Thursday, July 27, 2017

The Jewish Renaissance

Jarigold Taylorstein recently wrote to let me know that I had accurately portrayed his Murray/Rothbard online bookstore in my January post New Racism, Old Correctness, and Intergenerational Rebellions. I had written Taylorstein recently in regards to my continuing suggestions that the "alt-right" was, like Christian Zionism, a means of using societal conflict between Europeans and Africans, or Europeans and Mongoloids, to frighten Europeans into acting against their own interests, specifically by venerating Jews as the farseeing Chosen people who adopted modern border walls and genetic-testing-based citizenship before permitting America and Europe to do so. Although I had, in January, accused Jarigold of being a successor house-negro/shabbos-goy to Charles Murray, in the sense of his being the gentile frontman for the Israeli financiers who made it again acceptable to discuss racial differences in IQ (Charles Murray was the shabbos goy who put his name on Herrstein's Bell Curve research), I wanted to ensure that I had not made an error. While other Mossad assets, such as Jerry "Richard" Silverspence, are slated for state congressional seats, Taylorstein's age means that he may instead receive only pecuniary awards, and retire as a respectable commentator in a "think tank," rather than as a politician who becomes a regional household name.

Taylorstein was kind enough to direct his moderators to vindicate me as follows:



(The context of the response was the angry mewling of some of Taylorstein's kittenish readership that, if Trump didn't watch out and start keeping his campaign promises, he would regret it, because Taylorstein's kittens might actually--brace yourself--might actually vote for a different candidate in 2020's presidential selection.)

Not one to shrink from a challenge, Taylorstein was brave enough to order this censoring only hours before having his ad-men recycle numerous tweets against censorship at Auburn and Berkeley. This was, of course, a righteous condemnation of the methods of "the left," also known as "liberals," who, according to Taylorstein's subordinates as well as his handlers, are destroying western civilization through the pathological altruism they lavish upon violent Mexicans, Muslims, and Somalians. And occasionally upon Chinese, Amerindians, Venezuelans, feminists, transsexuals, and all other identifiable sub-groups except for one perfect subgroup who is beyond reproach.

Like satellite photos of smokeless ovens at Dachau, my putting this on the internet is systematically irrelevant; the depth is not present for any of this to change anything. I fantasize less about "the alt-right" having sufficient emotional sturdiness to realize their triumphant new racism is another partially-correct Jewish scam than I do about "the progressive left" having sufficient emotional sturdiness to realize that the Fed and capitalism and imperialism are also partially-correct Jewish scams. To mix metaphors, those trains have sailed. The domesticating has been done; there is no material escape. Rather, I'd like to take this moment to remember, again, all those who refused to participate any longer. Such honest philosophizing, such willingness to be humane in the truest sense of the word--making a stand for the future rather than just learning to adapt to ever-more-progressive slavery--is heartening. It's disgusting, too; disgusting, and wrong, and flawed. But it's at least a tiny step in the right direction, like making your first-ever minimum payment on the loans that are too impossibly big to ever actually pay back.

The tax farmer of today is, like the soldier of today, in large part, so far removed from the reality, the viscerality, of the task at hand, that we might as well not be here at all learning these things physically. Like a soldier playing air-conditioned mortal playstation, launching drones at children, the I.R.S. agent is now far removed from the effects of his arcane faux-actions. Tax farmers once had to hire thugs personally, and appear onsite when it was time to club a family out of their home so that the king could court a chinless cousin or add to his fingers some rubies cut in the new style. Now, they pass e-mails to people who pass e-mails to people who pass paperwork to the county that sends the most junior sheriffs--some poor fools who don't even understand what they're doing--to jail and repossess. The need to visibly present oneself as a cowardly thief is gone; so, too, flees the ability of the vast majority of people to understand that any thieving is actually being done.

It's rather a Pandora's box, where we are now: the horrible effects of these comforts, like those of flawless liposuction, will scar so many characters that it will become impossible to build a society on Terra where matters the willpower to accomplish something, rather than only to purchase it on credit.

In 2008, as in 2000 and 1992 et al., America's cowards "compromised" by voting for an evil candidate--a Zionist warmonger who had no intention of stopping humanitarian imperial warfare or shutting down the Fed--and rationalized it as being a "lesser evil" and therefore, despite being wholly evil, a "pragmatic" step towards a brighter future. At the time, I did not ever, even once, call them "faggots" or "pussies," because so many of Obama's supporters were feminists, LGBTQ community members, or allies of said groups, and viewed the employment of such insults as a faux pas. I think I called them "hypocritical fools," "murderers," "cowards," or something along those lines. Trump's supporters, though, are by and large quite comfortable with more basic personal evaluations, and therefore it is not at all inappropriate, nor inaccurate, to call them faggots and pussies in the most pejorative of senses. The allusion to bending over and/or spreading one's legs, shamelessly prostituting one's body and one's people and one's soul to take another eight years for Israel, in exchange for a few token domestic policy adjustments, makes those insults as apt as it does for Obama's supporters, and, unlike Obama's supporters, Trump's supporters are less comfortable with their own willingness to be dominated, so identifying them as the willing bottoms that they are could have more of a productive effect on their future self-demeaning and enabling.

No comments:

Post a Comment