This essay reminded me of a Peanuts comic strip. Lucy is lying on a mound with Linus and Charlie Brown and asks them what they see in the clouds. Linus describes the immaculate visions of his hyperactive imagination. Next, Charlie Brown says he was gonna say he saw a ducky and a horsie.
Well, I can only offer a Charlie Browny version of what Race Talk is really about. I don't get metaphysics and other sophisticated stuff Intelligent Dasein wrote about at length. Such intellectual stuff goes over my head. I don't know if it's highbrow or highfalutin.
Professor Dasein or Doctor Dasein gave us a Linusy version of HBD(or against HBD), but most people will better understand a stripped down Browny Version, or Race Talk in horsie-and-ducky pictures.
First off, we need to pare down Race Talk to a particular perspective and interest. The problem with the concept of HBD is it sounds disinterested. It sounds like an objective scientific query into the diversity of mankind, especially along racial and ethnic lines. It gives the impression that it's interested in humans the way botany is with plants or frogology with various species of frogs. In truth, HBD is an ideology and agenda of White Racial Consciousness, especially for pride and preservation. To that extent, there is a kernel of truth among those who accuse HBD of being a form of crypto-'white supremacism' or 'white nationalism' with scientific window-dressing. HBD isn't merely about science or a cold/dry research into diverse genetics of human groups. It is concentrated among those on the White Right, and its core purpose is to argue for white survival, white autonomy, and white pride(though a few might even envision white supremacy, as with Richard Spencer and the like). Of course, HBD-ers say they appreciate human diversity all around the world and would like ALL races and ethnic groups to survive. And most HBD-ers are no doubt sincere in their claim. But ideology or agenda is essentially defined and driven by passion, not neutrality of principles. The fact is HBD is mostly a white phenomenon, and the core passion among HBD-ers is WHITE survival, WHITE pride, and WHITE power. In other words, while most HBD-ers would consider the decline and demise of the German people as a horrific tragedy, they wouldn't much care if some obscure tribe in the African jungle or Amazonian forest vanished from the face of the Earth. While HBD-ers may wish the best for Eskimos in Alaska and Siberia, I highly doubt if any of them will lose sleep if Eskimo culture faded from the world and there were no more igloos, kayaks made of seal skin, and ear-lifting contests.
So, 'human bio-diversity' is kind of disingenuous as a term given that most people in the HBD movement(and it is a movement than a study) aren't objective or neutral but passionately committed to serving a particular race, the white race. Also, even when it involves non-whites, HBD-ers tend to prefer certain peoples over others. HBD-ers tend to be partial to Japan as a homogeneous nation that is ethnically conscious(though this is increasingly becoming an illusion as Japan is becoming super-'pozzed'). In contrast, few HBD-ers much care about Gypsies, Hindus(not least because so many Hindus in the West work with Jews against the white race), Chinese(who boil cats and dogs alive), the ghastly Negroes(the most potent force is destroying white manhood and unity of white men & white women), and Jews(who are financially, intellectually, 'spiritually', and 'idologically' the main force against the white race).
That said, there is a good number of HBD-ers who pray for the conversion of smart, rich, and powerful Jews to the White Side. Jared Taylor is a leading light in pro-Jewish HBD. Essentially, a craven character like Senator Geary in THE GODFATHER PART 2, he's too enamored with Jewish Power to speak the whole truth about it. While he acknowledges the Jewish Problem(and even the JQ on occasion), his dream of Hu-Whites is that they form the Jew-White Alliance. Like Charles Murray, he's so awed by the Jews that he's even willing to settle for an alliance where whites cuck to Jews AS LONG AS Jews drop their anti-white agenda. His shtick is, "I will suck your dic* if you don't tell my daughter to marry a Negro." Taylor is a HBD version of Bill Buckley the Cuckley. Buckley and others like him were so awed by the rapid rise of Jewish Power that they were willing to sacrifice EVERYTHING in the hope that Jews may identify as fellow whites and work with whites than against them. This explains why the Buckleyite wing gave Neocons everything they wanted.
Of course, Neocons exploited such cuckery to make whites serve Jews without ever doing anything for whites in return. Your average Jewish Neocon is like Jennifer Rubin. Whites like Buckley and Taylor are okay with whites playing sidekick to Jews as long as Jews aren't anti-white, but Jews, Neocons included, have only kept insisted upon whites sucking up to Jews even as Jews go on kicking white ass(and telling white girls to marry Negroes). Maybe, at one time, the hopes of Buckley and Taylor seemed half-plausible, but in our time, it should be obvious that a good-faith alliance with Jews is impossible. Neocons have proven themselves to be loathsome Jewish Supremacists who demand total servility on the part of whites. To Jews, whites are like Otis in SUPERMAN, and even little 'Otisberg' or OK-to-be-white-berg isn't acceptable. With Jewish Power at the helm, you can't even have Otisberg or OKberg, just like Palestinians can't even have West Bank. Indeed, what Jews have done to Palestinians is a sure sign of how they feel about goyim. Whites, in their foolishness, thought Jews would be grateful and reciprocate IF whites aided and abetted the Jewish 'genocide' of Palestine, but if anything, such cuckery to Jewish supremacist arrogance only whetted Jewish appetite for the Nakba-ization of whites as well. A rabbit that feeds rabbits to a wolf will not be spared.
Anyway, because HBD is a white-created and white-centric or Euro-centric worldview, it should be honest and candid about what its true mission. It should be called WRS: White Racial Survival or White Racial Shamelessness. Or WRSS or White Racial Survival & Shamelessness.
Now, what has shamelessness to do with survival? Because so much could have been different for the better IF whites had been more shameless in spelling out their agenda of survival. Imagine how racial history could have been different after Jack Johnson beat up all those white guys IF white men spoke out honestly about their fear of the ghastly Negro. Imagine if white guys, elites and masses, all across America were saying, "Wow, those Negroes sure are tough. Us white guys are just putty next to them. They can kick our ass in the boxing ring. That means racial integration will lead to tougher blacks beating up white kids. It will mean white women losing respect for white men as losers and going with black men who are not only tougher but got bigger dongs." In other words, if white men talked like Howard Stern, history would have been different. They could have made an effective and morally justifiable case for racial separation. And back then, it would have been possible because most whites, in North and South, believed in racial identity and solidarity of one kind or another. Even relatively liberal cities in the North were more-or-less racially conscious and proud to be white. But whites didn't talk like Howard Stern due to the cult of pride and dignity. The cult of the Big White Man couldn't admit to the fear of the Negro. There was the John Wayne Cult. In MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE, Woody Strode is a servile and shuffling servant to Wayne's character who's supposed to be the toughest man in that part of the West. But that was fantasy. In reality, Strode would have kicked Wayne's butt in less than a minute and hollered, "Where da white women at?". Indeed, that was what Jack Johnson was doing. Not only beating up white guys but humping white women, and that was 100 yrs ago. Now, D.W. Griffith did make a somewhat refreshingly shameless movie with BIRTH OF A NATION, which was still honored in 1980 when Lillian Gish announced the Best Picture for 1980.
But even Griffith didn't go all the way because his shamelessness was countered by the Anglo cult of dignity. So, even as BIRTH OF A NATION is very racy about race, it also strives to be very respectable and honorable. On the one hand, it hollers, "Look, there are ghastly Negroes attacking our town to kill white folks and rape white women", but then it strains to be a noble epic about the American Pageant. It's like a movie made by Howard Stern and Luchino Visconti. (To be sure,that can be said for certain Cecil B. DeMille movies like SAMSON AND DELILAH.) Now, I don't say this in admiration of Howard Stern who is a cretin in so many ways. Overall, Stern has been a bad influence on the US. Still, his vulgar shamelessness has sometimes served to offer an uninhibited and uncensored assessment of recent US history, as when he recounted his youth in a blackening school.
The problem with HBD is that the residue of the cult of pride and dignity prevents too many from speaking candidly about what is really happening. It is too hurtful to white male pride and too vulgar for one's sense of dignity. This is especially true of older members of HBD like Jared Taylor. It may be changing with younger members... though not always in the best way. Some yrs back, I was on an alt right email newsletter list and received a good deal of messages with porn lingo and references, e.g. referring to Sarah Palin as a 'MILF', something I had to look up then. And even the term 'cuck' in its current usage seems to be derived from the sexual phenomenon of white men(usually urban 'liberal' types) inviting black men to hump their women. Among the so-called 'zoomers', there are terms like 'e-thots', and the like. Still, that's not the kind of shameless vulgarity that is necessary. After all, one can be vulgar and trashy without speaking the truth. Pop stars like madonna and rappers are plenty vulgar but spout nothing but lies. Quentin Tarantino was vulgar with stuff like DJANGO UNCHAINED but didn't offer much truth. Trash can be used against Truth.
But one cannot get at the truth without touching the trash, just like you can't find gold without going through lots of dirt. And you can't do surgery without cutting the flesh and facing lots of blood and goo. So, even though whites should NOT emulate Howard Stern, let alone Jerry Springer, there is something to learn and take from Stern-ism. The same can be said for Camille Paglia. Even though neither Stern nor Paglia is a total truth-teller, it's revealing that we live in a world where some radio jock and a professor at some third-rate university has spoken more truth on certain matters than 99% of the more dignified and esteemed members of respectable media and elite academia. This is not because Stern and Paglia are smarter or more erudite than their peers but because their shameless candor have sometimes spelled out the obvious truths that most people dare not touch with a ten foot pole out of shame, anxiety, fear, or taboo. (Pauline Kael also made a difference because she was shameless in admitting what Movie Love was really about.)
In a way, Jewish rise to Power cannot be separated from their shamelessness. Of course, it had much to do with IQ, identity-consciousness, tribal networking, and power of will, but it also owed to shamelessness. This shamelessness had two advantages. It was a potent way to blow away the repressions or hypocrisies of the respectable/dignified goyim. A way to lift up the skirt or unzip the fly of the Enemy. After all, while the shameless have no dignity to lose, the shameful have much to lose. As dignity requires repression of certain animal urges, the shameless can easily bait the shameful as 'repressed', like what Cusack's character does in THE SURE THING. The other advantage of shamelessness is it can make one's aggressiveness funny, even endearing. We see this in the scene with Mel Brooks as the French king in HISTORY OF THE WORLD PART I. At once, he exposes and ridicules the repression & hypocrisy of the shikse of dignity while also making his loathsome behavior seem funny, charming, and 'liberating'.
At this point, Western culture is so decrepit, degenerate, trashy, porny, puerile, and vulgar that the cult of dignity is impossible. The only way to fight trashy shamelessness is with truthful shamelessness. This doesn't mean those in HBD movement should get ass-tattoos, green hair, nose rings, wear trashy clothes; it doesn't mean they should become gangsta-rappers, work in porn or strip clubs, go on tinder & have orgies, and etc. Rather, it means there needs to be a no-holds-barred discussion of real racial differences and why the white race must choose another path. It means HBD should focus less on sports and more on real world outcomes of racial differences. It means HBD must go vulgar-Freudian and speak candidly about the new sexual dynamics. In a way, Camille Paglia's star rose because she dared to broach topics in ways that most feminists did not. She wasn't part of the herd, though, given the nature of Jewish media control and certain powerful taboos, she chose NOT to mention certain things. As for Howard Stern, his worldview is essentially Judeo-centric, so his un-PC statements ultimately go to serve Jewish, not white, interests.
Because shamelessness can easily get out of hand, it has to be controlled and directed. The last thing we need is HBD people turning into a bunch of Sam Kinisons. Still, there is a reason why comedy has been one of the few areas where people on occasion speak the unspeakable. Humor and satire generally get more leeway in speech, and besides, the comic can always claim to have been 'just joking'. Not for nothing has Sam Hyde been one of the more effective purveyors of HBD or the Dissident Right though he's not officially of the movement. Vulgarity and shamelessness can easily degrade into cynicism, nihilism, or even infantilism, but they also have a way of making scales fall from one's eyes. No wonder the character in YOJIMBO and SANJURO has a clearer sense of what-is-what as opposed to other characters who are hung up no faux-respectability.
Just as HBD isn't truly concerned with the well-being and survival of all races and all human groups, it mustn't waste its energy on matters and problems that don't impact the white race. Now, if non-whites were to take up HBD consciousness of their own, they would have their own ethno-centric perspectives. HBD is use of science for a particular racial interest or cause. Currently, one might say it's a mild form of White Zionism. Just like Zionists study genetics and use blood lineage to determine who is and isn't Jewish and to design policies good for Jews, HBD's main purpose is to bolster white consciousness/identity and formulate what is best for the white race.
For that reason, HBD or WRSS(white racial survival & shamelessness) should focus on human groups whose impacts on the white race are bound to be most grave, profound, and consequential. The two groups that obviously matter most are Jews and blacks. And this owes to the particular kinds of superiority that they have over whites. If Jews had average IQ of 90, had weak/servile personalities, and no interest in their identity/culture/heritage, they would hardly be a threat to whites. But Jews have higher IQ, stronger personalities, and an obsession with identity/heritage. Their diaspora also means they got tremendous tribal networking. Perhaps, if most Jews were in ONE goy nation, they could have developed a national allegiance to it. Suppose 95% of Jews live in Russia or Turkey. But there are Jews in Russia, European nations, Latin America, the US, Israel, and etc. As such, the main allegiance of Jews is to World Jewry, not to any particular goy nation. Also, if Jews were lower in IQ and weaker in personality, they might have come to respect the higher IQ goyim and tried to fit in.
It's the combination of IQ and personality that matters. Consider the Gypsies and the Japanese. Gypsies are lower IQ but strong personality. So, even though they remain at the lower rungs of society, they've survived as a minority all across non-Gypsy lands. In contrast, Japanese in US are higher IQ but weak personality. In a way, Japanese personality is weaker than that of the Chinese because Japanese are obsessed with proper form, something Chinese are less of. Because Japanese sense of worth comes from adherence to form, they are more mindful to FIT IN to the dominant form of the host society. As such, Japanese Americans have become Very Good and Proper Americans. And that means little that is Japanese has remained. Gypsies achieved so little economically but they continue to survive as a people and culture. Japanese-Americans achieved much professionally but have dissolved into Americanism. The fate of Episcopalians also illustrates the problem of higher IQ without the strong personality to match it. With an ethos centered around an increasingly bland and spineless religion, Episcopalians have done well as individuals but faded as a Power Bloc. Jews, in contrast, have higher IQ and stronger personality.
To best understand(or visualize) this in the most elementary way, one merely need to think of Ron Jeremy, to whom I and other kids were introduced to by a Jewish classmate long ago. It was the era of the big heavy clunky VCR, which cost an arm-and-a-leg back then. The kid just had to show us something and led us to his parents bedroom and put in a tape that showed Ron Jeremy sitting on a garden chair sucking his own dic*. I could swear the kid was beaming with pride, either due to the possession of the tape or Jeremy's standing as some kind of Jewish stud. But that image stuck in my mind as young minds are impressionable, especially when seeing something the likes of which you hadn't seen before. The pervy character of the image aside, it said something about the Jewish Personality. It's one thing to be Portnoic but to show off sucking one's own dic*? Fast Forward to today, and think of Harvey Weinstein ejaculating into a potted plant. The problems of Anthony Weiner. And the big kahuna, Jeffrey Epstein. Now, those Portnoys eventually ended up badly, but they had a long good run. Weinstein was once called 'god' by none other than Meryl Streep. And think of for how long Epstein got away with his stuff before he was finally brought down. Now clearly, not all Jewish men are so pervy, but what many of them have in common with Ron Jeremy is the chutzpah, the power of personality, to pull out the metaphorical pud and suck on it for all the world to see. So, Ron Jeremy is useful as a metaphor for Jewish Personality. To understand Jewish Power, one must always think of the personality along with the ideas. If you want to better understand what Milton Friedman was really about, it can't hurt to visually imagine him sucking his own dic*. Not that he ever did such(or even led a pervy lifestyle), but he wasn't just about ideas but the Big Idea, one that he had to pull out and swing at the whole world. Jews got the power of Ron Jeremiad.
Jews, like elephants, have deep memory, and this makes them unwilling to side 100% with whites. After all, the big kahuna of Jewish tragedies, the Shoah, happened at the hands of whites. And the Jewish Narrative is filled with stories of Russian/Cossack pogroms, French collaboration, Anglo snobbery, and Big Dumb Polac*s stealing lunch money from Jewish students. Jews remember all this. Japanese, in contrast, have shallow memory that is utterly dependent on the ruling power. When Japan lost WWII and the new government said, "US is our great boss and friend", the Japanese became servile dogs of the US. Browns of Latin America are much the same. Though called 'Hispanics', they had a history and culture long before whites arrived, so they should be called something else, like 'Tacoans'(which isn't meant as an insult as tacos are good food). Tacoans have had a long history and culture before the Conquistadors arrived, and they were defeated, 'genocided', and raped by the newcomers, but most of them just go along with the ruling system still dominated by whites. And they don't object to their lands being called 'Latin America' or them being called 'Hispanic' or 'Latino'(now Latinx). If Jews had such shallow memories, they might just become good whites and get along. But they have deep and autonomous memory of who they are. They write their own history and remember their own narratives. So, Jews can't just become another bunch of happy whites.
But even if Jewish-White relations hadn't been so troubled throughout Western history, Jews would have had problems surrendering to whiteness. First, the pride of Covenant means Jews must maintain some degree of separateness and uniqueness. If Jews just become a bunch of whites, they are no longer Jews. Secondly, the West became Christian, and Jews have long regarded Christianity as a case of heretical Jews and goyim stealing the Jewish God. Third, the superior don't want to surrender to the inferior. Jews have long felt themselves to be smarter, wiser, and deeper. If most peoples have elites and masses, Jews in entirety felt as an elite people. It's a general rule that the superior don't want to yield to the inferior. It's like Chinese in Southeast Asia are far less likely to fully assimilate than Chinese in Europe or America. While Chinese see Western Civilization as superior to the Chinese one(though this attitude may change as the West turns into globo-homo Afro-boogie land), they look upon Southeast Asians as inferior bumpkins. Jewish Covenantism is intrinsically superiorist, but if Jews were inferior in IQ and weaker in personality, they might have yielded to white power and identity. But Jewish Covenantism in combination with higher Jewish IQ and stronger personality has led to a resilient apartheid-of-the-heart among Jews. Even when so many Jews today mate with non-Jews, they insist that Jewish Identity take precedence over the Other identity among the Mischlings, and this is often the case because non-Jews relatively have weaker identities and personalities.
Superioritism also matters with blacks in relation to whites. If Jews are superior to whites in brains and personality, blacks are superior to whites in brawn and stronger in egotism. And this affects the attitude not only of Jews/blacks but of whites as well, especially as the US and Modern West pride themselves on meritocratism. The Anglo Cult of Rule of Law and May-the-Best-Man-Win has led to the elitism of winners over losers, no matter who the winners may be. In the past, such meritocratism was balanced by race-ism that favored intra-meritocracy than inter-meritocracy, i.e. May the Best White Man Win. But naively well-meaning Anglo idealists, goaded by devious Jews, pushed meritocratism much further at the expense of white race-ism. Now, if all races are indeed equal(or if all races are just social constructs) or if whites were innately superior in all attributes over other races, the rise of inter-meritocracy wouldn't have mattered. If all races are equal, black athletes would beat whites sometimes but whites would beat blacks just as often. So, black boys would have black heroes, and white boys would have white heroes. Jewish genius would do wonders for Jews, but the far more widespread white genius(because there are more whites than Jews) would balance it all out and then some. But as it turned out, nature is 'racist'. Nature didn't create races to be equal but to be different so that every race would be superior in some respects while inferior in others. Also, different cultures favored certain traits over others. Blacks who lived in savagery surrounded by dangerous animals favored the traits of hunters and warriors. Such types are well-suited for the jungles and steppes of Sub-Saharan Africa but ill-suited for civilization. Most non-blacks developed more advanced societies that weeded out traits that were most aggressive and thug-like. In the game of breed-and-weed, blacks bred the thugs and weeded out the dweebs who couldn't chuck a spear. In contrast, non-black societies generally bred the dweebs and weeded out the thugs. The result is quite stark in the scene in TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN between Woody Allen and a huge Negro who wants to go see Miss Eliza. Jewish merchant/scholar societies bred their own to be smart and witty, black hunter/warrior societies bred their own to tough and aggressive.
The problem is people blame people for 'racism' when it is nature(and culture's role in genetic selection) that created differences in races. If people hate 'racism', they should blame nature(and cultural selection over thousands of years). If people hate the idea of races being different in ability, they need to rag on nature(and culture's role in selection). The notion of 'racism'-as-evil suggests that all races are innately the same in all abilities — or race isn't even a valid concept — and that some races have been discriminated against because of bigotry and prejudice. But this is only a half-truth. Yes, it's true that smart Jews weren't allowed in many institutions and professions in past Europe. And it's true that talented black athletes were effectively banned from mainstream sports. But ending those social policies didn't lead to end of different outcomes among the races but emergence of new ones. Letting blacks enter sports didn't lead to equality of whites and blacks but black superiority over whites. Letting Jews enter brainy institutions and industries led to Jewish domination of key industries such as finance. (The fact that PC seems unperturbed by black dominance in sports and Jewish dominance in finance suggests that it is fine with racial differences AS LONG AS they favor certain groups. 'Racism' is bad when whites to better than blacks, but it's no problem when blacks do better than whites.) Also, the reason why blacks lag in the brainy fields is the same as to why they dominate in brawny fields: Nature. And the reason why East Asians do better in math than in running also owes to nature. Not just in terms of intelligence but personality, as one needs patience and diligence to be good at math. Blacks, being more restless by nature, have tougher time with school work even when they're smart. When people complain about 'racism', just remind them nature is race-ist because evolution is about creating divergences. Before a species can diverge into different species, it must first split into different races. If they say nature is not race-ist, then evolution must not be true. Modern folks believe in evolution, so if they say evolution cannot produce divergences and differences among human groups, they can't possibly believe in evolution and science.
Now, there are visible superiorities and invisible superiorities. While every group has some superior quality — Tibetans and Bolivian Indians are better adapted to higher elevation — , their advantage isn't striking, flashy, noticeable(away from their extreme habitats), or consequential in the modern world. And whatever biological advantage Hindus have, it doesn't seem to be noticeable to the naked eye. Some Hindus have very high IQ and are quite capable, but Asian Indians as a people don't seem to be all that striking in anything. Eskimos and Lapps surely have traits better adapted to extreme cold, but whatever such may be, they are of no consequence to the modern world.
These people have relatively invisible superiorities. In contrast, Jews and blacks have visible superiorities over whites. They have the traits that mean most in the modern world in terms of money, influence, idolatry, popularity, and prestige. High Jewish IQ plus strong personality leads to fierce Jewish wit, Jewish verbal skills, Jewish creativity, Jewish business acumen, and Jews dominating as lawyers & pundits. Jews got the Will, Skill, and Bill. Will to Power, Skill in high places, and lots of dollar bills. Blacks also have visible superiorities over whites, and they matter in our age of sports adulation, celebrity, sexual hedonism, and idolatry. In a more restrained and sober America, black advantages weren't necessarily advantages. Many whites back then would have looked upon black behavior and said, "Look at those crazy ni**ers." Indeed, even many blacks would have said as much as they used to be into Church and Family too under white pressure. But we now lived in a world of libertine hedonism, extreme vulgarity, pornification of mainstream culture, and vanity & narcissism. Even the US military puts up posters promoting black men taking white women. Nick Fuentes, who calls himself a Trad Catholic, has Kanye West as his favorite musical star. I heard some Kanye, and the first song went on and on about women wanting to suck his dic*. So, if a Trad Catholic kid who is race-conscious is like that, imagine all the deracinated or PC-addled white boys. If the factor of Will, Skill, & Bill made Jews the dominant power in Hollywood, news media, finance, high-tech, law, academia, and etc, the factor of Song, Strong, & Dong made blacks the main idols of the West in US, Canada, and EU.
'National pride' for many whites has come to mean little more than 'cheering for our black heroes against your black heroes'. So, you got the French cheering for French blacks, Canadians cheering for Canadian blacks, Brits cheering for British blacks, and white Americans cheering for American blacks. In other words, the new nationalism is universal cuckery. Japan joined in this as well as Japanese women are now having kids with black kids and raising them to dominate Japanese sports. Over time, as Japanese cheer for blacks as the heroes of Japan, they won't be able to say NO to black immigration. Once blackness becomes idolized as the heroism that brings home trophies and medals, the Japanese will become like the Brits, French, and Dutch. In a way, Idol-Imperialism is extremely potent because it just takes a few invaders to change the culture. If Filipinos were to take over Japan, a whole bunch of them would have to go there and take over demographically. As Filos have no visible superiorities, they can't conquer the Japanese imagination. But because even a handful of blacks can take over Japanese sports and music, the two things that most Japanese are most wild and ecstatic about, even a few blacks can alter the Japanese imagination.
Now, one could argue that sports is just entertainment, and what does it matter if someone can run faster, jump higher, or punch harder? Rationally, that may be true, but who said most humans are rational or even humanist? Most people are emotional, visceral, and idolatrous. It's like most people don't notice people all around them but fixate on movie stars, TV stars, music stars, and sports stars. Even the News is more about idols than information. It's about the Personality: Tucker Carlson, Rachel Maddow, Bill Maher, Sean Hannity, and etc. Rush Limbaugh got a lot of mileage from the news/politics business because he sold himself as a Big Proud American with a big mouth. And this is why blacks are so threatening. They are lower in IQ, more aggressive, more psychopathic, and highly egotistical, indeed to the point where so many are totally without self-awareness. But their savage qualities, which cause so much trouble in schools and streets, have a way of dominating sports that get people so excited. When do people, especially men, get most worked up and emotional? It's not even politics or even their children are born. It's sports. White boys watching black athletes react like young girls losing their virginity. They shriek like cuck-wussies. And the art/entertainment that brings the most immediate and powerful pleasure is music, even more so than Hollywood blockbusters. Music is the most sexual of expressions, and blacks are most uninhibited and brash in sexual messaging. And then, there is sex itself, the activity that brings people to extreme pleasure of orgasm. As larger dongs make for bigger orgasms, it's long been a viral meme among white girls with smart phones that black dongs are the most potent pleasure machines. This has become such a thing that even white boys stopped objecting and learned to love the black dong, leading to the cuck phenomenon where white guys invite black guys to hump their women. The prevalent meme among white women is that, even if they don't marry a black man, they should sow their wild oatesses with black men before settling down with some dweeby white guy who can provide better. And today, most white guys are accepting of this as they grow up worshiping black men as superior athletes and studs.
Of course, this is the great contradiction of PC. It says race is just a construct and all races are equal BUT it also urges white girls to go with black guys who are superior in manhood over white guys. And dweeby white guys are such wussies that they dare not address this contradiction. Take CucKen Burns who (1) admires blacks as superior athletes and musical talents and (2) denounces 'racism'. But if blacks are indeed superior to whites in sports and musical funk, doesn't that mean racial differences are real? But don't expect dweebs to think straight. It's like the countless times the Mass Media praised Joe Louis and Jesse Owens for exploding the myth of 'Aryan superiority'. First, Hitler never claimed whites are faster than blacks. According to Leni Riefenstahl, Hitler didn't like to attend track events because blacks won. But more significantly, if blacks outran and beat up whites, doesn't that indicate black racial superiority in sports? It's not like Jesse Owens and German runners finished even steven. But again, never mind this glaring contradiction in the Narrative. Most people just nod along without noticing the hole in the argument. The white race is now caught between the Scylla and Charybdis of Jewish Will, Skill, & Bill and Black Song, Strong, & Dong. No people did more than Jews to undermine white power, privilege, and prestige in elite institutions and industries. And no people did more than blacks to demolish white manhood, white pride, and white idolatry. Jewish and black superiorities are most visible. And yet, the two peoples to whom whites cuck most are Jews and blacks. Unless this is reversed, the white race has no future. It's that simple. At this point, whites might as well be called Tworks as white women twerk and white guys are dorks.
So, what is PC really about? It's not about pushing equality on all peoples but elevating certain peoples as superior, therefore deserving of special treatment. Now, Jews, blacks, and even homos try to bolster their identities based on past victimization and suffering, i.e. they are deserving to feel morally superior because they suffered more than all the other races(which is a joke). But using such criterion, shouldn't American Indians be the #1 holy victim group in America? And since mass immigration wiped them out, shouldn't Americans be reminded over and over of the evils of immigration-imperialism? Furthermore, why is historical suffering always tagged to white villainy? You mean blacks didn't have slavery and genocide before whites arrived on the Dark Continent? And the horrors of the Shoah notwithstanding, didn't Jews give as well as they got in the 20th century? And haven't they been the main killers of the 21st century? Jewish communists killed aplenty. Also, Jewish capital financed much of Western Imperialism. So, there was the Jewish hand in the slave trade, opium trade, and other evils. And even though one big lesson of Nazism is Germans went crazy and should be mindful not to repeat such lunacy, the other big lesson should be Jews went a long ways to drive the Germans crazy and they need be mindful not to act like that again. But it seems Jews are acting that way 100x worse.
If PC is based on Moral Superiority of who suffered most, then the most prestige should go to American Indians and Tacoans, 55 million out of 60 million who died from diseases and Conquistador terror. So, why isn't this the case? Because the current supremacism of Jews, blacks, and homos in the PC sweepstakes has to do with their visible superiorities. In other words, despite all the yammerings about 'social justice'(among libs) or 'liberty'(among cons), the current politics on both 'left' and 'right' is about special adulation and servitude to visible superiorities. Just think. Suppose Jews suffered the Shoah but had an IQ of 90 and were economically on the level of Tacoans. Would there be a Holocaust Memorial in the Mall? Would Americans and Europeans have bothered in the creation of Israel? Would politicians be groveling at the feet of Jews? No, Jews would be mostly ignored by Americans. It is Jewish wealth, power, and influence, not Jewish Suffering, that made Jews special. If any people suffered the holocaust in the US, it was the American Indians, but who cares about them? They are poor, unskilled, verbally obtuse, and name themselves after birds, gophers, & reptiles. People make a big thing about black suffering, but suppose blacks suck at sports, can't sing & dance, can't bounce their booties, and were short like the Pygmies. For one thing, blacks wouldn't be so angry and aggressive as they'd be a bunch of weaklings. The main source of black rage isn't past or present suffering but the sense that they, the superior race, was done wrong by an inferior race, the whites. Blacks are childish and think only about sex, rap, hollering, and sports. So, they judge worth based on ball-playing, humping, making noise, and such. So, if blacks were weaker than whites, they would not be so hateful toward whites. They'd think, "dem badass white mothasfuc*as done whupped our ass and made us pick cotton cuz dey so cool and shi*." If whites whupped blacks in boxing, ball-playing, and musical hollering, blacks would be saying, "white massuh, enslave my black ass again and make me pick cotton." That's how blacks think.
Despite all the modern ideology about equality, the human mind has an inferiority-perspective and superiority-perspective. The inferiority-perspective looks up to superiority, and superiority-perspective looks down on inferiority. It's like Mike Tyson talking big before taking on Lennox Lewis. He felt superior and thought he would KO Lennox's ass. But he lost the fight and was babbling like, "Lenny, can I suck your dic*?" Look at Japan after WWII. US killed over a million and dropped two big ones. So, how did Japan react to the very nation that totally demolished it? It got on its knees and pleaded, "Unkaru Samu, ken ai soku yoru diku?" So, black rage isn't about past suffering but borne of black superiority perspective over whites who seem so lame by black standards of excellence, which is all about song-strong-dong. It's like dogs. You can try to teach dogs to be equal and fair with other dogs, but there is always hierarchy in how dogs feel about one another.
The reason why black slavery and Shoah matter so much is blacks and Jews have demonstrated visible superiority vis-a-vis whites. This is what fuels black rage, Jewish vengeance, and white guilt about blacks & Jews especially. Because blacks and Jews have proven themselves superior in essential institutions/industries(of brain) and most popular sectors of idolatry & hedonism, whites feel they've committed deicide. Why did the killing of Jesus matter? After all, so many people were killed by Romans. It was because the Christian Myth said He was the Son of God. Without that element of superiority, His killing would have been hardly more grave than the killings of countless others. If blacks were lacking in visible superiorities, whites wouldn't much care about slavery and having called them 'ni**ers'. Sure, whites would admit it was wrong, and some apologies would be in order, but they wouldn't lose any sleep over it. But because of black prominence in sports and music, white folks think, "OMG, we enslaved people like Muhammad Ali, Bob Marley, John Coltrane, Kanye West, Oprah, MLK, Wilt Chamberlain, Long Dong Silver, and other godlike folks!" And blacks feel like, "We so badass and special, but them fa**oty-ass white boys done call us 'ni**ers' and make us pick cotton and shit when puss-ass white boys should have been shining our shoes and white girls should be sucking our dic*s." Black mentality doesn't go much farther beyond that. That is the real fuel of black rage: Not America's failure at egalitarianism but the fact that blacks don't have everything they deserve as the superior badass race.
And Jews think and feel rather alike. Jews regard themselves as the Chosen. Now, if the ONLY thing Jews had was the historical myth of the Covenant, they wouldn't be so arrogant. Imagine if average Jewish IQ was just 100 or even 90. While all peoples would be pissed at mass slaughter of their kind, Jews would not feel so powerfully about the Shoah if they didn't have such high opinion of themselves. But Jews see themselves as a Certain People. So, the Nazis didn't just kill a bunch of mediocre nobodies but people like Einstein, Kafka, Marx, Oppenheimer, Bob Dylan, Barbra Streisand, and Ron Jeremy. And as whites are so enthralled with superiority — after all, what is the essence of Americanism if not 'Winners Rule, Losers Drool'? — , they too feel a special horror about the Shoah because superior Jews were killed. In contrast, who cares about millions of Ukrainian dead in the famine or maybe half a million Iraqi kids who died in Zionist-led US sanctions? Americans don't care because the dead were a bunch of 'losers'. So, whites consider the killing of Jews as something akin to deicide and black slavery as akin to inferior white beta-males having used the whip to control superior black alpha-males. While injustice is never good, it feels especially worse when the inferior wrong the superior. It's like the scenario of CINDERELLA feels especially unjust because inferior UGLY girls wronged the superior BEAUTIFUL Cinderella.
This is why PC isn't about equality but about the rise of New Superiority. If anything, the Victim Narrative is geared to serve the Superiority. Take homos. While it can be argued that homos were victimized through the ages as most societies suppressed homosexuality, there never was an organic or autonomous community of homosexuals. Homos were born among both slaves and slave-masters. A peon could be born a homo, but so could a prince. If a prince were a homo, he could do nasty things to his servants and get away with it. As for the AIDS epidemic among homos, it was the result of homos buggering one another like crazy in bath houses and other places. So, there is no homo equivalent of Shoah or Slavery. But none of that mattered. Homos do have a visible superiority of their own, which is in design, decor, fashion, and whoopipi-poo vanity, in vogue in our decadent age. So, once homos were tagged as special(especially with the aid of Jewish-controlled Media), a victimological narrative could be cooked up right on the spot. So, you have Obama mentioning slavery and Shoah along with 'homophobia'. Again, suffering per se doesn't add up to a plate of beans. The only thing people care about is the special injustice of suffering superiority. Once homos became a Made People, a special people, they became a major victim group. It's like all those Americans get so weepy about some dead celebrity but don't care about most Americans who die in worse ways. Heath Ledger died of drug overdose like some idiot, but he was a celebrity, and therefore, his death became a big deal. (And Magic Johnson was called a 'hero' just for going public with his infection.) In dictatorships, the death of the ruler is a great tragedy, but nothing is said of the many killed by tyranny. Why? The great ruler was deemed superior, deserving of immortality. Therefore, his death seems so unjust. As for the rest of the population, they are a bunch of losers, so who cares if they die? If a natural disaster strikes a certain area and if some celebrity is killed, most of the news will be about the death of the celebrity. Thus, Moral Superiority is often inseparable from Visible Superiority as humanity mourns more for wrongs done to the superior than to the inferior. Americans feel that killing one Jew is a greater moral sin than killing half a million Arabs.
So, despite our conscious efforts with ideology, the subconscious drives of instinct often shape how we really feel, and those feelings affect our thoughts and behaviors as well. It's like even if people were told, ideologically that is, that all men and women are equally attractive in the name of Beauty Equality, men will still find themselves preferring Rita Hayworth over Rosie O'Donnell and women will still find themselves preferring Tom Cruise over Jimmy Kimmel(or Guillermo). Obviously, people respond to visible than invisible qualities, especially those of special consequence in the most prestigious, powerful, and/or popular fields. This is why Jewish verbal intelligence is more valuable than East Asian visual-spatial intelligence. The power of words is a more visible, immediate, and consequential quality in society. People communicate through mastery of words, not geometry instructions. Whatever superior traits the Amazonian Indians may have in their survival in the forests of Brazil, they are irrelevant to the institutions, industries, and fields that garner the most respect, awe, and popularity in the modern world.
Because Jews and Negroes feel themselves to be superior to whites in skills, qualities, and expressions that are prized most — Jews with brains, blacks with brawn — , they have lost respect for whites. If Jews believed whites to be smarter and more brilliant than Jews, Jewish chutzpah would be mostly irrelevant. If blacks found whites to be tougher and meaner, they'd be on their knees and begging to pick more cotton. White people have this idea of most blacks being tough, mean, and aggressive, but that's because most blacks can whup most whites. But among blacks, many blacks are sheepish and cowering before tougher blacks. They know they gotta ho-de-do before the Big Bro or run like a mothafuc*a. Black community is instinctively extremely hierarchical like a chimpanzee or baboon clan. White society is less so because whites are less likely to resort to rage and violence to show their worth. So, whether a white guy is big and strong or small and weak, most get along in accordance to rules of peace and respect. But blacks are more prone to act violent, and so the threat of violence often shapes black perception and attitude in the black community. So, some blacks feel like Mike Tyson while others feel like Gary Coleman. Black pride is based on the King Kong factor. This is why weaker blacks like Ta-Nehisi Coates developed the Bleek Complex or Black Geek Complex. It's a complex because, on the one hand, bleeks have troubled memories of being pushed around by blugs or black thugs, especially because blacks are the least geeky of the races. But on the other hand, even bleeks feel collective black pride in the victories of blugs in sports and the like. It's like Spike Lee is a kermitty-looking bleek but shares in the collective pride of blacks being the toughest race.
Given that blacks judge worth physically and are prone to violence, it's understandable why they feel such contempt for the white race. To black guys, white men are not men but 'boys'. We've heard of how whites used to refer to blacks as 'boy', but blacks see white males as mere 'white boys'. Because blacks feel themselves to be superior due to athletic advantage, they have a hard time accepting white advantages in many areas such as law, economics, and technology. The primitive black mind thinks, "If we be more badass as rappers and ball players, we be superior and that means everything should come our way", but reality isn't like that. In a way, black frustrations about whites are akin to white frustrations about yellows(and to a lesser extent the dot-folks). Why should the inferior race of whites be doing better in many walks of life? Of course, we know why. Whites are smarter and more diligent on average than blacks. But because blacks are fixated on the idolatry of visible superiorities, they have a hard time accepting this. While diligence is a real virtue, it is not a flashy form of superiority. It's like a slow simmer than fireworks. Blacks are fixated on fireworks. They figure, "We's got more fireworks, so how come we don't own everything? Sheeeiiiit." And in a way, many whites agree with blacks. So enamored of blacks success in sports, music, and sex, they believe blacks are the awesome badass race deserving of the most prestige, respect, wealth, and success. This is why they cheer for black success in any field and wet their pants over Obama becoming president.
How blacks feel about white success, whites feel about Asian success. By visible factors, whites see yellows as inferior, or even dweebier than whites. So, how come such dorks, gorks, and geeks do better in school? On the level of instinctive psychology, it seems unjust that yellows should do better than whites in anything. From a rational and ideological level, yellow success in education makes sense. Asians may be slightly smarter than whites and/or more diligent and committed to doing homework and preparing for exams. But again, human mind operates more instinctively than ideologically at most times, and the images of so many yellow gorks winning top prizes and going to best schools just seem wrong, a crime against nature. The fate of Tacoans makes more sense to whites. Tacoans are shorter, smaller, and lacking in any visible superiority. And so, they do worse in school than whites, and the basic white attitude toward them is, "Hey, come here and pick lettuce and change my baby's diapers for minimum wage." To most whites, it doesn't matter that Tacoans suffered what may be the greatest tragedy in history. After all, despite centuries of white imperialism, blacks still got Africa, Asians still got Asia, Arabs still got the Middle East, and etc. But Tacoans lost their homelands forever and are still ruled by people who came as imperialist-colonists who, furthermore, imported millions of blacks to mess things up even worse. But none of that matters to whites on the instinctive level because they see Tacoans as visibly inferior and only good to act like Guillermo, a sidekick and laughing stock of whites. But it's different with yellows because yellows seem as lame as Tacoans but do better in school and hog certain elite industries far beyond their numbers. Of course, Tacoans may well beat out the yellows in the long run if the fate of Japanese Americans is any indication. Though successful, the low birthrates, racial mixing, weak identity, and soulless elitism have led to their demise as an identity.
From an WRSS angle, Tacoans pose only a demographic-electoral threat while the yellows pose only a managerial threat(though possibly a demographic threat in Canada and Australia). Tacoans don't have the means to rise high up the corporate or institutional ladder. Most remain as lettuce pickers or low-level employees. There isn't much social mobility among the younger generation; if anything, many do worse than their immigrant parents who at least had the willingness to work hard. The problem is the greater majority of Tacoans vote Democratic for two reasons: (1) historical resentment at Anglos who humiliated them, intentionally or not (2) more free gibs. Now, most Tacoans don't agree with the globo-homo agenda of the Jewish elites of the Democratic Party, but they still figure they get more from the Dems than from the Repubs. So, they supply the votes that allow Dems to win. But of course, as the Dem platform is shaped by the elites, it's a case of "Brown/Black Votes, Jewish Agendas". Effectively, browns keep Jewish Democrats in power who push more anti-white policies. Tacoans cannot take over white-made institutions like Ivy League and Wall Street. Jews could. They cannot rob white men of manhood. Blacks could. But as their numbers swell, brown votes keep Jewish Globalists in power, and that is most alarming from the WRSS perspective. Even though browns have long nursed anti-white feelings due to history, they are not big thinkers or have much of a historical mindset. Sheeplike, most of them just go along with the official narrative and/or prefer to serve others than lead.
Indeed, the history of Latin America tells us they're easily governable. After all, even though most Latin American nations are white-minority, whites still rule over the browns, and most browns just go along. Whether it's white-minority rule in Latin America or white-majority rule in the US, browns are used to being ruled by the Other. If browns are especially anti-white in the US, it has more to do with Jewish and White Cuck control of education, media, and propaganda. Being sheeple, browns soaked up all the anti-white PC concocted by Jews and white cucks. If white patriots controlled most of media and education, most browns would likely end up thinking like Italians who came to be Good Americans. But if Italians became Americans when Anglo-Americans still ruled and insisted upon immigrants to adopt the American Way and pledge allegiance to the flag, many Mexicans grew up in a US that is ruled by Jews and managed by white cucks for whom the highest virtue is white prostration before Jews, blacks, homos, and Diversity. So, if whites find browns to be hostile, it is largely their own fault. When whites handed over power to hostile Jews and became a bunch of worthless cucks, they relented to the new policy of the media and academia promoting anti-white vitriol to immigrant kids. As Tacoans and yellows have servile-dog mentalities, they mindlessly soak up whatever is taught them. This is why Tacoans are knee-jerk anti-blanco and why young yellows are among the biggest commissars of PC. Before whites blame them, they should blame the institutions that teach immigrants to be anti-white. When whites handed over institutional power to Jews, they pretty much signed their own death warrant. If you hand over the megaphone to someone who uses it to urge others to hate you, you have no one to blame but yourself. The main reason why so many kids of immigrants vote Democratic and blame whitey is because whites handed over power to Jews who incite anti-white hatred. What would happen to Israel if Jews handed over media and academic power to Palestinians and Arabs? The Pallies would use the institutions to instill Jewish kids with Jewish Guilt and Self-loathing while encouraging all non-Jews to blame and hate Jews. Also, they would change immigration policy and let in tons of non-Jews and tell them to gang up on Jews.
If the Tacoan threat is demographic-electoral(mainly because whites handed power to Jews to mold the minds of immigrant kids), the yellow threat is commissariat-managerial. Yellows have been compared to Jews in their academic success, but that's where the similarities end. Jews have both a strong individuality and strong collectivity. Jews have a deep and powerful sense of what they are and where they came from, and this forms a strong collective bond. But Jews also have a strong sense of individuality, as when Ron Jeremy sucked his own dic*. As so many Jews had to survive as peddlers and merchants in a world of non-Jews, each Jew had to be tough on his own. In contrast, most Asians lived as servants, serfs, or slaves to their masters. Jews knew every Jew had to learn to take care of himself. Most Asians lived to be led, told what to do, and be taken care of. In exchange for such guidance and protection, they served their lords with blind loyalty. This is why it's hard to imagine someone like Stalin, Hitler, or Mao coming to power in a Jewish-majority society. Most Jews wouldn't accept such a figure as he would be an affront to Jewish sense of individuality. While Jews believe in collective Jewish identity and unity, they also demand room for Jewish individuality. Each Jew feels as his own fuhrer. Can one imagine a whole bunch of Jews mindlessly shouting Heil Hitlerowicz or whole bunch of Jews acting like Red Guards and smashing Jewish cultural treasures at the behest of Maovitz? In contrast, that is exactly what the yellows did. The Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution happened among the Chinese. Crazy Chinaman Mao told his minions to kill all the sparrows, and all those yellow idiots did just that. Later, he told his minions to wage total war on Chinese culture, and they did just that, smashing their own cultural heritage. What does this say about the yellows? They have hive-minds and herd-mentality. They are servile to the Power. Whether it's Mainland minions who sucked up to Mao or Hong Kong minions who sucked up to the British Empire, the basic mentality of yellows is to go with the big boss on the strong horse.
Now, there may be legit HBD or WRSS reasons for opposing mass non-white immigration EVEN IF all newcomers voted for the GOP and supported 'conservative values' because too many non-whites will alter forever the racial-national character of America. After all, even if Peru were to become 100% conservative, it would still not be a white nation. Identity must trump ideology. Still, the sudden rise among even yellows to vote overwhelmingly Democratic has to do with the shift of power from White Christians to Jewish Globalists. Yellow kids watch the media and get anti-white propaganda from whites. They attend schools and are taught anti-white curriculum. They visit affluent cities and elite universities and see that Diversity, Jew-Negro-Homo Worship, and Bash-Whitey are the hippest, coolest, and most 'progressive' things and just go along, especially as yellows have weak personalities that are most anxious to be accepted and approved by the existing power. This is why Ann Coulter and her ilk bashing immigration as the main problem misses the point. They are too craven and cowardly to mention Jewish Power in this equation. Not only did Jews play an instrumental role in opening the mass-immigration gates but they used the power of media and academia to promote white self-loathing and non-white animus toward whites. This is why the generally more conservative non-whites arrive in the US and soon become 'liberal'. Granted, Americans must not confuse American notion of 'conservatism' with international understanding of conservatism. For example, neither free speech nor gun rights is essentially a conservative value. Most conservative nations have restricted gun rights. Through most of traditional European history, only the elites could own guns and deadly weapons. And free speech was certainly not a conservative value for most of humanity through most of history. If anything, free speech is a liberal or classical liberal value. So, when immigrants oppose total free speech and gun rights, they aren't necessarily being liberal. In the more conservative societies from which they came, universal gun rights and unrestricted free speech were not a thing. And look at US history, and free speech was the favored cause of liberals, not conservatives. If so-called liberals want to restrict free speech today, it's because all principles eventually yield to priority of power. When Liberals gained great power, they came to favor power over principles. Another reason is ideology turns into idolatry or iconography, whereupon certain things become sacrosanct, a 'spiritual' notion, and then even Liberals choose to protect sanctity than liberty. It's like the Shoah and MLK have become so sacred in the West that Liberals find themselves unwilling to protect speech mocking such sacred cows. And then, there is the Jewish Factor as it turns out most Jewish Liberals were really Liberal Jews, or Jews first, Liberals second, or Liberals only to the extent of furthering Jewish Power. As the top power in the West, Jews no longer care too much for free speech or satire that may speak truth to Jewish Power.
Currently, the Tacoan and yellow views of whites are probably on the neurotic side. For the longest time, both Tacoans and yellows viewed the white race as the premier race, the most powerful people on Earth. Mess with whites, and you get burned. Mexicans lost SW territories to Anglos. Japan got scorched in WWII. The fall of European Empires didn't dispel the view of whites as world rulers as the great powers after World War II were the US and the Soviet Union. US was seen the world over as John Wayne World, the land of triumphant cowboys. And Soviet Union was seen as the empire of mighty white Russians. So, yellows and Tacoans got used to seeing Whites as World Rulers.
Just like many who thought communism was here to stay were taken aback by the sudden demise of the Soviet Empire(and communist nations around the world), many Tacoans and yellows still haven't fully processed the sudden decline of whites, or what Douglas Murray calls the Strange Death of Europe. Especially for the Japanese following World War II, the white man was a tremendous kind of creature. It's like American Indians, who got continually whupped by the white man, came to regard paleface as the Great White Man. Not 'great' as in good but really powerful and not to mess with. Whites got powerful medicine. And Mexicans, for all their resentment and inferiority complex, looked up to the Great Gringo as some kind of god-man, like Aztecs once worshiped the Sun God. The Great White Man became a constant, like the Sun rising in the East. It's like there was a time when so many thought the British Empire would never end.
When (if ever) did the Sun finally set on the British Empire?
But just like the sudden demise of the British Empire, the world hasn't fully processed the sudden fall of White Might, especially as white nations are still the richest and most powerful around the world. And yet, they are without survival instinct, fighting spirit, and the will to power. White nations seem incapable of defending their borders. White elites seem to welcome invasion via Diversity. White nations, esp in Europe, have pretty much criminalized true patriotism, which is now 'hate speech' for opposing mass invasion-migration and great replacement. Now, if most white nations are still majority white and have white leaders and if they still constitute the richest and most powerful parts of the world, why are they so spineless, bloodless, and ball-less? How could white nations still be so white but so defenseless of whiteness and, if anything, welcoming of the great replacement, diversity, and deracination by race-mixing, especially by ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs? It's not like white nations are about to be invaded by Ottoman armies, Mongol hordes, Hun raiders, or Space Aliens. There are migrant-invaders but they are mostly impoverished rag-tag mobs who could easily be stopped and sent back. They are less invaders than virtual guests because most of the West flashes a giant billboard to the world that says WELCOME DIVERSITY, especially Negroes.
So, we have a strange case indeed. White Demise isn't like the fall of the Byzantine Empire, which tried to survive but couldn't because it grew weak, divided, and decadent. But one thing for sure, the Byzantines didn't invite the invasion and fought to the end to at least save Constantinople. In contrast, the White West seems to be welcoming and celebrating its own demise. Again, the main reasons for this owes to the visible superiorities of Jews and blacks. Jewish genius led to great Jewish wealth and achievements. Therefore, white elites came to suck up to Jewish Power. But Jews understood that money power only goes so far. Jews needed not only what money could buy but what morality could bait, and so, Jews used their power of media and academia to push Shoah as the new object of spiritual faith in the West, thus baiting 'white guilt'. And once whites came to regard Jews as a super-great people, the Shoah seemed especially evil because Germany, the most advanced and educated white nation, murdered a whole bunch of Jews who could have been Einsteins, Lenny Bruces, and Barbra Streisands.
With Jews as new elites, the core code of Western Civilization was reprogrammed. So, the West came to be all about Diversity and 'Inclusion'. The gravest sin is now white racial consciousness and pride. Nationalism in white nations is said to be evil... but it is the moral duty of whites to support Jewish identity and nationalism(and even imperialism). Jews also say all of White History was about mass immigration and Diversity. So, Brits must tell themselves that there were always prominent blacks among the Britons. Europeans must pretend Julius Caesar and others were black. Whites must make-believe the Middle Ages were not white, and Ancient Greeks weren't white but Afro-Asiatic. Look what Mark Zuckerberg's disgusting sister is up to. And as whites today are a bunch of shallow retards with Pop Culture and PC as main culture and value system, they just go along. Whites are now so trashy that they get all morally triggered about globo-homo. S.E. Cupp the so-called 'conservative' wept with joy over the US government forcing 'gay marriage' on all 50 states. Whites voted for Obama, the product of ACOWW, to prove they are not 'racist'. Jews are the cancer of Western Civilization. Just like cancer starts small but destroys the whole body, the cancerous new codes of Western Civilization is wreaking havoc on the whole system from within. Software determines the fate of hardware. Even if the hardware of the West is still majority white, the new software written by Jews says the hardware must function against itself. If there is a Terminator machine and if it is reprogrammed to punch itself, it will destroy itself. It's like the US police. Though mostly white, police as social hardware works only in service to the legal software from above. If the software tells the police to go easy on Antifa scum while harshly cracking down on white patriots, the police will do just that. Or consider the hardware of the US military. It is majority white, but the neocon software orders US military to invade and occupy other nations while doing nothing to defend US borders being invaded by endless hordes of migrants. In Israel, the Jewish hardware of police and military are coded by Zionist software that is all about defending and preserving Jewish Power(and projecting it further). In the US, the hardware of the white majority obeys the software of Jewish supremacy. This software says whites must welcome more Diversity and invade more nations at the behest of Israel.
But there is also the visible black superiority factor. No people can survive for long if the men lose self-respect and especially the respect of their women. And the main reason for the demise of white male self-respect is black superiority in sports and pop music. Black superiority in sports also means blacks are tougher in schools. Racial integration means black boys 'pussify' white boys who lose self-esteem and then lose white girls as ho's to black boys. Whites didn't so much drop white 'racism' as adopt black supremacism as their new favored racial worldview. In UK and Ireland, there's a TO SIR WITH LOVE mentality. Whites there feel that they were frigid, repressed, sullen, and gloomy in cloudy and cold northern Europe... but Negroes brought sunshine and warmth with reggae, blues, and rock n roll. In the postwar era, Brits are most proud of their emulations of black music. Black music is their neo-gospel, and that led to wholesale deification of everything black. Jewish war against white 'racism' plus black supremacism in sports led to white worship of blacks. Under Jewish control, whites can no longer defend or champion 'racism'. In the past, when blacks beat white hometown heroes, whites still had a sense of us whites vs them blacks. But such ideas became taboo through the power of media and academia. In other words, not only must European nations welcome blacks but, once blacks beat up hometown athletes and become the new champions, whites must cheer and celebrate blacks as new national champions. An African or Jamaican comes to UK, beats up whites, and white masses cheer for the blacks. How humiliating, but such is the new template for the West.
Often, the Cult of Morality is associative than autonomous. It's not about what you think based on moral reasoning, experience, reflection, and search for truth but how much big your faith is about the Sacred Jews, Noble Negroes, and Holy Homos. It's a variation of what came of Christianity. Over time, it turned into a ritual of association. You could be a bad person, a real scumbag, but as long as you wore your faith in God & Jesus on your sleeve with rituals and rosaries, it meant you're a Good Person. Just say 'Hail Mary' three times. Today, so many people think virtue is about saying Hail Negroes, Hail Jews, or Hail Homos three times or attending 'gay pride' festivals. "I'm a good person because I support the homo rainbow." Or, it doesn't matter how greedy or lowlife you are as long as you profess to especially care about Jews, Jews, Jews — that is the gist of Cuckservative Morality in the US and UK: "We love Jews more than you, more than anyone does." If morality were for real in the US/West, then one's moral concerns should be fair-minded and apply to all of humanity based on set principles. So, if blacks act badly, they should be denounced. If Jews use terror and war to destroy Palestinians and other Arabs, their actions need be denounced. But in the current US/West, you won't get any virtue points by calling out on the victimization of Palestinians or the suffering of non-blacks at the hands of black thugs. There is no moral reasoning in the US. There is only a priori moral idolatry that says Jews, Negroes, and homos are holy and superior. So, even as Jews continue to crush Palestinians and plan to wipe out West Bank as well, the only morality we hear from American Politics is 'We Stand with Israel', though it'd be more accurate to say, "We kneel before Jews as god people." No matter how many nations and peoples Jews destroy with wars, terror, sanctions, and other means, politics of virtue in the West is all about sucking up to Jews and hoping that Jews will bestow benediction on your kind. Because the history of 'antisemitism' was more a right-wing phenom in the West, 'conservatives' atone harder than 'liberals' in their praise of Jews and hope of gaining Jewish approval. This mental habit even infects Jared Taylor even though Jews kick his ass at every turn. Most Jews hate white 'conservatives', but US Conservatism Inc. is all about "ISRAEL, ISRAEL, ISRAEL, JEWS, JEWS, JEWS, can I suck your dic*?" When not Jews, it's about the blacks. Though Thomas Sowell is an interesting thinker, he's not the greatest political philosopher of all time. But because of the Moral Idolatry of the Noble Negro, American 'conservatives' go out of their way to court any black person or praise him to high heaven. So, Sowell gets affirmative action treatment from 'conservatives' who revere him like a black jesus. And the reason why National Review so lavishly praised the new Woody Allen autobiography is because he's Jewish. Allen has been a Liberal Jew all his life who did his share of bashing white people and Conservatives, but white 'conservatives' are so starved for Jewish benediction that they even praise the likes of Woody Allen to high heaven. Gee, maybe just maybe, Woody Allen will become a Neocon or say mildly nice things about 'conservatives' if Conservatism Inc. defends him just when he's being 'canceled' by Liberals. Alan Dershowitz has been supporting Democrats all his life, but the GOP is so happy he sometimes defend Trump because he's a Jew. Never mind Dershowitz is a Jewish-Power-Firster who only pretends to help Trump because he wants Trump to go all in on Ultra-Zionism. American Conservatives have no inner core, no autonomous sense of right and wrong. They are essentially Moral Idolaters, as evinced in their recent pro-homo and even pro-tranny noises. If the Power elevates homos and extols 'gay pride' as a core value of Western Civilization, so many 'conservatives' just go along to prove that they are good people because, better late than never, they are also for 'gay marriage' now and cheer on Lady Maga, some tranny freak who shows up at Charlie Kirk's cuckout events. In America, you get nowhere by saying you love Iranians, even if they are Iranian-Americans who support USA USA USA against current Iran. No one cares if you say you love Hindus or Chinese or Russians or even Mexicans who are now quite numerous. You can go to Minnesota and praise Scandinavian-Americans as among the best, but no one will care, the Scandi-Americans included. If you want moral credit, you gotta gush about Jews, blacks, and homos. It's the equivalent of kissing the Godfather's ring.
This is likely to be very confusing to peoples around the world who profoundly readjust their mental picture of the West. On the one hand, they are told by PC about white privilege, white supremacism, and white evil. But if US and West are ruled by white evil and white supremacism, how come there is so much white-bashing and scape-whiting? If whites are evil and powerful, why would they allow such ceaseless bashing of whites by Jews, blacks, and Diversity? Either whites are evil and powerless OR powerful and self-loathing(than supremacist) because, if indeed whites were all-powerful and very evil, they wouldn't allow all this PC bashing of whites. Of course, it makes sense if one realizes that hostile Jews control the West and guilt-baits whites to keep them browbeaten and servile to Jewish Supremacism that is the real supremacism of current America. But as Jews control the world media, they usually don't discuss Jewish Power and prefer to blame it on Western Whites(when not on Russians, Chinese, Iranians, etc).
So, what are whites up against? It's somewhat different in the US and the EU(and Australia and Canada). In the US, the main threats to whites are the visible superiorities of Jews and blacks. There is a demographic-electoral threat from browns, or Tacoans, but this is mainly due to Jews controlling the media/academia and using bribery to brown politicians. Browns increasingly offer more votes to tip the scale in US politics, but browns themselves have little say in national policy. Browns vote for politicians funded and owned by Jews. Yellow threat to whites is essentially managerial-commissariat. Yellows are not intrinsically anti-white but, due to their servile nature, they gravitate toward obeying and serving the top power, and it happens to be Jewish.
EU at one time had virtually no black problem, but idiot Europeans decided to import them. Europeans, smarting from moral inferiority vis-a-vis the US that saved them from Nazism and Communism, figured they could regain moral capital by welcoming blacks and treating them well in contrast to supposedly evil 'racist' America that has treated blacks as second-class citizens. Europeans got their image of blacks from Hollywood and US media. Also, they remember their domination of Africa when most blacks looked up to whites as god-men. As such, they didn't take blacks seriously and figured a handful of blacks in Europe would be no problem. But even a handful of blacks can lead to black takeover of sports, and so, Europeans began to lose their sports heroes to the African invasion. And then, once blacks became the new face of European manhood, Europeans couldn't say NO to more black immigration/migration since their heroes were black. For example, if blacks in UK are the new British heroes, how could the UK possibly say NO to more blacks, thereby offending heroic blackness? In addition, the black African population explosion became totally out of control. With black African access to cell phones and internet, black Africans learned that Europeans worship blacks, white women got jungle fever, white boys are wussies who cower before the black fist but also worship black power in sports, and most whites prefer black music uber alles. Reggae is the most popular music among European elites, and rap dominates lumpen white charts. Especially with so many white women coming to Africa for sex tourism, black men in Africa all got the Joe Buck fever. Joe Buck in MIDNIGHT COWBOY figures NY men are a bunch of pansies and NY women are all lusty for tall Texan men. Black African men see EU like Joe Buck say NY. They figure they can just go to EU, beat up wussy white boys to impress white girls, and white girls will all be putting out to them. Even if not all black males have such success, they figure it's better to leech off whites than stick around in their own backward black nations. Though Europeans have the means to stop the migration, they don't because they don't have the will, resolve, and sense of identity and unity. The new code of EU programming is Diversity is great and especially Magic Negroes have Midas Touch in liberating the frigid European soul with music, sex, sports, and Mandela-like wisdom. The programming also says there is no greater 'sin' than 'racism', which now includes the mere desire to maintain the racial-demographic integrity of Europe.
So, Europe, which was once blessed with NO BLACK PROBLEM, may well end up with a black problem worse than the one in the US. John Derbyshire said as much. Because US is far away from black Africa, the kind of blacks who make it to America are at least those who get passports and plane tickets. In contrast, any bunch of ragtag blacks can get on boats and get to Europe, especially as European ships(often funded by Jews) drag African boats to European shores even though blacks willfully endanger themselves in the seas just for that purpose. But because the white mind is now so reverential toward blackness as a kind of holiness, it doesn't matter if blacks cynically exploit white compassion. Whites feel nobler for acting in service to the Magic Negro Race.
But one difference is EU isn't threatened demographically by Mexicans/Central Americans/Tacoans. Rather, if there is a demographic threat, it's from Muslims. (Black Africans pose threats of both demographic and idolatrous nature, which makes them more dangerous. A people with idolatrous power can be a threat even if not big in number. This is true of Jews and blacks. Jews are a small minority but so visibly superior in finance and brainy areas that even a few Jews can make a difference. Likewise, black talent in sports and funky music means even just a few blacks can transform the cultural and iconographic ecology of the culture.) Unlike Jews and blacks, Muslims(Arabs, Afghans, Turks, Kurds, Pakistanis, etc) have no visible superiority vis-a-vis whites. They are not tougher than whites or sing/dance better. They are not smarter and cleverer than whites as Jews are. But they got number power as more and more come and have higher birthrate than whites. And in some ways, they may be more dangerous to EU than Tacoans are to the US. While Tacoans are of prehistoric Asiatic origin and mostly Christian, Muslims are mostly Semitic in origin and of a warrior-faith that had long been at war with Christendom. Semitic characteristic and personality is more aggressive than the Asiatic or alt-Asiatic. And Islam is still a cultural force with pride and confidence, something that can't be said for Christianity that is now mostly flaky Catholicism, decadent globo-homo Mainline Protestantism, and dimwit Evangelicalism that cucks to Zion. One look at the current pope, and it doesn't inspire confidence in the future of Christianity as the expression of Western Civilization.
But then, there is a crucial lesson to be learned from Islam as the ONLY solution may be the power of Prophet Production, i.e. the West needs a White Prophet or White Muhammad who can unite whites under heaven. Hitler failed because, for all his kitschy grandiosity, his petty Germanic take on 'Aryanism' alienated and subjugated other whites. Napoleon sought to unite Europe under an idea, but ideology isn't what holds people together. We saw the same fate with communism, an ideology that ran out of gas. Alexander the Great united the Greeks under his force of will, but it was a personality cult that could only last his lifetime. Muhammad's vision outlasted him and is still going strong, and Islam is now a more powerful force than Christianity. While the West is many times richer and more powerful than the Muslim World, Christianity now means nothing. It is materialism, hedonism, and imperialism that now define the essence of the West, and the sheer decadence is rotting the culture from within. Will a white prophet arise? Surely, Jews will fear such a figure more than Herod feared the coming of the Messiah. If such a man arises, it will likely be a member of the white elite who gives up his privilege to lead his people. It's like in TEN COMMANDMENTS. Moses could have chosen to be a privileged cuck prince of the Egyptians than accept his Jewish identity and be a slave, but he chose Jewishness because he became his true self. Most white elites are cuck princes. They love their prizes in their roles as collaborators(or 'collaberals') of the Empire of Judea. But suppose a white man of privilege, intelligence, and vision were to give up his cuck role despite loss of privilege and choose the Mosaic path of leading his people to the promised land with a special covenant for them alone? It's a tantalizing possibility, but such a man would be one in a billion. You never know if and when and where such a man might rise. But when we consider white elites in recent yrs, it sure doesn't inspire confidence. Macron, Hollande, Paul Ryan, Mitt Romney, Billy Boy Clinton, George W. Bush, Joe Biden, Pete Buttboyig, and etc. As for the business class, the likes of Elon Musk and Bill Gates may be smart but they seem to be of space cadet mentality. Could one rise from the White Left? White Left is pretty retarded with PC. White Right? If the face of White Left is Michael Moore the fat moose, the face of White Right is Alex Jones the mush-head. Alt Right crashed and burned with Richard Spencer shrieking that the world should look up at a face like his. Too many 007 movies with that one. But who knows?
But one thing for sure, existence comes before all else. White people must secure their existence before anything else is possible. It's like life itself. While a person doesn't live only for raw basic existence, he must first secure his existence before he can have values, principles, or ideology. If your house is burning, your only priority is to get out of there or stop the fire. It'd be stupid to sit on the sofa and read a book and think about ideas. You can do that once you are safe and alive.
Same goes for the white race. It is now under threat from so many quarters. Jews have taken over the domain of the white mind. Western institutions that used to serve as the brain-nerve center of white civilization are now owned by Jews who've programmed the Western hardware with malware-software. Fish rots from the head. The effect has been profound. Jewish influence taught whites that they don't own their own minds and don't deserve autonomy and agency. No, whites must not think in terms of white identity, white interests, and white survival. Whites must feel that their souls and bodies exist to serve Jews. As whiteness has been denied — Jews are Whiteness Deniers — , whites aren't allowed to think in terms of shared white property or white ownership. So, white souls belong to Jews, and white bodies belong to blacks. White male butts exist to be kicked by blacks, and white female wombs exist to have black babies. White women no longer belong to white men because Jews say whiteness is bogus and have no claim to anything, not even to its own history. Mark Zuckerberg's sister and many scholars say white history never existed. White bodies also exist to kill and die for Jewish Supremacism. White bodies also exist to be opioid guinea pigs so that Jewish dynasties can grow filthy rich. White conquests no longer belong to whites. Even though whites went about conquering and building America, Canada, and Australia, they must share it with the world. Do Jews insist on this out of generosity toward humanity? No, it is to increase goy diversity so that Jewish elites can play divide-and-rule over fractured dimwit goyim. It is also to mix the races because Jews know that mixed-race person is confused and have no real identity(except in the case of one-drop black rule in the US, UK, and Canada). While whiteness is denied, Jewishness is affirmed historically, culturally, spiritually, and genetically. And because Jewishness is an affirmed and consecrated identity, the false identity of whiteness must serve the genuine identity of Jewishness... or so Jews say. Jewishness is a name with meaning. Whiteness is a mark, like the mark of Cain. It is no longer a name of a people with identity and history. According to the TV mini-series SHOGUN, only the samurai had names in traditional Japan. The lower castes were called by their functions in society: blacksmith, potter, cook, carpenter, and etc., which is why the white ship captain played by Richard Chamberlain is called 'anjin-san', meaning sailor or some such. In the New Order, whites are to fixate on their functional usefulness to society, especially to Jews and blacks, but they are not to think of their racial-cultural identity. A Jewish doctor can be proud of his profession and his identity, but a white doctor must only focus on his social function and never think of his whiteness(except as a mark, a stain, a blot, like the scar carved into the head of the cosmo-nazi in INGLORIOUS BASTERDS). This is why whites have a difficult time waking up to secure their own existence. They are under the spell of Jewish whiteness-denying sorcerers who regard white people as mere commodities or zombies to control. This is why so many whites prioritize ideas over identity, explication over existence. While the white world is fast dissolving(and may fade away for good in several generations), so many whites are either obsessed with ideas like 'diversity' or 'inclusion' OR with idols of the Other, especially the Negroes as the black muscle/dong now defines Western Manhood and black booty/voice now defines Western music. Notice there was a time when white women had their own singing styles, but so many today just try to imitate Negresses and twerk their white buns like black buns having sex with black men.
Power dynamics often works like chemistry. Anti-white forces are so powerful because of the chemical unity of Jewish brains and Black brawn. If whites had to deal only with Jews or only with blacks, anti-white agenda would be far less effective. In a world without blacks, Jews could only rely on wit to run circles around whites. While this can go far, it has limits. In a world without Jews, black power would only go so far as whites would control the narrative. It's like Jews can get away with what they've done to Palestinians because they control the media and Narrative. When Jack Johnson was beating up whites, whites still controlled the Narrative and got the message across that whites must unite in power. Jews knew they could beat whites in brains but not in brawn. This is why Jews relied on the black body to act as the battering ram against white male pride. After all, even when a 'big dumb polac*' is outwitted by a Jewish nerd, he can still get angry and beat up the Jew. He can still play the role of Tough Guy. But what if the Jew calls on the Negro to beat up the white guy and reduce him to a pussy boy? That way, whites not only lose mentally to Jews but physically to blacks. If blacks provide the body for Jewish brains, Jews provide the brains for black bodies. Because Jews and blacks are so different, they aren't natural friends, but given that both have so much to gain from control of whitey, they've developed a symbiotic relationship. People say love unites the world, but hate(or fear) is also a great force for unity. Jews and blacks don't really like each other, but their hate/fear of whites(or potential white power) brings them together. It's like China and Russia are more natural rivals than natural friends, but the belligerence of US as lone superpower has brought them together. Their current fear(bordering on hatred) of the US has turned them into temporary friends.
Jews understand the chemistry of power. It's like alloys make for stronger metals. The current power is an alloy of Jewish brains and black brawn. It's like Jewish brains control and manage pop culture & pornography and hire black stars & studs to replace white males as the symbols of manhood in the West. So, whites must ponder the chemical 'alloyance' of power. It's like the movie MY BODYGUARD where the brainy nerd forms a pact with some big tough guy. Blacks are the bouncers of Jews, and white manhood totally got bounced and trounced.
Jewish control of the Narrative and Idolatry/Iconography has led to white people seeing Jews and especially blacks as sacred symbols than humans. Humans are flawed characters, and some races are more problematic than others. Blacks are among the most problematic. But whites are often to black pathologies because blacks have been portrayed as symbols of suffering, oppression, poverty, nobility, athleticism, entertainment, sexual liberation, and etc. As symbols, blacks grab the lead role in the Narrative. Blacks are stars whereas others are just extras. So, if non-blacks get killed by blacks, it's treated like a scene in an action movie where the hero just blows away nobodies. It's like no one cares when Stormtroopers are killed in STAR WARS. People only care when the leading stars are killed. This is why one dead Negro creates such giant waves in the news media while all those non-blacks killed by black thugs get hardly any attention. There was so much fuss about the 'gentle giant' Michael Brown, but there was nothing about those whites beaten or killed by black thugs hollering BLM. But then, it's the same with Jews and Muslims. Even few dead Jews are a big news story, whereas 100,000s of dead Muslims in Wars for Israel are just a statistic.
So, as long as the New Whiteness is about pathetic cuckery to Jewish power and Black savagery, the world would be better if white genocide happened because whites, as cuck janissary of Jews and blacks, will do great damage to the world. Unless whites seek white liberation from Jewish and black supremacism and act in white interests, the world may be doomed. If white liberation becomes a thing, it could serve as a template for all nations of the world in saying NO to Jewish and black monstrosity(and globo-homo degeneracy). It is because the white world said YES to those things that whiteness had come to serve as a bridge of Jewish/black supremacism around the world. Whites in cuck mode are spreading goy cuckery as the new model for all nations. This is what Jews want as their grand ambition is to gain dominance in all nations. Indeed, consider the sheer bitterness of Jews over Russia restoring some degree of national autonomy from Jewish globalist supremacism. Jews seethe with rage. If white liberation fails, the white bridge must be blown up like the one in BRIDGE ON RIVER KWAI.
Do Tacoans and yellows have visible superiorities? Tacoans certainly not. Even though Tacoans may have certain invisible superiorities or advantages better suited to habitation in what was once Meso-America, they don't stand out in anything. What about yellows? Isn't there the matter of IQ, equal to whites or perhaps slightly higher, that has led to Asian over-representation in education and profession? True, but intelligence isn't inherently a striking or visible superiority or advantage UNLESS it is wedded to verbal firepower, strong personality, gift for wit, powerful identity, and prophetic reach. This is where Jews have been advantageous over Episcopalians even though both groups are equal in having the highest IQs in the world. Jews got blood and soul, Episcopalians are(or have become) colorless and bland. In personality, yellows are more like Episcopalians... or even like Tacoans and American Indians, not least because all three groups are genetically linked. Also, the submissive culture and style of Asians prevents them from being prophetic in reach and vision. Even yellow 'rage' in the US is just pale imitation of 'woke' PC crap, just like all those Red Guards were must mini-me bots of Mao. Consider two prominent Asian-American scholars, Francis Fukuyama and Amy Chua, and both are toadies of Jewish Power. Japanese-Americans, like Episcopalians, have become a high-achieving individuals who vanish and fade as a People. Korean toadies used to become ardent Christians when the US was white/Christian, but they are now toadies of Jews and globo-homo since their way is to follow the big boss on the strong horse. Chinese might be somewhat different because there are many more of them than other kinds of Asians. And Canada and Australia should worry about the Chinese demographic threat because their core white populations are much smaller than that of the US. But I don't see Chinese making much of an impact in the US as too many Chinese women marry white/Jewish men and too many Chinese lack a powerful enough personality to use their intelligence in macro ways. Also, even though Chinese have more historical/cultural pride than other East Asians — they used to call their civilization the Middle Kingdom after all — , the core Chinese outlook is essentially the same as those of other Asians: To serve the top power. Indeed, consider the shameless cuckery of Hong Kong Chinese who happily worked with the Brits against China. Most Chinese in the US have switched loyalties to the lone superpower, especially as they have more opportunities here than there. Also, even if yellows do well in engineering, tech, and other brainy fields, such skills are invisible to most people. While people benefit more from achievements in engineering and scientific research, most people care more about sensation than cognition and don't get excited about who invented what medicine or worked on what building project. Indeed, if Jewish IQ really made a difference, it's less in science than in humor, verbal arts, big personalities, and prophetic talk — also, in combining Jewish finance and Jewish networking with Jewish science/tech. While Albert Einstein and Oppenheimer became a 'meme', most Jewish scientists who did great things for humanity go unknown, indeed even by most educated folks. In ethnic-white high schools in the past, Jewish kids were better students but the school heroes were big dumb 'Polac*' jocks on the football team(before the Negroes took over). Bill Gates said geeks win bigger in the end, but there is no love for them because most geeks, Steve Jobs notwithstanding, lack charisma and visceral qualities. Though Jews didn't exactly have charisma, they had 'caricarisma' that made them endearing as, for example, the Marx Brothers, Woody Allen, Mel Brooks, and Seinfeld. Because yellows lack even 'caricarisma'(though, oddly enough, some Asians seem to have it in Asian, especially Hong Kong, entertainment), their IQ advantage remains invisible.
It is precisely because yellows lack visible superiorities that non-Asians of all color resent Asian success in education and profession. Why should a people who seem so loser-like and 'lame'(like the Tacoans) gain such success in key areas? If blacks were acing all the exams and were over-represented in Ivy Leagues, most people would be happy to take in as many blacks as possible because they are regarded, subconsciously and sensually, as the superior race. Besides, blacks would be vocal and violent enough to holler and make threats if indeed 'diversity' was invoked to limit black enrollment. But it seems wrong that there too many Asians in elite colleges. It's like the inside memo among Ivy League colleges that said Asians have inferior personalities. In other words, they are viscerally lame and therefore undeserving of too many elite slots. Another factor that plays against the threat of Yellow Peril is it is perfectly fine to bash Asians. No one gets penalized for blaming China, Japan, or whatever Asian nation. Even as Democrats criticize Trump for overt China-bashing, they too have their own variations of Blame the Lame. After all, most media are run by globalists, 'liberals', & Jews, and the news are filled with alarmism about the Evil Dragon; in the 80s, it was Evil Japan, with Hollywood 'liberal' Jews making something like RISING SUN, which is like "Jap Suss". Likewise, so-called 'liberals' in Hollywood will denounce Trump for 'Islamophobia' even though they were the ones who made all those movies about Evil 'muzzies' that filled so many American minds with images of Muslims and Arabs as nothing but terrorists and crazies.
Still, HBD or WRSS should worry about Chinese in Australia and Canada. As Sun Tzu said, water flows into open spaces while going around obstacles. If the cucky Anglo elites of Canada and Australia put up Welcome Signs that says, "All You Can Feet" to Chinese(and Hindus), why wouldn't the big fat dragon and big fat elephant — India could now be the most populous nation — not send their millions upon millions to those nations? India would surely love to dump at least 300 million people on other nations. Not only will India still have a billion left but their current birthrate will soon create 300 million more. In a way, Hindus may turn out to be more of a threat to whites simply because they are less submissive than yellows. Unlike yellows whose minds are hardwired to follow the Big Boss on the Strong Horse(even if of the Other), Hindus are rather like Jews in their conviction of rich history-culture-identity-spirituality that transcends temporal powers and concerns. So, even as Hindus may seem to play toady and collaborator, there is a part of them rubs their hands like the Happy Merchant and plans to turn the world Hindu-centric, aka the Planet of the Apu. Actually, I can think of worse things than a Hindu-dominant planet, but if people want to have their hamburgers, it's something to think about.
HBD or WRSS must address the problem from an inferiority angle. To understand much of the world, one needs to understand the superiorist attitude and inferiorist attitude. Surely, people and things seem different when they appear inferior or superior. Just like dog A feels and acts differently with inferior dog B and superior dog C, people's views are always modulating in accordance to inferior/superior dynamics. Now, much of this is subconscious and emotional than conscious or ideological. After all, we've all been instilled with the ideology of equality. We are told everyone has rights and is deserving of equal dignity. So, consciously, many people want to look upon everyone as equally valuable. We don't teach kids to treat pretty people better than ugly people. We don't say smart people should look down on dumb people. And we don't tell ugly people to feel hatred or resentment against pretty people, and we don't tell dumb people to envy and hate smart people. But in fact, pretty people do feel superior to ugly people, and ugly people do feel resentment. And smart people do feel contempt for dumb people, and dumb people do feel resentment for the smarties who make more money. While liberalism is valuable in recommending that we all be more tolerant and accepting of differences, it doesn't really get at the true ways of human nature. To understand such, we need neo-fascism, the most honest and unrestrained exploration of human nature and the nature of power.
But for how long can whites rely on flight superiority? It's like what Joe Louis said, "You can run but you can't hide." Eventually, whites will run out of hiding places. Also, via Section 8, Jews and globalists mean to ship urban blacks into white small towns and suburbs to make more place in cities for 'gentric cleansers'. Jews also want black boys to emasculate white suburban boys and sexually conquer white suburban girls. White Flight has been workable in maintaining safe white communities, but it's not a long-term fix. It's the mentality of prey. Prey doesn't fight the predators but merely flee. Of course, white flight will be even more useless in European nations like France, Holland, and UK due to limited space as tens of millions of black Africans come barging into Europe. But even in the US, it is becoming less effective due to the War on Suburbs by urban globo-homo elites. Now, it's understandable why whites have relied on superiority of flight than the fight. Why not make more money and just move to nicer areas and forget about black crime?
Besides, the only way whites can win the fight against blacks is by collective action, but this is now called 'lynching'. Whereas blacks can beat whites on a one-on-one basis, whites can only win when they unite together. It's like a wild pig usually loses to a lone leopard but can kill it with the help of other wild pigs. It's like a lone wolf is no match to a bear, but a pack of wolves can kill a bear. In the past, this is the way whites won the fight against blacks. They formed packs and fought against black thugs. Today, blacks not only beat whites one-on-one but as packs as black violence is always justified as 'rebellion against 400 yrs of oppression'. One problem is whites never properly justified their pack fighting style. If wolves could talk, they would explain, "we gotta fight as a pack because a lone wolf will be demolished by a single cougar or bear." Whites should have made a similar case. Because blacks are more muscular and more aggressive, they can beat up whites. So, the ONLY way to fight back is for whites to have racial consciousness, sense of unity, and form packs against black thugs. But white male pride never could admit to this. And so, white pack violence just seemed like ugly lynch-mob mentality when, in fact, it was the only effective way to confront the monstrous Negro. And then, there was the Enlightenment truism that said all races were, more or less, alike, and it is the free individual that really counts. So, while it'd be honorable for an individual to beat another individual fair and square, it'd be wrong for a group to fight an individual. But such individualist ideal of the fight favored blacks because not all races are equal in certain attributes. Many more black individuals can beat up white individuals. So, a fair fight among individuals is nearly impossible between blacks and whites. It'd be like calling for a fair fight between men and women. If you can't win individually, you must win as a pack. Whites being smarter than blacks, this should be rather obvious to figure out. But people's minds are often clouded by pride, shame, taboos, and naivete. It's like Germans and Japanese are a smart people, but too many dared not speak the truth that could have avoided the disasters of WWII. But this is a problem among Jews too. If there is another holocaust in the future, it will have been because Jews just couldn't stop in their pathological contempt, arrogance, subversion, degradation, and obnoxiousness, but Jews today are so high on their own fumes of self-aggrandizement("we are so special") and self-pity("we are the biggest victims of all time") that they are utterly blind to how loathsome they've become.
Anyway, the option of white flight made too many whites complacent. They figure, "If things get bad, I will just move to a whiter place." But such attitude is really shameful. It's worse than American Indians fleeing from the white man. At least Indian put up a fight and lost. In contrast, whites are just being cowards. Besides, with massive African immigration, whites will have to deal with even more blacks. Also, with Section 8 housing and decline of white middle class, white flight isn't such an option anymore. With fewer opportunities, fewer whites will be able to afford white flight. Meanwhile, government will ship blacks to more white communities. And as black rap culture is now white culture as well, it will lead to more white male cuckery and more jungle fever. White kids will end up like the ones in the movies SPECTACULAR NOW and THIRTEEN, not least because Jews in the media are pushing interracism and blame-white-male full throttle.
So, it is about time whites seriously and vocally addressed their issues of inferiority. Where are they inferior to Jews and blacks, and how can they compensate for these inferiorities? That is the ESSENCE of evolution and survival. Every creature has superiorities and inferioritites. Also, superiorities and inferiorities go together as an advantage in one area often makes for disadvantage in another. It's like cheetahs are faster than lions and leopards but weaker. It's like cats are fearsome predators but have small hearts and not much stamina. Birds have wings but no effective fore-limbs on the ground. Jews, in having bred for intelligence, didn't do much for brawn. Blacks, in having bred for brawn, didn't do much for intelligence. Jews know this. They know they're inferior in physicality, so they used wit to gain power. Blacks sense this too, which is why they rely more on muscle. Granted, unlike Jews who really do know about racial differences in IQ but pretend not to, blacks are so lacking in self-awareness that they are stupid enough to believe that they all be geniuses but not recognized as such cuz of 'racism and shi*'. It's like Michelle Obama, a real dodo, thinking she graduated from Princeton and Harvard cuz she really is hot academic stuff.
Anyway, it'd be stupid for Jews to neglect brains and try to win with brawn. Jews know their own inferiorities. They know they are demographically just a minority, only 2% of America. They know they are physically closer to Woody Allen than the Chain Gang Negro in TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN who wants to see Miss Eliza. And so, Jews decided to focus on their advantages to gain maximum power. That's how organisms properly operate in the world of competition.
Then, whites must do likewise, but first, they need a strong identity. After all, what does it matter if whites are advantaged or disadvantaged IF they don't even consider themselves as part of a race, culture, history, heritage, and territory? Why does a slave-owner act in his own interest whereas a slave doesn't? Because the master has an identity, a sense of 'my interests', and a name/title. In contrast, slaves barely have names. They've been raised to believe they exist to serve the master. A slave has no autonomous identity or agency. Being a nothing on his own, he has to serve someone who has an identity. This is why Jews tell whites that there is no such thing as whiteness as identity or interests. It's the biggest enslavement in human history, and it's been done through mental colonization. Jews don't put whites in chains and make them pick cotton, but Jewish formulated PC has taught whites that they are without an identity, a history, a territory, a culture, a justification for their own interests. As such, everything white exists to be bought and sold by others, and whites exist to serve others, especially Jews, Negroes, and Homos. Tony Montana in SCARFACE says, you gotta get the money, then the power, and then the woman. In a similar way, whites need to get or regain an identity, get liberation from Jewish supremacism, and then white power to secure existence of their people.
Intelligent Dasein speaks of metaphysics, but in wartime, meat-a-physics is what matters. If you're white, why are you so? Because the white meat of your father met the white meat of your mother. The meat must meet for there to be life. For there to be white people, white meat must meet white meat. If your mother's white meat met black meat, you wouldn't be white but a Negro due to the one-drop rule and the moral honor of being a Negro in America. There needs to be more talk about 'meata' than 'meta'. And more about metal than meta as war is about the clash of swords.
In THE GODFATHER, Tom Hagen is a good consiglieri, but he's not a wartime consiglieri. He has the brains but not the balls. He has the sight but not the vision. He'd be fine if peace reigned among the Families, but when war breaks out he's not the man for the job. He's calculating but without killer instinct. Of course, Sonny Corleone is a bad don, but the problem with Hagen is everything is 'business' with him. Michael understands the art of 'business', but he knows the sons of the clan simply cannot treat the attempt on the father as mere 'business'. They must take it 'personally'. And the current crisis of the War is about existence above all. It is 'personal', or 'tribal'. White people must respond to attack on whites like Michael responded to the attack on his father. It's about war for keeps, war for survival, war for existence. Then, we need Wartime Terminology, Wartime Strategy, Wartime Mentality. Just like there is peacetime economy and wartime economy, we need wartime ideology. But most whites are now like Fredo(who is kicked around by Moe Green and the like).
I can't help thinking the white race is doomed unless it is able to birth prophets. (What would the Jews have been without Moses?) Without prophetic or Big-Think power, micro-minded whites will always be led by the nose by macro-minded Jews with deep tradition of prophetism. There are three kinds of power. Convenience, Conversion, and Convulsion. Whites are still prominent in Convenience — the invention and advancement of technologies to make life easier and more comfortable —, but people using the things of convenience don't think about them. Modern Plumbing is one of the greatest achievements of mankind, but how many people speak words of gratitude when they use the sink or sit on a toilet? The air conditioner made human habitation in places that are overly humid or arid, but how many TV specials or monuments are there about the inventors and innovators of air conditioning? Japanese made some of the best electronic products, but how many thank the Japanese when they watch their Sony TV sets? Even the Wright Brothers, who invented flight, are being written out of history books. Most people get most worked up over Convulsion of sports, pop music, Hollywood movies, videogames, and sex(if they can get it). People get MOST EXCITED about such things, which are increasingly dominated by Negroes who turn white manhood into jelly. But Convulsion has its own weakness. Like fireworks, it is intense but short-lived. It's like meth-users feel a super-high but not for long. Also, convulsive experiences often lead people down the wrong path. Gangstas may feel badass but many die young. Excessive sex leads to burnout and disease, not to mention bad reputation. 'Twerking' as culture has caught like wildfire, but is anyone really proud of such behavior? Many hedonists later turn to God. Roosh the ex-pickup artist now has a monkish beard and claims to serve Jesus.
Convenience isn't enough. Geeks may make electronic devices, but consumers are not watching or honoring geeks on them. Superhero movies are made by geeks but they are about ultra-super-duper-men. Convulsion of entertainment is fantasy, and convulsion of sports is dominated by blacks. Then, what should whites focus on? The power of Conversion. The reason why the future of Europe is coming down to a battle between the Jungle and Jihad is blacks dominate Convulsion whereas Muslims got the power of Conversion. In the short-term, Convulsion has the advantage. It's like the dynamism of sprints. But in the long-term, Conversion has the advantage. It's like Muhammad Ali was a super-athlete in his prime, but his body eventually failed, and all he had left was faith in Allah. Conversion is like the marathon. It is for the long march of history. Conversion is the product of not only intelligence and knowledge but prophetic vision and strong personality. Germans proved that white goy prophetism is possible. There was Richard Wagner as visionary artist. Friedrich Nietzsche, Oswald Spengler, and Martin Heidegger. And it was in the Germanic world that modern Jews came up with their biggest ideas. Tragically, it led to Hitler and WWII. This is why Jews have been eager to snuff out all embers of white propheticism lest whites reignite the agency of Conversion to rival that of the Jews. But at this point, there is no other way.