Video Link

The sorry sight of white people kneeling(or bending over) at the altar of GloboHomo is as remarkable as it is pathetic. Just how shallow of soul and weak of mind are they to be so easily manipulated into getting worked up over something so insipid, perverse, and ridiculous? Incredibly, degeneracy has been ‘spiritually’ placed atop the pedestal of themes that supposedly constitute the essence of Western Civilization. And, we’re not dealing with ignorant dummies but highly educated whites(and nonwhites with white-adjacent elitist vanities).
But then, what does it mean to be ‘educated’ these days when critical thinking, independence of mind, skepticism about authority, personal conscience, and free speech are suppressed in favor of idolatry, dogma, mantras, and official narratives?
Ideology can be oppressive, but at least it operates within a logical system, however restrictive it may be. In contrast, idolatry leaves no room for thought as it’s a mindless veneration and celebration of certain individuals(Stalin, Hitler, Mao, MLK, George Floyd), certain groups(Jews, blacks, and homos especially in the West), and cartoon narratives(superhero Churchill saved the West).
The rise of Safe Spaces and the doling out of milk & cookies to college students triggered by Donald Trump’s victory in 2016 were signs of the infantilization of American Mind, reaching its apotheosis with the Millennials, surely the most worthless and retarded generation in American History.
Jews, who’d once embodied the spirit of defiance and rebellion in their status war with the WASP establishment, came to favor hivemind obedience and brain-dead politics once they took charge. What was conceived of as ‘Critical Theory’ pioneered by Jewish intellectuals became vulgarized into a Jewish-led game of what & whom to condemn and what & whom to consecrate. Thus, Critical Theory wasn’t about cultivating a open critical mind on all questions confronting mankind but about the narrowing of criticality toward targets chosen by Jewish Power. If indeed Critical Theory were truly critical in outlook, there would have been ample criticism of Jewish Power, Black Thuggery, and Homosexual Degeneracy.
Instead, it was about harping endlessly about ‘antisemitism’, ‘racism’, or ‘homophobia’ against any candid discussion of certain topics while heaping endless critical abuse on targets chosen by Jews either out of genuine loathing(Russia, Iran, Hamas, and, of course, un-cucked whites like Thomas Massie) or for sake of distraction(China-China-China, or Yellow Peril card to distract the public from the real controllers of the West, the Jews).
It’s no wonder that Critical Theory soon evolved(or devolved) into Critical Race Theory. It wasn’t an exercise in free thought on racial matters but suppressing negative assessments of certain races or ethnic groups(especially blacks and Jews) while piling on the insults and blame on the white race, especially white males, especially real-sexual(or straight) white males, especially conservative real-sexual white males — if you’re a white male but homosexual, you’re somewhat blessed and if you’re a straight white male but ‘progressive’, you’re somewhat forgiven.
Not that the American Right has been much better. So-called HBD(Human Bio-Diversity) is also a kind of Critical Race Theory except that the likes of Jared Taylor heap abuse on blacks and Muslims but stay tight-lipped about the Jews, deemed so awesome that the white race’s only hope is apparently to win them over. As for Establishment Conservatism, it has proven itself to be just as foul and vicious as Critical Race Theory, with the likes of Tom Cotton, Mike Huckabee, Lindsey Graham, and countless others groveling at the feet of Zionists and cackling with hideous glee at the sight of starving Palestinian children and dead Palestinian mothers. In other words, the Right, far from being critical minded on all matters, has its own holy grails and blind-spots, its own politics of who/whom. HBD is less about biodiversity than Zio-diversity, the idea that Jews, being the top genius race, must be obeyed and served by the diversity of inferior goyim. Apparently, Zion deserves its license to operate above the morality of mediocre goyim whose only purpose in life is to compete for the position of the Favorite Pet of the Jews(as the rightful master race). So, we have garbage on the ‘left’, trash on the ‘right’.

Video Link

In a way, white weakness and shallowness were evident in the 1,500 yr history of Western Christianity. Only a people devoid of spiritual depth and vision would have appropriated the mythic narratives and icons of another people and, furthermore, worship as (the Son of)God an ancient Jewish Man said to have been the Messiah, a Jewish concept. If whites possessed spiritual depth of their own, they wouldn’t have blindly adopted a foreign faith, even to the extent of waging total Culture War on their own heritage. Apparently, Europeans felt that their own culture was comparatively a pile of worthless shit and that they’d been living in darkness until they were offered the righteous path and promise of Salvation via the stories and sermons of the Jews and heretical Jews(who comprised the Early Christians).

When it came to material ingenuity, intellectual challenges, and creative output, Europeans became the equal of any civilization and then surpassed them all. But when it came to spiritual imagination, on matters of the holy and divine, they remained mental slaves of the Jews. Even as Christians at loggerheads with Jews and/or Judaism, whites were beholden to Jewish-conceived spirituality. And now, as post-Christians, they still rely on Jews for the Big Idea and Big Icon.
Today, there’s talk of ‘remigration’, or the need to physically send back nonwhite migrants and settlers in the West, but no less urgent perhaps is the need for the Remigration of the Mind, i.e. white minds must expel the colonizing elements of Jewish Influence. Because Christianity developed as much as an opposition to Judaism as a continuation of it — Jesus Christ as Messiah is the fulfillment of Old Testament Prophecy — , whites could always fool themselves that they were not spiritual-mental slaves of Jews. But despite Christianity’s deviation from core Judaism, the fact remains that its justification owes to Jewish Prophecy and its originators were all Jews. Besides, the modes of seeing and believing expressed in the New Testament are part of Jewish cosmology.

The What-If’s make for interesting historical debate. Few developments were inevitable in history, though plenty of events were more likely than not to happen. There were forks along the road, and the current history in which we live is the product of the paths that were taken by those in power.
‘History’ in the generic sense means the documented/recorded and analyzed story of just about anything, e.g. the history of some small town called Bumbleville with the population of 200, the history of fly-fishing, the history of toy-making, and etc. But in the grand sense, History means the Story of Power, and for good or for ill, a small handful of people got to decide the fates of mankind.

If Current History is the product of what is remembered, it is as much, if not more so, about what has been forgotten or is (consciously)repressed. In a way, it’s like the workings of the human mind, a storage of countless details of events, incidents, and eccentricities of our lives.
However, depending on our profession and/or purpose, we tend to focus solely on those things that are of relevance to our needs in the here-and-now. Suppose someone suffered a trauma as a victim. If he’s in the military as a leader of a squadron, he’ll likely push his self-pitying victim-narrative to the back-burner as he must exude strength and confidence. However, if his profession is therapeutic, he might invoke his own victimhood to convey empathy for those who suffered similarly.

Granted, Christianity(and modern Jewishness) perfected the art of combining self-pity with ruthless aggression: “Sanctified by our saintly suffering, we’re morally justified in beating the war drums and destroying our enemies.”
Because the media apparatus controls short-term active memory whereas the academia functions largely as storage of long-term dormant memory, the media exert far more influence on Current History, though, to be sure, given the sheer politicization of the academia, many ‘scholars’ are far less interested in the depth of knowledge than what’s most useful to fashionable agendas.

The Jewish-run media have a funny idea of the ‘enemy’. The supposed enemies of the US, more often than not, aren’t those countries that chose to be enemies but were designated as such on the basis of “Is it good for the Jews?” So, even though Russia has long wanted good relations with the US, it’s been an ‘enemy’ because it didn’t totally put out like a whore to World Jewry. And even though China doesn’t want to be an enemy, it’s hyped as such because Jews prefer Americans to fixate on Yellow Peril as a distraction from Jewish Domination of the West.
Even Iran, always placed at the top of the list as an enemy of the US, has sought working relations with the West. It too is a designated-enemy than an enemy-of-its-own-choosing.
Jewish Power is like a mad-bitch girlfriend who insists on deciding who her lover’s friends and enemies are. No matter how much someone wants to be his friend, he must reject him as an ‘enemy’ if the mad bitch whispers into his ears to do so.
As such, the US has ended up with so many unnecessary enemies, or enemies only because Jews have designated them as such. It means White America has no agency in deciding with whom it should be friends or enemies. Jews decide, whites follow. Notice how the US interfered in the Middle East in the name of fighting terrorists after 9/11 but now regards Syria as a ‘friendly country’ even though it’s ‘led’ by a Jihadist(though some say he’s a crypto-Jew).

History is vast, but Current History operates only in relation to active memory while 99% of historical memory remains dormant and buried. No wonder the Western Media got away with pushing the ‘unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine’ narrative. They keep buried all the histories of what had happened to Russia in the 1990s, how the West manipulated events in Ukraine with one Color Revolution after another, how the Kiev authority shelled civilians in Donbass, and etc.
Instead, the narrative activates the selective memories of autocratic Putin murdering dissidents and Russians barging into Ukraine. Same goes for the crisis surrounding Iran. Instead of a complex narrative, we get a cookie-cutter cartoon about tyrannical mullahs secretly cooking up a Bomb, presumably to blow up London and NY, along with Israel. Never mentioned are Israel’s support of terrorism(and its own founding through terrorist acts, not just against the Arabs but the British) and the dark story of its attaining the Bomb, as well as the fact it hasn’t been pressed upon to come clean on these matters.
At the deeper level, on matters of Jewish-and-Goy relations, for example, the active memory dwells on numerous instances of goy-on-Jewish hatred and/or violence while keeping in dormant storage all the details about Jewish contempt for goyim. The history of Jewish antipathy toward goyim is certainly shelved in the stacks but not placed on the lectern.

At any rate, things are even worse because so much of Current History operates not only on the basis of selective memory but distorted or even outright false memory. In other words, even the paths-not-taken are invoked as if they were. Iran long ago decided not to build the Bomb, which means it took the non-Bomb path when faced with several alternatives. But, the West speaks of Iran as if it took the path of the Bomb. Iran doesn’t have the Bomb, but the West prefers the What-If-Iran-Got-The-Bomb narrative as holy writ. Suppose you had the choice of stealing some expensive jewelry but chose not to, but people still speak of you as if you did.
Current History is often molded from Let’s-Pretend-History, i.e. let’s just pretend something happened even if it didn’t and go with that. Some idiot is likely to raise the question, “WHAT IF Iran had negotiated on the nuclear issue. Then, Israel and the US would not have attacked.” Yes, an interesting what-if, except that Iran was indeed negotiating with the US(as spokesman for Israel) but got attacked anyway by the collusion of Israel and the US deep state.

One of the big What-If’s of History concerns what might have been if Adolf Hitler and National Socialism hadn’t been Anti-Jewish or Anti-Semitic. What if it had been more like Italian Fascism, at least prior to its drastic revision on the Jewish Question following the alliance with Germany. (Incidentally, National Socialist Germany probably would have weathered the storm had it not been so anti-Russo-Slavic, a more important what-if.)

Video Link

Recently, Tucker Carlson’s interview with Senator Ted Cruz went viral. What grabbed people’s attention, raising alarm in respectable circles but fanning enthusiasm in the alternative/dissident political sphere, of course wasn’t Cruz’s fanboy ruminations about Israel(as that sort of thing is dime-a-dozen among politicians of both parties) but Tucker’s pushback and counter-argument, as well as his refusal to be pigeonholed as an ‘Anti-Semite’.
Over the years, virtually everyone in the so-called Mainstream Media has either nodded along or remained silent upon politician after politician professing their utmost fealty to Israel, Zionism, and Jewish People in general. While Carlson didn’t go far enough, his eagerness to press upon Cruz to explain himself(as beholden to another country) signaled a seismic shift in the political discourse regarding Jewish Power and its impact on US foreign policy.

Even though it was refreshing to watch a popular media personality challenge what passes for conventional wisdom(or an article of faith) among US politicians and deep state operatives on matters pertaining to Israel, there was disingenuousness on the part of Carlson as well as of Cruz. While it’s true that Oozie Cruzie tried to imply that Carlson is an ‘Anti-Semite’, Carlson’s heated response wasn’t entirely convincing. Not that Carlson is indeed an ‘Anti-Semite’ but that the term has lost all meanings, not least because Jewish Power now labels as ‘Anti-Semitic’ just about anything that calls foul on bad Jewish behavior. Now, if ‘antisemitism’ means blaming Jews for everything and/or crediting Jews for nothing positive, most people would agree it’s a bad thing.
But nowadays, Jewish Power has conflated Zionism with Judaism(or Jewishness), and all ‘good’ people are now expected to unconditionally support Israel no matter what it does, such as supporting ISIS in Syria, carrying out genocidal acts in Gaza, bombing civilian targets in Lebanon, and pulling a Pearl-Harbor-style attack on Iran.

Therefore, for Carlson to still be triggered by the accusation(even if only implied) and profess innocence — “No! I’m not an Anti-Semite!” — is rather weak and wussy. Humanity needs to retire that term because it’s been redefined by Jewish Power as an apologist-justification for Jewish Supremacy: “We Jews are the masters of the universe, that’s that, and you goyim better support us or else you’re lowly ‘Anti-Semites’ who must be destroyed like ‘Amalek’.”

But more importantly, it’s disingenuous to speak of Israel merely as a foreign nation or entity when the current US is part of an empire, not a sovereign republic. The US and Israel are joined at the hip, and therefore, even though Israel is technically a foreign nation, it actually functions as the spiritual-imperial center of the Global Western Imperium.

Furthermore, the real power isn’t in Tel Aviv or someplace in Israel but in the Jewish strongholds in the US(and the EU). Without Jewish-American control of the US, there isn’t much that Israel could do. Netanyahu is able to trample all over US politicians because they are beholden to Jewish-American oligarchs and figures of influence across the institutions and industries.
Tucker Carlson must surely know this but is afraid to GO THERE: Addressing the deeper issues of global Jewish Power. It’s less risky to speak of the US vs foreign state Israel, i.e. the US shouldn’t be kicked around by a foreign government, than to speak of how Jewish tentacles reach into every corner of American Power, an undeniable reality that, however, may still be construed as ‘Anti-Semitic’.
By focusing on Zionist Israel, Carlson hopes to evade charges of ‘antisemitism’ by making a distinction between a foreign entity and Jewish Power in general. You see, he’s not talking about THE JEWS but only about a foreign country that happens to be Jewish and exerts an inordinate amount of influence on the US.

But, this is nonsense because Israel on its own couldn’t generate such overarching influence. It does so only because THE JEWs across the West have supported Zionism and used their levers to exert maximum pressure on goy puppet-politicians to do the bidding of the Greater Israel Project.
The dynamic between Jewish Power and the Goy Elites is like the one between the backwoods hillbilly and Ned Beatty’s character in DELIVERANCE. Jewish Power rams its cock into the arse of the goy who squeals like a pig, “Weeeeeeeeeeeeeee, weeeeeeeeeeee.” White goy cucks might as well be called Wee’s. Ted Cruz certainly is a Wee. Whatever comes out of his mouth is just more ‘weeeeeeeeeeee’ with a fat Zionist cock shoved into his cucked Cuban-American arse.

Video Link

At one point, Cruz accuses Carlson of being ‘obsessed’ with Jews, and of course, it’s pure projection as it is Congress(and all institutions of consequence) that obsessively toes the Zionist line. According to the likes of Cruz, it’s purely natural and normal, not ‘obsessive’, for Congress-creatures to applaud a pathological liar and psychotic murderer like Bibi Netanyahu with 57 standing ovations. But if anyone points out such cases of goy servility to Zion, that’s somehow unhealthily ‘obsessive’.

That said, shouldn’t a supposed liberal democracy be obsessively focused on who has the most power and how it is used? It’s in tyrannies that the people are not supposed to ask questions and merely chant “Heil the Great Leader”. For anything resembling a democracy to function properly, there has to be an open discourse as to which groups are the most powerful and what their agendas are.
Given that Jews are by far the most powerful group in the US(and the West), all of us should be obsessed with it, just like the Jews were once obsessed with what the Anglo-American elites or the WASPs were up to.
If we went on and on about West Virginia hillbillies or Mexicans in Pecos, Texas, now that would be unhealthily obsessive about absolutely nothing. Last I heard, it’s not the hillbillies who run Wall Street, and it’s not small-town Mexicans who run the State Department(and make the US fight Wars for Mexico).
The last thing we should be is passive(than obsessive) about The Power. There’s no point to the US being a democracy if it’s verboten to address the sources and the problems of The Power, which happens to be Jewish/Zionist.

Foulism: Foul Play Replaces Fair Play, Re-Moralization Follows Demoralization, and the True Failure of the Imagination

It seems over the years that more and more Americans have come to stop worrying and learn to love corruption. It’s as if many people, perhaps the majority, have become accustomed to corruption(and even criminality), much like Asian Indians have learned to live with air pollution. Corruption and foulness have always defined humanity and in many societies simply became mundane facts of life, even across centuries(or millennia for that matter).
However, the passivity, even a kind of acceptance(and embrace), in the face of corruption among Northern Whites is historically significant. Not that Northern White societies were ever devoid of corruption, a timeless and universal feature of humanity. But just as air pollution, though a universal condition, is a far bigger problem in some places than others, the levels of corruption have never been uniform across cultures. Some have been notably more corrupt than others, some remarkably less so. Some have been very tolerant of corruption, some highly allergic to it. Granted, there have also been societies that learned to ‘harmoniously’ navigate through meticulous rules-based corruption, like in Japan.

At any rate, the socio-political orders developed by Northern Whites have long held a reputation for being law-abiding, conscientious, and ethical. Some have called them ‘high trust societies’ due to confidence in the authority and the populace in general. A distinction between Northern Europe and Southern Europe(and Eastern Europe) has had much to do with public governance and civic virtues.
A similar distinction has applied to North America and South America, with the North having cleaner, more ethical, more efficient, and more conscientious societies than the South where too many people, from top to bottom, have become resigned to corruption and incompetence. It’s been a key reason for the mass migration from the south to the north, i.e. many in Latin America have given up on fixing their problems and opted to migrate up north in search for a better life.

This contrast between the North and the South has held for a long time. Therefore, the acceptance of corruption as the New Normal among Northern Whites is a troubling, even alarming, development.
For sure, the Northern prestige has dissipated over the years. In the past, Northern Whites in both Europe and America took pride in running the most functional societies in the world. Thus, they expected new arrivals from the corrupt South(and backward parts of the world) to show some respect and appreciation for what the Northern Whites had achieved. Those from corrupt countries had much to gain by modeling themselves on the Northern Whites who led the world in forming and sustaining sound societies.

But over time, with the rise of the ‘White Guilt’ ideology and ‘anti-racist’ dogma, it was unacceptable for Northern Whites to take special pride in their achievements. And for the peoples of the Global South being mired in poverty and corruption, the bulk of the blame was usually placed on ‘Western Imperialism’ — never mind that Latin America was the first creation of Western Imperialism in the New World; why did imperialism produce functional societies in North America but dysfunctional ones in South America?
With the abnegation of pride and confidence among Northern Whites, the only game in town was to blame them for having more goodies(apparently by exploiting and stealing from other peoples, especially the ‘darkies’) than to ponder why they achieved more(often with less) in life. Notice that Somalis and American blacks in Minnesota never make an effort to learn from the Scandinavian-and-German Americans who created nice societies; they only know how to bitch, complain, and demand.

But then, can we blame them when so many Northern Whites have been inculcated with ‘white guilt’ by the Jews? Jews made Northern Whites feel guilty about their achievements, and Northern Whites imparted this ‘wisdom’ to the darkies whose go-to-explanation to any problem is ‘systemic racism’ and ‘white supremacism’.
One of the vulnerabilities of Northern White conscience and high trust was the priggish(and even puritanical) desire to purge oneself of sin by deferring to figures of moral authority. Northern Whites came to regard Jews as especially intelligent & wise and predictably based their course of self-improvement on Jewish advice from the likes of Barbara Specter, a guru to childlike do-gooders in Sweden.

Undue emphasis on ‘white guilt’ and ‘anti-racism’ led to the fading of racial identity, solidarity, and pride among white elites who soon reneged on their special obligation to white folks, their own racial brethren. These days, any positive racial consciousness among white elites is anathema, the result being they’d rather serve the Jews(as the rightful master race), prioritize Globo-Homo, idolize blacks, and promote Diversity.
The white elites spin this as the new ‘woke’ virtues of ‘diversity’, ‘equity’, and ‘inclusion’, but they only end up indulging the corrupt proclivities of Jews, blacks, homosexuals, and nonwhites while placing the blame on whiteness as the catchall scapegoat for every problem.
Sadly, with no white elites to represent and guide them, the white masses find themselves without direction, especially in a globalized world where jobs are exported and labor is imported.

And given that Pop Culture, the only culture that matters in our age, has increasingly become debased, shameless, hedonistic, nihilistic, and pornographic, it’s no surprise that so many people, even Northern Whites, have become so trashy and retarded.
Even their righteousness has been perverted: Many Northern Whites believe green/purple hair dye, multiple piercings, trashy tattoos, and tranny delusions constitute ‘progressive’ values of the highest moral fortitude. Immorality has become the New Normal in morality, which is worse than honest immorality.
With so many people having grown up in broken families in broken communities with no elites to lead them and with debased Pop Culture as their only compass, it’s no surprise that so many people have turned to drugs, legal and illegal.

Video Link

Call it tribalism, ethnocentrism, nationalism, or whatever. It’s natural for a people to prefer and favor their own side. Any people who fail to do so either out of stupidity, decadence, complacency, apathy, or persuasion(by the enemy/rival/competitor-posing-as-friend) will fade from history. That is absolutely guaranteed.

However, to make my-side-ism work within the context of larger humanity, there has to be some ground rules. All people must acknowledge the validity of nationalism(or its variants) for all groups. If People A are primarily for People A, they must expect People B to be for People B, People C to be for People C, and so on.
If, however, People A favor their own side but deny the right of other peoples to do likewise, the core contract has been violated. It would certainly be presumptuous for People A to favor themselves while demanding all other peoples to favor People A as well. That goes beyond tribalism. It smacks of tribal supremacism(or monomania) where one Tribe insists on its own sovereignty while denying the same right to all the others. Such reeks of hegemony, the stuff of empire.

Sane and sound universal nationalism respects the national identities and interests of all peoples, with the full understanding that what may be good for one nation may not be so for others. Thus, there is a need for negotiation and compromise built on mutual respect and give-and-take.

Indeed, such is the very essence of athletics. While any given side understandably cheers for its own team, it’s within the framework of rules that equally govern all sides. All sides must pledge to play fair and all sides must agree to penalties upon fouls being committed. Otherwise, it’s no longer about sportsmanship but barbarism.
Therefore, all decent sports fans, despite their passionate loyalty, would not condone their team winning dirty. A fair loss is more honorable than a foul win. Of course, some fans are so petty, lowdown, and unscrupulous that they don’t mind their team winning by any means necessary, even if it entails the use of banned substances, bribing the referees, and etc.
But among the civilized, even fans who root for their own team are for fair play and penalties upon fouls committed. Thus, you have healthy tribalism but not tribal supremacism. You root for your side but understand why others root for their own sides. While there are winners and losers, fans of all stripes feel as participants of the Good Game, one where the immutable champion is the principle of fair play. So, while one team may win the trophy for this season while another team may win the trophy for the next season, the one constant is that all must submit to the rules of the game. Thereby, even the losing side can walk away with dignity and with respect for the winning side(deemed to have won fair and square, rightfully earned).

No wonder gangsterism is despised(or at least was). It has no use for rules. When several companies compete under the rule of law, they strive to offer better products or services to edge out the competition. But suppose an inferior company gains dominance through gangsterism, bumping off executives, researchers, and managers of other companies. It has won by foulness, not fairness. Enterprisers create and produce stuff, whereas gangsters take what others have made.

When fouls aren’t called out by the legal arm of the system(as referee), fair play falls by the wayside, and then everything becomes degraded or begins to fall apart. Why should anyone play fair when foulness isn’t only tolerated but rewarded? It paves the way for eventual collapse of the system, implosion from within or invasion from without.

Granted, the decline of the West is rather paradoxical given the strange dynamic between the Northern Whites(or Europeans and White Americans of Northern European and mostly Protestant extraction) and the Jews. While no system is devoid of foulness, the Northern Whites nevertheless created social, political, and economic orders that were more conducive to the Rule of Law and Fair Play. Then, why did the fairest and most legal-bound system in the world become so vulnerable to Jewish corruption?
Because the meritocracy provided an opportunity for the Jews(accepted as fellow whites) to out-compete and gain advantage over the Northern Whites. Now, this factor alone needn’t have led to gangsterism if Jews were committed to meritocracy themselves.
After all, it made good sense for Jews to appreciate, defend, and preserve meritocracy given that their higher IQ and willpower favored them in brainy competition(for wealth, privilege, and power).

But for whatever reasons, Jews lacked an honor culture, held extreme tribal-supremacist views, harbored contempt toward goyim, were boundless in their ambition, and were given to endless cycles of self-pity, paranoia, and revenge. Long having honed their skills as ‘parasitic’ sidekicks in the shadows than as leaders in open contention, Jews failed to develop the sense of honor so essential to dignified rule.

Thus, even though they gained wealth and power via genuine meritocracy, they used their newfound advantages to secure and expand their power with little regard for rules. Had Jews committed themselves to the Rule of Law as established by Northern Whites, the result might have been a happy story for all. But Jews, who’d gained so much through fair play(or meritocracy), weren’t averse to using the foulest means to grab more and more until the entire world became their (g)oyster. One really wonders what the likes of Alan Dershowitz had in mind when they studied law at Harvard. To uphold the law for all peoples or to turn it into lawfare for Jewish supremacist gangsterism.