Tuesday, June 5, 2018

Would American Foreign Policy be Sounder and Saner IF NOT for Heavy Jewish Involvement?

Due to the undeniable Jewish domination of US foreign policy, there’s been increasing criticism of Zionist-Jewish influence on America’s role in World Affairs. Many have noted that Jewish interests or Israel First mindset has warped a rational assessment of America’s true interests. Stephen Walt and John Mearshimer even wrote a book on the subject called THE ISRAEL LOBBY AND U.S. FOREIGN POLICY. And Andrew Bacevich in AMERICA’S WAR FOR THE GREATER MIDDLE EAST duly noted that following the end of the Cold War(when the USSR no longer existed to lend support to Arab client-states), nearly all of America’s wars have curiously been fought in the Middle East against nations especially feared or hated by Jewish Zionists. That said, is it fair to blame Jews when American History has long been replete with examples of imperial expansion, foreign meddling, ‘police actions’, subversion & regime change, and outright invasions? And yet, certain things are indeed no longer the same following the change in elite power from Wasps to Jews. It is worth considering the differences between Then and Now and how they’ve affected the reach and tenor of perceived U.S. interests and interference in world affairs.

Firstly, in the past, especially prior to WWII, US expansionism was part of the World Norm. Imperialism was common and proudly practiced on every continent. Ottomans ruled over a giant empire stretching across Middle East, Southeastern Europe, and parts of North Africa. Russians kept expanding into Siberia and Central Asia. It had also swallowed huge chunks of Central Europe. When the British opened up trade with China, it’d been under Manchu Imperial domination for ever a century and half. There were native imperialist wars among savage tribes(among whom Zulus were the most impressive and notorious) in Africa before European nations began to carve it up. And Mexico(as with the rest of ‘Latin America’) was also the product of empire building. Spanish imperialists bested the Aztec Imperialists. In the other words, the Conquistadors were aptly named. The Spanish also took Philippines. The British and the French embarked on creating vast new empires. The US was created out of empire-building and continued in that vein up to the 20th century.

Therefore, US warmongering in the past, for better or worse, was part of the world norm. Every major power did it or aspired to it. Also, empire-building was deemed as national glory for the Whole People(as in Roman times). So, even though the elites benefited the most, there was a shared sense of pride and victory among all Britons in the British Empire. And, all Frenchmen were to share in the glory of French magnificence around the world, i.e. they weren’t merely part of a great civilization but a great civilizing project in the world. And US expansion into SW territories was seen as a great opportunity not only for the Power Elites but for ordinary Anglo settlers who could start new lives in those parts. And it was an improvement, at least materially, even for Mexicans in the region because Anglos did so much more with the land than Mexico ever did. It’s like the character of Ramon has it pretty good working for gringos in THE BIG COUNTRY. He was like the Guillermo of his day.

So, imperial wars were once standard among the great powers, and nearly all peoples participated in them as conquerors or subjects. Even smaller powers practiced a local version of imperialism. If not for French Imperialism, the mini-imperialism of the Thais and the Vietnamese might have wiped Cambodia off the map. And of course, American Indians had been like childish savages ‘genociding’ one another since time immemorial, long before the first white man ever arrived.

In the Age of Empire, glory belonged to ALL the people of the victorious power. Empire-building wasn’t just an elite endeavor and enterprise. So, when British power gained domination in India, even British masses could go there and enjoy the privilege of calling a ‘dotkin’ a ‘brown sammy’. The elites got to lord over the empire, but the white masses got to feel some of the power too, like calling a ‘dotkin’ a ‘bloody coon’.

And when Anglo-American Empire spread across the ‘fruited plains’(now the fruity plains), little people gained alongside the big people. While the big industrialists always got more, little folks got their little house on the prairie. (If People Power in land-deficient Europe had no recourse but to demand distribution by taxation, People Power in the land-abundant US could be satisfied with promise of property... that is until the majority of Americans became urban dwellers dependent on wages than personal property, especially farmland, for a livelihood.)

But then, with the spread of European-style and American-style nationalism all around the world and the emergence of native elites who felt slighted by European imperialists(with their exclusive all-white clubs) and were no longer willing to collaborate with foreign masters, there was a sea-change in attitudes among non-whites, and anti-imperialist uprisings finally exploded in every non-Western corner of the world and achieved their main objectives as European powers were reeling from the calamitous effects of World War II. (Also, as even the great European powers had either been conquered/humiliated or attacked/devastated by Nazi Imperialist aggression, many Europeans after World War II began to feel that imperialism could no longer be justified in any part of the world. They increasingly sympathized with non-white subjects resisting European imperialism, even of their own kind.)

Still, prior to imperialism’s gaining a bad reputation, it was part and parcel of how the world operated… even though Europeans had extended it far beyond the reach of earlier civilizations. So, warmongering back then was perceived and practiced differently from the warmongering that existed in the post-WWII era. During the Cold War, nothing was deemed worse than imperialism in the court of World Opinion. This was rather ironic since both US and USSR were great neo-empires(or crypto-empires). However, it is telling that they employed imperial might in the name of combating the imperialism of the Other side. When the British and the French had competed on the world stage, it was openly about empire vs empire. In contrast, the US and USSR practiced empire vs empire ostensibly as anti-empire vs anti-empire. It’s like Progs pretend that HATE exists only on the other side. They themselves hate but see HATE only on the Right. Likewise, US and USSR practiced imperialism but saw it only on the other side.

Cold War was a strange phenomenon in exerting tremendous neo-imperialist energies against the threat of the OTHER imperialism. Pax Americana portrayed itself as representing the ‘Free World’ against Soviet-Communist Imperialism that held the Eastern Bloc captive and funded radical lunatics in Asia, Africa, and Latin America to spread the Marxist virus. In Afghanistan, the US purported to back the ‘freedom fighters’ against Soviet Imperialist occupation.

Soviets returned the favor against US hegemony. Soviets conflated imperialism with capitalism, i.e, US imperialism was the logical outgrowth of the naked greed of capitalism . So, US support of right-wing autocrats all over the world was part of the capitalist-imperialist plan of global exploitation. Pax Sovietica promised justice and equality for all peoples under the liberating power of communism and compatible ideologies.

And even though some historians and ideologues now claim that the Cold War was exaggerated and overblown, it was a real enough international conflict between giants. Both great powers resorted to strategies of imperialist character to brutalize their main enemy(or its proxies) and to bribe their allies(or puppets). So, the warmongering of the Cold War era was intrinsic to the how the world was structured and divided back then into two major spheres of influence. It was a real Struggle of History, one that finally came to an End when the USSR agreed to Western terms of peace.

So, even though US aggression and warmongering in the past(when Jews did not control America) had their dark side, they were either in tune with the international norm(dominated by Great Power politics) OR engaged in a Grand Battle of Ideas that would decide, once and for all, the ‘End of History’.

But, matters are so different in the present. The US is the lone superpower and stronger than ever. Imperialism is still regarded as a dirty word, and there are no rival ideologies that seek to unseat, let alone defeat, the US as the premier world power. If Soviet imperialism and US imperialism during the Cold War could be justified as ‘necessary evil’ against the Other Imperialism, such logic fails today because the US and its allies face no existential threat(except in Immigration, aka Mass Invasion or Demographic Imperialism, which is enabled by the very rulers of the US, Europe, and now Japan too). This is why US globo-imperialism must be ever more hysterical in exaggerating New Threats to justify its obsession with world hegemony.

Worst of all, the New Imperialism is used to serve the vanities of the 2% of Americans. Actually, it’s closer to 0.2% of the population that make up the Jewish globalist elites because many ordinary American Jews are increasingly growing critical of Israel’s reckless policies.

Whatever one may say of past imperialism, it served and represented an entire people. When US grabbed Southwest territories from Mexico, it was for ALL Americans to share in the land, cattle, and opportunity. But when the current neo-imperialist US makes a mess of Middle East and North Africa(nations hated by Israel), it only serves the extremely narrow interests of the Tribe.
Also, if warmongering during the Cold War had some overarching purpose in the War of Ideas, the new warmongering is petty and tribal by design and delivery. Sure, some Neocons try to portray it as the Next Great Cause. World War IV as Norman Podhoretz called it.
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/world-war-iv-how-it-started-what-it-means-and-why-we-have-to-win/. 9/11 was spun by Neocons and globalists as the beginning of the Next Big Struggle: The War on Terror. But as it turned out, the US found itself at war with a bunch of ragtag nobodies. Not exactly WWIV. And what did Iraq have to do with 9/11? If anything, Saddam Hussein(vile nasty bugger that he was) had ruthlessly clamped down on terrorists within Iraq.
Furthermore, how could the world suddenly be sprouting all these ‘new hitlers’? Lately, Putin became ‘new hitler’, apparently because he said NO to Homo Poo-Ride parades and ‘gay marriage’ in Russia. Most perversely, the War ON Terror soon morphed into War WITH Terror. Under Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, the US actually worked with remnants of Alqaeda(rebranded as ‘moderate rebels’) to undermine secular modern regimes that had kept order and stability in the region. It is incredible that Americans aren’t outraged that the war that had begun AGAINST the terrorists who did 9/11 eventually metastasized into war ALONGSIDE those very terrorists against secular Arab regimes in the region. It was as if Jewish Power was willing to tell any lie or invoke whatever convoluted logic to justify warmongering to expand Jewish globalist hegemony and crush any Arab or Muslim enemy or rival of Israel. (Even 9/11 was mostly blowback for needlessly intrusive US policy in the Middle East. Iran and Iraq had NOTHING to do with 9/11. It was US and Saudis that had funded and created Jihadi forces, esp in Afghanistan, to use against the Soviets and then Iran. US was attacked by the very monster it helped create with the Saudis. It's like poison gas could blow back to one's own side with shift in the wind. Indeed, it is telling that following 9/11, the US did absolutely nothing against Saudi Arabia, the very nation that had been most instrumental in the creation of monsters like Osama Bin Laden. But because of the deep historical ties between Saudis and the US[that had been no less involved in creating useful terrorists like Osama], the Jewish media moguls and the Deep State overlooked key details and spun wild theories about how Iraq and Iran must be destroyed to prevent another 9/11 or worse: the Day After of Nuclear Terrorism.)

All of it was hype: Speak pushily and carry a big Shtick. Cold War may have been exaggerated but it was real enough. Soviet Union at its peak was a great power and did rule over Eastern Europe. And if China had maintained good relations with Russia and if Mao had better economic sense, the Sino-Soviet alliance might have kept the Cold War going for much longer. Imagine if, with some economic reforms, Chinese labor had combined with Soviet resources and know-how. Communist power would have been far more formidable. But Mao had a peasant mentality and didn’t get modernity.

Anyway, the nature of today’s imperialism, hegemonism, and warmongering is far more perverse because it runs against the New International Norms that emerged as part of a universal consensus following WWII: Imperialism is bad, and nationalism is ideal for each people for whom nationhood is viable. And in recent years, there have been Western voices(usually shills of Jews) that say the US in the 21st century should openly and proudly espouse empire-building as its modus operandi. Andrew Roberts and Niall Ferguson are agreed on this. Their dream of Lost British Empire is relived through Zio-Anglo-American might. Still, most people will not defend imperialism as policy. By and large, even globo-hegemonic US continues to justify its expansionism and interventionism on the basis of defending the World Order from imperialistic or terrorist threats posed by Russia, Iran, North Korea, China, Venezuela, and etc.

So, why is the US acting like an imperialist power in a world that, ideologically at any rate, has no place for imperialism? US freaks out about Russia ‘invading’ Crimea(when it wasn’t invaded) but insists it has the right to make threats on other nations and invade & destroy Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and Afghanistan, and maybe Iran and Venezuela too down the line. The undeniable fact that most of these targets of US hostility and hegemony happen to be nations hated by Jewish globalists is proof that Jewish Tribal hostility is at the root of current World Problems.

During the Cold War, many people in both camps knew of the most egregious abuses and betrayals carried out by their own side. Surely, there were people in Soviet Union who felt bad about Russian invasions of Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia in 1968. And there were Americans who were disillusioned by US meddling in Latin America and Asia. But many Americans believed the alternative could be worse on basis of the Domino Theory that posited that if Commies are given an inch, they take a mile. Likewise, the Soviets believed that if ONE nation were allowed to exit from the Soviet-sphere, the rest would follow. If Soviets had done nothing following the Hungarian Uprising, the anti-Soviet rebellion would have spread to all Warsaw Pact nations.

But, we now live in a world that could be peaceful and harmonious IF the US wanted it that way. The world no longer believes in empires. There is no longer any great ideological struggle. Some characterize the New Struggle as The West vs Islam, a ‘clash of civilizations’, but actually, it could easily be resolved by ending mass immigration and US meddling in the Middle East. Leave those people alone, and they will leave you alone. Keep them out of your domain on the basis of nationalism, and they will live in their own nations. It was Jewish-Israeli paranoia about Iran, Syria, and all the rest that led to these useless wars that served NO ONE but Israel and Jewish globalist-Zionist interests.

Francis Fukuyama is a real globalist shill, but he was right in the sense that there was no longer any great ideological struggle following the end of the Cold War. Today’s so-called Big Ideas are all hype, manufactured and phony, like Homomania or Queertianity, which is really just a proxy of Jewish Hegemonism. If the world just wanted to get along and do business, it could do so and have peace and stability, the kind hoped for by Steven Pinker in BETTER ANGELS OF OUR NATURE, on the basis of Universal Nationalism.

Look around the world. Japan doesn’t want to fight wars. European nations don’t want to conquer and rule over other nations. Russia wants trade and investment, not more wars. It doesn’t have plans to retake Lithuania and Estonia. It is reluctant even to annex Donbass. China just wants more trade opportunities. Chinese don’t want to put military bases all over the world, nor does it want to ‘save’ or rule the world with Big Chinese Ideas. Chinese don’t think "inside every barbarian is a chinaman trying to get out." Latin America shelved ideological conflicts that had once seemed intractable. There was a time when just about every other Latin American nation was severely challenged by Marxist insurgency. That is all gone. Peace is possible if people want it.

So, what is driving all this madness that threatens to turn 21st century into a hellhole?

1. It is Jewish globalist greed in foreign policy. The desire to use American power to further Jewish Might, esp in the Middle East. As Jews control the US(the key vassal of the Empire of the Judea) and the EU(a vassal of the US), they pretty much own the two richest parts of the world. But Jews also want control over vast Russia with all its resources. The only obstacle to Jewish Supremacism is Russian nationalism, which is why Jews seek to undermine Russia with appeals to ‘democracy’ and homomania.
The main problem of this approach is the insanely narrow tribal interests of Jews on the World Stage. Jews simply don’t identify with most peoples who make up nations like US or Russia. When Anglo elites ruled America, they put their class interests above all else, BUT they still felt some degree of connection to the masses, many of whom were also Anglo, similar to Anglo, or, at the very least, white and Christian. Vladimir Putin feels a real connection with fellow Russians. Theodore Roosevelt and Franklin D. Roosevelt felt a certain bond with the white masses. Even though they were elites, they were of the same racial-and-cultural stock as the majority population. But Jews simply don’t feel much affinity with the goyim. Sure, Jews will make temporary alliances and feign compassion or shared values. For example, Jews will unite with Christians against Muslims and then later unite with Muslims against Christians or do both at the same time. Jews will make white Christians hate ‘muzzies’ and drop bombs in the Middle East... and then hug Muslim ‘refugees’ and pretend to protect them from ‘racist white Christians’. Jewish contempt for goyim runs very deep. Not all Jews have this animus, but many powerful Jews do. Chinese elites may be lowdown and dirty, a bunch of snakes, BUT they feel some degree of solidarity with other Chinese as fellow countrymen. But Jews lack such sentiments for the goyim, the white masses, the ‘deplorables’ who crave real leadership and inspiration. Jews pretend to care for blacks, but then go about welcoming Invasive-Immigration to replace urban blacks with Asians, Hindus, Arabs, and Mesos.

In a way, Jews feel that a world in a state of flux and crisis is to their benefit. After all, if all nations were stable and at peace, they would focus on their own domestic affairs. And then, each nation will ask itself, “who has the most power and privilege in our nation?”, and the finger could easily point to Jews. So, in order for nations around the world to NOT notice Jewish power, they must be set against each other. If Americans are angry with Russians, they won’t notice who really rules America. That way, Jews can play the role of ‘patriots’ defending US from Russian ‘aggression’ and ‘influence’. And if Americans are made to hate Iran(as an ‘existential threat’), they won’t ask questions about who really controls US foreign policy and why. And why not push the Yellow Peril narrative so that Americans will blame China for everything… even though Jews played a key role in bringing China into the globalist economic system. Do business with China but use media power to make China out to be the Princess Dragon Mom. If you’re a coyote, it’s better to have bears, tigers, lions, buffaloes, and etc. hate and fight one another than notice YOU.

2. But there is even a bigger threat that will mess up all nations in the 21st century. It is mass migration(or mass invasion) and demographic imperialism. No group has been more responsible for pushing this than the Jews. This will spell doom and end for Europe and possibly for East Asia and Australia/New Zealand as well. And Canada and US. Europe is esp in trouble as it’s being flooded with black Africans who are more muscled, more aggressive, more loutish, and bigger-donged than white men. As Europe become junglo-Africanized, white men will be wussified and white women will be womb-colonized and give birth to vile creatures like Obama and Kaepernick. Europe will become like Morocco or worse.
With control of Media, Academia, and the Sacred Narrative, Jews have persuaded all these naive native whites into embracing Diversity, Jungle Fever, Replacism, and ‘White Guilt and Atonement’ as the only way forward. And US is no different.

For a time following WWII, there was the Golden Age of Universal Nationalism when all peoples aspired to independence-from-imperialism and national sovereignty. At the UN, it was agreed upon by all members that imperialism is wrong in any part of the world. So, the end of the Cold War seemed to promise the end of imperialism. Indeed, even the first Gulf War was billed as anti-imperialist because, after all, Iraq had invaded Kuwait. But this posture of anti-imperialism and limited war soon morphed into a prelude for More Wars of imperialist power-lust. Saddam Hussein was small potatoes in grabbing only Kuwait. US will smash-and-grab entire nations, at least if Jewish globalists want them occupied or destroyed.

Anyway, the Golden Age of Nationalism could have been fulfilled with the end of the Cold War. The Cold War had necessitated both US and USSR to act like imperialist powers in the grand struggle. But absent such conflict, each people could finally be independent and secure their own national destiny. Indeed, the liberation of each Eastern European nation was greeted with enthusiasm. The defunct imperialism of the Iron Curtain no longer stood in the way of national independence of peoples finally freed from the Soviet/Russian yoke. Furthermore, the former Soviet Union itself birthed many new nations. Russian empire broke into various new republics, mostly peacefully. There was war in Yugoslavia, but at the end of the day, stable long-term peace was achieved with assertions of national identity and independence. And it could have been a happy story. And most peoples would have been content with Universal Nationalism.

So, what destroyed it? One was US-warmongering in Middle East and North Africa that led to huge ‘refugee’ crisis, mostly into Europe. Another was rise of PC in EU that made ‘diversity’ sacrosanct. Apparently, it was the duty of white nations to keep letting in tons of non-whites on some crazy notion that ‘diversity is a strength’. (If so, why are super-diverse Latin America and North Africa such a mess?)

But even more dangerous was the alliance between Jewish globalists and non-white elites & masses all over the world. Non-whites who had once resisted and fought Western Imperialists and told whites to GO HOME now decided to shift into Demographic Imperialist Mode and mass-colonize white nations. The reason was crass and obvious. They’d made a mess of things in their own nations with corruption, repression, violence, and/or barbarism. And they wanted shortcuts to material comfort and social stability in the West. So, these non-whites around the world went from the slogan of YANKEE GO HOME to YANKEE LET ME IN. And it was Jewish Power that pulled strings to pressure white nations into taking all these People of Color(or Corruption).

People of Color(POC) found PC very useful as a moral cover for their crassness. In reality, they’d failed their own nations and hoped to flee from their own peoples and cultures to enjoy better material conditions and opportunities in the West among Nicer White Folks. But admitting-as-much would have sounded crass and shameful. It would have meant they’d rather run off to White Success than deal with their own failures. PC came in handy because it justifies non-white invasion of white nations on moral grounds, however bogus they may be: Redress or reparations to compensate for white ‘exploitation’ of darkies in the past. The combo of POC and PC has led to a strange phenom of “whitey, I hate you, so please let me come live with you”.

So, universal nationalism was destroyed by this new virulent form of globalism. If the West had not allowed mass immigration, non-whites would have remained in their own nations and worked harder to improve things. But once the gates were open to the West, non-whites figured it would be much easier and faster to enjoy the good life in the West. In time, the process was completed with non-whites joining elite ranks alongside Jews and Homos.
When white elites used to send signals like ‘No Dogs and Chinese allowed’, non-whites felt slighted or insulted and decided to lead their own people in national struggles. But once Western elite institutions made room for non-white elites(as collaborators and partners-in-crime in globalist hegemony), the latter joined the Elysium club and pledged their main loyalty to neo-imperialist Jews/whites than work for their own kind. This has led to Diversity of Privilege where elites of all colors rub shoulders in hogging power, privilege, and influence. Having no allegiance but to power and privilege, they will cynically work to further Zio-US hegemony, even if it means harm and degradation to their nations of origin.
In contrast, masses get Diversity of Poverty. While white elites rub shoulders with fancy mulattoes and non-white sophisticates, white masses get punched by nasty thug Negroes and replaced by grubby masses of non-white foreigners.

So, under globalism non-whites effectively became demographic imperialists, and so, the world has reverted to the Age of Empire. But then, it is much worse than past imperialism. Back then, whites, the most advanced peoples, went to less developed places and spread science, technology, and new ideas. Also, except in some parts of the New World(and Australia), whites didn’t have the numbers to permanently replace the natives. So, Africa is still black, South Asia is still brown, Middle East is still Arabic, and East Asia is still yellow.

But the current demographic tide into the West, if unchecked, will turn white nations into mulatto nations forever. France will become Morocco-Cameroon. Germany will become Nigeria-Turkey. Sweden will become Somalia-Afghanistan. Why would Jews do something so terrible? After all, Jews insist on keeping Israel Jewish, and Zionists don’t take in any Africans or new Muslims.
Jews do this to white nations because they ONLY care about their own power. Jews figure that if all white nations are made ‘diverse’, there won’t be sufficient white majority and solidarity to work against Jewish elite power. Also, whites will be too busy bickering with Africans and Muslims to confront Jewish Power. Jews effectively play both sides. Jews go to the non-whites and say, “we are your allies against nazi ‘racist’ whites” and Jews go to whites and plead, “Oh help us poor poor Jews from those terrorist antisemitic Muzzies who are like the new nazis.”

As the result of current trends, the 21st century will be even more crucial than the 20th century. It will determine if the West and white race survive at all.

No comments:

Post a Comment