Tag Archives: politics

The Bannonocaust, Hoax Culture

bannonocaust

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In the News: Screeching Jews and Their Taboos

a_jews_election_nightmare

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

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

. . .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

. . .

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

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

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

What’s Flipping Yid Lids Today: The Coultercaust

fucking_jews

While watching the republican debate on Wednesday night pundit Ann Coulter let her kikeservative act slip when she twitted:

Cruz, Huckabee Rubio all mentioned ISRAEL in their response to: “What will AMERICA look like after you are president.”

How many f—ing Jews do these people think there are in the United States?

The response from incensed jews was swift, vehement, and continues to reverberate.

As Coulter’s old friend Joe Sobran once pointed out, “A hypocritical etiquette forces us to pretend that the jews are powerless victims; and if you don’t respect their victimhood, they’ll destroy you.” Time will tell whether the fucking jews actually destroy Coulter. In the meantime it is easy to make several other points.

That jews are able to so self-righteously swarm like this is a measure of their power – which would go without saying if not for the furtive and illegitimate nature of jew rule. Sobran was destroyed even before he spilled the beans on the jewed reality which confronts every jewsmedia pundit and would-be political “leader”. To work under jew rule one must understand not only that jews rule, but that you must not ever speak ill of this fact. Even praise makes some jews squirm.

Political/media jew-swarmings are a regular occurrence. Other recent examples include The Jew Republic layoffs, Tom “1% kristallnacht” Perkins, Chuck “I’m not an Israeli senator” Hagel, and Sarah “blood libel” Palin. And it’s not just full-time professional jews who swarm, a number of ambiguous jews ditch their disguise to fly to their tribe’s defense, and they fly right across the “left”/”right” divide the goyim regard as sacrosanct.

As Sobran noted, the dynamic of a jew-swarm is two-pronged. The multitude of jews who reflexively spring forth, either as individuals or as official mouthpieces for larger organs, all express a similar message in a similar way – screeching for someone’s head while whining that jews are the real victims.

It is no coincidence that the someone the jews swarm is always more jew-lover than hater. Coulter’s slip was to connect “f—ing” and “jews”, nullifying all her prior and subsequent pro-jew/pro-Israel groveling as far as jews are concerned. More often the trigger for the jew-swarm isn’t so clear-cut, and their target rushes even more eagerly to beg forgiveness. Even in Coulter’s case it’s plain that the hate-filled boogeywoman some of the more hysterical jews imagine is a mere projection of their own fathomless loxism.

Treason is Trending

the_poison_gobblet

Concerning the invasion of Europe, the US election cycle, and Donald Trump. The links below include the most significant articles and events discussed, along with the most relevant aspects of my previous commentary and analysis. All of it is connected to what I refer to here as the fundamental fraud of Western politics: the false idea that jews are White.

Links for the invasion of Europe (#refugeecrisis) highlighting the jewish narrative behind it:

Syria’s Refugees Feel More Welcome in Europe Than in the Gulf – Bloomberg Business

When Jewish people look at Calais migrants, we see ourselves | Laura Janner-Klausner | Comment is free | The Guardian

OPINION – Closing Europe’s borders is not the right answer to the refugee crisis :: World Jewish Congress

Is Branding Migrants a Shameful Throwback to Holocaust? – Breaking News – Forward.com

Refugee crisis: ‘Love the stranger because you were once strangers’ calls us now | Jonathan Sacks | Comment is free | The Guardian

Recalling Shoah, European Jews Urge Aid to Refugees – Breaking News – Forward.com

Jewish Groups Lead Push To Crack Open Doors to Syria Refugees – News – Forward.com

There’s No Stopping a Mass Migration That Will Alter the World – Opinion – Haaretz

Netanyahu: Israel ‘too small’ to absorb Syrian refugees | Jewish Telegraphic Agency

Merkel condemns ‘disgusting’ message of hate toward refugees | Reuters

Two examples of jews doing what jews do best – the constant backdrop, whatever else is going on. First, jews teach their children to clearly distinguish themselves from their primary host-enemies (Whites/Europeans):

Three-year-old ultra-Orthodox Jewish children told ‘the non-Jews’ are ‘evil’ in worksheet produced by London school – Education News – Education – The Independent

Meanwhile, “assimilated” jews dissimulate as “white” to better psychopathologize such behavior in their White host-enemies and preach toxic anti-White abnegation instead:

10 Ways White Liberals Perpetuate Racism | George Sachs, Psy.D.

Hightlights of the anti-White/pro-jew “left” response to Trump:

Twenty Thousand Considered Disappointing Turnout for Racist Event in Alabama – The New Yorker

Worse Than Hitler | KUNSTLER

Donald Trump 2016: Mobile, Alabama rally and the ghost of George Wallace – POLITICO

Behind Trump, the GOP Really Is Becoming the Racist Party – The Daily Beast

The Republicans Are Now Officially the Party of White Paranoia | Rolling Stone

Donald Trump and white nationalism: Does the candidate’s rise represent the ascendency of a resentful white wing of the American right?

Trump the Fascist

Nazis and White Supremacists Love Donald Trump. You Know Who Else Nazis Loved? 

#NRORevolt, explained – Vox

Highlights of the anti-White/pro-jew #cuckservative #kikeservative “right” response to Trump:

Trump, Sanders, Immigration — Nationalism & Socialism | National Review Online

Donald Trump and the White Nationalists – The New Yorker

Are Republicans For Freedom or White Identity Politics?

Donald Trump’s Popularity — It’s Corrupting Conservatism| National Review Online

Donald Trump and the War on the Brains of the Right

Jonah Goldberg and the Anti-Trump Bourgeoisie – Breitbart

Some ill portents for the White supporters of future President Shitlord:

Trump: I Want a ‘Big, Fat, Beautiful, Open Door’ for Legal Immigrants – NBC News

Donald Trump: I don’t want David Duke’s endorsement – POLITICO

Sheldon Adelson Is Ready to Buy the Presidency — NYMag is a jewsmedia overview of the dominance jews (e.g. Sheldon Adelson, Paul Singer, etc) have over “the right”. Though the focus is on Sheldon Adelson the article touches on many aspects of jew rule. Among other things it refers to organized jewry organizing (across party lines) to counter and defeat the “anti-racist” blowback against Israel in the form of the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction movement (BDS).

Obama’s Jewish problem: 10 principles that have guided his conversations with Jews about Israel.

“Jews, jews, jews! My head hurts!” Alex Jones debates David Duke 2015 08 18 full interview HQ – YouTube (mp3).

Related AoT podcasts and articles: Stupid/Crazy/Evil, Identity Politics, The Nature of Jewish Power – Part 2, Fear and Loathing and Treason – Part 1, Moral Fraud, Decoding Jew-Worship and Blasphemy, Anti-”Racism” is a Jewish Construct, Calling Out the Cuckery, Catching up with Kyle Hunt.

This just in, a transparent discussion of how the jews who fund “right” politics are hesitant to support Trump mainly because they so despise the Whites who will vote for him, whom they see not as a major demographic to appeal to, but as an obstacle to their agenda, a “more inclusive” (less White) party and country: Donald Trump’s Rise Sparks Widespread Angst Among Jewish Republicans – News – Forward.com

Calling Out the Cuckery

aipac_politics

The term cuckservative is shaking up the American political discourse. It originated outside the corporate judaized mainstream, in reaction to the destructive, destabilizing, degenerate policies of the anti-White/pro-jew regime. Cuckservative is as insult, an accusation, an indictment aimed at those who participate in this poisonous regime by those of us who are sick and tired of being poisoned.

Cuckservative has gained traction so quickly because it strikes a big, fat, pulsing White nerve. The term is an expression of White racial grievance. It has crystallized and brought forth decades worth of pent up White anger, resentment at being lied to and betrayed by White political leaders who have been going along to get along, dog whistling what they have to to get elected, and then giving the country away to aliens, people whose thoughts and desires and behaviors are so different from ours that they alienate us even when they’re not physically hostile and dangerous.

There are many aspects of the term cuckservative and the reaction it’s creating that are good and indicate a shift in a positive direction for Whites. There are also a few aspects that cause some concern.

On the good side, the cuckservatives and their cuckers haven’t yet figured out how to effectively deflect or defuse the accusation. The main response has been no response. The relatively few defenses have so far been along the lines of, “that’s racist, this is coming from White supremacists”, which only confirms the charge that cuckservatives, and the system they serve, are anti-White. Another type of reaction – the insinuation or counter-accusation that the term is being pushed by “liberals” – reflects the blinkered bunker mentality that afflicts those Whites who continue to work within the anti-White regime. They so want to keep on working within it that they pretend it is all that really exists.

The term cuckservative is breaking through and spreading through White minds faster and more broadly than other explicit attempts to craft language to express White interests have been. Bob Whitaker’s mantra, which has been spreading gradually for years, was too wordy and ironically stated. Even the more recent, shorter slogans expressing the same basic sentiments – that anti-”racism” is code for anti-White and to fight White genocide – just haven’t spread as quickly as cuckservative has. I think these other terms have helped. They’ve prepared the ground, and they’ll probably enjoy more use going forward. Many Whites don’t want to be discriminated against for being White, but they still aren’t willing to identify positively as White. The polarization created by the term cuckservative will surely encourage more Whites to see that they do have a racial identity, that they do have racial interests. More will find the nerve to say, “Yes, I’m White, and I’m angry, because I can see the media, the schools, the laws, the government, the whole system is anti-White. It has been working against me and my kind. That’s not right, and it’s got to go.”

I’m also glad because I think cuckservative also takes the wind out of the sails of “White pathology”. That’s the truly pathological idea that Whites are a race of catladies, that we’re driving ourselves to extinction because our ancient altruistic hunter-gather personality traits are reasserting themselves, causing us to want to smile as we give everything over to the hostile, alien invaders flooding our former homelands. “White pathology” is the idea that we’re doing this to ourselves, or at least that we’re literally programmed to be exploited by others. That it’s in our DNA.

The attack on cuckservative demolishes this “White pathology” suicide meme in two ways. First, if it wasn’t already obvious that many Whites oppose the anti-White regime, the popularity of the cuckservative attack demonstrates that the White opposition is broader than many of us imagined. So, no, we’re not a race of catladies. Second, it takes two, or more, to cuck. Cuckservative better fits the reality than catlady, in the same way genocide fits better than suicide. The leaders who are selling out and betraying us aren’t catladies. They’re not impoverishing themselves serving nameless, faceless, agentless cats. They’re enriching themselves personally by serving the interests of anyone and everyone but Whites, other people who every day more freely express their own “vibrant” non-White/anti-White racial identity. The word cuck evokes the biological roots of the injustice, the despicable, disgusting, deplorable, exploitative nature of the crime.

I’ve made the argument many times that parasitism is a more accurate term for what’s happening. Cuckolding is just one aspect of parasitism. Cuckholding hints at sexual deviance and gives perverts a cheap thrill, whereas parasitism more completely encompasses the sick, subversive, collective nature of the phenomenon – the infiltration, manipulation, and exploitation of one group for the benefit of another.

So on the downside, the term cuckservative is not as clear or racially explicit as parasitism or “White genocide”. In fact it’s more popular because of that, because it offers some wiggle room for the merely less squishy Whites to point their finger at the more squishy Whites and say, “they’re the problem”. Some Whites are using cuckservative only because they think they can tell themselves and their critics that, really, they’re not racists, they’re just upset about their money being given away or their Christian values being trashed, by other White people. In other words, they’re not really conscious of their racial interests, much less that they have racial enemies.

Another reason the term is so popular (and another downside) is because it plugs into the mental mold of the existing system – it focuses attention on just one half of the left/right, liberal/conservative, two-faces-of-the-single-party that is judeo liberal democracy. There are in fact White cuckees and jew cuckers in both halves of the anti-White/pro-jew system. The left side is certainly more explicitly anti-White, and it is the increasing obviousness of this hostility which has brought the anger at cuckservatives, who are seen as capitulating to this obvious enemy. There is a false impression, which is only reinforced by the partisan roots of the word cuckservative, that the source of the hostility is “the left”, that it arises more from some abstract ideological wonkery rather than from an inherent and implacable racial animus.

The White traitors on the left are just more out of the closet about it. As Robert Frost put it way back in 1961, “A liberal is a man too broad-minded to take his own side in a quarrel.” That captures a good part of the cuck mentality. We could call White liberals cuckerals, to match cuckservatives, but from what I’ve seen the terms libtard and shitlib are already far more popular.

There’s also some ambiguity to the term cuck which isn’t good. Calling someone a cuck could be taken to imply they’re a victim, that they’re the one being harmed. In the strict, biological sense of the word, you’re only being cuckolded if it’s your resources being taken and used to the benefit of another. That sense of the word technically fits someone like Jeb Bush, who married an anti-White mestiza, better than it fits a mere closeted queer RINO, like Lindsey Graham. But in both cases the outrage aimed at these two cuckservatives and others is collective, not personal. The politicians being called cucks are being accused mainly of giving away other people’s resources, the resources of their partisan base or race, not their own.

Which brings me to the last nit I have to pick with the term cuckservative. It mistakenly implies the traitor is weak, effeminate. In this way it is similar to the catlady slur. It’s easy to mock and taunt weaklings. They don’t fight back. But when you call these traitors out, and calling them cuck works well enough, they will fight. Generally speaking these are men and women who have risen to where they are in the poisonous anti-White environment because they have a lack of racial loyalty and a lack of scruples, not because they lack the will to seek and hold fast to personal power.

Still, as powerful as they may seem, the White traitors aren’t running the show. As I’ve just pointed out, they’re generally self-interested individuals. They aren’t really any more loyal to each other or their party or its abstract ideology than White voters. They aren’t in cahoots with each other either. The old boys club of White supremacy is long gone, not much more than a figment of jewish imagination at this point. It lives on in the imaginations of others mainly because of the propaganda the jews produce and distribute via media and academia.

What’s so demoralizing about the Whites at the top is that even the ones who aren’t actively selling out are keeping their mouths shut. They know that to even say something sympathetic about Whites, as a group, is “racist”, so they don’t. You occasionally hear someone say that cuckservatives, or other White politicians, are just afraid of being called names like “racist”. That isn’t accurate. A good part of their motivation is fear of pain. Fear of being punished, fear of being ostracized. It isn’t pain alone, and it isn’t a desire for power, fame or fortune alone. It’s both. It’s carrot and stick.

The jews are the ones wielding the carrots and sticks. The jews aren’t cucked. The jews aren’t White. The jews are the ones who are organized, and have always been organized, as a group. They’ve been organized and aggressing against Whites, from within White societies, for millenia. The jews are the source of the racial animus against Whites. The cucker is not “the left”, or “the right”, but the jews who fund and dictate the policies of both sides of the system. That’s why it is not just an anti-White system but a pro-jew system. That’s why the one unshakable principle that none of the White cucks, left or right, dares to question is jewish privilege. Jewish power is so thorough-going and secure inside America that jews have for decades been able to control American foreign policy to the painfully obvious benefit of Israel, a foreign ethnostate of jews, by jews, and for jews.

In the 1980s the well-known cuckservative William F. Buckley purged Joe Sobran from conservativism specifically for being insufficiently respectful of the jews and Israel. Since then jewish power has only grown. Nowadays every significant politician from every “Western” country sooner or later makes a pilgrimage to Israel to pay symbolic tribute to their jewish overlords.

Some of the people tossing around the cuckservative charge don’t realize it, yet, but the reason that term is bound to cause a real backlash from the regime isn’t because it embarrasses the traitors, or upsets the blacks or browns. It will be because it displeases the jews. The charge that White politicians are ignoring or betraying White political interests is a direct challenge to the jews and their narrative. Under the current zeitgeist Whites aren’t supposed to advocate for their interests as a group, that’s “racist”. If you do so with any hint that you understand that the jews are your opponents, not just standing in the way but the ones who are actively deconstructing and destroying White racial interests, then you’re a “nazi”.

Everybody knows the jewish narrative, that “racists” and “nazis” are not just wrong but crazy and evil. But the pols and pundits at the top also know that the first rule of jew rule is that nobody talks about jew rule. The notion that the jews and their interests are at the crux of it all this cucking business is already visible in some articles and comments. This may grow. I hope it does. That would be good for Whites.

The traitors certainly know who’s got the carrots and sticks. Super-cuckservative Mike Huckabee just recently provided an excellent example of both the dominant and unspeakable nature of the jews’ narrative and power. Huckabee tried to explain how he objects to the recent US nuclear agreement with Iran because he thinks it’s bad for the Israelis, and used the jewish holocaust narrative when he did it. He was immediately upbraided by Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a jewess politician from “the left”. His crime, apparently, was using terms that the goyim aren’t supposed to use, even in service of the jews. She actually demanded an apology.

Politicians who aren’t traitors also know about jewish power. They also understand that there are penalties for speaking against it. From France there is news that the nationalist politician Jean-Marie Le Pen is going to be prosecuted, again, for confronting the primacy of the jews and their narrative. As The Independent reports:

The decision to prosecute followed the aging politician’s comments on French television in April when he said: “Gas chambers were a detail of the war, unless we accept that the war is a detail of the gas chambers.”

He responded to the new charges by referring to the recent public protests that followed the muslim attack on Charlie Hebdo. He said:

“I thought that millions of French people had marched for freedom of expression”

“I thought that included the right to blaspheme. And this is blasphemy, isn’t it? It is after all an almost religious point.”

(For context see Charlie Hebdo and What Heebs Do and Decoding Jew-Worship and Blasphemy.)

But that’s the moral of the jewish narrative, that the jews are paragons of virtue, the highest moral authority. Thus it is right that they dictate what’s good and bad, what’s allowed and not allowed. The White race traitors say and do what the jews tell them to, even if it makes for something that looks like a glaring contradiction – arguing open borders and multicult for the US and security and ethnic homogeneity for the jewish state, for example. Whether any of them actually believe the fairy tales the jews tell, or not, they know the jews will punish them if they misbehave. That threat, and the fear it inspires, is what looms behind all the cucking.

The Jew Republic Disconnect Isn’t

tjr

Whatever happened at The New Republic we know that there wouldn’t be a story without the jews. Yet so far mainstream jewsmedia accounts haven’t even hinted that there’s a jewish angle.

Over the past week a collection of strictly jew-less and thus at best half-true accounts have been offered by Scott McConnell at The American Conservative; Jacob Heilbrunn at Politico; Dana Milbank, Ben Terris and Cinque Henderson at Washington Post; and Ta-Nehisi Coates at The Atlantic. The most elaborate attempt to explain the story, minus the jews, has been Ryan Lizza’s long article at The New Yorker, Inside the Collapse of The New Republic.

Every one of the aforementioned authors knows that TNR was “a jewish magazine”, as former editor Peter Beinart described it in Haaretz. None of them made any explicit mention of this, even though it meant leaving a gaping hole in their story. No account of the latest shakeup discussed, for example, how the “anti-semitism” card got played over similar, but less substantial staffing changes in January of 2013.

While searching for some exception to this bolshevist omission I ran across an even more detailed Beinart-like article aimed at explaining the story to jews. Anthony Weiss’ article The New Republic Exodus Raises Doubts About Magazine’s Jewish Future was cross-published by several explicitly jewish media outlets. Weiss described how “the jewish identity of the New Republic” made it “a primary address for American Jewish thought” and “one of the elite American media outlets with a strong focus on Zionism and Jewish intellectual life”. He noted:

Evidence of The New Republic’s Jewish DNA could be seen in the lists that have circulated on the Internet of the approximately 60 percent of the masthead who quit. Easily half are Jewish — including Foer and Wieseltier, whose resignations on Thursday under pressure from management triggered the general exodus — and many have written about their own Jewish lives.

A number of prominent Jewish staffers at the New Republic have gone on to greater prominence at other publications.

Weiss also supplied an explanation why the jewish magazine was not being described as such in the mainstream American jewsmedia:

The magazine also came to serve as a sort of successor to the mid-century journals, like The Partisan Review and Commentary, that had served as homes to Jewish public intellectuals. Wieseltier famously joked that The New Republic saw itself as “a sort of Jewish Commentary” — the joke being that Commentary, which was founded by the American Jewish Committee and continues to publish, is explicitly Jewish.

The New Republic was never explicitly or exclusively Jewish, either in its staffing or its focus, and it was defined as much, if not more, by its self-declared (albeit idiosyncratic) liberalism. Still, it retained what Berman described as a “Jewish sensibility,” and became a center for young Jewish writers and journalists.

Get it? Jews who disguise their jewish identity and interests, as at TNR, are being more jewish than those who more openly advertise their jewishness, as at Commentary. The joke is on the clueless goy readers, and on Hughes, the sucker who poured millions into the magazine and thought he actually owned it.

The upshot is that what appears to be a disconnect isn’t really. The pretense, in the American jewsmedia at least, that the jewish magazine isn’t a jewish magazine is only a continuation of the same old dissimulation that has always been going on at TNR. Such crypsis is in fact an age-old modus operandus of the jews.

Last but not least, Weiss also provided a more plausible reason for all the stomping and screeching than any of the jew-less explanations have:

Although Hughes rehired Foer and retained Wieseltier, observers noted a shift in its focus on Jewish issues. “Chris Hughes really has a different sensibility than [former owner/editor] Marty Peretz,” said [Judith] Shulevitz, who just stepped down from The New Republic. “He didn’t have the lightning-like focus on Israel and foreign policy that Marty did.”

The Jew Republic Cabal Swarms Forth

the_jew_republic

Dylan Byers, an ambiguous jew who tends to focus on jewcentric controversies, has been following the latest show-uh at The New Republic like a vulture. The following excerpts from Byers convey the highlights.

Shakeup at The New Republic: Foer, Wieseltier out; mag moves to N.Y., 4 Dec 2014:

Franklin Foer and Leon Wieseltier, the top two editors at The New Republic, quit on Thursday amid a shakeup that will relocate the Washington-based magazine to New York City

[Chris] Hughes, a Facebook co-founder, bought The New Republic in 2012 at the age of 28 with ambitions of restoring its esteemed place in Washington media. Instead, TNR failed to hire marquee names, struggled to attract advertisers and failed to gain a prominent place in the conversation.

In more recent months, Hughes has been working on plans to turn the once-venerable liberal magazine into a “digital media company,” an ambiguous proposal that left many staffers there uncertain about the future of the publication.

Inside The New Republic shakeup, 4 Dec 2014:

Through its history, The New Republic has been a vehicle for progressive thinking, while priding itself on a willingness to challenge liberal orthodoxy, from the left or right. In its early decades, it provided intellectual fuel for the emergence of the United States as an international force. And in recent decades, particularly after the 9/11 attacks, it continued to urge a robust foreign policy, even endorsing the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

After shake-up, New Republic staffers resign en masse, 5 Dec 2014:

Those who resigned are senior editors Jonathan Cohn, Isaac Chotiner, Julia Ioffe, John Judis, Adam Kirsch, Alec MacGillis, Noam Scheiber, Judith Shulevitz and Jason Zengerle; executive editors Rachel Morris and Greg Veis; digital media editor Hillary Kelly (who resigned from her honeymoon in Africa); legal affairs editor Jeffrey Rosen; and poetry editor Henri Cole and dance editor Jennifer Homans. Contributing editors Anne Applebaum, Paul Berman, Christopher Benfey, Jonathan Chait, William Deresiewicz, Justin Driver, TA Frank, Ruth Franklin, Jack Goldsmith, Anthony Grafton, David Grann, David Greenberg, Robert Kagan, Enrique Krauze, Damon Linker, Ryan Lizza, John McWhorter, Sacha Z. Scoblic, Cass Sunstein, Alan Taylor, Helen Vendler and Sean Wilentz.

TNR veterans protest Hughes’ ‘destruction’, 5 Dec 2014:

“From its founding in 1914, The New Republic has been the flagship and forum of American liberalism. Its reporting and commentary on politics, society, and arts and letters have nurtured a broad liberal spirit in our national life,” the statement continues.

The signers of the statement are: Peter Beinart (Editor), Sidney Blumenthal (Senior editor), Jonathan Chait (Senior editor), David Grann (Senior editor), David Greenberg (Acting editor), Hendrik Hertzberg (Editor), Ann Hulbert (Senior editor), Robert Kuttner (Economics editor), Robert B. Reich (Contributing editor), Jeffrey Rosen (Legal editor), Peter Scoblic (Executive editor), Evan Smith (Deputy editor), Joan Stapleton Tooley (Publisher), Paul Starr (Contributing editor) , Ronald Steel (Contributing editor), Andrew Sullivan (Editor), Margaret Talbot (Executive editor),Dorothy Wickenden (Executive editor), Sean Wilentz (Contributing editor), and Katherine Marsh (Managing Editor).

These lists of names are even jewier than the lists which came out during the Journolist scandal. I use the term jewsmedia for good reason. The mainstream corporate media is chock full of jews. Even the key figures who aren’t jews defer to the jews once they reach a consensus and start screeching about something in unison, as they have in this case.

The shakeup at TNR is creating such “anger” “shock” and “outrage” and getting as much notice as it is only because so many jews are involved. And that is not all. Jewsmedia jews are perpetually shocked, angered, and outraged about something or other, but their angst in this case is particularly poignant. That’s because Chris Hughes, the queer Facebook billionaire who owns TNR and made the decisions triggering all this very jewy whining and rending of garments, is a very goyish-looking goy.

“Anti-semitism” is the usual excuse jews make for throwing tantrums like this. In this case they already tried that and it already flopped. About two years ago there was a similar show-uh over changes Hughes was making at TNR. Back then “anti-semitism” was front and center, but “liberal” jews like Jonathan Chait and Jacob Heilbrunn mocked the “conservative” jews at The Washington Free Beacon for overreacting. This time around it’s “liberal” jews like Chait stomping their feet, and the “conservative” jews at the Beacon are mum.

In fact, that brings up another notable aspect of this latest swarm of angry jews. Like any swarm of angry jews really, it crosses and confounds the usual partisan “liberal” and “conservative” lines. For instance, from the descriptions above you might believe that TNR is a decidedly “liberal” institution. But here’s how “liberal” jew Philip Weiss describes it:

The New Republic has for forty years been a bastion of the Israel lobby.

This is a landmark in the era of the Jewish establishment. It’s petering out in an elite generation of far greater diversity. The New Republic had been supported by one neocon after another, from Michael Steinhardt to Bruce Kovner to Roger Hertog. For years the magazine helped impose its litmus test within the mainstream media: You must be a Zionist to write about the conflict; and if you’re not, then keep your mouth shut.

In other words, minus the jews there is literally nothing else to see here. The jewsmedia has for decades cheered on this frenetic globalist-capitalist economy in which corporations are bought and sold, shutting down and moving operations as a matter of course. When it’s goyim getting pink slips or being replaced it’s a non-story – the jewsmedia is apathetic or even antipathetic. But in perfectly typical fashion, when it finally comes around to them the jews exaggerate their suffering. The fact is that most of them left TNR on their own, probably because they prefer the jewy environs of Washington to the jewy environs of Jew York City, and probably, for the jews at least, because they know they’ll have an easy time finding work elsewhere in the jewsmedia.

Cruz Schmoozes Jews

two_jews_and_their_obsequious_servant

Here we have another illustration of the increasingly de rigueur public display of fealty and deference to the jews by the very highest level politicians. Texan Ted Cruz, ’16 Hopeful, Woos New York Jewish Donors, by Ken Kurson, New York Observer, 24 November 2014:

Last night, Mort Klein’s Zionist Organization of America dinner featured Mr. Cruz, known for his steadfast and aggressive support of Israel, in a prominent speaking role. Attendees included Alan Dershowitz, Pastor John Hagee, and Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus. Those who made the scene at a fancy VIP pre-dinner buffet included billionaire Ira Rennert, Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann, former Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, Public Relations authority Ronn Torossian, Bernstein Global Wealth Management (and recent Observer subject) Jeff Wiesenfeld, plus Rabbis Avi Weiss and Shmuley Boteach. Reviews of Mr. Cruz were uniformly positive as many New York Jews got their first taste of the tea party darling and discovered, to the shock of some, that the Princeton-educated lawyer was rather well-spoken and engaging.

The article emphasizes the bipartisan mix of jews and their overarching concern for Israel.

Mr. Boteach said, “You are arguably the strongest US Senator when it comes to Israel. But if you run, can you win? You’re seen as a champion of the tea party. And the media tends to caricature.”

Mr. Cruz replied, “Historically, the media has had two caricatures of Republicans. We are either stupid or evil.”

“Sometimes both!” volunteered one of the lunchers.

Mr. Cruz laughed and continued. “Reagan was stupid, according to the media. George W. Bush, Dan Quayle, stupid. Nixon was evil, Cheney was evil. I sort of take it as a backhanded compliment that they’ve invented a new caricature for me – crazy.

The jewsmedia does indeed caricature Whites, pathologizing and demonizing even the mildest, most unconscious expression of White racial interests, like the tea party, as stupid/crazy/evil. Knowing this, Cruz went straight to the belly of the beast, the New York kehillah, to explain his plan to become president. Part one is to get jewish money and media backing by professing how ardently he identifies with them and their exclusive ethnostate. Part two is the brown masses, the “hispanics”, who he argues are already in his pocket out of quasi-racial solidarity. Part three is a phony rhetorical appeal aimed at cutting into Hillary’s White base. White conservative and tea party support is taken for granted.

A video of Cruz performing his “blue-collar” “working-class” shtick for all these slimy “heavy macher” “power jews” would be pure gold, and potentially sink Cruz. Of course, as with Mitt Romney’s “entitlement” scandal, if such a video did surface, and some kind of scandal erupted, the jewsmedia would “blur out” the jewy essence of the political schmoozing and transform it into a reason to whine about “anti-semitism” at the same time.