What a great lost opportunity, the role that Jews around the world could have played in the post-Cold War order. If any people were poised to play this role, it was the Jews, especially in partnership with Anglos, the greatest empire builders in history. Anglos and Jews, more than any other people, on the basis of their traits, training, and trial-and-error, could have facilitated a New World Order of peace and prosperity for mankind. The tragic waste of this chance in history may yet lead to major crises in the 21st century that may rival the worst horrors of the last century. Hopefully, the emerging great powers will manage to deflect and defuse the confrontations provoked by the Jewish-Supremacist controlled West.

An obvious problem is the current nature of Jewish Power. It is in supremacist mode, made worse(and more complicated) as a hide-and-seek kind of supremacism, i.e. even as Jews devise and execute policies based on supremacist objectives with the backing of the white managerial class, they employ the smoke-and-mirrors of ‘wokeness’ to perpetuate the illusion that they, as the Eternal Holy Holocaust People, are the best friends of the ‘marginalized’ groups against the ‘far right’ and ‘white supremacism’.

In truth, it’s long been the case that most white(and goy) politicians in Washington D.C. have been little more than obedient dogs to their Jewish masters. It’s no wonder those brown-nosing cucks cheer on the mayhem in Gaza and the Judeo-Nazi alliance in Ukraine in total appeasement to the Jews as the Exceptional People. Yes, the very same Jews who hold endless conferences warning of the specter of evil-white-this and evil-white-that.
Of course, the bulk of Jewish ire isn’t directed at ‘Neo-Nazi skinheads’, an endangered species in the West(and nearly wiped out in Ukraine by the Russian military) but at any white person who wants out from the Maggie’s Farm of Jewish Supremacism overseen by the likes of Ben Shapiro, Bill Maher, Rachael Maddow, and Jonathan Greenblatt with their media bullwhips.

If you reject the Jewish-Supremacist-engineered White Nakba, aka the Great Replacement, and would rather preserve your homeland, you’re designated as ‘far right’, and if you want no part in wars instigated by Jewish Supremacists around the world, you’re likely an ‘isolationist’. (Remember that Neocons reviled MAGA, at least in its initial incarnation, mainly for its generally antiwar platform.) And if you name the Jewish Power, you are an ‘Anti-Semite’.
To demonstrate that you’re no such evil thing, you must support not only the idea of the Jewish Homeland(or nationhood for Jews, most of whom deny nationhood for goyim, especially Europeans and Palestinians) but also the endless Jewish or Zionist aggressions in any part of the world. And, keep pretending that Israel never does wrong, the corollary of which is that whatever Zionists do is right. (There you go, the Zionist definition of right-and-wrong. If Jews do it, it’s right. If Jews like it, it’s also right. If Jews dislike it, it’s wrong.)
For bonus points, one gets compared to Winston Churchill if one supports the Jewish proxy war in Ukraine against Russia, the conflict where Jewish Power has actively encouraged Ukro-Nazi forces. Things can hardly get more demented than this, but the madness goes on because virtually every white goy in elite position is a pitiful and pathetic dog of Zion.

Was it inevitable that Jewish Power would turn out this way? Perhaps, given the combination of Jewish ethno-religious tradition(with the Tribe as the Chosen of God) and Jewish self-perception of being smarter, stronger-willed, more devious(as honor is a dirty word for Jewish Power), and bigger-minded than other groups.
Even so, supremacist tendencies are usually humbled by reality checks. The boxer with the biggest ego will readjust his attitude after losing some fights. It’s one thing to want to win the marathon, quite another to actually do it. Had National Socialist Germany and Imperial Japan been checked more decisively early on, things might not have come to a head in Europe and the Pacific. Even the most dangerous leader in the world isn’t so dangerous if restrained by bigger, greater powers. Erdogan and Netanyahu are about equally unhinged, but the former is less dangerous because his ambitions haven’t been indulged on the world stage.

Then, the problems of Jewish Supremacism can be attributed not only to Jewish nature and personality but to the failure of goyim, especially the Anglos(in the US, UK, Canada, Australia, and etc.) to act as a reality check, pushback, or bulwark. Constructive criticism never hurt anyone.
Granted, one could say that Jewish Power checkmated goyim into a position whereupon meaningful opposition became virtually impossible, i.e. whatever was expressed as criticism or counter-argument was construed as ‘Anti-Semitic’, evoking memories of the Nazis and the Holocaust, thereby forcing critics, however well-meaning and non-malicious, into a defensive position. Worse, as Jews came to control the key institutions and industries of the law, academia, media, finance, and arts/culture, any prospective critic of Jewish Power found himself surrounded and ‘checked’ on all sides. Thus, the Jewish checkmate on the goyim.

But the Western goyim, especially Anglos, could have prevented this when Jewish Power was far from all-powerful. The fact that they allowed this problem to fester to the point where Jewish Supremacist Power became absolute is a testament to their stupidity, cravenness, weakness, and lack of foresight.
If Anglos and Anglo-Americans, having lost the will-to-power to compete for dominance, resigned themselves to passing from history, then, at the very least, they should have groomed other groups to serve as counterbalances to Jewish Power. But, just when Jews took over the top positions from the WASPs, the example set by the latter was one of limp and lame servility to Jews(as the tragic and magical wise-men of history). If anything is worse than having bad rulers, it’s the worship of bad rulers.

There’s long been a debate about goodness as essentially an internal quality or an external factor. If someone is good, is it mainly because he’s good on the inside or conditioned to be good by outside forces? According to B.F. Skinner’s behaviorism, it makes little sense to speak of ‘personality’ or ‘moral nature’ because human behavior is believed to be the sum of all the external pressures that have conditioned it, much like a sculpture is the product of all the strokes by hammer and chisel. The so-called free will, according to this idea, is mostly an illusion. People do ‘good’ or ‘bad’ not so much as a matter of individual choice but as a matter of social conditioning. This isn’t to be confused with something like the Ludovico Treatment in A CLOCKWORK ORANGE where Alex is bio-chemically programmed against acting violently, wildly, or licentiously. Alex is incapacitated from doing what he really wants to do, whereas according to behaviorism, the myriad conditionings not only mold a person’s behavior but customizes him into believing he’s doing the ‘right’ thing(and refraining from ‘wrong’ things).

The reality is surely somewhere between internalism and externalism. It would be foolish to rely on external conditioning alone. The cultivation of moral character goes some way in the creation of decent members of society. It’s been said Japan is a Shame Culture that has relied more on its own brand of behaviorism. People are raised to be mindful of how others think of them and act in accordance with those expectations at the expense of one’s own individual sense of right-and-wrong, or personal conscience.
In contrast, it’s been said the Christian West, especially the Protestant North, has been a Guilt(or Sin) Culture where one’s primary sense of truth and decency is between oneself and God, or in the secular era, between oneself and a rational-fact-based knowledge of the world. (One could argue that Christianity, far from fostering genuine conscience, led to a hive-mind of puritanism, a kind of collective sanctimony of hysteria and moral panic, the secular-degenerate variation of which can be found in ‘wokeness’.)

Whatever may be true in the case of individuals, externalism is the better model on the macro-international scale, i.e. it’s foolish to rely on a country, especially a very powerful country, to be good and do good on the basis of its supposedly ‘internalized’ value system. For proof, we only need to consider the current West with its endless talk of ‘democracy’, ‘human rights’, ‘diversity-equity-inclusion’, ‘rules-based order’, ‘tolerance’, and etc., when its actual modus operandi is Jewish supremacist gangsterism aided and abetted by brown-nosing white cuck toadyism.

Video Link

A society or nation, let alone an empire, is too big and complex for anything like an individual conscience. While a society made up of mostly nice people is likely to be pleasant, it’s no less true that even nice people can be swayed into believing the stupidest or craziest things. Nice is nice, but it’s a sentiment and attitude, hardly a guarantee for truth or meaning(which indeed may be deemed ‘un-nice’, like when a doctor has to tell the patient about a dire diagnosis). Most dogs are nice. Many cats are nice. Plenty of people are nice, which is nice, but it also means they’re docile, eager-to-please, and anxious-for-approval, thereby easy to manipulate by venal and devious types, for whom nice people are merely suckers-born-every-minute.

Usually, even in an order of nice people, the kind that rise to the top tend not to be so nice; they tend to be driven by greed, egotism, opportunism, power-lust, and etc. With their levers of control and manipulation, they can nudge-nudge the nice masses(with boy-scout souls) toward stupid or crazy things, much like how adults toy with the hearts and minds of children. How else does one explain so many NICE people going ape-shit over the Covid hysteria, not to mention BLM and Russia Collusion Hoax? 70% of Americans support ‘gay marriage’. They think they’re being so very nice. Lunacy via manipulation of niceness.

One would like to believe that a socio-political order full of nice people will reflect the general niceness at the top, but that hasn’t always been the case, not least because nice people tend to be suckers to the P.T. Barnums of the world.
As such, the only real hope for countries behaving well is through the mechanism of external pressures, e.g. the stronger country exerting pressure on a weaker country, weaker countries acting in concert against a stronger country, or a strong country counterbalancing a strong country. As for empires, they’re bound to fail at the level of decency because of the hubris intrinsic to imperialism. The US has amply demonstrated this following the end of the Cold War. It could have played the role of the Good Global Cop but became addicted to its power and prestige as the Lone Superpower.

The outcome of the political shift in the US might have been tolerable if the Jewish Ruling Elite that usurped the WASPs was represented by people of some wisdom, patience, and understanding. Failing that, if non-Jewish groups filled the counterbalancing role of constructive criticism.
Instead, with each passing year, Jews consolidated more control in the key institutions and industries, not only politically, economically, and culturally but spiritually, as Jewish Identity became most identified with the Holocaust(and the Cult of Anne Frank) and also with the images of Jews as funnymen, wise-men, and/or hapless victims, with the likes of Woody Allen often playing all three.

If Jews were mostly a passive, submissive, and/or resigned second-rate people, such sympathetic indulgences on the part of goyim would have been harmless. In truth, however, Jews have been among the most driven, capable, ruthless, devious, and/or neurotic people on the planet. Branding Jewishness with the victim-saint cult of Anne Frank, the adorable wise-man-cult Albert Einstein, and the endearing funnyman cult of Seinfeld simply missed the mark of the true nature of Jewishness and its victims.

Historically, Jews have been among the staunchest and most radical ideologues, often calling for violent means to effect change. Jews have been among the most spine-chilling executioners of communism. Jews have been among the most devious and parasitic of financiers, among the most corrupting influences on society and culture, among the cruelest in organized crime.
Jewish Supremacists engineered the events that led to the Ukraine War that may have consumed up to a million Christian Slavic lives, yet the ONLY Jewish concern is, “Is it good for the Jews?” Zionist Jews in Israel are now committing what some call a ‘genocide’ — if 1/10th of the violence done on Gaza was done on Israel, every Western member of the elite would call it ‘genocide’ for sure — , but the dominant discourse in political and legacy media circles boils down to “We must protect Anne Frank from another holocaust”.
The sacralized image of Jews and the actual nature of Jewish Power are so at odds that the contradiction has turned cancerous, utterly corrupting the West into defending Israel’s mass slaughter of civilians in Gaza as an act of ‘defense’, as if Jews are Forever-Anne-Franks no matter what they do whereas their victims are Forever-Nazis or Forever-Anti-Semites simply because they happen to be at loggerheads with the Jewish Agenda.

The other great contradiction in the current Western Mind involves the blacks who are narratively and idolatrously presented as wise, magical, kind, caring, noble, or so-cool-and-badass-that-their-transgressions-are-forgivable, but who, in reality, are the most criminal, thuggish, destructive, pathological, rude, and nasty creatures around. So, even though blacks have turned entire urban areas into mini-detroits and continue to fray the social fabric, they are usually regarded as saintly Emmett Tills or victims of ‘systemic racism’ — never mind the actual Emmett Till was a creep, though perhaps not as bad as Leo Frank.

We have psychopathic Jews using the US as the lone superpower to lay waste to entire parts of the world, and we have sociopathic blacks destroying entire communities across the US, but the great white majority in America is still stuck on the Anne-Frank and Emmett-Till narrative.
In the current West, we must pretend Benjamin Netanyahu is a wise and moral voice in the wilderness, a leader and a prophet, the ‘greatest man in the world'(according to Donald Trump), when he’s surrounded by ultra-right Zionist lunatics who aid and abet his maniacal wars. And we must pretend George Floyd is the greatest saint since Saint Paul, indeed even bigger than MLK, Mandela, and Michael Jackson combined.

Civilization isn’t just about wealth and material means. It’s about the vision of truth that guides it, and the current vision is about as decrepit as ever existed in history. Thus, no matter how rich and powerful the West may be, it will(and must) decline for its willful delirium that Jewish supremacist mass murderers are a bunch of Anne Franks and that black thug-savages are the salt of the earth, the kind of people at whose feet whites must grovel and mewl.

Anyway, with Jewish Power lacking wisdom & self-restraint and with most goyim, especially the white majority, sucking up to the Jews as the fount of all that is wise, holy, brilliant, and tragic, the continued degradation of the West seems a certainty. It makes you wonder about an order that puts the likes of Victoria Nuland, Anthony Blinken, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth in charge of foreign policy; an order in which the likes of utter human-garbage Mike Pompeo and John Hagee are emblematic of what represents ‘conservative’ values.

Whether it’s low IQ whites(Evangelicals) or higher IQ whites(libertarians and HBD), what unites them is a mental slavery to Zion as either the Chosen or the Champions. Evangelicals see Jews as the spiritual master race, whereas libertarian & HBD whites see Jews as the intellectual champion race, but the end result in political terms comes down to the same thing: It’s the duty of whites, as either Christian Zionists or IQ-cultist-Zionists, to cuck to the obviously superior tribesmen without whose guidance whites would have no direction and no future.

If sentimentality about the Jews, given what happened in World War II, may have been understandable prior to the apotheosis of Jewish ascendancy, it can only be diagnosed as a kind of retardation or craven opportunism nowadays, fueled mainly by fear and awe.
Likewise in ancient Roman times, partiality toward Christians went from voluntary sympathy for a victimized group to a mandatory adherence to a powerful group, indeed newly anointed as the most powerful. If, at one time, certain pagan Romans may have pitied the oppressed Christians, they later trembled in fear as all were mandated to pledge allegiance to the one and only faith.
Similarly, there is nothing personally or individually conscientious about white expressions of sympathy toward Jews in our time. No longer a matter of choice, one must grovel with compulsory sympathy(which isn’t real sympathy, a matter of personal choice) at the feet of Jews. When the likes of Mike Johnson, Mitt Romney, and Donald Trump do anal-licking on Zion, we know it’s out of fear and fright, but of course, no one wants to admit he’s a coward, so there’s the handy pretense that it’s all about caring for those poor poor Jews who may yet be Anne-Franked once again.

Now, why were the Jews uniquely poised to be the great peace-makers of the 21st century? One can come up with myriad reasons. The Jewish Diaspora is not only vast but intricately networked. So, while Greeks or Armenians in different parts of the world mostly focus on personal/local matters, Jews around the world have cultivated a global consciousness. So, a Jew in Germany, France, England, or Poland isn’t simply a Jew living in a country but a member of a larger worldwide community.
In addition, not only is the Jewish Diaspora vast and varied but Jews have gained elite status in most countries in which they reside, resulting in considerable institutional influence. Jews have also exhibited a dual nature that could be beneficial in international affairs, i.e. instead of a single-minded loyalty to one’s own nation, a larger sense of duty to mankind as a whole. (As things turned out, Jewish Power was less divided between nationalism[of the goy country in which Jews reside] and internationalism than between internationalism and Jewish supremacism.) Furthermore, Jewish intellectualism, especially the interest in history, politics, philosophy, and culture, lent the community an aptitude to excel in fields devoted to international relations that require depth and breadth of knowledge to understand and deal with peoples of different backgrounds, customs, and interests. And Jewish experience as haggling merchants and squabbling scholars well-prepared them for the arduous but rewarding profession of diplomacy and related fields. Diaspora + talent + knowledge + influence + sociability = Jewish advantage as interlocutors for the world community. Few groups were as well-equipped as the Jews to fulfill this role.

And when we consider men like Jeffrey Sachs and Chas Friedman, we can’t help but lament at the missed opportunity. Sachs and Friedman seem like decent individuals who, though loyal to the country of their birth/residence, wish well for all of humanity. Their vision is one of win-win for all nations. The United States need not see countries like Russia or China as adversaries or enemies. Differences can be ironed out or overcome. Or some kind of compromise is always preferable to demonization and escalation of tension. They may feel as patriotic Americans and even harbor a profound sense of Jewishness, but such feelings don’t negate acknowledging that Americans and Jews are part of a larger community of many countries and cultures.

If such Jews had commanded the heights of US foreign policy, perhaps the 21st Century would have been one of peace, in no small part made possible by the efforts of Jews.
Even Henry Kissinger, though understandably vilified in certain circles(especially on the Left), embodied a deeper and more complex idea of diplomacy, i.e. that while conflicts and confrontations are inevitable in history, there are common interests even among rivals, and those can be ferreted out to prevent the world from sliding into World War III. At the very least, respect your enemies as worthy foes. 21st Century diplomacy commanded by the likes of Kissinger might not have been ideal, but even that would have produced results preferable to what has been so far(and are likely to get worse).

Granted, Kissinger plied his talents when the US had a rival superpower(or at least a peer-power in military prowess, population, and resources) and when Jews played a supporting(than dominant) role in the power structure. Thus, there was less temptation for Kissinger(and other Jews of his generation) to prioritize Jewish Hegemony that had yet to materialize in years to come. (Given the CIA and LJB’s role in concealing/defending Israel’s nuclear program and the far-from-accidental USS Liberty attack, one could argue that Jews had already gained dominance in will-and-spirit even before achieving mastery of means. Even when Anglo-Americans or WASPs were at the top, they may have sensed somehow that Jews embodied an indomitable force that had to be either acquiesced or submitted to. Of course, there were even earlier signs, as when Harry Truman caved to the demands of the Zionists despite his personal loathing of them.)

In the final decade of the 20th century, several events and trends converged to make hegemony irresistible to a certain school of Jewish Thought. Boomers, in which Jews played an essential role in the various mini-revolutions(or ‘liberations’), took over the levers of power. The generational shift signaled an ethnic shift in the power balance, especially with the sudden collapse of WASP confidence, pride, and authority.
The Reagan Era deregulations gave green light to finance to run with ‘greed is good’, which meant a lot more money for Jews so prominent in the industry. It also meant the rise of monopolies and oligopolies, as with the concentration of all media in a few hands, most of them Jewish. (Jews had long dominated the media, but the domination got even more obnoxious beginning in the late 80s.)
The fall of the Soviet Union meant there was now only one superpower, the US that, under the presidency of boomer Bill Clinton, became a battleship of Jewish Boomer power.

The decade witnessed two falls and two rises. The fall of the WASPS(and the fading of the Greatest Generation) and the fall of the Soviet Union. The rise of Jewish Boomers and the US as the lone superpower.

Had Jews been wiser, they could have used the opportunity to take on the role of peacemakers around the world. And surely, there were some Jews, perhaps like Chas Freeman in his younger years, who regarded the moment(aka The End of History) as a golden opportunity to bring about greater peace around the world. After all, the USSR dissolved and the former Eastern Bloc nations went their own way. And China gave up Maoism in the Eighties and joined the global economy. Germany reunited without the alarmism of other European nations, and even Vietnam and Cuba were moving toward market economies. The US could have been the lone superpower minus the arrogance(that soon led to full-blown hubris) and could have represented the strength of immigrants drawn from all parts of the world.

Yet, just when so much was being made of ‘diversity is our strength’, the actual power in the US became ever more narrowly concentrated on ‘Jewishness is our master.’ Even as the goy elites grew more diverse by the year — blacks, browns, yellows, and etc. emerging in higher positions — , the ‘national’ theme became ever more focused on “Israel is our greatest ally” and “Israel is our closest ally” and Jewish This, Jewish That, and Jewish Whatever. All the ‘Arabists’ in foreign policy were summarily purged, and both political parties became ever more obeisant to the Neocons whose Democratic flipside were the Neolibs. And the slightest whiff of critical attitude toward Israel(and Zionist-adjacent policies) was grounds for dismissal, resulting in foreign policy teams(of both parties) that became ever more blindly, fanatically, and stupidly pro-Israel, pro-Neocon, and pro-Jewish-supremacist.

Perhaps, the test case for Jewish Power came when George H.W. Bush(and James Baker) pressed on Israel to stop building settlements in the Occupied Territories. Especially given the Gulf War, partly carried out to appease the Israel-Firsters, Bush possibly hoped that Jews would be more appreciative and understanding. He’d gone out of his way to crush Saddam Hussein, the much reviled enemy of Israel, and so, maybe the Jews would cut him some slack for putting some brakes on Israel.
Instead, Jewish Power(especially among the supposedly ‘liberal’ Democrats) pulled out all the stops to make sure Bush would lose in the 1992 election. A mild recession was made out to be another great depression. Now, it’s possible Bush would have lost anyway given the GOP fatigue, boomer-power emergence, L.A. riots aftermath, and host of other factors, but Jewish Power blatantly went out of its way to remove Bush and Baker for their stance on Israel. And indeed, it was the LAST TIME any President did anything substantial to check the Zionist agenda, though perhaps one could argue that Bill Clinton, the first boomer president, thought he was in good enough graces with the Jews to enact some kind of peace deal between the Jews and the Palestinians. (And then, sonny boy George W. Bush ended up being the biggest whore-dog of Zion ever, and it’s been a complete shit-show ever since, with Obama running as the man who opposed the Iraq War but then using the presidency to start even more Wars for Zion.)
With George H.W. Bush punished, demolished, and made-an-example for daring to apply pressure on Israel and with goy politicians getting the message that nothing must stand in the way of the Zionist agenda, Jewish Power became ever more emboldened that the world is their (g)oyster. The most illustrative face of this power was the hideous transformation of Victoria Nuland from a pleasant-looking operative to a monstrous hag willing to sacrifice any number of goy lives in service to Jewish Supremacism. What a crazy hagula.

Consider a few examples of what could have been.

Following the collapse of communism in Russia, Jews there and in the US & around the world could have coordinated efforts to transform the Russian economy and politics towards something beneficial to everyone, but the main focus was to prop up a handful of Jewish oligarchs who looted the economy.
The face of political ‘reform’ under this Jewish influence was the boorish-drunk-and-ultimately-senile Boris Yeltsin who, in more ways than one, anticipated the Trump-Biden-Trump clown-show.
Given that Putin stabilized a country in tatters, went after only the worst of the Jewish oligarchs, built relations with Israel, banned ‘antisemitism’, and offered good-will cooperation with the global Jewish community, one would have thought Jews would have reciprocated.
But go to any library, and just about all the books on Putin(mostly written by Jews) are utterly rabid and virulent, downright deranged. Indeed, even books on Hitler, Stalin, and Mao aren’t so lopsided in their appraisals. In the end, what did it all lead to? The Judeo-Russian War in Ukraine in which over a million Slavs were sacrificed on the altar of Jewish Supremacism.

Now, take the case of China. More than any other group, Jewish globalist elites gained the trust of the Chinese government, and the relationship appeared to be symbiotic. Thus, Jews could have played the role of constructive mediator between the two giants, the US and China.
However, the ultimate goal of the Jews was regime-change, to promote ‘democratization’ to transform China into yet another anemic and hapless ‘Asian Pussy’ vassal like Japan, South Korea, and of course Taiwan. It seems the Chinese wised up to this, i.e. the so-called Liberal Democracy is really an Imperial Democracy with the Jewish-run West as the hegemon imposing its standards of what constitutes ‘democracy’ around the world, even if it means propping up the nasty and repressive regime of Zelensky in Ukraine as representative of ‘democratic values’.
According to the supposed rules of the Imperial Democracy, even democratic means are ‘autocratic’ or ‘far right'(or ‘far left’ for that matter) if the results run counter to the designs of Washington D.C.(and New York and London, both Jewish-ruled), whereas even repressive and tyrannical methods are ‘democratic’ and ‘rules-based’ if the results comport with the wishes of the hegemon. Recently, even the ISIS-Al- Qaeda head-chopper Jolani became the darling of the Western ‘rules-based’ political jet-set because he was instrumental in toppling the Assad government hated by Zion.

More likely than not, China figured this out, i.e. all this talk of ‘liberal democracy’ is so much BS emanating from Washington. Perhaps, there was a time when, naively or not, some figures in the West really did believe global democratization could turn the world into a better, freer, and more just place. Yet, the current Imperial Democratic model(that began to take shape in the aftermath of Francis Fukuyama’s declaration of The End of History) is focused on one thing only: The Sorosian strategy of promoting openness around the world to better facilitate the infiltration of institutions, indoctrination of minds, and recruitment of collaborators to erase national sovereignty in favor of satellite status to the one-world order as dominated by the Jewish-run West. Whether it was Russia in the 1990s or Ukraine in the 2010s(or Iran, Venezuela, Hong Kong, and etc.), it wasn’t about idealism or principles but about control and domination.

There was once a time when the West, especially the US, was accused of propping up dictatorships around the world(as puppets), but who would have thought that democratization would turn out to be an even more potent means of takeover, control, and domination? Japan as a democracy may enjoy certain individual freedoms(missing in China), but is the nation politically sovereign and culturally independent? Or must it do the bidding of its political master, the Jewish-ruled US, and comply with the cultural program of waving the GlogoHomo flag? If the current EU is what ‘democracy’ is all about, who wants it?
Instead of working toward peace and cooperation between the US and China(as a sovereign country), Jews now fan the flames of Yellow Peril(or Dragon Danger) because (1) they’re bitter that China stood by Russia in the Judeo-Russian War in Ukraine and because (2) directing Western ire at China distracts attention from the fact of Jewish parasitism in the West. And as white elites are too afraid and weak to address the problems of Jewish Power, they are more than happy to display the bogus valor by huffing-and-puffing at Fu Manchu.

And then, consider the Middle East. The recent sneak-attack on Iran was the most egregious manifestation of the Jewish Supremacist way. Pretending to negotiate for a compromise in good faith while planning for total regime change and takeover. What Israel attempted on Iran was merely the most violent and dramatic reiteration of what Global Jewry had been planning against Russia and China.
And the West itself hasn’t been immune as the cucked reality in the US and EU cannot be understood apart from the fact that Jews have effected something like ‘regime changes’ in nearly all the Western countries(while even the ones that have resisted, like Hungary, live in a state of fear and seek to placate the Jews by rolling out the red carpet to vile Zionists like Netanyahu).
Indeed, consider the stark differences between the EU on the eve of Bush’s invasion of Iraq and the EU today. Back then, European governments pushed back against the Neocon plan, but today, there’s hardly a voice among the governing elites of the EU that has the temerity to say NO to Neocons/Neolibs, aka global Jewish Supremacists. What happened to the European elites during that period?
As happened in the US, it seems global Jewish Power, by hook and by crook, installed a new clone-breed of ‘leaders’ like Emmanuel Macron who are incapable of ever saying NO to any Jewish Supremacist demand. When even the man who as harassed and tormented by the Jews the most, none other than Donald Trump, goes out of his way to appease Jewish Power at every turn, even trampling on every liberal and/or conservative principle at the heart of American Constitutionalism, the Jewish ‘regime change’ operation in the West seems complete.
Of course, given the total Jewish takeover of Western institutions and industries, there was no need for violent tactics as seen in the color revolution in Ukraine, the air campaign over Libya, the manufactured ‘civil war’ in Syria, and the sneak attack on Iran, though, to be sure, when push came to shove, Jewish Power hasn’t been averse to employing violent mobs of Antifa and BLM to wreak havoc across the US. Rather, the ‘regime change’ in the West has been relatively silent and beneath the surface, i.e. despite the regular cycles of elections and successions of politicians, the end result has been a revolving door of goy cuck puppets of Jewish Power. Nearly every politician is like a stepford-clone of Marco Rubio.

The Jewish failure is, in some ways, most tragic in the Middle East. Many Jews have long held a dual identity as whites/Westerners and Semites of Near Eastern origin. Thus, if Europeans in the Middle East and North Africa could only have been perceived as colonizers and imperialists, Jews could have played a dual role as people of the West and a people of the Middle East. Had Zionism been more humane and mutual-oriented, it could have worked out a deal with the Palestinians. Instead, Zionism opted for wholesale takeover of the land at the expense of its native population.
Even so, there was the possibility of the two-state solution and lasting peace, but even that was squandered as Israel insisted on holding onto whole swaths of the West Bank that was to remain under Jewish military occupation even if Palestinians were to have their own state.

Thus, instead of acting as a people of dual-heritage-and-identity, the Zionists decided to act like the European Imperialists of old. And instead of working for peace between the West and the Middle East, they took over the former and arm-twisted it into destroying the latter, the only choices for the Arabs/Muslims being collaborate-and-survive or resist-and-die. The choice is between Jordan, which collaborates and survives as a whore-puppet of Zion, or Syria, which resisted and has been utterly destroyed.
Jews, one of the few ancient peoples to survive into the modern age, could have come to an understanding with the Iranians/Persians, another people with deep and rich history. The fact that there’s a thriving Jewish community in Iran proves Jews and Persians need not be enemies. But Jews opted for total regional domination, even if it means endless wars and even genocide.

The people who could have been the greatest peace-makers became the biggest piece-makers, blowing up entire parts of the world into bits and pieces. In a way, all the traits that qualified Jews to be peacemakers also equipped them to be piece-makers, were they to go that way.
In the end, it was up to the Jews to decide as to how they should employ their unique abilities and advantages in world affairs. For the good of humanity, in which Jews would play a key role, or for the vanity of Jewish Supremacism. Somehow, the good Jews lost out to the bad ones. The vile Netanyahu, so murderous and mendacious, has become the face of Jewish Power.

But the blame must also go to the goyim who let this happen. How pathetic the goyim must be around the world to be so easily duped, so easily manipulated, and so readily culpable in the biggest crimes of the 21st century. And it’s not just cuck-maggots like Lindsey Graham in the West. Jews provoked a war in Ukraine that killed over a million Slavic lives, but Vladimir Putin and his cohorts have named just about everything — the Nazis, the Anglos, the Americans, NATO, the Europeans, and etc. — except the single most responsible party, the Jewish Supremacists. It’d be like Stalin fighting World War II without naming the Germans as the invaders. Goyim are pathetic.

Some people say the world is turning into an ‘idiocracy'(akin to Mike Judge’s movie), but most countries are ruled and run by men of smarts and experience. Most elite members of the US, EU, Asia, and Latin America attended good schools, earned credentials, and have experience. They are not idiotic or low-IQ like the morons in the comic movie.
What they’ve amply demonstrated is that high intelligence is no guarantee for integrity, i.e. intelligent people, though not idiotic, can be insipid, and insipidity is the state of much of the world, even including the elites in Iran — following Israel-America’s joint attack, the vapid and soulless president of Iran still wants to negotiate for a deal on the nuclear program. Goyim sure are pathetic.

Video Link