Transformation of Diversity Politics from Rule by Anglo-America to Rule by Judeo-America — How Jewish Power used Diversity to divide & rule over Goyim and then formulated New Terms of Goy Unity on terms favorable to Jewish Supremacism

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.

WE KNOW HOW TO MAKE AMERICA STRONG - American Renaissance

How JUSTICE really functions in the IDOLATRY POLITICS of the Jewish-Supremacist West — The Immorality of Moral Immortality — US is a Theocracy of 'Idolocracy', a mindless worship of Jews, Blacks, and Homos

Justice, especially political justice, is a matter of who/whom: Who has the power and which groups have 'sacral' worth? This is also true of individuals — notice how certain Jews tend to get pardoned more than people of other groups, and consider how the Law pretty much allows black thugs and shoplifters/looters to walk free — but especially true at the political level. In Central America during the Cold War, the white-led right-wing regimes could employ 'death squads' and mow down countless indigenous brown folks suspected of being sympathetic to Marxist guerrillas. That was 'justice' in those parts, with the acquiescence of US power. In communist nations, the secret police could arbitrarily arrest anyone and charge him of treason, espionage, or 'bourgeois' thought crimes. The accused could be sent to prison camps or shot dead in basements. That was 'justice' under communism. So, justice is usually the tool of the power. It is what the Power wants and says it is.

Under liberal systems, there developed the idea that justice should be impartial, fair-minded, based on strict adherence to laws(applicable to all), and protective of the 'universal rights' of all citizens, rich or poor, regardless of color or creed. Though liberal systems were far from perfect in the practice of administering justice, it could be said that, more or less, the West was moving toward greater impartiality and fairness up to the 1960s. This mode of justice was based on individual rights. But the Civil Rights Movement wasn't just about the right of blacks as individuals but as a group, and that agenda, along with other trends, provided the groundwork for a different kind of justice. If traditional rightist justice favored the upper classes and certain races over others and if the radical leftist justice favored the notion of 'social justice' that trampled on individual rights in favor of the supposed good of the collective, the classic liberal notion of justice emphasized the rights of individuals. But the New Liberal theory tended to be both more collective-utilitarian(though not to the extent of communism) and special-interest-oriented in the name of reversing past injustice. Collective-utilitarian notion of justice was at the heart of the New Deal. And special-interest notion of justice animated the Great Society program of LBJ and the rise of Holocaust Cult. By emphasizing the problems of black history, the idea was that blacks as a group deserved special recognition. And because Jews suffered the Holocaust, supposedly the greatest evil act in all of history, they were deserving of special sympathy and consideration. (Initially, pro-black & pro-Jewish attitudes and policies were based on sympathy, but the rising cult of their Noble Suffering and their spectacular success in 'idolic' fields of brains & brawn led to idolatrous worship of them as the Truly Superior Races.)

This came to function as a template for other groups as well. Noticing how blacks and Jews gained so much by pushing for justice on grounds of special interest than individual rights, many groups in the US began to develop their own form of Identity Politics. Identity Politics was different from national chauvinism of old that was premised on the conviction of one's own people being somehow superior and/or more powerful than others. In contrast, Identity Politics was based on the cult of victim-hood. Your people could be said to be more special if they suffered more than others. As Identity Politics emerged when the white West pretty much dominated all the world — even the Soviet Union was mostly white, something Red China exploited in its appeal to the non-white world during the Sino-Soviet Rift — , the general impression was of White Dominance and Non-White Victim-hood. Still, as the scales of victim-hood were still determined by the Power, it all came down to who/whom/when/where as emphasized by the Narrative, the product of media & academia.
Victim-hood mattered more if the villains were white and if the victims were non-white or Jewish. And it mattered MORE if the oppression happened IN the West, especially the US or Northern Europe. And it was mostly about the 19th and 20th century. As blacks were oppressed in America by whites, they had a good claim. As Jews suffered in Europe in World War II, they too had an easy claim. But much less sympathy goes to non-white victims of whites in non-white lands. More blacks and Hindus were mowed down by whites in Africa and India, but there is far more outrage about far fewer number of blacks who were killed by whites in the US. As for all the violence among non-whites, they don't matter. Who cares about what's been happening in Kashmir? Even as anti-whites claim to call for 'de-colonization of the mind', they are hopelessly 'West-centric' in emphasizing what happened/happens in the West uber alles. (Furthermore, these 'de-colonizers' are desperate to depart from their own native lands to go live in the West. It's as if they still consider the West to be the only Metropole that matters. And of course, even most anti-Western rhetoric has been cooked up by self-hating Westerners whose minds were colonized by Jewish Power and fueled by post-Christian need for absolution by some other means. So, anti-white politics is essentially about non-whites adopting the politics of white self-loathing, and as such, non-whites are still under white mind-control, albeit that of self-loathing whites. And the fact that many of these non-whites prize Jews, blacks, and/or homos over their own kind suggests that they're still totally 'colonized' by Western Powers that now happens to controlled by Jews.) A truly de-colonized mind would stop seeing the West as the source of all good and evil — the paradise to emigrate to and the hell to denounce — , but such is the state of your average non-white & anti-white mind.

Because of the Rules of Identity Politics, various non-whites groups must demonstrate their worthiness of sympathy by emphasizing their victim-hood at the hands of whites in the West, especially in the 20th century(and maybe 19th century). But as many of these groups are relatively recent immigrants, their experience of oppression under whites happened mostly in non-Western lands, and that means their suffering counts for less than that of Jews and blacks. (Even as globalism attacks the notion of national territorial rights, the tragic worth of any history is largely determined by WHERE it happened, i.e. if the police kills a black man on US soil, that is an outrage, but if the US military kills scores of innocent civilians abroad, it doesn't matter. The logic of Tragic Dirt.) Shoah happened in Europe, and black slavery happened in the US, and as such, they matter more. (Oddly enough though, their cults of suffering are transferable to all others of their kind. So, even though American and Anglo Jews were safe during WWII, indeed infinitely more so than white goyim in Europe who died in greater numbers than the Jews did, they too can invoke 'muh holocaust' as fellow Jews. Likewise, recently arrived black African immigrants in US and Europe can also invoke BLM nonsense and 'muh slavery' even though their ancestors captured and sold black slaves to Arabs & whites and even though black-on-black oppression & violence in black nations are far beyond anything whites have done to blacks in recent years. Also, the fact that American Indian experience doesn't count for much in the Narrative shows that the rules of Identity Politics are not set in stone. If a certain group tends not to be vocal and exhibits no special talent in the 'idolic' fields, it is mostly ignored regardless of its tragic history at the hands of whites. Today, American Indians, the people with the biggest claim to victim-hood in American History, get less attention than Asian-Indians who are always talking and balking.) Identity Politics is based on victim-hood points, but over time, it has fused with the All-American culture of winner-takes-all. Jews and blacks began their Identity Politics by wailing abut their victim-hood but, in good ole American fashion, gained special consideration because of their success with money, humor, arts & culture, athletics, & entertainment. So, over time, Identity Politics became more like Idolatry Politics. In other words, 'muh victim-hood' wasn't good enough. What really mattered was 'muh victor-hood to accentuate muh victim-hood'. In other words, if a group could demonstrate superiority in some key field, its victim-hood was to be considered MORE TRAGIC on account of injustice having been done to something better. It's like it's deemed worse to kill a gorilla than a baboon or to kill a giraffe than a gazelle.

So, what we now call Identity Politics is essentially Idolatry Politics. We don't have mass parades in favor of Palestinians where everyone shows up and waves the BDS flag. But we do have 'Pride' Parades where peoples of all colors sing homosannas to fruits and trannies draped in 'rainbow' colors. Of course, Jews want it this way because an Identity Politics where all groups have equal worth — or where all non-white groups have equal worth — would be threatening to their Zionist-globalist supremacist agenda. Indeed, what would happen to Jewish Power if Americans were to give equal hearing to Palestinians, Syrians, and Iranians as to Israelis and their Jewish-American enablers? Also, so many groups around the world have had unpleasant experience with Jews, be they blacks in South Africa or the peoples of Latin America. And European History wasn't only of Antisemitism but Jewish chicaneries, some of which came to do great harm. This is why Jews are wary of all-out Identity Politics. It's like Ben Shapiro denounces it because it means groups such as Palestinian-Americans can have their day in the sun as a victim group as well.

As far as Jews are concerned, the only kind of Identity Politics that is acceptable is an Idolatrous one where Jews get to decide the who/whom. So, Jewish Identity and Jewish Suffering are special and must serve as the basis of goyim making amends to Jews by doing whatever Jews demand. And Jews have especially chosen homos and blacks as fellow Idolatrous Groups, not only because both are highly profitable to Jewish industries in fashion & entertainment but because blacks can be used to bait 'white guilt' and homo-celebration can be used to replace Christianity with Queertianity. (Deep in their hearts, Jews still regard Jesus and Paul as renegade Jews, and there is no 'hate symbol' more 'triggering' to Jews than the Christian Crucifix. Of course, as the West was overwhelmingly Christian for over a millennia, Jews couldn't say that outright, but their big dream was always to destroy Christianity and banish the Crucifix. They tried this by destroying churches in the USSR, but it didn't work, and so they are now working to spiritually corrupt Christianity with Anno Sodomini and worship of Magic Negro or Fentanyl Floyd.)

There can be no true justice or impartial justice with idolatry, which is a cheap form of theology. Idolatry may not be deep, but like religion, it is about blind or mindless worship/faith. As such, US justice system is essentially theocratic or 'idolocratic'. Just like religious folks cannot question, blame, or condemn God or gods(no matter what), the idolocratic US cannot condemn sacred Jews and holy blacks(and homos) no matter what they do. The ONLY time Jews, blacks, and homos come under fire is when they insult or attack one another. So, Donald Sterling the Jewish oligarch had to be denounced because he said unkind things about blacks. So, Nick Cannon has to be bitch-slapped back into 'sense' for having said nasty stuff about Jews — never mind what he said about whites. It's perfectly okay for Jews to insult, defame, and smear whites. It's okay for blacks to denounce whites as the devil. No matter how much abuse is heaped on them, whites must keep their mouths shut, do nothing as their symbols & monuments are vandalized by mobs or removed by the establishment, take the knee, and cuck out. Or, whites can go into brainwashed Janissary mode like Antifa goons or the likes of John Bolton & Dan Crenshaw and join with Jews against the Culture War on whites and nationalism. How can true justice operate in such a world?

The fate of Arabs and Muslims in the current order is a sure sign that Idolatry Politics has rendered Justice into a tool of special groups, namely Jews, blacks, and homos. BLM means black lives are precious, white lives are not. And, it's always who/whom. When blacks kill blacks, never mind. As blacks are special, they may kill other blacks, just like gods may fight gods. But how dare these inferior low-life white mortals dare to kill a black god like Fentanyl Floyd or Gentle Giant Michael Brown? Blacks have been robbing, raping, assaulting, and murdering whites in alarming numbers since the 1960s, but who cares? The god-race may attack the mortal-race. Gods are deemed immortal, and blackness has been immortalized in the sense that the black tragedy of American Slavery has been essentialized to apply to all black folks and all of black history. (Also, electronic recording means that all future generations of whites get to worship Otis Redding and Bob Marley as immortal gods of pop culture.) After all, the so-called 1619 project applies even to black African immigrants, the descendants of blacks who captured and sold slaves. So, all of blackness from time immemorial to all the future is to be defined by tragic suffering at the hands of whites. So, never mind Bantu genocides against other Africans. Never mind Zulu atrocities. Never mind the likes of Idi Amin and all those nasty black thugs in the US and elsewhere. All of blackness through the eons is now about 'muh slavery' and ennoblement by suffering under white 'racism'. 100,000 yrs of blackness is to center around 200 yrs of slavery in America. And Jews have done the same with 'muh Holocaust'. All of Jewish Identity and History are to be associated with that tragedy. It's as if all of Jewish-Gentile history led up to that point and all of Jewish-Gentile future must revolve around that memory that condemns whites while consecrating Jews. So, it doesn't matter if Jewish history is full of bad Jewish behavior and if Jews do terrible things now or in the future. Jewish Identity has achieved Moral Immortality via the Holocaust Cult. Of course, in practice, Moral Immortality can only be a monstrous immorality as it's downright demented for any human group to act like they're eternally hallowed and sacred, thus above the rules that apply to other groups.

What does Moral Immortality for blacks and Jews mean in practice? Consider the fate of Muslims and Arabs. There was the photograph of the Muslim man whose business was destroyed in the aftermath of the Ferguson riots. He'd done no wrong. He was strong-armed and robbed by Michael Brown, and later big bully Brown attacked a police officer and got killed in the altercation. But the ONLY narrative that mattered was 'black lives matter' or Negrolatry. The livelihoods or the lives of Muslim businessmen didn't matter at all. The Jewish Media pushed Idolatry Politics of blacks uber Muslims. And one wonders how many Muslim businesses were destroyed this time around following the death of Fentanyl Floyd? To the New American Mind, only Jews, blacks, and homos have starring roles as the good guys while whites have the starring roles as villains. All other groups have supporting roles(at best) or exist only as blurry extras in the background. In movies, we don't care how many people get killed as long as the main characters survive. In INDEPENDENCE DAY, who cares if the entire city blows up as long as the key characters are alive and well and get all the glory?
I'm assuming many more Muslims had their lives ruined as the result of riots following the death of Fentanyl Floyd, but no one cares. So, blacks have a righteous right to riot, burn, loot, and attack people. Their lives(and lusts) matter, but others don't matter. This proves the utter hollowness of all this 'liberal' yammering about Diversity and Equality. Not only are immigrant groups being slated to pay the bulk of 'reparations' to blacks but all these 'nice white liberals' show no sympathy for people such as Muslims who were attacked by black violence.

But it is even worse with Jewish Power and its use of Mass Murder Inc, aka the US military. When Neocons smeared the 'Arabists', what were they really attacking? An American policy of blindly favoring Arabs over Jews? No, so-called 'Arabists' were calling for a more fair and balanced approach to the Middle East by considering Arab/Muslim interests as well as those of Zionists. If anything, your average 'Arabist' was nevertheless more pro-Zionist than pro-Arab. Still, he wasn't 100% pro-Zionist and willing to lend an ear to the other side, especially in service to American Interests. But, that wasn't good enough for Jews, for whom it had to be 100% pro-Jewish and the hell with Arab/Muslim interests. In other words, US foreign policy must be totally JEWIST, but of course, all the cuck-shills of Zion aren't called that. Idolatry Politics means Jews are special, wonderful, and oh-so-admirable in every way. Jews being so great, how can anyone oppose any Jewish demand?
So, whatever the problem or consequence, the US must always favor Jews EVEN IF these policies lead to wanton destruction of countless Arab/Muslim lives. Jewish Lives Matter, Arab Lives Don't. Jews can wipe out Palestine off the map, but never mind, and Long Live Israel. Instead, focus on paranoid fantasies of how Iran is going to 'wipe Israel off the map'. Israel ignores international standards and has 300 nukes with stolen technology and material from the US while Iran has no nukes and has caved to every international demand. But never mind. Shower Israel with billions in aid while starving Iran and subverting its economy, making millions suffer. And if Jews cheer on Saudi Arabia's genocidal war on Yemen on grounds that it's good for Jews and bad for Iran, that's great too. And even though Mossad is carrying out terrorist attacks in Iran(and aiding the most demented terrorists in Syria), ignore all that and just accuse Iran of being the #1 terrorist nation, as worthless Donald Trump does all the time as the pathetic dog of Zion.
So-called 'liberals' are so into idolatry(of Jews, blacks, and homos) that they are incapable of fair-mindedness. And for all their bleating about injustice, they are such craven cowards who dare not offend Jews lest they lose their precious jobs in elite institutions and industries. As for 'conservatives', their hierarchical mindset means they will kneel before whomever has the most power and privilege. Whether it's Sean Hannity praising Amazon or Rich Lowry cucking before his Jewish donors, 'conservatives' are following in the grand tradition of sucking up to the royal court. As for some others on the right, cheering for White Jews over Brown Arabs is a subliminal way of White Pride. It's ironic of course. Jews prohibit white identity and white agency, but Jews wink-wink urge white rightists to cheer for white Jews and Israel(as outpost of Western Civilization) against those Sand Ni**ers. If you can't have Apartheid and Jim Crow anymore, you can at least cheer for Jim Crowitz and IDF death squads mowing down those brown women and children. The likes of David French will virtue-signal by denouncing Old America but cheer on Israelis defending the border and shooting women and children in Gaza. A truly surreal case of whites, having had their own 'racism' canceled by Jews, must outsource their 'racist' fantasies to 'white' Jews who, being Moral Immortals, have the license to mow down brown people in the old ways of colonialist-imperialist wars.

Moral Immortality means Jews and blacks get to loot the world. Jews, being smart, used financial trickery to rape the Russian economy. Jewish banksters in Wall Street got massive bailouts and grew even richer during the Great Recession at the expense of Main Street. Ever more billions are poured into the coffers of Israel while coffins multiply in the Muslim World. The likes of Paul Singer and George Soros can loot entire nations.
Blacks, being stupid and childish, loot in the savage-barbarian way of smashing windows and running off with the goods. And beating up or shooting anyone in their way. Outwardly, blacks seem to do far more damage, but the amount they steal is a pittance compared to cargoes of Jewish Booty. At most, blacks will destroy a part of town. Jewish oligarchs and sharks loot entire economies. Not for nothing was George Soros called 'the man who broke the Bank of England'. But just like most black looters get to walk away scot-free with their loot, Jewish globalist sharks are allowed to keep their ill-gotten loot and look to steal more and more.

But, Jewish Power isn't only about white collar crime. By controlling cuck-politicians of the US, Jewish Power gets to employ Mass Murder Inc, aka US military, to wage Wars for Israel, thus destroying entire nations with invasions, bombings, drone attacks, and blockades. The death tolls abroad from such ventures are far beyond the murder and mayhem committed by blacks. But what do Jews and blacks care? Even when they are caught doing bad stuff, they usually get a slap on the wrist or get pardoned. Most black looters will walk free, and so many bad Jews are never investigated, and even those who get convicted serve in minimum-security prisons or get pardoned. Such is justice in Idolocratic America. Justice follows the theocratic mode of worshipful attitudes toward certain groups who can almost never do wrong even when they do wrong, whereas certain other groups, especially whites, Palestinians, Russians, and Iranians, are always deemed wrong even when they do right. But what would be right-and-wrong in a world of 'gay marriage' and 'trannies are women' logic that has inverted all sense of reality?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/UZaI1ZqikkNH/

If White People give up their Special Claim to the United States, WHO should have Ownership and Control over the American State? — Anglo-America’s Fatal Misconceptions about Jews and Blacks — The Social Psychology of Homeland

If white people have chosen to relinquish their ownership of America, who shall the United States belong to? By historical rights, the United States should be a White Nation. While, in the 'spiritual' sense, we can acknowledge that the American Indians have the deepest and most special connection to the land — as they'd been here for many eons prior to the arrival of peoples from the Old World — , the nation that came to be known as the 'United States' or 'America' is almost entirely the creation of the Anglo-Germanic founders and settlers. Even acknowledging the key role of black labor in the development of Early America, it was the vision, skills, rules, values, and the culture of whites that made possible the rise of a nation that wasn't only distinct from those of the Old World but those of Mexico, Central America, and South America, the so-called parts of Latin America. The simple fact is No Whites(Anglo-Americans and Anglo-Europeans[non-Anglos who became Anglo-ized as white immigrants in the US]), No America. America as a modern nation is simply inconceivable without white Europeans, especially those of Anglo(and Dutch, Irish, and Germanic)stock who laid down the foundations and supplied the labor guided by Protestant Work Ethic(that, in time, came to affect the Catholic Irish as well). Only a churlish moron or liar would dispute the historical fact of No Whites, No America.

Granted, it's likely another kind of nation might have arisen in North America if it hadn't been for the Anglos(and Germanics, Irish, and Dutch). If Anglos had kept out of the New World, the French might have settled North America and built an impressive Franco-American civilization. Or if the French had also remained out of the picture, perhaps most of North America would eventually have been settled by Russians from the Northwest(via Alaska) and by Spanish from the South. Or, if the Chinese and Japanese had been more adventurous across the seas, they might have settled parts of the West Coast. Those are all maybes, but what actually did happen is that the Anglos and the Germanics(that would include the Dutch and Scandinavians along with Germans), two of the most accomplished and talented peoples on Earth(apart from the French) at the time, managed to settle most of North America and in time gained overwhelming preeminence over it. As such, the main credit for the creation and development is with them.

But, it is true enough that the land was taken from the indigenous natives who, though wild and savage, were proud warrior folks with deep and even 'sacred' connection to the land. Also, as Northern Europeans couldn't produce enough babies fast enough(and in time, birthrates would precipitously fall among their kinds) to settle the vast territories of North America, the American colonies brought over black slaves. And then, to put down railroads and man the factories, the US brought over lots of immigrants from other parts of Europe, south and east. Blacks would long remain a problem, not so much because of the color of their skin but because they're naturally stronger, tougher, more aggressive, and more pathological(as well as having lower IQ, but then it is a good thing that blacks are inferior in intelligence because black psychopathy + black thuggery + high black IQ would have led to even more problems; the last thing we need is blacks with the IQ of Jews as well as the muscles of simians; after all, animals are stronger than humans but thankfully dumber, and only a fool would wish gorillas, lions, and bears were as smart or smarter than humans as humans would be threatened not only physically but intellectually by the beasts). Chinese arrived to work on railroads, but their number was limited, not least because of immigration restrictive laws that came to regard mass Asian immigration as 'yellow peril'. (White Americans feared mass yellow immigration like Palestinians feared mass Jewish immigration. Back then, white Americans were able to stem the yellow tide from Japan and China, the most populous nation on Earth, whereas Palestinians weren't able to put a stop to the Zionist tide that eventually overran the Arab population. Today, Jews in Israel are able to prevent the Right of Return by Palestinians, but white Americans aren't able to do much about the endless non-white immigration that threatens to reduce whites to a minority in the very nation they founded and built.)

As for non-Anglo and non-Germanic immigrants from Southern and Eastern Europe, they proved to be white enough and more-or-less easily assimilated into Anglo-Americanism. ANGLO-Americanism was the crucial glue(the Anglue) that made it possible for various ethnic groups to become ONE people. If in Europe, the various ethnic groups clung to their own identities against the others as NO single European identity or culture could rightfully claim itself as the Essence of European-ness, Anglos in America could make such claim because they'd been most instrumental in founding and forging a new nation; furthermore, non-Anglo immigrants came to America with appreciation of Anglo achievements and express purpose of becoming a part of the New Nation. Without the Anglue, the diverse ethnic groups that arrived in America could not become ONE people. Even as various ethnic groups clung to something particular to their own peoples and history, they could form common bonds with other ethnic groups(and even with other races) only because all groups adhered, in varying degrees, to ANGLO-Americanism. (Jew-Glue is less effective as a national bond because Jewishness is far more exclusive and particularist than Anglue. While Anglos had racial consciousness, they believed non-Anglos could partake of Anglo culture, ways, manners, and of course language. Anglo-ness could serve as the connective glue even for non-Anglos. But Jews never envisioned their culture in the same way. Jewish ways, values, and language were for Jews alone. Jews never dreamed to use Hebrew or Yiddish as a 'universal language'. Some Jewish guy came up with Esperanto, but that was something entirely divorced from Jewishness. Anglue became like Christmas. Even non-Christians could convert to the Faith and join in the celebration. In contrast, something like Passover is for Jews alone. In the West, there is a kind of Jew-Glue in that all American, Canadian, and European politicians make a show of worshiping the Holocaust and supporting Israel, but they are honoring and paying tribute to Jewishness as the Great Other. They are united in their obedience to Jewishness as a unique and superior quality. In contrast, applying the Anglue meant that YOU, even as a Non-Anglo, could fully partake of the culture even if you could not be racially Anglo yourself. Even a Hindu or African could become something like an 'English gentleman' even if he couldn't become racially English. Or anyone could partake of Anglo-American manners, attitudes, work ethic, and values even if he or she couldn't become Anglo by blood. In contrast, Jewish culture and Jewish race were inseparable. Goyim couldn't become even just 'culturally' Jewish. Jews forbade it as Jewish culture was meant to be practiced only in relation to Jewish identity. So, Jewish assault on Anglo-ness is as disingenuous as the Hindu assault on whites. Both Jews and Hindus have been far more exclusive and particularist in defining their own identity and culture than Anglos ever were. Even as Anglos kept Anglo racial identity for themselves, they allowed and even encouraged Others to partake of Anglo culture in language, values, ethics, and laws. This wasn't the case with Jews[or Hindus]. It was the willingness to take part in Anglo-ness as the essence of Americanism that made it possible for the various ethnic groups to coalesce into One People over time. Without the Anglue, the various groups would have fractured along tribal/ethnic lines[as in Europe] because there would have been no common culture that all groups could acknowledge and adhere to as the founding & defining essence of America. Likewise, Latin American nations have been able to form their own Common Culture because the founding stock[of Hispanics or Portuguese] insisted that the various immigrants participate in the established culture and language to become full members of the nation. Thus, Italians and Germans in Brazil learned to speak Portuguese and became 'Brazilian'; in Argentina, they learned to speak Spanish as ticket to becoming 'Argentinian'. No one disputes that Hispanic/Latin culture has been the defining bond for the peoples in what is called Latin America, but somehow, it's now become unfashionable for Americans[and Canadians] to emphasize the Anglue as the key cultural substance to hold the nation together. This is all the more confusing because even those who are most invested in denouncing Anglo culture are, in more ways than one, taking part in that very culture in terms of language, customs, and adherence to Rule of Law. Furthermore, one could argue that Anglue-as-connective-bond in North America is less offensive than the Spanish Glue of Latin America because, whereas Anglos and Northern Europeans were indeed the majority-dominant folks of the American Foundation, most Latin American nations remained majority Indio or mestizo, which meant that an alien European culture had to be imposed on the brown majority population whose indigenous cultures were destroyed. Anglue was mostly for a white America made up of Anglos and other Europeans, whereas Hispanic culture was imposed on non-European natives. Anglue still exists to the extent that everyone who comes to the US must learn English. Also, its influence and impact are to be found in just about every facet of Americanism: Laws, contracts, property rights, individualism, empiricism, pragmatism, work ethic, literature, moderation, and etc. But it's been turned into Invisible Glue so that Anglo-Americans now almost get NO credit for all that they've contributed to the nation. The only visible glue in regard to Anglo-Americans is the Guilt-Glue that makes everything bad stick onto whites, esp those of Anglo origin. According to shows like HAMILTON, America is really about Junglue, and we might as well pretend Hamilton was a Negro. Oddly enough, the musical is not the work of a Negro but a resentful Hispanic who seeks to degrade and demean Anglo culture[that put Latino culture to shame in terms of achievements and power] by implying that it can only be redeemed by Historical Miscegenation, also a feature of BBC that now often feature European historical figures as Negroes or some Other. KKKrazy Glue is the very opposite of Anglue. It seeks to bind people with pathological animus toward that very thing that was most instrumental in the foundation and creation of America. It's like using anti-glue as new glue. It spreads paranoia and hatred that everything white must be KKK or 'Nazi'. Sadly, most of today's Anglo-Americans suck up to the very people who are most invested in selling KKKrazy Glue.) Most Eastern Europeans, especially Central European Slavs, were almost as pale-faced as the Anglos and Germanics. Southern Europeans, in contrast, especially from places like Southern Italy and Greece, were swarthier and less white, but they were still white enough to gradually assimilate into Anglo-America. Also, despite their fallen status in modern times, Greeks and Italians had tremendous cultural capital as Western Civilization would have been inconceivable without Hellenic and Latin roots. In a way, the United States was like the final culmination of what had begun in the democracy of Athens and evolved in the republics of Rome. Even though the once barbarian-northern Europeans grew to greatness whereas the once advanced-southern Europeans fell on hard times, there was a deep historical and cultural connection between them. In time, even Southern-European Americans became more-or-less Anglo-ized and in effect became Anglo-Europeans of the New World. Also, as Southern European Americans were outnumbered by Northern-European Americans, the majority of them were mindful to fit in with the Northern-European-American models of behavior, manners, and work. Thus, they soaked up aspects of the Northern Protestant Work Ethic and respect for the Law, something that was absent in Latin America where, in most cases, Southern European Latinos set the template for majority populations that were Mestizo and/or Indio. Despite Italian-American criminality, most groups that arrived in the US came to admire the vision and achievements of Anglo-Germanic Americans and sought to be a 'credit to their race' by living up to the American Model as forged by the Founders and Settlers.

And the fate of America might have been a happy or happier story if not for the fact that many of those 'Eastern Europeans' were actually Semites, the Jews who arrived with a different mentality and attitude. Even as the poor immigrants from places like Poland, Italy, Russia, and etc. were grateful to start anew in America, they still fondly harked back to their nations of origins as spiritual homelands. They appreciated the freedoms and opportunities in America, but there lingered a sentimentality and nostalgia for the nations whence they came. They'd left for America out of ambition, not out of hatred for their own nations and peoples. There may have been narratives of disgruntlement with the poverty and backwardness of their ancestral nations of origin, but they still felt an attachment(especially as personal bitterness ebbed away, especially over generations), and many of them tried to recreate the Old World in the New World, as in German-towns and Polish-towns. In contrast, many Jews left Old World Europe for New World America with something bordering on real hatred for the departed lands. Whereas most white Americans felt, "Even if nothing works out here in the New World, there is my homeland in the Old World, the one I might return to", the Jews came to the US with a "Don't Look Back" attitude. It was the attitude of the ancients leaving Sodom or Egypt. They weren't leaving their homeland but the land of hostile strangers. While many Irish-Americans were haunted by bitter memories/stories about poverty-stricken Ireland, it was still their beloved homeland. In contrast, Jews never felt that way about Poland or Russia. John Ford made THE QUIET MAN as tribute to lovely green Eire, but the typical Jewish movie about the Old World was something like FIDDLER ON THE ROOF; there is no love for Russia. (Even the Coen Brothers are more sentimental about the Irish in MILLER'S CROSSING than about Jews in their other films. Because the Irish have a homeland, they feel home away from home. Even when things go badly for them in America or elsewhere, they can at least say, "There is a place called Ireland where MY PEOPLE live" and hum to "Danny Boy". It's the difference between Steve Martin and John Candy in PLANES, TRAINS, AND AUTOMOBILES. Even when everything goes wrong, Martin's character knows he has a home and family that waits for him whereas Candy's character is forever a wanderer with no place to call home, no place to return to. THE SWIMMER is ultimately tragic because it turns out Burt Lancaster's character no longer has a home, unlike Odysseus who still had a loyal wife and son waiting for him. The Irish in MILLER'S CROSSING feel at home even away from home because they know Ireland exists even if far away. In contrast, the Jews seem more restless in MILLER'S CROSSING and BARTON FINK, especially as the stories take place in a time before the creation of Israel. Having a homeland can even sweeten the worst tragedies. Irish remember the Potato Famine with great angst, but they still love the land on which their ancestors perished. In contrast, Jews feel no such attachment to the killing fields of Eastern Europe upon which Nazis and their collaborators mowed down countless Jews. Irish tragedy and territory are one. In contrast, the Holocaust that has become so holy to modern Jews happened on the lands of goyim. Irish died in their homeland, whereas Jews died in strangers' lands. It's more comforting to die in your own home than in a hostile stranger's place.) And this is why Jews became especially covetous of the United States. If most white groups felt that they still had a dear homeland to return to(or at least dream about) even if nothing good came of them in the New World, Jews felt they better make it in the New World because they could never feel truly at home in the Old World, especially as the rise of modern nationalism across Europe made things difficult for Jews who were marked by various ethno-national groups as alien, disloyal, parasitic, and rootless.


Jews appreciated the blank-slate aspect of America, the idea that it was a land where arrivals could start anew without the old baggage. It was like a criminal having his tainted record wiped clean. The hope was that Jews would be regarded merely as fellow Americans and free individuals without the deep-rooted prejudices of the Old World. And yet, Jews were bound to be problematic because, even as they enthused over the blank-slate aspects of Americanism(whereby anyone or at least any white person could become 'American' and judged on the basis of meritocracy than identity), they insisted on clinging to their own ancient identity, heritage, and even hatreds. Even as Jews were relieved that America was less 'antisemitic' than the Old World, they themselves remained nasty, hostile,and contemptuous toward the goy population, often animated by bitterness, resentment, and envy.

Furthermore, Anglo-Americans had contradictory reasons of their own for having welcomed in all those Jews. On the one hand, it was that very ancient pedigree of Jews that made Anglo-Americans romanticize them(in the way that bohemian types romanticized Gypsies and the way that Counterculture types in the Sixties did with Hindus and Eastern Mysticism). Especially because America broke free from the British Empire, there developed the conceit of a New Civilization. In fact, United States was essentially a continuation of British(and Germanic) Civilization, but the narrative of Independence & clean break from the Old World made Americans eager to gain cultural credentials. Without the myth of 1776, the American colonies(remaining part of the British Empire) would have regarded themselves as continuous in terms of history and heritage in its loyalty to the Motherland of England. But 1776 became for America what Anno Domini was for Christianity. The vision of a New Beginning.
Never mind that Christianity grew out of Judaism and that America grew out of Britain. To validate the New Idea or New Nation as legitimate and even superior, the breach had to be emphasized over the bond. But this was easier said than done as America, in contrast to Old World Europe, was indeed 'shallow' in history and culture. It couldn't boast of Athens, Renaissance, Shakespeare, or Mozart. Also, many white goy immigrants who came to the New World came without much culture or learning. Many were barely literate and were hardly in a position to contribute much to the development of American Culture. They came mainly to supply manpower to build a new nation by working on farms and factories. But Jews were different. They were more educated, literate, urban, and cultured. Also, more of them were involved with ideas, philosophy, and history. Thus, Anglo-Americans came to appreciate Jews as the instant-bringers of Culture/Heritage to America. Paradoxically, precisely because of America's conceit of rupture from the Old World, it craved something of depth and heritage. It's like a man who breaks free from home may exult in newfound freedom but soon finds himself hankering desperately for a new sense of home. (Replicants in BLADE RUNNER are psychologically unstable because they have no sense of past, no prior memories.) As America broke with Old Britain, it sought cultural sustenance in connection to something with even deeper pedigree. No people were as ancient as the Jews.

In a way, this was rather ironic because the US was to Britain what Christianity was to Judaism. And yet, the very enterprising, adaptive, and venturesome ways of the Jews struck a chord with Anglo-Americans who entertained the Ideal of the New Jew. The idea was that Jewishness had been warped and distorted in the Old World because of repressions and prejudices, but the New Jews of America would become wonderful Good Americans in the open and healthy air of freedom and liberty. (And Jews flattered Anglo-Americans for harboring just such delusional sentiments about the Tribe. Much later, American Conservatism would similarly romanticize the Neocons as Jews who would finally see the light and become Good Americans via baptism by Conservatism Inc. In fact, Jews cynically toyed with naive Conservative minds to take over the movement to push Jewish Supremacism in cahoots with Jewish 'Liberals'.)

Another reason why Anglo-Americans developed a certain feeling for Jews had to do with the rootless nature of Americanism. After all, if the vast continent had to be settled, it wouldn't do for too many Americans to put down roots in any single place. They had to keep moving, especially Westward to take land from the Indians and even Mexicans. Thus, unlike Greekness or Polishness, Americanism wasn't defined by vertical roots but horizontal movement. Americanism had to be defined in a portable manner. One wasn't American because he was tied to a particular territory in the New World but because of the portable bag of ideas he carried within his heart and mind at all times. So, even if he left Pennsylvania for Ohio and then for Iowa and then for Idaho and then for Oregon, he was an American because what really defined him was the Narrative, Outlook, and the Constitution.
In a similar way, the Jews, especially following the great Exile from Jerusalem, survived as identity and culture in the Diaspora because Jewishness came to be identified with the portability of their Narrative and the Law. Of course, the difference between American Mobility and Jewish Diaspora was that whereas white Americans felt 'at home' even as they moved from home to home across the great spaces of America, Jews had always felt away from home even as they settled in various parts of Europe, Arabia, and North Africa. A Jew in France wasn't really French, a Jew in Poland wasn't really Polish, a Jew in Germany wasn't really German, and etc. And yet, Jews were promised that a Jew in America could truly become an American and as such was truly 'at home' no matter where he lived in the United States. For a people who hadn't had a taste of homeland for nearly two millenniums, the American Dream was intoxicating for Jews. Just like a famished person over-eats upon being presented with food, Jews gorged on the idea of America as 'homeland'. And yet, there was the paradox. America could be a homeland for the Jews precisely because it wasn't the homeland for a particular people. A nation like Poland or Russia couldn't really be the homeland of Jews because, even if Jews there were allowed to live in peace and prosperity, there would be the constant reminders that Poland really and mainly belongs to the Polish and Russia really and mainly belongs to the Russians. In contrast, if America belongs to no particular people, then it belongs to all the world, and that means Jews could claim it as much as any other people could.
There was certainly an aspect of Americanism that suggested as much, at least as a Dream, but the American Reality was something else. In fact, America was a specific racial and cultural creation, and it couldn't have been created by any other people. Pete Buttplug(aka Buttigieg) says 'white supremacism' will ruin America, but America wouldn't exist in the first place if not for 'white supremacism' and 'racism'. And this would become a great contradiction of Americanism. But there is another contradiction, that between Jews seeing America as belonging to the whole world(including the Jews) AND Jews seeing America as belonging to themselves to own as their empire.

Is there any way White Americans can reclaim the United States as essentially an extension of European Civilization? Maybe, maybe not, but it seems unlikely. If things continue as usual, the US will become a giant California. As Texas is poised to go Democratic in a matter of years, the GOP won't be able to win elections again UNLESS it becomes just another Democratic Party. But then, it's been useless on the issue of immigration and demographic Replacism for as long as anyone can remember. After all, the mantra of both parties became DIOS or Diversity Is Our Strength, a suicidal chant programmed into white minds by the Jews. But then, once US loses its core identity and meaning, most peoples, white and non-white, will lose their sense of identity, heritage, and history.
If Americanism is defined merely as a futurism, most Americans will have little or no sense of the past and just look forward to the latest fad/fashion or trend. They will be like kids who, having no sense of the past, just look forward to new thrills and excitements. Kids are born with blank slate memories. Unless they are taught of the history of their own people, they know NOTHING. Historical memory isn't passed down genetically. This is why kids are mainly fixated on the next meal, next prize, next cookie & candy, next thrill, next excitement. And Americans, even in adulthood, have become like kids. Instead of turning into grownups with a sense of history and duty, they become 'growndowns' as their mentalities are focused on new razzle-dazzles: New sports seasons, new blockbuster movie, new pop song release, etc.

While those who ONLY look backward will be mired in the past and fail to make progress, those who've mastered the art of looking forward-and-backward(like the Roman god Janus) will have a decisive advantage over those who only look forward(or backward). The Amish won't amount to much because they only look backward. But those who only look forward will lose out to those who look forward/backward... and eventually even to those who only look backward(as ultra-traditionalists at least have something of depth to cling to). While those who only look forward may succeed as talented individuals, they have no deep theme to bind them with others of their kind and with their ancestors. A white 'forwarder' thinks and feels as an individual. If smart and talented, he may do remarkable things in science/technology/arts. If untalented and stupid, he will likely wallow in insipid thrills of the moment. But in either case, he can only succeed or fail as an individual. He isn't part of a history, culture, or heritage(that serves as the great equalizer and uniter of the successful and unsuccessful within the race). Even if successful, his money is only about himself. Or, lacking a sense of belonging and history, he will likely donate his money to the latest fads and fashions in 'social justice', like Fund the Magic Negro or invest in Globo-Homo.

In contrast, if you're backward-looking as well as forward-looking, then you not only work towards individual success in the future but feel a powerful sense of connection to the past(with its deep history and line of ancestors). This is why Jews and Hindus are now favored over the deracinated whites who only look forward as Futurist Americans. Looking only forward, whites have forgotten where they've come from and who their ancestors are. Also, under Jewish control, the only thing they know about their own past is now associated with 'white guilt' and 'white shame' for all the wrongs. In contrast, even as Jews(and Hindus) push forward in science/technology and etc., they also feel a powerful connection with deep roots of history, culture, and heritage. They understand that a tree, in order to grow higher, must rely on roots to draw water and nutrients deep in the soil. Also, it is the roots that provide balance and stability so that the tree can remain standing against the wind and other forces. This is why Jews and Hindus want the power of History(backward-looking) only for themselves while they urge whites to look only forward to the Great Future... of atomized individuality and divisive Diversity — Jews would have us believe that Diversity, the main agent of division, is the best bet for unity in American, which is like saying water is the best drying agent. If whites had a powerful sense of history, they would object to Diversity. They would feel proudly white and struggle to keep their domain as white as possible. But under Jewish mind-control, whites have either forgotten their glorious past or been told that it was all shameful and evil, therefore requiring the smashing of White Idols and erasure of White Icons to make way for the redemptive symbols of Diversity(and oddly enough, Globo-Homomania, as if celebration of homo fecal-penetration and tranny penis-cutting has the magical power to wash whites of 'guilt'). If White Guilt won't do the trick with all the whites, Jews employ White Flattery to make whites welcome the world as an act of globlesse oblige, i.e. whites are so great, noble, awesome, and 'more evolved' than rest of humanity that, of course, they wouldn't stoop to 'petty tribalism' & 'racist' greed but instead generously and compassionately share their wealth & wonders with the all of mankind. Fools like David French seem to have fallen for this bait, but there has always been a self-righteous save-the-world element in Christianity that could be manipulated in such manner.

This is why Jews and Hindus live in the past, present, and future, whereas the great majority of whites only live in the future. And if the future is anti-white or less-white, whites don't mind because their lack of white-past-ness has failed to instill them with the requisite sense of identity, glory, and pride that would want to make them defend what they're about. Suppose Jews only looked forward and never backward. Why would they care about Israel or the Holy Land? Why would they care about the meaning of Jewishness? Why would they care about what happened in the Shoah? Furthermore, suppose Jews allowed non-Jews(especially those who are hostile to Jews) to rewrite Jewish history so as to selectively shape the Narrative to make Jewish History look pretty bad. Then, most Jews will look only forward because looking backward would be pretty depressing OR will look backward only to feel guilty about their shameful past, which would only embolden them to make amends to rest of humanity by doing all that is possible to erase the evil Social Construct of Jewishness that has done so much harm to the world. But in our world, Jews have the upper-hand over whites because, whereas Jews, like Janus, look backward to look forward, white folks only look forward for atomized success/thrills or look backward only to wallow in 'white guilt'. Of course, there are plenty of whites, especially libertarian-types, who look only forward without much in the way of 'white guilt', but having no sense of roots or past-ness, they have no compelling theme with which to link up with other white folks to form a united racial front like the Jews(and Hindus) have done for themselves.

The great fatal mistake of White America was to trust the Jews. Why did Anglo-Americans so miscalculate the Jews? It was because they imposed their own ideal of the Dream Jew onto the Real Jew, and the psychological savvy Jew read the White Mind and, at least partially, played the role of the Ideal Jew just enough to hoodwink whites. It's like whites also had this ideal vision of the Noble Negro as a credit to his race. This had little to do with the Real Negro. It's like some people have this romantic view of Gypsies as free spirits and soulful wanderers when, if anything, most Gypsies are a bunch of petty crooks and idiots. It's like boomers of Counterculture had this rosy view of Hindus and Eastern Mysticism when, in fact, too many Hindu gurus and the like were egotists, frauds, charlatans, or madmen. Also, contrary to the notion of Asian-Indians living in harmonic-karmic relation to spirituality and cosmos, most dotkins were a petty, stupid, nasty, greed, and materialistic bunch whose main wishes during prayer was More Money. The Counterculture fools also idealized the American Indians as the children of nature who'd communed peacefully with animals and trees before the arrival of Evil White Man. While one can acknowledge the deep 'spiritual' connection between Indians and pre-Columbian America, the fact is the Red Savages were brutal folks(like the ones in Michael Mann's THE LAST OF THE MOHICANS) running around with tomahawks and scaring gophers half to death.


Generally, the powerful are more likely to weave idealized misconceptions about the Other. As they got the upper-hand, they feel free and secure to romanticize weaker groups. And as they control the information and narrative, they can create myths of the Other and then prefer the Myth over the Reality. Having all that power and security makes them feel magnanimous, a noble trait to be sure(but only when not delusional). Such illusions aren't particularly dangerous IF the Other has little or chance of gaining real power. White Americans can idealize and even idolize American Indians or Eskimos all they want. The fact is the Indians or Eskimos are never going to amass the kind of power to threaten whites. But when whites came to prefer myth over reality in regard to Jews and Negroes, it was a fatal mistake as Jews had the will, talent, and means to gain great power; and blacks had the numbers, muscle, and arrogance to do real harm to weaker whites. Of course, powerful white elites initially idealized Jews and blacks when the latter groups were much weaker. There was a time when blacks were indeed slaves or second-class citizens in the US. Also, as blacks feared white power and reprisals(that could sometimes be very violent) back then, they tended to behave better, and this made certain elite and/or reformist whites to feel special sympathy for the Tragic Groid. Likewise, there was a time when most Jews from Russia and Eastern Europe looked like a pitiable lot, the kind lamented in the Bob Dylan song, "I Pity the Poor Immigrant".


There are two realities. Reality as it really is and 'Reality' as one sees it. The latter may be called 'Seeality'. This is why so many marriages go wrong. Suppose one person idealizes his/her partner as the most wonderful lover. He/she becomes so besotted with the idea of love and being wedded to the other person that he/she ignores all the hints, clues, and signals that, maybe just maybe, that person is NOT the dream-partner or ideal soulmate. One's dream, passion, illusion, hope, and/or compassion blinds his/her vision as to the Real Person. Such illusion can exist between humans and animals too. Why do some people end up dead mauled by animals? Because they insist on seeing certain animals as their 'friends' or even 'family members'. One person convinced himself that the alligators he'd raised regarded him as a 'friend'. He projected his humanness onto the mega-reptiles that, in time, killed and ate him. And there was Timothy Treadwell.

Just like American Indians who aided early white settlers had no idea of the true nature of white folks, Anglo-Americans had no sense of the Real Jew, not least because white minds were clouded with the vision of the Ideal Jew. When Jews washed ashore poor and powerless, Anglo-American elites were blinded by compassion and idealism, the notion that America is so wonderful that even Jews, who had a long troublesome history with Christendom in Europe, would become Good Americans and get along as capital fellows with white Christian folks. Instead of trying to figure out the Real Jew, they imposed their idealized view of the Ideal Jew on the Real Jew. Later, as Jews gained in power at the expense of Wasps, Anglo-Americans concocted new hopes that, once again, ran counter to reality. Liberal Wasps saw Jews as committed crusaders for justice for all mankind while Conservative Whites hope that Jews would eventually come to realize their own deep conservative roots, learn to bury the hatchet with white Christians, and invest their great wealth & influence for the good of Western Civilization. Neither bunch of whites had the clarity of mind to see the Real Jew for what he really is. White folks will remain hopeless unless they come to See the Real Jew at last. Likewise, Europe will become Africanized and turned into a hell unless white people there See the Real Negro at last. Due to Jewish control of media/narrative and black success in sports/pop-music, too many white folks have this notion that blacks are tragic-magic, the redeemers of much tainted white civilization, i.e. the white world can only be redeemed if white lands, white wombs, and white everything are touched and healed by Black Magic. The end-result will be the biggest human tragedy ever, what with savage black Africans rampaging through Europe and Africanizing everything they see and touch... just like the Siafu African ants in THE HELLSTROM CHRONICLE lay waste to everything in their path. Black destructiveness is so obvious that one would think white folks would have woken up by now, so why are so many of them still asleep? One reason is Jews and privileged cuck-whites(who are are sheltered from the racial reality) control the media and spread the image of the Magic Negro that became the 'seeality' for countless whites. Another reason is the song-and-dong factor. So many whites are addicted to black music and so many white women are into jungle fever that they mainly associate white surrender to blackness as pleasure in dance and sex. Another reason is 'guilt' and fear. Even whites who know the truth about blacks are nevertheless infected with 'white guilt' and feel paralyzed to saying anything negative or alarming about the ghastly 'groids'. They would rather face total demise than commit the 'sin' of 'racism'. And there is the Fear Factor as anyone even slightly associated with 'racism' will be fired, destroyed, blacklisted, and even physically attacked(with full blessing of the Power).


At any rate, if indeed White America is lost(because white folks just don't have the requisite will, courage, unity, confidence, pride, organization, or good sense), then... to whom should America belong? To all the world, what with the US as Immigration-Nation? If whites relinquished the title of the rightful owners of America, then it seems the only 'fair' and 'just' outcome would be America as free-for-all for all the world. Suppose a pack of wolves bring down a moose and claim it as their own and gorge on it. But then, suppose the wolves figure, "We had enough, and the remaining moose meat isn't simply ours but for all of you", the 'you' being all the other creatures who've gathered around the mass of meat: Coyotes, badgers, eagles, hawks, buzzards, weasels, raccoons, foxes, Gila Monsters, carnivorous turtles, cougars, bears, wild pigs, and etc. If the wolves no longer claim it, then the feast should be a free-for-all for all creatures great and small. It would make no sense for wolves to give it up to all the other animals ONLY TO have one particular species make special claim on it. Ideally, the wolves should have kept it as they'd brought down the moose. But if wolves lost their good sense and decided to share the meat with all the creatures, then it should belong to all equally. But suppose weasels come forth and say that THEY should have special claim to it... even as weasels argue that it was only right on the part of wolves to hand it over to the other animals in the name of 'fairness' and 'justice'. But if so, why should the weasels have special claim on the moose meat, taking the choice parts for themselves while doling out only second-rate and third-rate meat and innards for the other creatures? Indeed, IF one particular bunch of creatures must have claim over the meat, it should be the wolves because they brought down the moose. If the wolves give up their claim to the meat, then NO OTHER particular bunch of creatures should lay special claim to it. They must all share the meat equally. Then, how ridiculous it would be for the weasels to insist that the meat belongs especially to their own kind.

Such is the dilemma facing Future America. There used to be White America that was founded, made, and claimed by whites as their great domain. It was the America of THE BIG COUNTRY, the magnificent William Wyler Western. Whites were takers of the land and makers of the nation. They had every reason to lay special claim on it. But, especially under the influence of rising Jewish Power that pushed the Immigration-Narrative over the Founder-Settler Narrative, there developed the idea that America must be the land for all the peoples of the world. Apparently, America is too big, bountiful, blessed with over-abundant resources, and filled with potential for it to be greedily hogged by one bunch of people; come to think of it, John Wayne said as much as to why Indians didn't deserve to keep America for themselves. Apparently, something that magnificent, wonderful, and incredible has to be shared with all the world. Of course, the difference is that, whereas whites came to a wilderness to build a nation that wasn't there, non-whites come to partake of what another people built(and without much in the way of gratitude as their children are instructed by Jewish Media/Academia to hate Whitey). White Immigration was the story of capitalist enterprise to build what wasn't there; Non-white immigration is the story of socialist entropy to take from others who built it.

A most repulsive Dotkin

For whatever reasons — idealism, magnanimity, generousness, compassion, gullibility, fear of rising Jewish power, wish for buffer against blacks, madness, stupidity, & apathy, naivete, greed for cheap labor, etc. — , whites decided to forsake their special claim to America and re-brand the nation as a Proposition Nation of Immigration and Diversity(and 'Inclusion' too). This was a terrible decision on the part of whites, but what could be done about madness of such magnitude? Whites had the power to be stupid, and they chose stupidity. It's like when the lord made the rash decision to relinquish his power to his sons in Akira Kurosawa's RAN, there was nothing to stop it. He had the power to give it up, and he did. He willfully ignored all signs that his sons could prove to be treacherous and favored the myth of Loyal Sons over the reality of Suspicious Sons. There was once a time when white folks could have kept the title as owners of America, but they made the fatal decision to open America to all the world. Imagine if some rich guy is persuaded to withdraw all his money from the bank and hand it over to the People. It'd be most retarded, but if he's going to do it, then the fair thing would be for him to throw all that cash into the winds from a high tower so that everyone below has a equal chance of getting some. But what if the very persons who goaded the rich man to give it all away also convinced him to hand over most of the money to THEM so that THEY would get to decide who gets what. What would be the purpose of surrendering one's own money in the name of the People IF the bulk of the cash actually ends up in the hands of a tiny cabal of shysters who claim to work for the public trust but hog most of prizes for themselves as personal loot?

If White People give up their special claim to America, then America should belong to the world. I'd pity such an America of endless immigration and deracination all around, of whites and non-whites alike, a nation that has no majority but is made up of minorities of various backgrounds whose only common bonds are Money, Individuality, abandonment of culture-of-origin, and vapid Pop Culture. But such a prospect is still preferable to an America claimed especially by a particular group that has no historical rights to it. While Jews have made great contributions to America, they were not the founders, settlers, or builders who made it possible. They were mostly late-comers who benefited greatly by taking advantages of the system already in place.
Furthermore, it is especially wrong for Jews to make special claim on America because the very essence of their argument against America-as-White-Nation hinges on the New America being a Global Nation equally open to and representative of All Mankind. If such was the 'moral' and 'intellectual' argument that finally convinced White America to give way to New Global America, then Jews have no grounds to demand special privileges. They should be like everyone else in the New America that no longer plays favors to any single group. But, if Jews insist that New America must especially be sensitive and obedient to Jewish and Zionist agendas, then the Jewish argument against White America would have been just an elaborate hustle. Jews persuaded whites to give up special claim to America to hand it on a silver platter to the whole world, BUT, when the moment finally arrived, Jews snatched the platter mainly for themselves. It's so much like what Facebook and Google did to become monopolies. They gained the trust and participation of EVERYONE, 'left' and 'right', on the promise that they would not be biased toward any particular group. After all, if Google and Facebook had revealed their ideological agendas and/or tribal biases from the very beginning, many people would have refused their services and sought out alternatives. But precisely because Big Tech companies promised impartiality and fairness, EVERYONE regardless of race, creed, or color signed up to use their search engines and platforms. But once the Jews at Google and Facebook gained monopoly positions, they rigged results and gamed algorithms to favor the views and agendas of their Tribe and ideology. It was all just a hustle. Terms of Service mean nothing to Google and Facebook Jews. They know that with monopoly power, they can change the Terms as they wish, and there is nothing that anyone can do about it, especially as they've bought up so many whore politicians. Furthermore, the Jew-dominated media have their back, and most top judges and lawyers are either Jewish or controlled by Jewish money and power. How lowdown and dirty.

Because the US is the lone superpower, it can do great harm as well as great good around the world. While Anglo-American history is checkered with the bad as well as with the good, the so-called Wasps have not been without some sense of honor, decency, nobility, and rectitude. Also, as white elites of an overwhelmingly white-majority and white-dominant nation, there was a clear sense of American history, American reality, and American interests. There was a good deal of correlation between the American People and the American Way, its diplomacy around the world.
Today, things are so confused. While there are plenty of Anglo-Germanic Americans in upper echelons of business and government still, they are no longer the ruling elites. Even the richest and most powerful of them must look over their shoulders at Jewish Power that can make or break anyone. But Jews won't step up to the plate as the New Elites of America. They still hide Jewish Power behind the drapery of 'white privilege'. Even as the owners and managers of America, they still insist on using mostly white goy politicians as their puppets and buffers. Thus, even though New America is obviously all about "Is it good for Jews?", we are not supposed to notice that Jews are pulling the strings. We are supposed to believe that so many cuck goy politicians chant "We Stand with Israel" spontaneously out of their own volition as American as Apple Pie. We have a situation where so many white/goy politicians still hold nominal positions of power but actually have no power as they do little but the bidding of Jews. They are out front but have no will or agenda of their own. They are puppets. As for Jews, they remain behind the scenes or pretend to even though some of them are so prominent in American Power and Global Affairs. We are not supposed to notice that the likes of George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Hollywood Jews, Las Vegas Jews(like Sheldon Adelson), Google Jews, and the like are the real movers and shakers of America that, in turn, shakes the whole world. Just ask the Palestinians.

As the US is the lone superpower with the means to destroy entire nations, why should Jews, who make up only 2% of the population, wield the hammer and have the ultimate say on how American Power is to be used around the world? The only people with a rightful historical claim to America are white Christian Americans. As they gave up their title in the name of America as Proposition Nation for all the world, Jews have no right to claim special ownership of and privileges in America. Indeed, recent events especially following the end of the Cold War have powerfully illustrated the dangers of America-as-lone-superpower being controlled and manipulated for the narrow, supremacist, and hegemonic interests of a tiny minority. Just consider the Wars for Israel that have devastated and/or displaced millions of people. Look what Jewish-Americans, in cahoots with Russian Jews, did to the Russian economy in the 1990s; Jews could pull such a massive scam because they took the Big Stick from the Wasps. Look how Jews made the plight of Palestinians even worse while Israel has been indulged without limit despite its increasingly arrogant and aggressive policies. Consider how Israel is rewarded for having 300 illegal nukes while Iran is economically strangled despite having no nukes and complying with international inspections. And if the New America is all about equality for all, why have so many Jewish crooks, thieves, and gangsters been able to get away with so many crimes and abuses? Where is equal justice in all this? Jews even have special prisons for their own kind.

Consider America as a gun. There was a time when it was a gun held by whites. But Jews told whites that it's unfair and dangerous for whites to own the gun, thereby having unjust power and advantage over other groups. So, whites put the gun on the table so that it could be owned by all, and the only way such sharing would be possible is if the gun is disassembled whereby every group would get a piece of it. That way, no single group could hold the gun to his advantage over others. It would have just a piece, like all other groups. But that didn't happen. Jews grabbed the gun for themselves while handing a toy gun to whites to give the impression that whites still have the gun that has yet to be dismantled and shared equally among all groups. But in fact, the real gun, the real power, is with the Jews who press it on the back of cuck-whites who now have no choice but to do the bidding of Jews. If America were a poor and weak country, it wouldn't matter who owned or ran it. After all, who cares about who owns or runs Burma or Botswana. But the US is the lone superpower and has the power to destroy entire worlds. Thus, American power must be held by a good people. A decent, sane, and responsible people. Even though White America was far from saintly or even all that good, it was still better than most nations around the world, many of which were downright tyrannical, crazy, or evil. Also, with Anglo-Americans at the helms of power, the world got to more-or-less understand, anticipate, predict, and even appreciate what Americanism was all about. There emerged a certain pattern of Wasp attitudes and behavior around which others could adapt themselves.

But with the demise of Wasp rule and rise of Jewish Power that remains behind the curtain, it's been very confusing to the world as to what America is really about. Sure, plenty of people around the world know that the US is Jew-ruled, but because Jews go out of their way to punish anyone or any nation deemed 'antisemitic'(that now means any honest assessment or noticing of Jewish power), even powerful nations like China, Russia, India, and Iran dare not say the JEWS are behind American Power. As for America's obnoxious expressions of obeisance to Israel, Zionism, and Jews? Isn't that evidence enough that Jews control America? But you better not say so. We are to believe that all the politicians, celebrities, and cucks who sing hosannas to Jews and Israel do so purely out of the goodness of their noble hearts because, after all, there is nothing more inspiring in life than to love the Jew, revere the Jew, worship the Jew. "Oh no, Jewish Power didn't make me play fetch and roll over before Jews. I did it out of my own free will because Jews, oh the Jews, are the Chosen, the Holy, the Awesome." This game is very dangerous.

If Whites won't retake America as their special creation and nation, then the only two honest options are (1) We all demand that Jews admit that they are the new elites and take full responsibility on those grounds, i.e. Jews must be fully accountable as the New Rulers of America, taking credit when things go well but taking blame when things fail. It must also be understood by all that the American Proposition is NOT equality but Jewish supremacy. (2) Jews give up their dominant position in the US just like Wasps have done and then sincerely work to ensure that America will really belong to All peoples and will not favor any particular group. In other words, the US will not favor Israel over Palestinians and Iran. It will not favor Jewish globalists against Russia. It will not consider Jewish interests as of paramount importance in decision-making. While Jewish interests will be heard and considered, NO MORE SO than the interests of other groups. It's like the US plays it fair between Greeks and Turks on the issue of Cyprus. If US were truly a World Nation, then it must handle the Israel-Palestinian conflict in the same manner. It must stop insisting that "Israel is America's greatest ally", a supremacist sentiment if there ever was one, while being hostile toward Palestinian concerns. And if white goyim are to be hounded for their over-representation in many fields, the same criticisms must be leveled at preponderance of Jewish wealth and power in so many higher institutions.

Since the end of the Cold War, Arabs and Muslims especially know about the dangers of the Lone Superpower being controlled by one single group. Jews are only 2% of the US population, but they took the steering wheel of the American Battleship and have been using their position to make American superpower to favor Zionists over Arabs and Muslims EVEN WHEN Israel is clearly in the wrong. When we look at the devastation of Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Yemen due to Jewish control of America(and when we consider the economic tragedy visited on Iran due to Jewish-controlled US foreign policy), we can understand why Arabs and Muslims would like to see the US belonging equally to all the world. They'd feel much safer in their homelands IF the US were no longer the warship of the Jews. They probably wouldn't mind who owned or controlled America IF American Might wasn't used to bring about so much agony and suffering to the Arabs and/or Muslims in the Middle East. And Arabs and Muslims know that things are the way they are because the US, despite its growing diversity, is firmly controlled by Jews. Indeed, the burgeoning Diversity has, in some ways, emboldened Jewish Power even more because Jews have been able to use Diversity to undermine white power(as potential balance against Jewish Power). As most of Diversity doesn't have the brains, will, and/or guts to rise to the top, Jews will continue to hold most of the power. And Jews play Diversity against whites and whites against Diversity while they themselves are served by both whites and Diversity as Jews who, as high priests and high financiers, control both the Money and the 'Morality'.

America used to be a White Nation. And then, we were told it is to be a World Nation. And in the current year, we are supposed to believe that America belongs equally to all the world and rejects any kind of 'racism' or 'bigotry'. And yet, this is all just a ruse because the US really went from a white-owned nation to a Jewish-controlled nation. Even though its increasing Diversity lends the outward appearance of a World Nation, its inner-workings of power leave no doubt that it is a Jewish supremacist colony, the jewel in the crown(or yarmulke) of the Empire of Judea. And that must end for there to be balance and lasting peace around the world. America should belong to whites, but if whites give up the title, then it must belong to the world. It must not belong to Jewish hustlers who yammer about the America as a World Nation but only really care about World Hegemony by the Tribe.