There are many meanings to ‘diversity’. For one, it can serve as description or prescription. Diversity-as-description(DAD) is about noticing reality with judgement one way or another, e.g. ‘Brazil is very diverse’ or ‘North Africa is more racially diverse than Nigeria, which however has plenty of ethnic or tribal diversity’. Diversity-as-description merely takes into account the diversity in any given society. No nation is purely homogenous as even Japan has minorities(whose numbers are swelling due to global pressure and demographic demise of the native Japanese); and even if Japan were 100% Japanese, there would be diversity in intelligence, height, weight, temperament, talent, and etc.
In contrast, diversity-as-prescription(DAP) doesn’t merely take notice of varying diversities in different social or national orders but argues that diversity is a necessity, indeed an obligation, and the more the better, and there can never be too-much-diversity, always and forever(except for Israel for some reason, hmm; funny that this wonder drug panacea that Jewish Power pushes on all peoples is something that Jews reject in their self-claimed homeland). As for societies with ‘insufficient’ diversity, shame on them! Or maybe there’s something sick about them, the cure for which is DIVERSITY.
With diversity-as-description, one acknowledges the reality of diversity in one’s social/national order and searches for the best solution. How should minorities be treated? How could people of different backgrounds and/or creeds get along? Of course, the minority could have power over the majority, as was the case of white-ruled South Africa and is now of the US where the Jewish minority lords over goyim.
Throughout history, people have come up with different solutions to Diversity: Suppression and discrimination, expulsion, secession, breakup(like the Czechs and Slovaks peaceably going separate ways, which would have been the best solution for Ukraine as well), warfare, even genocide. In the modern world, there is the concept of Minority Rights as an extension of Human Rights(though we may now need the concept of Majority Rights as globalism has made the Jewish Minority and their rootless cosmopolitan goy elite collaborators the rulers and exploiters of majority populations all over the world; Irish Elites, now beholden to Jewish Globalists, no longer serve the interests of the Irish majority but push policies to erase them, but then plenty of Irish folks, brainwashed by education, media, and entertainment, believe themselves to be virtuous for welcoming the Great Erasure).
Of course, Diversity comes in many flavors. It can mean religious diversity, ethnic diversity, cultural diversity, linguistic diversity, or racial diversity. And, not all diversities produce the same results. Surely, a diversity made up of whites and browns will be far less problematic than one comprising whites and blacks. A 50/50 diversity of Buddhists and Christians is likely to be more peaceful than 50/50 diversity of Muslims and Globo-Homo-cultists(now a kind of pseudo-spirituality). Though diversity always comes with problems, one without blacks is likely to be more functional than one with lots of blacks. As for Muslims, the problem in the Current West isn’t so much their hatred of Christianity but their revulsion for post-Christian decadence and degeneracy, which, incredibly enough, have been ‘moralized’ into the New Virtue, i.e. ‘Western Values’ now holds that there is nothing holier than men engaging in sodomy, children with mutilated genitals, men in women’s sports, and reverence for black thugs on drugs.
Islam and Christianity have long been rival faiths, but most Muslims respect Christianity as a great religion and, furthermore, Muslims respect power, pride, and force. What drives them batty is the current West is still richer and more powerful than the Muslim world in material and military terms but spiritually and culturally so defunct and demented.
Anyway, because diversity can mean different things, blanket statements like ‘diversity never works’ are far too simplistic. While excessive diversity isn’t ideal, things can work out if the diverse groups tend to be intelligent, capable, and mutually respectful. The problem in the West is too many blacks(or Jiversity, with natural black tendency toward aggression, backed up thug power) and too much chutzpah among Jews who, with their higher IQ and pushy personality, have weaponized Diversity into an anti-white screed, i.e. under the Jewish regimen, the Diversity Formula isn’t about mutual respect for all but about nonwhites blaming Evil Whitey and about whites favoring Jews uber alles(against Palestinians, Iranians, Russians, etc). What was BLM but Jewish Money and Black Muscle working in tandem to terrorize and intimidate whitey, both physically and ‘spiritually’, what with cucky-wuck whites groveling to wash stinky Negro toes. White suckers or Whuckers are a pathetic bunch. Diversity in the West doesn’t mean equal respect or justice for all. You must favor Jews over Palestinians in the US, and you must favor blacks over non-black minorities. When Ilhan Omar offended Jews with her remark about Jews having the ‘benjamins’, Nancy Pelosi led Congress to pass a resolution against ‘white supremacy’. One thing for sure, the ‘woke’ morons who now fly the Ukraine flag were oblivious to the mass destruction of Arabs in Libya and Syria by Obama and Hillary.
Of course, diversity is discussed in the current West always as a prescription. The discourse isn’t merely about noting that Nation A or Nation B has such-and-such diversity but arguing that any given nation(except for Israel) needs more and then more and then even more diversity, until the native population is reduced to a minority, all the while defending Israel’s right to remain solidly majority Jewish. The argument holds that diversity is a matter of survival and sanctity — in our age of Inversion, the ideal way for a nation and culture to survive is to be inundated with endless waves of foreigners as the New Nationals while suppressing native birthrates with feminism, hedonism, individualism, and materialism.
And if diversity causes problems, the only solution is to double down and increase it some more, which is like a fat person trying to lose weight by increasing the calories. The likes of Matthew Yglesias want the US to be flooded by a billion immigrants. Apparently, obesity on the individual level isn’t enough, and we need fattening on the national level, or the US bulging at the seams.
Upon closer inspection, history teaches us that the best prescription on diversity is to keep it at a minimum. So, if a social/national order has a unique mix of diversity, it must find ways to deal with the problems, but the last thing it should do is increase the diversity. Even in cases where diversity comes with certain advantages, disadvantages follow. For example, increased presence of Asian-Indians in African countries in recent years has led to economic growth because Hindus are more adept at business than blacks. But it has also led to black politicians relying on bribes from foreigners and resentment from native folks, the ‘world on fire’ scenario.
Diversity-as-description is about facing up to reality and solving existing problems, e.g. various ethnic groups in Bosnia finding ways to get along without butchering one another over ethnic or religious issues. In contrast, Diversity-as-prescription is a blind faith for those who believe diversity in and of itself is next-to-godliness, but then these types betray their purported principles because, despite increasing diversity, their only concern is for Jews, blacks, and homos at the expense of just about all other groups. (What did Latinos get but the new label ‘Latinx’? And Palestinian-Americans can’t even get First Amendment protection for BDS.) Almost invariably, Diversity-as-Prescription turns cancerous as we see in Canada, where Justin Trudeau(the man-child spokesman for globalists) and his likeminded phonies are into shopaholic mode of always obtaining more and more diversity with no end in sight. Just like shopaholics consume just to consume(and feel devoid of meaning without acquiring ever more), diversaholics are so obsessed with gaining NEW citizens that they’ve no time to acknowledge the existing or native population except as a nuisance. In a way, it’s Americanism grown cancerous and now serving as the template for all the world, even Europe and parts of East Asia.
We’ve all heard the mantra “Diversity is our strength” or DIOS countless times. We’ve heard it from the media, academia, politicians, and officials. We’ve heard it from high and low, from the richest people and the most powerful people, and from the average Joe on the street. This is hardly surprising because most people are sheeple and merely repeat the talking points that come from above. Most people just chant slogans than think about anything carefully or critically. Most ‘conservatives’ and ‘liberals’ need others to do the defining and deciding for them. While they may have naturally conservative or liberal instincts, they lack ideological deftness to formulate their own positions. They must be told what is worth ‘conserving’ or what is worth ‘changing’.
As DIOS is the official chant of the hour, so many people just follow along.
But DIOS has been especially ubiquitous because BOTH sides chant the mantra despite the fact that it undermines the interests of many segments of both political parties. For the GOP, Diversity in the form of cheaper ‘immigrant’ labor may be good for business, big and small, but as most non-white mass-invaders vote Democratic, it spells doom for the Republican Party in the long run. Also, if the US becomes overpopulated with non-whites, it will no longer be the historically European-American nation that it was founded and developed to be.
As for the Democratic Party, more mass-invaders is an electoral plus. However, it has been devastating to the American Working Class as endless pools of cheap labor depress wages and the power of Organized Labor. Also, blacks come under increased competition from mass-invaders who find it easy to outperform blacks in everything except sports, rapping, and government jobs(for which blacks get special hiring preferences).
And even though non-white mass-invaders will gain materially from America in the short-run, they will eventually become race-mixed, deracinated, and confused mass of consumers with no sense of history or culture.
The fact is most gentiles don’t have a strong sense of identity and heritage. The only reason they have a sense of who they are is because they happen to be surrounded by people of similar race and culture in a particular piece of land. It’s more an identity based on condition than consciousness. For example, a Japanese in Japan feels Japanese because he is surrounded by people who look like him, speak the same language, and share the same manners & habits. Being Japanese is not something he thinks about or defines him. It is conditional to his existence in a nation called Japan. But if he were to move to another nation in which he is a minority, he will be surrounded by new conditions and gradually adapt to those until his sense of Japanese-ness is virutally gone.
It may well be true that Jews are the only people with a conscious, as opposed to merely conditional, identity. After all, most ethnic groups who came to the US soon became just ‘Americans’. Most Americans of German ancestry don’t know German language or much about German history. They are just ‘Americans’. This also goes for most Americans of Polish, Hungarian, Italian, Greek, Japanese, or etc. ancestry. Their ancestral identity has no meaning in America because they think and feel conditionally than consciously. Indeed, even Anglo-Americans, the very people who founded and developed the US, have lost their conscious sense of who they are… and this bug has spread to Great Britain itself, where the New Normal of National Identity is to ‘include’ Africans, Pakistanis, Arabs, and Chinese as fellow Britons.
In contrast, the Covenant instilled Jews with a conscious sense of identity. Their identity has been conceptualized, made portable, and spiritualized. Thus, the primal sense of Jewish blood has been linked to ancient history, continuity, and destiny. And this is why Jews have maintained their identity against the greatest odds even in exile surrounded by gentiles. Despite the fundamental changes in social conditions that Jews faced in the Diaspora, Jews maintained their sense of who they were, are, and must be because their identity has been made conscious. And this is why Jews are bound to be less negatively affected by Diversity than other groups. While most gentile groups in the US just become deracinated, soulless, and confused consumers and materialists, the Jewish community(at least enough of them) will maintain their powerful sense of who they are on the conscious level.
Some might argue that Muslims and Hindus also have powerful identities, but Islam is not specific to a people. After all, anyone can convert to Islam. Thus, it lacks an ethnic core and consistency of Jewishness. As for Hindus, they are too much a people divided among themselves. This is why Jews feel more confident in navigating through a sea of diversity. While other groups grow more diluted and diffuse in identity amidst diversity, Jews possess a CONSCIOUS WILL to stick to their identity. Indeed, even as many Jews mix with other peoples, they ‘convert’ their spouses to Jewishness and raise the kids as Jews. Also, Jews don’t mix with low-IQ rabble but with high-IQ gentiles, and thus higher intelligence among gentiles is absorbed into the Jewish Power Network.
History of Jews demonstrates the power of Consciously Willed Identity, as opposed to mere Conditional Identity. An Hungarian surrounded by Hungarians feels Hungarian, but when is surrounded by non-Hungarians, he loses his Hungarian-ness and melds in with the new majority. In contrast, even when a Jew is removed from a Jewish environment and placed in a non-Jewish one, he is likely to retain his sense of who he is, where he came from, and why he must preserve his identity. Also, this Consciously Willed Identity is ‘democratic’ in the sense that it equally belongs to EVERY JEW, from the richest to the poorest. Jewish identity wasn’t owned by kings or elites but envisioned by Prophets and absorbed into the heart and mind of every Jew. In contrast, most gentiles relied on elites to define who they are. So, if the elites said, “We are all Christians now”, the masses just followed. Or, if the elites said, “Britishness now means any African or Muslim who wants to feed off the fat of UK”, the masses go along. In contrast, Jews don’t let the Jewish elites define what Jewishness is. Each Jew has a Consciously Willed Identity that is independent of elite formulations and manipulations. Alone among peoples and tribes, Jews gained in the power of identity when they were surrounded by gentiles. If the natural mode of history was for a people to become absorbed into the majority population, the Jews swam against this natural tide. Jews were like salmon that swims up against the stream to produce the next generation.
As Jews were a minority in most places, they could not have survived as a people & culture without an immense consciously willed identity. And this is why the Covenant was so crucial. It made Jewish identity not just ancestral, tribal, and territorial but spiritual. It was the sense that, wherever a Jew was in the world, he was blessed because of a unique connection to God, the maker of all the past, present, and future. So, if any people want to survive in the world awash in the tides of globalism, they need to formulate their own covenant. Without it, they will be conquered, absorbed, dispersed, and dissolved.
Anyway, it is now time to consider Diversity as a Disease. Such diagnosis wasn’t necessary in the past because diversity was limited and restricted in most of the West. Back then, a bit of diversity was seen as good for adding color, flavor, and stimulation. After all, what harm could a small number of Indians, Africans, or Arabs do in Paris or London? It added a bit of spice, a bit of variety and difference. And if diversity had been kept to such minimum, it would have been no problem. It would have been appreciated for adding a bit of accent to what is largely a united and ‘homogeneous’ society. It’s like a birthmark or even a scar can add a bit of character. Or even a tattoo, though I personally can’t stand them. The thing is, they don’t keep growing. A birthmark doesn’t get bigger and bigger. Scar doesn’t expand.
In contrast, the current Radical Diversity(or Inclusion) that has gripped the West is essentially cancerous. It keeps growing and growing. Just like cancer cells devour precious blood and spread to other parts of the body, Radical Diversity demands more and then more. There is no self-restraining mechanism that halts the process when it has reached a certain level. No, Radical Diversity insists on growing and growing until the original nation is forever dead and gone. In other words, Radical Diversity is hellbent on turning UK, France, Sweden, Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Spain, Italy, and etc. into New Afro-Islamica.
Also, once something has been set in motion on a grand scale, its momentum is such that it can no longer be stopped even if elites want to stop them. Imagine poking more and more holes into the dam until the dam finally breaks. Then, there is no way to stop the torrent even if one wants to. On the matter of history, it’s not just a matter of material power but moral will. If the wall of Moral Will has been fatally compromised and broken, Material Power is useless to push against the hostile forces. And this is the problem of the West. In terms of manpower and material force, the West can still easily push back against the invasive tide from Africa and Muslim nations. White people have more than enough material power to take down the Jewish globalists who are orchestrating the Demise of the West. But the Moral Will is no longer there. The Moral Dam has been busted. The cult of ‘white guilt’ instilled into every white boy and girl by media, academia, and the state has rendered most white people wussy and weak in the face of invasion.
Also, as ‘white guilt’ has encouraged whites to hate whites, there is no white unity or solidarity against non-whites.
Moral Will is crucial. Why is it that in traditional societies, the bigger and stronger son takes the beating from the weaker and older father or patriarch? It’s because the advantage of Moral Will is with the elder. So, the younger man, though stronger, would feel ashamed and guilty to strike a blow against the older man. Jews know how this psychology works. They know that guilt-ridden whites dare not strike against the Jewish minority and non-whites. White people who fear being called ‘racist’ or ‘anti-Semite’ would rather take a beating from their Moral Superiors — Jews, blacks, ‘immigrants’, and homos according to PC — than fight back. So, Jews, blacks, homos, and non-whites have been able to get away with so much bad behavior in the West.
But Jews know that morality alone is boring. It’s not ‘cool’. So, they other way they used to break down the White Wall was with Funky Booty and Afro-Ramrod. Jews promote black female funky-booty-call to shake and bring down the White Jericho Wall. And the Negro Dong is promoted to turn white men into a white cucks and white women into ‘mudsharks’. In current France, UK, Sweden, and Germany, white women are so into jungle fever and white men are into such cuckish admiration of black manhood that whites ecstatically welcome ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. Emmanuel Macron says the future of Europe must be Eurafrica, whereby black Africans arrive to beat up weaker white men and hump white women and use white wombs to produce black babies.
|Je suis un cuck. J’accueille les Africains à venir coloniser les utérus blancs.|
Supposedly, white men should accept this because blacks are the Master Race. One might find this logic a bit weird since PC often says ‘race is a social construct’ and calls for equality. But always judge people and movements by what they DO than what they SAY. In terms of what is really happening, the future dynamics is Africa is the Male/Penis and Europe is the Female/Vagina. The current culture says white women should emulate black women and shake their buttocks as mating calls to black men.
So, the Western Wall against Diversity has been destroyed by both Moral manipulation and Sensual assault. Even though things are pretty dire in UK and France, white people still have the numbers and necessary materials to drive out the invaders and restore racial, cultural, and territorial integrity. But they are helpless to do anything about it because their Moral Will has been paralyzed.
In contrast, the Vietnamese and Algerians were materially disadvantaged vis-a-vis the French Colonists in their struggle for independence, but they fought on and eventually triumphed because they had Moral Will. They felt utterly righteous and justified in resisting and pushing back against the white imperialist-colonists. As such, they felt no qualms about using ANY MEANS NECESSARY(even assassinations and terrorism) to drive out the enemy. They understood the Maoist dictum, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.” All orders seek peace and stability but were founded with Willed Violence.
Then, what is necessary in UK and France is for white natives to fight BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY to drive out the foreigners and Third World colonists. Also, it will be easier than it was for the Algerians and Viet Minh(and later Viet Cong) because whites have great material advantage over the foreigners in the West. The problem is lack of Moral Will because the West is no longer ruled by native elites but managed by cuck-collaborators of the EOJ or Empire of Judea. Jewish Globalists control the US that controls the EU, and they use European ‘leaders’ as comprador-collaborators to push what is essentially the Sorosian Plan of White Demise.
Europeans have been Puerto-Ricanized. They no longer feel any sense of national identity or unity. They just see themselves as faceless, colorless, and bloodless consumers of a vast empire of ‘diversity’, ‘inclusion’, ‘tolerance’, and other baby-talk charm-words. It is only when the native masses realize that they are not represented, defended, and served by genuine national elites but hoodwinked, manipulated, and led astray(to their own demise) by cuck-puppets of globalism that they many begin to wake up as scales fall from their eyes. The main responsibility of national leaders is to preserve and serve the people of the nation, not to have them invaded and replaced by foreigners. But look at Theresa May, Emmanuel Macros, and Angela Merkel. They all serve Jews who call on Europe to welcome Mass Invasion by Muslims & Africans and to be replaced by them. Imagine if Ho Chi Minh had been a lowlife puppet of the French, suppressed patriotic Vietnamese voices, and welcomed millions of Africans and Muslims to take over Vietnam. He would have been a lowlife piece of turd. Well, the ‘leaders’ of Current Europe are little more than pathetic cuck-dogs of the Empire of Judea.
Jews are master manipulators and know that it’s difficult to change a nation by brute force. If Jews had sent arms to Africans & Muslims and encouraged them to invade Europe, all of White Europe would have risen up and pushed back the invasion. So, how did Jews go about engineering the invasion of Europe? Jews spread Jungle Fever so that white women would be hankering for black men. And white boys, addicted to ‘black heroes’ in sports and rap, would come to believe that the ‘better men’, the Negroes, are more deserving of white women than white men are. Also, Jews gained control of media & academia and manipulated educated gentiles into believing that nothing is worse than ‘racism’. According to Jewish-controlled PC, ‘racism’ for whites could be ANY sense of identity, pride, and unity. Indeed, not only did Jews associate non-white Diversity with holiness but ‘pathologized’ any positive white feelings about being white as evil, sick, and ‘nazi’. If you can’t invade an Order with brute force, weaken it from the inside. Then, its defense mechanism will have been neutralized, and it can be easily invaded even by weak foreign bodies.
It’s like HIV. If the immune system goes, even minor germs can invade the body in huge numbers and bring about demise. The West is suffering from Civilizational AIDS. Judeo-Nazis buggered the West in the ass and transmitted the PC germ of anti-white HIV. Thus infected, the White National Polity is paralyzed of white identity, solidarity, territoriality, and pride. The very elites who should be, like Viktor Orban, working to defend and preserve the nation are working to favor the invasion of foreign bodies. It’s like a father of the house refusing to defend the home and his daughter but welcoming intruders and helping them hold down his daughter as she is raped. But Jews didn’t just target the elites but the masses. If Jews controlled elite minds through higher education, they controlled the masses through jungle fever. So, even if the white father tried to defend the house from marauders, the white daughter wants to open the backdoor to let them in so they can beat up her father and have orgies with her.
This is why the West is currently so hopeless. They still have the numbers and materials to hold back the Third World tide if they want to, but there is (1) No Moral Will to push back against the tide and (2) too much Sensual Addiction to Diversity(more restaurants) and Jungle Fever.
There are few things more frightening than Diversity-as-Cancer or Diversinoma. It is far worse than Diversititis, a condition that afflicts many nations with excessive diversity. The difference is a nation with Diversititis isn’t necessarily into having MORE diversity. It isn’t their national policy or something people worship as an ideal. Rather, it is a chronic condition that must be dealt with. Take Egypt, Indonesia, and India. All three suffer from Diversititis as there is too much diversity of races, tribes, clans, ethnic groups. But these nations are not calling for MORE Diversity. They have enough, and the main emphasis is making the best of a troubled and messy situation. Same goes for Iraq and Syria. Both nations have been torn asunder by diversity. Diversity-as-chronic-problem or Diversititis need not be fatal, but it’s one big headache. It’s like chronic backache. It won’t go away but with care can be managed. Or, it’s like Diabetes. It can’t be cured, but if one takes good care of oneself, a pretty decent life is possible. A person with backache doesn’t think MORE backache is good. A person with diabetes isn’t told to devour lots of sugar. Rather, they are told to manage it as a problem.
In contrast, the West is told that Diversinoma, the metastasizing cancer of Diversity, is the greatest thing in the world. Indeed, the fatal disease is sold by PC quacks as the magic cure. So, if the West is overcome with problems of Diversity, the PC cure is to have even MORE Diversity. It’s like telling a fat person that the cure to fatness is eating more food because the body burns calories to digest food. Never mind that all those digested calories add to more fat.
Well, it is time for us to say ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. We must call out the quack social doctors of PC and properly diagnose Diversinoma as a fatal disease for ANY nation. Any nation that is committed to endless ‘immigration’ by foreigners will die. It’s pure and simple. The process may be fast or slow, but if foreigners keep coming and coming(especially when natives aren’t having many kids), the natives will be overrun by foreigners who will take over the land. It is simple math that any elementary school student can understand. If you keep pouring prune juice into a beaker of orange juice, the orange juice will eventually be altered and replaced by prune juice. Indeed, we need look no further than the fate of Palestine. Initially, a few Jews trickled in, and it seemed like restricted diversity that hardly posed a threat to Arabs/Palestinians. But as more and more Jews arrived, it began to dawn on Palestinians that they could be replaced and reduced to minority status living under the power of Jews. Control of demography is the #1 responsibility of a nation. The example of Palestine(that was turned into Israel) is textbook case of this. Today, Jews see all the West as just a big West Bank. If West Bank is to be taken over by Jews, the West is to be taken over by non-whites so that Jews can play divide-and-rule among goyim while they themselves hog most of the power, wealth, and narrative.
There are many nations around the world dealing with the problem of Diversititis. There is excessive diversity, and there are many divisions along racial, ethnic, or religious lines. But things may be tolerable if Diversity is maintained as a chronic condition. After all, longevity breeds familiarity even among different peoples. So, if a nation has a diverse population, but the various peoples have been there for a long while and have learned how to tolerate, interact, and even interbreed with one another, a kind of balance can be maintained. Switzerland, for instance, has three major groups, but they’ve co-existed in the same nation for so long that they know how to get along. Same with Flemish and Walloons in Belgium. But if large numbers of new peoples enter the nation, the balance could be upset. Same in nature. An eco-system has competing organisms, but over time, a kind of balance has resulted among the surviving species. But suppose a wholly new set of organism invade the system. Then, it may take a long time for a new balance will be attained(that may well lead to the demise of previously existing organisms).
Diversititis, though not ideal, can maintain a certain equilibrium. To be sure, even if new peoples don’t enter the system, the balance among various groups could be lost if one group outbreeds the other. Consider how blacks in South Africa vastly outbred the whites. And Muslims outbred Christians in Lebanon, thereby turning a once largely Christian Arab nation into a majority Muslim one. Thus, even Diversititis is always problematic.
In some cases, Diversititis can be resolved by breakup of the nation into smaller units. The breakup of the Soviet Union was perhaps the most spectacular version of this. Breakup of Yugoslavia, far more violent, was a smaller version of resolution to Diversititis by national breakup into smaller national units.
Initially, Diversinoma may hardly seem a problem. After all, non-white immigration seemed negligible and easily manageable in Europe in the 1950s and 1960s. One could also argue that immigration policy back then were not in Diversinoma mode. In other words, there wasn’t, as yet, an ideology that elevated endless non-white immigration as a moral imperative. Immigrants were allowed on two basic grounds: (1) to fill in for native labor shortage (2) non-white collaborators of the empire seeking sanctuary from violent reprisals by national liberators, e.g. Algerians who’d collaborated with the French feared persecution following Algerian Independence.
With the fading of European empires and economic stagnation by the early 70s, there was no more need for immigration from non-white nations. But it was at this point that the moral and cultural paradigm began to shift. Non-white immigrants came to be championed as having the moral right to enter the West. They were given the moral high ground over the natives. Why?
One reason was the rapid rise in the prestige of Jews. The idea of Jews as a Holy Holocaust People began to take hold in the 70s. While Nazism was vilified almost universally after WWII, there had been the useful myth of National Resistance against the Nazis. The idea was that, despite the despicable phenomena of collaboration in every Nazi-occupied nation, most people had nobly suffered or resisted, in ways big and small, against the great evil. But Jews finally blew up this ‘myth’ in the early 70s, most notably with Marcel Ophul’s THE SORROW AND THE PITY. More than anything, it was this shift that instilled ‘white guilt’ in the European Soul. Europeans had maintained that, while some people collaborated, most had resisted. Thus, Europeans could regard themselves as fellow victims, along with Jews, of the Nazis. The new paradigm reversed the narrative and argued, while some people(especially communists) had courageously resisted, MOST had either collaborated in ways big or small. Or, if they didn’t collaborate, they were apathetic and uncaring, refusing to lift a finger to save Jews. Thus, European pride of victimhood soon vanished. Only Jews could claim to be the true victims of Nazis, and all Europeans had to share in the guilt of WWII for having collaborated with Nazis or not having done enough to contain or defeat Nazism. Thereafter, year after year, Shoah became ever more the new religion of Europe. Thus, each European nation was no longer seen as a homeland justified by blood and soil but a land of shame soiled by blood of Jews who were murdered by Nazis aided by heinous collaborators.
This mindset came to affect the issue of immigration as well. Just like black slavery and Indian ‘genocide’ in America were conflated with plight of Jews beginning in the late 60s and 70s, European imperialism and colonization were conflated with Nazi crimes. (European leftists even associated American military involvement in Vietnam as akin to Nazi genocide. Ironically, some European leftists even took up the Palestinian cause in the idea that Zionists had become like the new Nazis. They got so used to regarding Jews as noble-and-helpless-victims-for-all-eternity that the idea of militant Jews waging wars and defeating Arabs violated their much cherished Cult of the Holy Holocaust Jew.) Because of the Narrative that the imperialist(and even genocidal) West had ravaged the Third World and kept it in forced poverty — in other words, all of the West had acted like Nazis around the world — , something was owed to the darky folks. But foreign aid and investment were not enough. Non-whites had to be brought to the West and given jobs, education, and welfare. Jewish minorities found such people useful. They deflected attention from the Jewish minority, and also Jews could use them as Moral Shield by making a big fuss about how the White Majority is ‘racist’ and ‘bigoted’ against poor immigrant groups. Also, it was deemed unjust to bring only single workers. What if they had families and relatives in the Old Country? The humane thing seemed to unite families by bringing their relatives to the West as well. After some yrs, one might think the Guilt Factor would fade away. One thing for sure, the high unemployment rates no longer necessitated mass arrival of foreign workers. But by then, the argument for more immigration(turned into Mass Invasion) had less to do with redressing historical-moral deficit than affirming the notion that Diversity is good and wonderful in and of itself. Diversity was just good. So good that there was need for more and more of it. It didn’t matter if Diversity caused problems. The solution was More Diversity and more training for the native populations to try harder at accommodating Diversity. Diversity was so good and holy that even problems caused by Diversity could not be blamed on it. Rather, the blame was always to be found in the native white folks for not having done enough to make it work. So, they needed even more Diversity as both punishment and redemptive blessing. Once this cancerous logic took hold, Europe was in the grip of full-blown Diversinoma.
Could Diversinoma have been checked and reversed early on? There was Enoch Powell and his ‘River of Blood’ speech. Just like cancer need not be fatal if spotted and treated early, the problem of Immigration-turning-into-Mass-Invasion could have been stopped and reversed with the proper will and resolve. But there were few doctors in the house to sound the alarm and call for radiation treatment, chemo, and surgery to remove the tumor. And even if some people knew of the dangers, they were fearful to speak out because of the Narrative following WWII. The overwhelming intellectual and cultural climate of Europe was leftist for understandable reasons. Europe in the 20th century had been decimated by the vain ambitions of Imperial Powers in WWI and the mad ambition of radical racist Nazis in WWII that was also accompanied by ghastly Shoah. And then, the post-war violence of Resistance and Liberation in the Third World made even European nations that had been at war with Germany seem like the Other Nazis. Especially because the main Moral Narrative arising from WWII was that Good Peoples had come together to defeat ‘racism’(of the Nazis) as the greatest evil in the world, any whiff of ‘racism’ on their part became anathema. So, even if British, French, and others may not have carried out killings on the scale of Nazis, they also felt tainted by their history of ‘racism’, which, in moral terms, made them sin-cousins of the Nazis. Thus, anything unfavorably associated with immigration could be denounced as ‘Nazi’. If anyone voiced fear of non-white immigration, that was ‘racist’ therefore ‘crypto-nazi’. If anyone didn’t like race-mixing, that was ‘racist’ therefore ‘crypto-nazi’. If anyone feared being overwhelmed or outbred by non-whites, that was ‘racist’ therefore ‘crypto-nazi’. In short, whites no longer had any moral grounds to judge non-whites because whiteness had been so tainted, corrupted, and compromised by history of ‘racism’ that culminated in Nazism.
In such a moral climate, how could there be honest critics of Mass Invasion? They were quickly denounced as ‘racist’, therefore ‘crypto-nazi’. The only acceptable position for whites was to welcome non-whites, embrace non-whites, praise non-whites, provide for non-whites, understand non-whites, apologize to non-whites, forgive non-whites(even when they mess up), and etc. It followed the same pattern that made it nearly impossible to speak honestly-negatively about Jewish power. As ‘antisemitism’ came to regarded as a great sin, even the most honest assessment or criticism of Jewish power or history was taboo. Therefore, white Europeans had only one option left. They had to keep proving that they are not ‘racist’ by welcoming endless Mass Invasions by non-whites. Even though this was Demographic Imperialism and Mass Invasion, whites had to pretend as though they were providing sanctuary for ‘refugees’ not unlike Jewish victims seeking shelter from the Nazis.
Of course, it never made any sense. After all, the non-whites were not fleeing from Nazis or White Supremacists but from their own people. In some cases, especially after end of the Cold War, many of the refugees had been uprooted by Wars for Israel, which would indicate that Jewish Globalists are the New Nazis or Judeo-Nazis. Also, ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs would indicate an ideology of racial supremacy. After all, the New European Ideal of beautiful white women going with Negro men is premised on the ‘racist’ notion that black men are superior to white men in manhood department because they got louder voices, harder muscles, and bigger dongs. It suggests that white men need to step aside and give up their women in the spirit of ‘may the best man win’. Since Negro men are deemed by globalism to be better men than white men, the current ACOWW ideology is ‘racist’. But then, there never was consistent logic in PC.
Perhaps, it would have been better if men like Enoch Powell had talked more like Gandhi and Ho Chi Minh, arguing for national independence from foreign invasion. But this was difficult to pull off. After all, if Europeans invaded the Third World with guns and bombs, the non-white Mass Invaders mostly arrived poor, pitiful, and penniless. So, it seemed laughable and mean-spirited to many decent white folks for anyone to sound the alarm about how those poor sods were going to take over Europe. The novel THE CAMP OF THE SAINTS by Jean Raspail addressed this insidious threat. Though I haven’t read the book, it’s about how Europeans drop their guard because the invaders seem so poor, desperate, and pitiable. (For some reason, Raspail made the invaders a bunch of Hindus when, surely, he knew that Africans and Muslims posed the biggest demographic threat to Europe.) In a way, a full-blown military occupation is less dangerous than demographic invasion. The latter happens gradually but steadily, eventually threatening to displace the native population or disgrace it through race-mixing. Consider how the natives of Latin America are forever a disgraced people who’d been mass-‘raped’ by Latin invaders. And ACOWW is a total war on white manhood. As black men colonize white wombs, white men can only be sappy, wussy, benchwarming cucks to Negro men as the New Masters of the West. The way things are going in UK and France, all their great glories are on the verge of being appropriated by blacks. BBC is filled with historical epics and dramas that feature black men as kings, warriors, sages, and saints. Anglo-Saxons are turning into Junglo-Saxons. Megalomaniac blacks are made to feel entitled to take over the roles of white historical figures. Not only do UK and France encourage Afro-Colonization of White Wombs for the future but they retro-alter past history so that many great white heroes and heroines are turned into Negroes. Of course, Negroes see no injustice in any of this because their very nature is to feel entitled to take stuff from other races. Blacks feel entitled to steal and loot even the graves of other races. Blacks are both womb-raiders and tomb-raiders, and the cucky white males and jungle-feverish white females are encouraging this all over Europe.
And if you don’t comply with this New Normal? You are denounced as ‘far right’ or ‘racist’. It’s as if whiteness is a pathology or disease that can only be healed by blackness. Now, upon taking one good look at Africa, one is liable to think that blackness is the real pathology and disease where maintaining civilization is concerned. But black poverty in Africa only brings out sympathy and/or guilt among Europeans. Oh, those poor Negroes must be saved from poverty, or maybe they are poor and don’t have Wakanda because of past history of white imperialist exploitation. Thus, Negro poverty in Africa is either a reason to feel sorry for blacks or a reason for whites to feel guilty.
Also, there is a kind of attraction to the primal element of the Negro. Current Europeans feel soulless, shallow, and materialistic. They feel as IKEA-ans than blood-n-flesh humans. So, the only way they can feel re-connection with the juice of life is to have Negroes in the West shake their booties, hump everything that move, and infect white women with jungle fever.
It’s like the Apathetics in ZARDOZ have lost the vitality of life. Too much peace, complacency, and safety have made life dull and boring. So, when Zed(Sean Connery) is among them, they draw sustenance from him. Of course, he has really been sent into the Vortex to bring it down. But then, even the denizens of the Vortex come to see that the Order must fall because it is at odds with the way of nature. Thus, barbarian invasion, horrible as it is, does serve a purpose is smashing a secure but lifeless order.
Long ago, an overly civilized, ossified, or decadent orders were brought down by barbarians of same or similar race. So, the sacking of Rome wasn’t such a bad thing. Germanic Barbarians came to dominate, and Europe remained white. But the people who will play the most decisive role in the smashing of the lifeless and decadent Current Western Order are black Africans. Thus, the blacking of Europe will have far greater impact than the sacking of Rome. It will not be a case of white barbarians bringing down a decadent and sick white civilization and, in time, creating something even better. Rather, it will be about Western Civilization being brought down by black savages whose takeover will mean the end of civilization for good because black DNA is the most antithetical to order, philosophy, and civilization. Black culture has always been centered around the buns and dongs.
The West moved from Order to Decadence because the latter seemed liberating from traditional constraints and bourgeois manners. So, when British youths listened to Jazz and Rock n Roll in the 1940s and 1950s, they felt liberated and grateful to Negroes. And Modern Art loosened up cultural conventions and allowed for new possibilities. Back then, a bit of decadence seemed healthy and productive. After all, TOO MUCH of anything is bad. But at some point, decadence turned into the degenerative excesses of Punk Culture, family breakdown, gluttony, shameless ‘sluttony’, mainstreaming of porno-sensibility, and rise of Trash as Main Culture. Worse, it combined with neo-puritanical PC. This makes UK one of the sickest and strangest nations on Earth. It is one of the most infantile, beastly, trashy, shameless, dissolute, and ugly — barbarism turning into savagery — , but it doesn’t even have the primal virtue of vulgarism: Candid and forthright talk. Even if barbarians have no manners, they can be refreshing in speaking freely and laying it all out like it is. It’s like a vulgarian belching and breaking wind. Unpleasant but, at the very least, honest and open about what his body must do. And indeed, one of the few virtues of rise of Counterculture and Punk Culture was the spirit of anarchy, freedom, and uninhibited expression. Consider the sheer zaniness and irreverence of Monty Python.
But something happened. The System decided to maintain the neo-barbarism — the elites also found it too fun, and of course, the entertainment industry found it too profitable — but curtail certain tendencies and restrict free expression that mocked certain new sacred cows, especially Jew-Worship(aka Judeovah, or Jews-as-jehovah), Black Reverence(aka Afroyalty, or black Africans as new natural royalty of the West), and Homo Celebration(aka Fairitocracy, or fruitkin fairies as the new aristocracy of the globalized West). Those are the Permanent Holy Three, but other groups can get some sympathy, on and off, depending on the political climate and expediency. Because Muslims aren’t very bright & rich, not dominant in sports & music, and not famous for creativity(esp in fashion and pop culture), there is no special feeling for them in the hedonistic, narcissistic, and megalomaniacal West. But there are many of them in the EU, and they must sometimes be heard. (It could be that Muslims resort to Terror in the West because they usually go ignored UNLESS they commit acts of violence. After all, Jews are always important because of their elite power, wealth, and of course Shoah Cult. And blacks always get jungle-feverish-and-cuckish love from whites because they dominate sports and pop music. And homos are at the center of Pop Culture because so many gravitate to Vice-and-Vanity Industry.
In contrast, Muslims, despite their rising numbers, get no love and respect from the white community. Therefore, the only way they can get some attention is by blowing up stuff or mowing people down with trucks. It just goes to show that Diversity doesn’t guarantee equal affection to all peoples. Some groups must do something really outlandish to appear on the social-cultural radar. It’s like kids in a family. Suppose out of five kids, four get the love for being either smart, pretty, funny, or athletic. But the fifth kid is ignored and made to feel insignificant. Then, the ONLY way he can get attention is by doing something crazy like burning down the house.)
Anyway, current UK is a totally debased society of foul and shameless behavior on so many social and cultural fronts. There’s been so much family breakdown, so much rise of degeneracy. And yet, it can’t even enjoy the benefit of the primal virtue of vulgarism. Consider the figure of Count Dankula, a truly gross figure splattered with tattoos and piercings. He represents everything that is ugly and demented about new Britain. And yet, one real(if lowly) advantage of vulgarism is the spirit of freedom, irreverence, and the uninhibited middle-finger to stuffy social conventions. Or so Count Dankula thought when he made infantile videos about making his pug do the ‘Nazi salute’ to commands of ‘Heil Hitler’ and ‘Gas the Jews’. It was the sort of thing Sid Vicious might have done in the 1970s just to provoke people or be a jerk. But no, the State went after Dankula for ‘hate speech’. So, UK now allows and encourages the most demented, ugly, stupid, trashy, porny, and infantile speech and expression — much of pop culture revolves around black thuggery, jungle fever, homo degeneracy, feminist vaginal obsessions, slut pride, anti-white vitriol, and etc — BUT it won’t allow ‘hate speech’ that is to be defined and determined by neo-Victorian stuff-shirts in the institutions of academia, media, and government. It reminds me of that Onion satire that complains about foul language in pornography by ‘Maggie Lehman’: https://entertainment.theonion.com/why-do-porn-actors-have-to-use-such-foul-language-1819583928#_ga=2.218135578.2072781814.1524769152-1002042756.1524769152
Thus, UK has managed to be both hoity-toity and porny-horny at the same time. In the past, the hoity-toiters used snobbery and repression to control the barbarian energies of the masses and to defend the homeland from foreigners. Back then, even fellow European Germans were considered as barbaric ‘Huns’. Today, the hoity-toiters still put on doopity-pippy-poo manner and sip tea and nibble on crumpets BUT they praise spread of barbarism and savagery(as long as they don’t mock Judeovah, Afroyalty, Fairistocracy, and intermittently Angry Muslims threatening to blow something else up unless they get some love), welcome mass invasion from backward and even truly savage nations of Africa, and dismantle all the national mechanisms of patriotism, pride, and normalcy that can save Britain. And with fading of religion — the Anglican Church is now just a nest of Homomania-pushers — , decline of the family, loss of culture, and fading of history(or vilification of white history or vindication of white history ONLY BY retro-blackening white historical characters), the only Culture left standing for the majority of Britons is Pop Culture. Worse, if Pop Culture of yesteryear represented Britishness, maturity, and morality(like in the films of David Lean and Carol Reed), the new Pop Culture is all about promotion of Homo degeneracy, Jungle Fever & ACOWW, the endless cult of Holocaust, Slut Pride, feminist vaginal pseudo-covenant or ‘cuntinant’, and mindless faith in Diversinoma as the best cure and Inclusion as morally necessary invasion.
So, the British people have been turned into beasts without even the liberation of being free like wild animals. Rather, British people are now like a horse ridden by Jews, Homos, and blacks. Or, it’s like a cow that was promised freedom but has a ring stuck through its nose to be dragged around by PC commissars. George Orwell wrote ANIMAL FARM as satire on Stalinist totalitarianism, but UK today is more like THE ISLAND OF DR. MOREAU. People have been turned into animals(made even more so by promotion of ACOWW that will turn Anglo-Saxons into Junglo-Saxons and make UK look like Morocco) but also trained to obey. The long-term result of this will be Jungle vs Jihad. As white people are now so decadent, soulless, vapid, and demoralized, they have no means to say NO to the African power of the Jungle. If anything, they are addicted to blackness as the heat-drug as whiteness, they’ve been told, is cold, dull, frigid, and lifeless without sucking vitality from other races. So, whites can’t hold back the demented influence of the Jungle. The ONLY people with the spine, courage, will, and pride to say NO to the Jungle is the Jihad, the power of Muslims. Currently, Jungle and Jihad are in a crude and uneasy alliance as both share the common interest of gaining access to the West. And Jungle and Jihad are also in uneasy alliance with Jude because Jews push Diversity to create gentile-divisions that they can exploit and manipulate. In the long run, it will be a war among Jungle, Jihad, and Judea. Whites, castrated and cucked, haven’t the spine to say NO to Judea as it’d be ‘antisemitic’, to Jungle as it’d be ‘racist’, and to Jihad as it’d be ‘Islamophobic’. So, with each year, white power will dwindle as its puts out to Jewish brains, black muscle & dongs, and Muslim threats. Can Judea, Jungle, and Jihad co-exist once white power is totally gone? Unlikely. In Africa, there is either the rule of Jungle(in most of Sub-Saharan Africa) or Jihad(mainly in North Africa where Arabs and even black Arabs use ruthless violence to keep the Jungle at bay).
When it comes to Diversititis, the chronic condition of problematic Diversity, there is no permanent fix or cure in the absence of massive civil war that leads to a bloody breakup of the existing national entity in separate parts. This is exceedingly difficult if the diverse populations are dispersed and mixed throughout the land. But a breakup of a diverse nation can be reasonably simple IF the various peoples occupy and dominate their own regions. This is why the breakup of the Soviet Union was relatively painless. Lithuania was mostly made up of Lithuanians, Georgia was mostly made up of Georgians, Armenia was mostly made up of Armenians, and etc. Even though there had been extensive population transfers during the Soviet era, most of the non-Russian Republicans had a solid ethnic majority. Some violence did flare up in border areas among republics with mixed populations, as with the case with Armenians and Azerbaijanis. In the case of Yugoslavia, the breakup ranged from painless to painful. Slovenia’s independence from Yugoslavia was relatively painless, not unlike the voluntary decision among Czechs and Slovaks to go separate ways. As most of Slovenia was made up of Slovenians, its withdrawal from Yugoslavia went smoothly. The biggest problem was in Bosnia that had large numbers of Croatians, Serbs, and Muslims who were, furthermore, interspersed throughout the region. Even to this day, the problems in Bosnia have not been fully resolved, and a very uneasy truce remains. Anyway, Bosnia is a case of permanent Diversititis. No single group can come to dominate as the majority in the foreseeable future. So, the best option is for the various groups to find ways to tolerate one another, respect each other’s spaces, restrain one’s own resentments, and develop better ways of inter-group communication and cooperation. Bosnia is an obvious case that Diversity sows seeds of discord. Still, it’s my understanding that it is in a state of Diversititis than Diversinoma. After all, the people there already know of the problems of Diversity. Why would they believe it’d be a good thing to bring in MORE Diversity when enough is enough?
In a society chronically infected or overcome with Diversititis, the only option is the coping mechanism. People must learn to cope with the tensions and conflicts. If they can’t, there will be violence and counter-violence and endless cycles of vendetta. A society racked with Diversititis will never be a Trust Society or an orderly one, but if the various peoples arrive at modicum ways to respect one another and even appreciate each other’s differences and find ways to complement one another by trading in good and services of ethnic niche specialties — for example, suppose one group is better at running restaurants while another group is better at white collar work — , then tensions can be minimized and relative peace can prevail. Diversititis generally undermines the Rule of Law as groups tend to favor ‘my group’ over common interests, but in some cases, it can boost Rule of Law because the Law is the only thing that the various groups can agree on as they differ so much in customs, manners, and attitudes. Lacking cultural consensus, there is only recourse to legal consensus, at least if the various peoples are willing to submit to the letter of the Law that has been sincerely agreed upon by all sides as being fair and balanced.
Even so, outcomes can upset the legal balance. Consider the Fireman Promotion Exam that had been approved by whites, blacks, and browns as fair prior to the test-taking but was immediately denounced as ‘racist’ when blacks and browns performed far below their white counterparts. Diversititis will always lead to headaches, frustrations, and recriminations. This is why no society should push for more Diversity.
But many parts of the world have become irreversibly and irreparably diverse due to imperialism, invasion, or careless drawing of maps. Every Latin American nation is the product of European imperialism, Atlantic Slave Trade, and Mass Immigration-invasion. And Europeans did a reckless job of drawing crazy maps in the Middle East that maximized diversity than homogeneity. Absent massive wars that lead to profound movements of peoples or redrawing of maps, the peoples of all such nations must learn to cope with Diversititis.
But coping isn’t enough with Diversinoma. It’s like one cannot cope with cancer. It has to be stopped and reversed OR the patient will surely die. If UK were to halt all further Mass Invasion, it might be able to cope with its already considerable Diversititis. Whites are still the majority, and they might be able to accept the long-term presence of non-whites who may or may not assimilate into the white cultural fabric.
Of course, the problem is British obsession with manners and politeness renders it bad form for the Brits to ‘rudely’ demand that the foreigners assimilate to British ways. To be sure, past Brits had pride of chauvinism and felt justified in berating the inferior ‘darkies’ to try to live up to superior white standards. It wasn’t considered bad form for whites to express their sense of cultural and even racial superiority and exert pressure on non-whites to improve themselves to act less like stupid ‘wogs’ and more like ‘Englishmen’. But such attitudes are simply no longer allowed among whites in the UK, so the only thing left is the good manners, which, without the backing of gruff pride or haughty honor, come across as weakness. Today, non-whites in the UK see White Culture as either HARRY POTTER-ish childishness or Benedict-Cumberbatchy wussiness. The sickening-looking Cumberbatch profusely apologized for having said ‘colored people’ than ‘people of color’. They get no respect because they don’t exude power. People, especially non-whites from brutish societies, only respect signs of might. When they see white people looking stricken, apologetic, and racked with guilt-and-doubt, they don’t feel respect or gratitude. They just feel contempt for the weak wussy white boy, especially because their peoples had, for so long, believe in the Great White Man. Sure, whiteys were the Big Bad Imperialists, but they were also the Magnificent Warriors and Administrators who’d once conquered and ruled the world. But now, non-whites see all these sorry-ass cucky-wuck boys in the UK. What passes for British Conservatism is Milo the ‘gay’ Jew and Andrew Sullivan taking black dongs up their bungs. Or, it’s that harridan witch Theresa May whose toxicity is aimed ONLY at the white native population.
Anyway, it’s worse than that because what the UK has is not a bad condition of Diversititis but a full-blown case of Diversinoma. As if things aren’t bad enough already, the Official Ideology of the UK calls for MORE Mass Invasion to be followed by yet MORE Mass Invasion and more and more. Jewish globalists and their cuck-collaborators have convinced so many white British that the UK had been a ‘nation of immigrants’ from the beginning. Also, so many white Brits are so bored with themselves that they want color, flavor, and distractions of Diversity. The more the better, like people addicted to drugs must have more and more even when the drugs are killing them.
Also, ‘white guilt’ about past imperialism has produced a Narrative that says non-whites have a moral right to invade and take over UK as historical revenge/justice. And there is also Jungle Fever among white women that want sex with big-donged Negro men and ACOWW or Afro-Colonization of White Wombs. And there are plenty of cucky British men who welcome this because, in a way, servility has been one of the characteristics of Britishness. After all, the British could not have come to dominate the world if they were all Alpha-male warriors. No, the bulk of the British people had to be drilled and disciplined to obey, follow orders, and tip their hats and say “aye guv’nor” when a social superior passed by. In the past, most Brits were cultivated to regard higher-class members, clergy, and officers as superior people worthy of respect. But White Prestige, especially of white males, faded long ago, and the new gods of British neo-royalty is Diversity, Inclusion, White Guilt, Afromania, and Homomania. (Among Conservatives, it is Jew-Worship above all.) So, British culture of disciplined servility that had served the British Empire so well is now in the service of other gods. Especially due to influence of black pop music and black domination in sports, many Brits now revere blacks as the natural royalty. Afroyalty is their new gods and kinds, which is why BBC shows feature British historical figures played by blacks. White Brits worship blacks so much that they believe the great heroes and legends of their own history must be cast with blacks who are superior in raw power.
Also, Diversity has a moral appeal to both the white have-nots and white have-mores. Among the have-nots and Leftist intellectuals, hugging Diversity is an easy way of virtue-signaling against the rich whites. Resentful of privileged whites and Jews who hog most of the wealth and privilege, the poorer whites and leftist intellectuals claim greater moral treasure by parading their ‘compassion’ for the darkies. But then, the rich whites play a similar kind of game. By hugging Diversity(from a distance, of course), they snobbily claim moral superiority over the ‘racist’ and ‘xenophobic’ white working class that is none-too-happy to see their hometown communities colonized by a bunch of bloody ‘wogs’. So, both the ‘left’ and the ‘right’, the ‘upper’ and the ‘lower’ weaponize Diversity for its own purposes. Because whiteness has been so disgraced and discredited, white Britons of any ideological faction must wave the Diversity flag to earn righteous Pokemon points. At the very least, especially if one isn’t to keen on Diversity, one has to cling to Jews(and homos) and argue that one’s opposition to continued Mass Invasion is to save Jews and Homos from Muslim Terrorists. But this is not a winning strategy because Jewish Power is fully behind Mass Invasion and Diversity. And the great majority of Homos are into Diversity. Even if Mass Invasion may not be good for homos in the long run, the very nature of homos tends to favor colorful diversions than deep-rooted sense of belonging. Homo nature is innately disloyal because, after all, homosexuality itself is a betrayal of nature and the way of life.
Unlike Diversititis, there is no way to cope with Diversinoma. It has to be identified. It has to be diagnosed as the most fatal disease that can afflict a nation. It portends and promotes the total destruction of the nation. It is immeasurably worse than the spread of bad ideology or destruction by war. Both Russia and China suffered under the ideology of communism, but they recovered. Ideology eventually blows away. Russia remained Russia after communism. China is still China.
Also, nations recovered from the most horrible destruction by war. Japan and Germany rebounded quickly. Britain recovered as well following WWII. Poland, which had been steamrolled by every great power, recovered.
But Diversinoma will lead to the total and permanent transformation of a nation, and the effects will be irreversible. There is no way Palestinians can ever take back their lost homeland again. There is no way Serbians can have Kosovo again. And if things go on as they are, the Brits, the French, Germans, and Swedes will lose their ancient homelands for good.
Now, the newly transformed nation may still have a working economy or even a bigger one, BUT the original and core ethnos, identity, and culture will be lost forever. They will survive in pockets and fragments but will be much degraded and, at any rate, will not command the center of what the nation is about. Suppose 10 million Chinese were to move to Nepal. The economy may greatly expand, but it will never be Nepal as unique people-and-culture ever again.
Because humans are organisms and because organisms are invasive, there are invasions afoot all over the world, especially from poor to rich nations. That, in and of itself, doesn’t constitute Diversinoma. Likewise, the human body experiences invasion by germs and toxicity at all times, and some cells act irregular and weird. The body is always under threat from something, internal and external. But the body manages to fend off most germs and restore equilibrium to maintain health. Cancer happens when this balance is lost. For some reason, the body fails to limit the growth of a malignant tumor. The tumor keeps growing and growing, and cancer cells begin multiplying and multiplying. And the body feeds the cancer cells with blood. Even as white blood cells continue to wage a valiant war on cancer cells, other parts of the body help cancer cells to grow. The bloodstream is carrying them all over the body.
Now, the body is no longer able to regulate itself to control or reverse the cancer. It has taken hold of the body, and its colony of cells keep multiplying and spreading to other parts of the body. Indeed, much of the body is mistaken in treating cancer cells as welcome parts of the body. Over time, more of the body assents to the spread of cancer cells than cooperates with white blood cells to fight the spread of cancer. And then, even the lymph nodes that are supposed to serve as a immune system are taken over by cancer cells, and it becomes hopeless. Diversinoma works the same way.
This is why Diversinoma has to be diagnosed and identified as soon as possible. And the nation-as-patient must be warned right away as to what must be done to reverse the process. Since the regular functions of the nation can no longer fend off Diversinoma — just like a cancer-stricken body can no longer fight off cancer on its own — , a special draconian treatment is necessary to save the patient-nation.
Consider the UK. It’d be nice if the elites and the people were woke to what is happening to their nation, call an end to Mass Invasion, restore white pride(as white blood cells of the nation), expose Jewish globalist wickedness, denounce ACOWW, and began the process of sending the non-white colonizers back to their nations of origin, just like non-white nations had once expelled European colonizers from their own lands.
But the cancer has spread to the elites and to so many people. The elites are cuck-collaborators of wicked Jewish globalist masters who rule EOJ or Empire of Judea, the most powerful world empire, of which even the US is a vassal. As for the British masses, so many of them have been turned by the 2 PCs — Pop Culture and Political Correctness — into Negro-worshiping, Homo-worshiping, and Diversity-worshiping dogs and sheeple. Their bodies and souls have been drained of patriotism and noble race-ism. Their passions are roused ONLY WHEN they listen to black jungle music, get hysterical at homo parades, or spot a ‘nazi’ or ‘racist’, which is ANY white person who is a patriot and doesn’t want Britain to be invaded and colonized by non-white hordes. Patriots are attacked by Parrots.
Therefore, the only way to save a nation like UK is by extraordinary means. At this point, the patriots must learn from the Algerians who resisted French colonization, the Viet Minh & Viet Cong that fought against French Imperialists and American Occupiers. As the UK is ruled by Jews and cuck-collaborators and as the UK media & academia are controlled by ideological quacks who keep assuring the British people that cancer is the cure(!), the savior and the medicine must come from extraordinary individuals form unexpected places.
In the coming decades, the stakes will be super-high. It will decide if the UK can be cured of the hideous cancer of Diversinoma or succumb to it totally and become just an European version of Paki-Africa. What Winston Churchill and the British people underwent in WWII was nothing compared to the dangers that the Brits face now. In the past, even in the case of worst possible scenario of Germans having invaded Britain, it wouldn’t have been so bad. As Germans respected Anglos as fellow-brethren, most Britons would have been treated nicely. And in time, the Germans would have left after setting up a friendly regime(just like the US Occupation of Japan and Germany ended after it installed pliable governments). Germans had no plan to racially or culturally destroy Core Britain. But that is exactly the plan of Jews, Africans, and Muslims. Jews seek to maximize Diversity to play divide-and-rule. It is also revenge for all those yrs of Anglo prejudice and snobbery, subtle if not always blatant, toward Jews. Jews want to see Anglo men humiliated by having to watch their daughters turn into shameless sluts whose wombs produce black babies. And of course, Africans love to leech off whites in the UK. They also love to beat up weaker whites and colonize white wombs. They feel as the physical champions of New Britain. And Muslims seek to keep coming and take over entire streets and spread Sharia in a nation that they deem to be decadent and lost.
If current demographic and cultural trends continue, it will truly be the fall of Britain. While the Nazis did pose a genuinely genocidal threat to Russians and other Slavs, they only demanded compliance and alliance from the UK. Indeed, the UK would have done better to ally with Germany in WWII if its only interest was narrow self-interest. Now, given the radical evil of Nazi Germany, the Brits were right to forge alliances even with the USSR to defeat Nazi Germany. Still, it must be stressed over and over that Germany posed no real threat to the survival of the British people, culture, and nation EVEN IF the UK had fallen to the Germans. The real threat of replacement, colonization, and extinction of Britain comes from EOJ or the Empire of Judea, the agenda of which is to turn UK into Othellonia. Unless a significant number of Brits wake up to the danger of Diversinoma and commit themselves fully to the struggle as Ho Chi Minh had done to the national independence of Vietnam, the UK will lost be lost forever in the coming decades. If the future is to be won and secured, there must be men like Noah, Moses, Samson, and King David. There must be heroes like Arthur and Perceval. There must be prophets like Enoch Powell. There must be barbarian lords willing to lay down their lives in the war against the decadent cuck elites who serve not the people & nation but the evil Soros-like sorcerers of EOJ. British patriots must wake up everyday reminding themselves, “Once a nation is lost demographically, it is lost forever.”
A simple children’s game can easily demonstrate the ideal conditions for World Peace: More Homogeneity or More Diversity? To find the answer, just get yourself a map.
The game is played thus:
Take a good look at Europe on the map. Now, erase all national borders until all of Europe is one landmass without divisions. Then, redraw national borders to either…
(1) Maximize homogeneity
(2) Maximize diversity.
You can draw borders around where the bulk of Polish people live to maximize Polish Homogeneity OR you can draw borders so that what is now Poland is broken up into 5 parts, each of which is included with OTHER nations that are also made diverse.
If you go for Maximizing Homogeneity, your newly drawn Poland will be mostly Polish.
But if you go for Maximizing Diversity, your nation will include a part of Poland, part of Germany, part of Hungary, part of Czech Rep, part of Ukraine. Polish people, instead of having a nation in which they are the solid super-majority, will become like the Kurdish people who are scattered among other nations.
You might do the same with Germany until there is no single Germany in which most Germans are situated. Instead, Germany would be divided into five or six parts and joined with other nations made up of diverse peoples, not unlike the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Now, which will be more socially peaceful, culturally meaningful, and politically more stable? A Poland where Polish people and culture are maximally homogenized or an entity where Polish people are divided and included as minorities in six other nations(in which no people are a majority)?
I think the answer is pretty obvious. Polish people with a nation of their own are likely to feel far more content, secure, and happy than if Polish nation is dissolved and if Polish people are divided and included as minorities into a bunch of nations filled with diversity of Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Ukrainians, Slovenians, Croatians, etc.
A nation may gain something by having minorities, but it’s always good to have a super-majority who define the identity, character, culture, and heritage of a nation and people. After all, don’t we pity the Kurds because they don’t have a nation in which they are the solid majority and can feel at home? Instead, they are scattered in nations like Turkey, Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Afghanistan. As a minority in each country, they always feel oppressed or marginalized. And other people look upon them with suspicion and hostility. Indeed, let’s play this game in the Middle East where much of the problem stems from maps(drawn by Western Imperialists) that maximized diversity than homogeneity. Was that a good idea? Well, just ask the Kurds who are a thorn on the side of every nation in which they constitute a sizable minority and to whom every nation seems like a boot pressed upon their face.
Anyway, let’s suppose we are back in 1918 after World War I. Suppose we have the chance to draw borders in the Middle East to create new nation-states. We have two choices. We can draw borders to
(1) Maximize Homogeneity in every nation
(2) Maximize Diversity in every nation.
Which would be the wiser option? To draw the borders on the map so as to give Kurds their own nation(or at least one where they are the overwhelming majority) OR to break up Kurdish-populated areas to be included into other nations designed for maximum diversity?
When we look at the current mess in the Middle East, the answer is pretty obvious. If the map of the Middle East had been drawn to maximize homogeneity after WWI, much of the political problems, at least pertaining to ethnic and/or sectarian conflicts, could have been avoided or at least greatly reduced. Take Iraq. If the imperialists had allowed a separate Kurdish nation, had united Sunni Arabs in Iraq with Sunnis in Syria, and if Shia Arabs in Iraq had been given their own nation, there would have been far greater stability. Instead, imperialists created nations like modern Syria, modern Iraq, modern Afghanistan, and etc. to be excessively diverse. As such, only an iron-fisted strongman could keep the peace as democratic experimentation would have led to divisions along ethnic lines.
How things might have been different if, following WWI, the Europeans had carefully surveyed the demographic reality of the entire region and drawn national maps to ensure that one particular group would be the overwhelming majority of every new nations. If Kurds in what is now Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, and maybe even Turkey(if Turkish resistance could have been overcome) would have been given a nation of their own, they would be far happier and securer. They would be causing far less trouble to their neighbors and vice versa.
Now, let’s play this game in crazy-quilt region of Southeast Asia. Suppose we erase the current map and draw new borders to either
(1) Maximize Homogeneity
(2) Maximize Diversity.
Would it be better to draw maps to create a maximally homogeneous nation for Vietnamese, a maximally homogeneous nation for Cambodians, maximally homogeneous nation for Laotians, maximally homogeneous nation for Thais, maximally homogeneous nation for Burmese, OR would it be better to draw arbitrary borders so that one nation(shaped like a longitudinal snake) is created that is demographically 1/5 Vietnamese, 1/5 Cambodia, 1/5 Thai, 1/5 Burmese, etc.
Which would be the wiser option? A nation that is as homogeneous as possible for each people OR a bunch of nations that is made of maximally diverse populations?
Would it be better for Vietnamese to have Vietnam, Cambodians to have Cambodia, Thais to have Thailand, Laotians to have Laos, and etc., OR would it better for there to be several nations in which every group is a minority? So, instead of the Vietnamese having a nation to call their own, Vietnamese people would be dispersed, like Kurds, among other nations filled with diversity?
We can also play this game with Northeast Asia. Currently, Korea is divided in half because the US, after Japanese defeat, split the nation with the Soviet Empire. If European imperialists forced different peoples into a single nation in the Middle East and Africa, Americans divided one people into two peoples in Korea.
But suppose there is a chance for great change on the peninsula. What would make more sense? To erase the border between North Korea and South Korea and form one nation composed of people of shared ethnos, language, and history… OR to join North Korea with Manchuria and to join South Korea with Japan? If we want to maximize homogeneity, North Korea and South Korea should merge. But if we want to maximize Diversity, North Korea should be added to Manchuria and South Korea should be added to Japan(like Ireland used to be joined to Great Britain). What would be better? To maximize homogeneity or to maximize diversity?
What does history tell us? I think even a child would figure this out. Maximizing Homogeneity wherever possible has been the best formula for peace within nation and with other nations. The threat to world peace usually happens when nationalism is violated in favor of imperialism. Imperialism causes diversity by invading other nations or by turning one’s nation into some cosmopolitan center welcome to all… in which case foreigners arrive to take advantage and eventually take over demographically, which is exactly what has happened in many cities and towns in France, UK, Sweden, and Germany.
Finally, let’s play this game with Israel and neighboring nations. Suppose we erase all existing borders and draw new ones. We can draw borders to maximize homogeneity or to maximize diversity for each people. Now, what would be better? To draw borders to maximize, say, Jewish homogeneity in Israel or to break up Israel into three parts and include each with other geo-political entities for the purpose of more diversity?
Now, suppose northern third of Israel is joined with Lebanon and parts of Syria. The middle third of Israel is joined with Jordan and a part of Saudi Arabia. And the southern third of Israel is joined with a part of Egypt and a part of Libya.
So, would it be better to draw maps to maximize Homogeneity of Jews within a nation to call their own OR to divide up Israel and Jews(like Kurds) and turn them into minorities in diverse nations?
Now, isn’t the main problem facing Israel due to diversity caused by Occupation of West Bank?
The answer is SO OBVIOUS, but Jewish globalist elites pressure the entire world to maximize diversity(except for Israel where Jews support JEWS-ONLY immigration to maximize homogeneity). Why do Jews give such bad advice when it’s bad for gentile nations? Because it is good for the designs of Jewish Globalist Supremacism. When nations turn overly diverse, it’s easier for Jews to manipulate in divide-and-conquer fashion. Also, a diverse nation hardly has any useful nationalism. Because the various groups don’t trust one another, they tend not to unite as ONE PEOPLE but forge alliances with foreigners and imperialists to gain an advantage.
This is why Jews find homos so useful. Because homos feel alienated in many nations, they will gladly collaborate with World Jewry that showers them with money and favors. As such, homos around the world have effectively become the proxies of Jewish supremacism.
This is why truly independent and autonomous nations like Russia, Iran, China, and now Turkey do NOT allow the US(the primary tool of Judea or World Jewry) to force Homomania on them. Turkey used to allow ‘gay pride’ parades but finally stood up to World Jewry and said NO. But puppet-whore nations of the US, such as Germany-UK-Italy-Japan-Mexico-Ukraine-S. Korea-Taiwan-UK-etc. all put on massive Homomania festivals. If Uncle Samowicz tell them they better, they better.
Jews know that a patriotic and unified people can stand together against Jewish infiltration. That’s why Jews do everything to weaken and dilute gentile national identity. Jews do this by spreading Homomania that says Minority Privilege must take precedence over Majority Values. Jews also use Afromania to make people all over the world addicted to rap music, black sports, and jungle fever. Afromania destroys the manhood of non-black gentiles around the world because black rappers sing louder, black athletes got more muscle, and black hustlers got bigger dongs.
And of course, Jews try to promote Holocaustianity as a neo-religion all over the world so that every people will feel sorry and ‘guilty’ about Jews. And then, once a nation’s identity and patriotism have been weakened, Jews use their immense power of media, academia, and finance to brainwash the gentile elites into believing that DIVERSITY is not only a great boon but a moral necessity.
The result is something like the disastrous experiment taking place in Sweden, a nation where hideous feminists rule, where men are castrated cucks, and where endless streams of invaders are ‘welcomed’ as adding more wonderful Diversity to the nation. Well, goodbye to Sweden. With Jews, You Lose.