I’m going to continue this in additional posts, primarily because I was running out of the text space allowed by our posting configurations. I date this date prior to the earlier post so that it reads in its proper sequential order -

“I don’t have to tell you about the tyranny of patterns, that is the rubric under which we meet. What you may not know is that you have to accept them.” - Bateson

In this disorder of modernity, resulting of the rupture of classificatory bounds, her increased one up position emerges as it is pandered-to from all angles and with that her predilections are confirmed overly and prematurely…

In this position pandered to thus, she can become a powerful social gatekeeper despite her ignorance. She sees herself gaining in power (albeit short sighted, prior to the empathy that she would develop for the vulnerability of children of her own kind in a stable order), her most base inclination to incite genetic competition as a female (otherwise sublimated to a more Augustinian level - sperm after egg and so on) is in a charmed loop and becomes normalized - her hyperbolic liberalism institutionalized through her gate keeping auspices. Solicited and pandered to in this addressive position, she can become overly confident and articulate of her predilections; and as she talked-to, has support (e.g., can make her way up the academic ladder) she becomes a powerful and brutally liberal gatekeeper - don’t like it? She’ll call in the thugs, the anti racist YKW, whomever.

The disorder of modernity creates an atavistic circumstance where it is hard to trust and have patience for the yield of protracted patterns wherein the best tally of Whites and Asians is to be found; and this circumstance not only bumps-up the contextual force of puerile female selection, it merges to favor the atavistic selection of blacks.

And while the masculine qualities - confidence, bravery, assertion, strength, decisiveness - are certainly good and necessary in balance, these qualities can be over selected to the detriment of empathy, survey, cooperation, sublimation, intellectual query - these later qualities being of the male perspective, the bias of what they value in females; and isn’t it rather a shame to not favor that bias.

But that’s not what’s happening as the selective predilections of puerile females are as one-up as they are in modernity.

And her selective predilections are on a self-reconstructing loop as she is pandered-to from all angles and incentivized to maintain her powerful position as liberal gatekeeper with continued incitement to genetic competition.

Confirmation of the predilections of her perspective as it values, rather over-values, confidence, hyper-assertiveness, intrepid masculinity, impervious and undaunted no matter what, through incitement to genetic competition to the most brutal natural fallacy and universal maturity has one basically describing - well, you’ve just described a black man…. to the interests of black men and to the detriment of White men, their predilections and the more sublimated society that they would create.

...it becomes/became like a litmus test from her in initial interaction episodes: are you a racist, are you ok with blacks?

And modernity’s rupturing and short circuiting of patterns in favor of moment and episode makes worse the incentive and power structure for White men.

Taking our hermeneutic survey back to appropriate a more scientific, working hypothesis of black evolution here:

While evolving in the warmer climates where resources were abundant, shelter and forethought of seasonal deprivation not as much the obstacle, sublimation was less important. As hunter gatherers without as much need for cooperation, forethought and care, a hypergamous style of selection of the “alpha male” developed. Males were being rewarded for their ability to fight other males and assert themselves with females, not as much for their cooperation and ingenuity with regard to the elements and child rearing; R selection prevailed - having more babies and taking less care of them was more the birthing strategy. No need to elaborate, black behavior readily exemplifies results that would lend credibility to this oft suggested hypothesis.

But the predicament for Whites is worse than that as right-wingers and liberals have imposed them upon us (and if you think that slavery wasn’t a right wing thing, you are absurd).

Blacks have evolved 150 - 250 thousand years prior to European differentiation. Blacks developed a generally more masculine people - from our perspective they are a more aggressive, hyper-assertive people - more about momentary and episodic assertion than about planning, thus inborn with less impulse control. Through their own less ordered societies, their female predilection was over represented as well, selecting for that hyper masculine, hyper assertive, aggressive, presumptuous kind of people, with low time horizon, less impulse control, they are prone to having more sex partners, sooner, more babies, sooner, more single parent families, poverty and violence - visiting marked destruction to infrastructure when they are introduced to Whites societies, but also destruction to our people in a myriad of ways - including, significantly, in terms EGI as theirs is also among the most distant. Nevertheless, as they are evolved 150 to 250 thousand years prior to European differentiation from Whites, this gives them an enormous evolutionary head start, if not a kind of biological hegemony - at least in some circumstances, such as the sheer momentary and episodic emphasis of modernity where it prohibits Whites and Asians from bringing the patterned resource they’ve cultivated to bear on moment and episode.

Never mind the abundant evidence of what their selection does to the broad patterns created by Whites. The one-up puerile female, pandered-to as the avenger of the “unjustly discriminated against black”, can find this excuse for incitement to genetic competition, the taboo and the humiliation of White men all too titillating, the high contrast tropism too hard to ignore, memorized as nature abhors a vacuum, black male exemplars of vindication in their momentary glory, end zone dances, boxing triumphs, cascading notes on the saxophone; smacking the White boy upside his head and mocking him. All the while her position as gate-keeper is so alluring that she maintains the rule, liberalism or else, black patterns reconstruct themselves irrespective of those Marxists who teach about their having been cheated historically - their patterns reconstruct even with hideously undeserved help in terms of welfare, education, work and career programs, massive Jewish propaganda and black outs on their crime and perfidy, even with the help of harems of women, many of them White now, the patterns reconstruct. And some of them have the nerve to talk about reparations? Talk about hyper-assertive.

While they are a strong, talented people, with remarkable and alluring, if not addictive musical, rhythmic and athletic ability, their kind of selection has quantified and maxed-out masculinity, creating a less sublimated, aggressive, presumptuous, hyper-assertive kind of people. Nevertheless, these abilities can actually flourish within the disorder of modernity, if it is is allowed to remain disordered and broad European pattern reconstruction is interrupted (e.g., by anti-racism) in favor of episodic and momentary achievements such as sports and music; or even in terms of episodic accumulation of sex partners, for that matter, if momentary and episodic prowess is the measure of success. Indeed, the disorder of modernity is not a fair criteria by which to judge the merits of European peoples, which are less about moment and episode than about pattern.

But it is because gender is so difficult a component to manage within the disorder of modernity that I will come back to a re-tooled paradigm of actualization as a site of its fair negotiation.

That the prohibiting and rupturing of classificatory patterns fall down atavistically to more momentary and episodic units of evaluation and overly favors her predilection for sheer confidence and assertion, traits more pronounced in blacks than Whites or Asians.

As we have said, with the enlightenment’s weakening if not delegitimization of social classifications and the YKW’s weaponization thereupon of individual rights at the expense of gentile group patterns, the fact remains that people have the need to classify anyway in order to make sense on a human sized scale. With other social classifictions having been prohibited, in the America of the last century, more and more focus came upon the two classifications that came to default because they were too difficult to ignore - females and blacks - largely because the high contrast tropism was too hard to ignore. Other non-White and religious groupings have been introduced to White societies of course, notably Islam (along with their low level masculinity, pseudo conservatism and pseudo respect for the institution of sex), but blacks remain among the most effective weaponizations against White interests. One may surmise that because they are so different, one may distinguish oneself in modernity, one’s prejudice against prejudice, one’s pure objectivity” amidst the universal maturity of modernity by “not seeing any difference in blacks.” And again, tautologies such as that difference are the first causality of didactic incitement, whoever it may come from - even from traditionalists incompetent to post modern requirements.

Pandering and the charmed loop of didactic incitement: wimp, pig, dupe, permanent puerile initiate.

With accountable classifications broken down we have the disorder of modernity and the low common denominator of atavistic, momentary and episodic units of analysis emerging for opportunistic significance. Males from every angle are competing with our sublimated, K selecting men, and vying and pandering for women, often coming from R selective strategies with high testosterone, low impulse control and low time horizon evolution - if not exacerbated by insane anti-racist propaganda and insane religions such as Islam. But more effectively than anybody, the YKW have sized-up this situation: we may surmise that they have pandered-to and weaponized our co-evolutionary females against us - as feminists, by depicting White men and their power as oppressors rather than complementary; while they have pandered to traditional women by depicting White men as wimps and cry babies of themselves ...rather than White males having a non-universal maturity and having legitimate grievances with their antagonists.

Nevertheless, the homeostatic input of the White male position to our social systemic homeostasis has been “intervened with” a sneaky way of saying disrupted and buried with stigmatic charges of racism, unmanliness, unworthiness somehow, etc.

And to repeat, at the same time, within the disorder of modernity, the one up position of females - you are so wonderful, may I have a date? - re-emerges with increased significance. Even puerile females are in a very powerful position as they are pandered-to from all angles. Don’t like it? Denying America the anti-racist land of opportunity? We’ll call in the goon squad on your racist self. And as she is pandered to she becomes more articulate and confident in her increasingly powerful gate keeping position (who will breed, who will not and with whom, what political and cultural ideas that they have…).

Whereas in a normal White society the process of maturation and socialization would have her gradually empathize as a burgeoning mother would, with the awkward position of children such that her primitive drive to incite genetic competition would be sublimated more on the order of a subterranean competition of the sperm, in the anti racist modernist disorder her base inclination to incite genetic competition is pandered-to and compounded; as it yields more power to her, at least in the short term, she can rapidly and unfairly move up the power ladder with plenty of help along the way - from desperate males or those well positioned - with opportunities that White men of her age can only dream of (until perhaps one of her alpha trysts takes her out of the game - indeed, she is playing hypergamy with all the hazards to her as well, that Roger Devlin observes). Her predilections as a female are pandered to, to over representation. She looks toward masculinity - Confidence, which is typically in inverse relation to intellectual survey and empathy. She likes idiots. She is besotted with the kind of hyper assertive, aggressive traits that no people manifest more than black males - black males, who aged 14 - 45 commit more than half he violent crime in America, including rape (and if you were to take blacks out of America, its violent crime rate would be more like Switzerland). But she doesn’t care about this pattern. She is like a drug addict only seeing and living for her next momentary and episodic fix. Her bastard Mulatto children should be the problem of White men. We all brought the slaves to America and discriminated against them unfairly once they were free, didn’t we?

Even though White men obviously could be very effective in fighting against blacks, we are not allowed to defend ourselves in our particular technological and strategic ways under the powers that be - YKW in tandem with Right Wing/Liberal sell outs.

Thus, we are subject to black people who are NOT at all at a disadvantage in important ways.

This disruption of our classifications, of our group systemic homeostasis, is a vulnerability created of our own enlightenment naivete and the disingenuous hubris of our right wing and liberals:

Anti-Racism is Cartesian. It is anti-social classification and discrimination thereupon, it is prejudice, a prejudice against prejudice, it is not innocent, it is hurting and it is killing people.

It is a a vulnerability that is being taken advantage of by those who don’t care about us and weaponized by those who actively seek to destroy us.

The YKW have largely weaponized these enlightenment (and religious) anti-social classificatory precepts against Whites, as we have indicated. And they have relentlessly pushed White identity as being right-wing, identified with these enlightenment/Judeo-Christian anti-classificatory precepts. ...and thus disrupt our capacity to organize - to unionize in our interests.

1. Controlled Opposition, Casuistry and Red Capes which have Whites fighting against their own interests.

A) From (((Frank Meyer’s Paeloconservatism))) succumbing to (((Neo Conservatism))), to Paleoconservatism permutating to the Alt-Right ...Dissident Right, “the anti-Left.”

2) Corrective Measures for Europeans/Whites

A) Unionization and other good things from the left vs its misrepresentation to Whites as liberalism.

B) The DNA Nations

C) Re-tooling Maslow’s Heirarchy of Needs/Motives to effect White social systemic homeostasis.

....

1. Controlled Opposition, Casuistry and Red Capes which have Whites fighting against their own interests.

There is indeed quite literally controlled opposition among YKW, some motivated mostly by money, others largely by their tribal interests. And there are non-Jewish elites, including Whites, who are controlled opposition as well, taking the pay off; many of our politicians fall into this category of selling us out as a people, taking the pay off while the YKW continue to look after their own, their core especially.

But I would wager to say that it is a blurry line for much of “controlled opposition”, that they are not fully aware that they are acting as such. They are being maneuvered there in view of circumstances where cynicism is rife.

People all too often accept the misdirection that if you criticize Jewish power and influence that you are a conspiracy theorist who believes that they are controlling everyone like puppet masters. While it is true that some of their minions are like that, after all, money doesn’t talk, it screams and bullshit walks, but most of YKW controlling of opposition is done more like a matter of casuistry - opportunistically making the best of a circumstance; even better for them, using terms and concepts to their best leverage for themselves and twisting them against would-be antagonists - what I call red caping.

They take terms that have a positive sound and meaning in fact for group organization, maintenance and coordination in human and pervasive ecology with others; and they probably deploy it for their own people, but in implementation (through academia, media, politics, courts) they vastly misrepresent these terms and concepts to Whites, as distortion, confusion, or outright reversal in semantic content and implementation to create didactic revulsion in Whites with the aim of disrupting White organization and getting Whites to react against their organization and coordination.

This is YKW red caping. There are many examples but getting Whites to join them and fight “THE LEFT” is the most fundamental red cape against our organizational interests.

There are many examples, some I’ve already spoken of: the anti-Cartesian notion of Social Constructionism (red caped as solipsism and anti-reality, which is Cartesian, thus contrary to social constructionism), the anti-Cartesian notion of Hermeneutics (red caped as sheer fiction and anti-scientific narrative claims, which would also be against its Cartesian mandate), Marginals (The sentinels of the boarders who bear our concern and compassion as being within the system are red caped - “marginals” misrepresented as outsiders and antagonists who ought to be “included” in the system), The Hippies/60s (Being as a White man, i.e., the organic wish to live and live with his people, is red caped for free love and myriad liberal indulgence, advocacy of black exploitation of White ecology, etc) and there are still more red capes, such as “The Friend Zone” (you shouldn’t be satisfied to be friends with women), Multiculturalism (red caping Monoculturalism with non-Whites), Diversity (red caping integration with non Whites), HBD (the idea of horizontal niches in human biodiversity red caped by the quantifying lateral and elitist discrimination based on I.Q.) “Equality/Inequality” (red capes Commensurability/ Incommensurability), Social Justice Warriors (red caping people who want to deprive Whites of fair treatment), to Post Modernity (a means to protect the relative interests of different peoples, including Whites, against the ravages of the modernist juggernaut and imperviously antagonistic ethnocentrisms was red caped as hyper relativistic “da da”) ....

All of these red capes serve as pseudo justifications for YKW elitism and White elitist sell-outs.

But “The Left” is the most fundamental red cape, it is the most essential - especially as of 2008 - and because of that it is most inter-esse, most interesting as Heidegger would say.

Almost all important YKW misrepresented ideas for White social organization of praxis stem from there.

[Break here, to be continued]

March 6

A) From (((Frank Meyer’s Paeloconservatism))) as controlled opposition, succumbing to (((Leo Strauss’ and Irving Kristol’s Neo Conservatism))), to Paleoconservatism permutating into the Alt-Right tentosphere circus to the “dissident Right” (or whatever “right”) but most importantly to the YKW as of 2008, the “anti-Left.”

There are reasons why the YKW want Whites to identify as right wing - in fact, have been referring to the most normal of White self interest as right wing and “far right” since I can remember; and the reasons for this strategy are to be found in the psychological conditioning and negative associations corresponding to logics of meaning and action in the depth grammar of ordinary language.

(((Frank Meyer’s))) Paleoconservatism, which he called “fusionism”, actually promoted a juggling of things that wouldn’t fuse, viz. Judeo-Christianity and the Enlightenment,as a false conservative opposition taken up by President Ronald Reagan. While Paleoconservatims was subsequently outmaneuvered by (((Leo Strauss/  Kristol’s))) Neoconservatism which served Operation Clean Break and drove Austrian School economics through the boom bust cycle to their greatest hegemony to date in 2008, from the time from Reagan until 2008 the mantle of paleoconservatism was haplessly carried by the likes of Pat Buchanan, Joe Sobran, Sam Francis and Paul Gottfried. We surmise that Paul Gottfried, a Jewish scholar, was at least partly motivated by a background instinct to do damage control for his people by encouraging the promulgation of the notion that “The Left” as the great problem.

This concern dovetailed with impending reaction to the hyperbolic liberalism of academia. During this time other academic Jews as well, markedly David Horowitz, became alarmed at how Frankfurt School PC (anti-White unions and coalitions) were beginning to intersect with Jewish interests. Back in the 90’s and early Naughts, PC was the devil term, but with its Frankfurt School purveyors being all too kosher….well…

With YKW riding high in at least 8 power niches upon 2008, money prolifically among them, the last thing the YKW wanted was for White people to get any “leftist ideas” such as organizing, unionizing themselves, coalition building with other beleaguered people unions and taking a look at who is in power, asking if they are there by objective merit and who of ours is screwing us over by taking the de-racinating payoff to serve only their own narrow interests.

Someone like (((Paul Gottfried))) wouldn’t want anybody getting the wrong idea ...no, we need that good old, kosher friendly Paleoconservatism, but something that will appeal to the reactionary kids of America’s Germanic heartland - we need a jazzed-up Paleoconservatism 2.0, an Alternative Right to lead that demographic - people like Richard Spencer could be the fresh face of a touring Regnery circus, inc to fit the got up Paleocon bill nicely - an Alt-Right Tentosphere of tents, the common denominator of which is being anti-social, being “against The left.”

While the consistent depth grammar in the ordinary language of the left is the function of social unionization, the YKW have Red Caped “The Left” as liberalism - which it is, for Whites, if you are talking about unions and coalitions of non-Whites and anti-Whites against would-be white union bounds.

The truth is, when we look beneath ordinary language and see consistently the idea of full group unionization underlying the notion of the left, that reveals that the left is the opposite of liberalism for those who would apply it in their group interests - You are in the union or you are not. You conserve what is in the union and those who would go out or let people in are trying to liberalize it. It is the opposite of liberalism; and the concept of left unionization applied to White Left Ethnonational borders and bounds would close off this oxymoronic fusing of the left supposedly, necessarily equating to liberalism.

With Jewish hegemony having reached its apex in the power niches, Money, Politics, Academia, Media, Law and Courts, Religion, Business, NGO’s and Trusts, Military and Bio Technology,  but now threatened by social unionization and growing awareness, The YKW marshalled their Paleocons as the Alt Right, (and now the Dissident Right etc, anything but The Left), through a marketing dispensary of memes and an increased rate of red cape terms and concepts, that they’ve been promulgating all along.

The Masters of Discourse, as it were, had moved from its major media control, its controlled opposition of Christianity, to the weaponization of enlightenment principles, to a weaponization of the left in Marxism and cultural Marxism and now they sought to weaponize the right and to encourage White right wing reactionaries to join them, take the pay off as their interests are intersected against from left currents.

Coming back to the depth grammar of ordinary language and why the YKW want Whites identifying as right - perhaps “dissident right” now that Spencer took Mike Enoch’s bait too hard and fucked-up any organizing capacity, right according to plan ....

One reason to have Whites repulsed by notions of the left is to remove positive associations for Whites: organizational capacity through unionization, social accountability and compassion. The other reason is to create negative associations, as we were saying, to include a revulsion by equating “the left” with hyperbolic liberalism; and turning people off to White advocates by associating them with the right-wing: unaccountably “objectivist” or theocratic, basically anti-social fools - chasing the red caped concepts of the left, majorly being “against equality” as if anybody is after that (only a right winger could believe it).

It is true that John Locke sought a liberalization of the Aristocratic class bounds, but a universalizing of rights to be extended beyond national boundaries, beyond the union of the nation, beyond the union jack, is not a necessary extension the union idea - on the contrary, for everyone in the world to have potential to be in your union is a complete absurdity. Even when talking about the French Revolution, which is usually cited as the definitive source of the terms, the left corresponded with a fraternity of the common French people, it did not necessarily correspond to a universal fraternity. In both cases, French and English, the union of the broad base of the nation’s people was being conserved against betrayal by elite interests.

Nevertheless, the YKW have promoted this misunderstanding of liberalism for leftism because they don’t want Whites organizing. And our right wing sell outs who are lucky enough, who have done well and want to minimize social accountability are all too willing to go along with this confusion of terms, left and liberalism - to claim they have their well-off position by sheer objective merit free of any social indebtedness to their folks.

Now, after perhaps the biggest red cape chasers of all, the Nazis, got done stigmatizing White Left ethnonationalism for a good half century…

The story is very well told by David Horowitz and William Lind as to how classic Marxism was not working to appeal to the White American middle class (temporarily frustrated millionaires) to join the international anti-capitalist left. And so the Frankfurt school developed a “cultural Marxism” to form unions and coalitions of anti-Whites - the initial groups being women, blacks and then gays and more.

While these anti White coalitions were building, with the YKW leading a nucleus of blacks, feminists and anti-Whites organized as such, and being presented in academia and media through the 1960’s, 70s, 80s, 90’s and even into the early to mid 00s, you did not hear conservatives being handed so commonly the broad brush talking point of these groups being just a part of THE Left. There was not as much talk about THE Left as the enemy, but rather a mixing-in of terms like liberals as the enemy and especially in the 90s and early 00s the idea that PC was the enemy (of implicit White advocacy, I should add). In truth, accounts given as liberal and enforcers of political correctness were more descriptive of our enemies than THE left.

However, by this time Jewish interests began to realize that PC unionizations and coalitions were intersecting with and liberalizing YKW (unionized) interests to their detriment as well. As noted, David Horowitz cooperated with William Lind to create a very accurate short history of PC/cultural Marxism as he sought to make his way out of this culture of critique and to position himself on the right - to return to Paleoconservatism.

Now, again, there was not just a threat of intersection from the so called left (liberalism), there was also a threat of backlash against the NeoCons, so clearly associated with Jewish figures as well.

The so-called Neo-Cons were a Trotkyist derived school of thought that began with Leo Strauss and Irving Kristol, the only union of which they sought to conserve was Israel. Otherwise they were a part of that weaponizing of the right, either attacking White groupings or using them as cannon fodder. They were controlled opposition able to get away with calling themselves conservative by a projection of American military might and neo-liberalism in geo-political strategy.

After they’d done enough damage to the world and America itself on behalf of Operation Clean Break - Netanyahu, Wolfawitz, Perle, Fife and other’s project to use American military might to secure the realm around Israel, stealthily renamed project for a New American Century, intersecting interests among their left coalitions were bringing significant criticism and public attention to bear and the Neo Cons game was losing its semblance of credibility.

The YKW had, since the Reagan administration, mothballed their other controlled pseudo conservative opposition; Paleoconservatism was being cultivated with difficulty during that time (William F. Buckley having given “conservatism” over to a philosemitic litmus test).

To sum again, Paleoconservatism began with another Jewish fella, Frank Meyer, who conceived of a cockamamie, what he called “fusionism” - though it didn’t really fuse anything, but rather tried to manage absurdly incommensurate notions of Judeo-Christianity and Enlightenment philosophy that were behind Americanism. President Ronald Reagan was a disciple of Frank Meyer and we can cynically assume that the YKW got him in there as a deceptive, dog whistling step in a process.

By the 90’s the NeoCon agenda was brought out as they saw the time as right for bolder moves on behalf of Israel. In the meantime, both cons, neo and paleo, were in sync with Austrian School economics, a stubborn offshoot of Wittgenstein’s last gasp attempt to secure a universal modernist foundation with his Tractatus (1921), which the Austrian school of logical postivism adhered-to even after he abandoned; making its way through Hayek, von Mises, Ayn Rand, Reagan & Thatcher as adherents, culminating with Greenspan & Bernake presiding over the boom/bust cycle’s exponential yield to YKW and their right wing sell out cohorts with the 2008 financial meltdown.

The Alt Right story and red caping.

As we indicated, Jewish interests, as witnessed by David Horowitz, were becoming alarmed at how their Cultural Marxim and NeoCon overreach were overplaying their hand and intersecting with their union, the conservation of Jewish interests. They needed to re-invoke the other controlled opposition - that is Paleoconservatism. As we noted, the Jewish Frank Meyers conceived of so called Paleoconservatism, which held a concept of “fusionism”, not really a fusion, but a juggling of Judeo-Christianity and Enlightenment principles. Paleoconservatims is absurd not only for the reason that it cannot fuse and integrate the incommensurate Judeo-Christianity with enlightenment principles, but also because Christianity and Enlightenment principles are liberal. But oxymoronic though conserving liberalism is, it is an easy sell to patriotic Americans who are not too penetrating because these facets are the precepts of the the land, The United States. Thus, paleoconservatim gained its way through Meyers disciple, President Reagan, and then Pat Buchanan, Joe Sobran, Sam Francis and Paul Gottfried .... to Netanyahu, Breitbart, Bannon and Donald Trump.

Paul Gottfried.

Both for the sake of damage control for his Jewish people who are happy to be ensconced as diaspora among Whites, and for the sake of diverting attention from the culpability of the Jewish pattern per se, and to curry favor with complicit right wing Whites who need ostensible exoneration for having aided and abetted liberalism in all its its unaccountable corrosion of union bounds, the Jewish Paleocon, Paul Gottfried, has been determined to have THE LEFT depicted as the enemy of the good and good people. With the 2008 financial crisis, as Jewish interests rose to a greater hegemony than ever, he became near frantic to have THE LEFT depicted as the enemy.

Recognizing that paleoconservatism was too dated and stodgy to captivate the imagination of a sufficiently broad array of new adherents to gain critical mass, Paul Gottfried sought a paleoonservative 2.0 - he called for an Alternative Right and sought help from the The Regnery publishing circus which had been the home of the paleocons - with its offshoot NPI group (headed by Sam Francis until he died) now with a new head, Richard Spencer, they would usher in this fabricated movement, a tentosphere - The Alt Right - that is to say a big tent of catch all tents that don’t have much in common, the only key to membership being “edgy anti pc reactionaries, coping to any anti-social stigma in some sort of right wing identity - short on compassion even for their own kind, they were right wing reactionaries who maintained characteristically rigid and spooky anti-social beliefs.

The Alt-Right was instrumental in promoting a new Zeitgest of “the left” as enemy - whereas PC and liberals were more often cited as enemy terms in previous decades. Suddenly The Left was the go to bogey on the lips of anybody who was going to be granted rights of display in media, and just as suddenly “Social Justice Warriors” were deemed a cancerous phenomenon - we don’t want any of that lefitist unionization and criticism of elite exploitation and betrayal; nor any social justice now that Jewish folks occupy hegemony in the 7 - 9 power niches. Our power and influence must be a result of objective facts, the reality of which these (stereotyped) lefties simply can’t deal with.

With Jewish hegemony having reached its apex in the power niches, Money, Politics, Academia, Media, Law and Courts, Religion, Business, NGO’s and Trusts,  but now threatened by social unionzation and growing awareness, the Alt Right, (and now the Dissident Right etc, anything but The Left), became the marketing dispensary of memes and an increased rate of red cape terms and concepts of the YKW, many new, some red capes that they’d had been promulgating all along by way of its Media and Academia.

The Masters of Discourse, as it were, had moved from its major media control, its controlled opposition of Christianity, to the weaponization of enlightenment principles, to a weaponization of the left in Marxism and cultural Marxism and now they sought to weaponize the right and to encourage White right wing reactionaries to join them, take the pay off as their interests are intersected against from left currents.

The election of Donald Trump is a personification of this effort, as he and his Jewish family were put into the office to undo the Iran Deal for Israel. He was given license for a bigger dog whistle than ever to signal to Whites Alt or implicit (but just as typically for Republicans, to deliver almost nothing to White interests), in order to get him into office, to complete preparation for the next phase of clean break - Iran - and hopefully for the YKW, a docile paleocon domestic agenda. Most of the world favored the Iran deal as it encouraged a gradual liberalization of Iran, weaning it away from Islam through business progress. but never mind, Israel didn’t like it (and Russia profited from its undoing). Never-mind that Trump really isn’t doing White Americans a whole lot of good, gets behind the programs for non-Whites, including, apparently, the biggest amnesty for non-White migrants to The US ever.

But the Alt Right were all gung ho about Trump, Mike Enoch couldn’t push him enough, Richard Spencer Zieg Hailed the leader! Even Storm Front, Don Black, put behind the age old wisdom there wasn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the Republicans and Democrats to get behind Trump and The Republicans. All of David Duke’s warnings about the saber rattling of Israel about Iran went out the window, he was just all about Trump and how Trump was going to help White people. etc.

“Unite The Right”, unite the reactionary anti-social right wing oxymorons.

Not that Hillary would not have been even worse but it was clear that the YKW were orchestrating both sides and leveraging for Trump in order to undo the Iran Deal for Isreal (and for the Russian Federation, its cleptocratic oil business standing to gain from Iran sanctions).

...............

Ok, so we see Jewry playing both sides, left and right, but just as fundamentally, if we are to understand them, we must realize that they are functioning from the top down and the bottom up - from their power niches disseminating misdirecting rules, and from their biology up, doing their infiltration and horizontal transmission thing.

Jewish power and influence is an antagonistic system coming from two directions - one direction is from the top down, controlling rule structures and their contextual force with tangles and misdirection; the other direction is biological, from the ground up, if not parasitic then generally antagonistic such that it can resurface intergenerationally and requires separatism, exclusion from our union.

The hermeneutic circle is how we maintain a surveillance on their system, on our traitors… we circle to other difficulties and adversaries as well of course, but particularly including our own elitist traitors, who should occupy a near frequency as the YKW in terms of check point on homeostatic maintenance and interference.

And a first step in our defense is to clarify the notion of unionization as opposed to liberalism.

A union is the opposite of liberalism. You are in the union, conserving what’s within, or you are not - perhaps trying to transgress the boundaries or allowing others to transgress the boundaries. So they’ve got Whites arguing against their unionizing initiatives by arguing against the left, while left ethnonationalism would close off this oxymoron that’s been deployed against Whites, this red cape of “the left” as liberalism. The union metaphor extends perfectly fine to our ethnonational concerns. Left Ethnonationalism would be the exact opposite of liberalism. In fact, liberalism and right wingism stem from the same arrogant, no social account, objectivist root.

With this notion of left ethnonationalism instantiated, not “equality but exclusionary “unionization” recognized as the essence, we can begin to undo and deploy in our interests all these formerly abused ideas, defining a moribund definition of White Left Ethnonationalism in our interests, such that it does away with all the worst aspects of Marxism. With our sociality and homeostasis established through national unionization, we may have private property, individual liberties, limited democracy (limited to those old and experienced enough, knowledgeable enough to merit a vote) devout conservatism, effective coordination with outgroups from a position of power.

Left Ethnonationalism closes the circle and facilitates systemic homeostasis.

And it must be left Ethnonationalism not third positionism because third positionism allows for reintroduction of the right’s inherent instability and a back door entryism for our enemies.

The right wing quest for objectivism, transcendence and myopic foundationalism makes it inherently unstable, its reflexive effect being hyper relativism. Whereas Left ethnonationalism has the much more manageable problem of being too stable, which can be remedied through the acceptance of fallibility in praxis and participatory correction.

In summation of “THE Left” red caped

You would think that people would stop to ask why it is that being “Right Wing” and on the side of “objective truth” would necessarily represent Whites, while “The Left” should be this personified ideology, a characterization that is anti-reality, against Whites (((and huWhites))), but nevermind, there is a (((marketing campaign))) to be run, equipped with a bunch of semi clever memes (red capes) to wave - including didactic Nazism, oh so “funny” gas and oven jokes to “red pill the normies” - to get them over optics (never mind that the content of Nazism sucks - was an epistemological catastrophe of the worst order for Whites - no, “we know what’s going on, wink”).

On the other hand, they have taken the social classificatory, unionizing facility of leftism to organize an internationalized coalition of anti-White groups against would be White classificatory, discriminatory bounds. At the same time, the YKW have done their level best to have White identity associated with the right against these left coalitions, referring to them and getting Whites to refer to them as “THE” Left; and with that, confusing the concept of Left with liberalism as one and the same - the reason for the confusion being plain, as ordinary Whites see other leftist unions trying to liberalize White borders and bounds.

Unionization

The YKW and the right wing elitist cohorts that they can get to sell out, have got Whites believing shallow misdirection that “The Left” is all about a baseless quest for “equality” and worse, that it is synonymous with liberalism, ergo internationalism.

But the truly consistent idea in the depth grammar of ordinary language of “the left” is unionization of the people against elite, rank and file and marginal betrayal. Unionization is the opposite of liberalism when it is done for your people - you are conserving what its within and protecting your union against elite betrayal (usually based on claims of “objective” necessity for the greatness of their wonderfulness, that they are not accountable), scabbing and liberalization of bounds for whatever reasons that rank and file and marginals might have to transgress the union (perhaps legitimate grievances that should bear account and address) and act traitorously and unaccountably with regard to social capital.

Getting Whites to react against “the left” has the effect of getting Whites to react against the organizing function of social unionization; and as they react as right wingers, they react into social stigmatization, with socially unaccountable, anti-social positions.

What I mean by this is simply a bounded social group with obligations to maintain its exclusivity; the idea can be applied to ethnonationalism as well, and that is primarily what I’m talking about. There can be problems of unionization being overly stable - too many accounts requested to the point where it becomes Orwellian; or a unionization of an industry which is inefficient and destructive, if not obsolete. The former problem can be corrected so long as we have a group structure, a unionized praxis to provide deep enough trust so as not to require relentless accountability and on the other hand to provide recourse for people who don’t agree (they can leave). While the latter problem will generally be corrected if we are unionizing our people as opposed to a particular industry.

It is important to maintain this exclusionary union of the human group ecology as White Left ethnonationalism and not third positionism because third positionism introduces right wing elements and thereby allows for entryism of enemies and traitors.

And the union provides for ostracism as it should - for example, of mudsharks and their mixed offspring; ostracizing them rather than their being able to impose their values upon us and forcing us (like slaves forced into involuntary contract) to pay for their offspring while we suffer the consequences of their betrayal otherwise - impact on our EGI, our human ecology, incentive structure, infrastructure and habitat. Regarding the ‘good ones’ of other groups, which of course there are, we can take satisfaction that they will be helping to maintain the quality of their own human ecology along with coordinating our pervasive ecology.

So what is to be done after over coming this misrepresentation of OUR Left, a White Left misrepresented as liberalism, a fight for equality and utter absurdity? How do we organize, foster, promote and maintain our union and group systemic homeostasis? ...after we’ve debunked the unaccountable magic hand of “objectivism” or “gawd” which is the essence and root of both right wing and liberalism?

These are, in effect, White union busting liberal moves; of course now altercast to us by the YKW.

This red caping of “the left” as the liberal enemy, it is a part of a (((marketing campaign )))that’s been put into overdrive since 2008 (and why wouldn’t (((they?))) having more money than god, as they do?)

We’ve discussed how they take a term and misrepresent its semantic implication with its opposite in practice prescribed - for example, Multiculturalism and Diversity would be naturally good ecological terms, that could be managed well by ethnonationalism, and an easy sale even to the normal public who are not especially racially preoccupied but well disposed to a variety of races, but then they promote policies of monoculturalism and integration. They have chasing this red cape of multiculturalism and diversity, arguing against it and implying an argument for monoculturalsm and integration.

However, the most fundamental red cape as we’ve observed, particularly since the 2008 financial melt down and Jewish consolidation of power, has been “THE Left” as the enemy.
The motive is clear, now that they have this hegemony, they are trying to align themselves with right wingers who want to argue along with them that they have achieved their hegemony not with the help, nepotism and attendant accountability to full group interests, but for quote, objective reasons. They are supposedly all about facts, nature, truth, science, and failing that the true Abrahamic god which guides their providence. The idea is to make quick work of accountability.

By the same token they are heavily promulgating stereotypes of THE Left. it is said to be unscientific, anti scientific in fact, to not be dealing with reality, to demand an impossible ideal of equality, that they think they can socially construct just whatever they want out of themselves, their gender, their race, but at bottom, an anti White rainbow coalition of facile anti White unions, cultural Marxists and anti-nationalist, internationalist Marxists represent THE LEFT.

They are social justice warriors, and how laughable they are for not dealing with reality. Social justice and equality - ha ha ha, we are the right, we are against social justice and equality. Doesn’t that sound great? It’s music to YKW ears, just as right wing reactionaries are that seek to redeem Hitler.

They are for Human Biodiversity and somehow, who knows how, that’s supposed to mean that you are talking about Ashkenazi I.Q.????

The YKW are assiduous about misdefining the left, because if it was understood as it functions below ordinary language people would see that it corresponds with a unionizing function that would allow the broad base of people to organize against their liberalizing destruction and their pay offs to our elitists betrayal.

So they want to maintain misdefinitions that its all about hierarchy and endless revolution, in the end, always synonymous with liberalism and anti White.

The most basic deception that they maintain and what Whites have swallowed time and again is the idea that the Left and Liberalism are interchangeable.

The Left corresponds with unionization. You are in the union and conserving what is within its bounds or you are out; if you are wanting to release yourself or let outsiders in you are a liberal.

As such, the left is the opposite of liberalism.

A right, such as the English Aristocracy would be trying to maintain its class distinction on objectivst or godly consecrated grounds, maintaining quasi union and trying to protect its interests not by means of full group, Left nationalist accountability, the broad based conservation of the nationalist union.

Now then, this is the means to close off this deception of the YKW, of left = liberalism that they maintain in order to prevent us from organizing and holding their power niches to account along with our elite betrayers:

Left Ethnonationalism closes the circle.

Again, it must be left Ethnonationalism not third positionism because third positionism allows for back door entryism for our enemies.

That is not to say that we can’t define the moribund concept of White Left Ethnonationalism for ourselves - we can and should say that in our definition, there can be private property, there can be wealth and unequal outcomes, there can be a great deal of individual liberty and free enterprise. There will be accountability however, while accounts requested will be kept to a minimum so as not to be invasive.

While maintaining that this unionization and its bounds would provide for meaningful accountability to our people and our social capital, I was challenged the other day by a civic patriotard, who tried to say that I was speaking nonsense, that what we need is character, the kind he found in compassion for his buddies who were injured and killed in Afghanistan. He’d come home to Kew Gardens in queens to find this character to be absent, irresponsible punks everywhere.

I found this interesting and an opportunity for a grand slam against a civic nationalist.

Kew Gardens, Queens. The irony was not lost on me. He lived in the very same housing complex where, in 1964, Kitty Genovese was murdered over the course of a half an hour (by a black, of course) within earshot of dozens of people and nobody so much as called the police. From this case social psychologists developed the concept of “diffused responsibility” - with civic nationalism, bowling alone as the folks there were, the call for accountability, character and compassion that this vet decried as absent, became diffused over would-be but absent socially unionized bonds of accountability. That’s the end result of liberalism for Whites. Not a White ethnonational left.

Upon this most fundamental deception that “The left” is the enemy - i.e., other people’s left unionizations and anti White coalitions seeking to break open and scab our would be bounds, a myriad of red capes are thrown up, distortions that the YKW created to begin-with to turn people off to good ideas for social organization that Whites could and should adopt ...social accountability is diffused.

Systematizing our resistance. [continued in part 4]