A response to Jeffrey Imm and R.E.A.L.
Growing up in the 1990s, I found myself pondering all sorts of mysteries as a teenager: why did my black classmates consistently receive lower test scores; why were black students always in the lower track courses; why did people on television claim that blacks were as smart as Whites; why did blacks act in such a peculiar way; why were the smart White kids herded into the same schools with black thugs and drug dealers. I didn’t get it. Something didn’t feel right.
The inclusion of blacks at my school always bothered me. It struck me as an obstacle to my education. Blacks often assaulted the White kids in the school cafeteria. They sold drugs in school. They disrupted the classroom. They didn’t show any interest in their studies. Their sordid underclass culture rubbed off on the poorer Whites. My teachers were constantly forced to waste their time catering to the lowest common denominator. It was one long farce from kindergarten to graduation.
When I arrived at college, I was catapulted into a whole different world. Suddenly, there were lots of bright people around me with similar interests. A magic filter whisked away all the troublesome blacks who took up space in high school. In their place, I had an enormous college library to mine with thousands of books that interested me. I had a slew of courses that I could take to satisfy my intellectual curiosity. There was no comparison between my new segregated environment and my old integrated one.
I plunged in head first. When I emerged five years later, I was a different person. I had come to realize that my generation was the subject of a cruel liberal experiment in social engineering. In the name of “equality,” a small group of federal judges and ideologues had overthrown Alabama’s segregated school system and forced raw negroes into the White schools. This was done solely to uplift the negro, not to improve the White schools. Integration was based on the flawed premise that segregated schools were the cause of black academic underperformance.
Fifty years later, the segregationists have yet to be vindicated. The racial gap in average test scores failed to disappear in the integrated schools. It has stubbornly persisted into the Obama presidency. The traditional social problems of the black underclass (illegitimacy, vulgarity, drug abuse, violence, indolence, teen pregnancy) were imported into the White schools where they became a common problem. America’s public schools once inspired envy throughout the Western world. Thanks to our growing black and mestizo population, they now rank near the bottom.
The segregationists were right about other things. Theodore Bilbo had predicted that the end of segregation would unleash a tidal wave of black-on-white violent crime. Even Bilbo though couldn’t imagine that the day would come when negroes would rape over 35,000 white women per year in the United States. This was unknown in the Jim Crow South. Interracial crime is a one way street. Whites are overwhelmingly the victims of murders, thefts, rapes, and assaults by negroes, not the other way around. Even when blacks murder, rape, and steal from other blacks, White taxpayers incur the costs of their incarceration. This is another unsavory aspect of Martin Luther King’s so-called “dream” that is deliberately ignored in the mainstream.
Why do Whites accept inferior schools? Why do they endure unbearable levels of interracial violent crime? Why do they put up with racial discrimination in the form of affirmative action? Why do Whites accept an immigration policy which displaces them from their neighborhoods and reduces their political power? Why do Whites accept the redistribution of their wealth to non-Whites?
Let’s travel further in this vein: Why do Whites accept the degeneration of their culture? Why do Whites accept the spread of poverty, disease, filth, and ignorance in their midst? Why do Whites accept economic underdevelopment? Why do Whites accept the surrender of their culture and identity to placate hostile minorities? Why do Whites think their displacement in their native lands is a good thing? Why do Whites confuse decline with progress?
From a perspective of self interest, White racial suicide doesn’t make any sense. It becomes explicable though in the light of ideology and altruism. Our enemies have twisted Christianity and republicanism to justify our demise as a people. The intellectual fraud they have perpetrated doesn’t stand up to close historical scrutiny. The real impulse to annihilate Whites comes from outside both of these traditions.
Two centuries ago, Whites didn’t have these debates. Republicanism and Christianity flourished alongside a vigorous racial nationalism. Slavery was a contentious issue, but Whiteness itself wasn’t attacked by even the most radical egalitarians. No one believed that “liberty” and “equality” mandated or required the demographic submersion of America’s White majority. If a Christian minister or priest had invoked “love” to justify the racial displacement of his flock, they would have laughed him out of church. They probably would have tarred and feathered him to boot.
The attack on Whiteness began in the twentieth century. It came from three primary sources: Jewish academics, black intellectuals, and Marxists. More often that not, blacks and Jews mingled in the same radical fringe. It was an extremely secular milieu. Collectively, they dreamed of overthrowing the bourgeoisie republican order and replacing it with a classless Marxist utopia in which all racial and social distinctions would be abolished.
The Soviet Union was the first European nation to permanently incorporate this revolutionary ideal into law. In the 1920s, the USSR became a mecca for radical black intellectuals alienated from America. In the United States, the Communist Party USA was the only political party that fully championed the colorblind ideal that gradually triumphed after the Second World War. It was instructed to unfurl the banner of racial equality by the Comintern. Within the CPUSA, the Moscow party line was controversial, as it tended to alienate White working class voters.
This is a rich story that no one has completely told. The term “racism” made its debut on the Marxist fringe in the 1920s, entered American public discourse in the 1930s, and penetrated the mainstream in the 1940s. The Civil Rights Movement had close ties to communism in its earliest years. The U.S. dismantled Jim Crow largely because of the appeal of communism in the Third World. The ruling class neutralized the racial threat of Soviet communism (the possibility of a black fifth column) by mainstreaming the Soviet racial ideal here in America.
The spearhead of anti-racism hasn’t changed in our own times. It is still composed of Jewish academics, black intellectuals, and Marxists. The common thread uniting them is communism, atheism, and hatred of Whites. They have since moved on to creating a new radical discourse about “white privilege” and new forms of subversion like “critical race theory.” These ideals are then smuggled into the mainstream through left-wing front groups as the newest form of Christianity and republicanism.
This is where Comrade Jeffrey enters the picture. His apparent role is to put words into the mouth of Jesus Christ or Thomas Jefferson that were never spoken. The true progenitors of his ideal can trace their footsteps back to Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin. He doesn’t want you to find that out though.
Kulaks writes:
“…Sounds amazingly like it is describing modern-day ‘Amerikwa’ and ‘Amerikwans’ — doesn’t it?
DOESN’T IT?…”
It DO It DO
Great post! And every single one true–who’d a thunk it?
“…Consider some of these passages, and who possibly it could be speaking of and of whom it could realistically apply to….”
Another very good place to seek answers is the Talmud (is is any wonder it’s difficult for us to access?), which lays it all out, no question of Jewish hostility toward Gentiles.
Consider the following:
Only Jews are human. [Gentiles] are animals. (Baba Mezia 114a-114b)
Even the best of the [Gentiles] should be killed (Babylonian Talmud Abodah Zara 26b.)
If a Jew is tempted to do evil he should go to a city where he is not known and do the evil there. (Moed Kattan 17a.).
Gentiles’ flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses.
Jews may use lies to circumvent a [Gentile]. (Baba Kamma 113a.)
What a Jew obtains by theft from a [Gentile] he may keep. (Sanhedrin 76a.)
Does anyone doubt the intentions of hostility of these hostile elites, what they’re doing to us and what they have in store for us: The complete destruction of Whites and Western Civilization.
Bon
I think we are getting somewhere with this discussion.
“In fact it seems that technical IQ and social IQ are inversely related.” Not necessarily, a lot of people I know have the twin advantages of being both antisocial bastards and mental nincompoops. Notwithstanding that though, your observation has merit.
“I have found that reduction of central *social* issues to their most basic elements, for purposes of explanation, is uniformly met with bovine expressions of incomprehension.” Huh? Wut?
“But what condemns the goyim to a likening to cattle is their profound lack of curiosity about that which they don’t understand.” Not wanting to spend too much time on this issue right now, a few observations are:
1) It is true that the vast majority of Whites are not informed about the JQ, dispossession, etc. Neither are most of them particularly interested in discussing it at this time. However, this does not mean that they are incapable of understanding these issues, or will not understand them in the future. The quality of the White genepool is substantially higher than that of Pakistan, for example. However, the Pakistanis are (I would guess) much more aware of the JQ, 9/11 Truth and a wide range of issues that are front and center for you. A major reason is that these issues are relevant to the Pakistanis (they affect the Muslim world), and there are media outlets which can discuss them openly. Most Whites are fat and happy right now, have only a faint inkling of the multicultural nightmare that awaits, and thus the issue has no relevancy yet (this is subject to change). Also, of course no respectable media outlet will touch these issues currently.
2) Whites are generally capable in their daily lives. They usually make reasonable choices when they have correct information available to them. When making important purchases, their decisions make sense more often than not. Most men can build their own home and maintain it, etc. Whites have displayed strong survival instincts in the past, and it can be assumed that these lie dormant currently, but are subject to awakening.
3) The majority of common Jews (not the higher-echelon leaders) have the high social IQ you mentioned, but have similar beliefs regarding social issues that have been ingrained into Whites. There is some cognitive dissonance with their own internal ethnocentrism and protection of apartheid Israel, but most Jews are true believers in multiculturalism. They do hope to create a utopia here, as their relatives hoped to do in the USSR. Would you also classify the majority of Jews as cattle too?
4) Jewish influence is tenuous, and they understand this very well. If you want to consider Whites as a “cattle”, there is a constant problem keeping the herd following orders, because there are about 7X as many IQ-115+ Whites as there are Jews in the US. Ross Perot’s campaign, the “Contract with America” and the “Tea Party” movement can be interpreted as White political reform movements that have arisen spontaneously and unpredictably, while being opposed by the media establishment.
5) Generally speaking, holders of higher office would have both high IQs (130+) and strong social skills, and it would be less accurate to describe them as cattle (though most of them are either unaware of a conspiracy or involved in it). This implies that the governing elites are capable of being awakened easier than the commons.
6) A little off the subject, going back a little to “Pitcairn II”, this is not something that we usually see in White communities (remember that the residents of Pitcairn were of mixed race). If you would review all of the examples of isolated settlements you can think of (Vikings, early Americas, Western Expansion, etc.), what we almost always find is that Whites do well in those types of circumstances. There are few incidents of post-Katrina armageddons.
“You need to stop with the question begging. You have not established that a “normal politician” is a normal person according to your prior analysis. Indeed, the presumption would seem to be otherwise, both in theory and as suggested by the history of the subornation of politicians who get elected locally on one platform and pursue another when they get their heads turned in DC.” When I say, “normal politician”, I am trying to suggest this is the case for “most White people” of that office. I think that just about all of such people are at least raised in “normal” environments, meaning that their parents teach them basic morality, which is reinforced in the schools they attend and generally by society during their formative years. I am assuming that you would generally agree, but believe that they are brought in to the Judeo-conspiracy at some point as they arise to higher office (that is, they are not groomed for this during childhood).
“But you grant that there is such a thing as a homicidal “false-flag operation” and a dark “conspiracy”.” I am not discounting either of these things. The USS Liberty was obviously an attempted false flag (confirmed by the NSA chief of the time). The former Italian Defense Minister recently exposed actual false flag operations committed by Italian secret service in the 1980s. He also was convinced that 9/11 was a false flag. I am also not suggesting that a Judeo-conspiracy is impossible. I am open to the idea. It would be helpful if you would explain how you envision politicians and other elite are brought into the Judeo-conspiracy, at what stage in their lives this typically happens.
“How do you account for the personnel who participate therein if you are not acknowledging exceptions to your rule about “normality”. And what is the basis for excluding politicians from this violation of your expectations.” I am not excluding all politicians (Dick Cheney is certainly a candidate for being in the conspiracy). I am saying that as I understand reality, most White politicians are not aware of or involved in the Judeo-conspiracy. This probably goes back to my view of human nature. Most politicians seem to be drawn to that field by the desire to change the world for the better (not all, some are probably corrupt from the beginning). As you know, most higher-ups start in local/state government positions, which have low pay (most state representative positions are part-time and have very little salary but require long hours). It is not easy to get a person to do something that goes against what he has been taught for his entire life. When a person violates these codes, he is often stricken by his conscience and/or insomnia. “Regular” people who commit murder often cannot stand the guilt, and walk in to confess to police. In addition, white children that would suffer in a Judeo-dominated world, and most people in higher office have families and children. In my mind, it is atypical for most parents to work against their children by knowingly participating in a conspiracy that would harm their future. Whites in particular love order, they obey laws when no one is around to catch them, and abhor bribery and crime (this is almost universal for Northern European nations). I believe these to be inherited traits, selected for through the millenia. In my opinion, this makes it difficult to corrupt your average White politician beyond standard graft and other common misdeeds. If you disagree, please expound on your view of human nature as it pertains to being corrupted to the extent of willingly joining the Judeo-conspiracy.
“Also, Andrew – and most importantly – the question of “how the system works” is of secondary importance to the question of the identity and agenda of the Oligarchy that governs a polity.” I agree with this. For those that argue there is a Judeo-conspiracy (meaning a hidden organization that is much larger than the JQ as described by Dr. MacDonald), the challenge is to present enough compelling evidence to make the case. Even assuming that the major events under discussion were Jewish conspiratorial events (WW2, Kennedy Assassination, 9/11, etc.), it is another matter to prove that they were all part of the same greater Judeo-conspiracy, which remains in existence today (by “prove”, I just mean to present convincing evidence).
After reading your blog, I am not able to find much information that specifies your beliefs about the Judeo-conspiracy. It would be helpful if you would briefly summarize:
1) Its history as known or conjectured.
2) Information about its perceived structure and organization.
3) Who is believed to be involved at present.
4) What would cause a “normal” White person with ambitions for higher office to join a conspiracy that ultimately plans to enslave his kind?
Does anyone doubt the intentions of hostility of these hostile elites, what they’re doing to us and what they have in store for us: The complete destruction of Whites and Western Civilization.
Bon
—
Yes Bon, the destruction of the true Israelites and their civilization — since Western Civilization is modern-day Israel.
~
Genesis 17: 2-7 & 22:17-18 — New International Version
Again Bon, what other civilization and race of People could the Bible be referring to other than Western Civilization and it’s role in shaping the world as we know it today — especially the constant references to ‘many nations’ and ‘company of nations’ — and ‘all the nations of the earth will be blessed’ because of Their Covenant and obedience to the Lord?
Of which now we are being severly punished for –
~
Deuteronomy 28:15, 45, 47, 58-59, 62
Well, if I was God I suppose I’d be very angry at Westerners, for so many reasons.
1) It is true that the vast majority of Whites are not informed about the JQ, dispossession, etc. Neither are most of them particularly interested in discussing it at this time. However, this does not mean that they are incapable of understanding these issues, or will not understand them in the future.
It means that they will understand them when it’s too late to do anything about it – kind of like the cow that has some dim sense that something is wrong on that final day when its head is entrapped for penetration with a pneumatic hammer.
The quality of the White genepool is substantially higher than that of Pakistan, for example. However, the Pakistanis are (I would guess) much more aware of the JQ, 9/11 Truth and a wide range of issues that are front and center for you.
Quality? By what measure? Vocational aptitude aligned with bovine complicity in one’s extermination? Sounds to me like the Paki’s have the better combination of qualities.
A major reason is that these issues are relevant to the Pakistanis (they affect the Muslim world), and there are media outlets which can discuss them openly. Most Whites are fat and happy right now, have only a faint inkling of the multicultural nightmare that awaits, and thus the issue has no relevancy yet (this is subject to change).
Whites were not “fat and happy” amidst the Great Depression and the run-up to the War to Save Communism. Yet their comprehension of the bases of the contemporary disorder was as contemptible as that which characterizes the circumstance today.
2) Whites are generally capable in their daily lives. They usually make reasonable choices when they have correct information available to them. When making important purchases, their decisions make sense more often than not. Most men can build their own home and maintain it, etc. Whites have displayed strong survival instincts in the past, and it can be assumed that these lie dormant currently, but are subject to awakening.
This citation of individualistic virtues is valid but irrelevant.
3) The majority of common Jews (not the higher-echelon leaders) have the high social IQ you mentioned, but have similar beliefs regarding social issues that have been ingrained into Whites. There is some cognitive dissonance with their own internal ethnocentrism and protection of apartheid Israel, but most Jews are true believers in multiculturalism. They do hope to create a utopia here, as their relatives hoped to do in the USSR. Would you also classify the majority of Jews as cattle too?
Yes, but to a much lesser extent. When I speak of “the Jews,” reference to elite, oligarchic, international Jewry is implied.
4) Jewish influence is tenuous, and they understand this very well. If you want to consider Whites as a “cattle”, there is a constant problem keeping the herd following orders, because there are about 7X as many IQ-115+ Whites as there are Jews in the US.
Again, you apply the incorrect standard. The vocational/technical IQ is not pertinent as other than contra-indicative. Such deviation from the Judeo-fascist and/or Judeo-Communist agendas as has been demonstrated has been inconsequential, and is not a matter of “following orders” but of adhering to attitudes.
Ross Perot’s campaign, the “Contract with America” and the “Tea Party” movement can be interpreted as White political reform movements that have arisen spontaneously and unpredictably, while being opposed by the media establishment.
Pathetic.
5) Generally speaking, holders of higher office would have both high IQs (130+) and strong social skills, and it would be less accurate to describe them as cattle (though most of them are either unaware of a conspiracy or involved in it). This implies that the governing elites are capable of being awakened easier than the commons.
Again, wrong yardstick. And neither are “strong social skills,” in the sense of inter-personal adroitness, that with which we are concerned. Thus, to the contrary, “the governing elites,” if not informed by impressive personal experience as to the true state of affairs, are the *least* likely to surrender a material and emotional interest in their illusions.
6) A little off the subject, going back a little to “Pitcairn II”, this is not something that we usually see in White communities (remember that the residents of Pitcairn were of mixed race).
(Remember that the proposed intruders are strangers to one another and to the resident population.)
If you would review all of the examples of isolated settlements you can think of (Vikings, early Americas, Western Expansion, etc.), what we almost always find is that Whites do well in those types of circumstances.
Not where 200,000+ individuals and geographic confinement are involved.
When I say, “normal politician”, I am trying to suggest this is the case for “most White people” of that office.
You have not shown that the representative politician is a representative person. A presumption to the contrary seems reasonable.
I think that just about all of such people are at least raised in “normal” environments, meaning that their parents teach them basic morality, which is reinforced in the schools they attend and generally by society during their formative years..
Does instruction in “basic morality” embrace convenience with the truth (lying) for a living?
I am assuming that you would generally agree, but believe that they are brought in to the Judeo-conspiracy at some point as they arise to higher office (that is, they are not groomed for this during childhood).
I would say that childhood instruction is irrelevant to the issue, and that those who are identified as most convenient with the truth and/or inclined to alignment with the oligarchic agenda are selected for introduction to inner circles.
I am also not suggesting that a Judeo-conspiracy is impossible. I am open to the idea. It would be helpful if you would explain how you envision politicians and other elite are brought into the Judeo-conspiracy, at what stage in their lives this typically happens.
It’s not clear why this is important, and I do not have a sense of the existence of an operators’ manual for the coordination and corruption of goyische politicians. You might consult a conspiracy theorist on the point with better result.
However, we do know of the introduction of Louis Howe into the mature FDR household for Communist indoctrination of F.D. and Eleanor. I believe I read that Wilson was marked as a prime stooge when professing at Princeton. D.D. Eisenhower was just a whore, advertising his wares in the Roosevelt district, according to Robert Welch. And Jimmy Carter, when governing Georgia, sent Bert Lance to pimp-roll into David Rockefeller’s offices one day when he was feeling that he had the ass of the requisite class.
What I have read of others, in passing, amounts to little more than suspicions.
I am saying that as I understand reality, most White politicians are not aware of or involved in the Judeo-conspiracy.
I would agree.
Most politicians seem to be drawn to that field by the desire to change the world for the better (not all, some are probably corrupt from the beginning).
A questionable generalization that I would not rely upon in support of a further thesis.
It is not easy to get a person to do something that goes against what he has been taught for his entire life. When a person violates these codes, he is often stricken by his conscience and/or insomnia. “Regular” people who commit murder often cannot stand the guilt, and walk in to confess to police.
Your analysis fails to distinguish between individual (personal) and collective (impersonal) acts.
In addition, white children that would suffer in a Judeo-dominated world, and most people in higher office have families and children. In my mind, it is atypical for most parents to work against their children by knowingly participating in a conspiracy that would harm their future.
You have not shown that a “knowing” is involved. The intellectual miasma and confusion created by ideology, short-term benefits, and the unforeseeability of long-term consequences allow moderns to earnestly believe in the virtue of any collective enterprise that suits them.
Whites in particular love order, they obey laws when no one is around to catch them, and abhor bribery and crime (this is almost universal for Northern European nations). I believe these to be inherited traits, selected for through the millenia. In my opinion, this makes it difficult to corrupt your average White politician beyond standard graft and other common misdeeds. If you disagree, please expound on your view of human nature as it pertains to being corrupted to the extent of willingly joining the Judeo-conspiracy.
No one “willingly joins the Judeo-conspiracy *as such*”. I recommend reading about the organization of the Illuminati. One is honored, rather than corrupted, by being introduced to, and placed in the service of, the inner circles of occult power. Those of common virtue who are excluded are *envious* of the Elect.
For those that argue there is a Judeo-conspiracy (meaning a hidden organization that is much larger than the JQ as described by Dr. MacDonald), the challenge is to present enough compelling evidence to make the case. Even assuming that the major events under discussion were Jewish conspiratorial events (WW2, Kennedy Assassination, 9/11, etc.), it is another matter to prove that they were all part of the same greater Judeo-conspiracy, which remains in existence today (by “prove”, I just mean to present convincing evidence).
It is not evident why this must be demonstrated. The effect is the same, whatever is in the black box.
After reading your blog, I am not able to find much information that specifies your beliefs about the Judeo-conspiracy. It would be helpful if you would briefly summarize:
1) Its history as known or conjectured.
2) Information about its perceived structure and organization.
3) Who is believed to be involved at present.
4) What would cause a “normal” White person with ambitions for higher office to join a conspiracy that ultimately plans to enslave his kind?
1-2-3: I don’t know, don’t think it can be known with confidence, nor think it of much importance. “4” is discussed, above.
What *is* important is that White’s grow up, in which case the “Judeo-conspiracy” – whatever its 1/2/3 – won’t matter *at all*.
I still think we are getting somewhere with this.
“It means that they will understand them when it’s too late to do anything about it – kind of like the cow that has some dim sense that something is wrong on that final day when its head is entrapped for penetration with a pneumatic hammer.” It will be 40 years until Whites reach minority status in the US. By the end of the century, Whites will still be around 25% of the population. This timeline suggests that there is plenty of time for an awakening to occur.
“Quality? By what measure? Vocational aptitude aligned with bovine complicity in one’s extermination? Sounds to me like the Paki’s have the better combination of qualities.” The higher quality of the White genepool is evidenced by intelligence tests, academic performance and such measures. But most telling is the level of civilization each is capable of, shown by history. However, of course you already know all of this, and I suspect your comment stems from frustration about Whites’ current complacency in the face of displacement, rather than a real disagreement.
“Whites were not “fat and happy” amidst the Great Depression and the run-up to the War to Save Communism. Yet their comprehension of the bases of the contemporary disorder was as contemptible as that which characterizes the circumstance today.” The Great Depression did result in a lot of unrest. There were violent strikes and protests, as well as racial strife. During the period, something like 1 million Mexicans were deported, even though over half of them were probably citizens. Figures like Father Coughlin, an anti-semite, were very popular and influential. This implies that economic hardship increases racial awareness and strife.
“This citation of individualistic virtues is valid but irrelevant.” In my mind, it is relevant for the prospects of a future awakening. A lesser capable people would be very difficult to awaken, such as Mestizos or Aborigines. If Pakistanis had been brainwashed for generations, it would be much more difficult to awaken them, as they exhibit inferior decision-making and comprehension abilities.
“Again, you apply the incorrect standard. The vocational/technical IQ is not pertinent as other than contra-indicative. Such deviation from the Judeo-fascist and/or Judeo-Communist agendas as has been demonstrated has been inconsequential, and is not a matter of “following orders” but of adhering to attitudes.” I will assume that a big part of your “Social IQ” relates to natural ethnocentricity and opposition to foreigners. I will note that I wouldnt expect other races to do any better under the media bombardment than Whites have. I am not aware that Asian Americans are less indoctrinated (blacks may be, but are relatively useless as a force against Jewry due to cognitive and behavioral factors).
“You have not shown that the representative politician is a representative person. A presumption to the contrary seems reasonable.” I think a possible problem here is an overly cynical view of politicians. The question at hand is what percentage of the elite political class is involved in a Judeo-conspiracy. This is relevant for determining who the enemy is, the probability of an awakening, and what White preservation scenario has the greatest chance of success.
“I would say that childhood instruction is irrelevant to the issue, and that those who are identified as most convenient with the truth and/or inclined to alignment with the oligarchic agenda are selected for introduction to inner circles.” In my understanding of reality, each political party seeks to find a candidate that has the greatest chance of being elected. In Scott Brown’s example, we have what appears to be a dark horse candidate who came from nowhere to win. It is difficult to conceive that most such candidates are anything more than they appear to be, which are ambitious individuals that want to further their political ideology.
“I am also not suggesting that a Judeo-conspiracy is impossible. I am open to the idea. It would be helpful if you would explain how you envision politicians and other elite are brought into the Judeo-conspiracy, at what stage in their lives this typically happens. It’s not clear why this is important, and I do not have a sense of the existence of an operators’ manual for the coordination and corruption of goyische politicians.” This is important for attempting to determine the likelihood of there being a Judeo-conspiracy, and if so, how far the conspiracy extends. We are in the position of attempting to compare our knowledge of human nature and behavior with the requirements of persuading individuals to join a conspiracy and remain loyal to it. Note that a whistleblower who could successfully reveal such a conspiracy would receive instant world-wide fame and a lucrative book deal.
“It is not evident why this must be demonstrated. The effect is the same, whatever is in the black box.” There are two possible explanations for the JQ that can be considered:
1) Dr. MacDonald’s Thesis: As you are aware, this states that Jews have a group evolutionary strategy, and are attempting to out-compete and displace Whites. In this case, the false flag operations, etc. were ad hoc conspiracies generally unrelated to each other (ie, the Kennedy assassins were not related to the 9/11 architects, assuming both were Jewish conspiracies). In other words, Jews form conspiracies to further their interests, but there is no permanent secretive organization. The White Goyim are to be displaced to the degree that they cannot pose a future threat to Jews (another Holocaust is made impossible, because the US will have no majority race). However, there is no coordinated plan for world domination.
2) A Greater Judeo-Conspiracy: This would be your theory. There is a secretive organization with deep roots in the past, and a complex underground organization with vast resources, which is working to carry out a diabolical plan, with designs on creating a world government, and enslaving/exterminating the Goyim.
If you wish to convince others that your theory is the correct one, then it would be best if you provided compelling evidence. I am not asking you to write a book, but it would certainly be useful for those of us who are interested in your ideas if you would briefly point out important points that would make the case for a greater Judeo-conspiracy. Obviously there must be more than you have presented to me thus far, as the evidence has been sufficient to convince you of the conspiracy’s existence. So far, you have talked a little about the Illuminati and the communist indoctrination of several presidents. What else should someone who is interested know? There are numerous books on the subject, which are generally contradictory in nature, and do not form a cohesive whole.
It will be 40 years until Whites reach minority status in the US. By the end of the century, Whites will still be around 25% of the population. This timeline suggests that there is plenty of time for an awakening to occur.
Yes it does. Unfortunately, it’s not the pertinent one. Please give close attention the the post, “Law, Ethics, Morality: Pretense and Illusion”.
The higher quality of the White gene pool is evidenced by intelligence tests, academic performance and such measures. But most telling is the level of civilization each is capable of, shown by history.
You are a serial offender. Now *two* questions begged in one paragraph.
IQ/academic performance, as we see and complain, will get you exterminated for lack of martial qualities, instincts, and common sense. And “history,” closely investigated, leaves a question mark as to the “level of civilization” reached by Whites when a Spenglerian-comparable analysis is performed and the pathological/exceptional aspects of the “West” are considered therein.
The Great Depression did result in a lot of unrest. There were violent strikes and protests, as well as racial strife. During the period, something like 1 million Mexicans were deported, even though over half of them were probably citizens. Figures like Father Coughlin, an anti-semite, were very popular and influential. This implies that economic hardship increases racial awareness and strife.
To no greater effect and understanding than today, and under much greater stimulus thereto than is the “fat and happy [and stupid]” circumstance of your own description. Obviously we have no hope in reliance upon *this* principle.
A lesser capable people would be very difficult to awaken, such as Mestizos or Aborigines. If Pakistanis had been brainwashed for generations, it would be much more difficult to awaken them, as they exhibit inferior decision-making and comprehension abilities.
My reckoning is exactly the opposite, aside from your third offense, in assuming your conclusion with regard to the Pakis.
I will assume that a big part of your “Social IQ” relates to natural ethnocentricity and opposition to foreigners.
That is an element but is not of the essence – which is the ability to *comprehend* social phenomena.
I will note that I wouldn’t expect other races to do any better under the media bombardment than Whites have.
You fail to apprehend and account for the responsibility of White’s for their vulnerability and submission to this propaganda in the first place.
I think a possible problem here is an overly cynical view of politicians. The question at hand is what percentage of the elite political class is involved in a Judeo-conspiracy.
I think that we are agreed that it is a small one in terms of actual service. But you seem not to have taken the point that most of the balance acquiesce in what they see, from the outside, as a prestigious and virtuous enterprise.
This is relevant for determining who the enemy is, the probability of an awakening, and what White preservation scenario has the greatest chance of success.
If you will learn to see it from the perspective of those involved.
In my understanding of reality, each political party seeks to find a candidate that has the greatest chance of being elected.
More begging. The greatest chance falls to he/they who is/are selected by Rockefeller/Rothschild for appropriate media exposure.
This is important for attempting to determine the likelihood of there being a Judeo-conspiracy, and if so, how far the conspiracy extends. We are in the position of attempting to compare our knowledge of human nature and behavior with the requirements of persuading individuals to join a conspiracy and remain loyal to it. Note that a whistleblower who could successfully reveal such a conspiracy would receive instant world-wide fame and a lucrative book deal.
David Rockefeller has publicly confessed, and he published his auto-bio. Haven’t you heard?
Let me note and advise, at this point, that you write and reason as though you are in the early stages of investigation of these matters. You assume that everyone knows what he is doing and that everyone else does, as well. This is a *starting point* for becoming familiar with the way that the logic of political economy works. But it is not the finish line – where I stand awaiting you. For example, you continue to refer to a “Judeo-conspiracy” as though its participants uniformly assess it as such. And you blithely impute a uniform expectation of social policy to all who are concerned therewith.
If you wish to convince others that your theory is the correct one, then it would be best if you provided compelling evidence.
You put a great many words in my mouth that do not belong there. Your alternatives are not exhaustive. #2 is not my theory – I do not *have* – or need – a well-defined theory. Do you understand what is meant by a “black box”?
I am not asking you to write a book, but it would certainly be useful for those of us who are interested in your ideas if you would briefly point out important points that would make the case for a greater Judeo-conspiracy.
The most important point is that the necessity for a successor-nanny to the Catholic Church suggests a degree of coordination characteristic of a formal organization. Other analysts suggest that a “Hive Mind” is involved. But you yet fail to explain where this analysis has important implications, operating as you do under a serious misconception, explained above, as to the clarity with which political entities conceive themselves and other such.
Obviously there must be more than you have presented to me thus far, as the evidence has been sufficient to convince you of the conspiracy’s existence.
Though not in the explicit terms with which you present my putative apprehension of it, and thus not with any more specificity than I have presented.
So far, you have talked a little about the Illuminati and the communist indoctrination of several presidents. What else should someone who is interested know? There are numerous books on the subject, which are generally contradictory in nature, and do not form a cohesive whole.
What you need to know does not address the question directly, as it is effectively an unknowable for other than its participants – and that in varying degree. You need to know about how political-economy works in general, in order to know what is and isn’t probable and normative – as in judging claims of having invented a perpetual motion machine, by analogy. So go clean the shelves of your local university of its works on social science, and spend several decades thinking through what you’ve read and observed – as I have done.
“Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure—one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”.
-David Rockefeller, Autobiography
It must be understood that truly extreme Globalist Goals are supported at the highest levels of the United States and Western Europe. (Note that Tony Blair got his start as a lackey of David’s Bilderbirger organization.)
One thing Rockefeller didn’t admit to, however, was anything about Israel having a special role to play in the highly integrated political structure he envisions.
Instead he’s spoken of “The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers” that is “surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
It’s funny how he fools around with words to make people deciding their won fate sound like a form of masturbation.
NeoNietzsche,
Do you think Zionists at the highest levels are troubled by the thought of Iran getting Nuclear Weapons?
And if Zionists were central to 9/11, in other words if they fooled the American people into thinking they were attacked by a Muslim group which they then heartily supported the US Military defeating, why can’t Zionists do the same thing again?
Why can’t Zionists fool Americans into thinking Iran was behind some outrageous terrorist attack on Americans?
And if Zionists can do that, why haven’t they done it already?
Is it that they haven’t gotten around to it yet, but will before its too late vis a vis Iran?
Do you think Zionists at the highest levels are troubled by the thought of Iran getting Nuclear Weapons?
Yes, but I can’t quantify that.
And if Zionists were central to 9/11, in other words if they fooled the American people into thinking they were attacked by a Muslim group which they then heartily supported the US Military defeating, why can’t Zionists do the same thing again?
They may yet do so. But the GJ military is overstretched as it is, if you are talking about ground troops again.
Why can’t Zionists fool Americans into thinking Iran was behind some outrageous terrorist attack on Americans?
And if Zionists can do that, why haven’t they done it already?
Perhaps they figure they’d be pressing their luck with another operation that supposedly involves too many people for the secure maintenance of discretion.
Is it that they haven’t gotten around to it yet, but will before its too late vis a vis Iran?
That would seem to be the leading alternative explanation.
I don’t think we are making very much progress anymore.
“You are a serial offender. Now *two* questions begged in one paragraph.” I think you are holding me to a higher standard than you apply toward yourself. Are you not begging the question in regard to a conspiracy? I don’t think you have established that it exists yet.
“To no greater effect and understanding than today, and under much greater stimulus thereto than is the “fat and happy [and stupid]” circumstance of your own description. Obviously we have no hope in reliance upon *this* principle.” I have given some examples of ethnocentric behavior. Note that there was very little immigration at that time (1930s). Had there been millions of non-Whites annually streaming into the nation, it would assuredly have been curtailed (immigration being one of the central keys to the displacement problem).
“My reckoning is exactly the opposite, aside from your third offense, in assuming your conclusion with regard to the Pakis.” I think we will have to part ways in our evaluation of population quality, as your methods differ fundamentally from mine.
“I think that we are agreed that it is a small one in terms of actual service. But you seem not to have taken the point that most of the balance acquiesce in what they see, from the outside, as a prestigious and virtuous enterprise.” There are probably those that would enthusiastically wish to join an organization that was presented to them as being a new “Knights Templar”, secretly working toward the betterment of mankind. However, this is antithetical to most, especially those raised with a Christian upbringing, who are concerned about biblical warnings of secret cabals. This is why an understanding of human nature as it pertains to the potential for being corrupted or acting contrary to ingrained values is important in determining the probability of a greater Judeo-conspiracy existing.
“More begging. The greatest chance falls to he/they who is/are selected by Rockefeller/Rothschild for appropriate media exposure.” I beg your pardon. I could accuse you of question begging for assuming that there is in fact a Rockefeller/Rothschild screening committee, without some evidence to indicate this. An unschooled individual like myself is in the position of attempting to determine what is more likely: the system as it appears to work, or a complex, hidden system functioning behind the scenes. Your suggestion seems to be that one should accept the latter, without much evidence to prove it, because it is the product of long study. You will, I trust, hopefully forgive me if I find this reasoning difficult to accept.
“David Rockefeller has publicly confessed, and he published his auto-bio. Haven’t you heard?” His confession appears to be a short sound-bite. He is appearing to admit that he and his family have worked with international organizations, and desire to develop an international system of governance. As far as I am able to ascertain, he has not included any notable details, or confessing membership in a wider conspiracy. If Rockefeller supports a one-world government, why is that decisive evidence that would support your case?
“Let me note and advise, at this point, that you write and reason as though you are in the early stages of investigation of these matters. You assume that everyone knows what he is doing and that everyone else does, as well. This is a *starting point* for becoming familiar with the way that the logic of political economy works. But it is not the finish line – where I stand awaiting you.” Being intellectually knock-kneed and educationally asthmatic, I am only willing to continue the marathon if it seems like the destination is a more enlighted one than my current position. Why are you unwilling to provide reasonable evidence that I can explore, to help determine if what you believe has merit?
“For example, you continue to refer to a “Judeo-conspiracy” as though its participants uniformly assess it as such. And you blithely impute a uniform expectation of social policy to all who are concerned therewith.” Lets assume that there are many levels of being initiated. There is an “inner sanctum” of knowledge, which only the fully aware Semitic masters are aware of. For other Jews and certain goyim, there is a lesser level of Illuminati, Trilateral Commission or Mason membership. For those whose service is only as a minor dupe, there are lower level organizations (the UN and political parties perhaps). Not all members know each other. Would this be a better description of the Judeo-conspiracy that is probably in existence? Yet this would still not change the major questions at hand.
“You put a great many words in my mouth that do not belong there. Your alternatives are not exhaustive. #2 is not my theory – I do not *have* – or need – a well-defined theory. Do you understand what is meant by a “black box”?” I had to look this one up on the internet. You are assuming that you do not need to know the functioning of the conspiracy, you just know that it is there, and the output (international events and so forth) are the product of it. But how do you know the conspiracy is there as you envision it? Is this “obvious”?
“The most important point is that the necessity for a successor-nanny to the Catholic Church suggests a degree of coordination characteristic of a formal organization. Other analysts suggest that a “Hive Mind” is involved. But you yet fail to explain where this analysis has important implications, operating as you do under a serious misconception, explained above, as to the clarity with which political entities conceive themselves and other such.” The system, organization, functioning and goals of a Judeo-conspiracy would seem to be important on a number of levels. An analogy: for every potential foe, the US gathers detailed intelligence on that nation’s command structure, military aparatus, economy, etc. This is invaluable in planning strategy and tactics in the event of hostilities. But even more importantly, we need to know that such a foe exists in the first place.
Perhaps you would be willing to address a few points:
1) In my opinion, the most informed and intelligent minds on the subject of the JQ are at TOQ and OO, though certain others are AWOL. The idea of a conspiracy as you seem to envision it is a minority position. Beliefs such as “major elects are rigged”, “Rothschilds appoint candidates”, “secession is impossible”, “most major events are the planned results of hidden actors” and so forth are not generally supported. Why are your ideas more reasonable than those commonly accepted by leading thinkers in the movement?
2) Also in my opinion, the premier theorist on the subject is Dr. MacDonald. I regard him as a genius, who stands out conspicuously in front of his peers even among the impressive group gathered at TOQ and other White advocacy sites. His ideas and methods assume that our political system is not manipulated by a hidden Semitic braintrust (he suggests that Jewish influence is substantial but in the open). Is he naïve or uninformed?
3) Its old hat that the more members in a conspiracy, the greater the probability it will be revealed (some say every member added exponentially increases the probability of exposure). Some examples of whistleblowers are Vanunu spilling the beans of Israel’s nuke program, Ostrovsky with Mossad, Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers and the Italian Defense Minister who revealed false-flag ops. There are a wide range of other conspiratorial events that have come to light, Iran Contra, USS Liberty, etc., as well as confessions in many other matters from high-level spies and political figures. The elite often have tell-all autobiographies or deathbed confessions when they are ready to die. But there has been no case of anyone confessing to a greater Judeo-conspiracy. Isnt this compelling evidence to the contrary for its existence?
4) The actions of a greater conspiracy would seem to be contradictory or at least incompetent. The founding of the USSR led to Stalin’s rise and eventually to anti-Semitic reactions. Why the selection of Stalin (or at least not his removal, to be replaced by a Jew)? If the creation of Russia was a goal, then why its inefficiency, planned demise and then breakup? Why found a new Jewish state in one of the worst possible locations, surrounded by Muslim enemies? Why not South America, where Jewish power could rule the continent among the easily-managed Mestizos? Why promote the rise of China, which can be expected to eventually eclipse the US in economic power, when Jews have little hope of subverting that ethnocentric nation? Why get Scott Brown elected, when 1/6 of the economy was about to be successfully socialized?
I will concede that perhaps my lack of education on political theory and other topics makes it nearly impossible for me to grasp certain concepts at this time. Currently though, I do not feel that I have yet been presented with any real red meat to chew on; and I had been expecting a feast. Is it any wonder that I am a beggar (of questions)?
Are you not begging the question in regard to a conspiracy? I don’t think you have established that it exists yet.
Please note that it is yourself who keeps referring to a “conspiracy”. I have not used that term and find it inapt. So you hold me to a thesis that I do not urge, for the lack of definition to it that evidence allows. If you wish a tidbit of direct evidence of a global “International Jewish Conspiracy,” please contact David Irving in regard to the pursuit, by Jews, of Irving, amidst his travels around the world. I again point out that you have yet to justify pursuit of this misrepresentation of my position as other than your own misconception of authentic political science as the mere examination of forms-of-government and political systems.
In writing as I do of “Jewry” or “elite Jewry” or “oligarchy,” etc., I am speaking of what I would call a “community of interest” that is evidenced by the unfolding of historical events forwarded with disproportionate participation by a certain group with results that suit their interests. If you will study the Revisionist history (IHR) of the past century, I believe you will find sufficient evidence to sustain *that* characterization of the element that governs significant events.
I have given some examples of ethnocentric behavior. Note that there was very little immigration at that time (1930s). Had there been millions of non-Whites annually streaming into the nation, it would assuredly have been curtailed (immigration being one of the central keys to the displacement problem).
But ethnocentric behavior, per se, is, again, of little value. It must be informed by administrative sophistication to be other than a pogrom. Even if we grant the curtailment of immigration, by ethnocentrists, in that era, the failure to interdict the Frankfurter administration in its involvement of the country in the War to Save Communism, meant that the foundations of the present dispossession would nevertheless be laid by the outcome.
I think we will have to part ways in our evaluation of population quality, as your methods differ fundamentally from mine.
Because you are at the starting line, where I once stood, rather than at the finish line, where I now stand.
Believe me, I understand exactly how you see things in this regard, since I was of your opinion for some decades, until the maturation of my grasp of a truly normative concept of human society. You still think of civilizational superiority in terms of technical prowess and IQ significant thereof – not realizing that there is another and debilitating side to that coin – one that is the source of constant complaint, self-deprecation, and prophecies of doom, in this very venue.
However, this is antithetical to most, especially those raised with a Christian upbringing, who are concerned about biblical warnings of secret cabals. This is why an understanding of human nature as it pertains to the potential for being corrupted or acting contrary to ingrained values is important in determining the probability of a greater Judeo-conspiracy existing.
The “most” are not confronted with the choice to be corrupted. Christians insist upon the fallen and corrupt nature of humanity, so is there any argument as to the potential/probable existence of a corrupting agency? And if I have not made it clear, the dimension of collective activity involved in the administration of human affairs tends to lift said activities out of the realm where the simplicities of “ingrained values” apply. By legalizing, collectivizing, and re-framing what for others would be “murder,” Christians will torture and kill other humans, righteously and repeatedly.
I beg your pardon. I could accuse you of question begging for assuming that there is in fact a Rockefeller/Rothschild screening committee, without some evidence to indicate this.
Jimmy Carter/Bert Lance.
In any case, if I have sinned, how does my offense mitigate yours, and relieve you of answering for it?
You averred that, “In my understanding of reality, each political party seeks to find a candidate that has the greatest chance of being elected.” This is to imply (beg) that which you have assumed, i.e., that your *parties*, as opposed to my oligarchic media-masters behind the scenes (see, again, the screening and promotion of Jimmy Carter) are choosing the most “electable”.
An unschooled individual like myself is in the position of attempting to determine what is more likely: the system as it appears to work, or a complex, hidden system functioning behind the scenes.
So I again emphasize that your attention to this issue is, not merely premature, but is altogether misplaced. The quickest way to a popular and fundamental misconception of political-economy is in thinking in terms of “systems” and form-of-government, rather than in terms of agendas. The formalities tend to assume a form appropriate to the fulfillment of the respective agendas, so you need not worry about them as other than a specialist pursuing details. But I again identify with your involvement in this procedural error, as it was my own for many decades.
Your suggestion seems to be that one should accept the latter, without much evidence to prove it, because it is the product of long study. You will, I trust, hopefully forgive me if I find this reasoning difficult to accept.
And you will pardon me if my prior protests against this caricature of my position seem, to me, to be falling on unresponsive ears. And I will forgive you, if, after several years of the prescribed conscientious study and observation with regard to general principles (“long study”), you yet find this reasoning “difficult to accept”.
“David Rockefeller has publicly confessed, and he published his auto-bio. Haven’t you heard?”
His confession appears to be a short sound-bite. He is appearing to admit that he and his family have worked with international organizations,…
Some founded *by* his family .
…and desire to develop an international system of governance. As far as I am able to ascertain, he has not included any notable details, or confessing membership in a wider conspiracy.
Do I need to direct your attention to the CFR/Bilderberger/Trilat troika? Make of it what you will – it’s not important as to details, as I’ve tried to explain. I would urge you not to make the mistake of becoming a conspiracy theorist or anti-theorist.
If Rockefeller supports a one-world government, why is that decisive evidence that would support your case?
It would support “a” case for your caricature, because of who he is. And I would prescribe study on that point, but this would be to indulge your youthful form-of-government vice, so I won’t. Rather, read about “The Iron Law of Oligarchy” and see if you can guess the identity of the Oligarchy of the present dispensation, on theoretical grounds and from general history. And let me reinforce, by repetition, my objection that your notion of Sunday-school prophylaxis against the potential and prospects for a corrupting conspiracy is uninformed by an appreciation of the intrinsic ethical context and moral culture of this higher-level political activity. So do this latter reading, instead.
An unschooled individual like myself is in the position of attempting to determine what is more likely: the system as it appears to work, or a complex, hidden system functioning behind the scenes.
So I again emphasize that your attention to this issue is, not merely premature, but is altogether misplaced. The quickest way to a popular and fundamental misconception of political-economy is in thinking in terms of “systems” and form-of-government, rather than in terms of agendas. The formalities tend to assume a form appropriate to the fulfillment of the respective agendas, so you need not worry about them as other than a specialist pursuing details. But I again identify with your involvement in this procedural error, as it was my own for many decades.
Your suggestion seems to be that one should accept the latter, without much evidence to prove it, because it is the product of long study. You will, I trust, hopefully forgive me if I find this reasoning difficult to accept.
And you will pardon me if my prior protests against this caricature of my position seem, to me, to be falling on unresponsive ears. And I will forgive you, if, after several years of the prescribed conscientious study and observation with regard to general principles (“long study”), you yet find this reasoning “difficult to accept”.
“David Rockefeller has publicly confessed, and he published his auto-bio. Haven’t you heard?”
His confession appears to be a short sound-bite. He is appearing to admit that he and his family have worked with international organizations,…
Some founded *by* his family .
…and desire to develop an international system of governance. As far as I am able to ascertain, he has not included any notable details, or confessing membership in a wider conspiracy.
Do I need to direct your attention to the CFR/Bilderberger/Trilat troika? Make of it what you will – it’s not important as to details, as I’ve tried to explain. I would urge you not to make the mistake of becoming a conspiracy theorist or anti-theorist.
If Rockefeller supports a one-world government, why is that decisive evidence that would support your case?
It would support “a” case for your caricature, because of who he is. And I would prescribe study on that point, but this would be to indulge your youthful form-of-government vice, so I won’t. Rather, read about “The Iron Law of Oligarchy” and see if you can guess the identity of the Oligarchy of the present dispensation, on theoretical grounds and from general history. And let me reinforce, by repetition, my objection that your notion of Sunday-school prophylaxis against the potential and prospects for a corrupting conspiracy is uninformed by an appreciation of the intrinsic ethical context and moral culture of this higher-level political activity. So do this latter reading, instead.
Being intellectually knock-kneed and educationally asthmatic, I am only willing to continue the marathon if it seems like the destination is a more enlightened one than my current position. Why are you unwilling to provide reasonable evidence that I can explore, to help determine if what you believe has merit?
Because you have me confused with with a conspiracy theorist. I am an oligarchy theorist. In that framework, an elite strata is, by the general logic and history of political economy, a given. Thus *agendas* are what significantly distinguish polities, in this modern day of confusing ideologies and strategic deception. And that is the lesson that will enhance your “current position”.
Lets assume that there are many levels of being initiated. There is an “inner sanctum” of knowledge, which only the fully aware Semitic masters are aware of. For other Jews and certain goyim, there is a lesser level of Illuminati, Trilateral Commission or Mason membership. For those whose service is only as a minor dupe, there are lower level organizations (the UN and political parties perhaps). Not all members know each other. Would this be a better description of the Judeo-conspiracy that is probably in existence?
Some level of stratification is evident in these organizations, which may or may not be optimally characterized as “Judeo-conspiratorial” .
Yet this would still not change the major questions at hand.
Is that a question (absent a question mark)?
If so, and given *your* assumption, I would say that such a level of organization is unlikely and would be vulnerable to exposure as was the historic Weishaupt organization. A lesser degree of stratification seems likely, and this alternative depiction does not seem to have other significant implications aside from the ease with which an appearance of innocence, objectivity, and public service can be maintained.
“Do you understand what is meant by a “black box”?”
I had to look this one up on the internet. You are assuming that you do not need to know the functioning of the conspiracy, you just know that it is there, and the output (international events and so forth) are the product of it. But how do you know the conspiracy is there as you envision it? Is this “obvious”?
It is obvious, rather, that a “community of interest” exists, based upon repetitive output, that simulates the action of a “conspiracy” – hence the “black box” analogy. I do not “envision” a “conspiracy” – as would beg a question and violate the analogy.
The system, organization, functioning and goals of a Judeo-conspiracy would seem to be important on a number of levels. An analogy: for every potential foe, the US gathers detailed intelligence on that nation’s command structure, military apparatus, economy, etc. This is invaluable in planning strategy and tactics in the event of hostilities. But even more importantly, we need to know that such a foe exists in the first place.
Thank you for enhancing the case for an approach to the military, who would have the access and resources for pursuit of the issue in these terms.
Perhaps you would be willing to address a few points:
1) In my opinion, the most informed and intelligent minds on the subject of the JQ are at TOQ and OO, though certain others are AWOL. The idea of a conspiracy as you seem to envision it is a minority position. Beliefs such as “major elects are rigged”, “Rothschilds appoint candidates”, “secession is impossible”, “most major events are the planned results of hidden actors” and so forth are not generally supported. Why are your ideas more reasonable than those commonly accepted by leading thinkers in the movement?
Because I am primarily a political economist. They are primarily racialists.
2) Also in my opinion, the premier theorist on the subject is Dr. MacDonald. I regard him as a genius, who stands out conspicuously in front of his peers even among the impressive group gathered at TOQ and other White advocacy sites. His ideas and methods assume that our political system is not manipulated by a hidden Semitic braintrust (he suggests that Jewish influence is substantial but in the open). Is he naïve or uninformed?
He is a specialist, with the limitations thereof. He evidences this with having been a “New-Leftist” well into his maturity, whereas any conscientious generalist would have rejected that unsupportable position at a very early period. The “Jewish influence” that involved the world in the pivotal creation of the Fed et al., the War to Save Communism, and the intrusive implantation and recognition of Lesser Judea, were not “in the open” and create a strong presumption that future such developments (WTC?) will not be exposed as such until well after the fact, contra MacDonald (if indeed he is so naive). Also, one may reason that KM, for much the same reason, is recasting the truth that he may know, a’la Jared Taylor.
3) It’s old hat that the more members in a conspiracy, the greater the probability it will be revealed (some say every member added exponentially increases the probability of exposure). Some examples of whistleblowers are Vanunu spilling the beans of Israel’s nuke program, Ostrovsky with Mossad, Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers and the Italian Defense Minister who revealed false-flag ops. There are a wide range of other conspiratorial events that have come to light, Iran Contra, USS Liberty, etc., as well as confessions in many other matters from high-level spies and political figures. The elite often have tell-all autobiographies or deathbed confessions when they are ready to die. But there has been no case of anyone confessing to a greater Judeo-conspiracy. Isn’t this compelling evidence to the contrary for its existence?
No. Primarily because it is not a matter of authentic “confession”. Presumably, the participants regard themselves as engaged in a virtuous enterprise – not a “conspiracy” – the rationale for which cannot be grasped by the unwashed.
And the very size, import, and endurance of an agenda seems to protect it from effective exposure, since the interest in its concealment is paramount.
For example:
Why did we learn of the massive and critical operation, “Ultra,” only after it was no longer of current consequence and thus permissibly exposed, following decades of effective containment?
What is the position of the CIA and the MSM on the remarkable defector, Golitsyn, other than rejection for their ideological and image-driven refusal to accept his compelling exposure/confession as to Soviet strategic deception?
Who, of the conspiracy, has convincingly confessed to killing Kennedy?
And who, in line with the principle of proportionality between numbers and risk, has confessed to the demolition of the WTC structures in the intervening decade? Plenty of time to write a book or be on the verge of expiring, I would say.
4) The actions of a greater conspiracy would seem to be contradictory or at least incompetent.
This is why I oppose the present regime in particular, but support oligarchy as inevitable in principle. The Jews are clinically insane (grandeur/chosen-ness/persecution/paranoia syndrome). They are bringing the global temple down on everyones’ heads – including their own.
The founding of the USSR led to Stalin’s rise and eventually to anti-Semitic reactions. Why the selection of Stalin (or at least not his removal, to be replaced by a Jew)?
He cleverly played both sides and was seen/rationalized as the shabbaz-goy front man that Jews wisely adopt as a tactic.
If the creation of Russia was a goal, then why its inefficiency, planned demise and then breakup?
“Inefficiency” was a product of the crypto-anarchist/messianist orientation of Marxism/Marxists. Anarchists are anti-administrators and are thus unsurprisingly irrational and inefficient in that capacity.
Its “demise” facilitates deception and effective disarmament of the West, which it is devoted to destroying as its “objective enemy” and as the (bourgeois) obstacle to the global, stateless (proletarian) planet of Marx’s promise.
The “breakup” (by planned and unforced decree) was the central event in the persuasion/deception of the West – and was consistent with the ultimate goal of *eliminating*, world-wide, *all* standing political structures (including their own), since they are nothing but the means of enslaving the proletariat and should be demolished in a global rebellion of “chain-breaking”.
Why found a new Jewish state in one of the worst possible locations, surrounded by Muslim enemies? Why not South America, where Jewish power could rule the continent among the easily-managed Mestizos?
As explained immediately above, Judeo-Communism is ultimately a *state-destroying* enterprise – hence our peril and reasoned objection to the present regime. Please note that you here display a questioning incomprehension of the circumstance – against which incomprehension I warn and prescribe remedy – for failure to examine it in terms primarily of the *agenda* that is evident from the *performance*, rather than from the structural details, of a political entity.
Why promote the rise of China, which can be expected to eventually eclipse the US in economic power, when Jews have little hope of subverting that ethnocentric nation? Why get Scott Brown elected, when 1/6 of the economy was about to be successfully socialized?
China will destroy the West, as intended. Not every battle in an ultimately successful war is a victory.
Andrew, I can’t help but notice the development of your discussion with NN here that is parallel to the one we had at the OO blog regarding the necessity of Hitler acting as he did during WWII. Your instinctive response seems to be to drown your interlocutor in a sea of mostly empty verbiage which flows from the well of wide-eyed earnestness that is only sustainable due to either a lack of an ability to reason and/or rank naivete. Don’t worry, the more cynical you become, the more succinct you will become as well, that is, if you have the mettle. There is only one truth, and the quest for it cannot brook a breezy ‘agree to disagree’ wave of the hand and back to lemming land. And certainly not with the stakes this high.
And if you wonder why I am so harsh in my treatment of the filthy lying kike who calls himself “Adam” who litters the comments section of OO blog with his transparent obfuscations, wonder no longer. Agreeing to disagree is a womanly cop-out, this is for real, this is war, something Adwarf I’m sure understands all too well, even if you refuse to.
NN, “Rockefeller/Rothschild” “formal organization” “hive mind” “black box”
How useful are groups like CFR and Bilderbergs as a model for the “black box” hostile elites? CFR for a more “formal organization” and Bilderbergers more of a “hive mind” approach? What I mean is that given we aren’t going to be seeing directly into the black box, and speculations about it’s internal workings are of limited usefulness anyway, is “The CFR Bilderbergers” a practical model for understanding “the conspiracy” so to speak?
CC: I heartily endorse your take on “Adam” – it must be something about the thought process of those people, as if you can “smell” them coming a mile away.
How useful are groups like CFR and Bilderbergs as a model for the “black box” hostile elites? CFR for a more “formal organization” and Bilderbergers more of a “hive mind” approach? What I mean is that given we aren’t going to be seeing directly into the black box, and speculations about it’s internal workings are of limited usefulness anyway, is “The CFR Bilderbergers” a practical model for understanding “the conspiracy” so to speak?
Ya know – I never even think about that stuff anymore, because it’s an aspect of imprisonment in form-of-government misconstruction of political philosophy that Nietzsche helped me break out of after having served what otherwise might have been a life sentence.
As you see, I’ve been *very* busy scratching away at a tunnel for cherry Andrew to squeeze through to freedom of thought, before he gets turned out as an irrecoverable Bride of Christ acolyte.
And as to “The CFR Bilderbergers” [as] a practical model for understanding “the conspiracy”, I must excuse myself – because, as I wrote to Andrew, I’m *not* a conspiracy theorist, and I would embarrass myself, and irritate an expert, with uninformed speculations about how these organizations fit in as other than “transmission belts,” to use Arendt’s phrase.
And if you wonder why I am so harsh in my treatment of the filthy lying kike who calls himself “Adam” who litters the comments section of OO blog with his transparent obfuscations, wonder no longer.
Captain, Mr. Adam the Obfuscator is also well known on the VNN front page. Just so you know. You’re not the only fellow who’s had to deal with his dissimulation.
Thanks for the tip, Kasimir. I saw Adwarf’s comments at VNN and he aroused my suspicions back then as well. And, when he initially started commenting at OO he signed in under the name “Progress,” as in the “progress” he alleged would accrue to the White race in mixing with Middle Eastern populations for “hybrid vigor” as he says is enjoyed by Jews. That was a red flag and told me all I needed to know in that it both asserted Jewish racial superiority and advised our racial destruction through race mixing. At that point I knew I was dealing with a Jew.
Also, Andrew, I think you’ll notice that NN’s “Iron Law of Oligarchy” is reducible to evolutionarily ingrained primate social dominance hierarchy. It is just that in our modern context there are different traits which enable one to gain dominance, in this case the verbal skills, group cohesion and lying cunning of the Jew. Your good buddy Adwarf at OO is a prime example, although we’ll see just who comes out on top there – stay tuned.
NN, please read “conspiracy theory” in my post on OD as your superior formulation “oligarchy theory.” Say groups like CFR and Bilderbergers fit into the oligarchy is some undetermined by uninteresting way.
If the current regime is Greater Judea run by clinically insane Jews bringing the temple down on everyone’s head, and you want a new (inevitable) replacement oligarchy, what form is that likely to take, and what actions are necessary for this potential new oligarchy to succeed and replace the crazy Jews? Are non-elite whites merely spectators or do they have any active role?
If the current regime is Greater Judea run by clinically insane Jews bringing the temple down on everyone’s head, and you want a new (inevitable) replacement oligarchy, what form is that likely to take,..
In that highly unlikely event, a military government is “dictated” (a little gallows humor, there) by the post-republican period in which we live.
…and what actions are necessary for this potential new oligarchy to succeed and replace the crazy Jews?
As with determining the particulars of the organization of the current oligarchy, the aspirant organization is best equipped to investigate that matter.
Are non-elite whites merely spectators or do they have any active role?
Educate military personnel whom you know and trust to be discreet.
“Educate military personnel whom you know and trust to be discreet.”
Certainly History is replete with examples, such as ancient Rome, of Empires that were taken over by Military Factions.
“China will destroy the West, as intended.”
NeoNietzsche,
From the standpoint of the preferences expressed in the performance of Judeo-Communist controlled and influenced entities, what advantage is gained by finally destroying all State power in the West, if it comes at the expense of empowering State power in China?
If in A.D. 150, a Proto-Marxist Oligarchy in the Roman Empire devoted itself to the task of assuring the destruction of Rome and its replacement as the Governing Entity over its holdings by the Parthians, how exactly would that have advanced the “ultimate goal of *eliminating*, world-wide, *all* standing political structures…”?
Thank you for taking the time to address my questions in depth. I am going to attempt to summarize, to the best of my ability, your theory:
There is a Jewish Oligarchy, which is not necessarily a conspiracy, but engages in conspiratorial activities when it suits that group, such as the Kennedy assassination, WTC, etc. In the pursuit of its goals, this elite group of Jewry operates a diverse assortment of organizations, including the Bilderbergers, Federal Reserve, UN, political parties, etc. Many influential goyim participate in furthering the Oligarchy’s goals; some have been subverted while others are unknowing dupes. The Oligarchy has farsighted goals, with great influence over world events, and especially over the governance of the US. The group’s ultimate designs are to achieve dominance over the Goyim by creating a world empire centered in Jerusalem. The exact organizational structure and individuals involved are not known, though much can be conjectured from a variety of sources. The proof for the existence of the Oligarchy does not lie in a concrete trail of evidence. Rather, the existence of this group is indicated by examining what evidence is available through the lense of a thorough understanding of political economy. If one has the requisite intellect and knowledge base, the existence of the Jewish Oligarchy is clearly indicated. And, by examing world events, we can determine the agenda of the Oligarchy.
If this is incorrect, please clarify. I am not attempting to misinterpret your theory or create a caricature of it, but rather attempt to understand exactly what you believe. Im not going to classify your ideas as a conspiracy theory, but since we need to call it something, how about the “Advanced JQ Theory” (currently a minority position), as opposed to the “Conventional JQ Theory” (CJQT) as proposed by Dr. MacDonald (the majority position). I am confident that Dr. MacDonald does not take the situation one step further as you do, as I have seen nothing in his writing or interviews that suggests this, and he is obviously someone who speaks his mind. I am not attempting to disprove your ideas, which I am not qualified to do, but trying to make a judgement for my own consumption on which theory is more likely to be correct.
“You still think of civilizational superiority in terms of technical prowess and IQ significant thereof – not realizing that there is another and debilitating side to that coin” It seems to me that grading a people on their success against the invasion of an extremely intelligent hostile elite an unfair one. Its like grading the evolutionary fitness of tigers based on the fact that they are going extinct due to human encroachment. It does not reasonable that either Whites or tigers, both being species exquisitely adapted for their natural envoronments, should be evaluated based on events they were not designed to cope with. In the case of Whites though, I believe that their intelligence, creativity and other traits will ultimately result in recognizing the danger and reacting in time (some portion of Whites will survive, though many or most will be lost).
” This is to imply (beg) that which you have assumed, i.e., that your *parties*, as opposed to my oligarchic media-masters behind the scenes (see, again, the screening and promotion of Jimmy Carter) are choosing the most “electable”.” The explanation of the CJQT is that Jewish groups naturally wish to promote pro-Jewish candidates. Carter was not the establishment candidate, and an individual’s charisma and appeal to voters is not usually something that can be manufactured by the media.
“Do I need to direct your attention to the CFR/Bilderberger/Trilat troika? Make of it what you will – it’s not important as to details, as I’ve tried to explain. I would urge you not to make the mistake of becoming a conspiracy theorist or anti-theorist.” I searched for information on those groups, but was unable to find anything solid that indicates they were part of a greater Oligarchy. This does not disprove anything, and I remain open-minded, but am still seeking persuasive evidence.
“So I again emphasize that your attention to this issue is, not merely premature, but is altogether misplaced. The quickest way to a popular and fundamental misconception of political-economy is in thinking in terms of “systems” and form-of-government, rather than in terms of agendas.” I have possibly misunderstood you here, but I took this to mean that to understand events, one needs to discover the agendas (intentions/goals) of the powers that be. We have established that there is a group of elite Jews with tremendous influence in the US and the West. How is it known that the agenda of the main body of these persons is domination/enslavement of the Goy (as opposed to the CJQT’s identification of the agenda as a piecemeal effort to promote what is “good for the jews”)?
“Thank you for enhancing the case for an approach to the military, who would have the access and resources for pursuit of the issue in these terms.” I had gathered from a previous comment by CaptainChaos that your solution to the problem was a military coup. I suppose that a coup would be superior to what we have now. I wont address the probabilities of success of the endeavor, which I am not privy to, though I am thinking along different lines for the solution.
“No. Primarily because it is not a matter of authentic “confession”. Presumably, the participants regard themselves as engaged in a virtuous enterprise – not a “conspiracy” – the rationale for which cannot be grasped by the unwashed. And the very size, import, and endurance of an agenda seems to protect it from effective exposure, since the interest in its concealment is paramount.” A potential problem with your reasoning is the growing number of people that would have been involved in an Oligarchy, as it reaches back quite a ways into the past. The more people involved, the greater chance of at least one whistleblower. Even among the Jews, there are Finkelsteins, Vanunus and Shahaks. There is an aspect of probability here with someone arising who would expose the Oligarchy, but to my knowledge, there has been no credible confession to date.
“Why did we learn of the massive and critical operation, “Ultra,” only after it was no longer of current consequence and thus permissibly exposed, following decades of effective containment?” True, but the operation did come to light in time.
“Who, of the conspiracy, has convincingly confessed to killing Kennedy?” Good point, but the number of conspirators was fairly small, especially in comparison to what must be entailed in an Oligarchy. Add to this the fact that the facts did come out, and it is now widely known that something wasn’t Kosher about the affair (or perhaps it was Kosher).
“And who, in line with the principle of proportionality between numbers and risk, has confessed to the demolition of the WTC structures in the intervening decade? Plenty of time to write a book or be on the verge of expiring, I would say.” Another good point, but again, the chance of an Oligarchy being exposed is exponentially greater, due to the number of participants and time that has gone by. Also, again note that all of the suspicious facts of 9/11 have come to light (as opposed to facts about an Oligarchy).
” Please note that you here display a questioning incomprehension of the circumstance – against which incomprehension I warn and prescribe remedy – for failure to examine it in terms primarily of the *agenda* that is evident from the *performance*, rather than from the structural details, of a political entity.” If I understand correctly, you are saying that by interpreting the continual output of events, we can ascertain the agenda of the Oligarchy. But how is it that you are able to make this connection between interpreting events and your conclusion of the agenda? The CJQT would propose a different agenda, why are your conclusions the correct ones?
“China will destroy the West, as intended. Not every battle in an ultimately successful war is a victory.” How are you able to determine that the rise of China is intentional, and part of the aim of an Oligarchy?
Im not sure if I am stubborn, obtuse, dense or knuckleheaded, or an unholy combination of those traits, but this is the paradigm (influenced by the CJQT) that I am currently working under as it pertains to the points you have brought up recently:
1) I agree that the law of nature is the law of the jungle, kill or be killed, the strong survive, the natural imperative of all life is to survive and procreate. Christianity is an artificial form of ethics and morality that attempts to alter the natural world of human behavior (and I subscribe to the view that this is a good thing, populations benefit greatly from Christian morals).
2) It is true that Oligarchies usually rule, the elites influence the masses. In the US, there are elites with great influence, but as the masses vote, there is a limit to this influence. I don’t see any evidence of large-scale vote tampering. It also does not seem to follow that because of the Iron Law of Oligarcy, there must be a true oligarchy (something different than our elected representatives), and that oligarchy must be a hidden Jewish one.
3) There is a body of elite Jewry that attempts to manipulate world events in a manner that is “good for the jews”. There are those within this group that dreams of Menachem Begin’s Judeo world empire. However, this does not appear to be a widespread belief or a goal sought after by the majority of elite Jews, such as Mortimer Zuckerman or Joseph Lieberman. There does not appear to be a council of “Learned Elders of Zion” that are the real power-brokers, working toward diabolical goals.
4) The Jewish elite appear to plan, debate and opinionate in conventional media, thinktanks and policy groups, and influence events using mainly conventional means such as politics. The goal of elite Jewry seems to be to pursue perceived Jewish interests, especially the protection of Israel.
5) The conspiracies that do exist (perhaps WTC/Kennedy Assassination) seem to be ad hoc operations established for a particular purpose, to carry out limited goals. For example, WTC would have been part of the effort to help secure Israel by smashing Iraq. Israel’s Mossad appears to have wide access to US intelligence, which is helpful for manipulating US foreign policy. I don’t see a wider agenda beyond protecting Israel and Jewry as a whole.
6) Presidental candidates (Carter, Bush, Obama, etc.) must pass muster by Jewish groups, who wield enormous political power. As part of the pursuit of Jewish interests, Jews attempt to influence politicians in high places as much as possible. A prime example is the influence of the Neocons over Bush. However, the Neocons appear to be a minority group within Jewry, which as a whole opposed Bush’s election.
7) Jews are strongly related to each other, so there may be some truth to the idea of a “Hive Mind”, as like minds tend to think alike. For the majority of Jews, there seems to be a siren song attraction toward Communism/Socialism, and creating Gemorrah. They are also drawn to hate and displace the non-Jewish majority among whom they reside. It is very possible that these are ingrained instincts that will inevitably direct Semitic behavior. However, there does not appear to be evidence of an agenda to enslave or obliterate the goyim.
8) There are organizations such as the Bilderbergers that support and work towards one-World government, and powerful individuals such as the Rockefellers support these organizations. However, while these groups are influential, it does not seem that they actually manage world events or are part of a greater Jewish Oligarchy.
9) All those that are seen as interfering with Jewish interests are mercilessly hounded and pursued by Jews internationally (Irving, Zundel, Duke, etc.) However, this seems to be explained by Jewish networking, assisted by groups such as the SPLC and ADL, rather than something deeper.
10) US politics are influenced strongly by Jews, who leverage their influence through the MSM and heavy funding of candidates. However, beyond that, Jewish influence appears to be limited. The political process generally appears to work as advertised, without rigged elections or the screening of candidates by unseen groups (vetting does occur, but seems to be done in ways we know about, such as AIPAC’s activities as disclosed by others).
11) The unfolding of events such as the rise of China do not seem to be the result of Jewish planning, but rather the outcome of economic and population trends. Jewish businesses find China’s expansion to be advantageous for obtaining increased profits and thus act opportunistically. Jews encourage foreign immigration to increase their security against the potential dangers of a White majority. Likewise with the Mexicanization of California. As Mestizos gain political control, they convert the state into the third-world, and Whites naturally flee third-world conditions. Neither outcomes appear to be the result of conscious efforts to achieve them by Jewry.
I think that the above would also be more or less supported by Dr. MacDonald et. al at TOQ or OO (although it would all be written more precisely and eloquently). In my humble opinion, you have not yet provided a good case why any of the above it not correct. You seem to be saying that it is imperative that I study political economy in depth (with emphasis on Spengler and Nietzsche of course) before I will be able to truly understand the situation, thus forcing me to take my brother’s ADD medication so I can concentrate. I guess this means that I am not capable at this time of grasping the Advanced JQ Theory. It occurs to me though, that if your desire is to persuade others towards the Advanced JQ Theory, why have you not written a pamphlet or treatise on the subject?
@CaptainChaos:
“And if you wonder why I am so harsh in my treatment of the filthy lying kike who calls himself “Adam” who litters the comments section of OO blog with his transparent obfuscations, wonder no longer. ”
Captain, you are a g******d, f*****g, foul-mouthed son-of-a-b***h, but you are shrewd and observant. After checking some of Adam’s old posts, I think you are probably right about him. Lets assume that he is an agent provacateur, attempting to derail the forum. You are doing his work for him if you make the forum toxic with epithets and ugliness. By all means call Adam out, but do so with the kind of language that isnt going to turn off visitors. If you say, “Hey Adam, this reminds me of the post where you suggested blacks and whites should miscegenate”, and quote him, that’s going to discredit him. Use smart tactics and debate strategies. If you say, “you dirty, lying, hooknosed kike”, he laughs and you have become a tool, helping to drive off readers from OO. It’s the same for those who talk about killing the Jews or harming them; how does that help? Normal Whites who are on board with WNs on important issues just absolutely don’t want to hear that stuff, its unpleasant and completely unnecessary. In forums such as Stormfront, there is no need to be inhibited, go for the gusto. But for OO and TOQ, I would hope you would respect Dr. MacDonald’s wishes and tone down your lingo, and get others to do the same.
Another thing, why these attacks on Kievsky, Wikipedian and the OD personnel? They all support a Jewry-free Ethnostate in North America. We expect attacks from the Semites, but not from our own team. If you are going to attack people, search out the real enemies, get on the SPLC blog or such sites and give em hell. If you really want to advance the cause, then go to the blogs of those who are against immigration and get them to check out OO (without talking about dirty kikes). Try and be part of the solution and not part of the problem (that’s a direct quote from my fat guidance counselor in Junior High).
“Don’t worry, the more cynical you become, the more succinct you will become as well, that is, if you have the mettle.” Unfortunately, the older I get, the more optimistic and less cynical I become, so Im probably moving in the wrong direction.
‘Your instinctive response seems to be to drown your interlocutor in a sea of mostly empty verbiage which flows from the well of wide-eyed earnestness that is only sustainable due to either a lack of an ability to reason and/or rank naivete.” You failed to mention the possibility I could be on drugs.
[Polyannish Andrew exits stage left, skipping along blissfully, dreaming of a Christian republic]
“Captain, you are a g******d, f*****g, foul-mouthed son-of-a-b***h,”
Yes, I suppose that’s true.
“…but you are shrewd and observant.”
Yes, that is also true.
As to your other concerns, I find it is often necessary to rattle peoples’ cages to get them to listen, so there is an element of psychological gamesmanship. Also, I’ll confess to having a quick temper. And often I’m just joking around.
Moreover, I trust my instincts, I have a natural ability to read people, to read for subtext – and use that to push people in the direction I think they need to be going in. I’ve been racially awake for a little over two years, and as such have not had the opportunity to peruse much of the relevant material many others who have been awake longer already have under their belts. Plus, I am not naturally studious. (I hope to correct that in future.) I attempt to make up for that, to maintain a competitive edge, by gaming situations relying largely on instinct.
P.S. I have hit the SPLC blog in the past, but there is the annoying habit they have of deleting comments that cut too close for comfort. Those I give a hard time on our side I take it that it goes without my saying that I hold them in high esteem and it is nothing personal (and if not, here I have said it).
P.S.S. Let’s let the Adwarf situation ride out a bit longer, as I have suggested, it is an object lesson for the lemmings, they get to see what lying, conniving scum the Jew is for themselves, and hopefully thereafter will have ceased to be lemmings. Also, it is quite entertaining – one time when I laid the NS rap on him, contrary to his usual long-winded comments, he gave me a terse little offering about how present day NS would get their asses handed to them just like the ones of yesteryear. He was pissed, he was flummoxed. Poor lil’ guy, high hilarity.
We expect attacks from the Semites, but not from our own team.
That is because we are naive and too trusting.
From the standpoint of the preferences expressed in the performance of Judeo-Communist controlled and influenced entities, what advantage is gained by finally destroying all State power in the West, if it comes at the expense of empowering State power in China?
The destruction of the West would lead to the collapse of a Chinese Marxist regime and to global anarchy, as intended.
If, in A.D. 150, a Proto-Marxist Oligarchy in the Roman Empire devoted itself to the task of assuring the destruction of Rome and its replacement as the Governing Entity over its holdings by the Parthians, how exactly would that have advanced the “ultimate goal of *eliminating*, world-wide, *all* standing political structures…”?
It would not. Your premises are radically counter-factual.
What *did* happen was the Jewish War and the later Bar Kochba Rebellion of that period, during which the Jewish expectation was of a Messianic Advent in assistance of the rebels, once a revolt was started.
Everyone here should read, or re-read, Josephus – and read about those rebellions. You will be amazed at how familiar are our old Semitic friends from that era. They haven’t changed in two thousand years.
The group’s ultimate designs are to achieve dominance over the Goyim by creating a world empire centered in Jerusalem.
Good summary up to this point – but my sense of the “ultimate design” involves global anarchy rather than empire. Though it is evident that a *non-sectarian* expectation of one-world-government is held by the goyische paladins involved.
It seems to me that grading a people on their success against the invasion of an extremely intelligent hostile elite an unfair one.
Define “fair,” please.
Carter was not the establishment candidate, and an individual’s charisma and appeal to voters is not usually something that can be manufactured by the media.
Excuse me – but Carter was *very much* the establishment candidate, unknown to the country at large but shamelessly promoted by the MSM. Carter lacks charisma to the point that one can speak of him as anti-charismatic. He was completely the creature of promotion by Rockefeller instruments, selected for his very anonymity (and his liberal ideology despite his Southern origins) and ostensible standing outside a discredited establishment, in refreshment of a political process that had been soiled by the Nixon era. You may assess me as an expert on Carter (“Jimmy the Tooth”/”Mr. Peanut”), since he was the governor of my state and unknown outside it – and was closely followed by the residents, here, who got a textbook lesson in the Establishment’s manufacture of an *anti-establishment* “candidate”. (And you may take your remark as a testament to their success.)
How is it known that the agenda of the main body of these persons is domination/enslavement of the Goy (as opposed to the CJQT’s identification of the agenda as a piecemeal effort to promote what is “good for the jews”)?
First, you mischaracterize the agenda, as I understand it. The objective of the Jews is, as a “Light unto the Nations,” to “liberate” mankind from material oppression and psychic repression – hence Marxism and Freudianism.
For some Jews, this is a prophylactic measure (“what’s good for the Jews”) in protection of Jewry from nativism. For others, the consequent destruction of the goyische kingdoms will initiate the Messianic Advent. And for others, this is simply a virtuous moral enterprise that is incumbent upon any person of good will.
There is an aspect of probability here with someone arising who would expose the Oligarchy, but to my knowledge, there has been no credible confession to date.
And there will be none, because one does not “confess” to virtue.
Rockefeller’s prideful little admission of participation in forwarding the NWO is conclusive and dispositive of the issue, properly framed and in consideration of what a responsible participant would be prepared to say.
I invite you to understand how the Jews regard themselves, and not to comprehend and anticipate them from the standpoint of an underclass participant in their regime.
If I understand correctly, you are saying that by interpreting the continual output of events, we can ascertain the agenda of the Oligarchy. But how is it that you are able to make this connection between interpreting events and your conclusion of the agenda? The CJQT would propose a different agenda, why are your conclusions the correct ones?
Because of my more inclusive survey of events (World and Comparative History and Philosophy of History) and consequent greater sophistication in understanding their rationale in politico-economic and (cultural) evolutionary terms. And it is the case that matters of degree are involved rather than mutual exclusivity, such that reasonable men can disagree as to a depiction of the case.
How are you able to determine that the rise of China is intentional, and part of the aim of an Oligarchy?
Secret collaboration in its achievement, from the beginning.
Christianity is an artificial form of ethics and morality that attempts to alter the natural world of human behavior (and I subscribe to the view that this is a good thing, populations benefit greatly from Christian morals).
When have “Christian morals” ever been realized, for the most part, in the sinners’ anticipated perpetual violation of their unrealizable tenets – leading “naturally” to hypocrisy, secular fatuities derived therefrom, and the crimes against humanity of the institutions founded upon this intrinsic duplicity? It’s a good question as to whether Christianity has restrained and palliated more crime and suffering than it has rationalized and inflicted.
I don’t see any evidence of large-scale vote tampering.
Nor have I claimed any. It is simply a minor device available in the tool box of much more effective means.
It also does not seem to follow that because of the Iron Law of Oligarcy, there must be a true oligarchy (something different than our elected representatives),…
Then you do not understand the Iron Law.
…and that oligarchy must be a hidden Jewish one.
In the present circumstance, it falls to the Jews by default and under pretense, for obvious reasons.
There are those within this group that dreams of Menachem Begin’s Judeo world empire. However, this does not appear to be a widespread belief or a goal sought after by the majority of elite Jews, such as Mortimer Zuckerman or Joseph Lieberman. There does not appear to be a council of “Learned Elders of Zion” that are the real power-brokers, working toward diabolical goals.
I agree, as this is not my thesis, as explained immediately above.
4) The Jewish elite appear to plan, debate and opinionate in conventional media, thinktanks and policy groups, and influence events using mainly conventional means such as politics.
So much history you do not know.
You must make a start on Revisionist History, none of which you’ve mentioned, and evidently with which you are not familiar.
The *pivotal* events of the last century were manipulated to the ends of Jewry very much sub rosa.
The goal of elite Jewry seems to be to pursue perceived Jewish interests, especially the protection of Israel.
Such is the prominent present concern. The past century, however, was the era of Judeo-Communist projects, for the most part.
5) The conspiracies that do exist (perhaps WTC/Kennedy Assassination) seem to be ad hoc operations established for a particular purpose, to carry out limited goals…. I don’t see a wider agenda beyond protecting Israel and Jewry as a whole.
Then, again, you must read of the operations that involved the West in the creation, enhancement, and defense of the Communist regimes.
As part of the pursuit of Jewish interests, Jews attempt to influence politicians in high places as much as possible.
I would use the stronger word, “manipulate,” since elite Jewry is not merely a pressure group, but is an oligarchy that *rules* with lies more than violence, as a primary and preliminary resort. They will try to govern with persuasion, rather than giving orders in betrayal of their actual power, as would benevolent parents, but will eventually resort to stronger measures as required to achieve their ends.
A prime example is the influence of the Neocons over Bush. However, the Neocons appear to be a minority group within Jewry, which as a whole opposed Bush’s election.
An excellent observation in support of recognition that *Judeo-Communism* is the older, larger, and more powerful element in the Jewish community and elite.
It occurs to me though, that if your desire is to persuade others towards the Advanced JQ Theory, why have you not written a pamphlet or treatise on the subject?
In effect, I have – somewhat in the disjointed fashion of N., himself.
However, there does not appear to be evidence of an agenda to enslave or obliterate the goyim.
I agree. They seek, rather, to liberate us from ordered existence.
There are organizations such as the Bilderbergers that support and work towards one-World government, and powerful individuals such as the Rockefellers support these organizations. However, while these groups are influential, it does not seem that they actually manage world events or are part of a greater Jewish Oligarchy.
You give the impression of not having read/studied history until 1990 – as though you are now in your 20’s.
Before the advent of the Kosher-cons, Rockefeller and Rothschild were very much the semi-public managers of world events.
9) All those that are seen as interfering with Jewish interests are mercilessly hounded and pursued by Jews internationally (Irving, Zundel, Duke, etc.) However, this seems to be explained by Jewish networking, assisted by groups such as the SPLC and ADL, rather than something deeper.
LOL. And the Jews are so unimaginative as not to take advantage of a global “network,” in pursuit of “deeper” objectives and with super-ordinate organization.
10) US politics are influenced strongly by Jews, who leverage their influence through the MSM and heavy funding of candidates. However, beyond that, Jewish influence appears to be limited. The political process generally appears to work as advertised, without rigged elections or the screening of candidates by unseen groups (vetting does occur, but seems to be done in ways we know about, such as AIPAC’s activities as disclosed by others).
When a war involving Jewish interests is in prospect, Jewry enlists the executive as a dictator (Wilson/FDR/Bush).
11) The unfolding of events such as the rise of China do not seem to be the result of Jewish planning, but rather the outcome of economic and population trends.
To be so young again. [sigh]
Read about the McCarthy Era. IPR. Owen Lattimore. Secretary of State Marshall. Chiang Kai Shek.
Jewish businesses find China’s expansion to be advantageous for obtaining increased profits and thus act opportunistically. Jews encourage foreign immigration to increase their security against the potential dangers of a White majority. Likewise with the Mexicanization of California. As Mestizos gain political control, they convert the state into the third-world, and Whites naturally flee third-world conditions. Neither outcomes appear to be the result of conscious efforts to achieve them by Jewry.
That which they permit would seem to be that which they desire.
In my humble opinion, you have not yet provided a good case why any of the above it not correct. You seem to be saying that it is imperative that I study political economy in depth (with emphasis on Spengler and Nietzsche of course) before I will be able to truly understand the situation, thus forcing me to take my brother’s ADD medication so I can concentrate. I guess this means that I am not capable at this time of grasping the Advanced JQ Theory.
I did not grasp it until I was in my 40’s – so – pop a pill and get started.
“The destruction of the West would lead to the collapse of a Chinese Marxist regime and to global anarchy, as intended.”
Then why would China destroy the West?
It seems to me you’re saying that while the Judeo-Communists are smart enough to see that if China destroys the West it will lead to its own collapse, the Chinese themselves lack this degree of foresight.
Then why would China destroy the West?
“Aw shut up, silly woman, said that reptile with a grin – you knew darn well I was a snake before you took me in!” (“The Snake”)
It’s The Scorpion and the Frog.
It’s the meaning, purpose, and unifying principle of a Marxist regime.
So the West is the bourgeois vehicle and obstacle to the eschaton, the stateless final society promised by the ideology – the millenium, in Christian terms.
It seems to me you’re saying that while the Judeo-Communists are smart enough to see that if China destroys the West it will lead to its own collapse, the Chinese themselves lack this degree of foresight.
To the contrary. The Chinese, as do the Russians, understand that their ultimate goal is global statelessness. Thus the “collapse” of any State, having served its purposes, is a victory, in Marxist terms. The Russian Communists, in shedding the Soviet pseudo-empire, are even farther along than the Chinese. Mao was premature in dismantling China, before it had a chance to compromise the West, and the “technocrats” under Deng had to retrieve the situation, to that end.
Also, understand that the “liberalism,” of both the modern Left and Right, in the West, is quasi-anarchist – in the libertarian disposition of the Right and in the anti-establishment sentiment of the Left. Thus the orientation and appeal of Communism, properly understood as crypto-anarchism, is not surprising, and is supposedly an ideological cousin, descended from Enlightenment thought.
But Marxist Communism *is not* properly recognized by adherents of these bourgeois concessions to reality, because, despite sharing with radicals some of the same liberationist sentiments, they are confused as to this convergence by radical fatuity and brutality in the antithetical (police-statist/megacidal) structure and governance of radical regimes.
Nevertheless, Marx *is* explicit in the promise he makes. But that promise is *unrealizable* amidst the intractable limitations on the administration of human society. And the tragic results of the attempts to overcome those limitations make the Communist goal *unrecognizable* amidst the inhumanity of the means to which the radicals must resort in establishing, maintaining, and advancing the regimes needed toward achieving the promised world-wide liberation.
“Good summary up to this point – but my sense of the “ultimate design” involves global anarchy rather than empire. Though it is evident that a *non-sectarian* expectation of one-world-government is held by the goyische paladins involved.”
Well, it would have saved us some time and trouble if you had provided this summary at the beginning, but for some reason you appear to enjoy seeing people bump their head and stub their toe in the dark before finding the light switch and figuring out what what you believe. You are well-informed and your theory is certainly cohesive. A possible problem is that there is a possibility you impute too much to the Jews, that you ascribe to them power that they do not have. Abe Foxman mentions this misconception in Kievsky’s excellent movie “Defamation” (he links to it in his article). If there are constant storms and incidents of inclement weather, that does not necessarily mean that there is an unseen intelligence or machine behind the scenes causing it all. If there are Jews continually involved in world events, that does not necessarily mean that there is an unseen organization behind it all. At present, as I attempt to understand the Jews, the Conventional JQ Theory seems to provide the greatest illumination on the “light among nations”. I will continue my studies though, and perhaps in time I will see further.
“It seems to me that grading a people on their success against the invasion of an extremely intelligent hostile elite an unfair one Define “fair,” please.”
Regarding evaluating a people, I am an unreliable judge, completely biased, hopelessly in love with my people. When I see a statuesque blonde, who is caring and loving, or a tall, noble White male, who thinks ever about building things, I don’t want them to change. They are exactly the way that nature intended them to be, with traits selected for since the dawn of Whitey. Faulting them for not being like the Semites is “unfair” in the sense of having expectations for the impossible. They would never have prospered in their ice age environment had they been cunning, mendacious ethnocentrists. You see the wolf pack preying upon the great herds of majestic elk, and condemn those noble creatures for not being more wolf-like. But the wolf is a niche survival strategy. Of course, I am also confident that with time, hardship, and the realization of true threat, there will be an awakening amongst Whites. I think that your view contains an overlarge amount of misanthropy.
“It also does not seem to follow that because of the Iron Law of Oligarcy, there must be a true oligarchy (something different than our elected representatives),…
Then you do not understand the Iron Law.”
I think that a more precise term for this is the “General Law of Oligarchy”. While a useful concept, I don’t think it has been established to the extent of well-understood phenomenon like Newton’s Law of Motion, as we are attempting to predict human behavior, which is relatively unpredictable. We could find probably find various exceptions to the law of Oligarchy, perhaps the long-lived democracy of Iceland is an example.
“It occurs to me though, that if your desire is to persuade others towards the Advanced JQ Theory, why have you not written a pamphlet or treatise on the subject? In effect, I have – somewhat in the disjointed fashion of N., himself.”
When you are ready to post this, I will be interested in reading it, assuming I have the background to understand it.
“You give the impression of not having read/studied history until 1990 – as though you are now in your 20’s.”
Im actually in my 30’s, but I suffer from chronic immaturity.
“I guess this means that I am not capable at this time of grasping the Advanced JQ Theory. I did not grasp it until I was in my 40’s – so – pop a pill and get started.”
Okay, but first I need to finish the comic books on my reading list.
Re:NN – “I agree. They seek, rather, to liberate us from ordered existence.”
So the best way to counter Judeoanarchism that is by instituting a pro-White militaristic society based around strict order, discipline, stability, reason, rationality, and hierarchy…i.e. an orderly ‘Apollonian’ one instead of the insanely ‘Dionysian’ society which our Judaized nation has become?
I agree that many Jews are anarchists at heart…especially the most leftist and secular ones seem to be anarcho-primivists who seek to ‘liberate’ humanity from all boundaries, rules, hierarchy, order, etc: they want a completely ‘leveled’ society. This is so laughable as to be completely insane. Many Jews are in fact insane and their neuroticism is a well justified stereotype — Jewish rule in modern times means that the (Jewish) inmates have escaped from their ‘asylums’ (Jewish ghettos) and these escaped crazies have seized the levers of power and control and are now leading us in to oblivion.
I am reminded of a famous quote:”Hence the result of Jewish domination is always the ruin of all culture and finally the madness of the Jew himself. For he is a parasite of nations and his victory signifies his own end as much as the death of his victim.” – http://www.zupdom.com/icons-multimedia/ClientsArea/HoH/LIBARC/ARCHIVE/Chapters/Prologue/ExtraHit.html
Good discussion here y’all. I’ve learned a lot by reading over it, and I’m sure others have as well.
NN:”Thus the orientation and appeal of Communism, properly understood as crypto-anarchism…”
I fail to see how Communism/Marxism is anarchic when those systems seem more control, more bureaucracy, more governmental interference, etc.
I can understand how ‘liberalism’ in general tends toward anarchism, but not by-the-book Communism or Marxism.
It seems to me that very strict totalitarian Communism or Marxism is anti-anarchist, a system for true control freaks who hate unpredictability.
The anarchic wing of Jewry seemed to have come later on amongst those who became disillusioned by Communism and later became willy nilly anything goes ‘liberals’ during the post-WWII era.
TYPO = seem —> seek
Fascinating.
You are the “aspirant organization” that seeks to learn the “structure” of the current aristocracy?
Another interesting construction. I ask, who is “us” and who is “they” and what do you mean by “ordered existence” exactly? Is this some kinky S&M thing?
I assumed that talking about Marxism in these days was grave-robbing defunct philosophies, but I’ll be damned if I can unpack those paragraphs.
“Convergence by radical fatuity and brutality” – does that mean the Iron Law of Mafia?
Well, it would have saved us some time and trouble if you had provided this summary at the beginning,…
Please direct me to the comment wherein the request for such a summary was made, and you will have my apology for having overlooked or misunderstood it as such. Otherwise, I am at your disposal for your own apology.
…but for some reason you appear to enjoy seeing people bump their head and stub their toe in the dark before finding the light switch and figuring out what you believe.
I see no warrant for this comment, having long ago “figured out what I believe” in basic outline. Nor can I see where our exchange reflects anything but my careful attention to your concerns and my full and frank response thereto – over an extended period of interlocution unprecedented in my experience.
A possible problem is that there is a possibility you impute too much to the Jews, that you ascribe to them power that they do not have. Abe Foxman mentions this misconception in Kievsky’s excellent movie “Defamation” (he links to it in his article). If there are constant storms and incidents of inclement weather, that does not necessarily mean that there is an unseen intelligence or machine behind the scenes causing it all. If there are Jews continually involved in world events, that does not necessarily mean that there is an unseen organization behind it all.
Necessarily? No. Probably? Yes. FDR himself assured us that all events are the product of covert planning. But I return to the black-box analogy, which allows for your “possibility” despite appearances. So I see no explicit argument here amidst your implicit desire to take one side of it.
I think that your view contains an overlarge amount of misanthropy.
I would have expected to have been charged with an unnatural degree of objectivity.
I think that a more precise term for this is the “General Law of Oligarchy”. While a useful concept, I don’t think it has been established to the extent of well-understood phenomenon like Newton’s Law of Motion, as we are attempting to predict human behavior, which is relatively unpredictable.
Which might be true of *individual* behavior, but humans in the mass, with increasing mass, come close to behaving as though according to physical principle, particularly in regard to the limitations involved in the administration of large populations.
We could find probably find various exceptions to the law of Oligarchy, perhaps the long-lived democracy of Iceland is an example.
Which illustrates my point. The smaller and less dense a population, the less the requirement for oligarchic administration. And Iceland is on the margin, demographically, of that requirement.
But any and all polities of hundreds of millions are *absolutely* in the thrall of a transcendent oligarchy, lest issues of high-level economic and political collusion lead to civil war and the dissolution of the polity as such. Precisely *this* foundational shortcoming led to the War Between the States and the requisite establishment of the unifying, though ultimately unsatisfactory, oligarchy of the so-called “Lords of Creation”.
When you are ready to post this, I will be interested in reading it, assuming I have the background to understand it.
I thought I had alluded to it, having the blog, “superhuman” in mind.
I fail to see how Communism/Marxism is anarchic when those systems seem more control, more bureaucracy, more governmental interference, etc.
Because you are thinking in terms of means rather than ends.
I can understand how ‘liberalism’ in general tends toward anarchism, but not by-the-book Communism or Marxism.
Ironically, it is *by-the-book* Marxism that is explicitly anarchistic. The “system” is clearly designated as a *transitional* means and period (the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat”), leading to the “withering away of the State” that represents no more than a device for the oppression of the proletariat, seeking to break its chains in revolt.
It seems to me that very strict totalitarian Communism or Marxism is anti-anarchist, a system for true control freaks who hate unpredictability.
Then it is your good fortune to have been exposed to correction of this misimpression.
The anarchic wing of Jewry seemed to have come later on amongst those who became disillusioned by Communism and later became willy nilly anything goes ‘liberals’ during the post-WWII era.
Then you need to read The Revolt Against Civilization, by Stoddard.
You are the “aspirant organization” that seeks to learn the “structure” of the current aristocracy?
No. The military, informed of the collective peril.
“They seek, rather, to liberate us from ordered existence.”
Another interesting construction. I ask, who is “us” and who is “they”…
“Us” is everyone. “They” are oligarchic Jewry.
…and what do you mean by “ordered existence” exactly? Is this some kinky S&M thing?
Exactly.
I assumed that talking about Marxism in these days was grave-robbing defunct philosophies,…
And your assumption reflects your solid standing among those who are au courant with current intellectual fashion.
…but I’ll be damned if I can unpack those paragraphs.
Some background in my contributions is helpful in this regard.
“Convergence by radical fatuity and brutality” – does that mean the Iron Law of Mafia?
No. The statement should have included, as follows:
“Convergence by [the] radical fatuity and brutality of…”
And if you wonder why I am so harsh in my treatment of the filthy lying kike who calls himself “Adam” who litters the comments section of OO blog with his transparent obfuscations, wonder no longer. Agreeing to disagree is a womanly cop-out, this is for real, this is war, something Adwarf I’m sure understands all too well, even if you refuse to.
After being corrected on a gross statistical error at TOO blog today, “Adam” responded by saying that it didn’t matter and he was right anyway. I also posted quotes by Lothrop Stoddard in response to Adam’s attempt to portray Stoddard as not having been much of a racialist and as having been an anti-anti-Semite.
The seeming glee with which Adam discusses miscegenation is very peculiar and certainly arouses suspicion.
Looking back through the posts at TOO blog, I see that Adam says technology is the source of our ills. He says what is required is “the complete destruction of the global technological system.” He even contemplates whether it is necessary to “destroy primitive techniques such as spear points and snares”!
@CaptainChaos:
“I’ve been racially awake for a little over two years, and as such have not had the opportunity to peruse much of the relevant material many others who have been awake longer already have under their belts.”
How did you come to be awakened, if I may ask? What happened and how long did the process take?
“Moreover, I trust my instincts, I have a natural ability to read people, to read for subtext – and use that to push people in the direction I think they need to be going in. ”
You are obviously right about Adam, he is definitely an internet troll. I have been sparring with him a little bit, but I dont think he has any plans to dissappear. I was thinking about the best way to handle trolls to keep KMD’s mag free of them. I am going to approach Reginald, who helps to moderate OO about what to do. My suggested plan will be to have a “watchdog group”, which signs in with the ID “Forum Watchdog”, and scans for trolls such as Adam. When found, we insert a warning like “Troll Alert! The poster Adam, formerly known as “Progress”, is a confirmed troll, of the Poison Dwarf variety. Please do not respond to him (please do not feed a troll, it only encourages him).” Then we have a short description of his activity with links. Getting into a discussion with the guy doesnt seem to help, as he ignores all of that for the next article, then people unaware of the situation will naturally engage in his poison apple discussions. Would you be on board with this?
@MLGS:
“After being corrected on a gross statistical error at TOO blog today, “Adam” responded by saying that it didn’t matter and he was right anyway”
Unfortunately, Adam is an internet troll as mentioned above, whose modus operandi is to simply sabotage discussions. His aims are furthered when he doesnt actually address the points you bring up, because it tends to exasperate the person who attempted to engage him seriously (your time wasted is his small victory). I will contact one of the individuals who helps with OO, and get his advice on what to do.
“Please direct me to the comment wherein the request for such a summary was made, and you will have my apology for having overlooked or misunderstood it as such. Otherwise, I am at your disposal for your own apology.”
Well, if the fault wasnt yours, and it obviously wasnt mine, then only one possibility remains: it was the fault of the Jews!
“I see no warrant for this comment, having long ago “figured out what I believe” in basic outline.”
I only meant that tongue-in-cheek.
” Nor can I see where our exchange reflects anything but my careful attention to your concerns and my full and frank response thereto – over an extended period of interlocution unprecedented in my experience.”
You have been very thorough and I do appreciate your time and patience.
“But any and all polities of hundreds of millions are *absolutely* in the thrall of a transcendent oligarchy, lest issues of high-level economic and political collusion lead to civil war and the dissolution of the polity as such. Precisely *this* foundational shortcoming led to the War Between the States and the requisite establishment of the unifying, though ultimately unsatisfactory, oligarchy of the so-called “Lords of Creation”.”
A problem with the population size requirement is that your sample size of nations is very small for the purpose of testing the theory (relatively few polities have ever had a population near or over one hundred million). That being said, if the US is in fact controlled by a Jewish Oligarchy, I am hard pressed to think of a nation that has no such political control (possibly Japan, India or Brazil? I imagine powerful business interests are deeply involved in the politics of those nations, at least.)
“I thought I had alluded to it, having the blog, “superhuman” in mind.”
I think there would be a number of people that would be interested in reading your ideas if put into a more organized essay form. However, I know from experience the difficulty in organizing such a complex literary work.
A problem with the population size requirement is that your sample size of nations is very small for the purpose of testing the theory (relatively few polities have ever had a population near or over one hundred million).
I mentioned hundreds of millions to make a point about the Greater Judean circumstance, in particular.
The population-size requirement for franchise-free oligarchy in general would be in the tens of millions, for any polity (other than Switzerland) that was significant to its neighbors. Thus a great many such entities are available for examination.
However, let me mention that the basis of the Iron Law is largely logical, in the recognition that formalities (especially legal) become increasingly and necessarily the basis of human interaction, with increasing population. And formalities and legalities and political agendas cannot be codified in a complete and coherent fashion. Thus a transcendent stratum of society, the Platonic “Guardians,” *must* exist to referee, regulate, and arbitrate that which cannot be thorough rationalized. As I said before, the alternative is civil war and dissolution, logically and historically.