What Is a Manufactured Crisis?

Noam Chomsky the famous left-wing Jew spoke at length about manufacturing
consent, about which he must be an expert since he’s been manufacturing ideological
consent among his zombie-followers. Though some people value Chomsky as a voice
that speaks truth to power, he’s really in the tradition of Lenin and Trotsky. Chomsky speaks not so much truth to power but lie to power so as to can hog and control truth himself. A world where the media were owned by the likes of Chomsky would hardly be free. While it is true that
Chomsky has been a tireless crusader against the Consent-driven MSM, he only wants to replace one form of consent with another. To be sure, there are plenty of people on the White Right who would do the same if they had the power. Power is something that corrupts politics, ideals, and souls. We all want and need it, but it often gets the better of us because of the temptation to grab all of it. Even so, some personalities and ideologies are more prone to radical greed for total power than others.
　
Anyway, for the media to manufacture consent, it must first manufacture crisis. By ‘manufacturing crisis’, the media don’t necessarily have to make things up–though that’s done too; just consider the cases of journalists who made up stories(and even won awards for them). In most cases, a crisis is manufactured through selective reporting, suppression of opposing accounts/stories/ideas, exaggeration of truth, emotional heart-tugging, whipping up of mass hysteria, fear-mongering, guilt-baiting, hope-peddling, and a creation of a grand narrative.
There are some crises which are so huge and major that the media simply do their job. 9/11 or Pearl Harbor were prime examples. Of course, HOW the media covered, handled, and shaped them did involve a fair amount of manipulation and bias, but some crises are really worthy of the name. If an asteroid hit Texas or California and killed millions, the media would merely doing their job by reporting the event.
　
But more often than not, the crises we hear in the news are more manufactured than news-worthy. Part of the reason is economics. Nothing sells like crisis and anxiety. TIME or NEWSWEEK sell more copies when they run fear-mongering cover stories about the global warming, how some epidemic is gonna wipe us out, how our educational system is a total mess, how Iran is on the cusp of having nukes, etc. Hope sells too but hope must follow crisis. We cling to hope because we are worried about a crisis. Oprah and Dr. Phil peddle crisis and then peddle hope. You need a downer before you need an upper.
　
But there’s more to the art of manufacturing crisis than dollars and cents. Most people who go into journalism tend to be change-the-world idealists. Today, most of them have been weaned on censorious and self-righteous political correctness. If past journalists grew up in rougher times and came from diverse regions with different experiences–and valued toughness, thick skins, and resilience–, today’s journalists come from nice middle class families, watch the same news, read the same highschool and college textbooks, and have had little experience with the real world. As reporters they finally come to see some of the darker realities, BUT since they’ve been emotionally and intellectually shaped during soft, cushy, and pampered formative years by political correctness, they lack the edge and courage to see beyond their PC blinders. Anyway, what they do have in common with journalists of the past is the change-the-world idealism. To feel morally superior and wonderful about themselves, they report on social crises–poverty, ‘racism’, ‘sexism’, oppression, poverty, ignorance, violence, etc–so as to awaken the nation to confront and fix the problems. And this template especially goes back to the 1950s and 1960s when the Civil Rights Movement was aided and abetted by conscientious and good-willed publishers, broadcasters, and reporters. The role of journalism wasn’t merely to report the news but to change the world. Since there’s no shortage of news and crisis to be found across a country as large as America, the national media have been careful to pick and choose only those stories that suit and serve their liberal agenda. (To be sure, modern journalism has always serve one agenda or another. This has been as true of the Right-wing press as of the Left-wing press. William Randolph Hearst, it is said, used the full force of his media empire to fan the flames of war against the Spanish Empire in places like Cuba and Philippines. He even spread false rumors, a practice that continues to this day, sometimes by mistake, sometimes willfully.)
　
In a country as large as ours, a news organization can select and create any crisis they wish. There’s a lot of black crime, and if MSM were owned by the likes of Peter Brimelow or Jared Taylor, all of America would be talking about the crisis of BLACK CRIME, especially against whites. But it just so happens that liberal Jews own most of the media and choose not to highlight the crisis of black crime. Not only do the liberal Jewish dominated media suppress stories on black crime, they spread the alarm that anyone who blows the whistle on black crime is a ‘rabid’, ‘virulent’ and unforgivable ‘racist’. So, even media outlets owned by conservatives for the most part do not cover stories where blacks in America assault, rape, and murder whites. In Canada, it is illegal for news organizations to even mention the race of the criminals since a disproportionate number of them are black. The media not only can manufacture bullshit crisis but it can suppress real crisis.
This was obviously true enough in Nazi Germany and Maoist China. When Nazis were rounding up and slaughtering millions of ‘subhumans’, there wasn’t a peep about it in the Nazi-controlled media. When 30 million starved to death in China in the late 50s due to Mao’s economic policies, not a single communist controlled newspaper covered it. Totalitarian media are not free, we all know that. They can create monsters out of thin air and hide real monsters.
But it would be foolish for people in democracies to think that they enjoy a truly balanced press. What passes for news in democracies almost entirely depends on what a handful of corporate conglomerates decide is newsworthy. Most of these conglomerates are owned by liberal Zionist Jews. Since the media determine what is true and untrue and can even make or unmake the reputation of politicians, even politicians dare not question the truisms set forth by the media. To be sure, politicians being afraid of the media sounds like a good thing and indeed would be in an ideal world. The real problem is that even good honest politicians are afraid of speaking the truth because the liberal MSM care less for the truth than for the liberal agenda. Suppose a courageous and honest politician wants to discuss the dangers of illegal immigration and what it’s doing to this country. The MSM will tear him down as a ‘racist’ and ruin his career–and then go after his funders and supporters. The MSM, instead of giving voice to contrarian and opposing voices, favor only the politically correct voices who play by the rules. Again, things would not be much better if MSM were controlled mostly by conservatives as power corrupts all. Nevertheless, the point is the MSM, rather than standing up to the government and those in power, merely seek to work–or even collude–with those in power to push certain agendas. The MSM will pretend to represent or give voice to the little people or ‘oppressed’ groups but this has less to do with social reality than with political agendas. We all know illegal aliens are not oppressed. They violated the law to enter into this country by breaking the law. We know that rich blacks step over poor whites via affirmative action programs. We know that rich liberal whites–and even rich conservative whites–made a pact with rich blacks to keep power for themselves while sacrificing the rights of poor whites. Affirmative action doesn’t affect rich whites as it does poor whites. Rich whites generally score higher than poor whites(and/or have political connections), so it is poor whites who are set aside to make way for rich blacks or well-groomed chosen for instant success by the liberal white elite. We know that Jews are the richest and most powerful people in America. But by playing up the Holocaust Card, Jews justify their hogging of the media and academia in the name of serving minority or ‘victim’ interests. Jews are big people acting like little people.
　
Certain crises are indeed manufactured, as in falsely made up. One such crisis was the story that one out of four college girls are raped. This was a cover story in TIME magazine in the late 80s or early 90s. People all across were alarmed and shocked.
It turns out ‘rape’ in this scenario was a semantic sleight of hand. Rape even included sex in which the girl was initially unwilling but changed her mind. In other words, if she first said ‘no’ but then later said ‘yes’ because of sweet nothings whispered into her ears, that counted as rape. Or, if a guy got sex from a girl by showing off his superior status–as an upper class man or as ‘big man on campus’–, that was counted as rape too. (Following that logic, any rock star or athlete who gets sex from his fans is a rapist too.) It was all manufactured bullshit.
In the book BEAUTY MYTH, Naomi Wolf said 100,000s of women die each year from anorexia nervosa, and she blamed this on the beauty ideal erected by patriarchal men. The national media ran with this CRISIS and Wolf became an overnight sensation. Needless to say, she’s a left-wing Jewess. It turns out a only handful of women die from the disease per year. Also, the ideal of super-slimness is not something desired by most men but one favored by gay men who dominate the fashion industry, something feminists like Wolf dare not admit or deal with.
　
Also, why was there so much emphasis on white males raping white females in college? Consider that the majority of American youths don’t go to college. Consider the far more numerous cases of rape and assault among black and Hispanic youths. And consider the problem of black-on-white rape, which has risen to epidemic proportions. Yet, the media suppressed all such real crises. They didn’t fit into the liberal political agenda. Such stories might make blacks come across as savages. And reporting on black-on-white rape may stoke white ‘racism’, and of course, we can’t have that, so says the left-wing Jew.
Instead, the liberal Jew-owned media decided to focus on white college males raping white coeds en masse. Why? The whole story wasn’t really about rape. Indeed, it wasn’t really even a news story but an epic use of liberal Jewish feminist propaganda to make white females fear and hate white males. No race was specifically mentioned, but almost all the news were about white fraternity boys, white seniors, white this, white that. And, most of the so-called victims were white too. The whole bullshit crisis was an ideological program to drive a wedge between white females and white males, between oh-so-sensitive white liberal males from manlier conservative males.
　
And we’ve heard endless stories about ‘campus racism’, though most of the incidents have been carried out by ‘people of color’. But even when the culprits turn out to be non-white, the liberal media turn the stories into issues about ‘white racism’.
And who can forget the Duke Lacrosse case where the entire national media and academic organizations jumped to conclusion and called for lynching of those white males. The liberal Jews in the media have done to white gentile males what Nazis once did to Jews. The liberal Jews are hellbent on dehumanizing white males. Liberal Jews even perform a kind of spiritual or mental eugenics. They may not cut off the actual balls of white gentile males, but white gentile males are utterly feminized and wussified by constant assault on their manhood, racial pride, and sexual health.
　
And there is the issue of ‘gay rights’ and ‘gay marriage’. Though there are indeed instances of ugly gaybashing, we know full well that most gays are getting on well enough. But, you’d think there’s a huge crisis of gays-in-danger all across America. Worse, the targets of the gay agenda are not only violent gaybashers but good normal people who oppose abominations like ‘gay marriage’. (Notice that the clever liberal Jew media now changed it to ‘same sex marriage’ to give it a mainstream ring.)
　
In foreign policy, why was there so much more news about Sudan than about Congo? We were reminded over and over that 100,000s of people were dying in Darfur, but we heard almost nothing about the 3 million that died in the Congo in the same period. Why was Darfur a bigger issue? Because Chinese heavily invested in Sudan, the anti-Chinese liberal Jew media sought to morally and politically embarrass the Chinese. Also, the crisis could be spun as Muslim Arabs killing innocent blacks. In other words, Zionist Jews in the media were trying to send a message to the black community that Arab Muslims are the enemies of blacks–meaning blacks should keep their political alliance with Jews. (The Janjaweed who were accused of the crimes are indeed Arab in the cultural-lingustic sense, but they are mostly racially black., a fact suppressed by the liberal Jew media.) And we know all about how the liberal Jewish media report heavily on Palestinian violence on Jews but under-reports all the violence and oppression committed by Jews against Palestinians. And the liberal Jew media don’t give a damn about crises such as Afrikaner farmers being robbed, raped, and murdered en masse by savage South African blacks.
　
So, what goes by the name of ‘crisis’ in most cases is simply a matter of what the liberal Jews who run the academia and media designate as such in order to push a certain ideological and ethnic agenda. A famous case is the rise of Fidel Castro. When Castro had just a handful of men in the jungles and was on the ropes, NY Times reporter Herbert Matthews wrote up one helluva inspiring story that Castro out to be a shining hero leading an mass uprising. Liberal Jews in this country manufactured the ‘crisis’ and ‘hope’ that led to Castro’s victory. Cuba was a country with many problems to be sure, but Castro couldn’t have come to power without the aid of the Western Press, which is to say the liberal Jew press. So, when you hear ‘crisis’, more often than not, it’s some liberal Jew who’s been taught to cry wolf. And when there’s major crisis, the liberal Jews can always make something up–just like they inflate economic bubbles through their buddies on Wall Street and the Fed. And when a real crisis is the product of liberal policies such as Great Society, the liberal Jews will evade blame by distracting out attention to some new hopeful solution... devised by liberal Jews of course.

--A.F.

What Obama and Chance the Gardener of BEING THERE Have in Common.

Obama's success and popularity remind me of Hal Ashby's movie BEING THERE. Chance the gardener(Chaunsy Gardiner)says the most banal and inane things, but people find great meaning, hope, and wisdom in his words. Chance is misunderstood because people read him the way they want to. People think Chance is using gardening as a metaphor for zen-like wisdom not just about politics and economics but the spiritual and organic nature of man.

Much the same could be said about the appeal of Obama. When he ran for the presidency in 2008, he often said vague, contradictory, or high-faluting things which could be interpreted in any number of ways. His yammerings could be read as reformist, socialist, free-market, Christian, secular, patriotic, global, conservative, leftist, black, white, post-racial, pro-gun, anti-gun, pro-familiy, pro-abortion, etc. Even when he stood for a specific position, he wrapped it around emotions appealing to the other side. So, even when he was for abortion, he emoted a lot about how sacred life is--as if he was legally with the pro-choicers while emotionally with the pro-lifers. Though one of his books is titled AUDACITY OF HOPE, Obama's real secret has been the vacuity of meaning. Though empty and hollow, his mickey mouse charisma and status as a 'new kind of black guy' urged, even compelled, many white people to read meaning and 'truth' into his words and positions according to their liberal or 'progressive conservative' fantasies. How else do you explain Obama's support from the poorest blacks to the richest whites, from both Democrats and neocons, from the likes of Bill Ayers to the likes of Colin Powell, from both the gay community to Notre Dame university.

But, there is one major difference between Chance and Obama. Chance, like Forrest Gump, is utterly innocent and unaware of what's going on. He hasn't a clue as to what the buzz is all about. Obama, on the other hand, is like the Will Smith character in SIX DEGREES OF SEPARATION. He knows full-well how to work the system, especially the emotional and conceited psychological system of educated whites. If Obama should have won the Nobel prize in any area, it's in medicine--psychology--, as few politicians have mapped out, understood, and manipulated white mentality as well as Obama. He understands that whites are filled with fear/fascination and hate/love of blacks, and this fills whites with what might be called the negro/nigga complex. Indeed, white fear and fascination, love and hate, are complementary. Whites find blacks fascinating because blacks appear powerful, dangerous, and fearsome. Similarly, people are most fascinated by big fearsome animals such as lions, tigers, and bears. Most nature programs on TV are about big predators, not about gophers and frogs. There is also the guilt factor. On the one hand, whites feel(or are made to feel)historical guilt toward blacks--and look upon blacks as helpless victims who need white sympathy and help. But, many whites are also aware of many aggressive and hostile blacks who love to whup white folks. Society teachs whites to feel guilt and love blacks--indeed, this is trumped as the greatest virtue in the world--, but many whites who've seen or experienced social reality just can't help but to hate or fear blacks. This leads to negro/nigga complex. Society teaches whites to look upon blacks as noble negroes but many blacks turn out to be rappin' 'niggaz'. White folks, especially liberals, just don't know what to do. They've staked their goody-goodness on their compassion for negroes, but even a lot of white liberals can't stand how a lot of blacks act.

Blacks like Obama and John McWhorter know what this is all about, and they know how to manipulate the system to get as much mileage out of white guilt or Jewish compassion as possible. Obama utilizes just enough blackness to dazzle and woo the white audience, reining it in before it gets too threatening for whitey. He balances blackness with intellectaulity and dignity. Of course, he plays it both ways. He's also aware of the fact that many blacks resent successful oreo blacks who try to act too white--like Colin Powell--, so Obama has practiced a lot before the mirror to sound a bit Martin Luther King-ish and rapperish(even if just a hint of it).
Jews, unlike gentile whites, feel little guilt regarding blacks but prefer to blacks as fellow 'noble victims' of evil white Christian history and civilization. (This is useful for Jewish power and moral narcissism.) But, there has been a lot of trouble between Jews and blacks. So, Jews have latched onto Obama and John McWhorter(who now writes for the New Republic, a Zionist rag).

So, Obama is like Chance but he leaves nothing to chance. And, he certainly knows how to cultivate the mind garden of gulliberal whites. Besides, he has the vast money, influence, and power of the liberal Jews to help him at every step of the way. Just like Jewish Hollywood wrote, produced, and directed the movies of Will Smith, the Liberal Jewish Machine wrote, produced, financed, and directed the blockbuster starring Barack "Will Smith" Obama.

What Makes a Good Society? What Makes us Worship the Great Man?

In this period of economic turmoil, War on Terror stress syndrome, and mood of general uncertainty, people are understandably worried about their society, present and future. Many people feel something is wrong with America and something BIG needs to be done. What is that something? Who can do it?
Due to the scale of the problems it’s understandable that many people feel helpless and look to people with Big Power(big government) to pull us out of the crisis. It seems people lost faith in people with Big Money(big business). We’ve borrowed and spent ourselves into national bankruptcy at the behest of ‘free market’ capitalism. We’ve driven ourselves off a cliff. We feel maxed out economically and spiritually. No wonder that the Obama phenom isn’t just political or economic but spiritual; he’s The One to fill the hole in our soul. Supposedly a man of ‘impressive’ or ‘staggering’ intellect, he’s also to fill the hole in our head. He even made a promise to provide free college tuition so more of us can be educated... or indoctrinated.

Something seems to be wrong here. Yes, the scale of the problem is HUGE, but we should realize that a Good Society begins in your neighborhood and community, not in Washington. Of course, those with more money and political power have greater means to do good or evil, but they cannot do it without the cooperation or collaboration of the people–countless individuals and families.
If anything, we should be wary of Big Money or Big Power for this very reason. Take Iceland for instance. It was a decent and prosperous nation whose economy had been soundly built on production and trade. But, it caught the finance capitalist bug peddled by Big Money. Finance is supposed to work with, not usurp, the economy. But, the decent people of Iceland lost their heads and followed the Pied Piper of Big Finance. They weren’t coerced but they did so anyway. They were misled and misinformed; people abandoned their common sense and put their faith in the Big Money folks who seemed to have all the answers. If a nation of educated people can fall for stuff like that, think of political and economic problems elsewhere. We all need to sober up. We must first trust and gain control over ourselves, not people with Big Money or Big Power. Icelanders stopped practicing capitalism and started worshiping capitalism as preached and led by the Big Church of Funny Finance. And, much the same happened in America. This happened with the New Economy shenanigans of the Dot Com Bubble in the late 90s and then with Easy Loans & the Housing Bubble. Never mind that Americans were shipping jobs overseas or running up huge trade deficits in a New World Order designed to favor the global elite over everyone else. We lost our sense because we knelt and prayed at the altar of Big Money. Actually, it was more like a pagan bacchanalia, with human sacrifice and orgies and all. Our society has become addicted to excess, pushed by liberals, libertarians, and even conservatives. America lost its hardworking and thrifty fascist soul that had been at the core of TRUE Americanness.

From Big Money, now we look to Big Power. From the Cocky Cowboy to the Dark Knight. Bush to Obama. Of course, Bush too was about Big Power and Obama too is about Big Money. But, the focus of Bush’s administration was ‘money is good’ and the focus of Obama administration is ‘power is good’.

We have lost sight of what makes a good society. Unless we regain our vision, we shall not found our way back. We shall no longer be Americans in the historico-spiritual sense. The national spirit of America has always been about individuals, families, and communities than Big Money and Big Government. America of course always had Big Money and Big Power, but Americans had a strong sense of personal and communal values. But, even as our individual freedom has expanded greatly over the years–especially since the 50s with rise of youth culture and rising wealth–, we’ve lost our sense of individual and communal worth, power, and responsibility. The Reagan Era, with its undercurrents of Ayn Randism, made us mindlessly worship the Donald Trumps of the world. The corporate and business giants were seen as new heroes, worshiped as new gods. This reached its apogee during the New Economy hightech bubble of the late 90s. Supposedly all those Silicon Valley geeks were the new supermen. They were going to remake our society and make us all millionaires in the bargain. Americans invested in the stock market like never before. Experts and commentators said old economic rules no longer applied. A new era was dawning. But, the bust happened. And, then companies like Enron and others turned out to be massive frauds. People lost faith. But, the economy had not totally sunk. Then came 9/11 and a feeling of new patriotism. And then, with low interest rates it was cheap to borrow money. With new financial instruments, new lending policies, and the promotion of the ‘ownership society’, it didn’t matter if you lost your job or if your income wasn’t much nor guaranteed. Anyone could get loans and buy homes and watch the value rise and expect to live off an endless boom. Well, that finally came crashing down. So, here we are, finally at a point where we lost faith in Big Money. So, what do people do? In panic and despair, they turn to Big Power. After worshiping capitalism, now they worship socialism. We turn men into gods, gods into scapegoats, and then find another bunch of men to worship as gods, then turn them into scapegoats. I suppose that is easier than taking a good hard and honest look at ourselves, what we can and can’t do, how we can succeed, how we can fail.

But, taking a good hard look at ourselves is the only step that can really do us any good. And, only such undertaking can teach us what makes a good society and what makes a bad society. By ‘we’, I mean all of us or at least most of us. We can’t do it alone. If only a relatively few people act smart or decent while the majority act stupid, ridiculous, or destructive, the tide of idiocy will overwhelm the pool of decency and sense. But, if most people gain good sense, think and act honest, and have a firm grasp of reality, we would live in a much stabler and better society.

What makes a good society? Before looking at or to the Big Man, Big Money, or Big Government, we need look closer to home. Everything big starts from everything small. Before asking what makes a good nation, ask what makes a good state. Or, what makes a good city. Or, what makes a good town. Or, what makes a good village. Or, what makes a good neighborhood. Or, what makes a good street. Or, what makes a good family. Or, what makes a good person. Bigger the entity, less power we have within it. Smaller it is, more power we have. So, before we raise questions about what goes on in Wall Street or Washington, we must ask what goes on nearer to us–where we have greater power.
How are we acting? What are we thinking? What kind of values do we support? What kind of things we do purchase? How much do we borrow? What kind of culture do we promote or consume? What kind of ideas and values do we cherish? What do we teach our kids? How do we raise our kids? How do we treat our parents and grandparents? What kind of relationships do we have with friends, lovers, spouses, relatives? How do we treat our neighbors? What do we expect from our neighbors? These are all things we have power over. These are the things that really define us. We must not hide behind or between Bush or Obama, or blame it all on Bush or Obama; Bush or Obama certainly deserve more blame–because they have more power–but not all the blame.
Notice that too many blacks have crazy sexual relationships and do a terrible job of raising their kids, but they never blame themselves; they only blame government or rich people for ‘not caring’ about the problems in their community caused by themselves; and they only look to government or handouts from the rich or do-gooders to solve all the problems. (Because so many blacks have been so pathetic at minding their own affairs, it has become unfashionable and even ‘racist’ to blame the individual for his problems. Blaming the individual would imply that individual blacks are to blame for their problems. That simply won’t do in our politically correct society. Because we are discouraged from blaming black individuals, this mind set bleeds into society as a whole; as a result, we are less likely to blame any individual for his failings. If the failures of black individuals are not their fault, why should the failure of any individual be his fault? Also, even conservative philosophy and policies stressing individualism have failed in the black community. Since the rise of Reagan, many people have succeeded in various fields through individual ambition and accomplishment. Blacks have seen many fellow blacks succeed in sports, hollywood, music, politics, and various other fields. And yet, many blacks are still social failures.
The problem is not the lack of individualism or self-interest in the black community as such is indeed more than abundant; the problem is lack of individual responsibility and sobriety to buttress the freedom and desire. It’s a truism that black failure is due to socialist mentality in the black mentality, but this isn’t really true. Welfare mentality certainly contributed to black decay, but welfare-ism isn’t socialism. If socialist policies lead to same problems everywhere, every corner of Sweden should be like Detroit, but it’s not. Indeed, black failure is, in some ways, due more to ultra-individualism, rampant greed, and self-interest than anything else. Black teens don’t turn to crime, drugs, pregnancy, and welfare out of socialist principles but out of hunger for lust, easy money, instant power, and etc. The welfare system may support and thereby indirectly encourage such kind of behavior, but the root of such behavior has nothing to do with altruism or socialist ideology on the part of blacks. Blacks fail because they are a primitive bunch of Donald Trumps who want instant pussy and money to boogie woogie with all night long.)

We should not worship Wall Street as the Golden Goose nor scapegoat it as the Golden Calf. Of course, Big Power and Big Money do have great power over our lives, but their power–often abused–would be less if we had better sense and took better care of ourselves. We need not have fallen into the traps of recent history. The Bush trap was one where the economy fell into debt, and the Obama trap is where the economy falls into government hands.
It could be argued that most of us were duped by both Bush and Obama, but we wanted to be duped because we wanted it easy. And, we looked to Big Money and Big Power because we just don’t want to deal with problems near to us. Especially in our non-judgmental, overly sensitive, hedonistic, and self-obsessed age, we don’t want to get into other people’s faces and speak the truth or look straight into the mirror and face the music. To some extent, tolerance is a good thing, but excessive ideology of tolerance has created a climate of fear, anxiety, and intimidation. It has made us afraid to judge what needs to be judged. Indeed, the only people who are JUDGED are those deemed to be insensitive, intolerant, and bigoted(‘racist’, ‘sexist’, ‘homophobic’, ‘xenophobic’, and the like). A society where we cannot criticize the dangers posed by crazy blacks, denial of obvious sexual differences, the idiocy of ‘gay marriage’, the dangers of liberal & leftist Jewish power, and the recklessness of illegal ‘immigration’ is a world that is dishonest, incapable of hard truths, evasive, delusional, and self-deceiving.
In our age of rampant hedonism and lunacy, we are not supposed to judge men who act like pimps, women who act like skanks, boys who act like thugs, filthy TV shows, slutty fashions, and extreme-excessive-moronic behavior of all kinds.
In a way, political correctness and excessive hedonism go together. Since we feel repressed about uncomfortable truths regarding race, sex, gayness, illegal immigration, and liberal Jewish power which are having such negative effect on our lives, we seek to drown our fears and apprehensions through wild partying, drugs, drink, stupid tv shows, and the like. In a way, the rise of PC and Howard Stern go together. PC stifles us, so people turn to Stern. Stern is acceptable despite his political incorrectness since he’s Jewish and a total pervert degenerate. Since he degrades, denounces, mocks, and attacks EVERYTHING and EVERYONE(including himself), his kind of excessive hedonistic lunacy is deemed acceptable. Sarah Silverman gets the pass for the same reasons. But, neither PC nor hedonistic lunacy(despite its anti-PC-ness) promotes truth. Political Correctness is puritanical and censorious; hedonistic lunacy is degenerate and degrading. One is repressive, the other is excessive(it throws out the baby–moral values–with the bathwater–pc sermons). The sensible Middle is not allowed in this equation. Stern is allowed to attack PC because he attacks civilization itself. The Left tolerates Stern because what he is far more damaging to solid conservative values than to Hollywood celebrities and liberal politicians. Suppose someone with a bucket of shit enters a Church and slings it all around while badmouthing Rosie O’Donnell and Barney Frank. Only an idiot Christian would applaud him because the shit slinger has some nasty things to say about Rosie and Barney. But, just look at what shit slinger is doing to the church itself. This is why conservatives who embrace stuff like Southpark and Family Guy are retards. They think those shows are cool because they go after liberal sacred cows but fail to see that such shows turn our culture as a whole into a pile of manure. It’s why liberals don’t really mind Southpark, Family Guy, and Howard Stern. Some liberal sacred cows are mocked but our traditional values as a whole are degraded. This is why Camille Paglia too is ultimately subversive and dangerous to the Right. She’s a pagan fart, not a pagan fascist.

Anyway, the point is we basically knows what makes a good society at the smaller level. A good person is diligent, serious, honest, reasonably disciplined and self-controlled, moderate in his appetites, considerate, judicious, and helpful but also courageous enough to criticize relatives, friends, and peers. A person who’s totally nice and wants to be liked by everyone is a fool. Everybody must judge and be judged sometimes. And, it’s not good enough to be ‘tolerant’–in the pc way–if one happens to be lazy, deceitful, nasty, trashy, bratty, infantile, and/or moronic. Sadly enough, even as our society has become politically more judgmental, it has grown laxer in the area of morals and ethics. Trashiness, ugliness, and excessiveness of every kind is tolerated or even celebrated as long as it is politically correct(though to be sure, certain groups have license to be politically less correct than others; blacks, for instance, are given greater leeway to badmouth Jews, gays, women, etc; and it’s perfectly okay for Hispanics to speak of their Race or Raza).

In a way, laxity of our morals is intertwined with the rise of PC because much trashiness comes from the black and Jewish community. The highly influential pimp-and-ho music and attitude come from black culture. Jewish wit and irreverence target the sacred cows of our civilization. Jews, once the profound originators of much of our moral values, are today busy tearing them down. Jews do it because they love to show off their wit, to make money(as crazy stuff is popular and profitable among hedonistic barbarians), and to undermine the values of white goy society they want to get even with for the Holocaust and for all the times rich white goy dads said, ‘you can’t marry my daughter’. To scrutinize, criticize, and denounce the foul aspects of our culture is essentially to target Jewish and black cultures since they are the main movers and shakers of popular taste; problem is we are not allowed to criticize anything Jewish or black. Whether it’s the writers and producers of stuff like Sex and the City or all those jive-ass pimp-and-ho rap music, it’s Jewish or black. Indeed, many other groups try their best to ape the Jews and blacks, corrupting themselves in the process. They too try to become the new Lenny Bruces, the new Rappers. It’s a pathetic sight.

Anyway, since Jews and blacks are the favored racial or ethnic groups according to PC, we are supposed to accept their cultural garbage–disgusting, skanky, worthless, trashy, and hideous–as the wonderful and liberating blessings of our culture Call it by its real name–immoral garbage–and condemn the people who produce such trash, and you’re labeled as a ‘racist’ or ‘anti-semite’ like Gregg Easterbrook was charged by the dirty liberal Jews at The New Republic(who, by the way, feel free to criticize the culture of goyim all the time. So, it’s okay for Jews to attack Zhang Yimou’s "Hero" as evidence of something foul in Chinese popular culture, but it’s not okay for Easterbrook to criticize Jewish financing of anti-human movies as proof something rotten in the Jewish business community. By the way, suppose Muslims dominated the porn industry and used Jewish women as sex meat for black men, and then donated much of the profits to Muslim causes in the Middle East. It would be pretty outrageous, right? Well, it seems to be perfectly okay for Jews who run the porn industry to use white shikse women as meat for beastly black men, and then send much of their profits to the cause of Zionism and the Obama campaign. It’s no wonder that people have had this image of the Dirty Jew all throughout history. Of course, not all Jews are like this. Many Jews are good people, but liberal and leftist Jews are the biggest lowest scums in the history of man.)

If much of our ugly and foul culture had originated or was dominated by the white gentile community, it would be a different story. Indeed, consider the feminist reactions to white heavy metal vs. their reactions to rap. Many feminists screamed ‘sexism’ and ‘male chauvanism’ when it came to stupid raunchy white heavy metal acts, but most of them stayed mum about the far worse Rap culture. When Madonna first appeared as a white slut, the feminists jumped all over her. But, when she became the inflatable doll for the NBA, she became a good role model for all the white girls in the eyes of feminism(an ideology that favors interracism).
Modern feminism was created by ugly left-wing Jewesses jealous of pretty white goy girls. (The leftwing Jewesses were also angry because Jewish men were going with prettier shikses.) So, the ugly and rabid left-wing Jewesses created an ideology–disseminated far and wide by their liberal Jewish allies who control the national media and academia–which came to influence an entire generation of white goy girls to see white goy guys as the enemy. All the hoopla over Date Rape focused only on one set of victims and one set of perpetrators–white guys attacking white girls on campuses. White girls were to see their fathers, uncles, brothers, and sons as villainous people. White girls were told that it’s better to go with black men–like Obama’s traitorous and disgusting skankass mama–because white men were the REAL rapists. White mothers were told to castrate their sons into metro-sexual, dorky, and pussyass white boys–like what Anna Quindlan did to her faggotyass sons. In this day and age, even straight white males are raised to be faggotyass dorks by liberal white mothers who’ve been influenced by radical feminism constructed by ugly left-wing Jewesses. It’s no wonder that so many liberal white boys wet their pants at the sight of Obama. They’ve been raised to think, "I’m an inherently evil and privileged faggotyass white boy. My role in life is to find and worship a noble person of color."
Anyway, much of the trashiness of our popular culture emanates from black and Jewish culture. We are not supposed to criticize or attack anything defined by blackness or Jewishness. So, we have allowed cultural sewage to flow everywhere.

Sometimes, it gets confusing. For example, black people call each other ‘niggers’. And, it’s now part of mainstream culture for non-blacks to call eachother ‘nigger’ and even act like ‘niggers’. ‘Whiggers’ are all around. Chinese-American kids act like ‘chiggers’, and Mexican-Americans act like ‘spiggers’. It’s an ugly and trashy way to act, but kids wanna imitate ‘niggaz’ because blacks are tougher in sport and in pop music, the twin pillars of our popular culture. People are animals and naturally admire, respect, and want to emulate figures of POWER. Since the top athletes and top muscle-flexing ass-shakers are black, most kids want to act black. Never mind that black behavior is destructive, worthless, trashy, and useless outside a MTV studio or football field. People wanna associate with naked power, just like primitive people wear lion or bear claws to absorb the power of those mighty beasts. Bling blings–worn by kids of all backgrounds–are the lion or bear claw necklaces in our modern culture. Though we are technologically advanced, primitive tribalism has been on the rise because blacks have come to define that which is MIGHTY and BADASS. When Rampage Jackson or Rashad Evans flattened white boy Chuck Liddell, even white boys wanna be black, and white girls wanna put out to the tougher and studlier black men. Just look at sports like Basketball or Football, and you see pretty white girls cheering for strong black men; most white boys have been relegated to bench-warming status. White boy is to the Black Dude what the Asian geek is to the white guy.

Jewish-black alliance is strange because Jews promote cosmopolitanism while blacks practice a kind of wild-ass tribalism. Black culture, style, and expression are all about ‘we blacks are badass!’. Though there is an element of Jewish pride/identity in superior Jewish wit, Jewish culture casts a wider net–as does their control of much of the economy and media. Jewish-owned music industry have disseminated rap music and black culture far and wide. So, black culture, though primitive and tribal, has become the universal model for youth culture everywhere; perhaps one could call this uni-tribalism or globo-tribalism. So, you have Palestinians and Zionists trashing one another through rap music. We have French youths–white, black, and Arab–trashing one another America through rap. Kids all over share the global culture of tribalism. They sing the same ugabuga songs that turn them against each other as the soul of rap is thuggery and bullying.


Anyway, let’s return to the original point. What makes a good society? The quality of individuals and families make a good society. There are many levels of society within a good society. A village is a society, a town is a society, a city is a society. If the smaller units of society are rotten, society as a whole will be rotten(even if those at the top are good men). But, the smaller units of society are sound, it will weather even bad leadership at the top–as long as the leadership doesn’t gain totalitarian power over society. Civil society is more important than political society. All the Main Streets are more important than Wall Street. (One of the problems of globalism is that our control of our nation, city, down, village, etc weakens as our economy become more linked with the rest of the world.)
Suppose you want to build a toy tower with blocks. Most of those blocks will have to be cubes or interlocking for the tower to stand firm. The shape of the blocks matter most at the foundation or around the bottom. If blocks came in all kinds of strange shapes, the tower will not stand. In other words, a soundly built tower depends on the shape-worthiness of individual blocks. It would be foolish to see only the tower but not the blocks that make it possible; that would be like seeing the forest but not the trees. Of course, there can be some non-essential decorative stuff on the top, but we know that’s not why the tower is standing. (Remove decorative stuff from a skyscraper, and the building still stands firm. Undermine the structural integrity of the main body, especially at the bottom, and the skyscraper starts wobbling and may well collapse. Of course, it could be argued that society is more like a human body than a building. Building is all body and no brain whereas a society, like a human body, has a brain center. One could argue that the brain–the top–is the most crucial part in a person. Even so, the body has to be healthy for the brain to work properly. If the back, ass, stomach, or whatever hurts, the brain is much less able to focus and accomplish tasks; mental energy becomes focused on the ailments of the body. It could also be argue that the body is more important than the brain in this sense; life developed body before mind, mechanisms before consciousness. The brain is the outgrowth of the body, not the other way around; indeed, the brain is really just a part of the body that can function as if with ‘free will’ and imagination. But, the brain is useless if divorced from and ignores to serve the central reality of the body. A healthy society is where the body is healthy so that the mind can do things that the rest of the body cannot. When the body is unhealthy, the mind eventually collapses too, emotionally and intellectually. The ideas developed by the brain center of America–mainly liberal or leftist Jewish–in the past 50 yrs have not been healthy for the body as a whole–white gentile America. The brains have become ever more brilliant but not at facing and dealing with reality but in trying to suppress it, elude it, or go around it.)
Many people mistake the decorative stuff on the top as the essence of the tower when the real essence lies in the square cubes that making up its main body. Of course, all towers, even toy towers, need an architect, but an architect is useless unless he has many cubes to work with. This is why a national leader can only do so much. A leader working with cube people can build a mightier nation than a leader with odd shaped people. Hitler was able to do much more than Mussolini because Germans were made of more solid stuff than Italians. Hitler failed because once he erected his mighty tower, he tried to make it move. A nation takes a giant risk whenever it tries to conquer other nations.
In America no leader has had the power to disassemble the entire system and build anew. He must work with a system, a society, or a reality we all inherited. The president doesn’t have totalitarian powers to overhaul everything. Our society will essentially be as good or bad as the individual blocks composing it. This is why it’s foolish to look to the Great Leader to fix our biggest problems or save us. The greatness of Reagan wasn’t that he DID something but simply allowed the private sector–free individuals–to their own thing. He trusted in the individual blocks that made America. (Where Reagan and many conservatives failed is they over-estimated the wisdom of individualism. In an increasingly materialistic society, individualism can become synonymous with excessive hedonism and barbarism, promoting a freedom that is destructive and mindless than constructive and responsible. The overly materialistic yuppie culture that developed in the 80s was ultimately counter-productive; it was a culture based on individual hard work and success but its values were hollow–succeed to gratify yourself; the children of yuppies were raised to be spoiled brats; spiritually hollow, they either became stupid idiots or new leftists seeking meaning through the secular religion of radical ‘social justice’. Thus, Reaganism led to Obama-ism.) But, Americans, like everyone else, have been prone to fall for the Great Man or Great Men myth. That there are greater men in society is very true, but man is not god. When we look up to certain men as gods, we are making trouble for our nation. This happened with the deification of CEO’s in the 80s and especially in the internet boom yrs of the late 90s. Milton Friedman was a great economist, but many looked to him as a yoda-like sage guru. Ayn Rand fans are crazy about that crazy bitch. Wall Street and Silicon Valley were seen as bastions of all that was free, exciting, excellent, wonderful, intelligent, brilliant, and etc. The internet bust in the 1999 taught us the danger of worshiping techno geeks, and the recent financial bust taught us the dangers of blindly following Wall Street.
So, have we learned our lesson? No, because we now have people blindly worshiping Big Government led by The One, The Messiah, The Anointed One, The Prince, The King, etc, etc, Obama. Instead of looking to ourselves–and honestly at ourselves–, we are looking to the so-called Great Men to solve our problems.
The problems we face were created by all of us, though of course those with more power deserve more blame. They misled us, but many of us put them in power and/or foolishly or blindly trusted and followed. Or, we didn’t stand up to them and blow the whistle even though we sensed what they were doing was reckless or unwise. Consider the fact that the vast majority of people of Illinois re-elected Blagojevich though it was obvious that he’s a low-life crook. Not that a GOP candidate would have been any better, but the fact is both parties come up with unscrupulous leaders because of the arrogance, stupidity, naivete, or laziness of the people.

Sometimes, we do need a great bold leader to speak the truth and push forth a fundamentally new approach and system. But, that’s not easy to do in a highly developed society such as ours(where power isn’t concentrated in one place and where many people have the power to resist new ideas and policies for good or bad). It was relatively easy to establish a fundamentally new order in the Americas of the late 18th century because North America was mostly a vast empty continent. With plenty of land for everyone and following a terribly disruptive war, the Founding Fathers had a unique opportunity to try something profoundly different. Such was much harder to pull off in France because France was already a highly developed civilization with much entrenched interests; lack of radical policies would have left much of the Old Guard in power while radical policies would have led to a bloodbath and frightful dislocations. (Of course, our society has changed rapidly in the past century, but it was mostly the product of countless individuals competing with new ideas. Change in a free society is organic, unpredictable, and elusive than centrally planned and implemented. Like in sports, the real game happens on the field regardless of the game plan. Though practice and strategy are important, the real ‘plan’ develops as the game is being played, with constantly shifting realities on the ground. Communism had a different idea of progress, where central government would come up with five year plans detailing and commanding what must be done and how. There was no room for individual initiative and freedom. It was difficult to breathe change into the communist system because of its massive size and pervasive power. And, it’s difficult to radically change our system because individual resistance to government dictates and power. The real question is what kind of individuals and communities comprise America? Not all anti-government resistance or disobedience is a good thing. Arnold Schwarzeneggar tried to push saner policies some years ago but had to back down due to massive objections from the people of California. Government effort to educate blacks has been met with hostility or indifference on the part of blacks. The people of New Orleans didn’t cooperate with the government during Katrina. Indeed, the aggression and craziness of the people frustrated the rescue efforts of government at local, state, and federal levels. And, we only need to look at places like Jamaica, Haiti, Dominican Republic, etc to realize that minimal government doesn’t necessarily produce heaven on earth. If individuals of a community suck, then the community will suck.)

Only rarely do highly complex, advanced, and sizable civilizations get an opportunity to try something drastically new. It happened in Russia following the chaos of WWI. The power vacuum allowed the Bolsheviks to seize power and push forth radical policies turning society upside down. Nazi policy in Germany was less revolutionary but made possible by prolonged depression of the 20s and 30s. China was ripe for radical revolution in the late 40s and 50s because it had been worn down by a prolonged period of imperial decay, Western imperialism, warlord-ism, corruption, and Japanese invasion. But, without such giant geopolitical earthquakes, a new leader has only so many cards to play with. Even in America, presidents were able to do something truly new only following a massive crisis: Lincoln thanks to the Civil War, FDR thanks to the Depression and WWII, Johnson thanks to the Civil Rights Movement. Obama, of course, is hoping to use the current crisis to turn US into a socialist country. Even so, no American president had the kind of power to re-order society to the extent that leaders of other countries had done. America has simply been more stable than more countries, and furthermore, the strain of individualism and local autonomy has made many Americans resist the idea of government amassing power to shove its policy down all our throats. (It must be said, however, that because the freedom of the people was preserved there has been far more change in America than in nations with governments with power to do much more. Communism produced greater amount of change in a short period of time than any other system, but after the initial revolution a long period of stasis and stagnation followed since the only game in town was communism. At no point in history did America produce the kind of overnight change as happened under communism, but America kept changing year after year, with individuals infusing new ideas into the system day in and day out, year in and year out. America was not a nation of single all-encompassing revolutions but many mini-revolutions in various fields–science, business, culture, etc–happening all year round. Communism was a giant storm of change followed by a long drought whereas America was more like steady rain of new ideas.)
But, Americans tend to lose faith in themselves during times of duress and look to the Great Man. When times are good, Americans are likely to admire Great Men, the successful capitalists. When times are bad, Americans are likely to run to the Great Man, the savior who promises to protect us from the avarice of the Great Men exposed as Great Robber-Barons. In the Clinton and Bush yrs, many people looked up to CEOs and bankers. Today, those people are despised, and many people look to Messiah Obama to save them from the Greed of the Evil Rich Folks(though rich folks got Obama into office).

Perhaps, we should ask why this is so. What is it about human nature that makes us look up to and worship Great Men? The most obvious reason would be that some people are indeed great–imbued with special talent or power. But, there seems to be more at hand. It’s not just that people look up to men with great talent but that people NEED to look up to such figures–heroes, chiefs, kings, titans, gods. It’s as though there’s an innate desire within us to seek and worship great figures. Indeed, we would invent them if they didn’t exist–indeed, we do all the time. It begins with children who don’t need to be taught to admire super heroes, giant monsters, sports stars, etc. They have a natural inclination to look up to Great Figures. And, this tendency remains intact as people grow older. Even people who come to reject or distrust authority and institutions worship or, at least, highly admire figures like Hunter S. Thompson or Ayn Rand who supposedly embodied the essence of individualism. Even anti-authoritarianism has its own heroes and gods. And, of course Marxism, an ideology committed to destroying religion, had its own Holy Men.

Consider, for instance, people’s worship of movie stars. We know that movie stars are fakers. At best, they have a talent for mimicry, for putting on an act. But, we don’t admire only their acting talent; we see them as larger-than-life; we associate them with the mythic characters they play. We don’t look upon John Wayne merely as an actor who did a good job playing cowboys but as the myth of the American Cowboy itself. There’s no other way to explain the great popularity of movie stars. They satisfy the need of people to submit to something ‘higher than themselves’. And, consider comic book heroes. We all know such heroes are fake, yet kids love spiderman, superman, and the like. Even adults pay good money to watch Hollywood movies about action heroes. People spend lots of money on super hero posters, t-shirts, and such. There is an aspect of worship even as people consciously know super heroes are fake. And, athletes are admired and even worshiped by their fans way beyond their real worth. They’re seen as Hometown Heroes, National Heroes, or representative of the Noble Virtues or Great Causes. All sorts of cultural and mythic significance are draped across their shoulders. So, Muhammad Ali wasn’t merely seen as an entertaining and excellent boxer but as a god-like hero of the black community. Liberal Jews have vastly exaggerated the significance of Jesse Owens–whose only ability was to run fast–, making him into a larger-than-life hero so as to morally browbeat the white goy community and to teach blacks that Jews are their natural friends. (Jesse Owens, Joe Louis, and Jews against all those evil white goyim.)

To be sure, there is an element of hype and manipulation perpetrated by corporations that control information; therefore, it could be argued that we are conditioned to worship certain celebrities, leaders, and ‘heroes’. Still, we must ask why people are receptive to such conditioning and manipulation to begin with. People controlling the media can manipulate us because there’s something innate within us that can be(indeed wants to be)manipulated. It’s like the porn industry can manipulate the desires of men because men are horny to begin with; men’s innate sexual desires can be exploited and magnified, but it was there to be begin with, not implanted in man by the porn industry. Indeed, even before the advent of modern media and technology, the innate nature of man led him to seek out great men, worship idols, and so on.

Why do people feel this need to admire or even worship great men or great power? Fear may be offered as one reason. Fearsome things/beings may be unpleasant or terrible, but they are awe-inspiring. Fear may not inspire love but can inspire respect or at least acknowledgment of its power.
There is also the element of protection and security. You feel safer if you have a big strong guy on your side. Naturally, people turn to John Wayne-like figures to save the town in Western films. Power inspires fear, fear inspires respect. And, we hope that the powerful being is on our side or on the side of good. Indeed, most action films are predicated on the hope that some fearsome guys will choose good to protect the people from fearsome bad guys; Yojimbo is a classic example.
Even so, we respect power itself, good or bad. Detroit Pistons were the bad boys of the NBA but still admired by many simply because they were the best. Jack Johnson played the bad ‘nigger’, and even though whites hated him., they still had a reluctant admiration for his tough black ass(and today, ‘faggoty ass’ white boys worship him as the great black man who taught the ‘racist’ white boy a lesson and promoted noble black pride); and white women secretly desired to submit to him, the destroyer of the ‘faggoty ass’ white men. In the film "A Bronx Tale", the son feels closer to the tough mafia boss than to his good humdrum dad. In "Shane", Joey looks up to Shane because he’s cooler and faster than his father. Lucky for us, Shane is a good guy. Jack Palance is the bad guy and we fear him... but we are fascinated by him as well. If you ask most men who would they wanna be, Shane or Palance, they would probably say Shane–as Shane is a tough good guy. But, if you ask most guys would they rather be Palance–tough bad guy–or one of the weaklings of the community, most men will say they’d rather be Palance. Power even if evil is more enticing and seductive than weakness even if good. Rap music is openly about being nasty, raw, bad, disgusting, savage, uglyass, and putrid but it’s tough, aggressive, and power-mongering. Because blacks, the main practitioners of Rap, are seen as the toughest and baddest mofos, kids around the world imitate and hope to be black-ish. Even Hispanics who fight with blacks in California listen to black music, watch black dominated sports, and all that stuff. Blacks see Mexican-Americans as short funny-looking midgets while Mexican-Americans see blacks as badass mofos. So, even though Mariachi music is a lot more pleasant than ugly stupid Rap, Mexican-American kids ape blacks and not the other way around. It’s because blackness is associated with power whereas Mexican-ness is associated with funny-looking stubbiness. Of course, there are many tough Mexicans around, but they are no match for blacks generally(except numerically).
Blacks pose a real problem to our society because people naturally look up to powerful figures. We want our heroes to be both powerful and good, but the problems is blacks are powerful and bad. There was a time when whites were fearful of black power, good or bad. White men didn’t want to lose their status as the top dog, the alpha male of society. They wanted white women to see them as the top studs. But, black males whupped white boys real good. Black males became the new alpha males admired by stupid white bitches. Since this was fait accompli–largely with the help of liberal Jews who took special delight in the humiliation of white goy males–, white males hoped that black power would be synonymous with decency and goodness. Whites were willing to accept to the studly superiority of blacks but wanted blacks to be like Sidney Poitier in Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner. Blacks played along with this charade for awhile(Jackie Robinson-ism), but Muhammad Ali revived the ghost of Jack Johnson in the 60s. Blacks didn’t want to be nice decent good negroes approved by white folks; blacks wanted to express their own style, do their own thang, and all that. Much of this could only offend or scare the white community. Even so, it was obvious that blacks were louder, tougher, badasser, cooler, and all that jazzier. Since kids naturally gravitate to power and toughness, more and more white kids turned to black culture even though much of it was hateful, stupid, retarded, ugly, and obnoxious. Again, most men would rather be Jack Palance in "Shane" than one of the weakling good characters. Young people prefer Alex in A Clockwork Orange to his victims. White suburban teens admire and romanticize the tough gangsta thugs of the black community than the decent ‘boring’ blacks who try to make an honest living. In the past, many people romanticized gun-slinging outlaws more than decent farmers and church going folks. Though most white guys in the past wanted to look up to tough white heroes and most white girls wanted to admire white men as the white knight(saving the damsel in distress), the fact was black dragon was tougher than the white knights((and bit by bit, the star of white male-dom dropped lower; white women no longer felt satisfied or safe in the arms of white men; they turned to the black dragon). So, gradually, more and more white guys became sorryass white boys worshiping and imitating black muscle AND more and more white girls became skanky white ho’s worshiping black dick.
But, because black culture is so ugly, hideous, disgusting, and yucky, this cultural shift within mainstream America has had a terrible impact on all our racial communities. (Instead of white people
upholding solid and proud values which blacks could accept, practice, and improve their lives with, white people stooped to the level of stupid wildass black culture. White culture grew trashier while blacks no longer had any higher ideal to look up; as such, blacks just wallowed more in their own trashiness as society deemed it as the badassest and coolest thing around.)
There isn’t much good that comes of imitating stupid ‘niggaz’. They may be exciting on the basketball court or singing and dancing like sex-crazed lunatics, but blackness cannot serve as the basis of civilization or maintain a stable society. Indeed, blackness is the very anti-thesis of civilizational values. If blackness takes over a society, society will fall. Look at the hellish black parts of Brazil. Look at Zimbabwe after blacks took over. Look at what’s happening to South Africa as blacks take over more institutions. Look at the black parts of America. Compare Hispanics who emulate decent middle class whites vs Hispanics who emulate ‘niggaz’.

This is why so many white folks have invested so heavily in Barack Obama. The white community is thinking, "okay, you black guys are tougher, sexier, and more badass. You can fool around with my wife, you can f___ my daughter, you can be my president, and I will pick cotton for you. Just smile more often, do the fist bump than hit me in the face, and don’t scare me half to death. Be tough and cool but also GOOD, because, let’s face it, black culture as it now exists is bad, destructive, and corrosive." (Because black culture is both cool and bad, it is highly dangerous. If black culture was considered bad and uncool, it would be ignored by most people and wouldn’t influence society. But, because it’s considered cool and bad, people identify badness with coolness. Vice becomes the new virtue. Ugliness becomes the new beauty. Obnoxiousness becomes the new manners. In-your-face attitude becomes the new face of American behavior. We’ve seen the awful result of such behavior in the black community, so why do other races try to imitate such behavior? Because blacks are seen as the toughest, baddest, and coolest. People worship power, good or bad. People simply don’t respect weakness, even if good. This is why Passion of the Christ was so popular in our deranged culture. It showed that Jesus was the baddest dude in the world by taking all that PAIN!!! The mentality behind Passion isn’t much different than mentality behind worship of Tupac the Rapper. Of course, Jesus in Passion isn’t some trashy mofo, but his worth is proven not so much by his spirituality but by his badass ability to soak up tremendous amount of pain. He is like a pitbull dog that could take hell of a beating.)

Long ago, whites wanted blacks to keep their asses still and act like Negroes–blacks who practice middle class white values. But, the Black Ass has been popped out of pandora’s box and won’t ever go back. Blacks can no longer be Negroes since even most of white society has grown so enamored of black coolness and jiveassness. Colin Powell was much liked, but he made many blacks and whites feel uncomfortable because he was too much of a traditional Negro. He looked and sounded too white. It wasn’t realistic for whites to plausibly believe that most blacks could be like Colin Powell; that would have been tantamount to saying blacks should act and talk just like white people. It would have smacked too much of expecting blacks to be ‘a credit to their race’. On the other hand, white folks–even liberals–thought that most black leaders were disgusting jiveass buffoons and sleazebags–the Al Sharptons so prevalent in black politics and culture. This is where Obama made his entry and solved the conundrum for many gullible, stupid, dorky, and confused white people. Obama has some jiveassness, but it is restrained by some manners. Colin Powell was missing the Ass Factor crucial to genuine blackness. Problem is that most blacks with the Ass Factor be shaking their booties wildly and violently, bruising white folks both physically and emotionally. Barack Obama has the Ass Factor but he’s goodass than badass. So, Obama is to politics what Will Smith is to movies. They are goodass blacks.
Now, wouldn’t it be far better for white people to come to realization that blacks in general are dangerous and hideous? Wouldn’t it be far better for white people to unite for white power like blacks are united for black power and Mexicans are united for Mexican power–and Chinese are united for Chinese power and Jews are united for Jewish power? So, why don’t white people unite? It’s because the Liberal Jews who have taken control of the media and academia have brainwashed white folks through guilt-baiting and guilt-peddling. It’s also because US had been locked in a long Cold War with the USSR in which US had to prove to the world that it wasn’t ‘racist’ in the eyes of the world in order to win hearts and minds all over the Third World(and in Europe which had been half-destroyed by the ugly radical racist policies of Adolf Hitler). So, white people have been hopelessly castrated by the liberal Jews’ Doctor’s Plot. Despite all the evidence, white people cannot accept that blacks are a racial danger to white folks and to civilization itself. Even if such were proven true, white folks are unable to look at truth in the face because they’ve been raised since cradle to kiss the ass of Martin King, suck on the teat of Oprah, wiggle their ass to Usher, and cheer for their hometown Negro sports hero.

Anyway, the innate desire to worship the Great Power may have predated the arrival of man. Look at social animals, and one notes a strict hierarchy within a pack or pride. Though males of any pride or pack(or females among hyenas as female hyenas are stronger than the males)will fight for dominance, the losing beta-males comes to accept the leadership of the alpha-male. It isn’t just that the weaker males are beaten into submission but that they come to genuinely look up to the stronger male. It’s not mere a case of reluctant submission but a willful submission once the dust clears after the battle. This kind of feeling may exist among solitary animals, but it’s certainly an aspect of social animals. Once the alpha member is chosen, all other members–male and female–look up to it as the god of the tribe. It’s as though all the members realize that they need such a Great Heroic Figure to lead the tribe to victory, safety, dominance, and etc. The alpha male also gets the best pussy. It’s also as though beta-males and females innately understand that if the alpha member falls, there will be dissension and chaos within the tribe in which a whole new round of internecine battles will have to be fought to produce a new leader.
Perhaps, this kind of innate mentality wouldn’t have developed if not for the fact that the natural world is dangerous. In a hazardous world, there must be strict cohesion within the tribe or pack; otherwise, they fall to other packs or tribes, or it will fall apart from internal dissension. An anarchist or libertarian social order is possible in a world without external threats or problematic individuals within the group, but such has not been the case in the natural world or through human history. A community had to cohere together against other communities and to suppress the crazies within. (The farming community in Seven Samurai wouldn’t have survived if everyone just did his own thing.) Even if one community practices peace and atomized individualism, other communities could well be tight-knit, united, and aggressive. (The problem of the Greek city states was they were too divided to form a solid and stable bloc capable of repelling all enemies indefinitely. So, they all fell under Alexander the Macedon.) For a community to prevail or protect itself from others throughout human existence, it needed a leadership class that it could look up to, follow, obey, and admire. The farmers in Seven Samurai need the warrior caste to save them from bandits. Usually, we think of superiors hiring people to serve as inferiors, but in Seven Samurai, inferiors hire people to function as superiors. Farmers need Hero-like men to save them from the bandits. When the bandits are finally gone, the farmers feel less need for the samurai. Even so, respect for the great force or being that maintains justice, peace, order, and advantage to one’s side is probably something that developed since the time mammals became complex social creatures. Whether it’s a wolves happily submitting to their top wolf to lead the attack or retreat from other packs or other beasts OR Hebrews looking to Moses to lead them to the Promised Land against all sorts of obstacles, there is a natural propensity for higher social mammals to play follow-the-leader. This feeling could be one of the basis for our social, political, and religious mentalities.