Disclaimer: I don’t write dis sheeeit fo yall niggerz to indulge in your favorite pastime, namely frenetic mental masturbation followed by ego gratification at the feeling of superiority provided by my intellectual genocide of an entire ethnic group (6 million, if I’m not mistaken). I write dis sheeit to “dispel [sic] with da fikshun” and provide WNs with a broader and more accurate understanding of a (((certain issue))).
After each novel (((cohencidence))) in which a Lampshade gets outed after professing advice to his “fellow White brethren”, the neo-conservative/pro-Israel/anti-djihad faction of the Dissident Right undertakes the task to explain to their (White) audience why “not every Jew is like that“, “a few bad apples“, “jews are victims of antisemitic muslims!!!” and the eternal “the Israelo-Western alliance is the logical solution to the rAdiKKKaL iSLaM problem!!!“.
The Alt-Right rightfully objects, but they too suffers from the same misunderstanding of the jewish problem.
They rationalize jewish behavior as a result of either greed (it’s not), political subversion (it’s not), Alex Jones style NWO conspiracy (it’s not), kabalesque atavistic adherence to the Talmud (it’s not).
It’s not even related to their alienation from traditional societies, their hatred of non-jews and Whites in particular or even their tribalism and ethnocentrism, although these are certainly important factors.
It has everything to do with the way the jewish mind processes and interprets information.
I highly recommend you to take any article published on a jewish site and simply read the comments.
Pay close attention to the reaction any mention of Whites/Nazis/Christians (as we’ll see, these terms are interchangeable).
One such article was published at the height of the Richard Spencer “Nazi Salute” conspiracy.
The post was something about Spencer’s comments about Zionism, where he drew parallels between a certain ethnostate in Occupied Palestine and his own vision of a segregated America or something.
The content of the article itself wasn’t that interesting, a simple exercise in rehearsing the typical hasbara talking point without even attempting to refute Spencer’s claims, but the comments proved to be a great example of not only jewish hypocrisy, which is well discussed in Alt-Right circles, but also jewish histrionics and schizophrenia, which are more obscure phenomenons.
The reactions this simple equivalence made by Spencer, which was meant to be rather tongue-in-cheek more so than politically factual, triggered among the jewish readership are particularly revealing: insults, death threats, apology of terrorism, apology of the Gulags, calls to curtail freedom of speech in America and of course, the continual, immutable, everlasting monomaniac fixation on Anne Frank and the HollyCost™.
We’re not talking about a few marginalized posters but an absolute, furious consensus.
I invite you to try the experience and see for yourself how the (((chosen people))) speak of their perceived enemies, I say “perceived” because there was no explicit hostility in what Spencer said, when they are not extolling “love”, “tolerance”, “compassion” and the values of the multiKult on mainstream media outlets.
These were not the profiles of a few marginalized ultra-orthodox rabbis either, no more than they were particularly inclined to Zionism beyond the fact that they were presumably frequent commenters on a pro-Israeli site.
Likewise, they were certainly not “elite jews” like Soros or Kushner, a caste White Nationalists rightfully disparage, but whom I have never ceased repeating are only an infinitesimal part of the larger jewish problem.
Amongst the commenters, you will not find a single Goldman Sachs banker, a single payot toting Hasid Rabbi or a single Israeli military officer.
What you will find are “everyday jews”, with approximate spelling and lacking grammar proficiency, who are either lawyers, accountants, social workers, sometimes professors at American universities if their Facebook profiles are to be believed.
If asked publicly, many would identify as atheists, progressives and liberals.
This is not “hypocrisy” in the sense White people understand it.
Psychosodomy of the judeo-Semitic Subject
The key factor in appreciating the jewish problem is the understanding that Semites, and particularly jews, have a vastly different conception of truth and reality.
To the jew, the narrative is reality.
Case in point.
Nazis, Christians and Fascists Everywhere
You see that constantly in hate crime hoaxes, where the tribes gets even more hysterical at disbelievers (infidels) than at the perpetrators.
For people of most races, to lie would be to go against reality. To claim as real something imaginary.
For jews, to lie would be to go against the narrative. To disbelieve what jewry says.
The “it was real in my head” meme is not just a means for comedy, it accurately describes jewish psychology.
So does the “everyone is a Nazi” meme.
When they call someone a fascist/Nazi/racist/antisemite/Christian, they are not accusing them of adhering to a particular political affiliation or practicing a specific religion.
Jews use the terms Nazi/fascist/Christian/antisemite to describe something “not jewish“, or more accurately something “bad for jews“.
Hence, they will call Golden Dawn a “Nazi party” despite it being named after Metaxás because in essence it’s “bad for jews“. Same methodology for the Front National who touts their love for De Gaulle at every opportunity they get. It’s Nazi/Christian/antisemitic because “bad for jews“.
If you contest their assessment, you too become “bad for jews“… a Nazi.
It’s not about whether or not they believe there is a secret Nazi inside every White person, the term Nazi has no meaning for jews except to designate something “not jewish” or “bad for jews“.
Nasser was bad for jews, Hussein was bad for jews, Qaddafi was bad for jews, Ahmadinejad is bad for jews… Trump, Putin, Assad, Le Pen, Farage are seen as bad for jews…
Guess which one of these figures has not been called “the next Hitler“? None.
The HollyCost™ as a Religious Doctrine
Many in the Alt-Right have taken to calling jews “pathological liars“.
It’s not an accurate descriptor in that the pathology lies not in what they say, but in what they believe, and more importantly in how they believe it.
Do jews actually believe that 6 million people died in gas chambers before being cremated only then to be buried, exhumed, electrocuted, brought back to life, tortured and finally re-executed by drowning and decapitation?
Some say yes, many say no.
The reality is that it doesn’t matter to jews.
To jews, the HollyCost™ isn’t a historical event guided by laws of physics and available to historical scrutiny. To jews, the HollyCost™ is the narrative.
The point of contention isn’t whether it could or couldn’t have happened, it isn’t even the iconoclasm of “neo-Nazis” attacking the primordial myth of their secular religion. What infuriates them is that someone, somewhere, doesn’t believe something a jew said.
The Case of the “pro-White” jew
You also see it with ostensibly “pro-White jews”, whether public figures such as Nathanael Kappner or not.
The first thing they do when they become “pro-White”, or at least anti-jew, is to claim that anyone who ever existed was a jew or a crypto-jew. Washington, Lincoln, Nixon, Bush, Obama, Trump, Merkel, Trayvon Martin, Gladstone, Robespierre, every homosexual ever, the Democrats, the Republicans, the UN, NATO, protesters, the girlfriend who dumped you in seventh grade and even the boss that fired you… because why else would he fire you, if not because he was a jew?
See the pattern of thinking?
For the regular “pro-jew jew” (99.99% of jewry), GOOD is jew and BAD is Nazi.
For the “pro-White jew” (00.01% of jewry), GOOD becomes Nazi, or at least White, and BAD is therefore… jew.
What is or is not a “Nazi” or a “jew“is irrelevant, in fact jews can’t explain themselves what it means to be a jew.
We racists can: it’s biological. They can’t.
Anne Frank makes it even more obvious in her (or her father’s) diary.
Germans aren’t called German, Nazi, bigots, racists, Christians, antisemites or any of the otherwise interchangeable terms, they are simply called… “the Enemy“.
Ellie Wiesel Redeemed & Uncucked
One particular jew came very close to realizing this obvious fact, that Europeans and jews process information differently and therefore have incompatible conceptions of reality.
His name is quite infamous in the Alt-Right, Ellie Wiesel.
This story happened before he became a HollyCost™ hustler.
After WW2 Ellie moved to Paris and served as a tourist guide for his brethren whenever they decided to visit “the Enemy”.
See for yourselves.
Miriam asks me for explanations on Paris, and I gladly provide them. No effort required. I improvise with an audacity of which I am still ashamed today… At the time, I’m quite used to embroidering, inventing prickly details about the history of Paris that would not be found in any book, even if it was romanticized. Why? By laziness. Too many Israeli visitors insist that I show them the Louvre and Concorde, Montmartre and the Russian cabarets. […] I begin to invent an anecdote for each statue, a story for each monument. To rearrange the past of the capital for an hour, a morning, in what way would it cause harm?
One day, the unavoidable happens: a guide, unfortunately professional, is at the Place de la Bastille near the small group (francophone) who listens to me describing the days of 1789; I am in good form, I know the name of the officer who first opened the doors of the prison; and that of the prisoner who, on his knees, implored his mercy. In the neighboring cell a princess was preparing for death; she wanted to die, but the sight of the officer caused her to change her mind, and here she is, who, at the scandal of her friends, claims her love of life and of the living… I could continue embroidering until the next revolution, if it wasn’t for the cry of a wounded animal from an unknown man next to me… He throws himself at me, ready to shred me: “How… how dare you? I, who know this city, the history of each stone, how dare you lie in my presence and pervert history?” We leave rather hastily. “Don’t pay any attention to him, one of my (((passing guests))) tells me. He’s a madman.” Another (((man))) corrects him: “No, he’s jealous, it’s as clear as day.” But Miriam loves the stories. True or imaginary, they entertain her.
Ellie Wiesel, Mémoires, Tome I, p. 271-272.
We have a good example of what Whites would call jewish hypocrisy, but to see only the pretense would be both ethnocentric and missing the forest for the trees.
For once, tattoo artist Ellie subtly implies that perhaps, possibly, conceivably, in an alternate universe, maybe, hypothetically, the anger of his “aggressor” could vaguely, and only in the realm of pure speculation, be somewhat slightly justified… only a little.
His (((tribe))), of course, naturally defends him against this rabid antisemitic “persecution”.
“Madman” and “jealous” are the term and adjective used to describe “the Enemy“.
One can easily guess that this is yet another “embroidering” on the part of the world premier HollyCost™ survivor. The actual descriptors would most likely, if we are to believe that these events actually happened, be closer to those that modern (((journalists))) use to smear anyone opposed to the Zionist regime of Occupied Palestine… “anti-something” and “fashmaster” I think.
Do jews lie?
For jews, Bobby Fischer is probably the biggest jewish liar ever.
Not because anything he said was legitimately analyzed to determine its veracity, but because he went against the narrative… “bad for jews“.
Ellie Wiesel is also a jewish liar.
Not because he fabricated story, but because he admitted to doing so (see above)… “bad for jews“.
The Cognitive Dissonance of European Elites
By itself, the jewish mentality, or mental illness as Weininger would claim, is not the issue.
The fact that jews hold their fantasies in higher regards than what Whites consider the truth (i.e. events that actually happened) is not a problem in itself, nor is their willingness to prosecute, jail and even attempt and encourage murder on those whose views they consider “sacrilegious”.
That’s how judaism and jewry have operated for millennia, there is nothing new or surprising there.
What is problematic is for European societies to dogmatically refuse to understand these differences and to persevere in their beliefs that other races, and Semites in particular, are of the same nature as Europeans and possess an identical mental structuring.
This attitude stems from the masochistic and narcissistic ethnocentrism of European elites, who believe that the diverse components of the human “race” are in fact interchangeable and all share the same aspirations, governed by the same vision of the world.
Whites believe in the HollyCost™ not because they have scrutinized the subject but because they see all these jews believing it.
If so many jews believe the in the HollyCost™, it must be the truth.
If I live in a slaughterhouse (or in California), I must be a bull because why else would I be surrounded by all these cows?
It’s this radical negation of racial differences which is the primary nexus of the jewish problem.
Not the HollyCost™.
Not the Talmud.
Not the FED.
Not a Bilderberg/Alex Jonesian conspiracy.
Not even the racial differences in themselves.
This incomprehension is perfectly enlightened by Spencer’s aforementioned comparison, which can only be addressed to an audience of racial Europeans, or to a lesser extent spiritual Europeans. That is, the bulk of the American population, to whom Spencer’s comments were certainly addressed.
Objectivity, rationality, comparison and the scientific method are not part of Semitic psychology, which is fundamentally built on the rejection of doubt. For doubt implies individual freedom, that is to say a critical distance from the group (i.e. the tribe).
There is no such thing in the jewish world. Anyone who doubts and adopts a critical mind and/or scientific curiosity is immediately perceived as “the Enemy” of the group, a factor of tribal dissension. This breach of social cohesion and its associated obligations – of which “judaism” is only the pseudo-spiritual superstructure – invariably leads to the elimination of “the Enemy”.
This kind of gregarious behavior is not just a philosophy: it’s an ethno-racial atavism that accompanies endogamy and Semitic consanguinity, as cultivated in Occupied Palestine and before that in Polish/Austrian ghettos. jewish tribalism is literally the product of a mode of reproduction which racially conditions the psychology of these populations before, by pseudo-spiritual transmutation, erecting itself as a culture.
“Judaism” is not a religion but an ethno-racial identity with religious accents. This is how jews, in practice, mask their racial determinism in pseudo-religiosity.
Jewry conditions the Talmud, not the opposite.
The “Persecution” of jews by “the Enemy”
This is why, although few jews have ever entered a synagogue and even fewer have any interest in the Talmud/Kabbalism/the Messiah, the reactions of (((Western))) or (((israeli))) commentators are invariably the same: inflamed and fanatical.
They do not distinguish their individual being from what they call “jewry” which denotes indifferently the visible superstructure of racial, tribal and religious collectivism.
Any criticism of the narrative is not understood by them as rational argumentation about a belief but as a psychoaffective impairment targeting them as a collective individual. They interpret it as a “persecution”.
For Europeans, questions about the narrative arise in rational terms.
A typical debate between two Europeans aims to answer a specific set of questions.
For instance, “are jews overly represented in the media/banking/Hollywood/politics?“.
The question is limited to its purpose.
Before providing answers the European seeks to assess the reality of the situation, which in itself will give rise to more questions.
- What is the proportion of jews in the general population?
- What is the proportion of jews in the aforementioned fields?
- Are the ratios comparable or is there a discrepancy?
For jews, the question will not revolve around reality, the definition of “jews”, the definition of “the media”, the proportion of the former in the latter or the existence of a discrepancy.
The question will revolve around whether the jew can subject the European to the narrative (jewish reality).
The question is limited to its subject.
A non-jew who rejects the narrative is responsible, in the mind of the jew, of “persecution”. That is to say psychological domination.
The content itself is irrelevant.
Semitic “Greed” and Personal Merit
A common trope is that of the alleged “greediness” of jews.
The fact that this stereotype is mainstream, and allowed by the anti-racist brigade to be so, should tell you all you need to know about its relevance and accuracy.
Interpreting jewish behavior as “greedy” is entirely misunderstanding jewish ethnopsychology.
What most people interpret as greed is only ethnocentrism, and even that is just a superficial analysis of the jewish problem.
The reality is pretty much the opposite.
Let me insist on this point: merit is a very devalued notion among Semites.
Personal accomplishments, results of individual talent or autonomous capabilities, are inevitably suspect because they refer to the failures of the group.
But the group can never failed – jews consider themselves perfect, innocent and eternal victims of others – all individual successes are relativized and made to contribute to the group.
The tribal model exerts relentless pressure on its members but even more so on outsiders (non-jews).
This mechanism is important to understand. Since jews define legitimacy on the basis of their ethno-racial kinship and not on personal merit, as is customary in ultra-individualistic European societies, they believe what is yours to be theirs. Starting with your country, your money, your rights, your decisions, your ideas, your words all the way to your thoughts.
Instinctive Unconsciousness and Semitic Hypocrisy
Unlike the European man, for whom individual merit, equality, fairness and freedom are the founding values of the social order, jewish collectivism admits only subjugation by dogmatic obscurantism and tribal fanaticism. If this domination is object to or, better yet, abolished by the physical removal of (((genetic impurities))), the reaction is histrionic, irrational and psychoaffective. This is manifested by an attitude of complaisant and hysterical victimization.
Hypocrisy is the basic principle of the social functioning of these groups, especially in European societies where the functioning of the social body inheres within the egalitarian treatment of individuals.
jews understand instinctively that, due to their genetic intellectual and physical limitations, in such a system based on equality and individual merit, organized ethnic cohesiveness is their only salvation.
Considering themselves as “persecuted” – meaning, in their jargon, that their narrative is contested – jews make use of anti-racist, humanist and egalitarian phraseology in order to reinforce the positions of the tribal group vis-à-vis of Whites.
It’s the fabled double standard, or chutzpah, by which jews claim Whites are “privileged” and jews are “oppressed”.
That is jewish reality, the narrative.
Back in European reality, the factual and rational analysis of a situation, it’s precisely the opposite.
The concepts of double standard, hypocrisy and even chutzpah aren’t new when discussing the jewish question.
What’s important is that these notions are manifestations of jewish psychology, and the cause is the incompatibility between:
- European rationality: conceptual understanding, scientific method, intellectual curiosity.
- jewish fanatical dogmatism: the tribal parroting of the narrative, historically professed by semi-despotic rabbis (or as Kevin McDonald would say, secular rabbis… aka the media).
These manifestations are unconscious.
The entire concepts of conspiracy, deception and scheming are closer to the European modus operandi than anything else.
The Final Solution to the jewish Problem
Let’s take the example of South Africa, for once, since I tend to always talk about either America or Germany.
Just like in Tsarist Russia, in Hitler’s Germany, in pre-Civil Rights America, in Pétain’s France, in Catholic Spain, in modern day Palestine and elsewhere, jews were “persecuted” in Apartheid South Africa.
“Persecuted” obviously meaning that someone, somewhere, didn’t prostrate himself to the narrative and that South African officials on principle didn’t hold jews above the law.
As you probably know, jews were heavily involved in overthrowing the “oppressive” regime.
They financed Black communist organizations that are today recognized as terrorist organizations by even the most fanatical anti-racist historians.
Far from being perceived as terrorists or murderers, it is indeed as “freedom fighters” and “justiciaries” that Blacks terrorists (and today’s anti-White jihadis) are consciously and unconsciously identified by jews in the West and in Occupied Palestine.
“Justiciaries” in the sense, as you will have guessed, of what justice means in these groups: the elimination of Nazis/fascists/Christians/antisemites/”the Enemy“.
In these circumstances, the “judeo-Western alliance” against the Hollywood choreographed threat of the Star and
Striped Crescent is, at best, a pleasant joke.
To have a judeo-Western alliance, you would need judeo-Western values. To have judeo-Western value, you would need jews to adopt Western values. But values derive from culture which itself derives from race.
What the counter-jihad Breitretards want is, ironically, a moderate jewry.
There can be no “moderate jewry” because there is no moderation in a psycho-racial determinism whose political expression is gregarious fanaticism.
There is no acceptance of criticism because there is an inability to doubt. There is an inability to doubt because in these groups there is a powerful limitation, for genetic reasons, of abstract thinking.
The reason, which normally dominates the affect, is considerably reduced in Semitic populations. The result is an emotionalism which combined with typically jewish histrionics leads to what I’ve just described.
Consequently, these masses are not governed by reason but by conformism and schizophrenic fantasies.
Their cultural system, in which “jewish identity” is nothing but the collective personality of the jewish masses, is radically incompatible with the qualities proper to European societies, the most essential of which is the autonomy of the individual.
The current Alt-Right debate is thus turned upside down, focusing on the consequences and manifestations rather than the causes.
The solution to the JQ is given somewhere in this post where I draw a parallel to the (domesticated) animal world.
And to conclude on a recurring argument used by the Alt-Lite and other Breitards to justify their ridiculous and delusional dreams of judeophilic pseudo-nationalism: No, jews aren’t “the victims of antisemitic muslims“.
Jews are the victims of being jewish.
Stop the hate.