Sign into an existing account

I thought so too.

I think the collective Jewish behavior (and Jewish history) can be best understood by one principle: assimilation. Adopting the Jewish perspective, assimilation is the most significant evil. Their attraction to all things cosmopolitan is also explained by this.

In nature, when two groups encounter one another (under ideal conditions where neither group is vastly different from the other) both groups will have something to share (knowledge, technology, etc.). However, it is always the case that with sufficient time, one group assimilates the other - so long as artificial boundaries are not maintained. Maybe one group is larger, or, for whatever the smaller group has that is good, perhaps it doesn't compare to the behemoth of competence the first group represents. Eventually one group will assimilate into the other, albeit with changes, so that the new mixture is not quite the same as either group had been previous to the encounter (but will go on in name and likeness with the assimilating group, not the assimilated).

One good example concerning the Jews was the Babylonian captivity. Babylon at the time was like the near east's version of New York. Many of the Jews loved it, as Israel was relatively a backwater at the time. Many Jews chose to stay, even when they'd been liberated.

We might call this a law of nature: that to partake of (benefit from) another culture socially, involves some kind of sacrifice. The idea that cultures come into contact and share things without assimilation is wrongheaded, and it is only politics that promotes such an order. It is via politics and war that two self-sustaining nations can maintain peace of trade, without assimilation, and where neither nation wishes to assimilate to the other.

The Jew cannot self-subsist. It requires directly parasitizing. The threat is obvious: either Jewish assimilation to its host (like in Babylon), or eradication if the host catches on. How not to assimilate or be eradicated. That's the real Jewish question.

Cities are appealing for two reasons:

1. The great number of transactions that can be parasitized by middlemen, and gate-keeping schemes. The Jew tends to use the legal system to increase the rate of government intervention on public affairs (bigger government), creating opportunity points to siphon value from transactions. They also do this through banking and other middleman paradigms. Think: agency settings. You could do what an agency does yourself, but if they make the legal landscape for doing so massively convoluted or the tax situation is severe, then going through the Jew who invented the profession that navigates the taxation minefield is your best option (if you don't want to be blown up by taxes!) And they'll make a cut off everything.

Do you see the brilliance? They make the minefield, and then create the profession that guides people through the minefield.

If their group can do this consistently across many industries, then they'll accrue an overwhelming share of a nation's wealth per capita. It's just a matter of time and growth while maintaining dogged ethnocentrism and nepotistic practices for wealth sharing.

2. By incentivizing racial minorities and/or the poor to come to cities, the Jew also gains an opportunity to hide. They can focus the public immune system's attention onto other enemies (notice, the Jew creates enemies for the host by using socialist programs, for example the welfare state and Marxist education to revise racial histories). Now they can keep you distracted with other social issues besides their presence as ringleaders. The rule is simple: if you are one kind of enemy, muddy the waters by making more enemies to the host who are like you behaviorally, but are not you ethnically.

But their mode of being is ultimately fatalistic. Eventually, if such a scheme is successful and it goes unchecked, it will be noticed. The greatest success of Jewry in the 20th century was to create an event, the Holocaust lie, that would handicap host immunity from even sending the alarm signal. Imagine if a host's immune system became punished by the body, for pointing out the disease to the body.

The entire thing is made even more confusing by the fact that the Jew (as collective) understands there will be casualties of assimilation. There is a kind of mosaic of assimilation, where some Jews become nearly fully assimilated, remaining Jews only nominally. This is another layer of defense. One can always point out the small Berg family who runs a vacuum repair store in anywhere-ville America. Are you attacking them!? Furthermore, since your average Joe will have more experience with this more assimilated sect of Judaism, they'll give you confused looks when you talk about the core of the Jewish organism.

Not only that, but the Jew can launch attacks on the fringes, on those assimilated Jews. Because those Jews still identify with the main body nominally, their woes can be portrayed as a host assault on all Jewry. This means the Jew sacrifices its own element (those Jews who are most prone to assimilation) while strengthening the core's ability to hide from the host immune system. It also guarantees that the organism gets stronger by shedding its more assimilable elements, further cementing the Jewish collective identity as unspoken but extreme loyalty at the core.

We're much better off treating this like an organismal threat. I think that's what it is. And I also think that Jewry was willing to create the environment in Weimar Germany that would lead to its fringe elements being killed. It is an organism that sacrifices its least loyal cells to strengthen itself against the host, capitalizing on societies with high social trust. They know high-trust populations are vulnerable to guilt: "Look what your people did to us!", when in reality the Jew knew it was building animosity toward itself, just to sacrifice its weakest members. The primary difference between their society and ours is that their collective is joined merely by number and horde-loyalty, whereas high-trust societies such as ours value members on the basis of a robust human value. We believe humanity is dignified. For them, it's the group or it's nothing.

This all permits the Jew to parasitize while avoiding assimilation, but their effectiveness shifts throughout history. They may get by for a time, before some Jews get too greedy, and this causes other Jews to overstep, and before you know it, they're expelled from the country.

Their main success in America (besides Holocaust indoctrination) has been four-fold: (1) control of media, (2) control of the money supply privately, (3) massive over-representation in the legal system, and (4) using of all of the above to convince huge parts of the public that they (the public) benefit from Jewish activities. "Look goy, you can afford a $500k home with this instrument called a mortgage!"

All of the middleman activities, and even some of their obviously harmful activities, are believed helpful to the host (or at least by enough of the host to crush a unified response to the Jew). Many people you see every day believe a direct assault on their society is actually good for them.

Be? I mean you can't just. But act like one, you sure can. They encourage people to do so. Without actually belonging to their group, you can't compete with them at being a jew.