BioShock Part One: The Ethnic Struggle
I’m shocked, bioshocked, to discover that a cabal of jews made a video game not so subtly psychopathologizing Whites, portraying jews as victims of Whites, and shifting blame for jewing onto Whites.
Excellent decoding and analysis by American Krogan. Starts gently but pulls no punches. A disturbing glimpse into the minds of jews. Naive goyim will find it eye-opening. Perfectly sensible at 1.5 speed if you’re already familiar with jewing.
Bari Weiss – Where Did the Media Go Wrong?
In this interview with two sympathetic alt-jew jesters Weiss revels in her hyper-tribalist jew identity while venting her hostility toward Whites. She sees herself first and foremost as a member of the world’s first and foremost collectively-imagined victim collective. She laughs as she refers to herself as an “unhinged zionist”. She describes her worldview as “liberalism”, claiming it is based on the “truths” that everyone is an individual, created in the image of “god”, and therefore should be treated equally by law. She says “no person should be held to a standard of collective innocence or collective guilt” due to their “immutable characteristics”.
This is the standard IDW shtick, though IDWers more typically avoid saying the jew part out loud. They prefer the jew-led war on Whites continue by deception, under the guise of “liberalism”. They oppose the more overt “wokeism” tack only because they believe more open aggression may somehow not work out as well for jews. Weiss makes her jew-first mindset more plain than usual, causing more cognitive dissonance. (Her new podcast, laughably titled “Honestly”, is bound to be more of the same “liberalism” double-talk.)
The portion of Weiss’ motivation which she does not credit directly to being a jew she attributes indirectly to an inner voice telling her to fight “anti-semitism” for her tribe’s collective benefit. She wrote what has to be the six gorillionth book on the subject.
As Weiss jewplains in the interview, she deplores “the right” because “anti-semitism”, but thinks it’s obvious to everyone. She prefers to focus on screeching about “anti-semitism” on “the left” (citing Columbia and the Jew York Times as her primary examples) because she imagines it is relatively unrecognized and unopposed.
Weiss is not so much stupid, delusional, or even hypocritical as she is unapologetically, unselfconsciously, and unfathomably jewy. Convinced that the jew-first “left” and “right” just aren’t good enough, she seeks to spawn a jew-first “center”.
You can picture Weiss’ frustration when she finally decided to leave the Jew York Times, having screeched herself hoarse at the supposed “anti-semitism” of all those uppity house niggers and with no White men left to blame. After so many hard years in the mainstream jewsmedia, boosted by her tribemates from one cushy position to another, constantly discussing what is or isn’t good for her tribe, Bari Weiss is now a mogul, raking in the shekels at the alt-jewsmedia hub Substack, finally free to be the Superjewess she always wanted to be.
Open Letter to Facebook — Stop Antisemitism (PDF), 7 August 2020:
In accordance with the recommendations outlined in the “The New Antisemites” report, which call on social media platforms to eliminate antisemitic content by adopting the IHRA working definition as the basis for content removal policies, we the undersigned coalition of 128 [as of 11 August, 145 as of 26 August] organizations, urge Facebook to implement a hate speech policy on antisemitism that includes the full IHRA working definition at its core. Nearly 40 countries have already endorsed or adopted the IHRA working definition in some official capacity, either through their membership in the IHRA or independently. In the United States, in addition to the adoption by the State Department, the recent Executive Order on Combatting Anti-Semitism instructs the Department of Education to consider the IHRA definition when evaluating Title VI Civil Rights Act complaints of discrimination.
The overwhelming majority of civil society organizations at the forefront of efforts to combat antisemitism endorse and encourage the use and adoption of the IHRA working definition. Today’s antisemitism undoubtedly includes the delegitimization of Israel’s right to exist. This bigotry is expressed in various ways, such as the rejection of Jewish self-determination, Holocaust revisionism and denial, and the application of double standards toward the Jewish state and people.
. . .
Jews today, like many other minority communities, are being targeted and attacked in record numbers. They experience physical violence, harassment, and discrimination offline and online. Jews overwhelmingly report that online antisemitism is the most acute form of Jew-hatred they experience.
Facebook’s Community Standards Recent Updates (italics denote additions), 11 August 2020:
We define hate speech as a direct attack on people based on what we call protected characteristics — race, ethnicity, national origin, religious affiliation, sexual orientation, caste, sex, gender, gender identity, and serious disease or disability. We protect against attacks on the basis of age when age is paired with another protected characteristic, and also provide certain protections for immigration status. We define attack as violent or dehumanizing speech, harmful stereotypes, statements of inferiority, or calls for exclusion or segregation. We separate attacks into three tiers of severity, as described below.
. . .
Tier 1
Content targeting a person or group of people (including all subsets except those described as having carried out violent crimes or sexual offenses) on the basis of their aforementioned protected characteristic(s) or immigration status with:
. . .
Designated dehumanizing comparisons, generalizations, or behavioral statements (in written or visual form)- that include:
. . .
Jewish people and rats
Jewish people running the world or controlling major institutions such as media networks, the economy or the government
Facebook announces new policy combating anti-Jewish stereotypes – Jewish Telegraphic Agency, 12 August 2020:
Facebook announced that it would ban posts about Jews controlling the world among several other efforts to combat hate speech.
The announcement comes following a monthlong boycott of advertising on Facebook spearheaded by a coalition of civil rights groups led by the Anti-Defamation League. More than 1,000 companies participated in the boycott, which was meant to protest Facebook’s lack of action against hate speech.
In an announcement Tuesday issued by Guy Rosen, the social media platform’s vice president of integrity, Facebook said it would ban posts about Jews controlling the world, as well as those containing blackface. Rosen also wrote that Facebook has removed 23 “banned organizations” from the platform since October, half of which were white supremacist.
. . .
Responding to the announcement, an ADL spokesperson called the changes “welcome yet overdue.”
“It’s distressing that it took this long for the platform to crack down on these particular forms of hate, when it’s quite obvious they should not have been allowed to proliferate in the first place,” the ADL statement said. “It’s equally as disturbing that Facebook still doesn’t view Holocaust denial as violative of their terms of service.”
Facebook banned stereotypes of Jewish global domination – The Forward, 13 August 2020:
In May, Peter Stern, Facebook’s director of Content Policy Stakeholder Engagement, said in a conversation with a representative of the AJC they have “mapped” some elements of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of anti-Semitism onto their own policies, but not the parts that relate to Israel, since the site does not want to penalize people for criticizing Israel.
. . .
Greenblatt, of the ADL, criticized Facebook for not taking a stronger stand on Holocaust denial, and called it “disturbing” that the company classifies such posts as “misinformation,” and not a form of hate speech against a protected group.
. . .
Facebook still permits inaccurate and false statements about the Holocaust, but takes down posts that in any way celebrate or defend the Holocaust, or mock the Holocaust or survivors, Cutler said. When asked if there is content on Facebook that denies the Holocaust but is not otherwise anti-Semitic, Cutler said the site moderates such pieces of content on a case by case basis.
Here we see jews, obsessively organized and acting collectively as jews, setting themselves apart from and above non-jews, shamelessly proclaiming themselves the arbiters of what non-jews can say, instructing the world’s most powerful corporations how to better serve their tribe, bragging that governments of 40-odd countries have already codified special privileges for jews, as spelled out by jews.
Note how they screech as if anyone else’s bigotry or “application of double standards” could ever be more obnoxious than their own, and how they respond to any concession with more demands. Note too how their usual identity fraud, their outrageous “fellow white” shtick, is conspicuously absent here. Instead they present themselves like “other minority communities”, as a “protected group” per civil rights law, as non-White.
Indeed, with jews so openly dictating who can speak and what they can say, and doing so under color of a jew-defined and jew-driven moral imperative to combat “White supremacism”, jews could hardly make it more obvious that they see themselves as the utter opposite of Whites – morally, politically, socially, legally.
After years of indifference The Jew York Times now disingenuously asks, Who Protected Jeffrey Epstein?:
At first glance, the Epstein saga looks like another example of how justice is not, in fact, blind — of how it tilts toward the powerful at the expense of the vulnerable. Mr. Epstein, who has claimed to have made his fortune managing other rich people’s money, was not just wealthy; he was politically and socially wired, hobnobbing with such boldfaced names as Prince Andrew, Bill Clinton and Donald Trump.
. . .
It betrays a system in which the rich and well-connected can bully public officials into quiescence — or into pursuing a deal so favorable to the accused that it runs afoul of the law.
I think I described what’s going on pretty well in The Tautology of Jewing. The system is criminal jewing, a system so successful that it defines whatever vexes jews as criminal.
Nobody really gets bullied for criticizing “the rich and well-connected”. The system tilts toward the jews at the expense of anyone and everyone else, no matter how wealthy or supposedly powerful. Lame attempts to describe it the other way around demonstrate this tilt. In 2014 Tom Perkins provided one particularly stark but short-lived example. Since 2015 President Kushner has provided regular reminders about who does the kicking and who does the licking.
Who protected Epstein? The questions shouldn’t stop there! Who is still protecting him? Who helped enrich him in the first place? Who boosted him up, got him “politically and socially wired”? The answers aren’t difficult to find.
The Times editors link a notorious 2002 Jew York Mag article, Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery, which describes the jewy network around Epstein. Of course, this was before Epstein’s wrong-doing was exposed and the jewsmedia began shifting blame to “the rich and well-connected”.
Vicky Ward’s 2003 Vanity Fair article, The Talented Mr. Epstein, delicately describes his jewy club like so:
A few of the handful of current friends who have known him since the early 1980s recall that he used to tell them he was a “bounty hunter,” recovering lost or stolen money for the government or for very rich people. He has a license to carry a firearm. For the last 15 years, he’s been running his business, J. Epstein & Co.
Since Leslie Wexner appeared in his life—Epstein has said this was in 1986; others say it was in 1989, at the earliest—he has gradually, in a way that has not generally made headlines, come to be accepted by the Establishment. He’s a member of various commissions and councils: he is on the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations, the New York Academy of Sciences, and the Institute of International Education.
His current fan club extends to [Bear Stearns C.E.O. James] Cayne, Henry Rosovsky, the former dean of Harvard’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences, and Larry Summers, Harvard’s current president. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz says, “I’m on my 20th book…. The only person outside of my immediate family that I send drafts to is Jeffrey.” Real-estate developer and philanthropist Marshall Rose, who has worked with Epstein on projects in New Albany, Ohio, for Wexner, says, “He digests and decodes the information very rapidly, which is to me terrific because we have shorter meetings.”
Just last April Nathan Oseroff-Spicer dropped a series of twits jewsplaining how “Lawrence Krauss, Steven Pinker and Jeffrey Epstein have an odd relationship that provides insight into the relationship between the institutions of science, the movement of capital, the profit motive and science funding”. As with the longer mainstream jewsmedia efforts, ostensibly to provide insight, the attempt is to explain the jewing without mentioning that it is jewing, substituting less sensible motives instead.
What makes this unfolding story all the more remarkable is that sniffing out and screeching about tribalism is very trendy in the current totally jewed political discourse. Pinker expressed his concerns a few months ago by citing an op-ed decrying tribalism written by a tribemate at the Jew York Times.
All this sniffing and screeching isn’t about rooting out tribalism as a general principle. It’s just jew tribalism, racial animus aimed at Whites by jews. The same can be said for the jewsmedia’s constant disparaging use of the terms White privilege, White nationalism, and White supremacy. The slur is in the word White, not whatever other words they attach to it.
Some “liberals” may try to White-wash the jewing around Epstein, framing it as an example of “white” privilege or supremacy, but it’s unlikely to become the dominant jewsmedia take. As with the Fed, any such effort would only call attention to a tribalism which is more jewy than “white”.
Likewise for crying “anti-semitism”. Dershowitz tried that in the early 1990s, helpfully highlighting the jewy essence of a massive wave of financial fraud that was otherwise more vaguely attributed to American greed. Yes, explicit efforts to favor jews, because they’re jews, remain as semitically correct as ever. It’s possible to see The Tribe circling their wagons around Epstein, as they did with Alfred Dreyfus and Leo Frank. It will happen if Epstein’s jewing ever becomes widely perceived as jewing. As things stand right now it’s easier to see Epstein treated more like Bernie Madoff, the free-wheeling mystery-man played up, the jewing played down.
In late March Facebook announced an explicit ban on “White this” and “White that”, or in practical terms, any content which the Facebook/ADL/SPLC jews interpret as implying that it’s OK for Whites to be White.
Yesterday YouTube followed suit, announcing that its ban on Whites being too White was specifically in defense of jewry and their jewing. Official YouTube Blog: Our ongoing work to tackle hate:
Removing more hateful and supremacist content from YouTube
YouTube has always had rules of the road, including a longstanding policy against hate speech. In 2017, we introduced a tougher stance towards videos with supremacist content, including limiting recommendations and features like comments and the ability to share the video. This step dramatically reduced views to these videos (on average 80%). Today, we’re taking another step in our hate speech policy by specifically prohibiting videos alleging that a group is superior in order to justify discrimination, segregation or exclusion based on qualities like age, gender, race, caste, religion, sexual orientation or veteran status. This would include, for example, videos that promote or glorify Nazi ideology, which is inherently discriminatory. Finally, we will remove content denying that well-documented violent events, like the Holocaust or the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, took place.
Most of YouTube’s verbiage remains intentionally vague and generic-sounding, but at root they are discriminating and trying to segregate “holocaust” believers from “Nazi ideology” believers, promoting the former while excluding the latter.
Enabling jewing while disabling (until they can criminalize) whoever and whatever vexes jews is basically what the past several decades of “hate” rhetoric has always been about. During the Trump era the jew war on Whites has simply been transitioning from more stealthy to more overt form.