|The American Mythos of Anglo Pride|
America was diverse from the beginning, predominantly Anglo but with other Northern European ethnicities, and it increasingly grew diverse as later newcomers were less Anglo or Northern European in general. There was also the large number of blacks, but they were sufficiently different to be considered and treated as a separate population, and this was even truer of the American Indians. More immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe and then finally from non-Western nations meant that the US would grow more diverse, which could also mean more divided.
Therefore, as counterbalance to the divisiveness wrought by diversity — even the American Civil War resulted from Diversity as an all-white South surely would NOT have seceded from the North; it did so because white Southerners feared the blacks and thought the whites in the North were agitating the Negroes — , the Anglo-American elites devised a formula for unity that roughly went as 'Principles for All, Pride for Us', i.e. the American Ethos would de-emphasize origin, race, ethnicity, color, religion, and etc. BUT the narrative of American Mythos would emphasize the vision, courage, foresight, ability, and wisdom of the Anglos. So, Americanism would appeal to all but reveal the Anglos as the true founders, builders, and settlers for all else for everything else to be possible. So, even as the US grew more diverse, dangers of division would be ameliorated by not only shared principles(in the Constitution) but shared respect for the Anglos as the First and Foundational Americans.
But Jews couldn't abide by that. Now, if Jews were a middling people with, say, an average IQ of 90 and possessed of a milder personality(than a pushy one with chutzpah coming out of their ears), they too would likely have abided by the Anglo Formula for Principles for All, Pride for Us(Anglos). After all, even though every non-Anglo group felt some degree of envy and resentment for the Anglos, there was more respect and admiration. It's like in the traditional Southwest, a Mexican might call an Anglo a 'damn gringo' behind his back but was ever ready to say "Si, Senor" when the Anglo boss needed the Mexican to do something, like saddle a horse in THE BIG COUNTRY. Same with the Negroes. For all their rage and loud talk, blacks on their own are like the Tataglias without the backing of Barzini in THE GODFATHER. Blacks on their own 'could never have outfought (white)Santino'. This is why blacks so eagerly pimp out to Jews. Not that they like Jews, but they know Jews place special value on blacks as bouncers and pimps.
Jews exploited the possibilities inherent in the promise of Principles-for-All in order to gain power over Anglo-Americans. Jews argued, "If the US is indeed all about equality and liberty, why was the history of America 'racist' and why was Free Speech restricted in one form or another?" Taking over the Law and Media, Jews pushed ever harder on civil liberties, especially as many Jews were radical, subversive, criminal, and/or pornographic. And under this pressure, the US did become freer than ever for awhile. Late 60s to the mid-80s were probably the golden age of Free Speech, not just in the US but in world history.
But as Jews aimed to grab more power and take over as the new ruling elites, they believed that both the politics of Pride and Principles as laid down by Anglo-America had to be altered. As long as the Pride of Narrative belonged to the Anglos, Jews would have to play a sidekick role in the American Mythos. Jews might even come to be seen as usurpers than rightful rulers.
Just like Christianity, though owing so much to Judaic tradition and Early Jews, defined itself against Jews as Christ-Killers — it was an effective way for Christians to wrest the rightful ownership of God from the Jews — , Jews felt they must villainize the white race(especially those of Northern European stock) in the American Mythos in order to conceive of a New Americanism where Jews and their allies/minions would be the true rightful owners of America.
Jesus was a Jew, but also the Son of God murdered by Jews, or so said the Christians. Gentiles took so much from Jews but blamed the Jews for the greatest crime conceivable, the killing of the Son of God. Likewise, Jews took so much from Anglo-America but felt compelled to stab its heart in order to lay claim to the New America. According to the New Jew Narrative, White Americans, despite having founded and built Early America, betrayed it like Judas betrayed Jesus: Whites talked a good talk but were really 'racist' & 'white supremacist' and crucified black jesus(though there isn't much talk of American Indians lately) while their racial brethren in Europe came to crucify the holy Jews as new christs. So, ultimately, White America is the Judas that betrayed the American Mythos, and the True Founding Fathers are the Immigrant Jews and the Blacks(and their proselytizing missionaries or missionfairies are the homos).
So, the Pride of Anglos had to be changed to Shame/Guilt of Anglos. And these emotions had to be a kind of Moral Pornography or 'Mornography', so relentless, aggressive, and overwhelming in its mind-fuc* that whites wouldn't dare stand up and say, "Wait a minute, you're going too far..." It explains why Jews promote stuff like MISSISSIPPI BURNING and 12 YEARS A SLAVE where southern whites males aren't merely flawed or bad but downright perverse & degenerate in their evil. It's beyond heroes and villains; it's about angels and monsters. So, the Pride of Anglos, which used to be a key unifying factor among diverse non-Anglo Americans went out the window. These days, the debate is about whether it's worth saving any statue or monument to Anglo-American heritage.
Now, what about the Principles? Would it still be Principles for All based on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights? Initially, Jews took full advantage as stalwart champions of this ideal to protect Jewish radicalism/subversion/pornography and also to ensure the separation of the state from any expression of Christianity. But, as Jews amassed more power for themselves and noticed that others were critically taking notice of Jewish power, Jews began to change their tune and go the neo-Bolshevik route of altering the meaning of Free Speech whereby it became 'free' only if Jews approved of it.
Likewise, when Jews talk of 'democracy', they really mean outcomes favored by the Tribe. So, if a legitimate democratic process leads to an outcome disfavored by Jews, it's 'autocracy' or 'far right'. But if Jews pull dirty tricks to subvert the democratic process but get the result they prefer, it is 'democracy'. For Jews, both the ideas of Free Speech and Democracy are about Rule of Lawyers, not Rule of Laws. Whatever Jews say is the 'truth'.
As a result, the Ideal of Principles-for-All turned into Power-for-Us, the Jews. New America is essentially about Shame for Anglos and Power for Jews. Blackness is the bludgeon Jews use against whiteness, and Queertianity is the replacement for Christianity.
Under Anglo-American rule, the problems of increasing diversity was dealt with limiting immigration mostly to whites, ending mass immigration in the 1920s, and instituting Principles for All & Pride for Anglos. And it more-or-less worked... except with the Jews, but then, this was to be expected from a people who stubbornly maintained a separate identity and culture amongst majority Christians and Muslims over the many centuries. Also, among the various newcomers, Jews alone had the combination of identity, ability, neurosis, and cunning to fully exploit American Meritocracy for their own aggrandizement and apotheosis.
Once Jews secured their place in the New Order, they concocted a grand plan of not only takeover but permanence. After all, in the game of king-of-the-hills, the king is usually pushed aside by challengers, old and new. If a people as prestigious, privileged, and powerful as the Anglo-Americans could be pushed off the hill, it could happen to Jews as well. Jews felt that, as long as the US remained a white majority nation, whites might finally come to realize Jews are a hostile/subversive bunch up to no good(not least because the better Jews, for sake of tribal, were too often hesitant to go after the bad Jews). Therefore, Jews needed to bring about even more Diversity to secure permanent power, and this time, the newcomers would be non-white.
Jews figured there would be less chance of non-whites uniting with whites against Jews than whites uniting with other whites against Jews. After all, blacks had been in the US for a long time, but white/black tensions were never resolved. Jews pushed for more immigration on account of 'Diversity' and 'Multi-Culturalism' being advantageous to Jews. And indeed, it did lead to more divisions among the goyim in the 'culture war' that took off in the late 1980s. Jews were relieved by the sight of babelization among the goyim.
But, this wasn't entirely good for Jews either. After all, if Diversity means more division among various groups insisting on their distinct identities & narratives uber alles, that meant there could be no national unity to get anything done on a domestic, let alone global, scale. For Jews to use American Power effectively, all Americans had to be united around SOME themes even if remaining divided on others.
After all, in a truly multi-cultural system, most gentile groups would ask, "Why should I praise Jews and support Zionism when I am not Jewish, and besides, what Jews are doing to the Palestinians is like what white imperialists did to my folks long ago?" A much divided America would mean the goyim wouldn't be able to unite against the Jew, BUT it also meant they couldn't unite on ANY issue as each group would be into 'our identity' and 'our interests'. Furthermore, if Multi-Culturalism really meant each group should stick to its own culture and values, most cultures(especially non-white ones) would be anti-globo-homo, something pushed by Jews. Such would be an obstacle to the Jewish Agenda.
Jews needed the goyim divided on identity & color but needed their unity on certain matters to render them useful to Jews. It's like a metallurgist uses heat to pry metals apart but then remolds them into unified solid metal. The increasingly diverse peoples had to be brought together on key issues and agendas favored by Jews. (Of course, Jews only needed to win over the elites and 'spokesmen' of every group, and such status-driven types were easy to bribe and browbeat.) And what would the terms of re-unity be for the diverse goyim in the New America with Jews as top dogs. It obviously couldn't be the old terms of Pride for Anglos and Principles for All. It had to be Shame for Anglos so that Jews and non-whites(and cuck-whites) would all be united on Blaming Whitey as the Eternal Bogeyman.
The other term was Power for Jews(than Principles for All), but it had to be veiled as the goyim might recoil from brazen Jewish Supremacism? And this is why Jews couldn't hog all the prestige for themselves and favored two other groups, Homos and Blacks to form a triumvirate. Homos of all colors(white, black, brown, yellow, etc.) would create the rainbow-impression that the New Order is about equality for people of all colors. And as the black narrative in America came to define the struggle against 'racism', blackness would have significance beyond its racial identity. MLK and Mandela are like global symbols for struggle for justice in the way that Jesus, though Jewish of origin, came to symbolize Love for All Humanity. With such elevation, of course homos and blacks were fully onboard with the Jewish Agenda... on the understanding that the two groups would pretend to be the best of friends — notice how BLM activities prominently display 'gay' colors — and either totally support Jews or at least keep mum about the crimes of Zionism & Wars for Israel. One thing for sure, whether one is Pete Buttigieg, Joe Biden, or Barack Obama, you get rewarded big time if you kiss the Jewish Behind.
The end result hasn't been Multi-Culturalism where each and every identity/interest is of equal worth and equal time but the Tri-Supremacism of Tentpole Identities(or Idolatries) of Jews, blacks, and homos. So, if you're Jewish, black, or homo, you are 'made', but if not, you must seek 'social credit' points by sucking up to one, two, or all three of the Tentpole Identities.
Indeed, for all the talk of 'white privilege', a white person who sucks up to Jewgromo(Jewish-Negro-Homo) Idolatry is favored many times over than a non-white who sympathizes with BDS, condemns the Wars for Israel, or denounces 'gay' behavior. The blondest and most-blue-eyed white person who sucks up to Jews, waves the 'gay' flag, and/or flashes a BLM sign is far more likely to succeed than the nappiest blackest black who, unlike Barack Obama and Kamala Harris, dares to condemn Israel and champions Palestinians and other brown people being crushed by Zionism and its wars.
In other words, one's own race/color ultimately matters less than which race/color one sucks up to. A white person's 'white privilege' actually expands IF he sucks up to Jews, takes the knee for the Negro, and bends over for the homo. In contrast, a non-white's supposedly magical 'diversity' means next to nothing if he or she goes against the terms set by Jews. There are many whites in the Deep State because they suck up to Jews. In contrast, Tulsi Gabbard's mixed-race identity means NOTHING because she dared to upset Jews on foreign policy. Indeed, so-called Liberal Jews much prefer white GOP cucks like Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell over someone like Gabbard. What does that tell you? It's the politics and 'spirituality' of group-idolatry.
Paradoxically, America's anti-class attitudes turned society into more of a neo-class system, at least with the rise of globalism. Prior to the radical expansion of 'free trade', the US had essentially a National Capitalist economy where the middle classes and working classes had considerable leverage in the economy. With the vast majority of Americans identifying as 'middle class', it seemed as if US solved the problem of class conflict after WWII and during much of the Cold War. But with hyper-globalism and China/India entering the world economy, the American Middle Class and Working Class were threatened. Also, the ebbing away of any traditional sense of Americanism and with libertarianism ensconced as the new defining value of Establishment Conservatism, the individual mattered far more than the community, and one's worth was entirely the product of personal success. Thus, successful whites were more likely to feel closer to other successful individuals regardless of race or color, especially as whites were taught to believe white identity/solidarity is 'racist' and any notion of white folk/volk is 'nazi'. So, what did this neo-individualism lead to? The rise of the new uber class for whom status-conscious membership in the club means everything whereas the unsuccessful whites are dismissed as 'losers' or 'deplorables'. In a way, the elite goy attitude toward the masses came to resemble Jewish attitude toward goyim: Contempt and derision. (Jews needed to worry less about class because the majority of Jews were very successful, and besides, pride of identity/unity wasn't verboten among Jews and, if anything, a tribal obligation that was, furthermore, cheered on by goyim who would have denounced similar consciousness among their own kind.) It's no wonder Jews encouraged the spread of libertarian individualism among whites. 'Muh liberty' negated 'Our Community' among whites. Of course, Jews, blacks, and homos were, contra the whites, totally encouraged not only to boost their own identities but demand that other groups favor Jewishness, blackness, and homo-ness over their own identities & culture. A Muslim who hollers BLM is favored over a Muslim who shouts, 'Proud to be Muslim', and a Mexican who waves the 'gay' flag is favored over a Mexican waving the Mexican flag.
Anyway, that's how the new unity works in New America. It's no longer about diverse white ethnicities and non-whites being united on Principles for All and Pride for Anglos. Rather, the pride(even holiness) is hogged by Jews, Homos, & Negroes as the Tentpole identities that the lesser multi-culti identities are pressured to rally around. As for Principles, the hell with Americans striving to live up to the promise of the Constitution. Why, that would mean equal gun rights and speech rights for all Americans. A well-armed populace might rise up against tyranny. And a free-minded people might speak truth to power, which is mostly Jewish nowadays.
So, it must be about Power than Principles. And yet, Jews understand that most people will not discard Principles in favor of Tribal Power for Jews despite their special sympathy or reverence for the Jewish people. So, even though it's really all about control, Jews have worded their power-grab in the language of principles pertaining to 'hate speech' and 'white supremacism'. (Of course, goy 'liberals' have their own reasons for supporting Speech Control. Prior to the internet and especially social networks and live-streaming, most discourse-of-consequence happened in the big media, elite academia, and institutions of the learned, or indoctrinated. So, it was mostly the educated talking amongst themselves. But the internet and live-streaming made it possible for the Average Joe to have his say on equal terms, and oddly enough, the less educated Joes sometimes had more interesting things to say because, being unattached to industry or institution, they could speak their minds in the way that elites could not, at least if they were to hold their status and positions; paradoxically, the more power you gain, the less power you have to speak freely. With all the Average Joes saying that Liberal Princelings wear no clothes, naturally the 'liberals' want to control speech for the masses. Other than that, the New Cult of Wokewicz demands that all be properly reverential to the Holy Three of Jews, Homos, and Blacks. If Jews want to control speech to protect tribal power, 'liberals' want to control speech to preserve status & prestige.) The gall, the chutzpah, of these people. It's like the notorious Jewish Harvard Professor Noel Ignatiev who rags on 'whiteness' as inherently 'racist' & 'supremacist' and must therefore be wiped out as an identity, but all of this is just projection because, if identity has been supremacist in conception and practice, it is Jewishness that says the Jewish soul, blood, and body are superior due to special blessing by the one and only God. So, Jews not only denied that other peoples have their own gods and insisted the God of the Jews is the only God for all the world and all of humanity, BUT this God made Jews better than all the rest. Jewish Supremacism is a jealous god that will simply not tolerate any other identity that has the potential of saying NO to Jewish Megalomania. This is why Jewish Power shames whiteness into paralysis so that it will serve Jewish Supremacism.
So, in summary, there was the problem of diversity that was solved under Anglo-American rule with Principles-for-All as ethos and Pride-for-Anglos as mythos.
But Jews brought about the second round of Diversity that led to yet another crisis of divisiveness. This served Jews well in having a goy populace that could not unite, but it posed the problem of each group being for itself than for any sense of common purpose. How could Jews rally the diverse goyim into serving the Jewish Agenda(as the New Americanism) if every group says 'Our Identity Uber Alles'? And so, Diversity had to be re-united under the New American themes of Sacred Semites, Noble Negroes, and Holy Homos. Therefore, whatever differences your people may have with other peoples in the US, just remember that it is the 'patriotic' duty of ALL AMERICANS to bow down before the Jews, kneel before Negroes, and cheer for homos & trannies. And spit on whitey.