The Enlightenment: Good for Whom?

In the comments on the previous post I made the somewhat flippant claim that the Enlightenment was all along a jew-led, jew-serving psyop. Fred W, a frequent commenter whose opinion I respect, asks:

??? How?

The foremost minds of the Enlightenment were the most antithetical to the jewish spirit and principles, foremost among them , Voltaire. Proto-Enlightenment philosopher, Bacon, didn’t have any common currency wi judaism. Diderot and his associates didn’t have any jewish persuasions.

How you can reach the reach the above idea, I don’t understand.

Even before Fred asked I had already expanded on my claim, stating that the essence of the so-called Enlightenment is that the goyim must never think or speak or act as the jews do, because jews. The only rationale ever offered for the system is that it serves the interests of “humanity”, i.e. the jews. Consult any mainstream discussion of the Enlightenment if you doubt this. Most of my readers are well aware of this and other games jews play with words, but here’s a bit on the meaning of “humanity”.

We can easily get lost in the weeds trying to define the Enlightenment and it’s key figures. The thrust of my argument, however, is elementary. Cui bono?

If you’re interested in getting lost in the weeds anyway, consider the bragging of jews, provided by Andrew Joyce. Here’s a taste:

I explore what is arguably the most ambitious effort yet attempted to create a Jewish icon for the non-Jewish world. In this, the case of Baruch Spinoza, I will outline the history of the Jewish effort to place him at the very heart of the Enlightenment, and to crown him as nothing less than the founder of the modern West, and even of modern democracy itself.

. . .

In [Jonathan] Israel’s words: Spinoza and Spinozism were “the intellectual backbone of the European Radical Enlightenment everywhere.”

I disagree with Joyce’s interpretation, that this effort from jews is a false exaggeration. Like most White men, Joyce sees the Enlightenment favorably, as a product of by and for White men. I see it more as typical jew arrogance, as the criminal claiming responsibility, boasting about their crime long after they imagine anything can be done about it.

The psychological failing here, the vector or vulnerability enabling the psyop, is apparently endemic to Whites. It is this peculiar recurring pattern of being hoist with the enemy’s petard, while jealously clinging to it as if it is your own. We see it also in (((the British Empire))), for example. It is a pitfall I’ve called racial solipsism.

I see the Enlightenment negatively. I see it as a watershed moment when White men, deluded and debilitated by Christianity but starting to wake to reality, tried to cure their hangover. Unfortunately, they ultimately did so by doubling down on the jew narrative, looking to the jews for answers to problems that jewing had caused. Whatever the details, they came to the conclusion that the answer was tolerance. The world was broken and the White man needed to fix it, and that meant…emancipating the jews, who then quickly helped themselves by helping the White man decide to emancipate the negroes, women, homosexuals, and so on. The disastrous consequences are exactly those things that the jewsmedia today most emphatically celebrates – feminism, open borders, sexual deviance, black lives matter, and the never-ending wars to keep the world safe for jewing.

There are people who purport that this is all about the White man trying to kill himself. They claim that all this pathology proves we’re suicidal. I disagree. I see the pathogen as jewing. I see jews bending the arc, as they put it, toward White replacement and extinction. They have made the highest purpose of every government they control to combat “racism” and “anti-semitism” while boycotting, imprisoning, or dropping bombs on whoever vexes the jews-first jews-only state. Proponents of this system call it “liberal democracy” and they trace its origins to the Enlightenment. In fact it is rule of by and for jews, and its roots go back much farther.

Here’s another recent claim of responsibility for the Enlightenment, with jews mischaracterizing themselves as the victims of their much less conscious Christian dupes, of course:

The development of the study of Jewish texts and Jewish culture within the university setting, as opposed to in a yeshiva or rabbinical academy, was by its very nature tied to the emancipation of the Jews in modern Europe, and their concomitant entry into broader European culture. As Martin Goodman notes, the earliest professors of Jewish literature in European universities were Christian professors of classical Hebrew, who claimed that their study of Hebrew language and literature could help them to discover the “true” (and invariably Christian) meaning contained within the text they called the Old Testament.

By the late Renaissance, Christian Hebraists in the university setting became interested in Kabbalah, part of a broader academic trend in which Christian scholars claimed that a whole array of esoteric literature, ranging from Zoroastrian and Hermetic texts to Egyptian hieroglyphs, could be interpreted to reveal Christian insights.

More on cabalism and its influence is coming in The Burden of Jewing, Part 3.

You might be thinking the Enlightenment is ancient history. But that’s where you’re wrong, bucko. The most vociferous proponents of Enlightenment/”classical liberal” thinking today are jews like Stephen Pinker, Dave Rubin, Ben Shapiro, and the broader jew intellectual movement calling itself the Intellectual Dark Web. They can clearly see a backlash building to the increasingly naked anti-White screeching of their “leftist” cousins. Their response is classic bagelian dialectic. Rather than call out their cousins’ jewing as jewing, they instead pine for a return to its previous, more cryptic form. They seek to moderate the White reaction to jewing, and they are doing so by encouraging still more Enlightenment thinking among Whites. They’re not doing this to hijack the credit for and esteem of what the deluded White man imagines is muh Greatest Achievement. They are doing so because they sense that the White man’s capacity for soft-headedness is not yet completely exhausted.

The Enlightenment was all along a jew-led, jew-serving psyop. Indeed, it is all the more obvious now in retrospect, now that jews no longer think there is any need to hide it.

UPDATE 6 Nov 2019:

In a remarkably explicit and expansive claim of responsibility, published in 2002 and titled The Jewish Roots of Western Freedom, Fania Oz-Salzberger jewsplains “the story of political Hebraism, the sustained effort to read the Bible politically during the seventeenth century”:

This essay attempts to point out some of the most interesting, most thought-provoking, and least studied Hebraic and Judaic origins of early modern political thought in England and beyond. It will examine several political Hebraists of the seventeenth century, and will consider the reasons for the abandonment of biblical and post-biblical sources of political thought by Enlightenment and post-Enlightenment thinkers—in particular modern liberals.

. . .

Jewish texts were not accidental sources for the subtle discussion of liberty engaged in by seventeenth-century thinkers. There were several important ideas about the nature of freedom, which early modern Europe learned from the Bible and its Jewish interpreters, and from them alone. These ideas, which Enlightenment thinkers and their progeny either abandoned or ignored, have now returned to the forefront of political discourse, and are relevant in no small measure to contemporary Israel as well.

. . .

Seventeenth-century thinkers used their Bible in a multitude of ways: There were biblical royalists, biblical republicans, biblical regicides, biblical patriarchalists and defenders of the old order, biblical economic revolutionaries and deniers of private property, biblical French imperialists, biblical English patriots, and their biblical Scottish counterparts. Policies, polemics, and parodies were based on the Bible. Writers and readers alike were intimately familiar with the Old Testament.

In Protestant Europe and in much of counter-Reformation Europe, it was the central compartment of a learned man’s toolbox, the principal weapon in his scholarly arsenal

. . .

What all of these had in common was their stout belief not only in the supreme importance of the Hebrew Bible as an authority for their convictions, but also in its uniqueness as a source of historical models. Since Calvinists and Puritans, monarchists and monarchomachs, French and Dutch and English alike all viewed themselves as the “second Israel,” the ancient Hebrew state was their best political template, if not their only one. Not Athens or Sparta or Rome, but Israel, with its kings and priests, its tribes and elders, its institutions and, especially, its laws.

. . .

the tradition of religious tolerance that was transformed by Spinoza and Locke into a doctrine of political tolerance.

. . .

A highly influential group of seventeenth-century thinkers found within Hebraic sources a cluster of significant ideas, and put them into the mainstream of European intellectual history. These thinkers, and the ideas about which they wrote, were linked to one another in several ways. The following sections of this essay discuss three seminal ideas, explicitly and often exclusively Hebraic in their inspiration—ideas for which Aristotle, Cicero, or Tacitus (among others) could not reasonably be credited— which played a crucial role in the genealogy of modern political thought. They affected early modern thinking about the state and about political liberty, and took part in the birth pangs of classical liberalism itself.

. . .

Seventeenth-century Amsterdam was the most fertile soil for social and scholarly interaction between Jews, primarily exiles from Spain well versed in classical thought, and Christian scholars, primarily Calvinists with a Hebraic fire burning in their bones. In the Dutch golden age, the “Hebrew republic” took shape as an ideal type for the modern European legal and political system. Grotius was one of the first to search for the Hebraica veritas, the Hebrew truth, a natural law common to all nations.

. . .

The glory of the Hebrew republic in Western political thought reached its apex in the middle of the seventeenth century, when the English republican revolutionaries made it their central historical model, some-times alongside the Roman republic, but more often above it.

. . .

These thinkers all repeat, with individual variations, the same basic theme: The people of Israel had a republic, a nearly perfect republic, from the time of the Exodus until at least the coronation of Saul.

“Political Hebraism”, i.e., jewing.

87 thoughts on “The Enlightenment: Good for Whom?”

  1. When Jews lack power they seek greater societal freedom to give themselves more latitude to operate in their quest for power. When they have power they try to restrict freedom so as to curtail potential opposition to their rule. The argument seems to boil down to this: if Jews use it, it must be bad. Jews use freedom, freedom bad. Jews use computers, computers bad. Jews use toilet paper, toilet paper bad. The solution is not to get rid of the Jews, but to get rid of freedom. We will stop wiping our asses and return to the Stone Age. That will really show those kikes! Lulz

  2. Quite the contrary, the argument boils down to getting rid of jews. They’re in the process of getting rid of White men and they’re not going to stop themselves. The jews realize this, and constantly screech out loud in fear that the tables might somehow turn on them. How could you not see this? Why do you keep blubbering on as if I’m the one threatening to take your imaginary freedoms away from you?

  3. We will stop wiping our asses and return to the Stone Age.

    It is out of character for “Captainchaos” to argue like a jew, in defense of jews. Did you intend to use some other nym but forget?

  4. ” The Enlightenment was all along a jew-led, jew-serving psyop. ”

    I’d submit that Jews have stolen and corrupted the common understanding of the Enlightenment. In typical jewish fashion they have elevated Spinoza to an undeserved position and blocked out the true innovators.
    I do believe the jews have hijacked and corrupted our concept of the Enlightenment to serve their own ends.

    “The jews are a race of thieves”
    “The religion of the jews is the religion of savages”….
    Essai Sur les Moeurs, Voltaire.
    (Voltaires most significant work and most suppressed.)

    “The Jews deep and secret hatred for gentiles” New Atlantis, F. Bacon

    That portion of the Enlightenment is far from jewish inspiration. With most of the primary movers in the Enlightenment having contempt for judaism.

    Another kosher hijacking of an otherwise positive institution.

  5. “Why do you keep blubbering”

    Because there are men who drink from the chalice of power, or imagine themselves doing so, and are driven mad by it. Your value to the cause, Tan, is not that you are particularly brilliant or courageous (although certainly sufficiently so), it is that you are exceptionally reasonable. A man capable of inner restraint and moderation.

    I contrast this with the cases of James Bowery and Ted Sallis. Bowery really DOES want to do away with civilization entirely. Ted Sallis, for all his alleged concern for our duskier brethren from the southern portion of our ancestral continent, says explicitly that he wishes to exterminate 15-20% of the Italian people as a part of his “New Order” eugenics project. Were their plans brought to fulfillment, this would constitute nothing less than a hideous, monstrous crime against – yes dammit! – our European “humanity.”

    These are men, for all their brilliance, who have become lost in the wilderness of their own grinding fanaticism and misanthropy. Don’t let their fate become yours. Don’t cast aside the restraint and humanity the Enlightenment teaches.

  6. “Unfortunately, they ultimately did so by doubling down on the jew narrative, looking to the jews for answers to problems that jewing had caused.”

    This is an absolutely brilliant observation by Tanstaafl. I immediately thought of a White male friend of mine, who is a rather typical ‘Boomer’ and who is a basic bitch Republican who also possesses a potentially fatal leaning towards libertarianism – specifically, the obsession with ‘rugged individualism’ and a stubborn refusal to realize that scattered and disorganized groups of individuals have zero chance of defeating the hyper-ethnocentric, extremely organized, finely tuned and racially cohesive jewish enemy.

    I try to discuss the jewish problem with this particular guy, and he pretends that he is ‘jew wise’ – but, he really is not. As with the brilliant observation made by Tanstaafl – this White male friend once showed up at my house with a copy of the Ayn Rand book ‘Atlas Shrugged’ tucked under his arm, which was his reading material during his visit. Looking to the jews to get the answers and solutions to problems caused by jewing.

    Rand was a huge critic of the idea of establishing a society based on White racial solidarity and racial loyalty – and she promoted the idea of selfish individualism and encouraged the White gentiles who allowed her to set the hook in their jaws to never think in terms of ‘whether it is good for Whites’ or ‘bad for Whites’. Her main obsession was, as stated by her wikipedia page, can be summed up thusly: “that the proper moral purpose of one’s life is the pursuit of one’s own happiness”.

    In other words, ignore the long term consequences of one’s choices or behavior to the racial group and family you are a member of, and just focus on pursuing whatever makes you as an individual happy. That is a recipe that is certain to weaken an opponent who is engaged in a long term battle for their group survival against an enemy who operates as a determined and well organized, cohesive team.

    Ayn Rand was working the divide and conquer strategy and she managed to infect millions of our people with her racially suicidal poison.

  7. This is fairly tangential but: Does Tanstaafl have any thoughts on ZMan?

    ZMan is about as prominent an American blogger as there is.

    And conveniently he is decidedly opposed to what he insists on calling “anti-semitism.”

  8. Counter-Currents Radio Podcast No. 189 Greg Johnson Interviews the Z Man

    I listened back then and got the impression he was a boring navel-gazing bloviator even before they got to the part where he sides with the jews. It brought back back memories of Moldbug, Unamused/Karl Boetel, Ian Jobling. Yet another “right”-poseur with an opinion on everything that’s wrong with the world, and how it has nothing to do with jewing. Searched for “zman jews”, top hit has him repeating the usual two jews, three opinions how to jew, while making the case that alt-jewing is good for the jews.

    In Letter To The Antisemites he literally echoes the jew Nathan Cofnas’ critique of MacDonald:

    The truth is though, Jews are over represented in everything that requires a high level of math and verbal skill. Every intellectual movement since Jewish emancipation, that was not explicitly anti-Semitic, saw an over representation of Jews. Intellectual movements tend to attract intellectuals. They also tend to be located in urban areas, especially urban capitals in Europe, where Jews have always lived. Therefore, no one should be surprised that Jews are over represented in left-wing political and cultural movements.

    The main argument of McDonald is that Judaism is a “group evolutionary strategy” engineered to promote Jewish interests at the expense of the host society. He argues that Judaism promoted eugenic practices favoring high intelligence, conscientiousness, and ethnocentrism, so Jews reached the late Middle Ages with these qualities in extraordinary surplus. Once Jews were allowed to participate in Western society, they were uniquely equipped to dominate intellectual movements, turning them to Jewish advantage.

    While admitting that is perfectly plausible, it has always struck me as a bit like intelligent design. This unique tool kit for undermining Western society evolved for the purpose of undermining a Western society, that only came into existence recently. In fact, this group evolutionary strategy came pretty close to getting all European Jews killed half a century ago. Jewish dominance today is entirely due to America opening up the country to Eastern European Jews at the start of the last century. Apparently, Jews really plan ahead.

    The bottom line, with regards to Kevin McDonald and the general idea of Jews being a hostile and subversive people, is that it could be true. It could also be true that Jews have followed the pattern of all minority populations and gravitated to the people in charge, seeing them as protectors.

  9. “the obsession with ‘rugged individualism’ and a stubborn refusal to realize that scattered and disorganized groups of individuals have zero chance of defeating the hyper-ethnocentric, extremely organized, ”

    “There is no individual solution to a collective threat.” Linder

    ( he’s absolutely right.)

  10. ‘rugged individualism’

    Yeah, sure, show me the person who does their own dentistry or a myriad of other essential services provided by a complex society, so pervasive we take them for granted.

    Alisa Rosenbaum, sure sold the gullible goy a major con.

  11. While admitting that [ complex group evolutionary strategy ] is perfectly plausible, it has always struck me as a bit like intelligent design. This unique tool kit for undermining Western society evolved for the purpose of undermining a Western society, that only came into existence recently. In fact, this group evolutionary strategy came pretty close to getting all European Jews killed half a century ago. Jewish dominance today is entirely due to America opening up the country to Eastern European Jews at the start of the last century. Apparently, Jews really plan ahead.

    — ZMan as quoted above

    He tries to walk a fine line. While “admitting [as] perfectly plausible” and that “it could be true”, in the main he casts KMac’s interpretation and explanation for their behavior, as dubious and unlikely. Why, it’s just another crackpot notion! like Intelligent Design

    Do jews employ a group evolutionary strategy, or not; what does the evidence point to?

    Realistically it’s not an easy question. First of all defining what is group evolutionary strategy, and what are the groups under consideration, is no small task; which is why intelligent people, experts or not, are able to hold forth on it, and the more simple minded will lean this way or that.

    In my opinion it’s self evident that groups of like individuals, will work together to their advantage. And that the jews are one of the best examples of this; and certainly the best and most pertinent example, in the politics of contemporary White societies.

    ZMan’s quoted opinion above, comparing group evolutionary strategy to intelligent design, is NOT convincing. His argument literally reduces to: How possibly could something so complex, be active in the world?

    It’s frankly an absurd position; it reminds of the position that what’s-his-name took, Lucas Davenport was it? in his podcast conversation with Tanstaafl. The topic then too, was group evolutionary strategy and its possible manifestations in jews and their behavior, and particularly their propensity to out-marry. Luke what’s-his-name, could not fathom that jews could do two things at the same time:

    1) Have a cohesive and complex strategy, to further their group interests; and
    2) Out-marry

    He seemed to think that because jews will outmarry, that that proves that they don’t act in their own interests. It is an absurd conclusion.

    Why wouldn’t the second thing be part of the first? The group strategy under consideration is subtle and complex, as are human societies; and arguably it’s more subtle and complex by an order of magnitude: of course it will occasionally include outmarriage.

    **************

    In summary ZMan would say that their group strategy is unlikely, because it only appears (to our eyes) at the very time it is active and effective. Well of course that is when it appears: the very time it works. (Similar in that regard to intelligent design; incidentally.)

    And then it doesn’t work, and it stops being active. Like a lot of things.

  12. The Enlightenment was largely responsible for the widespread promotion, propagation and acceptance of smallpox vaccination. That alone makes it a stellar accomplishment and contra-jewish.

    ( I can’t think of a single jew in that period that promoted vaccination.)

  13. If Whites simply fight for ourselves, as we’re naturally disposed to do, like all life, who are we gonna lose to? No-one. Only our unusual susceptibility to ideas as such prevent us from doing so.

    No ideas. Just us.

  14. ‘How could you not see this? Why do you keep blubbering on as if I’m the one threatening to take your imaginary freedoms away from you?’

    Why do you let him post here? He’s just another pretend pro-White who is quick to undermine the consensus here by equivocation. Unz review is full of them. They also took over Counter Currents. They will admit one thing about the Jews lay low for a while and cone back and start blaming Whites. Tell him to f**k off.

    Parasitism is the best explanation for the Jq. It is the most scientific and cut and dried. The parasite cannot be the host.

  15. @ Elk, Tan:

    ZMan is a Jew. His occcupation: make the hardRight

    safe for the Jews. As to the Enlightenment:

    much positive, much negative. Principal among the latter:

    de-ghetto’ing the Jew. Shortly followed by debt-finance and

    rise of the (((Banker))).

  16. “Do jews employ a group evolutionary strategy, or not; what does the evidence point to?”

    Duh…….Ahavat Yisrael.

  17. “1) Have a cohesive and complex strategy, to further their group interests; and
    2) Out-marry

    He seemed to think that because jews will outmarry, that that proves that they don’t act in their own interests. It is an absurd conclusion.”

    You’re absolutely correct.
    Just look to the book of ester for that very blueprint. Outmarriage is encouraged when it furthers the cause of judaism. It’s a subordinate principle in purim.

  18. ZMan is a Jew. His occcupation: make the hardRight safe for the Jews.

    More likely some form of mischling, married in, somehow personally entangled with them. He’s familiar with and biased in favor of them, yet doesn’t really seem to get “anti-semitism”, from either side. He can mouth the grievances of the goyim, without empathy. He can echo the jew argument against MacDonald, without the usual visceral, reflexive disgust of a full-on jew screeching about “anti-semitism”. Mister Between.

    As Elk puts it, he’s trying to walk a fine line.

    The premise of his (i.e. Cofnas’, i.e. very old jew) argument is that jews dindu nuffins. The goyim just need to work harder. Maybe pay the jews for some lessons. JEWS ROCK!

    As Nick points out, the question that cuts through the nonsense is simple. Who is us? The jews don’t regard anyone but jews as us. And they make no bones about that. In fact, YOU are the criminal if you have any problem with jews on this score. Goyim is a jew term. It basically means nigger. It neatly illustrates the clear distinction they see between themselves and the rest of us.

    Apologists like Zman play games with this simple question. They want Whites to see jews as us, but also as a “minority population”, just doing what they must to survive White racist oppression. It’s identity fraud, their fraud, The Fraud of All Frauds, as old as the jews themselves.

  19. “This guy gets it.”

    Reality-inversion is absolutely the biggest psychological trick the Jews play on their victims. Sin projection is another trick, and it ties in with the former. Jews don’t just persecute, they persecute in such a complete way that the only way to make sense of what they’re claiming is to believe the opposite. Herve Ryssen calls it “accusatory inversion” and “The Mirror of Judaism.”

    Jews aren’t crazy; this is a cynical and aggressive tactic they use. Judaism is a war religion, and Jews are a war tribe. The only difference between them and other war tribes is that words are their bullets. Whites developed language as a means to understand reality. Jews developed language as a means to undermine it, via Talmudic “scholarship,” i.e. learning how to lie. They do it to absolve themselves of their own evildoing and keep on surviving off of the blood of their hosts.

    http://volkish.org/2019/03/31/the-kapparot-impulse-the-jewish-love-of-slaughtering-innocents/

  20. “Why do you let him post here?”

    “undermine the consensus here by equivocation.”

    A consensus based on bullshit is no consensus worth preserving, you stupid faggot.

    Some of Voltaire’s more choice quotes critical of Jews can be found at http://www.solargeneral.org. Indeed, the most scathing of these quotes are taken from letters in which Voltaire responds directly to Jews who wrote to him asking for “tolerance.” Voltaire basically tells these Jews to go fuck themselves right to their greasy kike faces. Voltaire was aware of “marranos in the [American] colonies” there for the purpose of money-grubbing chicanery. He once characterized niggers as being “less intelligent than apes.”

    If Voltaire were here to defend himself against the accusation that he was essentially a shit-for-brains Jew tool, what do you think his response would be?

  21. Tan: ” The Enlightenment was all along a jew-led, jew-serving psyop “
    Fred: ” I’d submit that Jews have stolen and corrupted the common understanding of the Enlightenment “

    I would agree with Fred on that one, but I don’t like the common understanding of “The Enlightenment” in the first place.

    A dictionary definition: “A movement in Europe from about 1650 until 1800 that advocated the use of reason and individualism instead of tradition and established doctrine”.

    Between 1650 and 1800, the intellectual life among European elites may have changed faster than between 1350 and 1500, but the main reason must have been material: there were more and more books, newspapers and libraries around. Society had become wealthier, and communications easier. Cities were expanding. Technical progress was accelerating. The result was a transformation of society and a greater number of intellectuals who could make a living as teachers or writers.

    Contrary to what the theory of “The Enlightenment” seems to say, the development of the European intellectual production did not result from the activities of a small group of thinkers pushing individualism, atheism, contractualism, and so on. Technical progress had an effect on people’s lives and their mentalities. It encouraged scientific research. It’s a shame that it also encouraged some philosophers to try out stupid new ideas like contractualism. By the way, Voltaire was not a very serious and honest author, from what I’ve heard.

    Many changes and improvements occurred during the 17th and 18th centuries, as in previous centuries. The idea that the “Enlightenment” encapsulates the gist of it is absurd. The name enlightenment can also be used to describe the period as a whole, but it is annoying to see people draw a contrast between the “obscurantism” of the “Dark Ages” and the “Enlightenment” that followed.

    Fred: ” The Enlightenment was largely responsible for the widespread promotion, propagation and acceptance of smallpox vaccination.”

    I think the technical progress that had already been achieved was responsible for encouraging inquisitive minds to pursue further scientific research. It had nothing to do with the ideas of individualism and atheism usually associated with the Enlightenment.

    The Enlightenment was “an intellectual and philosophical movement”, according to wikipedia. Vaccination is something more practical. It is science, not political philosophy.

  22. KSA:
    “The only difference between them and other war tribes is that words are their bullets.”

    After they’d been beaten to near extinction by the Romans in AD 72 and AD 115, there’s the rise of rabbinic judaism. By bloody experience they discovered what Twain put so succinctly

    “WORDS ARE THE AMMUNITION OF THE MIND”

    (Which most Whites are pathetically clumsy with.)

  23. Reality-inversion is absolutely the biggest psychological trick the Jews play on their victims. Sin projection is another trick, and it ties in with the former.

    Those words should be the lodestone of every jewary WN.


  24. The Enlightenment was “an intellectual and philosophical movement”, according to wikipedia. Vaccination is something more practical. It is science, not political philosophy.

    The Enlightenment was about freeing science from theocratic tyranny.


  25. Ayn Rand was working the divide and conquer strategy and she managed to infect millions of our people with her racially suicidal poison.

    “Spread confusion among your enemies, so that you may destroy them.”……torah

  26. ‘You stupid faggot’

    Hey Tan now that Captainchaos has insulted me directly can I call him out as being a Jew apologist and insult him or do you not want that on your site?

    Like all such people when seen through and challenged he results to insults partly as a way to psychologically unbalance his opponent and partly because the issue of Jewish crypsis is so central to their Jewing. Pull the mask off and watch them panic.

    The rest of Captainchaos’s post was just too enthusiastic anti-semitism as a flamboyant cover to distract from his butt-hurt at being called out.

    I have seen these people infiltrate almost all other Jew aware sites and they never stop unless called out.

    Jews dindu nuffin.

    Pathetic.

  27. The most common bit of Voltaire’s thinking lives on in the minds of the self-imagined classical liberal White man. He hates everything the jews are doing but will defend to the death their “right” to do it.

    The Enlightenment didn’t hinge on one man or one idea. It was a tectonic, collective shift. Even the name has a jewy marketing ring to it. It marks that point in time when the jews, who had already for centuries more or less freely colonized and fed upon Europeans, with the special protection of an aristocracy already thoroughly jewed in mind if not in body, were compelled to change tactics by changing circumstances. It is telling that this change was triggered by a revolution in communication and exploration. As a consequence Europeans were freer to challenge the jew narrative on history and morality. The goyim were beginning to think and plan for themselves, and some were beginning to ask, who are these shysters among us, what’s their game?

    Jewry’s adaptation was radical. They directed the uprising against the aristocracy whom had for so long enabled their jewing. They decoupled the justification for their special privileges and protections from their book and Christianity, and shifted it instead into an abstract secular form, as a set of jew-serving principles – freedom, equality, brotherhood. All the subsequent upheaval, really one long European civil war, set Tommy against Jerry to secure citizenship and equality before the law FOR THE JEWS. That what the actual result, whatever Voltaire or Napoleon or Hitler or any of the other White men who fought and died thought it was about.

    Today these same jew-serving Enlightenment principles, which the apostles of tolerance congealed into a quasi-religious system called liberalism, are themselves challenged by changing circumstances. The goyim have been stirring on the radio, television, and now the internet. So here comes the Enrichment, the next jew move. Shut everything down for Whites. Open the gates to non-Whites. It’s still all about freedom. Freedom of jewing. Freedom from Whiteness.

    Whereas the Enlightenment was about securing a future for the jews as “fellow whites”, the Enrichment is their perfectly characteristic goodbye and thank you for the White man’s faithful service. The Kapparot Impulse is a great and terrible insight, an apt name for the general pattern of behavior.

  28. So let us imagine a different end to the videos we have seen of the hapless Japanese soldier running from a cave set afire by an agent of zog. Instead of futilely flailing about, he has summoned Odin and Odin has instilled in him a war rage. The war rage instructs him to cover his eyes with one arm and grab a pistol with the other. When he he emerges from the cave afire he pulls the arm from his eyes and puts a bullet through the brain of zogs agent then shoots zogs tool, the flamethrower, and kills those following zogs agent. Of course the spell check knows Jew words but not Bushido. Not in wiki either


  29. “The most common bit of Voltaire’s thinking lives on in the minds of the self-imagined classical liberal White man. He hates everything the jews are doing but will defend to the death their “right” to do it.”

    I believe you are referring to the infamous…

    “I may disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” –

    falsely attributed to Voltaire by biographer
    Evelyn Beatrice Hall, without any historical confirmation or precedent.

    Another example of our hijacked and corrupted history.

  30. This question really does deserve an answer as it is the crux of the entire matter: why not ONLY get rid of the Jews and NOT the Enlightenment in its entirety along with them?

  31. It is Hall’s quote, Hall’s characterization of Voltaire’s mind. How many people who mouth the idea, as if it is their own, know or care? They just think it sounds noble. That’s the Enlightenment in a nutshell – something most Whites can’t describe, and don’t understand, but would defend to the death because they imagine it is quintessentially White. My argument is that it isn’t. But even if it were, it is has clearly been turned against Whites, turned into a justification to serve the jews, rather than our own kind.

  32. why not ONLY get rid of the Jews and NOT the Enlightenment in its entirety along with them

    Why not end jewing and see what else goes away with it? Why make that contingent on saving “the Enlightenment”, whatever you imagine it is? As I’ve already pointed out, we don’t even actually have the freedoms you keep saying we must not lose.

  33. It is has clearly been turned against Whites,

    Well, sure, but everything they touch is turned against Whites, law, education, medicine etc. We can’t just dismiss institutions because they’ve been corrupted by an evil force. Seems that to condemn the Enlightenment for its misapplication is unwarranted.

    Before the Enlightenment jews had many special privileges,’king’s men’, evasion of common civil/criminal court by remandation to rabbinic courts, status as ‘god’s chosen’, exemption from torture and death sentence, exemption from taxes and military service. The Enlightenment brought them into the reach of civil law.


  34. …many people who mouth the idea, as if it is their own, know or care? They just think it sounds noble. That’s the Enlightenment in a nutshell .

    Just because many people misunderstand or misapply a concept, that doesn’t invalidate it.

    With that I’ll let the subject rest, I’ve exhausted my points.

  35. The Enlightenment in Germany was heavily influenced by Jews. The salons- meeting houses where young German intellectuals and noblemen would gather to network and develop themselves intellectually- tended to be owned by Jewish magnates and hosted by their Jewish daughters. So Germany’s elites would gather there and end up hooking up with wealthy young Jewish women. It eventually led to basically the entire Prussian aristocracy being intermixed with Jews. It also led to German intellectualism being heavily Judaized with demands for more individualism, feminism, “rights,” etc. That’s not to say it was all bad; although liberalism developed at the time, racialism did as well.

  36. “Theocratic Tyranny” imposed by Jews and their Judaized golems. Spinoza is effectively a Jew optics cuck apologizing for the unbearably Jewy Hebrew Bible, which Jews had already made obsolete at that point with the Talmud.

    They really do lead us from one mind prison to another.

    I’ve started noticing this masochistic “you get the Jews you deserve” nonsense slipping into the ‘siege-pilled’ contingent at the Waffen Haus. Any chance you’ll make a guest appearance to set these zoomers straight TAN?

  37. Just because many people misunderstand or misapply a concept, that doesn’t invalidate it.

    The concept in question is the core value of the Enlightenment: It is the White man’s duty to die for the Other, especially for jews. Whether they understand it that way or not, they internalize and they act upon it. They think they are righteous for doing so, because they’ve been propagandized to believe that all the smart people see such “Enlightenment values” as the epitome of goodness.

    We can’t just dismiss institutions because they’ve been corrupted by an evil force.

    The Enlightenment is in effect the name for a centuries-long campaign of psychological warfare against Whites. The reason it is effective and the jews are still able to wield it is because most Whites don’t regard the jews as enemies. They don’t see half of what jews do, and what they do see they misunderstand and mistakenly attribute to their own kind.

    The Enlightenment brought them into the reach of civil law.

    True. But civil law is the idea that jews should be subject to the same laws as Whites. Why should Whites make such a concession? The jews certainly don’t.

    How it plays out in practice is that jews screech that the goyim are evil for thinking jews are different from themselves, screech as if the goyim are treating jews unfairly and unequally, screech that equality is the goyim Enlightenment ideal, and screech that the goyim must therefore grant jews even more special privileges and protections and funding than they already enjoy.

  38. Hall’s quote, about Voltaire posing as a defender of free speech :
    ” I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it “

    The idea of the enlightenment as the victory of free speech over obscurantism may be specifically a Judeo-American interpretation. Until recently, the Jews used to invoke the ideal of free speech to defend attacks on Western society, but their new priority, especially since the internet, is to ban hate speech.

    At the same time, some Jews are still sticking to their old rhetoric. Our “Jewish advocates” will even defend White Nationalism in the name of free speech. They will say that White Nationalism is something repulsive that must nevertheless be allowed, because the core of the free speech ideal is the idea that we must protect speech that we disagree with.

    That rhetoric is harmful to us. Actually, White Nationalism is not repulsive or extremist, and it isn’t a fringe idea. It is simply the idea that we have a right to exist as a race. Most White people would agree with us. But this reasonable position is under assault, specifically by the Jews. And it needs to be protected from them.

    A distinction must be made between the dominant view, which is the Jew view, and the majority view, which is White people’s view. The opinion that most needs protection is obviously that of the White majority. It needs protection against the Jewish genocidal dictatorship. The most important part of free speech is the protection of opinions shared by 98% of the population.

    On the other hand, we need to ban some harmful ideas that the Jews are pushing. We will still have free speech. The Jews like to push valid ideas to the absurd, whether it is communism, free trade, liberalism… Contrary to what they say, free speech doesn’t have to be total free speech.


    I think Noam Chomsky and Glenn Greenwald are two examples of Jews who defend hate speech (the idea that Whites have a right to exist) in the name of total free speech. Greenwald has worked with the CIA agent Edward Snowden who released information about the U.S. secret services. Some people will see Snowden as a traitor, but it seems to me that the U.S. secret services have largely been taken over by ZOG. I was glad to see that Whitney Webb is accusing Greenwald of retaining information given him by Snowden.
    https://twitter.com/_whitneywebb/status/1182371054561513473

  39. “group evolutionary strategy” – Just Like Trump, Why Did All Of Joe Biden’s Children Marry Jews? – “Jews have an innate attraction to power and wealth, and going back through recent history, Jews often found themselves in the inner-most circles of European aristocracy because of their willingness to extend loans to the cash-strapped profligate elite at interest.
    “And one of the easiest ways to get those un-repayable loans forgiven was to marry the daughter of the jewish money lenders, a simple strategy that allowed Jews to infiltrate and ultimately replace the native aristocracies of Europe.” – https://christiansfortruth.com/just-like-trump-why-did-all-of-joe-bidens-children-marry-jews/

  40. They who say they, ‘would defend to the death your right to say what I believe to be false,’ never ever seem to make good on their claims when people are jailed for opinions in the West. I don’t know of one example.

    Loyalty to ideas induces tendencies toward dishonesty because everyone knows no idea is always known to be true. It’s a fudge and they’re loyal fudgers.

    People not ideas.

  41. Fred W: “I’ve exhausted my points.”

    There is one more point worth making. Tanstaafl has essentially concluded that it doesn’t really matter what the Enlightenment thinkers actually said. What matters is that Jews have so hopelessly queered public perception of the Enlightenment that its only use now can be to aid Jews in ushering in their nigger-loving, “brotherhood of man.”

    Ironically though, this critique could be applied to his own work. What if the Jews have so hopelessly distorted public perception of anti-semitism as being the product of frothing at the mouth, nazi lunatics that no one will any longer listen to criticism of Jews? In that case, wouldn’t Tanstaafl’s own work be useless at best, and counter productive at worst?

    Like the rest of us, he too places his faith in the saying that “the truth will out.” It’s a pity he can’t be as charitable to Enlightenment thinkers as he hopes others will be to his own work.

  42. It’s a pity he can’t be as charitable to Enlightenment thinkers as he hopes others will be to his own work

    Boo hoo.

  43. “They who say they, ‘would defend to the death your right to say what I believe to be false,’ never ever seem to make good on their claims…”

    Haha, so very true !

    People just like to virtue peacock, “hey, lookie at me, I be so righteous”.
    ( it especially applies to “I’m not racist, everyone is equal”).

  44. “It’s a pity he can’t be as charitable to Enlightenment thinkers……”

    I don’t think you made a dent.:)

  45. Ilhan Omar:

    1 year ago we witnessed the deadliest anti-Semitic attack in our nation’s history at the Tree of Life Synagogue. Holding the victims and survivors in my heart today.

    We must confront the hateful ideology of white nationalism and treat it like the national security threat it is.

    Kikeworld.

  46. “It is simply the idea that we have a right to exist as a race.”

    There is only one ‘right’ – the right to attempt to survive.
    The rest are privileges most often paid for in blood.

    First Thing First : Eliminate Jew Influence

  47. ” First Thing First : Eliminate Jew Influence”

    We’re going to need a lot more media than we currently have. Our institutional influenc3 is just about zilch.

  48. “The psychological failing here, the vector or vulnerability enabling the psyop, is apparently endemic to Whites.”

    But as a matter of fact did Poles ever really fall for this or any other ruse? Are they an exception even today where we see Orban pay lip service to Zionism, and to the rights of Jews in Poland? Lip service is all he could give, but costs nothing, while he and his party are openly committed to maintaining the ethnic basis of Poland as an independent Polish State. His party’s supporters are *all* ethnic nationalists and polls say the majority are anti-Jew, as are most Poles in fact. In my own experience of Poles that’s true also, god love em (they should just stay in Poland). And how about the Russians?

    I don’t think Whites have a particular psychological failing. I think groups from every race would have succumbed eventually to a sustained 2500 year assault on their identities by media preachers.

    The pagan ancestors of today’s Muslim populations in the Mid and Far East succumbed and were more utterly subdued and deracinated in far less time. American Indians, Maoris and Australian Aborigines were psychologically destroyed in just a century of contact with the West where they now can barely function as welfare recipients. When they look in the mirrors we traded with them for land – they hate the reflection they see much more than we ever do.

    Whites are not known to be peculiarly vulnerable to subversion. The opposite would seem more true from observing the broad historical picture.

  49. “So have any of you Yanks called yer Congress critter? Or is this FUD and 1stAm means this Bill can’t be effective whether or not it gets passed??

    https://www.truthtellers.org/ https://www.truthtellers.org/alerts/Anti%20Semitism%20Awareness%20Bill%209-24-2019-v3.pdf

    btw for you legal beagles out there: isn’t there some federal offence of conspiring to deprive citizens of their constitutional rights? Are the Senate and the rest indictable? Or is that another paper tiger in this pay-per-play justice system?”

    The number’s 1-202-224-3121.

    Rev Ted Pike’s been treading the boards for a long time and seems a straight-up kind of guy.

  50. Nick, Orban is the prime minister of Hungary, but your point is well taken.

    Whites are perfectly capable of rallying around leaders who speak to us, and to counter the natural popularity of this instinctive behavior requires constant demonization and psychopathologization by the jewsmedia. As the jewsmedia’s hostility toward Whites becomes more plain, so too does White disdain for the jewsmedia. The problem, as ever, is that Whites still try hard not to see it as the jewsmedia. Even most who dislike and distrust the jewsmedia still think of it as “our” media, just a bit kooky for some reason they don’t want to think too deeply about.

    I don’t think Whites have a particular psychological failing. I think groups from every race would have succumbed eventually to a sustained 2500 year assault on their identities by media preachers.

    Right. But the psychological failing I’m talking about – the White failure to perceive jews as their enemy, thus accepting and internalizing their point of view – is the crack into which the jewsmedia drives its wedge. To racially conscious Whites this failure appears endemic to Whites exactly because we are most attuned to our own kind. Yet much of this failure is itself a consequence of jewing. It is impossible to say how much given that the jews very deliberately disguise their jewing, but in my opinion even relatively racially aware Whites have historically underestimated and misunderstood the jews. I’m dismayed to see evidence of this even in the face of jews literally broadcasting their anti-White hostility, justifying it by claiming it is in defense of jews.

    How have the jews ever hijacked anything? By infiltrating and manipulating the goyim who previously created and controlled it, by convincing these goyim that The Tribe is no different than themselves and should be treated as equals. As we can see clearly – whether in hindsight, or in the most active open jewing today – “Enlightenment values” is just code for “you need to open your gates and tolerate our hostile toxic deadly jewing, bigot”. This is the thoroughly jewed program by which the thoroughly jewed world order, and especially the United States, operates right now. There are jews taking credit for this program, jewsplaining how it works, every day in the jewsmedia. Yet still I hear claims that this jewing was ours, that it still is ours, that we can’t live without it! To the extent such claims aren’t outright lies I think they reflect a perplexity that is, by design, itself a product of jewing.

  51. “How have the jews ever hijacked anything?”
    We are born into the trick the jews have used for centuries to control, exploit and destroy us at will. This trick is called “Individuality” which is nothing more than a divide and conquer strategy. These principles were formed by the french jews during the so called enlightenment, and the scam called “the rights of man”when in fact the enlightenment was a return to the dark ages. With a social system where people are all individuals, the social system is then wide open to a wide array of destabilizing forces which the jews unleach on us. As we have seen since WWII, traditional culture was subverted by the beatniks, hippies, feminist, glbt, hordes of latino invaders, etc. Each new generation was encouraged to rebel against the traditions before it, to sever connections, create anomie, and pitt all these disconnected individuals against each other. Meanwhile, hidden, in the background, the jews continue their march through our institutions, taking them over, buying them out, shutting them down, outsourcing them abroad. Individualism, without a centralized worldview, has allowed all this to happen. Everything that connected the individual to all the other individuals has been systematically destroyed. Labor unions, civic organizations and so on. I have even noticed that many of our artists, who act as social connectors, are systematically being killed while they expect us to believe these successful millionaire family men are suicides, over doses, cancer, etc. Meanwhile we see major churches cracked into even more schisms, as we’ve recently witnessed with the mainline methodists and lutherns split up by the lgbt jewish psyop. From all directions, this nation is under attack, while we continue to see the consolidation of wealth and power fall into the hands of jews. Like the jew hero “Neo” in the Matrix Movie, he eventually defeats Agent Smith, who is us, by actually getting inside of him, and exploding him from within, leaving behind massive debts, endless war, and a confused, polarized peoples. As we now see, jews have lied about everything, and its clear why the 20th century Germans so hated this jewish virus. It is also true that the National Socialist system was able to dislodge these parasites from their system, and thus is the way forward. Vote National Socialist and lets end this shit

  52. Charlie Kirk getting btfo’d at these universities has been a major white pill. I think there might be hope for these Zoomers after all. The Overton with window is definitely shifting.

  53. Realpolitik. Would the outcome of the National Socialist uprising been different if they had summarily executed any jew who fell into their hands? I don’t think so. It probably wouldn’t have helped expand the uprising. And even if it helped extend its life then Germans would have gotten nuked, just as Einstein and Szilard and the other Manhattan Project jews had hoped. In hindsight only a more widespread and comprehensive uprising had any chance of success.

  54. “…Germans would have gotten nuked, just as Einstein and Szilard and the other Manhattan Project jews had hoped.”

    That’s a laugh.

    ‘Manhattan Project jews ‘ didn’t have any idea how to trigger a nuclear weapon until the capture of Dr. Schlickle on May 14,45.

    Where would they have gotten the enriched uranium ?

  55. I copied and searched this sentence. Manhattan Project jews ‘ didn’t have any idea how to trigger a nuclear weapon until the capture of Dr. Schlickle on May 14,45. I was led to a website Wherein, a kike with access to Germany’s fission program showed neils bohr a picture of a fission reactor. Bohrs ignorance of what it was threw him into a fit. It also made Manhattan proj kikes apoplectic. There are letters from wives and others corroborating the event and hurt feels. Hahahahaha

  56. Furthermore, marxist thought about not interpreting rules rather making them. Einstein’s fraud; take physical fact (speed of light), assert it has something to do with time because it is measured against time, claim to find time. I turned on my kitchen faucet and the flow approached my bathroom faucet and I wrap through time and am now 2 again. Hahaha

  57. What is there to laugh about? Rather than rising up and throwing off the jew yoke, the good goyim in America helped the jews, and probably would have had no qualms about dropping Fat Man and Little Boy on Germans. That was certainly the conscious intention of the jews who were working on the Manhattan project.

    Einstein and Szilard conceived their letter to FDR urging development of atomic weapons in the summer of 1939, prior to the start of the war in Europe, and almost two and a half years before the US was even at war with Japan. They didn’t know exactly how to do it, but they realized the goyim would soon be fighting each other, and they deliberately set out to get the most useful idiot goyim to help them develop a weapon to incinerate the most uppity goyim.

    I don’t think the American (or British or Russian) collaborators would have been any less willing to help the jews with their agenda (including atomic weapons) if Hitler had ordered the extermination of jews. The only thing that might have worked is if Americans (and Brits and Russians) had thrown off the jew yoke, as the Germans had.

  58. “What is there to laugh about?”

    That the USA could develop an atomic weapon without german cooperation and resources. There never would have been an atomic bomb to attack Germany .

  59. It doesn’t necessarily matter if America had operational nuclear bombs before the time of Germany’s official capitulation. What matters is what Hitler believed about America’s nuclear capabilities at the time of his decision making. I’m sure Roosevelt and Truman weren’t sending Hitler weekly progress reports on the Manhattan Project. Hitler was doubtlessly aware of the damage nuclear weapons could do in theory because of Germany’s own effort to acquire them. It is quite possible Hitler didn’t wish to risk the potential use of nuclear weapons against Germany.

  60. Hitler wasn’t about to massacre jews, it wasn’t in his character.

    He was an ethical vegan, wouldn’t have cut flowers in his house, ‘corpses’, stopped the fire bombing of London when briefed on Luftwaffe operations.
    He refused his generals request to white phosphorus at the critical juncture of battle of the bulge,” I will let Germany go down to defeat before using such a terrible weapon”. Hitler was far too ethical to kill jews, he wanted mass resettlement.
    He never used a drop of the 50,000 tons of nerve gas the Germans had.

  61. I am laughing at Jew high iq bullshit. Speed is function of time. How does time become dependent on it? Two sentences and I have completely destroyed the theory of relativity. Attag this bullshit relentlessly and it will become apparent to children. Full spectrum attack full spectrum response. They have no redeeming qualities. They disgust me.

  62. Any thoughts of the young wipper snapper Nick Fuentes calling out the ‘conservatives’ with his Groypers?

  63. ” because everyone knows no idea is always known to be true… ”

    Are you sure about that, in all instances ?

  64. Ryan Dawson on 9/11

    @5:30
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=eCtjhcsFqt8

    ” Give us twenty (20) years and we will take over your media and destroy your country ”
    Urban Moving Systems

    This is such common knowledge among the jws that the low levels rub it in the goys face.

    Give them 20 years ??? WTH, they already control it.

  65. ” Nick Fuentes calling out the ‘conservatives’ with his Groypers? ”

    Seems like an excellent idea. It’s clever and has the potential to seed other activities.

    I’m biased, I’m in favor of any actions that undermine the kosher agenda and their stogies.

  66. @Fred W, I agree. Fuentes has a big following and they are onto the jew subversion.
    Sometimes I want to choke him, but mostly he is wickedly good for our cause.

  67. The groupers have been working on physics sites for years with questions like this, “does gravity change with density or mass?”. The sites admit that they don’t know where Newton’s g originates from. They also come up with spurious explanations for that question like when an object moves real close to a very dense object there are linear forces on the moving object. The groupers/children are exposed because they don’t fire back with of course it’s linear, g works in line directed at center of mass and you’re response is poorly thought out. As in, you should define the trajectory of this linear force and explain how it functions in 3 dimensional world. Which brings us back to stieny’s problem, where did he find all of that light traveling in only one direction?
    Soooo , just read article of simplistic nonsense that further makes my point, and illustrates how this charade works. Apparently you can just move a ruler around the galaxy and determine the time of the Big Bang. The dazzlingly interesting part is how this works. because those proposing the theory can apply forces and densities and mass to objects billions of miles away that are worked on By trillions of objects that create forces like Newton’s g that aren’t properly understood “you should believe the science goy”.
    And how does argument function as criticism of enlightenment. Use liberty, equality and fraternity as standard. Equality, arguments are now of equal validity as theories, throw chink in armor of relativity and watch it defended as theory. It’s only a theory we need to fund “scientific” research with billions of dollars to prove. Fraternity, becomes consensus that is more important than sense or logic. Ask the meteorologists from Australia how that worked after they questioned climate change. No grants for you!

  68. Wintermute / Colin Laney, who used to comment here and elsewhere, and was something of an expert on the jewish problem, often used to say that the only two “good jews” he knew of from history were Spinoza and Simone Weil (not to be confused with Simone Veil). I would be interested to know why he thought that.

    At face value it looks like Spinoza was a fierce critic of Judaism, who was excommunicated by the Jewish community, and only hailed as a hero by jews many years later. But who knows, perhaps there was something else going on. I’m reminded of something I think Revilo Oliver once said about the jews who invented Christianity making it look superficially anti-jewish so as to fool the gullible goyim. Of course Oliver himself said in ‘the Jewish Strategy’ said he couldn’t think of a single jew from history (even taking into account Pfefferkorn, Henry Klein and Benjamin Freedman – he didn’t mention Spinoza or Weil) who had genuinely betrayed his race.

  69. This jewsplainer for The Enrichment comes from anarcho-capitalist messiah Bryan Caplan. Open Borders Are a Trillion-Dollar Idea. Original title: Open Borders Are Immigration’s Best Fix.

    Tearing down all barriers to migration isn’t crazy—it’s an opportunity for a global boom.

    . . .

    As long as Haitians remain in Haiti, they produce next to nothing—and therefore do next to nothing to enrich the rest of the world. When they move, their productivity skyrockets—and so does their contribution to their new customers. When you see a Haitian restaurant in Miami, you shouldn’t picture the relocation of a restaurant from Port-au-Prince; you should picture the creation of a restaurant that otherwise would never have existed—not even in Haiti itself.

    The central function of existing immigration laws is to prevent this wealth creation from happening—to trap human talent in low-productivity countries. Out of all the destructive economic policies known to man, nothing on Earth is worse. I’m not joking.

    It isn’t a pile of dog shit, it’s a pile of gold! Reality inversion doesn’t get more chutzpathic than this.

  70. “It isn’t a pile of dog shit, it’s a pile of gold!”

    Yep, the typical inversion of facts.

    ” hey goy, taste this, I know it looks like cow shit, but really, it’s the finest form of steak known to man. Look at the fine texture, you don’t even need a knife to cut it, and the unique odor is only appreciated by the most sophisticated of connoisseurs. Eat up goy.”

  71. moo moo cow:

    19. The word “racism” was not even a thing 100 years ago

    Yet today our entire society’s existence seems to revolve around fighting “racism”

    The definition of “racism” is an act of “oppression” which causes racial inequality

    Who planted this concept in everyone’s head and how?

    https://twitter.com/i_am_cattle/status/1174332436320346112/photo/1

    Just ask any self-described classical liberal promoting Enlightenment values. They’ll jewsplain that the imperative to combat “racism” is second only to combating “anti-semitism”. Point out that <insert any classical liberal or Enlightenment figure here> was a “virulent racist/anti-semite”. They’ll agree and tell you that’s what makes America great and standing by Israel so important. Then perhaps an incensed Groyper will grab the mic and set everyone straight by jewsplaining how the real problems started when Whites abandoned Christianity.

  72. “real problems started when Whites abandoned Christianity.”

    That would describe the Framers of the Constitution, Paine, Franklin, Jefferson etc. Seems that was the start of the solutions.

  73. So the two main planks of White nationalism should be exterminating the Jews and getting rid of Christianity?

  74. Read “enlightenment empiricism” in article written by smug Christian in suit and tie as prompt to believe his argument. Searched web for said empiricism. Was given choices for further searches that included “empiricism vs. rationalism”. Given that rationalism derives from Greek philosophy and Greek philosophy generated western culture, it is safe to say that the enlightenment was attag on western culture. Rationalism was described as asserting a priori knowledge in line with DeCarte and Plato. Jews obviously don’t like a priori dna of Whites.
    Further a priori vs. empiricism, https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/12/after-botched-launch-orbiting-atomic-clocks-confirm-einsteins-theory-relativity. OK BOOMER, The overarching time used as framework to determine rockets time change has only one explanation. provable Known quantities like 1/2mv2 would not add energy to clock that functions by releasing energy and thus disrupt its time recording mechanism. It could only be time warp, look goy measurements, empiricism rules.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *