Perspective

How the AltRight Must Slay the Hydra

It is intellectual nonsense to attempt to blend a nationalist politics with an internationalist economics – a fudge which fake Brexiteers in England are trying to achieve. I suspect the same contradiction is present among America’s “Right.” A nationalist economics is set inevitably on a collision course with Finance. The genuine “Right” must understand this.

It is received wisdom, in light of Brexit and Trump, that the world is on the verge of a paradigm shift and that it will require perhaps one further upset – a Marine le Pen presidency in France, for example – for the move to become irreversible. A new, “alternative” Right is poised to capture a narrative which for decades has been the monopoly of the Left with its supposedly progressive agenda. With that agenda’s failure, a space has opened up for this new force to re-establish the role of the state and thereby honour the bargain at the heart of the Social Contract. For what is the purpose of government if not to protect the citizenry in the deepest sense? – to secure the borders that encircle it, the culture which defines it, its welfare, its safety and so on. The nation, submerged by globalising institutions which in fact do the bidding of the Banks and Transnational Corporations, is rising. Meanwhile the old liberal order issues its warning; beneath the clamour we should discern the menace: the Valkyrie ride once more.

But it is now that the disparate elements which comprise this new force must define a coherent intellectual programme which unites them and can serve as a guide to future generations when no such programme currently exists. This will be no easy task. First, because the Left, in unholy alliance with neo-liberal economists, dominate the universities and thereby control the forming of our most able, and malleable, young minds – in a manner not dissimilar to that by which Saudi-funded mosques have inculcated heresy throughout the Islamic world. Second, because the genuine Right must be disentangled from the deviancy of Thatcherism – or neoliberalism – with which it is mistakenly conflated. Authentic conservatism has nothing to do with that brand of extreme economic liberalism and it would be a capital error for the architects of the new paradigm to confuse the two.

For the time being, the elements which comprise this new force, acting on brilliant instinct, see only the Hydra’s heads: uncontrolled immigration, homogenisation, increasingly vast discrepancies in wealth, spiraling indebtedness, social breakdown, cultural decadence, the erosion of tradition, the corrosion of our very characters, the disappearance of the nation, environmental degradation, over-population, to name a few. But how to pierce the heart and slay the serpent once and for all?

Limitations of space make it impossible to outline a comprehensive manifesto but here are some ideas.

Before anything the new force will need to make out the real enemy, and there should be no doubt about its identity: international finance. Every one of the hydra’s heads sprouts from this evil and it works by means of a process that is very simple but to which our “elite” seems oblivious.

It begins with the creation of money – which is to say debt – out of nothing. It took the Bank of England 320 years to admit the reality in its first quarterly Bulletin of 2014. Some 97% of the world’s money is not physical cash, or tangible, at all, but “fiat”- manufactured by banks when they conjure up loans to their customers many times the value of their deposits by means of fractional reserve banking; conceptually very similar to counterfeiting, with the important distinction that the instruments created by such means attract interest while counterfeit notes do not. Bearing in mind the development afoot to phase out the remaining 3% cash, the day will soon arrive when every last financial transaction will be channeled through these banks. Being the creators of the world’s money these institutions become in turn the arbiters of who that money is distributed to, and for what purpose – a unique privilege for which no politician or economist has provided the slightest justification; Liberal Democracy’s ultimate weapon, directed against the people it claims to liberate.

But the creation of loans that attract interest out of nothing has a consequence: the need for growth. Expansion – relentless and extractive – becomes not our friend as the politicians would have it, but our worst enemy. We borrow 100 pounds at ten per cent. We now need to grow to 110 pounds by the end of the year, just to stand still. Granted, a part of the excess will be mitigated by inflation but for our creditors to feed at least a portion of this excess will need to be “real.” When we can no longer grow in these real terms – now in fact – then we will have to pay back our loans out of existing capital; exactly what has been happening over recent decades. Our capital – resources and state assets – have been cannibalised (often under the fig leaf of privatisation), and the revenues generated thereby mis-described as ‘profits’ instead of capital depletion; simple false accounting designed to create the impression of growth and exactly the path down which the IMF insists countries such as Greece and the rest of the world must travel.

To put some figures to my argument: the environmentalist Margrit Kennedy demonstrated how a single penny invested at the time of Christ at 4% would have bought 8,190 balls of gold the weight of the earth by 1990. Increase the rate of interest to only 5% – the approximate amount assumed by pension funds to meet their future obligations -and it could have bought 2,200 billion of them. Such is the power of compound interest. Begin not with a penny but with the trillions upon trillions of debt currently outstanding and the reader will quickly grasp what has eluded our politicians: that while it may be possible for numbers to be multiplied in this way on a computer, it is clearly impossible to do so on a planet of limited size and resources. In short, our liabilities can never be repaid. Notwithstanding this fact, our obsession is to swap that which perishes – the real – for that which does not: the virtual; that which is finite – the world – for that which is not: interest bearing debt. I can think of no greater example of collective madness in human history than this quest to build the ultimate perpetual motion machine and it stands a good chance of destroying us.

Understand this psychotic compulsion for growth and we recognise how so many of the hydra’s heads have come into being. Take the one most talked about: unbridled immigration. The logic of growth to fund escalating debt for the benefit of a tiny minority requires that people must flow as easily as money in a twisted two-way convulsion. The bottom line necessitates outsourcing our industry to places where human beings come cheaper, perhaps because the targeted country has laxer labour laws, or because its inhabitants are more desperate and have lower expectations than our own spoiled workers, or simply because capital there is allowed to decamp and suppress the local currency, thereby lowering costs for the investing corporation. Mexicans are happy when a new American factory opens and they are employed. Meanwhile their relatives will try their luck further afield, smuggling themselves across the border where their numbers will curb the wages of the host country’s population. But eventually the corporation which built the factory tires of Mexico. Its workers now demand more where in Vietnam they seek less. Ever-pressurised by the loans it needs to service and the exigencies of its owners whose shares have been valued on the assumption of future growth, in the tap of a keyboard it transfers its capital to Saigon and “adios amigos.” Back to your hovels you go. Money knows no loyalty and no flag. That is why finance must be cosmopolitan, why it must sap the nation and the communities within it, and why the internationalist discourse of the Left and of the mainstream, bogus Right, directed through globalising institutions such as the EU and WTO, is Goldman Sachs’s most perfect bride.

Mr Trump is correct. The process is bad for Americans. But here is the point: it is just as bad for Mexicans; and for the rest of us. The hunt for growth evolves and now Darwinian logic herds us to the next horrific phase: the outsourcing of work not to foreigners but to robots.

While the first step in the formulation of the new paradigm must be the identification of the enemy, the second step will require the subordination of that enemy, namely global finance – or the virtual – to the real, such as industry and agriculture; which is another way of saying the rejection of Thatcherism, or neo liberalism. Because the real recognises limits – anathema to a liberal mindset which does not – this in turn must lead to an economics that can accommodate contraction in an overpopulated and over-exploited world. But such contraction will inevitably occasion the wholescale repudiation of the debts which our politicians know perfectly well can never be repaid. Too frightened and self-interested to admit this fact because such repudiation would have redistributive consequences that cannot be contemplated by vested interests, their strategy has been simple and criminally irresponsible: to delay the day of reckoning for future generations. It was cheap money, loaned into existence, that got us into the mess in the first place and yet the cure administered by our experts has been to prescribe ever larger doses of the same medicine and to make the hole even bigger.

In fact there is only one solution: massive debt jubilees as proposed, among others, by the economist Steve Keen and, before him, Rome’s Emperors and the Book of Leviticus. Perhaps auspiciously, if there is one man whose business career will have taught him the ins and outs of debt write-offs, it is surely America’s new President. If such a mechanism is practised every minute at the level of the corporation, I see no reason why the same cannot pertain to private debt: a sort of global Chapter 11 if you like. The bankers will cry. We weep for them.

It worries me therefore when certain representatives of the new force speak wistfully about Thatcher and Reagan. Their thinking must be more rigorous. No one was a greater friend to finance and the virtual economy. It was they who allowed the processes I have described to run riot by giving free rein to international finance. And it is their heirs, all along the political spectrum, who deliberately stoke the insecurities of the Middle Classes in particular, arguing that they will have too much to lose if the financial status quo is altered. But this is wrong. In fact it is exactly the Middle Classes who have been most prejudiced. All the research shows how in the last few decades it is the top tiny percent – a rentier class living off interest – who have benefitted vastly to the detriment of all the strata below them, the greatest portion of which comprise the middle classes. Mistaking what was a global credit splurge for genuine enrichment, we have been suckered. Take housing, for example. On paper we may be ‘richer’ but who really owns our homes? Us, or the bank? The same with our cars and the shirts on our backs. A class of owners or of debt slaves? We all know that over the past few decades our quality of life has been in terminal decline. Where previously one breadwinner per household was sufficient, thereby freeing the non-breadwinner to perform that socially (and economically) vital task of bringing up healthy members of society, two breadwinners are needed to compete ever more ferociously just to keep their heads above water, abandoning their children into delinquency – not good for business, let alone society. Less leisure, less time for friendship, less social cohesion, more stress – no matter what some clown on CNN tells us about GDP having “grown.” Talk of rehabilitating the nation and protecting its culture and its people without confronting the financial system that suffocates them is intellectual incoherence.

Moreover, what evidence is there that to be a genuine conservative we need espouse neoliberal economics? Were the Tories not originally the protectionist party? And why should weak-to-the-wall contempt for the less privileged define conservative psychology? Now is the time for the “interdependence,”(code for dependency pure and simple), so lauded by our internationalist politicians, to yield to greater national self sufficiency, for there can be no such thing as sovereignty or freedom without a large measure of economic independence. And economic independence will require in turn for the creation of the nation’s money to revert from privately owned international banks to the state, where it belongs. Simply put, any politician posing as a “Brexiteer” who does not seek to rein in finance is a fake.

I refer the reader to one of Keynes’s lesser known works, a prophetic lecture entitled “National Self Sufficiency” delivered at University College Dublin, in a year the significance of which is evident – 1933 – for insight into the distinctions that must be drawn between the varieties o f internationalism and their radically different qualities. Had either the Left or the Right grasped these distinctions instead of confusing them, as they continue to do, then the world would be a happier place:

The divorce between ownership and the real responsibility of management is serious within a country, when, as a result of joint stock enterprise, ownership is broken up between  innumerable individuals who buy their interest today and sell it tomorrow and lack altogether both knowledge and responsibility towards what they momentarily own. But when the same principle is applied internationally, it is, in times of stress, intolerable…Experience is accumulating that remoteness between ownership and operation – what is historically symbolised for you in Ireland by absentee landlordism – is an evil in the relations between men, likely in the long run to set up strains and enmities which bring to nought the financial calculation…I sympathise therefore with those who would minimise, rather than maximise, economic entanglement between nations. Ideas, knowledge, science, hospitality, travel – these are the things which should of their nature be international. But let goods be homespun whenever it is reasonably and conveniently possible, and, above all, let finance be primarily national.

Finally, to suggest a third plank in the new order’s programme; all the disastrous consequences that I have referred to, stemming from the imperative to grow in order to pay down exponentially increasing debt, have at their centre a view of man: as a commodity; not something unique and precious, or sacred, but something to be exploited and sucked dry. The neoliberal and the Marxist are psychological twins: materialists who dismiss man’s transcendental nature. And so we will need a change – in mood. The very spirit of the age must alter. What form that spirit will take is a matter of conjecture. Suffice to say that it tends to have the same home: the nation. It will undo the fixation set by Marx and nearly every economist who followed him. “Economics” must be whipped back into its proper place within the genuine hierarchy – not as the locomotive of history, at the pinnacle of our priorities, but as a subset of the environment and of human societies. For without a healthy ecosystem and healthy societies there can be no such thing as a healthy economy. And when this new spirit is ushered in at last we shall possess the antidote to the current paradigm’s signature tune: ugliness.

In the words of F.D Roosevelt given at his inaugural speech as President.

Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men … Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish.

The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent    to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.

In sum, Mr Trump, and any leader who considers themselves the representative of a new, genuine Right, will be judged not so much by how they deal with Mexicans and Muslims, but by how they deal with Wall Street.

  • Marathon-Youth

    Article covers a lot. Some aspects of the article that I address
    -BREXIT, Le Pen, Trump and the EU. I would like to add that Greece is thinking of dumping the Euro and switching to the US dollar. That is sending panic buttons across the EU.

    -Outsourcing, Cheap labor and multinational companies:
    They will move jobs to cheaper locations. Same jobs different hands. Jobs once outsourced to China are now outsourced to Mexico. But when cost of production becomes expensive in Mexico jobs will be moved to cheaper places in Africa.

    also many jobs are being replaced by Robots which are the ultimate “slave” (no need for vacations, sick leave, pensions, salaries etc and it works 24 hours per day 7 days per week)

    -Fully agree with the Jewish concept of Jubilee. Jews have been forgiving the debt of other Jews using the tradition of “Jubilee” (where a debt from a bank is forgiven after 7 years and in some cases, after 50 years. This gives the Jew who takes a loan an advantage over a non Jew doing the same in that Jewish bank)

    • Captain John Charity Spring MA

      That means blood btw.

      • Marathon-Youth

        What means “blood”?

  • Theodor Körner

    The most necessary action to free the people from the Wallstreet-Slavery is, to take back the Dollar under federal control. Make the Fed a state-institution. This would immediately end the world-wide robbery of the plutocrats, “purchasing” stock or whole industries with the fake-currency USD, created with a mouse-click just a minute ago.

  • Ed Edgerton

    The title of this essay reminds me of a very recent video from the TruthMediaRevolution channel on YouTube. Around 2:20 it has a picture of Trump and Obama shaking hands with the caption “Hail Hydra.”

  • Muzeli 2

    Darius Guppy the toff who cried like a baby and fooled the seasoned New York cops:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/guppy-going-to-prison-for-a-very-long-time-in-pounds-18m-gems-fraud-1472975.html

    I’m getting the sense this blog is a closed shop for people of Iranian descent.

  • Laguna Beach Fogey

    Darius Guppy?! Blast from the past! Too funny.

  • Ed Edgerton

    There are three different interconnected concepts involved in our currency system.
    1. Fiat money (i.e., money created by the government)
    2. A currency backed by government debt
    3. Fractional reserve banking

    It is important to understand the differences between these things. In my opinion, 1 and 3 are not necessarily a problem, given sufficient transparency. #2 tends to be problematic, but it is not the root of our problems. The root of our problems is the betrayal of European-descended people by their natural elites, who have sold their own souls to the non-European hostile elite.

    • Will Windsor

      (1) and (2) are huge problems along with (3). Economics is driven by monetary policy (See Ray Dalio:”How economics works”).

      The AltRight’s official economic/monetary policy is Social Credit, where the Govenrment issues debt-free money as credit backed by the people. Only then can we end the never ending growth of debt (and crashes) inherent to (1), (2), and (3)

      Social Credit explained here: http://www.counter-currents.com/2012/01/money-for-nothing/

      • Ed Edgerton

        I have heard of social credit theory, but I am not too familiar with it.

        I think that 1 and 2, without 3, will not necessarily lead to a boom-bust cycle. We should not base our views about this on what happened in the period just before the creation of the Federal Reserve. As I understand it, bankers created the booms and busts as an excuse for creating the Fed.

        Modern information technology makes things possible that were not possible a hundred years ago. The government can create money using unique numeric identifiers. Everything could be out in the open. The money supply would be very stable.

        It is true that such an approach would facilitate surveillance, so I am not calling for this type of system now, but rather after we have rid ourselves of our more basic problems, having to do with the hostile elite.

  • Muzeli 2

    Altright.com seems like a vehicle to rehabilitate ex-cons. Darius Guppy time spent on the inside for gem theft, Richard Spencer time spent in a cell in Hungary, Millennial Woes currently on the run somewhere in Europe, Henrik Palmgren former gang member and Hells Angel, Dr Kevin MacDonald sounds like a Chicago gangster, Jason Jorjani under investigation for helping his students cheat in exams. This is a worry.

    • Laguna Beach Fogey

      Some of the commentators, I can report, have taken part in street fights and spent time in jail.

      • WP

        Unlike Muzeli … who spent all of his time studying the torah at shul, and summers in the Catskills, oy vey!

    • Lucy Lipinska

      What is the point with this blabbering of yours?

    • Simon_in_London

      There’s a difference between being a common criminal (Guppy, as far as I know) and a political prisoner (Spencer) or target of persecution (Woes).

    • Jason R.

      Not sure you understand our movement; Spencer and Woes received these injustices *precisely* because of their work for our movement. Dr. MacDonald . . . well, who cares what you think about the sound of his voice. Darius Guppy I don’t know much and can’t speak for, but his article above was fantastic.

  • Gubbler Chechenova

    We need a new terminology to truly understand what is happening in America(and by extension the world since the US more or less controls it).

    We speak of ‘left’ and ‘right’, as if there is a fixed principled left and fixed principled right. Actually, both are very fluid and malleable depending on WHO HAS THE POWER.

    The fact that both Democrats and Republicans are so slavish to Israel and Jewish Power tells us who has the real power. Also, the fact that the ‘left’ became so homomaniacal and the ‘right’ was so muted about the homo issue also tells us about the true nature of power. Which group has been using homomania as proxy to promote minority-elite-supremacism all over the world? Since Jews got the power and pushed homomania, homos could run wild and crazy… and even Conservatives, so slavish to Jewish power, didn’t dare to resist what they knew was a Jewish agenda. If homomania had no Jewish backing, Conservatives would have opposed it with greater fervor. But since it had Jewish fingerprints and signature all over it, the GOP either remained mute or even argued that ‘gay marriage’ is a ‘conservative value’.

    Ideology follows the power.

    If there is a fixed ‘left’ with its iron principles, why were ‘leftists’ opposed to Bush’s wars yet silent about Obama’s wars and now bitching about ‘war-mongering’ Trump? If the ‘left’ is truly ideologically and reliably anti-war and anti-imperialist, it should have opposed Obama’s wars too. (And how come the ‘left’ antifa types don’t attack Hollywood, Silicon Valley, and Wall Street that are dominated by ultra-capitalists?)

    If the ‘left’ is against politics of paranoia(as during McCarthy Era), why is it now going nuts about the Russian connection?

    And if the ‘right’ is about ethno-nationalism, how come the white party GOP says NOTHING about white interests while foaming at the mouth over Israel, Israel, Israel?

    The ‘right’ in America follows the power. The Power decides what is ‘right’. That is why American Conservatism is essentially Cuckservatism. It’s about goy toys obeying their Jewish globalist masters.

    So, the discussion of ‘left’ and ‘right’ muddies up the true nature of power in the US.

    The power struggle is essentially ethnic, not ideological. After all, look how the Neocons are working with Democratic Jews to undermine Trump. Look at the likes of Bill Kristol and David Brooks who claim to be ‘conservative’. Sure, they yammer about ‘principles’, but it’s all about the Tribe. If they are indeed conservative, it’s about doing whatever to preserve the Jewish tribe and Jewish supremacist power.

    Now, there are some Jews for whom ideology or principles trump all else. But two swans don’t make a summer. It’s like there are principled blacks like Uncle Thomas Sowell, but two Negroes don’t make a fried chicken festival.

    If you question a ‘rightist’, he will likely be FOR something if it’s pushed by GOP and against it if pushed by Democratic Party. And if you question a ‘leftist’, he will likely be FOR something if it is pushed by Democratic Party and against it if pushed by GOP.

    For most people, it’s not about principles but about partisanship. They are too dumb and shallow to have any principles. It’s us vs them.

    Also, because it’s a matter of us vs them, the OTHER side’s appropriation of one’s own side’s positions doesn’t lead to satisfaction but anger. So, even though Clinton did a lot of things that should have pleased Conservatives, they hated him even more. And even though Nixon did a lot of things that should have pleased Liberals, they hated him even more for filching ideas from Democrats. If people really favored principles over partisanship, it shouldn’t matter WHICH SIDE promoted certain policies. But much of politics is about owning the right to certain views(even though they tend to shift from ‘right’ to ‘left’ depending on the time. Working class issues used to be leftist, but now they are seen as rightist.)

    Especially with the end of Cold War, dearth of literary culture, and demise of values, we are living in a post-ideological age. Homomania, tranny-mania, immigrant-invasion, tattoo-and-piercing freakery, and flipping out about Russia makes no ideological sense. These are attitudes, hysteria, or diversions. Look at the Pussy Hat March in Washington. I mean what the hell was that even about, with madonna and ashley judd talking psychobabble nonsense?

    And what does the ‘right’ stand for? National Review is a total cuckzine filled with second-rate hacks and shills. What does Jeb or Rubio stand for? They were the favs of the GOP establishment. They were for what? Illegal immigration is an act of love? Since when did conservatives talk like that?

    And Trump won because he was post-ideological. He has no grand theory of politics. He’s for nationalism, a kind of civic pragmatism. If he were to go ideological, he will fail. For one thing, all the current ‘ideologies’ are just toxic derivatives of ethno-supremacism of Jewish globalists. Whether it’s Liberal humanitarian intervention or Neocon ‘democracy building’, it all comes down to Wars for Israel and Banker class. And all this talk of Russia, Russia, and Russia isn’t about democracy or human rights. After all, the US is cozy with Saudi Arabia and other repressive nations. And US never says Israel must return Golan Heights to Syria. No, all current ideologies are mere tools by the Power.

    The only thing that matters if power in the 21st century. So, we need a new political terminology that addresses the true nature of the conflict in the US, and it is not about the ‘left’ and ‘right’. The Left used to be for nationalism + working class, the formula of the New Deal. But now, such concerns are seen as the ‘right’ whereas the ‘left’ is mostly about worshiping Homos with ass tattoos and welcoming masses of Muslims.

    Given Trump’s praise of homos against Muslims, even he can be said to be ‘leftist’ on homo issues. As for Islam, is it left or right? Since Islam is ultra-conservative, one might say it is rightist. But since Muslims now paraded as poor immigrants allied with ‘progressives’, Islam is now seen as part of the ‘left’. Ideological fluidity of the Current Year is quite amazing. Notice how all those Trump-bashers really have no ideology. They are spinning every issue this way or that way to create the illusion that they are ‘progressives’ against Trump and his Nazi deplorables.

    So, ‘left’ and ‘right’ makes no sense in current reality.

    We need to identify and name the real powers.

    And I see.

    Jewish Globalist Supremacism

    Demographic Imperialism(the immigrant invasion to leech off white America)

    Homomaniacs

    Globalist Urban Elites

    Feminist Hysterics

    Black Thug Politics

    White Nationalism

    Christian Moralists

    Working Class/Middle Class interests

    Because of the sheer scale of Jewish power, it funds and supports demographic imperialists, homomaniacs, feminist nuttery, and black politics of intimidation.

    Without Jewish support, the non-Jewish identity politics wouldn’t amount to plate of beans.

    This is all called the ‘left’, but surely there’s a world of difference between the ‘leftism’ of Haim Saban and that of Islamic demographic imperialists. For one thing, the reason why so many Muslims have been uprooted is because of Jewish control of US foreign policy that waged many wars in MENA.

    This is why we must dispense with talk of ‘left’ and ‘right’ which only obfuscates the true character of the political conflict in the US. The conflict isn’t about ideology but identity. Now, some groups may adopt an ideology and pretend to stand for principles, but it all boils down to “Is it good for us?”

    Jews go with ‘leftism’ to weaken white gentile nationalism that they see as the main threat to Jewish supremacism. Jews use ideology to serve identity.

    Even though Muslims hate Jews who dominate the West and despise much of decadent Liberalism, they go with ‘leftism’ because it opens doors to Muslims who want better material lives in the West. Also, despite problems between Muslims and Western Liberals, Muslims find more hostility on the Western Right. (Ironically, Muslims and Western conservatives hate each other more because they have more in common. Both think more tribally, so their differences are more starkly drawn out even if their social values may have more in common with each other than with Western Liberals. In contrast, the cult of tolerance among Western Liberals make them overlook the socio-moral differences between themselves and Muslims.)

    Blacks go with ‘leftism’ because it simply means more goodies for them via government. Of course, increased immigration means more competition for blacks, but then, blacks look to government for largess. So, if more immigrants means more victory for the Democrats, it means more government jobs for blacks who are heavily invested in the Democratic Party.

    So, the struggle is about identity and group interest. It’s essentially tribal, not ideological. So, sticking to discussion of ‘left’ and ‘right’ often misses the point.

    The ONLY people who seem to be sincerely ideological are white Liberals who will sacrifice white interests for some notion of the ‘higher good’. But are these white Liberals really such noble self-sacrificing fellers? Some are, but most are not. After all, their anti-white rhetoric is really directed at ‘bad whites’. Indeed, attacking OTHER whites as ‘racist’ is an easy way to pat themselves on the back and score pokemon points to be invited to cocktail parties and gain promotion in institutions and industries committed to ‘progress’. For these whites, their privilege is gained by denouncing ‘white privilege’. So, they are also into a kind of identity politics, that of the bobo elite class. Clintons and Bidens of the world only rose higher and higher by denouncing the ‘bad whites’.

    So, we need to talk of politics less in ideological terms and more in identity terms. We need to spell out Jewish power in this. It’s not ‘leftist’ or ‘liberal’ or even ‘neocon’. It’s Jewish globalist-supremacist. We have to call it by its real name.

    Just consider Jews and Muslims. Jewish ‘leftists’ pretend to care so much about those Muslim ‘refugees’ and denounce Trump as new Hitler, the kind of person who wouldn’t have saved Jewish refugees during WWII. But these very Jews used the American war machine to destroy the Muslim world like Nazis destroyed Poland. NYT was fully with Clinton when he was killing Iraqis with sanctions. NYT was also with Bush and Iraq War. NYT endorsed Obama’s wars that spread the conflagration all over MENA. If Jewish ‘leftists’ are all about sympathy for the Other, why do they care about Muslims ONLY AFTER they are turned into ‘refugees’ by US aggression? So much for ideology. It’s really about identity. When it’s useful for Jews to destroy countless Muslims in the Middle East, they will not hesitate to do so. Jewish communists in the 20s and 30s demonstrated that they can kill just as cold-bloodedly as the Nazis, and we’ve seen the same kind of ruthlessness since the End of the Cold War when Jews took control of US foreign policy.

    As for masses of immigrants, they are not ‘leftists’ or ‘liberals’ but demographic imperialists, documented or undocumented. Even legal ones are problematic since current levels of immigration will fundamentally change the character of Western nations. These demographic imperialists will latch onto ANY ideology to get free tickets to the West to enjoy better material lives.

    Now, do a mind-experiment. Suppose Iranian-Americans made up 2% of US population and had decisive control of media, academia, deep state institutions, courts, Wall Street, Hollywood, Las Vegas, and etc.

    Suppose these Iranians are very ethnic-conscious and invested in further expanding their power and influence even more. And they mold and manipulate both ideologies of ‘left’ and ‘right’ to push their agenda.

    Now, would it make much sense to hardly mention Iranian-American Power while yammering endlessly about ‘right’ and ‘left’? But both ‘right’ and ‘left’ would heavily be funded by Iranian-American supremacist elites. Given that reality, wouldn’t it make more sense to talk of ethnic power along identity interests?

    Isn’t it odd how we always mention the RUSSIAN, the CHINESE, and the IRANIAN, but we don’t mention the Jews? We are supposed to see the world in terms of Russia vs America, China vs America, and Iran vs America. But whose America? Are Jewish views on Russia really ours? Jewish control of media would have us believe so. But in fact, Jewish hostility toward esp Russia and Iran owes to ethnic interests. If there were no Jews in America, would most Americans have this animus against Russia or Iran? No. The dire truth is that many Americans, on both ‘right’ and ‘left’, have been made to see Russia and Iran as enemies because Jews who control the media have spread this notion that Russia and Iran are threats to America.

    If Russian and Iran foreign policy seem at odds with the American, it’s because America has been aggressive toward them. And why? Because the US is ruled by Jews who seek supremacist control everywhere they go. The Rule of the Jewish-controlled Media is: All Americans must hate those whom Jews hate(for the time being); All Americans must love those whom Jews love(for the time being). We must be like dogs who who greet or growl others based on the master’s wishes. Russian minions were like this under Stalin. If Stalin said Nazi Germany was the enemy, it was the enemy. But if Stalin said Nazi Germany is an ally, as during the Nazi-Soviet Pact, it was a friend. So, bark or smile according to Stalin’s wishes.

    We cannot understand American politics(and by extension the world politics) without recognizing the fact that Jewish Neurosis is the animating factor of American Power. So, if Jews freak out about Iran, their neurosis had ripple effect because Jews control the media and political donations. If Jews feel rage, then the rage ripples all around to the likes of Hillary, Trump, and Rubio who bark at Iran too. Not because they have personal animus against Iran but because they bark according to their master.

    Jewish neurosis is the result of the contradiction between their tribalism and universalism, a combo that turns into globo-supremacism. If Jews want to be only tribal, no big deal. They’d be like the Amish or Hasidim. No one has any trouble with Amish. Conservatives and Liberal just ignore them. Amish are tribal, have their own communities, and just mind their own business. And this goes for American Indians on reservations too. I mean who cares about Pueblo Indians think in their reservation? Likewise, if tribal Jews just wanna be Jews in their own place, that’d be fine.

    Problem is Jews are tribal but not only tribal. They have universal ambitions. And this leads to neurosis. If Jews want to be truly universal, they should adopt a totally universalist ideology like communism, Christianity, or Islam; they should abandon the narrow blood identity of Jewishness. And there was a time when some Jews did convert to Islam or Christianity or become communists.

    But the core of the Jewish community in the West did not surrender tribalism even as they promoted universalism. They could have become atomized cosmopolitan individualists of libertarian bent, but they didn’t opt for that either. They clung to their Jewish tribalism while seeking power and influence all over the world.

    This combination of tribal persistence + universal reach could only result in Jewish globalist supremacism(especially as Jews favored other Jews in global networks of power). Jews try to penetrate into every nation. They want to take over everything: US, Canada, EU, Russia, Middle East, Japan, and even China.

    But if Jews want to merge with all of humanity, why stick to Jewish tribal identity? Why cling so tightly to something so ancient and ethnic(atavistic) while trying to weaken all other identities in the name of universalism, globalism, and cosmopolitanism?

    Indeed, we can see Jewish neurosis in Jewish promotion of Diversity. Just think. If Jews really prized diversity, they would discourage mass migrations of peoples that lead to mongrelization and confusion of identities. Unique cultures and identities are lost if all nations are overrun by masses of foreigners. The world will remain diverse IF every nation maintains its unique identity and culture. Globalism also destroys diversity by spreading the same Hollywood images, rap crap, and homo ‘rainbow’ into every nation.

    Now, one could argue for massive migration and mongrelization on the basis that cultures are not worth saving since all people are members of Same Humanity. So, one could argue that cultures are ‘atavistic’ & ‘reactionary’ and should be destroyed to make way for One World Culture of Common Humanity. And globalism has this effect(though its idea of One World Culture is Trash Pop).

    But then, Jews say they are pushing massive immigration for the sake of diversity. They are doing the very thing that does most to undermine diversity in the name of serving diversity. This is why Jewish Politics is so neurotic. In a way, this confusion about Diversity reflects the very neurosis of Jews. Jews want to have the cake and eat it too. They want to maintain their unique identity and tribal interests while, at the same time, merging with all of mankind. Jews want to penetrate into every society and gain control of every nation… but they don’t want to assimilate with rest of humanity. They want to maintain their own identity. The Jewish historical experience has shown that a people could be move all over the world and STILL maintain their unique identity. But Jews are an anomaly in history. After all, most cultural identities of the Ancient World vanished, especially when people were conquered by others or trekked to distant lands as minorities and ended up being swallowed by larger groups. So, what applies to the Jews doesn’t apply to other groups. For most groups, mass migration means the weakening and loss of identity. Jews were a special people for whom the experience of exile had the opposite effect of strengthening ethnic bonds. But then, Jews had the idea of the Covenant that instilled every Jew with a sense of special relation to the one and only true God. One of the side-effects of such worldviews was contempt for non-Jews. So, it’s hardly surprising that the relation between Jews and gentiles has not been a pleasant one.

    Anyway, just like Jews had a spiritual neurosis in relation to the world, they now have a material/political one. Jewish spiritual neurosis arose from the fact that Jews believed there is only one true God for all the world, all people, and all the cosmos, BUT Jews were special and the Chosen of God. So, Jewish spirituality was universal and all-encompassing but obsessed about Jewish-centrism.

    In the modern world, we have Jews clinging to their own identity — esp in relation to Holocaust(“No people suffered like the Jews”) and Israel(“Jews finally regained their sacred homeland”) — but also believing themselves to be the rightful rulers of all the world. When Jews were religious, it was enough for them to believe that their God ruled all the world. They didn’t have to rule the world since their God ruled the world, and through Him, they felt their power over mankind.

    But now that Jews no longer believe in God, they believe that their POWER should dominate all the world; and Jews see it within their grasp since they control the US, the #1 power in the world. This is why Jews hate Trump. Trump isn’t anti-Jewish and is wildly pro-Israel. But Trumpism indicates that gentile Americans, WHITES INCLUDED, have a stake in America’s future too.

    Also, Trump’s rabid pro-Israel-ism implies that Jewish power should be restricted to Jewish national borders and not mess with Libya, Syria, EU, and Russia. So, paradoxically, Trump’s pro-Israel position is seen as anti-Jewish-supremacist. Trump’s extreme Jewish supremacism IN Israel implies no Jewish supremacism OUTSIDE Israel; other nations should have their own supremacism that is gentile. So, Jews should be supreme in Israel while Hungarians should be supreme in Hungary. But Jews want to be supreme in ALL nations. Since Jews don’t have the numbers to take over European nations, they use Diversity and Homomania to weaken the power and authority of the majority native population.

    This Jewish or Zionist Neurosis — Jewrosis or Zionosis — has to be identified and discussed if we are to have a honest discussion of what is really happening in America and the world.

    Also, it is necessary in order to break up both the phony ‘left’ and ‘right’. So many dupes and minions are part of angry coalitions in various ‘ideological’ camps because they are still under the impression that the main power conflict in the US is between the ‘right’ and the ‘left’. In fact, it is really along various lines of identity.

    Ideology is useful to Jews because they need to form a coalition of non-whites and win over sufficient sucker whites. After all, if blacks, browns, yellows, and etc ONLY thought in terms of identity, they would never come together. Each would pursue its narrow tribal interest and may well hate one another. So, ideology is useful in creating this notion that their tribal interests are ‘progressive’ in combating white ‘racism’ and ‘white privilege’. Also, if political discussion was only tribal, most whites would identify as white and pursue white interests. As such, they would totally outnumber Jews and non-whites. If all whites were to support GOP as the ‘white party’, it’d be game over for the Democrats. So, Jews need to win over some whites to the Democratic side, and they make use of ideological appeal. The notion of ‘social justice’ means that ‘good whites’ must side with ‘victim groups’ against the ‘bad whites’ or ‘racists’ or ‘fascist’ or ‘nazis’.

    Never mind that Jewish-controlled US foreign policy has been most nazi-like in wreaking havoc all over the Middle East. Never mind that Jewish War on Russia is most like Nazi-rhetoric during WWII and or like McCarthy’s anti-communist crusade. Never mind Jews have promoted rap music urging blacks to sing about killing one another and treating women like whores. Never mind all those facts. Jews manipulate ideological discourse to fool enough white suckers that the white community is divided between Good Whites and bad ‘nazi’ whites who need to be punched. Smart people use ideology to manipulate the idiots.

    • Lucy Lipinska

      Yet another proof of your brilliant intellect, Ms Gubbler Chechenova.
      Behind this urge to use “neutral” terms as “left”, “right” or “liberal” with relevance to any human, even in the contexts there only members of the superior tribe are involved, e.g. the bigwigs in EU or in the “Russian” revolution, must be fear/angst or misguided thoughtfulness. We are all at such unrestricted liberty to smear ethnic Germans, Russians, Poles, Swedes, Serbs… you name any White people, but we absolutely must walk on our tiptoes – if not singing their praises – when approaching any topic/issue with connection to the special tribe. I hope that this considerateness/angst is not as deeply ingrained in USA as it has proved itself in all countries of Europe.

  • June of 44

    The AltRight now sounds like every other dude who’s done well, then feels GUILTY for it. Trumps on to this. Lookout :#

  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Get_Out_(film)

    When blacks are going around committing all the crime(killing blacks and whites and raping and robbing whites), we have to worry about some white town that is make negroes disappear?

    What is this? “Black Boy with the Dragon Tattoo”?

    But then, Hollywood gives us FAKE AMERICA.

    This movie was written and directed by a Negro and produced by a Tim-Wise-like Jew.

    Jews control Hollywood and give us stuff like HIDDEN FIGURES and GET OUT.

    FAKE HISTORY and FAKE AMERICA.

    Lugenkino.

  • Mikep

    Good post, we need more of this kind of thing.
    Growth is clearly key to understanding the dilemma of our time, in particular the desperate need of Governments to maintain at least the appearance of growth explains many of their increasingly bizarre decisions in recent years. How else can we make sense of Merkel’s crazy decision to throw open Germany’s borders to the entire Mosley world.

  • Kameron_Iron

    Damn this is good. Well Done.

  • Troy Ounce

    Congratulations, Darius.
    My comment, fwiw: It all started on August 15th, 1971.
    See you at the Club!