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.

The Virtue of Choosing Something Lesser than Oneself than Greater than Yourself — Why Jews, with their Contradiction of Fanatical Tribalism, are Unfit to be Imperialists — Hubris of Richard Spencer and Matt Heimbach in the Fall of the Alt Right

John McCain the 'War Hero' who called on Americans to serve something greater-than-oneself. In his case, it was serving the Uber-Tribal-Ideology of Zionist-Jewish Imperialism.

We’ve all heard from politicians and teachers that we shouldn’t be so self-absorbed and individualistic. We should live and struggle for something ‘greater than ourselves’. John McCain said as much in the 2008 campaign. Of course, ‘greater than yourself’ doesn’t necessarily mean something grand, awesome, and powerful. It doesn’t mean you have to be part of History with Capital ‘H’. It doesn’t mean you must be associated with Important People, Macro Trends, and Geo-Politics. It could actually be humble, about doing good work for little people who need it most. After all, Christian missionary work where people from the West(and now East) go to poorer parts of the world to spread the Gospel and improve lives has been regarded as doing God’s work, and what work can be greater than that to a Christian? And Peace Corp. that started with the Kennedy Administration was about bringing American Know-How to the underdeveloped Third World.
And yet, words matter in shaping our thought processes, and the term ‘Greater than Oneself’ has had a corrupting influence on people. Indeed, we can start with John McCain himself. So, what did McCain mean by working for something ‘greater than himself’? It was all about shucking for Wall Street and shilling for all-powerful Jews. Even McCain’s faux-compassion for illegals from Mexico and Central America was under the directive of Wall Street, Globalist Elites, and Jewish Power. After all, if McCain was concerned about suffering non-whites, why was he blind to the disasters wrought upon the Muslim World by Jewish Power, esp. that of the Neocons? Why was he reliably silent about Zionist oppression of Palestinians? In practice, what McCain meant by ‘greater than oneself’ was serving the biggest power(that in his lifetime became Jewish and Zionist) and participating in Big History. Of course, McCain and others like him spouted the usual talking points about ‘human rights’, ‘spreading democracy’, and ‘fighting terrorism’ — to give the impression that their political lives were devoted for the Greater Good of all Mankind — , but his main attraction to politics was about being where the Power is at.

Words matter, and when most people hear invocations of ‘greater than oneself’, they don’t think of good works or good deeds but being part of Greater History. Because History, as the conflicts and tensions on a world scale, is generally moved by the Powerful(who tend to be amoral, heartless, opportunistic, cynical, ruthless, cunning, fanatical, and/or unscrupulous), those who take part in Big History will rarely be working for the good of mankind. Rather, they will be working for the aggrandizement of the super-elites. Things are especially worse when the Great Power happens to be both intensely tribal and maniacally imperialist. If a people choose to be tribal, they should stick to nationalism: Our people, our nation, our culture. If they choose to embark on the imperial project, they need to rise above narrow tribalism and try to meet other peoples at least halfway. The reason why the British and Christian Europeans made such successful imperialists was they gave as well as took. While they could be ruthless, cruel, and greedy(and committed innumerable horrors like all other empires), they could also show genuine respect for other peoples and cultures. And they were willing to share their God with other folks via conversion. One might say Christianization of the natives was a form of ‘cultural genocide’, and there’s some validity to that claim, but it also demonstrated that white Christians were willing to regard even their subjects as fellow children of God. In contrast, Jews, like German Nazis, make awful imperialists. Jews with their current mentality, like Germans of the National Socialist period, should really just stick to nationalism. They are too tribal to ‘rule the world’. German Nazi-Imperialism became especially brutal, murderous, and insane in areas where the inhabitants, such as Russian Slavs, were barely regarded as members of the human species. There was no possibility of meeting the natives halfway. The Nazi German attitude was one of total superiority over inferiority. It could easily become a blueprint for mass-genocide or mass-enslavement.

Imperialism has partially justified itself across the span of history as a liberating or uniting force. Napoleon was an imperialist leader but spread French concept of freedom and liberty to other Europeans. Indeed, had Napoleon prevailed over Russia, Russian people would have been freer as individuals even if their nation was under French domination. Same was true of Chinese in Hong Kong under British rule. It was clearly a case of imperialism but an enlightened one. So, even though the empire's days were numbered, there was appreciation as well as resentment.
Imperial subjects may find domination by foreigners tolerable and even welcome(to some degree) IF there’s a compensatory gain over the loss of national-tribal autonomy. (In a sense, the inner-logic of immigration is like imperialism. So many people choose to come to America, abandon their own land-people-cultures, switch loyalty to a new nation[even at the risk it may attack and destroy the homeland of immigrants], and follow new narratives & worship new icons IN EXCHANGE for better material lives and more personal liberty. Muslims come to the US and have better material lives but pay taxes to support Wars for Israel that kill Muslims by the bushel. And in turn, white Americans accept demographic replacement on account of its economic benefits. There is give-and-take in both imperialism and immigration... at least until the balance is lost as in the case of Palestine where Jewish arrivals totally took over and expelled the great majority of Palestinians.) This is especially so IF the national leadership has traditionally been corrupt or tyrannical. This was part of the reason why not all Frenchmen were dispirited by the German invasion and occupation of France. Incredible as it may seem to many today, there were plenty of Frenchmen who believed that France was under leftist-Jewish-socialist domination in the 1930s and that the German invasion, though regrettable, at the very least removed Jews and the Left from seats of power. Such sentiments were possible in France because the Germans respected the French and treated them rather nicely. But such feelings were impossible in much of Poland and especially Russia where Germans invaded as exterminators and/or slavers. Even Russians who detested Stalin and Communism soon realized that German Victory would be even worse. So, if the imperialist power isn’t willing to meet the conquered & subjugated halfway with concessions that sweeten the humiliation of defeat, it’d be better for everyone if the invading power just stayed home and stuck to nationalism. If Hitler had invaded Russia with a Napoleonic outlook(as an Enlightened and Tolerant Tyrant), he might have won over more Slavs to his side; they might have thought, "It’s better to have humane treatment under foreign domination than inhuman treatment under national rule." (To be sure, Stalin and many Bolshevik rulers weren’t Russian.) But Germans invaded to take everything while giving nothing. For Russians, the options were resist, win, and survive OR surrender, lose, and die. As Germans attacked only with the stick and no carrot, Russians had no choice.

Nazi German Invasion of Soviet Union. A Total War of Zero-Sum stakes.

When we look at Jewish Power in the current world, it is obvious that they, rather like the Nazi Germans and, to a lesser degree, the Japanese Imperialists, is unfit to be imperialist mode. Anglo-Americans, for all their faults and hypocrisies, made better imperialists because they had a modicum of honor and sense of shared humanity. Despite Anglo-America’s racial views of superiority and culturally arrogant attitude, its vision of humanity was tempered by Christianity that taught all peoples are God’s children. Also, the Anglo tendency to suppress its own tribal peculiarities to arrive at a more 'generic' vision of law and order served as a useful template for imperialism and immigration -- the downside, in the long-run, was a cultural anemia that, lacking in vital tribal blood cells, lost out to the virile semen-and-blood Jewish Power fueled by Portnoia and dong-and-booty-call of Negroes who are worshiped as the Sun people by white Brits who consider themselves the frigid Ice People who'd be lost without Afro-Warmth.
So, even though Anglo-Americans could be just as ruthless and bloody in war, they tended to seek common ground and offer compensation once hostilities were over. When the time came to bury the hatchet, it was buried, and sincere efforts were made to forge a new future based on better relations. Anglo-Americans did have a sense of something greater than their identity and tribe. As a world power, they understood they had certain obligations to the rest of humanity. Such bigness of vision(and even heart) is sorely lacking among Jews. This is why Jews are just fine among themselves and in taking care of their own problems, but they are miserable and miserly when dealing with other peoples, the filthy goyim. In that regard, Jews only think in terms of "Is it good for Jews?" and nothing else. Because of the cultural and historical habit of Jewishness, a supremacist mind-set that says God favored Jews over goyim whom some Jews regard as hardly better than cattle, Jews hardly think of the higher, greater, or common good when they deal with others. Even secular modern Jews retain this habit of mind, even if only subconsciously. Just ask the Palestinians. Just ask the Russians who were fleeced by Jews in the 90s. Just ask the global victims of Jewish finance.

Chechen Bad Boys

Now, there are plenty of cutthroat peoples and tribes around the world that are just as nasty, vile, and vicious as the Jews, but Jews are far more dangerous because they (1) are smarter (2) more aggressive (3) more seasoned in manipulating and cheating others (4) adept at cooking up moral or spiritual excuses for their perfidy (5) play the eternal victim to shield their evil deeds and (6) make universal claims despite serving narrow tribal interests. Jewish actions put shame to their claim. When Gandhi heard of ‘Western Civilization’, he sardonically remarked it’s a good idea. He meant Western Imperialists talked the talk but didn’t walk the walk of enlightenment. But European Imperialists, for the most part, were angels compared to Jewish Imperialists who really care for NOTHING but their own power and privilege. Now, I wouldn’t be surprised if Chechens are just as nasty and mendacious as the Jews, but they will never amount to anything more than gangsters, thugs, and ragtag terrorists. In contrast, Jews have made it as professors, lawyers, historians, judges, bankers, oligarchs, and deep state operators. Jews are sharks, Chechens are piranhas. Jews control the oceans while Chechens are stuck in their ponds. Both Jews and Chechens wouldn’t be problematic if they stuck to their territories and own kind. Because they are so intensely tribal, both are unfit for imperialism and foreign ventures. Chechens have spread out over parts of Russia to expand their empire of crime, and they are loathed and detested by non-Chechens of all stripes. Still, because Chechens are only good at criminality and mainly stuck in the Russian territories, they mean nothing to the world. In contrast, Jews have had the means the take over the elite institutions and industries of America, and that automatically catapulted them as the Imperial Rulers of the World. Jews prize and savor their role as the New Caesars, but they simply don’t have the perspective and attitude necessary to be good Imperial Rulers. Indeed, compare French and the Algerians, British and the Irish(or Scotch), and Jews and the Palestinians. If Algeria and Ireland had come under Jewish control, things would have been much worse for the natives. In the end, the Algerians were able to regain their land(and then some, as the French allowed Algerian immigration to France itself), and the Irish were able to reclaim their nation. But look at the plight of Palestinians. Jews are not satisfied with Israel that was established over much of historic Palestine. They must also take West Bank which is being swallowed up piece by piece, taken inch by inch. (Compare what whites were willing to sacrifice in South Africa with what Jews did to Palestinians.)
Worse, Jews not only disgraced themselves with their foul form of Judeo-globo Imperialism but corrupted Anglo-Americans as well. As top dogs, Anglo-Americans could be a force for both good and bad. They were willing to do much bad to gain hegemony and domination, but they were willing to offer much that was good to make amends. But now, as underdogs of Jews, Anglo-American elites are mindless and worthless cuck-dogs of Jewish Power that they pretend is noble for all time because of the Shoah, an event that had NOTHING to do with most of humanity. Deep in their hearts, Anglo-American cuck elites may well know that Jews are foul cretins, but they repress such dire truth because it would mean (1) they relinquished their power to a bunch of a**holes, (2) they were stupid enough to be fooled by Jews ideologically & morally, and (3) they’re a craven and cowardly bunch of running dogs to the Tribe. Fish rots from the head, and a dog is only as good as its master. With rotten Jewish BUGS(busy urban globalist Semites)at the helm, WASP cuck elites are merely their servile dogs.
Ireland, over centuries of British rule, underwent many hardships but wasn’t wiped off the map. Even Scotland, a territorial part of Britain, was allowed to remain Scottish. But now, both Ireland and Great Britain are under Jewish globo-homo imperialism and are being demographically and culturally replaced by Homomania, Diversity, and Afro-Worship. Why are the Irish and British masses so blind to what is happening? It’s because the Jewish Empire remains invisible. Wherever the British or the French went, they displayed their symbols in pageantry and declared their dominance over others. So, at the very least, imperial subjects knew they were being ruled by a foreign power, and this consciousness eventually led to resistance. But because Jewish Power operates through a Stealth Empire that isn’t detected by the Media Radar(that is also Jewish-controlled), many Brits and Irish still don’t know their nations are colonies of the Empire of Judea. Also, because Jews work stealthily to indoctrinate elite British and Irish minds through control of World Academia centered in the US — universities all around the world take cues from what comes out of Harvard, Yale, and other Ivies that also train many world scholars — , it creates the impression that British and Irish masses are being instructed by their own British and Irish scholars when, in fact, those scholars are mental puppets of Jewish scholar-agents of the Empire. So, even though Jews pushed Diversity, Afro-Worship, and Homomania to destroy Ireland and Britain, so many Irish and Brits think those are their own values and principles conceived by themselves. As for Irish and British elites who DO KNOW that Jews control the world, they can be bought off to collaborate and comply with generous bribes and sinecures. In the US, Joe Biden is no dummy and knows that Jews control everything, but notice how he goes out of his way to scrape the Jewish anus with this tongue to get his goodies.

Another factor that may redeem imperialism is if it acts in the common good of humanity. Whatever one may say of Christianity, Islam, and Communism, they did offer mankind a shared vision of equal justice under God or History. All those who converted to Christianity were part of the brotherhood and sisterhood. All those who became Muslim were the beloved of Allah. And communism was about comradeship among workers of the world. So, even though Christian, Muslim, and Communist Imperialists committed lots of atrocities, their ultimate message was about uniting all humanity under the banner of shared humanity and theory of justice. And this is why Napoleon was a much idealized and romanticized figure even among subject peoples of French Imperialism. His rule wasn’t simply about French aggression and domination but about a New Order in which the average person, regardless of identity, would have more rights, liberties, and protections. And in their own way, Anglo-Americans believed that the world could become a better place under Pax Americana that would ensure the flow of goods, liberty, and know-how to all the world. They were willing to take but also offer. It’s like what Merlin tells Uther in the opening of EXCALIBUR. "He(the Duke of Cornwall) has given, now you must." Cornwall is willing to yield to Uther’s authority but expects compromise. Uther, proud and rash, isn’t about to give an inch, but wise Merlin urges him to do so as a king must be magnanimous and make friends as well as enemies.

Jews take and take but cannot give. And even when they give, it is in the way of a hustler, merely preparing for the day when they can grab it all for themselves. Jews are about hustle than honor. Just ask the Palestinians who were assured that Jewish immigration would lead to economic opportunities and NOT lead to their demographic demise. Pure hustle. Given there are so many non-criminal Jews in law, academia, history, arts, criticism, government, and etc, you’d think they would be above con-man gangster mentality, but they aren't. Because of their essentially hostile & neurotic personality and tribal & merchant mentality, even Jews who are respectable professionals than crooks, cheats, con-men, or gangsters think more like the latter. They don’t think straight; instead, they twist logic and meaning to get their way. Everything is a pretzel logic with these people. This is surely the product of two opposing modes of Jewish behavior throughout the ages: (1) Maintaining tribal identity and superiority at all costs (2) Gaining universal domination by money, diplomacy, and ideology. One part of Jewishness is intensely tribal & hermetic and another part of Jewishness is obsessively universal & expansive. Usually, when a people try to become a world power, they need to reformulate their identity to be more encompassing of the Other, as with the Romans. But Jews are obsessed with their identity rooted in the Covenant. The Covenant says they are the blessed of God who, furthermore, willed them to rule all the world. (Christianity as formulated by Apostle Paul offered a compromise where both Jews and Gentiles could be brothers and sisters, but Jews said NO. And Jewish Diaspora after the Exile made them see the larger world and want to have it all while maintaining their zealous identity of superiority and particularity.) Because of the great contradiction between Jewish tribalism and expansionism, perhaps kind of psychological con-game trick plays out in the Jewish mind to resolve the problem. Of course, it cannot be resolved, so the Jewish Mind constantly comes up with warped rationales as to why Jews must remain Jewish and why Jews must dominate the world. The contradiction has gotten even worse in the aftermath of World War II because Jews now define themselves as both the most victimized & helpless people AND the most awesome & fearsome people. Arrogant Jews bask in their great power with nasty Netanyahu and Alan Dershowitz leading the way. But Jews also insist on being perceived forever as the poor hapless Holocaust People. When a people who insist on their close-knit tribalism demand to rule the world and furthermore play victim while ruling as the utmost victors, the world is really in a messed-up situation. Imagine a weasel with the power of a lion pretending to be a mouse. British Imperialists sought to make their subjects serve the glory of Britain, but there was the sense that even non-British were part of the empire, thus shared in the glory and, therefore, were also ‘British’ in a way. (This worked well as an imperialist strategy but is proving to be fatal as a nationalist policy as the Mother Country of Britain is now being invaded and colonized by the World.) But Jews do not seek to share any of their glory with others. It’s all about goyim praising, honoring, and worshiping Jewishness while Jews sneer and snicker at others. Consider the relation between Jews and White Evangelicals. The latter praise Jews and worship Israel, but Jews show nothing but contempt for the Bible-Thumpers. If anything, Jews pushed Homomania as the Main Theme of their globo-homo-shlomo imperialism. Unlike Christianity, Islam, Communism, and Liberal Democratic values that emphasized the greater good of the vast majority of mankind, Homomania(or Queertianity) preaches that the vast majority of people who are not homo must worship the Holy Homo minority along with the Sacred Jewish Identity. So, it’s all about Minority Supremacism, and for the great majority, the message is "Get on your knees and suck the Jewish cock and then bend over to take it up the ass by the Homo." How can Jews be trusted when they don’t admit that they are the rulers of the world? If anything, Jews use their great control and power to shut down voices to suppress the fact of their power and control. It’s like a rich man using his riches to shut down people who say he’s rich. It’s like a loud man shouting to silence people who remark that he’s loud and obnoxious. Jews are immensely powerful but deny they got the power. Jews treat Palestinians like dirt but expect others to believe that they will be treated any better by Jews. Jewish Chutzpah is incredible. Jews got so much while Palestinians got so little and continue to lose what little they got, BUT the US pours billions of aid into Israel while turning a blind eye to the plight of Palestinians. It’s about sympathy for the rich & tyrannical and antipathy to the poor & helpless. This is how Jews have corrupted the American Mind by purging US politics of ‘Arabists’, foreign policy advisers who urged a more balanced treatment in the Middle East. For Jews, everything has to revolve around them. No longer believing in the one and only God, they made themselves the one and only Power.
Also, Jews make OTHERS pay to make the Jews appear generous. If the British Empire expended its own treasury to maintain its empire, Jews squeeze goyim to pay for all the costs of empire. Jews invoke ‘white privilege’ to make all the world blame whites than Jews for all that goes wrong. Jews milk white teats to provide milk for people of the empire. The Wars for Israel will mainly have to be paid for by the white middle class. White soldiers certainly did most of the killing and dying. We know from 2008 Wall Street fiasco that Jews are ‘too big to fail’. And those who serve Jews, like John McCain, Paul Ryan, and Barack Obama, are rewarded handsomely. But the white middle class must be milked dry to pay for all the mess. Or Jews will just keep printing more money and then shift the blame on China to avoid blame. Jews, who decry ‘antisemitism’, never tire of using the media to scapegoat and smear other peoples such as Russians, Iranians, and Chinese. In the US, the usual scapegoat is usually whites, mostly straight white males, but ‘Beckys’(white females) get it in the neck too. Fussy Jews who always rag and nag whites about everything have the temerity to accuse white women of complaining about bad black behavior(as if blacks are above the law, at least in relation to white goyim, indeed as Jews are). Of course, when blacks act bad in Jewish neighborhoods, Jews use stop-and-frisk to have them patted down and/or arrested. Generally, Jews ignore and even suppress all news of black-on-white violence and only highly black criminality as a problem when Jews are attacked. For the longest time, Jews said the Knockout Game is fake news, that is until blacks began to knock down Jewish men, in which case it was big news in NY.

Jewish spread of Globo-Homo around the world as agent-collaborators of the Zio-Empire

Anyway, perhaps what is best for many on the Dissident Right, Alt Right, and Left-Right(my brand of National-Humanist Neo-Fascism) is to think of serving something ‘lesser than oneself’. Now, there are plenty of people all over America and the World who devote their lives(or some time of their lives) to aiding, serving, and guiding those are less fortunate, less talented, and less able. And of course, the teaching profession is about adults who know more passing knowledge to youth who know little, though to be sure, today’s educators are more like re-educators of PC Dogma. Under Jewish control, schools have become more like reeducation centers than educational institutions. Why? Because Jews are no longer climbing the rungs of power but at the very top. When Wasps used to rule, Jews valued free speech as a means to speak honestly and forthrightly about the failings of Anglo-American elites. In any system, honest and free criticism will hit the Power the hardest as people tend to notice and blame those who have the most power. But now that Jews have the most power and want to keep it, they fear critical thought, honesty, and courage as the hallmarks of education because honest, fearless, and critical voices will target the most powerful.

Matt Heimbach the Fat Fuhrer of the Malt Right

The fact that words matter can be seen in the decline of the Alt Right. While Jewish Power had much to do with it, the blame must fall on its ‘leaders’ and ‘spokesmen’ as well. People on the Alt Right claimed to be for something bigger and greater than themselves. They spoke about how it’s not enough to be an atomized consumer or deracinated individual. One must live for something bigger, greater, and grander. But such terminology corrupted the Alt Right just as much it did guys like John McCain. The Alt Right forsook the element of humility and got wrapped up with hubris. Just like John McCain pontificated about the nobility of serving the larger humanity than one’s own ego but actually spent his entire career serving the biggest oligarchs and warmongers, the movers and shakers of History, so many on the Alt Right spoke about caring for fellow white folks but spent an inordinate time waxing romantic(or idiotic) about how they are like the new invincible ubermensch who can shake thunder out of clouds to create the Fourth Reich. Consider the gross shithead Matt Heimbach. As leader of the Traditional Workers Party that claimed to care for working class Americans and their problems of unemployment and substance abuse, he could have done much good. In other words, he would have done best to work in the mode of living for those lesser-than-oneself. Less educated and less well-off in every way. After all, while it’s pointless to help those who are richer, more fortunate, and more intelligent, anyone can make himself useful by helping and guiding the less fortunate. A one-eyed man is of no use to a two-eyed man, but he can lead an army of no-eyed blind people. A one-armed man can do something for a no-armed man. A third-rate doctor is of no use in a rich part of town with many first-rate doctors, but he will be invaluable in a poor part of town with no doctors. Thus, by seeking out those who are lesser-than-oneself, one can find meaning in life. As the path to power is shut off to the Dissident Right for the time being, many in the Alt Right could have gained moral and spiritual credit by demonstrating their usefulness to people who are without meaning, hope, or direction. And you’d think that was what Matt Heimbach was about as the leader of a Working Class Party. But like Richard Spencer and others, he was so full of himself. Serving something greater-than-oneself meant playing the game of History(even though he was no in position to be playing any such game). So, he made himself out to be Fat Fuhrer and promoting Neo-Nazism because, apparently, being a 'humble' helper to the less fortunate wasn’t fun, exciting, and thrilling enough for his big fat ego. And he had to be a ‘rock star’ among his White Power community. Being faithful to his wife wasn’t good enough. He had to hump other women, including the wife of his father-in-law Matt Parrott in pure Jerry-Springer 'white trash' style.
Richard Spencer was seen as an elite leader of the Alt Right, corralling its intellectuals, while Heimbach was regarded as the leader of the lumpen-whites, but what they both had in common was egotism and narcissism over the needs of the people. Contrary to Spencer’s Faustian fantasies, most white people were, are, and always will be just average people with modest goals in life. Spencer’s haughty egotism made it impossible for him to touch base with most whites — as he’s too busy communing with gods in heaven such as Batman, 007, and Darth Vader — , just like horny alpha-male-ism made a total mess of his married life. Being closer to regular folks, one would think Heimbach would have avoided such pratfall, but nope. Deep down inside, he’s just another egotist. He was using the theme of White Working Class and their problems to play out his fantasy of being Fat Fuhrer of the Fourth Reich in the form of beerbelly ‘white trash’ America. He wanted to be king of Malt Right.

For so many people, from John McCain to Richard Spencer to Matt Heimbach, the meaning of serving something greater-than-oneself got perverted to mean something awesome, powerful, grandiose, megalomaniacal, and etc. They forgot that greater-than-oneself means serving a certain GOOD. In the end, it’s not about serving one’s own ego or serving(or seeking) the Power. It’s about making oneself useful to those who need the help. But, via such good work, one can gain genuine appreciation, admiration, and respect that can be traded for glory and power. Of course, ‘doing good work’ is exploited for that very reason by the vain elites. Consider all those brats of rich parents who take up ‘good works’ just to fill up their college applications with ‘holistic’ credentials so that they may be accepted to Ivy League schools whereupon their lives will hopefully be smooth sailing to the bastions of power and privilege. People like Spencer grew up too spoiled, privileged, conceited, and snotty to ever roll up their sleeves to touch base with regular people. When he talks about living for something greater-than-himself, he means touching base with pagan gods of heaven who shall hand him the world on a silver platter upon a Faustian Pact. Too many Alt Right guys have hipster than humanist disposition and, as such, lack the humility to really go among the people and offer them anything. And Heimbach has been a perfect example of this. He couldn’t put away the stupid neo-Nazi paraphernalia and get down to serious work. He preferred to play fatso Leonidas of the movie 300, looking for more tussles with Antifa to make himself out to be Butterbean of the Alt Right.
Like so many SJW or NPC types, too many Alt Right guys grew up on Pop Culture fantasies, which, when mixed with Euro-pagan mythicism(related in some cases with Nazi symbolics), becomes like a drug, not unlike meth or crack, that sends young people, especially the men, into paroxysms of egotism, delusions of grandeur, and megalomania. It wasn’t enough for Eli Mosely to fight for his people. He had to inflate his resume with bogus war record. It wasn’t enough for Kyle Bristow to diligently work to defend free speech rights for White Nationalists. He had to torch his ego to the point of self-immolation. If guys like Spencer possessed more maturity, experience, and character, they might have had a sobering and corrective influence on other members.

But fish rots from the head, and when the self-appointed and media-anointed leader of the movement thinks it will all be very fun to play combo of 007, Batman, and Hitler in his role as the leading light of the movement, the result was predictable: Drunkenness, Drug Abuse, Adultery, Disloyalty, Hubris, Recklessness, Delusions of Grandeur, and etc. It’s all the more ironic because Spencer has been saying the world is really all about power, power, and power. If he really believes that, why did he think the Jewish Globo-Homo Power would stick to principles and higher values in dealing with his ilk? Spencer got the Spencerowicz treatment by the Jewish Masters who rule America. And as if he learned nothing from the fiasco, the moron goes on Youtube and says he believes in White Domination of all the world, thus revealing himself to be, indeed, a white supremacist. He could have been a defender of nationalism or national liberation from Jewish supremacist hegemony, but his ultimate message is he wants to replace Jewish Neocon Imperialism with Anglo-White one. THIS in the 21st century when the world has been much transformed by so many factors.

Words matter and, in living for what is ‘lesser than oneself’, people(especially on the Dissident Right) might find some true meaning and do some real good in the world. Sadly, the notion of serving something ‘greater than oneself’ came to mean, in too many cases, serving one’s inflated ego or the movers-and-shakers of History. If John McCain had sincerely taken the role of speaking up for the unspoken and unrepresented, he might have been a good man, the true basis of greatness. After all, he experienced Vietnam War first hand. He was a pilot who dropped bombs and killed people; he was also a POW who suffered much deprivation and humiliation. So, he saw the war from both sides: As warrior and as captive of the enemy. He experienced the tragedy of war. So, he could have stood against further wars. In other words, No More Vietnams. Furthermore, he should have known that Vietnam set a dangerous precedent and template for future problems. Not only did the war lead to death and destruction on a grand scale but it led to a refugee crisis that compelled the US to take in tons of Viets and Laotians who’d been promised protection by the Americans. Since Vietnam, US involvements in new wars have led to more refugees, a problem for not only the US but its EU puppets. In the end, the other aspect of the Vietnam War — the ensuing refugee problem — should be the main argument against US involvement in the world. Called ‘Invade-Invite’ by Ilana Mercer and Steve Sailer, it’s been an oft-repeated pattern since the end of the Cold War when the US stomped its boots on Somalia, Iraq, Syria, and etc. And US meddling in Latin America led to (mostly disingenuous)justification for Brown Caravans on the premise that US intervention messed up those nations. Invade-Invite might more accurately be called Wreck-Rescue or Bomb-Come.
Anyway, how sad that John McCain, who was once regarded as a conscientious and thoughtful moderate, turned into a vicious and nasty warmonger. When he revisited Vietnam in a diplomatic mission, he was admired as a peacemaker with the message that even once-bitter enemies can bury the hatchet and get along in the world. That is the true meaning of ‘serving something greater than oneself’. But it wasn’t long before greater-than-oneself became just another egotistical involvement of oneself in History, and of course, war-making is most exciting to people in the game. But then, McCain, never a smart guy, might have been duped in part by Jews who were clever enough to fervently moralize whatever they do(even though their motives were always tribal, supremacist, gangster-like, and ethno-mercantile). "The Jew cries out in pain as he strikes you." With their power of media & over whore politicians and their collective personality as tribal-gangsters — notice that most Jewish law professors with prestigious degrees think and talk more like gangsters, goons, and thugs than principles scholars — , they wrap all their vile doings and dealing with pseudo-moral blanket. And naturally, a dummy like John McCain fell for so many Jewish Narratives and BS, not least because he felt so flattered to be doted by Jews, the self-promoted and self-aggrandized Holy Holocaust People.

Given the power of words to corrupt meaning and be misinterpreted, maybe it’s better to be more blunt and straightforward. We should say we should live for something that is lesser-than-ourselves. And in a way, this is how much of the world works. A doctor treats people who lack medical knowledge. An auto mechanic fixes cars of those who know nothing about cars. A chef prepares meals for those without culinary skills. So, professions are about providing services for those with lesser talent or knowledge in certain areas of expertise. But most people provide service and instruction to the ‘lessers’ for money and self-interest. It’s about economics, not virtue or good work.
But what if people in the Alt Right, Dissident Right, and Left-Right took it upon themselves to serve the ‘lessers’ out of racial, cultural, and moral consciousness? In this big wide world, there are always people who are lesser than you. Even for a man of 100 IQ, there are many with lower IQ. Even for people with limited skills, there are those with less skills and less ability. Even for people with problems, there are those with bigger problems. And now, so many white people are without guidance, leadership, and representation as most white elites(in government and business) are all about serving Jews, Diversity, Homos, and Blacks. Even "It’s Okay to be White" is investigated as a 'hate symbol' by media and state controlled by vicious, murderous, thuggish, supremacist, and hateful Jews. When so many white people are without representation, it is about time for people on the Right to touch base and reconnect. In the 60s, there was the hippie stuff about ‘touching Indians’, but that was silly and flaky. But there is a real need to touch base with the suffering white masses, the forgotten people. Mythic grandeur is a part of any people and culture, but so is humanism and humility. Those who are overfed on myth end up like Nazis and Japanese Imperialists. Or like Spencer and Crew who acted as though some divine pagan force was on their side as they played fire with Jewish Supremacist Power that crushed them like IDF death squads regularly crush Palestinians. Things might have been different if Spencer was humbler and humanist. He could have said Alt Right is like a white counterpart of the Palestinian struggle for National Liberation. Liberation from what? From Jewish Supremacism. Thus, Jewish Power would have been placed on the moral defensive. But he said Alt Right is like white Zionism, and the implication was that Spencer simply wants his kind to replace Jews as world hegemonists. Spencer could have shamed Anglo-cucks for sucking up to Jewish Supremacism and gained moral high ground. Instead, he presented himself as a white supremacist alternative to Jewish supremacism. Given that Jews are associated with victimization in the Holocaust while the slightest whiff of white supremacism is associated with the burden of the Holocaust, it was a dumb move on Spencer's part.

For the weak, morality is the best weapon. Blacks understood this in the 50s. Jews understood this when they lacked dominant power in the US. But so full of delusions of grandeur and inflated pride, the likes of Spencer could not admit that whites are now an occupied and defeated people who, like Third World resistant-fighters, must learn to push back against the empire. Spencer is simply miffed that the empire is controlled by Jews. He’s fully into supremacism and imperialism.
With his head up in the clouds of Grand History, he failed on all counts. He failed in his reach for the top because Jews above him just kicked him down the ladder. But more importantly, he had no defenders among the white masses because he never touched base with them and instead spent all his time partying with drunken buddies, whoring around, and strutting like god-king-chief of the Alt Right. But having been raised in a bourgeois-aristocratic world with all the privileges, Spencer feels a fundamental distaste and disregard for the hoi polloi.

Serving that which is lesser-than-oneself has benefits, both moral and strategic. Obviously, people who are ‘less’ need more care and attention than those who have ‘more’. Generally, people want to rise high as possible and rub shoulders with superiors while snubbing inferiors. This is due to the naturally hierarchical side of us. It’s like men prefer pretty girls over plain ones, and women prefer handsome men over ugly ones. People want to attend good colleges and live in nice neighborhoods. Such attitude has many positives. It fuels motivation, ambition, and competition. But the end result over time is that many people not only get left behind but are held in contempt as ‘losers’. In current US, the libertarian wing of American Conservatism regards white working class as ‘white trash’, a people to be disposed of by the Garbage Truck of History. And the new so-called ‘leftism’ is all about favoring rich, vain, and privileged homos while having near-zero concern for the lower classes(except as useful helots to be drugged to death with opioids or replaced by foreigners as New Americans). This is why capitalism has to be tempered, and it once was by the power of Christianity. Judaism has a tempering impact on capitalism but only among Jews. It informs rich Jews to care about other Jews, but it says NOTHING about how Jews owe something to goyim who are regarded as sheep, cattle, or dogs by the Tribe. And even the Alt Right, with its hubris and myth-mania, had little to say about regular white people and just went off on too many silly quasi-hipster tangents or playing fuhrer. Alt Right neglected the morally worthy mission of connecting with white people across America and speaking for them. It could have created connections among small towns that dot the landscape of America via the internet. It could have raised consciousness and argued for a healthy and moral living. But how could such be possible when the very leaders of Alt Right were into hedonism, drugs, alcohol abuse, childish antics, infantilism, dumb haircuts, and obsession with Pop Culture?
It’s all very well for a movement to have an elite vanguard, and Greg Johnson with Counter-Currents at least has maintained that. But Spencer failed even in that regard, filling up his altright.com site with mostly tripe. But in order for a movement to resonate with the masses, it has to convey a message and speak in a tone that is directly appealing to them. This was true of communism. Most communists never read DAS KAPITAL but they understood the Bolshevik appeal in its call for Land, Peace, and Bread... just like many illiterate Jews of the Exodus understood what was meant by Land of Milk and Honey.

By connecting with the people, touching base, and creating a white people network via the internet through all the towns in 50 states, something new is possible. On the moral level, it is simply good because doing good is its own reward. If the Power snubs and denies you, go among the powerless. That’s what Jesus and Mao did. Jesus preached to the regular folks. Mao went to the countryside and built his base among the peasants who made up 90% of the population. But aside moral considerations, it is also strategically wise because you will have wind behind your back. If Spencer had formed a mass following, he would have been defended from below as he was kicked from the top. But at the bottom, there was no one to hold out a blanket to soften his fall. He fell hard because even ‘lesser’ whites came to regard him as a conceited and snotty rich boy playing hipster-fuhrer.
And apart from his small cult following, Heimbach got nowhere because most whites were put off by his Fat Fuhrer antics. This is why Alt Right is mostly finished. The ONLY way forth is the Left-Right. By the ‘left’, I mean the real and true left that is concerned with the masses and regular folks(who are being left behind by New Globo-Turbo-Capitalism that favors only the elites). Rightism has to be tempered and balanced by leftism, and vice versa. This is the nationalist and humanist version of Neo-Fascism. Fascism can do so much good and so much evil. It’s like fire. It all depends on how you wish to use it. Fascism was the most honest theory and vision of power in the 20th century, but it destroyed itself with hubris and pathology. A Neo-Fascism must learn from past mistakes, but the Alt Right failed to learn any though it had an ample chance to do so.