It would be nice to have centrism, but the only kind of centrism that works is macro-centrism, the Goldilocks Rule. But in an order where Jews control the gods and the money — they have both the sacred cows and piggy banks, the golden calf — , we can only have micro-centrism. But micro-centrism is pretty useless as it's centered on a very narrow Overton Window.
If we could be macro-centrist, we can choose the warm between very hot and very cold. Earth has life because it's positioned ideally from the Sun. It's not too close, it's not too far away. And in most human affairs, the macro-center is usually ideal. It's like we want something between totalitarian tyranny and anarcho-chaos. We don't want ultra-statism, but human nature isn't suited for total freedom either. People want something between slavery and savagery. Slavery ensures order but erases freedom. Savagery allows freedom, but it's law of the jungle. In a sane, sound, free, and rational order, most people will choose the center. They don't want the far right or the far left. They don't want a theocracy that burns heretics at the stake, but they don't want radical atheist tyranny where the religious are persecuted and sent to Gulag either. Most people want an order where people are free to believe or not to believe. Let the atheists not believe, and let the religious worship. Most people say no to both ultra-libertarianism and Leninism. Most people want something between pacifism and militarism. Pacifism is too weak and naive, and militarism is overly aggressive and addicted to war. Most people want national defense and a military that is powerful but also ethical.
For there to be macro-centrism, there must be no sacred cows. The only sacred cow that has proven historical worth is nationalism, but a centrist-nationalism at that, one that is neither imperialist nor isolationist. In an order defined by sacred cows, the range of options is severely limited. For instance, in a theocratic order, all must worship God, and heretics must be purged/persecuted. Thus, there can only be micro-centrism, one between ultra-theocracy and moderate-theocracy. But either way, the system is theocratic and repressive towards atheists and those who worship the 'wrong' gods(or belong to banned sects). This was true of the ideocracy of communism where everything and everyone had to be communist. One couldn't choose between extreme communism and extreme capitalism, thereby arriving at the macro-centrism of something like a social-democracy or mixed-economy. Communism was the law of the land, so only micro-centrism was possible, the one between ultra-communism and moderate-communism. But even moderate-communism, though not as murderous and tyrannical, supported the eradication of private property and enforced statist control over most things. It was like choosing between extreme-hot and very hot than between hot and cold. Or between icy cold and very cold. Micro-centrism is choice within an extreme order. It's the middle between very extreme and pretty extreme.
In regards to Jews, Homos, and Negroes, a macro-centrist position would be best. This would acknowledge Jews as a talented and special people in history but also a problematic one. With this centrist position, Jews would be given their due and allowed to be high-achievers. But especially because they're bound to accumulate more wealth and influence than other groups, they would come under close scrutiny and criticism. It would be a centrist position between demented Antisemitism that sees nothing good about Jews and/or blames Jews for everything AND retarded Philosemitism that sees nothing bad about Jews and/or blames goyim for whatever's wrong with Jews. Such macro-centrist position would reject both pathological Nazism and pathetic Pozzism. Nazism brought about hell-on-earth, but the current 'pozzed' cucky-wuckery is doing irreparable harm as unchecked Jewish Power is growing as cancerous as radical Teutonism unchecked.
But Macro-Centrist position on Jews is impossible in the US because Jews control the gods and made themselves sacred and worthy of worship(and even compulsory to worship). Thus, only a Micro-Centrist position is possible as the perspective on Jews is limited in range from totally gushing mouth-open worship to slightly critical respect & reverence. As Jews are sacred cows, it's heretical to express any view truly critical of Jews as a people, power, or culture. Thus, the range of discussion about Jews is from 110% pro-Jewish to 98% pro-Jewish. Thus, only micro-centrism is possible, which would be 104% pro-Jewish. Perversely enough, the most pro-Jewish voices tend to be from white 'conservatives' whereas the slightly critical voices are from white 'liberals', blacks, and Jews themselves. This seems rather odd considering that Jewish Power is most hostile to American Conservatism, but it makes sense given Jews are like the gods. If Jews are indeed divine and godly, then those disfavored by them must go the extra-mile to prove their worth at the feet of Jews. It's like a slave rebuked by the master will make an extra effort to win back approval. Dogs are the same way. The dog that is punished by the master will try harder to earn affection and prove it's a GOOD dog.
If Jews didn't control gods and weren't sacred cows, White Conservatives would have a sounder approach toward them. Jewish Power would be handled rationally. If Jews are anti-white, then whites shouldn't support Jews or Jewish causes. If Jews want white support, whites would negotiate for Jewish support for white interests. A free man bargains with a free man. Man makes counter-demands on Man: "I scratch your back, you scratch my back." It's give-and-take, not take-and-take. That's how a free and independent man deals with another free and independent man. But, a slave isn't allowed to bargain with his master. The master commands, the slave obeys. The current Jewish-White relations resemble that of master-and-slave than man-and-man. Actually, it's worse. After all, a slave can be soul-free even if body-bound. A soul-free slave serves the master in body but not in spirit. He sees the master for what he is: a tyrant. He obeys but doesn't respect, let alone worship, the master. In contrast, worship is about soul-slavery. Man doesn't merely obey God or gods but worships Him or them. Even when God or gods seem unjust, He or they must be revered because He or they are divine and far above man. When Solzhenitsyn was a slave in the Gulag, he was soul-free. The state controlled his body, but his spirit was his own. And this could be said of many who toiled in Nazi captivity. Body-slaves but not soul-slaves. But what we now have in the US is truly sick and dangerous. Whites are soul-slaves of Jews, and as Jews control the gods and demand that all goyim worship whatever Jews favor, whites have also become soul-slaves of homos and Negroes. Whites now fly 'gay' flags in churches and wash the stinky feet of cackling lip-smacking blacks. When blacks attack whites, whites no longer react with righteous rage but tell themselves that they've been justly punished. Negrovah(or negro-jehovah) has the right to smite thee!
A sane macro-centrist position is possible for blacks and homos. In regards to blacks, one can choose the middle road between cursing them as wildass savage looney-bin bunners who should be chained and made to pick cotton AND worshiping them as awesome magical black christs who suffered nobly and deserve worship for their prowess with song-and-dong. One can acknowledge the tragic history of the Atlantic Slave Trade and the contributions to America by black labor and creativity. But at the same time, one could argue all of history has been tragic — how many Germanic barbarians were killed by Roman legions, how many Persians perished at the hands of Mongols, how many Poles died in World War II, etc? — and black suffering was hardly unique.
Furthermore, notwithstanding the fact of racial oppression and discrimination in US history, it must be said the current black problems owe more to evolution than history. Does anyone really believe US would have the same racial problems if it had enslaved South American brown natives or Chinese to pick cotton? Them folks are physically smaller and weaker than whites; they are not naturally aggressive like blacks. In a sane and rational order, a macro-centrist position on blacks would reject both the idea that black savages should be enslaved and the idea that blacks had a uniquely tragic history and are worthy of worship because they can bellow louder, dunk the ball better, and go wild with buns/dongs. (One wonders about the state of American Culture when it proudly promotes 'twerking', a black bun-dong dance, as a signature achievement, and one wonders about the world that readily welcomes such a thing.) Macro-centrism on blacks would place responsibility on both whites and blacks to improve matters. Whites should know the history of slavery & racial discrimination and show some sensitivity in that regard. And blacks would admit that their American experience was as elevating as well as degrading. Sure, they were called 'ni**er' and made to pick cotton, but they also went from savagery in the Dark Continent to considerable cultural advancement under whites. Indeed, even black moral denunciation of white moral failures is premised on Western Morality that concluded slavery to be not only wrong but evil. Blacks bitch about reparations, but compare blacks in America to blacks who remained in Africa. Even if blacks got less than whites in America, they got much more than blacks in Africa got on their own.
Also, if whites must try to be fair with blacks, blacks must also realize that non-blacks have good reasons to fear blacks. Indeed, their reasons aren't much different from black reasons for fearing other blacks. Blacks know fellow blacks commit the most crime and cause the most trouble. So, if blacks feel this way about other blacks, why wouldn't non-blacks feel the same way(especially as they're physically weaker than blacks)?
But such macro-centrism isn't forbidden because blacks are sacred cows. Thus, the only range of discussion regarding blacks is between Magic Negro Worship(whereby even a lowlife moron like George Floyd is consecrated as a saint) and "We Conservatives LOVE blacks, and Democrats are the real racists." So, even as blacks, with the encouragement of Democrats, were burning down cities and wreaking havoc, there was the pathetic Donald Trump singing paeans to George Floyd the black angel. Or, Conservatism Inc. was pretending that the main instigators of violence were Antifa or Communists. And when BLM riots got too crazy even for Democrats, there was talk that, gee, maybe it was Russia that was fueling the violence. With Negroes as sacred-cows, only micro-centrism is allowed, i.e. seeking a middle path between seeing blacks as awesome dudes and seeing blacks as just the most wonderful folks. It's between blacks-as-gods and blacks-as-angels. So, what about the reality of blacks acting like thugs, louts, and lunatics? As blacks must be regarded as gods or angels, their violence must either be ignored('teens' or 'youths' did it) or morally justified as righteous punishment upon a 'systemically racist' and 'white supremacist' nation. Man argues with Man, and Man negotiates with Man, but Man cannot argue or negotiate with God or gods. Before the gods, man must grovel, plead, and make offerings of appeasement. There aren't enough blacks in America to conquer-and-bonquer White America, so why are whites acting this way? It's because they've been made into soul-slaves of blacks under Jewish Rule. Jews control the gods, and they used the media/academia to sanctify blacks into angels/gods. The result is so many whites sucking up to blacks. MLK is now bigger than god and jesus. It's like the only choice is between extremely hot and very hot. There is no warm middle between the hot and cold views of blacks. Imagine someone who insists we must judge him as anything between awesome and great. With 'awesome' and 'great' as the two opposites, what would be the middle, the (micro)centrist position? Very great or Almost awesome. What about him being bad, dirty, lowdown, lousy, and vile? Forget about it!
Same goes for Homos. The macro-centrist view of homo is surely ideal. It would be between seeing homos as a bunch of totally dangerous & demented degenerates who should be stoned to death like the Good Book says AND celebrating & revering them as angels-on-earth radiating with holiness & wisdom(because, of course, sodomy, aka homo-fecal-penetration, is oh-so-wonderful and tranny-penis-cutting-and-vagina-mutilation is so very edifying). In truth, homosexuality exists in nature. Some people are born that way, and it's not a matter of mental illness that can be 'cured'. So, the sensible thing is to let homos be homo and do their own thing. But, at the same time, let's not pretend 'homosexuality' has EQUAL worth with real sexuality. A dong up the bung is not real sex and never created a single life. Also, if homos are so sure their form of 'sexuality' has equal value, then let them create their own children via homo-fecal-penetration or lesbian-poon-grinding. (But then, we are way past pretending homosexuality has equal value with real sexuality. We must pretend it is higher and superior, even holy and 'spiritually' uplifting. Your average proglodyte is more likely to find personal 'meaning' in praising the homo than by praying to God.) Homosexuality is a natural phenomenon but a natural abnormality, like dwarfism and Mongoloidism(aka Down's Syndrome). Nature, like everything else, is often defective. It's like some kids are born deaf or blind. But we don't celebrate such things. So, why did we end up celebrating homosexuality? One reason is the obsession with power and success. Homos have certain traits that drive them to achieve more on average, especially in fingerish fields such as fashion and nimble creativity. Homos also tend to be more vain, and this fuels their ambition and drive. The other reason is Jewish Power that has decided to use the World Gayry as agents of World Jewry. (Homo advantages are understandable. Deficiencies in nature often lead to advantages in other areas. Blind people develop more acute sense of hearing and smell.)
Now, we can give homosexuality its due as many of the great artists and achievers in history have been homo. There's no reason to go around shouting 'God Hates F*gs'. But whatever advantages homos may possess and whatever civilization may owe to homosexuality, there's no getting around the fact that homosexuality, especially among the man, is gross and sickly. A male reproductive organ up the fecal organ? Dong meets Dung? And it makes no biological sense, especially considering sexuality is about reproduction? Homos may have an edge in creativity, but it's not the same thing as creation. It's like no painting of a flower or sunset, however well done, can match the real thing, which was created by the cosmos or by God(for those who believe).
So, we can arrive at a sensible macro-centrist position on homosexuality. But under Jewish Rule, homos are holy, another bunch of sacred cows. It's gotten so that we can't even blame the AIDS disaster on homo behavior. (How can we when we are told everything associated with homos is so wonderful? Out-of-control homo behavior lead to disease and death? What are you, a 'homophobe'?) In the past, especially prior to the boomer takeover of power, the US had a sane position on homosexuality. Most Americans came to accept the real science on homos. They were no longer seen as Sodomites fit for stoning or mentally-ill people scarred by childhood trauma(based on Freudian theory) but as people who just happen to be born tooty-ish with weird 'sexual' leanings. Most Americans came to accept this and were willing to let homos be homos, and leave it at that. But as Jewish Power became ascendant in the US, Jews pushed for political rhyming between Jewish Power and Homo Power. Filled with megalomania, Jews weren't satisfied with Macro-Centrism that saw Jews as humans than as devils or gods. Jews insisted on being seen as gods, and to buttress the conceit of the special-minority-elite as sacred cows, they chose homos as their partners-in-crime. So, just as it became increasingly difficult to speak frankly about Jews and their power, the same happened with homos. We could no longer regard homos as a people(with flaws) between the extremes of 'sodomites'(fit for stoning) and heavenly angels shimmering with 'rainbow' colors. No, homos had to be seen only as the latter. So, instead of a middle position between mindless anti-homo nuttery and mindless pro-homo nuttery, the permitted range of discussion became Democratic Party's ecstatic celebration of all-things-homo and GOP's craven & sullen silence & utter lack of opposition to the homo agenda. In time, the homo-thing became such a sacred cow in America that even the GOP began to jump on the bandwagon and argue 'gay marriage' is a 'conservative value' or a creature like 'Lady Maga' is glorious to behold. Today, the micro-centrism on homo-and-tranny matters is between 'homos are godly' and 'homos are great'. Even feminists are so cowed by the transcendental trannies that, at most, they plead rather pathetically, "Pretty please, no trannies in women's sports." They don't dare to argue that trannies are NOT women.
It would be nice if everyone can come down to ground and be human again in America. That way, Americans-as-humans, whites-as-humans, and conservatives-as-humans can argue, negotiate, and compromise with Jews-as-humans, blacks-as-humans, and homos-as-humans. But Jews, blacks, and homos insist on being gods, thereby not to be judged like other groups. In truth, man is half-devil, half-saint. He is half-animal, half-angel. He is good and bad. This is true of all groups, though racial variances manifest their goodness and badness in different ways.
If Jews, blacks, and homos were regarded as human like the rest of us, they'd have the angelic side but also the demonic side. They can be good, they can be evil. It is extreme to see them as all-evil or all-good. So, the sane position is to see them as capable of both good and evil, as are all peoples. Germans and Aztecs could commit mass-murder, but then so could Jews and blacks(like the Zulus and Hutus). Seeing a people as all-evil is dangerous and can lead to attempted mass-murder of them. But seeing a people as all-good is also dangerous as one would naively lower one's guard against their potential evil. Why are dogs so defenseless when their masters decide to eat them in Asia? To the very end, dogs look up to humans as good decent rightful masters, just like Winston Smith died in 1984 loving Big Brother. Dogs emotionally trust humans as wise and good. White people in the US are now like dogs. Jews openly celebrate the Great Replacement of white people, but white people are also told in no uncertain terms that it is 'antisemitic', 'paranoid', and evil to suspect Jews are capable of such a thing. And most whites just go along like good little doggies. It's like a Chinese man loudly preparing to make dog soup while the dog looks up at him with love and trust.
How did Jewish Power become so evil? Because macro-centrist view of them has been forbidden. We can't consider or see the evil side of Jews. We must only see the good side. It'd be like seeing only the good side of Germans and never regarding their dark side. Such fuels megalomania, an ethnic diva mentality.
Worse, if Jews must be seen as only good, it leads to the tendency to look upon certain others as only bad, and this is happening with 'whiteness'. It is taboo in America to see the dark, evil, and wicked side of Jewishness but then equally taboo to see the good, noble, and decent side of whiteness. The very act of praising or admiring whiteness is now deeply suspect in America and the West. FBI is called to investigate signs that say "It's Okay to be White." If Jews are god than man, then whites must be the devil than man. In truth, both Jews and whites are Man, with both devilish and divine natures. But with Jews choosing to hog all the goodness, they must push all the badness onto whites. Thus, even Jewish evil becomes labeled as 'white'. So, never mind all the power, wealth, and privilege that Jews got. That ain't 'Jewish Privilege' but 'WHITE Privilege'. And the same logic applies to black badness. When blacks act vile and do terrible things, just blame it on whites. No matter how badly blacks act, just pretend whiteness somehow made them do it. Blacks loot and burn a city? History of 'white supremacism' drove blacks to desperation(to steal high-priced gym shoes). Blacks attacking people in the streets? Don't blame blacks as they're holy. Blame whiteness instead. So, when blacks attack Asians in the US, what do Asians do? They march against 'white nationalism'. But then, what do whites do when Jews defame and demean them? They blame China because Asians, unlike Jews-blacks-and-homos, are still in the category of Man, and that means they can be bad as well as good... though there is a tendency among Conservatives to vilify China and Iran as the source of all evil because, having been made into the White Devil by the Jewish gods, they seek to regain their humanity by demonizing another people. Of course, they can't do a tit-for-tat with Jews — Jews demonize whites, whites demonize Jews — because they've accepted the premise that Jews are gods. So, when robbed of their humanity by Jewish gods, they seek to regain their humanity(and approval of the Jewish gods) by pointing their fingers at the 'real enemy'. After all, if China or Iran is the Real Satan, then maybe whites aren't so bad after all and even qualify as human than remain the devil. It's all so pathetic.
As long as Jews control the gods, nothing good can come of America.
Democratic Party is an openly anti-white party, and white people in it are expected to join in on the anti-white rhetoric and policies. Only whites who attack whites are welcomed into the party. Democratic Party is totally controlled by Jews.
If those are the terms by which one major party operates in the US, then the other major party should do likewise but against Jews. It must be openly anti-Jewish, and Jews in it should be expected to join in on the anti-Jewish rhetoric and policies. Only Jews who attack Jews should be welcomed into the party.
Then, things would be more fair. Anti-White party with self-loathing whites versus Anti-Jewish party with self-critical Jews.
But currently, there is the Jewish-controlled Democratic Party that demonizes whites and there is the Republican Party that never defends whites but praises Jews to high heaven.
Furthermore, would most Republican voters support a GOP that is openly anti-Jewish in the way that most Democratic voters support a Democratic Party is openly anti-white? No, because most Republican voters are also under the spell of Jews who control the gods that say Jews are holy and whites are unholy. Jews fixed it so that, in minds of both progs and conzos, Jews are divine whereas whites are demonic. So, even the GOP praises Jews and feels reluctant to even half-way defend whites.
Two great sins in current America are OFFENDING JEWS and DEFENDING WHITES. Offending Jews is akin to offending the gods, and Defending Whites is akin to defending the devils. Jews fixed it so that Whiteness = Nazism.
Whites must break free of the Jewish spell.THE BETRAYAL OF BRETT KAVANAUGH AND AMY CONEY BARRETT by The Red Elephants - Vincent James