God’s Chosen People

Why is the World so Perilous?

Many perceive us to be “advanced” as a species, yet there’s so much chaos and heinousness in the world, that it makes many wonder—what exactly is going on here? If indeed we are so “advanced” as many will preach, why the conflict? Why world hunger? Why anything negative?! Why can’t we all just be happy?

Many point the finger to corporations, international bankers, cultural Marxism, the military-industrial complex, globalization, patriarchy, and a slew of other boogeymen. But as dedicated as they are to uncovering the truth, they’re falling for smoke and mirrors. Decoys set up by the victors of the most deadly conflict in human history. The post-war world is one of lies, deception, and nearly a century of cover-ups, scandals, genocides, and international espionage. If one truly seeks to understand the underlying cause of all of this, looking into the other side of WWII is essential.

Sefirot – a doctrine of Judaism



Jews are inherently secular“, meaning that what they believe is right and wrong changes, depending on the situation. They are an ideology of supremacy as well, framing the world populations as strictly that of two: Jews and non-Jews (gentiles, goyim).[1]


To communicate anything to a Goy about our religious relations would be equal to the killing of all Jews, for if the Goyim knew what we teach about them, they would kill us openly.


You probably know where I’m going with this by now and might feel inclined to leave a comment like, “but know good Jews.” As in, Jews that treat everyone fairly and are honest, hard-working people. But before you do, consider the following:

Christianity—is Judaism, reformed. Most involved with the genesis of Christianity and its prominence during Christendom (including Christ himself) wanted something new out of Judaism.[2]

Catholicism, Protestantism, Calvinism, Mormonism, and other non-Orthodox “denominations” of Christianity—are called reform Christianity, for a reason. It’s reforming Christianity back into Judaism, an ideology dating back to around 7th century BC when we were savages, and naturally wanted a belief system that taught us to stand our ground, in the face of rampant tribalism and uncertainty towards the forces of nature.[3]

Civilization eventually settled however and people grew tired of the egotism at its core, particularly because it led to countless wars and conflict and still does to this day. They wanted a new belief system that from birth would crank out clever, altruistic, cooperative people who didn’t make needless enemies everywhere they went. They wanted to destroy the ego.[4]

And so you see, when one is told, “don’t believe any of that ‘antisemitic garbage’, I’ve met plenty of decent Jews,” what they speak of are really closeted Christians. They may act like us. It doesn’t change the fact that they’re free to be selective with the doctrines of their scripture at will, as long as it plays the goyim’s disadvantage.




Christianity delineates no such others in this fashion and considers everyone, non-Christians included to be God’s children, worthy of basic respect and dignity. A Christian will never harm you willfully.[5] A Jew might. Because nothing about their holy text is meant to benefit all of mankind, as is in the case of the Bible and possibly the original version of the Quran, which was wiped out and revised heavily by the caliph Uthman.

What he ended up revising it into and from becomes quite clear if one pays particular attention to the demographical shifts going on before, during, and after the Quran’s conception in Mecca around 610 AD.




(((Pagans))) essentially persecuted Muhammed and his people with the classic divide and conquer, psychological warfare routine, leading to the conception of the Quran—which sought to capitalize largely off of the gospel[6] and bring providence together again; however, the version systemically pumped out over millennia by Uthman—has far more in common with the teachings of the Torah, Talmud, and Kabbalah. If Muhammed could see what “Islam” is today, he’d roll over in his grave. Ever since its inception, Islam has led to mostly, dismal, counterproductive, war-waging empires that conquer their surroundings by the sword to sustain themselves.[7]

And that is something to expect when your religion is corrupted by another ideology with more reach, resources, and intensely deep-rooted supremacist attitudes.[8] It will of course only come to serve as a proxy or decoy for said ideology’s agenda. As hard as it is to tell Muslims this to their face, their religion is mostly fraudulent.

Paganism can be thought of the first reformed Christianity; the first one to take prominence in a world superpower that is. Recall, if you will what I said earlier: reform Christians indeed as Wikipedia mocks aren’t Christian.

Terrorism and Islam are inherently related, but it is not the fault of Islam itself, the people who initially conceived of it, or Muslims themselves. Islam is yet another decoy, folks. A pivotal one marking the end of Christendom (a mostly Christian world) and the beginning pieces of the classical end-times scenario, covered extensively in Jewish holy texts.

A scenario in which most Jews will be safe in their homeland (which is Israel, a country currently building borders and putting up mandatory DNA testing for entrance) and the gentiles will suffer in the outer Israeli, globalist cage like the cattle they’ve been seen as all along.


Jews As a Race

In sequence tree form, from the emergence of mankind to the modern day, racially it goes Blacks > Reds > Yellows > Whites > Jews. Blacks came out of Africa, their skin lightened a little; they became Red. Some of those reds migrated to cooler areas and became yellow. With each cooler migration, the races began to get more civilized. Yellows (Asians) would end up ruling the planet for some time with their intelligence and perseverance. Smart as they were, many migrated to the Caucus mountains to experience peak cooling and thus peak civilization. These Yellows of course Whitened and the rest is history.

But like all racial groups throughout history, whites are no different than any other when it comes to infighting. Civilized though we may call ourselves, we all have our “prejudices”. Some whites didn’t care for this nu-found Western way of life and chose to migrate back to the Middle East and indulge in their outdated, hedonistic lifestyles—which overtime turned them into genetic monstrosities.

Jews are an ethnoreligious group (a sub-race, if you will) Ethno is racial in this context. It is a race of people (in this case, whites) engaging in the same religion. Christians are an ethnoreligious group, also. They don’t all act the same. Many Christians sin and many non-sinners don’t identify as Christian. As with Jews, we’re a “gray area” as well. The difference is our intention. Jews want a world for themselves, whereas Christians want a world for everybody.


It’s true though. We’ve all got the “bigotry” bug; we all need to get off our high horse about that.

The reason it is often stated that race is “nothing more” than a social construct, is because it’s the biological phenomenon of genetic division among a species and we are social creatures. Therefore, most racial divisions occur because of differing behavior, environment shifts, and other supposed free choices we make. But is this variation freely chosen?

What is free will?

Can you even describe it? Something free is uncontrolled; Something willed is completely controlled. Science has no who, what, when, where, or why of any such “free will”. If anything, we’ve gradually disproven it by providing more and more explanations overtime for phenomena we had once attributed to “free will”.

What was the last thought you had? Did you choose it? How’d you do it? Did you think about what you wanted to think? And what made you do that?! Do you have free will, or has a chain of intellectually lacking “wills” infected you with the notion?

Still not convinced? Consider the following questions and your answers.

  1. Would you agree, like most people, that we are part of nature? That is to say, not separate from it, and in fact—entirely dependent on it?
  2. Would you agree, like most people, that ants are a part of nature?
  3. Would you describe the behavior of ants as robotic? If not, how about bacteria? It’s just cells. All it can do is spread mindlessly. It’s as close to a pure automaton of nature as we can get. But keep in mind, bacteria—like you is just another part of nature, right?
  4. Speaking of bacteria, wouldn’t you agree that all of this complexity in the animal kingdom had to emerge from something? A cell or two, maybe?

If you answered yes to all or most of these questions, then I’ve got a question: what are you? If you ask me, you’re nothing more than a heavily advanced version of bacteria. You wanna know where the idea of free will comes from? Quite simply, our hubris. The ego is a powerful thing, as it should be, for it served an evolutionary purpose during our daily struggle for survival. But it has since become outdated and its promise people, those who seek to reinvigorate and keep it alive the most—are Jews.


Who Shot First?

Judea Declares War On Germany, a 1933 newspaper said in response to Germany crawling out from under the heel of international bankers. For they knew not that Germany would “take over the world”, but that Germany’s restored ideals (nationalism, family, tradition, etc.) would soon usurp the globe and bring the private banking industry down.

Globalism vs. Nationalism

Hitler didn’t reach enough people in time for international Jews not to start using their accumulated financial power across the globe to turn public opinion against Germany, setting into motion so many events of instigation, intimidation, mass-rapings in Germany, sanctions, and so on, that she had no choice but to “declare war” on the Allied Forces. The Japanese were similarly frightened into involvement in the events that took place during “Pearl Harbor”. The Axis were the good guys. That’s why we live in a hate-filled, divisive, and oppressive world that rewards Machiavellianism and antisociality. Nobody knows who they are anymore. WWII was a battle of ideas. Nationalism vs. Globalism; Diversity vs. Assimilation; Many Cultures vs. One that can easily be controlled.

It also touches upon the paradox that is our wide-spread misconception of collectivism and individualism. The combination of characteristics and traits associated with all the collectives you belong to, the uniqueness of your’s in comparison to others’, is what makes you an “individual”. Collectivists are the true individuals, each belonging to a variety of different groups in their own respects. “Individualists”, on the other hand, are ironically all the same. They think values are all that matter and while they are important, where the values come from is just as important, if not more so.



Concentration / “Death” Camps

The camps in Europe during WWII were not death camps, nor did they function as oppressive facilities to milk communists in Germany for all they were worth, then throw them in the meat grinder. National Socialist Germany wanted communists to move, yes. But they didn’t want to just dispose of those who didn’t leave. So they essentially created neat, little, make-shift, communist communities for them, out of the camps.

These camps had cafeterias, hospitals, beds, dentistry, maternity wards, currency. The “prisoners” of these camps lived exactly the kind of life they longed for. Nobody owned anything; yet everyone had access to whatever they needed, and they were happy. Even long before these camps were implemented, Germany attempted (mostly with success) to relocate the communists into neighboring countries that were more than willing to accept their integration, as was “evil” Germany more than happy to finance it.

Germany was the foremost superpower in Europe at the time. Hence, if any of her neighbors were in dire trouble, she was the one to step in and help. This is why there were camps not just in Germany, but some in Poland, Austria, etc. Because many countries in Europe at the time were experiencing absolutely horrific Soviet purges. “Prisoners” of these camps were “kidnapped” from a life of constant uncertainty and chaos and taken into boxed communities that took care of them.

On the other hand, guess who did have and in fact, invented concentration camps.

British and German Jews in South Africa.


Typhus, a skin-eating disease with no cure at the time, spread itself through bugs, lice, and microorganisms, an issue commonly expected when dealing with crowds of people in constant close proximity to one another. The only way to contain the virus was to shower, sanitize, shave everyone regularly and burn their clothes (in ovens) if they weren’t salvageable. If they were salvageable, they had to be sprayed first with the delousing agent, Zyklon-B.

This stuff was deadly to put it lightly and certainly not the kind of thing you wanted to be left uncontained, which would make it the perfect weapon to use in war, wouldn’t it? How might one use it? Well, here’s an idea. How about we (the Allies) bomb the hell out of German supply bases and medical facilities, to deprive and ultimately shut down administration within the camps, leading to—well, chaos. Better yet, let’s just bomb their whole country with phosphorus fires all over, so that even those who survive somehow—will roam for a while, then starve to death. Seems like a solid plan to me.

Then after we occupy their camps, we’ll alter them. Take old photographs and footage of them; edit those as well. The goal really is: make our enemies look terrible. Nothing is too extreme.









Globalism / Israel

Everything Hitler predicted in Mein Kampf about a globalist world has largely come to pass and the Jewish homeland “Israel” fittingly enough is at the heart of the storm. Abolition of religion, abandoning of all culture, centralizing of communication, education, and everything holding our precious, various cultures together on their own merits. It cannot be understated; the broader society we all suffer through today isn’t like communism. It is communism.






Chinese Warming

4) “Climate change” alarmism. No matter how much contradicting evidence is presented or how divided the scientific community is global imperialists always express 100% certainty in “climate change” and “global warming” theories. They virtually never question it and they usually insist on reacting to the worst case scenario hypothesis. This is of particular importance in their ideology because it creates a fear-based imperitive to bring all the nations of the world under the economic and political control of “internationalist” institutions.

–Globalist Traits, Rob Ager, March 2011









Why Did We Let it Happen?

We didn’t. They tricked us, folks. It all goes back to usury. We keep borrowing, thus indebting ourselves, but never asking, “when is it going to be enough?” Jews know how to exploit this weakness. Democracy is a scam to give you the illusion of choice, when the bankers have already pre-determined the outcome EVERY TIME by funding and not funding whoever they wish.


National Socialism

A Truly Diverse Ideology

No two national socialist societies were, are, or will ever be alike. Yet all communist and anarchist societies seemingly fall down the same path, no matter how they approach their system, which let’s be honest–doesn’t vary much. There are not very many ways to have no society, and there’s just as few ways to run a society that takes everything from everyone by force. There is practically an infinite number of ways, however, to run a national socialist system, for at the core of national socialism is: the nation; the people. It is the one true “democracy” if ever there were such a system that you could describe as such.

Natsoc isn’t subject to the same potential corruption as today’s “democratic” societies, for if a banker or any corporate entity attempts to overstep their boundaries, they will fail. If people wish to conduct business in natsoc societies, the business must serve the nation in some measurable way and not take more than it gives. Societies that allow such businesses to operate, regardless of usefulness are called capitalist systems and such systems are a catalyst for (((globalism))), much like international socialism (communism) would be. Any international entity for that matter, as well as any that operates under market fundamentalism (deregulation), will naturally and necessarily overstep its boundaries and become a world superpower, putting every other smaller territory under its heel.

Now, when I say that natsoc is in the center of the left and the right, I’m not necessarily insinuating that it’s a “centrist” ideology. What I’m getting at is much bigger than that. Once one truly grasps what national socialism really is, they’ll understand that there is no such thing as the left or the right. Those are terms invented by divisive people who have been led into living in systems they don’t like, because they’ve been heavily influenced by global powers that want them to be divisive, to buy things they don’t need with money they don’t have, and to spend 1/3 of their daily waking hours absorbing news media. The left is just a melting pot one swims in all day, every day until they eventually become a communist; the same goes for the right and anarchy.

Would you rather have as oppressive a society as possible, no society at all, or a functional one?


Most civilized societiesare white. In that, they’re made by whites, for whites. Civilized in that they have an infrastructure, hygiene, schools, research, automation, central heating, air conditioning, refrigeration, plumbing, shelter, housing, agriculture, manufacturing, news media, entertainment, churches, distinct cultural music and art, engineers, scientists, functional nuclear families, unity among class and sub-culture, and so on.

Once one realizes how white supremacy truly works, most won’t take issue with it. In fact, they’ll immediately come to realize that they’ve been a “white supremacist” for longer than they thought. For it is quite simple. We, whites—have taken and “pillaged” all that we have in this world throughout history, by killing our enemies with one thing: altruism; Christianity. Our egolessness. Kindness, if you will.

Our people are amazing. The world we live in today with all our neat gadgets and obvious authority status over nature—is a mostly white invention. Non-whites can never repay us for this, if we did ever come to collect the debt that is, which we won’t, because that very humbleness is what makes us white, on the inside. Egyptians, Persians, North Americans, Mesopotamians, Indians, Chinese, Mongolians, Japanese, Incans, Mayans, Aztecs, Peruvians, Iranians, Iraqis, Bosnians, and especially Palestinians were all once visited some time ago by what many of them called, “giant, white Gods” from the mountains (Caucasia), before the peak of all of their civilizations. Why did they all collapse, and why so quickly (say in the span of about a century or two, every time)? They sent whites packing and often slaughtered them. It’s the same story, every time.

And part of that sadly is our fault. Because we are so kind and brotherly with our fellow man, we often mingle, work, and eventually mate with any surrounding minorities, such that—demographical change, in the long run, is inevitable without state intervention. And once few enough people are white on the outside, there won’t be enough who are white on the inside to keep society running functionally. It will collapse without us; make no mistake. As a non-white, if you care about your people, you should be every bit a “white supremacist”, as we are. Because any world absent of our people is a perilous, virtually uninhabitable one for the rest of you.


That no rape culture thing is not an exaggeration. There was indeed no rape culture, no homeless slums, no neighborhoods of single mothers. None of those societal ills we’ve come disgustingly to just accept everywhere we are. The one true eutopia is the one most strongly discouraged and looked down upon.

It can’t be that shocking.

Dispelling a Myth

Nationalism is “Supremacy”

Supremacy means “nationalism for you, but globalism for everyone else.” But as I just explained, “white” supremacy doesn’t work like that. There’s only one group of people with an abundance of power that behaves in a truly supremacist fashion openly.

Jews Control the World

This would be problematic in the case of cultural hegemony of any kind because it would bend several delicate, unique peoples and systems over to the will of one master, which is just patently unethical. It is even extra harmful, however, given our circumstance because Jews don’t exercise their power out in the open. They craft boogeymen for us to chase after like sheep, by spending their money very meticulously. Anticipating the damage, they then fund the cleanup crew, and it’s a never-ending cycle of chaos and recovery—all of which they profit from. But it’s more than just profiting from it. They outright engineer it, most of the time.

Understanding that they can’t not do this—that their ideology is inherently supremacist and depends on creating conflict perpetually to sustain itself, is important.


Let’s say you and I are acquaintances and you need $30. Suppose I give you $30, under the expectation that you’ll give me $30 back at some point. This–is what’s called a loan.

Now, suppose instead that we’re not very well acquainted and I decide that if you want my $30 now, you have to give me $35 next week, and if not–$40 the next, and so on. You might be familiar with this process; you might also think this is a loan, or at least some special type of loan. It’s not. I’m not “loaning” you money out of the kindness of my heart. Your bills, your child’s braces, and wife’s breast cancer treatment mean less than nothing to me. I’m using you and your unfortunate financial situation to make money for myself. If you hadn’t yet, perhaps you see now why the Catholic church banned it for so long,.

Usury is any kind of lending that enriches the lender. Understanding its role goes a long way toward understanding how Jewish supremacy is sustained and what to do about it as a society.

Imagine, If You Will

a World of Thelema

This one time, I was taking a stroll across town, when I saw a Thelemite. I could tell he probably was one because he had a shirt on of that famous Aleister Crowley picture with the Eye of Horus. I walked up to him, pushed him down, stuck my foot in his mouth, and starting kicking him viciously in the testicles. He cried, naturally. I asked what was wrong and he said, “you’re hurting me,” to which I smirked and remarked, “hurting you? Sir, this is my will, and it shall be done. Now, quit oppressing me,” to which he responded graciously, “oh, right,” and continued receiving the ass-beating that had begun moments ago.

I went back to his house; I could tell it was his house, cause he had an Ozzy Osbourne memorial on his porch. I let myself in and used my second brain to put his wife in a choke hold if you know what I’m saying. He walked in shortly before I came; he was not amused. But I repeated the same line to him as I did earlier. “Sir, it is my will. If you interfere, you’re suggesting that your will is superior to mine. Don’t tread on me.” He sighed, looked down in shame, and said, “right,” after which I continued thrusting, moaning, and relieving myself.

I tore up a dollar bill and left it in his mailbox. The (((mailman))) found it the next morning and now would probably be a good time to mention—this guy is black. Needless to say, there was a warrant for his arrest and a battering ram headed for his doorstep hours later. He was shaking; I think one of the cops inadvertently shot his daughter in the face when a bullet ricocheted into her after bouncing off a quoted Maya Angelou picture frame. So he was furious to put it lightly.

But on that faithful court day, when it was my turn to take the stand I said, “your honor, have not we heard the Law of Thelema in this court?” to which everyone, including the judge, responded in gasps, hushed whispers, and looks of bewilderment. The black Thelemite, who was now wearing a Black Lives Matter shirt, was sitting in the defendant seat with his face in his hands, looking absolutely defeated.

An explanation for all the

“Hygienics” in the story there

The Law of Thelema holds the individual will of each of its adherents to be divine law. A true Thelemite will not question the will of anyone else, even if it conflicts with theirs. They can act in their “own will” to defend themselves of course. But they can’t be upset with you in good faith for trying to wrong you as a Thelemite; for if they did, they would fail to understand what Aleister Crowley taught. To let go of morality.

Now, what’s the difference between a Thelemite, which let’s be real here is nothing more than a Satanist attempting to come off as more “philosophical”, and a Jew? Well, Thelemites think they’re God. Deep within Aleister Crowley (the first Thelemite) was a detachment from reality. This is due to the innate fact that nothing seems to exist outside of perception, which seems to only exist within our minds, hence–it’s impossible to know whether or not anything is real. Because he wasn’t sure he was real, he assumed he was God, genuinely. That he was solely responsible for keeping this “world” together that he was nearly convinced was all in his head.

A Jew knows there’s a God. As do Christians.

Ya see a Christian thinks that life is a test. A test of what: faith.

Jew thinks they are testing life. Testing what about it: its stability.

Deep within Thelema, you’ll encounter people like Elon Musk, who suggest that if anything–we aren’t real; that if indeed we are to reach a level of sophistication one day where we’ll be able to create life from scratch and become God in a sense, then that’s probably already happened. Many, many times. Musk thinks that we’re not only living in a “simulation” but that our “simulators” are living in one as well, as are their’s and so on.

It truly takes an unbelievable amount of narcissism and willful ignorance of the suffering of others for someone to have this solipsistic worldview. It’s disgusting. I don’t get how such people are unable to look around them and see that others go through the same struggles, trials, and tribulations that they do. That they bleed, cry, and have urges just like them. That they too feel like they are the main character of the universe in a sense. It’s called sonder, and it’s the key to stepping out of this cancerous, “individualist” mindset.

Everything your ancestors have built must be preserved if you are to have a future for your grandchildren, great grandchildren and so on. In order to do that, you must not give into the divisive mechanisms being peddled to us by our Israeli puppet masters.






























Tomato Bubble

Huge Questions

Globalist Traits


Trump Hate Map

The Federal Reserve

Murdered South Africans

Macrocosmic Thinking


Featured post

About Me (cont.)

A More In Depth Perspective

As the more simplified About page on this website bluntly points suggests, I am a fascist, which hasn’t always been the case. Although my tendency to seek out really out-there shit, corroborate it into my experiences, and draw conclusions based on what I perceive with my senses to be reality (which has brought me to this worldview)—has been with me since I gained access to the Internet around age ten. My background in the “alt-right” can be traced all the way back to, if someone dug deep enough, I shit you not—cat videos. Yes, the Internet used cats to turn me into a Nazi.

Ya see, I always looked up goofy shit online when I was a kid, and among that cesspool of cancer which also included stick figures on crack and YouTube Poop as an aside, was videos of cats. I found one such channel called Hiddentracktv2 (Mylo the Cat) and became obsessed with it. I was as iMustDestroyAll would call it, a fanboy, which is the next step down this rabbithole. For you see, through iMustDestroyAll, I ended up encountering, meeting, collaborating with, and involving myself in many other infamously autistic ways (I’ve been involved in my share of gay ops) with several other Internet personalities, from charming and enlightening to downright psychopathic.

Cat Videos > Hiddentracktv2 > HiddentrackTV Critics > iMustDestroyAll > Critics in General > Commentators > “Skeptics” > Anti-feminists > Race Realists > White Nationalists > White “Supremacists” > and eventually—the Daily Stormer.

But of course, that’s the black and white version and I could go all out and give a full on autobio. Talk about my childhood and all of that, but it really all boils down to experience and I’ve always consumed the content and sought out the information that provides the explanations for cultural phenomena I witness and encounter every day of my life. If I had “gone down this path” for reasons of malice like many assume, I’d have gone full “neo-Nazi” decades ago. My fixation on Hitler is nothing new. That shit’s always gotten me into (((trouble))).

(((The Left)))

Leftists seem to have an obsession, often an intense hatred even for white men, and as a white man—who knows that he’s a white man and is proud of it, that’s always steered me away from identifying with them at all, just out of dignity. But I have political gripes with them as well. In particular, I can’t stand how uneducated they are on race and how they see multiculturalism as “natural” and just. Oh, it’s natural alright. The natural evolutionary strategy of the most antagonistic race out there. (((They))) don’t wanna be unmasked and I don’t blame them.

(((The Right)))

I’ve always seen eye-to-eye with right-wingers on basically everything, especially social issues. But one thing I’ve lately begun to have a gripe with regarding their politics is their pension for equating socialism with communism. That and, we’ve experimented with “free markets” before, which is the go-to, end-all-debates, imaginary eutopia of the right-wing. It’s called anarchy, and my issue with anarchy is the same as with communism. It’s (((international))) and thus bound to fail.

What the left and the right both need to realize is that they’ve been divided up needlessly among political issues that don’t and shouldn’t matter, because they’re both wrong anyway. Every leftist is just a communist waiting to happen and every right-winger, an anarchist. They’re both right about certain things, but both are terribly misguided in one big aspect, which is their involvement with internationalism.

My Conclusion

The only way to run a sensible society based on what I know to be “equality” (a world where every nation fends for itself and looks after its own people), is to take from both the left and the right, everything that is functional and achievable. Personal liberty in the case of the left primarily, and an emphasis on family and culture in the case of the right. More importantly, however, we must exclude the elements of both that lead us towards endless division. What one ends up with as an ideology when they do that is national socialism. Socialism can be thought of as a nation giving back to itself. Right-wingers have an aversion towards socialism because they equate it in their minds with international socialism (communism). Nationalism is simply an awareness of one’s culture and people and an instinct to preserve them both. Leftists fixate so vehemently on it with vitriol anywhere they encounter it because they equate it with supremacy, which is the go-to strawman idea of subverting all peoples to the will of one.

Everyone Literally Ever

But Shank, the problem with you having opinions like this is that you’ll normalize it and make literal klanspeople lynch Jews and stuff.” Ah, but your politically correct worldview certainly couldn’t be used to justify white genocide. Gotcha.


I’ve only questioned the Holocaust as an event as of 2016, although I’ve always been skeptical of the whole “Hitler is evil; Nazis are bad; pride is bad when white people do it” narrative. All societies have reprehensible atrocities under their belt I’ve always thought, some openly worse than anything accredited to Hitler. Yet everytime anybody, no matter what walk of life they’re from, needs a big, bad boogeyman when referencing fascism, they default like a Pavlovianly conditioned lapdog—to Hitler—every single time. Again, I see a white man being blamed for something others do more than him and that he most likely didn’t even do anyway. Same story every time; but I’m expected not to question it. My ass.

How Do You Do It?

It’s hard. But that’s life. Gotta pick your battles, right? My ultimate gripe at the end of the day isn’t with the blue pilled people that control everything, the red pilled people that go about spreading our message the wrong way. It’s the black pilled people that I’m at war with ideologically. Their apathy disgusts me, for it’s what gives the blue pills their power. And if I’m starting to sound “wacky” describing people as pills, think about it for a minute.

There’s three kinds of people in the world:

  • There’s people going around telling everybody to shut up. (blue pills)
  • There’s people like me telling those people to shut up. (red pills)
  • And then there’s the majority of people—shutting up. (black pills)
  • Red pilled guy: What’s wrong with you all?! We’re losing the battle! We need to change tactics now!
  • Black pilled guy: What’s the use, man? They’ve already won. Let’s just lie down in peace. Maybe they’ll give us some kind of a deal.
  • Blue pilled guy: I dunno what y’all are going on about. This is great!

I can almost respect blue pills intellectually more than black pills even. Because like us, they have a clear, cohesive mindset and a largely shared vision of the world. If you got a room full of all blue pills or all red pills, the conversation would be decently tempered and civil in either case. Everyone would be on the same page for the most part. But if you got all black pills in the room together, it would be a gore fest. Because they’re confused. They know something the blue pills don’t (that there’s something fucked up with the world), they’re just far from consensus on what it (((is))).

One more level of autism as it pertains to the pill paradigm if you care to indulge, is that there’s also two kinds of blue pills. There are the paradoxically red-pilled blue pills. In that, they know the world’s not all ponies and rainbows for everyone and that’s the way they want it (Jews). And then there are the genuinely blue pilled people, that are plugged into a system and defending it blindly, without having an inkling just how cancerous it is (the Goyim).

The main factor as to why goy pills are the way are is almost always in tragically selfish origin. They haven’t experienced the plight of this world, nor have they encountered others that go through the “struggle”, so they can’t relate to the idea of the world being a stage very well. Because from their perspective, it isn’t.

It wouldn’t take any serious kind of soul-searching, travel, or anything too complicated, to see their way to reason though. All they would need to do is abandon individualism in their minds as a concept, which won’t be difficult when they open their eyes to how mindbogglingly ineffible the idea of “free will” is. It doesn’t invalidate anything they’ve ever done and are proud of, but it demonstrates that different environments and genes result in different outcomes of behavior.

Stepping out of oneself and getting to ground base with all the collectives and groups they belong to and that have shaped them, doesn’t invalidate their “individuality”. It shows them how it came to be. It didn’t come out of thin air, bud. You’re not special. Individualism is an illusion; a byproduct of collectives merging with others. It’s a step and a half logically from there to accepting then that—all societies have been formed the way they were—for survival purposes, entirely. Any other reason we attribute to these behaviors usually boils down to, the person believes in free will, in which case—give them their dunce hat. Free fucking will. Yea, you don’t believe in God. But you’re sure God, yea. Fuck yourself and your “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” boomer, garbage ridiculousness.

This is why while I certainly don’t consider them my ideological colleagues, I’m able to yield my tip of the cap towards Jews. I know what they’re doing, why they do it, how to stop them, and I expect them to fight me every step of the way. It’s a game in a way for me when it comes to them. When I see blue pills, I don’t try and red pill them. You can’t help someone that doesn’t want to be helped. Ya just gotta realize who you’re dealing with and work around their shenanigans.

But if someone notices the world’s not all honky dory and believes world peace to be something of a fantasy, I will gladly drop the Jewish Question on their ass any day. Not like a bomb-shell of course. Gotta crush the red pill up into pieces and make a trail for them, until they come back to you scratching their necks asking, “ya gotta any more of that stuff?”  And I’m not a Machevellian asshole for doing that. You can’t drop this shit on people all at once. It’s dangerous.


I ain’t going to sugar coat it. If you watched a movie through my eyeballs from birth ’til now, you’d be bored out of your mind. My interests are very particular. Narrow as can be. A documentary of my life could very well be called: Insight into Introversion. I’ve always considered myself an observer of reality, rather than a participant. It overwhelms me. The degeneracy of our culture. I don’t get how anyone can appreciate it. The rave shit, “selfie” sticks, hook-up culture, smashing conservative statues, ethical pedophilia! Why? Why all this pathetic garbage? Why can’t we just be people? It absolutely repulses me. Not so much the fact that it exists, but as I said earlier—the complacency (black pills). How is any of this okay?! Is it because you fear being called an old racist uncle or something for calling a spade a spade?

If you must know though, I make videos, write blog posts, synthesize corny music I used to “rap” over (very fucking badly -.-), strum the guitar here and there, play video games, watch YouTube videos, browse 8chan, excersize ’til I fall over like a pussy, try like hell not to consume anything with soy in it, and crush up red pills everyday, so I can snort ’em. That’s basically what I do in my free time.

Paradox of Intolerance

Why The Intolerance in Tolerance?

One may believe it to be hypocritical when SJWs and snowflakes choose to behave in a discriminatory manner towards people they perceive to be racist, bigoted, or what have you. One may see it as mere psychological projection. After all, such behavior would make these virtuous, morally superior individuals look, well—no better than their perceived enemies, right?

But what if I told you that this kind of thinking was inevitable? What if I told you that we all believe in “equality”, but simply have a different idea of what it is and how to achieve it? There’s no such thing as a totally tolerant person. In fact, certain ideas and people cannot be tolerated without necessarily showing contempt for others. There is no paradox-less tolerance.

All efforts to fight for equality, regardless of how one interprets it, will necessarily involve opposition towards one group of people or another. All tolerance requires intolerance. Bigotry is more or less—unavoidable. So, between open racists and anti-racists, who would you suggest lives more in reality? Who would you say is conforming their beliefs and opinions based more around what’s real and achievable, rather than ideals and fantasy?

These “social justice” types (postmodernists, at their core) are a bit in denial. After all, most of them end up shockingly on the same two places of the “gender spectrum”. They often have open prejudices when it comes to sex, religion, age, and other “superficial” things about ourselves that we can’t change, but not race. This is because no matter where you lie on this spectrum of intolerance, everyone is racist. And I don’t just mean that in a tribalistic sense, where we all look after our own extended families, before anyone else’s.

I’m talking about overt, hateful racism where you want nothing to do with a certain group. One cannot support nationalism without hating Jewish supremacy and one cannot support globalism without hating white supremacy. If you hate Jewish supremacy, you’re not going to get along with most Jews; for Judaism is an inherently, divisive, supremacist ideology. And if you hate white supremacy, then you’re going to find it difficult interacting with most people in general, but above all whites, seeing as how white supremacy and civilization are essentially synonyms.

Many anti-racists out there get accused of hating white people; but in many cases, this is unfortunate. For these people are simply looking out for everyone in the fashion they know to be the most humane and objectively successful given their experiences. Likewise, many “antisemites” such as myself, certainly don’t choose to be. We simply perceive different obstacles on the road to “equality” than most of you.

Haven’t you ever wondered how someone who’s nice and pleasant to be around in most cases—could seemingly hate white people so much? Some may also similarly wonder how antisemites can be the way they are—despite the fact that they don’t feel or come off that way in regards to any other particular groups out there. This is why, folks. We’re all racist. Some are less open with their racism through and these are the dangerous people.

We’re the good guys.



I didn’t wake up and decide out of nowhere that multiculturalism was really nothing more than (((war))) by demographics. The unjustified mob mentality of everyone around me, on and offline has demonstrated this to me that this is the case. There are few places for the bulk of us to immigrate to go if America gets blacked like Europe; nor is going anywhere an option for many of us for reasons of pride and perseverance. America is a white country and it needs to start getting its identity back, so that white children here in the future—don’t have to suffer like whites in South Africa.

All we ever hear in terms of “dialogue” on these matters from most people is apathy, disgustingly lackluster justification (usually some half-baked argument about “imperialism”), and people turning right around and not applying the very values they preach about so virtuously all the time—to a certain group of people that they feel—“deserve” it. When one is hit with, “you’re a hateful bigot”, the proper reaction is to laugh in their face and say, “so are you.” Then gauge their perception of “white imperialism” if they challenge you. These people are all the same. Whether they outright despise white people, or simply focus vehemently on them because they don’t like our perceived “oppressor” status—they’re anti-white at the end of the day, and as someone facing future minority status that does not consent to it, that makes them my enemy.

In the same way that you can’t break through to a brainwashed sociology student about how it’s actually not necessary to kill all white people to—“make society better”, you’re going to have quite a time trying to get alt-righters, such as myself to accept the idea of “peaceful co-existence” with Jewish people. White people will always face discrimination everywhere they are, in ways that are accepted by the establishment and thus, don’t “count” as racism—unless we find our spines and bring back the camps.

And no, I’m not saying, “gas them all.” I’m simply saying that we take all non-whites, single mothers, and other deviants from the original straight, white, nuclear family, and put them in designated labor camps throughout the country. They won’t be given money, rather housing, dental, entertainment, and all of their needs will be met in a semi-communist fashion (as many of them long for ultimately), in exchange for their labor. Nobody will own anything in these camps (no corporations); thus most of them will be happy and we will integrate those who aren’t happy with the changes into neighboring countries with population quotas to fill.

No tricks either. It’s not like we’re going to be feeding you food that secretly makes you infertile, or placing guards with guns pointed at you for your “protection”. We genuinely don’t want to hurt you people; no matter how badly you may want to harm us. We just don’t want to live with you, or near you. We don’t want anything to do with you. You have your culture; we have ours. Leave us the hell alone.


Describing Multiculturalism

It’s kind of like throwing twenty or thirty different flavors of Jello into one bowl and saying, “look at all the different kinds of Jello we have; so diverse, wow.” Then you taste it reluctantly and it tastes kinda bitter, doesn’t it? If you wanna taste all the uniqueness and beauty within each of the Jello flavors, ya gotta cook ’em separate.

People of other races aren’t the problem. Mixing them together (miscegenation), is. Not only because it inevitably after awhile results in a population decline, if not the eventual extinction of a certain people or few—but it can potentially damage children genetically also.

I don’t mean that it’s going to prevent the child from having “all the traits” from both races (although, that is true.) I mean something much more dire. Fatal illnesses are far more in common among mix-babies and “mutts”. This is because there are a variety of genes for human survival from fairly helpful to downright essential that end up being skipped in the replication process during reproduction. Kind of like how if a wild tiger impregnated a house cat, you wouldn’t expect a fine mix of the two species. No, a mutant of some sort would come out and that’s the reality with miscegenation among humans as well. It’s in the word, which most people mispronounce. Mis-Geneation

Read Guns, Germs, and Steel by (((Jared Diamond))) is a good read for anyone skeptical of this. Different races aren’t born out of race-mixing, contrary to popular belief. Genetic variation among humans happens as a response to their changing environments. The cooler the area, the cooler tempered they are. Ever notice that IQ distribution is higher among the poles than it is for the equator?

Diversity Hiring

Diversity hiring is cancerous. Briefly covered this in my post about Diablo: Immortal, this issue warrants its own post for reasons that will become apparent as you read along. For this is an issue that encompasses much more than just video game companies. Nay, this is a hurdle all Western companies and cohencidentally many other white countries must meander through if they wish to do business.

Diversity hiring (aka. affirmative action) is when companies act supposedly in the interest of “multiculturalism” and hire people that they feel qualify as “diverse”, instead of hiring people who can—oh, I dunno—do the job, regardless of their race and sex. You’d think these vehement “anti-racists” with their moral high horses and all—would embrace the idea of meritocracy. Instead, these postmodernists concern themselves with race more than openly racist people do.

But that’s the (((accepted))) definition of diversity hiring. What it really is, is simply—going out of one’s way not to hire straight, white men. It’s as simple as that. Allow me to demonstrate how diversity hiring shows contempt for all races and women, but above all—white men. In doing so, I’ll also demonstrate how true tolerance and acceptance of other people comes from among other things, an appreciation for meritocracy, a state wherein companies hire the best possible workers.

Say you have a lemonade stand. It takes two people to run it, while you, the Manager, are out doing errands. You hire one guy to make the lemonade and another guy to pour it and collect cash. Suppose you luck out and haven’t run into any mandated quotas yet and decide to make your lemonade producer a white man who has a degree in Lemonade Production. Now, suppose there’s another white man available who’d be perfect for the cashier position.

But, what’s this? A gigantic, quota boulder has landed right on your lemonade stand. You need to hire some black folk, Asians, women, or something other than a white man to shrink (satisfy) the quota boulder. So it takes up less space; otherwise, you’re not going to be able to get any business done. Now, I’m sure you know plenty of minorities and “marginalized” peoples. But can any of them pour lemonade like that white man we had to skip over? Can they take inventory? Perform their MAC duties sufficiently? Will they show up on time? Will they work proactively and not reactively? Essentially, can they follow simple protocol?

I suppose they could—if they were hired in a meritocratic society. And you may believe these questions to be of obvious importance to most companies today. But when these quota boulders hit them, they need to roll it off of them quick. Think of how often that must lead to compromise, wherein employers are hiring folks who—maybe slack a little. Not that they don’t do a bang-up job and keep the flow of business going while they’re there. But it would seem that there’s a general sense of entitlement flowing among non-whites and women in any given work environment, involving affirmative action.

And how could there not be? These people are being deprived of being hired into positions they know they’re qualified and prepared for (like a meritocracy) and instead they’re being used as pawns to satisfy (((feminist))) legislation and keep the company going. There is something missing for these people. Direction. Wherever these people go to find work, whether or not they land it depends solely on the legality.

Given that this is a white country (both in terms of majority population and culture) and men classically and always will be the breadwinners—there’s bound to be several white men applying for any given job, no matter how effeminate. So when there’s no need to fill quotas, these aforementioned entitled people will in all likelihood be turned down for a white man. When they are hired, it’s statistically undoubtable that they were placed there because, “oh, yea. You’re Asian; we need an Asian actually. Come on in, sport.”

If that sounds like incredibly racist and bigoted thinking, not to mention terrible for profits, the one thing any company should care about, that’s because it is. There’s nothing good about affirmative action. It fucks everybody over. But for all the trials and tribulations it forces these deviants to undergo in the workforce, at least affirmative action gets them in the workforce, even if most of them do inevitably end up leaving for one reason or another within a year or so. At least they have some spending cash, whilst they digest their blue pills some more.

What it does to white men though is painfully obvious. All the jobs we want are being shelved for folks who couldn’t care less for our Western way of life. All of these deviants should be at home—women with their families and racial minorities with countries of their ethnic origin. Then, maybe we could start producing good stuff in America again. Right now we’re a laughing stock. Anytime something’s American-made, you’re cautious, aren’t you? Americans, even. Admit it. Not to mention we have data leak after data leak. Won’t be long before everyone’s hard d0xed. Maybe if we were focused a little more on merit instead of diversity when hiring security workers, we wouldn’t have these massive data leaks and all these other issues that appear to have spawned since the 60’s, huh?

Click here if you don’t like the taste of blue pills.

Diablo’s Immortal Middle Finger

Blizzard is yet another one of those companies that doesn’t give a rat’s ass if its customers don’t like the product they’re receiving. For these people, it matters only that you simply buy their products and stop whining about progression in gaming. What are you, guys, fags or something? You mean to tell me you—don’t have a smart phone? Oh, you do, you just don’t want to see your favorite PC game get watered down into a (((freemium))) mobile nightmare? Well, either way—you guys are just—frickin‘ mean for not buying our shitty, new shit. We worked so hard on it. So original, it is. Really.

I don’t know what’s more pathetic:

  • That diversity hiring in Blizzard continues to crank out more and more (((genius))) ideas that nobody likes.
    • Like changing a one-time-pay PC game into a nagware, mobile game that constantly pesters the player to get out their wallet for microtransactions.
  • Or that Blizzard’s actively trying to suppress opposition to this.
    • (((Allegedly))).

The smirk this Asian guy gives in the intro gives is priceless. It just screams, “oh, wow. The audience isn’t perceiving our PC-to-mobile rape of Diablo to be a wise tactic? Let me crank out a shit-eating smile and demonstrate better than I already have, how full of shit and out of touch with the customer base I truly am.” The nerve of this cunt. “Do you guys not have phones?” Um, do you possess a functioning brain? Do you actually think outright condescension in loo of widespread, negative perception of a yet-to-be-sold product, is the intelligent and proper course of action? You’re kidding me, right? Do you know the first fucking thing about customer service? The customer. Is always. Right. They will always be right. No matter your qualms with them, personally. Get over it.

And the part where the dude’s offering (((solutions))) for players with lack of quality internet speeds—priceless. Guy’s fucking nuts to just outright go on there and say, “just get the 360 version, you penniless apes.” So their solution to creating a game too large and in charge for fans on a budget (most of the middle class) to enjoy them as well as others is essentially—fuck ’em. And it might come as a shock to some, but I’ve grown accustomed to seeing diversity hiring everywhere I go and it never seizes to amaze me all the issues it amasses and the way in which everyone runs around like a headless chicken, trying to make sense of it all and offer some kind of justification.

And here we thought they had simply “lost base” with their World of Warcraft audience long ago and caused unrelentingly, unapologetic alienation—within that one particular game. “Well, sure they totally fucked up this game,” we thought. “But they’ve got plenty of other games now, I guess. So good for them now, right?” Wrong. Ya see, people. Blizzard’s “expanded” over the years the way that it has, to include more games than its original three—not for expansion purposes at all, but rather supplementation. Over what, you might ask? (((Diversity))).

Affirmative action guarantees that most white men you work with about 80% of the time—will be competent. The reverse is true anytime you encounter a non-white or a woman working. No matter their skill level and dedication; they simply aren’t being hired for merit, which is all that objectively matters in the business world; profitability. So about 80% of the time, you will see them slack, fuck up, lash out at others, and eventually switch jobs. If you need any hard proof that affirmative action is bad, look no further than the Equifax leak about a year ago, when at least a third of Americans had highly sensitive information about themselves like addresses, SSNs, credit cards, and phone numbers leaked during a security breach. And who was in charge of security at Equifax? A woman.

But (((feminists))) and other postmodernists will strain incredulity, insult your intelligence, and actually ask for “proof” of this; as if it’s not implied a thousand times over in our legislation and as if they can’t fucking see it with their own goddamned eyes.  These people are disingenuous, through and through. If one makes it a lawthat you cannot hire the most qualified applicant all the time—one would expect your company not to have the most qualified people at any time. To expect anything else is lunacy.

Also, I’d just like to say; it’s astonishingly ironic that Blizzard calls their newest addition to the Diablo series, Immortal, when in fact—this could be cataclysmically received, such that the Diablo series, if not the company as a whole—may go under, or sell itself in time more realistically to a conglomerate that will diversify it even more.

What’s the significance of the triple parentheses? Click here.


Turn it Off / You’re Mean / It’s How We Makes Le Monies

No, MundaneMatt, I will not turn off my “pesky”, oh-so-bothersome AdBlock. I kinda like not seeing ads. They’re gay. I don’t mind putting ads on my site though and any videos I make; as well as linking PayPals and shit, through which I can “e-beg” to people. Because it’s free money; come on. Like I’m gonna say no to free shit; I also want people to have the option to support me directly if they choose. I don’t feel offended or gunshy around them though if they openly use AdBlock around me. I couldn’t give a fuck less; I use it too.

Anyway, it seems like the only people who take serious issue with AdBlock are Boomers (people born from 1964-1982), or people that simply didn’t grow up with the Internet and personal computers. I’m not sure why this is, considering such people have had advertising thrown in their face halfway through their favorite television shows, every day of their lives. You’d think if any generation would embrace this beautiful browser extension, it’d be them. Instead, they complain about it the most and try and talk down to people who use it, as if they’re better and more enlightened than them. Because they can sit through commercials they’re not interested in. What saints these people are. Look out, mother Teresa. Here come the football fans. Here to virtuously absorb corporate messaging to make a “difference”.


Instant Gratification

Contrary to popular belief, the world wide web didn’t become the next big communication mechanism because of the abundance of information on it. There’s plenty of information in libraries too. The main reason that the Internet became so popular, is because it was an easy way for people to escape the harassment of corporate marketing. The ease of access to this information was also a huge incentive. Companies eventually caught on however to the fact that the Internet was the hegemon it had become and subsequently started filling every inch of it with ads to make up for the death of traditional American consumption.

The problem is, while these naive companies may think they’re eventually going to buy all of the Internet and reduce us to marketing slavery again, they fail to understand our perseverance. They fail to realize that one is not entitled to money to keep their websites functional. They think that it costs nothing for your audience to bombard them with corporate messages. That if you really like their “product” so much, you oughtta be “grateful” they don’t charge you outright to use it.

When in actuality, it is the “content” producers that should be grateful that they get to sit on their asses and make a living off of our viewership, while the rest of us grind away with blood, sweat, and tears. They should feel privileged and the instant they start acting entitled and ungrateful is the moment they lose all credibility. Your audience doesn’t owe you a fucking thing. Communities are about the community, not your wallet. You wanna be able to pay the bills this month, here’s an idea: get a jobThat way, when you don’t make enough off of your precious ad revenue to keep the site going, it stays up anyway because you’re pumping actual money that you earned into it.

AdBlock is merely the Internet defending itself from corporate molestation. It exists so that the Internet doesn’t become the next TV. Remember that? Where you’d see like 11 minutes of something you like, and then four minutes of bullshit you didn’t give a frilly fuck for 99% of the time? One of the reasons us Millennials like this Internet thing so much is because there are no “commercials”, obligatory sales offerings, or anything gay, corporate-like, and hamfisted down our fucking throats constantly. Not only that but TV gave you what you wanted on their time. Us barbarians that use this evil Internet, on the other hand, can enjoy the content of our choosing at a moment’s notice, a concept that to Boomers just seems to border on the realm of the impossible.

Ya see, “back in the day”, if you “wanted” something, you had to “earn it”, (*gags self*) So to them, there really is no such thing as instant gratification. The very concept makes them giggle. Any time that happens for them, they just consider themselves lucky and privileged. “Aww, I could have waited.” Why?! What purpose does the wait serve, you masochists?!

Considering that we only live for a finite time, I’d say that the idea of patience being a “virtue” is so beyond tits-out retarded that I can’t do anything but snicker at the idea. Especially in moments when waitingis optional! By virtuously demanding that I use AdBlock, you’re asking me to give up precious seconds of my life for corporations don’t care about and you don’t care about. Corporations that probably lobby to fuck you and I over, and every other common man every day. But nevermind all that. Tell me about your moral superiority some more, please.



TL;DR — MGTOW’s an anti-social, gender-divisive plague that will only grow if feminism isn’t retroactively discontinued and all of its “works” on society.

Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) can best be defined as voluntary bachelorism. They tend to overlap with involuntary celibates (incels), their desire to have sex being the only major difference. MGTOW’s are generally alpha males, having had relationships and one night stands and gotten a reading on the pulse of your typical Western woman, ultimately deciding to distance themselves from their involvement with them, on the basis that they’ve become culturally brainwashed, receive far too much leniency in court, and have been conditioned by society into despising men through feminism.

The most notable dissenter surrounding your typical MGTOW is the NAWALT (not all women are like that, ya know) and the folks who point out the mundane paradox of going the way another man tells you.

MGTOW: You should be a MGTOW. Like me.

Regular guy: What’s a MGTOW?

MGTOW: A man going their own way.

Regular guy: am a man “going my own way”.

MGTOW: And you have a stepson?

Regular guy: Yes …

MGTOW: … (brain combusts)

In all seriousness though, this is a tired argument. Of course, you’re still going your own way if you’re compelled by a MGTOW to change what that way is. MGTOW’s about changing that path you’re going in as a man, particularly if it’s headed in the direction of alimony, child support, divorce, cuckolding, bastard/illegitimate children, etc. We’re just looking out for ya, dudes.

And as for the ladies upset with MGTOW. I totally get that a lot of genuinely butthurt, beta cucks use MGTOW as a sort of troll shielding because they know deep down that they’re an incel. Many of them are simply “hurt” as you may put it. I acknowledge that.

However, being upset with MGTOW, in general, is not warranted. It’s necessary and lemme tell ya, it ain’t going away until you all start being women again. Stop listening to (((feminists))). They’ve brainwashed you and made you miserable, and only because they themselves became miserable through their own bad life choices and sought to drag you all down to their dykish, androphobic level.

You’re not a man. You will never achieve happiness or success in doing what men do, sexually, professionally, emotionally, and otherwise. In general; most of you. You’re women. You’re detail and socially orriented (unlike men) because it is your natural imperative to look after the tribe and until you all recognize that, MGTOW is only going to get uglier. We’re a mammalian, sexual team. You gotta work with us, not against us.

Are Women More Childlike?

TL;DR — Yes and the “misogynist” mechanism responsible for it is nature (specifically human psychology).

If you’ve ever talked to a psychologist, you may have heard them at one point bring up OCEAN. It is the base of what we’ll be discussing here. It stands for Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. OCEAN’s used with heavy accuracy in modern psychology to determine personality types, traits, characteristics, patterns, etc.

Of those five factors, the two most commonly associated with women (based on survey data) are: Agreeableness and Neuroticism.  To be generally affectionate and welcoming towards everyone is to be agreeable. Neuroticism is the tendency to think negatively; to be possessed by timidness in the face of adversity and be hypersensitive to situations that aren’t proportionally as threatening, if at all.

Now, call me a fedora-wearing dudeth bro-heamieth from the misogynist dimension of misogynist misogynists. But I happen to notice a parallel between those traits and children. Think about it for a second. Do you doubt that most women in your life have or have had at some point manifested in these traits? I mean fuck. If that’s not true, then most of you are lucky to have come out decently as adults, huh? These are pretty helpful traits for house moms trying to raise their kids not to be shitheads. Ya might even say it’s an evolutionary advantage!

There’s a myriad of ways to tell that these traits are bound to show up in most women. But there’s 4 words that sum it up nicely: rape and bad pay.

Most rapists go after weak, insecure, shut-in people, and this is the kicker—most people who get raped—are women. If agreeableness was just as common among men as it is women, where are all the male rape victims? They’re far few and in between. There’s always going to be rapists in the world, and that’s part of the reason why agreeableness and neuroticism do not help women, beyond raising children. The broader world is harsh and unwelcoming towards them, because their brains were not designed by nature expecting them to navigate through it. Women being housewives was naturally selected for because it works. 

I only meant ‘bad pay’ ironically. What I meant was—bad work life. Confident and outgoing people (people high the first three traits of OCEAN) earn more money because they do stuff. They don’t do what other people “suggest” for them, and more importantly—they don’t do just enough. They give it their all, they catch their breath, and they come back for more. Women. Don’t. Do this. They work hours and a pay that is comfortable and make an uncompromising effort to “balance” work life with family. Are there women out there who are trailblazers? Of course, but like stay-at-home fathers, they’re an exception; a cultural anomaly (not the rule).

Soyboys / Beta Males

Vegetarians and vegans often feed their children soy products. They also tend to be very left-leaning, teaching their children meaningless constructs like “tolerance, acceptance, diversity,” and all of that stuff. This is why men conditioned into such effiminate behavior—are referred to as soyboys. The term beta means “still working”. Alpha means “work finished”. In other words, a beta male is merely a man that is still developing (a boy).

What signs are there that one falls in line with this “beta” category? Simply take the behavior of your traditional American woman and see if they have anything in common? Are they a “good listener”? Do they act two-faced, for the sake of not hurting anyone’s feelings? Do they shy away from conflict? Do they prefer to let women seek them out because they—(*snicker*) “respect” them? If so, that’s not sweat coming off of them; it’s soy.

Alpha males (real men) embrace conflict; it’s in their nature, especially when the tribe is at stake. They don’t whine about trivial things. They seek women out, because that’s what all women want, whether they want to admit it or not. Just like all men want a woman that’ll do whatever they want them to. That goes even for men who are into (*shivers*) BSDM stuff and “domination”. They’re still imagining in their minds a woman that is trained to please them sexually in every facet.

Women, on the other hand, don’t want control, and that look of frustration a woman has when you “don’t know what you’re doing” is deserved. They don’t want to take the wheel; they want you; the man if you are one that is–to rock. Their. World.

They are people-oriented; don’t you forget that. Meaning, when they encounter things every day, like their partners for instance—they’re always thinking of something different. Instinctively, they ask us how our day is, what we do for fun, and all that stuff–because any kind of information they can share back and forth with the tribe to keep it healthy and functional, they ought to have; because they are the people humans.

Men, on the other hand—are object-oriented. What they think of when they encounter something is generally static; they have a tinier brain within their brain (a box if you will) for every subject, every person in their life, everything of general importance that preoccupies their thinking. Depending on the situation, they change which box they operate from within. You could say they’re flexible in this sense, at least as workers. Women don’t think in our box system. Their every thought and action can be characterized as being that of loosely connected and stringy, almost like a giant wire. This is why they tend to overshare and talk a lot. They can’t really help it.



Feminism created MGTOW. It can destroy it as well. Question is: will it be adaptable and wise enough to make the changes necessary to do so? Or will all of its adherents continue to smell each other’s farts, blame men for all of society’s problems, and make this divisive bullshit fester even more? They’re two sides of the same coin, but feminism’s the heavier side, folks. It has all the (((funding))).


Feminism is Rape

Feminism doesn’t fight rape; it is rape. Rape of the family, tradition, morality, decency, culture, and everything we hold dearest. It turns women into sex-crazed witches that lose their minds trying to work and provide for their “families”. It turns men into selfish, fat, lazy slobs that lose their minds trying to “be the mom”. Anyone who tells you it’s about “choice”, “equality”, or any of these other uplifting buzzwords–is either naive or trying to indoctrinate you.

It taxes the other half of the population; gee, how convenient. Bet that had (((nothing))) to do with it. Speaking of triple parentheses, why is it that all the most prominent feminists throughout history have been Jews? Why is it that women can declare to be or not to be Jews whenever? Why is it that if a man has a Jewish mom, then he’s a Jew no matter what? Why do boys have their genitals mutilated at birth in Judeo-centric societies?

Because feminism is not only about female supremacy, but it and Judaism are more linked than most people realize. Judaism is anti-male. Our “shiskas” can be mated with of course. But we’re absolutely disposable to them. It doesn’t take a genius to realize feminism doesn’t help men in any way, and anyone who tries to tell you otherwise probably doesn’t think very highly of your intelligence.

Feminism is simply a refuge for women’s failure to be proper, modest, and fit for motherhood, much in the same way that MGTOW is a refuge for incels, men who “just can’t” get any women, or keep them happy. Feminism is Judaism fine-tuned just for women. Rich, (((“white”))) women that is. For everyone else, it’s like a Twinkie on a treadmill with equality written on it. Only we keep knocking each other off the treadmill and that’s sort of the purpose. (divide and conquer).


Feminism is (also) Lysenkoist in Nature

Trofim Lysenko was a man who taught “agrobiology” in (((Soviet))) Russia. From 1929 to 1964 — he sat alongside Stalin and company, carrying out legislation—particularly in regards to agriculture; specifically the minimization of water use on crops.[1]

Now, surely it’s reasonable to expect that “minimization” of water use on crops probably isn’t a remotely good idea, let alone a concept that would increase crop production. If you pour a full cup of water in plant A, and a spoonful in plant B—using the same seeds, same conditions, and everything, they’re going to grow at vastly different rates, if at all. Most normal people with functional frontal lobes recognize this. It’s not something that needs explaining once one has an elementary understanding of nature.

But, in the same way, that feminists have managed to convince most Westerners that there’s no such thing as gender, with time, precision, propaganda, and good ol’ totalitarianism, Lysenko managed to woo people into the spook. That genes, DNA, natural selection, and all of that was all a lie perpetrated by the bourgeoisie (the rich in Soviet Russia)—and was made merely to oppress the proletariat, from which Lysenko hails from. They were in effect able to amass full governmental control over agriculture, leading to famine, mass starvation, and gulags.

It’s not even that feminism acts similarly to Lysenkoism. It is Lysenkoism, reincarnated. It is a competing view of reality (and a false one), rising to the ranks, effectively crushing all credible science and findings in its path.

We’re a sexually dimorphic species. There’s two forms of us. Man, and woman. If you deny that which you are a part of, you’re denying in a sense part of yourself, which is a known characteristic of psychopaths. It’s a concerning state of mind for someone to be in—to be able to believe with genuine conviction that there’s no such thing as male and female, that the fact 98% of the population comes out as one or the other, is just a coincidence. We should really all be somewhere in the “middle”; it’s a “spectrum” after all.

What our future looks like without the neo-reactionary movement (the Dark Enlightenment):

    • Endless frivolous lawsuits over “misgendering” and subsequently the death of business.[Venezuela]
    • Affirmative action will become harsher on whites than it is now and societal permission to denigrate whites will have surpassed greatly what it is already.[2]
    • Rape will eventually come to mean “penetration”; Think of what that entails for female predators.
    • The number of people experiencing feelings of “transness” growing up and the subsequent mental issues are going to go up majorly, the more these “progressive” parents keep reproducing and enabling this Lyskenoist, science-denying, nature-defying culture.
      • Which should concern anyone, considering that one’s odds of committing suicide as a gender dysphoric person go up from 21% to 42-46%, after they’ve had “surgery”.[3]
    • Pedophilia will become tolerated; I dare even say normalized. There’s already extreme fringes of the far left that advocate for it. They’re small now. But they’ll grow.
    • Straight, white males will cease to be and subsequently, everything we have left.[4]



What’s everyone’s favorite thing about it?

Well, we can do whatever we want, within reason of course. But who does this benefit? If you ask most people, you’ll probably get, “well, everyone. Duh.” But think about how different people are for a minute. Now, imagine every single person in this system going down a path that could potentially interfere with the path of another person. Does it sound beneficial now?

Now factor in that with more resources comes a greater ability to pursue one’s goals. People that normally wouldn’t stand for certain schemes may feel inclined to abandon their values and do one’s bidding because the rewards for doing so are simply too large to resist. There is because of that an inherent divisiveness to this political system. That being the matter of the 1% vs. the 99%, robber barons vs. the working man, rich vs. poor, bourgeoise vs. proletariat, etc. Democracy, capitalism, and free markets, therefore, can all be thought of as synonyms.

The simple ugly truth about democratic societies is that “freedom”, it’s central tenant, necessarily leads to their inhabits falling prey to exploitation. In other words, people can’t be trusted to keep a democracy going. It will not sustain itself. Because someone or some group of dedicated individuals within the 1% will eventually use their resources to reduce the 99% to slavery.

Are monarchic/aristocratic societies any less vulnerable to foreign attacks, invasions, and civil disputes? Of course not. But there is consistency. You may not get what you “want”, but you at least know what you’re going to get most of the time. Monarchs, unlike deciders within the 1% in democracies, genuinely must in fact appeal to “the people”. Because if they don’t, they will be overthrown.

Central deciding figures within democracies, however (mostly financial and international), have no need and are in fact disincentivized from appealing to any honest, hard-working people here in the US. Because those people want what’s reasonable. For them to share. But there comes a point when one has so much money, that on top of getting greedy and changing themselves, everyone’s perception of them changes wildly and they suddenly find a bunch of friends they never knew they had. They get greedy themselves and when you don’t cover this month’s rent for them (cause it’s like “nothing” for you), you suddenly find a bunch of enemies you used to consider friends. You see what’s going on here? It’s an inherently divisive system.

Free Will

and the Pursuit of “Happiness”

is Illusory

I can prove there’s no free will with pure semantics. Did you choose the last thought you had? If so, how did you do that? Did you think about what thought you wanted to think? If so, what compelled you to think that thought? Did you have to think about thinking about your thoughts to do that? And what compelled you to think that?! Did you think about thinking about thinking about your thoughts? You see how ridiculous this notion is that we “control” our thoughts, emotions, and subsequently—our behavior?! There’s no such thing as an uncaused cause. Everything happens for a reason. To suggest that our every thought and action is made purely out of thin air, based on our authoring is madness.

There is no free will, and by extension zero applicability in democracy and egalitarianism. When you give people the “freedom” to do what they want; they don’t. They take the path of least resistance, paths they end up regretting most of the time, which they wouldn’t have, had the state taken the reigns and made sure they were going down their optimal, objective path.


Free Speech

Another aspect to democracy people just can’t seem to let go of is freedom of speech. What many don’t realize however is that freedom of speech was made to protect unpopular speech. Speech that’s popular doesn’t need protection because everybody engages in it. It’s unpopular speech that could get someone jailed or killed in societies where free speech isn’t a priority. On that note, what’s the most unpopular speech you can think of? What’s the most taboo subject matter out there?

Holocaust revisionism. It’s more reviled than “misogyny, racism, transphobia,” and all this other stuff that upsets the establishment nowadays. Arguably, the single quickest way to become a social pariah nowadays, is by simply asking, “did the Holocaust really happen?” It’s the only genocide that’s illegal to question in certain areas, primarily Germany. But that’s probably just a coincidence, I’m sure. It’s not like anybody resides there that might know anything.

Now, I don’t think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out: things aren’t okay in our society, and the world over for that matter. It’s free speech that allows us to get through these tough times, talk out our differences, and come to conclusions that will benefit us all. But free speech has to be entirely free speech if this is to work, and for that—the unpopular speech (again, Holocaust revisionism, more than ever before) must be paid attention to. It must be acknowledged, fairly debated, and given the thorough, objective analysis it deserves.



The state’s job in fascism is to put everyone both where they want to be and where they are most efficient, without overstepping the boundaries of other people’s positions as I alluded to with democracies earlier. In democracies, we’re left to figure those positions out and get them filled on our own, which doesn’t work because quite frankly we’re not all on the same page.

Think of it as a combination of democracy and monarchy. There’s an election every ten years or so, the person has full dictatorial power, can be impeached, and obviously won’t be up for re-election unless they act in favor of the people that put them in power, right? Makes sense. Why don’t our (((politicians))) do that? Well, simple. We don’t “elect” them. The (((banks))) do, by funding them at the request of the Rothschilds. Even if one source wasn’t providing most of the funding, however, there are still other people that get to vote and do so, mostly to our peril. This is not “democracy”. It’s rape.

What’s Going on Here?

This system was never meant to work or keep us in a cooperative state of union with one another. It’s a system made by people who wanted the world for themselves and simply loosened laws and traditions around the world (since we were so cucked as to let them) to do so.

Demo means people, cracy means system. Democracy, therefore, means, a system by and for the people within the system. Does that strike you as familiar in any way, perhaps in terms of a sixth grade “social studies” lesson? You get true “democracy” from fascism. Why? Because the people of the land decide the fate of the state, not everyone and anyone, as is in the case in multicultural, feminist societies.

Given that different cultures are well—different and that said cultures, their composition, birthrates and all of that change over time in said “societies”, you can kind of think of your typical democratic state, if you imagine the state as a human body, as one that’s on the ground, shaking, trembling, and seizing out because it has absolutely no cohesion and structure, whatsoever. All the wheels of this internationally driven machine turn a different way, with different torques, resistance levels, speeds, and wheel sizes. This is the perfect system by the way for the Jews. Because in a society where race is taboo as subject matter, they are free to monopolize our financial system without us giving them the stink eye, thus compromising essentially all institutions within the nation and bending it towards the will of their people, and if you think they have your interests in mind, you’re dead wrong.

They don’t have interests, culture, food, distinct characteristics, or anything like that. They’re not exactly people, in the way we’ve come to understand them in their civilized, milk-toast form. They’ll tell ya that themselves. Just look at Jew-run Hollywood. Alien movies; non-stop. They consider themselves outsiders from mankind. I’m not saying that to be mean.

Fascism is about making that aforementioned, literal, state body one that’s awake, alert, coherent, and marching towards a goal with clarity, making whatever tweaks necessary in all institutions across the board—to achieve it, to make all those wheels go in the same direction. Very little is done in a “tyrannical” fashion. Think of it as controlled capitalism.

We allow certain things for certain people during certain periods of time and provide incentives through the state, because we know they’ll do what we want them to do. For example, suppose we allow and even provide abortion for black couples, but not white couples, and instead, we provide white couples with state funds to get married, housed, and start families. This creates an environment where blacks who can’t afford to have children and whites slacking on starting families, have a reason to follow the will of the state. It’s consensual.



Is America Really Capitalist?

Communism is often compared to fascism in a horse-shoe theory-esque fashion. While they are functionally similar, communism exhibits one key difference that cripples it. Desire is not a priority. What people want to do, their faith, culture, and their potential desire to leave the country is not a factor and won’t be taken into consideration. All you get for non-compliance is a bullet.

It’s communism that “anti-fascists” are against, yet advocate for at the same time. It’s a topsy-turvy world we live in, folks.


Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑