blacks back to Africa or give them a separate nation in America." But, Americans simply lacked such resolve because they were too Christian and too much into the Constitutional myth of equality. So, even as white folks practiced racial discrimination against blacks, they wanted to believe that, maybe and somehow, a compromise could be hammered out in the long run between the races. And this is why the Noble Negro myth was necessary. Whites hoped that blacks would look upon the Noble Negro trope and emulate it. If whites showed how much they revered the Noble Negro, maybe the real Negroes will unclench their fists and try to be like the Noble Negro — nice, kindly, forgiving instead of looking mean and scary — to get some love and affection from white folks. But in fact, Uncle Tom was a fictional character, along with the giant Negro in GREEN MILE. And the #1 Noble Negro role-player MLK was, in reality, not noble and not saintly but a wild-ass satyr who wallowed in filth and degeneracy. They say Billy Boy Clinton and Donald Trump failed to lead exemplary lives, but they were choir boys compared to MLK the king-kong-ding-dong mofo.

But because blacks are one of the Holy Three, the Tiger Mother turns into a Pussycat. Even when blacks are punished for criminal acts, Chua focuses on the black being incarcerated than on why he got arrested in the first place. So, if a black thug rapes a white woman or kills a white man, Chua expresses zero sympathy for white victims. Instead, she just virtue-signals by going boo-hoo-hoo over another black guy being ‘disproportionately’ locked up in prison. I wonder if she’d feel the same way if some black guy killed her father, husband, or kids. Would her primary concern be that a black guy will be locked up than the fact that he killed her loved ones? But of course, she doesn’t have to worry about such since her family are so rich, privileged, and well-connected. They go to the best schools, live in the nicest neighborhoods, and hang with the ‘best kind of people’. So, for Chua, black criminality is just an abstraction she can polemicize to suit her biases. She can just moan and groan about ‘disproportionate incarceration’ among Negroes while ignoring the WHY.

Suppose Chinese-Americans acted like blacks and committed lots of crime. Wouldn’t they be disproportionately locked up? Would that be unjust? Proportionately, more men than women are locked up. More white students than Asian students are punished in school. So, is the System necessarily anti-male or anti-white(at least in relation to Asians who tend to make less trouble in school)?
Chua’s precious attitude about blacks gives us a glimpse into the mindset of the privileged cocktail party circuit. Vain and vapid, what matters most is to be accepted by equally vain, privileged, and snotty peers by spouting pieties about the Holy Three. There is a side to Chua that wants to be a free thinker, but her vanity trumps virtue in favor of inane virtue-signaling by rules of PC.

6. Amy Chau discusses Islamism as a form of tribalism, but problem of Islam derives from a weird combination of tribalism and universalism. Muslims do see the Near East as their home, and they resent Western invasion of their lands. But sectarian conflicts among Muslims often lead to competing Muslim alliances with Western(and even Zionist) Imperialists(whom they privately detest) to gain an advantage over other Muslim sects or ethnic groups — there is also the problem of Arab Christians. (Similarly, European Christians allied with Muslims against other Christians when it was expedient to do so. Christian Ukrainians allied with Tatar Muslims against Polish Catholics. Germans sided with the Muslim Ottoman Empire against Russia and France. Britain sided with Arab Muslims against Ottoman Empire and Imperial Germany. So, all these crazy alliances between Arabs/Muslims and the West are nothing new and hardly different from Japan, Taiwan, and Vietnam being allied with the US against China, which currently is allied with Russia.) Even though Muslims want the West out of the Near East, they also need the West as support system against other Muslim tribes, clans, and sects. Narcissism of Small Differences is big in the Muslim World. So, Saudis will side with the US and Israel against Iran and Shia Muslims. Iran will side with Russia against Sunni Muslims. Alawites in Syria will side with Russia against Sunni rebels. And Sunni rebels of all stripes, from ISIS to Alqaeda, will side with Israel against Other Muslims. Various Muslim clans in Libya sided with the West to overthrow Gaddafi whom they considered too Western and secular — what irony of ironies! Even though most Muslims are focused on making MENA(Middle East and North Africa) great again, they are now also sensing that they can eventually conquer the West. Not with arms(because the West is militarily so much more advanced than the Muslim World) but with migration, birthrates, and conversion. Muslims see Europe as rich but decadent and soulless. They see whites as useless cucks who’ve abandoned their own great Christian tradition for Afro-boogie and jungle fever. The West is ruled by Jews and addicted to the Jungle. Maybe Jihad can win over Jews and the Jungle. Granted, many Muslims in the West also succumb to lifestyles of decadence and degeneracy, but there is a committed contingency of Muslims in all European nations who believe the future is theirs if they keep the faith. (Also, even Muslims or Arabs who do fall into Western hedonism and excess may seek redemption and rejuvenation through a born-again Islamism. After all, extreme-hedonism can easily lead people astray, and lost souls seek meaning. Also, even decadent Muslims soon realize that they mean nothing in the Pop Culture Hierarchy that favors blacks, homos, Jews, and whites.) In a way, Islam does have aspects of tribalism. Unlike Christianity that is credo-centered, Islam fused universalism with the particular customs & practices unique to the Semitic world. If Christianity detached Judaic ideas from Judaic customs to formulate a universalism, Islam reattached the universalism inspired by Christianity with Arab-Semitic and some Judeo-Semitic practices. So, if you want to be Christian, you can keep most of your original culture and customs. What matters most is that you believe in Jesus as your Savior. In contrast, to be a Muslim, it’s not enough to believe in Allah and honor Muhammad as the last Prophet. You must live the Muslim Way that goes back to ancient and medieval Arab tribal customs. Yet, Islam is also an aggressive universalist religion, and Muslims try to spread their faith everywhere. And unlike Christians who apologize for their past violence in spreading the Faith — as having been a betrayal of Jesus’ message of love and peace — , Muslims feel no guilt about having used violence as a ‘conversionary’ tool because Muhammad himself preached violent Jihad to either spiritually save or physically slay the Infidel. Now, Christians were no less violent in forcing other peoples to convert, but at least in principle, Christianity is about love and forgiveness, not about violence and aggression. In contrast, Islam is more like Judaism in its precepts of moral and spiritual warfare, the only difference being Jews feel justified in killing bushels of goyim to preserve Judaism whereas Muslims feel justified in killing bushels of infidels to expand Islam. Neither religion is into apologizing to infidels or goyim for past violence. Muslims always felt justified in their violence, as have Jews and Zionists in theirs. However, the differences is Islam is a universalist faith despite its particularist Arab-cultural baggage whereas Judaism is a particularist faith(that discourages conversion of gentiles to Judaism) with universal ambition for power. Even though most Jews are now secular, they retain the Chosen-People-Complex. They strongly guard their Jewishness — even when they marry non-Jews, they insist the kids be raised as Jews first and foremost — and yet also seek domination over other peoples(goyim seen as cattle). Jews go for Jewhad. In many respects, the Jewish Way is closer to the Roman Way. Romans sought hegemony over other peoples but didn’t try to turn other peoples into Romans or make them worship Roman gods(even though Christian Rome did try to force Christianity on everyone in the Domain). In time, Romans granted Roman Imperial citizenship to non-Romans, even to pesky Jews, but Romans still had a sense of who were real Romans and who were mere citizens. Jews could be Roman citizens but not Romans. In time, however, the distinctions between Romans and non-Romans broke down as the Roman military relied more and more on non-Roman recruits. As a united fighting machine, Romans had felt proud and special to be Roman. But when Roman military filled with bigger and stronger Germanic barbarians who could whup Romans on a mano-a-mano basis, individual Roman pride was broken. It’s like whites had great pride when they fought together against the darkies like in the classic movie ZULU. So, while blacks are tougher than whites as individuals, the combined might of white unity was near-invincible as long as there was a wall between whiteness and non-whiteness. But once whites let blacks into white ranks, blacks began to whup whites on a man-to-man basis, and this undermined white pride and unity as the new iconic individual champions of the white world became the Jivers. As an exclusive unity, whites could defeat blacks and share collective pride as a race(like the collective effort in DUNKIRK where everyone does his part for the good of the whole). But once blacks were allowed into the white order, showboating individual blacks beat up whites, and the loss of white individual pride eventually undermined white collective pride as well.
Also, when Christianity made inroads into Roman culture, it further eroded the sense of Roman-ness because all Christians within the Roman Empire were equal before Jesus. The ensuing erosion of the particularity of Roman glory and might was bound to weaken respect for Roman authority throughout the empire. The Eastern half of the Roman Empire that survived lacked the robustness of the once great Western Empire. It was ‘Roman’ in name only. Lacking a clear ethnic delineation of who ruled and who obeyed, the Byzantine Empire just became a labyrinth of conspiracy and corruption.

Anyway, Islam is particularly problematic in our world because it’s a two-faced phenomenon. It has both a powerful universalist and a resilient tribal component. (In the West, it is seen as both an ‘existential threat’ and a ‘victim identity’ in need of protection.) Just like Christianity once became almost synonymous with White Europe, Islam became mostly synonymous with the Middle East and North Africa, the world of Arabs, Persians, and others. Granted, Islam spread to black Africa and parts of South Asia and Southeast Asia and even to parts of Philippines. However, the cultural and intellectual center of Islam remained in the Near East. Malaysians and Indonesian haven’t done much to define World Islam. The battle for the Heart of Islam is still mainly between Arab Sunnis and Iranian Shias. Also, Muslims who act most radically tribal are also the most fanatically universal, a crazy kind of paradox. ISIS is a clear example of this. On the one hand, their purist version of Islam is so radical that it has led to the most extreme us-versus-them dichotomy. And yet, because they are so nomadic, globalist in scope, and internet-savvy, theirs is a kind of World Movement. Though it has been crippled in Syria thanks to Iran and Russia — and finally even from the US(under Trump administration as opposed to Obama administration that allowed ISIS to run wild to mess up Syria for Israeli interests) — , it appealed to youth like no other Islamic movement. It was like Punk Islam. How many young Muslims living in Europe got excited about Iran, Turkey, or Saudi Arabia, all seen as Establishment Islam dominated by old men? In contrast, ISIS looked young and fresh, an Islamic Counterculture, a way for young Muslims to play Che Guevara. It channeled the energy of Rap thuggery, Punk Rock, and May 68 Movement’s middle finger to the Establishment Leftism of the Communist Party and the Soviet Union. It was like Islamism as the new Red Army Faction or Baader-Meinhof Group. Youth have energy but also stupidity, and ISIS has been one of the most demented movements, comparable to the Red Guards in the throes of Cultural Revolution and Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. ISIS makes the Iranian Revolutionary Guards look like Mr. Rogers Neighborhood. But Jews found ISIS and other Jihadi elements useful as 'destabilizer' of Iraq and Syria(allies of Iran), and so, the Jew-run US did precious little to do help Syria and Iraq combat the radical cancer. If anything, Israel and the proxies of the US directly aided ISIS. (From 1865 to 1965, just a few thousands of blacks were killed by white violence. In contrast, US and Israeli strategy in MENA has killed 100,000s, by some estimates millions, in two decades beginning with anti-Iraqi sanctions that killed so many with famine and disease — Madeline Albright is to Iraq what Lazar Kaganovich was to Ukraine. It also led to millions being forced into refugee status. But Chua only sheds crocodile tears for blacks idolized by the Narrative. Lacking Autonomy of Sympathy, she has nothing to say about the crimes of Anglo-Zionism is turning MENA upside down. She also overlooks the grisly history of black-on-white crime.) Given the geopolitical context, we need to discuss another aspect of tribalism. It is often a weapon of Judea. Even though Chua argues that the idealistic West naively overlooks the matter of tribalism in its foreign policy and overseas ventures, the truth is far more complicated. Yes, sometimes the West is blind to local realities and think ‘all black Africans are alike’ or ‘all yellow folks are alike’ and 'all the world will be made better with shopping malls and election booths'. But there are times when the Judea-ruled US is totally cognizant of the tribal or sectarian tensions bubbling beneath the surface and willfully exploit them in divide-and-rule tactics to unleash chaos so that the globalist empire can fill the vacuum. This was obvious in Ukraine where Judea stoked the most extreme flames of nationalism to undermine Russian influence. And despite Ukrainian military aggression and even acts of terror against Russians in the Donbass region, the Jew-run US media and government pushed the Narrative of Russia as the aggressor. (Jew cries out in pain as he punches you.) Judea even recruited Neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine to do the dirty work. Jew-run US policy wasn’t naive in Ukraine. It cynically stoked and exploited 'tribal' differences. And same goes for Syria and Libya. Jews knew all about the tribal and clan divisions in those nations and intentionally spread chaos to bring down Gaddafi and to cripple Assad’s regime is allied with Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah. According to Chuanalysis, Americans are well-meaning but just naive. But more often than not, the Jew-run US is exceedingly cynical and cutthroat in exploiting the strategy of divide-and-conquer to gain control over other nations. Indeed, that is the reason why Jews push more Diversity on ALL gentile nations while permitting Jewish-Only-Immigration to Israel. Jews are NOT naive enough to believe that Diversity is a Strength(to the native majority population) or a blessing. They value Diversity as a wedge in gentile nations because a gentile nation divided unto itself is far easier to penetrate and manipulate than a nation that is united. It is when the husband and wife break up that the lawyers can profit from the rift. After all, it’s the division of Korea that allows the US to play south versus north. It’s the division of Sino-sphere into China and Taiwan(despite its small size) that allows the US to play the game of ‘our chinks’ versus ‘mainland chinks’. When Jews say, ‘Diversity is Our Strength’, they don’t mean it’s a strength for ALL peoples. They mean DIOS is good for Jewish minority elites because they can play divide-and-rule among the many goyim. And even in homogeneous nations, Jews play divide-and-conquer by creating ideological divisions. Consider radical feminism(that divides men and women), youth culture(that divides young and old), and homomania(that divides decent moral folks and decadent degenerate folks who conflate homo fecal penetration with the ‘rainbow’ that is associated with christian churches). So, while Chua is right that US foreign policy sometimes overlooks the factor of race, ethnicity, tribe, and clan, she is willfully blind as to how the US, especially under Jewish control, consciously exploits tribal differences to weaken and gain advantage over other peoples and lands. The Yugoslavian breakup may have been inevitable(maybe or maybe not), BUT the US policy cunningly stoked ethnic divisions in Yugoslavia. As the dominant Orthodox Serbs were closer to Russia, the US policy encouraged breakup to draw much of Yugoslavia to the West. And in the Vietnam War, the US recruited the Hmong people with full knowledge that them Mountain Folks had tribal issue with other Laotians.

Chua details the some of gruesome acts carried out by ISIS and other Muslim terrorists, and indeed, one would have to be sociopathic not to be repulsed. But is the US or Israeli way of warfare really any more humane? New revelations show that the US intended to drop 12 more atomic bombs if Japan didn’t surrender after Nagasaki. Douglas MacArthur, who denounced the nuking of Japan as contrary to American honor, called on Truman administration to drop 10 big ones along Chinese-Korean border. We recoil from images of ISIS burning people alive, but the US dropped tons of napalm on Vietnam knowing full well that many people(and animals in the jungle) would be incinerated in the most gruesome way. So, what does that tell you? It goes to show that, in the rage of war, all sides lose their minds and act in inhuman ways. That is a universal truth. It’s like sports. In the heat of competition, players will go to any lengths to win... which is why referees are necessary because players driven to rage will even bite off ears and gouge out eyes of opponents. The horrors of WWII and the Yugoslavian conflict, as well as terrorism carried out by both Shias and Sunnis in the Middle East, have to be seen in this light. Granted, it may seem worse when Muslims do it because terrorism just seems more ‘ugly’. But there is no clear distinction between terrorism and conventional warfare. When Israel dropped all those bombs on Gaza, a lot of innocent civilians were killed in gruesome. When the US uses drone-strikes against suspected terrorists, the strikes often kill many innocents. The US employs convenient terms like ‘collateral damage’, but when we look at some of the results of US(or Russian) bombings, it’s mass-terrorism by another name. (That said, we mustn’t succumb to the fallacy of moral equivalence. Just because all sides in war commit war crimes and horrible atrocities does NOT mean they are morally equal in values and principles. US, UK, and USSR committed serious war crimes against Germany in WWII, but they were still the good or better guys against a truly insane ideology and agenda. Same goes for US vs Japan. Though both sides acted horribly, the Japanese agenda was nearly as demented as the German one. If all sides acted like monsters in the war, the post-war peace illustrated the moral superiority of the Allied vision. Once Japans and Germans were defeated, they were still treated like human beings by the victors. But imagine if Germany had won over Russia and Japan had won over China. The ‘peace’ would have led to mass exterminations and enslavement. But that was then, this is now. Today, Judea-ruled US is the greatest source of Evil in the world. It Sorosian agenda is to destroy the ethnic, cultural, and historical fabrics of nations. Its spiritual vision is homomania. Its message is Rap thug music. Its instruction to youth is the pornification of mainstream culture. Its academia and media are the Ministry of Propaganda. Its economy is the financial rape of nations. Its cultish idols are Magic Negro, Holy Homo, and Sacred Jew. Its neo-ubermensch-ism is ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs to be welcomed by cucked out ‘white boys’. PC says ‘race is a social construct’, BUT Jews and blacks are deemed especially holy and Homos are angels and saints. THIS is the Template that is pushed onto the entire world by Hollywood, Wall Street, CIA, FBI, Ivy League, Las Vegas, Silicon Valley, Music Industry, and Big Media.) And there is also economic terrorism, like when the US chokes the bloodline of a nation, sometimes resulting in disease and mass-starvation that affects millions of lives. (Also, the US as lone super-power gets to decide what is or isn’t a ‘rogue nation’. By universal standards of morality, the US has certainly been the biggest rogue nation since the end of the Cold War. But both Republicans and Democrats are too busy chanting USA USA USA in praise of US as the ‘exceptional nation’ to ever wake up to their own madness and perfidy. During the Bush regime, it was the Republicans who were especially supportive of neo-imperialism. But at the Democratic convention in 2016, the Democrats were more supportive of Deep State and neo-imperialism because their guys, Obama and Hillary, made an even bigger mess of the Middle East and restarted ‘new cold war’ with Russia. And father Khan of the Gold Star Family was welcomed on-stage in support of Invade-Invite globalist strategy. A Muslim father brought his Muslim son to fight for Judea-ruled America against Muslim nations. That became the face of New Progressivism.) ISIS is scum, but it didn’t create(but merely exploited) the current chaos in the Middle East and North Africa. Judea created those conditions. Judea, by using the US as its bouncer and bully, wreaked havoc on MENA(Middle East and North Africa). Chaos and broken borders enabled Jihadis, terrorists, mercenaries, and foreign armies to enter Syria from all sides. Syria is a poster-child of what happens to a nation when it loses control over its borders. And the EU is yet another of the disasters that befall a nation that forgoes border security. Hungary and Poland are resolved to control their own borders and save their own nations. But Germany and Sweden have been ‘syrianized’ — 80% of ‘refugees’ are not even Syrians — in the name of taking in ‘refugees’.
But, Chua is a globalist who sides with illegal invaders in the US against real American citizens. She is fazed by the fact that illegal aliens take academic positions from real Americans. But what’s really pathetic is that she pushes for Open Borders for the interests of OTHER peoples than her own. If Chinese support open borders in Australia and Canada to take over those nations, at least it would be in Chinese interests. If Jews are for Jews and Turks are for Turks, why shouldn’t Chinese be for Chinese? Instead, Chua presses for globalism to serve Judea. If Judea tried to penetrate China and take over its institutions, she would probably support that too.

JOEL OSTEEN, the repulsive Benedict-Cumberbatch-faced crook who preaches the go$$$pel. Osteen-ism is like Mormonism crossed with Imelda-Marcosism.
Creflo Dollar's Granddaddy
7. Chua’s class arrogance rears its conceited head in the passage: "When American Dream eludes them(white middle class and working class) — even when it mocks them, or spits in their face — they would sooner turn on the Establishment, or on the law, or on immigrants and other outsiders, or even on reason, than turn on the dream itself."

Now, I have no beef with Chua’s view that too many Americans are morons. It’s true that American Populism isn’t anti-capitalist and tends to be distrustful of ‘socialism’. But then, is it really different on groups on the so-called ‘left’? Blacks are allied with the ‘left’(for more gibs), but they are obsessed with rich celebrities, bling, Cadillacs with fuzzy dice, gold-plated, images of rapper tycoons with mansions and swimming pools, and etc. And even though Chua contrasts Hugo Chavez’s socialist-populism with America’s pro-capitalist(or at least anti-anti-capitalist) populism, her account of Venezuelan mass obsession with beauty contests and pop culture suggests even Chavez-supporters are really rich-wanna-be’s and celebrity-funna-be’s. And given pop culture’s huge role in Western ‘leftism’, today’s socialists aren't exactly about the salt-of-the-earth. It’s no exaggeration that most ‘leftist’ attitudes among ‘progressives’ are shaped by movies, TV, advertising, pop music, and celebrity culture. "Hey, Eminem and Miley are for Hillary! Cool!" "Hey, drinking Starbucks coffee is a political statement!" (It seems to me that American Populism is more dignified than Venezuelan Populism because, whereas American right-wing populists are hoping for a chance to work and afford family life, Venezuelan left-wing populists are hoping for more free stuff and subsidies from the government.) Now, why do people want to come to the US? For freedom and democracy? But freedom and democracy are now dime-a-dozen around the world. Most Latin American nations are now democratic and have plenty of liberty. Most Marxist movements have faded, and military juntas have given way to democratic, technocratic, or plutocratic rule. Democracy is now almost universal in Africa. Most of Asia has one form of democracy or another, and even autocratic China allows lots of personal liberties.
So, why do people still flock to the US? It’s because they are crass and materialistic, even more so than American populists. They were not inspired by Emma Lazarus poem. They just dream of more stuff in America, like what they see in movies and TV shows. Chua mocks the naked materialism of White Populist masses, but why do all those Chinese try to move to Australia, Canada, and the US? To make money. Why do overseas Chinese communities exist in Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia, and etc? Chinese are intensely ‘greedy’ & materialistic and in the most crass and status-obsessed ways.
Now, Chua may not be as crass as some Chinese who obsess about gold, but she’s a status-obsessive too. Why did she want to attend Harvard than a Public University with The People? Because she wanted to dilly-dally with the ‘best kind of people’. Why did she marry a Jew(esp one that looks more ‘Aryan’ than Semitic)? Because Jews rule the world and ‘Aryanism’ has iconic aesthetic value. Why did she push her kids into classical music? Because of real appreciation for art and culture? No, she just wanted to show off her kids as status-prop-monkeys.
Indeed, THE BATTLE HYMN OF THE TIGER MOTHER is brazenly nouveau-riche, and that’s why it rubbed a lot of elites the wrong way. It was like Tiger Prosperity Handbook(though more fixated on status than wealth). While elite parents across the board do everything to secure privilege and connections for their kids, Chua was openly brazen about it, which struck a lot of people as uncouth. "Me so hungry, me so hungry. Hungry for attention and privilege. Me talky talky long time. Me want marry Jew, top dog of world. Me want my Jewish kids play classical music and win prize as haute bling. Me want celebrity status as sexy Suzie Wong public intellectual." Chua has been an attention-addict. So, when it comes to crassness and ‘greed’, it’s not just a white Populist thing. The whole immigration racket is purely materialist. People want to come to America to make more money, live in bigger houses, drive bigger cars, and status-signal.

More crucially, Chua misrepresents the American Dream. To be sure, in our debased and degenerate age, it may well be true that too many people conflate the American Dream with Hollywood lifestyle, celebrity, fame and fortune, fancy cars and big mansions, and etc. But for the longest time, the American Dream meant something modest and basic. It wasn’t about getting Rich but about having the essentials of a good life: family, home, good education for kids, safe neighborhoods, liberty, and steady jobs and incomes to support such a life. So, a modest middle class family lived the American Dream in the postwar era. For them, American Dream was NOT that of Willy Loman of THE DEATH OF A SALESMAN who wanted to hit the jackpot. The Clint Eastwood character in GRAN TORINO, who owns a modest house and raised a family, lived the essential American Dream. (One of the biggest threats to the American Dream was the Negro Nightmare. People blame White Flight on ‘racism’, and Jew-run Hollywood makes movies like SUBURBICON, a groundhog-day movie that totally overlooks what has happened to American neighborhoods that underwent massive racial integration since the Civil Rights Era. In the proggy imagination, all those petty and narrow-minded white folks got together to keep out wonderfully respectable middle-class Negroes. But as Howard Stern recounted his experience with racial integration, the MAIN reason why whites wanted a world of their own is because blacks are prone to greater aggression and violence... and are physically tougher to boot. Progs are especially full of shit because they project their own fears and anxieties onto others. Because they want to push black-out to gentrify cities, they vilify the white suburbs as ‘racist’ communities with ‘irrational’ fear of blacks. But if white/Jewish urban progs love blacks so much, why do they see blacks as a problem-people who need to be pushed elsewhere? SUBURBICON is a Section-8-propaganda by Jews who want to gentrify cities by dumping inner-city blacks on the white suburbs. And of course, it takes place in the past to erase the all-too-inconvenient memory of all that has happened since the government pushed the Negro Nightmare on America. Negro Nightmare really is the worst thing in America, worse even than white poverty. Even if white folks are poor, things aren’t unbearable as long as there are no Negroes around. There are lots of poor white and even brown communities in the US that are relatively low-crime and livable because of absence of Negroes.)
Howard Stern has live the Negro Nightmare:

Ghastly ‘groids’ feel nothing but contempt for the ‘white boy’ - the OTHER side of Integrated Suburbicon that Progs like Chua dare not mention or discuss:

The American Dream was not about the pie in the sky but American-as-apple-pie. Especially in the aftermath of the Great Depression and WWII when so many people were traumatized by poverty and/or war, it was a great relief for Americans to gain middle class status and lead nice decent lives. It was not an impossible dream, something akin to winning a slot on Donald Trump’s THE APPRENTICE.
The real problem today is that even this modest form of the American Dream has eroded for many white Americans(and black Americans), and globalism and replacement-immigration are partly to blame. The 1965 immigration law, by opening the floodgates to the world, exposed whites and blacks to non-stop competition for jobs and resources. Even Affirmative Action often favors African or West Indian immigrants. And white working class lost out HUGE because globalization shipped factories overseas and because endless supply of immigrants drove down the value of labor and undermined Unions. Also, with Diversity as the new mantra of America, white elites abandoned their special political covenant with white masses who ended up leaderless. With the rise of the internet and India joining globalism, even the white middle class was threatened. Via the internet, many services were outsourced to India for 1/4 the cost. And Asians with high-tech work visas competed with white Americans for jobs across the board. In many cases, white workers were ordered to train the Asian workers slated to replace them. This happened as Jew-run Disney. (One positive thing about Immigration is that it has spared some communities from the Negro Nightmare. Better to have a neighborhood fill up with Mexicans, Asians, Hindus, or even Muslims than with ghastly ‘groids’. Even among the Chosen Tribe, the worst anti-Jewish violence of near-pogromic proportions was when Negroes attacked Jews in Crown Heights. The police had to use all their muscle to push back the blacks who easily beat up weaker Jews. Granted, the Hasidim are almost universally disliked, but blacks have been acting like that all across America.)
But Chua has NO SYMPATHY for established Americans whose jobs and security have been threatened by hydra-like globalism. She only cares about Judea as Hyper-power. Instead of discussing the erosion of the American Dream as a modest attainment, Chua lampoons white populist dummies as wanna-be-billionaires or wanna-be-contestants on THE APPRENTICE. She would have us believe that the white populist dummies voted for Trump because they wanted to live like Trump. This is total BS. They voted for Trump because he promised them the return of modest American Dream of jobs and security. White working class are not asking for the pie in the sky. They just want the means to what had been a dignified middle class life for many Americans. If Chua is correct about populism’s obsession with Super Wealth, why was the white working class less enthused over Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan whose message was stridently pro-wealth and libertarian? Why did many white working class connect with Trump? Because Trump promised them big bucks, yachts, and private jets? No, because Trump offered them security from globalism that is accelerating change in favor of Jews and globalist elites like Chua who hog all the power, privilege, and wealth while the middle and the bottom half increasingly get less.
Trump’s message was NOT a Get-Rich-Scheme for the masses but Respect for the American Workers who deserve a measure of economic security. It was closer to what Pat Buchanan spoke of at the 1992 GOP convention. Most white working class are into the Security Manual, not the Prosperity Gospel. But Chua paints the white working class populists as just wanna-be-nouveau-riche rubes. Perhaps, Chua is projecting her own crass materialism(albeit adorned with Ivy League credentials, intellectual pedigree, and children as high-art-classical-music trophies) onto the white working class. Most white working class don’t aspire to reach so high. They want good decent-paying jobs as basis for home and family. It’s people like Chua for whom everything is ‘moon or bust’. They must attend the most elitist schools, rub shoulders with the richest and most powerful people, be invited to haute cocktail parties, and do everything to ensure privilege for her kids. Indeed, why do yellows study so hard? To gain real knowledge to speak truth to power? Or to gain status and pedigree to serve those who lord over the masses seen as cattle? All her life, Chua with cheerleader mentality wanted to with the Hyper-Power. Upon realizing Jews rule the world(as also noticed by Obama and Zakaria), she sucked up to Judea and now serves as its publicity agent. And yet, she, of all people, deigns to mock the American Working Class as a bunch of crass strivers for status and wealth.
White Working Class wants job security and decent living standards, but Chua would have us believe that American 'right-wing' populism is about crass white dummies addicted to Joel Osteen's Prosperity Gospel dreaming of flying around in private jets like Donald Trump.
Granted, there are whites(and many more blacks) who are addicted to the corrupted version of the American Dream, like what is shown on ‘Reality TV’, celebrity culture, and stuff like THE WOLF OF WALL STREET and AMERICAN MADE which, while ostensibly cautionary tales about American Materialism, wallow in what they expose as hollow and vapid. But then, why have many Americans become so debased in their values and expectations? How did black Americans go from respecting a woman like the mother in RAISIN IN THE SUN to obsessing about imitating rich rappers driving in limos or bitchass ho divas ‘twerking’ all night long? And why did so many white working class end up with ugly tattoos, piercings, and other trappings of cultural debasement? Well, who controls pop culture? Who pushed shows like Jerry Springer and Maury Povich? Who made all those Hollywood movies promoting Spring Break kind of attitude? Who gave us MTV? Who controls Disney that gave us trashy whores like Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, and Miley Cyrus? It’s true that there was always something crude and vulgar about the lower classes, and that was why the bourgeoisie upheld higher values as ‘aspirational’ models for the lower elements to emulate. Despite the temptation to profit from indulging the ‘unwashed masses’, the culture of respectability and shame had once restrained the entertainment class from corrupting mainstream popular culture. But now, the Jewish-and-Homo media-entertainment complex are utterly shameless in pushing pornified mass culture even on young girls. This is the New Normal. With the elites raking in big bucks by corrupting the masses with gambling and trash culture, it’s rather disingenuous for Chua to blame the likes of Osteen for the crass materialism of Americans. While Prosperity Gospel of the Osteens of the world and Trump’s Reality TV show are indeed crass and ridiculous, they are downright sober compared to the kind of images, icons, idols, and attitudes pushed by Jews and homos who run entertainment and media?
Also, Trump was small potatoes in the spread of gambling across the US. If anything, Jews used him as a goy front to legitimize gambling as the New Economy. Gambling, a truly degrading and destructive force in the US, is almost totally owned by Jews. So, let’s ask honestly, why did so many young blacks and whites come to devalue the modest-humanist way of life of their parents and grandparents? Why are they obsessed with imitating vain celebrities? Why are they addicted to the Prosperity Thuggery of the Gangsta? That’s what Rap is about, the biggest musical genre in the US. Though rappers claim to represent the ‘authentic’ voice of the ghetto, their obsessions are ‘my dough, my ho, my bling, my limo, my mansion, my gold, my swimming pool, etc’. The dream of rappers isn’t to help the poor in the community but to act the gangsta and sell that polluted dreams of degeneracy to millions to rake in big dough to become mega-rich.

Rappers try to have the cake and eat it too. As the supposedly ‘authentic’ voice of the ‘ghetto’, they pretend to speak for the poor and of ‘survival’ — never mind rappin’ thugs are trying to survive from the bullets and fists of other rappin’ thugs. But the 'heroes' are not honest poor folks struggling to make something of themselves but thugs who prey on poor folks by pushing dope and pimping girls. By playacting at nihilism(enticement of unfettered freedom), rappers seek a big fanbase and music contracts with Jewish moguls. They are addicted to the Prosperity Thug-gospel lifestyle... and almost no one denounces its baleful effect on society.
The most powerful hand behind the corruption and debasement of the American Dream is the power of Jews who control the media and have soul-poisoned and sou-murdered countless young lives with decadence, degeneracy, and dementia of all kinds. Jews also control pornography and block all efforts to restrict access by young people. And Jew-produced shows like Lena Dunham’s GIRLS would have rated X in the 70s and 80s. But Chua, the apologist and agent of Judea, won’t address any of these issues.
Lena Dunham, a real-life Miss Piggy with ugly tattoos and whore attitude. THIS is what the cultural elites promote as the New Normal in female behavior.
Emma Sulkowicz, the half-Chinese Jewish neurotic nut and spoiled brat whore doing one of her routines before an admiring audience of hipster-sophisticates who look own on rural rubes and working class as 'uncultured'.
Instead, she writes as if her esteemed crowd own Reason and Law as their fiefdoms. In her conceited mind, REASON belongs only to the know-it-all elites like herself. She’s like Anne Applebaum who thinks the Truth should be left up to the ‘experts’. (Likewise, the lying media that pushed the bogus Russia Hacking Narrative impugn all independent news sources as ‘fake news’ or ‘Russian propaganda’.) Now, I’m all for expertise and credentialed academics. And I’m sure that Applebaum knows a lot more about Eastern European history than most people do, and I’m sure Chua knows a lot more about the law and many subjects than we dummies do. But, academics and journalists cannot be trusted for one crucial reason. As hirelings of the Power, they fear deviating from the Narrative. How far could Chua have advanced in the academia if she’d devoted her life to exploring Jewish power and its abuses? And given that all major publishing in the US are controlled by Jews, what are her chances for future book deals and good press IF she were to expose the true character of Jewish Power? Chua and Applebaum have one thing in common that they both stick to the Narrative to serve Jewish Power. But of course, Chua serves another people while Applebaum serves her own. For Applebaum, tribal loyalty trumps all other considerations. Why is Applebaum so committed to exposing Soviet crimes? Is it because she fears that the world will forget the evils of communism? No. She tends to skip over Jewish role in communism. It’s really her way of spreading anti-Russianism by conflating Soviet tyranny with Russia. In fact, the Soviet Union during it most radical and murderous phase wasn’t even ruled by Russians at the top. Stalin was surrounded by Georgians, Jews, Ukrainians, and others than with Russians.

There’s no guarantee that academics and ‘experts’ will necessarily favor Truth, Objectivity, or Reason over service to the Power or loyalty to the Tribe. Even though they know more and have access to more information, they are prone to self-censoring or muting certain facts because of the Power Protocol and Power Etiquette. Granted, this is true of any System, be in China, Russia, UK, Israel, Iran, or the US. Every system has taboos and sacraments built into its Narrative. We may be misled into believing such restraints don’t exist in nations like the US, UK, France, Germany, and Canada because of their commitment to ‘liberal democracy’, but ‘liberalism’ and ‘democracy’ in the Judea-ruled West are whatever Jews say such are. So, we are to believe that supporting Israel and Zionism is a Liberal Value. We are supposed to believe the breakdown of borders and the flooding of Europe by endless hordes of Muslims, Africans, and Asians are what ‘Western Values’ are all about. And this commitment to ‘liberal values’ means anyone opposed to mass invasion must be shut down, shamed, shunned, or silenced. Apparently, ‘liberal democracy’ and ‘western values’ are all about the collective suicide of a once proud people.

Now, no one owns Reason. All sides use reason and logic to defend their gut-instincts and gut-interests. Jews use reason, facts, and logic to argue in favor of Zionism, and Palestinians use reason, facts, and logic to argue in favor of National Liberation from Zionist Imperialism. Reason is not the BASIS of anything. It is a tool, an instrument, a weapon. Reason, in and of itself, is neutral. In and of itself, it doesn’t favor anything. Rather, reason is used by any side to justify its actions. There is no cosmic logic that says a certain part of the Middle East has to be the Holy Land, British Protectorate, Palestine, Israel, or whatever. Instead, people with impassioned visions believe it must be Israel or Palestine or something, and they use their own set of arguments to justify their agenda. Of course, there are cases where someone is clearly wrong and someone is clearly right. In the court of law, if someone has been accused of stealing something and it can be proven with facts and argument that he did indeed steal that something, then he should be convicted of the crime. But there are times when both sides agree to the facts but use reason differently based on conflicting perspectives. And this is true of Israel-Palestinian conflict. There was a time when Jews denied that Palestinians had been removed through massive pogroms and insisted the Palestinians left of their own accord because Arab leaders fear-mongered them. But that canard has been totally debunked, and now, even Israeli Textbooks admit that Palestinians were forcibly removed from their ancestral homeland. So, both sides are agreed on what happened. But Jews still use facts and reason differently to justify their actions. They say such kinds of ethnic cleansing were happening all over the world — like Ost-Germans pushed out of Slavic territories into Germany — , therefore the expulsion of Palestinians was part of the larger global trend and Jews didn’t do anything uniquely abominable. Or, Jews argue, yes, they did take the land from Palestinians, BUT they have an ancient claim because it used a Jewish Kingdom in ancient times. Or, Jews argue, even though Nakba was unfortunate(and maybe even tragic), Jews more than redeemed the land-grab by creating the ‘only democracy in the Middle East’. Or, Jews say, Jews deserve a homeland because of WWII and the Holocaust and... so on and so forth. There is no single correct way to use reason. No side owns reason. Rather, various sides compete to out-reason(and out-spend) the other, often through convoluted lawyerly tactics. Consider the use of reason in the story of the Rabbi, Talmud, and the Chimney. With Jews, reason is not an objective and universal means to truth. Rather, it’s about twisting and bending logic to serve Jewish interests. So, when Jews were in dissident mode challenging Wasp elite power, they argued that the US Constitution is all about absolute protection of free speech. But now that Jews got the supreme power, they push the notion of ‘hate speech’ — ‘hate’ is, of course, to be determined by Jews themselves. Jews now reason, "We are for free speech but not for hate speech." So, is Zionism ‘hate speech’ for oppressing and terrorizing Palestinians? Jews say no, but YOU will have committed ‘hate speech’ for even questioning Jewish power.
Amy Chua, having hung around Jews for too long, uses reason in a similar way. Earlier, I pointed out her disingenuous balancing of White Grievances with Black Grievances. What is truly unnerving is that someone who twists facts and logic in such manner is teaching law at one of the most prestigious universities in the world. It is a form of intellectual corruption(which is also moral corruption), but Chua probably isn’t even aware of her craven compromises because the System rewards and takes care of its own. After all, she is surrounded by the Best and the Brightest, right?
She is hardly alone. In PC America, neurotic & sociopathic Jews have distorted and corrupted the Law and Logic like Houdini’s body or Gumby. A good example of Jewish corruption of Legal profession, journalism, and rationality is David Schraub who argued that a Zionist ‘hate-hoaxer’ who defamed white gentiles is really guilty of ‘antisemitism’.

Apparently, Chua thinks it’s against REASON for Americans(especially white ones) to see immigrants as a threat to their way of life. But Chua herself amply demonstrates that immigrants do indeed pose a threat. Does Chua defend historical America? No, Chua sides with Jewish Globalists to destroy White America. She sides with illegal alien students who stole academic slots from white Americans who are, furthermore, discriminated by Affirmative Action(as even Chua admits). Jewish elites at Ivy Leagues care more about recruiting illegal alien students than poor or working class white students. Chua mocks the white working class as a bunch of dummies who want to be millionaires when they’d be satisfied with steady jobs, moderate homes, and safe schools for their kids.

Chua says ‘racism’ is the worst thing in the world when, in fact, the greatness of the US could not have been possible without it. It was ‘racism’ that emboldened the white man to transform the land of Red Savages into an extension of European Civilization. If whites arriving in the New World had decided to ‘go native’ and act like Kevin Costner in DANCES WITH WOLVES in the name of white-red equality, America would have remained a land of savages, and people like Chua’s family never would have wanted to come to the US. Also, the US was able to develop economically and stabilize socially because it suppressed black savagery. While slave trade was evil and slavery was unjust, the fact remains that blacks are the stronger, more aggressive, and nastier race. If whites had allowed white-black equality from the beginning, blacks would have run amok and made much of the New Land into an extension of Africa or something like Haiti. Europeans Europeanize, Africans Africanize. It was because white suppressed and kept in check black savagery that the US developed as a modern Western nation where European-Americans Europeanized everything they touched. If blacks had been allowed to run wild and free, they would have used their superior muscle to power to beat up white men and hump white women, and America would have been Africanized with oogity-boogity being its central theme. Blacks got full freedom in the 1960s, and the Africanization of America has been downright frightening in St. Louis, Baltimore, Detroit, Newark, and etc. When white ‘racism’ dominated America and discouraged black savagery, many blacks made a modicum of effort to be a ‘credit to their race’. Sure, it was socially unjust and oppressive by the standards of America’s founding principles, BUT, the fact is all people are not created equal despite Thomas Jefferson’s lofty rhetoric. Fact is Race-ism is truth. Ism means belief, and Race + Ism should mean belief in reality of race and racial differences. Because whites imported a stronger and more aggressive race, the only way they could ensure America’s development as a Europeanizing Civilization was by suppressing naturally savage African energies. Now, suppose white Americans had decided to free blacks from the very beginning and allowed massive free African immigration from the 1700s. What would the US have been? It would have been worse than Brazil. America would have been Africanized. Now, would people like Chua want to come to a nation that’s like Planet of the ‘Groids’ than Planet of the ‘Honkers’?

Indeed, before people like Chua nag and whine about ‘white racism’ and ‘white supremacism’, they need to ask why they wanted to emigrate to white-majority, white-made, and white-ruled nations. If Chua finds ‘white racism’ to be the worst evil in the world, why does her kind prefer white nations even over their own yellow ones? And if she believes ‘race is just a social construct’(as she seems to), why did she choose NOT to be with a Chinese man and have Chinese kids? In her BATTLE HYMN book, she says tons of Chinese girls in elite colleges go with white/Jewish guys and reject Chinese men. It appears Chua is a closet-white-supremacist herself who would rather share her life with a white Jew(one that looks more ‘Aryan’ than typically Semitic, btw) and give birth to white-looking kids than be with a yellow man and have yellow kids. If Chua and so many other non-whites around the world don’t want to live with their own kind and want to move to white-made nations, why should white people want to live with them? If Chua’s attitude is, "I don’t want to be in Chink-nation and live with chinks and marry a chink man and have chink kids", why should white people want to live with ‘chinks’? But same goes for the ‘dotheads’ and the ‘groids’. If Asian-Indians don’t want to live with corrupt annoying Hindus who shit all over in public, why would whites want to live with such people? I suppose Chua’s logic goes like this: "It’s okay for non-whites to despise their own kind and to want to move to white nations to live with whites, but it is soooooooo ‘racist’ for whites to say NO to non-whites who want to flee from their own kind."
'Dotkins' say the West should welcome 'immigrants' as a blessing because they add to the economy. If so, they should use their precious energies to fix problems in their own nations than going off to rich white nations to make them even richer. If non-whites around the world have the economic Midas Touch, they need to touch up their own underdeveloped nations into prosperity than running off to offer their talents to the West. 'Racism' did a lot of good for the Third World. If Gandhi had been welcomed as an equal by the Brits, he would have chosen to be an 'Englishman' serving the Empire. But because the 'racist' British Empire called him a 'wog' and Lee Kuan Yew a 'chink', they went back to inspire and lead their own peoples.
White opposition to Immigration is logical and rational. Immigration is a form of invasion if (1) it’s big enough and (2) if the newcomers are different from your own kind. Surely a tsunami has a different impact than the ebb-and-flow of usual waves. When just a few Jews trickled into Palestine, it was no big deal, and Arabs didn’t much mind. But when tidal waves of Jews washed up in the Middle East, Arabs understandably grew alarmed. And their panic was vindicated by Nakba pogroms that wiped Palestine off the map.
Now, mass immigration of peoples same or similar to the existing population can be a net plus. Jews in Israel are NOT threatened by arrival of more Jews. More Jewish immigrants adds up to more Jewish power and solidarity in Israel. But suppose most immigrants to Israel were African or Arab/Muslim. Israel as a Jewish state will be replaced by something new. If most immigrants to the US were white, whites would have less to worry about. It might have a negative effect on wages or environment, but America-as-an-extension-of-European-civilization will remain intact. But currently, the Southwest is being Mexicanized. Minnesota is being Afro-Somalized. And parts of Canada are being Sinized or Hindized. Did Anglos and white folks go through all the trouble of founding and developing new nations just to hand them over to a bunch of nasty Jews and Third World leeches and ingrates?

Anyway, contrary to Chau’s observation that right-wing populists are a bunch of wanna-be-richers, the 2016 election revealed that much of American Populism is against the greed of globalists. Trump’s railing against Wall Street didn’t hurt him with the working class folks. Now, one may argue that Trump is full of shit and, like Bush and Obama, filled his economic team with Jewish bankers from Goldman Sachs and the like. Still, his message was NOT a ‘prosperity gospel’ but a Security Blanket for Americans who lost out to the globalist super-rich and their immigrant-helots.
In contrast to Populist Dreams of Prosperity, Chua mentions Occupy Wall Street as an anti-wealth, anti-Dream, and anti-privilege movement. She does note the self-delusional oddity of a movement that mainly attracted participants from the wealthier cross-section of America.
So, if poor whites worship wealth and want to become rich themselves, affluent whites(of Occupy Movement) loathe wealth and criticize privilege. But are Occupy people really anti-wealth? If they are anti-wealth, why do they always flock to the most privileged parts of the US, like elite college towns(funded by oligarchs) and white gentrified parts of cities?
Even though billed as 99% against the 1%, the Occupy Movement was sourpuss activism of kids from affluent families who were envious of peers who are set to do much better in life. After all, those who major in high-tech and finance have a huge economic advantage over those who major in humanities(even at the most elite schools). And not all kids of affluent parents are smart. There are colleges that "rich parents send their dumb kids too", and these kids with their degrees in Women’s Studies or Photography aren’t going to amount to much in life. After college, they see their peers who majored in law, finance, and high-tech rising up the ranks while they are stuck with posturing. So, despite the veneer of ‘progressivism’ that politically unites rich Wall Street yuppies & Silicon Valley elites with humanities graduates who work as baristas at Starbucks or waiters at restaurants(with the near-impossible dream of making it as an actor or dancer), there is a HUGE gap between the finance/high-tech proggy elites and most proggy graduates of elite colleges who never amount to much financially(and live off trust funds). So, Occupy was really about the 9% vs the 1%. It just added another ‘9' to the 9 to create the illusion of being about everyone.
OCCUPY WALL STREET. 'Social Justice' as excuse for self-aggrandizing narcissism among Humanities Graduates who won't amount to much
And contra Amy Chua, the Occupy people DO believe in the American Dream, which they define as (1) writing off their student loans (2) government paying for whatever ‘creative’ pursuits they fancy (3) rent control so that they can also afford to live among the urban gentry. If indeed these Occupy People really disbelieved in the American Dream, why are they so supportive of mass immigration? They still believe in the US as an ‘exceptional’ nation, the beacon to the world, a nation where people from any nation can come and make something of themselves. They believe in Emma Lazarus. Of course, these affluent whites, Jews, and Asians of Occupy don’t really care about anyone outsider their narrow circle of snot-nosed proggy brats, but they must believe in the Dream enough to call illegal aliens ‘dreamers’. Maybe, progs can feel excitement in the Dream only through immigrants because they themselves are bored with affluence. It’s like adults find renewed excitement in Christmas only through the eyes of children. People from poor nations come to the US and find it so much better than their own ‘shitholes’. What seems mundane to jaded Americans is ‘dreamlike’ to them. But if Newcomers in the past came with respect for White America, the Jew-controlled US encourages newcomers and especially their children to hate whitey. Mexicans, Chinese, and Hindus who came to the US in the 1970s were less hostile than today’s arrivals who are encouraged by Jew-run media to see ‘whitey’ as evil. Occupy Wall Street was not a genuine socialist movement. It mainly channeled the anxiety of young adults from affluent families who were either none-too-bright OR majored in humanities with limited economic prospects. These graduates want to live in hip, affluent, trendy, and ‘cool’ areas of the city, but they don’t have marketable skills comparable to those who majored in high-tech, engineering, law, and finance. If they really cared about the 99%, they would go to small towns and depressed communities and try to help the poor.

Chua scolds the Sovereign Nations for its conspiracy-theory-peddling, but how much power does it have? Did it cook up the lies in collusion with Deep State and Media Network to persuade the majority of Americans into believing in WMD and supporting the Iraq War?
8. Chua’s account of Sovereign Nation is interesting but inconsequential. Personally, I’d never heard of the organization, movement, cult, or whatever it is. Its members seem kooky and partial to ridiculous conspiracy theories. But does it matter? Do the members of Sovereign Nation have any power in America? Do they have global hegemony over the world? In the end, however kooky a bunch of people may be, the question comes down to power and influence. For example, whatever one may think of the Amish, they are of no consequence to American or World affairs because they have zero power and influence. (Chua may have chosen to highlight Sovereign Nations because her globalism is committed to sabotaging the sovereignty of gentile nations. By associating the term 'sovereign nation' with a kook conspiracy organization/movement of that name, she creates the impression that those who are for national sovereignty must be conspiracy-theory-obsessed nuts.)

So, what can be said about Sovereign Nation? How much pull does it have in Ivy League universities, top Law firms, Congress, the Department of Education, the Fed, Wall Street, Hollywood, CIA, FBI, Las Vegas, Silicon Valley, Big Media, and etc? I’d venture to say ZERO. If anything, it could be Chua is making a fuss about some kook movement as a diversionary tactic from dealing with the far graver danger of the lies, propaganda, and hysteria spread by the real Powers-that-be. Never mind the kookier conspiracy theories about 9/11. The FACT is the Osama Bin Laden and Alqaeda were the products of joint US-Saudi strategy to create Sunni Jihadis to be used against the Soviet Union and Iran. But after 9/11, the US and Saudis dodged blame(with full support of the Jew-run media). And Pakistan, which had colluded with US and Saudis to arm Islamist elements in Afghanistan, was also let off the hook... as long as it joined the ‘War on Terror. Hussein’s Iraq that had NOTHING to do with 9/11, but it became the central focus of the US that had played a role in the creation of radical Jihadis. Imagine that. The three nations that had done most to create and arm Sunni Jihadi radicals were the US, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, but they decided to scapegoat another nation. Iraq got nailed for terrorism even though Hussein, loathsome as he was, had ruthlessly suppressed Islamic radicalism in his nation. If anything, Osama and Alqaeda went rogue because the US stationed imperial troops in Saudi territory, holy land to Muslims. Osama and Jihadis had been willing to work with the US against the Godless communism and Shia heresy, but they were outraged by US military presence in the Middle East. Also, consider the sheer US hypocrisy on "this will not stand" stance against Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait. Israel still occupies Golan Heights, stolen from Syria, and still illegally occupies West Bank, but the US never said there must be war to liberate Golan Heights or the West Bank. But when Hussein took Kuwait, that was intolerable, so said the US that has routinely invaded other nations. (If Chua were a low IQ, she would be a cheerleader putting out to black athletes. But being high-IQ, she cheers for higher stakes, indeed for the Hyper-Power, the most powerful power in the world. Women like Chua are ultimately destroyers of civilizations because they are so utterly enamored of Power. Her only allegiance is to power, and not just any power but to the Hyper-Power. Indeed, her writings don’t dwell much on the sheer brutality of American or Israeli Power. You won’t find anything about Abu Gharib in her book. Just like the Jewish woman in GOODFELLAS is attracted to the tough ‘goomba’ even though he beat up a Jewish guy, Chua is turned on by the Hyper-Power, that of Judea. It’s been said women will make better elites than men because they are less aggressive and more cooperative, but it’s proving to be nonsense. There are two kinds of women: Pussycats and Cat Ladies, and both kinds mess things up. The pussycats, of whom Chua is one, just cheer for the power. It doesn’t matter how amoral or nihilistic the power is. Bigger the power, bigger the excitement among the pussycats. It’s like a white cheerleader can’t get enough of big tough black guy beating the shit out of white boys. All she cares about is her excitement even though the Negro is whupping the men of her race. And then, you got the cat ladies, many of whom are lesbians or spinster neurotics. They are into castration of their own men, but the long-term result is the takeover of society by foreign barbarian men. Sweden is a classic case of what happens to a nation taken over by Cat Ladies. Swedish feminists cut off the balls of Swedish men who became cucky-wucked. Without the proud Male Principle to defend Sweden, the theme of Sweden was the maternal wish to baby the Third World. Swedish Cat Ladies, having castrated their own men as ‘racist’ and ‘nazi’, welcome the whole world as poor stray cats to be housed and taken care of. Also, even Cat Ladies feel a longing for the Male Principle because it’s just the nature of women, even if ideologically repressed. But since Swedish women see their own men as ‘evil patriarchy’, they get their fix of Male Principle from foreign men, African and Muslim. Because non-white males have PC credentials as ‘victims of white racism and supremacism’, they are shielded from feminist ire in the spirit of ‘intersectionality’. After all, whites mustn’t judge non-whites according to PC. Furthermore, as so many Cat Ladies see motherhood as oppression, they remain single, and their repressed maternal instinct long for something to nurse and go goo-goo-gaga over. In time, Sweden is taken over by foreign barbarian men because Swedish men have been castrated and because Swedish women worship Diversity.) We live in some crazy world when the three nations — US, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan — that were most responsible for funding and harboring the terrorists who carried out 9/11 took on the mantle of fighting the War on Terror. And they targeted Iraq, a nation that had NOTHING to do with 9/11. Why was Iraq slated for destruction? For the interests of Judea. Jews believe goyim exist to serve Jewish supremacist interests. And it wasn’t the Sovereign Nations that concocted the lies to make that war possible. It was the corrupt Deep State run by agents hired by politicians controlled by Jews. So, the US lied to the UN about Hussein’s nuclear program, and the Jew-run media played along with the Narrative. So, we had the War on Terror in Iraq that only introduced terrorism into that country. But things got even crazier under Obama. Bush’s demented War on Terror morphed into War with Terror as the US armed, directly and indirectly, Jihadi elements to tear Libya and Syria into shreds. When the US was not directly supplying arms to terrorists, it just let the arms and trucks ‘fall in their hands’. Just think. The US that had declared War on Terror against Alqaeda under Bush was arming Alqaeda remnants in Syria to take down the secular regime of Assad. It boggles the mind, but Chua seems more concerned with kooky groups like Sovereign Nation. If the Iraq War politically divided the nation, the wars under Obama went without political or activist opposition. Obama was careful to ‘lead from behind’, and also, the usually leftist anti-war elements remained mum because a ‘historic’ black guy was president. Also, with the military becoming totally pro-homo, it came to be seen as purveyor of ‘progressive’ values around the world. And the Conservatism Inc., as opposed to Paleo-Cons and the Independent Right, never met a war it didn’t like.

Anyway, who needs Sovereign Nation for kooky conspiracy theories when the Jew-run US media have been running one of the biggest lies of all time: the Russia Hacking Hoax and total nonsense about how Russian trolls fixed the 2016 election at the behest of Putin. Surely, Chua is too smart to believe any of this, but she is silent about the Jewish media’s role in stirring up national hysteria. She knows that naming the Jew will hurt her chances to become the captain of the cheer-leading squad for Hyper-Power. Jew-run US has given us the most wretched foreign policy since who-knows-when. It turned the world into a game of neo-cowboys and neo-Indians. So, even though the US has been the aggressor against Russia, even instigating Georgian and Ukrainian provocations against Russia, the Jew-run media say Russia is the aggressor. Even though the US is the #1 meddler in world affairs and rigger of other nations’ elections, it acts all butt-hurt about how Russia, Russia, and Russia meddled in US elections because Jew-run media say so. Jews are the real Alien Elites who’ve gutted American national sovereignty, but Jewish media would have us believe Russians pose a threat to American Independence. (But then, like the Jew-run media, Chua relies on SPLC or $PLC for ‘facts’ on certain groups. Now, why don’t the media consult BDS or NPI for its views on Jewish supremacism or Zionist hatred? Because the media are owned and run by Jews and because Jews are the main funders of organizations like SPLC and ADL. Those are not independent institutions committed to truth and objectivity but paid shills and assassins for Judea. Notice SPLC is silent about Antifa thuggery because the Proglodyte Janissary is useful, in collusion with the police, to Jewish power in shutting down White National Liberationists. If a Yale law professor relies on an organization as biased as Jew-funded SPLC for the ‘truth’ on certain individuals and organizations, the legal profession is a den of corruption and lies. In truth, Jewish power goes out of its way to discourage and punish law firms that dare to defend controversial clients hated by Jews. Jews even use their muscle to criminalize BDS. Legal profession has been weaponized in the US, and Chua is one of the tools of Judea who says nothing about legal corruption by Jewish power. When ACLU defended the right of Unite the Right to hold a rally at Charlottesville, rich Jewish donors threatened it with withdrawal of funds. This is rather ironic since ACLU historically took pride in free speech absolutism and even defended the speech rights of the most extremist groups. But now, it’s becoming clear that past Jewish support for Free Speech Absolutism was cynical and self-serving. Back then, Wasps and cultural conservatives still held sway in America; therefore, Jewish radicals and pornographers invoked the constitutionality of free speech absolutism to push through their agendas, radical or degenerate. And that’s why ACLU defended even elements of the Far Right to cover its partisan and tribalist tracks. But today, with Jews being the supremacist elites of America, their main concern is expanding the power, and that means shutting down people who dare to speak truth to Jewish Power. Legal firms are now afraid to represent Alt Right figures because Jewish power will try to disbar them or destroy them financially. But esteemed legal scholar Chua has nothing to say on that issue. Her legal philosophy is not about Principles but about Power. Despite her proggy posturing, her legalism is closer to that of Chinese philosopher Han Fei Tzu for whom laws existed purely to serve the Ruler.) Jews favor illegal invaders and denigrate American nationalism in favor of globalism but then denounce Russia for meddling in the affairs of the US. Democrats have won many elections by global bribery — letting in tons of non-white immigrants and offer them more freebies for voting Democratic — , but they bitch about national sovereignty vis-a-vis Russia. Isn’t it ironic that the Democrats and NeverTrump Republicans defend National Sovereignty only when a Nationalist was elected to office? Funny that. Globalists who decry the alleged Russian meddling in US elections in the name of National Sovereignty wanted as president Hillary, someone who is opposed to National Sovereignty and wants to go Full Empire by invading the world and inviting the world. Globalists try to invalidate nationalist Trumpism by claiming that it was the work of Russians. But supposing Hillary had won, what would have been the theme of America? No need for nationalism, no need for national sovereignty, because the US should be part of a globo-empire where the it can invade any nation and be invaded by endless tides of foreigners as ‘New Americans’. Ironically, the ONE TIME the globalists made fuss about national sovereignty was when a globalist failed to win an election to destroy national sovereignty.

The US is especially an empire of lies because it is ruled by the ethno-monopoly of Judea, Chua’s master. Consciously or subconsciously, by directing our attention to a powerless subculture like Sovereign Nation, Chua shields the truly powerful Network composed of Big Media(Jew-dominated), Academia(Jew-controlled), Hollywood(Jew-owned), and Deep State(Jew-directed). Did the US invade Iraq with lies about WMD because of Sovereign Nation? Did the US aid Jewish oligarchs to rape Russia in the1990s because of SN? Did the US destroy Libya even though Gaddafi gave up his weapon programs because of SN? Did the US aid Neo-Nazis in Ukraine in the coup because of SN? Did the US aid terrorists in Syria because of SN? Did the US media promote Obama the phony as the messianic ‘The One’ because of SN? Did the US media go hysterical over Trump as ‘literally Hitler’ because of SN? Did the US media and Deep State spin lies about Trump’s alleged collusion with Russia because of SN? Did the US media spread hysteria about white ‘racist’ cops gunning down innocent blacks all across America because of SN? I don’t know who belongs in SN, but them kooky losers have NO power. Chua has more influence in her pinky finger than all the members of SN because she is a servitor of Hyper-Power that promotes her books and made her a celebrity. And it’s people like her, along with Nikki Haley(on the so-called ‘right’) and Rachel Maddow(on the so-called ‘left’) who are far more responsible for corrupting the US into an Empire of Lies.

9. Chua discusses WWE(professional wrestling) and NASCAR as white blue collar pastimes that are despised by the Liberal Elites. Personally, I’ve never seen NASCAR on TV, let alone been to one. And yes, WWE is pretty dumb, but it’s also popular with blacks and Hispanics. The appeal of NASCAR and WWE’s is partly racial, i.e. they’re events in which whites remain competitive. NASCAR drivers are almost all white. Because of black athletic superiority, biological discrimination effectively bans whites from certain sports. For example, for the position of Running-back in the NFL, there might as well be a sign that says: "NO DOGS AND WHITES ALLOWED". And the defacto biological-discriminatory law of NBA is, "ONLY BLACKS NEED APPLY". Many hoped that the end of social discrimination would lead to proportional equality of races in all areas, but it led instead to new hierarchies and even near-total racial monopolies. For example, if Mexican-Americans want to be play professional basketball, they need to start their own league. Meritocracy will naturally favor blacks and exclude Mexicans(along with East Asians, Hindus, Arabs, etc). Since sports are about identification and cheering for one’s own kind — in the Olympics, peoples cheer for their own respective nations — , people want to see their own kind win. In the West, sports identification has largely turned into one of "Our Africans vs Your Africans". This has spread even to Europe where most ‘European’ sprinters are Africans. So, we have French African vs British African vs Dutch African vs Spanish African vs Swedish African vs American African and etc. And it’s spread even to Japan, as Japanese women got jungle fever, reject Japanese men, and have mulatto babies who grow up to beat Japanese males in sports. And Vietnam and South Korea are also recruiting Africans to represent their nations, so there will be Vietnamese Africans and Korean Africans against European Africans and Japanese Africans. World Sports will turn into ‘Our Africans vs Your Africans’. But if a Vietnamese African wins the gold, who really believes that a Vietnamese won? If China gets an African to run and nab a gold medal, who really believes that a Chinese guy won? If Russia were to get an all-black basketball team and win the gold, who would believe that Russians really won? In the US, it’s a pathetic sight to behold cucky-wuck white college boys cheer four ‘Our Africans vs Your Africans’. Every major college has a black-thug-dominated team, but white, Asian, and Hispanic students feign identification with those blacks who, by the way, were accepted only for sporting talent.

Because of real racial differences favoring blacks, there is biological-discriminatory exclusion of whites in many sports. Now, white elites may not mind so much about watching blacks in sports because they feel as winners in their own prestigious chosen field. So, if you’re a white doctor, lawyer, professor, or something fancy-like, you probably don’t look to sports for ‘pride’. In contrast, blacks and white working class look to sports for collective pride. When poor blacks heard of Jack Johnson beating up white guys, they felt pride as Negroes. A poor nation winning the gold in the Olympics means a lot more than a rich nation winning one. Rich nation has other things to be proud of. Also because the US has so many winners in so many fields, many Americans don’t even care about who-or-what in the Olympics. But for a poor nation, a gold in the Olympics or the World Cup is occasion for collective celebration. Likewise, sports identification has always mattered more to the white working class, and in the past, sports used to be an outlet for ‘dumb Polacks’, ‘tough Irish’, and etc. But once blacks were allowed into sports, biological discrimination kicked into gear, and white working class lost out big, even more so than white upper class that doesn’t need sports to feel esteem and pride. After all, if you’re an affluent Jew, you can be or identify with successful lawyers, thinkers, scientists, Hollywood moguls, or owners of sports teams. Blacks may dominate the sporting field or stadium, but it’s the Jews and rich whites who own the sports franchises and media. But if you’re white working class, what do you have? You don’t have status or money. And when you turn on the TV, all you see is white cheerleaders with jungle fever cheering for black guys who totally beat and humiliate white guys.
American Sports are about the Pussification of the White Male into White Boy. Powerful Negroes dominate NFL and NBA. White women got jungle fever and go for ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. White boys are told to be cucky-wuck maggoty-'faggoty'-ass dorks. If educated and affluent whites have pride of status and career, the white working class got nothing. They lost their jobs overseas. They lost their women to Negroes. They lost their kids to drugs and Trash culture. They lost their churches to Homomania and 'Muh Israel'. Blacks commit the most crime and rob, rape & murder so many whites, BUT the Jew-run media give us the false narrative(also perpetuated by Chua) of Evil Cops shooting down innocent blacks. If a black thug beats up white people and is then shot by a cop for resisting arrest, the Jew-run Narrative says "Innocent black man killed by Evil 'racist' police." 
Then, it is hardly surprising that many whites turn to NASCAR and WWE where whites still dominate? NASCAR isn’t about physical prowess but mental acuity inside a vehicle. And WWE is fake sports despite the brutality. It is choreographed with pre-determined winners and losers. It is a sport where white guys can beat up black guys according to showbiz script. In real sports, the genetic script favors blacks over whites. Jack Johnson beat up all the white guys. Muhammad Ali and Joe Frazier handily beat up all their white opponents. The ten best basketball players in the past 50 yrs have been all black with the possible exception of Larry Bird. The official credo of the US is freedom-and-equality, but freedom(and equality of opportunity) has led to extreme racial/ethnic domination in certain fields. Tough blacks dominate lots of sports, and smart Jews dominate much of finance, media, law, gambling, and entertainment.

Chua overlooks the above-mentioned racial factors for obvious reasons. Being a PC-pusher, she steers clear of issues of biological racial differences that are so obvious. Just how is it that tiny Jamaica produces faster runners than all of China, India, Russia, and EU combined? But Judea-enforced taboos are so strong that we still keep repeating the same mantras over and over despite the obvious reality.

Chua mentioned the two sporting cultures to mock the low cultural level of white working class. She attributes the snobbery to the Liberal Elites but, being a member of the Hyper-Tribe, no doubt shares its contempt... which is okay by me since WWE really is dumb(and ugly) and NASCAR is mostly screeching rubber.

Now, there was a time when well-educated and cultured people had good reason to frown upon the vulgar pastimes and recreations of the unwashed masses. The aristocrats certainly turned up their noses at the peons. But, there was always an element of hypocrisy in their snobbery. After all, the elites could be just as bloody and ugly in their own way except that they dressed up their bloodlust with fancy rituals and manners. Take Fox Hunting — Fox Lynching would be more accurate — tradition among the British elites. Aristocrats in fancy attire practiced it like a ceremony. Fox was hunted to be torn apart by dogs in service to their haughty masters on horseback who later gathered for tea and crumpets. Also, what the aristocracy really about? It was a military caste that waged wars and killed people. It maintained power by use of threat and terror against their subjects and rival powers. They commissioned the peasantry to serve as cannon fodder in wars of elite vanity. They fought duels and killed one another over trivial issues of bogus honor.
Today’s elites may see themselves to be above the cruel vanities of past elites, but are they really? They don’t go on Fox Hunts, but they use rabid Antifa as dogs to attack patriots.
When Richard Spencer was sucker-punched by an Antifa goon, the elites, esp the Jews, were ecstatic and calling for more violence. Indeed, Antifa violence is tolerated by the elites to beat down the opposition. Elites order the police to go easy on Antifa or to ‘stand down’. So, Antifa, as the paramilitary thug force of the elites, go around bashing ‘far-right’ activists and individuals. This was especially true at Charlottesville where Alt Right guys did everything by the book, respected city ordinances, obeyed the police, and worked totally within Constitutional rights. So, what did the Jewish elites do? They ordered the police to shut down the event and then push the Alt Right guys into a mob of Antifa and BLM thugs who were allowed to run riot and beat up patriots. Similar things have happened all across America. Just like the British elites sat on horseback while making the dogs tear the fox limb from limb, the globalist elites maintain their haute composure while letting Antifa run riot and do the dirty work. We see this with Chua herself. Nowhere in the book does she mention the thuggery of Antifa, a Janissary force created by Jews. (Turks raised Greek Christian boys to hate and fight against the Christian West. Jews drug and indoctrinate whites to hate and attack fellow whites. But then, Jews also train Chinese like Chua to serve Judea against China. So, if Judea were to wage war on China, doggy Chua will be barking at China as the fox to kill.)

Another form of modern fox-hunting is Bashing-Palestine. To be pro-Israel means to be anti-Palestinian because Israel still occupies West Bank and implements Apartheid policies against Arabs. Also, Israel works with AIPAC to pressure the US to wage more Wars for Israel. So, one cannot be pro-Israel in the current year without being anti-Palestinian. Therefore, every whore politician in the US has to join in the Palestinian-hunt or Palestinian-lynching. It can be done blatantly, as with Nikki Haley who openly blows Jewish cocks while kicking Palestinians. Or, it can be done subtly like Amy Chua who, in reference to a biased study, presents Israelis as being merely anxious about Arabs while presenting Arabs as being murderous about Jews. All politicians — Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack Obama, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Nancy Pelosi, Kamala Harris, Dick Durbin, Rick Perry, and etc. — join in the Palestinian Hunt. Every year, Zionists take more land from Palestinians. Every year, more walls are built within West Bank to enforce Apartheid against Palestinians in their last remaining territory. Every year, IDF beats up and terrorizes more Palestinian women and children. But there is total silence from the American political class. And Chua’s infatuation with the Hyper-Power blinds her to the cruelty of what is being done DESPITE the fact that she’s Chinese and her own people were treated in such manner by Japanese imperialists. Because the US political class fully aids and abets Israeli policy in the West Bank, it effectively guns down Palestinians, terrorizes Palestinians, tears down Palestinian homes, poisons Palestinian wells, and sprays Palestinian children with sewage-smelling substance. Now, how would Chua feel if her own children were sprayed with such foul substance simply for desire for liberation for imperialist occupation? But there is no mention of Jewish Political Tribal power in Chua’s book and its reverberations around the world: Financial rape of Russia in the 90s and premature deaths of millions, the brutal oppression of Palestinians, Jewish mass-robbery on Wall Street, the spread of pornification of mainstream culture, the rise of opioid crisis, the spread of anal cancer among millennials due to normalization of extreme sex and homosexuality as promoted by Jew-run media, ‘new cold war’ with a Russia that actually wants good relations with the West, and Wars for Israel that have literally killed over a million Muslim lives and set off a massive ‘refugee’ invasion of the West.
Chua lacks the Autonomy of Compassion. Her compassion or hostility, like that of dogs, is at the behest of Jews. So, she feels more compassion for some BLM thug who loots stores and spews lies about ‘racist cops’ than for the entire Palestinian people who live under Occupation in the ONLY LAND THEY HAVE LEFT. A person with Autonomy of Compassion would not look over his or her shoulder for permission to feel sorry for a suffering people. But Chua, ever servile to the Hyper-Power, looks to see if it’s OK or NO-K with the Power. So, there is no sympathy for Palestinians being crushed by the IDF and for White National Liberationists who are ambushed and attacked by Antifa scum, the Janissary dogs of the Jewish snobs on horseback.

Despite the hypocrisy of past elites, they did serve in the respectable capacity of role models for the lesser classes. So, the British upper-middle class aspired to be like the aristocrats, and in turn, the British middle class aspired to be like the upper-class, and in turn, the British working class aspired to be like the British middle class, and so on. This could be stuffy and snobby, but it not only exerted pressure on the bottom to better themselves but on the top to maintain their good name. So, the elites were expected to be well-mannered, well-read, well-versed, well-cultured, well-dressed, and etc. Even the rebellious Romantics of the 19th century were well-bred and well-mannered compared to what came later.
The rise of modernity and modernism undermined old hierarchies, but new hierarchies were, in their own way, just as demanding and exacting. Modernism meant artist and thinkers couldn’t just fall back on the same old same old, the staid conventions. They had to be avant-garde, original, and ahead of the curve. Whatever one thinks of Picasso, like him or hate him, there’s no denying his brilliance and originality. Modernists took art seriously. If anything, the notion of the avant-garde made culture even more elitist as the New Art Appreciation required something more than good education and erudition. One needed originality, brilliance, insight, the edge, and the courage to think outside the box. As a result, much of Leftism opposed the Avant-Garde as elitist, ‘bourgeois’, and art-for-art’s-sake. Leftism called for thematic art, such as Socialist Realism that depicted images of noble proletariat, salt of the earth harvesting grain, or Marx & Lenin as godheads. It was because of this rift between the Ideological Left and the Avant Garde Left that the CIA funded the latter against the former. Dwight Macdonald generally disdained the middlebrow and the lowbrow. (He detested the middlebrow more as either failed highbrow or pretentious lowbrow. In contrast, pure-and-simple lowbrow was at least honest.) Even though the Avant-Garde was ideologically more anti-right than anti-left, it thrived in a liberal capitalist environment and, as such, lent prestige to the West(as the bastion of freedom and experimentation). There was a time when even most leftists and liberals into arts & culture were elitists. They took arts and culture very seriously than casually as is so often the case today. They were erudite & sophisticated and believe in Art. And even when they argued in favor of Popular Culture, they did so in utmost sincerest terms. Andrew Sarris defended certain Hollywood directors as genuine artists or ‘auteurs’. Susan Sontag’s take on ‘gay’ culture and Camp was in the form of a serious essay. Back in the days of Pauline Kael, Norman Mailer, Gore Vidal, Susan Sontag, Anthony Burgess, and etc., art was being redefined to incorporate the best of popular culture, but there remained a wall between Art and Trash. Back then, it was understandable why sophisticated and cultured folks would look down on unwashed masses and poor rubes whose idea of culture was the rodeo, country music, or TV.

Fast-forward to today, and the elites have NO REASON to feel culturally or even intellectually superior to the rest. The Best and the Brightest have become the Bestial and the Brutalist. Obama is supposed to be refined, cultured, and sophisticated, but who were his most prized guests to the White House? Trashy rapper celebrities whose spent entirelives spewing filth about ‘muh dick’, ‘muh bling’, ‘muh bitchass ho’. College-educated Liberals act like 5 yr olds at the feet of fat stupid vapid pig Negress Oprah. Yale University hosts lectures and conferences on pornography during ‘sex week’. Proggy college students’ idea of social protest is by carrying dildos around campus. Amanda Marcotte, supposedly one of the leading feminist wits of our age, writes articles about hankering for praise because she jumped in the sack with a porno ‘actor’. Liberal parents’ idea of proper child-rearing is to have some tranny — a guy with penis and balls pretending to be a 'woman' — read twisted stories to the kiddies. Jews who control the media urge women to ‘peg’ their men, i.e. put on dildo-straps and bugger guys. Is that what sophisticated Chua does to her hubber? CNN says cuckolding may be good for the relationship, and Daily Beast finds nothing wrong with it being the favorite sexual fetish among ‘intellectuals’, a code word for the kind of people Chua hangs around with. Jewish Liberals turned Disney into kiddie porn factory and crank out creatures like Miley Cyrus, who along with trashy Lena Dunham, Katy Perry, and Eminem are big Democrats welcomed with open arms by Hillary, a Yale graduate. One of the darlings of Liberalism is Emma Sulkowicz, a half-Jewish and half-Chinese nutter whose antics are praised by her mother. (We can only hope Chua’s kids don’t turn out so crazy.) This graduate of Columbia’s art program indulges in pornography and S&M as Political Theater about who knows what(or who blows whom). And how did feminists express their outrage at Trump? By wearing vagina-costumes and ‘pussy hats’. And what is the meaning of Christianity to Progs in the Current Year? "Jesus is for ‘gay marriage’ and for men cutting off dicks and balls to become ‘women’." And what kind of movies elicit the greatest enthusiasm from our sophisticated Liberals? The Disney reboot of STAR WARS because it features a Negro and some fat Chinese girl. Diversity makes even the pop-fascist aesthetics of STAR WARS ‘cool’. And Liberals have been wetting their pants over fantasy Wakanda of BLACK PANTHER. Now, what is more stupid and ludicrous? Pretending that a bunch of pro wrestlers are really fighting OR writing serious essays about how the fantasy of Wakanda opens a New Chapter in Black American consciousness? ROTFL.

Now, I’m not defending NASCAR(which I have no interest in) and WWE(which I think is pretty retarded), but given what has happened to the arts and culture even among the cultural elites, I don’t think Chua and her ilk have the credentials to look down on the hoi polloi. In a sane world, a woman as old and experienced as Hillary Clinton should be giving sound advice to young ones. But in our youth-pandering, celebrity-obsessed, vanity-driven, and hissy-bitchy culture(created by Jews who control media and entertainment, homos who worship themselves, and Negroes who have no interest in anything but their own thug egos), old white Liberals are expected to shut up and LISTEN. Jews indoctrinate and brainwash young ones to be rabid and hysterical, and old people are supposed to pander to them... like Mao turned young Chinese into crazed nutters whose shoes had to be licked by older people. Liberals have no argument except, "My eight year old said..." In our infantile age, truth = purity of youth and without even the irony of THE CATCHER IN THE RYE. Of course, the passion of youth is never independent or autonomous because impressionable young people simply believe what they are told. In the end, all those passionate Red Guards were just the attack dogs of Mao. And the millennials who are ecstatic about ‘gay marriage’ and Homomania are nothing but teachers’ pets whose heads were poisoned by Jews who control the 2 PC’s, Political Correctness and Popular Culture. Using brainwashed youth as political soldiers is the last refuge of scoundrels. Using children is the last refuge of subhuman scoundrels.

On the subject of neo-tribalism exacerbated by pop culture and subcultures, Chua could have mentioned thuggish rap music, perverted homo degeneracy(where entire city streets are shut down to conflate homo fecal penetration and tranny penis-cutting with ‘rainbow’ and even Jesus), pornification of mainstream culture, feminist ‘slut pride’, and etc., but she remains mum about them and only lampoons dumb whites who watch pro wrestling and NASCAR. Well, excuse me, but I think ‘sophisticated’ Ivy League-graduated Libs who worship Homomania and wax romantic about Wakanda are more delirious, delusional, and idiotic than the rubes who are into NASCAR. To get a glimpse of what Liberal Culture has degenerated into, get a load of the Gallery of Fruitkins. The following images should give you a good indication of the kind of Arts and Culture that Chua's elite class gave us. Homomania, slut culture, pornification of society, thug life, normalization of Spring Break perversion, promotion of drug use, hook-up culture, and etc. were all push most heavily by Jews who control media, entertainment, academia, pornography, ideology, idolatry, and the iconography of America, a land where we are told to worship MLK as holy icon, read TO KILL A MOCKING BIRD as holy writ but also worship the Negro as super-thug-ape-criminal-stud-gangsta-nigga in music, sports, and cuckold-fetish. Pray to Noble Negro as the new christ and boogie-woogie to Badass Nigga as the baddest and the blingest. So, what does the culture that Chua’s crowd promote as the New Normal, ‘rational’, and ‘progressive’? Take a look:

Homo-Cola. Prosperity Progressivism of the Current Year
10. Making fun of trashy white working class into WWE and NASCAR isn’t enough for Chua. She also mocks their irrationality of heeding the advice of Prosperity Gospel hucksters like Joel Osteen, a variation of Thomas Frank’s thesis in WHAT’S THE MATTER WITH KANSAS?, though, to be sure, Frank dwelt more on Culture Wars issues as to why relatively poor white vote for the GOP. Both Chua and Frank have a point but they miss the larger picture. For Frank, the have-lesses and have-nots have more to gain from the Democratic Party than from the GOP, so why do many white have-lesses vote for GOP. He sees this as the result of GOP’s exploitation of the ‘culture war’. Frank is correct that the GOP(that only really serves Wall Street, War State, and rich Zionist donors) has manipulated the naive sentiments of white folks. But he is overlooking the fact that culture is ultimately more important than materialist economics. Wealth doesn’t just grow from the ground or fall from the sky. There is a reason why certain peoples, such as Anglos-Germans-Jews-Japanese, have done more with than other peoples despite the access to the same resources or even less resources. Attitude, habits, values, virtues, and mindset matter a great deal... as well as natural talent of course. Most Jews came to the US poor. Why did they do so well? Most Swedes arrived as poor folks to work the fields, like in the films THE EMIGRANTS and THE NEW LAND. Why did Swedes in America make steady gains? Did the US government especially shower them with wealth? Of course not. So, values matter. (Furthermore, people don't need wealth to have meaning in life. Ultimately, a society is more about what it believes and values than what it owns and displays. Therefore, cultural and moral issues are crucial, though, too often, exploited by cynical politicians who only care about votes to get them to DC as 'Hollywood for ugly people'. This is why 'gay marriage' was an very important issue. Its passage degraded the meaning of marriage, the most important human institution, and the moral cancer metastasizing from that sickness has been corrupting every aspect of American society. It's a fallacy to believe that because politicians cynically exploit 'culture war' issues, cultural issues don't matter. A society of decent and moral people with less is richer than a society of vile and venal people with more. It's why Harry toasts George Bailey in IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE as the 'richest man in town'.) The Podestas are rich but scum. Many whites and blacks in the past had less but led more meaningful lives than many whites and blacks today who don't know hunger and have lots of stuff but are soul-corrupted. Japanese today are materially better off than Japanese in the 50s and 60s but empty in purpose and meaning.) Even if a people were to remain materially poor, they can still have a sane and healthy society with the right values and attitudes. Many Polish communities under Soviet rule remained moral and sound despite relative poverty vis-a-vis the West. So, if Frank thinks problems can be solved with just Bigger Government, he is dead wrong.

On the other hand, the GOP and American Conservatism have been weak in defending and demanding real morality and values. As they’ve depended on donations from Wall Street and Las Vegas, GOP and Conservatism Inc are just a soulless libertarian political machines that promote ‘liberty’ without forbearance. Also, American Christianity has gone from a religion of discipline to a religion of childish faith, war-mongering, or vapid materialism. Evangelical Churches indulge dumbness and laziness with the uh-shucks message that Jesus just loves you no matter how fat, slobby, and lazy you are. Prosperity Gospel preaches that money will fall from the sky like manna from heaven if you believe like dummies and donate more to the Osteens of the world. And then, you got churches that preach little else but "We must fight more wars for Israel, hallelujah."
What happened to the serious and sober Christianity that had instilled American with virtues, discipline, and diligence? The whole Protestant Work Ethic tradition? Work Ethic is a real virtue because the message is NOT Work is good because it make you rich. It means work is good in and of itself. It says people should be engaged productively with the world. This work could be manual labor, mental labor, enterprise, or social work. It would pay a lot or a little. The thing is, because God gave you a mind and body, you should use them with appreciation and gratitude than being lazy or stupid. Today’s Christianity either indulges physical laziness or encourages mental laziness. Mainline churches used to be serious and impart an intelligent form of Christianity, but over the years, their best members became secular and lost faith, and in time, the churches were taken over by lesbians and deviants whose only interest in Christianity is as a vessel for homomania and other ludicrous fads.

Christianity in and of itself doesn’t do much for wealth creation. Christianity preaches real virtues, but they tend to be passive and pacifist. To succeed in life, life energies must be focused and forceful than recessive and resigning. Christian values, in and of themselves, are defensive than offensive. Plenty of Christian civilizations, from Byzantium to late Catholic to Russian Orthodox, failed to generate an energetic and dedicated work force. It was Northern Protestantism that achieved concentration of industry with emphasis on mental discipline and cultivation of good habits. Thus, mental and physical energies converged to perform certain objectives. Today, something like this survives only among the Mormons. Even though Mormons are generally not very rich or successful, their emphasis on habits and attitudes has spared many of them from degradation so common across America.

Now, Chua and her ilk aren’t wrong to look down on the dummies who attend the services of Joel Osteen(or the black dummies who go for Creflo Dollar). But again, Chua is pulling a misdirection. In a book about Tribalism, she pays too much attention to the hypocrisies or delusions of the powerless while overlooking the far more consequential hypocrisies and mendacities of the powerful. Joel Osteen got rich by fooling lots of dummies, but neither he nor his followers have any consequential power in the world. Also, as stated earlier, most white working class who went with Trump voted for Security, not Prosperity. Their big hope is to see factories return to their communities, not own yachts and private jets. They ate up his anti-Wall Street speech and anti-globalist rants. Trump denounced current ‘free trade’ as making the rich richer while doing nothing for too many Americans. (And these voters are NOT happy with Trump’s tax cuts for the rich.) So, if anything, the Kansans of Thomas Frank’s book did act RATIONALLY in supporting Trump. The white working class rejected all the libertarian-sounding ‘free market’ preachers and went with Trump who promised them jobs and security.

The real Economic Hypocrisy of America is not the Prosperity Gospel but the Prosperity Progressivism. Though signs of this began to emerge in the 80s, it came to full fruition in the Clinton 90s. There were several reasons for this. With spectacular Jewish success as capitalists and the total collapse of Marxist regimes around the world, the Classic Left or the True Left vanished in the late 1980s. With the breakup of the Soviet Union, the main interests of American Jews was not to restore communism or socialism in Russia but to use finance-capitalism to pull off the greatest heist in world history. This was done by ‘liberal’ and ‘progressive’ Jews of Harvard University in collusion with Russian Jews. Indeed, when the Communist Party launched a comeback campaign in 1996 against Boris Yeltsin, a hapless stooge of Jews, the entirety of Judea kicked into gear to keep Yeltsin in power. Though Jew-run Time magazine credited the Yanks for intervening in Russian election, it was really the Yankovichs that really pulled the job.
Yanks or Yankovichs? Jewish finance capitalists raped Russia under Yeltsin and kept him as 'leader' to steal some more. In her book WORLD ON FIRE, Chua was courageous enough to point to the Jewish nature of the massive heist, but since then, she's turned into an obedient doggy of the Jewish Hyper-Power, aka Judea.
Jews now came to regard communism as their enemy. To be sure, even prior to the fall of the Soviet Union, communist nations had fallen out of favor with Jews whose main allegiance was to nationalist Israel and capitalist USA. Though Jews once regarded communism as empowering mechanism for Jews in Eastern Europe once rife with ‘antisemitism’, the anti-Zionist purges of the 1950s that restored gentile power made Jews increasingly hostile to Communism and radical socialism... though many leftist Jews clung to the ideology in theory. If Jews ultimately failed to sink their claws into Russia, it was due to neo-nationalism under Putin, and this is why Jews are so hard at work in undermining majority-gentile-nationalism that may push back against Jewish hegemony. And Jews figure that the surest way to destroy gentile nationalism is via immigration-invasion and Diversity. While ideology can divide one people into various groups — conservative, liberal, independent, and etc — , there is always the chance that the people may come together and form a unity. After all, once divided China — split among warlords, KMT, communist, collaborators, etc. — came together as a united nation.

Anyway, late 20th century Jews, who came to define and dictate the terms of New Progressivism, saw nothing of value in communism and socialism. While some Jewish academics still used Marxist lexicon, the fire had gone out of belly of classic leftism. Indeed, even after the massive economic collapses of 2000 and 2008, there was hardly any attempt to reignite the radical fire. (Perhaps, it might have been somewhat different if John McCain had won in 2008 and bailed out the banks. Because Obama the ‘historic’ president and supposed ‘socialist’ did it, even the Socialist Left went relative easy on the Magic Negro. Similarly, the anti-war Left either slept through Obama’s wars or even lent support. Making ‘black socialist’ Obama the president was a brilliant move by the oligarchic class to defuse social unrest and anti-establishment activism. It was a soft demagoguery that masked so much financial robbery and war-mongering by the Deep State that takes orders from Judea.)

But the rise of Prosperity Progressivism owed to other factors as well. The boomer elites of all ethnic stripes came to be adept with high-tech, big pharma, finance, and ‘creative’ pursuits in fashion, entertainment, and design. During the Reagan 80s, they were ‘yuppies’, but mere materialism didn’t satisfy their whims and vanity for ‘meaning’. Also, their material success made them feel sort of’‘guilty’ for having betrayed the ideals of the 1960s when many(though far from all) had been part of the Counterculture committed to being ‘different’, as Benjamin Braddock says in THE GRADUATE. Consider Albert Brooks’ boomer character who belatedly decides to pursue the EASY RIDER lifestyle but discovers that non-urban Americana is, economically and creatively, dead as a doorknob.

The idealists of the 1960s began to make ‘too much’ money as lawyers, comedy writers, entertainment execs, doctors, designers, financial agents, and high-tech programmers. Some of these people were political but came to love money above all. Others had always cared for nothing but success. If you’re ideologically socialist or Marxist but make so much money, you’re going to feel hypocritical. If you only cared about money, you’re going to look crass and shallow to your peers. So, former-socialist-turned-capitalists altered the rules of Progressivism, and in time, this New Progressivism or Prosperity Progressivism also appealed to initially apolitical tycoons like Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and Jeff Bezos. Thanks to Clinton, the Democratic Party was able to shed Big Labor and the White Working Class in a way similar to the abandonment of Southern Whites. But it was also a way of giving up on blacks as well, even though this sleight-of-hand trick was pulled off with crafty audacity. One way was to lock up tons of blacks to bring down crime. Another way was to use immigrants to replace or push out blacks. Within a few decades, blacks went from the only minority that mattered to being outnumbered by a category called ‘Hispanics’. And in some states like California, even Asians came to outnumber them. But because the Democratic Party pushed the theme of White ‘racists’ vs Diversity, blacks were led to believe that more non-white immigrants would be a boon to black power against the ‘white supremacist’ GOP. Also, Clinton's many photo-ops with black secret service agents and easy rapport with the jivers had many blacks believing that he was the 'first black president'. Blacks were blind to the fact that Jews and urban elites were really aiming to replace them with a more docile and better-behaved people. Mexicans, for all their problems, are far preferable to blacks, as explained by David Cole. With the working class dumped overboard in favor of ‘free trade’, Wall Street financial deregulation, and the ‘creative’ economy, the Democratic Party no longer had much use for class politics. Indeed, even many of Bernie Sanders’ supporters weren't working class folks but white college kids demanding free college tuition or more European-style socialism. It was less about jobs and security for the working class than freebies as ‘positive rights’.

The Democratic Party became very close to Wall Street, Silicon Valley, Las Vegas, and other Big Money sectors. Soon enough, the Democrats were raising more big money from the big donors. This may seem odd since it was the GOP that had been more pro-capitalist and pro-rich than the Democratic Party. Even after Clinton transformed the Democratic Party into a 'free trade' party, the GOP offered even more tax cuts and deregulation for the rich class. So, why did the rich shift their support to the Democrats? It was because the rich are status-greedy as well as materially ‘greedy’. They want respectability, and they couldn’t find much from the GOP whose cultural themes ranged from small-town ‘hick’ values(that didn’t even exist anymore) to Born-Again Christianity(that seemed real dumb) to Libertarianism(that seemed self-centered and crass) to Guns & Military(that seemed brutish). The Liberal elites loved money and power(and couldn’t get enough of it), but they wanted to seem sophisticated, hip, trendy, fashionable, intellectual, compassionate, and yabbity-dabbity-doo. And it was the Liberals who held those cards by controlling colleges, fashion, Hollywood, celebrity culture, entertainment, and political activism(mostly noise-making to feel holier-than-thou). Granted, most Liberal intellectualism is specious, most pop culture is trashy, most celebrity culture is inane, and most media are propaganda. But still, there was the semblance of hipness, caring, and sophistication, and that’s what really mattered because status-ism isn’t about sincerity but signals. In truth, Oprah is just a shallow fat Negress who only cares for money and fame, but Liberals(and sucker conservatives) wanted to pretend otherwise because she laughed, cried, and hugged than growled like bitchass ho Sister Souljah. And even though Obama was a lazy jerk who coasted on Jewish support and money, people wanted to believe that he was this guy with ‘staggering intellect’(according to The New Republic) and ultra-cool sophistication who, golly gee whiz, even made the Harvard Law Review. In fact, Obama was never anything more than a smooth operator who, in tandem with rich savvy Jews, manipulated white psychology to see him as The One. Now, what were Obama’s cultural interests? He basically liked to hang out with Hollywood and rap celebrities.

Indeed, the trajectory of Hollywood and movie industry itself is instructive as to what happened to America. Robert Altman’s THE PLAYER isn’t much of a movie but a revealing expose of Prosperity Progressivism. Now, just about anyone who works in Hollywood calls himself or herself as a ‘liberal’ or ‘progressive’, but in fact, the only thing he or she really cares about is money, status, rank, awards, fame, celebrity, connections, and influence. Jews tried to ensnare Donald Trump with accusations of sexual impropriety, but it boomeranged on them with the #MeToo hysteria that exposed just how many Liberal Jews are libidinally out-of-control as Portnoys. Morally and culturally, Hollywood is a cesspool of Jewish and Homo perversion though, on occasion, it does produce some great movies.

Anyway, there was a time beginning in the late 60s, especially with EASY RIDER and perhaps peaking with THE GODFATHER PART 2 or TAXI DRIVER, when many hoped that a new kind of cinema defined by ‘auteurs’ and maverick producers(who respected the ‘personal vision’ of writers & directors) would prevail in the aftermath of the studio system: The boomers would gradually take over and infuse the movie industry with counterculture idealism and personal vision. But then, JAWS and STAR WARS happened while the personal films of the much-heralded 70s ‘auteurs’ began to falter. And after Michael Cimino’s HEAVEN’S GATE sunk an entire studio, hitting the box office jackpot was the main thing. Prior to JAWS and STAR WARS, the biggest money-makers had been movies like THE GODFATHER, THE GRADUATE, and DOCTOR ZHIVAGO, works made for adults. But with the advent with Spielberg and Lucas, almost all the top earners were summer blockbusters aimed at youth.
And even though George Lucas & Steven Spielberg(and their generational peers) weren’t particularly political or ideological in their movie brat orientations, they eventually adopted Prosperity Progressivism to show they weren’t only about $$$ but for the Cause, whatever it may be. What was this cause? For Spielberg, it was revising past into myth: COLOR PURPLE, SCHINDLER’S LIST, AMISTAD, LINCOLN, BRIDGE OF SPIES, etc without ever taking an hard look at the world around him. The sheer nostalgia for a mythic past suggested an inability to come to terms with the real world. (Spielberg’s movies set in the present tend to be fairytales or fantasies, whereas ones set in the past tend to impart generic political platitudes that wax over the intractable specifics of the human condition.) As for Lucas, his main cultural inspirations came from Nazi aesthetics(of Leni Riefenstahl and others) and what would now be considered ‘racist’ stereotypes of Old Hollywood. So, he made TRIUMPH OF THE WILL as a space opera and filled his universe with creatures based on racial caricatures. But having bought into Progressive Prosperity, he made his ‘racist’-fascist space fantasy into a ‘progressive’ tale of how Diversity triumphs over white guys, though, to be sure, the Emperor sorts of looks Jewishy and Darth Vader, though white, has a black man’s voice. (Vader the first specimen of the GET OUT syndrome?) It’s like watching SONG OF THE SOUTH redone as a PC spectacle in space. And among the new crop of directors in the 1990s, the most prominent was the nihilistic Quentin Tarantino whose movies coasted on mayhem and degeneracy. But they were stamped with the ‘progressive’ label because they featured cool blacks and ‘hipster racism’, a form of ironic ‘anti-racism’ for those supposedly in the know. So-called ‘progressive’ mogul Harvey Weinstein made lots of money with fellow ‘progressive’ hipster Quentin Tarantino. But’ if INGLORIOUS BASTERDS and DJANGO UNCHAINED are supposed to be moral statements about WWII and slavery, what does that say about the mentality of current ‘progressivism’? (PC spawned a new kind of bigotry that might be called ‘progotry’. The excessive cult of self-righteous supremacism closes hearts and minds. Self-righteousness always blinds and needs to be countered by competing narratives and agendas for balance. But when a certain strain of self-righteousness is encouraged and enforced at every level of society, it feels zero obligation to ponder other perspectives. It’s why Cultural Revolution spiraled out of control in China. Young people are naturally prone to enthusiasm or idealism, aka simplemindedness, but when the Power hails their naivete as solid gold, it compounds their over-excited egos that grow intolerant of anything that casts doubt on their inflated vanity. They are so sure that they are on the right side of history that any punishment meted out to the enemy seems not only justified but necessary and satisfying. Sadism becomes a virtue. So, the Red Guards beat up and murdered their victims with aplomb and without the slightest hint of doubt or remorse. And a low-burner version of this kind of progotry has taken hold of US colleges. Just ask Charles Murray. SO SURE of their anti-bigotry, progots are blind to their own purity spiral of arrogance, contempt, and dementia. We saw what progots are capable of in Stalin’s Russia, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, May 68 France, Jim Jones church of demented diversity, and Antifa goons embolded by Judea. These anti-rational idiots are like pitbulls pumped with steroids. They think they know everything because they possess the magic chants and icons. Why do college professors turn students into deranged barking dogs? It’s not about social justice but about psychology. Most college professors don’t amount to much in power & influence and feel envious of others who gain wealth in business, power in government, or true honor in the hard sciences. So, the only way they can feel a sense of power is by training their students to obey like dogs. Amy Chua herself is a progot when it comes to the Alt Right. As a legal scholar, she will defend Charles Murray’s right of free speech from the mob but not the Constitutional rights of the Alt Right. There is no mention in her account of Charlottesville that the Alt Right, which had done everything by the book, was set up and ambushed by the quadruple whammy of Jewish supremacist power, the police, antifa thugs, and the Fake News Media. When push comes to shove, Chua is the guard dog of Jewish Hyperism, the true supremacist power in the US and the world.)

Many boomers achieved great success in media and entertainment, but the biggest winners were those who went into high-tech. There were already signs of high-tech supremacy in the 1980s with the rise of video-games and the personal computer, but it really exploded with the internet that turned the computer into the next TV. The boomers, ‘generation X’, and millennials who made their money in high-tech simply have no conception of the proletariat. If there must be manufacturing, just get Mexicans or Asians to assemble the products, made all the easier due to ‘free trade’ pacts with the entire world. Also, as most high-tech people tend to be nerds and geeks, they lack political or cultural agency. They fixate on ‘geek’ stuff and rely on others for advice on style, fashion, and culture. Since homos and Liberals dominate fashion, entertainment, and urban lifestyle, the geeks and nerds just go along with whatever happens to be trendy or correct. And because Jews own the media and publish books by the likes of Malcolm Gladwell, most nerds and geeks adopt the worldview of Judea. They invariably turn proggy and worship Homomania and Climate Change hysteria. (Global Warming fears may be legit, but 'climate change' is proselytized as a neo-religion.)
Now, because the ‘progressive’ elements in media, academia, and entertainment must pander to tycoons like Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates for funds and investment, they’ve concocted a new kind of ‘progressivism’ that is prosperity-friendly. It’s like the spiritual adviser in SILICON VALLEY is always ready to shower the Rich Guy with fulsome praise. Nerds and geeks are very smart but tend to have no taste and anything like a sensibility. They are only used to crunching facts and figures in their minds. Their idea of culture is STAR TREK novels and video-games. But ultimately, they want status & respect too and outsource ideology and idology to others. And so, the Consultant Class(more accurate term than the ‘creative class’) tailored a new kind of ‘progressivism’ that is palatable to the new globalist class of ‘aspergy’ winners. But then, this new ‘progressivism’ is also appealing to those who made it in Real Estate(another enterprise dominated by well-connected and well-financed Jews), finance, retail, media, etc.

What do rich folks fear most? Class politics because it involves real economics. Class politics doesn’t have to be Marxist to cause headache for the owner and managerial class. Collective bargaining can apply lots of pressure, and not always in a good way, and the story of Big Labor in America has been marred by corruption. Still, without the push-back of big labor, capitalism tends to see workers as disposable helots because (1) the kind of people who rise to the top in capitalism tend to be ruthless operators and (2) we are living in the post-Christian age when the elites are far less sentimental about their moral obligations. (After class politics, rich folks fear urban black crime, but Prosperity Progressivism also offered a solution to that problem beginning with the New Democrat policies of Billy Boy Clinton. Because blacks have iconic value, the trick is to push out the bad blacks while cozying up to the good ones. That way, you can have the cake and eat it too. Show that you’re not ‘racist’ by shaking hands with Obama while having Obama push housing policies that push bad blacks out of cities.)

Anyway, the New Progressivism, or Prosperity Progressivism, fixed the bugs in the Democratic Party for the rich class. The new themes would be about lifestyles, narcissism, fashion, sexuality, entertainment, and empowerment through vanity. And guess which group took top prize in this competition, especially with the special backing of Judea? The fruitkins of course. While blacks are narcissistic and vain, they tend to fail in creativity(except in rapping, funk, oogity-boogity, and coming up with colorful names for their ‘chillun’) and management. It’s telling that when the Democratic Party finally found a clean-cut Negro in Obama, he was half-white, raised by white grandparents, and had hung around non-blacks all his life. But homos are not only vain and narcissistic but creative and disciplined when they need to be. Whereas blacks are aggressive/aggressive, homos are passive-aggressive like Jews, and this gives them more maneuvering savvy. So, with Mayday giving way to Gayday, the Prosperity Progressivism found a magic formula with which to woo the Rich Class. In the past, when the Democratic Party was seen as the champion of Big Labor, it had rubbed many rich folks, even Liberals, the wrong way. Democratic defense of Big Labor meant brakes on Free Trade, which the Rich Class wanted in order to expand markets and access cheap labor in other nations. Also, the Liberal Rich especially grew to hate the working class because so many of them voted for Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan for socio-political, if not economic, reasons. As many Liberal Rich happened to be Jews, they held grudges against the white working class as a bunch of ‘Dumb Polacks’ or ‘white trash hicks’(who reminded them of Cossacks).

Not that the rich folks were too keen on blacks either. And even though Rich Liberals always made the right-sounding noises about Noble Negroes, they’d witnessed or heard of the degeneration of black America and quality of black labor. Prior to welfare and black power politics, blacks could be made to work harder and more responsibly because blacks really needed those jobs. Also, prior to the 60s, blacks knew that white folks had the power, so they had to grin and bear it and keep working hard. But once blacks got full equality and a plethora of legal protections, they not only lost their fear of white power but began to act uppity at work, steal a lot, and flip out like the sour-grapes Negro in CAR WASH. And when American businesses began to hire immigrants from Asian and Mexico, the word got around that they made more compliant workers than the blacks.

So, immigrants as helots or scab labor undermined National Leftism, the only kind of Leftism that works. After all, the people can exert power against the elites only as a unified collective. But in a globalized world, the big companies can always threaten to ship jobs overseas. Worse, even when the native workers are compliant, the companies may still send jobs overseas for more profits. Also, the vast pool of immigrant labor undermines the power of labor and collective bargaining. Happy to be in the US, immigrants work for low wages.
Also, immigration & attendant diversity shift the moral advantage from the native working class to the elite uber-class. Prior to mass immigration-invasion, when the US and Europe were either all white or overwhelmingly white, the working class held the moral ace against the ‘greedy’ capitalists. White have-mores had to answer to the white have-lesses. But by hugging non-white immigrants as members of Holy Diversity, the ruling elites pushed the native hoi polloi against the ropes for sins of ‘racism’, ‘xenophobia’, and ‘exclusion’. Of course, Jews and people like Chua live in the nicest neighborhoods, travel first-class, and stay in the finest hotels. They live in the Elysium world and affect self-righteous supremacist airs by snubbing the white middle/working class as ‘bigoted’.

They will claim that this is a new kind of ‘progressivism’ and ‘leftism’, but it’s nothing of the kind. True Leftism died long ago. While true leftism is universalist in values, it can only be nationalist in implementation. For example, it is up to the Russian government to represent, lead, and guide Russian folks, and it is up to the Chinese government to represent, lead, and guide Chinese folks. Even if both nations were to ascribe to similar concepts of basic human rights, each must resolve their own problems. Vietnamese leftists were nationalists. Their task was to liberate Vietnam from imperialism and to solve problems for the Vietnamese people. Suppose the Vietnamese elites opened Vietnam to endless Chinese, Hindu, Muslim, and African immigrant-invaders and then accused the Vietnamese population of being ‘racist’ and ‘xenophobic’ for not being welcoming enough. But why should the Vietnamese people welcome foreign invasion?

Democracy has always worked only on the national level. It has also worked best in nations with a homogenous population or a commanding majority. A nation without a majority population will have a hard time making democracy work. True leftism has always been linked with nationalism, and if Hitler had played his cards right and NOT shifted into imperialist mode, National Socialism could have been a constructive fusion of rightism and leftism as two fists of a boxer than opposing principles. Both leftism and rightism are essential to power. True leftism lent moral gravitas to the native masses against the ‘greedy’ elites; therefore, the elites felt obligated to do more for the people. After WWII, the white British working class had tremendous moral leverage against the British elites. And so did the Swedish working class and the French working class.
So, why did it all go to hell? One reason was the rise of the mercurial white-collar class. Also, there was degradation of working class morals by youth culture and Negromania. And, labor unions grew corrupt, and Communist Party lost legitimacy as the crimes of the Soviet Union and Red China became better-known. Then, Jews took over Leftism and waged war on gentile nationalism by promoting Diversity and Mass-Immigration. Elites came to value the new ‘leftism’ based on immigrants because they finally had an issue with which to gain moral advantage over the native working class. Snotty elites could symbolically hug Diversity and sneer "Are you a racist?" or "Are you a xenophobe?" to the native hoi polloi. PC made Diversity the highest virtue and passed the moral ace from the working class to the replacist elites who only care about their own privilege but learned to affect virtue-vanity by repeating the mantra of ‘diversity is our strength’.

And, Homomania is the Jewel in the Crown of Prosperity Progressivism because Wall Street, Las Vegas, the Military-Industrial Complex, and oligarchs like Jeff Bezos can get away with just about anything by waving the Homo flag. Unlike class politics with its tough negotiations over wages and benefits, Homomania is totally pro-rich because Homos, with their quasi-aristocratic flair and fancy-pants whoopery, love to cater to the rich and privileged. As even Richard Florida(of the ‘creative class’ theory) admitted, it’s the homos who flock to rich folks than vice versa. Since the New Progressivism favored homos like the fancy-pants fruitkin in THE WOLF OF WALL STREET, the rich finally had an inexpensive way to gain ‘progressive credentials.

In the post-spiritual West, people were hankering for some New Age spirituality. Also, the race-fatigue — black crime, riots, pathologies, and etc — made many urban progs sour on blacks. Sure, as blacks are one of the Holy Threes, the progs always pay fat-lip-service to poor, poor blacks... just like Chua does in her book. But in fact, many white/Jewish urbanites feared black crime & thuggery and quietly used mass incarceration, stop-and-frisk, immigrant-invaders, and section 8 policies to reduce the presence of blacks in cities. As for the once noble image of working class as the salt of the earth, it got associated with ‘white trash’ and people like Archie Bunker. Also, Jews came to hate Big Labor as the den of Italian-American ‘goombas’ and Irish machine politics. And even though Progs made a big deal of Diversity as an idea, they found most non-white peoples and cultures dull and boring(except for the black kind). I mean how many progs, urbanites, and Liberals read Guatemalan poetry, listen to Chinese music, watch Hindu TV, follow Mexican sports, and play Arab instruments? Other than whites/Jews and blacks, the only FUN people in the progo-global imagination are homos and trannies who make spectacles of themselves as the people of flamboyance.
In our age of hedonism and narcissism, people want a fun & celebratory kind of Progressivism. Also, in our post-religious age, people want some kind of spiritual uplift in life. And homos supplied both. Homos not only love to indulge in fun but are into self-worship. It’s also possible that homos may have an edge in IQ, so they get respect from the intellectual community as well. Ours is an age when people attend church services mainly for entertainment value. Blacks dance and holler in churches. Many white churches play rock music. So, why not turn the church into a ‘gay thing’? And isn’t there something ‘miraculous’ about pretending that two men can be ‘two daddies’ or two women can be ‘two mommies’? Or that a man can transform into a ‘woman’ or vice versa? After all, wasn’t Jesus born of a Virgin Mother according to the Christian myth?

Now, why is Prosperity Progressivism so much more dangerous than Prosperity Gospel? Because of the power. While Prosperity Gospel followers may want to be rich, most of them are not, and they hold no sway over the elite institutions that really matter. In contrast, Prosperity Progressivism is the defacto governing principle of the West. It was behind the Housing Bubble. Wall Street scoundrels cooked up a scheme of mixing good loans with bad loans, stamping them with AAA approval from a corrupted rating agency, and selling them as ‘derivatives’ all over the world. By invoking universal home-ownership for People of Color or Diversity, both the GOP and Democratic Party pushed massive fraud by deregulated Wall Street. Just like bubble was supposed to make everyone rich in the 1990s in the ‘New Economy’, the Housing Bubble was going to turn everyone into a home-owner. It combined ‘progressivism’ — anti-‘red-lining’ against minorities — with ‘prosperitism’. It got both the ‘right’ and ‘left’ onboard.

And how did Gambling Industry make inroads into Indian Reservations to make Jews even richer by fleecing rural whites who flock to Indian casinos? By fusing historical redress(a leftist theme) with cult of enterprise(a libertarian theme). It’s like how Albert Brooks in LOST IN AMERICA explains the formula of associating Las Vegas with Christmas and Family Values. Sheldon Adelson, who wants to nuke Iran and is the #1 contributor to the GOP, isn’t far from Prosperity Progressivism. He’s a globalist just like Jeff Bezos and Tim Cook, though, of course, a fierce nationalist when it comes to Israel. Even the so-called Liberal media don’t denounce him. Imagine someone who wants to drop nukes on Iran being the #1 donor to the GOP, and yet, even so-called Progs like Amy Chua refuse to mention the foul cretin in her book about Tribalism. There was a time when social conservatives and true progressives were fiercely opposed to the expansion of gambling, but with the GOP relying so much on the likes on Adelson and with the ‘new progs’ caring more about homo vanity than depressed working class communities(and with so many politicians being shills of Jews who own and run the gambling industry), there is no effective opposition to the vice industry. Gambling Industry is truly a dangerous power, but Chua prefers to yammer about Joel Osteen & Creflo Dollar who have no power and influence apart from suckering their pathetic flock.

Prosperity Progressivism employs symbolism, idolatry, and hype over truth and reason. It explains why the Globalist Elites were able to get away with so much bad behavior by hiding behind Obama. Because he was sold as a ‘historic’ black candidate and a ‘socialist’, his awestruck supporters overlooked all the corruptions and betrayals. So, Wall Street Jews could use him to bailout the banks and not go after the fraudsters. And the Fed could repeat new rounds of ‘quantitative easing’ to inflate the stock market and enrich the very people who'd been most responsible for the 2008 debacle.

Also, because the New Progressivism is all about homomania, the US military became ‘cool’ and ‘hip’ upon allowing homos and trannies to romp around openly. With the military-industrial complex draped with homo colors, the Progressive resistance to US imperialism dried up despite the horrors in Libya, Syria, and Ukraine. Besides, since the Commander-in-Chief was the ‘historic’ Obama, the so-called Left defacto became pro-war. So, the very people who’d denounced George W. Bush as a War Criminal overlooked Obama’s own War Crimes in Libya and his aid to terrorists in Syria.

Anyway, all of this is part of Prosperity Progressivism. It destroyed entire nations. Because the super-rich class made and paid for Obama as a Hollywood production, their globalist agenda could be laundered through the symbolism of the ‘historic’ and ‘clean-cut’ black guy. And when Obama pushed through with Homomania, the Progs were ecstatic because worshiping Homos is the only spirituality they have left apart from Magic Negro worship. So, never mind the neo-imperialist crimes of the military-industrial complex. Never mind the destruction of Libya. Since Obama did it with a military that celebrates prancing homos, the New Imperialism can’t be all that bad in the eyes of Progs. And it was also grounds for a ‘new cold war’ with Russia, a nation whose economy is smaller than that of South Korea or Apple. And why is Russia evil? According to Prosperity Progressivism and holy homomania, it’s because Russia won’t allow massive homo parades and propaganda for ‘gay marriage’ among school children. Yes, THAT is grounds for progot hatred for Russia.

Prosperity Progressivism is the real power with worldwide consequences, but there is nothing about the fusion of Prosperity and Progressivism in Chua’s book. Instead, we have accounts of idiotic followers of Joel Osteen and Creflo Dollar to make Chua’s prog peers snicker with contempt at the dummies. There is no mention of Jewish power as the dominant factor in Prosperity Progressivism and how its unholy hypocrisy warps the world. Though 2% of the US population, Jews own anywhere from 35% to 40% to US wealth, and the share grows every year. Because Jews are the richest, most powerful, most imperialist, and most tyrannical force in the US, shouldn’t progressivism(that prides itself as ‘speaking truth to power’) be calling out on Jewish abuses, arrogance, corruption, warmongering, censorship(of BDS), finance-capitalist robbery, pornification of society, selling of opioids, and etc? Now, there are some brave souls who do just that, BUT if you work in the media, academia, finance, Hollywood, or Deep State and call out on Jewish power, you will get the Alt-Right-Treatment.
Chua the status-seeker knows this, of course. She knows she barely got away with her chapter about Russian Jews in WORLD ON FIRE. She’s wised up since then... or has completed her obedience training as the dog of Judea. She has learned the taboos, the do’s and don’ts. Her previous book TRIPLE PACKAGE was buried by the media because it too brought attention to the over-representation of Jews in wealth and influence. So, in the new book POLITICAL TRIBES, which is getting massive push by the Jew-run media, there is almost nothing about Jewish Power. What a world we live in.
Isn’t it interesting that Hollywood has never made a movie about the Nakba pogroms even though Israel-Palestinian issue has been a thorn in US foreign policy. Isn’t it interesting that Hollywood has never made a movie about how Jewish Bolsheviks took part in massive bloodbath in the USSR? And even in movies about Wall Street corruption, the villains are usually portrayed as gentiles and the anti-corruption heroes are often Jewish. In THE BIG SHORT, we are shown a super-conscientious Jewish guy who is so guilt-ridden about cashing in on the financial collapse, and the movie ends with him boo-hoo bleating about how bad nasty people will just blame ‘minorities’ and ‘immigrants’. This is how Jews employ misdirection. Jews in Wall Street were most responsible for both the dotcom bubble and housing bubble, BUT they pretend to be the most heartfelt critics and go boo-hoo about how helpless groups who might be scapegoated by the mob. Well then, I have a proposal. If the wrong people shouldn’t be scapegoated, then we need to speak the truth, and we must blame Jewish Power. But of course, that would be ‘antisemitic’.

Jews are the ruling elites. They control much of finance, real estate, law, entertainment, sports industry, media, Ivy League, and etc., but they playact at being ‘progressives’ sticking up for the ‘underdog’. Jews pretend to be allies of Muslim Refugees but NEVER mention how their Wars for Israel created all those refugees in the first place. Jews don’t pressure Israel to take Syrian refugees but they say Europe and even Japan should. Jews claim pride in having defended free speech rights for dissidents, but when BDS and Alt Right speak truth to Jewish power, Jews pressure politicians to criminalize Palestinian voices and de-platform White National Liberationists who say NO MORE to serving Jewish Hyperism. If the likes of Chua wants to serve Jewish Hyper-Power, let them do so. But there is no reason why Palestinians and White National Liberationists should aid and abet the evil of Jewish Hyper Power.

Chua is enamored of Judeo-Nazism because it has cunningly weaponized ‘diversity’ and ‘tolerance’. In the interview of her book on Hyper-Powers, she says the main formula of super-duper-power is ‘tolerance’ and ‘diversity’ because the Hyper-Power must draw on the talents of all peoples and make them feel welcome within the empire. She argues the Nazis failed in empire-building, at least in Russia, because they went for purist-supremacism and imperialism. In order for imperialism to work, it has to conquer and suppress other peoples with the stick but also win them over with the carrot as collaborators.

Of course, in a Hyper-Power, prestige and control are not evenly distributed and shared among all groups. Some groups are ‘more equal than others’, like the Brits were more equal than others in the British Empire. However, all peoples are given a piece of the pie if they go along. Chua surely sees Judea as the greatest Hyper-Power that ever existed, but it’s a Power that cannot be named, just like Hebrews couldn’t mutter the name of God. Chua now knows the rules as she got a lot of heat for naming the Jews in WORLD ON FIRE. To be part of the Jewish Hyper-Power, she has to watch her steps, and POLITICAL TRIBES is exactly that kind of book. It is a work of misdirection that makes the reader focus on everything BUT the most important tribal power in the world, that of Judea. It is no wonder that Jews are petting her like a good dog. Chua is a Compradore elite, like the Chinese who once served the British Empire in Hong Kong. Her main identity is Power, and since Hyper-Power is the biggest power there is, she is a concubine of the Hyper Power. She’s an intellectual moll, or it’s like she’s auditioning for Bond Girl for Double-O-Schwarz. She’s an assassin for the Hyper Power like Luv the hitman(or hitwoman) for Wallace in BLADE RUNNER 2049. Jewish Hyperpower is Nazism done right. Just like imperialism is cool in the New STAR WARS if it’s diverse enough — the so-called Rebels constitute another empire, after all — , Nazism is cool if it is ‘diverse’ and ‘tolerant’ enough. And that’s how Judeo-Nazi globalism works. Jews got most of the power, BUT there are crumbs for others willing to participate in the Hyper-Power. It’s like all those men who flock around Hyman Roth for the crumbs.

Anyway, something is wrong with the world when the most prosperous, powerful, hateful, arrogant, murderous, and destructive people are considered as paragons of the ‘progressive’ community. We have Jews who raped Russia in the 1990s playing the role of ‘progressives’ allied with homo and Pussy Riot ‘dissidents’ in Russia. The mentally sick Pussy Riot, along with the demented Masha Gessen, are supposed to lead humanity to the promised land of being ‘more evolved’. Chua seems hardly aghast at any of this degeneracy. Did her father bring her to the West to become a servitor of rot and filth of Jews-gone-crazy?

We have Jews as ‘progressives’ aiding Neo-Nazis in Ukraine against the Russian minority there. (Now, it’s understandable why some Ukrainians have fond memories of collaboration with Germans against the USSR. Given the horrors of Stalinism, it’s not surprising why many Ukrainians welcomed Germans as liberators and fought alongside them. Still, isn’t it time for Ukrainians to come to terms with Nazism-as-the-greater-evil?) We have Jews using Wall Street, Las Vegas, Hollywood, and Real Estate bubbles to rob us blind but then posing as ‘progressives’ by invoking ‘diversity’ and hugging immigrant-invaders who further erode the identity, posterity, security, and inheritance of the historic American folks of European origin. We have Jews pushing Wars for Israel by dressing up Zionist-Imperialism as missions of ‘democracy’ and ‘human rights’. And Samantha Power, another moll of the Jews, serves as their white dog in arguing for the destruction of nations like Libya. We got white dog Samantha, yellow dog Amy, and brown dog Nikki all serving Jews. Like Chua had once been critical of Jewish machinations in Russia of the 90s, Samantha once had some courage in condemning Zionist occupation of West Bank, but that’s all in the past. People like her are now little more than servitors of Jewish Hyperism. Power corrupts, Hyper-corrupts all. Too afraid to denounce Zionist oppression of Palestinians, Samantha Power’s repressed moral outrage was diverted to other nations.

Finally, Chua serves Jewish Hyperism by bashing the Alt Right. She mentions Richard Spencer as calling for ‘ethnic-cleansing’ against Diversity but fails to recognize that Diversity(Immigration-Invasion) IS a form of ethnic-cleansing against white people. So, what Spencer is really calling for is Counter-Ethnic-Cleansing against the Current Ethnic Cleansing of whites by Diversity. It is because Palestinians failed to stop the Jewish immigration-invasion that they were replaced in their own homeland. And Serbs lost their sacred homeland Kosovo forever because the Albanian influx replaced the Serbians. (Hypocrisy Alert: Jews believe they had the historical right to reclaim the Holy Land as their ancestral homeland, but they totally opposed Serbian efforts to reclaim Kosovo from Muslims. So, why did Jews support Albanian Muslims? Partly because Serbia was close to Russia. Also, Jews wanted to win some moral credit with Muslims to grease the eventual US invasion of Iraq.) Immigration is a form of Ethnic-Cleansing IF (1) the new arrivals come in huge never-ending waves and (2) they are different from the native or dominant population. More Jewish immigrants arriving in Jewish-ruled Israel replenishes and strengthens Jewish power... just like more Europeans arriving in European-made America bolstered and expanded white power. But if most immigrants arriving in Israel aren’t Jewish and keep coming in ever bigger waves, you can kiss Israel-as-Jewish-state goodbye. It would effectively be ethnic-cleansing against Jews and Israel as a Jewish Homeland. When we look at the immigration-migration-invasion waves now crashing into Europe from Africa and the Muslim world — not least because of Jewish Hyperism’s Wars breached Gaddafi’s dam between Africa and Europe — , the future looks bleak for the West. But Jews don’t care. Jews shower lunatics like Angela Merkel and Theresa May with praise while condemning nationalists in Poland and Hungary for wanting to defend their own nations. Of course, this has nothing to do with Jewish compassion for Muslims or Africans. After all, Jews sure as hell don’t give a crap about Palestinians in West Bank. Jews are not returning Golan Heights to Syria. Jews sure don’t mind lending aid to ISIS and terrorists in Syria. Jews cheered the total destruction of Libya. Jews raped Russia in the 90s and didn’t shed a tear for all the lives ruined. Jews feel no brotherly love for American ‘white trash’ whose lives were ruined by globalist gutting of factories and the spread of drug culture. So, why do Jews push for mass invasion of Europe? It’s all about Jewish power. Jews fear that the rise of gentile nationalism in Europe will serve as a barrier to Jewish penetration and takeover. After all, Jews nearly had all of Russia but lost it because of Russian nationalism, though very moderate in form under Putin. That’s all Jews care about. It’s like what Viktor Orban said about Jewish Hyperism even though he didn’t spell it out as ‘Jewish’. But we know.

Also, why are people like Chua and other non-whites so angry with people like Spencer who want to preserve white nations for white people? Non-whites have their own lands. If Asia, Africa, Middle East, and Latin America were sinking into the sea, and if all these people had nowhere else to go, I would understand their plight and desperation. But Chua’s family could go settle in China or Hong Kong. And Latin America is HUGE. Brazil alone is bigger than continental USA. And Mexico has lots of potential. And Africa is gigantic and so much could be done with it.
Also, if indeed Americanism is an universal idea, then people need to remind themselves that ideas are meant to be portable and transferable. People don’t have to come to the West to have modernity and prosperity. They can borrow those ideas and apply them to their own nations. Japanese stayed in Japan and made a modern nation by emulating Western ideas. China has made dramatic changes in several decades by adopting ideas and technologies from Europe, Japan, and America. Also, democracy and ‘human rights’ have gone global. They are not particular to the US. Furthermore, if progressivism is about helping the poor, then immigrants(the darlings of progressivism)should move to the poorest nations and help develop the economies there. If Chua’s family were truly progressive, they should have moved to a poor nation in Africa or Latin America to help poor folks. Why come to the US and help rich folks become even richer? If there’s a rich person and a poor person, should a progressive go to serve a rich person or go to help a poor person? All these immigrants claim to be progressive but they never want to go to poor nations to help poor folks. They want to come to rich nations to serve rich corporations. Chua didn’t move to a poor nation to help people defend themselves from US imperialism. She moved to the US to aid and abet the Hyper-Power she swoons over. She has nothing to say about the plight of Palestinians because she’s too busy serving Jewish Hyperism. Even within the US, she could have devoted her life to helping ‘poor white trash’ hooked to bad drugs. Or, if she feels black customers are neglected or if blacks calling for taxis go ignored, she could have opened a business in the black community or driven a cab in Detroit. But instead, she decided to hang around places like Harvard and Yale and rub shoulders with the globalist elites. Chua and her ilk don’t want to be true progressives by going to where the poor folks are... like Jesus went to the sick and poor. She wants to hang around the rich and powerful while, at the same time, virtue-signaling her ‘progressivism’ by feigning compassion for illegal aliens and the like. If Chau really wants to help the poor folks in Latin America, why not go OVER THERE and become a teacher or businesswoman? Instead, she hangs around the bastions of power and privilege. She loves the supremacism of globalist hyper-power. But to mask her power-lust and power-worship, she makes lame noises about Diversity and all that crap.

If Progs truly revere Emma Lazarus, we should push her sacraments to their logical conclusion. If all these Jews and Progressives really care about the ‘huddled masses’, why not go to where they are and help them out there? If Jews love immigration and non-white majorities, I suggest American Jews all immigrate to Latin America, black Africa, and poorest parts of Asia. As caring progressives, they can use their knowledge and compassion toward developing the economies of the poorest nations. Instead, Jews have always followed and trailed Anglo and Germanic ‘white supremacists’ because they knew the Anglos and Germanics made the best kind of societies. And, it’s not just about ideas and systems but about habits, values, and manners. After all, the Americanist concept of democracy and human rights have spread all over the world. In terms of political philosophy, there’s hardly a difference between the US and Latin American nations. They are all committed to democracy. So, why has the Anglo-world done better? Anglos and Germanics have had attitudes, values, and manners that allowed for more constructive and conscientious behavior. Even within the US, consider how people in Anglo/Germanic communities practice local politics in contrast to how Mexican-Americans and especially black-Americans practice theirs. If not for federal tax dollars, many black communities in the US would be hardly different from your average black African nation overrun with corruption, thuggery, and ugabugary.

There is also the matter of aesthetics. Non-whites want to be with whites because they find whites more aesthetically pleasing. This is certainly true of many East Asians who even get plastic surgery to look ‘white’. Tons of black Africans try to move to Europe not only for freebies but to demand, "Where da white women at?" People like Chua are incensed with people like Spencer because, deep down inside, they prefer whiteness and white folks over their own kind. Indeed, even as globalism celebrates Diversity, people are not coming to the West for diversity but to get away from it. Latin America is very diverse, so why do the people there try to move to the US that is still majority white? North Africa is very diverse, so why are people there try to move to white Europe? India takes pride in Diversity(as well as being the world’s biggest democracy), but so many people there want to move to white majority Canada and Australia. These people are not running to diversity but away from it. They are running to whiteness, especially Anglo-Germanic kind. They’d rather move to US, Canada, or Australia than to more diverse Latin America where, already, whites are the minority. So, if they are running from Diversity, why do they invoke Diversity to gain entry to the West? It is to fool whitey into thinking Diversity will be good for white folks. After all, if white folks knew the truth about Diversity, they would say NO to non-white immigration. If a Chinese told a white person in China, "you not Chinese, you go back to white nation and be with white people and marry white person and have white kid", the white person would feel, "Okay! Time to go home." But if a white person were to tell Chua that she belongs in China with yellow folks, she would take umbrage because she wants to be with whites/Jews, have babies for whites/Jews, serve white/Jews, and etc. Non-whites also invoke Diversity to morally paralyze white nations into letting them in. By associating white homogeneity with 'racism'(the worst possible sin), white nations are morally browbeaten into letting in people of color. But no one asks, "why do people of color run from color to whiteness?"

Anyway, on the matter of Chua vs Spencer, it’s no competition who has more integrity and honor. Spencer also could have gone the academic, political, or legal career route. He could have been like Paul Ryan, Dan Quayle, and Mitt Romney, cuck-gentiles who took thirty pieces of silver to serve the Jewish Hyper-Power. Isn’t it odd that (1) Jews insist that whites give up their own tribalism (2) Jews insist that whites, devoid of their own tribalism, serve Jewish tribalism than color-blind universalism.
Jews attack white tribalism or race-consciousness not because they believe tribalism, per se, is wicked or evil? They attacked white tribalism so that whites, having no identity of their own, would serve Jewish identity instead. In other words, Jewish attack on tribalism is really to suppress white and Palestinian tribalisms to strengthen Jewish tribalism. Because the White World of the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and EU(and even Russia, which Jews keep eyeing to take over) are the richest and most advanced parts of the world, Jews seek to suppress white identity and white national sovereignty to make whites serve Jews. And Jews have succeeded most with Anglos and Germanics because, being generally more earnest and conscientious, they want to work hard at being good. Once Jews infected Anglo and Germanic minds with the notion that Diversity is wonderful and ‘racism’ is most evil, Anglos and Germanics(which includes Nordics) have been striving so earnestly to win approval of Jews who’ve elevated themselves to the vaunted status of Holy Holocaust People. Jews toyed with what Kevin MacDonald called ‘pathological altruism.
Anyway, Richard Spencer and others like him swim against the current of Jewish Hyper-Power that pushes mass immigration-invasion as a replacist weapon against the white race. And non-whites like Chua side with Jews(who’ve opened the gates of white worlds to non-whites) because, deep down inside, they prefer the white world, white folks, and white management than their own nations and own kind. Chua certainly would rather serve Jews and globalist whites than her own people and culture. In case of war against China, she will cheer on the Hyper-Power to kill those ‘subhuman chinks’ who could even be her blood relatives.
Compared to a compradore-traitoress like Chua, Spencer is true to his own ancestors, race, tribe, and culture. He will not serve the Jews. He will not worship the Judeo-Nazi Hyper-Power that uses the sticks-and-carrots of Imperial Diversity and Imperial Tolerance to gain hegemony over all the world. Chua accuses the Alt Right of supremacism, but it is she who serves the supremacist Jewish Hyper-power that has made a wasteland of the Middle East and wages a ludicrous ‘new cold war’ on Russia.
Jewish projection is utterly obnoxious. Jews are the global hegemon that uses invasions, sanctions, bribery, and financial rape to control the world, but Jews would have us believe that Russia and Putin are the Evil Empire messing up the world. Jews project everything they are doing on OTHER peoples.
Jews bitch about how 'anti-Semites' have depicted JUDEA as the parasitic, invasive, meddling, and rapacious force in the world, BUT they project all their globalist neo-imperialist ambitions and Power-Lust on Russia. Surely, people like Chua know the truth, but they carry on with the Jewish Hyper-Power Narrative because they are intoxicated with Worship of Supremacist Power. Unlike Nazis who openly sought supremacist power and rejected Imperial Diversity and Imperial Tolerance as their strategy in their Eastern Campaigns, Jewish Hyper-Power hides its supremacist aims with rhetoric of Imperial 'Inclusion' and 'Open Society'(which really means all nations should spread their legs like whores so that the Jewish Portnoy can bang them all.
Generally, Jews oppose all forms of gentile nationalism so they can penetrate and take over. Jews obviously see gentile nationalism as the biggest barrier to Jewish power because gentile nationalism tend to unite gentile elites and gentile masses. Also, its us-and-them mindset favors fellow national against foreigners, of whom Jews are most prominent as rapacious hustlers and infiltrators. This is why Jews are now also waging culture war on Japan. Jews will use Kurdish nationalism against Syria and Iran, but they hate Palestinian nationalism for resisting Zionist imperialism. Jews will support Ukrainian and Georgian nationalism against Russia while, at the same time, trying to weaken them with Homomania. In Eastern Europe, the Jewish way is to encourage gentile nationalism against Russia but discourage gentile nationalism against the EU that is controlled by the US that is controlled by Jews. Granted, what Jews are doing is nothing new. The British used nascent ‘Arab nationalism’ against the Ottoman Empire while, at the same time, trying to weaken it vis-a-vis British imperialism.
To the extent that Jews still view White Identity to be the main threat against Jewish supremacist power, they need non-white allies against Whitey. So, Jews encourage black identity, brown identity — Jews pretend that even white Hispanics are ‘people of color’ because they are useful against White Americans — , and other non-white identities... for now. But when it comes to BDS and Palestinian Identity, Jews do everything to shut them down because of the threat they pose to Zionism and Jewish supremacist domination in the Middle East.

Finally, Amy Chua tries to explain and justify the New America as a nation of ‘super-group’. Her cheerleader mentality loves to come up with terms like ‘hyper-power’ and ‘super-group’. So, are Americans a bunch of Supermen and Supergirls? According to Chua, the US gave up on racial identity and conceived of a New Identity based on... shared values. But of course, Chua isn’t really interested in values. After all, what goes by the name of American values — democracy, liberty, individualism, free enterprise, private property, and etc — are now dime-a-dozen around the world. Most Latin American nations, more or less, adopted the same values. India prides itself as the largest democracy in the world committed to tolerance, diversity, and etc. So, what is this American ‘supergroup’ really about? Again, it’s about Chua’s Me-So-Horny intoxication with Power. In Chua’s imagination, being American is to be a part of the supremacist globalist empire led by the most powerful people, the Jews. She wants to be part of this SUPER-Group because she’s a cheerleader for power. Unlike us neo-fascist national humanists, Chua is an all-out globalist supremacist. If she has one thing in common with Spencer, it’s their 007 mentality. Spencer wants to be James Bond, and Chua wants to be Bond girl.

Americans as a ‘supergroup’ is misleading because there are such huge discrepancies of power, prestige, and privilege among the various groups. According to Chua’s formula, both Jewish-Americans and Palestinian-Americans would be part of the Great American Supergroup. But are they equal in power? Palestinians have no say in the use of American Power. Imagine the US as a gigantic ocean liner called the Super-Ship. So, everyone on the ship would be part of this giant vessel. But does everyone have superpower on this Super-Ship? Who controls the steering, direction, and destination of the ship? Now, all the people in various compartments of the ship do their part to make the ship work, but the fact remains that most of them have NO SAY in where the ship is headed. They aren’t much better than galley slaves when it comes to the actual power. It is the captain with hands on the wheel that decides where the ship is headed.

Now, in a nation like China, Iran, and Russia, the elites(even though autocratic, repressive, and corrupt) may steer the ship with the interests of their people in mind. Xi Xinping appears to have real feeling for fellow Chinese, and Vladmir Putin has real rapport with Russian folks and nation, but what of a nation like the US where the Jews, as the ruling elites, feel almost NO connection, concern, or sympathy for Americans who are gentile? Instead, Jews see gentile Americans as expendable and replaceable. White are to be replaced by new immigrant-invaders who are, in turn, to be replaced by newer immigrant-invaders and so on and so forth until NO people have claim on the US but the Jewish elites who are resolved to remain on top indefinitely. All Americans may have a role to play in the Super-Ship, but all their energies and effort converge on the Jewish captain’s hands on the steering wheel. It is in elite institutions that all the energies and taxes of Americans converge, and therefore, it is the elites who monopolize supergroup power. The fact is Jewish elites who rule America have no feeling for the gentile Americans. Unlike Chinese elites who feel a historical, ethnic, and cultural connection to their people going back 1000s of yrs, Jewish elites feel zero connection to most Americans and just see them as replaceable units or cattle.
So, Chua’s conception of the Supergroup doesn’t work. What we have in the US is a Jewish supergroup and with most other groups being super-dupes. The US has Russian-Americans, Iranian-Americans, Polish-Americans, Hungarian-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Iraqi-Americans, Palestinian-Americans, and etc., but they don’t get to decide the direction of America. Rather, all their energies, efforts, and tax dollars go to support the Jewish supergroup that has control of elite institutions where all the profits and power converge. So, even though Palestinian-Americans work and pay taxes, their tax dollars ultimately go to supporting the Zionist oppression of Palestinians. And if a Muslim-American joins the military, there’s a good chance that he will be ordered to participate in the invasion and destruction of Muslim nations. And Russian-American tax dollars go to supporting the Jewish globalist war on Russia. And Chinese-Americans tax dollars will go toward killing tons of Chinese if the Jewish supergroup were to decide that US must crush China before it grows too powerful.

What Chua overlooks is that the world is made up mostly of Manipulators, Managers, and the Manipulated. Very few belong in the Manipulator Class, the super-elites. The Manager Class(lower elites and upper-middle) serves the Manipulator Class. And everyone else belongs to the Manipulated Masses. So, it's not enough to focus on the 'us' and the 'them'. To truly understand a puppet play, one has to see beyond the stage at the puppet-masters. Most people lack agency and autonomy. They are easily manipulated like puppets. Therefore, so much of 'us' and 'them' conflicts are fabricated and manufactured by the powers-that-be, the puppet-masters who control the media, academia, government, finance, and etc. And troublesome Diversity could have been avoided if the puppet-masters hadn't manipulated one bunch of puppets to enter the domain of another bunch of puppets. There would be no white vs black vs brown vs yellow tensions IF the Manipulators hadn't brought over tons of non-white puppets to clash with white puppets who furthermore clash with white cuck-puppets who've been manipulated to welcome their own replacement. There would be much less white vs white rancor if the Manipulators hadn't concocted bogus wedge issues to divide America into 'blue states' and 'red states'. The main failing of POLITICAL TRIBES is Chua turns her gaze on the Manipulated Masses on the bottom who comprise the 'us' and 'them' without gazing up at those ABOVE who pull the strings, playing various sides against each other to consolidate their own power at the top.
But, there is another class of people who aren't part of the Main Three: Manipulators, Managers, and the Manipulated. These are people without the power of the Manipulators. They refuse to join the Managers serving the Manipulators. But they aren't members of the Manipulated either. They learned to grab the knife and cut the strings that had kept them in bound to the Manipulators.
Despite its failings, this is what the Alt Right is about. And this is why the three main classes hate the Alt Right with such vehemence. The Manipulators are infuriated by the sheer defiance and irreverence of the Alt Right. The Managers(of whom Chua is one) are angry because the Alt Right exposes them as collaborators and company men to the Power that really despises most of humanity.  And the hoodwinked Masses, having been manipulated and managed by the Power for so long, react with panic when triggered by real courage and truth. But then, nothing is more dangerous than the truth. Truth not only shames the lie but the cowardice because it's the courageous who dares to speak the truth against the cowardly who protect the lie to maintain the status quo of privilege and comfort.
Unlike the brave soul in the above-movie who digs for the truth despite its disturbing implications, Chua sticks with the Official Narrative because she is Hegemonist and Hyperist than a Humanist. It all comes down to Status Vanity and proximity to Power and Privilege.

No comments:

Post a Comment