Tuesday, December 11, 2018

Ultimate Power belongs to Those who control the Smug Drug of Self-Righteousness — Why the Big Pharma of Globo-Homo Political Correctness is so dangerous — People want to feel Morally Superior but don’t get to decide the 'Terms of Service'

People love to feel superior. Since ethnic/racial sense of superiority is OUT, especially among whites, the people(esp. the snobby elites) need something else to feel superior about. For some, it's More Money. For others, it's moral superiority or self-righteous supremacism. (Moral Supremacism is obviously easier to come by than money, which requires time, talent, and effort. In contrast, Moralism is the great equalizer. Even a 'nobody' or 'loser' can put on airs and feel superior to those deemed as 'bad people'.) It makes them feel oh-so-very-good and better than others. They become addicted to that virtue vanity high, the moral orgasm or morgasm.

But what is one to feel self-righteous about? After all, one can feel self-righteous just about anything. THIS QUESTION is the key to power. In a world where people need to feel self-righteous and holier-than-thou about something, the game of WHO gets to decide WHAT to feel self-righteous about decides the future. Gain control of that and you get to control much of the world because self-righteous commissars and mobs will hysterically serve the themes you've handed to them. Most people, lacking agency and true individuality, are unable to form their own terms and themes of self-righteousness. They need to receive the terms/themes from above.

So, if you control the big pharma of self-righteousness, you get to design the Smug Drug. And then you have an emotional army of like-minded people who will bark like dogs in service of your preferred ideology and idolatry.

Jewish elites control the big pharma of self-righteousness and design the Smug Drugs to favor certain identities and agendas that best cater to the question, "Is it good for Jewish supremacism?"

The top three holy identities according to PC are Jewish, black, and homo. Jews indulge in self-righteousness as the Shoah People. And non-Jews may feel self-righteous(by association) by revering, serving, and 'defending' Jews. Then, it's not surprising why so many Goyim self-righteously worship Jews who self-righteously worship themselves.
The Smug Drug also favors blacks. By making blacks into a holy people and invoking slavery at every turn, Jews can bait 'white guilt' and paralyze white pride. Also, by making white boys and white girls admire black prowess in sports, sex, and song, the white race becomes cucked and tamed. Thus, whites come to feel it's 'racist' to serve their own interests and instead serve Jews(and blacks as allies of Jews). And Smug Drug also favors homos, close allies of Jews, who are useful in subverting Christianity with Queertianity. Also, being a fellow minority-elite seeing eye-to-eye with Jews on matters of power and privilege, homos make the perfect partners-in-crime.

The desire for self-righteousness is timeless and universal. However, different peoples feel self-righteous about different things. It all depends on WHO gets to design the 'moral chemistry' of the Smug Drug. In the past, Christian Church was the main dispenser of the self-righteous drug in the West. And its theme was Christians are morally and spiritually superior as worshipers of the Messiah; and of course, Christians are superior to Jews, the killers of Christ. (No wonder Jews hate Christianity and Google annually snubs Easter.) For traditional Catholics, wafers and wine at Communion are the ultimate Smug Drugs of Self-Righteousness. Jews fear such substances as powerful medicine with de-worming effect against (((parasites))).

In the American South, white folks once felt self-righteous and morally superior to blacks. This sounds counter-intuitive since blacks were the slaves, the people suffering injustice. But whites controlled the Narrative and said white civilization was elevating savage blacks via the institution of slavery, which, though not exactly just, was teaching blacks the ways of social order and discipline so crucial to human advancement. So, slavery was defended as a system that dragged blacks from ugabuga jungle savagery toward semblance of civilized life. At worst, it was a 'necessary evil'. So, whites felt morally superior while blacks were made to feel they had to prove their worth and be a credit to their race. Back then, white Southerners controlled the Smug Drug. Savagery, not slavery, was seen as the biggest evil. Since black Africans were seen as wallowing in the sinful world of oogity-boogity, slavery was seen as a necessary purgatory to save the Negro body and soul from the sin of savagery. (Of course, things are different today when white people worship black neo-savagery as the 'coolest' and most 'badass' thing, something to imitate in 'honkey see, honkey do' manner.) So, even apparently unjust things can be made to seem just. It all depends on control of the Narrative and Iconography. Just ask the Palestinians. Notice how in the Jewish-controlled (((Western Media))) harsh Zionist policies against Palestinians are always justified on grounds that 'terrorist' Palestinians want to wipe Israel off the map. Palestinians are made out as the genocidal aggressors while Israeli Jews are made the humble defenders of homeland. This Narrative overlooks the fact that Israel was created by wiping Palestine off the map. It also ignores the continuing Zionist Occupation of West Bank. But such is the moral chemistry of the Smug Drug in the West(especially in the US) in regards to Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and the majority of Americans still feel morally justified in defending Israel and demeaning Palestinians.

Just like dogs can be made to rabidly serve any command of the master -- make friends with that cat or maul that cat, be nice to that man over there or bite him in the ankle -- , most people can be made to feel deliriously self-righteous about anything(and hateful toward what is deemed 'evil'). Lacking agency and individuality, most people take the Smug Drug handed to them from above.
Consider the politics of self-righteousness in relation to Red Scare(of the late 40s and early 50s) and the current Russia Hysteria. In the so-called 'McCarthy Era', there were real Soviet spies and agents in all walks of life. In contrast, Russian influence in current America is totally delusional. If anything, US politics and media are controlled by globo-homo Jewish imperialists, not by Russians. But most Libby-Dibs still feel smugly self-righteous in defense of noble communists and martyred fellow-travelers of the 'Anti-Communist Hysteria' era while foaming at the mouth about how Russia, Russia, Russia and Putin-Putin-Putin are pulling all the strings behind Trump and the GOP. Most Libby-dibs are total addicts of the PC Smug Drug. This applies to most Cuckservatives too, but the drug is beginning to wear off among the nationalists and patriots. And this is why Jewish Big Pharma is freaking out and trying to force more PC drugs down our throats.

As for the Muslim World, the Smug Drug is about faith in Allah. Therefore, Muslims feel themselves to be righteous and superior to infidels who know not the true way. What Muslims feel self-righteous about is beyond the control of the Jewish globo-homo imperialists. In this sense, Islam still remains an independent religion, something that can't be said for Current Christianity that has been stripped of dignity and perverted into a cult worship of Jews and even homos(and trannies).
But Jewish Power is trying to change Muslim minds in the West by associating Islam with homomania, feminism, and anti-white vitriol. Muslims in the West, being so eager to come to the richer and (relatively)freer West, do form alliances with Jewish Power. It's a love/hate relationship. Jews use figures like Justin Trudeau to serve as bridge between Muslims and Homomania(and anti-white politics). Jews want Muslims to feel most self-righteous about being part of Diversity, waving the homo flag, and hating 'evil racist' whitey. Especially because the Western 'Right' is even more pro-Israel than the Western 'Left' is, there's little reason for Muslims to side with White Conservatism against PC Proggery. Muslims may hate Zionists and globo-homo stuff but nevertheless see them as the lesser evil to White Conservatism that strikes them as more slavish to Zionism and hostile toward Muslim Immigration-invasion into the West.

As long as Jewish globo-homo supremacists control the Smug Drug in the West, whites will keep losing. They need to design their own Drug, and it has to be stronger than the Red Pill, which acts as a blocker of PC and booster of the white right but not so much of white righteousness. It is when people feel righteous that they go from feeling ashamedly defensive to confidently assertive.

Monday, December 10, 2018

How the Church of Political Correctness(that favors Jews, Homos, & Negroes) has deviously appropriated the Christo-Formula to protectively layer its Awesome Power

The Christo-Formula seems to be the basis of PC strategy and its idolization of Jugromo(Judeo-Negro-Homo) Sanctimony.

Consider this scene from MONTY PYTYHON'S LIFE OF BRIAN:

What really sticks out is that the Holy Victim-Victor Group wants to be, at once, mollycoddled(or poli-coddled), bereaved, and worshiped. Baby-Victim-Victor or BVV Syndrome. Consider the mytho-legend and iconography of Jesus. There is Jesus as a cute and cuddly baby in all those paintings of the Madonna. People's hearts go out to the darling little child. Then, there is Jesus as saint-prophet who was rejected and victimized by cruel & brutal humanity. People are made to feel guilt over His noble torment, death, and self-sacrifice. And then, there is Jesus as the returned champion, the King of kings, indeed none other than the Son of God.
So, within the Christo-Formula universe, the faithful feel (1) protective compassion for the cute baby Jesus (2) profound guilt over the murdered Messiah and (3) ecstatic adoration of the King of kings, all-time spiritual champ. It appeals to several key aspects of human emotions.
Jesus as helpless baby
Jesus as martyr, tragic object of guilt
Jesus as triumphant King of kings
When we consider Homos(and Trannies) as members of the Holy Three(along with Jews and Negroes), we see a similar kind of emotional manipulation at play. The recent controversy at Columbia University with Nimesh Patel and the (East)Asian-Alliance well illustrates this phenomenon. The reaction of the 'triggered' yellow dogs seems contradictory. On the one hand, it's as though they feel protective emotions over the weak, vulnerable, and cute-and-cuddly LGBTQXYZ community. Oh, those poor helpless 'rainbow' babies. They must be nestled in a crib and sung lullabies, goo. The homos and trannies have found a way to tug at the (oft-repressed)maternal instincts of the secular community(esp. among women who often put off motherhood). This is the passive babyish side of PC. Granted, babies are both helpless and 'tyrannical', i.e. they demand constant attention 24/7.

Anyway, because of the 'cute and cuddly' aspect of LGBTQXYZ Idolatry, so many people have a tendency to view homos and trannies as little baby darlings that need constant love and protection. And woe unto anyone who doesn't go along with this charade. Why, he's like a child abuser!
There is this with Jews and blacks too. Anne Frank is THE face of the Jewish Community after WWII. Just a sweet little girl who just wanted to have fun. What a cruel cruel world to deny her such. And Pop Culture has never lacked for the cute Negroling, such as Gary Coleman of DIFF'RENT STROKES and Emmanuel Lewis of WEBSTER. Many white people grew up looking at such darling Negro kibblers. And famous celebrities and cuckservatives like David French like to show off My Little Ebony like My Little Pony.

This mollycoddly side of PC is very effective in eliciting protective maternal instincts. Jews certainly know how this psychology works. Even though they are the most powerful group in America, they use Anne-Frank iconography and pop culture narratives of nice little Jewish kids bullied by Big Dumb Nazi Polacks to garner protective sympathy. Jews know how to push the buttons of protective-maternal-instinct so as to make it seem as though 'antisemitism' is like Big Bad Goy picking on a tiny Jewish child.
And even though so many problems of violence and criminality are caused by blacks, pop culture is saturated with images of too-good-to-be-true darling Negro kids with a glow about them. Or even fully grown Negroes are presented as possessing pure childlike souls, as with the mountain-sized Negro who wuvs a wittle white mouse in GREEN MILE. Even though he's the size of an entire football team, we are to believe he has the soul of the kid on WEBSTER.
This is why the LGBTQXYZ agenda is so hellbent on promoting homosexuality and even tranny-cult among kids. By concocting a cutesy cherubic as a feature of the iconography of Queertianity, Homomania comes to be shielded by protective maternal instincts of the Normies who easily fall for PC(as they'd been deracinated and deculturalized of their true identity, values, and heritage). After all, who wants to be seen as being AGAINST DARLING INNOCENT KIDS? Granted, this is a gambit on the part of LGBTQXYZ agenda because many people will be grossed out by the sexual perversion of children, but then, many others will feel that LGBTQXYZ is especially special and in need of protection because "It's all about the children!" Just like Open Borders activists associate Illegal Migration-Invasion with images of poor helpless children(from Syria or Guatemala), the publicists and commissars of Homomania drag little kids around to pull on maternal heartstrings of women around the world. And women are especially vulnerable because feminism has fostered repression of their healthy maternal drives to have children and be good mothers.

And then, there is of course the Guilt Element when it comes to Jews, Negroes, and Homos. Just like Christianity says Jesus was the perfect Man who was wronged by a tyrannical empire and cruel mob, we are told that Jews, blacks, and homos were always the most wonderful people wronged by history and humanity. The entire history of Jews is presented to us as a narrative of the noblest & kindest people always having been set upon by bigoted goy populations. Jews were never wrong, and it was always the fault of the deranged goyim(especially white ones). And if you say different, you're an 'anti-Semite', as bad as a child abuser(or even molester). And never mind black Africa was always dark and violent place. Oh no, blacks were always wonderful & noble and living in harmony with nature and each other... and if it weren't for evil whitey, Africa might be one big Wakanda. Apparently, blacks have always been pure and noble, but Evil White 'Racism' caused all this harm to a perfect people(along with Jews).
As for homos, they are angels, and Reagan and Jerry Falwell were to blame for the AIDS epidemic in the homo community that killed so many people. Just watch PHILADELPHIA and weep for pure-souled 'gay baby-man' who dies as a saint. AIDS was like Homocaust that spiraled out of control because of indifference and 'homophobia'. Never mind all the sick orgies and homo fecal penetration done by homos.

And then, there is the element of awe at the sheer power of Negroes, Homos, and Jews. Negroes dominate so much of pop music, sports, and sexual idolatry. They are the Official Heroes of every city during NBA and NFL seasons. French worship Negroes as demigods who won the World Cup. BBC propaganda promotes black-males as the rightful sexual owners of white women because white men are now to be demoted into dorky cucky-wuck losers vis-a-vis the more muscular and bigger-donged Negroes. As for Homos, why looky! They are so creative, so flamboyant, so colorful, and so celebratory of everything they do. They stoke our own vanity and narcissism by promoting self-celebration as the defining 'value' of the globo-homo 21st century. In our post-religious age, Homo-worship is THE central 'spiritual' experience for many secular urbanites. And even those who still attend churches love to decorate their churches with 'gay' colors.
And the most awesome power of them all, the Jews! Jews are so powerful in finance, media & entertainment, law & courts, academia & think-tanks, vice industries(such as gambling), big pharma, high-tech, and Deep State(and Dark State). They are the makers and breakers of anyone and anything. They can even make a big-name personality like Alex Jones disappear from entire platforms. They can push a button and make US politicians whore out to Israel and turn much of the Middle East upside down with Wars for Israel. They can bring back the 'cold war' with Russia just because they hate Russia. They can make the US enforce sanctions against Iran and send billions in aid to Israel even though Iran allows inspections and has no nukes whereas Israel stole American uranium and has 300 nukes. They can shut down Free Speech with lawfare against 'hate speech'(to be determined by ADL and SPLC, both Jewish-funded groups). They can make every nation erect Shoah Monuments and worship 'Holocaust-Survivors' as bigger than God and Jesus. That is some power.

Now, people have a Will to Cower, and countless minions kneel at the Altar of Power. But there is also a natural tendency of people to fear power, worry about power, distrust power, feel envy about power, and speak truth to power... and rise up against power. So, power merely as awesomeness is vulnerable. Paradoxically, power is even more powerful when the awesomeness is associated with emotions of guilt and coddle. This was the genius of the Christo-Formula, one reason why Christian Power lasted for so long. It played on all three key emotions of menfolk(and womenfolk): Affection & tenderness for something cute-and-cuddly, Guilt & Remorse for Purity-and-Nobility, and Awe for the Power. And even though these emotions are different(and even contradictory), they reinforced one another as an Iron Triangle.

And now, PC has appropriated the Christo-Formula for the Jugromo trinity. So, those Asian students at Columbia were emoting and acting on three levels. They were sucking up to the Cult of Awesome Negroes and Tremendous Trannies; they were servile dogs of the Power and Prestige. But they were also acting in accordance to instilled guilt associated with holy Homos and noble Negroes. And, finally, their maternal instincts kicked into gear as they'd grown accustomed to regarding Homos/Trannies and Negroes as precious little babies whose cribs need to be protected from the scary howls of the Big Bad Bogeyman.

Saturday, December 8, 2018

If Jewish People were your Next-Door Neighbor and then House-Guest, what would likely happen to you and your family? If Jewish People were your Next-Door Neighbor and then House-Guest, what would likely happen to you and your family? An Allegory of Power as Ethnic Strategy.

Gregor Gysi, the vile 'German' Jew who calls on the Genocide of Germans


Imagine you have a house, and your ancestors built it up to be very nice. This is House A. Imagine there is another house that is also rather nice. This is House B. Suppose there is another house that hasn’t been well-maintained. It’s rather dilapidated and falling apart. This is House C. Finally, there is another house someways off. This is House D.

Now, suppose you have it pretty good in House A. But, you hear of some commotion in House B. Even though House B is also nice, it has a problem with its boarder. The boarder is Jewish and doesn’t get along well with the landlord. The property owner blames the Jew and vice versa. But, you figure it’s the problem of House B. It is not your problem. As for people in dilapidated House C, you don’t much care as long as you and your family in House A remain separate from them(not least because they keep having more kids who are barely fed). As for people in House D, it is outside your radar of interest, and you don’t much care.

Now, imagine if the Jewish boarder in House B comes to your door and pleads with you to take him in. He says the owner & family of House B are a bunch of a**holes. They don’t take kindly to him, just an innocent and well-meaning Jew who only needs a roof over his head. Even though your family in House A and the people in House B aren’t enemies, there is nevertheless some tension between the your house and their house. Also, the Jew flatters you by saying your family in House A must be so much nicer and kinder than the vile people in House B. He massages your ego as a most generous and magnanimous man. He states his wish that House A would take him in as a boarder. He’ll be very mindful, and there won’t be any trouble, honest and truly. You’re hesitant at first, but you decide to take him in out of kindness and mercy(and egotism of moral vanity). So, you offer him room and board. Then, is it happily ever after with the Jew? Do donkeys fly?

As time passes, you notice that the Jew acts less and less like a boarder and more and more like the owner. He begins to consume excessive food from the fridge. Your money and property begin to disappear. Worse, your wife says he grabbed her in the ass, and your daughter tell you that he tried to molest her. He peddles drugs to your son and teaches him cards to rob him of his allowance money. You get angry and confront him, but he accuses you of paranoia, ‘antisemitism’, and prejudice. He says the ONLY reason you’re grilling him is because he is Jewish. He then shows you a photo(fake or real, you aren’t sure) of his murdered mother and pulls on your heartstrings. So, you let it pass... even though his behavior around the house grows ever more nasty, vulgar, obnoxious, and offensive. He pisses all over the toilet. He throws his dirty laundry everywhere. He sometimes walks around the house naked in front of your wife and daughter. He even suggests that maybe your son is into incest and wants to have sex with his mother, your wife. Next, he suggests that your boy may be a ‘girl’ and should have his penis and testicles cut off to get a fake ‘vagina’. And when you and your wife are not around, he tells your daughter that white men are inferior wusses and that she should jump over the fence and go to the Negro quarter and have sex with Negroes and have black babies... and if she doesn’t feel like it, she is a dirty ‘racist whore’. Meanwhile, she should suck his dick on the sofa.

And then, the Jew begins to question your ownership of the house. You say it is private property that has long remained in the family, but the Jew argues that the house was really founded on a proposition that it belongs to anyone who wants to come and stay. You ask him where he got that idea, and he reads from your great-great-grandfather’s letter that he filched in the attic that the area was once used as a shelter for pioneering folks. So, before there was a proper house, there was something like a shack in the area that had been used as shelter for various settlers on the move. On that basis, House A was, is, and must be a proposition shelter for all who wants to come. Never mind that your ancestors put down the foundations and built the roof & walls. You tell him that, but he says when the house was built long ago, it used some slave labor, and therefore, it is a house of sin. Also, the land was taken from indigenous people, so people in House A can’t lay moral claim to it. Since it was taken from indigenous people, it should be open to more guests from all over. If your people took from others, it's only right that others should take from your people. And if they want to stay indefinitely, they have a 'right' to.

The Jew toys with your mind and guilt-baits you, and you relent somewhat and let him bring over his Jewish relatives. You hope that these other Jews would be nicer than him, but they are just as obnoxious, vicious, vulgar, and nasty as the first Jew. When you’re not watching, they are trying to hump your wife, molesting your daughter, and trying to cut off your son’s wee-wee and substitute them with a plastic vagina. And the Jews call on Negroes to come over and do the wife and daughter. They say the house should have orgies and that they should film it and share it with the world.

The Jew hassles you so much about your house that you hope that he will leave you alone IF you hand over the House Deed to him. You think that if the Jew is made owner of the house and your family is turned into boarders, the Jew will be grateful and will take it easy on you and your family, i.e. because you acted so generously, he will show new-found appreciation by being nice to you and your family as the nicest bunch of philo-semitic people.

But instead, the Jew feels contempt for you like Dark Helmet felt for Lone Star when he fell for the ring-trick in Mel Brooks' SPACEBALLS. The Jew can’t believe that you are so naive and dumb to have fallen for the oldest trick in the Jewish Book. Deep down inside, the Jew knows he acted like a foul louse out of greed and nastiness. He knows that any people with sense and honor would expel such an intruder and would-be-usurper. Even Jews learned to be mindful of fellow parasitic Jews who play prophet to make a profit... which is why the Jewish wife in the prologue of Coen Brothers' SERIOUS MAN takes no chances with the ghostly(or ghastly) Jewish guest.

But, by golly, people of House A rewarded the Jew for bad behavior. So, instead of appreciation, the Jew expresses even more contempt for the family. As the new master of the house, he invites blacks over to beat up the man and the son while other blacks rape his wife and daughter. Jews watch your humiliation and giggle with hideous glee. Jews take pride in owning you, your family, and your ancestral property.
Deep down inside, you feel sick and nauseous for having been taken in by the Jew, but you can’t face the shame of having been such a dumbass, so you double-down on the moral justification that you did the right thing. You tell yourself that it was only right for the noble Jews to have your property that your kind doesn’t deserve due to ‘historical sin’. And you tell yourself that all the nasty and obnoxious Jewish behavior are actually so ‘progressive’ and liberating. And you tell yourself that it’s good for your wife and daughter to have orgies with Negroes and be raped by them because it’s all about sexual liberation and racial justice. It’s sexual reparation for the Negroes, and you, as a white ‘racist patriarch’ scum deserve to be a cucky-wuck.
And when your son finally confronts you and accuses you of being a gullible and weak-willed idiot, you strike him and denounce him as a ‘racist’ because there is NO ROOM FOR HATE in his house(which is now really the Jew’s house). Now, even though Jews have effective ownership of the house, they still order you to pretend that it is your house. So, YOU must pay the property taxes. And if there’s any trouble related to the house, YOU must be liable. You sheepishly nod along like John McCain and Mitt Romney, two worthless cucky-wucks.

So, are the nasty Jews finally content in your house? No. They tell you that they have this sentimental longing for their long lost house, which is none other than House D. Your family never had anything to do with House D and, in your guts, you feel it’s none of your business. People in House D never did your family wrong and vice versa, so there is no need for antipathy between your family and people of House D. Whatever bad blood may exist between Jews and people in House D, it’s their problem, not yours. But the Jews say YOU BETTER make it your business and your problem. They tell you that it’s a moral obligation for you and your son to go beat up and evict the people in House D and hand it over to Jews. Otherwise, you are a bad bad person because you don’t care about Jews. You don’t hate what Jews hate. You don’t attack and kill what Jews want attacked and killed. You must be some kind of ‘anti-Semite’ who doesn't care about the feelings of oh-so-noble Jews.
Browbeaten again, you and your son take up arms and attack the people of House D. You kill half of them and evict the other half. During the attack, your son got shot in the spine and became paralyzed from chest down. While you and your son are doing all this, Jews invite Negroes & Homos over to House A and have a massive orgy with themselves, Negroes, and your wife and daughter. And when you return dragging your paralyzed son to the porch, the Jew opens the door and shows you the orgy and tells you that this is the ‘freedom’ you are fighting for. To honor you, he puts a dog collar around your neck as your ‘medal’ and a flea collar around your son’s neck as his medal.

Now, because you cleared House D for the Jews, you think that maybe the Jews will move over there and finally leave you and your family alone in House A. But nope. A few Jews do move to House D but most Jews remain in House A. Also, Jews in House D demand constant money and supplies from House A. But Jews in House A don’t just give their own stuff to Jews in House D. Jews filch your stuff and send it to Jews in House D also. And whenever there’s a problem in House D and its neighbors, you and your son are ordered by Jews to go over there and kill more ‘enemies of Jews’. It doesn’t matter that your son is in a wheelchair. If he refuses to support Jews in House D, he is denounced as an ‘Anti-Semite’. And every time you and your son return from battle, the door is opened to the sight of a massive orgy of Jews, Homos, and Negroes getting in on with your wife and daughter. And Jews hang another dog collar around your neck and another flea collar around your son’s neck... as medals, of course, for which you are supposed to feel so grateful and honored. And both of you are made to watch the orgy and read a prepared script that says, "This is the freedom we are fighting for."

Still, you believe it’s not a total loss. After all, even though Jews now own the house and abuse you & your family and even though Negroes are invited to do nasty things, you and your family still feel as having a place called ‘home’. After all, apart from nasty Jewish behavior, awful visits by Negroes, and periodic battles you must fight around House D, it’s still a kind of ‘living’. You have arrived at some kind of stability and status quo.

But then, Jews worry that you and your family will finally wake up and get real angry. You will grab baseball bats, pitchforks, and guns in the basement and come after the Jews. So, the Jew takes the guns and locks them away. And the Jew gives the baseball bats to the Negroes. But as coup de grace, Jews figure Diversity is the key. Jews decide they will hog the upper floor of the house while the lower floors will be filled with Diversity. That way, you and your family will be so busy bickering with diverse cast of invaders that you won’t have any energy left to take revenge on the Jew.

So, Jews use their bullhorn to call on the big family in House C. Jews also put up a sculpture in your front yard with a plaque that says, "All you freeloaders in House C, come to House A and get lots of stuff." People in House C hear the message and see the sign and come storming to House A like a caravan. So, you and your family now have your hands full trying to deal with this mass inflow of bums from House C. Meanwhile, Jews in the upper floor cackle with hideous glee.

Yes, if Jewish People were a guest allowed into your house, such will be the fate of you and your people.

Asian-American Students(or Yellow Dogs) at Columbia University are Predictable Toady-Servant-Lackeys of Political Correctness that lionizes Blacks and Homos as the favored Sacred Objects of the Jewish Globo-Homo Empire.

See the source image


Sometimes, it may seem as though the PC crowd just doesn't get the joke. Often, the problem is they do get it and just can't handle it. Likely, the Asian attendees at the event got the Nimesh Patel joke, and that is why he had to be Babu-ed or Baboo-ed. As well-trained dogs of PC(that serves as the manual for status-striving), Asian-Americans were predictably 'triggered'. Yellow dogs have a tendency to seek approval and follow, and in the Current Year, 'gay rights' are blessed Gay Rites.

Now, jokes are generally triggering and 'offensive'. Usually, someone or something is the object of mockery, the 'target' or 'victim'. It could be the other or it could be the self, usually the case with Joan Rivers and Rodney Dangerfield, the man who never got any respect.

Humor usually doesn't go well together with holiness and reverence, matters that call for sanctimony. When mockery of a sacred cow is tolerated, the once holy cow looks like holy shit. Perhaps, it was less Darwin & Marx and more Marx Brothers that did in Christianity & Bourgeois morals. One can never look at opera in the same way after NIGHT AT THE OPERA.

Peter Ustinov's take on an ill-fated production of Richard Wagner's SIEGRIED is hilarious. One can hardly watch that scene with 'solemnity' and straight face anymore. Video at 40:05.

And the Old Elites of Europe relied heavily on pomp and spectacle, the stuff of awe and reverence that kings and noblemen relied upon to justify their privilege and dominance.The Order sensed that, once people began to see the rulers as laughable and ridiculous, the status quo was doomed. Pompous elites could be weakened with humor or fanatical anti-humor. With the rise of modernity, mass media, and growing cynicism(especially in urban areas), people began to chuckle about kings, queens, and idiot prince who seemed increasingly out-of-place and even 'alien' in the New Order created by the power of money and machines. Sometimes, humor and rage aren't that far apart.

In the case of Iran, the mass revolt vilified the Shah as both a ridiculous clown and an impotent shill. The most fanatical within the uprising soon lost their sense of humor and thirsted for blood. Same in Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge. And certain Russian/Jewish communists weren't big on humor either. Think of the character of Strelnikov in DOCTOR ZHIVAGO.

But in the capitalist West, the general way(often Jewish) of subverting The Order was through humor(and pornography as in Weimar Germany). In some cases, laughter at one authority was the flip-side of grim commitment to another authority, the new boss.
Consider how the soldiers laugh at the elite officer in DOCTOR ZHIVAGO, but mockery is soon followed by brutal violence and bloodthirsty hate. Whatever the ultimate agenda or outcome, few things are as effective as laughter in de-legitimizing authority. This is why PC can't abide by humor directed at what it deems holy. If humor could bring down respect/reverence for kings, ideologies, and God Himself, it can bring down just about anything.

Why does the urbane sophisticate finally lose his cool in ALL ABOUT EVE? He becomes the object of laughter. He's used to being the wit than outwitted. And Humbert's biggest humiliation in LOLITA is that he's just a butt of jokes to Quilty.

Humor can be gentle or G-rated(like on the TV show HEE-HAW) but is most effective when racy and irreverent(or, at the furthest reach, surreal). (Potty-mouthed 'X-rated' stand-up routines with nonstop twaddle about sex and genitals are mostly tiresome with few exceptions: Sam Kinison and Eddie Murphy, esp. Mr T. as a 'faggot' routine.) Edgy humor stings its 'victims' with potency. It can be downright lethal. Granted, humor is often self-effacing or double-edged, passive/aggressive. It often mocks the mocker along with the mocked, like with the Mexican Restaurant scene in SANFORD AND SON, a show with many 'Hispanic' jokes that spring back on Fred G. Sanford as a black bigot.
The passive/aggressive nature of humor elicits both self-pity and confidence in the audience. On some level, the audience identifies with the comic/clown(for whom nothing seems to go right) because everyone has problems. And by laughing at the comic's 'problems', the audience 'therapeutically' comes to laugh at their own with similar overtones. Thus, there is no clear line between comic-as-them and comic-as-us. Because the comic is given to exaggeration, the audience is relieved to find that their problems aren't so bad, and yet, the exaggeration is of situations all-too-familiar to many people. But then, because the comic has the balderdash to spell out his 'problems' and give the middle-finger to the world, he is also a figure of confidence, even arrogance. He becomes kind of 'heroic'. And yet, there is ambiguity in his middle-finger. Is it for the audience or for the audience?

Now, in our post-religious age, nothing should be sacrosanct, but as Jonathan Haidt and others have remarked, human psychology is drawn to righteous holy-schmoliness, and new 'gods' are elevated by cultural consensus shaped by elite academia and mass media. Certain figures and narratives become de facto sacred even if ostensibly part of secular culture & politics. MLK, (Harvey)Milk, and Mandela aren't regarded as gods in the literal sense but treated as figures of idol-worship nevertheless. Homos are associated with New Agey 'rainbow' colors, Jews always with the Shoah, and blacks with slavery(as an evil second only to Shoah according to the current Jewish-dominated narrative hellbent on milking 'white guilt' for all it is worth) and Civil Rights Movement, the Manichean Narrative of which is about stark Good vs Evil with no grey in between.
Granted, there has been a schizo element in trying to sustain reverential thoughts about Jews, blacks, and homos. After all, even as Jews insist on being regarded solemnly as the Shoah People, their natural tendency is to be subversive, perverse, and insulting. So, when we think of Jews, the mask of Anne Frank often peels off to reveal Sarah Silverman. Blacks demand we see them as the 'We Shall Overcome' people, but so much of black culture is crazy, trashy, ugly, and demented(and proud of it). We live in the Age of Mandela and Twerking, of black reverends and black rappers. In a way, Quentin Tarantino's INGLORIOUS BASTERDS and DJANGO UNCHAINED conveyed this schizo aspect of Jews and blacks as Sacred Monsters: Consider their Moralism + Sadism, or Sado-Moralism. And then, there are homos. It's amazing how many people have been led to remember the AIDS epidemic as a kind of homo-holocaust when it was the result of sodomites butt-banging one another like rabbits-in-heat.

Now, what was Nimesh Patel's great 'sin'? It was simply that he mocked blackness and homosexuality. (Good thing he left out the Jews or else the controversy would have been greater.) Now, one could argue that his jokes were ultimately sympathetic to blacks and homos, i.e. those groups have a tough time due to 'racism' and 'homophobia'. Still, he made a joke of issues related to sacrosanct groups, and PC will not tolerate mockery of the holy-schmolies. It undermines sober reverence of the main idols of PC. Humor, inebriated with anarchic spirit, forgets what is holy and pokes fun at just about everything. PC demands a teetotaler brand of humor that is always mindful of what can and can't be said. One might say humor has entered the Prohibition Era, and who knows, maybe humor(with anarchic intoxicant content) will go underground as a form of gangsterism.

If Patel had joked in such manner about any other group, even Asians, there wouldn't have been a fuss. But Jews, homos, and Negroes are are not to be mocked; and the insistence is the product of both PC indoctrination/idolatry and craven cowardice. After all, surely the yellow dogs in college campuses know that the most vocal and hostile groups tend to be Jews, blacks, and homos. Piss off one of them, and all hell may break loose. So, to prevent homo and/or black outrage directed at Asians, Asians shut down a fellow 'bad' Asian to preemptively signal that they are with the PC program 100%. They understand that we must all revere and quasi-worship the Holy Schmoly Three of Jews, blacks, and homos.

If anything, the joke-that-no-one-got within the purview of the recent event is that these Asians sure lived up to racial stereotypes as the ever-so-obedient, ever-so-conformist, and ever-so-predictable yellow dogs. They made it plain as day that they suck up to power and kowtow before the Official Narrative. Since blacks and homos are holy in the Jewish-controlled West, Asian yellow dogs worship at the altar of Obligatory Iconography. The perimeters of humor are to remain within permissible bounds.
Because Jews control the Power and designated themselves, blacks, and homos as the Holy Three, most Americans are nervous about saying anything that might be construed as neo-blasphemous and offensive to precious sensitivities of the Holy Three. Granted, Jews can joke about Jews, blacks can joke about blacks, and homos can joke about homos... but everyone else better watch out, and furthermore, Jews, homos, and blacks must be careful not to step on each other's toes in their Holy Culture Waltz. As for Asians(especially yellow East Asians), they come from status-obsessed conformist cultures, and therefore, they(especially sheepish and dog-like East Asians) tend toward conformity with the Prevailing Dogma(of whichever society they happen to reside in) to gain status points. This isn't really about 'safe spaces' but about status-points. Especially because Asian Identity lacks intrinsic value in the Western PC scorecard, Asians yearn to latch onto one or all of the Holy Three. Asians-as-Asian having no value, Asians seek value in roles as Asians-for-Jews/Israel, Asians-for-blacks, and/or Asians-for-homos. In this way, yellows are like pseudo-white-people. Just like whites, having been robbed of autonomous worth by PC, have no choice but to gain moral worth by latching themselves in service to Jews, blacks, and/or homos(as the Holy Three), Asians feel they must also latch onto the Holies to have any worth. So, Asians-for-Asians is regarded as a yawn or irritation, and that means Asians can feel righteous only by cheering or championing the Holy Three. Because Asians-for-Asians is regarded as petty and selfish by PC(whereas blacks-for-blacks, homos-for-homos, and Jews-for-Jews are regarded as the noblest commitments), 'woke' Asians go out of their way to show that they prioritize the interests of Jews, blacks, or homos over their own. Whether it's Nikki Haley or Amy Chua sucking up to Jews OR the Asian Alliance at Columbia University sucking up to blacks and homos, it's obvious that Asian themes have no moral or spiritual currency in the West. Hindu browns and Far East yellows must suck up to the Three Holies. Incidentally, one crucial difference between whites and yellows is that, whereas whites lack intrinsic value due to the cult of 'white guilt', yellows lack intrinsic value due to their perceived 'lameness'. Asian women have some 'hot' value but as sexual subjects to be owned by other races.

Now, why are some peoples holier than others? After all, isn't our 'progressive' society all about 'equality'? One reason is Jews have the power, and Jews get to decide who is or isn't holy. It's simple as that, and Jews are of course going to favor themselves and their key political allies. The other reason is that the core formula for being part of Holy Three is as follows: Possession of Superior Ability + Possession of Victim Narrative. Why does a particular group receive more sympathy for its victimhood IF it is perceived as having superior qualities? Because there is the sense that a SUPERIOR and even god-like people have been wronged. Thus, it seems more tragic than if a 'lame' or mediocre people had been wronged. Why do we feel more tragic when a lion than a warthog is killed(even though warthogs are intelligent animals too)? It's because we admire lions as the superior hunter, the king of the jungle, whereas we regard warthogs as just ugly prey animals. After all, who ever got enraged in the West over some white hunter who killed a warthog?

Because blacks are admired as superior athletes, singers with louder voices, and studs with bigger dongs(or sexy ho's with bouncier booties), they are admired in the West as the superior race. People may not consciously think so but they sensually feel it, and feelings go a long way in shaping society. (It's like most men are more likely to help a pretty woman in distress than a fat ugly one. It's not conscious but subconscious bias. Most men probably see themselves as decent fellers who'd care equally for anyone in need of help, but reality plays out differently based on people's feelings.) Because of differences in perceptions about race, the history of slavery and Jim Crow seems especially unjust because blacks, a Superior People, were wronged. In contrast, there is far less sympathy for American Indians even though they suffered something worse than slavery. They suffered 'genocide' and permanent loss of their land due to massive immigration-imperialism. Given the 'genocidal' impact of immigration-imperialism on American Indians, one might think PC would associate immigration with imperialism & historical 'sin', indeed the Original Sin of America. But not so. Instead, all we hear about immigration is that it's especially great because Jews, one of the Holy Threes, gained so much from it. Also, we are told that the Original Sin of America is black slavery, not the 'genocide' of the Red Man. Why? Blacks are deemed holier. Because American Indians can't sing and dance, don't excel in sports, and aren't seen as super-studs, their victim-hood is acknowledged as sad but dismissed as boring. (In some ways, the American Moral Paradox can be explained in terms of a people trying to cover up 'crimes' with crusades. Because America was founded upon 'genocide', slavery, imperialism, and massive destruction of natural wonders, it is easy to paint its history with blood, sweat, and tears, a saga of greed and plunder. Because of this moral crisis, one way to justify Americanism was to tirelessly associate its growth with never-ending crusades. "Offense is the best defense" as they say. The most surreal version of this is Tim Cook fulminating about necessary crusades against the 'sin' of 'hate speech' before the ADL. As we all now, Apple is a vile, greedy, and corrupt globalist company that uses semi-slave labor around the world. It has no qualms about doing business with tyrannical regimes like Saudi Arabia, one of the biggest sponsors of terrorism. It is also joined at the hip with the neo-imperialist Deep State that pushed wars that destroyed millions of lives. As for ADL, it is a hateful Zionist-imperialist organization that seeks to silence any criticism of Israel's murderous policies against Palestinians. If anything, Apple and ADL have a lot to answer for, but notice that Tim Cook goes on the moral offensive and accuses other people of 'sin'. But then, it's hardly surprising that homo-supremacist Tim Cook is so deferential to Jewish-Supremacist ADL. After all, Jewish Power was behind Homomania that elevated homos and trannies to the status of angels and demigods. Jews made people like Cook the new gods of America, and homo vanity is just fine with Jewish power. With Anno Sodomini, homos get to decide what is 'sinful'. So, it is 'sinful' to refuse to appease the filth of 'gay marriage', but homos waging ugly war on true morality and decency is never 'hateful' since Jews and Homos get to decide what is 'hate speech'. Tim Cook is of Christian background, but post-religious ilk like him, having lost their faith, seek new meaning in New Age lunacies like Homomania, especially as it stokes their 'gay' vanity as a superior breed.)
The formula for the Holy Three has roots in Christianity. If Jesus was just a man who got beaten and killed, it would have been just another sad story of a good man undone by powerful forces. Such men were dime-a-dozen throughout history. So, why did His story become so powerful? Because a Narrative developed that He wasn't just some guy with a helpful message but the Messiah. Humankind didn't just kill a Nice Person but the one and only Son of God. And so, Christians were filled with both great awe and massive guilt.

If white folks had brought over scrawny Vietnamese or meek Bolivian Indians to toil as slaves in America, there would have been no great respect or reverence for those peoples. And not much in the way of 'white guilt'. Even after Emancipation, such peoples would not have excelled in sports or pop music. And small Asian men or short brown men would not have been regarded as studs that can inspire 'fever' among white women and cucky-wuckery among white men(reduced to hapless 'white boys'). Also, as Asians and browns have weaker voices, men of oratorical power like MLK would not have emerged among them. Brown natives of Latin America suffered 'genocide', slavery, and oppression for centuries, but the attitude of even American Progressives is essentially "bring them over to cut our lawns, do our laundry, and change diapers." Americans of all ideologies regard browns as a race of permanent helots. In contrast, Americans regard blacks as the superior race due to black success in song, dong, and strong. Thus, whites feel more guilt about blacks because they came to realize that they'd once oppressed a 'cool' superior race of 'the greatest', as Muhammad Ali anointed himself. So, even though Americans like to tell themselves that they are all about 'equality' in terms of ideology, they favor some groups over others in terms of idolatry. Some groups have more idolatrous value than others, esp. because American sense of worth is largely determined by celebrity of sports, song, and sex.

Now, why do Jews and homos also have holy power? Jews are not successful in sports and the sexual attractive sweepstakes. Granted, many Jews were talented music composers(though often for black singers with more powerful voices). Still, Jews also have a combination of Superiority and Victimhood so essential to the Holy Formula. Jews can invoke the Shoah(as the greatest evil of all time) & history of persecution under Christians for their Victimhood Narrative. But Jews can also promote themselves as the Chosen People, the Genius People, the people of wit, and the people of wealth. So, Jews are regarded with awe. Awesomely tragic and awesomely triumphant. In contrast, Palestinians get no respect despite their undeniable victim-hood because they are seen as mediocre, uninspired, and lame. After all, where is the Palestinian Einstein or Mendelssohn? Where is the Palestinian Bob Dylan or Steven Spielberg? So, victim-hood isn't enough for a people to gain Holy-Schmoly status. To be one of the Holies, you need the formula of Victimhood + Superiority.
Homos also concocted a victim-narrative for themselves(of course with the invaluable support of the Jew-run media), but no less crucial is their perceived superiority. Because homos tend to be vain and narcissistic, they've gained notable success in fashion, entertainment, and upper echelons of privilege. It's like the rich in THE WOLF OF WALL STREET feel prestige in hiring a 'gay butler'. And because homos love to rub shoulders and dilly-dally with the rich and powerful, the privileged classes have come to see homos as loyal partners-in-crime(with better taste in decor and design). Granted, the homo victim-narrative centered around AIDS relies on twisted logic. HIV spread far and wide among homos because they were indulging in wild orgies at all times in all places. But because Jews control the media and prize homos for Favorite Ally Status, they've spun a PC narrative about homos as saints & angels destroyed by some 'homophobic' tragedy. So, HIV epidemic was more the product of Ronald Reagan's wickedness.

Anyway, the reason why the Asian Alliance shut down Patel was simply because he mocked two of the Holy Three. He didn't show 'due' deference when speaking of homos and blacks. Asians are sheepish status-seekers and predictably conform to prevailing socio-cultural dogma. It's a pattern we see over and over. Why was it that East Asians, despite possessing intelligence comparable to that of Western folks, failed to achieve the kind of progress and revolutionary breakthroughs that came to define European Civilizations? Because the Asian Character tends to be sheepish, obedient, and conformist. So, their minds were used mainly to gain status and seek approval from the existing power structure than to expand freedom and seek truth(beyond the dominant dogma). If not for the impact of Western incursions into East Asia, yellow people there would still be preparing for eight-legged Confucian essays to pass exams to become the same-old-same-old bureaucrats mouthing the tired truisms. Then, it is not surprising that East Asians in the West are such unoriginal yellow dogs who predictably toe the dominant line. Furthermore, having no intrinsic value or powerful self-identity in the West, the yellow dogs seek worth by begging for approval from the Holy Three: Jews, blacks, and homos. But then, dogs always seek out masters to serve. The main Asian trait is 'to serve' than 'to lead'. It is to be the dog than the master of history.

Apart from the Holy Three, no other people really matter in the West, especially if the people in particular have been wronged by the Holy Three. So, when blacks riot and burn down businesses, no one cares about the store-owners, many of whom are Arab or Muslim in depressed communities. Or when Zionists use brutal force on Palestinians, people look the other way or support Israel(as Congress and US presidents always do). Or when homos use their privilege to shut down bakeries & organizations that won't bend over to the 'Gay' Agenda, there is either sullen silence(among craven and cowardly 'conservatives' who dare not infuriate Jews who are behind Homomania) or ecstatic support of homo tyranny(among 'progressives' for whom immorality is the New Morality). The Holy Three are like the 'made men' in GOODFELLAS. They are free to roam and rule as they please.
How about Muslims? They are mere cannon fodder. Since Jews are holy and control the US, they continue to steer foreign policy to destroy any Muslim nation reviled as a 'threat to Israel', even though Israel is the main threat to all peaceful nations in the region. As a result, millions of Muslims have had their lives ruined in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Iran through wars, invasions, terrorism(sponsored by US and Israel), and sanctions. But who cares? After all, Muslims are mediocre and have no special talents. Sure, Jews feign sympathy for Muslim 'refugees' while willfully ignoring the fact that those nation-less Muslims are the result of Wars for Israel pushed by Jews who control the US. Ending Wars for Israel will stop turning Muslims into refugees, but Jews keep using whore-politicians(Clinton, Bush II, Obama, and Trump) to wage more Wars for Israel because Israel-Uber-Alles is the neo-religion of the West. Also, notice that Jews steer those Muslim 'refugees' into the West while Israel takes in not a single one(nor hands back stolen Golan Heights to Syria). If anything, Jews continue to steal more land in the West Bank. At any rate, the reason why Muslims get no love despite being victimized in a Jew-controlled world is because they aren't superior in wit(Jews), athleticism(blacks), or creativity(homos). So, who cares if millions of them die?

Same with Asians. Americans may have killed up to a 300,000 Filipinos(by indirect as well as indirect means) in the US-Philippines War, millions of Japanese in WWII(in a conflict in which the Western Imperialists were just as much to blame), millions of Koreans and Chinese in the Korean War, and millions of Vietnamese in the Vietnam War. The greatest killings done by the US were mostly in Asia. These wars resulted from US imperialist hegemony over Asia, but Asian victimization at the hands of the US doesn't count for much because Asians are seen as lame and boring grinds whose dominant theme is "Hey, be quiet, this is the library". Victim-hood without perceived superiority doesn't stir up much sympathy.
A single dead Jew, black, or homo is regarded more tragically than a million dead Muslims or Asians because Jews, blacks, and homos are perceived to possess superior qualities, whereas Muslims and Asians are seen as masses of faceless lame folks. But then, it seems most Asian-Americans are indeed pretty lame, conformist, and predictable given their attitudes in the West. Most being mere teacher's pets, they just regurgitate PC fed to them since kindergarten. They are 'good little boys' and 'good little girls' who never had an independent idea or value in their heads. Even when they act 'defiant' or 'rebellious', it is in total imitation of other peoples, esp. Jews, blacks, and homos. Asians are yellow dogs and copycats. There are exceptions to be sure, but as they say, two swallows don't make a summer. Likewise, two yellows don't do it either.

Now, one could argue that Arab Muslims and East Asians are both superior to blacks in IQ. After all, the Arab World and Asian World are far more advanced than black Africa and better-run than black-dominated cities like Detroit. But not every advantageous trait is 'iconic'. After all, people with superior engineering skills just do their jobs. They are not celebrated as stars or celebrities. Only a handful of uber-smart people like Einstein become well-known to the world. To appreciate science, technology, and most brainy professions, it takes time and patience. In contrast, it is immediately fun to listen to music, watch sports, get excited about sex, laugh at comedy, and rhapsodize about celebrity. Homos are creative with fashion and celebrity, Jews are funny & brilliant as comics, and blacks dominate pop music & sports, both of which are closely aligned with sex culture.
In some ways, Jews have both the easiest and most difficult task in maintaining their 'iconic' status. It's easy because they control media and academia; as such, they get to pick and choose what is holy and unholy. But, much of 'iconic' Jewish value reside in elite levels of achievement. Jews gained renown as writers, intellectuals, and scholars. Despite the high regard for Jewish Genius among the educated classes, most people don't care such things. For every person who read Philip Roth, a thousand people heard rap songs. Jews have been dominant in comedy, but as culture becomes dumber and trashier, future Woody Allens may not be properly appreciated. Worse, PC is doing to comedy what HIV did to homos, and this is bound to cut into Jewish wit. And as athletes and singers, Jews have been unable to compete with blacks. Also, someone of Bob Dylan's vision and genius isn't likely to be highly regarded in future America where the culture just keeps getting stupider. The key to Dylan's success was wit and brilliance because he wasn't a conventional song-and-dance man. But, in an idol-obsessed world, there is less space for eccentric artists like Dylan. And Shoah is too much of a downer. In contrast, homos have the wild-celebration thing that gets people all excited, and blacks got song, dong, and strong. Straights can join in the celebration of flamboyant homos, and non-blacks can enjoy blacks showing off on the sports field, but how can non-Jews really enjoy Jewishness?

Anyway, Asian yellow dogs are a confused lot. In a way, they are almost like closet-white-supremacists. In Japan, they have all these animation or 'anime' where characters tend to look Caucasian. Japanese cultural identity is a fantasy of wanting to be white. And, a New Yorker article reported that South Koreans are champions of plastic surgery. They go under the knife to emerge with white-looking eyes and noses. They go for trans-racial fantasies. And they dye their hand blonde and pretend to be pseudo-white-people. Also, Asians prefer whites as sexual mates and want to have white-looking babies. Granted, Asian women have advantage over Asian men in this department because, whereas Asian women have high sexual market value, Asian males have the lowest. Men of all races want to have sex with Asian women(who are seen as very feminine) but women of most races have no attraction to Asian men(who are deemed a bunch of dorks). And in dating sites, Asian women prefer white men over Asian men. And Asian male homos prefer non-Asian men to bugger their bungs. Notice how George Takei's yellow homo-bung is the plaything of some white guy. When Yukio Mishima visited New York, he looked for a blond homo, apparently to bugger his yellow bung.

Also, in terms of immigration patterns, Asians always prefer white-made or white-majority nations. Asian immigration preferences are for Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the US. Or Europe. Asians don't want to move to non-white-majority nations. In fact, Asians would rather move to a white-majority nation than to a fellow Asian nation. Asians feel that whites will treat them better and fairer than other Asians will treat them. So, everything that Asians DO would indicate a preference for whiteness. But to hide this shame(of favoring another race while devaluing their own), yellow dogs bark lots of anti-white noises. But if Asians really feel that way, why not avoid white people by staying in their own Asian nations? Why permanently relocate to white-majority nations? Why prefer white-made institutions over their own? Why take white names instead of keeping Asian names? Why not have Asian-looking babies than having white-looking babies? Why dye hair into blonde or brunette? Why have plastic surgery to look white? Asians bitch about past American policies that excluded Asians, but why were they so eager to flee from their own kind in the first place to live in a white-made and white-majority nations? Aren't Asian immigrants favoring whites over their own kind? Aren't they trying to 'include' more whites while 'excluding' fellow Asians in their own lives? After all, by coming to white-made nations, Asians become part of a white-majority world while excluding Asian Civilization from their daily lives. Such total lack of self-awareness. We should judge people by what they do than what they say. In terms of what Asians actually do, they seem to be closet-white-supremacists who want to live in white-majority nations, have white names, have sex with whites, and have white-looking babies. And it seems to be matter of Like Yellow Father Like Yellow Daughter. Asians see 'becoming white' as a journey of social, racial, and civilizational evolution, improvement, and ascendancy. Whether via plastic surgery or race-mixing, Asians feel no intrinsic value.
In the moral politics of PC, Asians suck up to Jews, blacks, and homos. As Evil Whitey is PC's main scapegoat, Asians join in on the Two Minutes of Hate against Whitey. But the fact is Asian immigrant-invaders moved to white nations because they favor whites over all other races, including their own. And despite their PC rhetoric, they try to settle in white areas and avoid brown and especially black areas. Based on what they really do than say, they are closet-white-supremacists. But then, so are Jews. For example, Jews revile 'racist' Nazi aesthetics of superior Aryan Beauty, but Jewish men have often longed for 'blonde white goddesses' while dumping Jewish women. Men like Woody Allen, Philip Roth, Norman Mailer, and Arthur Miller had quasi-Nazi taste in 'Aryan-looking' women as the epitome of beauty and desire. And brown hordes seem to be closet-white-supremacists too. They run from fellow browns and Diversity to make it to the US that is still perceived as a white country.

Anyway, Nimesh Patel the brown Asian was silenced by yellow dog Asians because he violated the PC decree of worshiping Blacks and Homos. Asians, being lame and conformist, seek to appease the Holy Three and are deathly afraid of displeasing them. Patel dared to crack jokes about homos and blacks, and that was simply a capital offense in the minds of conformist and sheep-like Asian grinds whose idea of humor is to serve the Power. (If these Asians really care about justice, why were they silent about Obama and Hillary's destruction of Libya and Syria? Why don't they protest Trump's anti-Iranian and anti-Palestinian policies? And why were they silent when Jewish Madeline Albright was killing 500,000 Iraqi kids?) They're really a bunch of phonies.

Be that as it may, in some ways, PC may be saving comedy.

Comedy reached its greatest heights as a subversive form of expression. Someone like Oscar Wilde would have been redundant and irrelevant in a permissive society. Best kind of humor always had to be risque. Lenny Bruce certainly got mileage of going against the system.

For a time, there was total freedom for comedians to be as outrageous as they wanted to be. The burst of freedom greeted as liberation and was fun for awhile but became pointless and tiresome because wanton vulgarity saturated everything and become just another mundane feature of life. People using F-words and discussing graphic sex became the New Normal, from elite-educated to the unwashed. The only way comedians could remain 'edgy' was by getting grosser and more putrid than the next guy. It was like a bunch of drunkards wallowing in their own vomit and urine.

But now, PC is once again creating a climate of repression and taboos, and that means real comedy can become risque again. But what is especially perverse is that PC considers itself to be edgy and subversive. After all, PC is the dogma of 'radicals' who take pride in their subversive attitude toward society. (Of course, the mindless dogs of PC, lacking agency and individuality like Mao's Red Guards, must be told by Central Command what to 'subvert' and attack. So, if Big Sister tells feminists to subvert the dead horse of 'patriarchy', you bet feminist dogs do just that and only that.) PC's delusional rationale for repressing free speech(now almost synonymous with 'hate speech') is to protect ‘radicalism' in a safe space. (It's as if 'radicalism' is now an infant that has to be babied and nursed. But then, we live in an infantile age.) It’s like a blade that has to be perpetually sheathed to keep it from blunting or breaking. But, this defeats the knife's purpose. A knife is designed to be a sharp instrument in order to cut. Then, cut it must despite the risk of tear-and-wear. The radicals once took pride in being edgy, but that edginess has been institutionalized. The blade has been placed as a sacred relic in the PC museum, and any weapon that dares to call on the knife to a knife-fight must be silenced & suppressed because the knife, having been consecrated as holy, no longer needs to prove itself. Everything institutionalized comes to be protected and preserved, shielded from further challenges. So, PC’s radicalism has become in name only. It is a protected blade that remains in the safety of the sheath. And the Power tells us there is no more needs for duels or knife-fights to see who or what is better because the 'debate is over', that's that, so you better shut up, and just learn to love PC and the Holy Three of Jews, blacks, and homos.

But this provides a new opportunity for comedians to subvert the Power. Political Correctness, in the name of protecting the 'weak', has come to protect the powerful. Once this state of affairs is exposed for what it really is, comedy comes alive again. We are living in a time when Jews, homos, and blacks wield immense power. Pretending that the Historical Clock stopped in the late 50s or early 60s is pure fantasy. Blacks today aren't like blacks back then. Jewish Power today isn't like what it was back then. And heaven knows homo privilege today isn't anything like homo reality back then. It's like the Chinese today aren't the coolies of yesteryear pulling rickshaws carrying white imperialists. Time passes, and things change. In a world where homos can destroy bakeries for refusing to bake a 'gay wedding cake', it is laughable to treat homos as some pitiful victim group. (What is the next frontier for 'marriage equality'? Same-Family or Incest Marriage?)

Monday, December 3, 2018

‘Latino’ or ‘Latinx’ is an Insult to the True Identity of the Indigenous Peoples of what is called ‘Latin America’ — Indigeneity of the Original Peoples was destroyed by the Diversity brought forth by Spanish and Portuguese Imperialists who furthered Diversity with Massive Influxes of African Slaves — Diversity conquered and raped Indigeneity

Mayan Civilization was not Latino. Then, why are peoples of Mayan backgrounds called 'Latino'(or 'Latinx')?
Inca Civilization was not Latino. Then, why are peoples of Inca backgrounds called 'Latino'(or 'Latinx')?


The real moral outrage should be this: Why use 'Latino' or 'Latinx'(or Latin-whatever) to designate so many people of Mexico, Central America, and South America who are NOT of Latin identity, history, or heritage?
Latin-whatever is an IMPOSED identity in Mexico-Central-America-South-America UNLESS one happens to be of European Conquistador or Immigration-Invader origin(or have substantial white blood). In truth, the native peoples of those regions had an existence going back 10,000s of yrs. And some of them had histories and unique cultures going back 1,000s of yrs. So, they had an identity BEFORE the arrival of the Europeans who came as imperialists and conquerors. And under Latin-American rule, they were not co-masters of Mexico-Central-America-South-America but, more often than not, subjects and slaves of the European Conquerors. So, referring to ALL the people of that region as 'Latino' or 'Latin-whatever' is deeply insulting.
Imagine if we call Filipinos 'Latin-Asians' because they were ruled by the Spanish for centuries. Suppose we refer to Asian Indians as Anglo-Asians because of 250 yrs of British domination. And supposed we refer to black Africans as Latin-Africans, Gallic-Africans, Anglo-Africans, Dutch-Africans, Belgian-Africans, and etc. because much of Africa had been ruled by various European colonizers at one time.

At the very least in the US, we don't refer to blacks and American Indians as 'Anglo'. Even though they came under Anglo power and learned to speak English, they are still referred to as 'African' or 'Indian' or 'Native American'. That much of their true identity is respected. They are not labeled with the generic term of Anglo or Anglx. But for some reason, everyone( regardless of racial or cultural origin) in Mexico-Central-America-South-America is called 'Latino' and now 'Latinx' even if he or she(or 'they'?) has no white blood or little white blood. The deep identity of the indigenous folks are disregarded, and they are merely labeled with the identity of the European imperialists who conquered them. It's as if they had no history, identity, and culture prior to the arrival of Europeans. And blacks in and from that part of the world are also referred to as 'Latino' and now 'Latinx' even though they are really African in origin and were enslaved and brought by force by the Latin-European and Latin-Jewish slavers.
Using this logic, I suppose Palestinians living under Jewish rule should be called Judeo-Arabs. (Slavery under Jews was especially tragic. If European Christian slavers and Muslim slavers were at least willing to share God and Jesus/Muhammad with the slave population, Jews didn't share the Covenant with their slaves. Via Conversion to Christianity or Islam, the slave was made the equal of the master at least in spiritual matters. But the Jewish Covenant was only for Jews, and Jewish masters never regarded the goy slaves as their spiritual equal.)

Another thing. This gender-bender ideology is just the latest in Western Cultural Imperialism(now gone decadent and degenerate under Jewish-capitalist globo-homo nuttery). Indeed, gender-ideology, Homomania, and LGBTQ-ism are essentially proxy forms of Judeo-globalism. It is the Jewish Imperialist equivalent of Christianity. Since Jews hate Christianity and no longer believe in something like Marxism, they need a neo-'spiritual' and missionary ideological agenda to unite all elites around the world. And their 'spiritual' weapon is Globo-Homomania. Why? Because gender-bender-ism poses no economic challenge to the ruling elites. After all, homos and trannies are naturally vain and narcissistic and suck up to the rich and powerful. Also, because homos and trannies everywhere are favored, lionized, and elevated by the power of the globalist elites, they become the most loyal servants of globo-homo world domination. 'Gay rights' turned into Gay Rites, the consecration of the homos and trannies by the Gay Ray of the sodomy 'rainbow'.
Also, as every nation has its share of homos with grievances, those homos make ideal fifth-columnists who will be most willing to collaborate with globalist Jewish power. Jews and homos see eye-to-eye in favoring elite-minority rule over goyim and straights.
Most Chinese are patriotic and stand with China, and most Iranians are patriotic and stand with Iran. But homos & trannies in China and Iran are likely to be disgruntled because they don't get the adoration & adulation that homos(and increasingly trannies) receive in the Jewish controlled West. So, they will be most likely to collaborate with Jewish globalists to subvert their own nations. After all, if Jewish globo-homo ideology takes over China and Iran, the homos there will be elevated and celebrated as saints, angels, and even gods.
So, this 'Latinx' business is a double-assault on the indigenous folks of what is called 'Latin America'. Their true indigenous identity is (1) buried under the imperialist identity of the European conquerors and (2) pasted over with the decadent & degenerate consumer-capitalist cultism of Jewish globo-homo world order. It is total BS.

A real movement for a truer sense of identity for all the indigenous folks in 'Latin America' should call for the rejection of the term 'Latin' altogether. 'Latino' or 'Latin-whatever' should ONLY apply to people in 'Latin America' who are white or mostly white of Spanish or Portuguese origin(and maybe Italian origin). People who are brown or mostly indigenous should recover & revive their own indigenous identities and insist that they be referred to as such than being labeled with the imperialist identity of the very people who conquered them, 'genocided' them, enslaved them, and 'raped' them(to create the mixed-race Mestizo).

What is called 'Latin America' is the most tragic part of the world. At least in North America and Australia(and Siberia), the native populations were small enough to be easily conquered and pacified. In contrast, it is estimated that there were 60 million people(with reasonably advanced and complex civilizations) in what is now referred to as 'Latin America'. And around 55 million of them were killed, mostly by disease but also by guns and greed. At the very least, Asians, Middle Easterners, and Africans were immune to the diseases brought by Europeans. (If anything, a disease that began in Asia came to wipe out 1/3 of Europeans in the Bubonic Plague.) So, in time, Africans, Asians, and Middle Easterners all regained their territories and independence from the Europeans. But the indigenous peoples and cultures of Mexico-Central-America-South-America came under permanent domination by the European Imperialist elites. And this takeover wasn't merely political or economic but even in the area of cultural identity. By calling the indigenous brown people of Mexico-Central-America-South-America as 'Latino', 'Latinx' or 'Latin-whatever', they've been denied not only political independence(from European Conquistadoreans) but their own cultural and racial identity.

Sadly however, browns must be awful stupid because, instead of seeing the big picture, they think they won some great Culture War by being suckered by Jewish imperialism into embracing the globo-homo 'Latinx' idiocy as their true identity. No wonder they were so easily and permanently conquered by the Spanish and Conquistadors. They are estupidx.

Finally, it goes without saying that most Latin-Americans(of European background) prefer the vague and confused terminology of ‘Latino’(or ‘Latinx’) that obfuscates the identities of whites, browns, and blacks(and all the mixed-raced mestizos and mulattos). This way, white Latinos(of Conquistador background) can posture as ‘people of color’ and pretend to be ‘victims of gringo imperialismo’ and demand ‘affirmative action’. By posturing as people-of-color, they can pretend to have much in common with browns(whom they conquered and raped) and blacks(whom they enslaved and exploited). There are few things more disgusting than the sight of all those white Latin Americans(who still dominate most of ‘Latin America’ politically and economically) pretending that "race doesn’t matter in ‘Latin America’ because everyone is totally mixed" when, in fact, there are many color barriers and hierarchies in Mexico-Central-America-South-America. The loose terminology of ‘Latino’ allows white Latin Americans of Conquistador or Immigrant-Imperialist backgrounds to wash their hands clean of all their invasions, genocides, and acts of enslavement. After all, if a white Latin American and a indigenous brown person are both equally ‘Latino’(or ‘Latinx’), then it means they are one and the same or interchangeable. ROTFL.
Most Latin Americans who gain favoritism via Affirmative Action in elite institutions are white or mostly white. Their ancestors pioneered the conquest of the Americas and carried out the first ‘genocides’ and mass-rapes of the natives. But now, they go around pretending to be ‘people of color’, poor victims of Yanqui Imperialismo, and take advantage of Affirmative Action programs that were designed to help black Americans and American Indians. Such a shameless people without an ounce of honor. Look at Guillermo Del Toro and Marco Rubio. They are white-as-can-be, but they pretend to be spokesmen for the People of Color. They call for mass-migration as a human right when, in fact, it was the mass-migration of European Conquistadors into the New World that set off the worst mass deaths and exploitation in human history. The story of mass migration has been about Human Might, not Human Right. The more powerful people migrated into other lands and took them over. Just ask the Palestinians what mass migration of Jews did to that part of the world.
If people like Guillermo Del Toro and Marco Rubio really believe in mass-migration as a good, how about all the white Latinos in Mexico-Central-America-South-America migrating back to Europe and handing over the lands back to the indigenous peoples who were destroyed by the Imperialism? Restore indigeneity by removing diversity.
Guillermo Del Toro of European Conquistador background is a Latino.
This indigenous brown woman is a 'Latina'. ROTFL.
Cubano Marco Rubio of Conquistador background is a Latino.
Evo Morales of Indigenous Blood is also 'Latino'. ROTFL.

Sunday, December 2, 2018

Subjective ‘Racism’ & Subjective ‘Anti-Racism’ versus Objective Race-ism — Why I am an Objective Race-ist — The Need for Racial Objectivism in order to better understand People and Problems


The problem with this issue about 'racism' is it is always treated as a matter of subjectivity, esp in the presumably diseased minds of whites. So, the only reason why the world is 'racist' is because 'racist' ideas are in the minds of white folks. Remove those ideas from the mind and the world will be made un-'racist'.

Now, if reality were only subjective, maybe this would be true. If reality were like dream-logic where the 'world' warps in accordance to one's thoughts and emotions(within the dream), one could conclude that the problem is in the head. Buddhism sort-of believes in such concept of reality. It teaches that what we consider to be reality is all just an illusion. Nothing is really real. Real isn't real. Our perceptions of the world aren't real or really real. They are just illusions, tricks of the mind.

But reality isn't just some illusion or thought. There is real reality out there, an objective reality. If 'racism' were purely subjective, a matter of the mind, then one could argue that we can change 'racist' results by removing 'racist' ideas. Such argument assumes that we act 'racist' and maintain a 'racist' world because we have 'racist' ideas and those ideas shape our behaviors. "I think 'racist', therefore I am 'racist'." If we get rid of such ideas, then we will stop thinking 'racist', and then, we will stop acting 'racist', and the world will be un-racist. Okay, that might be valid IF 'racism' is only a matter of subjectivity.

But what if 'racism' or race-ism is a matter of objectivity, or objective truth. In other words, races and racial differences are objectively real regardless of what we think, feel, or hope subjectively? So, even if all of us do our best to eradicate 'racism' from our subjective minds, race-ism remains as fact in the real world as objective reality. (As -ism means belief, race + ism should really mean belief in the reality of race and racial differences and the inevitability of racial identity/consciousness.) Races did evolve differently, and general racial differences do exist. While every race has a wide range of individuals with various traits, certain traits tend to be far more common among certain races than among others. The ability to run fast is surely more common among West Africans. Also, some traits are virtually unique to one race. Nappy hair is a black African thing. You can't find it among Europeans or Asians. And blue-eyes are almost exclusive to certain subsets of white Europeans.
Some races are smarter, some are stronger & more aggressive, some are bigger, some are more impulsive, some are more neurotic, some are more passive, and etc. Then, it doesn't matter what we think subjectively because objective reality remains regardless of our thoughts.
It's like we can disbelieve gravity as mere subjectivity, but it's still there in reality as an actual objective force. We can say pain is a social construct or subjective delusion, but pain really exists in the nervous system of complex organisms. Similarly, all this focus on subjectivity of 'racism' overlooks the objectivity of race-ism. Objective Race-ism notices racial differences and their social consequences regardless of our subjective wishes or biases. After all, white subjective 'racism' failed to produce a white boxer who could beat Jack Johnson. Whites subjectively reassured themselves that white men are the superior athletes and could beat the Negro. But objective race-ism favored Jack Johnson because blacks evolved to be faster, more explosive in motion, and stronger-in-bone. White subjective 'racism'(of wishing for white victory over the black) was no match for objective race-ism that favored the black man as the superior athlete. But just as subjective white 'racism' failed, so has subjective white 'anti-racism'. White progs can subjectively reassure themselves that 'race is just a social construct' and that racial differences are phony. They can subjectively claim that all races are equal in brains and brawn. But reality is otherwise. Objective race-ism favors Jews in brains, blacks in brawn. Just look all around.

When blacks fail more in school or act more violent, the libby-dib explanation is the lingering legacy of white 'racism' as subjectivity, i.e. because whites still have 'racist' attitudes in their minds, blacks have little chance. Or, black fail because they've been led to devalue their own aptitude in intellect because they internalized white 'racism' about black inferiority. So, all we need to do is remove the subjective virus of 'racism' from white and black minds. But what if it is generally true that genetics made blacks more impulsive & aggressive, and less intelligent. Also, what if the fact that blacks are tougher & more aggressive makes them feel contempt for 'white' learning and culture as 'fa**ogty-ass', therefore less willing to learn from lame 'whitey'?
Then, even if we try to eradicate 'racism' as subjectivity, it won't do much good because race-ism as objectivity will still shape reality.
This is certainly true in sports. Why do blacks excel far more than whites and esp Asians, Mexicans, Hindus, etc? We can blame subjectivity, i.e. blacks hold 'racist' views of themselves as more athletic whereas non-blacks hold 'racist' views of themselves as inferior to blacks in speed, jumping, and etc. And of course, one's attitudes do shape one's actions to an extent. But are most of our attitudes & outlooks merely a matter of subjective bias or delusion? Or, more often than not, are our attitudes based on observation of objective reality, whereupon all races, blacks and non-blacks, arrive at the conclusion that blacks do indeed have a decisive and objective racial advantage in sports and physical aggression/confrontation? So, in the end, it doesn't matter what a black guy or Mexican guy thinks. The fact is LA Lakers will remain mostly black even though LA has many more Mexicans than blacks. It is because race-ism is an objective truth. Different races evolved from separation by 1000's of miles and 10,000s(even 100,000's) of years. It is no one's fault because so many results in life are not decided by subjectivity but objectivity.

Black areas have lower home values because blacks, being less intelligent, are going to have less income and be able to afford less. Also, blacks tend to be more aggressive and violent, and this leads to social degradation and declining property values. Also, due to black violence, many non-blacks(and even many blacks) try to avoid overly black areas. Indeed, non-blacks are willing to pay the Black Tax(or Blax) of higher home prices to live away from violent and threatening blacks. So, it's not just that black property values are devalued but non-black property values are over-valued because so many non-blacks want to live apart from dangerous blacks.

If 'racism' were purely subjective, then it should affect only 'racist' white conservative 'who hate black people'. Let's assume that white conservatives subjectively hold unwarranted negative views of blacks. So, they try to move away from blacks even though blacks are objectively no different from any other race. In contrast, let's say 'anti-racist' white liberals are free of 'racist' subjective bias. They've been cleansed of 'racism' in their subjective minds and want to get along with Negroes. Now, if 'racism' were purely subjective, white liberals would have no problem with blacks.
But in fact, even white liberals joined the white flight. Even Jewish Leftists like Howard Stern's mother finally had enough and left the neighborhood when it became too black. No matter what these Jewish Leftists wanted to believe or espouse subjectively, the fact was objective reality remained race-ist, i.e. stronger blacks saw Jews as weak & easy victims. (In the Crown Heights Riots, Jews cowered in fright while tougher blacks did all the beating.) Even Liberal Jewish communities became more dangerous as the result of 'too many' blacks moving in. Why? Because blacks are naturally more muscular and more aggressive. And being less intelligent, they achieve less in school and work, and they figure an easy way to get free stuff is to rob whitey or Jewey.

Ism means belief, and race-ism should mean belief in the objective reality of race and racial differences. It's not a matter of subjectivity but objectivity. We can't consciously wish or will 'racism' away because it's not just in our minds. It is not just some illusion that we can eradicate via PC meditation toward SJW nirvana. Even if we reject it in our subjective souls, it remains outside us as external reality. Races exist, and they are really different.

Now, sometimes, what we think of as 'reality' is a matter of internal belief system and has nothing to do external facts. Some people believe in fairies and angels, but it's all in their minds. Tooth fairy is an internal fantasy, not external reality. And in those cases, eradicating false subjectivity can lead to better understanding of objective reality.
Suppose some people subjectively believe that humans are not animals. They prefer to believe that humans are unique beings created by God and that evolution is false. Pat Buchanan subscribes to this false view. But no matter how much such people subjectively reject 'animalism' and reject the essential animality of man, the truth is it's an objective fact that humans are really just another species of animals(of the primate variety). Evolution is real. Humans did arise from apes. So, no matter how much we subjectively denounce 'animalism', the objective truth is that we are also a kind of animal.

And same goes for sexual differences or sex-ism(as properly understood). We can subjectively reject biological sex and cook up 50 or more 'genders' and play all sorts of silly games. We can denounce biological sex-ism 24/7. But it doesn't matter what we think. Objective reality still exists, and there is male and female REGARDLESS of thought or wish or subjectivity. It doesn't matter what Bradley 'Chelsea' Manning tells himself or 'herself'. His 'vagina' is fake, and he was born with pud and balls because his DNA is coded with 'this kid got pud and balls'.

Maybe there is something in Christianity that is sort of similar to Buddhism. An idea that Good and Evil is really a matter of the heart/soul. Thus, a secular version of this view is that, "whatever is wrong in our society is a matter of our thoughts and feelings, and if we purify bad subjectivity from our minds, there shall be heaven on earth." Protestantism, with its emphasis on direct soulful connection between man and God, may be more susceptible to this way of thinking.

I used to be a total 'anti-racist' in the subjective sense. Even though my early youth witnessed so much that indicated the truth of HBD and racial differences, the effect of public education, PBS, and etc. indoctrinated me that it's all in the mind and that 'good' ideas and values(of the 'anti-racist' kind) can change the world. But no matter what I thought or hoped, I couldn't help but notice that objective reality is stubborn and won't submit to my subjective ideas or wishes. The fact is race-ism is here to stay because it is primarily an objective truth than a subjective delusion.

If anything, it is Christopher Ingraham who is too much of a teacher's pet and PC-programmed robot to understand anything beyond his narrow ideological worldview. And even though he bitches about 'racism', he is able to maintain his subjective illusion because he lives in a bubble of privilege where academics can pat themselves(and oneself) on the back for having the 'correct' ideas that makes one feel glibly vain with false virtue. It's like the proggy academics at University of Chicago protected from racial reality by TWO WALLS of Tough Vigilant Policing. Without such protective walls, racial reality would rush right at them like defensive linemen toward the quarterback. They would be sacked by objective reality. But because they are protected from brutal racial reality by two walls of policing, they can cook up fancy rationales and glibly pat each other on the back for being 'progressive' and 'anti-racist'.


According to the myth, Siddhartha was raised in a perfect physical world of health and harmony... much like today's privileged academics in their safe and affluent environs. But when he ventured outside the wall and saw actual reality, it was plagued with disease and violence. But in the end, unable to accept this reality, he sought escape into nirvana of eternal peace. Unable to handle reality, he decided it's all just an illusion, a matter of the mind. (Maybe Puyi's realization at the end of THE LAST EMPEROR was more sensible. More humble to be sure but based on acceptance of reality than escape from it.)

If proggy academics and journalists like Ingraham really feel as they do, I suggest they lead the way. Break down all walls and barriers between their gated communities and the urban jungle. Stop preaching and start practicing. Break down the walls and form a unity with the black underclass. Invite all those blacks in. And see if their subjective 'anti-racism' can wish or will away the objective reality of race-ism. Maybe it will be as effective as the remote control in BEING THERE.

It's about time people talked less in terms of 'he is racist' or 'she is racist' than in terms of 'reality is race-ist regardless of what he or she thinks'. Even if every white person in a diverse community chooses to be resolutely 'anti-racist' in his or her subjective conviction, the fact is he or she will find out the reality all around him or her is stubbornly and objectively race-ist. Some races are generally tougher and more aggressive & troublesome than others. Other races will tend to be smaller and more passive. Some races will excel more in studying, some more in sports. It's like the oft-heard adage among Jews: "A Jew is more likely to own an NFL team than play in one." With blacks, it's the opposite. Is it all due to subjective bias? So, if they just change their way of thinking, Jews will succeed as running backs and defensive linemen while blacks will be financial and business wizards? Or, gee, perhaps it's just skin color. Maybe if Jews cover themselves with black shoe-polish, they will do just as well in 100 m sprints and the dance floor.