Fake News, Real Power

cy_vz-euqaaps7v-jpglarge

ADL jew Etzion Neuer twits: “Today’s @NYDailyNews front page confirms what @ADL_NY knew: it has been far too busy in the last month. #fighthate”

Neurotic jews busy painting mangled swastikas. The jewsmedia and lobbyists busy screeching, “FIGHT HATE!!1!”. Kikeservatives in government and academia busy serving the jews:

Sen. Bob Casey (D-PA) and Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) have introduced the Anti-Semitism Awareness Act which according to a statement on Casey’s website is meant to “to ensure the U.S. Department of Education (DOE) has the necessary statutory tools at their disposal to investigate anti-Jewish incidents” on college campuses.

Citing a recent FBI report stating over half of all reported hate crimes in 2015 were of an anti-Semitic nature, the senators claim their bill is necessary to provide the DOE with the “firm guidance” it needs to determine “what constitutes anti-Semitism.”

The bill’s definition of “anti-Semitism” is directly culled from a 2010 State Department memo, which The University of California Board of Regents considered adopting as official policy, before ultimately agreeing to a softer condemnation of “Anti-Semitism, anti-semitic forms of anti-Zionism,” but not a blanket ban on anti-Zionist expression itself.

Unfortunately, the bill also proposes the following as examples of hate crimes:

  • Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust
  • Demonizing Israel by blaming it for all inter-religious or political tensions
  • Judge Israel by a double standard that one would not apply to any other democratic nation

No other other group has government departments specifically dedicated to promoting their interests. No other group enjoys the privileged protection of speech codes and laws which specifically condemn and even criminalize their political opponents. Only the jews.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

Decoding the Racial Political Discourse, 2016

shlomo_says_phobia

Democrats, Not Trump, Racialize Our Politics, by Heather Mac Donald, City Journal, 27 Nov 2016:

Democratic (((pundits))) are calling on their party to court working-class and non-coastal whites in the wake of this month’s electoral rout. But the Democratic Party is now dominated by identity politics, which defines whites, particularly heterosexual males, as oppressors of every other population in the U.S. Why should the targets of such thinking embrace an ideology that scorns them?

The most absurd Democratic meme to emerge from the party’s ballot-box defeat is the claim that it is Donald Trump, rather than Democrats, who engages in “aggressive, racialized discourse,” in the words of a Los Angeles Times op-ed. By contrast, President Barack Obama sought a “post-racial, bridge-building society,” according to New York Times reporter Peter Baker. Obama’s post-racial efforts have now “given way to an angry, jeering, us-against-them nation,” writes Baker, in a front-page “news” story.

[Ta-Nehesi] Coates’s melodramatic rhetoric comes right out of (((the academy))), the inexhaustible source of Democratic identity politics. The Democratic Party is now merely an extension of (((left-wing))) campus culture; few institutions exist wherein the skew toward Democratic allegiance is more pronounced. The claims of life-destroying trauma that have convulsed (((academia))) since the election are simply a continuation of last year’s campus Black Lives Matter protests, which also claimed that “white privilege” and white oppression were making existence impossible for black students and (((other favored victim groups))).

Hillary Clinton employed classic Democratic “racialized discourse” throughout the campaign. During a Democratic presidential primary debate in January 2016, Clinton agreed that it was “reality” that police officers see black lives as “cheap.” In a February debate, she accused Wisconsin, along with other states, of “really systemic racism” in education and employment. In July she called on “white people” to put themselves in the shoes of African-American families who “need to worry” that their child will be killed by a police officer. When Clinton called half of Trump’s supporters “racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamaphobic—you name it” who belonged in a “basket of deplorables,” she was speaking the language of (((the academy))), now incorporated into (((the Democratic worldview))).

Mac Donald attempts to spin the conflict as a black war on Whites, but the Clinton campaign was speaking the anti-White language of jews.

See also: Decoding the Racial Political Discourse (2012).

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

Are Jews People

cnn-chyron-526x345

The jews have been screeching about Richard Spencer’s NPI conference in Washington DC this past weekend. Alot of it is just the usual jew normal wow-just-wowing that a handful of Whites still have the nerve to openly meet and speak positively about White identity and interests. The loudest wailing has to do with a bit of exuberant hailing at the end of Spencer’s closing speech, but there was a more telling response to a rhetorical question he asked at the beginning:

This was the year when random shitlords on Twitter, anonymous podcast hosts, and dissidents working deep within the beltway right proved that they objectively understood politics better than the “Republican strategists” and “political consultants” snarking at us every night on MSNBC. It’s not just that they are leftists and cucks. It’s not just the many are genuinely stupid. Indeed, one wonders if these people are people at all – or instead, soulless golem, animated by some dark power to repeat whatever talking point John Oliver stated the night before.

This twit, from one screechy jew organization to another, captures the gist of the reaction that immediately echoed throughout the Lügenpresse: “‘Alt-right’ Trump supporters are unsure if Jews are people. @jfederations, are you sure you want to support this admin? #JewishResistance”.

CNN pushed a similar line, which produced a swift jewlash and apoplectic apology. Of course, the apology was for offending jew sensibilities, not for distorting what Spencer said.

Spencer was speaking in terms of partisan political opposition, at the edge of the jew normal box – his alt-right and Trump versus the left and their cuck-right. His use of the term golem alludes to jews as the animators of the entrenched opposition, implying that the non-jews, the kikeservatives of whatever party affiliation, are behaving inhumanly, like robots.

It is telling that jews immediately reduced what Spencer said to being entirely about jews – as if nobody else matters, as if nobody but jews is human. Much the same occurred last month when Trump started speaking stridently against the elite globalist bankers and media. Jews flipped out exactly because they perceived this as a coded threat to themselves, not at all out of concern for anybody else, elite or otherwise.

CNN’s crime was to highlight Spencer’s reference to the jews’ golem tale, in which the jews are saved from the inhuman goyim of medieval Europe, while deploring a modern day meeting of inhuman White “racists” and “anti-semites”. The jews are screeching so loudly because they feel exposed. By crying out they seek to ensure that everyone understands the jews are not just people, part of “us”, but are that extra special part of “us” who defines who “them” are.

When some member of the jewed elite equates Trump to Hitler what they’re implying is that Trump (and his supporters) must be attacked, destroyed, and even killed. Never Trump. Never again. By any means necessary.

The toxic anti-White jew Tim Wise put it this way: “Nazis must be crushed. No co-existence…crushed. If the “alt-right” wants to play Nazi, we need to play the Allies, circa 1944 and 45″.

Another toxic jew, jewsmedia editor Michael Hirsh, screeched his thirst for goy blood more explicitly: “Stop whining about Richard B. Spencer, Nazi, and exercise your rights as decent Americans. Here are his two addresses. …”

Are the jews people? In fact their definitive concern is for themselves, for their own peoplehood. As a parasitic people they not only organize around this exclusive sense of “us” as jews, but actively seek to co-opt, control, and ultimately destroy any similar sense among the goyim host “them” they feed upon.

One thing is certain. The jews aren’t White people. They are empirically collectively anti-White, the enemies of Whites. Indeed, when jews attack Whites while screeching about “anti-semitism” it is because they are drawing a clear distinction and expressing a truly racial animus.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

The Jew Normal

oyyyy_veeeeeeyyyy

A major theme for the jewsmedia this selection cycle, especially after getting a result they didn’t expect, has been to cry about how out of the ordinary this or that aspect of Trump’s campaign has been. The current year’s new normal is, “wow, just wow”, and we can expect more of the same for the next four current years.

Of course, many aspects of the Trump campaign were extraordinary, but a truly frank discussion of the who, what, and why isn’t something you can actually find in the jewsmedia unless you read between the lines. Trump’s many transgressions were, vaguely speaking, violations of political correctness, which his supporters actually liked. The loudest screeching and deploring of these violations came from the jews, who created this web of taboos in the first place.

At heart the conflict is over what constitutes normal, it’s about who gets to define what normal means. The jews, tremendously amplified by the jewsmedia, see themselves and their screechy, neurotic sensibilities as normal, and have for decades foisted their preferences and priorities onto everyone else. Whites, on the other hand, voted for Trump exactly because they don’t like this jew normal. They imagine he might actually change it and return them to a less jewed culture they innately perceive as more natural.

A clear example of this struggle over the definition of normal is occurring right now. The cabal behind The Bannonocaust perceives it as just one battle against the “normalization” of Trumpism. It’s an unselfconscious inversion of the term. The idea is that anyone treating Trump like any other candidate or president-elect has ever been treated is behaving abnormally. How many times do the jews have to announce that Trump is Hitler all over again, “anti-semitic”, fueling “anti-semitism”, or let’s just say he’s promoting “conspiracy theories”, “racism”, “xenophobia”, “intolerance”, “hate”, “oyyyy veeeeeeyyyy”. What is it about all these jew buzzwords the stupid/crazy/evil goys don’t understand?

The tone of this screeching isn’t new. What’s new is the volume and the clarity with which the battle lines are drawn. The jews are at war with Whites. To see it just take a peek behind the jewsmedia curtain:

Elad Nehorai: “In case you don’t think antisemitism is officially normalized in the US, take a look at @PeterBeinart’s feed.”

Peter Beinart: “In name of Jewish safety, America’s most powerful Jewish groups normalized Trumpism. And now it’s turning on us.” Beinart links his own article in Haaretz, America’s most influential Jewish groups have prioritized Netanyahu over U.S. Jews’ safety.

David Corn: “Read this: White Nationalists Celebrate Trump’s Victory and Early Appointments. (Don’t Normalize Trum) #DONT” Corn links Pema Levy’s article in Mother Jones, White Nationalists Celebrate Trump’s Victory and Early Appointments.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

The Bannonocaust, Hoax Culture

bannonocaust

In the wake of the selection of Donald Trump on the 8th of November a fresh wave of malformed swastikas began showing up in various jewy haunts across America. Despite the lame nature of these so-called “hate crimes”, and the long history of fakery, each new incident is soberly and earnestly reported by the jewsmedia not only as if it were an example of real hate but as the most disturbing crime ever committed. After each furtive act comes another very public act, the theatre echoing with cries for more money and more laws to combat “hate”. And even when some later report reveals yet another hoax there is no connecting of dots, no recognition of the larger pattern. Thus by very deliberate acts of both commission and ommission the jewsmedia creates and sustains this “hate” hoax culture.

Of course many people see through this charade, and when jewsmedia forums permit comment many critics do in fact speak out. On social media sites it is increasingly common to see these tall tales of “hate” not only called out but mercilessly derided. Alas, corporate social media is ultimately just another more insidious form of jewsmedia – owned, operated or otherwise ultimately marching to the tune called by jews. Critics are squelched with a circular argument: opposition to the jewsmedia narrative is by definition “hate”, especially if you notice the jews. Bad goy. Shut it down.

Amidst the swastikas comes an even grander hoax, The Bannonocaust, a jewsmedia construct through and through. Before social media platforms were widely used the journalist cabal used to strategize and coordinate via email. Nowadays they conspire more broadly and openly on Facebook and Twitter. On the 13th, when Trump tapped Steve Bannon as his chief strategist, the yids who operate the jewsmedia immediately flipped their lids. Before any articles had even appeared prominent jewsmedia figures were screeching anti-White invective into their collective Twitter echo chamber, decrying Bannon’s supposed “anti-semtism” and advising each other to gird for battle.

Jamil Smith: “Steve Bannon, an anti-Semite whose website is a hub for white nationalism, will be the @WhiteHouse chief strategist. We are in trouble.” Charles P. Pierce: “Let us be clear. The hiring of Steve Bannon as a WH policy adviser is exactly the same as hiring David Duke. Please don’t normalize this.” Jonathan Alter: “Bannon’s bigotry must be front and center in all coverage of him for as long as he has power.” David Corn: “Hey, media, if the words “white supremacist” or “racist” are not in the lede of your stories in Stephen Bannon, you’re doing it wrong.”

This is how the jewsmedia narrative on Bannon was constructed. Over the course of the next week it oozed out of various outlets in longer forms. On the 14th, David Rothkopf’s Trump Appointments Send an Ominous Signal appeared at Foreign Policy. In it Rothkopf laid out the jew versus White nature of the conflict fairly clearly. A similar, prescient article by Sarah Posner and printed by Mother Jones in late August, How Donald Trump’s New Campaign Chief Created an Online Haven for White Nationalists, was also widely cited and recirculated as an explainer.

Much of the broader print media and television coverage was less explicit. Generally the jewish source of the hostility toward Whites has been more muted, the accusations against Bannon reduced to unspecified “bigotry” and “racism”. Jay Reeves’ article, AP EXPLAINS: Election brings white nationalism to forefront, is typical in this regard, presenting Whites as the source of the trouble:

White nationalists often support the idea that white people are under attack in the U.S., and need protection from the growth of minority and immigrant groups. Adherents sometimes use the hashtag #whitegenocide on social media to promote their belief that the future of the white race is in peril. They see diversity as a threat to fight, not a goal to embrace.

In spite of such whitewashing, the fundamentally jewy nature of the Bannon controversy is made obvious in other ways. Self-righteously jewish screeching to fire Bannon has manifested quite literally. A representative of the bagel republic “found” yet another swastika, and the jewsmedia literally helped attach blame for the “hate crime” to Bannon. On the 18th, the “conservative” wing of organized jewry officially and collectively condemned Bannon’s appointment.

As with Trump, Bannon has long surrounded himself with jews and supported zionism – a jew-specific form of parasitic nationalism. Several jews have come forward to vouch that Bannon is a good goy, but none makes as compelling a case for it as Bannon himself. The Wall Street Journal ran an article quoting their interview with Bannon on the 18th:

Here are a few things you’ve likely read about Steve Bannon this week: He’s a white supremacist, a bigot and anti-Semite. He’s a self-described Leninist who wants to “destroy the state.” He’s associated with the “alt-right,” a movement that, according to the New York Times, delights in “harassing Jews, Muslims and other vulnerable groups by spewing shocking insults on social media.”

At first Mr. Bannon insists that he has no interest in “wasting time” addressing the accusations against him. Yet he’s soon ticking off the reasons they are “just nonsense.”

Anti-Semitic? “Breitbart is the most pro-Israel site in the United States of America. I have Breitbart Jerusalem, which I have Aaron Klein run with about 10 reporters there. We’ve been leaders in stopping this BDS movement”—meaning boycott, divestment and sanctions—“in the United States; we’re a leader in the reporting of young Jewish students being harassed on American campuses; we’ve been a leader on reporting on the terrible plight of the Jews in Europe.” He adds that given his many Jewish partners and writers, “guys like Joel Pollak, these claims of anti-Semitism just aren’t serious. It’s a joke.”

He blames the attacks on a lazy media, noting for instance that the “renegade Jew” line wasn’t Breitbart’s. Conservative activist David Horowitz (also Jewish) has taken responsibility for writing the headline himself, in a piece about Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol.

What about the charge of white supremacism? “I’m an economic nationalist. I am an America first guy. And I have admired nationalist movements throughout the world, have said repeatedly strong nations make great neighbors. I’ve also said repeatedly that the ethno-nationalist movement, prominent in Europe, will change over time. I’ve never been a supporter of ethno-nationalism.”

“Our definition of the alt-right is younger people who are anti-globalists, very nationalist, terribly anti-establishment.”
But he says Breitbart is also a platform for “libertarians,” Zionists, “the conservative gay community,” “proponents of restrictions on gay marriage,” “economic nationalism” and “populism” and “the anti-establishment.” In other words, the site hosts many views. “We provide an outlet for 10 or 12 or 15 lines of thought—we set it up that way” and the alt-right is “a tiny part of that.” Yes, he concedes, the alt-right has “some racial and anti-Semitic overtones.” He makes clear he has zero tolerance for such views.

Even before Bannon spoke out Dylan Byers was begging the question, “What’s the end-game of the anti-Bannon crusade?” What’s the point of any jewy hoaxing and screeching? As with so much of their swastika drivel The Bannonocaust is nothing more than a hoax – an attempt by jews who already dominate the political discourse to mold public opinion, to influence the political agenda, to grab more public funds and government-backed privilege for themselves. It’s not “nazis” doing this. It’s the jews.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

Talking with Henrik Palmgren, Hour 2

RIR-151014_big

The second half of my conversation with Henrik, recorded on 21 September 2015. The first half was published in mid October.

In this half, before getting into the invasion and rape of Europe, the rise of Trump, and anti-Nordic hostility, we touched briefly on the discovery of Homo naledi, which was described in a NOVA episode titled Dawn of Humanity.

As I mentioned, The Ugly Nationalist Politics of Human Origins is an example of the legacy of Franz Boas, the jewing of race science, with contemporary Boasian storytellers like Jonathan Marks not only hijacking the objective authority of science to promote a reality-distorting anti-”racist” narrative, but relatively openly describing how and why.

What and who were our ancestors?

It might seem as if the answer to this question is simply a question of biology, but in his new book Tales of the Ex-Apes: How we think about human Evolution anthropologist Jonathan Marks argues that the story we tell about our origins, the study of our evolutionary tree, has cultural roots. Evolution isn’t just a question of biology, he argues, it’s also a question of mythology. Our scientific facts, he says, are the product of bioculture and biopolitics.

The study of who we are and where we came from is inherently political, even as science. Understanding what he means by this is best explained by way of example. Take, say, race. In the U.S. the 19th-century “American school” of physical anthropologists used racial features to hypothesize that there were separate origins for the races. As late as 1962, the evolutionary “fact” that the black race was 200,000 years less evolved than the white race was used to argue in favor of segregation.

Evolutionary biologists often explain the emergence of morality in terms of Darwinian imperatives about survival and breeding.

This is about who gets to partake in, and to tell, the authoritative scientific story of our origins. It’s a lot more than biology.

There is much more to say about the semitically correct migrating/mixing/Out-of-Africa narrative and how it distorts science and morality. A recent, typical demonstration of the effect was provided when Bill Clinton preached his understanding of racial purity and mixing.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

In the News: Screeching Jews and Their Taboos

a_jews_election_nightmare

Ex-ADL chief: Trump’s ‘raise your hand’ gambit was deliberate, Nazi-style ‘fascist gesture’, The Times of Israel, 7 March 2016:

“It is a fascist gesture,” Foxman said. “He is smart enough — he always tells us how smart he is — to know the images that this evokes. Instead of asking his audience to pledge allegiance to the United States of America, which in itself would be a little bizarre, he’s asking them to swear allegiance to him.”

. . .

“What scares me is he’s broken all these taboos and it’s helped him,” Foxman said. “That frightens me. It frightens me that there are all these things that we’ve worked so hard on, but one after another he breaks these taboos and the people applaud him and come back for more.”

Despite Foxman’s fears, the ultimate taboo remains unbroken by Trump and the bulk of his White supporters, who have so far demonstrated little explicit recognition that jews are the driving force behind the “political correctness” they so despise. Indeed, though Trump knows the elites are thoroughly jewed and hostile to Whites, and could expect applause for speaking that truth, he has not done so and likely never will, because his family is very much a part of that jewed, hostile elite.

The irony is that jews are doing what Trump won’t. In reaction to his rise they have provided several pointed op-eds expressing their alienation and antipathy in explicit in racial terms, specifically against Whites. Here are three examples.

Trump’s America is bad, very bad, for the Jews, The Times of Israel, 26 February 2016:

In other words, Trump’s base tends to be white, male, undereducated, and struggling financially. But that doesn’t necessarily explain Trump’s appeal. After all, if economic self-interest were their only motivation, such voters might well support Bernie Sanders, who blames big business and crony capitalism for the inequality that has suppressed wages and decimated the working class.

But put it all together, and you get a chunk of the electorate for whom the New America is hardly America at all. If you were to create a composite from the Pew stats, you’d have a white guy who has almost nothing in common with the kinds of characters in Master or Transparent — that is, brown, Jewish, nontraditional, college-educated, pluralistic. These shows don’t represent to him what’s new about America, but what’s wrong with America. And worse, the seeming success of these characters, he feels, comes at the expense of “real” Americans like him.

Trump’s real ideology is murky, but his targets are clear: Immigrants bring problems and take away jobs. Muslims represent the worst kind of threat: an internal one. America is corrupt and fallen, and by opening its doors to foreigners, tolerating difference, and insisting upon “political correctness,” it has suppressed the very people — that is, middle-class white families — who once made the country great.

Donald Trump Is Winning Because White America Is Dying, Huffington Post, 29 February 2016:

Noam Chomsky, the renowned scholar and MIT professor emeritus, says that the rise of Donald Trump in American politics is, in part, fueled by deeply rooted fear and hopelessness that may be caused by an alarming spike in mortality rates for a generation of poorly educated whites.

“He’s evidently appealing to deep feelings of anger, fear, frustration, hopelessness, probably among sectors like those that are seeing an increase in mortality, something unheard of apart from war and catastrophe,” Chomsky told The Huffington Post in an interview on Thursday.

. . .

“[They] are sinking into hopelessness, despair and anger — not directed so much against the institutions that are the agents of the dissolution of their lives and world, but against those who are even more harshly victimized,” he said. “Signs are familiar, and here it does evoke some memories of the rise of European fascism.”

Trump’s Triumphs Demolish Netanyahu’s Fortress GOP Strategy, Haaretz, 3 March 2016:

The Jews will run away from Trump because he scares them. Because his demagoguery is ominous, his willingness to slash and burn anyone standing in his way is disturbing, his tendency to incite his supporters against other ethnic groups from rapist Mexicans to terrorist Muslims, is a source of deep anxiety. Beneath the great wave of popular support for Trump one can make out with increasing clarity the dark undercurrents of rage and resentment and xenophobia that is often seen morphing into White supremacism and abhorrence of African Americans and then, on the outskirts, bad old hatred of the Jews. The allusions to Germany in the 1930’s are absurd, no doubt, but nonetheless surfacing with ever-increasing frequency.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+

Politics + Technology = Nonsense at the Speed of Light