The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewJung-Freud Archive
The Conspiratorial Style in American Politics
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Historian Richard Hofstadter wrote a landmark essay(followed by a book) on the ‘Paranoid Style of American Politics’. Being a good Jewish Liberal, his target was the American Right even though the ‘paranoid style’ was as pervasive on the American Left as on the Right. It really came down to which side held the prestige and influence to brand labels of ‘extreme’ and ‘paranoid’ on various views and actions, no less true today. One man’s paranoid theory is another man’s reasoned speculation. Though Hofstadter’s perceptions of the American Right were insightful, the term ‘paranoia’, like ‘phobia’, was surely meant to suppress than encourage debate.
After all, if one end of the political spectrum is rife with irrational and/or delusional paranoia, why engage with it at all? Why not just diagnose its members as clinical cases and propose solutions that are ‘medical’ than ideological or intellectual? When ‘prestigious’ and ‘authoritative’ powers-that-be in the academia and media label certain groups and views as such, most ‘respectable’ people(focused more on status than truth) are apt to shun the latter regardless of whether they have something to bring to the table or not. In other words, “There are no two sides.” One might characterize this as the ‘hysterical style of American politics’.

While there have undoubtedly been elements of the American Right partial to outlandish theories about international plots and ‘protocols’, it needs to be asked why such a mindset might exist in the first place. Also, the ‘paranoid style’ could be buttressed with hard facts. Style isn’t the same as substance. One can, after all, speak the truth like a maniac or spin a lie in a composed manner.

The import of Hofstadter’s essay suggests as to why the American Right became rather disreputable in intellectual circles in the post-war era. It wasn’t so much WHAT but HOW certain things were said. And the posterboy of this style was Joseph McCarthy, followed by the the grumpy Barry Goldwater. History would prove many of McCarthy’s allegations to have been true, but his boorish and demagogic style made even truth sound ugly and buffoonish, an affront to the elite patrician class, the so-called best-and-the-brightest. Style matters in politics as in boxing and dancing. (For sure, Donald Trump’s style alienated many elite and elite-wanna-be types with their conceit of superiority over the bawdy rabble, rather amusing in an era when the cultural stew at the top consists of swooning over Lena Dunhum, Jay-Z, trashy globo-homo parades, and a rap musical like HAMILTON.)

In contrast, many radical and extreme Jewish intellectuals of the post-war era cultivated a measured, sober, and/or academic style(that is until the young radicals went crazy in the 1960s, whereupon Saul Alinsky advised them to restrain their excesses to defeat The Man). Even though some were Soviet agents or fellow-travelers with their own brand of paranoid and conspiratorial attitudes about American society and power, they presented an image of the diligent and thoughtful scholar or social critic. And, despite their radical ideologies, some of them were serious men and women, not least because many leftist intellectuals came from bourgeois backgrounds and were well-trained in philosophy, history, and the arts. Besides, most leftists were socialist or communist and did value their ideal of order & discipline(and justified violence only as a means) than anarchists into chaos-for-chaos’-sake. The British counterparts were men like Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm, a hardline Stalinist radical committed to his role as historian and public intellectual.

So, even as the substance of prominent Jewish ideologues tended toward radicalism, they earned respect as bona fide intellectuals of good standing and manners in vaunted circles. Many post-war ideologues on the American Right, in contrast, were seen as stupid for their lack of credentials and manners or seen as uncaring and heartless in a world so at odds with the highest ideals. Even when justified on the communist threat, they played the cards badly by coming off as know-nothing philistines whose vision amounted to little more than Old Glory and Apple Pie(which would be replicated in the aftermath of 9/11 with alarmism about World War III against a global network of terrorists). Lacking subtlety, they invoked ‘communism’ one too many times when a far graver threat to America was brewing from within the capitalist stew of mass consumerism, hedonism, and monopolization. Their creed amounted to little more than ‘better dead than red’(though, of late, the hysteria about ‘Russia-Russia-Russia Collusion’, ‘Trump as Literally Hitler’, Covid Cult, BLM delusions about cops genociding blacks, and etc. has robbed the so-called ‘liberal’ side of dignity, not that the so-called ‘conservatives’ are any saner with their panic attacks about ‘Chinese balloons’ conquering O-Beautiful-for-Spacious Skies).

The 1960s did witness the rise of firebrand radicals whose antics came to turn off much of America, even the Democrats. If not for the hippies and yippies in 1968, Hubert Humphrey probably would have won the election. The era’s crazy style of leftist politics certainly offended Middle America and cleared the path for Republican presidential victories until 1992. Even Jimmy Carter won barely in 1976 against an opponent as lackluster as Gerald Ford, who may have sealed his fate by pardoning Nixon.

Amidst the fine mess of crazed 60s, damage control was conceived by an older radical(with the instinct of a salesman or advertising agent) who appreciated the art of marketing. Saul Alinsky, already middle-aged when the young firebrands were calling the police ‘pigs’, was like a merchant-socialist who urged youngsters to think ‘Middle America’ than the middle finger. Don three piece suits and mainstream-ize radicalism by wrapping it in the American flag. He proved to be one of the architects of the left’s revival, though what the left mutated into turned out to be beyond his prognosis, that is unless he was a closet Jewish-Supremacist Weimerian than a true Marxist.

As things turned out, the Maoist-sounding ‘long march through the institutions’ proved to be rather hollow. If Mao and his movement hardened in their ideological conviction during the Long March, the so-called New Left adopted every trashy capitalist-consumerist fad and turned into a circus, culminating in the game of gender-pubic-hair-splitting. The only thing current ‘wokeness’ has in common with the Red Guards is the shrillness and hysterics(and the all-too-easy resort to violence or justification thereof). The supposedly ‘communist’ Antifa and its related ilk probably have more trannies hooked on Grammy Award shows(and meth) than thinkers well-versed in classical Marxism.

Even though traditional Liberals often crossed swords with boomer radicals, the establishment was nevertheless sympathetic to the latter for reasons ethnic and/or ideological: Jewish Power sheltered Jewish kids, and older Liberals thought the leftists(and blacks) had their hearts in the right place despite the immaturity and barbarism. Some Liberals, feeling compromised by ‘bourgeois’ comfort, envied the radicals for their purity of commitment. That element of sympathy proved decisive for boomer radicals who faced minimal obstacles in their path to institutional power in the 80s and 90s. The seat on the throne had been warmed by the traditional Liberals.

A show like WILL & GRACE employed a bit of Alinskyism, with some Gramsci-ism thrown into the mix, even if the globo-homo message was more the product of late-stage capitalism; indeed, the ‘gay’ movement was a means of obfuscating the Jewish abandonment of the true left and class warfare(except as upper class attack on the lower classes in a reversal of Marxism) in favor of tribal power and privilege. With ‘gayday’ as the new Mayday, young would-be-progressives were sold on the idea that nothing’s more leftist than 50-plus genders and homo/tranny narcissism. During the Clinton 90s, US foreign policy became increasingly tribal-supremacist in favor of Zion, US domestic policy became forcefully law-and-order in locking up lots of black criminals(to make Jewish-heavy big cities safer and fancier), and Wall Street became a casino so that the ‘house’ could rake in limitless profits.

Given those factors, it’s a misconception that the Left won the Culture War as compensation for loss in the Cold War. (But then, the West that won the Cold War was hardly rightist.) As has so often been the case, people who gain position by pretending to be something other become that very thing, if in a mutated form. Consider what happened with the rise of Modern Japan. The original plan was paradoxically to Westernize in order to fend off Western advances, but Japan became far more Westernized than originally intended, as well as participating in Western Imperialism, most problematically against China.

Similarly, the American Left is anything but. In its appropriation of mainstream symbols(and its adoption by the existing power), it simply merged with the system that remained structurally unchanged(except toward greater authoritarianism). In a way, it was a symbiotic relationship wherein the left gained access to power while the Power remade its image as ‘progressive’. The most successful leftists, who’d thought to use capitalism against capitalism, found themselves flush with cash and joined the rat race where ‘money talks, bullshit walks’, which actually means bullshit that works wins over sincerity that doesn’t. If it wasn’t money, it was the allure of status and rank in ‘important’ institutions. The rope to hang the capitalists with were tailored into neckties around their own necks.

To be sure, the new mainstream is starkly(even shockingly) different from the old mainstream, but the power game is still about winners and losers, not about ‘equity’. Do Jewish ‘radicals’ awash in millions or even billions really want a revolution? Do they really want social-democracy with tax rates at 90%? Do affluent globo-homo urbanites really want the masses of white working class, black underclass, and Hispanic poor to rise up in rage?

If the nose-to-the-grindstone approach did wonders for the Left in institutional circles — diligence amidst drudgery is an asset in academia and bureaucracies with their mounds of paperwork — , it didn’t work so well for Liberals in national politics. Americans at the start of the Cold War felt safer with manly General Eisenhower than egghead Adlai Stevenson. John F. Kennedy won in 1960 thanks to his freshness and charisma(as well as some election rigging), and his myth certainly didn’t hurt Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964. Later, when American streets were riddled with black crime and radical upheaval, Americans wanted tough, not nice, guys. Hubert Humphrey seemed a nice guy, and George McGovern a nicer guy. Jimmy Carter too was a nice guy but squeaked through in the aftermath of Watergate and with Gerald Ford being even a nicer guy. But Carter was handily defeated by Ronald Reagan the tough guy, who then easily defeated Walter Mondale the super-nice guy. And Michael Dukakis the nice guy got throttled by George H.W. Bush the nasty guy(but one who never escaped from the ‘wimp factor’ image). Billy Boy Clinton figured that the Nice Style of American Politics wasn’t the meal-ticket and played the big man on campus, with smiles and charm(like Reagan), and won twice. Gore was not a nice guy but seemed stiff than tough. Reagan, Clinton, and Obama perfected the tough-guy-with-the-nice-smile act. To be sure, Gore was hampered in 2000 by Clinton fatigue and stock market slump, but he could have won against a weak candidate like George W. Bush with a tad more charm — if he’d only kissed Oprah. George W. Bush won re-election in 2004 because John Kerry seemed like a dopey guy.

Why has the paranoid style been so appealing to large segments of the population? Because of the nature of power in a complex system. In a tribal-communal village, there would be little to be paranoid about. Close proximity among the tribesmen would make transparent why THIS guy is chief and THAT guy isn’t. Everyone would be on familial or at least familiar terms. The distance between the chief and the lowest member, even a slave, could be measured in footsteps. What need for paranoia about the dark secrets of power?
‘Paranoia’ in such a setting is more likely to concern the mysteries of nature with its fire and wind. Myths and religions arose as ‘conspiracy theories’ about natural phenomena. Why did earthquakes, hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, etc. happen? Primitive man had no way of knowing and imagined dark forces behind events. As the forces were conceived as supernatural, paranoia turned into worship and pleas for mercy.

Modern folks have far less reason to fear nature and don’t believe in the supernatural(though there is a rise in witchcraft). The power of man is now such that ‘spirituality’ concerning nature is less about its threat to mankind than vice versa, e.g. the ‘climate change’ cult.
It is man-made power(either under control by dark overlords or out-of-control beyond the will of any individual or group) that is now dark, mysterious, labyrinthine, and terrifying, as evinced in the works of George Orwell and Franz Kafka(and any number of science fiction writers who tend to obsess over dystopia than utopia). The forces that govern us have grown ever more perplexing in their integration, networking, and expansion. Furthermore, with Jews at the helm in overwhelmingly goy societies in the West, the power hides behind ‘fronts’ and ‘buffers’. Does anyone with self-respect really believe Joe Biden is the ‘leader of the free world’? A truly free world is free of delusions that now beset the West.

Though the media are inundated with the official faces of power(the politicians, officials, experts, directors, celebrities, and etc.), it’s only natural for us to wonder as to the power behind the Power. Are the talking heads on TV the real controllers of the media? Are Hollywood movie stars the real masters of Hollywood? Do pop-scientists like Neil Degrasse Tyson direct the scientific agenda? Are politicians really the most powerful people in America? Is the US President really the most powerful man in the world?

In nature, much of the power behind the phenomena remains hidden to the eye. Some happen far above or far below our known realm. We can witness earthquakes and their aftereffects but not the tectonic forces at work underneath. We can see the effect of winds on objects but can’t see the wind itself. Judging reality only by what is seen when a gust knocks down an object, it would seem the object acted upon itself to fall because the air cannot be seen. One might say Jewish Power works like the wind on the structures of American Power. We ascribe the actions of goy politicians to personal agency or the representative will of their constituents but fail to notice the Jewish wind acting upon them. (Even when the active figures are Jewish, we see them as ‘Americans’ than as Judeo-centric actors.)

Given the complexity of modern systems, there is a greater tendency for both paranoia and ‘paraploia’(or the temptation to conspire). It’s easier to shuffle one’s true motives and agendas through many layers of the leviathan with its seemingly endless halls and mirrors. Jewish Supremacist ploys can be contrived as proposals to further the ‘rules-based order’ or ‘democratic values’.
Naturally, those in the deep state practicing ‘paraploia’ are apt to dismiss as unfounded ‘paranoia’ any voice that questions the official narrative and explanations. It’s rather telling that Hofstadter was less invested in exposing the hidden nature of power than in discrediting those who did so as ‘paranoid’. For someone who disparaged the ‘authoritarian’ mindset, wasn’t he in effect defending the powerful who embedded their ploys through ‘democratic’ institutions?

Who has the real power in America? Though such queries can lead to wild and outlandish speculations, is the Naive or Gullible Style of American Politics preferable? Should we take at face value all the truisms and factoids supplied by the official organs of the media and government? How believable were the BLM and Covid Narratives? Do we really have more to fear from ‘far right domestic terrorists’? Is our system truly meritocratic? What is the true nature and extent of Jewish power in America? Is ‘diversity’ really about diversity, and if so, where are the Palestinian-Americans in prominent positions? What is the truth about MLK and how did he become a sacred icon in American culture and politics?

Even though religion is still going strong in many parts of the world, even in modern America, it is the power of the global elites that draws most of our attention and imagination. It takes years of study in the academia to understand the power, but even this research and discourse are guided and shaped by the powers-that-be, who are often Judeo-centrists who, when push comes to shove, prioritize tribal supremacism over cold truths. Why else is there such silence about Jewish Dominance when that very topic will instantly clarify so many issues concerning World Affairs?

Given the complexities of power, everyone is bound to partake in some measure of the ‘paranoid style’, e.g. polls that show the majority of Americans believe JFK was killed by a plot covered up by the Warren Commission. In some systems, it’s starkly clear who holds the most power. Stalin over the USSR, Hitler over Germany, and Mao over China, though their inner-workings were shrouded in mystery.

Paranoia isn’t only about the people’s dread of the Power but the Power’s dread about the people(and the underlings of the system who may be slackers, spies, saboteurs, or traitors). Stalin to his dying day was paranoid about his underlings and even entire populations(often forcibly removed to other lands). But then, he never forgot that the Bolsheviks came to power through subversion, intrigue, and terror. And in the absence of the Rule of Law in the USSR, power was really a matter of conspiracy and coercion(who did it best). He understood it was kill-or-be-killed.
Naturally, he made a lot of enemies along the way and made sure to avoid the fate of Julius Caesar who was undone by his ‘friends’. In such a zero-sum game of power where one wins all or loses all, it was safer to be paranoid and secure than trusting and sorry. The mentality was that of gangsters, like the kind in GOODFELLAS and CASINO where they all act like friends but have fingers on the trigger. Excessive paranoia can be paralyzing(as with Howard Hughes), but no one survives for long in a world of gangsters without some paranoia. Animals have acute noses and ears for a reason; doom can jump out of any bush. Those that aren’t sniffing or listening will be eaten.

While functional ‘democratic’ civil societies do allow for more rule-of-law and transparency, those very factors can fuel more paranoia. As the US isn’t a dictatorship, who’s really in charge? There is no single locus of power in America, and instead, the power is the sum of all sectors and networks, private and public. All groups have some measure of influence and rely on alliances and coalitions.
Even so, not all groups are equal in reach and representation. Besides, not all power is quantitative. Some groups, especially Jews and homos, have power way beyond their numbers. Jews control Wall Street, Big Media, Big Pharma, top law firms, elite colleges, Silicon Valley, political funding, and more. Homos are ensconced in elite business circles, creative pursuits, and upper echelons of government as either strategists, managers, bureaucrats, or aids to big-time politicians. For homos, whispering into the ears of politicians may be more erotic than buggering some anus.

But then, precisely because power and influence are so dispersed in a ‘democratic’ order, with various factions and interests checking or obstructing one another, there’s been a tendency toward an over-elite or inner-elite to somehow pull the various contentious strains together to get things done for sake of ‘national interest’. Wasps once played the role of the over-elite. Through legacy, ability, and prestige, they were in dominant positions to push things through despite the opposition and gridlock. There was less need for political paranoia to understand the WASP elites who didn’t hide the fact of their rule. They certainly did shady things(which inspired speculation and criticism), but their vaunted position was undeniable.

In contrast, Jews as new elites play the role of inner-elites who, though really on top, refuse to sit on the throne and instead remain within the recesses of power. Therefore, if indeed there was a Jewish Hand in 9/11, it was hidden behind or mixed with the goy facades of George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, Condoleeza Rice, and Colin Powell. Jews now use Joe Biden and Diversity hires, often black, as fronts for their operation. Jewish Power is natural fodder for political ‘paranoia’ and ‘conspiracy theories, both of which would be off the charts but for the fact of Jewish control of media, platforms, and politics that maintains the strict taboo on the JQ.

Furthermore, Jewish Power isn’t merely based on the carrots and sticks of bribery and blackmail but on the control of ‘spiritual’ themes of the West. Jews know that even those in political loggerheads could be united under the ‘gods’, which are deemed sacrosanct via the power of narrative and iconography.
In this respect, the current US is rather like a theocracy because, despite all the socio-politico-economic fissures, virtually all politicians and the majority of the population are still united in awe of certain themes like “Holocaust Worst Thing Ever”, “Muh Israel”, “Jews are superduper”, “Negroes are magic & MLK is god”, “Homos are saints and angels”(what with even Donald Trump and Kari Lake getting on their knees to suck homo dong on ‘gay marriage’).

The current US is divided along party lines and factional interests but united in ‘spiritual’ themes controlled by Jews. No wonder politicians and the people of both parties have been staunch supporters of the ‘sacred’ cause of Ukraine against Big Bad Wolf Putin. Despite all the discussion of increasing animus and distrust between the ‘red states’ and ‘blue states’, both sides are usually agreed upon appeasing whatever agenda that’s prioritized by Jews. People who should be ‘paranoid’ about Jews have had their anxieties diverted to Russia-Russia-Russia, China-China-China, Covid-Covid-Covid, or Trump-Is-Hitler(as the GOP establishment did everything possible in cahoots with Jews to remove him). But then, even Trump’s main message is ‘Muh Israel-Israel-Israel’ even after Netanyahu tore him another anus.

Paranoids, in seeking the actual truth, can end up further from it. A rational distrust of power can radicalize into suspicions about everything, spun as either a conspiracy or party to one, wittingly or not. In some cases, an aptitude for pattern recognition can turn into a pattern imposition on things unrelated to one another.
That said, it’s only natural for us to suspect or imagine greater complexities than the power lets on. But then, neurosis is woven into the very fabric of modernity, which has made us at once atomized/alienated and united/converged. For one, everyone has his own TV which he spends an inordinate amount of time watching, often alone, but he’s one of the countless millions partaking of the same images and sounds that form shared narratives of ‘reality’ and fantasy.

The rise of individualism and ‘choice’ has cut people from their roots and a sense of organic community. But, non-stop streaming of popular culture and relentless marketing(of products and causes) have brought the lonely masses together for stuff like Globo-Homo celebration, even if they themselves aren’t ‘gay’. It accounts for the success of HARRY POTTER and TWILIGHT that inspired massive fan communities. Facebook redefined the meaning of ‘friend’ as noun and verb(as in ‘to friend’). A ‘friend’ is now a cyber-presence that slips in and out of your ephemeral circle of contacts.

The atomized/alienated part of us, disassociated from a sense of community, is bound to feel Kafkaesque about the totality of power, i.e. if modern people lead fragmented lives, what great force holds all the ‘atoms’ together? But even the sense of unity(national and/or global), mainly via mass electronic media, has an undercurrent of anxiety and doubt because of its illusory nature, which could be turned off with a switch, as in power failure or the censorious whims of elites to shut down even the most popular voices on the internet(as happened to Stefan Molyneux on Youtube). Besides, Jewish Power, for all its fulminations against irrational ‘conspiracy theories’, fuels conspiratorial panic about the ‘far right’ and Nazis or Russkies hiding behind every corner.
There’s also something weird and outlandish about celebrity culture where the masses are obsessed with idols who don’t know and care for them. Many people care more about their favorite stars than about family members, friends, or neighbors. Indeed, in any given apartment or housing block, most people don’t know each other despite having lived in close proximity for years, but they all know the familiar faces on TV. Thus, their felt community is illusory, molded and manipulated by the controllers of media.

Now, what is meant by ‘conspiracy’ given its connotations and relativity, i.e. it’s always the OTHER side that is either conspiring or cooking up conspiracy theories? (Hillary Clinton once spoke of a ‘vast right-wing conspiracy’, meaning that she does believe in conspiracies, like the alleged plot hatched by Putin and Trump to rig the 2016 election. But then, people like her are the first to charge ‘conservatives’ of concocting ‘conspiracy theories’ when conspiracies simply don’t exist in a ‘democracy’. Jews are no different. So-called ‘anti-Semites’ are, at once, always conspiring against Jews AND cooking up ‘conspiracy theories’. If certain groups do indeed conspire against Jews, doesn’t it mean conspiracies do exist? Apparently, only ‘bad’ people both conspire and cook up conspiracy theories, LOL, as angelic Jews would never do either.) If ‘conspiracy’ means a small number of people secretly hatching a plot, such a thing is hardly uncommon in business and politics(and religious organizations as well).

‘Conspiracy’ connotes something nefarious or sinister but not always. The ‘Good Germans’ who conspired to assassinate Adolf Hitler have been lauded as tragic heroes. Often, however, a plot deemed noble or justified isn’t referred to as a ‘conspiracy’ but a project or a plan, like the orchestrated event surrounding Rosa Parks. A conspiracy requires more complexity than mere secrecy that goes into, say, a small-town bank robbery involving a bunch of hoodlums.
What most people refer to as a ‘conspiracy’ tends to be elaborate and sophisticated. While conspiracies are usually associated with unethical or criminal behavior, they can occur within the purview of the law, as when key figures in the mass media more-or-less coordinate among themselves to tip the balance for one candidate over another, though this may be characterized more as a ‘consensuspiracy’ than a conspiracy. (It must be said, however, that in the media’s infatuation with Obama in 2008 & 2012 and revulsion for Trump in 2016 & 2020, even the facade of objective and balanced reporting went out the window.)

Various activities of the deep state agencies may be deemed ‘conspiratorial’ but are legitimized by institutions that decide what is lawful or not. What one nation or system deems as conspiratorial may be appreciated by another as an act of patriotism or loyalty. Who complains about all the tricks employed by the Allies against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan in World War II? In the Soviet Union, spies and double-agents were seen as heroes. American Power(and the public for reasons jaded or patriotic) isn’t troubled by the fact that the US has meddled in the affairs of other nations, even toppling certain regimes, because those conspiracies were supposedly in the ‘national interest’, if not exactly adherent to international Rule of Law.
Even the slightest hint of Russian meddling in US politics is alarm for officially sanctioned hysterics about the Kremlin conspiring against the US, but no amount of Jewish-Zionist interference or circumvention is called out as conspiracies because (1) Jewish Power so thoroughly controls the system (2) one would be hounded and destroyed as an ‘anti-Semite’ for noticing. Just like the once shocking notion of ‘gay marriage’ is now the New Normal, the once odious idea of foreign/alien meddling in US politics has become the New Normal of ‘patriotism’ and ‘national interest’ when World Jewry is involved. Jewish Power is a jealous power like the Jewish God is a jealous God. It throws tantrums over Miss America merely smiling at Mr. Russia but demands she get down on her knees and blow Zion and swallow(and then turn around and take it up both orifices).

The MLK cult could be said to have been a conspiracy in the broader sense of the term. He was less a self-made man than a construction of myth and iconography by those with the means to do so. Paths were cleared for him on the fast-track to lead the Civil Rights Movement. Jews played a big part in the hype, which is why MLK dutifully defended Zionism against its critics. The myth tells us that MLK was a natural saint/prophet who inevitably and rightfully attained greatness, but for all his undeniable talents, he was carefully groomed, coached, and instructed by various handlers, most of them Jewish(who would later create the myth of Obama and Zelensky, who went from a TV clown to the superhero defender of the ‘Free World’). MLK was used as a Trojan(or Negrojan) Horse to fool the white majority that blacks only demanded peace and justice(and offered forgiveness) in a bigoted America. Imagine that, the most thuggish and criminal race put forth as the champions of pacifism and reconciliation, LOL.

Jewish control of MLK was similar to the Soviet hand behind the Peace Movement in the West that condemned the containment policies against communist aggression or subversion. While aiding radical agitation around the world, the Soviets used front groups(witting or not) in the West as the promoters of Peace. It was an effective tool during the Vietnam War. (Indeed, ‘antiwar’ is a misnomer for it’s never about denunciation of all wars or aggressions but a call for non-intervention in particular wars deemed unrelated to national interests or ideologically justifiable for the advantageous side.)
After the fall of the Soviet Union, it came to light that many groups involved in the Peace Movement had been willing fronts for the USSR, or at least unwittingly funded by it. That said, most rank-and-file types in the movement were probably sincere in their idealism, including those who knowingly worked for the USSR.

Not everyone in the conspiracy is IN ON the conspiracy. Consider the Frank Capra movie MEET JOHN DOE where Gary Cooper’s character only belatedly comes to realize he’s a tool in the machinations of rich powerful men. Capra also worked in ‘paranoid'(albeit left-populist) mode in MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON. And the champion of the people in ALL THE KING’S MEN is taken for a fool by the political machine.
Conceivably, even ‘anti-establishment’ movies could be construed as serving the powers-that-be in assuring the American public either that good guys do win in the end(invariably the case in Capra movies and in THE CHINA SYNDROME) or that the US is a free society with journalistic or artistic freedom to stare into the abyss. The heroes fail in PARALLAX VIEW and SILKWOOD, but the viewers are made to feel grateful to live in a free society where such darkness and evil can be aired.

Power dynamics today is hardly different from what it was a hundred years ago. Barack Obama sang ‘socialist’ melodies but bailed out Wall Street. Trump promised to drain the Swamp but filled it with more neocon sewage. Ron DeSantis presents himself as a defiant maverick, but it’s hard to think of a bigger shill for Zion.
Granted, con-jobbery such as this is so ubiquitous in politics that it hardly registers as conspiratorial. It’s like where corruption is rampant(like in Greece), most of it’s just a way of doing business. For the term ‘conspiracy’ to have significance, it must involve agendas where the audacity(or chutzpah) and obscenity are truly off the charts, as was the case with 9/11, likely the work of a cabal, and 2020 pandemonium(with riots, pandemic, and election rigging), which was institutional and participatory(which is to say many people probably suspected the powers-that-be were using Covid and BLM to unseat Trump but went along just the same because they regarded Trump as literally Hitler’ or triggering to their conceit as the ‘best and the brightest’; it’s no wonder then Time magazine ran an article penned by Jews who bragged about how the election was ‘fortified’ in service of ‘democracy’).

In many cases, those at the lower echelons(who merely take orders) do sense dirty tricks at the top but go along for partisan or ideological reasons. In other cases, many underlings(e.g. suckers working for Bernie Madoff) haven’t a clue and believe themselves to be engaged in respectable work. Madoff carried on for so long in the financial, legal, and cultural capital of America(or the ‘Free World’), New York that many regarded him as totally legit and respectable. He got the green light thanks to partnerships with famous and/or powerful people when, in reality, it was little more than a giant ponzi scheme. But hey, before he lost money for the Jews, he made a shitload of it for them.
And there was the Enron scandal that involved a good number of Republicans. If Enron crooks ended up behind bars, most Jewish Wall Street crooks got off the hook(and even got richer from the bailouts) after 2008. ‘Too big to fail’ served as rationale for what really amounted to an institutional conspiracy in favor of Wall Street, but it technically qualified as rule-of-law because the politicians and courts were all in the pockets of the banksters or loyal to the Tribe. ‘Too Jewish to Fail’ was more like it. The Zionic cancer has spread so far and deep that it’s hard to tell apart the healthy from the diseased tissue.

Conspiracies in fiction usually feature a cabal of evildoers(like Harry Lime in THE THIRD MAN), whose defeat promises a restoration of political and moral health. In reality, there’s nearly as much foulness among the conspired-upon as among the conspirators. If current times seem more pernicious, it owes to the ultra-tribal nature of power dynamics. Corruption in contention is less dangerous than corruption in concentration, now in Jewish hands.
The tensions among WASP prestige, Jewish ambition, and various other forces resulted in a golden age of journalism and intellectual debate in the 1950s and 1960s. Though hardly a bunch of shining idealists, Jews and other contending groups did raise key questions about the nature of power in America.

But now, Jews control Wall Street, law firms, big media, government, high-tech, big pharma, Hollywood, and much else. It used to be Jews were anxious about ‘rocking the boat’ lest it stir up ‘antisemitism’, but today, it’s the cucked goyim who dare not rock the Jewish Titanic with its maximum carriage of chutzpah.

Is the nature of Jewish Power conspiratorial? Even if not in the strictest sense of small groups of people secretly plotting together, the vast network of wink-wink understanding among various players in key fields, all with the same tribal interests, does constitute a low-burner world of secret power, the true motives of which are different from the official line.
How else does one explain the Covid Hysteria, BLM mania, and the ‘fortified’ electoral malfeasance of 2020(and before those, the Russia Collusion Hoax and Impeachment of Trump over Ukraine, when the real corruption was with Jews and the Biden crime family)?
When an ethnic group holds so much power, even silence and inaction can aid in the coordination(that comes close to a vast ‘psychonspiracy’, where even people who don’t know one another on the personal level intuitively pick up signals of what is expected of them in the production).

Consider the long-forgotten case of Rick Sanchez who lost his job at CNN after mouthing off about Jewish Power. Imagine an alternative scenario where ‘conservatives’ hounded him for ‘leftist’ views. The mass media would have gone into a tizzy by invoking McCarthyism, forcing ‘conservatives’ into a defensive stance. But, Sanchez got into hot water by talking about Jewish over-representation, i.e. Jews have super-white-privilege, and he was met with either outright denunciation or stony silence from his peers. While one sector of the media gut-punched him, the rest gave him the cold shoulder. (Helen Thomas met much the same fate.) Noise and silence working in tandem to destroy a man’s reputation and career for having stated the obvious.
The media can expose or bury controversies, and poor Rick Sanchez was effectively blacklisted after routine denunciation. Indeed, it didn’t even rise to the level of controversy because the scandal ended just as it began. Like Tommy in GOODFELLAS, he was gone, and that’s that, and there was nothing that could be done about it. (Sanchez later got a gig at RT, but then the whole channel was nixed by the Jewish-controlled Deep State with its monopoly over the Narrative.)

The current climate of blacklisting and ‘disappearing’ people is far more egregious than the so-called ‘Red Scare’’ during the McCarthy Era. At the very least, Joe McCarthy named the target, the communist agents and spies; even if he over-reached at times and politically exploited the opportunity, he never hid what he was hunting and why.

In contrast, Jewish powers-that-be that coordinate between the public and the private spheres to silence, blacklist, intimidate, demote, or fire a wide range of voices never offer a clear justification for their censorship and purges. During the ‘Red Scare’, McCarthy got considerable pushback from liberals and the Left, eventually from the military and President Eisenhower as well. But, the current ‘canceling’ or the Great Silencing has the approval and involvement of all the power centers, be they private or public(but then what goes on inside public institutions is secretive), and the so-called ‘conservatives’ not only lack institutional leverage but operate mainly on the fear and awe of Jewish Power as the wizard behind the curtain.

Of course, the Power often plays devious, fomenting public outrage(or coordinating private sector disapproval) via control of the megaphone, so as to spin its censorious policy as mere acquiescence to public demand(or business pressure) than the agenda of Jewish Supremacism. Consider how Youtube shadow-bans, suppresses, or silences certain voices ostensibly on account of pressure from advertising companies, when, if anything, the advertisers hold the same tribal biases and political interests as the bosses at Youtube.

There’s also the abuse of punditocracy, which often comes in more handy than the politicians. Train the dogs to do the barking lest YOU come across as overbearing. Joe McCarthy the politician growling gave the impression that the government itself was undermining free speech and civil liberties.
In contrast, much of Jewish Censchwarzship is outsourced to private companies, and an army of pundits and celebrities(along with hordes of ‘influencers’) do the bidding of the Tribe to manufacture ‘popular’ outrage to a fever pitch, in effect drowning out dissident voices to the giddiness of the Jewish Elites.

Given the nature of power, some degree of ‘paranoia’ is bound to affect our worldview that has a hard time swallowing certain official narratives, like those of the recent Nord Stream bombing. Especially in a so-called ‘democracy’ or free society, it’s foolish to innocently and naively trust authority. Besides, what is the so-called ‘mainstream media’ but a Jewish-Zionist Supremacist propaganda machine?

When Jewish Supremacists(not least because Jewish anti-supremacists are weeded out by Zion) rule finance, media, and government, there’s effectively no outlet for airing Jewish dirty laundry. Even as Jews hurl accusations of ‘paranoia’ and ‘conspiracy theories’ at ‘far right’ types and the anti-Zionist Left, their mindset and methodology are mired in true paranoia, though understandable to some degree. If the US were 90% Jewish, perhaps Jews would feel sufficiently secure to call out on bad behavior among their own kind. But as only 2% of the population, most Jews seem obliged to circle the wagons lest the goyim wake up, discover the true extent of Jewish corruption, and then go mad with another would-be Hitler. Even conscientious Jews who’d like to blow the whistle on the Tribe are often afraid that such revelations may fuel ‘antisemitism’. Even most decent and idealistic Jews are Jews first and idealists second. The end result is JEWS FIRST uber AMERICA FIRST and WORLD FIRST.

Indeed, the central conflict isn’t so much nationalism vs globalism, at least if globalism is meant to promote the same set of values and principles for all peoples. Current globalism provides pass-over privileges for Jews who, unlike goyim(especially the white kind), are allowed the pride of identity, territorial integrity, and prestige of heritage. Thus, even as globalism discourages nationalism among all goy groups, it lends full support to ultral-nationalism-cum-hyper-imperialism for Jews. If Jews seek supreme power but anxiously conceal their dominant position, the power can only be exercised in a ‘conspiratorial’ manner.

When WASPS had the power, they admitted as much, and ascendant Jews heavily critiqued this power for its abuses, failings, and hypocrisies. Even if WASP elites did engage in conspiracies, the fact of their power was no secret. Thus, at best, WASP conspiracies were one-layered, whereas Jewish conspiracies are double-layered(or more) because Jews won’t even allow their power to be discussed as an open secret(as Kanye West found out not long ago).

Though the conspiratorial way is nothing new to Jews(who probably mastered the art for longer than any other people), for a time in the US there was the idealized image of Jews as conspiracy-busters, the radical or dissenting voices that spoke truth to power. (Some may argue Jews passed this torch of inquiry by outing the Trump-Russia-collusion, but in fact there was no conspiracy between Trump and Russia, and if anything, the conspiracy theory about ‘Russian meddling’ was itself a Jewish conspiracy to undermine Trump. Victoria Nuland said Russia blames the other guy for doing what it does when Jews are the real masters of such projection of shameless chutzpah, which makes one wonder if Jews like her are merely corrupt or downright psychotic).

Jewish Power, uninhibited in its tribal-nihilism, seems to have lost all reservations about the Conspiratorial Way, which has become basic policy, its modus operandi. Such a mentality can be glimpsed in LINCOLN by Steven Spielberg and Tony Kushner. Spielberg and Kushner seem to relish the fact that Lincoln often acted in conspiratorial ways on the basis that ends justifiy the means. It’s as if Jews, with all their power, now feel they know what is ‘best’ for everyone and therefore should have free rein to manipulate and ‘nudge’(ala Cass Sunstein) any way they please to achieve the desired outcomes. (At the very least, Lincoln manipulated events to preserve the Union and end slavery, whereas the Jewish Agenda seems to divide the world into Zionic masters and goy ‘house negroes’ & ‘field niggers’.)

The ‘paranoid style’ of American politics is only logical as a reaction to the very real ‘conspiratorial’ style of power. Who can deny that Andrew Jackson lost his first bid at the presidency due to a conspiracy of sorts by the ‘rightful’ heirs of the Republic? Lincoln was a devious figure who employed all manner of tricks to manipulate public opinion, form coalitions, betray allies, wage war, and etc. But he got things done. And the same could be said of FDR. Not that the current Jewish Power is comparable to Lincoln and FDR, both of whom had some sense of the national good.

For sure, Obama was someone for whom lying came naturally, indeed all too easily, whether trained in Alinkyism or not. There was no sense of inner struggle or pangs of conscience, as was the case with Lincoln who understood politics as a necessary evil. Without the slightest reservation, Obama could dish out lies with a straight face as if all politics is a hype and con-job. His game was not to BE like Lincoln, FDR, and Kennedy, only to SEEM like them. No wonder Jews and Obama understood one another perfectly in their Hollywood version of politics. No wonder Obama could vaguely but eloquently promise whatever, only to do the bidding of Jews who fattened Wall Street and ignited more Wars for Israel. Obama was himself a conspiratorial tool of the Jews.

With all the abuses of power and the silence of the complicit media(that would rather obsess over fake stories such as Russia Collusion, Assad-gas-his-people, Michael Brown bogus narrative, and etc.), whom can we turn to for the truth? On the occasion when a scandal does bring down a prominent figure, it seems more the work of political expediency or coverup than true justice. (Scapegoat that guy while the real culprits remain free. Like with the Jeffrey Epstein affair.) A convenient way to remove inconvenient people. If a war on corruption really swept through the government, 99% of the politicians would be behind bars.

Politics, as the gathering place of power, is understandably corrupt, which is why people look to the Fourth Estate of the media to probe and expose the inner workings of power. Sadly, actually tragically, the so-called ‘free press’ is in cahoots with the Power, doing its bidding as a kind of media-hit-man to harm only those targeted by Jewish Power and the Deep State, like when Biden family’s abuses and corruption in Ukraine go overlooked whereas a molehill was made into a mountain when Trump pried into the Biden Rot for political gain.
Weaponization of media and the justice department is essentially conspiratorial, even if so commonplace as to seem mundane to those involved. Jews, blacks, homos, and so-called ‘liberals’ feel so superior on grounds of meritocracy, education, creativity, conscience, and/or idolatry that they feel justified in using the institutions for their agenda than for any principled notion of balance. When one side feels itself to be totally correct and other side totally wrong, balance itself is deemed an evil. After all, the religious choose God over the Devil than a balance between the two. It goes to show the ‘woke’ mindset is essentially ‘spiritual’ than secular. But then, ‘conservatives’ are paying a price for their utter failure to hold onto elite institutions and mold ‘educated’ opinion. In the end, one cannot rely on principles as an entitlement. They have to be fought for and steadfastly held.

Video Link

Conspiratorial methods can spread far and wide, even affecting those in the middle professions, especially when lies and corruption are spun as matters of ‘social justice’. Some years ago, there were loud cheers about racial parity in academic achievement in New York public schools. There were similar stories of notable improvement among black students in Georgia. It turns out the educators, many of them black, agreed to lie about the results for good publicity and more funding & financial rewards. Granted, some of these stories came to light but not before the rot spread far and wide.

There was the case of the former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich. He finally got his comeuppance, but who were his enablers? How did he manage to win re-election despite the obvious corruption? And, where did all the money come from that financed the Obama campaign to the tune of over a billion dollars in 2012? And what happened to the media that, for so long, had been up in arms about the need for campaign finance reform?
Jews and Democrats who control the media no longer seem invested in such issues(as big business and big bucks are on their side). Instead of any real concern for truth or justice, it comes down to “Is it good for the Jews?”

So, even though Donald Trump won against all odds in 2016, the media made a big stink about how Trump might have won as the ‘Siberian Candidate’. But when there were truly weird things in the 2020 election(compromised by Covid and record mail-in voting), it was ‘unpatriotic’ and ‘anti-democratic’ to question the results. How can America boast of being the freest and most democratic society, a City on a Hill, when the all-important issues of truth and justice play second fiddle to the whims of Jewish Supremacism?

As long as the powers-that-be operate ever more in conspiratorial mode — with journalism serving as the machinery of enforcing taboos, pushing Globo-Schlomo-Negro idolatry, trading celebrity news for real news, and covering for deep state propaganda(e.g. six men on a yacht blew up the Nord Stream pipelines, so say the NYT and WAPO) — , we can’t help but be ‘paranoid’.

How did the Iraq War really come to be? Were the men around George W. Bush merely mistaken about WMD? Even if they expected WMD to be discovered, that surely wasn’t the real reason for the war. Neocon Jews used George W. Bush, aka the New Winston Churchill, the way Liberal Zionists later used Obama, the difference being Obama, for all his egocentrism, knew full well he was a whore working for Jewish pimps.

No people are more conspiratorial than the Jews and for good reason. Having survived for thousands of years as a ‘hostile minority’ among ‘hostile majorities’, Jews mastered the art of being secretive, subversive, devious, and cunning. One could argue Richard Hofstadter was worried about the ‘paranoid style’ precisely because it probed into the ways of the Jewish conspiratorial style.

Jews wanted the American Public to believe that Liberalism(the chosen ideology of most Jews) operated on the basis of good faith and good will, and that NOTHING was being hidden from public scrutiny. (Even though many on the Left were no less ‘paranoid’ about the power, the association of political suspicion/distrust with the ‘authoritarian’ right served as a warning to leftists and liberals who abhorred being characterized as right-wing-like in their political style and outlook.)

It’s only natural for adults to question the ulterior motives of any power group and its aggressive agendas. Only stupid children accept at face value what they hear from politicians, public intellectuals, and other men of power and influence. Jews most certainly had ulterior motives in pushing leftist politics, Civil Rights Movement, Holocaust Cult, Open Immigration, and the Peace Movement.
And the ‘paranoid’ right rightfully suspected that something was up, a mostly healthy suspicion that the likes of Hofstadter tried to neutralize, even pathologize.
They wanted Middle America to accept at face value the notion that Jews and Liberals were working tirelessly for the good of all Americans in accordance to the Constitution. Middle America was conditioned to despise the American Right as a hotbed of paranoids who saw ‘conspiracies’ everywhere.

But from the current perspective, what is the state of America after the countless machinations of Jewish power? What did massive immigration do? What happened to the economy with the total Jewish takeover of Wall Street? What happened to academic freedom once Jews consolidated their hold on universities? What has become of the media as propaganda tools of AIPAC and GAYPAC?

Jews prized William. F. Buckley Jr. because he purged ‘respectable’ conservatism of the ‘paranoid style’ of American politics and accepted Jewish intentions, agree or disagree, at face value. Thus, Jews could go on openly speculating about the dark motives of the WASPS, but goyim(or Jews for that matter) couldn’t do so about the Jews. Later, Buckley opened up American Conservatism to neoconservatives, whose ultimate agenda was to steamroll dimwit gentiles into serving Zion. And even as Buckley continued to disagree and debate with Liberal Jews, he never questioned the assumption that they, even if benighted or misguided, had the best interests of the nation in mind than some Jewish Supremacist agenda. In other words, they were Great Americans. But then, Neocon Jews had no qualms about labeling any conservative who opposed the Iraq War as ‘unpatriotic’ and ‘un-American’. To be fair to Buckley, he was dealing with a weak hand as American Conservatism continued its decline in elite fields.

Hardly surprising that Buckley became one of the biggest whores of Zion. To be sure, in his own personal-conspiratorial way, the philo-semitism served to mask his own ‘crypto-Nazism’ as Gore Vidal put it, i.e. how could Buckley be ‘racist’ when some of his best friends are the People of the Holocaust? Jews today, despite their purported ‘leftism’ or ‘liberalism’, probably remember Buckley more fondly than Gore Vidal the leftist who did sometimes name the Jewish Power and dared to be critical of Zionism. With the benefit of hindsight, Buckley was totally outplayed by Jews. Jews aimed for Jewish Supremacism all along and got it at the expense of white power, white interests, and white America. The so-called ‘godfather of American Conservatism’ became just another ‘buffer’.

Hide 16 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. The US Soldiers, and other US Military personnel, who fought and died in The Second World War, did so on behalf of the Soviet Union. They merely destroyed one of Europe’s most infamous tyrannies, Nazi Germany, to make life easier for the other of Europe’s most infamous tyrannies, namely Commie Russia. That is all they did, all they accomplished. I am sure Dear Old Uncle Joe could sleep a lot better then.

    And, there was a monument to the US Soldiers, and other US Military personnel, who perished. It was called The Berlin Wall. “Americans” must have been really upset when it was torn down. After all, “America” is a Nation of anti-German bigots.

  2. SafeNow says:

    As the essay notes, it’s a good idea to look at what Hollywood is thinking. But this is Hollywood’s best scene on style and power.

  3. ruralguy says:

    Good article, but a bit too long. When schools stopped teaching grammar, children lost the language training to perceive essential distinctions between what they sense, think, and express. Today, most Americans think of everything in terms of a jumble of emotions and the dominant social mores. The worst consequence is that Americans aren’t comfortable evaluating opposing thoughts. Instead, they latch onto the thought that would give them social acceptance among their peers, while thinking the other thought as evil, joining the mob in attacking anyone who thinks it.

  4. Some of the most misogynist men in history were Communists. Of course, Left of Center types like to focus on the sexism of the Fascists, and, there are some Conspiracy Theorists who link Feminism with Communism. Still, let us never forget the Soviet Rape of Berlin, and how Joseph Stalin– Hitler’s enemy of all people– approved of it.

    Now, to be fair to Jewish people, if there is one thing they can never be accused of, it is being Egalitarians. After all, (((they))) believe themselves to be The Chosen People, destined to rule over the rest of us, whom (((they))) view as Cattle in Human form. No Jew could be a True Feminist for the same reason no Jew could be a True Communist. Jews merely hijacked such political movements, via entryism, because they served the purpose of dividing the Goyim along sex lines (as in Feminism) or class lines (as in Communism).

  5. Xanadu says:

    The J-F runaway train just won’t stop!

    • Replies: @Odd Rabbit
  6. Chebyshev says:

    The Boasian racial egalitarianism of the 50s and 60s wrought a surge in violent crime and the destruction of major cities by blacks. Thus, whites swung towards the Right. But once elected, Republicans fleeced the working class with Randian economics. Mainstream conservatives like Buckley did nothing to stop this unhealthy kosher sandwich from being served to the masses. Of course, when this is the reality, then conspiracy theorizing is very dangerous to the Jewish power structure.

    P.S. Do you think Jon Stewart’s advocacy for legislation giving money to 9/11 first responders was because he felt guilt about what Zionists had done to all those firefighters, paramedics, and cops? He also worked on a pro-Zionist film about an Iranian dissident.

  7. Chris Moore says: • Website

    This warped ((Jew)) diagnosis of mental illness of opponents originates in the intra-tribal imperative of declaring anyone who doesn’t believe in the “Chosen People” dogma to be insane, and worthy of expulsion, or worse. They killed Christ for this kind of heresy (actually, they had the Romans kill Christ, which is how ((Jews)) launder their atrocities–by having others do their dirty work per the Talmud instructions, so there is a built in scapegoat when the their evil schemes fall apart, as they are again falling apart today).

    It didn’t work with Christ, though, as the New Testament states they collectively admitted their guilt (“May his blood be upon us and our children”) and demanded the criminal ((Jew)) Barabbas be released, and Jesus crucified.

    This is how Christians are informed of their guilt and treachery, which has always been inherent in their mad-dog sects, who eventually ruled the entire religion/tribe, and still do.

    The evil professed believers in “Holocaust” dogma are like the evil professed believers in the 9/11 fairy tale — ((Jew)) stooge collaborators and Judas Class dogs; in it entirely for the money.

    These are all “Jewish Century” dupes and rats, going through a massive exercise in method acting, all as an exercise in exculpapting their own guilt — just like the Talmud instructs.

    What worthless, soulless scum. These scum preach that they have a future in the Kingdom of Heaven? That’s like preaching the ((Jews)) are “Chosen” — anti-Christ malarkey on its face. Nobody believes that kind of double-think except schizos and madmen.

    This is why ((Jew)) stooge empires fall and fall hard: they’re filled with the worst kind of lying rot and reprobate grifters and trained monkeys who go around drooling like troglodytes and nodding along with every utterance of their insane kike masters.

    There’s no place in the Kingdom of Heaven for such creatures, but there’s a nice warm spot for them to cast themselves in a volcano and get it over with. But the ((Jew)) must be made to jump first, before the ((Jew)) stooge will follow.

    Time to turn up the heat on the kikes to incentivize them, maybe dangle a couple shekels out near the rim. They’ll then all stampede themselves straight into hell.

    • Replies: @Twin Ruler
  8. @Chris Moore

    The Jews are the mentally ill people, if they assume everyone is to worship them!

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
  9. @Twin Ruler

    if they assume everyone is to worship them!

    But all these goyim say “sometimes I do”.

  10. Trying to critique the conspiratorial nature of the country from the conspiratorial nature of this website is like an apple telling other apples they are nuts for being apples.

    • LOL: A. Clifton
  11. “History would prove many of McCarthy’s allegations to have been true,”

    No, it would not. This is a myth which had been spun in Right-wing circles over the last 3 decades. In 1947, the Truman administration launched an investigation of suspected spies which was motivated by intelligence information gathered in the previous few years since 1944. McCarthy had nothing to with this. While there are still debates over whether or not Alger Hiss was really a Soviet agent (the Venona archives don’t give specific information, although Hiss is an obvious suspect), there is no better confirmation about the exact degree to which Soviet agents were placed within the US and UK.

    But what brought McCarthy to prominence was something completely separate. It was the argument about “who lost China?” McCarthy repeatedly insinuated that Dean Acheson and George Marshall, two of the leading architects of the Truman administration’s Cold War policy, were actually foreign agents who had worked to engineer the triumph of Mao in China. Nothing revealed since 1991 has in any way supported this charge.

    What the historical record confirms repeatedly is that the demands for land redistribution (which Chiang Kai-shek carried out in Taiwan after he had been booted from the mainland) were such that it was possible to try supporting the Kuomintang without a radical land reform. Since Chiang rejected this until his overthrow on the mainland, it was pointless for the US to get dragged into supporting him. This would have made the mess in Vietnam look like Grenada. Acheson and Marshall should have been credited for common sense when they refused to get drawn into this. McCarthy’s charges were false.

    • Replies: @Priss Factor
    , @Marcali
  12. “unless he was a closet Jewish-Supremacist Weimerian than a true Marxist.”

    He was neither. Alinsky never claimed to be Marxist and specifically disavowed Marxism in his writings. Alinksy is what in old-fashioned Marxist lingo would be called a “bourgeois reformist.” He rejected the Marxist notion that capitalism as a stage of history is supposed to be superseded by a new stage that will begin with the revolt of the industrial proletarian class. Instead, Alinsky maintained that all the relevant changes could be accomplished by intelligent and fervent political activism without needing the Marxist notion of proletarian revolution. At the same time, Alinsky followed a classic Leftist approach of treating the labor force as a major force in such attempt at change. Alinsky was open towards any special demands which blacks might have formulated in the 1960s. But he would find it ridiculous to think that one can make any sustained radical change simply by pushing white workers to pay more benefits for blacks at a time when black crime rates are rising. Alinsky knew very well that demanding more high paid jobs for women while the male workers are facing increasing economic insecurity is not a way forward.

  13. @Patrick McNally

    the Truman administration launched an investigation of suspected spies which was motivated by intelligence information gathered in the previous few years since 1944. McCarthy had nothing to with this.

    But his ALLEGATIONS that the US government was deeply compromised by spies and sympathizers did turn out to be true.

    But true that McCarthy didn’t do much that was constructive as he fixated more on the smoke than on the fire.

  14. @Xanadu

    Fortunately, it doesn’t stop. It would be a great loss.

  15. Marcali says:
    @Patrick McNally

    “Testifying in 1949 at a secret hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Acheson said that in late 1946 Byrnes told him that he had received continual reports from various sources, including the FBI, that Hiss had been involved in Communist activities.”
    (Herbert Romerstein and Eric Breindel: The Venona Secrets, Exposing Soviet Espionage and America’s Traitors, 2000, p. 126.)

    • Replies: @Patrick McNally
  16. @Marcali

    Some of the ups and downs in the Hiss evidence are gone through here:

    What is clear from the Venona documents is that there was a Sovit agent in a position that was at similar to that of Hiss, and that Hiss himself is a perfectly natural suspect. At the time of the Hiss, many conservatives were hostile to Hiss over the New Deal and basically took the view that advocating social welfare spending made Hiss a Soviet agent. Although the original charges against Hiss came when J. Edgar Hoover made a tip-off to Richard Nixon (Joseph McCarthy was not on the scene yet and had nothing to do with this case), people were often suspicious about Hoover’s motives (Hoover did have a tendency to play political tricks on people he didn’t like). But the information from the Venona cables makes it unlikely that Hoover would have ignored a real Soviet agent just to carry out a political hit. Hoover must have been persuaded that Hiss was a real Soviet agent. Whatever other dirty tricks he often did, I can’t imagine Hoover being like the French officers who framed Alfred Dreyfus while they ignored evidence that Charles Esterhazy was the real German spy. Hoover was capable of deliberately framing people for political ends, but he would not have failed to investigate the evidence from Venona of a real Soviet agent.

    In any case, none of that had anything to do with Joseph McCarthy. The investigation of Alger Hiss was perfectly compatible with efforts that the Truman administration began in 1946-7. What brought McCarthy to national prominence in 1950 was his insinuation that Dean Acheson and George Marshall had been Soviet agents who had conspired to “lose China” for the USA. That was false. They simply avoided an intervention in China which would have committed the USA to trying to support the Kuomintang in a costly prolonged conflict much wider than Vietnam ever became.

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply -

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Jung-Freud Comments via RSS
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
From the Leo Frank Case to the Present Day