Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Movie Notes: AMERICAN ANIMALS, READY PLAYER ONE, HOT SUMMER NIGHTS, HEREDITARY, PATERNO, GOTTI, LAST RAMPAGE, WHERE IS KYRA?, UNSANE, OUTSIDE IN, PUZZLE, SOLLERS POINT, BEAST.

https://www.unz.com/isteve/at-least-crazy-rich-asians-didnt-get-any-oscar-nominations/



AMERICAN ANIMALS, like KINGS OF SUMMER, is an instant classic. There are lots of skilled directors in the business but stuck with poor/weak material, with so much talent going to waste. David Fincher is maybe the best example but hardly alone. Because kids today grow up with so much high-tech gizmo, they picked up lots of stylistic savvy from cradle. They don't so much learn to develop a personal style as pick and choose from countless pomo bits and pieces swirling all around, what with easy access to everything from youtube videos(made with green screen + effects) to Tarantino flicks to blockbuster movies(that are also often omnivorous in their cultural references, like the Beatles movie YELLOW SUBMARINE). A kind of reverse-dada-ism seems to be at play. If dadaism was about the freedom of breaking all the rules, reverse-dada-ism selects fragments from the nonstop maelstrom to improvise new arrangements. It's like Wellington Wimpy picking stuff from the food fight between Popeye and Bluto.



If Dadaism smashed art forms into smithereens, the current culture, being so inundated with excesses of cultural 'junk', opts to take and make of them as it pleases. When a culture is junked, the distinctions among high, middle, and low lose their meaning. It's like the space debris in GRAVITY is no longer distinguishable from complex to simple. The new collage incorporates elements from all forms of expression in ways that range from ingenious(on rare occasions) to clever(often) to mocking(too often) to retarded(all too often). Anything becomes fair game(though the formula in Pop Culture will always be winnowed in accordance to audience preference for fast and easy). Among big-budget movies wallowing in hyper-pomo-sity is READY PLAYER ONE by Steven Spielberg. Apparently, an old dog can learn new tricks, and Spielberg has proven time and again that he's up with the latest styles and gadgets. In contrast, men like John Ford, Howard Hawks, and Alfred Hitchcock mostly clung to their tried-and-true styles(though Hitchcock pushed boundaries with PSYCHO). If one missed Spielberg's name in the credits, one might think READY PLAYER ONE was made by some up-and-coming movie geek weaned on videogames than Disney movies on TV. READY PLAYER ONE references and 'quotes' everything and may be the most pomo-crazed big-budget movie ever. The hologram scene with Elvis and Sinatra in BLADE RUNNER 2049 is nothing compared to pomomania of READY PLAYER ONE. More than any movie, it captures the kind of virtual reality that kids now grow up with. In GHOST WORLD, the girl had to pay some weird kid to acquire exotic cultural products, like a VHS of Bollywood musical. Today, via various devices and sites, so much of cultural history is at one's fingertips, and kids can access every picture, sound, or motion clip from all times and places. Because there is so much stuff yet so little attention span, not least because of the effect of fast-paced video games, everything gets tossed and turned in a whirligig. Before anything is processed(let alone understood), the senses are assaulted with ever new(yet culturally recycled) stimuli. Because the emphasis is on the Initial Impression of WOW, most people fail to absorb much of anything. Before anything could be mentally processed, there is the constant rush of something new and new and new, a never ending mania of images, sounds, and effects. This is of course true with all those computer-animation movies where characters bounce around like rubber balls and talk at breakneck speed. As READY PLAYER ONE restlessly moves back and forth between animation and live-action(which itself is heavily animated), the overall impact is like getting a whiplash. There was a time when George Lucas and Spielberg were accused of turn movies into roller-coaster rides, but their works of the 70s and 80s now look slow and 'classic' by comparison to what goes on in READY PLAYER ONE. Also, back when they were 'Movie Brats', Spielberg and Lucas took on one genre at a time or carefully mixed together a handful of genre elements in movies like STAR WARS and TEMPLE OF DOOM, mostly an action-adventure with musical number as intro. On one level, READY PLAYER ONE has the fireworks and schmaltz of most other Spielberg movies, and maybe it's faithful to the graphic novel(as source material). But there is something dark and dystopian about the material that movie halfway addresses but mostly overlooks... which makes it different from A.I.:ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE where Spielberg did depart from the usual comfort zone(possibly because Stanley Kubrick's pull was so strong). READY PLAYER ONE tries to have it both ways. It is a total celebration, mindless but technically awesome, of the latest possibilities in CGI that favor fantasy and cultural pomo-miscuity, and there are some ingenious passages. But it also tries to end with a message that we need to wake up from our escapism and face reality... but then, its idea of reality is as far-fetched as the one offered in MATRIX movies. As with ROGUE ONE, the evil villain is someone who looks like Paul Craig Roberts. He's yet another Waspy type who stole the idea from some Jewish-looking genius with the most gentle nature. The too-muchness of READY PLAYER ONE makes it tiresome after awhile, but it is an amazing work that ups the ante in special effects. Even though CGI is now advanced and makes lots of sci-fi movies look impressive, ingenuity is still rare. READY PLAYER ONE has what TOMORROWLAND, ANT-MAN, and remake of ROBOCOP have. Not just visual muscle but visual wit.


In some ways, AMERICAN ANIMALS is the opposite of READY PLAYER ONE. The plot revolves around a rare book of Audubon's famous paintings of birds, a work where each image was carefully crafted by the author-artist. One of its leads is an art-student, a painter(specializing in an almost archaic artform), something of an eccentric who isn't cut out for fraternity life. He admires the great masters and wants a taste of what made them feel and see beyond the ordinary. He hooks up with another guy, and together, they recruit two more fellers who seem rather serious about life and study. They are far more grounded than the pomo-maniacal gamers of READY PLAYER ONE.
And yet, the guys in AMERICAN ANIMALS were also weaned on pop culture and think it might be fun, hip, and cool to pull off a heist in the special collections library. Also, even as they pull off something tawdry and shameful, they have some of the frontier spirit that created America through 'theft' and violence of men of impulse and impatience. The 'ringleader' is Warren, the driving spirit. He's the John Lennon of the crew. Without him, the others would not have entertained the idea. Indeed, the three seem to join in the scheme largely because they want to be liked by Warren, a bundle of energy. He's like what Don Rickles said of Scorsese.



The movie was certainly not meant as an allegory about the Iraq War -- it is set around the same time -- , but the heist and the war have one thing in common. They were both driven by power of personality. Warren has 'vision' and insistence. He marks himself as the Alpha of the pack. The other guys are not bad kids. If anything, they are from respectable families and seem normal(maybe not the coolest thing for a young male). But humans are animals, and especially young males(raging with hormones) respond most to the guy with the biggest hunger. As young males have yet to make something of their lives, they are in a state-of-being. As none of them have power or wealth of their own, they gravitate to the guy who possesses the greatest will for 'power', and Warren has that. This movie, which claims to be not just based on a true story but IS a true story, inter-cuts between the real-life persons and their movie counterparts. And the real-life Warren really has that cowboy spirit. He might have gone far in the frontier world of the 19th century but feels out of place in a ready-made world. He needs to shed excess energy because, unlike frontier men, he doesn't have to hunt for food or build one's own shelter. By coincidence or not, the guys with latent frontier spirit, end up stealing a book by man who captured North American wild life in his travels. (They sort of have something in common with the character of INTO THE WILD except the latter literally decide to become a neo-frontiersman in an all-too-discovered country. Maybe they should have just built a tree house or something, like kids in KINGS OF SUMMER. AMERICAN ANIMALS considers the difficulty of the American character in coming to terms with age and tradition. While younger than Old World civilizations, the US is no longer exactly a young country. Furthermore, it's an extension of Old Europe. Yet, just like young males have this naturally rebellious propensity to break free from home and normality to go off and conquer, the American mythos is that of youthful people coming to the New World as virgin territory to conquer and claim as their own. So, even as the US grows older, the culture has been stuck on the cult of youth[increasingly more so since the 60s due to pop culture's effect of amnesia and hedonism]. American history is an epic version of rebelling against parents and home to be 'different'. Some have compared the founding of US with the founding of Israel, but whereas Israel was about the return to ancient homeland, the US was[and is] about permanent detachment from the ancient homeland to reinvent oneself in a new land. Such being the mythos of America, so many Americans still crave for that dramatic jump into the Bold and New... and over time, what with US cultural hegemony, Americanism has come to infect even people in the Old World, what with Europeans welcoming the reinvention of their ancient homelands with multi-culti colonization by endless flows of Muslims and Africans. AMERICAN ANIMALS was directed by an Englishman whose emotional detachment from America allows for a keener perspective.)
If young males without power are attracted to the guy with the most hunger, established older men are drawn to those with the most actual power. It's less a matter of hunger than fullness. People like Sheldon Adelson are belly-full of money, and so, politicians are drawn to such men. Many Jewish oligarchs are also belly-full of money, and furthermore, due to the holy cult of Jews(and 'antisemitism' being the greatest sin), Jewish power has the biggest gut. What the GOP has envied most about the Democratic Party was not that it has the black or brown vote. Rather, it has the rich, powerful, smart, and holy Jews. So, what could the GOP do to win over Jews? Neocons offered a deal. GOP would do a great thing for Israel by smashing Iraq, and maybe many more Jews will come over to the GOP. After all, even NYT, New Republic, ABC, and CNN were pro-war, just like Fox News. The plan turned out rather like the heist in AMERICAN ANIMALS, though the far bigger crooks of the Deep State didn't go to jail. Justice is only for the little guys apparently. Still, it was a huge loss for the GOP as, even after 8 yrs of Bush II groveling to Israel, most Jews went with Obama.

AMERICAN ANIMALS is not a political movie but offers a psychological glimpse into the reckless radicalism among the young from the 'far right' to the 'far left'. It says something about the problems of boredom, the appeal of excitement, and the allure of the dominant edgy personality. Alt Right's strength and weakness owed to the element of Alpha-male-ism. GOP's manner of cuckservatism(also shared by white males in the Democrats) was about low testosterone, submission, and passivity. (In one scene, Warren is taken aback by the sight of his father weeping after discovering his wife wants divorce.) Among white male Democrats, it's been about sucking up to POC. Among white male Republicans, it's been about sucking up to Neocons. Also, white males need permission to be passionate about anything. Otherwise, they are derided as 'angry white males'. Their anger is justified ONLY WHEN it's directed at PC-approved targets or whatever-happens-to-be-hated-by-Jews. So, white males can hate 'bad' white males(like James Watson or the Covington MAGA kid), resulting in a kind of Multi-Sclerosis of the white race: White nerve system attacking its own. Or, people like John McCain and Lindsey Graham are allowed to bark at Iran, Syria, Russia, and etc. to win doggy biscuits from their Zionist masters.
In contrast, Alt Right was Warren-like in demonstrating agency and aggression independent of the globalist master class. But such alpha-male-ism, especially when up against a much greater power, can recklessly shift into high gear on a difficult road and drive into a ditch. If you're climbing up a hill to take the fortress, you have to be extra careful as the advantage of gravity is with those on top. They can just roll rocks down the slope. Also, men with independent aggression tend to be reckless, even borderline psychopathic at times, feeling bulletproof and rushing into action without much thought or preparation.
But the mentality in AMERICAN ANIMALS also say something about Antifa members. Many of these guys seem bored, listless, and disoriented UNLESS they have some handy excuse and target to take out their frustrations on. Even though they are idiots whose only score against The Man is smashing a few coffee shops here and there, they seem to get excited over being part of a Cause.

AMERICAN ANIMALS is top-notch film-making based on promising material. The director's cinematic grammar is amazing, stylistically ranging from meticulous brushstrokes -- he has background in painting -- to feverish licks, combo of an illustrator's eye and guitarist's ear.

Based on the movie alone, few would think HOT SUMMER NIGHTS was made by a black guy(Elijah Bynum). Spike Lee made a few all-white movies -- SUMMER OF SAM and 25th HOUR -- , but they were mostly unconvincing or infused with irrelevant stuff that applied more to black concerns. In contrast, Bynum really seems to know the feel of white culture from inside-out. Maybe he was one of those Negroes who mostly hung around whites and non-blacks. That was true of Obama as well, which is why his 'black' stuff usually came across as phony or strained. HOT SUMMER NIGHTS is low-budget but stylistically impressive. Where it fails is in striving for significance that is either absent or missed. It has some of the drawbacks of young directors(as evident in early Coens' movies). Sometimes, it tries too hard to impress, it is overly derivative of the masters(esp Scorsese), and it plays a bit cute, especially with voice-narration. But once the story finds its groove and tracks the fate of its character to sure doom, it's often riveting. Especially impressive and unexpected is the emergence of the girl's father as a minor but key character.

HEREDITARY is a puzzle. Time will tell if it's a genuine horror classic or merely a nice try, but it is clearly the work of someone with big ideas. Maybe the problem is the youth of its Jewish director. 30 yr old Ari Aster seems to have Kubrickian ambitions. He might have done better to start with a simpler project and then work toward something more complex. It took several tries for Darren Aronofksy to finally knock it out of the ballpark with MOTHER! It seems Aster went for THE SHINING the first time out. Not sure if even he understands what he's aiming for, but it's a remarkable piece of film-making. And very relevant in our taboo age of HBD. Another esoteric movie like ROSEMARY'S BABY about the power of blood and tribe. Far more impressive than the phony art film UNDER THE SKIN by Jonathan Glazer.



THREE IDENTICAL STRANGERS could have been more, but it's pretty good for what it is.


LAST RAMPAGE is yet another in the genre of White Psychopathy. Though set in the late 70s, it says much about the degradation and depravity now so common in white communities all across the nation. It lacks the directorial mastery of something like William-Friekin-directed KILLER JOE -- ultimately a sick demented work -- , and it's rather familiar material, but one can't help feeling for the characters on some level. Like AMERICAN ANIMALS, it says something about the power of personality. The father-convict is a most terrible man, but he has what it takes to be a leader... and his sons tag along in a state of awe, fear, and/or haplessness. Not great but pretty decent.



Italian-Americans in trouble. PATERNO and GOTTI were made by different directors but could have been made by any capable professional. Barry Levinson directed PATERNO in impersonal style, not always a bad thing. It is a TV drama about the fall of Joe Paterno, and it's solid stuff and says something about power, truth, and celebrity. The movie overlooks one thing though. Based on what we know about People of Power, the question is no longer "who is the pervert?" or "who knew and when?" It is really, "Who gets to decide who, why, and when someone falls out of favor?" That's what the movie fails to ask. Look at the light sentence Jeffrey Epstein got. And how did Ed Buck get away with so much bad shi* over the years?
Everything about GOTTI is similar in style and treatment as PATERNO. The latter is somewhat better due to its focus on a specific case. In contrast, GOTTI covers too much ground for a movie under 2 hrs. And even though John Travolta does a creditable job, he's always too likable to be convincing as a monster. Al Pacino as Paterno is acting on a higher level.


WHERE IS KYRA? is an art film directed by a black guy of African origin(Andrew Dosunmu). As with HOT SUMMER NIGHTS, one wouldn't think it was made by a black guy based on the movie alone. Maybe a bit too arty and slow but a provocative work just the same about the problems of family, identity, and crime. The 'crime' here lacks the suspense of the one in AMERICAN ANIMALS, the sensationalism of ones in LAST RAMPAGE and GOTTI, or the grossness in PATERNO. Basically, a woman tries to steal her mother's identity to gain benefits. There is both an element of fealty and desecration in her scheme. Strange work.


UNSANE starts out brilliantly, and I was hoping it'd be another masterwork like THE INFORMANT, the one film where everything just came together perfectly for Steven Soderbergh. His use of odd angles is genuinely disorienting. Much feels, than merely looks(as with Gilliam), strange and off-balance. But for an admirer of Kafka, Soderbergh attempts something foolish here. He ultimately tries to make sense of his weird idea, and the story goes from warped to weary.



DOUBLE LOVER by Ozon is a pretty solid movie but more a cold exercise than a story about anyone we might care about.




OUTSIDE IN, PUZZLE, and SOLLERS POINT are well-made films I didn't care for. I got through about 40 min of OUTSIDE IN(directed by Lynn Shelton) before I couldn't take it anymore. Idiot male character and stupid woman. I'm sure the film is true to life on some level, but it's no fun watching a total moron.
PUZZLE(Marc Turtletaub) is a remake of some Argentinian movie. Well-acted and well-done all around. Another one of those true-to-life movies. But it also feels all-too-familiar, what with the housewife who feels unfulfilled and turns to puzzles to fill her void. It's not long into the movie before she meets up with some Dotkin as puzzle-partner, and all of a sudden, it felt less true-to-life. (Granted, the movie doesn't vilify her white husband and kids as Bad People.) I began to wonder where this movie would go and just Fast-Forwarded and, yep, she ends up in bed with the Dot-Man. I don't need to see Curry Fever, so all in all, I may have seen about 30 min of it.
SOLLERS POINT(directed by Matthew Porterfield) has some moron kid who looks like Andrew Anglin. Like the guy in OUTSIDE IN, he's out from prison and lives in Baltimore with blacks and white 'trash'. Overall, it's true-to-life though it underplays black urban pathology, and of course, the nastiest characters are white 'trash' idiots with white power tats. After about 30 min, began to Fast-Forward, and it struck me as one of those dull 'honest' films about 'reality'.


BEAST(directed by Michael Pearce) is far superior to OUTSIDE IN, PUZZLE, and SOLLERS POINT. It's like a cautionary real-life version of TWILIGHT. The girl is less attractive and has serious personality problems. The boy, also less attractive, is truly disturbed. The film is either confused or complex in the way it pulls our emotions in opposite directions with an ending that seems as dramatically unexpected as morally necessary. Whereas OUTSIDE IN and SOLLERS POINT pretend to favor truth but only in a half-hearted way, BEAST pushes its implications much further. But what it has in common with the other three is the sheer idiocy or repulsiveness of its characters. Such moronosity is dispiriting.
In AMERICAN ANIMALS, the guys do something awful, but they still come across as recognizably human and sane. One hopes they will learn from the experience, make better choices, and regain membership in society. In contrast, one wonders if the fools of OUTSIDE-IN, SOLLERS POINT, and BEAST even belong to the same species as us.

Thursday, January 10, 2019

Commentary on "Debate with Nick Fuentes: What Caused the West's Decline?" -- Why Fuentes is Wrong to blame the French Revolution as the Source of Decline.



Nick is wrong to pinpoint the French Revolution as the beginning of the Decline of the West. French Revolution and American Revolution(that shared similar ideals) opened up new possibilities and paved the way for Western greatness and domination. From the time of the French Revolution to World War I, the West saw rising numbers, wealth, might, and influence. There was advancement in every field of science and technology. More people became educated, ate better, and lived longer. The historical trajectory of Western Might was on the up and up for the West until 1914 when World War I destroyed much of Europe. Still, consider the rapid recovery of Germany in the 1930s. Had Europe avoided WWII, things might have been great all around. But Hitler sunk Europe into WWII and tens of millions died.
EVEN SO, the fact is that most Europeans never had it so good as during the post-WWII era. All European economies recovered quickly, living standards rose, and most people were better off than ever. And in the US, the majority entered the middle class. Even communist Eastern European nations saw considerable rise in living standards from end of WWII to the 1960s -- though behind the Capitalist West, they were better than any other part of the world. The West was mostly riding high after WWII. For example, France became a real industrial power only AFTER World War II. Prior to the war, 1/3 of Frenchmen were farmers. It was in the 50s and 60s that France became truly industrial and modern. Living standards improved markedly after the war. Also, the loss of empires didn't hurt the European economy at all. For one thing, nations like Sweden and Norway, which never had overseas empires, did very well. And France and UK saw their economies rise higher just as they were letting their empires go.

So, why did things begin to fall apart for Western Man?

1. Jews took over the US that controls the rest of the West. Jewish Supremacists, filled with virulent resentment against whites, used media power to fill whites with Guilt and Fever. 'White Guilt' paralyzed white pride and confidence. Whites were told that their history was one of oppression of others, and therefore, any notion of collective white identity and interest must be denounced and suppressed. To atone for 'white guilt', whites must serve OTHER peoples, beginning with the Holy Holocaust Jews.
And 'White Fever' made white boys and girls addicted to black music, black sex, and black cool. Today, white boys imitate rappers, and white girls want to have mulatto babies with black guys who are seen as superior studs. If the black race didn't exist in the West, white decline would have been far less dramatic. It was blacks who destroyed white male pride and confidence by kicking white ass and conquering white pussy. Blacks have been especially threatening to whites because blacks win so much in the areas that give whites the biggest collective orgasms: sports, pop music, oratory, and sex culture. Faceless white crowds cheer like mad for black sports heroes. White guys act like cucks before black athletes who hump 100,000s of white women. And white butts and groins pump and grind to black music whose message is "white girl, suck my big black dick". And because blacks have louder deeper voices, whites react to Negro speech like it's the voice of god. Would MLK cult exist if King didn't have a bellowing voice?

2. Good times and youth culture led to decadence and degeneracy. When times are good, people take things for granted. They lose the fighting spirit and survival instinct. Americans got soft and flabby in their post-nationalist affluence. A people who feel secure and well-fed don't care about nationalism. And young people lost respect for tradition and old people. They got addicted to new fashions in youth culture that were all about 'me, me, me', and 'admire the Negro singers'. Young people's idea of culture became loose sex, drugs, and imitating trashy celebrities(marketed by Jews). Look at Miley Cyrus and other shikse cunts pulled by Jewish puppet-strings. Jewish globalists want white girls to be turned into sluts for portnoic Jewish and black men.

3. Rising economy meant more jobs, and that meant more women at work. As more women found work, they grew more independent and spent much of their spare time and money on having fun than raising family. Also, when women take good jobs from men, there are fewer men with good jobs to afford family formation. So, they have a hard time getting married. And women with good jobs have a hard time finding mates because they want to find men with good jobs. But if women take good jobs from men, there are fewer men with good jobs. Also, as women became sexually freer, they had tons of premarital sex, and this made them less appealing to men who want marriage. Most guys don't want to marry some 'ho' who's been at spring breaks and been sprayed upon by lots of frat boys and wild Negroes.

4. Pop Culture in general. Prior to electronic media, people felt lonely unless they were with other people. So, they wanted to get married to be with other people and have a sense of belonging. And they joined local communities to feel human connection and warmth. But with TV in every home, even lonely individuals could just turn on the TV and live with substitute family members and friends(who were prettier and cooler) on TV. This affected old and the young. Check the last scene of Barry Levinson's AVALON where the kid just stares at the TV.

5. Spread of universal-elitism. As more people got college education, they came to value only fancy jobs and higher status. This is a problem in the East as well as in the West. In the past, people had kids just to have kids. Today, people don't want to have kids unless they feel assured that their kids will grow up to go to good college and get fancy jobs. So, both whites in the West and Asians in the East have fewer kids. This socio-demographic trend leads to labor shortage, and that means FOREIGNERS must be brought in to do all the 'dirty, dangerous, and demeaning' jobs. Even Japan finally decided to let in hundreds of thousands of foreigners to fill up jobs because Japanese don't have kids. Why don't Japanese want to have kids? Japanese don't want to have 'loser children' who may not attend good schools and get fancy jobs. When a people come to despise labor, they are doomed. This is why we all need a bit of socialist mindset. Socialism respects the working class, the laborers. But in today's globalist world, whites and yellows only respect white-collar professional jobs. They see working class jobs as 'dirty'. So, they figure they should bring in foreigners to do the lowly dirty jobs.

Finally, French Revolution and American Revolution were actually good for the West. The theme of both was nationalism, the idea that the national elites should represent and serve the national masses. Prior to the French Revolution, the French aristocratic elites looked upon their own people as subjects. If anything, fancy elites identified more with aristocrats of OTHER kingdoms than with their own French folk. It was like a network of elites, all of whom regarded their own folks as lowly subjects.
In contrast, the French Revolution said that the people matter too, and that the main role of the national elites is to represent and lead the national folk. The populist-nationalism we see today is very much in the spirit of the French Revolution. The globalist rhetoric is neo-aristocratic and much like the elitist worldview PRIOR to the French Revolution. Globalism says the elites of the world should link up together in their own cloud castle realm and look down all the masses as 'deplorables' to exploit. Yellow Vests represent the French Revolutionary Spirit. Emmanuel Macron represents neo-aristocratism. Aristocrats were fancy-pants and dressed like fruits because they recruited haute-homos to make fancy things for them, like those puffy wigs that the French aristos wore. Is it any wonder that the globalist neo-aristos promote Homo Stuff as the 'new progressivism'? It's really just neo-aristocratism.
What the West needs is to recapture the national-revolutionary spirit of the American and French Revolution. It must break free of the globo-homo neo-aristocratic rule of Jewish Hegemonists. (Notice that Jews, even as they undermine the unity of elites and masses among goyim, insist on the unity of Jewish elites and Jewish masses, esp in Israel. When Jewish masses in Israel demand a wall to keep out Arabs and Africans, Jewish elites listen and deliver. That's why Israel is so sturdy; it is founded on the unity of elites and masses. But when Viktor Orban in Hungary tries to serve his own people the same way, Jews shriek with horror because they see goy nationalism as a barrier to Jewish penetration and total takeover. Jews know nationalism means ethnic solidarity and power. That is why they guard nationalism for themselves but denounce it among other peoples. And they bribe goy-cuck-collaborators to do their bidding.)

According to Nick Fuentes, the heart of the matter is the European Man lost the sense of spiritual authority, and THAT began the process of inexorable decline. But notice that Byzantine, French, and Russian Monarchies all fell to foreign armies, popular revolt, or minority-subversion DESPITE their adherence to tradition. If traditionalist spiritual authority is such an effective bulwark against degeneration and destruction, why didn't the Byzantine Empire go from strength to strength despite its arch-spiritualism? Why was the French Monarchy, despite blessings of the Catholic Church, unable to stem the revolutionary tide? Why was the Russian Czar, despite the backing of conservative Russian Church, fail to stave off the Socialist Revolution?
While there is something to be said for spiritual roots and guidance, history shows us that church authority, like any other kind of authority, tends to grow corrupt, stagnant, and dull over time. But then, this problem goes back to the very moment when Early Christians joined with the Roman Empire. A religion founded on peace, forgiveness, and brotherly love made a pact with the 'devil', the very imperialist power that sacked Jerusalem and used ruthless violence to maintain military hegemony over much of the known world. Once politicized, religion turns into just another arm of Power Politics and Insider-Privilege, and then, especially in times of severe duress(when people are desperate) or happy affluence(when people are decadent), traditional religious authority seems either supportive of 'tyranny' or obstacle to good times(aka party poopers, like when Moses returned from Mt. Sinai and said NO MORE to the festivities with the Golden Calf).

Monday, January 7, 2019

Commentary on the Nassim Nicholas Taleb's IQ Controversy on Twitter



In a way, maybe Nassim Nicholas Taleb speaks a certain truth about IQ, at least in the socio-political sense if not so much in the cognitive-scientific.

Now, IQ can tell smart apart from the dumb, but it is now essentially a ideo-economic tool used by the IYI('intellectual-but-idiots') to favor their own kind. The great contradiction of the Current Order is that the 'right' supports the concept of IQ whereas the 'left' tends to suppress it, BUT it is the 'left' that benefits from it far more than the 'right' does. Look at all the elite academic institutions that rely on IQ-esque tests, and they are totally 'leftist'. So, even as the 'left' tends to downplay IQ, it is the biggest beneficiary of it. And even though the 'right' emphasizes IQ, it is the biggest casualty of it. After all, the biggest beneficiaries of IQ meritocracy, the Jews and the 'left', use all their power to shut down the 'right'.

Even if affirmative action were to be eradicated and pure meritocracy reigned supreme, the fact is the elite institutions will remain 'leftist' and anti-'right'. Why? Because people aren't just rational beings but righteous beings, and 'leftist' ideology is simply seen as more on the side of 'justice'. (Also, the modicum of 'diversity' on campus gives the elites the justification for their own position and privilege on the basis of IQ. Affirmative Action & Diversity create just enough impression that the most prestigious institutions operate on the basis of 'inclusion' than elite exclusion based on IQ.)

The problem with Taleb is he throws out the baby with the bathwater. He should have said IQ, while measuring real cognitive abilities, doesn't measure integrity, individuality, courage, and honor. It only separates the smart from the dumb. But in a society where both smart and dumb are inundated with PC from cradle, even the smart grow up using their mental skills to aid and abet the Official Holiness.

This is why the 'right' is foolish to put all its eggs in the IQ basket. IQ alone is just a cognitive tool. It's like an advanced computer has super-fast processing power but works according to algorithm. If Google rigs the algorithm to ban certain ideas and information, the processing system does as programmed no matter how fast and efficient it is. So, IQ alone won't lead to truth. IQ serves something deemed 'higher', something holy. And all kids, smart and dumb, are raised to worship PC gods.

To break out of this mold, society needs people with traits other than IQ. Even though higher IQ is always better than lower IQ(all things being equal), higher IQ doesn't guarantee anything. Even a high IQ person may get all weepy about MLK and Mandela because of childhood indoctrination. Or even a high IQ person may be conformist in personality, craven and cowardly. China had a system of choosing smart people over dumb ones for over 1,000 yrs, and it produced little more than IYI obsessed with passing eight-legged essays.
In China(past and present) as well as in the current West, IQ is mainly associated with careerism, so the Smart Art is mostly about test-taking and memorizing knowledge WITHOUT the individual-and-independent will to ask questions as to WHO is pushing the knowledge and WHY. It's been said the Deep State is brimming with smart people with super-credentials, but notice there is hardly any real integrity-and-independence of thought. It's filled with cretins like Cass Sunstein, Samantha Power, Hillary Clinton, and James Comey. Things are so bad that one guy with a modicum of integrity finally said enough and quit.




Anyway, it's too bad that Taleb went the throw-baby-with-bathwater route. He would have done better by saying that even as IQ measures real mental ability, it does little to separate those with integrity and independence of mind from craven careerist-minded sheeple whose main passion is status and social approval. And status according to whom? That would require the JQ(Jewish Question), and most people don't want to go there(because of conditioning-from-cradle that Jews are the Holy Holocaust people who must never be criticized or doubted). What the world needs is ICQ or Integrity-Courage-Quotient, the will to break out of the mold and speak the truth against social opprobrium and political pressure. Something Socrates had(and Galileo too though not as much).

Anyway, the mob-lynching of James Watson by none other than the cognitive elite goes to show that IQ is no guarantee for honesty, integrity, and courage. All said and done, most smart people push the Big Lie for two reasons.

(1) Cynical power play. Smart Jews privately know that Watson is right, so why do they torment him? They need to perpetuate 'white guilt' about blacks to keep whites browbeaten and servile to Jews and their allies(mainly homos and blacks). 'White Guilt' paralyzes white pride that enables white independence that leads to white agency liberated from Jewish Power. So, Jews feel a need to push 'white guilt'(especially about blacks) as long as possible.

(2) As for smart goyim who attack Watson, they act as they do because they've been raised since cradle in the secular church of Magic Negro Worship. They've been instructed from a young age that blacks are holy and that whites can atone their 'historical sins' only by helping blacks fulfill their destiny of becoming First Humanity, the Wakandans. So, if blacks are lagging in schooling or some such, it's all due to ANYTHING(often associated with 'white evil) except the mundane facts of biology. Blame history, geography, or economics.

-------------------

Now, a theory as to why Nassim Taleb may be the way he is.



Nassim Nicholas Taleb claims to admire the Romans than the Greeks; he called Ron Paul a 'Roman among Greeks' as high praise. Romans got things done whereas Greeks theorized without solid grounding in reality. But it seems like the Romans he feels closest to are the Byzantines than those of the Western Empire. Taleb comes from a world that was once part of Byzantium, a world where everyone cautiously eyes the hidden power, the shadow hand, the ‘deep state’. Turks, Lebanese, and etc don’t trust anything at face value. And it seems Persians are much the same. Watch any Iranian movie, and there are no straight lines, physically-emotionally-dramatically. It’s all about navigating roundabout ways, with the shortest distance from point A to point B avoided for any number of reasons ranging from tragic to farcical.



BLACK SWAN’s success, as I take it, was the argument that what people consider to be straight lines of cause-and-effect in history really aren’t. It’s just the illusion of straight lines of cause-and-effect. Sometimes, the suppose straight lines are false or illusory. In fact, there are OTHER hidden factors at play almost everyone fails to notice.
And this is where Taleb was right about the financial crash in 2008. So many experts were speaking in terms of cause-and-effect straight lines between home-ownership and economic growth. Everything was getting better because more people were ‘owning’ homes. And yet, this supposed straight line between cause and effect was bogus and illusory because it required so many crookedness and devious instruments — derivatives that allowed for bad loans which could be bundled, sliced, and sold around the world — to keep it afloat. But people willfully ignored these hidden factors and just thought in straight-line terms of cause(the policy of ‘ownership society’) and effect(economic growth and rising home prices making everyone richer).
Taleb, having worked in the financial industry, knew what kind of devious forces are at play to distort prices and value, to effectively bribe politicians into supporting nutty policies based on dubious high-sounding ideology, such as that led to ‘compassionate conservatism’ which should really be called ‘compassionate libertarianism’(and let’s not forget ‘compassionate neo-imperialism’ of warmongering and ‘spreading democracy’).
It’s interesting that Adam McKay who made BIG SHORT, a movie about ferreting out the hidden factors behind the mess, failed to really address the role of Jewish power. He was even more negligent in this regard in the new movie VICE where he blames Big Oil for the war. When a movie purports to expose the hidden truth but does a switcheroo with an even bigger lie, it’s worse than a simple lie.

Anyway, Taleb comes from the Byzantine part of the world. Christian-Greek-Lebanese, his 'emotional' and 'temperamental' worldview isn’t much different from Turks of the Gulen School.

And this could be why he finds it difficult to trust the methodology of IQ. It’s too simple, too much of a straight line. He’s used to black swan thinking. In his worldview, there are no Occam’s Razors, just the Assassin's Daggers(hidden behind shadow behind a shadow). So, Taleb has a tendency to be distrustful of ANY theory or argument put forth by the western intellectuals(most of whom he dismisses as IYI) who, in their naivete or childishness, still believe in straight lines and cause-and-effect when, in fact, the truth is hidden and/or lurking.

But what Taleb fails to understand is that IQ theory is NOT part of correct or approved Western PC ideology. If anything, it is PC ideology that is downright ‘byzantine’ in looking for the ‘black swan’ excuses as to why blacks fail. It can never be the simplest answer that blacks are less intelligent and more impulsive(thus less likely to focus on study because their cultural life is all about fun and jiving). Besides, the current IQ theorists are the crime-thinkers who are going against the grain of Western PC, a true poison of the mind. A true black swan is what everyone fails to see. PC, in contrast, constructs fake black swans(or rubber ducks) as explanations for black failure in school. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Even Freud said so. And IQ is real. But it doesn't measure integrity.

--------------------------------------

To understand Taleb, you have to consider his cultural personality. Emotions, often unchecked, override reason and logic. This is true of Jews with excess chutzpah as well. You have to know their mindset before you really understand their minds. Tucker Carlson said he often felt confounded in the presence of Robert Kagan. Kagan's a smart and erudite guy, so one would think someone like him would be cautious and thoughtful. But no, too many like him get all boorish about certain matters, esp pertaining to Jewish power and advantage, with which their egos and pride are invested.

Some people have smaller personalities and bigger minds.
Some have bigger personalities and smaller minds.
Big minds with small personalities tend to be more rational, but they lack direction because reason is 'adirectional'. Reason doesn't favor one agenda over another. It tries to understand all sides. Reason lacks emotions or passion and is 'blind' as judge and jury. It is passion(love, hate, pride, paranoia, greed, resentment, envy, etc) that pushes reason in a certain direction. Big personalities with small minds do have a sense of direction, but they fail to see the big picture because they're stupid. It's just a matter of 'me, me, me', and such narrow-minded egotists burn out fast.
And then, there are big personalities with big minds. Now, which guides which? The big mind or the big personality? It's the latter because the mind, no matter how capable, is 'adirectional' and neutral(and objective in analysis of all things), whereas personality is about ego and passion.
This is why big personality with big mind will push around small personality with big mind. This is why Jews gained over Wasps. Wasp culture was about controlling emotions, and Wasps may have been bred to be reserved than temperamental(a trait that was sent to the gallows for bad manners). Also, small personalities with big minds are drawn to big personalities with big minds. Because they lack passion of their own, they latch onto the impassioned egotism of others. It's why Albert Speer was drawn to Adolf Hitler, why Zhou En-Lai was drawn to Mao Zedong. It's why cucks like Romney and Ryan are drawn to Jews with big big personalities.
The key difference between big personalities with big minds and big personalities with small minds is that the former see the big picture. They realize that 'me, me, me' isn't enough for sustained power and reach. It must be 'we, we, we'. So, while Nicky Santoro -- big personality but small mind -- in CASINO can't think beyond 'me, me, me', the Jewish moguls who eventually take over Las Vegas have a sense of 'we, we, we', i.e. We Jews working as one. After all, individuals don't last forever, but the Tribe can last a long long time.


Of course, there are white goyim with big personalities and reasonably big minds. Trump is such a person, and that's why Jews fear him and what he stands for. He has White Chutzpah though, to be sure, he can't do much as he is hemmed in by all sides by Jewish Deep State chess moves. Still, his own ego and passion are big enough that he doesn't need to latch onto Schlomo-Ego to feel pride and show bravado. Jews don't fear the White Negro, but they fear the White Jew, the Goy with chutzpah to match that of Jews.

Taleb is obviously smart, but he is also a big personality, and his egotism drives his reason... sometimes unwisely, as with the recent IQ controversy. But then, his perspective on IQ is different from our own. We tend to see the IQ issue as breaking the PC ice so that truth can be told. It is the battering ram against the Establishment's Wall of PC.
In contrast, Taleb sees IQ testing as the tool of the IYI establishment to keep the power and pat themselves on the back as the 'best and the brightest'. How many times have we been told that Obama Administration had the Most Qualified people or that Hillary is the 'most qualified' candidate who ran for president? The elites justify their grip on power on the basis of 'meritocracy', which is primarily grounded in various forms of IQ testing. But Taleb regards so many individuals selected by means of 'meritocracy' to be worse than retarded. So, he considers his anti-IQ stance as anti-Establishmentarian. Still, he failed to be measured on the matter because it became so contentious and personal(and because he made it so personal).

He comes from a part of the world and gene pool where people tend to be Infuriating. A diverse world of many religions, sects, ethnic groups, clans, and etc. Even within the same ethnic group, it was often more a matter of kinship than shared identity. So, no one got anywhere in such a world without the personality of a haggler or bully. In a diverse world, one has to be willing to raise his voice to be heard. You have to hustle and tug at harder to get 'what is mine'. In a homogeneous trust-society, people believe that 'what is mine' will come their way in time if they wait with trust and patience. In a diverse world, you get nothing unless you make a fuss, and Taleb sure knows how to make a fuss.
The extreme opposite of Taleb's culture of Infuriating-ness is the Inscrutable-ness of the Japanese who, even when upset and angry, try not to express their real feelings lest doing so upsets the social order. In between Far East personality and Near East personality is the culture of Indecision of the Anglos. Anglos aren't as restrained as the Japanese but aren't really keen on speaking their minds because it might constitute bad manners and form. So, there's a ironic micro-push-and-pull between repression and expression. Much is intimated and hinted but never really laid out.
In contrast, the culture of 'infuriation' is never afraid to speak one's mind though it doesn't necessarily mean honesty or truth. It's more like expression of ego and personal pride than well-reasoned thought. (There is the Insane cultural personality of blacks, but that belongs in a world of its own.) But 'Infuriation' is often a ploy. It can be personal but can also be a game of how far you can push before being pushed back. It's a measuring tool in social situation. It's about acting as if you take everything personally without really doing so. So, people of this culture can switch emotions in a heartbeat. They can go from trying to slit your throat to hugging you as best-friends-forever.

Anyway, the essence of Taleb's personality can be seen in the MR. SHOW video below: People from that part of the world emote and act like that. Too often in the West, people try to understand others by their stated views and ideas. It's the product of the Cult of Reason and Enlightenment, the notion that humans are, above all, thinking beings with reason.
More often than not, knowing their personality(individual and/or cultural) hits closer to the mark of what they are really about. If one really wants to understand people like Max Boot, Robert Kagan, and Victoria Nuland, one should first study their cultural personality than their stated reasons. More often than not, their reason follows their passion than vice versa. In THE GODFATHER, it's not just about conflict of abilities but personalities.



-------------------------------------------------------

Nassim Nicholas Taleb vs Stefan Molyneux(on Twitter) suggests the real reason why Taleb dislikes IQ as the measurement of all things. It makes Europeans and East Asians look smarter than his own folks. It might matter less if not for the cultural baggage of the Near East and Greece, the cradle of civilization. But those parts had long been surpassed by Western Europe and even by East Asia. Taleb is nothing if not proud, and the idea that Northern European upstarts got the better of the people of Greece and Near Easterners is too much for him to bear. He attacks Molyneux of Nordic supremacism, but Taleb's pride is animated by Levantine Pride(if not supremacism). If IQ tests showed his folks to be as smart or smarter than Northern Europeans, maybe he wouldn't be so anti-IQ. Taleb sees himself as a wise man from the Levant who has arrived to teach the bright but childlike people of the West. Sure, the West reached great heights, but it is too materialistic and trusting in the Cult of Reason(which is too often manipulated by Deep Reason, the hidden undercurrents of Official Reason. Official Reason: Home Ownership For All makes perfect economic sense vs. Deep Reason: It's a killer way for Wall Street to rake in billions).

But there are ironies about Taleb's thinking. He prefers Romans over the Greeks but thinks like a Greek. Romans were more pragmatic in politics and technology. They were doers, whereas Greeks, in their preference for theories and ideas, were talkers. And yet, Taleb's role is as a talker who sticks up for Eastern Cultural wisdom & prestige against Western arrogance & materialism. Taleb consciously roots for the Romans but thinks and feels more closer to the Greeks(and presumably Persians and etc). Molyneux mentions real material achievements of the Modern West, and Taleb dismisses them by invoking the once-greatness of the East.

Now, I think Molyneux's argument about Iraq and Jeffersonian democracy was stupid. The democratic project failed in Iraq because of diversity more than anything else. Sunnis who'd had the most power were suddenly shut out. Shias and Kurds, with less practice in politics, took power. Also, they were in revenge mode and made things bad for Sunnis.
Furthermore, the US didn't pound Iraq like it pounded Germany and Japan. At the end of WWII, all Germans and Japanese knew they better go along with the new order or it'd be extermination by rape, bombs, and nukes. US and USSR invaded those nations as victors with all the righteous fury and pride. In contrast, the US entered Iraq as liberators and friends. So, the moral advantage was with the Iraqis. US position was Iraqi folks are wonderful and ONLY HUSSEIN AND BAATH PARTY were bad. So, Iraqis never felt defeated by Americans. They just saw an opportunity to grab whatever under the New Order.
Also, keep in mind that the US has been extremely cynical, devious, and hypocritical in its promotion of democracy. When Hamas won in the Palestinian territories and Muslim Brotherhood won in Egypt, the US did everything to subvert those democracies. US also pulled a coup in Ukraine and toppled the democracy that was replaced by an odd alliance of Jews and Neo-Nazis. If Iraq had been homogeneous upon US invasion, maybe things would have worked out better. But Sunnis couldn't swallow defeat, just like the white South had difficulty accepting the terms of defeat imposed by the North after the Civil War.
Also, did Japan and Germany really become democracies? Japan became a one-party state with the backing of the US. The Japanese Left was powerful after the war and with US backing. But once the Cold War set in with Mao's takeover of China, US worked with the Japanese Right to effectively suppress the Japanese Left, and Japanese politics has been more like Chinese one-party system ever since. Except for few yrs, the LDP has ruled Japan. (Oddly enough, both homogeneous Japan and diverse California became one-party states albeit for different reasons.) And German Democracy didn't really matter because regardless of the party in power, Germany was just a puppet of the US. Look how worthless Merkel is. And when Europe elects real leaders with the will of the people(like Viktor Orban), the US elites lead the way in condemning it as 'anti-democratic', 'autocratic', and 'far right'. As far as US elites are concerned, 'democracy' around the world means national leaders taking orders from Soros & Co. and submitting to Homomania. If success of democracy = High IQ, then why are Jews, the people with the highest IQ, doing everything in their power to subvert real national democracies all around the world? Maybe democracy works best when the IQ of the upper class isn't all that different from IQ of the rest of the population. Higher but too much higher. But when IQ differences are considerable between elites and masses, the the former may want to lord over the masses than merely rule over them.
Anyway, democracy certainly didn't work in Yugoslavia due to diversity. So, I don't necessarily agree with Molyneux that democracy = high IQ. Singapore is high IQ but found a rational non-democratic way of rule that is effective.

But Taleb's argument fails too. He says the Near East came up with all the great stuff until recent times. But this isn't really true. Even during most of the Ancient Era, most of the great civilizations stopped advancing. Egypt was a fossilized civilization for 1000s of yrs, even at its peak. And Greeks stopped being inventive long before the rise of the Modern West. What was the great achievement of the Byzantines or even before that? Except in some periods of the Ancient Era, the Near East didn't produce much that was revolutionary. And much of Arab achievements in the Middle Ages were due to rediscovery of ancient Greek learning.

But even if we agree with Taleb that the East was far more accomplished than the West until about 500 yrs ago, it doesn't follow that those who invent or found something are naturally better at it. Japanese invented Judo, but bigger whites and blacks have natural advantage over Japanese(all things being equal in training and diet). Whites invented boxing, basketball, football, and etc, but blacks are naturally better at them. White people invented the saxophone, but black Jazz musicians were most creative with it. On the other hand, blacks invented blues and rhythm-and-blues, but British whites took the forms to new levels of sophistication. So, there is no guarantee that the people who found or invent something are going to be naturally better at it than those who didn't.
Due to reasons of climate and trade, the East was more advantaged than the North West in Ancient Times. North West was too cold, and people there focused mainly on survival(though not as much as the Eskimos). Also, as the Near East was situated among Europe, Asia, and North Africa, it could draw ideas, goods, and talent from all sides. But trade and communication routes could be a disadvantage as well. While people in the Near East could gain access to new goods and new ideas(and new blood in talent and intelligence), it could also be invaded by peoples of lower IQ or enslave them in great numbers. Tyrants were addicted to slavery as easy source of labor. So, great civilizations oftentimes brought in tons of foreigners as laborers. Egyptians enslaved a lot of blacks, but what did this to do the Egyptian gene pool? And maybe Greeks used a lot of dummy foreign slaves who came to mix with Greeks and mess things up. Would it really be to Japan's advantage in IQ if it took in lots of less intelligent people as labor force? Japan is doing just this, and it will be profitable in the short term for Japanese businesses, but what will it do to Japanese gene pool and IQ? Not good. Japan will be Philippinized... just like European IQ is being Arabized and Africanized. But for awhile, all that cheap labor was surely great for businesses.

Finally, the Taleb Controversy is amusing because so much of Taleb-ism isn't really about East vs West but East vs East. Taleb won't say it, but he knows that the West came under the control of Jews who originated from the East. And Taleb himself originated in the East. So, much of Taleb's tirades over the years have really been against Jews. He can't believe that a handful of Jews hoodwinked the West so effectively and sold them on PC, financial fraud, and wars for Israel. Naturally, Taleb has been an admirer of men like Ron Paul who refused to play along to Neoconism and such.

Taleb feels that the West has become a platform for one part of the East: Jews who originated in the Levantine East. So, the West is all about supporting Israel, waging wars for Israel, and praising Jews to high heaven. He sees himself as the OTHER side of the East: Christian Greco-Arab side. Though he's not too crazy about Muslims, he has much in common with them because both Christians and Muslims in the East have been pounded by the West controlled by Jews. Deep down inside, he may wish that the West would wake up, stop sucking up to Jews, and come to appreciate a better relation with the Other East, the non-Jewish one.

IQ debate goes against his agenda because it says (1) Jews are smarter, so they deserve all their power and privilege(the argument of Jordan Peterson) and (2) Northern Europeans are smartest after Jews, so they should feel closest to Jews(the argument of Jared Taylor despite being bashed by Jews from all sides). All this IQ debate puts Jews at the top and makes whites aspire to be accepted by Jews, the royalty of IQ. This makes it more difficult for whites to wake up to the dark side of Jewish power and take sides with the Other East.
And this is why Molyneux's remark about Iraq and democracy is especially hurtful to Taleb, and I'm inclined to agree with him here. Blaming the failure of Iraqi democracy on IQ is besides the point. While higher-IQ people may be better suited for running a democratic system, the implosion and destruction of Iraq owed other factors. For instance, real achievements in living standards had been considerable under secular Hussein. Iraq moved from Third World nation to Second World nation, and that was precisely why Israel was so triggered by Iraq as a rival power. Not because it was a total basketcas but because it was making real gains. (Iran is sanctioned for the same reason with bogus nonsense about nukes.) Contrary to official line about 'Muslim Terrorists', the US(under the control of the Jewish Levantinians) has been most opposed to secular modernizing Arab nations. It has been in bed with arch-Islamic monarchies with which it colluded to spread terrorism against secular regimes and the Soviet Union. The one exception was when the US aided secular Iraq against Islamic Iran(which however, contrary to Zionist-US claims has NOT been one of the main patrons of terrorism). After the Gulf War, Iraqi economy and healthcare were destroyed by sanctions, not lower IQ. And by the time the US invaded, the Iraqi economy was a mere shell of itself and civil society had all but vanished in a world of misery. Imagine if the US sanctioned Israel over its human rights abuses in West Bank and starved 100,000s of Jewish kids to death. People would have called it another holocaust, but the West mostly pretended not to notice all the misery in Iraq except in the alternative media.
So, sometimes, this talk of IQ can be obscene in explaining the failure of nations. Recently, the fall of Libya was engineered by the West(controlled by the Jewish East). Given the total domination of the West by the Jewish East, it's not a bad idea for the West to pay more heed to the Other East: the Christian/Muslim Arabs, Greeks, Turks, and etc. of the Near East. While IQ is important, it isn't everything. If the West applied the kind of pressure it placed on Iraq on Israel, there would be great social crisis in Israel despite the presence of some very high IQ Ashkenazim there.

Enlightenment was great for the West in paving the Way for Reason. But the Cult of Reason and Freedom has fooled so many in the West into believing that they live in a world defined by facts, logic, reason, truth, and liberty. Well yes, the West has comparably been more rational and free than other parts of the world. But, the real power in the West happens behind the scenes, and in this, the West is like the non-West.
Indeed, the non-West may have a better grasp of power and its dark ways because it is less under the Cult of Reason. In contrast, Westerners think even the power that governs them is guided by concern for facts and logic. In fact, reason can be used in a million ways by those who control the platforms and outlets of 'rational discourse'. The Power can use 'reason' to fool people into thinking that men are 'women' and that Iraq with its WMD poses an 'existential' threat to the US.
Reason is good, but power will always be about something darker and deeper than reason. It will be about passions of ego and/or ethno. The West is now controlled by Jewish East because of its immense ego/ethno. Wasp Episcopalians have been known to have IQ equal to or even higher than Jewish Ashkenazim, but they lost out big. Why? They subscribed to the Cult of Reason whereas Jews were animated primarily by the dark powers of ego/ethno. Jews used reason alright but as directed by their deep passions.

Monday, December 31, 2018

Commentary on "Jewish Involvement in Contemporary Refugee and Migrant Organizations — Part One"(by Andrew Joyce)

Jewish Involvement in Contemporary Refugee and Migrant Organizations — Part One

https://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/2018/12/28/jewish-involvement-in-contemporary-refugee-and-migrant-organizations-part-one/

Look all around the media and academia, and the the elites believe spreading falsehoods is okay(and even necessary) because, according to PC wartime logic, lies in the service of the Holy Crusade are more justified than truths in the service of Evil Tyranny. The value of the Noble Lie.

It's the mindset during wartime. Wars are so extreme that truth is secondary to winning. Both Right and Left agree on this in times of war. US and USSR told tons of lies in World War II, but because the overall understanding was that Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so utterly Evil, all means and methods(even deceitful propaganda) were justified in taking them down. (And of course, Germany and Japan did the same, often sacrificing truth for their own formulation of the Noble Lie.)

Now, if there had been no war, truth might have been favored over 'us and them'(or 'good vs evil') mentality. But the war was on, and the enemy was seen not merely as a rival or competitor but Evil Incarnate. This was why so many on the Right were willing to tell lies about the Soviet Union and communism. Even if they peddled in lies and half-truths, such were apparently justified because the Soviet Union was the Evil Empire. Its defeat was so necessary that even lies that served against communism were preferable to truth that suggested the USSR wasn't all bad(thereby weakening the righteousness of anti-communist moral furor; besides, moralism or moral-high is addictive like drugs; people love to 'vape' on that stuff).

The central fact of PC is that it is on war-footing as Jonathan Haidt pointed out.



It's like Sonny Corleone laments that Tom is not a wartime consiglieri. Tom is 'business'-minded and believes that negotiation is still possible with the other side. He feels that what the Tataglias and Sollozzo pulled wasn't evil. Nasty yes and very ugly. But it was 'business' and all sides have done similar things. In contrast, Sonny(and later Michael in a more calculated way) believes it's a matter of us or them. Only war, not peace, can settle the differences. One side must win, the other side must lose. When Michael takes power, he removes Tom from the role of consiglieri. Michael will only pretend to negotiate but really gear up for war and go for blitzkrieg take-out of the heads of the Five Families.



While NPCs or SJWs make the most noise, they are mere 'buttons' and 'buffers' of the ultimate power of the GLOB(that is dominated by Jewish Power). Jewish globalists see the world in terms 'We rule and they obey'. Goy autonomy is like a slave rebellion to Jewish Globalists who've achieved the summit of power. No other option is tolerable.
Of course, if Jewish globalists laid out the the terms of PC in such brazenly tribal and supremacist manner, no one would follow them. If anything, NPCs or SJWs will turn against Jewish Power as being nazi-like. So, Jews have masked what is essentially an us-versus-them tribal agenda with a good-versus-evil universal calling. Thus, most people are blind to the struggle between Jewish Hegemony and Goy Autonomy AND instead see the world in terms of Diversity & Inclusion versus 'Racism' & Nazism(which today means even Hungarians and Poles who want to be left alone) It used to be that Nazism represented the invasive force while anti-Nazis represented defensive resistance. Today, however, Europeans who resist the globalist bankers and third world hordes are the 'nazis', whereas the invasive forces -- Zionist-controlled US military or African mobs -- are the crusading angels against 'hate'. But then, we live in a world where a man pretending to be a woman is said to be 'properly gendering' himself whereas someone who sees him as still a man is 'misgendering' him.

War warps the mind. As the saying goes, "First casualty of war is truth." In some ways, the motto is a complaint, but it's also an admittance of the usefulness of 'necessary evil' in extreme times. After all, there are moments when lies are justified. If some thug is out to rob you and hurt your loved ones, does it make sense to offer up any truth that will advantage him? No, you'd be justified in telling any lie to survive, keep your wealth, and protect your family. In crime movies like DOG DAY AFTERNOON and HIGH AND LOW, lawmen use deception against the crooks who are seen as undeserving of fair play; they are criminals who violated the social contract after all.

The problem is such a mentality can outlast the 'war' context and come to poison politics by continuing to warp reality by appeals to wartime footing. (Since the context no longer exists, its facsimile is projected onto the world via the media and think-tanks that inform the political culture.) Sharper or more experienced minds saw how this played out in the aftermath of the Cold War. Finally, the world could breathe a sigh of relief and hope for better relations all around. But the Neocons, Anti-Communist nostalgists, and Warmongers had to cook up new cold wars(that even led to hot wars) by projecting Cold War mentality onto a host of other conflicts(actually of limited regional relevance). But then, this mentality could be sourced back to the aftermath of WWII, what with Jews and Interventionists invoking 'new nazis' and 'new hitlers' to justify their power move. (For a time, many Jews felt Joe McCarthy and the American Right were the 'new nazis', whereas hardline anti-communists argued that the Soviet Union was just as dangerous as Nazi Germany.) Iran has become the perennial 'New Nazi nation', and there is now a 'new cold war' with Russia because its opposition to 'gay marriage' is apparently neo-Stalinist.

In GOODFELLAS, Paulie tells Henry that he looked the other way on the drug-dealing because Henry was in a tight situation and had to do whatever was necessary to survive while in prison. But now that Henry is a free man on the outside, he mustn't get involved with narcotics because the risks are too high. So, what was justifiable in one situation isn't in another. In the end, it's the drug trade that brings down not only Henry but all those fingered by him. Paulie was right.



The truth that must be recognized is that the predominant Jewish Power sees the world in terms of Us versus Them, or we Jewish Superiors who deserve to rule versus You Goyim Inferiors who exist to serve us. Because Jews are so vastly outnumbered by goyim, they feel they mustn't ever let up on their War on Goyim. But then, since Jews cannot win an openly Jews vs Goyim War, they use PC to re-frame it into Diversity(and Social Justice) versus Nazis(and White Supremacism), though in the Middle East and North Africa, the Narrative is re-framed into Forces-of-Liberal-Democratic-values(that includes white American soldiers in battle gear to mow down tons of Muslims and Arabs) against tyrants and oppressors(such as Assad and rulers of Iran). Use whites against non-whites in the Middle East in the name of spreading 'Western values' & 'liberty' AND use non-whites against whites in the West in the name of 'diversity' and 'inclusion'. Both agendas serve Jewish Hegemony, but whites are fooled into believing they are spreading 'democracy', and non-whites are fooled into thinking they are upholding the magic of 'diversity' by fighting 'racism'(even though their immigration patterns of favoring white nations over their own would indicate that they believe whites are better than their own peoples and cultures; shouldn't that count as 'racist'?)

Anyway, because Jewish Power is in constant war-footing, they use their control of finance, media, academia, and government to push wartime mindset in journalism and think-tanks. Jews in media and academia know what the real game is(though some idealistic Jews like Philip Weiss and Max Blumenthal rebel against this), and goyim in journalism schools are trained to be attack-dogs than tracking-dogs. So much of journalism is about mindless frenzy of hunting the enemy and tearing it from limb from limb than about tracking down the truth. Fact-hunting in today's journalism isn't about tracking down the truth as the highest good but about mauling any 'inconvenient fact' into shreds to send a message that certain views simply cannot be allowed to inhabit the media-sphere and academisphere. In recent years, certain exiled or banned facts made their way back through internet platforms, but the Jewish ethno-monopoly is now working to hunt them down to extinction as well:



Because Jewish Power sees everything in terms of Us(who deserve to win and rule) versus Them(who only exist to serve us) AND because NPCs or SJWs(usually goyim who've come under Jewish influence in media and academia) see everything in terms of war between Resistance and the Nazis, they favor the lie over the truth IF the lie favors their agenda. They will favor facts and truth when such are apolitical, neutral, or advantages their side, BUT when given the choice between the lie that favors the agenda and the fact that validates the Enemy, they will choose the lie every time because their mentality is totally in war-footing mode. To Jewish Power, Trump(even in his lame cucked-out state) represents the awakening of white consciousness for autonomy from Jewish hegemony; and to NPCs or SJWs(brainwashed by Jewish-controlled media and academia), Trump represents 'racist' and 'white supremacist'. The mentality of your average goy NPC in media or academia came to light in, of all places, a vape shop. Look at this virtue-vaper who won't sell products to a Trump-supporter.



But the American Right shares something in common with NPC or SJW-types. Because there's been so much emphasis on God and guns in US conservatism -- and mindless flag-waving for the military -- , too many American Conservatives have been as easy to dupe and manipulate as the NPC-types. If NPC's can be made to see 'nazis', 'racists', and 'white supremacists' everywhere, the guns-and-God American Conservatives could be counted onto support any new hate-fest or even war against whatever is deemed the New Evil Empire. Looking back, too many on the American Right were duped into over-zealous anti-communism and support of insane wars and sanctions-policies since the end of the Cold War that only served Zionist-globalist and military-industrial interests. It's good to see that Tucker Carlson and even Ann Coulter have come to see the stupidity of such mindset. (As for certain elements of the 'far right', their wartime mentality against Jews is so strong that they can't see anything admirable about Jews and can't see evil in something obviously insane like Nazi Imperialism. Warped by War Path.)

Ideally, people should favor the facts over falsehoods(and truth over lies), and I think all people, regardless of political ideology, agree to this. But, most people, again regardless of ideology, believe that there are extreme situations or conditions when winning matters more than anything because losing means the failure to survive or the triumph of evil.

Survival is less a moral issue than a life-force issue. All organisms want to live, 'good' or 'bad'. Even in movies about criminals and outlaws as 'heroes', we find ourselves rooting for those trying to survive and make it out alive(as in escape-from-prison movies). There is an instinctive animal-part of us that makes us identify with anyone or anything that wants to live for another day. Even Jews watching DAS BOOT(German film about a submarine crew in WWII) can understand the all-too-human-animal desperation of men struggling to survive.

When it comes to the elemental matter of survival, truth-or-false is secondary to live-or-die. It's like Winston Smith is willing to betray even the woman he loves to be spared from the ravenous rats in George Orwell's 1984. There is a part of Jewishness that forever feels like cornered rats trying to survive, ranging from desperate Jews hiding from Nazis during WWII to globalist overlords trying to maintain their tribal-imperial domination over all goyim. In the past, Jews tried to survive as Jews; today, Jews try to 'survive' as Jewish Supremacists as they've become addicted to Total Power.

The OTHER reason that makes people favor Falsehood over Facts has to do with Sacro-Mentality. We see this in both religion and PC(which is a form of quasi-religious secular cult that views esp. Jews, Negros, and Homos as the Holy Three). When something is held to be sacred, its infinite worth cannot be contested with facts and/or reason.
It's like faith is beyond facts. You can lay out all the logical argument and hard evidence against the existence of God or miracles, but those with Faith will continue to believe even against all factual evidence. To true-believers, God or Jesus(or Muhammad) is so sacred and holy, so above everything, that they cannot be bothered with 'petty' facts or details that go against Faith. Facts wilt in the face of Faith. PC is a neo-faith with Jews, Negroes, and homos as sacred cows. So, facts don't matter to the idolaters of PC. It's like no amount of scientific facts can persuade religious people to lose or compromise their Faith. This is even true of relatively higher IQ people. Nick Fuentes is a smart educated guy but, like Patrick Buchanan(another smart person)who has always rejected evolution(as an affront to Christian theology), is willing to play dumb about scientific facts -- such as Earth revolving around the Sun than vice versa -- to prop up some archaic Christian Orthodoxy about the cosmos. As for PC pod-people, too many have undergone 'communion' with Diversity to harbor any skepticism about it. 'Diversity is our strength' or DIOS is one of their core catechisms. So, even when increasing Diversity is destroying the fabric of their societies, they stick with the Faith than face up to Facts.
In summary, animal instinct for survival(of basic self or dominant position) and spiritual inspiration for sanctity both militate against facts that come together into the truth. Jewish mania for survival(as hegemonic supremacists) and NPC/SJW fanaticism for self-righteous sanctimony are the core animating factors at the nuclei of PC.


When Jews purport to support 'refugees', they are really pushing for De-population of Arabs in the Middle East. Jews want more war in Syria... so that Jews could grab territory in there ... or to drive Palestinians in West Bank into Syria.

Jews want to empty parts of the Middle East so that Zionists can create Greater Israel. And Jews want to fill up the West with more non-whites in order to play divide-and-rule among goyim. When Jews say 'Diversity is OUR strength', they don't mean All of Us will benefit. 'Our' just means Jewish.

If Jews really cared about refugees, they should first acknowledge that the main problem(or crime) is people being forced to become refugees in the first place. So, real humanitarians should try to prevent wars that turn people into refugees. But notice how Jews NEVER address that issue. If anything, Jews have been pushing for endless Neocon warmongering policies that turned the Middle East and North Africa upside down. Jews also worked with Neo-Nazis in Ukraine to foment a refugee crisis there as well.
So, Jews see nothing wrong with using their power to spread wars and/or economic destruction(via sanctions especially) that turn millions into refugees. Turning goyim into refugees is okay, indeed wonderful. Jewish Moralism on the Refugee Question is never about preventing people from becoming refugees but about how the West(but never Israel) must welcome the refugees. And we must never ever mention the fact that those refugees are fleeing from war zones created by Zio-globalist policies carried out by the US-Israel-Saudi Axis. (Saudis are turncoat Arabs who will harm other Muslims to maintain their artificially vaunted place in the Middle East.) Libya and Syria would be stable nations if not for the fact that US-Saudis-and-Israel(and Turkey in a spectacular act of miscalculation) conspired to aid and arm Jihadi lunatics. Of course, this entailed violation of border security in Libya and Syria. So much for the wonders of Open Borders. In Syria, it led to 10,000s of terrorists flowing freely from all sides. I guess the West must take in millions of refugees while Syria must take in tons of Jihadis. The wonders of Open Borders(or Broken Borders).

Jews say the West must accept refugees because them poor folks are just like Jewish 'refugees' in the 20th century. But if we go by the earlier history, the sober lesson should be 'taking in refugees is a bad idea'. Palestine took in Jewish refugees, and guess what happened? Jews took over the territory and now treat Palestinians like subhuman cattle in West Bank.
US took in Jewish refugees, but Jews took over America and are now gloating about how they're gonna replace the white population. Boy, aren't Jews so grateful to whites for having been welcomed into America.
Even Jewish 'refugees' from the Soviet Union in the 1980s turned out to be vile scum like Max Boot and Julia Ioffe who hates people saying 'Merry Christmas' to her. (Btw, if Jews hate Christmas so much, how about a law that forbids Jews from profiting from Christmas? Jews rake in so much cash from the Christmas season but bitch about how much they hate Christians and the Christian holiday.)

Jews always mention evil Hitler and how the world didn't do enough to save Jews from Nazis. But when millions were dying in genocides in Ukraine, China, Cambodia, or Rwanda, how many Jews volunteered to save innocent lives from mass slaughter or famine? (Has anyone met a Jew who thinks the Jewish race should nobly sacrifice their own to save members of another kind? Jews would laugh at such a notion. When millions of Ukrainians were dying in the Great Famine, how many Jews
urged fellow Jews to sacrifice their own lives to save those poor Ukrainian goyim? NONE. Also, whenever Jews invoke altruism, it is never at their own expense but at the expense of others. Jews tribalize the sanctimony but universalize the costs. Jews make a big show of caring about refugees, but the burden is pushed onto goyim. Jews use Western Power to invade & destroy the Middle East and then encourage more immigration/migration of non-white 'refugees' to use against white goy 'racist-nazi-xenophobes' in the West.)

Also, even though the Nazis were clearly evil, maybe the fact that there was yet another outbreak of anti-Jewish violence had SOMETHING to do with Jewish perfidy? Given Jewish behavior in the US and Russia since the end of the Cold War -- Jews surely knew how to rape the entire economy of Russia in the 90s -- , is it a stretch to assume that Jews in the past acted like they do in our time? While there's no doubt that the Nazis over-reacted, they meted out violence not to a saintly innocent people but a vile, hateful, murderous, and contemptuous people.

Sunday, December 9, 2018

Commentary on "Cambridge gives role to academic accused of racist stereotyping"(by the Guardian)

Noah Carl รข€“ Medium
Noah Carl, Social Scientist hounded by PC
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/07/cambridge-gives-role-to-academic-accused-of-racist-stereotyping

It seems the department of Social Sciences now works backwards.

Instead of gathering and analyzing facts & data to reach conclusions, it already has a mandatory set of correct conclusions that must be confirmed by all new research.

Should science work like this? “We have the Correct Answers already, and your job is merely to validate them(even if it takes tortured Procrustean logic.” What’s the point of science on such terms? It’s like saying “We know the sun revolves around the earth, so you better use your calculations to prove what we know already.”

Such wouldn't be matter of scientific invalidation but ethical disapproval based on ideological dogma or bias.

Apparently, according to the current PC system, certain observations are wrong no matter what the factual data-driven evidence says simply because they seem ‘racist’, ‘fascist’, and ‘xenophobic’, none of which are scientific terms, by the way.

It’d be like saying it’s been ‘discredited’ that men are stronger and more aggressive than women because such a statement would be ‘sexist’ and at odds with the dogma that 'gender is just a social construct'. Discredited by science or by ideology?

In reality, Objective Race-ism or Racial Objectivism prevails over Subjective ‘Anti-racism’(or Subjective ‘Racism’ for that matter). By 'race-ism', I mean the belief that races are real and racial differences are the real product of evolutionary divergences among the various races. After all, -Ism means belief, and Race-ism should properly be defined as BELIEF in Race and possibility of racial differences. Reality is what it is regardless of subjective dogmas or prevailing orthodoxies of coerced consensus. Ideologies, unlike true science, are subjective. They compel us to view and determine everything about the world through a single lens.

The fact that 700 academics signed the petition against a scientist who revealed 'uncomfortable' truths suggests that Social Science should now be called Social Silence, a kind of cult that demands ideological conformity and complacency(so easily 'triggered' and outraged into Justice-Hysteria or 'Justyeria' by the slightest whiff of wrong-think). And, it seems most of these preening and snot-nosed academics are mostly about status and peer-approval than courage and integrity.

Furthermore, even if a scientist is a ‘bigot’, it doesn't disprove his findings if they're factual and demonstrable. If a Jewish scientist arrogantly looks down on Gypsies as dumber than Jews, he may be a Jewish supremacist, but it still doesn’t invalidate his factually true observation of higher IQ among Ashkenazi Jews.
Or suppose a black scientist happens to be a black supremacist who says blacks can run faster. He may be an arrogant jerk, but it still doesn’t disprove his case that blacks are generally more muscular and superior in speed, coordination, and jumping ability. Or imagine there's a male 'misogynist' who looks down on women as weaker in body and emotions. Suppose he mocks women for their athletic inferiority and for being quicker to cry. We might agree that he's some kind of an ass, but his statement about sexual differences would still remain true.

Science that rejects what we can obviously SENSE in service of SENSITIVITIES is no science at all.

Friday, November 30, 2018

Commentary on "A QUIET WAR RAGES OVER WHO CAN MAKE MONEY ONLINE"(by Paris Martineau)



https://www.wired.com/story/quiet-war-rages-who-can-make-money-online/

OVER THE PAST year, two popular forums for men who identify as involuntary celibates, or incels, have been banned by Reddit and a domain registrar in response to members’ history of toxic misogyny and celebrating violence against women.

Jewish-run music industry promote rappers who call women ho's and worse. They sing about all sorts of degeneracy. And yet, these ugly rappers who spew garbage are showered with million dollar contracts. And Music Industry and Pornography(also controlled by Jews) promote white women as whores, sluts, and sex meat. And yet, these industries are allowed to rake in billions. I agree that some incels are nuts and retarded, but it is amusing that they are demeaned as 'misogynists' in a culture that idolizes rappers, women-as-sluts, and gun-toting morons on TV. The message of much of Pop Music is 'muh dic*' and 'you is a ho'. The mass media promote the likes of Lena Dunham. Does anyone really think such promotes respect for women? Really?

Attacking through the payment processors is a new wrinkle on that approach.

Does Wired have the courage to address the JQ or Jewish Question? Is Wired owned by Jewish oligarchs? The fact is Jews pioneered the means of abusing the monopoly of payment processers to deny Free Spend to groups they hate. Jews hate A LOT of people. Jews hate Palestinians, so BDS groups have been deplatformed and denied payment processing. Jews hate Russia and Iran, and both nations have been sanctioned. While the criminal terrorist imperialist state of Israel gets showered with billions of US tax payer dollars, critics of Jews are effectively denied free speech and free spend where it counts: in the public forum.

After a gunman allegedly killed 11 people in a Pittsburgh synagogue, a social media platform he frequented was driven offline for nearly a week when its payment service providers, web host, and domain registrar dropped contracts with the company. A similar fate befell the primary forum for incels in the wake of the related Toronto terror attack carried out by a self-professed incel, and neo-Nazi site the Daily Stormer after Charlottesville. However, most cases are not as clear cut.

GAB is a free speech platform and allows any speech as long as it's legal. Why was it held accountable for what the Pittsburgh shooter did? Plenty of people on Twitter and Youtube went off to commit crimes and murder. If anything, Twitter protects much of antifa lunacy and hosts Deep State goons who've been behind wars, surveillance, censorship, propaganda, subversion of foreign nations, and torture.
Also, 11 people died in Pittsburgh. In contrast, a million Muslims have been killed in Wars for Israel. Israel uses IDF death squads to mow down Palestinians who want to return home. 2018 is the 70th anniversary of the Nakba pogroms that wiped Palestine off the map. Israel occupies West Bank and enforces Apartheid. US and Israel are allied with terrorist state of Saudi Arabia that tortures/murders Journalists and drops bombs on Yemen(which began under Obama and Hillary). Neocon Jews aided Neo-Nazis in Ukraine to take down a democratically elected government. Obama and Hillary destroyed Libya. US Deep State has been behind globalist imperialism. Why are creeps like that allowed to have platforms and use financial power? Madeline Albright said it was worth it to kill 500,000 Iraqi kids. Sheldon Adelson urged the US to drop a nuke on Iran. These are psychos, and yet they get to operate at the upper echelons of US power. They are not de-platformed and de-funded even though they've been behind Zionist imperialism and Wars for Israel that murdered so many.

As for Daily Stormer, yes it is a stupid trashy clown neo-nazi website, but the fiasco at Charlottesville was the result of Jewish mayor, black police chief, and Antifa thugs. The Alt Right people, like them or not, gathered to defend a monument and give speeches. They did everything by the book. They had the Constitution on their side for free speech and free assembly. But the city officials conspired to shut down the event and then shove the Alt Right people into a crowd of Antifa scum who went on rampage. If there is any justice in the world, the Jewish mayor and police chief should be in jail, and those Antifa goons should have been locked up. But there is no justice. We have the might-is-right of Jewish supremacist power.

But I see that Wired is a Jewish-Zionist rag that is perfectly fine with Jewish supremacism and violation of free speech.
Daily Stormer is shit, but it was not behind the Iraq War, Libya destruction, the coup in Ukraine, and the endless murders of Palestinian women and children by IDF death squads. If any people need to be brought down and banned, it is Judeo-Nazis who force Americans to support the monstrous state of Israel and support Jewish Hate Campaigns against Russia, Iran, Syria, Palestinians, and white patriots.