French eighteenth century journalist and propagandist Jacques Mallet du Pan coined the adage that “A l’exemple de Saturne, la révolution dévore ses enfants,” frequently translated as “Like Saturn, the Revolution devours its own children.”
“Revolution devours its own children” doesn’t apply here. It would if Jews were destroying other Jews in a mad frenzy of purity spirals. But Jewish Power, both ‘liberal’ and ‘conservative’, tend to remain united through thick and thin. The Tribe remains intact. In this case, Jews all across the ideological spectrum closed ranks to denounce an uppity Negress who dared to point out that Jewish Power historically operated at elite ranks of society. The Holocaust wasn't about powerful white Germans oppressing weak Jewish whites but about powerful German whites versus powerful Jewish whites. But Jews are invested in portraying themselves as victims, all the better to justify their immense power and supremacist grip on the West, thereby the Rest as well. So, it's hardly surprising that virtually all Jews joined in solidarity to dump on Whoopie.
Indeed, it’s been the case that Jews generally don’t destroy other Jews(with some notable exceptions like Norman Finkelstein and David Cole). Jews stick together. In contrast, goyim tend to devour fellow goyim in radical times. Why? Because whereas Jews put identity before ideology, goyim(generally possessing weaker identities) tend to put ideology first and foremost, thereby getting sucked into purity spirals. So, Russian communists destroyed so many fellow Russians. Chinese communists destroyed so many fellow Chinese. In contrast, Zionism was the Jewish Left and Jewish Right united by identity over ideology. Jews are smarter that way. Also, Jewish communists were less likely to be outright murderous toward Jewish capitalists and vice versa.
Specifically, Goldberg, who is no critic of Jews or Israel and is as willing to submit to proskynesis before Zionist force majeure as anyone in the entertainment industry, said “Let’s be truthful, the Holocaust isn’t about race, it’s not. It’s about man’s inhumanity to man, that’s what it’s about. These are two groups of white people.”
Goldberg’s statement makes sense within the more recent American context where all peoples of European descent, including European-Jewish, have been categorized as ‘white’. After all, Anglo-Americans, German-Americans, Irish-Americans, Polish-Americans, Italian-Americans, Ukrainian-Americans, Greek-Americans, and etc. all simply became ‘white’. And Jews counted as ‘white’ too, though with special exemptions(like the burden of 'white guilt'). So, Whoopie’s American-centric view failed to appreciate the significance of ethnicity in the Old World. Ethnic distinctions also mattered in the American Past, but most peoples of European origin just melded into ‘whiteness’, just like black Africans of various tribal origins simply became 'black', which also includes mulattos.
Of course, this poses problems of its own. For example, it means even white Americans of Polish origin with no history of colonizing Africa, practicing the Atlantic Slave Trade, and owing slaves in the South — if anything, Jews were more involved in that — must bear the burden of ‘white guilt’. Also, there's no sense of Poland's history of oppression under Russians and Germans. Or, you could be of Lithuanian origin, but there's no special regard for Lithuanian tragedy in the great wars and under Soviet domination — most Lithuanians, like many Europeans, had a far more difficult time in the 20th century than most blacks in America. The moment any Lithuanian's foot sets down in the US, he too counts as 'white' (in the American sense of the term) and is associated with 'white privilege'. You could be a recent immigrant from Romania, and you too would be stained with ‘white guilt’ despite having no roots in America. In contrast, you could be an African immigrant whose ancestors actually captured and sold black slaves to white slave ships, but your blackness automatically becomes associated with cotton gins, Jim Crow, and Civil Rights Movement. So, your identity is aglow with special consideration merely for being black and instantly showered with all sorts of Affirmative Action advantages. THAT is the real idiocy of racial politics in the US. Recently arrived black Africans whose ancestors massively profited from the slave trade are lumped into the Black American Narrative, and white ethnic groups(with tragic horror stories of their own) who arrived post-Civil-War and had nothing to do with the oppression of black Americans are lumped in with America's 'racist' past. And it's almost always about blacks. Take Scandinavian-Americans in Minnesota who, if they have some blood on their hands, played a role in the expulsion of the American Indians. One thing for sure, they had nothing to do with black American history, yet, their primary moral responsibility is toward blacks, much like the people of Sweden have been goaded into playing savior for all of Africa, even at the risk of losing their native land to migrant-invaders.
At any rate, as Whoopie is ignorant of European History, her 'provincial' black-American mind lumps all peoples of European origin into the generic category of ‘white’. She’s unaware of the powerful ethnic hatreds and resentments throughout European History, which ebbed since the end of WWII but flared up in fracturing Yugoslavia of the 90s. Worse, ethnic hostilities have recently been stoked in Ukraine, pitting one bunch of Slavs against another. Jewish-controlled US that controls EU made it fashionable for Western globalists to hate Russians(and Hungarians) for rejecting the cult of Globo-Homo and for reinvigorating traditionalism and ethno-preservation.
In a way, the deracinated ‘deracists’ are now the most hostile people in the West toward other whites. ‘Deracist’ whites in the US hate white patriots(deemed as 'racist') for having retained or revived some semblance of ethnic or racial identity and pride, and ‘deracist’ whites in Europe hate nationalist whites who regard mass immigration and great replacement as existential challenges.
Of course, deracination or ‘deracism’ is really a tool of Jewish Supremacism as it's directed at goy whites, not at Jews. Though white dummies or whummies take it to heart as virtue, most Jews are careful not to drink the 'deracist' kool-aid themselves. After all, even as white ethnic identity has been shamed and subverted, Jewish identity has only been further emboldened. But then, Jews will opportunistically encourage ultra-ethnic politics among goyim IF it can be directed against another bunch of goyim on the shit-list of Jewish Power. So, even as Jews denounce moderate Hungarian nationalism, they fan the flames of ultra-right nationalism in Western Ukraine against the Russian population in Eastern Ukraine. It's also why Jews, who generally deride goy nationalism, support Kurdish nationalism as it is useful against Arab, Persian, and Turkish rivals of Israel. There is no principle to Jewish Power. It’s always a matter of “Is it good for Jewish Power?”
While the Shoah was clearly about man’s inhumanity to man, it was also an extreme reaction to Jewish inhumanity to goyim. If Jewish behavior hadn’t been so excessive, would the National Socialists have come to power in Germany? No, one-third of Germans bit the bullet and voted for National Socialism in 1933 because they just about had had enough with bad Jewish behavior. (Some may argue George Soros and his ilk act destructively toward the West to avenge their fallen tribesmen in the Holocaust, but many Jews acted the same way BEFORE World War II, which is what paved the way for men like Hitler in the first place. Furthermore, Jews act the same way toward non-Western goyim. Soros sure raped the economies of Asia, and Neocon Jews concocted foreign policy to rain down maximum pain upon the Arab World.)
Of course, even those who voted for Hitler didn’t vote for war and genocide. The fact that the Nazis went out of their way to hide the horrors in the killing fields and certain concentration camps is proof that they understood all too well that mass killing was too much even for most ‘anti-semites’. Likewise, the Soviets and their useful idiots denied the Great Famine. Even as millions of Ukrainians perished, the official line was the New Order resulted in bountiful harvests and more food for everyone than before.
That said, both National Socialism and Communism were extreme reactions to real problems. Jewish Power was understandably hated for its exploitative, subversive, parasitic, and supremacist ways. And the appeal of communism owed to real problems of class exploitation under either aristocratism or capitalism.
Still, there were more rational and sensible ways to deal with the problems, as opposed to the radical way, which ends up committing great evil in the name of fighting a great evil. Sadly, when people are driven to the edge, they tend toward extremism. A good lesson would be “don’t drive people to the edge”, but it's a lesson self-aggrandizing Jews never seem to learn as, time and time again, they're hellbent on driving goyim to the edge once again, whereupon goyim can submit and fall into the abyss and take the last stand with zealous fury. It must be said rational, moderate, and sensible opportunities were often lost in addressing the Jewish Question/Problem because Jews refused to meet the other side halfway. If one side does wrong and infuriates other sides, it's usually helpful if the former acknowledges accountability at least in part. Then, a series of negotiations can take place where lessons are learned and the problem is settled more or less. But when Jews refuse to admit any wrong and are utterly intolerant of any criticism of Jewish abuses, the wronged party may conclude there is no rational, moderate, or sensible option when dealing with Jews. It becomes a zero-sum game of Jews win and take all OR goyim win and take all. The radical will of Jews had a way of radicalizing the other side. Will Jews ever admit that German radicalism under National Socialism owed in part to utter lack of Jewish accountability in regard to the woes of Weimar Germany and Bolshevik conflagration in the East? If anything, Jewish sense of moral culpability has grown only worse following World War II. Full of themselves as the Holy Holocaust People, their every abuse is laundered as a righteous expression of "Never Again".
So, there's no discussion of the murderous Jewish role in communism. Jews whine about Joe McCarthy and HUAC but ignore Jewish role in Soviet espionage. Jews pushed a total lie about USS Liberty and never came clean. They pull every trick in the book to get the worst Jewish crooks pardoned by puppet-presidents. Jonathan Pollard for one is sitting warm and cozy in Israel giving a big fat middle finger to the US. There's been zero accountability about Nakba and the Neocon Wars that killed so many. Or, what Jews did to Russia in the 1990s, which led to Putin's rise. Jews never admit any wrong and blame everything on 'Russian aggression'. No Neocon Zionist, whose foreign policy proposals have turned out to be disastrous, has paid a professional price or expressed any contrition. If anything, they've been placed in elite positions in the media to spread more lies in service to Jewish Supremacism. When Jews act this way, even those who desire a moderate, sensible, and rational solution to the Jewish Problem is pushed to extremes because Jews themselves are extreme. If someone burns your house down and admits no guilt(and if anything sends you the medical bill for the burns he suffered while torching your house), the chances are you're going to become 'anti-semitic' and counter-extreme against the vile extremism of the Jew.
The problem with the Holocaust Narrative is it assumes that Jews were wholly innocent pure-as-snow angels but set upon by crazed Anti-Semites for no reason at all. This is utter BS, rather like arguing Japan and Germany were smashed in WWII just for the hell of it.
If another Jewish Holocaust were to happen now, it’d be a horrible crime, BUT once again, it would have been an extreme reaction to vile and obnoxious behavior by Jewish Power: financial shenanigans, murderous foreign policy, medical tyranny, political subversion, cultural degeneracy, and etc. One may argue NOTHING justifies genocide, but people driven to the edge tend towards the extreme. It's just part of human nature under duress or in a state of outrage. Take the Morgenthau Plan. Henry Morgenthau the Jew was understandably appalled by Nazi atrocities and wanted revenge on the Germans. Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. US went crazy from the war. Palestinian terrorism has been reaction to Jewish Nakba, and Israeli bombings of Gaza are extreme reaction to Palestinian harassment via constant rocket attacks.
In his autobiography, Woody Allen wrote of his sympathy with black rage and commendation for any amount of black violence against whites, however extreme. Blacks have the right to attack whitey. (Predictably, the book was much praised by cucky National Review.) Allen’s moral logic is hardly different from that of antisemitism. If blacks, feeling so terribly aggrieved, are justified in committing extreme violence on whites(even indiscriminately), then one could argue Germans and their collaborators felt similarly justified in their anti-Jewish violence in reaction to Jewish perfidy.
The lesson of the Shoah should not only have been “genocide(especially of Jews) is a great evil” but “try not to act in a manner that stirs up great hatred against your kind.” The tragedy of the Holocaust Narrative is it taught one lesson at the expense of the other instead of emphasizing both. Paradoxically, it has effectively turned Jews and their cuck-collaborators into the New Nazis as the Holocaust Narrative unwittingly(or maybe wittingly) became synonymous with Jewish Supremacy. If Jewish-Gentile History is about totally innocent Jews being set upon by totally loathsome goyim, it means Jews are innately noble and therefore could never have done wrong, which further indicates that any anti-Jewish expression or action among goyim must ENTIRELY be their fault and never the fault of Jewish attitude or behavior. The presumption that says Jews can be wronged but can never do wrong is essentially supremacist because it stems from the conceit of Jewish moral perfectionism, as if every Jew is a little jesus.
Such outlook can only further Jewish arrogance and supremacism. After all, Jews would feel that they, as a race of Anne Franks, must always be right while those at odds with their identity or interests must be 'anti-semitic' reprobate scum. Then, is it any wonder that Jewish Power in the 21st century has waged wars that have led to the deaths of so many? Jews, being a race of Anne Franks, feel they have the license to judge, sentence, and kill, and it's the way things should be because Jews are never do wrong and can only be wronged.
Palestinians sure know how this game works. Jews can encroach ever more into remaining Palestinian territory, but Jews have the total support of US and EU under the spell of Anne-Frankism. As for Palestinians, they are a bunch of ‘terrorists’ and ‘anti-semites’ for resisting Jewish occupation and colonization.
And in the US, Jews, as the Perfect Race, can wage endless wars on whites and whiteness. As Jews are deemed to be morally perfect, their murderous hatred toward whites not only gets a pass but underpins the national narrative and curriculum as a 'moral' imperative. Jewish supremacist contempt is deemed as 'justice', whereas white desire for identity and heritage are condemned as 'far right' hatred. But if you call out on Jewish hatred against your kind, YOU are an ‘anti-semite’ who deserves to be dehumanized and destroyed.
The Holocaust Narrative would have done real good if the lesson were, “Jews must act better because bad behavior can lead to the rise of demagogues like Hitler.” Instead, Jewish Power led Anne-Frank-worshiping goyim to concur that Jews have always innocent(and right and noble), and all tensions between Jews and goyim had entirely been the fault of the latter. But without criticism, bad Jewish behavior only becomes worse. And today, it is utterly rotten. Who would have thought US foreign policy would come to be dictated by harridans like Victoria Nuland and US domestic policy would be directed by lawfare gangstoids like Merrick Garland who pushes anti-white CRT down the throats of white school children?
“The Holocaust was about the Nazi’s systemic annihilation of the Jewish people — who they deemed to be an inferior race. They dehumanized them and used their racist propaganda to justify slaughtering 6 million Jews. Holocaust distortion is dangerous.”
While it’s true that Nazism was rife with contempt and hatred for the Jewish People, there was also fear and anxiety about Jewish superiority. While Nazis were loathe to admit Jewish superiority in anything, they had genuine trepidations about predatory Jewish Power. Germans had a strong dose of Jewish Craziness in the Weimar Period. Germans learned of what Jewish Bolsheviks had done in Russia. Also, Germans hated the fact that World Jewry gained considerable influence over Anglosphere and steered its peoples toward intense animus toward Germans, their racial cousins. Also, speaking of racial supremacy, Anglo World was hardly different from the German one, and World Jewry worked hand-in-glove with Anglo global supremacism to penetrate all corners for the world for control and exploitation.
Nazis most likely wouldn’t have pushed for outright genocide IF World Jewry hadn’t declared war on Germany. Indeed, the preferred policy was mass expulsion than mass extermination. But as Jewish Power had used its influence to turn Anglo World against Germany and as German war efforts seemed doomed in Russia, Nazis decided to pull all stops in their war on Jewry as revenge and last chance at 'victory'. Fated for defeat, Germans would take down as many Jews as possible with them, a kind of Nazi Samson Option. (Jewish mentality isn't all that different. Israel has hundreds of nukes and is dedicated to nuking all of Europe if Israel were to fall, EVEN IF Europeans didn't cause the fall. The way Jews see it, whites exist to serve Jews and ensure the survival of Zion. So, if whites fail in this, Jews should wipe out as many whites as possible as Israel falls, presumably to Arabs/Muslims.) Same happened in Rwanda where the genocide got especially heated it seemed Hutus would be defeated by the Tutsis. Kill as many Tutsis before the Tutsis wipe the floor with the Hutus.
Little Marco denounced “upscale liberals who control the media” in a tweet and was immediately attacked for “the anti-Semitic trope that Jews control the media,” which of course they do, but an ardently pro-Israel Rubio surely was not suggesting anything like that.
If the perception of “Jews control the media” is ‘antisemitic’ and if Jews do indeed control the media, isn’t Jewish Behavior ‘antisemitic’ as it fulfills an ‘antisemitic trope’? If “Jews controlling the media” is antisemitic, then Jews should relinquish their control of the media because it’d be ‘antisemitic’ for Jews to control the media.
It’s like, if the statement “Italians are prominent in organized crime” is anti-Italian, then Italians are ‘anti-Italian’ because they are indeed disproportionately involved in organized crime, thereby fueling an 'anti-Italian trope'. But then, none of this is about truth or principles. It’s about power. Jews got the power and decide what we can and can’t say. That’s about it.
(Sarah) Silverman has been on a roll complaining about the paucity of “Jewfaces” displayed playing obviously Jewish characters on television or in movies…. she is particularly incensed that a non-Jewish woman Helen Mirren is playing Golda Meir in an upcoming movie. Silverman is enraged that anyone but a Jew should be cast in roles “in which Jewishness is an inherent and substantive component.”
Her outrage is fake, and she knows it. She’s feigning outrage to portray the Jews as poor little victims. She knows Hollywood has been Jewish-controlled and that goyim have often been cast as Jews for pro-Jewish reasons. One reason is ‘Aryan’ types are deemed more attractive. It was more glamorous to have Charlton Heston play Moses and Ben-Hur. Indeed, even big Jewish stars often looked rather ‘Aryan-ish’, like Kirk Douglas, or was half-‘Aryan’, like Paul Newman.
Jews figured their public image would be improved by Aryan-types playing Jews. If Jewish characters look more Aryan, goy whites are more likely to identify with the Jews. Like Aidan Quinn as a Jew in Barry Levinson's AVALON. Ingrid Bergman played Golda Meir in an earlier TV show. Jews worry that Jewish characters played by very-Jewish-looking characters will elicit less sympathy and identification on the part of goyim. So, goy-playing-Jew, far from being a marginalization of Jews, has been a calculated move to make Jewishness more attractive and palatable to goyim. Silverman surely knows this, and so her complaint is full of shit. Take the film JULIA directed by Fred Zinnemann based on the life of Lilian Hellman. Hellman wasn’t an attractive woman, and guess who played her? Jane Fonda. But this decision was made by Jews, not by goyim. But will Silverman blame the Jews? Of course not. The vile Jewess only seeks to create the impression that poor little Jews are being denied roles in Hollywood because of… ‘anti-semitic discrimination’. ROTFL. Never mind the only roles that Arabs got from Hollywood were as subhuman terrorists.
No comments:
Post a Comment