Tag Archives: black

“Wokeness” is a Jew Construct

Here’s another professional jew claiming responsibility, connecting the dots between BLM, liberalism, and the Enlightenment. Recounting the “song of jew history” (the jew version of history, the eternal screech), he jewsplains how jews with a particularist “jew lives matter” idea always foremost in their own minds “practically invented” the toxic universalist ideas which have repeatedly killed their hosts.

Zionism is the Jewish Black Lives Matter – The Forward:

Throughout history Jews have tried the “all lives matter” argument. We brought the idea of ethical monotheism to the world — under the foundational beliefs that all humans are created in the image of God. In a world dominated by social hierarchies, the early Israelites and prophets railed against this unjust caste system, starting a long process of moral progression. We practically invented the idea of “all lives matter.”

According to Jewish tradition, we then tried teaching this to the Egyptians, Babylonians, Greeks and Romans – yet their hostility towards others, specifically us, went unstopped. We engaged in medieval debates with the Christain hegemony, making the argument that all humans are inherently valuable and godly. Yet the libels, pogroms and scapegoating never ceased.

Finally, we thought after the Enlightenment that anti-Semitism would soon be over. Finally the world recognized that all lives matter — that people have fundamental and unalienable rights that need not depend on color or creeds. Yet we all know how that worked out.

. . .

The “all lives matter” song of Jewish history slowly stopped and was replaced by “Jewish lives matter.” A state for the Jews, in our historic and indigenous homeland, where we can govern and protect ourselves, cultivate our tradition and keep it alive, and be a refuge for any Jew in trouble. Yes — Zionis mis the ultimate claim that Jewish lives matter.

Jews have come to the difficult but important realization that we need to occasionally thrust aside universalism in favor of particularism. We understand that while we need to be constantly dedicated to global and universal issues, Jewish-specific education and protection is paramount to our well-being. We have no issue proudly advocating for the fact that “Jewish lives matter.”

Because of this, we don’t just have a moral imperative to support Black Lives Matter. We have a personal one. The same history and values that inspire me to be an outspoken Zionist underpin my support for Black Lives Matter.

Our prophets teach that in Messianic times the entire world will come together in a monolithic utopia where there is no more strife or war. Until then, we need to be on the frontlines of racial justice and yes, that means rejecting broken and ineffective claims such as “All Lives Matter.”

“Messianism” is jewing. The term refers specifically to the shameless jew-serving moralizing with which they have repeatedly turned their host societies inside out and upside down. The current moral panic, “wokeness”, is just the most recent example.

Many jewsmedia pundits have noticed this moralizing. Most critique its religious character, and its war-like character, while ignoring its jewy character. We’re In A Cultural Civil War. It’s Time For Conservatives To Fight Back is a typical “classical liberal” take:

In some sense this is entirely psychological. A relatively small group of radical left-wing activists is using classic cult psychology to wage psychological war against the rest of us. They are the vanguard of what can only be described as a religious movement in America.

Indeed, Black Lives Matter and its attendant ideology contain all the elements of a religion: it promulgates doctrines that are explicitly normative, it has a cosmology and a morality, its claims are not subject to or consistent with scientific proofs. James Lindsay has gone further and described it as a cult, with recognizable and well-established features of a cult such as initiation, indoctrination, and cult reprogramming.

But this is a religious movement unlike any we’ve seen before, because unlike established religions it’s formally secular enough to be allowed into purely secular institutions of public life. This is why the Black Lives Matter agenda and The New York Times’ 1619 Project are being taught openly in our public schools.

We certainly have seen this kind of “formally secular” religion before. Consider the “nazi death camp” and “six million” shibboleths. These Big Lies have been openly taught in public schools for decades. What’s more, jews organized openly as jews stage an annual public spectacle whereby their most useful servants make a pilgrimage to worship jews and recite their cultish beliefs about jewland.

Anything critics say about “the BLM agenda” applies even more so to jewing. No doubt that’s why many of the pundits who might say something critical of blacks decide not to. They’re not afraid of the blacks. They’re afraid of the jews who see “black lives matter” as a proxy for “jew lives matter”. Whites who have already accepted some form of jew worship will find it easier to accept black worship. They need only imagine blacks as their “new jews”. They might feel some cognitive dissonance when jews screech about black “anti-semitism”, but the jewsmedia will surely help them work that out.

Lindsay’s The Cult Dynamics of Wokeness, linked in the Federalist article quoted above, equates the “wokeness” behind BLM to anti-“racism” (another jew construct) and notes its similarity to Christianity (yet another jew construct):

“Christ died for your sins, so you can be forgiven” is a Christian example, and “Be an antiracist. Help us dismantle the system and build a better world” is an “antiracist” example.

Lindsay elaborates upon the emotional and psychological manipulation of “the mark” by “the cult”, but also connects it to Marxism, another “formally secular” bit of jewing:

I know this part gets a little heady, but it’s important. Critical consciousness is, formally, the cult mentality of Karl Marx’s conflict theory. Conflict theory, in briefest explanation, is the idea that society is broken into different groups or classes (for Marx, they were economic classes, and for the Woke, they are social group-identity classes) that are oppressive on one side, oppressed on the other, and in conflict over this. That is, conflict theory is the belief that different social groups in society are always in conflict with one another for power and dominance, and that rather than working together in complex, dynamical ways that can be mutually beneficial, they are at war. A critical consciousness means realizing this and that you are somehow personally complicit in creating the material conditions for that war and need to “do better,” either by renouncing your dominance (if dominant) or by agitating for a full-on revolution (if oppressed).

Critical consciousness is therefore a very cartoonish, us-versus-them reading of the world. This mentality, of course, tweaks various psychological and social impulses in people as described in social identity theory, for example, and dramatically increases what’s called “parochial altrusim.” This means strongly favoring the in-group (here, the cult) and forgiving it for every excess and abuse while becoming overtly hostile to the out-group (here, everyone else in society and society itself) and reading everything it does in the worst light possible. This is obviously core to the present sociological dynamic! It also dramatically increases cult commitment, adding an overtly warlike tenor to the us-against-them mentality, which in critical cults like Wokeness is us-against-the-world.

. . .

To summarize, then, Wokeness is a cult. It might even be, in its broadest functions, a proper religion at this point with a describable and fanatic cult element within it and protected by the relative reasonability of the broader faith. Antiracism, in particular, under its auspices is explicitly framed religiously and with clear patterns of cult initiation written all over it. This is what we’re up against.

This cult mentality Lindsay describes as manifesting in Christianity and Marxism springs from the more ancient and potent “critical consciousness” of jews. They translate their cabalist term “tikkun olam” as “social justice”. It means: “help us dismantle the (non-jew) system and build a better world (for jews)”.

The jews have always had an us-against-the-world mentality, a jews-versus-goyim “reading of the world”. Just a few months ago, amidst the hysteria around coronavirus, before BLM and “wokeness” went viral, jews were shamelessly screeching that “anti-semitism” is the real pandemic everyone should worry about. In that screeching it was clear that they see non-jews as diseased and ever more jewing as the cure.

The Tribe refers to themselves, among themselves, as “The Tribe”. They see themselves as morally and culturally distinct from and superior to non-jews. They see themselves at perpetual war with non-jews. Their primary weapons are emotional and psychological manipulation, using their long-standing dominance of the mass media and academia to constantly accuse non-jews, especially Whites, of oppressing them. The oppression narrative at the very center of “wokeness” isn’t a non-White construct, it’s a jew construct. In the “wokeness” narrative Whites remain the oppressors, the epitome of evil, and the jew role, by definition good, has simply been generalized to include all non-Whites. As jews sometimes put it, the non-Whites are the “new jews”.

“Supercession” is the religious term for this kind of jew-sanctioned, jew-serving extension of jew mentality. There’s a cargo cult quality to other non-Whites trying to ape the jews. This is especially the case with “wokeness”, where the jew role isn’t explicit, making it more likely some goy will lose the plot and either conflate or distinguish Whites and jews in a way that displeases the “fellow oppressed”.

Early in his article Lindsay notes:

The concept of “white fragility” in the antiracist Woke cult is exactly this sort of emotional shakedown. White fragility separates white people and their “adjacencies” into exactly two types: racists (who admit it) and racists (who are too emotionally fragile to admit it).

The concept of “anti-semitism” is where the concept of “racism” and this newer, more precisely-targeted buzzterm “White fragility” come from. “Anti-semitism” is the original “original sin”. The jews separate non-jews into exactly two types of “anti-semite”: those who know, and those who don’t know yet.

Another mainstream “classical liberal” has written pointedly about this jewing-by-other-means without identifying it as such. Andrew Sullivan coyly asks, Is There Still Room for Debate?

The orthodoxy goes further than suppressing contrary arguments and shaming any human being who makes them. It insists, in fact, that anything counter to this view is itself a form of violence against the oppressed. The reason some New York Times staffers defenestrated op-ed page editor James Bennet was that he was, they claimed, endangering the lives of black staffers by running a piece by Senator Tom Cotton, who called for federal troops to end looting, violence, and chaos, if the local authorities could not. This framing equated words on a page with a threat to physical life — the precise argument many students at elite colleges have been using to protect themselves from views that might upset them. But, as I noted two years ago, we all live on campus now.

In this manic, Manichean world you’re not even given the space to say nothing. “White Silence = Violence” is a slogan chanted and displayed in every one of these marches. It’s very reminiscent of totalitarian states where you have to compete to broadcast your fealty to the cause. In these past two weeks, if you didn’t put up on Instagram or Facebook some kind of slogan or symbol displaying your wokeness, you were instantly suspect. The cultishness of this can be seen in the way people are actually cutting off contact with their own families if they don’t awaken and see the truth and repeat its formulae. Ibram X. Kendi insists that there is no room in our society for neutrality or reticence. If you are not doing “antiracist work” you are ipso facto a racist. By “antiracist work” he means fully accepting his version of human society and American history, integrating it into your own life, confessing your own racism, and publicly voicing your continued support.

This suppression orthodoxy is visible in its purest form when jews swarm and screech about “anti-semitism” and “anti-semites”. It’s chilling effect is visible in these jewsmedia pundits describing “wokeness” as if it has no connection to jewing.

Whites “liberals” who display their “wokeness” by saying “black lives matter” are doing the same thing as White “conservatives” waving a jew-state flag and proclaiming that they “stand with Israel”. It is not an act of self-abnegation. Quite the opposite. They are trying to protect and even elevate themselves. Whites who have accepted and internalized the jew lie that race is a social construct may even imagine they can change teams, or “convert”, as if they were jews. Even those who don’t believe the lies understand they can get ahead by mouthing those lies more quickly or convincingly than others.

Job #1 of the jews’ anti-“racist” “work” has been painting Whites as public enemy #1. “Wokeness” is a recent extension of that project, an add-on to “political correctness”, which itself is more aptly described as semitical correctness. The jewing that begat “wokeness” isn’t shrinking or being displaced. It’s adapting and growing.

To be woke is to wake up to the truth — the blinding truth that liberal society doesn’t exist, that everything is a form of oppression or resistance, and that there is no third option. You are either with us or you are to be cast into darkness.

The truth is that liberalism and the Enlightenment belong to an earlier, now obsolete phase of jewing. It was characterized by jews dissimulating as “fellow whites”. This newer phase, the Enrichment, is characterized by jews dropping their “white” mask. In this phase jews are openly screeching as jews, jewsplaining how their jewness sets them apart, how their oppression status outranks any other and thus entitles them to tell non-jews what to think about anything.

The truth is that even the “wokest” non-White goy who somehow vexes jews gets piled on almost as viciously as any uppity White goy. Swarming screeching jews overrule any truth, trump any chimpout. However “nuanced” the pilpul gets when jews try to jewsplain what everyone else should think about “wokeness”, their premise is always the same. They either support it or oppose it because that’s what they think is best for their tribe. That’s the essence of semitical correctness.

Whenever a newer, more cryptic offshoot of jewing intersects an older, more in-your-face form of jewing, the jews on all sides will ensure the former is what gets corrected. Here’s an example:

The BBC has reportedly ordered its television presenters not to wear Black Lives Matter (BLM) badges on air after Campaign Against Antisemitism exposed worrying antisemitism in the movement and its other extreme views emerged.

. . .

A spokesperson for Campaign Against Antisemitism said: “We are not surprised that the antisemitic outbursts and revelations of other extremist views from within the BLM movement are causing those who had lent their support to distance themselves. All decent people oppose racism, which is why seeing anti-Jewish racism emerging from within the movement against anti-black racism has been an ugly sight. Prejudice cannot be beaten with more prejudice.”

Here the anti-White teacher is correcting their student.

Niggers and Kikes, United Against Whites

maher_carmichael_lear

Notice all the cucks and niggers pretending to be offended at Bill Maher’s latest act, calling himself a house nigger. Among other things it demonstrates the power of taboos, how simply uttering certain magic words can unleash a torrent of emotion and vitriol, even if much of it is fake.

The nature of this power is revealed in who censures whom. If political correctness is a war on noticing, as Breezy Steve Sailer often notices, then semitical correctness is the war on noticing jewing. Thou shalt not mention jews or their jewing – that’s the One Strange Trick behind the current prevailing structure of taboos.

This tantrum Maher triggered has everything to do with mistaking him for “white”. In reality he’s anti-White. Indeed, he’s a shape-shifting transracialist mischling, a professional celebrity crypto-jew. He’s an actor-provocateur whose career consists of playing the white-faced minstrel, pissing on White norms while tilting impotently against semitical correctness. His job, couched in snark and irony, is to stake out what is or isn’t taboo and for whom, to spell out the unwritten rules by making an example of himself.

It is the pretense that Maher is “white”, an exemplar of “white privilege”, which makes his use of the word nigger “racist”. It is the white-washing of this jew’s jewing which makes it perfectly semitically correct to loath him. To call him out and loath him for being a particularly toxic jew is the exact opposite, perfectly semitically incorrect, six gorillion times worse than saying nigger.

Just prior to the hysteria Maher inspired the jewsmedia was busy promoting a positive attitude about niggers saying nigger. The difference is complementary, not contradictory. Whereas Maher’s shtick is aimed at demoralizing the White goyim, The Carmichael Show strikes a defiant tone aimed at emboldening the black goyim.

The jewsmedia’s PR included this helpful little aside:

The use of the word is not unprecedented – see All in the Family. But that aired “before political correctness,” jewsmedia house niggress Loretta Devine said at NBCU Summer Press Day

Yes, see All in the Family, the icebreaker for prime-time anti-White talmudvision. Bill Maher’s jewing pales in comparison to Norman Lear’s. The old kike is jewing away to this day, ever more openly relishing it as he descends into senility. In May Lear invited Jerrod Carmichael on his podcast specifically so they could say nigger together.

Listening in you’ll notice that the real Carmichael, behind the uppity talmudvision nigger act, is a true jewsmedia house nigger. Jewsmedia jews made him, own his black ass, and he’s happy with the arrangement. More to the point, notice that neither Lear nor Carmichael bother to pretend jews are White.

Dylann Goes Through the Roof

dylann_roof

“You rape our women and you’re taking over our country.” – Dylann Roof

It seems a White man has finally fired back in the decades-long war on Whites. The motive Roof purportedly stated, as relayed in early reports, is quickly being buried beneath a public outpouring of loathing aimed at Whites more broadly. The anti-White hostility is coming largely from non-Whites, of course, but much of it is also coming from deracinated Whites, and some even from racially-aware Whites, who should know better.

That much of this hostility originates from and is amplified by the jewsmedia is really just a consequence of jew rule, one indication that “they” have already taken over “our” country. Yet, in spite of the jewsmedia’s modus operandi, their usual attempt to bury what they can and distort what they can’t, a more or less fuzzy awareness of the harm caused by non-Whites still somehow seeps into some White heads.

Some of that awareness comes via first-hand experience. Some by word-of-mouth. The majority is undoubtedly spreading via social media and the internet more generally. Likewise what we know about Roof. At this point it’s difficult to know exactly what Roof thought. We should discover more during his trial, assuming he is ever afforded an opportunity to speak. Frankly, I wonder less about why Roof acted as he did than why there aren’t more Whites doing so. I don’t wonder if the jews will let a good crisis go to waste rather than using it as a pretext to ban the “hate” speech and guns they’re always looking to ban anyway.

For the jewsmedia it hardly matters that Roof appears White and is at least somewhat racially conscious. Their anti-Whiteness is ineffable and irrepressible. This was evident, for example, in the anti-White assumptions and speculations that they so freely expressed about the Beltway snipers and the Boston bombers before the perpetrators were identified. In George Zimmerman’s case they maintained their anti-White narrative even after it was visibly demonstrated to be false. With Roof they’ve only finally found the Great White Perp they’ve long been crying about. And even in this case, what Roof is accused of pales in comparison to the mountain of White casualties who have been targeted quite deliberately for rape, beatings, and murder by non-Whites. The jewsmedia derides and minimizes even the most common and blatant portion as “the Knock-out Game” – it’s just a game, goyim, only “racists” care about such things.

It’s also hardly surprising that non-Whites in general, who usually have nothing more to whine about than “micro-aggressions” and “cultural appropriation”, are once again suddenly interested in appropriating the White concept of justice from the “White supremacist” “oppressors” they insist on living amongst. Even when it’s one of their own who stands accused they think, speak, and organize monolithically, along racial lines – so there really is no difference here. As absurd as they may believe race is, they’ve accepted their assigned place in the jew-led anti-White “people of color” coalition. Nobody really cares what they think, especially not in the judaized overclass. And Whites shouldn’t.

What disturbs me most about the shooting is the reaction of Whites. I understand that most Whites are deracinated. They feel leaderless and powerless, able only to witness with a vague foreboding what they see going on around them. They may understand that something has gone horribly wrong in what used to be their country, but they’re too busy or afraid to think too deeply about it. They hear the drumbeat of the anti-White jewsmedia, but don’t consciously associate the animus as coming from the jews. To the extent they even think about jews they imagine them as some exotic kind of “white”. Thus when they hear the jewish narrative blaming all the problems on “racism”, effectively blaming Whites and only Whites, they internalize and adopt that poisonous attitude as their own. The demoralizing, pathological effects of this are visible every day, not only in the jewsmedia headlines, but on the internet, and in our face-to-face interactions with family and friends.

Among the most disturbing reactions are those coming from some race-aware Whites, as if their main concern is to openly condemn Roof or his actions. Perhaps they believe this will help either themselves or Whites generally. It won’t. They know, or should know, about the jewsmedia poison. That non-White anti-White hostility is implacable. That Whites need positive, unapologetic leaders. That White concerns and morality, starting with the very definition of right and wrong, can only be legitimately rooted in what is healthy or unhealthy for Whites, as a group. That the utopian “liberal” (now “conservative”) dream of creating a race-blind society has not only failed, but can never work, no matter how hard Whites try. That non-Whites, led by the hyper-self-interested jews, wouldn’t let it work even if it could, even if Whites foolishly continued to try to include and tolerate everybody. That instead Whites are being destroyed in the attempt.

In fact, the clearer the disastrous outcome, the clearer the complicitly of those who do nothing to reject and oppose it, let alone join in the anti-White chorus.

Dylann Roof didn’t cause any of this to happen. His actions haven’t made any of it worse either, but only concentrated and revealed the anti-White miasma that what was already there. Like a lightning rod. How everyone else reacts when the lightning strikes is their own choice, and their own responsibility.

Why Ferguson Burns

the_jew_yorker

No new AoTR today, I’ve got too much else going on.

The black chimpout/intifada in Ferguson came to a head last night. Diversity is divisive. I have nothing to say that I haven’t
already said on Twitter months ago.

What I said in the 2nd hour of Discussing Trayvon/Zimmerman with Carolyn Yeager in the summer of 2013 also applies, and even more so now – the open air zoo, the role of jews and the jewsmedia in creating, exacerbating and perpetuating it and transferring all the blame for it to Whites.

Jewish rule is disastrous for Whites.

Fifty Years of Nightmarish Fraud

Many people know that Martin Luther King was not the virtuous saint the jewsmedia propaganda portrays him as. This is only the most blatant aspect of the fraud that has been perpetrated for the past fifty years. The more subtle yet far more significant apsect of this fraud has been the promotion and celebration of a short string of ambiguous words – a promise of hope and change disingenuously offered and naively accepted.

Here is just one perfectly typical example of the jewsmedia aiding and abetting the ongoing fraud, describing two starkly different perceptions of this string of words and attributing that difference to political partisanship rather than race.

King ‘content of character’ quote inspires debate, by Jesse Washington, AP, 20 Jan 2012:

“I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.”

This sentence spoken by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. has been quoted countless times as expressing one of America’s bedrock values, its language almost sounding like a constitutional amendment on equality.

Yet today, 50 years after King shared this vision during his most famous speech, there is considerable disagreement over what it means.

For at least two of King’s children, the future envisioned by the father has yet to arrive.

“I don’t think we can ignore race,” says Martin Luther King III.

“What my father is asking is to create the climate where every American can realize his or her dreams,” he says. “Now what does that mean when you have 50 million people living in poverty?”

Bernice King doubts her father would seek to ignore differences.

“When he talked about the beloved community, he talked about everyone bringing their gifts, their talents, their cultural experiences,” she says. “We live in a society where we may have differences, of course, but we learn to celebrate these differences.”

For many conservatives, the modern meaning of King’s quote is clear: Special consideration for one racial or ethnic group is a violation of the dream.

The quote is like the Declaration of Independence, says Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, a conservative think tank that studies race and ethnicity. In years past, he says, America may have needed to grow into the words, but today they must be obeyed to the letter.

“The Declaration of Independence says all men are created equal,” Clegg says. “Nobody thinks it doesn’t really mean what it says because Thomas Jefferson owned slaves. King gave a brilliant and moving quotation, and I think it says we should not be treating people differently on the basis of skin color.”

Last week, the RightWingNews.com blog included “The idea that everyone should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin” in a list of “25 People, Places and Things Liberals Love to Hate.”

“Conservatives feel they have embraced that quote completely. They are the embodiment of that quote but get no credit for doing it,” says the author of the article, John Hawkins. “Liberals like the idea of the quote because it’s the most famous thing Martin Luther King said, but they left the principles behind the quote behind a long time ago.”

“To ignore color is to ignore reality,” says Lewis Baldwin, an Alabama native who marched in the civil rights movement and now teaches courses on King at Vanderbilt University.

“Dr. King understood that we all see we are different. You accept color differences, affirm them, celebrate them, but don’t allow them to become a barrier to human community,” said Baldwin, author of a new King book, “In A Single Garment of Destiny: A Global Vision of Justice.”

To reduce race to skin color, to the point of equating the two, is to willfully distort reality. Long before King’s speech this distortion and others were promoted by Franz Boas, whose followers included it in anti-“racism” propaganda they produced in the 1940s.

Fraud works to the extent that the lie it is based on appears plausible on the surface. In this case the thinking goes like this: Race is just skin color, and color is unimportant, therefore race is unimportant. The article excerpted above depicts “liberals”, i.e. blacks enabled and led by jews, as pimping this lie that they themselves don’t believe. “Conservatives”, i.e. Whites, are depicted as the only ones who have really taken King’s demagoguery to heart, misunderstanding its true meaning and intent.

Skin color is only the most obvious racial difference. The lie is that it is the only significant difference, which disguises the fact that the content of character is too. In this light, what King actually said is revealed as tautological nonsense:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation (amongst those of common heritage, race) where they will not be judged by their race but by their race.

For fifty years “conservatives” have sought to judge people by their character and “liberals” have been telling Whites that non-Whites shouldn’t be judged, period. Thus IQ statistics are “racist”, violent crime statistics are “racist”, stereotypes are “racist”. Anything that reflects negatively on the content of non-White character is “racist”. And in a sense it is.

Taking King at his word is “racist”. The stark differences in understanding and reaction to what King said is itself a reflection of racial differences in character. Whites buy the lie. Non-Whites don’t. Whites have deliberately shared and conceded power, setting aside their racial identity and group interests. Blacks, in contrast, have followed the lead of white-skinned jews. They shamelessly promote their own identities and group interests. The fraud comes through clearly in the rhetoric. The supposed ideal is equality, which can supposedly only be attained by celebrating differences, with the most important difference being that Whites must continue to defer to the moral authority and superiority of non-Whites.

The differences are as much in each groups’ thoughts as in their genes.

It’s high time for Whites to recognize the fraud, to assess the terrible cost of the false belief that race is just skin color and doesn’t matter, to take heed of what non-Whites actually mean and do rather than blindly trusting what they say. Wake up. End the nightmare.